Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-23-2000 Council PacketI Ut’l 2 3 200UREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cl I T Kjr onv.»ivu DATE: October 19,2000 ITEM NO;JZ Department Approval: Name RonMoorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission Proposed Year 2001 Budget Attached is the proposed year 2001 Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission budget. Sally Koenecke, the Cable Administrator, will attend the October 23 Council meeting to provide information regarding the proposed budget. The franchise administration and access to their production budgets are increasing by 7% and 8% respectively. The increases are due mostly to increases in full-time salaries and benefits. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion regarding the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission proposed 2001 budget. fe* Tf: « i A Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission 2001 Budget Proposal pronchtse AdminlsimMon ^ Eipctucs Pasanil Services 101 Salaried Futl4ifne 102 Salaried Overtime 103 Salaried Part-time 121 PeraConL 122 FICACobL 123 MedkareCoaL 131 Healtb Insuranoe 151 Woriien Comp Ini. ToUl Poional Scrvioea SiBBlia 200 Office SuppUai 220 Repair A KlainL SuppUei Tout Suppliea noleMional Service* 301 Audit Fees 304 Legal Fees 314 Payroll Sendos 318 Janitorial Ser CCS 319 Security Serv-iwca Total Profeational Servioaa Other Servioes and ChaTMi 321 Telc|)hanet:oaimunioations 322 Posuge 331 Travel School A Coofctanoe 332 Mileage 350 Printing and Publiriting 360 bsuranoe 380 tXililica 384 RaAtieARecydb^Cotleolkn 404 Mata. Repair E(|w.p. 412 Building Rent 413 Equipinaii Rental 433 DucaASubacriptioas 438 PnpertyTaxea 439 Coatatgcney ToUl Other Charges Total Espcndltam 2000 .■\dopted 2000 6 Month Actual 2000 Revised 2001 Conunhee Proposal $43,000 SO $7,000 S2430 S3.100 $725 $3,000 im $5«55 SMOO um SU50 $3,900 $450 $900 im $7,050 $1,800 $1,000 $6,000 $1,800 $1,700 $2,500 $2,000 $120 S3.0QO $9,000 SO $3,000 $1300 tm $33,720 $102,725 $266 $1,009 $358 S919 $75 $90 $4,590 $677 $985 $635 S S s s s s s s s $ s SlLf99 S $41,854 S $14,677 S 25300 S 27,000 SO S2.291 $7,000 S 7300 Sl,2(s0 S 1305 $1,400 $2,388 S 2,463 S 2,640 $0 $- $m $1,164 S 3,000 $S,000 JIJ34 $SOO S SOO $23,553 $39.469 $44.040 $914 S 1300 S 1300 i}\l$1300 S 1300 SI W S 2.400 S 2.400 $819 s USO $1315 $3,530 S 5,000 $S3S0 $0 S 450 $450 $583 $1,200 $1360 i 550 S 580 $5,176 i MSO $8J8SS $997 S 1,800 S 1390 $453 $1,000 $1,050 $745 $6,000 $6300 1300 $ 2300 $ 2300 $ 2,000 no 3300 9.000 700 3.000 UOO $ s s s s s s i. $ 1,800 2300 2300 2300 ISO 3,000 9,180 700 3,000 1330 _jao 36,000 SS339 $91395 Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission 2001 Budget Proposal Sludlo ProAiettoa Expcofes 2000 2000 2000 2001 Coounitec Adopted 6 Month Actual Revised Proposal Persona] Services 101 Salaried FuU-drae $33,000 $26,637 S 53,000 $71,000 102 Salaried Ovoiime $0 103 Salaried Part*time $17,000 $5,752 $17,000 $7,000 121 PcraCont.S1.710.$982 $2,745 $3,680 122 nCAConl.$3,100 $2388 S 5355 $5,970 123 Medicare Cont.$725 $0 $m $m 131 Health Insurance $3,000 $1,164 $3,000 4 5,000 ISl Workers Comp Ins.$3358 $500 $600 Total Personal Services $59,035 $40,180 $81.600 dL.93.250 Supplies 200 OfRce Supplies $1,200 S741 $uoo $1,200 220 Rq>air dt Maint Supplies S1.200 S312 $1300 $1,200 Total Supplies $2,400 $1,053 $2.400 s 2.400 Professional Services 301 Auditing Fees $1,250 $819 $1350 $1,315 304 Legal Fees $2,100 $0 $2,100 $2,205 311 Access Contractors $12,500 $5,120 $12300 $12,500 314 Payroll Services $450 so S 450 $450 318 Janitorial Services $900 $583 S 1300 $1,200 319 Security Services $300 $133 $300 $300 Total Professional Services S 17.500 $6,655 $17.800 s 17.970 Other Services anH Oiprge^ 321 Tdepbooc/Communicadoni $1,800 S877 S 1300 $1,800 322 PotUge $1,000 $453 $1,000 $1,050 331 Travd School d: Conference $1,500 $416 $1300 4 1,575 332 Mileage $600 $363 $600 4 650 350 Printing and Publishing $5,300 $3,799 $5,800 4 5,800 360 Insurance $2,500 $358 S 2300 4 2,500 380 Utilities $4,000 $1,838 S 4,000 $4,800 384 Refuse dr Recycling Coflecdon $120 $75 $120 4 150 404 Maint Repair Equip.$20,700 $2306 S 10,000 4 10,000 412 Building Rent $27,000 $13,770 $27,000 4 27,540 413 Equipment Rental $0 $500 S SOO 4 600 433 Dues dr Subscripdotis $600 $265 $600 4 SOO 438 Property Taxes $3,700 $1,808 $3,700 4 8,775 439 Condngency SSQQ 500 s SOO Total Other Charges S62.32Q 12233$. 1 59.620 4 61.240 t Total Expenditi&res $148,255 $75,124 $161,420 4 174,860 4 i r :•? h LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 2001 PROPOSED BUDGET Franchise Administration Revenues Franchise Fees PEG Fees Mound PEG Fees Studio Rental Dubbing Fees interest Total Revenues Total F.Tpenditurea (See Detail Pages) Begining Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) in Fund Balance F.nding Fund Balance 117,000 4,000 12LQ0Q- Studio/ Production 75.000 44.000 36,040 500 4,000 1 «;0.S4Q 174.860 Capital Improvement i 0,000 10,000 500 20.SO0 28.76S Total : All Funds . .202,000 ; 54,000 - 36.040 . . 500 8,500 .» ■I •-■v.r---vvs "v-v 185,545 83,545 24,950 294,040 29,705 (15,320)(8,265) t' “ S21&IS0.S68.225 SI 6.685 t'-ilSSw ci 1 it-- i. ■.{ r^.v Mcfn’lNO UUI 2 3 2000 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION^ Cu r v/r Wftv/ivo DATE: October 19,2000 ITEM NO: 3 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:m Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Maple Plain Fire Department Update At a recent Council meeting, the Maple Plain Fire Chief reviewed the Department’s plans to purchase an aerial truck. The Chief had indicated the City of Orono’s share of Ae annual payments for the purchase of the truck would be approximately $3,300. This calculation was based on the City of Maple Plain continuing an existing contribution of $30,000 per year toward capital equipment purchases. However, the purchase of the aerial truck will be based on the same cost sharing percentages that are used for the annual operating costs. Under this formula, the City of Orono’s annual cost for the aerial truck will be $7,181.44. Dave Eisinger, the Maple Plain Fire Chief, will attend the October 23 Council meeting to address this issue. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the purchase of an aerial truck by the Maple Plain Fire Department with the City’s share of the costs to be $7,181.44 per year over a ten year period.■i 1 1 DCT-11-E000 15:21 FROM:BERGERSON CASWELL 763-479-2103 TO:+9522494616 P.001'002 . 4 BERGERSON - CASWELL INC. .Commercial • Municipal • Residential Geothermal • Irrigation Submersible <t Turbine Pumps Environmental Drillers WtU Drilling, Abandonment <& Repair Since 194S CeitgUdmaOrtlUn. C4fXifi€d Pump butalUn J f FAX TRANSMISSION COMPANY:FAX#: ATTN: FROM: yCti^JL. ^ DATE: lO'l('-on HLE#: COMMENTS: ~"f l/li^ fS ~fZ» i _____ YTi .^ ^ ^ I, a/:/a <. o/f .’I-eff/^ f'Anf" cyfu fylo^l^A. P/ctfr\ u/t 1/ h.^. j9Af^tHCt’j'^T\ oh "tie. 'T’L.^ C4t.7 "f~. ’’H.ij/iI/fue. ff'o>.^5 /to U f 'T%,oti>ik.(^o U O jg^ ih<yrl^, y^V-e. NUMBER OF SHEETS SENT INCLUDING COVER SHEET: If liau If n«t kipbic nr iFiht proper number of bJutvi* were nor rcctivtti as indicatc>i above, ptcuc coll bcr\;moii - Cnwcll ai (?(i^) <i70«5l2l. cr r r K» •% n. t# » #*%»•#»•<» «»»»» [K jomAii^^T>r. •■.•>* .-'ll mm .-i. m^mm r,i>ff-: .v:-j i \ >;:■ ■ - .'V * % k [z^Z:: y o>r. Proposed Aerial Truck and Equipment Cost 1-, : •: ;< • ».. ..■»■••• '*•■‘*1 •■••.• Do^vn Payment Existing Balance in Equipment Kcplncancnl Fund 2001 Contribution 2002 Contribution Trade Value of MPFD Engine 12 Total 539,000.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 .^11*000.00 $120,000.00 Amount Financed ■ a::Annual Lease payment @ 6.25% Rale Net Annual Increase £55,2.1Lai $55,241.81 r*' |- '<■ t- :V.. *■ A Breakdown by City of Annual Budgetary Increase for year 2002 Maple Plain 34% $18,782.22 Independence 42% $23,201.35 Orono 13% $7,181.44 Minnetrista 5% $4,971.77 Medina -234 $L104^.4 100% $55,241.62 u Hi " a^• V"- ‘l;.• i' S % 'V^-'/cilSaa A m $530,000.00 . • $120,000.00 $410,000.00 $55,241.81 $55,241.62 3 !>4) si mh*« 8 K 4 r si-'. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 mcctiMO (jUl 2 5 2000 ROLL GU t wr The Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members Charles Kelley, Barbara Peterson, and lUchard Flint. Representing staff were City Attorney Tom Barrett, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Alissa Wintemheimer. Council Member Bob Sansevere and City Administrator Ron Moorse were absent. ’Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend Items 14,15, 16, 17,18, 19,20,21, and 22 were added to the Consent Agenda. Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to approve the consent agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. (Mr. Flint had not yet arrived.) 2. Public Hearing Authorizing Levy Certification Tax Rate for the 2000 Tax Levy Collectible in 2001—Resolution No. 4528 The Public Hearing opened at 7:02 p.m. There was no public discussion. The Public Hearing closed at 7:03 p.m. Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4528 authorizing a **Levy Certification Tax Rate** for the 2000 Tax Levy Collectible in 2001 that is greater than the **Levy Certification Tax Rate** for the 1999 Tax Levy Collectible in 2000. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *3. Regular Council Meeting of September 25,2000 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular 1 i 1 i ' ■ >T f»i‘ ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 *3. Regular Council Meeting of September 25,200&—Continued Council Meeting of September 25,2000 as presented. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS—ANDREW MCDERMOTT, REPRESENTATIVE Mr. McDermott stated that the Park Commission is looking at playground equipment for Hackberry Park for next spring. They plan to revisit the Crystal Bay master plan. At the next meeting, they will have a slide show of various lake access points to discuss maintenance issues. Mayor Jabbour stated they are working on the Dakota Line issue. The Mayor and Council directed staff to send a letter to state legislators discussing the project and asking for their support on behalf of Orono and the other cities that support the project. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS None. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Nygard asked when work would begin on Navarre Park. Gappa stated the equipment was supposed to arrive on October 9,2000, and the parking lot was to be paved that same evening. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 4. /^2596 Brenshell Homes, 1181 Wildhurst Trail—Preliminary Plat—^Resolution No. 4529 Weinberger stated that staff had been directed to draft an approval resolution for a 5 lot plat. He stated that item 10 on page 2 of 9 had been removed from the resolution, and discussion of trail construction and park dedication, items 14 and 15 on page 5 of 9, will no longer state that the nail shall be made of bituminous surfacing, also, the applicant has requested that the resolution include language that states any costs required by the developer for construction of the trail would be removed from the total of the park dedication for the 5 new lots in the area. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 4. §2596 Brensheil Homes, 1181 Wildhurst Trail —Preliminary Plat —Resolution No. 4529 —Continued Flint questioned the status of the wetland area on the proposed lot. Weinberger stated that the Watershed District is putting together a panel that will make the final determination of the wetland area. The panel will consist of BWSR, the DNR, the Miimehaha Watershed District, and a City wetland expert. If they determine there is wetland on the proposed lot, a conservation easement will be placed over the wetland area. Mayor Jabbour stated that if the wetland exceeds the excess area on the property, the developer would have to reduce the number of lots in the subdivision to accommodate the wetland. The applicant stated he understood that condition. Mayor Jabbour stated the Council ’s preliminary approval is subject to the wetland survey being completed prior to Final Plat approval. Flint asked if the -.wale on lots 2 and 3 could be fenced to prevent people from altering it. Gaffron stated they can place signs on the property comers delineating the drainage areas, also the title would define the drainage easements. The applicant stated that an association would maintain the subdivision and each homeowner would be subject to the association, which would have access to all necessary paperwork. Gaffron stated that the swale should be delineated on the property and a covenant should be filed against both properties, requiring homeowners to maintain the swale and allowing the City to enforce the n .itter in the future. Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4529 granting preliminary approval of a Class III Subdivision for property located at 1181 Wildhurst Trail and owned by Steve Benke, with the addition that a covenant be filed against lots 2 and 3 requiring homeowners to maintain the swale. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 1 (Flint). 5. #2604 James Anderst, 3380 Shoreline Drive—Commercial Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit—Resolution No. 4530 Mr. Anderst and his legal council were present. Weinberger stated that the City of Orono had issued a building permit to allow remodeling of the Narrows Saloon. The applicant was now requesting a conditional use permit for the property, which is located in the B-1 Retail Sales Business District in which a Class II Restaurant is defined as one that serves intoxicating liquor or has live entertainment—typically bands that play on Wednesday through Saturday nights. The Planning Commission recommended approval on the conditions that: live entertainment end at 12:00 a.m., the business close at 1:00 a m., and that there be a 2 door system to reduce noise pollution outside of the building. The front entrance has single doors. Staff discussed using the front entrance as a fire exit only during hours that bands are playing. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 5. U2604 James Anderst, 3380 Shoreline Drive—Commercial Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit—Resolution No. 4530—Continued The Planning Commission discussed that requiring the applicant to cease live entertainment at 12:00 a.m. could put him at a disadvantage with his competition. Kelley questioned the definition of “live entertainment.” Flint stated that the City has ordinances against excessive noise and adult entertainment. Mr. Anderst stated that he would like the Council to reconsider the Planning Commission ’s recommendation that he be required to stop live entertainment at 12:00 a.m. He stated that a large number of patrons would use the rear entrance because most of the parking is to the rear of the building. When they have live entertainment, they post staff at the entrances to collect a cover charge, and staff will be able to control the doors and keep noise pollution to a minimum. He requested 1 year to prove that noise pollution would not be excessive under the current circumstances before the City dictate restrictions. Mayor Jabbour showed Mr. Anderst a letter of support from a neighbor. Gaffron showed Council a petition that staff received in support of the Narrows Saloon expansion and live entertainment with 10 to 12 pages of signatures. Mr. Anderst stated tliat their liquor license require they have last call prior to 1:00 a.m. and no alcohol can be served after 1:00 a.m., with everyone out of the building by 1:20 a.m. He would like bands to play until 1:00 a m. Jan Berg. Planning Commission, stated she would prefer music be stopped by 12:30 a.m. Peterson. Flint, and Kelley agreed with a 12:30 a.m. stop time for bands and a I year trial period where the applicant controls noise pollution. Kelley stated that in future, a police report on any complaints of excessive noise should be included with such applications. Mayor Jabbour stated Council would pass the conditional use permit allowing live entertainment until 12:30 a.m. with the applicant monitoring noise levels foi 1 year, at which time the Council will revisit the issue. Mr. Anderst asked what the 12:30 a.m. rule accomplishes. Kelley stated it would move people out earlier. Mayor Jabbour stated that the City’s primary concern is for the residential interests. •t Kelley moved, and Flint seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4530 granting a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.40, Subdivision 4(D) allowing a Class II Restaurant, which serves intoxicating liquor and has live entertainment in the B>1 Retail Sales Business District with the conditions that live entertainment end by 12:30 a.m., and that the front entrance may remain a single door for one year provided that the applicant adequately monitors and controls noise, at which time the City Council will review the situation and any complaints P-- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 5. U2604 James Anderst, 3380 Shoreline Drive—Commercial Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit—Resolution No. 4530—Continued against the applicant. The City reserves the right to review the conditional use permit on an annual basis. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *6. ^2608 Philip and Karen Skoog, 280 Tonka Avenue—^Variance Resolution No. 4531 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4531 granting a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.27, Subdivision 5(B) to allow a rear yard setback of 39 feet where 50 feet is required and to allow a front yard setback of 43 feet where 50 feet is required. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *1. #2609 Alan and Maxine Opheim, 1985 Eagerness Point Road—Variance Resolution No. 4532 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4532 granting a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6(B) to allow construction of a porch on an exbting concrete slab located 6.9 feet from the side yard lot line where 10 feet is required and Section 10.22, Subdivision 1(B) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C)(6) to allow the porch to encroach 73 feet into the average lakeshore setback. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 8. #2610 Jerome J. Hall, 80 Leaf Street—Afterthe-Fact Variances Kelley stated that the Planning Commission recommended denial of the plan they reviewed. A revised plan came to the Council without benefit of the Planning Commission reviewing it. He stated he would like to deny the application, or send it back to the Planning Commission for their review, Flint aiid Peterson agreed. Mayor Jabbour explained the situation to the applicant. Weinberger stated he could appear on the Planning Commission’s agenda on October 16,2000, and that he had already had a public hearing. Peterson moved, and Flint seconded, to send the application back to the Planning Commbsion. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. i' ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 *9. #2612 Donald MacMillan, 2550 Fox Street—Variance—Resolution No. 4533 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4533 granting a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(C), to permit the construction of an oversized accessory structure on the lot with a maximum foot print of 1,600 square feet and Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(D) to permit the construction of an oversized accessory structure closer to the street lot line than the residence. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *10. #2615 George Stickney, 879 Brown Road North—Lot Line Rearrangement- Resolution No. 4534 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4534 approving a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for property located at 879 Brown Road North. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 11. #2616 Minnetonka Center for the Arts, 2240 North Shore Drive —Conditional Use Permit Weinberger stated that the Minnetonka Center for the Arts has proposed to construct a new facility on their property located at 2240 North Shore Drive. They need a new building because: their enrollment and attendance have steadily increased and they have outgrown the existing building; the existing building has structural problems with the foundation and the roof; the mechanical systems are out of date; and it contains asbestos and lead paint. The proposed building would be constructed north of the existing building, and upon completion, the old building would be removed. During construction, the existing building would remain in use until the new building is completed. The Planning Commission discussed the construction schedule and how the property would function during construction. They would want all construction traffic to use North Shore Drive and not any residential streets. The “cooling tower” requires a conditional use permit to allow it to exceed 30 feet in height. The Arts Center has proposed a crushed rock material for its parking lots, instead of a bituminous surface. A stormwater management pond would be located in the northwest comer of the property. The service entrance would be on the west side of the building, and trash receptacles would be screened. The east parking lot should be screened, and possibly fenced, to provide a buffer between it and the Hill School. Chair of the Building Committee Julie Halquist, Minnetrista, and Executive Director Roxanne Heeley, Plymouth, were present with their architect, James Dayton, and ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 11, #2616 Minnetonka Center for the Arts, 2240 North Shore Drive—Conditional Use Permit—Continued landscape architect Tom Oslund. Mayor Jabbour asked why the Arts Center was requesting a conditional use permit for the 45 foot cooling tower. Peterson asked if the cooling/heating system could be placed elsewhere. Mr. Dayton explained the system they chose to use, and stated they designed the tower to contain and screen mechanical equipment required by the building so the elements would not just sit on the roof. Mayor Jabbour stated he felt allowing the tower would set a precedent in the City for allowing buildings to exceed the 30 foot height maximum. Mr. Dayton stated that the tower is serving a necessary fimction while identifying the building. Mayor Jabbour stated the tower was a design element not strictly necessary. Flint stated he agreed it was too tall. Kelley questioned the kind of hazardous materials that will be used in the Center. Mr. Dayton stated that the amounts of materials on the site won’t require extensive special handling. They will follow national fire codes for the storage of oxygen, acetylene, paint, etc. They have sprinklers throughout the building and smoke sensors, as well as heat sensors. Kelley questioned what sort of functions would occur outside the Center. Ms. Heeley stated they expect outdoor activity to increase. Eventually a sculpture garden will be on the grounds. She stated that art openings tend to be sedate functions that should not disturb the neighbors. Mr. Oslund stated that because of the grading, the backyard would not be conducive to holding functions, so most functions would occur in the front, along North Shore Drive. Peterson questioned the vegetative screening along the east and west sides of the property. Mr. Oslund stated that the east side of the property will have the sculpture garden. The border of the garden will be planted with amur maples that grow quickly and densely. Mr. Dayton stated that the west end of the building will have the service drive. As a result, the screening will be denser at that end of the property to hide the dumpsters from the neighbors’ view. Mayor Jabbour asked the neighbors to comment. Nancy Roehr of 1345 French Creek Drive stated that she supports the new Center, but was very concerned about the trees at the northwest comer of the property. She wanted heavy screening of the service drive and dumpsters. Mayor Jabbour reminded her that trees would not be planted until after construction is finished. Mr. Dayton stated that the project is supposed to take 14 months, and they plan to open the new Center in June of 2002. He also stated they have put considerable energy into designing a plan that fits ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2000 11. U2616 Minnetonka Center for the Arts, 2240 North Shore Drive—Conditional Use Permit—Continued within their budget. Ms. Roehr stated she prefers the gravel parking lots to bituminous ones. Steve Miller of 1360 French Creek Drive stated that he supports the new Center, but feels the tower is too tall for the neighborhood and for the City. Pam Sagan of 1300 French Creek Drive stated that she supports the new Center, but she was also concerned about screening the service drive and dumpsters. She asked for a guarantee that the Center would not run out of funding before finishing the landscaping, such as putting funds in an escrow account. She stated she felt the tower was too tall, and she was in favor of gravel parking lots. She also stated she was concerned about construction traffic near the residential roads. Mr. Dayton stated that the existing west drive will be used as the construction drive, not the proposed west drive. He stated that they did their best to camouflage the service entrance. The garage door is recessed and fully glazed. Mayor Jabbour stated that the City has a bond and they won’t release the letter of credit until the project is finished. Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to approve the conditional use permit with the conditions outlined by staff, and with the additional conditions/exceptions that the cooling tower height extension is denied, all Arts Center functions end by 11:00 p.m., the proposed gravel parking lots are acceptable, and the letter of credit will not be released until the project is complete. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *12. #2617 Doug Olson and Barbara Bowers, 2601 West Lafayette Road- Variance—Resolution No. 4535 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4535 granting a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22 Subdivision 1(A) to allow a second story addition on the existing residence where a portion of ii lies within 75 feet of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka and Section 10.22, Subdivision 1(B) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C)(6) to allow the second story addition to encroach 70 feet into the average lakeshore setback. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 8 'I W '■4 >i-' -, f' i £ 1 f i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 *13. #2619 Paul and Denise Aasen, 577 Park Lane —Variances —Resolution No. 4536 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4536 granting variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14(C) to permit structural coverage greater than 1,500 square feet where 1,881 square feet exists and 1,881 square feet has been requested; Section 10.24, Subdivision 5(B) to permit a structural addition 6 feet from the north property line where 10 feet is required; Section 10.22, Subdivisions 2 and 1(B) and Section 10.56, Subdivisions 16(C)(6) and 16(L)(2) to permit an encroachment into the average lakeshore setback for the family room addition. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Flint reported that if the City is going to get the support of the Watershed District for the study on Stubbs Bay, Council Members and the Mayor should appear before the Watershed District to ask for assistance. Mayor Jabbour stated they are still working on getting two new parks. They closed on the land with the school. He stated the Council should think about adopting a resolution to ask Mn/DOT to put a left turn lane in next to Washington Scientific so that the lane can be planned for and funded, even though it would not be completed until after the Highway 12 improvements. Kelley stated that at the end of Orono Orchard Road there is a stop sign before the railroad tracks, and one after the tracks. He asked if the first stop sign could be removed. Gappa stated it could. *14. Housing Week Proclamation —Resolution No. 4537 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4537 proclaiming November 11-18,2000 to be Housing Week in the City of Orono. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT *15. Fox Ridge Sanitary Sewer Revised Assessment Roll—Resolution No. 4538 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4538 to amend the interest rate and date applied to the Fox Ridge Area Sanitary Sewer Assessment Roll, as established by Resolution No. 4493. J I- ri* t ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 *i5. Fox Ridge Sanitary Sewer Revised Assessment Roll —Resolution No. 4538- Continued Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *16. East Long Lake Sanitary Sewer Revised Assessment Roll—^Resolution No. 4539 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4539 to amend the amount for one property, and amend the interest rate and date applied to the East Long Lake Sanitary Sewer Assessment Roll, as established by Resolution No. 4491. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *17. Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Revised Assessment Roll—Resolution No. 4540 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4540 to amend the amounts for all properties, and amend the interest rate and date applied to the Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Assessment Roll, as established by Resolution No. 4459. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *18. Head Property Sanitary Sewer Assessment Roll—Resolution No. 4541 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4541 adopting the 2090 Shoreline Drive (Head Property) Sanitary Sewer Improvements Assessment Roll. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *19. Hazardous Tree Removal Assessment—Resolution No. 4542 Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4542 for the collection of 2000 Hazardous Tree Removal Charges. *20. Request for Payment #5—2000 Lift Station Projects Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to approve Request for Payment ^5,2000 Lift Stations Project to Ford Construction, Inc. in the amount of $83,584.47. *21. Request for Payment #2—Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to approve Request for Payment ^2, Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project to Earth Burners, Inc. in the amount of $52,812.79. -lit.. I ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 21a. Temple Israel Request for CUP Hearing at City Council versus Planning Commission The applicant was not present due to the Yom Kippur holiday. Mayor Jabbour moved, and Peterson seconded, to enable a conditional use permit for a new shower/toilet facility at Camp Teko to go directly to the City Council for a public bearing at tbe October 23,2000 City Council meeting, bypassing the Planning Commission. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *22. Curbside Recycling Contract Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to recommend extending the current contract with E-Z Recycling for one year through December 31,2001, and sending out RFPs in July 2001 for curbside recycling in the seven cities participating in the West Hennepin Recycling Commission. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT None. *23. LICENSES None. *24. BILLS Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. u ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 9,2000 ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk - -f-. j'.if #dJ <M jij*- Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor A/ 1 • I ^r-f Application Date: 10/20/00 Deadline: 12/19/00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION UCI 2 3 2001) CU If DATE: October 20,2000 ITEM NO.: S Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2632 Temple Israel - Camp Teko 645 Tonkawa Road Conditional Use Permit Public Hearing 7:30 p.m. Zoning District:LR-1 B One Fam ily Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Applicai ....2 Public Hearing for Conditional Use Permit to permit construction of a 2,100 s.f. toilet/shower facility ^br Camp Teko. List of Exhibits: A B C D E Site Pian/Survey Side Eievation View Front Elevation View Section i0.20. Subdivision 3 (C) permitting Clubs and Camps as a Conditional Use in “R” districts Council Memo (October 6,2000) Ron Moorse, City Administrator Background: Ihe City Council approved a request to schedule a public hearing for October 23,2000 for a CUP for Temple Israel. The request is to permit a toilet and shower facility on the property, with the condition that a full CUP application for the Camp use be submitted prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being granted for the shower and toilet facility. No CUP has ever been issued for Camp Teko. The use has been “grandfathered” as the property has been in use as a camp since before adoption of the zoning ordinance. Before Camp Teko the property had been used as a Boy Scout camp. A CUP had been applied for in 1989 to permit an expansion to the main building for Camp Teko. The item had been reviewed by the Planning Commission, but before Council review the applicant had withdrawn the application. Conditioual Use Permit Review: Camps are a conditional use in residential districts. The request is not for the use of the property as a camp, but to permit a new toilet/shower facility to be constructed between the Dining Hall and Stone Lodge. T^e Municipal Code requires accessory buildings, for the proposed use, to meet a minimum setback of 50’ to property lines. The proposed location of the building meets ail required setbacks for new accessory structures on the property. k ^ ■■ X, 4 -^‘# 4 Request for Council Action continued Page 2 October 20,2000 #2632 Temple Israel_____________ The building is proposed to be approximately 2,100 s.f. in size. A review of all other buildings on the property will be completed with the review with the full CUP application. The size of the building is not a concern due of the size of the property that is owned by the Camp. Sometime before the Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the new building Temple Israel will apply for a CUP for the use of the property as a Camp. Copies of the survey and plaxis for the toilet/shower facility have been provided and are attached. Public Hearing: The public hearing has been noticed and ail property owners within 350' have been mailed notice of the of the public hearing. The advantage to rescheduling the public hearing to the October 23,2000 meeting of the Council allows the applicant to receive a building permit, if the CUP is approved, on October 24 rather than November 28 if the item would be reviewed by the Planning Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve a conditional use permit to allow Temple Israel to receive a building permit for a new toilet/shower facility with the condition a full CUP application for the Camp use of the property be submitted prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued for the new building. I'l . ' i mi: • t ApP*^0)( '\ »<5Vt , :rS-^CL c * \ » ^'/ . m 35’ accessory building setback NEW SHOWER FACILITY. * >IAM. MOLX?ED LOUVER EOT TO TOIET ROOM U5T - BLANK OUT AS >. N MILLNORK « 660R 36 aUAL P 5IDIN6, PAINTED tainted ^ IZED CEDAR SHAKES TO MATCH MAIN : - s TED HOLLOW rand FRAME \ II* I I ir ufiiuiiun I' I • ’I I r 5i£7^SSi2FiniwniiMi • ■ r ' I • I' r I SiiUIffilttl!! I I I I J. — • 1 r ~i I IP 1^1 ll I I iii it I -«i - I III' i' I .1 I IL I ^i'li T+ih I □t I I I I 1. SIDE ELEVATION 1/4" = r-o" [w IVAMihiarTTki ■ I '~M Wk I YTTihii^iiiMliiftiAIMitiii'k*tf«vanuA \ «*• w I, r § 10.20 B. Churches. Churches including those related structures located on the same site which are an integral part of the church proper, convents or homes' for persons related to a religious function on the same site provided no building other than a residence shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District. ^ C. Clubs. Camps, etc. Golf courses, country clubs, tennis clubs, public swimming pools serving more than one family, scout camps, YMCA camps, YWCA camps, church camps, or private non- profit parks, playgrounds and other similar uses. The principal structure for any of the above listed uses shall be 1 00 feet or niore from any abutting lot in an "R" District, jnd^ accessory structures shall be a minimura^ofiifty ieet from any lot line. D. Public Service Structures. Public service structures, including but not limited to electric transmission lines, buildings such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure regulating stations, wells, and plumbing stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electrical power substations, provided no building shall be located within 50' from any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District. Prior to granting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design of service structures is compatible to the neighborhood in which it is to be located and thus will promottf'the general welfare. Public service structures as defined above that have been approved by the City at required public hearings for public improvement projects shall not require a condition^ use permit but such structures shall be subject to all other appropriate standards set forth in tWs section; amendments to approved plans involving design and/or placement of these strucmres will require written notice by the City to all affected property owners 14 days prior to the adoption of the amended plans by the Council. Personal wireless services and commercial broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be considered public service structures. Source; Ordinance 29,2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 Source: Ordinance No. 161,2nd Series Effective Date: 5-27-97 E, Greenhouses. Commercial greenhouses provided all outside storage is fenced in such a manner so as to screen the stored material from view when observed from the public street or adjoining lot. Commercial greenhouse structures shall not be located in a required yard area, and are subject further to the general zoning code requirements pertaining to accessory structures. Source; Ordinance 72,2nd Series Adopted: 8-14-89 B, i r- ORONO CC 280 (4-1-84) B REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: October 6,2000 ITEM NO: ^ / Department Approval: Name RonMoorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Temple Israel Request for CUP Hearing at the City Council versus Planning Commission Temple Israel is planning to build a new shower/toilet facility for Camp Teko. Materials related to the planned new building are attached. The Camp Teko private camp use is a conditional use under the City ’s residential zoning district. Because Camp Teko was in existence prior to the City ’s zoning code, there has never been a conditional use permit for the camp. Construction of a new building for a conditional use requires an amendment to the CUP. In discussions with Camp Teko over the summer, staffindicated it was unclear how the new building should be handled in terms of zoning review due to no existing CUP for the camp. The Temple Israel representative understood the discussions to indicate a zoninj application and review would not be required for the shower facility, and that only a building permit application would be needed. Staff has determined that the new facility should be a part of an overall conditional use permit application that brings the overall camp use into confoimance in terms of a conditional use permit. Temple Israel recently applied for a building permit. A conditional use permit application process would delay the project until late November. Temple Israel has requested the City to consider other options that would enable the building project to move forward more quickly. An option proposed by staff is that the City Council hold a public heeiring regarding a CUP specifically for the new shower/toilet facility at its October 23 meeting, with the condition that Temple Israel agrees to then submit a full CUP application for the overall Camp Teko use. Although holding the public hearing at the City Council meeting would bypass the Planning Commission, it would enable public input regarding the proposed building; and if the CUP is approved, it would enable a building permit to be provided on October 24 versus November 28. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion regarding enabling a conditional use permit for a new shower/toilet facility at Camp Teko to go directly to the City Council for a public hearing at the October 23,2000 City Council meeting, with the condition that a full CUP application for the overall Camp Teko use be submitted prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being granted for the shower/toilet facility. i Total Fee: $ Entered By: Date Received: ^ -~7" Permit ff: _______ CITY OF ORONO - BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION All information must be submitted in full before plan review will be started. {please print all information) THE APPLICANT IS: {circle one) OWNER OR CONTRACTOR JOB SITE ADDRESS: TT>JKAV\/A gOAD ZIP: NAME OF OWNER: TEMPLE ISRAEL, _ PHONE: (hor^) (work) MAILING ADDRESS: 7V.U FMFP<aM AVE.S.CITY: MIKIMEAFDUSZIP: S5^ CONTRACTOR: niVFgsiFign PHONE: CONTACT PERSON: DAVP SrHAFFgg. MOBILE/PAGER: 4>l^ ~ mailing ADDRESS: ^OlD HWVJ_______ClTY:Cr.lOO& PAEUZIP: SStfUf STATE LICENSE: » 3faMI ARCHITECT/ENGINEER: WAISH BKttDP PHONE: //.IT. MAILING ADDRESS: q7f>f;FyriMn AVE. S. CITY: MWJM^RilS ZIP: 'SSMBL. NAME: MVHAEL SHIELDS___________REGISTRATION» 12MBO------^---- Addition •T\TE OF WORK: New X Move Remodel/Alteration Accessory Structure Land Alteration PROPOSED W'ORK {describe in detail)'. MEW SlADWEE / TPl LtiT—WCJLjTV l=pg. C/VMP T£EQ STORIES:__I SQ. FEET OF EACH FLOOR: NO. OF BEDROOMS:GARAGE STALLS: ATT. I^OQO DET. ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION VALUATION (excluding land): S__lOPiQQO: I hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the information above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City and wit the State Building Code; that I understand this is not a permit and work is not to start without a permit; and that the work will be in ac^dance with ^ app^ed plan. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: Aya^'^c / D.ATE: ^/^/eri> biOTE! Parade of Homes events require separate permit approval by Police Department and City Council 60 days prior to the event. Non-permitted events will not be allowed. h VC. 1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 2 5 2000 Cl I T or onu/vo DATE: October 18,2000 / ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2571 Jim Ginther and Doug Ault 2739 Shadywood Road Variance Zoning District: LR'IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) List of Exhibits: A B C D E Resolution Hardship Statement Letter (dated October 16,2000) Zimmerman/Ogle Property Survey Staff Reports (8/17/00 and 4/13/00) Application Background: Ginther and Ault had submitted a Conditional Use Permit and variance application to request continued use of a property as a ‘dock lot’ that has been in use for the mooring of nvo boats, and an after the fact variance to permit expansion of a parking area constituting additional hardcover within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. On August 11th the City of Orono received a letter from Mr. Thomas M. Crosby, Jr. applicant representative, withdrawing the request for the conditional use permit for a dock use on a lot without a principal residence. They do wish to proceed with the request for the variance for the parking area. The request before the City Council is an after-the-fact variance for the addition of 4' of gravel to the parking area located off ShadNwood Road. The applicant’s hardship statement is attached as Exhibit B. The City of Orono posted the area along Shadywood Road as a “No Parking’’ area in 1999. As a result the property owners expanded the gravel parking area to accommodate parking for two vehicles cn the lot. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission Recommended 6 to 0 to approve the variance for the expansion of hardcover on the lot based on the following findings: 1.Citing concerns over safety, the City of Orono posted Shadywood Road in the area of the dock lots as a “No Parking’’ zone. To accommodate parking on-site rather than on the street the property owners expanded a parking area from one vehicle width to allow for parking of two vehicles. 2. The property has been used for two dock slips for many years and has t\vo owners, each with one . boat slip. 4 I'v e-^L V ► Request for Council Action continued Page 2 October 6,2000 #2571 Jim Ginter and Doug Ault r’. ' I ; ♦ ' V ,t ’ 3.The entire lot is located within 75' of the lakeshore. It would not be possible to construct or expand a parking area without impacting the 75' setback. Staff Recommendation: To approve the variances subject to maintain a 5' separation between the parking area and fire hydrant. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the resolution approving an after-the-fact variance. T * r- k'.. ■t I:" A A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN AFTER THE FACT VARIANCE TO ORONO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (1) FILE NO. 2571 WHEREAS, James O. Ginther and Clara Joanne Ginther and Douglas R. Ault and Kristen Ault (hereinafter the "applicants") are owners of a property located at 2739 Shady wood Road in the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: The northeasterly 110 feet of Tract U, Registered Land Survey No. 415, Files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for an after the fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to permit an expansion of a parking area constituting an increase in hardcover on the property with the 75' lakeshore setback. WHEREAS, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on October 16, 2000; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File ^2571. The property is located in the LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential District requiring a minimum lot size of 43,560 s.f. The property is 7,223 s.f. in area. Page 1 of 8 I F T'^ 3.The Planning Commission reviewed the request and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0 to approve an after the fact variance based on the following findings of fact: A. D. Citing concerns over safety, the City of Orono posted Shadywood Road in the area of the dock lots as a "No Parking" zone. To accommodate parking on-site rather than on the street the property owners expanded a parking area from one vehicle width to allow for parking of two vehicles. The lot is commonly owned by the Ault’s and Ginther’s. Etch property owner has one boat slip for a total of two slips on the property. The entire lot is located within 75' of the lakeshore. It would not be possible to construct or expand a parking area without impacting the 75’ setback. The dock lots were created as part of Registered Land Survey No. 415 (2/3/1955) in common with residential properties located within the plat. It as assumed at the time of the plat lots within the neighborhood would have access to dock lots for storing of a boat. Since none of the dock lots were ever legally combined with the residential lots nearby they eventually were sold off separately and are held in private ownership. The City of Orono has received several letters and comments from concerned property owners in the neighborhood questioning the legality of a second dock slip on the property. Staff has no strong evidence to suggest one of the slips had been added after the adoption of the ordinance requiring a principal structure to have a dock as a accessory structure. Although no CUP has been issued by the City of Orono, it is the position of the City the property has been "grandfathered" as a legal non-conforming use for dock use. City Staff believes that it would be difficult to require these docks, or one dock, to be removed Page 2 of 8 4 » 4. 5. based on there long existence. The City of Orono has no strong evidence that the use of the second dock is illegal. F.The existing hardcover on the property is 792 s.f. The driveway has been determined to be 28' X 17'. Other hardcover located on this property includes a small amount of retaining wall and landscaping which encroaches from an adjacent property. G.To maintain an access point to the fire hydrant located on the proper.y, it was suggested the parking area be relocated to the north by T leave a 5' separation to the fire hydrant. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comment, by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The Council finds th?t the conditions existing on this property are peculiar ‘o it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the requested variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, 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; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning C^e and Compreheusi^'e Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one it ». ore of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants an after the fact v.*! •«/«:; to Municipal Zoning Code Section Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to permit an expansion of a parking area constituting an increase in hardcover on the property with the 75’ lakeshore setback, approved is 578 s.f. (8%) hardcover subject to the following conditions; Page 3 of 8 r\ * , I . 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 5. r ■ Improvements shall be in conformance with to the site plan provided by the applicants and attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Any future revisions to the site plan shall require further review by the City Council. The parking area shall be relocated to accommodate a S' setback to tliC fire hydrant located on the property. Applicants shall work with the adjacent property owners to develop a suitable vegetative buffer between the dock lot use and residential properties. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owners, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a permit within one year of the date of Council's approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (October 23, 2001). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themscives, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 4 of 8 ^ • j I,.. & ■M Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 23rd day of October, 2000, ATTEST; Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owners Property Owners STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of October, 2000 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 8 JHL r ‘ • hL STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of for said county, personally appeared before me a Notary l\iblic within and known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN > On this day of , 20 for said county, personally appeared before me a Notary Public within and known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 6 of 8 ■■■ iM F-.IT • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 20. for said county, personally appeared before me a Notary Public within and known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged *hat he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of . 20 for said county, personally appeared before me a Notary Public within and known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public ... » : it ^ r Page 7 of 8 it •rvT«rt rvuL i »OQV«T •r sen L a UGKTfCST 1 9 OJ^nKST1mcjrmc Iff f 1 f*,. Exhibit A • «• •• •• m m • m mt m ^ ^ 0 f •• w iV-Q u 2^ •1^ «% suRvcy FOR; JIM'GINTHER FEET Ifrgi^ DCSCftPDOtt 1 D i9 ivorlh4C4%w1y 110 of Trod Ua Roctstvod LoAd Sl^vs ^ N a . Ati irm a / R#9W«r of Tl0«ia H«^V\ Coun^. ^ ^ CCTH/ICATIOK: ; D«tal Ihl# 22n<J tfcy of Fdbnwx^OO ^ «««•■ «io len j^f Ui« StoU of KCnflwola. |Uvfn4 Wm W‘.y c(^, ^ itocK e«ika WVsrfMolo UcwiM No. a02si • • . ., • HARDCOVER AREAS cravol o(«>e *n so. FT. OOOCS CN UNO -85 sa FT. CONCRETE 1MJL -IT 90. FT. TbTM. H/AOCONCR >578 SO. FT. TOTAt. LA.N0 tPZA -7223 SO. FT. TOT/1. P»C6?tT CT HARDCOVER 8 X • t Page 8 of 8 FROU FAEGRE i BENSON ITUE) 8.15 ’00 15;59/ST.15:5 i - B Date: To: August 15,2000 Orono Planning Commission From: Jim Ginther and Doug Ault Subj'ect:Gravel Parking Variances Shadywood Road (P.I.D. 21 117 23 24 0028) Enclosed: *Copy of survey dated 4/26/00 showing gravel parking area off of County Road 19 On M^h )5,2000 we applied for a variance of an expansion of the gravel parking area that has existed on the property for many years. We expanded the parking area sufficient for one car to one sufficient for two cars. The cuircnf expansion area (approximately 18* by 27’) is two car widths and represents .065% of the total land area of the lot. I A two car wdth parking area is required so as not to have one car blocking the exit of the first if parked end to end and to avoid the need to park on County Road 19. Hardships 1. j Two boat slips have been maintained for, to the best of our knowledge, approximately 20 years. A hardship exists if both owners cannot park on the loL 2. Since 1999 parking restriction on County Highway 19 have been strictly enforced. Priw to 1999 parking was permitted on Highway 19. A hardship exists if the lot is to be used for its intended purpose without adequate parking on the lot. 3. Mainlaming the lawn areas adjacent to the parking areas without appropriate hard sirface parking in a fashion consistent with the quality of the neighborhood creates a hardship Hard surface parking areas prevent erosion of soil and eventual run off into the lake 4. The lot has been owned jointly as tenants in common, to the best of our knowledge,; for over 30 years. Each owner is entitled to a parking space with appropriate ingress and egress. Not having such a space creates a hardship. > . GCT-16-2 11:44 ZIMMERMflN GROUP 3410323 P.02/02 C October 16,2000 TO: Orono Planning Commission cc: Richard Gay FROM:Jim Zimmerman 2745 ShadywoodRoad Dick and Marfys O^e 2771 Shadywo^ Road SUBJECT: Ginther/Auh Parldnp I The O^es only received notice of the Planning Commission Meeting on Friday. Given the late noticetb ji 1.. .... . m, . , attend ei notice th^ will not be able to attend and Jim ZSmmeiman has a conflict and won't be able to timer. It is our understanding from p^e^dous discussions with city staff that only one issue will be discussed tonight and that is a variance for parking for Ginther and Ault. It is our understanding that thQr are proposing a hard cover variance to allow for a total of two parking places. We understand that Richard Gay has worked with Gindter and Ault on determining how to place a 2 car driveway that works for both of them. We are totally supportive of any car park solution that meets the needs of Ginther, Ault and Gay. We would ask that any other issues raised concerning the non-resident dock lots be postponed until we could be present. It's our understanding that there is not to be discussion of other issues besides the parking and so we are comfortable having Richard Gay work with the Ginther and Ault to resolve this issue.Commission and V « #> i' TOTAL P.02 ’I'--' 0 rvTU ruLL! o I HXOnjHT mti ixsKTrosr OJMO POST mime uem ■>% SUR\€T fat JIM^GINTHER IXBAL DCSOhPTKXt Tht 5ert»*M«y 110 fMt of Tract U. ftagblnd Land n <v *ts n- «# Ragktrar ef UllM. Hani^h County, ilwSote • ' ^ COITlflCATlON: DoM Ihli doy of robnwy Soo^ uncor tto ten j^f Ih* StoU et Mlnr.ts< Hiil—1 thU Ott) doy of Mordt. >nnn fUvbfd Utli 2ath doy of Aprfl, 2000 end ole. SoOlo Uconst No. 202B1 HARDCOVER AREAS • cra ^ o«\e ~«n so. rr. DOCKSON LAND -9$ sa FT. OONCRCTC muL «11 sa FT. total HAROOOVOt ■578 sa FT. total UNO ARCA >7223 SO. FT. TOTAL PfjtCENT or HAROCOVCR 8 X I f ‘ TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE: RE: August 17,2000 #2571 Jim Ginther and Doug Ault 2739 Shadyvvood Road Variance 0-75' Hardcover-Public Hearing Zoning:LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District List of Exhibits: A B C D E Hardship Statement Letter, City of Orono (8/9/00) Property Survey Hardcover Calculations Staff Report (4/13/00) Application Background: Ginther and Ault had submitted a Conditional Use Permit and variance application to request continued use of a property as a ‘dock lot’ that has been in use for the mooring of two boats, and an after the fact variance to permit expansion of a parking area constituting additional hardcover within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Mitmetonka. On August 11th the City of Orono received a letter from Mr. Thomas M. Crosby, Jr. applicant representative, withdrawing the request for the conditional use permit for a dock use on a lot without a principal residence. They do wish to proceed with the request for the variance for the parking area. The request before the Planning Commission is an after-the-fact variance for the addition of 4' of pra\ el to the parking area located off Shadvwood Road. The applicant ’s hardship statement is attached as Exhibit A. The City of Orono posted the area along Shadyvvood Road as a“No Parking ” area in 1999. As a r ilt the property owi.ers expanded the gravel parking area to accommodate parking for two vehicles on the lot. The dock lots were created as part of Registered Land Survey No. 415 (2/3/1955) in common with residential properties located within the plat. It was assumed at the time of the plat lots within the neighborhood would have access to dock lots for storing of a boat. Since none of the dock lots were ever legally combined with the residential lots nearby they eventually were sold off separately and are held in private ownership. Several owners of dock lots applied to the City of Orono in 1985 for a conditional use permit to allow legal use of the lots without a principal structure. The Mumcipal Code has not permitted accessory structures (including docks) to be constructed on lots without a principal building as early as 1968. #257/ im Giniher and Doug Alt 2739 ^hadpvood Road After the Fact Variance August 21, 2000 page-l The City of Orono has received several letters and comments from concerned propert>' ovMiers in the neighborhood questioning the legality of the second dock slip on the property. Staff has no strong evidence to suggest one of the slips had been added after the adoption of the ordinance requiring a principal structure to have a dock as a accessory structure. Although no CUP has been issued by the City of Orono, it is the position of the City the property has been “grandfathered” as a legal non- conforming use for dock use. City Staff believes that it would be difficult to require these docks, or one dock, to be removed based on there long existence. The City of Orono has no strong evidence that the use of the second dock is illegal. History of Dock Lots The 1985 conditional use permits were apparently only required for dock lots whose owners did not reside in the immediate neighborhood, approved the use of the lots as dock lots for Tracts S/T, R/Q, 0/P and E. Since that time the Hoffman/Messer Tract U has been sold to non-residents Ginther/Ault and they had initially agreed to apply for a conditional use permit. The Orono Zoning Code does not have the provision of a conditional use for dock lots. The CUP was accepted by the non-resident owners in 1985 as a practical way of placing some limits on the dock lot usage. Review of Hardcover The e.xisting hardcover on the property is 792 s.f. The driveway has been determined to be 28' X17'. Other hardcover located on this property is a small amount of retaining wall and landscaping which encroaches from an adjacent property. The parking area is located immediately next to a fire hydrant. Should the Planning Commission approve the request, it may be appropriate to require the parking area to be moved to allow some separation to the fire hydrant. It has been suggested that a 10 ’ separation would be adequate. Issues for Planning Commission Discussion 1. It is unclear how long Tract U has been used for the mooring of two boats. This makes it difficult to determine if there has been an expansion of the use based on the number of boats using the lot. Previous CUPs for adjacent dock lots only permitted one boat and one parking space per dock lot. Because this lot currently has two boats and two boat slips the applicants have requested an after the fact variance to permit a parking area to accommodate two vehicles. 2. Recently the City of Orono has prohibited parking on Shadywood which has been very controversial. Is there a created need for internal parking for this specific dock lot? Does the parking area have to be gravel? 3.Is a variance to allow an increase in hardcover in the 0-75' zone for the parking area justified since on street parking has been eliminated? ti257I Jim Giniher and Doug Alt 2739 Shadyivood Road Afttr thf Fact Variance August 21, 2000 pagt-2 !■ The recent flurry of neighborhood concerns regarding the dock lots has raised many issues related to this application. These issues can be summarized as follows: (From 4/13/00 memo) 1.General neighborhood resident concerns about parking on Co. Rd. 19, overnight stays on boats, lighting, security alarms, and a general e.xpansion of a non-conforming situation ith the concurrent perception of increased activity. 2.Non-resident dock lot owners concerns about parking needs and the need to provide amenities such as lighting and security alarms to make the dock lots usable. 3.Resident dock lot owners negative response to City’s suggestion that they permanently tie the dock lots to their neighborhood homestead properties. 4.Lack of clarity as to existence and impact of existing easements and covenants dating back to the 1950's that may impose limits on use or require maintenance of access. Staff expects area residents will be in attendance to voice their specific concerns about this application. Also see attached letter from neighbors. Mike Gafifron has written a letter to state the City’s position on several of the issues raised by concerned neighbors. It is attached as Exhibit B. Comments from the adjacent property owners and there attorney are attached following the exhibits noted on page 1 of this report. Note, most of the comments were received earlier this year and are in reference to the conditional use request that has been withdrawn. Options for Planning Commission Action 1. 2. 3. 4. Table for additional information Recommend approval with condition Recommend denial, stating reasons Other action ^2571 Jtm Gimhirand Doug All 2739 Shatfywood Road After Fact Variance Augujt 21, 2000 pap-3 --------------- ---- ------ ..J., . FROM FAEGRE & BENSON hv (TilEl 8.15’00 15:59/ST. 15:59/110.4862058749 P 2 A Date: To: August 15,2000 Orono Planning Commission From:Jim Ginther and Doug Ault Subject:Gravel Parking Variances Shadywood Road (P.I.D. 21 117 23 24 0028) Enclosed: • Copy of survey dated 4/26/00 showing gravel parking area off of County Road 19 On M^h )5,2000 we applied for a variance of an expansion of the gravel parking area that has existed on the property for many years. We expanded the parking area sufficient for one car to one sufficient for two cars. The current expansion area (approximately 18 ‘ by 27‘) is two car widths and represents .065% of the total land area of the lot. A two car width parking area is required so as not to have one car blocking the exit of the first if parked end to end and to avoid the need to park on County Road 19. Hardships 1. j Two boat slips have been maintained for, to the best of our knowledge, approximately 20 years. A hardship exists if both owners cannot park on the Iol 2. Since 1999 parking restriction on County Highway 19 have been strictly enforced. Prior to 1999 parking was permitted on Highway 19. A hardship exists if the lot is to be used for its intended purpose without adequate parking on the lot. 3. M^Uuning the lawn areas adjacent to the parking areas without appropriate hard si^ace parking in a fashion consistent with the quality of the neighborhood creates a hardship. Haiti surface parking areas pirevent erosion of soil and eventual run off into the lake 4. Thelothasbeenownedjointly as tenants in common, to the best of our knowledge, for over 30 ye.ars. Each owner is entitled to a parking space with appropriate ingress and egress. Not having such a space creates a hardship. ■ A t August 9,2000 Jun Zimmerman 2745 Shad}r\\ood Road Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Narrows Dock Lot Issues Dear Mr. Zimmerman: CITY of o: street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Municipal We are in receipt of your July 20 memo. The City’s position on the variou Narrows dock lots is as follows: Miiirii 1.Re: Ownership/rental status of the boat ’’Chop Chop". It is ou boat "Chop Chop", docked at Wittman’s lot, was formerly owned is currently owned by Wittman and Bates jointly. Bates claims that of the boat and that Wittman’s share in the ownership is minimal, with a representative of Bates resulted in a proposal to re-title Wittman’s name to eliminate any question that Wittman is an own If such a re-titling did occur, the City would have no basis to coni situation. The fact that the primary user of the boat is a co-owner i person not on the title, is a non-issue from the City’s perspective, b( prohibit a person from allowing others to use his boat (this woul situation where a pure rental or charter craft was being operated as a zone). ♦ The code sectior.s that apply to slip rental read as follows: 5.43 (i.l_nna Business License): Subd. lA: (Definition^ "Business Use" means engaging in or the business of docking, mooring or storing boats. Subd. 1C (Definltion’l: "Business of Docking, Mooring o renting or otherwise providing space, including boat buoys, storing one or more boats belonging to persons other than t the property, except when licensed as a joint use. ItKlK* rtNfUHl ftrATtrmraTsriin] Telephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.ci.oroDOJnn.us ir.’M W- '•( ' I *. ^■1' r Jim Zimmerman August 9,2000 Page 2 2. Subd.2: License Required. It is unlaviful for any persons to engage or participate in business use without first having obtained an annual license therefor from the City. Subd. 6: Business Use Licenses Limited to B-2 Zone . No business use shall be licensed in any zoning district other than B-2, except when a business use is allowed by ordinance in another zoning district, such use conducted in said district shall not be required to obtain a license. Per the above, a business use requires a license and a business use license may only be issued for a site in the B-2 zone, hence business use is not allowed in any residential zones. However, the BatesAVittman situation seems to be ever-changing. We were advised last Thursday by a representative of Bates that Bates has no intent to re-titling the boat to Wittman. Bates claims to have been leasing the land (and its attached dock space) from Wittman for a few years. Bates’ representative claims he has a right to use the dock space because he is renting the land which includes the dock space, and is technically the ‘occupant’ of the property. The code allows a boat to be docked when it is owned by the occupant of the property. The City Attorney has reviewed the term ‘occupancy’ in this context and has concluded that ‘occupancy’ likely does not require actual living on the property, but merely requires an occupant to have the leased rights to use the land. City staff will be following this up by attempting to obtain a copy of the lease. We are advised by Bates’ representative that "Chop Chop will be moved to a different site next year, hence the immediate issue may be resolved in a few months. City staff will be considering possible code revisions prior to the 2001 boating season to close this apparent loophole. Please be aware that until last week the City Attorney has had no direct involvement in this specific matter. We know of no action by the City Attorney to force the removal of "Chop Chop" in 21 days, in 5 days, or in any number of days. Staff haS had a number of ongoing discussions with Bates’ and Wittman’s representatives over the last month, and the issuance of deadlines for action is a fluid process as information is gained. ' Ginther/Ault Docks. A. Potential CUP Withdrawal. Ginther and Ault have not vet withdrawn their CUP application. We are not convinced that they will withdraw it. They have the right to withdraw it if they so m I , • • •- '.T •• . • i Jim Zimmerman August 9,2000 Page 3 choose. If thev withdraw it, the City will have to decide what actions to take. The decision on what action the City might take is affected by a number of factors, including: The CUP application was not forced upon Ginther and Ault. They chose to apply for a CUP at the request of City staff, based on the same method of regulation that the City chosp *‘o pursue in 1985 for Narrows docks that were owned by persons who did not live in the immediate area. As you know, the Ginther/Ault dock lot was owned by a neighborhood resident as of 1985, hence no CUP was required at that time for this site. In 1985 the City apparently concluded that the narrows docks were legally non-conforming by virtue of being in place and generally continually in use since prior to 1-1-68 when the "no accessory use without a principal use" code was first adopted. The City therefore chose not to pursue removal of the docks. The City apparently concluded that those docks owned by persons in the immediate neighborhood could be considered as accessory to the nearby principal residence, which met the intent of the ordinance (security, primarily) if not the letter of the ordinance. The City in 1985 chose to further regulate the docks owned by persons who did not own a principal residence in the immediate neighborhood. Absent clear direction in the code, the City chose the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit as an effective way of establishing suitable controls on the non­ resident docks. The CUP established minimal standards for parking and dock length, but not much more. The CUP apparently was voluntarily accepted by the non-resident owners of dock lots as a reasonable method to establish their continued rights to use the docks. Because the Gintl ■ and Ault dock lot was owned by a neighborhood resident in 1985, it was not subject to a CUP. If Ginther ^d Ault choose not to accept the CUF method of establishing their rights, the City has limited recourse via the CUP process, because the zoning code technically does not require a CUP for a doc^c. City staff agrees that expansion from one slip to tw o slips is an expansion of anon-conforming use. However, removing the second Ault/Ginther dock slip based on it being added after 1-1-68 is not necessarily as simple as providing an airphoto showing only one dock at some giver, date in 1971. A » VT » • rr-^'^*•^**4- • Jim Zimmerman August 9,2000 Page 4 ■ The findings made by the City Council in the 1985 CUP’s support continued use of the existing docks subject to a small number of conditions. At this time the Citv does not intend to pursue removal of the docks from anv of the dock lots. City staff believes that it will be virtually impossible to legislate these docks out of existence, given their long history of continued use. The issue of whether the second dock on Ginther and Ault’s lot is legally nonconforming is extremely murky in our opinion. The fact that the City has tinowed this property to exist unhindered with two slips for nearly 30 years makes it difficult for the City to make the case that this use shouldn’t be allowed to continue as it has in the past. Had the second dock appeared very recently, the City would be in a much better position to pursue its removal. It is my understanding that the Mayor has had numerous discussions with you and with vairious dock lot owners in an attempt to gain for you and your neighbors a ‘first right of refusal’ for purchase of the non-resident dock lots as they come up for sale. City staff fully supports the concept that dock lots should be owned by property owners in the immediate neighborhood. City staff will support your efforts to establish covenants which will disallow the separate sale of dock lots from the neighborhood principal residence property to which they are accessory. Such a covenant would provide you with more neighborhood control of the situation than currently exists. General expansion of use at the docks: L 2. 3. 4. We do not consider the flagpole as an intensification or extension of the nonconforming use or a violation of any past CUP conditions, an"! we will take no action regarding the flagpole. We do not consider the provision of electricity at the docks as an extension or intensificaion of a nonconforming use, even though electricity allows the docks to have certain amenities which may be offensive to the neighborhood such as lighting, etc. We do not consider the addition of canopies over the individual docks as an expansion of the nonconforming use. We do not consider overnight occupancy of boats stored at the docks as an expansion of the nonconforming use. The City has not adopted any ordinances prohibiting overnight occupancy of boats. Jim Zimmerman August 9,2000 Pages D. 5.Based on staff measurements this year, none of the docks subject to an existing CUP have been extended past the lengths allowed by the CUP. Docking of boats that are longer than the docks is not specifically regulated in the City code nor in the existing CUP’s. C. Issues City Will Address. 1.We believe that the City can address lighting issues through the Zoning Code. The City can require the shielding of the source of lighting (the bulbs) so that it is not visible from adjoining properties. This is normally enforced by the Zoning Department. You or the neighborhood vsill have to advise us of any specific lighting issues before we will take action. Generally, City staff supports the idea of security lighimg for these docks as a deterrent to theft and vandalism, which can spill over into the neij_,hborhood. 2.Noise issues with the use of security alarms, loud music, etc. can be dealt with via the noise ordinance which is enforced by the Police Department. False alarms would be dealt with in the normal maimer by the Police Department. Cit>- staff supports the use of securit>- systems and alarms as a deterrent to crime. 3.The-is.sue of the driveway hardcov'er within 75' of the lake is a zoning mar.ier which the Zoning Department is pursuing. While the placement of grave! does not require a building permit, the location in which it was placed is not I .gal given that it is considered as hardcover when used as a parking area. The City has asked Ginther and Ault to remove the hardcover parking area. Their response is that they will request a variance for the parking area hardcover because the City has eliminated their street parking. 4.The Police Department has advised that parking on private property is only required to be 3' from a fire hydrant; the normal 1 O' parking separation is not enforceable on private property. Other Issues. 1. lam advised by the LMCD that there may be issues with certain Narrows docks in relation to the dock use areas defined by extended lot lines. This is a separate matter that would have to be addressed through the LMCD. $ V.- Jim Zimmerman August 9,2000 Page 6 2.The City intends no additional action in relation to tb.e dock lot parking along County Road 19. The parking ban remains in effect. I hope that this letter provides you with a clear picture of the City’s position on this matter. Please contact me at 952-249-4600 if you have any questions. Senior Planning Coordinator cc:Richard Gay Dick Ogle Ron Moorse Greg Gappa / Paul Weinberger-' Gary Cheswick Thomas Barrett City Council Xi'. 'I . j I .. r /; ^ ' V FROU FAEGRE A BENSONV rviKK rtu. j A mONANT , ♦ aw , « ueHTPosr • CU/MO POST ■ ucnvcMctn '..'f (TOE) 8.15'00 I6:00/ST.15:59/N0,4862058749 P SURVEY foR! JIM QINTHER FEET LEBM. DCSCRlPINM , Thfiwthwtjly 110 of Tfw* Und Survey N«. 419. FB«f of Rvgiitrar of TlUaa, Honnopln Couu^. MmoMta. COniFICATIONo Rodo«l Itila eth day of MorcK 2000 lUvInd INo 29th doy of Aprt. 2000 and Mlnnoaolo. MinifMolo UcoAM No. 202B1 HARDCOVER AREAS oftAvei. onve *♦72 sa FT. DOCKS ON LAND 95 sa FT. OOHCRTit WAa 11 sa FT. total m 978 sa FT. total UNO APCA TOTAL PERCDIT *7223 SO. FT. or haroco \cr ■f X NOTES: Z Rm area of (ho preporty ohoon horoen \t 10.SM oquor* fool or 02442 acreo. O No Wfo «oili «oo hoTWed for tho (troporallon of tnlo ourvoy to vortfy tho teaol doocripOon or 0\o oitctonco of ony oooomont or wieumbronooi. 3c r-1*^-l5-2iDOO 0:3:53 EGAJI, FIELD S. lO-lAK 61i54bt:337 P.02 0'2 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET D SETBACK ZONE: (CmCLF. ONE) 0-73' 75-250* 250-500' 500-1000 ’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House_____________S.F. Length Wi'Oih X X X S.F- S.F. S.F. D. Oarase ___________ Driveway /~ S.F. X X n */-S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Pntio/Deck X X a s.'.. F. andscape Undertoin By Plastic k'sJA X X X 3:10 S.F. SJ. a a S.F. S.F. G. Oihcr S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 7<^0 + B $0C> X 100 s: 736 S.F. /O. ■^56 S.F. A B «/» |.nopn.<;r.n HA.nnrovETt in 7.onf. A. House _____________ X S.F. Length Width X X X n E SJ. S.F. S.F. B.X C.Driveway X X D.Sidewalk •• X X E.Patio/Deck X X F.Lanclscane X Underlain X By Plasiic _Xit C.Other X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ^2 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. SJ. TOTAL ILXRDCOYER IN ZONL TOTAL PROPERTY AREA Fin 7.0NF. - B S.F. S.F. A B .X 100 % TOTi:^ P.02 i TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: RE: Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner April 13,2000 #2571 Jim Ginther and Doug Ault 2739 Shadywood Road Conditional Use Permit and Variance After the Fact Variance Zoning: LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District Application: Conditional Use Permit and variance to permit a ‘dock lot’ for two dock slips within Tract U, and an after the fact variance to permit expansion of a parking area constituting additional hardcover within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. List of Exhibits: A B C D E F G Application Existing Survey Dock Lot Ownership Plat Map Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 Resolution No. 1847 Approving Dock lot for Tract E (Sample) Letter from Zimmerman, Gay and Ogle Hbtory of Dock Lots: The dock lots are shown on a plat map attached as Exhibit C. They were created as part of Registered Land Survey No. 415 (2/3/1955) in common with residential properties located within the subdivision. It was assumed at the time the subdivision occurred each lot within the subdivision would have a dock lot for storing of a boat. Since none of the dock lots were ever legally como/ned with the residential lots nearby they eventually were sold off separately and are held in private ownership. Several owmers of dock lots applied to the City of Orono in 1985 for a conditional use permit to allow legal use of the lots without a principal structure. The Municipal Code has not permitted accessory structures (including docks) to be constructed on lots without a principal building as early as 1968. *2571 Jim Ginther and Doug Alt 2739 Shady^^ood Road Conditional Use Permit and Variance After the Fact Variance March 20, 2000 pag€--I ij f ¥.■ i ',fr 1 The 1985 conditional use permits were apparently only required for dock lots whose owners did not reside in the immediate neighborhood, approved the use of the lots as dock lots for Tracts S/T, R/Q, 0/P and E. Since that time the Hoffman/Messer Tract U has been sold io non-residents Ginther/Ault and they have agreed to apply for a conditional use permit. The Orono Zoning Code does not have the provision of a conditional use for dock lots. The CUP was accepted by the non-resident owners in 1985 as a way of placing some limits on the dock lot usage. Issues for Planning Commission Discussion 1.Does the pre-existing use of the dock lots prior to 1968 and presumably continuous since then given new property owners perceived “grandfathered ” rights, and therefore the same conditional use permit rights given to other dock lot owners in 1985? 2.Some lots have had electricity and lighting added since the CUPs were approved. This lot has also. Would the addition of electricitv/liehting. etc, constitute the expansion of a non- conforming use? 3.It is unclear how long Tract U has been used for the mooring of two boats. This makes it difficult to determine if there has been an expansion of the use based on the number of boats using the lot. Previous CUPs for adjacent dock lots only permitted one boat and one parking space per dock lot. Because this lot currently has two boats and two boat slips the applicants have requested an after the fact variance to permit a parking area to accommodate two vehicles and the CUP to reflect the lot is to be used for storage of two boats. 4. 5. Can the property, based on the size, be put to any other reasonable use. The existing docks are approximately 65' long. If approved now at this length, any extension of the docks would require an amendment to the CUP. 6.Recently the City of Orono has prohibited parking on Shadywood which has been very controversial. Is there a created need for internal parking for this specific dock lot? Does the parking area have to be gravel? If you approve of a conditional use penr’t and variance for the this application recognizing tlie riparian use of these tracts as a legal non-conforming use and approving the necessary variances to allow an accessory structure without a principal structure and setback variances - consider whether the following findings are appropriate: 1 . The use ot this lot as proposed will not create a hazard to the public, health, safety or welfare. 2.The present use as a riparian dock lot had been established on this property prior to official municipal zoning and controls. #2571 Jim Gimher and Dcug Alt 2739 Shadywood Road Col Jitional Use Permit and Variance Aiter the Fact Variance Afarch 26. 2000 pagf-2 » •. I J ' 3.The property as subdivided in the mid 50s without under apparently minimal local controls, is a unique situation requiring use but for limited dock use. 4. The property because of its physical constraints, cannot be put to any other reasonable residential use but for limited dock use. 5.A variance to allow an increase in hardcover in the 0-75' zone for parking area is justified since on street parking has been eliminated, (or should on street parking be allowed for tliis lot?) The recent flurry of neighborhood concerns regarding the dock lots has raised many issues related to this application. These issues can be summarized as follows: 1.General neighborhood resident concerns about parking on Co. Rd. 19, overnight stays on boats, lighting, security alarms, and a general expansion of a non-conforming situation with the concurrent perception of increased activity. 2.Non-resident dock lot owners concerns about parking needs and the need to provide amenities such as lighting and security alarms to make the dock lots usable. 3.Resident dock lot owners negative response to City’s suggestion that they permanently tie the dock lots to their neighborhood homestead properties. 4.Lack of clarity as to existence and impact of Existing easements and covenants dating back to the 1950’s that may impose limits on use or require maintenance of access. Staff expects area residents will be in attendance to voice their specific concerns about this application. Also see attached letter from neighbors. Options for Planning Commbsion Action 1. 2. 3. 4. Table for additional information Recommend approval with condition Recommend denial, stating reasons Other action #2571 Jim Ginther and Doug Ah 2739 Shady>vood Road Condition^ Use Permit and Variance After the Fact Variance March 20. 2000 poii-3 I 4 Application# I iW<Date Recehed ^IlSloo Amcunt Paid ^ “Z.SO ^1 CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION ^ 7 3 */ Site Address g g>r f{/ >A</^wy nQ Type of Application to be Filed CONii i~ri ^y/K~ C-Vi? p/=r(Z./n/Y___________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) //'? ^3 0 0 0-'^________________ APPLICANT Name .X4 M B -T . jy'^hone (home)C0^^ V O GrlAJr^^^/rca^*K'Phone (work) (V-r- kT ^ /• 7m ?'7 Address/ ^ / rSi4vgTM CiTT'if- b/ife- City ^^CAr^^/Y £7't Zip ]L y OWNER (if different than applicant) ^ Phone (home) (/>5~8 -'^'77 1^ Name i9^ g/gj /g.Ai^ H Phone (work) 772^-ggyjLfiName vj ^ Address Q>City £) Date Property Acquired _____ I (do) (3o n^) also own the adjacent parcels of land, Zip (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERi\nTS - $ 75.00 For each variance request wiih CUP application \/^ $175.00 Residential Accessory Use ___$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ___$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ___$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ___$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use ____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore (‘I - v*. r.~‘ M PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee V. •' i. « •.*• OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 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) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule K • ’/ - > nAR-15-2000 0-9:0v3 LEQEND: ff I. F I ELD ^. r JOMPK e 1 2546^:53 P.02 .*L V CA1CH BASIN po^n Pou: HtURANT SAN UCMIT ^03T GUAKD POn CLECTOtC NrrEA v-^1 reCT soBvrr KQH. JIM QINTHgR lcoal ocrmtiPTioN: Th* f»orth«oo^dy 110 r^ail of Tract O, CiCQlatered Lond Stirvay No. *1t>. FBc* of *jf TTJ««, H#oncptn County. M‘nn*«oto. ^ CCBTIFICATION: I certify tt^ot tniiirmp wn% pr#po<#d by m* or iinii«i my oiroct oueorvtslon oncJ 3i..*Tjr?r undor tnfl Iowa of of 4mn«cpio.Uotod th»f 72n*i doy of Fobruory, liOOO ^ PvvUtd tnio Atn doy of Ma^c^. ?0OO * py 40CK BCiHO ^/^lnn«P<«otQ Uconeo No. 20261 NOUS! t. THo otf-nioilpn of tiio Pooling oy»|pim ft poooo go the north«ai%l :r» of Vroct U wNifih 19 ot»un>od to h«ivo a bogrinq of South 66 dogr««i qi mlnutco S9 tocond- Foil 2. Thd or.%0 uf lh« p<ooorty ohown hcrotm |« 10.050 gquare foot or O 24^i2 r rog, 3. ^*0 tftl# wofH wd:: fumtohaJ fo# tho proporotiori of thio ouiwiy to wonfy tho Icoot d^»«ript:on or the existence uf ony oatomont or cncumbron.>r» HAJtOCO’^9 OftlVTwAY ■■ 472 eouoro feet LANOSftAPC ■■ 320 couaro ftet TOTAJ. » 790 cquoro (cot PRCPCnTY - in.MO oquero foot TUTAL PCNCCNT -* 7.64?5 2r.3i-?v5 EQAN FIELD A NOWAK INC. SURVEYORS 741/: wa '»7a Ta aevAXVAhO MNNEATCUU. vis.sfsota TtU: C%V2> 94« ia37 total r.C2 L'i- m §10.03 B. Combination of Separated Parcels Prohibited. No lot or parcel of land which is divided by a public, private or platted road or road easement, which results in any segment thereof being less than the minimum acreage required for that zoning district, shall be allowed to be combined with any separated parcel of land across the road for purposes of qualifying under the minimum acreage, open^pace, required yard, setback or sanitary or septic system requirements, nor shall building or density credits be credited or transferred between such parcels under any provisions of this Chapter. Each separate parcel must individually conform to the provisions of this Chapter in connection with construction of improvements thereon. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 C. The separation by the transfer or sale of non-conforming, undeveloped lots not served by public sanitary sewer, aligned in a contiguous arrangement, undivided by a public or private road or road easement and under same or common ownership is not permitted without Council approval. Council approval is not required if the separation of such lots results in individual building sites that satisfy the area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapter. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 Subd. 7. One Building Per Lot. Except in the case of Planned Residential Developments as provided for hereinafter, no more than one principal building shall be located on a lot except that staff may issue a permit to use a manufactured home that shall meet all required setback standards or an existing dwelling while a new^ principal structure is being constructed. Such permit shall be issued for a period of 3 months, any extensions must be approved by the City and shall expire upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new structure and such structure removed. Source: Ordinance 26,2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 Subd. 8. Lots to Face Streets. Each lot shall face on a public street or appropriate private easement. Subd. 9. Accessoiy Buildings. A. Time of Construction. No accessor^' building or structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessor)'. B. Height Restrictions. No accessory building in the "R" District shall exceed the height of the principal building, nor shall an accessory building exceed 30 feet in height. Source: Ordinance 72,2nd Series Adopted: 8-14-89 ORONO CC 254 (4-1-84) I /J' • .V t . * I ^ City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __________ .J SmifA RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER »IUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIfyiSION 5 FTLE #946 J WHEREAS, David C. Cook (hereinafter "the applicant") is an owner of one of the properties located at 2739 Shadywood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally des­ cribed as Tracts E, Registered Land Survey No. 411 (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a conditional use permit•per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 A through J to permit the continued use of the property as a legal non-conforming use and, specifically, per Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (J) seeks a variance to Section 10.24, Subdivision 4 (A) to allow an accessory structure (dock) on a property that is unable to sustain a principal structure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #946. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. On August 19, 1985 the Orono Planning Commission re­ viewed this application as proposed and recommended approval based on the following findings: A) Per Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (J): "Where, however, such a situation existed legally under the prior applicable law, the Council will not unreasonably require strict compliance and will generally look with favor on granting of a variance..." The substandard tracts were created prior to formal municipal zoning and controls in February of 1955. B) The Orono Council minutes of 1958 and a newspaper article published in the Minnetonka Harold in that same year confirm that the City was aware of the existence and use of accessory docks by non—adjacent owners. Page 1 of 4 1^’ 1'^ % ? . L_& \y. v; vj 'lu■-'Vr^V:v>.:?^'Vc f City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUI^CI.L . . ”•’ ii ® «S SKSNO. C) The property# as subdivided in the mid 50's without the benefit of local controls, is a unique situation requiring special consideration. D) The limited use of these tracts as proposed by the City will not create hazards to the public safety. E) The property, because of physical constraints, cannot be put to any other reasonable residential use but for limited dock use. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow continued use of the property as a riparian lot with an accessory dock not to be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use perit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 to permit the continued use of an accessory dock on a property that cannot sustain a principal structure hereby establish a legal non-conforming use of the property, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant is limited to the mooring of one boat at zero lot line dock. n •Applicant is advised to arrange for appropriate off- street parking for the parking of one car. 3. The existing dock at Tract E measures 50 feet in length and 3 feet in width. The applicant must file a conditional use permit with the City if an increase in the length of the dock is considered at some future date. Page 2 of 4 1 i •:V -V -1 r ■ r • 4 'i.' : " r ' 5 •* . •* ^ •' 1 L* ■ SL • City of OROINO % ^ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUfiiC NO_______mi OUNCIL ^ n.v- » A • m^rn4 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the teirms 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, understood and here­ by 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 property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of Sept€mber, 1985. ATTEST: allin. City Clerk Metiy'C. Bubler, Mayor Tom Frahm, Acting Mayor V (1) Property Owner Page 3 of 4 ; V • 1 *•■ , *^ • J .an:.v:t City of OROINO .yl^OK^'V ; RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL V-,. ' -•. v^‘ • •* J r.»;NO. 1847 .»• w 8*^ •* *. .> ••• •.‘ •*' .• • A STATE OP MINNESOTA COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) On this day of 1985 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ _ _, C^oic:^ known to me to be the personCs)describedinandwhoexecuted the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. j/z^cT// /fs:> MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OP MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, 1985, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 4 of 4 * •« Hi” HHI April 13, 2000 TO: Orono Planning Commission FROM: Dick and Marlys Ogle Richard and Sue Gay Jim Zimmerman 2771 Shadywood Road 2735 Shadywood Road 2745 Shadyw'ood Road SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Artnlication for Ault and Ginther Agenda Item # 25Z1 E We have a number of specific concerns, issues and questions about the specific property in question. We also have a number of issues and concerns about all of the non-conforming non­ resident dock lots that exist in our small residential neighborhood. To understand the issues and concerns of the neighborhood residents it’s important to r^ew the history of the non-conforming dock lots in the neighborhood. That background and history is as follows: Oriyin of the Non-Conforming Dock Lots ■ The 20-foot non-conforming boat dock lots were created specifically and exclusively for neighborhood residents. Each non-conforming dock lot was tied to a specific neighborhood lot. The purpose of tae non-conforming dock lots was to provide docks to neighborhood homeowners not on the lake, as well as to provide permanent docks to some of the homeowners on Carman s Bay so that they would not need to put temporary docks on Carman’s Bay. Non-Resident Ownership When the covenants of the neighborhood expired, a few of the residents sold off the non- conforming dock lots to non-residents. Over the years, a number of the non-conforming docks have been resold to other non­ residents. Earlier city documents detail that there was an agreement that when docks were sold Aere was a requirement that a 10-day written notice be provided to residents of the immediate area. This agreement was so residents in the neighborhood would have the opportunity to purchase the non-conforming dock lots from the non-residents and return them to me neighborhood use for which they were intended. There is no record of any non-resident owner that sold their dock pro\iding the agreed to 10 day written notice when they sold their docks to other non-residents. i Dock Location and Numhprs • We are working with the city and the LMCD using aerial photographs to determine exactly what docks and structure was associated nith each non-conforming lot at specific points in time. We expect to have that research completed in the next 2 to 3 weeks. ■ What was involved with each propert>' is critical to understanding the issue of prior use foi each property. A Long History of Problems with Non-Resident Dock Owners ■ In doing background history on the non-conforming dock properties we discovered that there is a long history of recorded problems with these properties. The attached Orono city memo from 1984 states that there have been many years of complaints about the non ­ resident docks. The city cites the many years of complaints focused on theft, garbage and litter, abuses of parking, excessive num^r of guest boats, all day picnics and boat slip rental. City staff also stated that the area had been complained about as being a commercial marina. • Ber^use of all the stated problems and complaints, in 1984 the city asked residents and non ­ residents to agree on covenants to address this issue. The City Council stated that they ^ auld approve a building permit for a non-resident owner (Thimesh) if covenants were developed and agreed to. Based on the verbal commitment of all the owners, approval w-as giveii to Thitnesh to install his dock. Once his dock was in, he had his lawyer send a letter to the city refusing to sign the covenants Thimesh had agreed to in order to get his dock. Because of this, the covenants were never signed and the problems stated in 1984 have continued and accelerated. ■ Despite acknowledging the serious complaints and problems and the city’s conclusion that "Tliere was indeed a potential threat to the public health, safety and welfare" posed by the 20 foot non-conforming lots, conditional use permits were granted to 4 of the non-resident dock owners in 1985. • As a neighborhood, we have documented numerous issues, concerns and complaints about the non-resident dock owners as detailed in the attached past correspondence. Intensifying and Significantly Expanded Use of Non-Conforming Dock Lots ■ Since 1985 there has been a consistent and extensive increase in use that we feel the city needs to address. ■ In 1985 the non-resident dock slips were used in the same manner as residents, which was for daytime recreational use. Boats were in the size range of 18-30 feet consistent \>ith other boats in the neighborhood and appropriate for the very shallow and narrow lagoon where the docks are located. ■ In the late 1980’s or 1990, electricity’ was added by the non-resident dock owners which fundamentally changed the nature and usage of the boat docks. This addition more than any other has led to a significant intensification of use. • The addition of electricity has changed the docks from appropriate only for da>'time recreation use to making them habitable docks. Large boats that can be used essentially to live on require shore power, which w’as not available at the non-resident docks in 1985 when the conditional use permits were granted. ■ With the addition of electricity, boat size has increased substantially, and usage has changed. ■ Usage of the non-resident boat docks has gone from da>time weekend use to boats being used by many non-resident k owners as weekend homes. A number of owners frequently spend 2 or 3 nights ^ jr week on their boats, sometimes tied up at their dock. r «• m & w kLB The addition of electricity has also allowed the addition of a high intensity anti-crime light that burns all night. This light disturbs the peace and quiet of the neighborhood and also because there is bright light, it facilitates and encourages late night boating. When there was no electricity and lights, non-resident dock owners generally brought their boats in at the end of the day when there was still daylight to unload their boat. With the light in place they now frequently bring their boats in at midnight and later. The engine noise from the large boats and the talking and music is disturbing to the neighborhood given the very narrow channel the boats must go through to get to their docks. As detailed in 1984, abuse of parking privileges has been a serious and perpetual problem. The agreements and the conditional use permits call for each dock o\vner to have the right to park one car p ‘•r slip in front of their dock on their property. Since Cook (one of the non­ resident dock owners) has essentially no lake shore, his conditional use permit does not grant him the right to park a car and states that he must arrange for parking in some other location. In return for agreeing to give Dick Ogle tfie right to purchase his dock lot when he is done using it, Dick Ogle agreed to let Cook park on his property. ■ Non-resident owners consistently and routinely have violated their parking agreements, frequently parking two or more cars per boat slip. Overflow parking has wound up on County Road 19. This created serious safety problems both for bicyclists and walkers that use County Road 19 as a designated county bike path and for residents that need to use the areas that were designed to provide safe deceleration lanes to exit County Road 19. There were a number of near miss accidents with bicyclists and residents turning off County Road 19 using the deceleration lane that were due to non-resident dock owners parking cars along County Road 19. As a result of this dangerous situation, neighborhood residents, in 1999, petitioned the city to place no parking signs on County' Road 19. The city and county agreed with the safety risks and put up the no parking signs. Because the non-resident dock ovsmers could no longer park the multiple cars per dock in violation of their parking restrictions, they petitioned the city', in late 1999, to park along County' Road 19. The City' Council addressed the issue for a second time and once again concluded there was a serious safety' issue that necessitated the no parking restrictions. Once again, in March 2000, the non-resident dock owners have petitioned the city to grant excess parking along County Road 19 and for the third time in less than a year the City' Council will address the parking issue at the May 2000 City Council meeting. As neighbors we are very frustrated that the non-resident dock owners will not live up to the one car restriction they agreed to and that the city' seems unwilling to tell the non-resident dock owners that they must comply with the one car per dock agreement they made. Rental of Boat Slips It*s clear froni the 1984 Orono Cic> memo that dock rental by noi.'-resident ow'ners has been a problem for many years. The memo states neighbors referred to the non-resident dock area as a marina because of the dock rentals. For the last few years there has aUvays been at least one dock and frequently two of the non resident docks that have been rented to non-residents of the area. We have made the city aw are of the rental situation. Renters create substantial problems since the neighbors have no idea who should be in the area. Renters also don’t know the rules, regulations and restrictions that affect the non- conforming dock area and tlierefore frequently violate the rules and restrictions creating noise, parWng and other problems. - i • We have been told by the city and the LMCD that rental of these boat docks is absolutely not allowed. ■ Despite knowing about the rental problem in 1984 and our reiterating the rental situation in 1999 and again this year, to our knowledge the city has never taken any action to restrict dock rental by non-resident dock owners, ■ We want the city to vigorously enforce the no rental restrictions beginning \vith the 2000 boating season. Docks Have Moved From Intended 1Q8.S Daytime Recreational Use to Becoming Habitable Docks and Essentially Weekend Homes ■ Wirh the addition of electricity, the non-resident docks have very large boats that are essentially used as weekend homes by. many of the non-resident dock owners. ■ Shore power allows them to have the t>pe of boats that can be used essentially as weekend homes and that ’s increasingly how the boats are used. ■ The larger more valuable boats allowed by shore power are also attractive targets for crime and there have been numerous break-ins on the non-resident boats. Theft and crime were a^:.o referenced in the 1984 city memo. ■ Because uf the crime attracted to our neighborhood by the large, expensive non-resident boats, they have installed a high intensity anti-crime light. • One of the boats, R Tonka Toy (owned by Ginther), in the past installed a motion activated burglar alarm. The alarm malfunctioned, causing it to go off at all hours of the day and night, completely disrupting the neighborhood. Since Ginther did not live in the neighborhood and we had no way to contact him, the neighborhood was disrupted for weeks until he returned from vacation and turned off his alarm system. • There have been a number of instances of trees being diseased and dying or trees coming down by storm in the non-resident dock lots. Since their entire dock is in the 0-75 foot range, it is our understanding that legally these trees need to be replaced. None of the trees that were taken down or came down have ever been replaced. • In 1999, a flagpole was added to one of the non-conforming dock properties. We’d like the flagpole removed since this clearly was not there in 1985 and is an expansion. One flagpole may lead to others. • Essentially, the addition of electricity has resulted in the non-resident dock owTiers being able to use their 35 plus foot boats as weekend homes on Lake Minnetonka while paying S200-$300 per year in property taxes for the prmlege of having a “second home" on the lake. SPECIFIC ISSUES RELATING TO GINTHER AND AULT We feel the above information relating to the non-conforming dock lots and the long history of problems and issues is essential in looking at the specific issues related to Ginther and Ault. Our specific issues relative to this lot and the conditional use permit they’re seeking are as follows: • Two Boat Docks on One Non-Conforming Lot - It is our understanding that only one dock is allowed per non-conforming lot. If this is the ordinance in Orono, we would ask that a condition of the permit be that one of the two docks on this property be removed. ■ Boat Slip Rental - For many years, we understand Ault has rented his boat slip. We want the city to enforce a strict no rental policy on this dock property and actively and aggressively enTbrce this policy. ^' i i- Prior Use - We understand that 1968 is the date that governs prior use. We have reviewed 1971 Heard aerial photographs that show there is one boat shed or boathouse on this non ­ conforming lot. That further supports that there should be no more than one dock on this property ’. Hard Cover Driveway - There is a hard cover gravel drivevv’ay within the 0-75 foot setback. We understand that city codes do not allow this and that no permits were ever requested or granted for the driveway. In 1999, the driveway was expanded from accommodating 2 to be able to accommodate 4 cars. We would ask that as part of any conditional use permit that the gravel driveway be removed. Blocking of Fire Hydrant - The non-permitted driveway that Ginther and Ault have put in is immediately adjacent to the only fire hydrant in the immediate area. Frequently, four cars are parked on the gravel driveway making easy' and quick access to the fire hydrant virtually impossible. Within the last 24 months, there have been 2 home fires in our immediate neighborhood where the fire trucks used this fire hydrant. Thankfully, it was at a time when cars were not parked immediately next to the fire hydrant, which allowed the fire department to get to the fire hydrant. We wouic* ask that, as part of any conditional use permit, parking not block the fire hydrant. ■ Burglar Alarms - As referenced earlier, Ginther’s burglar alarm created major disruption to the neighborhood in the past. We would ask that burglar alarms not be allowed at this property. Parking for Only One Car per Dock - Consistent with the other conditional use permits for the other non-conforming docks, we w’ould ask that only one car be allowed to park for each dock. Since we believe there should be only one dock at this property, we w'ould request that only one car be allowed to park at any given time on this property and that that parking be in a spot that didn’t limit access to the fire hydrant and didn’t violate hard cover restrictions. Remov’al of Electricity - Per the previous discussion on the non-conforming dock lots, we’d request that electricity be removed from this property. Noise Guidelines - Since this property' is at the end of a very narrow lagoon area, we’d request strict noise guidelines be incorporated into any conditional use permit granted for this property ’. We’d also ask that boats not come or go from these docks after 10:00 p.m. on weelmights and 11:00 p.m. on weekends so as not to wake up the neighbors and disturb the neighborhood. We would respectfully ask that until all of the above issues can be satisfactorily discussed and resolved that no action be taken on applicant’s request for a conditional use permit. Both Richard Gay and Jim Zimmerman plan to appear at the Planning Commission meeting. Dick Ogle will be out of tow'n and thus unable to testify in person. We hope the above information provides some helpful background on what we see as a very serious and expanding problem. We respectfully ask for the city ’s help in resolving the many issues surrounding the non-conforming dock lots. .Si I To: Proa; Dace: Thomas Frahm, Marina Committee Chairman Charles Kelley William Sime Jeanne A. Mabusth, Sorinc Adm.inistrator June 17, 1985 Subject: Riparian Outlots North of Narrows Bridge List of Exhii>its Exhibit A - Agreement of 5/31/85 Exhibit 0 “ Combination Papers Tracts S S T Exhibit C - Building Permit for Temporary Dock 6/7/e-; Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit X Exhibit J - Soule's Letter Dated 6/25/84 - Zoning Administrator's Letter Dated 6/23/34 - Casey's (Resident Ov.».er) Letter Dated 7/10/64 - Inspection Notice “ Building Permit for Nev; Dock Tract S s T - Survey/Site Plan for New Dock ~ Pegistered Land Survey 415 & 411 Review of Application In the Spring of 1984, after the m.any years cf receiving complaints concerning the intense use and reported operation of a commercial marina v/ithin Narrows Lagoon area. Council directed staff to inspect the subject area. Staff advised Council that there was indeed a potential threat to the public health, safety and welfare in the unregulated use of these ’0 feet wide riparian tracts given the lis^ited area of the lagoon. The original Registered Land Survey division created uhe tracts to provide protected dock use areas for the homestead lots within that sam.e Registered Land Survey. The covenants, dealing, with the use of these tracts have long expired and the tracts have been sold off to r.on-reSident owners. Com.plaints range as follows: garbage and litter of land portic.". of tracts, theft, obuses of parking, encroachm.ent of dock use areas by adjacent dock owners, excessive number of guest boats stored at cocks, all day picnics conducted on private property by guests, rental of residential slips. The City’s real concern is for the potential for the congested lagoon and the alledged commercial within the LR-IB Resdential Zoning District. Status of Review accidents within • .ntal of slips A.t your June 6, 1984 meeting, the Orono Marina Committee was reassured by all resident and non-resident • owners t.*.at they had accepted the directive of the City Council and agreed to execute conevants for the limited use of their riparian tracts. Based on this verbal commitment by all owners, the chairman advised staff that they could issue a building permit for a temporary dock to the current owner of Tracts S i T. Review Exhibit C, the building permit speci­ fied the agreed upon standards (non-resident owner) for the docks construction. The tracts were sold upon construction of the cock to John Thimmesh who refused to accept covenants that he claimed dis­ criminated against non-resident ov/ners (see Exhibit D). The agreement of May 31 , 1934 , is amended at the June 6th mee'^ing, was never exe­ cuted . Z. • • -f: r'^V-.v - ' 2vf ^■im' '■:rJSf, 't?/^ 1^ V Marine Coninittee Jur.e 17, 1985 Page 2 of 3 P.eview Exhibit A. The follcving anendnsnts were agreed to by all parties with interest: A. Performance Standards for use of riparian tracts of resident owners (Tracts N & R, RLS 415) Thomas Casey and Joseph Flcischhacker 1. Dock structure/cock use area: a) Dock length - not to exceed 55' in lenr'-h (length measured from shoreline at 929.4 elevation) b) Limit of 3 boats - boats not to encroach 20 feet wide dock usa area. c) 20 feet wide riparian tracts do not qualify-for the use of buevs in lacoon. B. Performance standards for use of riparian tracts by non­ resident owners (Tracts C.?.,S, RLS 4J.5 & Tract E, RLS 411) James Johnson (now John Thir.mesh), Paul Nutt, Dear. Thomas, David C. Cook. 1. Dock structure/ccck use arf:a: a) Doc'x lerjgth - not tc e.xcecd 40' in length (length measured fro.c shoreline at 929.4 elevation) b) Limit of 1 boat over 16 feet in length - boat may not encroach defined ?C feet wide dock use area. c) 20 feet V'*ice riparian tracts do not qualify for use of buoys in laccc.n. C. Perfor.-nancs standards for use of land tracts owned both resident and non-resident c-.ners (Tracts L, P, Q, T, RLS 415 s Tracts D « B, RLS 411) 1. Executed e.xclusive/nutua 1 access easements over land tracts specified above in favor of i.ndividual riparian tract owners. 2. Each land tract is to be used solely for vehicular access and/or the parking (except for Tract B, RLS 411) of 1 motor vehicle - picnicing, etc. is not allowed (owners may wish to establish other limitations on use). D. Additional rccuirements of a.'i owners: 1. Owners agree to install t. keyed access cate to bo placed :»n east lot line of Tract D, RLS 411. 2. Owners agree to legally combine their indivicu.il land tracts with respective riparian tracts rpecificallv Tracts 0 6 R, RLS <15 and Tracts P & O, RLS 415 still rem^air. to be combined. { I zI i4r*V'i -♦-iv: r^ . -C •V s. *7r<->^* Wi-- m m - * »• ^ .^t-l 4:^ . • «5k*i-« Marina Connittee June 17, 1985 Page 2 of 3 P.sview Exhibit A. parties with interest: The following anendnsnts were agreed to by ail t\Porformance Standards for use of riparian tracts of resident owners (Tracts N S P., P.LS 415) Thor.as Casey and Joseph ?lcischhac)cer 1. Dock strucfjre/ccck use area: a) Dock length - not to exceed 55' in lenr*-h (length r.easured frorr shoreline at 929.4 elevation) b) Limit of 3 boats - boats not to encroach 20 feet wide dock use area. c) 20 feet wide riparian tracts do not qualify Cor the use of bucys in lagoon. B. Performance standards for use of riparian tracts by non­ resident owr.ars (Tracts C.?.,S, P.LS 415 & Tract E, P.LS 411) James Johnson (now John Thir.mesh), Paul Nutt, Dean Thomas, David C. Cook. 1. Dock structure/ccck use area: a) Dock le.ncth - not tc e.xcecd 40' in length (length measured from shoreline at 929.4 elevation) b) Limit of 1 boat over 16 feet in length - boat may not encroach defined ?C feet wide dock use area. c) 20 feet wide riparian traces do not qualify for use of buoys in lacao.-.. C. Performance standard.? for use of land tracts owned both resident and non-resident c-.-ners (Tracts L, M, P, Q, T, RLS 415 s Tracts D <'. B, P.LS 411) 1. Executed e.xclusive/mutual access case.monts over land tracts specified above in favor of individual riparian tract owners. 2. Each land tract is to be used solely for vehicular access and/or the parking (except for Tract D, RLS 4il) of 1 motor vohicle - picnicing, etc. is not allowed (owners may wish to establish other limit.^tior.s on use). D. Additional recuirements of all owners: 1. Owner.s agree to install a keyed access gate tc be placed on east lot line of Tract D, RLS 411. 2. Owners agree to legally combine their individual land tracts with respective riparic.n tracts .«fpecifica 1 Iv Tracts 0 & R, RLS 4)5 and Tracts P & O, RLS 415 .still remain to be combined. I %t:'•’5('i4 .•.Jll viv-oT^ m k'v* * -W *.•/ mM a f-V^ Marina Conr.ittee June 17, 1925 Pace 3 of 5 3. Owners herebv agree to the terns of this agreenent and on behalf of thenselves, their heirs, successors . nc as- sicns, hereby agree to the recording of this agreenent in the chain of title of their subject properties. In 1935 absent the executed agreenent The Citv r.ust once again ask the residents to share in the solu­ tion of this'dilena. Without the necessary covenants and as the City has cone before, a building pernit was issued to John Thit^.T.esh ^o-. a <8 foot length dock for apparently 2 slips. The dock has been place as with the others with a zero side yard setback with each sli? at 9 feet. The dock does not appear to encroach the dorr, use area oz the adjacent users. Unfortunately without the necessary con..:. .n use, Thinn»esh (Tract S) has gone ahead and installed an electrical cable from Cook's dock (Tract E) and juried the cable underground within Tract R,0,H and K without proper authorization. J. have no- checked with Thim-mesh but I would imagine he never received a permit fren the State Inspector authorizing the installation. In tact, Thirur.e.sh installed the dock without a building permit. e. area: There are other violations or irregulaticns within the subject 1. Gasoline tank within Tract E must be removed from lake immediatly - Cook. 2. Canvas top has bean stored on Tracts Q i P for the past two vears - it must be removed or installed over does as in past u not left on shore - Nutt. •J^ •Garbage continues to be a problem on r.on-rcsider.t wrac*.s. 4. Grass is not maintained on non-rcsident tracts - potential violation cf mun.vcipal ordinance. The Marina Cor-mittee must see that the following is included in any agreement by the residents: J. •For safe navigation cf lir.itcd lagoon - controls for dock size and limit of boats stored at docks. 2. Updated registration each season with the , current ownership, licen.se numbers of boats store- at doc.«c insurance certificate for each boat. ' • ..-V -4 ii'Ark •. -'-r 'V>** :wBP\-5^‘»r • - V.^T •. • «T ;• r •. 1 • :-^«r.;; :*. t. '.v*•A *'Vi• .j"-1% £jv- . V'» 'm •>.«*ifi ' >x m Tr-rdim Marina Conr.ittee June 17, 1935 Pace 3 of 2 3. Owners herebv agree to the terns of this agreenent and on behalf of thense 1 vas, their heirs, successors ..nd as-on ocnaXa. Oa. wne*adcj»'/t:9# — signs, hereby agree to the recording of this agreenent in the chain of title of their subject properties. In 1595 absent the executed agreenent 'The Citv’ nust once again ask the residents to share in the solu­ tion of this*dilena. Without the necessary covenants and as the City has done before, a building pernit was issued to John Thinnesh -or a 48 foot length dock for apparently 2 slips. The dock has been placed as with the others with a zero side yard setback with each slip width at 9 feet. The dock does not aopear to encroach the dork use area of the adjacent users. Unfortunately without the necessary cont:.-.. .'.n use, Thinnesh (Tract S) has gone ahead and installed an electrical cable from Cook’s dock (Tract E) and juried the cable underground within Tract R,0,N and K without proper authorization. I. have not checked with Thin.nesh but I would imagine he never received a permit from the State Inspector authorizing the installation. In fact, Thin.T.esh installed the dock without a building pernit. There are other violations or irregulaticns within the subject area: 1. Gasoline tank within Tract E nust be rcrr.oved from lake ia\nediatly - Cook. 2. Canvas top has been stored on Tracts Q ^ P fer the past two years - ir. nust be removed cr installed over dock as in past but net left on shore - Nutt. 3. Garbage continues to be a problem on non-resident trac-s. 4. Grass is not maintained on non-resident tracts - potential violation cf run.’cipal ordinance. The Marina Con.T.itteo nust sec that the following is included in any agreement by the residents: 1. For safe navigation cf limited, lagoon - controls for dock size and limit of boats stored at docks. 2. Updated registration each season with the City advi.sing of current ownership, licor.se numbers of boats stcrc^ at doc.s an. insurance certificate for each boat. - 4 # r• ! 4r •-OS’ K:<j s3 >r; “ t; vs *N' SP li- AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this 31st day of Kay, 1934 ar.cng Jaxes F. Johnson, Paul Nutt, Joseph F. Fleischhacker, Thoxas Casey, David Cook and Richard Ogle, all of Hennepin County, -Minnesota. WHEREAS, Jaxes F. Johnson is the owner of Lots S and T, and Paul Nutt is the o-wner of Lots O, ?, Q and R, and Joseph F. Fleischhacker is the o-^-ner of Lots N ani M, and Thoxts Casey is the owner of Lots K and L; All of the above said lots arc part of Hegistcrod Land Survey No. 415 of Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, David Cook is the o-wner of Lot E, and Ric’.-ard Ogle is the owner of Lots B and D in Registered Land Survey No. 411 of Hennepin County, Minnesota; and V"-!ERZAS, th® above listed Lots S, R, 0, N, K a.nd E are used for boat docks and th : o-wnnrs of said lots have easexent rights ever the above listed Lots T, Q, p, m. l, D and 3 for the purposes of ingress and egress to the said lots used for boat docks. NOW, THEP^SFORE, the parties agree as follo'ws: 1. That each of the above parties who are cwners of the six lots used for boat docks will contribute to the cost of a gate which can be kept locked; said gate to be placed at the entrance to Lot B of Registered Land Survey No. 411 and which will control the use of the easement that the parties hereto'have for Ingress and egress to the beat dock lots. i N. V*1. t '\.i ft' agp^ement THIS AGR£Eyj:NT is entered into this 31st day of Kay, 1934 ar.cng JaT.es F. Jcnnson, Paul Nutt, Joseph F. Fleischhacker, Thonas Casey, !k:1i David Cook and Richard Ogle, all of Hennepin County, -Minnesota. WHEREAS, Ja."nes F. Johnson is the owner of Lots S and T, and * r*i . ,0 yrk Paul Nutt is the o-wner of Lots O, ?. Q and R, and Joseph F. Fleischhacker is the o--»-ner of Lots N ani K, and Thotr.e.8 Casey is the owner of Lots K and L; All of the abo-.-e said lots are part of P.egistcred Land Survey No. 415 of Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, David Cook is the O'wner of Lot E, and Ric.-ard Ogle is the owner of Lots B and D in Registered Land Survey No. 411 of Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEPJIAS. fn- above listed Lots S, R, 0. N. K a.nd E are used for boat docks and th : o-*.-nrrs of said lots have easenent rights over the above listed Lots T, Q, p, m. L, D and B for the purposes of ingress and egress to the said lots used for boat docks. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follo'ws 1. That each of the above parties who are c-«.*ners of the six lots used for boat docks will contrib-ute to the cost of a gate which can be kept locked; said gate to be placed at the entrance to Lot B of Registered Land Survey No. 411 a.nd which will control the use of the easement that the parties hereto have for ingress and egress to the beat dock lots. .••••• * • • : f % i5>*» >v'.* *■ Vl*- »>V -* • *• • ^ •• ^ 5>-A' P• « *-ln£f.r.AvKf rm * ^5^ I ■r. ^ »; -m <*VX- ^s± i W<6 my-i ■:'^S ■vsm -• : .-.vjjn.at Said expense will be distributee arecr.9 Messrs. Jonnsor., Flerscr.nac.-'.er, Casey and Cco'< so that each will bear 17 percent of the total cost and Mr. t:utt, the ov.*ner of two lots, will bear 2'^ percent of the total cost. 2. Each of said o-r.ers as listed in paragraph 1 above and Richard Ogle shall have a V.ey so that each r.ay open the gate \'.nicr. tl;e owners agree to keep locked. 3. Each of the owners listed in y ir.agraph 1 above agree that he • will keep not r.ore than three bonts on each cf the boat cocks he owns and said boats shall be of such sice that they will not intertere with the use of the other boat lots listed above. 4. Each of the owners agree that boats docked on tr.e».r respective boat lots shall be owned bv said owners or r.c;r.bors of tr.eir fa.*nilics and the ownershio of such boats will be so registered 5. Each of the owners agree that in using the acev? described Lots T, Q, P, M, L, D and 3 for the purposes cf ingress a.nd egress they w’ill not perttit vehicles or property owned by the.r. to interfere with others who have such caser.ent rights. 6. Attached hereto for illustrative purposes are replicas of the Plats of Registered Land Survey No. 413 and No. 411. 7. Each party to this acreer.cnt has signed one copy of this agree Rt'nt a.nd each signed copy can be considered an original. IN WITNESS »'r:EREOF. each cf the parties hereto have executed this agreement as of the day and year first above stated. • * ^s'>;I vVr.* .* '•• •; :*» ■ •. v .. . # • .■* ft-%^ .* ‘v • - • .>————a—— - r>^-?v: '•Vi. r® ■’.'.'.v'. €m Said expense wiil be distributee arr.cng Messrs. Johnson. FLeischhacker. Casey and Cook so that each wiLL bear 17 percent oi tne total cost a.nd Mr. t^utt, the ov.*ner of two lots, will bear 22 percent of the total cost. 2. Each of said o-*r.ers as listed in paragraph L aoeve and Richard Ogle shall have a key so that each nay open the gate %T.icn th.e owners agree to keep locked. 3. Each of the owners listed in ;• i?.agraph 1 above agree that he • will keep not ir.ore than three bents cn each of the boat cocks ne owns and said boats shall be of such, size that they will not znterzere with the use of the other boat lots Listed above. 4. Each of the ow.ners agree that boats docked on t.'.ekC respective boat lots shall be ow.ncd by said owners or r.c:r.bers of t.“.ei.r fa.*nti.tes and the ownership of such boats will bu so registered. 5.Each of t*nc owners agree that in using the a'zcv •» described Lots T,Q. P.«.L. D and 3 for the purposes cf ingress a.-.d egress fney wi 11 not pe rrr.it vc'nicles or property oxT.ed by thc.T.to interfere with others who have such easor.ent rights. 6. Attached hereto for illustrative purposes are replicas of the Plats of Registered Land Survey No. 415 and No. 411. 7. Each party to this acree.T.ent has signed one copy of this agree r.ert and each sig.ned copy can be considered an original. IN WITNESS •'■HEREOF, each cf the Cvarties hereto have c.secuted this agreement as of the day and year first a'oovc stated. 19* ^.• , *«r. :v.■<C V - >• ■• WB -•.v::•••r? •«<? ■>? • -j vi t ''i e9-i'-‘'\S . ■;• v'l: •? ‘.;ia ^■' v-'.;:- S?i^. . .*'-feV-^:P^^ : - rrJCTv<-'’ ' *• *, * * - i -c r' S'; '’»;. ; mssspsji ;^P f;:<. ,;^; % i Soules. McKendrick. Gurevvltz. Glew S. Mas^^son. Ltd. Attorneys at Li v 8C3 Fifs: Bank Place V/ei: 120 South 6ih Street MinotjDoils. V.in.-?»o:3 55-02 Teleohor.c (6121 339 3100 June 25/ 1984 !I©S0\W[llrh Jo^n c MirwfO L. W*»li30» S C*f^ ’Af^\ K. 0* Csw^l*! Wm. f. . J'* Rfsiy to Minnetonka office* Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Adtiinistrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Tracts S 6 T, RLS 415 John Thinunesh Dear Ms. Mabusth: I an attorney for John Thinunesh, who has purchased Tracts S & T, RLS 415 from James Johnson. This letter,is in response to your r.enorandun dated June 11, 1984 regarding the property and the adjoining tracts. Mr. Thinnesh has been furnished a copy of the proposed agreement dated May 31, 1984 to be signed by the five affected property owners. Ke is willing to become a signatory to this agreement. On the other hand Mr. Thinnesh does not agree with the additional conditions set forth in your memorandum. In particular he objects to tne discrininatior that would exist between resident ov.-ners and non-resident owtiers, and to tne restrictions that would be imposed on the length of doCi:s and the nu.. er size of boats. Mr. Thinumesh is willing to abide by reasonable regulations that are aoplied. He therefore supports the conditions contained in tne May 3 ment, and he opposes the conditions contained in the June 11 memorandum. Wo await your reply. Thank you for your consideration. Yours very truly,- - - -^ v::llia.m SOULES KS/san cc: John Thinwesh ■1 o« Mins«QAV* 0<f;e«: 207 Rltfscdj** Cute SfV Su.ld.---;. 1?20 SootA Plymouth Ro*d. M.AflitonVj. M.'.’ s53i.1 Telephone: 512/S46-2'i5S Blaine Oflice; 2l01 105th Street. SUlne. .Vfi 55-3-. Teteohone: bi2/70O £.342. ' -jl.iJ-Vu' -"A-V;- iv.‘<c.^ J? v: =;'/Wr.': ; I- V ‘ 'I CITY - 1. : OF- I^RONO: June 28« 1904 Mr. William Soules Soules > McKenclrick, Gurevitz, Glew & Mcj:r.uson, Ltd. S08 First Bank Place West 120 South 6th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Dear Mr. Soules: On June 7, 1934 , the City o£ Orono issued building permit No. 5310 to James Johnson for the construction of a residential dock at Tracts S and T of RLS <51 subject to the following conditior.s nc^roed to by ^arr.cs Johnson at a special Marina Corjnittee'r.ecting on June 6# 198i: 1 • Tracts S and T must be corr.bined - Johnson filed for ccnbination on June 1, 1984, see copy attached. 2. Per attached buildj.ng permit - Johnson signed the pcrinit with the sti.pulations agreed to by all involved property owners o.. the six riparian tracts (2 residential ^ < non-resicential) within ^he Narrows lagoon that non-resident owners* docks be limited in length to 40 feet and the mooring of 1 boat over 16 feet in lengtn. The Marina ConuT.ittce directed the City staff to issue a builuing permit for this specific dock prior to the execution of an amended agreement oy all invoived owners because of the unanimous agreement by a*i concerned including James Johnson at that same Juxie 6th meeting- An inspection on June 21 , 1984 confirmed that a dock hau constructed complying with the 40 feet length and 1 boat in excess Oi. 18 feet length moored at the subject dock. The City^ will^ ^ building permits for the reconstruction or alteration o*. the do^r. located on Tract S, RLS 415 until the subject agreement has been executed by all parties with interest in the six riparian ^raCwS. BtsLuiNt*. 1 zuM.vc; - 4?).:j 5: ASStssiNc; AD.MLSmTKATION I riNANCr. - 473-73*5 puluc WORKS - 4:3 CITY of ORONO Patl Office Box &C*Cry.'.Li! Bay, MinnajaU Gi322 • Municipal OfScs Cn the North Shore of Lake M:nr.ciar.ks rHrie:; .*r » •;• >> : I Kr. William Soules Page 2 June 28, 1984 I will send a copy of your letter of June 25, 1934 , with this letter t.o the five owners. Once again, I will restate the directive of the Orono Marina Committee which is for all persons with interest in t)je six riparian tracts to establish limitations on the use of the land and riparian tracts, to address specifically parking, dock, and lind use limitations. The owners were responsible for drafting an agreement for the review and approval of the City. Please advise my office if there are to be additional araendments to those set f erth on June 6 , 1984 , if so, the Marina Convaittee must review and approve all amendments. Sincerely, /^]\ Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator JAM/ps pc: Mr. David C. Cook 8012 Pennsylvania Road Bloomington, MM 55438 Mr. TKomas Casey 2785 Shndywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331' Jin Fleischhacker 2775 Shadywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331 Paul R. Nutt 9200 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55426 Dean Thomas 1500 Bohns Point .Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Mr. Jin Johnson 26420 Oakridge Circle Excelsior, MS 55331 Edward H. Callinan 706 Second Avenue South Suite 930 Baker Building Minneapolis, MK 55402 Enclosures:Combination Paper - June 7, 1984 Building Permit No. 5310 William Soules letter datec 6-25-84 • ••• •• • • mm l-:' m t- - m r ••• '•> ' -- i *;> '''•/.. •• ’T' -.vii •-•/ ?.'■•..(•. •> ''2^mL:*^ cS. Mr. William’Soules Page 2 June 28, 1984 3- will send a copy of your letter of June 25, 1934, with this letter t.o the five owners. Once again, I will restate the directive of the Orono Marina Committee which is for all persons with interest in tlie six riparian tracts to establish limitations on the use of the land and riparian tracts, to address specifically parking, dock, and land use limitations. The owners were responsible for drafting an agreement for the review and approval of the City. Please advise my office if there are to be additional amendments to those set ferth on June 6, 1984, if so, the Marina Co.Tjnitteemust review and approve all amendments. Sincerely, Cc. /f]\ Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator JAM/ps pc:,Mr.David C. Cook 8012 Pennsylvania Road aloomington, MM 55438 Mr. TKomas Casey 2785 Sh^dywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331 ‘ J 8 n Fleischhacker 2775 Shadywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331 Paul R. Nutt $200 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55426 Dean Thomas 1500 Bohns Point Road Wayzata, MM 55391 Mr. Jin Johnson 26420 Oakridge Circle Excelsior, MS 55331 Edward M. Callinan 706 Second Avenue South Suite 930 Baker Building Minneapolis, MS 55402 Enclosures:Combination Paper - June 7, 1984 Building Permit No. 5310 William Soules letter dated J-25-64 •X - V *% .• • • • m ’/mi hr.'yjh1* • i'm irf'M A ■- C >*-^' 2 •: •#'-T•;;*7T*■■ • s • J- ^ •Nfc•tfi rj z-rrci-: «wr i'^ • * :/ C O' -4W * ?^r>ir;-=- rw^CA£:EYAND CASEY, INC. Y3UR •RCTECTICN 19 CUn PAO^CSSION rroOwOCiAN iV£ sc • vinmc^vouS m;nn 5Si:j*PHCN£ JMt-ri' •IvliSO^g 1^ July 10, 1984 •’ ■. * i’’.\i i 3 I9c4 ! •. ! U I '* * \ * * r CITY OF ORONO tH' Jeanne A. Mabusth City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, *^•1 55323 Be; Tracts ; T of RLS451 •*. Ms. Mabusth, Mr. Jin Johnson was in ocrolete agreericnt with all Imitations rccardinc the caotioned lots. I believ ’e should bo binding with Mr. Thii rresh, and his disagraeinen* worked out with Mr. Johnson. All owners did agree or. all aTi^rdrents. agreed. May we please close thds as Thank yo*^ for >*ovir tine and concern. •U8IKI88 AfiO PSPSONAt. IN80PANCE CASUALTY • llFf • rini • WiAVTH • MUTUK FUKO I 'i 1^ ■ va •.J y '**«.i,--'f mm :^5 /a “ p?'fe® Vr-i'-f:if«W* m I if C V' >: —J KV-i: CA5TEYAND CASEY. INC. Y3UR RASrtCTlCN 13 CUn PPOrCSSION 7700VGC.AN i</£ SC • ?.!lNMti('OL!S M:Nf4 5SiJ3 • PHCNEBM i-Tl' iKjJLSOWS . ^. .. .— ■ ■---------------------- « ■' I .: •. / tj** • i!t •.* . *. • » o*l.^ ^/ II .: I • ;. I .3 IwC^ I •* \ • •. i X \ I .• * III •« i CITYOFORONO 111'July 10, 1984 Jcaruie A. Kabusth CiW of Ororo Box 66 Crystal Bay, 55323 Be: Tracts . T of SLS451 Ms. Maj:ust.h, Mr. JiiTX Johnson v’as in oorolete agreenc-nt vith all linu.tations recardlr.c the captioned lots. I belie'.'o they should be binding with Mr. Thii cesh, and his disagree!'.ont worked out witii Mr. Johnson. All owners did agree on all aTcrvire.nts . May we please close thds as agreed. Thank jou for yov.\r tine and concern. Sincere 1 ■usiKisa AMO PinsoNA ’. insopanci CASUALTY • U7C • 7IPI • WEALTH • MUTUAL. 7UNO 1 •* ' * •. ••■< Sr' /•^.‘,» / ' i*.* *4* *♦ r*/-A ‘S^*4^»' •• ‘ v*^*’- \ ■ '*'.* - * * •• ).^^.- v»:v^ •*••V'* ;V f•4»«^ <1 • a^*« VST — . •• *•.»• '• **✓•.* • 4 • *, •* • • • • • • •%• •• ••• ♦ u. •-:r Prom: Date: Subject; Mayor Butler , , . ^ Mark E. Bernhardsor., City Administrator Orono Council Members Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator September 3/ 1985 conditional Use parDits and Varianca revia-.- for non-adjacant land o^nars of riparian tracts within lapoon located 300 foa. northwest of Narrows Bridge. a) 1941 Paul R. Nutt b) S946 David C. Cook c) #951 John Thimmesh P?'oSltf-“tur 2oi'o“ wide riparian tracts Iccatad within harrows lapoon - see Exhibit D. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.24, Subdivision 4 (A) Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (J) Application^^ section lO.H, Sebdtvison i (M a “ maintain a dock (accessory structure) on a xot priticipai structure. b) Per section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (J) a and variance is required if this continue and, be recognised as a xegal non-conforming use. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Applications Property Owners Lists Plat Map Lagoon Lots - Subject Properties Record of Ownership Survey in Relation to Ownership Thimmesh Letter Cook Letter News Article 6/12/58 Survey Tract S s T Review of Individual Applications: a) Paul R. Nutt Mr. Nitt has owned four traces (irncts: has owned four tracts F & Q - Exhibits d“& Tracts 0 s ft - 2 riparian tracts) since the , owner of the area I;en"le^f:^rf:h%^^co^‘’eTanVs°thV;'^L S^l'L;e^V\Veir-s•’AV\.'d“cA^-fn “re^^'de^ft.^^)nara%^%Vd Vo ^iU\7 aVA'^ctt^^^^ ,.vV.l*i5- A-** H^v- :, ... , viv-.. ^-•/«v.o.v ;v^:-v;v-:v^.- .;V.-.Vv -''' \ - • '^c.'* r,, - * . ' ■ • I • * ■ , - " ■ * * •••*•' . • .-.’•-A <*'•;.- • .-.• t-:r.-->►, ' • * m. fe‘-'m^}>. s • ! ;1 ?2 . ■=: ;»- «« ■% ’i * « 4$' -V •i " *'■ Sfe-n-/'. • :24V ,fe-^' - ir:i: To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Butler , , Mark E. Bernhardsor., City Administrator Orono Council Members deanne A- Mabusth, Zoning Administrator September 3, 1985 conditional Use Permits and Variance review ;®'';^J^,3acent 1^^^ owners of riparian tracts within lagoon located 3 northwest of Narrows Bridge. a) S941 Paul R. Nutt b) #946 David C. Cook c) 1951 John Thimmesh ProSrt?'-“oSr 2o''£'o« vide riparian traces located within Narrows lagoon - see Exhibit D. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.24, Subdivision 4 (A) Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (J) Application 10.24, Subdivison 4 (A) a ^ maintain a dock (accessory structure) on a rot without a priricipai structure. b) Per Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (J) a ® ^V^^to and variance is required if this continue and, be recognised as a xegal non-conforming use. •i List of Exhibits Exhibit ?\ - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Applications Property Owners Lists Plat Map Lagoon Lots - Subject Properties Record of Ownership Survey in Relation tc Ownership Thinunesh Letter Cook Letter News Article 6/12/58 Survey Tract S & T Review of Individual Applications: a) Paul R. ^Jutt e r n - 9 land tracts# And Mr. Nitt has owned four tracts (irncts F ^ Q peview E.xhibits i) & Tracts 0 S R - 2 riparian tracts) since the lo j £*„ai owner of the area E. Ke purchased them from the developer and . tracts exnircd in even before the covenants that governed the u..c - orono City Council was residen\.^"lie^MragreV<3°o file^n ^ the new owner. . «■ •- •' * ".•• .• >■"•. • -''K- ^‘ • ■■ . .-^' •■ • • • •! ■• ■■ :"■ •• V-.I ••/* •"-- r*a ^ • w «- * *^■jy's r-^\, •'.'.*■?t a*» ,••*•.•. *. • zT'- •r*. •. ^ Zoning Files ^941, ?945 S »951 August 14, 1935 Page 2 of 4 Tracts R & 0 have contained docks since the early 60's. Each c: with the others, r.dintain a zero let line setback. Both doc.<s r.a each one sail boat over 16 feet stored for the su-rr.er season.^^ knowledge there has never been another boat kept at these doc.es. & P are the land tracts providing a parking space for each owner, tc these tracts are via Dick Ogle's property to the south. ;ck, as I ve had / To r-.y racts Q Access b) Donald C. Cook Cook has owned Tract E, a riparian tract since 1979 or 193;. Tne tract was originally owned by an adjacent land owner and when the sj ]ec_ owner sold his homestead lot, the riparian tract was not inciudec Ta'7 sale but sold independently to Cook. The covenants governing .-he s^. . ownership combinations for the riparian tracts owned by ad^acen. xa..o owners expired in January of 1965. Cook has maintained 1 boat over 16 feet in length at the zero ijat line dock since his ownership. Cook docs not own the contiguous land _.racw D. Dick Ogle owns Tract □. The land tracts serve as of ..-street car. Cook does not have sufficient dry land area to provide o_i a i corking for one car. Cook is «ble to legally parx on Ccunwy P.oac 19 bt- this mav not be an arrangement that the City would wish to encourage. - these non-conforming uses ere to be approved by the City, their ‘ no way plaice any unnecessary hazards or ris.xs in the use o. ..he p.». - - or create nuisances for the surrounding property owners or the general public. It would bs preferable for Cook to acquire the use Ou Tra-- off-street parking purposes but in light of the available parxing on j cent County Road 19, it is difficult for the City to deny a conditio.nal u permit to the applicant because of safety factors si ice the ooc< -as - used for the past five years without mishap. Limits on the u.se c. ®P* ^ cant's dock would result in an increase in safety - gue.-ts to bo p.cxed up at public landing areas rather than encourage additional parxing c.. coun-/ Road 19. c) John Thimmesh _ , „ ^ e , - Thimmesh is the current owner of recently combined iC^TCts S & *. prooerty remained with the original owner/dcvciopor's ' V '’i It was the request of a potential buyer to build a new doex that cs..jnence this year long review process. Tract S har. had a zero lot line coex .o. mar.v veor.s. The applicant asks if this property could be > with another individual. I have explained that this review may cs.abx-s. limits on the use of thtsc docks so that joint ownership is He understands our concern but also asks that the ir-cth and adjacent owner could maintain 2 beats in excess of the 16 tv,< « not encroach on adjacent dock atoas or create hazard^s for rc^- lagoon. I suggested that the City would be wary o. ^hc co.-cntia- . or lease the second slip and add to the parking r we the neighborhood. He advised that, this was not. his inwcntion ‘ ‘‘ had cl.inr.od at some future date to acquire a collector type hoaw i.. -XwC.. of 16 feet length. I advised Thimmesh to come hack at th.it time .o a..onu liis original conditional use permit per Council approva-. I • i - I I • 1 f« I# t\ i « I 7# i ? 9r 4 -- '* . .\ ^y .- r^'r^t>><'.’^^^^ 'V- r* F-o *>»v»;—;'•* . ■• mm^ , ■••• •..V •' .•i • 3:“;* • *- •'• V p-' •» *•* rTzT*-* ^'.r.. V.'V i- - Zoning Files 49<;i, ?5»-;6 & *951 August 14, 1935 Page 2 of 4 Tracts ?. & 0 have contained docks since the early 60's. Each ccck, as with the others, r.feintain a zero lot line setback. Both doc.<s each one sail boat over 16 feet stored for the sujrrr.er season.^ knowledce there has never been another boat kept at these doc.ts. .ract Q & P are'the land tracts providing a parking space ..or each owner. ,-.ccesj tc these tracts are via Dick Ogle's property to the south. b) Donald C. Cook Tne tract owner Cook has owned Tract E, a riparian tract since ^979 or I9s-. was originally owned by an adjacent land owner and when the sub^ec- owner sold his homestead lot, the riparian tract was not includes ^he sale but sold indeocndently to Cook. The covenants governing whe special ownership co.-nbinaticns for the riparian tracts owned by adDacen. ia..o owners expired in January of 1965- Cook has maintained 1 boat over 16 feet in length at the dock since his ownership. Cook docs not own the contiguous * Dick Ogle owns Tract D. The land tracts serve as of ..-street * car. Cook does not have sufficient dry land area to provide suitabi oarking for one car. Cook is «ble to legally on Ccuns.y Roa- this mav not be an arrangement that the City would wish to encourage. these non-confor.minc uses are to be approved by the City, their use . in no way pl<'.ce any unnecessary hazards or ris.<s in the use o. - ® P*”*" . or create nuisances for the surrounding property owners or the genera i public. It would be preferable for Cook to acquire the use o^ off-street parking purposes but in light of the available parking o. j cent County Road 19, it is difficult for the City to deny permit to the applicant because of safety factors since the coex ^.a - used for the past five years without mishap. Limits on the use c: appi - cant's dock would result in an increase in safety - guerts to be picxed u? at public landing areas rather than encourage additional parking c.. coun-y Road 19. c) John Thimmesh ^ e , -Thimmesh is the current owner of recently combined iracws S & prooerty remained with the original owncr/devciopor's until It was the request of a potential buyer to build a new doex that cc..jnence this year long review process. Tract S har. had a zero lot xine coc *.* many vears. The applicant asks if this property could be ownec goinwi> with another individual. I have explained that this review may cs abi.sh limits on the use of chtse docks so that joint ownership is ^ '• ^ * He understands our coi\ccrn but also asks that the C11 y cons ic o r j adjacent owner could maintain 2 beats in excess of the 16 foot not encroach on adjacent dock areas or create hazards for lagoon. I suggested that the City would be wary o. the co.-cntia- . or lease the second slip and add to the packing congestion the neighborhood. He advised that, this was not his intention bu. had pl.anncd at some future date to acquire a collector typ- boa. i- of 16 feet length. I advised Thimmesh to come hack at th.at time .o a..c. u l;is original conditional use pcr.mit per Council approia.. i • ri 4. I :: *. •1.ji 5I I A" Ko'j' “ *.^' Vc* ..7 -.v ^.iy ■ ", ‘ .V •fSiT-vu '»>/.♦- •’>41 •••1 •*''?» .•7y:< ? « Review of Application In the Spring of 1934, after receiving coT.piaints concerning the intense use a'nc reported operation of a - area Narrows Lagoon area, Council directed staff to su^^w area. Staff advised Council that there was indeed a public safetv and welfare in the unrecuiatec use of these 20 foo. wide ’-ioa’-ian •■racts (see Exhibit F) given the linited area of the lagoon. ine original'Registered Land Survey division (1954) created these tracts to provide protected dock use area for the homestead lots Lgistered Land Survey. The covenants dealing with the ,^se of ;-"®®- have long expired (1915) and four tracts are currently in the ownership of non-adjacent land owners. The City was introduced to this multiple dock area in 1979 in the process of reviewing a lot area variance for a^ Robert Watson. application involving the common ownership o. two traCwS ° ‘ r oroperties. One was developed, the other uncevcloped. A cond^ition of approving that variance application was that both homestead mainlake retain a lagoon tract for dock purposes, ns a owners of Tracts X. & N and K i L are the only legai or the riparian tracts. The original covenants established standards fo.th use of these limited properties but they are no longer in effect and many would require variances to our present code. The Marina Committee had been attempting to deal with the owners, two adjacent residential ewners and four owne^rs^^^ found It impossible to come to any agrccm.ont uecausc^ of the divers- ship pattern and the illegal or unresolved status o. of'the four c I. and E. The chairman of the Marina Committee advised ®^^he owners of the need tc ga’.n legal status or recogni ion un»-v"with all riparian tracts from the Council before the committee could work with all six owners on a safe agreed upon use o.*’ the iageon area. Planning Commission was asked to consider the fcliowing is.sues: 1. Can these tracts be put to another reasonable use under the present r.onir.Cj? 2. Were the hardships created by the owners or due to circumstances unique to this :'io[»ctty? 3. is the current use of ehc property cut o-' character with the surrounding lagoon ncighborb.oou? 4. Is there a safe level of use for a 2C wide riparian lot; 5. Should the fact that these formal zoning have any beat ing on the * f nr^. that these tracts were not owned at:d ustn. ey adjacent 1* •* •• f-». >. ...........................• • • •• li zoning Files #941, ?945 s #951 August 14, 19S5 Page 4 of 5 6. What forr. of ownership is feasible for these tracts? Single or joint? 7. What coT.bir.atien of boat storage is acceptable? a) 1 boat ever 16 feet in length only b) 1 boat over 16 feet in length only and 1 under 16 fees, in length c) 2 boats each over 16 feet in length 8. Is there a special placer.ent or pattern for dock construction that should be considered for these tracts? The only survey on record for these tr;cts is for the Thitrr.esh property - I have enclosed the survey to assist in your review. a ) b) c) d) limit on dock width limit on widths of boat slips dock location withir. 20 feet width tracts cannot cualify for use of buoys in lagoon 9. Use of land tract: a ) b) c) iir.it number of cars parked on land tracts to one ^ no parking a 1 loved or. Shadywood Road for riparian tracw users “ nice, but how do you enforce? other land use limits? The Planning Cc.rrr.i J .sion felt the scope of their review non-conforring use issue. They unanimously aorcert to ; granting of a conditional use permit for the continued ® os legal non-conforming uses. The individual rcsciuticns draftee b> sta include the necessary findings. membership did rot ail agree or. the limits ie tracts. Four of the six members voted to iimi> each c.The total adjacent land owners' tracts without the written consent of the n.fcctcc ewne r. The minority cf two Coir that limit inn th^ dorks to one boat w»^s an unrca.Honabic a-.Kl unfounded. J imi tar ic*:i not ba.sod or sa.cty considerations. The enclosed resolutions have l.-;vn t'.raltcd based or. the directives c. the majority opinio::. nnV -s. %- s- Zoning Files S941» *9-^6 & i951 August 14, 1335 Page 5 of 5 staff ful-thet racortcvends “^^ned bj^non- pVoretfy -ersTat bian --l^d tbat^^a ^ ‘IJt?n\“e%f''tha\Vie;;raXy will bfc i“2sponsible for revie-^ing t» i 9- ‘ U 1: r } I .;^ .V -yr-^ »■ ■ ■.v.>%.. .^.>^v^.. •-%■■ r.-T »•-• ^ J7'r-M r&^<r--«. •».'• >~--~ • -:iuii-:_L-^—J— •J '-■S'-'; Vn^JTTS^ ji"- -, ?K ■ - -’k-— / i/, 4'>^< •.« v.r MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 19, 1985. PACE 2 #948 - 565 LEAP ST. continued „ _ , Asst. Eor.ir.'; Adr.ir.istrator Gaffrcr. stated t.nat r.evere..d Chaffin vas ccr.cerr.ed about the er.crcach-er.t c: the patto, v.’hich is used fer church services, ; r.to the pronose- subdivided property. As a potential sclution to the encroachr.er.t problem, ^Mr. Hanson suggested a possible conveyance of that csr».axn property to the church. Mr. W.J. Korcnkie'-ict, 465 Leaf St., was in attendance for this natter. Goetten asked about the plans for the existing house. Mr. Kanson stated that when the property was acquired, they thought they had a full 6 acres and was unaware of the high dry buildable ordinance, and felt they were dealing with a minimal variance. Due to these proble.r.s, their plans are to sell one lot for a new home to be built, and sell the other lo- with the e.xisting home. Mr. Hansen also stated that the applicant understands that he will bo responsi-le o. partial road maintenance of Oxford F.oad. It was moved by Chairman Callahan, seconded by reconur.er.d approval of the proposed subdivisiou subject -o staff's 4 recc:..-endations as listed in addition to 5) conditioned upon obtaining approval f ro.m r.eccessary parties for use of Oxford Road for entrance to Lot 1, 6) applicant being notified of the attractive nuisance pool and need to be addressad. Metier., Ayes (o), Najs tO). ZONING A.MENDMENT PUBLIC HEAJIING 12:14 . ^ i j h<-Due to the late hour, it was moved by McDonald, seconded b,. Goetten. to continue this public hearing r.lanning Com-mission meeting. .Motion, Ayes (6), Nai s lOJ. C35iX>PAUL NUTT, #946 DAVID C. COOK, #951 JOHN TaiMMISB 2739 SEADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:58 -8:29 , -hr-ni «h w»-cPaul R. Nutt, David C. Coo.-., and wchr. S Pavti ihim—ish w_-o present for this natter. Zoning ,Administrator Mabusth noted the certificate of moiling and the affidavit of publication. zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the ° lots located west of bridge: John land ow nt land tract (D 5 J/*l.^.:e?^b.,\wo''ad"jaccnt wners. Mr. Casey and Mr. Fleischhacker. ►r- /V‘- ©■^'i l^--v IS ?i>::r J » •.*% ll AiNUTES op the planning commission meeting held august 19, 1985. PAGE 3 4941—1946—1951 2739 GHADYViOOD RD. continued Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the question is how to deal with the r.or.-conforr.ing use o£ these properties. Mabusth noted that the Citv has been aware of the non- 4. -conforming use of these lots since the late 50's. .Mabus. gave a short background as to when these lots were purchased by the applicants’. Mabusth indicated that because the applicants' are non-adjacent property owners creates the illegal r.on-confcrming use, which has been a non-conforming use fer the past 30 years. Mabusth als'' noted that some of the tracts have been combined and some have not. All three applicants indicated that their request is to be allowed to use the lots for boat dockage. In order to do this, the City must recognize them as a legal non-conforning use. Rovegno questioned, since back in 1955 this use was apparently a legal thing to do, at what point did it become an illegal use? Zoning Ad.m.inistrator Mabusth indicated the change occurred in 1967, when the for.mal zoning came in. Zoning Administrator Mabusth st.atcd that the Planning Commission is being asked to addresu two things : 1) recognize these lots as a legal non-con.formir-c use 2) grant conditional use per.mits because these lots have accessory structures with no principal structure. Mr. Ogle stated that issues to be considered are that the applicants' want to change the confoim.ity of the lots, the lots were intended for x'esidents, parking a.nd access problems for guests, and the problem with regulating the use and nu.mber of boats being docked. A person from the public stated that the LMCD allows one boat per 100 feet of lakcshcrc and the lots in question are 20 foot lots. Tom. Frahm, Chairman cf the Marina Committee, stated that the Marina Committee found a problem with the number of boats and ownership of boats. Frahm. stated that the real problem, is that the Marina Committee felt they could not deal with the dockage probie.m without a legal definition of what these pieces of property are, which is why it is before the Planning Com.mif sion. Rovegno wanted to m.ake clear the Planning C ,vmissio.n' s issues in this m.atter which is a conditional use permit to allow an. accessory use absent a principal use and variances because the lots are sub-standard under the terms cf today's zoning review. P.ovegr.c felt that is what probably a reasonable use because it Jias been clone for over 30 years. Rovegno questioned whether these docks have permits from, the I.MCD. « I \ Ju ■*! • I }i I- - - - - -•• •* ■ .. . . . . .. '>:'V -V.i: Jt'v* • Y. •yt gfl-?: •*'Ac- /-fe. 1 ii'. o iffi. f-' AiNUTES op -THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 19, 1985. PAGE 3 f941~I946“#951 2739 GHADYWOOD RJD. continued Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the question is how to deal with the nor.-conforr.ing use of these properties. Mabusth noted that the City has been aware of the non­ conforming use of these lots since the late 5C's. Mabusth gave a short background as to when these lots were purchased by the applicant.*?'. Mabusth indicated that because the applicants' are non-adjacent property owners creates the illegal non-conforming use, which has been a non-conforming use fer the past 30 years. Mabusth als*^ noted that ro.me of the tracts have been combined and some have not. All three applicants indicated that their request is to be allowed to use the lots for boat dockage. In order to do this, the City must recognize the.m as a legal non-conforming use. Rovegno questioned, since back in 1955 this use was apparently a legal thing to do, at v/hat point did it become an illegal use? Zoning Ad.ministrator Mabusth indicated the cha.nge occurred in 1967, when the formal zoning came in. Zoning Administrator Mabusth st.etcd that the Planning Commission is bei.ng asked toaddresu two things: 1) recognize these lots a s a legal non-con.f ormit-g use 2 ) grant conditional use per.mits because thase lots have accessory structures with no principal structure. Mr. Ogle stated that issues to be considered are that the applicants' want to change the confoim.ity of the lots, the lots were intended for residents, parking and access probler.s for guests, and the problem with regulating the use and number of boats being docked. A person from the public stated that the LMCD allows one boat per 100 feet of lakeshcrc and the lots in question are 20 foot lots. Tom. Frahm, Chairman of the Marina Committee, stated that the Marina Com.mittee found a problem with the number of boats and ownership of boats. Frahm. stated that the real problem, is that the Marina Co.mmittcc felt they could not deal with the dockage problem without a legal definition of what these pieces of property are, which is why it is before the Planning Co.T.mif Sion. Rovegno wanted to m.ake clear the Planning C ssio.-.' s issues in this natier which is c conditional use permit to allow an. accessory use absent a principal use and variances because the lots arc sub-standarc u.ndcrr the terns cf today's zoning review. Rovugr.c felt that is what probably a reasonable use because it !»as been done for over 30 years. Rovegno questienvd whether tho.se docks have permits from, the I..MCD. •;( V.". - w—.-.K- t • • 1 i \ 1 f • 4 * ff f s ‘M?.m n.-* 1 - _.. f^^7r.trVHsSS#4 ■■'}yrV.y'J..r - ■"•• •:":. - • • •^.V'.ir - • « -^:--4 .v -/va "n -•^yyrm ■^'T - 'tri 'At «4« ..js -3 &-U-; C lk-^>’r.^7 ic^ sa«s;- 1 ■ r 1' Wa vlk »v r» V-c: ^ V -i ‘■'.y'r^’ 'minutes of the planning commission meeting held august 19, 1985. PAGE 4 I941-I946-I951 2739 SFLADYWOOD PJD, continued Zor.ir.9 Adxinistrator Mabusth stated that the LV.CD considers -his a 9ra:ic;fatherec situation and that the docks are le9al because they existed prior to the creation of the LMCD. y.abusth also stated that the LXCD recor.T.ends 50 feet of lakeshcre per boat but would consider variances fora c’.inir.ur. of 10 feet for one boat. Mr. Ogle stated that a "grandfathered" clause should oertair. to the original cv;r.er only and not be sold off. There were no other corr-nents from the public and the public hearing was closed. Chairenan Call :han felt tnat Mr. Ogle's stater.ents regarding parking prob .err.s should be considered. It was r.oved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to recoitutend granting the Conditional Use Permit's to use as a non­ conforming use subject to no parking be allowed on property they don't own and allowing one boat per non-adjacent landowners. Motion, Ayes { 4 ), Nays (2 ). Sime and McDonald '•oted nay for reasons of limiting one boat per owner creates a hardship. #945 k.J. BAUMAN 1040 TONKAWA ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC BEARING 8:53 - 9:03 Asst. Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. Mr. Robert J. Bauman was present for this matter. Mr. Baum.an that he wants to clean up his shoreline area using a backhoe to rem.ove tree stumps and poison ivy which requires a conditional use permit. Mr. Lauman stated that he will comply to all of staff’s recomr.iendations as listed in their report. Asst. Zcning Administrator Gaffron indicated an issue regarding th.e drainage pipes. .‘•.r. Baum.an stated that there is a surface drainage problem, that ran oown to the Mooltings property and t.nat the pipe is just laying th«rc now. Ti'.e t.celtir.gs, 1C60 Tenkawa Road, stated that now that the fence is there, there is no drainage problem. -urgen Stiolow, i020 Tonkawj Road, stated th.at he did.-.' t like seeing nature trees taken down. -t wa.< moved by Sine, sccor*.dcd by Gccttcn, to rcco.m_me.’'.d approval of the Conditio.na 1 L’se Pern'.it, .subject to applic.^r.” co.m.plying wi th the five cond ' tion.s rcco.m-.cnUed by staff an.: that stafi will review and wor.‘*. with applicant regarding the draiiiage on the .north let line. .Votion, Ayes (6), Nays (05. ! • I • i February 23,2000 TO: Mr. Mike Gaffron FROM: Jim Zimmerman, Richard and Sue Gay, Dick and Marlys Ogle SUBJECT: Resident and Non-Resident Boat Docks E Rl h, ■■ We understand that one of the non-resident boat owners has asked the city to revisit the parking situation along County Road 19. We also noticed that one of die non-resident dock properties is now being surveyed, and we’re concerned about what may be planned for this property. The docks along Country Road 19 were set up to be resident docks for homeowners of the Pheasant Laum Development. They were obviously never intended to be sold off as independent properties or rented out as rental property as is now the case. What started out in 1985 as the sale of a couple of docks for normal recreational use has grown to the point noiv where we have essentially a condominium marina in our small neighborhood. It’s creating a number of problems now, and we have a veiy real fear about what could happen in the future with these properties. There is also the issue of conditional use permits vs. no permits. The dock properties break into the following three categories: ■ Resident Docks with No Conditional Use Permits - Olson and Casey • Non-Resident Docks with No Conditional Use Permits - Gunther and Ault ■ Non-Resident Docks with 198.S Conditional Use Permits - Huber, Miegel, Wittman, Cook There are currently issues relative to all 3 of the above categories of docks. Rather than address the issues one at a time in isolation, we feel it is important to look at the total issue of the docks and look at both short and long term issues. In the short term, we w*ant to work with the city to clearly understand exactly what the rights are of the neighborhood and what the rights are of the non-resident dock owners. Longer term, since these properties are completely non-conforming and do not fit within the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City, we would look to work with the city to bring this area into compliance with the current Zoning Codes and requirements. Detailed below is background and histoty on the dock area in question. In addition, there is a summary’ of current concerns about the dock area and the expanded use of the docks beyond what was in place in 1985 when the permits were granted. w • In looking at the situation, we thought it made sense to look at it in five different ways: ■ The phjfsical characteristics of the area in question and what is appropriate • Original intent for the dock area ■ The histoiy of what’s happened relative to these docks in the last 15 years since the Conditional Use Permits were granted • How the current use of the docks no longer conforms to the conditions set forth in the Conditional Use Permit ■ Resident docks without Conditional Use permits Specifics of each are as follows: Physical Characteristics of the Dock Area ■ The area where the docks are located is very shallow, ranging in depth from 2-4 feet. • Because the area is so shallow, docks need to be 40 feet plus in length to be usable in periods when the lake is low. There is a very narrow channel leading back to the non-resident dock area. At the narrowest it is approximately 60-70 feet from the end of the dock at 2765 Shadywood to the other shore. Because of the shallow depth of the channel, the navigable area at the narrowest part of the channel leading to the docks is only approximately 20 feet wide. In testifying before the planning commission in January, one of the non-resident dock owners, Miegel, testified regarding the narrowness of the channel and that there wasn’t room for large boats. He stated that a 33-34 foot boat w*as the maximum that would be appropriate for the area. This is smaller than a number of the boats currently docked at the non-resident docks. ■ Due to the very' shallow depth and narrowness of the channel, extremely large boats are not appropriate for the non-resident dock area. In 1985, the boats docked at the non-resident docks were much smaller than those docked there today. Orieinal Intent of Dock Area ■ In taking a historical look at the dock situation, it’s important to go back to the original intent and plan for the neighborhood and docks. ■ The docks were established when the neighborhood was originally plotted. ■ The docks were created solely for neighborhood residents. ■ The covenants of the neighborhood development clearly specified that the docks were for neighborhood residents and the path behind the boats w*as to be used to take things to and from your boat, and not as a car park area. There was certainly no overnight parking envisioned or allowed. • • What*s Happened Since 1Q85 • As the neighborhood covenants expired, a few of the neighbors who had lakefront footage and also a dock in the channel sold the channel docks to friends. ■ There are a total of 5 docks now owned by non-residents. ■ Since .-985, there has been a gradual but steady increase in the size of boats moored at the docks, the amount of boat usage, and the number of cars and amount of traffic due to the non-resident boats. ■ The parking and safety issues became so severe this past summer that the city posted the County Road 19 in front of the non-resident boat docks as a no parking zone because excess car parking resulting from the non-resident docks created a major safety issue. ■ There has also been a substantial increase in the infrastructure of the non-resident boat docks N>ith the addition, since 1985, of electricity, running water, a flagpole, burglar alarms, high intensity anti-crime lights, gravel car parks and other amenities. • Along with the substantial increase in boat size has come a significant change in boat usage. In 1985, the non-resident dock owners were using their boats in the same manner as the neighbors, which was for recreational boating. In the past several years, however, as new owners have come in and established owners have purchased larger boats, the boats have come to be used for weekend or overnight accommodation. Generally, a number of non­ resident boat owners stay on their boats from Friday to Sunday. This results in cars being parked for the whole weekend. While general!)’ boat owners do not spend the night tied up to the dock, it is not uncommon for owners to sleep in their boats while they are tied up at the docks. There have also been a number of instances of partying on boats and loud music on boats late at night that disturb the peace and quiet of the neighborhood. • There have been a number of break-ins on the non-resident boats. One non-resident boat . owner put a motion sensor burglar alarm on his boat when he went to the 1996 Summer Olympics. For the three weeks they were gone, the alarm went off many times each day at all hours. Since the dock owner was not from the neighborhood we had no way to reach them and instead were a\\’akened every night when the alarm went off. • Over the past few years some of the non-resident dock owners have used their slips as rental property. In 1999, at least two of the slips were rented. Current Use Compared to 198.5 Resolution The Conditional Use Permits were granted for the four docks in 1985 based on the assumption that granting a Conditional Use Permit for docks would “not to be detrirnental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air norpose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties nor \sill it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City.” Given the significant changes since 1985, we feel the conditions set forth in the Conditional Use Permit no longer are valid in a number of important areas as follows: • “Docks w’oiild not adversely affect light” - In the past few years, a high intensity anti-crime light has been installed by one of the non-resident dock owners. In addition to the very’ negative message an anti-crime light communicates for a neighborhood, this bright light that burns all night is a substantial and adverse increase in light in the area. • “Nor pose a fire hazard” - In the past few years a gravel car park has been built (without permit) by one of the non-resident dock owners. This car park is immediately next to the only fire hydrant in the \icinity of the boat docks. Frequently, cars are parked for 24 hours or more directly in front of the tire hydrant. There are also frequently 4 cars in the car park preventing any easy access to the fire hydrant. This poses a significant increase in fire risk to the neighborhood. VVe also believe that the large boats with correspondingly large gas tanks that are left unattended pose an increased risk of fire to the neighborhood. The boats have been broken into. It’s certainly not unreasonable to assume that vandals could set fire to one of the boats, which could pose a serious fire risk to the whole neighborhood. • “Nor pose other danger to the neiehboring properties ” - The non-resident boats have been broken into a number of times. A recent article also indicated that boat crime on the lake is on the increase. The large, extremely valuable, untended non-resident boats are an obvious target for thieves and vandals. Their presence is an in\itation to burglars and vandals to enter our neighborhood, where they are not likely to stop at the non-resident boats. The presence of the non-resident dock owners makes it very difficult to practice Neighborhood Watch since neighbors never know which cars belong in the neighborhood or who is supposed to be in the non-resident dock area. ■ “Proposed level of use" - The level of use has changed substantially since 1985. In 1985, the docks were used for normal recreational boating and the boats were much smaller than they are today. None of the slips were used for rental propert>' as two of the slips were used in 1999. There was no electricity, water, lights, flagpoles, car parks or other amenities in 1985. The level of use is quite different than in 1985. ■ “Use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the citv^" - We’ve all been told that no other situation like this exists in Orono and that no docks are allowed without a structure. We’ve also been told that these properties are all non-conforming. We don ’t understand how in 1985 these docks w'ould have met the criteria stated above but they certainly would not seem to meet these criteria today. ■ “Nor will it depreciate surrounding propert\~ values’’ - We believe strongly that the current situation does depreciate our properU* values. There is no other place in Orono w'here a condominium boat marina is allowed to exist and that’s because it goes against the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The city mandates that only lots with structures are entitled to docks because this is the proper use of land to maximize property* values and proper lakefront usage. While in 1985 an argument could have been made for these non-resident docks not harming property values because the boats were much smaller and used for normal recreation, this is no longer the case. Ha\ing a condominium boat marina with large boats, break-ins, substantial car parking, rental slips, noise, lights, etc., in the middle of a quiet residential neighborhood most certainly adversely affects property- value. Given the city*’s rationale in the 1985 resolution, we believe that if the city applied those guidelines to today’s situation, the conditional use permits would not be granted for the size boats, infrastructure, and current use of the non-resident slips. Resident Docks without Conditional Use Permits • The two docks owned by residents without conditional use permits are Olson and Casey. • Neither Olson and Casey were ovN-ners in 1985 when the conditional use permits were granted and neighbors agreed to provide access for the fins car that was allowed to park for the three non-resident owners entitled to park one car. . k $ • I y' FiJ.. L;r r Access for the non-residents to park cars has always been granted by previous owners of these properties and Olson and Casey. While no permanent easements have been put in place, we think the access issue is probably governed by the fact that it’s been done for 15 years wiAout protest from anyone. Also, the land behind the docks is clearly a right a way to access the docks and was always set up that way. Specifically as relates to Olson and Casey’s docks, they are separate tracts on the plot map but were purchased by both Casey and Olson in a single purchase agreement and transaction when they purchased their homes. The docks and homes have always been tied together, and as neighbors we would like to ensure that they continue to stay together. If these two docks are allowed to be sold off to non-residents, it will only increase the problems and potential problems we already face. Conclusions We feel strongly that since 1985 there has been a substantial expansion of use of non- conforming properties (specifically the non-resident boat docks). • The non-resident I* it owners have gone substantially beyond what was approved and intended inl985. We would ask that the city carefully review this situation to determine if there is any way to bring it within the current zoning code and Comprehensive Plan. Since the non-resident docl^ are the only non-conforming dock properties in all Orono, at some point in the future we feel these non-resident docks will need to be eliminated. Given the continued expanded use, the current problems and the significant potential for much greater problems in the near future, we feel it is important to address the issue now. At a minimum, we would ask that the city eliminate all of the expanded use since the Conditional Use Permit was granted and bring these properties back to where they were when the permits w’ere granted. Specifically that would involve the following: — Only 1 car of parking p>er boat slip for the three boat slips whose Conditional Use Permits allow 1 car of parking. - No overnight parking. - Removal of anti-crime light. - Removal of flag pole. - Removal of gravel car park. - Elimination of parking that blocks the fire hydrant. No partying on boats tied un to the docks. No overnight accommodations on the boats tied up to the docks. - Removal of electricity to docks and running water. Given the narrowmess of the channel and the shallow depth of the area in question, we’d ^so like to see boat size for the non-resident slips restricted to the boat sizes that were in use in 1985, or the 33-34 foot limit stated in the January' Planning Commission meeting by one of the non-resident dock ownqrs. V » Mr. Gaffron, we would like to work with you on this issue to develop solutions Aat protect rights and maximize the quality of life for our neighborhood. It’s unfortunate that this situation exists and there probably is not an easy ans^ver, but the issues need to be addressed and the sooner the better. We’ll plan to call to set up a time to meet and discuss. i ( t ' *■JtJ t > ! i 1 ♦r k' Application Date: 8/21/00 Deadline: 12/19/00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: October 18,2000 ITEM NO.; 7 Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Se^ tion: Zoning Item Description:#2610 Jerome J. Hall 80 Leaf Street After-the-Fact Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) 36,625 s.f. (0.84 acre)OCT 2 3 2000 List of Exhibits:CITY or unwi>ivJ A B C Resolution Revised Plan Planning Report (October 11,2000) Application Review: Applicant requests approval of an after-the-fact variance to permit replacement of a deck within the 75 setback to a protected tributary. The applicant has stated the preexisting deck was not safe and needed replacement. In July, 2000 it was observed the deck was being replaced without a permit. Based on the recommendations made by the Planning Commission at their September meeting, the applicant proposed a revision to the plan that would remove some of the deck located within the 75* setback and extend the deck to the south an additional 2' (which would be outside of the 75* setback to the creek and would not require a variance for that change to the plan). The Planning Commission reviewed the revised plan on October 16th and recommended 6 to 0 to approve the after the fact variance request. The revised plan has reduced the size of the deck to 170 s.f. within 75 of a protected tributary where 174 s.f. had existed before removal of the old deck. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the resolution attached approving an after the fact variance to permit 170 s.f. of deck structure within the 75' setback to a protected tributary. i-r > , A A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN AFTER THE FACT VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (1) AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 FILE NO. /Jf261C WHEREAS, Jerome J. Hall (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 80 Leaf Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Tract A, R.L.S. No. 744, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 18, 2000 and October 16, 2(XK) at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for an after-the-fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit construction of a replacement deck within 75' of a protected tributary constituting 170 s.f. of hardcover within the 75' setback where no hardcover is normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2610. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB One Family Rural Residential Zoning District. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 16, 2000 and recommended approval on a vote of 6 to 0 for a variance based upon the following findings: Page 1 of 4 II %I ■ >. 4. I 1 5. A.Air photos indicate the preexisting deck was constructed sometime between the mid 1970's to the early 1980's. The City does not have a permit on file for the deck. B.At its’ closest point, the deck would not encroach nearer to the protected tributary than the old deck (48' from the OHWL). C.A deck would continue to provide a landing for a sliding glass door located at the rear of the house. D.The original deck would have been constructed prior to the adoption of the Shoreland Ordinance. The Shoreland Ordinance applies to non- lakeshore property. Section 10.22, which is the ordinance that regulated hardcover prior to 1992, applies only to lots zoned Lakeshore Residential and only to lakeshore properties. The applicant ’s property is zoned RR-IB and is not a lakeshore property. t The total hardcover for the replacement deck within 75’ of the creek is 170 s.f. where 174 s.f. had existed prior to removal of the deck. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 4 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit construction of a replacement deck within 75’ of a protected tributary constituting 170 s.f. of hardcover within the 75’ setback where no hardcover is normally allowed subject to the following conditions: 1.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (October 23, 2(X)1). 2.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. 3.The undersigned applicant has read, understands 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 property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of October, 2(XX). ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner Page 3 of 4 a V '*• fc- ’ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of October, 2000 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Notary Public On this day of , 20 for said county, personally appeared before me a Notary Public within and known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged ^t he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 4 vYT^rrrxTT J7.7 . r , -’; ■ i K| 37.3 V ^\ \ V Aooeo SO SQ oARF F •••sr 'i.,' r t m X (/) VE Re‘fv\6vffa 6c?urti^c’ f 3^ C Application Date: 60 Day Deadline: 8/21/00 10/20/00 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 11,2000 #2610 Jerome J. Hall 80 Leaf Street After-the-Fact Variance Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) 36,625 s.f. (.84 acre) Council Review The Council voted to return the review of the variance back to the Planning Commission to discuss options on the property for deck replacement without increasing the size of the deck. The Planning Commission had voted 7 to 0 to recommend denial of the request based on the size of the deck within the 75' setback would increase. The applicant has requested further review of the application with the Commission to review an alternative plan. The revised plan is attached as Site Plan A2 to this memo. Application Summary: Applicant had requested approval of an after-the-fact variance to permit replacement of a deck within the 75' setback to a protected tributary. The applicant has stated the preexisting deck was not safe and needed replacement. In July, 2000 it was obser\ ed the deck was being replaced w ithout a permit. The deck has been about 50% completed and is constructed larger than the deck that was removed. Preexisting deck =174 s.f. Replacement deck = 244 s.f. * Approximately 25 s.f. of the replacement deck is outside of the 75' setback. List of Exhibits A1 Application A2 Revised Deck Plan B Plat Map C Site Survey D Project Photo E Site Topography F Propert)’ Owners Notification List #2610 Jerome J. Hall 80 Leaf Street Aftcr-ihc-Fact Variance Page 1 - Public Hearing Pertinent Code Section 1.Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) prohibits hardcover within 75' of the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of a tributary. f: 4 r Analysis Air photos indicate the preexisting deck was constructed sometime beUveen the mid 1970 ’s to the early 1980's. The City does not have a permit on file for the deck. The replacement deck would include two areas that were not part of the original structure. Please refer to the site plan attached as Exhibit C. At its’ closest point, the deck would not encroach nearer to the protected tributary than the old deck (48* from the OHWL). A deck would continue to provide a landing for a sliding glass door located at the rear of the house. The additional 6' at the south end would not be required for access to the door. The closest the added 6' would encroach to the tributary is 70' where 75' is required. Hardship Ihe applicant has included his hardship statement as part of Exhibit A. The original deck would have Iteen constructed prior to the adoption of the Shoreland Ordinance. The Shoreland Ordinance applies to non-lakeshore property. Section 10.22, which is the ordinance that regulated hardcover prior to 1992, applies only to lots zoned Lakeshore Residential and only to lakeshore properties. The applicant’s propert>' is zoned RR-IB and is not a lakeshore property. Staff Recommendation Staff makes the following recommendation: To approve the variance application to permit replacement of a deck and adding 6' to the size of the deck based on the following finding: 1.A deck has existed for many years in the location of the new deck. The additional 6' of deck would be located 70' from the lakeshore and partially outside of the 75' setback. 2. 'fhe house and deck were constructed prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. 3. The deck would not encroach closer to the creek than the preexisting deck. 4.The deck is located on an area of the property that is generally flat and does not slope directly to the creek. This condition allows for surface water to infiltrate into the ground better than property with varying topography. #2610 Jerome J. Hall 80 Leaf Street After-the-Fact Variance Page 2 - Public Hearing * »• • Options for Action; 1. Recommend approval of variances. 2. Recommend denial of variances, stating reasons. 3. Table for additional information. 4. Other action. i* - ' 'd * « . 12610 Jerome J. Hall 80 Leaf Street Afier-the-Fact Variance Page} — Public Hearing h ■ I-’. ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area; LR-IB Lot Area Required 2 acre Actual 36,625 s.f. (.84 acre) Structural Coverage: Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 36,625 s.f.Allowed: 5493 s.f. (15%) Existing: 1,733 s.f. (4.7%) Proposed: 2,003 s.f. (5.4%) Hardcover Calculation: Distance from Total area in Allowed Existing Proposed shoreline setback hardcover hardcover hardcover 0-75'11,150 s.f 0 s.f (0%)462 s.f 507 s.f (4.1%)(4.5 %) r*- ■ • Jk- « m t f ■»A Application # I 0 Date Received g~ 2 I*OQ Amount Paid 2S^ 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-ihe-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFOR jVIATION Site Address ^’ra^£T------------------------- Property Identification Number s tAcrai Hpcrrintinn to anoHcation if not included on reouired surv< Jrropcrijr lUCllUXl^auuil ^ f ---r ■ ■ ------- '■ _(mo.th/ycao I (do) (do noj^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: u residential ___pother (specify). Zoning District:. applicant Name J. Address: i- * - f ^ /" Phone fhome"!?^-^ ~ ____ Phone (work)___ij------!-----------v:, r:ty Zip: riT ^ JT ;1 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name '____________ ' Phone (home). Phone (work). Address:City:.Zip:. description of request Estimated Construction Cost $. Describe request in det2ul: f\ ^ I- ^ ^ •-— (attach additional sheets if necessary ’) m VARIANCES REQUIRED ^ T nt CoveraeeLot Area ___Lot Width ___Hardcover -----Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARTISHIP/DESCRIPTION of unusual property conditions Describe undue hardship or pracUcal difficulty or unusual property cond.UOM prevents compliance with Zonina Code requirements: ]7vc y —\/^c ^ c i ft/\/i r<'r\ <1'T •<- ---------------------------------------------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) /!2 -I M Rcv/ls-ecJ I a.v\ Se'h z. i r B o CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR SHIRLEY HALL OF TRACT A. R.L.S. NO. 744 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA o ; d«not«« kon mqrlur Stories or« bcsrJ upon on ottunod doti^ LCCAL OeSCHPTCN Of PRCWSTS . Trocl A, Lond Ho. 744. fits of Re^stfor of Tilltt, Htnntpin Cownly. limtola TK» ivxv«x Vfitndi to thow tho botf^itt of obo<4 p^eof^ty. t^o location of on fiiittn^ howtc s^td. ond dtc^. gnd Iho p^opoftd locot*on of o d«cv it doos • ot ^port to tho« ony other Wnprovtfnentf or oncroochmenta COFFiti & CROHBERC, l((C. hCooiiK oocsa uve sjhcnn i tt r. >icn 441 fMMUai AvtHC IPC I4rc. tfl I Km* a«*r* iu»f r»« on *CAONt W M( ON VNCM m oncct a*o tMAt I Ml • ox* wCDoo NNVtnoMi oociN mo u #o XNK'Oi iKO H un or »c o«t| 9 ox aitx ^ tgjngt III — ■ y Z7 J"T >C axC •••X* OaTC »>2-C0 jce Na 00^17 If . y ‘ *t t %. ■ I • I o. ..rf y % £.1 • 4 % .-1#^ 1 **4 V- t PNL/ )L ich t t.- f I «**•.*“*• r.JVv *.^‘**»r.‘{ '• r* : r - ■? jr.-'- ''i. - • ‘ •‘ • k». ■ 'i>- . ' >«i ■ 1 VClMP mtm-] M . -r' '.^; •• 1?' L. .?r^ : tvv^'r*/ • •,' 4-^■ •‘^'i ■ : ■ sSgKitgSK/gj^ '^y ‘. A) ■^^■ : . i.' ’i/ - 5*' k—^iv.i j :i^iy . •» • V * EH.> rJ' '*•' T¥'X -i £ ftUN DATE •7/Sl/tA EATCN 502 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INfORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. P1A35A01 FACE S PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR Sa 0A-I17-23 22 0003 03195 WATERTOWN RD T C RITTER A K S RITTER TNONAS C I KALLI S RITTER 3195 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 000630 06-117-23 22 00000 LEAF ST JEROME J HALL JEROME J HALL 00 LEAF ST LONG LAKE HN 55356 30 06-117-23 22 0005 00110 LEAF ST H S 0 K J GR0NBER6 HARK S 6R0NBER6 110 LEAF ST LONG LAKE HN 55356 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 06-117-23 22 0007 00025 CYGNET PL D C I A L SHAU6HNESSY DAVID I ANN SHAUGHNESSY 25 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE HN 55356 30 06-117-23 00065 CYGNET R I Y HOFFATT YVONNE HOFFATT 65 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE HN 22 0000 PL 55356 30 06-117-23 22 0009 00005 CYGNET PL / 6 J EHALT ETAL GREGORY J EHALT 105 CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE HN 55356 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR 30 06-117-23 22 0010 00105 CYGNET PL G J EHALT ETAL GREGORY J EHALT ^ 105 CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE HN 55356 / 30 05-117-23 11 0001 03265 WATERTOWN RD C 0 A RHAME CARL P RHAHE 3265 WATERTOWN ROAD LONG LAKE HN 55356 30 05-117-23 11 0005 00095 LEAF ST E C GRAHAM JR ETAL E C GRAHAM JR 95 LEAF ST LONG LAKE HN 55356 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR TOTAL BATCH 502 00009 1 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 DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST ,1 OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE ^1. ’ . / ^'1 // II l*n t-i I Application Date: 8/21/00 Deadline: 12/19/00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: October 4,2000 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2610 Jerome J. Hall 80 Leaf Street After-the-Fact Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) 36,625 s.f. (0.84 acre) List of Exhibits: VoT£ M-0 4-0 re+t/rn 4t) lovv. Oc+ober 2oco 3 A B C D Site Plan Revised Plan Planning Commission Minutes (September 18,2000) Planning Report (September 13,2000) Application Review: Applicant requests approval of an after-the-fact variance to permit replacement of a deck within the 75' setback to a protected tributaiy. The applicant has stated the pree.xisting deck was not safe and needed replacement. In July, 2000 it was observed the deck was being replaced without a permit. The deck has been about 50% completed and is constructed larger than the deck that was removed. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission Recommended 7 to 0 to deny the application because the amount of hardcover w ithin the 75' setback would be increased. The Planning Commission also reviewed the application and determined they would hav ; not recommended increasing the size of the deck had the application been reviewed prior to any work being completed. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission they would support replacement of a deck without increasing the hardcover w ithin the 75' setback. Revised Plan: Based on the recommendations made by the Planning Commission, the applicant has proposed a revision to the plan that would remove some of the deck located w ithin the 75' setback and extend to the deck to the south an additional 2' (most of which would be outside of the 75' setback to the creek). Please refer to Exhibits A and B show ing the survey and proposed plans. The applicant has stated the deck extension to the south may be better because it would require fewer steps up to the deck platform. Some of the deck would '4 r H 51 '..V '^y .r^: Request for Council Action continued Page 2 October 4,2000 #2610 Jerome J. Hall_______ be required to remain within the 75' setback due to the existing sliding glass doors being located at the north east comer of the house (with access to the east side of the house). It would be possible to extend the deck further to the south since that portion of the property is outside the 75' setback. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to direct staff to draft a resolution for adoption at the October 23,2000 meeting of the Council, ? 0^ r r - <f * ' . a > . P ti'i (V- r V Application Date: 8/23/00 Deadline: 12/21/00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: October 18,2000 ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2611 Marlys McCarty 225 Tonka Avenue Easement Vacation Zoning District:RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) Lbt of Exhibits:OCT 2 3 2000 A B C D E F Application Description of Request Property Survey Utility Map Plat Map Resolution 1619 (Vacating a portion of Brook Street) CITY or Application Summary; The applicant has requested vacation of a utility easement located thru the center of the property. A 20' X 100' portion of Brook Street on which the detached garage is currently located was vacated by the City of Orono in 1984 per Resolution No. 1619 (attached). A condition ol the vacation was that the property owner grant to the City a Utilities Easement over the northerly 15' of the vacated Brook Street, for fiture use by the City. It is this easement the current property owner has requested to vacate. The property ow .er has recently acquired the property north of the vacated Brook Street. The property owner has stated the current location of the easement is an obstacle and deterrent in plans to improve the property ’. The applicant would like to construct an attached garage to the existing house. In exchange for the vacation of the 15' easement the property owner would provide an easement over the south 15' of the property. The new easement would make it possible to provide sewer service to the west. The lot to the north and west has access around the applicant's property via the platted right-of-way beginning at the north end of Tonka Avenue. According to the sewer maps a stub was made available about 100 ’ north of Tonka Avenue to provide service to the property north and west of the applicant ’s lot. A 25* section of Brook Street west of the Tonka Avenue/Brook Street intersection was not vacated in 1984 to provide access to the north lot. This lot eventually went tax forfeit before the current property owner acquired the lot and combined it with the 225 Tonka Avenue lot. To vacate an easement a finding must be made that no public purpose exists for the easement. The relocation of the utility and access easement would still allow the property to the west access and sewer connection. 1 i il^ Request for Council Action continued Page 2 October 19,2000 #2611 Marlvs McCaitv_____ Providing access to the north lot would no longer be required since it has been acquired and combined with the applicant’s lot. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission voted 7 to 0 lo recommend approval of the request to vacate the easement subject to the applicant providing a utility easement across the property. Such easement shall be provided prior to recording the vacation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the resolution to vacate the utility easement conditioned on an easement to be granted in favor of the public for utility access across the south side of the property. Ul'l'ii c r * » IKJ > t fj^ % (’■ ' # •- m 4 A A RESOLUTION VACATING UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT WITHIN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 225 TONKA AVENUE FILE NO. 2611 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Marlys McCarty (hereinafter “the owner”) has applied loi vacation of an access and utility easement for property located at 225 Tonka Avenue legally described as follows Lot 1 and 2, Block 3, and part of vacated Brook Street Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka and part of Lot 5, Aud. Sub. No. 203 (hereinafter “the property”); and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held by the Orono Planning Commission on August September 18, 2000 regarding said vacation and all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, on September 18, 2000 after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the proposed vacation; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation of drainage and utility easement legally described as follows: That part of vacated Brook Street Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka Aud. Sub. No. 203, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The utility easement vacation as proposed is in keeping with the public interest and in consideration of the following findings: 1. The vacated easement has not been utilized for utilities, 2.A new utility easement has been granted in favor of the public along the south property line 15' in width. 3. The City does not intend to use the easement to be vacated for any public purpose. Page 1 of 3 iLili I-*' 4. Utility companies have been notified of the proposed vacation and none have indicated an objection. 5. The owner has acquired the lot north of the existing easement and has legally combined the lot v/ith the subject parcel. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the vacation of the access and utility easement legally described above is hereby granted by the Council of die City of Orono on October 23,2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayoi STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledg-'d before me on this 23 rd day of October, 2000 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor ana City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 2 of 3 Exhibit A o<o irf LOT I EXJSTWC EASEMENT OVER VACATED BROOK STREET TO BE MOVES TO THE SOUTH 15* OF LOT 2. «s SOUTH LHC OF LOT a, AUO. SLS.NO. aoa NW COA. cr SAYSCC ACOT iON N* LY CNC cr ■8AYSCE ACCITCN TO LAKE lO^KCTOMCA S 89*48* 00** t s o CM Xh-cc W£ST Of GLCO< 3. eAfSCC . A0C4T1CH TO uucc W^»CTC»^U exisTiNc HOUSE 1 *,— 25.21 —' 8§ 25J1 N 89*48* CC‘* W 8 8 /-CXSTNC «0 I BROOK L l J > < < Xo I— yA N 89*46*00** W r 3 Proposed ^<ASeiM€Vl*l" 125.25 Page 3 of 3 1 ■ r I . "n. ■ft *■-». B 225 Tonka Ave Orono, MN 55356 Name of Applicant and Owner Marlys Rae McCarty Single Description of Request Relocation or vacation of current easement, for potential use of utilities. I am requesting that the current utility easement, for potential use of utilities, 15 feet wide, over a vacated road, to be moved to the south edge of the property line or vacated completely. In reviewing the sewer layout and ordinances regarding subdividing it does not appear that an easement is needed in anyway. The current location of this easement is a huge obstacle and deterrant in plans to improve my property. I purchased an adjacent tax forfeited property and the two properties have been combined. The easement cuts through the middle of the newly acquired property and inhibits options for building a new garage. 03 ^4. c FxisrtNCs V.! ' ■■ r-.'.r OT I CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR MARLYS McCarty IN LOTS 1 tc 2. BLOCK 3. tc PART OF VACATED BROOK STREET BAYSIDE ADDITION TO LAKE MINNETONKA tc PART OF LOT j. AUD. SUB. NO. 203 EXJSTWC EASruDlT OVER VACATED BROOK STREET TO BE MOVES TO the south 15- OF WOT Z south WK CF WOT S, MJO. M m. 20i 'Hm CCR. OF B at SCC *CC«T«w M»WY Lt€ or TSOC ACOTC n TO WAKC MMTOMCA s tlur 00* c to X i - —• —M l«a C c STmC 1 t• a K3U?£ 1 H# BROOK 8 ST. MJ1 ... M M*44*0Q* wi\ 8 8 HCST WK or •WOO X tATlOC. AOOinON TO WA«C Ld > < < Zo h-r Vropfisei ejMe'oo- w 125JS 3 ^0 LfC4L Lms I *2.0^ aim . .MAMl Wcst-yly 100 K m IU<mW .<oc«t. -|My«0« Xliuam l« WiMMCttkX* aim , *«t «fL« S. A mA m'i 20). iwm0«0 m Mt«t 1 Oh HMfcwMKM— of (MylMK a ItMMM M LiO* IfWMMfcK^MM NMt»arfy K oa | a iM «0ic0 « dM NmiMHt rmiMiiM •Ttlkc WMMir iM «f IlMk ). •tjr«0« AifiiMA M LiU IlMcirAfci. M a potn «lhcO d «0 ib« SmA ndwty Ka da S«Mh«.MuHy Sm a Tda IC mmhi Waar« fl•^t af««7. mmoati at itfM af»i;a dMr«Oa«. daaaa lawiWaagty aM*| a Imc 4ra«M »araM m ite S*«dl»Mtarty tea «f laM Wma • RadMaO Coaa«*T af »ty aad 40 bat OauM SaM><*MiMt| iteaftaK, unaarad a ng)H aa^ »lOa fain af Marwbiaa a# aa»4 5aa*ii>‘JaT*arthaftyfiaianfc<aafdatamiTyiaaafBa<k 1. Bays^a AMdoa M Laka VOaiaanikv daaca lawW<| aiaaf aaid Nanb«4y ffajaatiaa af da Eaaarfy laa aT •laak). BayaUa .ViBaaa m taka Idaaaaalia ta 0m munmeam af laM Saa aaA «ka Haniaty ha af BarMa AKMa ta Laka \bMaiaafca; Oa<aa WMarty ilaaf Aa Nanlar^ Saa aTOajrada AlJaaa la Laka kbaactoaka ta da faiai afkijpaaiap a: Oanataa iiaa iiurtar inzsBr 6CC^ 003TB ICvMQa a.ic OCUMIC m Vr \ /^^COF f cogw ^ ai ti COFFIN k GRONBCRG. INC. IK cocm LWO BJM10IW Sd TVaaOl ai TAIOMI AVCMJC IOC WAIC Ml U2M •I2-A73-414I I MWtT CD»»r» tmt aat Haa Mfcro^o* aa awacat aaa Mca«acD tv •< oa tacca m cmci •#€ wt • M a our uZMit aartiattiu IMMM .m w>m •MCW aco at U«I or M IU« 4T rr TJarr ••-X ^alf :«/17/00 JOB Id 00210 # O (R ‘,1^ W X 1 D ujer- CN lO“ * irdtDAf^^ WOOD FENCE , , <yi<°coyyy:^<’j 5 fi w/i ^ ^ Proposed Ce loC^J-icii^ --- > \ — 1 i "Ouse ’ 1i 1 _________ p»«- % 1 —r-^ |s”-?3 i ,""'“'11 ✓ -I / % . *1 2 K 1 rO o■n Z7 /////// 3 V • • • 00 ‘yoooeo N \\% ••• i '4 © • / • 0 ^.<1- 5 • 5 e-* / •i ^ mmmrn «• ^ ^ 'x m X \ \ X X V \, % 6 8 ocs .« r3_lbr7«si» • ^gLS >iooda (Ml * I I___ I----- ■ I \ ------------ m ✓WA.✓ ——— « \• • fiO(JS£... U»8 ...» 14 > i 5 H .1 -f I -J--n s ! ^ouse 1(5 CONC. iri \ s ,L.^ (D j £ Jfor A %f^ ^ /,1. ' 6 (13); JO -% N ^3 : (2!) ■? (12) - '25.25a ^ ,s a - 125 25 « ' ^.% * '5 „a: ci^) ^S 2 :c ?D(I9)'' ‘ ^ (20) ^ 13 9 a!25 Q : 12 Q '(23) ^ ** 5 c (22) ‘ *1 a lei 6 Z ^ (23) - 10 a (27) a ^ 7 c (22) ^ O *(25)p !Si25 25 /W!^^ -HILL 03C:vELC?cD^-5^ -'‘<(29) M 2 K ^ • o C0----RD-^'^' !N0-r. »9 . a a;5^ a I I N ^\^2) ^ 2 \ (30)S a ■ 5 (41)ajlej 0 N? a i3 (40)^i?5 (31)';^ 1 *4 5al5 9 <?' a 13 4^'6 ? - >?3:rb..- Q *2 ^ S (3:5) 7 *> ^ • •i«® ;:i.«3 r-.J -b'V<^ :?«■•....... Ks;.......:......,• ; it., ! so : S3 : 50 : M I; « ; » •. |(39)j(38)!(-0V-(2;)!;<35):(32): JO. Td U7. :i * - - - L'Jji -TB-r-----L:J-- H: 25' i a (^)! s 8 (56) iAVSIBE 115 (59) C9@33S i:4 .-(57) :123^3 >‘3 - II ^... ..BAYSibiE...RD ■'^(CO fiD ■ HO-64^• !T3 23 Kt,V %3»--2*;3 * CD 2sT.29 :fTJ. -9 ®£5 nOVT I OT 2 •5;. -•V .i>*‘ ¥*V vV'’4u#j • '.•«; ‘ A-jVC^'f . • •• » I jM ■:-:;-i-^5-3 • *»T<v'vV- ‘irrJVV--* hm :♦•* .*• •*::> I’ **.***..\.>i' ^.. ,• .*.r< •--»-.(/ ’ •' •v;*r;’ • f> -x.-i.-'v '.•>* « ft,..i;.'.v.>.V'.i .' / •—..'T.j’v • ■‘i •.•:•• vr.u ‘; ‘A .i'«ifi • , •til r»0< - ••• -.* . vV 'v' t* - ; *!.>• t .•T<-5t;.*'.W 4^V '• •!; Va1 . V v.irw Ciiy of 0R03?«d0RiSOLUTlON OFTrtSaWCOUKCJL NO. lol9________ A RESOLUTION VACATING AN UNUSED PORTION O? DSOOX STRSE7 WITHIN THE PLAT 0? BAYSIDE ADDITION TO LAKE MINNETONKA, SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 117, RANGE 23 IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on .March 3, 198«, Scott C. McLain and Debra McLain filed a petition with the City of Oro.no requesting the vacation of the westerly 100 feet of Brook Street, Baysido Addition to Lake iMinnotonKa, Ken.ncpin County; and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held before the City Planning Cor.tussion on March 19, 198-*, regarding said vacation and all persons interested were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHESE,\S, after due study and consideration, the Planning Co.Tc.ission reco.Tvr.er.ded approval of the requested vacation a.nd the City Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation, as proposed, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following findings: • • 1. The vacation does not affect access to cr use Ok any adjoining property 2. The City has not and docs not intend to develop, improve or use the property in any way except for utilities and access purposes hereir.aiter described 3. The property as it e.xists servos no public purpose NOW, THEREFORE, 3E IT RESOLVED that the petition of Scott C. McLain and Debra McLain is hereby granted and that that portion of Brook Street legally described above is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition in subject to the following conditions; 1. Upon vac.Vwion, Scott C. .Mct.ain and Dobra .McLain n»ust combine the vacated portion of Brook Street .» .adjacent homestead property (Lots 1 4 2, Dlocx 3, BaysiwO Addition to l.okc »Minr\etor»k%i TkANS.'ua s'li’cScD 4v \y s ntiJ ) " ^. a*»Mr» J,.*.;*;5 •II'W • •«:v. r -A- •!*. </.r. , ;v-:ArA.V: 5 I V I r.' » '■'*•*'* W’ ! ' • • • •*« • ^ i0* • . . ^ ' s'* '• ;*N*'sv^:** t V»,^>v * • r, '• * •v *'T ’ 5**. ‘...•••P'k... . • ’.'h •• %s >*^C-Ji-.* • • '• • : Vi * ( ;v cJ-:A'.; • > : J -'yp ' v; A*' V j •* • * t . j f"’. . ■C-X;Vi'-C- i;-’; mMi m. . \ .« .» T •*.*.,’* *'f.V ••.mj. ji' • s* *■’ j **r fe-! VxHi^ ;;-=M# ••V;i#5 ”V m^v 4 ;;:*;'q^’ >yp • -w v*vn ■m Ci’iy o^ (0>22.C5r^^Jresolution Or TRE CITV COUNCIL NO. ^619 2. Uaon vacation, Scott C. McLain and Dobra KcLai.n must VcicAtcd portion of Brooic Street Adopted by tho City Council of tho City of Orono, Minnesota at meeting held April 9, 1954. a regular Mdry C.^^lor, Mayor '' • • •• I ■ . .-r •;••/; \ Xteo ^ . ' ••■.A’aecva M. Strom, .<f/h■iru.City Clerk • • • * i •■• *' t..•.•l>A • ! v. ;> t.\* •*• • • - Ii. * ' ''-.A* ». •;4 .* ^*. •- ;I ' _ • #A-r •,>•..* A!#*■•;f • •. ; '- • • • ! !!<*•■! ! : **-'V ‘*‘V V "t^* •. ..•.*».*i ** • .•;. .fc't i''•* * > *i*^’•• * ‘-Vr*..V** < V’- * • ! \ • > ■•'‘'■■l-.jyi!'-.'- ; t ..'.’.y.-.y’^f**. i -w-’y'i - ’ I- »••: ’V*'***'.'/ ‘ » f '- ‘ SV.v" V;V • i . » » ' •*>1L . . ;*-r' . Mr •_■ ' ■T-.-l-v'- /**'?• X-. y i fv. ■*■ * i n-V:''./:?!vk;C * ^3^ •;! w« RUN DATE ftA/2A/00 HEN»'^PIM COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM •ATCN 5«A PROP AODR ONNER NANE TAKPAVER NAHE/AODR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AODR PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR ■ PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR f... PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAIffi/ADDR SO RS-llT-aS 11 0005 000Y5 LEAF ST E C GRAHAM JR ETAL E C GRAHAM JR 05 LEAF ST LONG LAKE HN 55356 3« 05-117-23 12 0017 03A15 HIGH LA RICHARD G HARKLUND ET AL RICHARD GUSTAV HARKLUND I NINA E GUERTIN-MARKLUNO SAIS HIGH LA LONG LAKE MN 55356 SO 05-117-23 13 0012 05A20 DAYSIDE RD ROW ANDERSON RODERT F I WENDY S ANDERSON SA20 DAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 SS 05-117-25 IS 0028 0020S TONKA AVE H 0 R SCHMITZ HENRY t ROSIE SCHMITZ 205 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE MM 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0051 00225 TONKA AVE HARLYS HC CARTY MARLYS HC CARTY 225 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 10 0020 00205 CRESTVIEH AVE GARY F GOLL II GARY F GOLL II 205 CRESTVIEW AVE LONG LAKE MN 55356 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 05-117-23 12 0015 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF MINN DNR REAL ESTATE HCIir ATTN DEBBIE GURTIN 500 LAFAYETTE RD ST PAUL MN 55155 38 05-117-23 15 0003 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ROBERTA E VAUGHAN ROBERTA E VAUGHAN 3000 BAYSIDE RD ORONO MN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0013 03000 BAYSIDE RD T M ZIESHER AMT ZIESMER TODD H 8 MARIE T ZIESHER 3000 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0029 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ESTHER M ADDISON ESTHER H ADDISON 3382 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN '55356 38 05-117-23 10 0012 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF MINN DNR REAL ESTATE HGMT ATTN DEBBIE GURTIN 500 LAFAYETTE RD ST PAUL MH 55155 38 05-117-23 10 0021 00255 CRESTVIEH AVE MICHAEL L MCCALL MICHAEL L MCCALL 5306 PIPER RD MOUND MN 55360 REPORT NO. PI035001 PACE 16 36 05-117-23 12 0016 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF MINN DNR REAL ESTATE MGMT ATTN DEBBIE GURTIN 500 LAFAYETTE RD ST PAUL MM 55155 ( I 1 38 05-117-23 13 0000 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ALISHAH S AZAD ALISHAH S AZAD 200 BEDERWOOD DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0010 03070 BAYSIDE RD TRST J C WALSTEDT RV LFTM TR JOHN 6 WALSTEDT 3070 BAYSIDE RD . LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0050 00205 TONKA AVE MARY KAY MCCARTY MARY MCCARTY 205 TWGCA AVE LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 10 8019 00235 CRESTVIEH AVE S T ANDERSON t C ANDERSON S T ANDERSON A C ANDERSON 235 CRESTVIEW AVE LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 10 0022 00265 CRESTVIEH AVE JOHN C MORGAN JOHN C MORGAN 265 CRESTVIEH AVE LONG LAKE HN 55356 I1 4fTr fS V.)vj ' 'S>.• I j i KHi ftUN DATE •A/24/D9 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATIOH SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST BATCH 504 PROP AODR OWNER HANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR SB 05-117-25 14 0023 •0275 CRESTVIEW AVE HAROLD R HANSON ETAL HAROLD R HANSON 275 CRESTVIEW AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR SB 05-117-23 14 0028 00250 TONKA AVE 6ERALD L I ZOOS/IRENE BRICCS 6ERALD 8 IRENE BRIGGS 250 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR SB 05-117-23 14 0041 •B2B0 TCtSTA AVE P A A K S SKOOG PHILIP 0 KAREN SKOOO 2B0 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 f* V* ' X y ' . .*9 ' X . ■ -r PKlMlrjNHE REPORT NO. PX43S401 PACE 17 SB 05-117-25 14 0024 00285 CRESTVIEW AVE HARK R LARSON HARK R LARSON 2B5 CRESTVIEW AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 38 05-117-23 14 0025 00285 CRESTVIEW AVE HARK R LARSON HARK R LARSON 285 CRESTVIEW AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 38 05-ll7-:»3 14 0029 00230 TONKA AVE S A OLSON OKA OLSON STEVEN A t KELLY A OLSON 230 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 38 05-117-23 14 0055 00240 CRESTVIEW AVE JEFFREY S HELBY JEFFREY S HELBY 240 CRESTVIEW AVE LONG LAKE HN SS3S4 TOTAL BATCH 504 00025 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE OH THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTHEHT OF PROPERTY TAXATIOH. TO THE BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.. OAT .. ^ MJLJ ‘fftt A ^•1 f! P * ”1 1 i r •r REPORT NO. PI43S401 PACE 17 i 0025 EW AVE IE S5S5C I loss EH AVE VE 5SSSA I TRUE I THE RECORDS TO THE lEST • • 5 Application Date: 8/23/00Deadline: 12/21/00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: October 18,2000 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Zoning District: List of Exhibits: #2614 Joe and Sue Haus 4485 Bayside Road Variance RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) OCT 2 3 2000 CITY Or oriv.»i«v^A Resolution B Site Plan C Planning Report Application Summary: The applicant requests a variance to permit an accessory building to be located closer to the front property line than the principal residence. The property is being redeveloped requiring the old house and all accessory buildings to be removed from the property. The request was to permit a recently remodeled accessory building on the ?' from the north property line to remain following removal of the principal residence. The Planning Commission tabled the request at their September meeting with the recommendation the applicant consider alternatives or relocation of the building Kirther from the property line, due to the building being located near an adjacent residence. The applicant’s have amended the plan and request to remove the non-conforming accessory building and construct a smaller storage building 70' from the front property line. The building would be a one stall garage (14* X 22') one story in height. The existing building is 12* X 32'. The Planning Commission reviewed the revised plan at tneir October 16,2000 meeting and recommended approval of the revised plan to permit the 14' X 22' building to be located along the driveway based on the following hardships and findings: A. The Property does not have direct access to a road. The lot is accessed via an easement for driveway purposes along the west property boundary of the property to the northeast. The building would be located approximately 575' from Bayside Road. B. The area located behind the new residence is a low area without driveway access. The accessory building will be used for storage of equipment for maintenance of the shared . driveway. * ' ' V- > l’ i''.V •I 7^ Request for Council Action continued Page 2 October 19,2000 #2614 Joe and Sue Haus__________ C.The building would be located 70' from the north property line and a minimum 30' from the side lot line. The building would be located as far south as the existing well would allow. The well is located about 90' from the property line. South of the well are mature trees that would be required to be removed to make room for the building. The existing location would take advantage of the building pad for the old house. No tree removal or regrading would be required. D. The existing building shall be removed prior to the City of Orono completing a final inspection on the new building. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED fyiyiotion to adopt the resolution approving the vari'ir.'^e as revised by the applicant. IS . ‘ Y ri.Q 1 • ft. • « ^ • w J'"’ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIMSION 9(D), FILE NO. 2614 WHEREAS, Joe and Sue Haur. (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 4485 Bayside Road within t>.v City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit “A” attached hereto, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) to permit the construction of an accessory structure closer to the street lot line than the residence. WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 16, 2000, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2614. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 16,2000 and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The Property does not have direct access to a road. The lot is accessed via an Page I of 6 easement for driveway purposes along the west property boundary of the property to the northeast. The building would be located approximately 575' from Bayside Road. B. The area located behind the new residence is a low area without driveway access. The accessory building will be used for storage of equipment for maintenance of the shared driveway. C. The building would be located 70' from the north property line and a minimum 30' from the side lot line. The building would be located as far south as the existing well would allow. The well is located about 90' from the property line. South of the well are mature trees th.at would be required to be removed to make room for the building. The existing location would take advantage of the building pad for the old house. No tree removal or regrading would be required. D. The existing building shall be removed prior to the City of Orono completing a final inspection on the new building. E. The height of the proposed building will be significantly lower than the height of the existing house and will be screened from the load by existing trees, therefore the visual intrusion of the accessory structure wil 1 be minimal. 5. 6. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance will not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 6 L. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) to permit the construction of an accessory structure closer to the street lot line than the residence. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. 5. 3. 4. Prior to the City of Orono completing a final inspection, the existing 12' X 32' accessory building shall be removed fiom the property. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (October 23,2001). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the te.Tns and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, .shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agre^ to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 3 of 6 i' .i V fr Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of October, 2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of October, 2000 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and CiK Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) Notary Public ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of for said County, personally appeared ., 2000, before me a Notary Public within and ________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 J n ft. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of.2000, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. 4 . V’Notary Public < h '‘V; Page 5 of 6 »: \ •Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Tnat pan; of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section b, Township 117, Range 2*o desorioed as follcws:Beginning at the Northeast corner of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section bjthenoe West along the North line of tli^ Southwest 1/4 of said Northeast 1/4 of Northwest 1/4 of Section 6, a distance of JJB j'pdsf‘ thence South and paraTlel with the West line Of said Northeast 1/4 of Northwest 1/4 to South line of said Northeast 1/4 of Northwest 1/4 or Section b; thenoe East along South line of Northeast 1/4 of Northwest 1/4 of Section 6, 20 rods; thenoe North a distance of 48 rods to a point 10 rods East of the Y/est line of the Northeast 1/4 of Northeast 1/4 of Northwest 1/4 of Section b;v'thence West 10 rods to West line of said Northeast 1/ of Northeast 1/4 of Northwest 1/4 of Section b; thence South to poj of oeginning, all in and part of Section 6, Tornishlp 117, Range 25; Also a strip of land ti 1/4 feet wide on each eide of a line draTm fiom a point on the North IIes of Northwest 1/4 of Section 6, Township 3J.7 , Range 23 a distance of 10 I/2 rods East of Northwest comer of Northeast 1/4 of Northeast 1/4 of Northwest I/4 of said Section b;thenoe South a distance of 3b rods to a point 10 I/2 rodi East of West line of Northeast 1/4 of Northeast 1/4 or Northwest 1^ of said Section 6, Township 3J.7 , Range 2b. (Note:The strip or land 8 1/4 feet wide on each side of the line acoTe descrioed is included in the aocre caption for purpose of snowing title to an easeaient thereon which is appurtenant to the ‘ #oalance of the premises covered bj above caption Page 6 of 6 i i ! vt: Application Date: 8/23/00 60 Day Deadline: 10/22/00 TO;Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM;Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE:September 13,2000 SUBJECT: #2614 Joe and Sue Haus 4485 Bayside Road Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Size: RR-IB Rural Residential (2 acre) District + 7.5 acres List of Exhibits: A B C D E F Application Description of Request/Hardship Statement Building Photos Property Survey Plat Map Property Owners Notification List Pertinent Code Section: 1. Section 10.03, Subdivision 9: Location of Accessory Structures Application Summary: The variance request is to permit a recently remodeled accessory building located in front of a new principal residence that will be constructed on the property. The Haus’ purchased the property last year and had a conditional use permit for a guest house approved by the Council. They have decided not to construct the guest house and, instead, build a new residence and remove the existing residence following receipt of a Certificuic of Occupancy for the new house. The Property does not have direct access to a road. The lot is accessed via an easement for driveway purposes along the west property boundary of the property to the northeast. The building in question is located along the north property line where the driveway enters the applicant’s property. The building is located approximately 530' from Bayside Road and 200' from the nearest adjacent residence. A property map has been attached. In the Hardship Statement the applicants have stated they would prefer to keep the building where it is located since they have just completed remodeling the building. The project description and hardship are attached as Exhibit B. *2614 Joe ind Sue Haus 44S5 Bayside Road Variance - Public Hearing Page I i r hK' ■ L j !■ i'i > ip Conformity to Zoning Code ; The Code prohibits accessory buildings from being located closer to the front property line than a principal residence and meet a minimum setback of 10' to the side propert>' lines. Because the structure has been there since prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance it is considered legally non-conforming. The variance requested is to permit the structure to remain on the property without a principal building assuming the structure to which it is accessory will be removed. Required Setbacks; Lots in the RR-IB district have the following setback requirements: Principal Structure Front Setback = 50 ft. Rear Setback = 50 ft. Side Setback = 30 ft. Accessory Structure Front Setback = shall be a minimum of 50 ft. and not closer to the front property line than the principal residence. Side Setback (for buildings less than 750 square feet) = 10 ft. Rear Setback = 5 ft. Staff Recommendation; Staff recommends approval of the variance based on the following findings: 1. 0 3. The building has existed as a legally non-conforming structure and was recently remodeled. The building is located on a property without frontage on a road. Access to the propert>' is via an easement over the lot located to the northwest. The building is located well behind all other residential structures along Bayside Road. Natural vegetation adequately screens the building from view from adjacent structures. Options for Action; 1. Recommend approval. 2. Recommend denial, stating reasons. 3. Table. 4. Other action. 02614 Joe and Sue Haus 4485 Bayside Road Variance - Public Hearing p ! ► 15 This variance request is to keep an existing garage that will be located in front of the principle structure. This garage has recently under gone considerable repairs. After purchasing the property last year we applied for a Conditional use permit to build a garage/guest house with the intended purpose to live in that residence while construction on a new home took place. After realizing the cost invol ..'J in building the guesthouse we discontinued that course and decided to put the money towards a r.‘W house in 2000. To provide for immediate storage we started repairs on one of the accessory structures removing half of the structure according to the city inspector’s recommendations. At that time we removed the other run down structures on the property that were not as easily repairable. This year during the process of getting a permit for the new residence Lyle called with questions on plans for the existing house and garage. We plan to remove the existing house after moving into the new house but want to keep the garage. The intended purpose of the garage will be for storage and snow removal equipment as it is at the top of the property/driveway and will make snow removal less difficult. Lyle said that we would need to apply for a variance because the garage would be in front of the principle structure. He indicated a variance might be granted because our property and this structure are located far from Bayside Rd and cannot be seen from the street. While visiting with Paul from the city he also indicated it might be desirable to move the structure farther from the lot boundaries to meet setback regulations. After discussing this with several contractors we discovered the cost for moving the garage because of foundation oddities would be better invested in a completely new structure if keeping the current garage is not approved. Thanks for your consideration. Joe and Sue Haus Before and After Pictures attached. .v« CJ A"',’ - -vt- •v.J.-’-* K'-*• ••\ - ; ': > . - • • ;.?'X - • ■ ■•■• ■ ■ I •. • •• c - '■'.. iv O"' ••r ' . A'“.If.’•',% ‘ .* , *■ - *. ...... .51,. '.v ;t 1 c* ■ - '.**• ft '• •. •■' C\l e *sr5:'- ; •■ • . ^ mMmmm '/'i. ■..,'- 'i^ . '' • ^ A* ' • • "r jT ' «,* I . • -?-•:•>.•■• • -T. rr. * .-> 5. V"’' y•■>>-,- V-; '7 <.r #. • .'’ . * ' • I - '- . Al£io ri ovse LocATiOAJ NOTE: Proposed grades ora subject lo results of soil tests. Proposed building Information must be checked with opprovad building plon ond development or groding plan before excavation and construction. Proposed Top of Block |QQ*J.V Proposed Coroge Floor C? Proposed Lowest Floor Type of Building •FUu- U)ALKoi^T ■vTuB jecT BoiG Thmt p»r« of thw ltor%hoo»t 1/4 of Uio Ilorihoool l/i of loottoo •• Tovnoiitp U7, Ronto rj 4o«orloo4 to ftoUoooiBoclMlttf •! Ik* HortiMoot •orn«r of tlio aoulh«««l 1/4 of tko Rortbooot 1/4 mt Um Nortbvoal 1/4 of 8«olioM 4|«koooo Isol kloM Ibo Borlh lUo of %h\ •ouihwoot 1/4 or 9014 Merttwoot 1/4 oT llorilio««l 1/4 of ••otioo o. • 4iol«oo« of lu .jroA«r 4konoo 8oulli o»4 poroIisX ollli %km toot of Oft to |for«b««ol l/i of NorlkooM l/4 It Btulli lito of «ol4 Norlbooot l/% of Norllioott 1/4 of Booltot tt ilMBOO B«ol olooii 9oulb Hot of llortkoooi l/i of Hortkooot l/4 of Sootlok i. BH ro4o| ihoaoo Norik o 41otoaoo of 44 Mo io o folki 10 ro4o Bool of «bo OfPl llko or tko Northoool l/i of Borikoool l/i of Norlkoovi 1/4 or Oooiloo •f tboiwo tool 10 Mo %o tool lioo of 0014 tortkoooi l/i of Uorlkooot l/i of Nortkoool 1/4 of iooliot t| ikoooo Sootk io totkl or ooolaalfiii, *11 la oo4 pori of •••iloa 0, Tooaoklf UT. Noao* iki iloo o oirlo or loa4 4 1/4 fooi «l4o oo oook ol4o of o ilao 4rovo rroa o ttlBi oo iko Norui Ilao of Korthoooi I/i of tooiloa 4, Toooobll 117, llkAfo 13 o 41010000 of 10 1/k Mo Bool of Norikwoti ooTJtr of Norikooii 1/4 of Borikoool 1/4 of Borikoool l/i of ooU Booiloo oiiboooo Bouik o 41oioooo of 3*4 ro4o io o Mlot 10 1/r ro4o tool or lino or Borikoool l/i of Borikoool 1/4 or Borib««oi l/i eue______________________________VeMMMkOULti__l_l_5__ OaAim________________________________________________________if ilKJU I/’ t^V £ •V •• •/•.. :••• .••% *••. :•• :'.•* • ••• J A •••••.1..*• •• • • • 9 v; .. m RUN DATE MTCN SM HCNNEPXN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATXON SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LXST REPORT NO. PX435401 PAGE 10 PROP ADDR OMNCR NAMEr.TAXPAVIR L NANC/AODR ! 1 ■PROP ADDR ONNIR NANI TAXPAVIR NANt/AODR PROP ABOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SO OO-llT-ZS 21 0002 0445S BAYSXDC RD H t P JOHNSON HARK S A PATRICIA P JOHNSON 44S5 BAYSXOE RD HAPLE PLAIN MN 55559 SO 94-117-2S 21 0005 04505 BAYSXOE RO PBS RENNEBOHN PETER I SHARON RENNEBOHN 4505 BAYSXOE ROAD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 SO 00-117-25 24 0001 00215 NORTH ARH LA C A PASS ET AL TRUSTEES JEAN T ARHSTRONO 255 ARH LA N HOUND HN 55304 S3 06-117-25 21 0004 04495 BAY8XDE RD 0 I B KELLEY GERALD f KELLEY. 16925 CO RD NO 6 PLYNOUTH HN 55447 58 06-117-25 21 0006 04465 BAYSZDE RD BRENT I SHIANN JOHNSON BRENT I SNZANN JOHNSON 4465 BAYSIDE RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55559 TOTAL BATCH 504 00007 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF ZNFORHATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS . OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION# TO THE BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE "f Ji A A'£. if jT-* ‘ u Application Date: 8/23/00 Deadline: 12/21/00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: October 20,2000 ITEM NO.: jO Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2616 Minnetonka Center for the Arts 2240 North Shore Drive Conditional Use Permit Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) 3.65 Acres ocr 2 3 2000 List of Exhibits:CITY Or Onv^,,^ A B C D E F G LlOO L200 L300 L301 L400 L401 L600 Site Layout and Materials Plan Grading and Drainage Plan Planting and Seeding Plan Plant Schedule and Details Site Details Site Details Preliminary Site Lighting Application Summary Council approved a CUP to permit the property located at 2240 North Shore Drive to allow continued use of the property as an Arts School, and denied a CUP to permit height to exceed 30' . for a lower. Council directed Staff to draft a resolution for adoption at the next regular meeting. Attached is a resolution reflecting the motion made by the Council and copies of the approved plan set. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the resolution approving continued use of the property as an Arts Center and for construction of a new principal building and denying a CUP to allow the height of the tower to exceed 30' subject to the conditions as noted in the resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF AN ARTS SCHOOL ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2240 NORTH SHORE DRIVE FOR THE MINNETONKA CENTER FOR THE ARTS PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUED. 3 AND DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.75, SUBDIVISION 1 FILE #2616 WHEREAS, Minnetonka Center for the Arts, (hereinafter "the applicant") on August 28,2000, filed an application for a conditional use permit to allow construction of a new 30,000 s.f. arts center and a conditional use permit to permit the height of the structure to exceed 30' in height for property located at 2240 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter " City") and legally described as: The South 499 feet of the East 474.5 feet of Government Lot 5 in Section 10, Township 117, Range 23, and Lots 2 and 3 and the West 89 feet of Lots 4 and 5 in Block 3, Markville, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with the City of Orono's Zoning Code, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 18, 2000, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and •t WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 9,2000, the Orono City Council considered the application noting the following findings of fact: FINDINGS: 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2616. The property is located in the RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential District. j.The property contains approximately 246,000 sq. ft. or 5.65 acres. Page 1 of 8 'm .'VX'-'V Ml ■: v-5 '■ft :‘4 ■■i ■ •V IKff '■ UV|i 4. The Orono 2000-2020 Comprehensive Plan land use map designates this site as "Public/Semi Public" which includes school uses. 5. The art school is a conditional use in the RR-IB Zoning District. The proposed arts school conforms to the minimum lot area, lot width, and front yard setback. No building is proposed to be located closer than 50' to any lot line. 6. The proposed arts school is approximately 30,000 sq. ft. footprint. 7. 8. The Zoning Code requires Community Centers, Physical Cultural Studios and Museums provide ten parking spaces plus one for each 300 s.f. of usable floor area in excess of 2,000 s.f. The Arts Center has calculated the usable floor area as 21,192 s.f. of usable floor area. The site plan indicates the site does contain 74 parking spaces meeting the minimum requirements as established in the Zoning Code. The topography of the site is relatively flat. A stomiwater management plan has been provided and includes a pond at the northwest comer of the site. All stormwater from the parking areas and building are designed to be directed by storm sewer. 9. Sanitary sewer is available to the site. 10. Access to the proposed eirts school is to be provided by two driveways from North Shore Drive. An access permit is required to be approved by Hennepin County. 11. The existing Arts Center building has been located on the property since 1950 and would remain on the property and in use until such time the new Arts Center is complete and a Certificate of Occupancy is issued by the City of Orono. The building is scheduled to be removed in the Summer of 2002. 12. The proposed west parking area would have two pole mounted lights and the east parking lot would have four of the pole mounted lights. The lights have recessed bulbs that are designed to screen the light source. Other lighting on the propert)’ would be lower level lighting to illuminate the walking areas and a few lights are located on the building that are for use with special events. Page 2 of 8 t ■ I ’ , » ; A, A 13. 14. n* '■< V. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Trees are proposed to be planted along the east property lines along Briar Street and to screen the property from the residential properties located to the east. Additional trees are to be planted to screen from the residential properties to the north and west. At the Planning Commission meeting, the Arts Center agreed they would be willing to plant a few trees between the adjacent Hill School and the parking lot. The property is adjacent to the Hill School which uses the tennis court and has an outdoor area used by the students of the School. The area is immediately adjacent to the proposed east parking area. The use of the lot for parking is a possible safety issue for Ae neighboring Hill school. Permanent fencing will be constructed along the property line between the school and Arts Center to define the property boundary and screen the parking area. The conditional use permit for the building height to exceed 30' is denied based on the precedent that would be set for non-residential buildings in the City to exceed height limitations as design elements to new buildings. The Arts Center has proposed a conditional use permit to permit screening of mechanical equipment requiring a 44.5’ screening tower. The tower would be visible to adjacent residential properties and Lake Minnetonka. The Municipal Code permits buildings to have a maximum height of 30' above the natural elevation. It is not required that mechanical equipment be located above a structure. The tower was also proposed as a design element to the building with an Arts Center logo of “MCA” to be placed on the tower. Temporary fencing will be provided along the property lines to the Hill School to separate the construction area from the Hill School property. Construction traffic is limited to access to the southwest entrance. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to continued use of the property as an arts school will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding Page 3 of 8 i property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 21. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the affect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the conditional use permit for continued use of the property located at 2240 North Shore Drive as an arts school, per Section 10.28, Subd. 3 and denies a conditional use permit to permit the height of the structure to exceed 30' in height per Section 10.75, Subdivision 1, subject to the following conditions: 1. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS The number of parking spaces provided shall be a minimum of 74 parking spaces as shown on the plan dated August 23, 2000 on file with the City of Orono. The parking spaces shall measure at least 9' x 20'. The handicapped spaces shall measure at least 10'x20’. 3. Any reduction or change in the configuration of the parking area shall require an amendment to the conditional use permit. The Zoning Code allows one (1) nameplate sign with 12 sq. ft. of surface area. The sign height is to be lower than 8' in height and at least 5' from the property line. Any signage that is proposed that exceeds the Zoning Code requirements shall require a variance. The sign shall be limited to a logo, name and site address. Such sign plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. The proposed building is a two story building with a 30,000 sq. ft. footprint and approximately as shown on the plans dated August 23, 2000. Any changes to the use, intensity of use or size of the building shall require a conditional use permit amendment because the number of parking spaces may need to be increased. Page 4 of 8 I 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Revised plans, indicating removal of the tower shall be approved by the Orono Council prior to issuance of a building permit. The Zoning Code requires that the lighting not have a direct source of light visible from the right-of-way or adjacent land. The parking area and walkways shall be developed according to the site plan on file with the City of Orono not to exceed 12' in height. The cutoff angle of the light shall not radiate light beyond the property lines. Glare and light trespass shall be prohibited. Lighting plan shall be in conformance with the approved plans on file with the City of Orono. The Landscaping shall be completed in conformance with the plans provided and approved by the City of Orono dated August 23, 2000. The types and species have been identified by the planting schedule provided by the applicant. The driveway access and parking areas shall be constructed to City Standards and are subject to final approval by the City Engineer. The City Council approves the parking areas to be crushed aggregate material rather than a bituminous surface. All driveways and the service area shall be bituminous surface. The existing building shall be removed within 60 days of a Certificate of Occupancy being issued for the new building. Asbestos removal shall be completed with appropriate State requirements and permitting. The Arts Center shall be required to notify the City of Orono and adjacent property owners prior to beginning asbestos removal. All construction traffic shall access the propert}* through an entrance located near the southwest comer of the site. Because North Shore Drive is a County Road, a permit shall be obtained from Hennepin County approving access to the property. Construction traffic shall be limited to a separate entrance so not to interfere with the everyday traffic using the existing building. 10. A fence shall be constructed during the entire constmction period to separate the building in use from the new building. 11 . Silt fencing shall be in place prior to and during the construction and grading on the property. Final erosion control shall be approved by the City Engineer. Page 5 of 8 .5 12. An erosion control permit shall be issued by the MCWD prior to any construction activity. 13. All improvements are subject to the applicant enter into a Developer’s Agreement and provide a Letter of Credit in the amount of 150% of specified improvement costs associated with the project, including stormwater management and landscaping. PLANS REQUIRED PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL: 14. Applicant shall provide a drainage area map with storm sewer and ponding calculations. 15. Applicant shall provide outlet structure details for the stormwater management pond. 16. Final storm sewer and grading plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 17. Developer’s Agreement shall be executed and Letter of Credit shall be provided for 150% of improvement costs to be determined by the City Engineer. LEGAL DOCUMENTS REQUIRED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY 18. Signed and executed drainage easements shall be provided over the ponding area. TERMS; 19. Authorities granted by this resolution are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one yerj- of the date of Council approval or this conditional use permit will expire on that date (October 23, 2001). Page 6 of 8 '4 -i 20. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 21. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 23rd day of October, 2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of October, 2000, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corpo.'‘ation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 7 of 8 \vr I j 4<" ■■■4' ■ >\ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 20 ___before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss, ) On this day of ., 20 ___before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrume U, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 8 of 8 1 Application Date: 10/5/00 Completion Date: 10/5/00 60 Day Deadline: 12/4/00 f/ipETiNG UCT 2 3 2000 C» I Y UnU/vO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name Wendy Booenberg Tide Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE: 10,23/00 ITEM NO.: /1 Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:U2620 Paul Pascuzzi 3320 Navarre Lane Variance - After the Fact Zoning District: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (/21 Acre) Lot Area: 7,139 s.f. (.16 acre) List of Exhibits: A Resolution B Notice of Planning Commission Action C StaffReport and Exhibits of 10/16/2000 Application Summary: The applicant has applied for after-the-fact variances to permit a storage shed to remain on the property. The shed is currently located on a property line, within the front yard setback and in front of the principal structure. The accessory structure was built in October 1999 without a building permit. The applicant was notified by Orono's building official of the violation, October 1999 and August 2000. The notification letter explains when a building permit is applied for a review of the plans is done to check if it meets City building and zoning codes. (Exhibit D). The applicant had the property surveyed and the survey indicates the shed is located over a property line and within the front yard therefore a building permit has not been issued. The shed is currently used for storage of yard equipment and other items not easily moved up or down the steep slope in the front yard. The front yard is flat for approximately 25 feet from the street and then becomes very steep. Structural and hardcover coverage are not an issue with this application. I. Section 10.25, Subd. 6 (B): Front Yard Setback: The minimum requirement for front yard setback in LR-IC zoning district is 30 feet. Request: To permit a 7.8' x 10' (78 s.f.) accessory structure to be located 15' from the front lot line. 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 9 (D):Accessory Building Location: No detached garages or other accessory' building shall be located nearer the front or street lot line than the principal building on that lot. Request: To permit a 7.8' x 10' (78 s.f.) accessory structure closer to the street lot line than the residence. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 6 to 0 vote to: Approve the application as presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution, \r. VMM; < )»/»•. «*. ' I I I'j A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03. SUBDIVISION 9(D), SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6(B), FILE NO. 2620 WHEREAS, Paul J. Pascuzzi, (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at3320 Navarre Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, WILEY’S NAVARRE ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) and Section 10.25, Subdivision 6(B) to allow placement of an accessory structure between the principal building and the front lot line where no accessory structures are normally allowed and 15' from the front lot line where 30' is required. WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 16, 2000, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 5 ’ • 1. ■ This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2620. 2.The property is located in the LR-IC Zoning District, where '/a acre or 21,780 s.f. is the minimum required lot area. The property consists of appro.ximately .16 acres or 7,139 s.f. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 16,2000 and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. Page I of 5 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The topography of the lot limits where the accessory structure can be located. The front yard is flat for approximately 25 feet and then becomes very steep. B. The property does not have access from the rear. Navarre Lane is not a heavily traveled street and is the only access to the property. C. The location of 15’ from the front property line and 1 O' from the side property ‘ line will not impact neighboring properties. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other propert>' in this zoning district; that granting the variance will not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) and Section 10.25, Subdivision 6(B) to allow the proposed accessory structure to be located nearer the front lot line than the principal building where no accessory structure is allowed and 15' from the front lot line where 30' is required. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted L> li.c- applicant attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Page 2 of 5 I, 1: 2.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (October 23,2001). 3.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. 4.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, and his successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of October, 2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of October, 2000 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 5 1 / STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 2000, before me a Notary Public within and knownfor said County, personally appeared____________________________________ to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. if Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) day of,., 2000, before me a Notary Public withinOn this_________ and for said County, personally appeared _________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 o IT.O. 1 v> ■ ..nMi V \i ’ V ............. I s 56®2jp' 00" E ••*••••*, .................. ^■■■■■'^'^,noLj2f ^ 1 ^(943.8}- k2. iS* ^ dl^\ i GRAVEL DRIVEWAY N 56'^30‘ 00 153.28 ■\ 46.31 piA’ 1 I r I ‘ he i. W CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 612-249-4600 ZONING FILE » 2620 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 17,2000 TO: Paul Pascuzzi 3320 Navarre Leine Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance - After the Fact DATE OF MEETING: October 16,2000 VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted. Applicants next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council on October 23,2000 at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. i 1^' 7 TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 16,2000 SUBJECT:#2620 Paul Pascuzzi 3320 Navarre Lane Variance -- Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC List of Exhibits A Analysis Appiication/Applicant Letter Survey Storage Shed Plans Building Official Notification Letter Hardcover Calculations Plat Map Photo of Property Location Map Property Owner’s List Permit Record Actual Lot Area; 7,139 s.f. (.16 acres) B C D E F G H I J K Pertinent Code Sections (After-The-Fact) 1. Section 10.25, Subd. 6 (B): Front Yard Setback: The minimum requirement for front yard setback in LR-IC zoning district is 30 feet. Request: To permit a 7.8' x 10' (78 s.f.) accessory structure to be located 15' from the front lot line. 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 9 (D):Accessory Building Location: No detached garages or other accessor) building shall be located nearer the front or street lot line than the principal building on that lot. Request: To permit a 7.8' x 10' (78 s.f.) accessory structure closer to the street lot line than the residence. Application Summary: The applicant has applied for after-the-fact variances to permit a storage shed to remain on the property. The shed is currently located on a property line, within the front yard setback and in front of the principal structure. The accessory structure was built in October 1999 without a building permit. The applicant was notified by Orono's building official of the violation, October 1999 and August 2000. The notification letter explains when a building permit is applied for a review of the plans is done to check if it meets City building and zoning codes. (Exhibit D). The applicant had the property surx eyed and the survey indicates the shed is located over a property line and within the front yard therefore a building permit has not been issued. The shed is currently used for storage of yard equipment and other items not easily moved up or down the steep slope in the front yard. The front yard is flat for approximately 25 feet from the street and then becomes very steep. Structural and hardcover coverage are not an issue with this application. U2620Paul Pascuzzi 3320 Savarre Lane V’ariance 10/16-2000 Page / m . i ‘.if r' ANALYSIS ^ot Area and Yards LR-IC District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard 1/2 acre 100 ft.30 ft.10 ft. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 7,139 s.f.1,000.44 s.f.14% 1 lardcover Distance fron Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 500'-1000'7,139 s.f.1,955 s.f. (27.38%) 2,498 s.f. (35%) 1,955 s.f. (27.38%) & Application # ^ Date Receh’ed_____ Amount Paid SC-^ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 (550.00 per each additional vsiriance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application tee) PROPERTY INFORMATION , Site Address ^ .v:. K.-. Property Identification Number (P.I.D.), 5 A.ttach legal description to appl^ation if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired <r/9 '?(month/year)f \ .?) I (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: >C residentid ___other (specify). Zoning District:____________________________________ APPLICANTT^ I Name ___C.cc ’zri Address: ^ O Cjjt,. C City Phone fhome'l ^f~?( “ ^ ___ J>hone(work l ‘ 'itv: ^ ^ o _______Zin: S'S'19/’ 5 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ______________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST, ^ Mo VDescribe request in detail: ^ /0'~f ^ Estimated Construction Cost $ -----^ / . <r f .g» < tvj A / ST ^ ^.^o? '«■ T~ P S' (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage \Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore f * Other (specify) €H' c a fuc<^uc/ <c hardshtp /description of unusual property conditions Describe undue hardship or practical difficqlty or ’musual property con^tio^ p^ventmg compliance with Zoning Code r»qiiirements:t J i^O /j<uf A , ^—• (attach additional sheets if necessary) i hp*' i p 3. REQUIRED SUB^^TTALS AH of thg follpwing information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in 0.tlder_for your apDlication to be considered complete: J Completed Application Form _i£ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of / Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910). _j/ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 854" x 11" for reproduction. , Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing J grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/4" x 11" for reproduction. ^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/i" x 11"). 7 ist 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 yanantg ftPPlicatjQn is not complete if the above information has not heen included. /PPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) md/or consultant expenses^^curred b review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is^^flle/tod^eferr^to the best of his/her knowledge. 5. 6. 7. 8. Applicant’s Signature / Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the propert)' ^jy^City stafiErconsultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes^f Hcalloa,of this Owner's Signature / ________// ^ ' Date / --//^ / C) Applicant must have all submittals into thT~Cit>' offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES Lot 1, WILEY* S NAVARRE ADDITION o : denotes iron marker (96t.i): denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum Bearings shown are based upon on ossumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundories of the obove described property, the location of on existing house, two existing sheds, and the locotion of on visible "hordcover** thereon. It does not pu'^port to show any ether improvements or encroochments.M. *. • tf •'w5' COPFilj ft dROtjBERO. CmiK COaii& U<0 9JKia^ sc RAMB tomuama iocuic,vii&» 612-47J-4H1 I htfA; cflrU/ that (hit in>e; bf inc cr (aXt my ^ecl suptf- viiav and tel I om 0 diy rf^cred CH and Land Sntyor the lows ot te side ol lirwvsota Work S Cfortxfq k£nn<sota Kenst Hunger 12755 SCALE r*-20 OaTC 12-29-99 JOB NO. 99-468 99-48S (2- i. ........... \•«•••••, s 56®:^’ 00" ^ •••• ........ ....................... (959.5) i#....“ 87.7 34.5 .^'77|77:i^? oc #-^v 28.4 J t f ! • 9.3 < i§43^ GRAVEL DRIVEWAY N 56°30 ’ 00" 'W 153.28 ^*SURE0 146.31 pv.^T •••*••* D cz n - . .T.‘^ “., ^ V f !! J 1 k ••* /^ ■/'» • •• V.fr%.\ A '7 * / •• i* eo 10*.0- ^ . / ■* m p » if' 5-1 */ .V \ A .V^ t: CITY of ORONO Municipal Ofllces street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, VN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 October 26,1999 Paul Pascuzzi 3320 Navarre Lane Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Re: Shed without Building Permit Dear Mr. Pascuzzi: It has come to the attention of this department that you have recently constructed a shed ori your propeuy at 3320 Navarre Lane in Orono. This letter is to notify you that the City requires building permits for the construction of sheds. Therefore, the City must require you to remove the shed or submit a building permit application along with building plans and a survey showing the location of the shed. A review will be done and if found to be in compliance with building and zoning codes, a pemiit can be issued. A deadline of November 2,1999 has been established for submittals. If this deadline is not met, the City will initiate legal action. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at rny office. Sincerely, Lyre Oman Building Official LO/ch Enc. Permit Application cc: Marc Davis, Building Inspector Telephone (612) 249*4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 August 23,2000 CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address; P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0065 I Paul Pascuzzi 3320 Navarre Lane WayzataNIN 55391 Re: Storage Shed without Building Permit and Unlicenced Inoperable Vehicle Dear Mr. Pascuzzi: This office has notified you of zoning and building violations on property on several occasions. This letter is to provide you one last opportunity to bring your property into compliance. A deadline of August 30,2000 has been established for submittal of a building permit application or removal of the shed, and to licence and make operable the van on the property'. If this deadline is not met the City will issue a formal complaint regarding the shed and the van will be towed from the property and disposed of. If you have any questions or concerns, pleas«- feel free to contact me at City Hall. Sincerely, Lyle Oman Building Official LO/sp Telephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.cl.orono.mn.us ••• • /^A SCI HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75‘75-250-250-500 ’ TTVTSTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Lcn|th X X X Width 0.3 0,U>7 u/»ot B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck 24.r X X 7.0 s, •• bv r * F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X i G. Other t-.c.0.667 u/io£ •• • TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -r B X 100 PRnPOSF.n HARDCOVER IN ZGhHE A. House X Length Width X X X •• < ‘ B. Garage C. Driveway X X r •. . D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck __X X -t . I F. Landscape • • Underlain '■ ^ By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -i- B X 100 t. \ • • F 545 77 15L S\8> »44 l^l 34 14^5 7/34 S.F. S.F. - IS^cic ovfffLu. S.r.'-vv^^O S.F. cp-^PJAVtsL . s?: c F -tWWO ; 6il2Avi S.F.-4<V<..AIMa> g p TO HOvUL S.F. S.F. S.F. 5 p (jl/auc ___S.F. ___S.F. 7-7. 3^ % A B S.F. -•I ] S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ..IS.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. .-•V. 4 • • • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. -7 S.F. .7 •..'V •• r S.F. S.F. % 9 r. /7.//7-A3-^f 0 (24) ^i^(3^9*26"E <S^ 0)%o OUTLOTA (39) ■^^3- *7 • •* w*j: C*v f • . i- .•v; .• .* > *'"V /,y -n—.« ** - »i-v>4^ tf jir- 00^ /'OlV/1^ • cr’ ^ !T*- •-*5': f< •»•',<;.'T'* ► • • • . ^ 4' ^ f Pi-'-S - ■ .•^'j ^ . - J /' .^4 ; V, ,i -u 1 I .• \ /» v>r, ^ V .♦^ « * • 1 # S ^-1 ^ r l‘ •' •• !: ^9? */S'% .• • ’ I »■; '* .* •*!' *• ** •''^ .’••.i*Ti* •’ - * ■»*’ V *• • ^ • •• • ♦ . ■- .:p V • V- /: --^ V; '' V--,::" • T.‘-- * — -- K.« • ^ . •• .'. >■ • -K • ^ ■*1V ■f > HEP QhxUBm t- Oat ^ COIC •; 'Course '«, \ 15 s ^ %V 6RAWDV1EW>\a VE "* ''''? Mdrlve: t -*o/' '’“> ift-iw re v-ra;a—Sgy- • • 5 kogsbtrg Point § g \ 9B Ui . ^, ORONO Arm '‘oodPoini 'I h-':\-.:/i/% DEERINO j * ’.4*v.' A \ X • - • • ‘ *.i i •- •■\:Arm .-. ..v..-; AV ^?^::. -r^j •!•* *.«. • ' \\*^ ^■•»• •■J' • •* >’.v * '• <" • . '>V- i*' • ^ y'^%yy.tc^ BOHMSz POIMT'S \U *• - /’• . Crystal • •• % ^-v^LAND .\': '\j. ■ ^ ^ ■ . ,FagfrntssPcin, , ■&^...;'../ ,, a. oa OTtM A« hn // •o^._____________ »• ••* 01# W5 ^^^BnacACHOi mQil\ Spring sf;^, 4-i<haioioiu \lfsH Park ^ ^GOOSE ISLAND iTJvS McsTM T*viv»r>^ ----------^ ' ^ A\M \ ^ ^.SMORELIXE o V* CiZaE S”« m3 c ^TfiLS Carman iMi ’k^'«8oq?\ Bay \ORO ^SPR-AY L_/ISLAND SHADY 15JLSAmL_'/ m,0^ ■ MM DATE •9/2i/00’HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATIOM SYSTEM PRl/ERTY OWNERS LIST •ATCH 5A9 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME taxpaVer NANE/AOOR 30 17-117-23 44 0007 02304 SNAOYWOOD RD NALFRED PROPERTIES LLP WALPRED PROPERTIES LLP 5100 EDEN AVE 0112 EDINA HN 55430 PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SO 17-117-23 44 0030 02205 BAYVIEW PL DART E POHERLEAU DART E PONERLEAU 2205 BAYVIEW PL NAYZATA MN 55391 jiPROP ADDR DWNER NAME TAXPAVER NAHE/ADDR SO 17-117-23 44 0033 02305 BAYVIEW PL R N STELLINO ETAL CENE H BLOCK 2305 BAYVIEW PLACE WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP AMR OWNER NAME TAXPAVER NANE/ADOR SO 17-117-23 44 0003 02344 OLIVE AVE JANES 3 HEITZ JANES S HEITZ 2344 OLIVE AVE WAVZATA MN 55391 * PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAVER NAIflE/ADOR 50 17-117-23 44 0077 03320 NAVARRE LA WALPRED PROPERTIES LLP WALPRED PROPERTIES LLP 5100 EDEN AVE B112 EDINA MN 55436 PROP AOOR OWNER NAM TAXPAVER NAME/ADDR TOTAL BATCH 509 00015 S-i 30 17-117-23 44 0020 02245 BAYVIEW PL OINA I SUMMERS GINA I SUMMERS ‘2245 BAVVIEW PL WAYZATA MN SSSOl 50 17-117-23 44 0031 02275 BAYVIEW PL JAMES R ANDERSON JANES R ANDERSON 2275 BAYVIEW PLACE WAYZATA MN 55391 30 17-117-23 44 0059 03320 NAVARRE LA PAUL J PASCUZZI PAUL J PASCUZZI 3320 NAVARRE LA WAYZATA MM 55391 30 17-117-23 44 0064 02330 OLIVE AVE PAUL HACKINNEY PAUL J HACKINNEY 2330 OLIVE AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 30 17-117-23 44 0004 02350 OLIVE AVE GARY L WILL GARY L HILL 2350 OLIVE AVE WAYZATA MM 55391 REPORT NO. P143540I PAGE 26 SO 17-117-23 44 0029 02253 BAYVIEW PL 6 H LENIN I C M OLSON-KOSKA GREG LEWIN/CAROL OLSON-KOSKA 2253 DAYVIEW PL WAYZATA MN 55391 r 30 17-117-2344.0032 00030 ADDRESS UNASSICNED GENE AND SHERYLL BLOCK GENE AND SHERYLL BLOCK 2365 BAYVIEW PLACE WAYZATA MN 55391 30 17-117-23 44 0060 03324 NAVARRE LA CURTIS R SMITH CURTIS ROBERT SMITH 3324 NAVARRE LA .WAYZATA MN 55391 30 17-117-23 44 0076 02336 SHADYWOOD RD JOHN C I BARBARA E ERICSON JOHN 0 BARBARA ERICSON 1620 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 30 77-117-23 44 0094 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOWNERS LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOWNERS P 0 BOX 41 MINNETONKA BEACH MN 55361 M €1)!/*A ’• lUiV-' f—rV q , ^ u. O tAJou^cxyiAJi.K • PERMIT RECORD Permit No.Date Type of Permit yo -/9-U'7 7/A CUi 7-/7-73 P \V' r J dbjk ^P^iiyUr -•- » *vj AppIicatioD Date: 9/18/00 Completion Date: 9/18/00 120 Day Deadline: 1/18/01 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Zoning Administrator/Planncr Item Description: U2621 James Barth 3725 Togo Roau Subdivision Cniiwrii ft/irpn^ING OCT 2 3 2000 Cl IY Ohuno DATE: 10/23/00 - ITEM NO.: I 40^ Agenda Section: Zoning LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) 1.22 acre Zoning District: Lot Area: List of Exhibits: A Site Plan/Preliminary Plat B Resolution C Staff Report and Exhibits of 10/23/2000 Application Summary: The property is a developed 1.22 acre property that is proposed to be subdivided to create a second .61 acre building site east of the existing house. Both lots meet or exceed the standards of the Zoning and Subdivision Codes. Dedication of right of way of 15’ from the center line of Togo Road was requested to be consistent with other lot developments along Togo Road. The survey submitted 10-19-2000 shows a dedication of 25' from the center line, which exceeds the City ’s request and yields only an 11' front setback for the existing home on Lot 1.. Staff has concluded that 15' is acceptable and consistent with past plats in the area. Future use of accessory building located on proposed Lot 2: An accessory structure has been built on Lot 2 with a permit approved by the building official. The lot being divided off is being sold to the owner’s brother. The Planning Commission recommended that the applicant ’s brother have one year from final plat approval to obtain a building permit for a residence. If a building permit is not obtained within a year, the property owner will be required to remove the accessory building. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 to recommend approval of the prelimin^ plat with the understanding that the accessory structure will be removed or a building permit obtained for a residence to be constructed on Lot 2 within one year of recording of the final plat. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to the conditions of the attached resolution. •• COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. • ■ M rt‘' *« A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3725 TOGO ROAD PID 17-117-23-31-0017 FILE NO. 2621 WHEREAS, James Barth, (hereinafter "the subdivider") on September 18, 2000, filed an application with the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") requesting subdivision for a property located at 3725 Togo Road within the City of Orono and legally described as follows: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 763, Files of Registrar of Titles, 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 Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 16, 2000, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on October 23, 2000 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdivider noting the following findings of fact: FINDINGS 1.The property is located within the LR-IC Single Family Lakcshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of Vz acre of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. 3. The property contains a total of 1.22 acres of land. Lots 1 and 2 each meet the minimum size requirements for lots in the LR-IC zoning district. Minimum lot requirements are 100' of frontage along the front property line and Vz acre of dry buildable area. Pa2e I of 4 i r f 4. 5. 6. 6. 7. 8. Each lot will be serviced with sewer and water. Sewer and water assessments were paid based on the width of the lot at the time the sewer and water projects were completed in this neighborhood. An additional assessment is due for the 1999 Navarre water treatment plant rehabilitation project. The total assessment due based on the 2000 fee schedule is $360 for the new lot (Lot 2). A driveway access is currently provided by an opening from Togo Road for Lot 1. A new driveway access will be needed for Lot 2 from Togo Road. The Public Services Director shall approve a driveway cut for Lot 2 prior to the issuance of a building permit. An accessory building is located on proposed Lot 2 and would remain on the property following recording of the subdivision. The subdivider has agreed that the structure remain on the property allowing one year from final plat approval to obtain a building permit for a residence. Subdivider has agreed to dedicate additional land for public right of way 15' from the centerline of Togo Road. Standard drainage and utility easements would be dedicated on the final plat S' along interior property lines and 10' along exterior property lines. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat for James Barth per preliminary plat drawings by Robert Rohlin, Land Surveyor, Meyer-Rohlin, Inc. Engineers-Land Surveyors dated 9/18/00, revised 10-18-2000, subject to the following conditions: 1.Subdivider shall pay the standard Park Dedication Fee per City ordinance for one additional building lot. 2. Subdivider shall pay one additional assessment is due for the 1999 Navarre water treatment plant rehabilitation project. The total assessment due based on the 2000 fee schedule is $360. Page 2 of 4 J ■ w* V ' 3.15' from the centerline of Togo road shall be dedicated as public right of way on the final plat. Standard drainage and utility easements shall be shown on the plat per the attached drawing. 4.Subdivider is hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval will expire one year from the date of Council preliminary plat approval. Should the subdivider fail to complete the filing of the final plat application within the year deadline, it shall be necessary for the subdivider to file a new preliminary subdivision application with the City. Final Plat Submittals: The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourdi Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City's records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200'. Drawing to include: a.Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Meyer-Rohlin, Inc. dated October 18,2000, on file with the City of Orono. b.Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10' wide along the exterior boundaries of property and 5' along the internal lot lines, per the attached drawing. c. The naming of plat. Legal documents required: a. Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements Page 3 of 4 f ' ■ K:-. y currently affecting the property. 3. F<ies to be paid. 3#io ts a. Final plat fee = $200.00 b. Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents $200.00 c.♦Park Dedication Fee: amount shall be determined as soon as City AssesscM- has placed a fair market value on the undeveloped land at the time of preliminary plat approval. The subdivider shall be advised as soon as Assessor's report h^ been filed with City. Park dedication fee shall be based on 8% of the fair market value of the land. d.Assessment is due for the 1999 Navarre water treatment plant rehabilitation project. The total assessment due based on the 2000 fee schedule is $360. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 23rd day of October, 2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of October, 2000 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 ► •«• # i* •/S'' ^ ^ .-i^vc.. (^kh */O' frro'^^-‘‘rrT^'^ fA^jrfji'^A.rz '‘S'* /t^rhiuoi^ 2>^ LA « PARCn 1 The Weet H Kt:nnesota, the right of subject to PAPcn 9 The East He Uinr.esota* « the right of subject to « DRAINAGE A The south 1 West Naif o os measure The south 1 East Half a as measure STREET EAS The north 2 kUnnesoto, d. TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner October 16,2000 SUBJECT: #2621 James Barth 3725 Togo Road Preliminary Subdivision-Public Hearing Zoning:LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 acre) List of Exhibits A Application Site Survey/Proposed property lines Sewer Map and Assessment Water Map and Assessment Right-of-way (Subdivisions-Brenton Woods, Halcyon Hollow) Plat Map Location Map Property Owners Notification List B C D E F G H Application: The applicant has applied for a Preliminary Plat for a two-lot subdivision of a 1.22 acre site located offTogo Road. The lot does contain one house, owned by the applicant, that would remain on Parcel 1. Pertinent Code Sections: Section 10.25, LR-IC, Subd. 6(B): Lot Standards for LR-IC Zoning District Section II, Subd. 12: Class II Preliminary Subdivision •iI J ANALYSIS ]Lot Area and Yards LR-IC District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Vj acre 100*30'10’30 ’ U262f James Barth 5725 Togo Road October 16, 2000 Preliminary Plat Page I Subject Property Lot Area and Yards; Parcel Required Actual ^ * p Lot Width Required * Lot Width' '• ' Proposed • ' Parcel 1 1/2 acre .61 Acres 100'122* Parcel 2 1/2 acre .61 Acres 100'122' The proposed lots will meet the minimum lot width and lot area requirements. Suitable areas exists within the required setbacks for a building pad that will not result in the need for any variances. The existing residence will meet the required 10' side setback. Access: The preliminary plat does not indicate where the ^ iveway would be located. The city engineer has indicated that any driveways should provide adequate sight lines to ingress/egress from Togo Road. The driveway shall be located at least 5' from either the east or west property lines. The Public Services Director shall approve the driveway access for the new lot. Sewer and Water: The current residence on Parcel 1 has sewer and water. Sewer and water lines are located in Togo Road. There is a sewer stub for Parcel 2. (Exhibit C). The propern* was assessed in 1965 on a footage basis, hence there is no sewer connection charge due. There is also a water stub in place for Parcel 2. (Exhibit D). The properu' was assessed for 2 water units in 1970. The only additional charges due would be $360.00 1999 Navarre Water Treatment Plant Rehabilitation Connection Charge for Lot 2. Park Dedication Fee: The City Assessor will review the plat and determine the fair market value to establish the Park fee due. Accessor)' Building: A permit was issued September 2000 by the building official for a 24' x 42' detached garage on what will become Lot 2. By city zoning code an accessory building is not allowed without a primary structure on the property. The applicant is aware of this code requirement. The lot being divided off is being sold to the owner ’s brother. Staff would recommend that the accessory structure be allowed to remain on the lot as long as a building permit for a residence is obtained within one year from the date of final plat approval. If a building permit is not obtained within a year, the property owner will be required to remove the accessory building. ^26'/ James Barth 3“25 Togo Road October 16, 2000 Preliminary Plat Page! r, . r t f ► .*• Easements: Standard drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated on the final plat 10' along the boundaries of the property line, and 5' along all internal property lines. Right-Of-Way: A 15' right-of-way shall be dedicated on the plat from the center of Togo Road for each parcel. This is consistent with other lot developments along Togo Road. (Exhibit E). The existing right- of-way is only 10' from the centerline, which is inadequate for maintenance and snow storage. Note that this will reduce the existing house’s front setback from 31' to 21'. (Also note that the survey shows iron monuments at 16.5' from the centerline. If in fact the city has rights to 16.5' of right-of-way per some prior action, the applicant must dedicate 16.5' on the plat). ■1 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to the following: 1. Creation of drainage and utility easements as noted above. 2. Creation of right-of-way as noted above. 3. Parcel 2 subject to standard park dedication fee. 4. Plat subject to all other standard platting requirements. »262I James Barth 2275 Togo Road Preliminary Plat October 16, 2000 Page 2 r #*• Application 2C:2| Date Received ^-lt~CC Amount Paid ^ CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site address ON p, ,S7g ^ 'rocpa Property Identification Number fPID’) 'TracA- Art 7 6^ Please check one - Property abstract or____torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name^ Address ^ '^OC:fO Phone (home) City ^^r\AJcf ZiiS<^?/ Phone (workV*^/g“^gT^.^3t;a OWNTR (if different than applicant) Name _________ Address City__Zip Phone (home) Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size I . Present use (check) Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units ^ I Other (specify)_________ %• V' ,0 '.a Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) ____ Division for Tax Purposes _____ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) \y Subdivision foi New Building Sites 1 Existing Units / New Units 2 Total Units '•N •I I . ) • •• Number of Building Sites e 'a /■? . • I_____Units per Acres I . -zt. Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land _Residential Other (specify)________ 1 : fm MLNIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMLNARY APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to "application fees" listed below. 2. Completed application form. 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. 4. Certified Property OwTiers List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt. Center 348-3271). 5. As an addendum to thia-apjrfic^on, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Zoning Official’s Signature ^ ^ _____ Date _________ MLNIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if applicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of (Ti ing Official's Signature ^ ___Date *7 ~ / 9-CC I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check pC] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) $250.00 _____Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $350.00 X Subdivision Application (Class I & II) $350.00 _____Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 + S25.00/Iot (Class III & all non-residential) _____ Final Plat Application (Class 111) $200.00 _____ Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. S200.00 Totals _____ Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) _____ Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) _____ Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) _____ Renewal of Class III, Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) _____ Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from original application) B. Special Improvement Fees: _____ Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + $.50/lineal ft.;_____lin. ft. x .50 “ S______ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50/lineal ft.; lin. ft. x .50 » S Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/stub Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 On-Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) S50.00/per lot x_____new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees _____ Variance S220.C0 ($50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100.00 _____ PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council nyMsary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by App^Ss Signature ___________ Date ________________ Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commis' and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in yo- place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. %o JC LOCAl *OH L H IMA? i: rSi'i* uNil I iv.rr I C**AM;.C PfIOJECT DESCRIPTION l/ilnn/iL iLfcitH 6ii ADnn»CNAL CMAMCE tr ¥v MUMH* ri 10 tkojcc T IIUMBf N FUND i»l*t I4UM11W M ^ IMl NAME OF ADDITION IN i V* L A K *. w U • V L *\ Li / .5 REASON FOR A O D I T I O R A L CHARGE riMST YLAR nr.$cnipi ive imfomm m ion :• . ^ ; JM .. J f*':* ,* '.■■ -V,’-■■ ■• ji* ■• ■ . -, M I S C E L t A ri C O U S I r^ F O R M A T I O R r ^ UNITS irool AGEI It 1 r.) T*T-r *rlr •\::. A * I •• PAnctiL riUMULfl c- i.- S l c i.o; -NA 1-# • -.’s T%vn iiLir -rrr Mor TOTAL PfUMCIPAL A'iHUAL PMINCIPAl. rr- -T;r- V \'.i.«i\ n C UIIM C N Y V i: AH ASM.SSMI'N t I I'i.. , I •; / i I <j' V1. « • 'I # H-r.- cuitii V K A (• AS$i:i%Mi:ii I i*.c •; I *7 ! H !•; /•. ----r-:^^'r«T-4- • • CLfIMI.R 1 V I A M ASSI.iSMLR I 1 Vi*. r' / I ».»• ■; ‘TTvrl -.1 ‘» 9\ b r •~rsi'* .* »*••«- -* ?r* i .A f 9 9 r' t -t .. L» J . r» * i '■ ai-*! • ?)1 aO w ,• . V? • y (48D0) 43.4 ••/.. .34.4• ♦•••••23J-< TOGO RD. (4950) ,...•> 3« 9 (4850) M.*v- (4980) \ ...■•■'•9*0 < H,YC .80/ •• 6L V 99.1 0) 5553 \ 's. 4-^4t4 t •;4i.2 .HYD.,6Va s', 8X6 TEE t 6 LEAD :•»; • • • • •• • A • •• ^*9 **J • ••• • *• •• • • •#• ... V t *. l^.1 A. c« .a •;'‘.■;-»*o.j Jl HQ e'V^ (5750) ., •••^ IP ■ 8T U: 3000 41 000 5000 6000 75.25 72.70 115.20 I4j6.91 125.20 60.10 120.20 r V/ V * Farool Resident Res Id ■ O Footage Units 43102 6000 116.99 1 7000 8000 82.12 1 • 43104 3000 130.25 1 6000 121.70 1 9000 125.00 1 • 43111 3000 ✓2<W.00 2 7020'474,18 3 • 43114 2000 4000 6000 8000 43116 2000 165.06 1 4000 155.42 1 6000 127.39 1 8000^112,23 1 43139 4010^160.00 1 . ^6373 8000 144.65 1 43148 5000 160.00 1 43149 3000 154.95 2/3 6000 133.00 2/3 43150 9000 132.49 2/3 1000 2000 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CoDunerc. Footago Units Services Totai. 1210,£7 1" <>.c' Assmt.Assmt0 Assmt,Assmt ResIdo Resld.Comm.Comm. Footage Units Footage Units 678.54 580.00 476.30 580.00 • 755.45 705.86 725.00 i4i5.20 580,00 580,00 580,00 1160.00 • 2750.24 1740,00 • • SerVo 957.35 901.44 738.86 650.93 928,00 838 .97-928.00 898.71 771.40 768.44 j»36>5 421.66 668,16 852.08 726.16 348.58 697.16 580.00 580.00 580.00 580.00 580.00 5 8 0 i^fr 580.00 386.67 386.67 386.67 580.00 580.00 580.00 580.00 500.00 580.00 580.00 / 7/ } 'iL 20.00 'tt ’H, * ff ) *■ HALCYON HOLLOW L • 'f; r ORAIMAOC AMO UTtUTT CASCMCNTS SHOWN THJS> V' • \ INO tTMtet UN CT IN WIDTH AHO AO^MINO LOT _ MO lOOO rCCT IH WIDTH AND ADJOIN' LfHCS AS SHOWN ON TH( PLAT. 0 b so -4- 100 d SCALE FEET o DENOTES IRON MONUMENT BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASSUMED GORDON R. COFFIN CO., INC. ENGINEERS B LAND SURVEYORS LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA IREN TEN W b ✓ ^ / / :Hennepin Count/ r!ght*of*«oy monuimnl *.c • N . J :t I . J I .ul /•) / <.V ^ I 130 39 matured m 1S8.SO'Wll«’* POfk’^^^ \ ^ ^ / TO-j O N 89” 48 ’30''E 'Cl; 'i V^' X!t \ Hennepi' DRAINAGE 8 UTILITY EASEMENTS SHOWN THL Bting 10.00 fttf In width ond rood lintt ond bting S.OO f« ond Adjoining lot lints os »t ■CYON I <1 S OLLOV 24 1 (33) _JDL (Ml c-JLm \E0 OAXt m: ;Oat-V Coir.'>1200 -V ,••. •.- ■' NortForestaRAMpytEW^H^Uyg Afa-xivi?:/ ^iV/•>.. r ■-< • • « Skogsberg Point West r. Arm :. ^ :-.-^ aA >;!c. /-.vrji ->■..;'fi cssg'^ o « * ' ORONO Arm 55 * ood Point DEERING POLAND . .,\^j Pager ness Pot ni^^^ BOHNS X MINT g *«• i to.I Jil BUOO 1- SNomm PL • iriui 1 i Iu 5' «S S ' SetonM Lake 'fJir SPaSJMfi a>oaoTM)m _ »<««■ AVf u ■ PATTKS OR S.t **** - ' L_i KTOUCHU \ Spring Crystal Bohns Bay i / / iSj »rtwm I I s i I 2^M: I $ 8 * si , »<3i%Uia ‘ iii^aANw r op « tmuiiMn Cvail UM ii / Bay Pel QUBIT » n Point 4\ SHORELINE c \ curn* iiuroa A « tl aciftli AAMftl -JcX; _GOOSE _ ISLAND •* / SPRAY O-SHADY . f Of 4 ^tTN ^ ^ ISI^ V. . • y/\ 0ULW2I! CRtS'*^ ^ Savi SDR \ ITOIAR \ Crescen mm DATE 28/0* BATCH 503 4 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORl. -ON SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR SO 17-117-25 31 0017 05725 T060 RD JANES LEROY BARTH JANES BARTH 5725 T060 RO ORONO NN 55391 PROP AOOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 58 17-117-25 31 0024 05788 T060 RD 0 eUSSCO 8 J CLASSCO JUANITA CLASSCO 5788 TOTO RD HAVZATA NN 55591 • PROP AOOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 58 17-117-25 51 0028 88858 ADDRESS UNASSXCNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 88 CRYSTAL BAY IM 55525 rROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR 58 17-117-23 31 0029 05888 TOCO RD RONALD J NESSERXCH RONALD J NESSERICH 3888 TOCO RD ORONO NN 55391 PROP ADOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 38 17-117-23 31 0032 83870 TOCO RD WARREN W DAY WARREN DAY 818 NXACARA LA N PLYNOUTH HN 55887 PROP ABim OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 58 17-117-23 31 0057 83885 TOCO RD CARRET S KIRCHENWXTZ CARRETT S KIRCHENWITZ 5885 TOCO RO WAYZATA HN 55391 ■4m- 38 17-117-23 31 03780 TOCO RD DOUGLAS H HCHILLAN DOUGLAS H HCHILLAN 3780 TOCO RD WAYZATA HN 55391 0019 002838 17-117-23 31 03720 TOCO RO H F SLECHTA I E A SLECHTA HERBERT F SLECHTA 3720 TOGO RD WAYZATA HN 55391 OO^T58 17-117-23 31 03710 TOGO RD LINDA J LINDQUIST NS LINDA J LINDQUIST 3710 TOGO RD WAYZATA NN 55391 003038 17-117-23 51 03880 TOCO RD LESLIE J DOGCETT LESLIE J DOGCETT HCOl BOX 79 E DRIPPING SPRINGS TX 78620 38 17-117-25 31 0055 03875 TOCO RD RALPH WILLIAH KEHPF RALPH KEHPF 3875 TOCO RO WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-25 31 0038 03795 TOCO RD H J O'CONNOR 8 R H J O’CONNOR A R 3795 TOGO RO L L O'CONNOR o'cormoR WAYZATA NN 55391 REPORT NO. P183S801 PAGE 10 38 17-117-23 51 0022 03780 TOGO RD GEORGE CLASSCO ETAL GEORGE GLASSCO 3780 TOGO ROAD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 37 03700 TOGO RD SUZANNE 0 FACKLER SUZANNE D FACKLER 3700 TOCO RD WAYZATA HN 55391 0025 V . -i ' 38 17-117-23 31 03690 TOGO RO TIHOTHY P ROBERTS TIHOTHY P ROBERTS 3890 TOCO RD WAYZATA HN 55391 0028 *A L 38 17-117-23 31 0031 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 88 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 003838 17-117-23 51 03855 TOGO RD HOUND CONG JEHOVAH WITNESSES NAVARRE CONG OF JEHOVAH WITH C/0 KINCDON HALL 3855 TOGO RO WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 31 0039 03785 TOGO RD STACY L KEKKONEN STACY L KEKKONEN 3785 TOGO RD WAYZATA HN 55391 "J '■'iv \ HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PROP AMR ONNiR NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AMR 36 17-117-23 31 OOAO 63745 TOGO RO tUCNAEL H A RITA C PRAHM MICHAEL H A RITA C PRAHM 3745 TOM RO MAY2ATA MN 55391 PROP AMR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 36 17-117-23 34 0015 60036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED JEFFREY ROiERT ZELL JEFFREY R06ERT ZELL 3466 NORTHERN AYE NAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AMR 36 17-117-23 34 0016 63476 NORTHERN AVE R P JOHNSON A N K JOHNSON ROiERT P A MYRA K JOHNSON 3476 NORTHERN AVE HAYZATA NN 55391 OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR TOTAL BATCH 503 00027 i * » ' - • f : ' i«!-■ ' ■ MEi'i' REPORT NO. PI435^01 PAGE 11 004436 17-117-23 31 03745 TOGO RD GERALD EDWARD MACKEY GERALD E MACKEY 3745 TOM RD WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0002 03700 NORTHERN AVE LEO J SLECHTA ETAL LEO J SLECHTA 3700 NORTHERN AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0014 03460 NORTHERN AVE JEFFREY R ZELL JEFFREY R ZELL 3460 NORTHERN AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0017 03440 NORTHERN AVE SCOTT W GARDNER SCOTT W GARDNER 3440 NORTHERN AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0049 03775 TOGO RD J L KNOLLENBERG/K L TIFFANY JON L KNOLLENBERG AND KRISTEN L TIFFANY 3775 TOGO RD WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0051 03740 NORTHERN AVE J R GUAM I J E GUAM JOHN R GUAM 3740 NORTHERN AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 Si V 1 I CERTIFY'THAT THE FACTS REPRESEHTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE r,v ^ 1^* *<4 JLIO G P.-' J 1 <1 I % I t7 .<tL Application Date: 9/20/00 Completion Date: 9/20/00 60 Day Deadline: * 1/20/00 COitMr'ii K4PPTING oci 2 3 2000 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenbe g Title Zoning Adminsr.ator/Pianner Cl 1Y ur Uttu«vo DATE: 10/23/00 ^ ITEM NO.: / ^ Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2624 Roger Olsen 8 IS Partenwood Road Variance Renewal Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area: 44,225 s.f. (1.02 acre) List of Exhibits: A Resolution B Notice of Planning Commission Action C Staff Report and Exhibits of 10/16/2000 Application Summary: The applicants are requesting approval to renew variances that were granted on October 25,1999, October 26,1998 and November 24,1997 to allow expansion and remodeling of an existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living area. .Applicants have indicated they hope to begin this project within the ne.xt year. 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 1(A): Lakeshore Setback Regulations: No principal building shall be located closer than 75 feet to the natural ordinary high water mark of a lake abutting the propert>\ To allow remodeling per the plan in Exhibit A of the resolution where the residence is currently located 34' from the ladceshore where 34' is proposed and 75' is required. 2. Sectio ’ 0.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(1): Hardcover in 0-75': Permit 4,413 s.f (15.3%) hardcover in the 0-75' where 5,815 s.f. (20%) exists and 0 s.f (0%) is allowed. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 7 to 0 vote to: Approve the application as presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. J Tt-;- k ’-f' ! L' t i t .'1 >1 ’'■ . Tcor.i Vjvi^'f A RESOLUTION GRANTING RENEWAL OF VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 FILE NO. 2624 WHEREAS, Roger Olsen and Elizabeth Olsen (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 815 Partenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for the renewal of variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space located 34' from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark where 75' is required and requiring a hardcover variance of 4,413 s.f (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is existing and none is allowed as shown on Exhibit A. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2624. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consists of 1.02 acre. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on October 16, 2000 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed additions would not further encroach on the OHWL. Page 1 of 5 ? 'e i 4 J K 2. 3. The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. The amount of hardcover in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback would be reduced from 20% to 15.3%. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this propert>- are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence located 34' from the OHWL where 75' is required and hardcover of 4,415 s.f. (15.3%) in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is existing and none is allowed. 1. 2. 3. All plastic under landscaping must be removed in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback prior to any new construction. No further variances will be granted to this property in the future. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit wuhin one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (October 23, 2001). Page 2 of 5 •W'- iJif. * , f t 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. 6.Any substantial changes or revisions to the plan in Exhibit A will require reconsideration by the City Council. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of October, 2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) S3. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of October, 2000, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 5 4 % I I 4-- f| ■JIST CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 612-249-4600 ZONING FILE » 2624 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; October 17,2000 TO:Roger Olsen 815 Partenwood Road Long Lake, MN 55356 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION; Variance Renewal DATE OF MEETING: October 16,2000 VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commbsion recommends the following: Approval as submitted. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council on October 23,2000 at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. utr I !!■ ir«iltri4n .1 I TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 16,2000 SUBJECT;#2624 Roger J. Olsen 815 Partenwood Road Variance Renewal -- Public Hearing Zoning District: LR*1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area: 44,225 s.f. (1.02 acre) LUt of Exhibits A Application B Report from previous renewal (10/25/99) C Minutes from previous meetings (PC- 10/18/99, CC- 10/25/99) D Res. 4367 The applicants arc applying to renew variances that were granted on November 24,1997, October 26,1998 and October 25, 1999. The plans are to expand and remodel the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living area. Variances were approved for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0-75' zone. Variances were required for remodeling to the existing residence that is located 34' from the lakeshore where 75’ ■ is required. Also hardcover in the 0-75' zone where 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) proposed, 5,815 s.f. (20%) exists and 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed. Staff Recommendation: The zoning lot conforms to lot area, lot width, and side yard setback requirements. The existing residence is located within the required lakeshore setback. The proposed plan reduces the amount of hardcover in the 0-75' setback. The existing amount of hardcover on the site is 10,228 s.f (23%). The proposed plan is for 6,595 s.f. (14.9%) total hardcover on the lot. Staff recommends renewing the variance for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0-75' setback »2624 Roger J. Olsen 815 Partenwood Variance Renewal page / 0. Application # r h • 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-conformint; structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Date Receded 9/Oc/cfo Amount Paid / S’O- ^ fifjM&iJPtL- PROPERTY INFORMATION , _ _ rrr ^ ^ Site Address '6/^ Pan^Tei^uyoct/ ^ ^^ -----------' Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) *93—0.Q03. A.ttach legal description to application if not included on required survey Date Progerty^Acquired______S' - — -------------------------^(month/year) »I (do)<fdo no D also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residentiad ___pother (specify) Zoning District: in. LR- \R _\ APPLICANT Name Rcn^;- J- Phone (home ) 9:>Q" ^f7f~ 77*; 1 Address: C(7c Pc,. jQ, yJ City: PhonefwQrk )9s-:3- Zio: I . 7 •i.. OV'NER (if different than applicant) Name______________^________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:, S>-v •> DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: __ Estimated Construction Cost $ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ____ Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Sc:''4ck-Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Ocher ^specify) /o,c<r HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventmg compliance with Zoning Code requirements:_ (attach additional sheets if necessary) * i ’ it REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of thQ.. folio wing information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. 7, 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property 0^^•ners 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, pro\ide one (1) copy 814" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 814" x 11" for reproduction. 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). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature ' /3..Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature /0~r^^0^ / Date 9'" ' €/0 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline: 9/22/99 9/22/99 11/21/99 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 10/20/99 ITEM NO.: F Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner Item Description:^2531 Roger J. and Elizabeth Olsen 815 Partenwood Road Variance Renewal Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot .Area:44,225 s.f. (1.02 acres) B Application: The applicants are requesting approval to lenew variances that were granted on November 24, 1997 and October 26, 1998 to allow expansion and remodeling of an existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living area. The requested variartces are for: 1. To allow remodeling per the plan in Exhibit A of the resolution where the residence is currently located 34' from the lakeshore where 34' is proposed and 75' is required. 2. To allow 15.3% (4,413 s.f.) of hardcover to be located within the 0'-75' lakeshore setback where (20%) 5,815 s.f. is existing and none is allowed. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: To approve renewal of the requested variances on a vote of 7-0. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. —- A RESOLUTION GRANTING RENEWAL OF VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 FILE NO. 2531 WHEREAS, Roger Olsen and Elizabeth Olsen (hereinafter "the applicants") are o^vners of the property located at 815 Partenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for the renewal of variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space located 34' from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark where 75' is required and requiring a hardco-'ir of 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f (20%) is existing and none is allowed as shouTs .'!x.t:bit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2531. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consists of 1.02 acre. j.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on October 18, 1999 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed additions would not further encroach on the OHWL. Page 1 of 5 ■1 2. The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. 3. The amount of hardcover in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback would be reduced from 20% to 15.3%. >* ' 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence located 34' from the OHWL where 75' is required and hardcover of 4,415 s.f (15.3%) in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is existing and none is allowed. 1.All plastic under landscaping must be removed in the 0 ’ to 75 ’ lakeshore setback prior to any new construction. 2. No flirt’icr variances will be granted to this property in the future. 3.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (October 25, 2000). Page 2 of 5 '1^--h 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 tindersigned t^plicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. 6. Any substantial changes or revisions to the plan in Exhibit A will require reconsideration by the City Council. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 25th day of October, 1999. ATTEST; Linda S, Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 25th day of October, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 5 If If' ~ > ■ > • Pi' • m mm ■ \« * STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instiument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )I On this day of ^ 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _____________________________—^--------------- i^own to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,an acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed, NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 5 t 1 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Wendy Bottenberg, Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner October 8,1999 SUBJECT; #2531 Roger J. Olsen 815 Partenwood Road Variance Renewal — Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area;44,225 s.f. (1.02 acre) This application requires the following variances: Section 10.22, Subd. 1, Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.22, Subd. 2, Lakeshore Hardcover Requirements Section 10.24, Subd. 5(B), LR-IB Lot Requirements Application Summary: The applicants received variances to expand and remodel the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living area. Variances were granted on November 24,1997 and October 26,1998 for lakeshore setback to be located 34' from the lakeshore where 75' is required and for hardcover in the 0'-75' setback where 20% (5,815 s.f.) was existing and 15.3% (4,413 s.f.) was proposed. H253I Roger J. Olsen 815 Partenwood Variance Renewal PC-lO/8/99 page-l v*-- :4i m ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR*1B District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard 1 acre 140 ft.35 ft.10 ft.75 ft. Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside 1.02 acres 225 ft. at 75' setback; 357 ft. atOHWL yj ft. (existing) 35 ft. (proposed) 46 ft. (existing) 20 ft. (proposed) 34 ft. The existing residence does not conform to the current lakeshore setback regulations. The homeowner's association has more restrictive side yard setbacks than the zoning district, therefore, the garage was placed 20' instead of 10' from the side yard setback. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'28,810 sq. ft.5,815 sq. ft. (20%) None 4,413 sq. ft. (15.3%) 15.3% 75’-250'15,415 sq. ft.2,995 sq. ft. (19%) 25%3,600 sq. ft. (23%) None The applicant was granted a hardcover variance in the 0'-75' setback to reduce the amount of hardcover from 20% to 15.3%. U235I Roger J. Olsen 815 Partenwood Variance Renewal PC-lO/8/99 page’2 % 4 4 I ’ r- 4 - j-, ’ ■iii V V ;iL''i'j m >;■ Statement of Hardship : See Exhibit B Staff Recommendation : The zoning lot conforms to lot area, lot width, and side yard setback requirements. The existing residence is located within the required lakeshore setback. The proposed plan reduces the amount of hardcover in the 0'-75' setback. The existing amount of hardcover on the site is 10,228 s.f. (23%). The proposed plan is for 6,595 s.f. (14.9%) total hardcover on the lot. Staff recommends renewing the variance for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0'-75' setback. Attachments A Application B Applicant's letter C Architect’s letter D Elevation E Site Plan F Hardcover worksheets G Minutes from previous meetings (10/20/97,11/17/97, 11/24/97) H Res. 4004 I Minutes from previous meetings (10//19/98,10/26/98) J Res. 4185 Roger J. Olsen 815 Partenwood I'ariance Renewal PC-10/8/99 page-3 A t Application # ^ S3 } Date Received" 7/2 2 A~y Amount Paid ^____ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) ^ Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 —p- (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Pa/LT^*^^oo»> 'koAi> OflcNo n)/\/ Property Identificatioii Number fPJ.D.I CS-HI^3OO^ ^ A a a AAAAttach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired____________Sldo^ 7 ________________^(month/year) I (do) (do^p iw also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential ____other (specify)_____________________ Zoning District: /<9.>^V.3’' U^-18_____StLC(. <r h\!eW_________________ .a applicant Eli A• F. Name X CiSe^ Address: >^/S~ PaP^ nFfJi^z^yi> R.oACi City:. Phone thome^l V?/ ~7 73S_____ Phone fworkl V/ 7 - 30-^ _ CCCf^o_______Zip: fT^350 •• OV7'ER (if different than applicant) Name _____________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: __ Estimated Construction Cost $. /■...e ) A V. (attach additional sheets if necessary) varl ^nces required Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Vl^ Other (specify) ^rJSwAL 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) 6 V f.- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete; 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Ow>Tiers 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 8i4" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 854" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views Qjrovide one (1) copy 854" 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 notifled 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 variai ce application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature /I OJe^Date 9-71'9 9 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 Data Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. • J . i t : ■ I B September 22,1999 To: The City of Orono From; Roger Olsen Subject; Renewal of Variance for my home at 815 Partenwood Road. I am requesting a one-year extension of the existing variance on my property due to the following circumstances; Several general contractors have turned down my project after initiating the bid process due to a lack of time and their inability to get reliable commitments from their sub contractors.■r ij After receiving a firm bid four weeks ago from a general contractor willing to do the project, the price is over one hundred thousand dollars higher than my initial expectations and financial tl i'lty at this time. This represents a 25% increase in construction costs over the initial estimates. i.., •j Thank > ou for your considering this renewal variance. Sincerely, •-.i ; Roger Olsen ■:. :V 4 r } 4* tleV/VTlOW / I ' -f • >^ H O ^ •it <^^3/ 4S ..1 b^ICbM) illpl ■iiiriHMii hokn>t*\ y/^ X 1 . % • .1 rr»(i•• ■• -'-' * f. ll^ 1 m .+rm-Jvr! P f '-T'.* I ■ llTi I ■ I ■ ■ <»! SI aiBi o^roM LJkKfe<!>lOe gl.fewia.f*^r»* lam^^ ««0^, V"' .'■ou<«M ps^oeMUS '\- •p kwtf I t'o-. :’yV«\V », b '• •■ ^ -H i r-11/2097 10:04 K> I hi iy • • FAX 612 473 8222 ALEXANDER DESIGN tlAlUJCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET EXISTING HAPnCOVT.tt TN gONK f 75-2S0*250-500 ‘(i<^f jl) A. House /rX^TOAf Len|clT^Width 'Z.eh’Zn S.F. X X X S.F. S.F. S.Fz B. Garage C. Driveway liryJoAfl^ \r\ s.F. X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Pat;o/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other ^ a TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 4- B X 100 - PROPOSED TTARDCQVER TN ^ONTE A. House 3l ^ ,- m B.Garage C.Driveway D.Sidewalk E.Pailo/Dedc um m Landscape Ucderlala By Plastic 0.Other e»6l-CjC*4'r r C d ^J^* ciiciaG- X X total hardcover in ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE __ 4. B X 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. _____ S.F. fli ri s.F. s.F. I.(p4n s.F. s.F. S.F. ^__S.F. eh^P^\th S.F. '7^^fK\r\ S.F. 75 *2..tog>Q 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. S.F. S.F. 'ZFSj^lO S.F. J E HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDrovyR IN ZONE A. House -V LtnjtK^ • . 250-500'500-1000 p ' (s of<a^ B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X X X X ?^g=3n s.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. trT^ A\. S.F. S.F. S.F. {^GCi S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ■^<=7 S.F. ________S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL hardcover IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B X 100 S.F. \e=b.M^ S.F. 1*=! % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House k 'b'bd S.F. Len|ih Width B. Garage X X X C. Driveway ^ D. Sidewalk " E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 11^/)\v^/\ tr*\ t. S.F. ______________ S.F. I gn S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B X 100 S.F. A B minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 20,1997 Cr (#12 - #2304 Deborah Sholl - Continued) Schroeder moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2304. Vote: Ayes 6, NaysO. ^ (#13) #2305 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 10:45-11:05 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Bressler reported that the application is for remodeling and expansion of an existing residence to include an attached 4-stall garage and loop driveway requiring a lakeshore setback, and hardcover variances in the 0-75' and 75-250* lakeshore setbacks. A ^e^^ed survey was presented. Bressler indicated that due to the lot configi^ation, the building pad on the lot is restricted. Staff recommends approval of the application subject to ^ conditions noted which include elimination of the loop portion of the driveway, plastic under landscaping, and with the notation that no further hardcover would be allowed in the future. Bressler reported that the applicant has agreed to remove the plastic under the landscaping. Olsen said the plans have changed due to the homeowners* association covenants requiring a 20' side setback. The plan currently calls for a 10' side setback. He would like to move the design down 10' to satisfy this requirement. Hawn said in order for this to occur, a new plan would have to be submitted. Bressler noted that hardcover calculations would change. Berg questioned what existing foundation and walls would be used. The existmg ^ foundation and walls to be used were noted. The house is a w^-out style. Lindquist said he would agree in principle to this change but would require reviewing the plan. Olsen said there was a time limit problem for beginning construction this year Hawn asked about the elimination of the loop and location of the well. Olsen said he has reduced hardcover 1185 s.f. in the 0-75' setback with the elimination of driveway and retaining walls. The applicant's designer asked if approval could be based on percentages and changes meeting the percentages required. j ( 1 I. ^ minutes of the ORONO PLAJ'fl^G COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 20,1997 (#13 - #2305 Roger and Elizabeth Olsen - Continued) Schroeder indicated he would have to review the plan. Berg said she would like to see • what the impacts are. Schroeder suggested guidance be given to the applicant. Lindquist asked Aat the hardcover calculations be improved. Berg noted that the Planning Commission must review the application that will be seen by the Council. Olsen said the shift would change the front setback from 35' to 32' and asked if that was a big consideration. He was icibrmed that Lindquist that it was a considerationu Schroeder questioned the need for 4 garage stalls. Lindquist informed the applicant that the City does not like to see any structure within the 75' lakeshore setback. Mrs. Olsen suggested the plain eliminate the 10' within the setback that is in question by the covenants. Olsen said he could eliminate 10' from the plan but would lose storage space. Lindquist suggested the architectural design be considered as well. Schroeder moved, Berg seconded, to table Application #2305. Dr. Bill Cottleman, a next-door neighbor, was present representing the homeowners' association. He submitted a letter form the architectural committee regarding their restrictive covenants. He noted their restrictions are rhore stringent than those of the City. He said the homeowners' association would approve the home being more centered on the lot. A copy of the letter was submitted to staff. He said the association prefers to see as much distance between the homes as possible. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#14)^23a^^LEN PETERSON, HAVING AN HsITfREST IN 3355 CRYSTAL BAY R0AIT>V4IHANCES - PUBLIC HEi^lNG 11:05-11:10 P.M. The Affidavit of Publicatioh'aqd Certificateof Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Photos were shown of the pr^erty. Bressler reported th^t-me applicant is proposing fconstruction'bf^82's.f. carport with a decx above it atmehed to the front of the existing residence. Thel^^^e carport would extend 22 oi^.over the existing driveway v ’*h a walkway. This proposall'A^U require variances fpf side setback, lakeshore setback, and 0-75' and 75-250’ sctbackfedcover. JL 1 r •▼7 m • • \ minutes of the orono plannino commission MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17,1997 \ h \ . Vote: Ayes 5, Nays C.• • ^ (#3) #2305 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD ROAD - VARIANCES - 6:47-7:03 P.M. ■ 'v^ b The applicant and architect, Kathryn Alexander, were present Dressier presented pictures of the property. The applicant is proposing remodeling and e:q)aosion of the residence to include a 4-stall attached garage. The application requires variances for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0-75' setback. There is no problem with average lakeshore setback as noted in the topographical map. The residence currently has a 3-stall side loading garage. The driveway configuration has been changed. The existing residence encroaches the lakeshore setback. The allowable building space is limited by the property. Only a portion of the existing foundation will remain; further information is included in the packet The total hardcover is proposed at 19%. The 1.02 acre property is located in the one acre zoning district with 3/4 acre in the 6-75' setback. The street setback is also restricted. Dressier reported Staff recommended approval subject to maintaining a 34' lakeshore setback from the designated OHW where 75' is required. Encroachment on the lakeshore setback will not be increased by the improvements. Staff recommends hardcover be maintained at a maximum of 14.5% in the 0-75' lakeshore setback where 20% is existing. 16% is proposed, and none is allowed. Dressier mdicaled that the amount of existing * hardcover excluding landscaping underlain by plastic is 14.5%. This figure could largely \ i * 1 i V 1. »• t r- ORONO PLANNING COiMMISSION MEETINO HELD ON NOVEMBER 17,1997 b« m^t by eliminating several proposed decks and existmg patio area on the lake side of &e residence. By approving this percentage, there would be no net gain in the amount of harfuover on the property, not including plastic under landscaping. Staff recommends all landscape underlain by plastic in the 0-75' lakeshore setback be removed prior to commencement of new construction. The appUcant has agreed to this provision. Staff also recommends that no further hardcover variances be granted to this property in the future. Mr. Olsen, in noting the difficult lot, said he preferred not to reduce the hardcover further than the proposed 16^ to 14.5%. Ms. Alexander said the total hardcover is less than the • 25% allowed. Hawn informed the applicant that trading hardcover for landscaping underlain with plastic is not the same and does not justify the additional hardcover. Lind(juist said he agrvcd noting there is a large amount of structure on the property and is of the opmion that the applicant should maintain the 14.5% hardcover ma.ximum. Stoddard asked Bressler to explain the suggestions fer hardcover removal. Alexander noted that as suggested, the hardcover wou’J still be over 14.5%. Bressler informed • McMiUan that he arrived at the 14.5% by subtracting the landscaping underlain with piastre from the hardcover. The balance of hardcover to be removed would come from eliminating a portion of the patio, dog run, decking, or decreasing the size of the additiotL Olsen said that he would have to eliminate the existing patio or addition even if aU of the decking was eliminated. Lindquist informed him that if the residence was new I i' MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17,1997 _ X » * kl i h construction, he would not be allowed any structure in the 0-7i' setback. Olsen acknowledged that the home would not have been able to be built to meet today s • ^ standards. Alexander noted that the patio consists of pavers and asked if pavers with drainage holes is still deemed hardcover. Lindqxiist said they were. Alexander said eliminating 1.5% of hardcover would consist of 497 s.f. i When asked by Hawn what items are necessary, it was noted that the dog kennel could be gravel and the patio could be reduced in size. This would amount to less than the decrease being required. The patio is 810 s.f. and could be reduced. m • There were no public comments. Stoddard moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2305 for lakeshore setback hardcover variance in 0-75' setback, subject to revised Staff recommendation including a 41' lakeshore setback variance for structure to rem^ at 34' from the OHW, hardcover variance for a maximum of 4415 s.f. in the 0-75' setback, and plastic under landscaping moved in the 6-75' setback. The reduction in hardcover in the 0-75' setback will be decidedby applicant subject to staff approval. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#4)^368«5R00K PARK REALTY, 3560 SHOj^EL^ DRIVE - PLANNED KESroENTI^L^I:VELQP^IENT AND^^At,S HI PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - 7:03-7:39 P^ Bill Gleason \ya8^escnt representing Brook Park Realty ♦ ! r • V MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 24,1997 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT \i^) #2279 G. MARC AND TRACY WHITEHEAD, 1220 LYMAN AVE CONSIDER PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL Mrs. Wmkhead was present. Gaf&od reporte^N^at discussion was held at the last Council n^fmg regarding the park dedication fee. Pub^^t to Staff discussions. Staff recommepds reopening the preliminary plat resolbion to enable Staff to draft for incoj^ration into the resolution additional findings relatebto the nexus and proportion^ity issues related to the park fee. Mrs. Whitehead had no commehts. She verifiedSddBf and Council reviewed her letter faxed to the City Office. Gaffi on^cated th^^ was received on this date and distributed for Council review. Jabbour informed Whitehead that the CtobiU)lans on acting on the appUcation in a timely manner. Mrs. Whitehead Midfshe appwbtes that. Jabbour said the Council must also protect the interests ofthe City. Jabbour moved, Peterson^sdconded, to reconsider Resoh^don #3966 for purposes noted. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0., Jabbour moved, Hmt seconded, to direct Staff to draft findingsb^exus and proportionali^f^or inclusion in Resolution #3966. Barrettvenfied that the findings will include the nexus and proportionaH^j^f the subdivision’s impact on parks. ^ ^ • ote; Ayes 3, Nays 0. ^ (#4) #2305 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OLSEN, 814 PARTENWOOD ROAD ' VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4003 The applicants and architect were present. Van Zomeren reported that the 1.02 acre property is located in the LR-IB Resident! District and meets the minimum lot requirements. Pictures were presented of the property. The existing house is located within 75' of the lakeshore. “nie lot is imus w the lot extends along the lake but is narrow in its depth. The application is a propo or a 4-car garage and additions to the residence. A patio :th pavers cunently exi^. e Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the 41' variance for ^ lakeshore setback for the residence 34' from the lakeshore and 15.o% hardcover variance in the 0-75’ setback where 20% exists and none is allowed. 4 . • . i; * r m liT CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ ^ ^ ^___i— ■ A RESOLUTION GRANnNG VARIANXES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 FILE NO. 2305 WHEREAS, Roger and Elizabeth Olsen (hereinafter "the applicants") are ON^ners of the property located at 815 Partenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to.the City for v^ances to Mumcipd Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions I and 2 to allow the remodeling and ® the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional livmg space wa e ^ the 929.4 ordinary high water mark where 75' is required and requiring of 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is existing and none is aUowed as shown on Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City . Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. FINDINGS This application vfss reviewed as Zoning File #2305. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consis o The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 17, 1997 and recommended approval of &e proposed variance ase upo following findings: 1. The proposed additions would not further encroach on the OHWL. Page 1 of 5 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OFTHE CITY COUNCIL NO. >1 A Q ^______ 2.The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. 3.The amount of hardcover in the O' to 75’ lakeshore setback would be reduced from 20% to 15.3%. 4.Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to It and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that grantmg the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a emonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City 5.e City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments y he applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS (20%) is existing and none is allowed. 1. All plastic under landscaping must be removed in the O’ to 75' lakeshore setback prior to any new construction. 2. 3. No further varances will be granted to this property in the future. Authorities grated by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, out ^e per^ssive 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 (November 24, 1998). Page 2 of 5 r CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4 0 04NO. 4.ViolfttioQ of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this vaiiimce shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall ^automaacally terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of November, 1997. ATfEST: Dorothy M. ? al^. City Clerk Prop^ Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th ay o November, 1997 by Gabriel Jabbour and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of ® ^ of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on beh o the City. ____jAMSLeaMR NOtlfrrfUUMMBOU HBteMCOUKTY IN CoBMlaiai in. 91, MB Notar>7 Public0 Page 3 of 5 CITYof ORON RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 0 4 - STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HEI^PIN ) On this day of —. 199^ before me a Notary Public within and kno™ to me to be the petson(s) descnbed^ Wfd who executed'Eeforeg^g ins^en^a^^ acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. r HENhEPWwJBJf^ notary PUBLIC M STATE OF MINNES OTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of )ss. ^ 199 _before me a Notary Public within and ■h». for said county, personally appeared __________ kriovtn to to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 5 . t \ i fi ■^1 M X ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, October 19,1998 ROLL: The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Sandra Smith, William Stoddard. Elizabeth Hawn, Dale Lindquist. Commissioner Charles Schroeder arrived at 6:45 p.m., and Commissions Janice Berg and LIU McMillan were absent. The following represented City Staff: City Planner/Zoning Administrator Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, Senior Planning Coordinator Mike Gaffron, and Recorder Jackie Young. Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. RENEWALS AND AMENDMENTS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#1) #243t^OANN JUNDT, 1400 BRA©k 6’S POINT ROAD - VARIANCE RENEWAL, 6:32 p.m 6:34 p.m. There were no public Lindquist rnpvd^, Stoddard secondedTto-wrove Application #2421,1400 Bracketts Point Road^rpni^l of setback and hardcover vari^nq^ per the findings and conditions of Reaofi^ons #3786 and #3986. VOTE: Ayes 4, N^ (#2) #2431 ROGER OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD - VARIANCE RENEWAL, 6:34 p.m. - 6:36 p.m. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2431,815 Partenwood, renewal of variances for lakeshore setback and hardcover In the 0-75* setback per the findings and conditions of Resolution #4004. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#3p2434^ROL OLSON, KID’S ART SCHOOL, 2180 NORTH SHORE AMENDME^TrS:^ p.m. - 6:40 p.m. -CUP Carol Olson was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is request a tipi to be located on the property for ej use to the art school. in amendment to the conditional use permit to allow tionarpuropses, which is considered to be an accessory Lindquist inquired whethej^th^pplicant had any concerns with City recommendations. Olson stated she^s fine with the recommended conditions. Therc^ere no public comments. Page 1 i .1^ iif ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 26,1998 (^2430 Paul Phillips, Continued) Goetten nioveBTTcttfSoa^econded, to^enjLAppKcgtT^ #2430,2140 Sixth Avenue North, back to th» ^fir review. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *(#13) #2431 ROGER OLSEN, 815 PARTENVVOOD ROAD - VARIANCE RENEWAL - RESOLUTION NO. 4185 Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2431, 815 Partenwood Road, and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4185. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. y) #2432 GREENFIELD CORPORATION, 4755/4775 BAYSIDE ROAD EASEMENT/SUBDIVISION Laurie Lur\deen, Greenfield Corporation, and Jim DeBerg, were present. Van Zomeren staged the Applicants are requesting a revision or amendmwt to the final plat resolution to accommodate a private driveway easement over Lot 3 toprovide access to Lot 1. The private dnyeway easement does not comply with the ap^val resolution for the final plat, which shows ahsoutlot for all three lots along Bayside Ro^. Van Zomeren stated Staff is generally not in favotvof private driveway easements due/o the possible problems that may result. ^ ' The Planning Commission recommend^ denial of a private easement and suggested that the Applicant apply for a lot line rearrangembqt, which woijra require a lot width variance for Lot 3. Jim DeBerg. 1551 Hunter Lane, Medina, stated hi^d previously met with the property owner and offered the private driveway easem^ notV^lizing that it was in conflict with what was originally approved in the Resoluti^. DeBei^H(Uted he was later informed by the building official that he could not have a private driveway cement. Laurie Lundeen stated they were unaware they could not grant a private driveway easement. Mayor Jabbour stated the City doesmot officially recognize a private drivbway easement. DeBerg remarked that even witiythe granting of the private driveway easemenvtlie lot still exceeds the minimum lot size. Van Zomeren stated a lot^dth variance would be needed in the case of a lot line rearrangement for the middle lot. 1 r' ;k m[ j'j ^;r CITYof ORONO m RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 1 .9 ______ A RESOLUTION GRANTING RENEWAL OF VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 FILE NO. 2431 WHEREAS, Roger Olsen and Elizabeth Olsen (hereinafter "the applicants") are O'vners of the property located at 815 Partenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood Oierelnafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for the renewal of variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space located 34' from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark where 75' is required and requiring a hardcover variance of 4,413 s.f (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f (20%) is existing and none is allowed as shown on Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Miruiesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2431. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property, consists of 1.02 acre. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on October 19, 1998 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: 1.The proposed additions would not further encroach on the OHVrT. Page 1 of 5 ♦ ■■ CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.41 8 5 The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. 3. The amount of hardcover in the O' to 75* lakeshore setback would be reduced from 20% to 15.3%. 4.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect trafiSc conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely ser\e as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence located 34' from the OHVVL where 75' is required and hardcover of 4,415 s.f (15.3%) in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is existing and none is allowed. 1.All plastic under landscaping must be removed in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback prior to any new construction. 2. No further variances will be granted to this property in the future. 3.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approv^, or this variance will expire on that date (October 26, 1999). Page 2 of 5 I 1 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 1 ft 5 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall ^ automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. 6.Any substantial changes or revisions to the plan in Exhibit A will require reconsideration by the City Council. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of October, 1998. ATTEST; v/ l/A Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Property Owner (s) Gabriel^bbour, Mayor \ 0 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before , me on this 26th day of October, 1998, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of t e City. C^J^CLEA.HASE.Wj'1 w • •’ HOT;fiYFtEL!C-WNrKO ^ 'iC \*.y CCUNTY t--yCc<r.(r.!uicnE)C-'ssJM.31.2CC0 ^5 a j( L Notary Public Page 3 of 5 % Co^ CITY of ORONO MUt^ CSHO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _4-l . 9i 5-------- STATE IOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this ^ day of A.m,i«>4 said county, personally ap^ared _ known to me to be the person(s) descnbed in^d who e.xecuted the foregoing instrument.and acknowledged that he (^ey) executed the same as his (±eir) free act and deed. , 199^ before me a Notary Public within and for : • ■ ■) • • ■•y E A. HPSF.VAM KCT/?.YFljEUC-W!ICI:£SOTA KSNtlEfIM COUNTY I l-VCcTjr.'silcnWfwJin.ai.rocO /7A'jy>^ j NOTARY PUBUC ^/A STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 4 of 5 A \1 'p. t ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 18,1999 (#2530 wniiam Wear, Continued) compliance. Lindquist stated he would like to table this application to allow the Applicant time to submit a revised plan, and that he would not be opposed to total signage in the amoun^L380 square feet. City Council Member Kelley suggested that the Planning Commission take Ifito consideration what they would like to see for signage along the old Highway 12 corridor as.^well as the new Highway 12 corridor, along with lighting and building materials. Kelley stated that most of these guidelines were established with the understanding that Highway 12 would rema in its present location and that these Issu' ^ now need to be reviewed. / Motion by Lindquist, second by Smith, to table Application #2530, 2160 Wayzata Boulevard, to allow the Applicant time to submit a revlsei^i^nage plan for the entire property. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#5) #2537 CITY OF ORONO REVISION TO ADULT USE ORDINANCE, 8:31 p.m. - 8:33 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. There were no public comfnents regarding this application. Hawn stated due to the amount of information Involved with this revision to the ordinance, in her opinion discussion of this issue would be better suited to a work session, Hawn requested that the appropriafe notice be given to the general public regarding this ordinance revision. Motloifby Hawn, second by Kluth, to table Application #2537, City of Orono Revision to Adult Use Ordinance to a Planning Commission work session to be scheduled this evening, '1/OTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#9) #2531 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD ROAD - RENEWAL VARIANCES, 8:34 p.m. > 8:43 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Roger Olsen, Applicant, was present. Bottenberg stated the Applicant received variances to expand and remodel the existing residence to include a four-stall garage and additional living area. Variances to lakeshore setback and hardcover were granted on October 26,1998. The Applicant is requesting that these variances t .enewed. Olsen stated that he is having a difficult time retaining a contractor to do the work at a reasonable price, but that he would like to have the work completed within the next year. Smith commented that she does not see any problems with this application. There were no public comments regarding this application. Kluth inquired whether the hardcover that was requested to be removed has in fact been Page 11 C- i ' I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 18,1999 (#2531 Roger and Elizabeth Olsen, Continued) eliminated. Olsen staled that a portion of the patio has been removed along with elimination of one of the porches and the concrete dog run. Motion by Smith, second by Lindquist, to recommend approval of Application #2531 815 Partenwood Road, renewal of variances to lakeshore setback and hardcover as previously approved in Resolution No. 4004. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#10) #2532 HERMAN AND MARILYN CRAWFORD, 4745 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES, 8:43 p.m. - 8:47 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Hehnan and Marilyn Crawford, Applicants, were present. Bottenb^ stated the Applicants are requesting variances to the rear yard setback and hardcover liKpermit construction of an attached garage to the existing residence. The attached garage woulobe located three feet from the rear yard setback where 30 feet is required and for hardcover in th^5-250' setback where 26 percent exists, 29.08 percent is proposed, and where 25 percent is allov/^ The existing garage will be removed when the new one Is constructed. Bottenberg stated the existing driveway will continue to come off County Road 19. but the garage door will face east. The ex^^g gravel/driveway will remain and will be used as a tum*around. The Applicant Is proposing to construct the garage in this location in order to preserve .a number of very mature trees located on hls^ot. N The Applicants had no comment regarding their application. Hawn Inquired whether the existing garage was Included In the hardcover numbers. Bottenberg stated the existing garage is included in th^hardcover numbers. Smith inquired whether the deck will be replaced or wheUier a new deck Is being added along the garage.'v \ Herman Crawford staled that the size of the deck is being reduced. Kluth questioned whether the gravel driveway was included in the hardco\^r numbers. Bottenberg staled that the driveway was Included In the hardcover calculation.,, V There were no public comments regarding this application. \ % Smith noted that th** hardcover for this property would increase slightly with this proposal. Nygard Inquired whether the plastic underlaymenl would be removed. Bottenberg staled there Is a small section where some plastic underlayment will be removed, which Page 12 c ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 25,1999 Jabbour amended his motion to include denial of the comprehensive to guide the land use designation from two acre density to one acre c Peterson seconded the motion. Mayor Jabbour inquired whether the public comments regarding this application. There were no public coi *(#6) #2531 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD ROAD - RENEWAL VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4367 Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4367, a Resolution Granting Renewal of Variances to Allow Remodeling and Expansion of the Existing Residence Located at 815 Partenwood Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 17) #2538 ROB AND TORI JAFFRAY, 540 BARRETT AVENUE - VARIANCE - REiSOLUTION NO. 4368 Flint movdd^eterson seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4368 a ResolutioiHSMnting Variances to Permit Construction of Dormers on the Second Story of an Exishqg Residence Located at 540 Barrett Avenue. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. •(#8) #2541 PAUL PHlbbn>S, 2i40 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH, FIN.\L PLAT OF PHILLIPS WOODLAND Tfe^ACE THIRD ADDITION - RESOLUTION NO. 4369 Flint moved, Peterson seconded, toiljmrove and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4369, A Resolution Approving the Plat of ^ulUps Woodland Terrace Third Addition. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#9) REQUEST FOR DOCK ACCESS - D.\VID UOyELACE, 220 BIG ISLAND David Lovelace, Applicant, was present.' Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting dock access to his pro^e^’ located at 220 Big Island. Back in April, 1999, the City Council granted a lot area varianebv^^ this property to permit the construction of a seasonal dwelling on the property*. As of today's date/tiw City has not received a request for a building permit from the Applicant. The property is 4?3N^res in size and is landlocked. This property is one of several lots on Big Island that potentialljs^ill request dock rights. Weinberger stated that according to Municipal Code, installing, maintaining, keeping or usm^ private dock on any platted public right-of-way, when such a dock has been specifically authorized as part of a permit issued by the Council, is allowed. Not more than one seasonal dock Page 7 C D CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF TH| CITY COUNCIL NO. • • A RESOLUTION GRANTING RENEWAL OF VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 ANT) 2 FILE NO. 2531 WHEREAS, Roger Olsen and Elizabeth Olsen (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 815 Partenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter ”the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for the renewal of variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space located 34' from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark where 75' is required and requiring a hardcover variance of 4,413 s.f (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is existing and none is allowed as shown on Exhibit A. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL\TD by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2531. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consists of 1.02 acre. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on October 18, 1999 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed additions would not further encroach on the OHWL. Page 1 of 5 > I i iBiii F ^ i ty- CITYof ORONO !i'iV>i1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ ^ 6 2. The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. 3.The amount of hardcover in the 0’ to 75’ lakeshore setback would be reduced from 20% to 15.3%. 4.The City Council finds that the conditions e.xisting on this propert>‘ are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring propert)'; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, repons by City* staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. • V CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City' Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence located 34 ’ fi-om the OHWL where 75' is required and hardcover of 4,415 s.f. (15.3%) in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is existing and none is allowed. 1.All plastic under landscaping must be removed in the O' to 75’ lakeshore setback prior to any new construction. No further variances will be granted to this property’ in the future. 3.Authorities grant-.-d by this variance run with the property’ not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (October 25, 2000). Page 2 of 5 4 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 3 A 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 an y authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. 6.Any substantial changes or revisions to the plan in Exhibit A will require reconsideration by the City Council. iU<'Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 25th day of October, 1999. ATTEST: y . >0 ^. y \^i tC Linda S. Vee, City Clerk -Tg- - Propert/'Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 25th day of October, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the NBW N. STURMAN 8 Notary Public ConnMm Eifim Jm. 3 Pase 3 of 5 i 1 ik CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A ^ li' STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) before me a Notary Public within and for Sd'cou^^ fJi'ziJreih (OlSan, Hv>»b«»V ^ ^ :ri^in aSl who exwuted the foregomg mstrument.andknown to me to be the person(s) descni acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. HBWN.8TURMAN OoniMiM &9*n jm. M ac C/Jpju4^^. jIb notary public i STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ day of , 199__ before me a Notary Public within and for town ’wme w be *e person(s^^^^ in and who executed the foregoing instrument.ana acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 5 ' ’.r'1■lif p Application Date: 8/23/00 Completion Date: 8/23/00 60 Day Deadline: 10/23/00 ^4CPT|NG UCT 2 3 2000 Cl 11 Kjr Unojvtj REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Zoning Adminstrator/Planner DATE: 10/23/00 ITEM NO.: /y Agenda Section: Item Description:#2627 William Thorkelson 440 Big Island Variance - After the Fact Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area: 48,781 s.f. (1.12 acre) List of Exhibits: A B Letters/Phone Calls of property owners on Big Island StafTReport and Exhibits of 10/16/2000 Application Summary The applicant has applied for an after-the-fact variance to permit a 12' x 24' (288 s.f.) storage shed to remain on this property located on Big Island. The shed is currently located 23' from a platted, dedicated right-of- way where 30' is required. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission voted 3 to 3 on a motion to recommend denial of the variance to permit die storage shed to remain on the property. It was the opinion of the Planning Commission members favoring denial that permitting the storage shed to remain would set a negative precedent. These members would not have voted for the plan as is, but would favor requiring it to be decreased in size or moved to meet the required setback. It was the opinion of the Planning Commission members favoring variance approval that permitting the storage shed to remain was acceptable because only a small portion of the storage shed was in the setback; the platted, dedicated right-of-way is not and is not intended to be a developed street within Big Island; and because the building is in the most appropriate location on the lot because of the topography. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the application based on staffs conclusions as voted on page 2 of the 10/16/2000 staff memo. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motibn to direct staff to draft a resolution for adoption at the November 13, 2000 City Council meeting. y ■< vr r- Gabriel E. Jabbour 985 Tonkawa Road Long Lake. Minnesota 55356 Phone: 952*471-9256 FAX: 952-471-7735 October 9,2'• •• Waldron Law Offices, LTD. John B. Waldron 1951 Concoiia Street Wayzata. MN 55391-9320 Re: Variance Application of Willmar Thorkelson 440 Big Island, City of Orono Dear Mr. Waldron: As an adjacent property owner, I am writing to express my support for your requested variance. I walked the site personally this past weekend. There is no reason to apply the setback to Big Island that the city applies to the roads on the mainland, since the “roads ” on the island are nether traveled or used. Sincerely, . V i —•-g-' '«■-'- '.... 's.- A . \ m- ,*• . •*.• t *.. • T • ■‘■i^ i . 4lif‘l .:Z3h3JJ^______ •»«•••*•«, • •• • • •• ■^* iC^zHo'^OO • ••• -. (WM # • ►•••••••••• *> • wmwmm%%^rn ••mt »•••« te -• «»♦«• * « • #«..l • #•« • • #.• Av(\^ Uj J'K^U. Ct<^-.•♦ •• •• --------------------—J • • ••• «««»,^ < Cl iitAcLuL in Si^/OcC'i.!^..lAA(^, • t '4.>2 • 1 f \ \ 1 •f r- /a 6 TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 16,2000 SUBJECT:#2627 Willmar Thorkelson 440 Big Island Variance — Public Hearing Zoning District: RS (Seasonal Recreational)Actual Lot Area: 48,781 s.f. (1.12 acres) List of Exhibits A Analysis B C D E F G H I J K L Application/Applicant Letter Site Plan/ Survey Building Official Notification Letter Shed Plans Topographic Map Photos of Property Hardcover Calculations Plat Map Location Map Property Owner’s List Permit Record Pertinent Code Sections (After-The-Fact) 1. Section 10.31, Subd. 8 (C): Mmimuin Setback: The minimum setback from platted street rights- of-way, all structures: 30 feet. To permit a 12' x 24' (288 s.f.) accessory structure to be located 23' from the property line. Application Summary: The applicant has applied for an after-the-fact variance to permit a storage shed to remain on the property. The shed is currently located 23' from a platted, dedicated right-of- way where 30' is required. The accessory structure was built in 1999 without a building permit. The applicant was notified by Orono’s building official of the violation, April 1999 and August 2000. The notification letter explains when a building permit is applied for a review of the plans is done to check if it meets City building and zoning codes. (Exhibit D). The applicant had the property surveyed and the survey indicates the shed is located 23' from the street right-of-way, therefore a building permit has not been issued. The shed is currently used for storage of an ATV, yard equipment, gardening tools, supplies and other tools. The property consists of two lots that have been legally combined making it large and odd shaped. The shed is used to house equipment for the back property. ^2627‘Willmar Thorkelson 440 Big Island Variance 10/16Q000 Page I i.ii i i The platted right-of-way was dedicated to the public use forever on the plat of Morse Island Park in 1887, but is not a developed road/street. The city does not intend for it to becomea developed street. It is more like a trail through the woods and provides access for emergency or service vehicles and utilities to Big Island (Exhibit G-1 ). The storage shed is located on a high spot on the property. (Exhibit G-3). The surrounding land includes wetlands and slopes to low areas. The area surrounding the shed is wooded, and the existing shed location is appropriate in terms of topography and trees, save for the lot line encroachments. Merely moving the shed 6' back will result in the need to remove two mature trees. A total relocation of the shed on the site to meet setbacks would potentially do damage to the site due to the probable soil and vegetation disruption that would be caused by the heavy equipment to move it. Structural and hardcover coverage are not an issue with this application. Staff views this building encroachment as extremely minor as compared to the 0-75' violation on the opposite side of the island a year or so ago. That applicant was required to move a newly constructed cabin out of the 0-75' zone. The visual and perceived impacts of the Thorkelson request, by contrast, are minimal. Statement of Hardship: The applicants have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit B. The applicants should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: 1. 2. 3. Will the location of the shed impact neighboring properties or use of the right-of-way? Is moving the shed worth cutting down mature trees? Is damage to the property, surrounding property and access location to the island that large equipment would cause that would be needed to move the shed a concern versus leaving the shed in its current location? 4. The topography of the property limits where the shed can be located. 5.The platted right-of-way is not and is not intended to become a developed street within Big Island. 6. Does Plaiming Commission have any additional issues or concerns with this proposal? U2627 Willmar Thorkelson 440 Big Island Variance 10/16/2000 Page! ■idtai Options for Action: 1. Recommend approval of variance. 2. • Recommend denial of variances, stating reasons. 3. Advise applicant what other possible revisions will make the application acceptable. 4.Other. Staff Recommendation: Recommend approval of the variance to allow the shed to remain located 23 ’ from the right-of-way. V 1 ^2627,Willmar Thorkelson 440 Big Island Variancs 10/16.2000 Page 3 tern i -4 I ■m r' ANALYSIS Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 48,781 s.f.1,250 s.f.2% Hardcover 1Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover •0-75'7,786 s.f.53 s.f. (0.7%) 0 s.f. (0%) 53 s.f (0.7%) 75-250'8,852 s.f.972s.f. (9.1%) 2,213s.f (25%) 972 s.f (9.1%) 250-500 ’32,143 s.f.278 s.f. (0.9%) 9,642.9 s.f (30%) 278 s.f (0.9%) A..-- «• I. i ' 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) Application # Date Received ^ - 2 Amount Paid ^ c SC'^ PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Big Island Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 23-117-23 32 0071 * •! Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired April 1997___________________(month/year) I (dn) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residentid ___mother (specify). Zoning District: _______________________________ ;) ■ APPLIC.\NT Name Wlllmar L. Thorkelson Phone (home) 588-2^86 Phone (work).i • ■) AddresTT ^^51 Dawnvlew Terrace Cits': Golden Valley Zip: 55^22 •V.'’ ' OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work)_ ) Address:City:.Zip:.^ • Estimated Construction Cost $DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: after the fact variance - see Exhibit A attached hereto. 9 (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage X Setback:Front X Side Rear 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 Exhibit A attached hereto. (attach additional sheets if necessary) r EXHIBIT A CITY OF ORONO VARIANCE APPLICATION OF WILLMAR L. THORKELSON 1. Legal names of all persons with an interest in the subject property: Willmar L. Thorkelson, married to Maxine B. Thorkelson Peter A. Thorkelson, a single person 2. Description of variance request and hardship/description of unusual property conditions: This after-the-fact variance request is made for the purpose of allowing a storage shed to remain on the subject property, which encroaches 6.28 feet into the sideyard setback area for the lot. The shed is of recent construction, is well-made, and is 12 feet by 24 feet in dimension. Detailed plans for the shed as built are attached, as is a photograph of the shed. You should already have on file a survey of the subject property dated April, 1999, by Advance Surveying & Engineering Co., together with hardcover calculations. The applicant’s co-owner and son, Peter Thorkelson, regretfully constructed the shed without knowing that it encroached on the side yard setback, and thought that he was positioning the shed in a manner which would be best for the lot and surrounding properties. The encroachment is fairly minor, especially given the fact that the shed encroaches on the sideyard abutting what is laid out as Moslin Avenue. Moslin Avenue is a street that has never been opened and it is questionable whether it was ever actually dedicated to the public. It is currently no more than a two-track cartway through the woods. As the survey indicates, the subject property consists of two, unusually shaped lots. If the shed is moved, large trees would have to be destroyed in the process. The encroachment is minor and the applicant lespectfiilly requests that it be allowed to remain in place. 5 t-:a “Vi ■i;: ■r i. ’ \’^ ', r ■ I ik ■ •• ivi A !<‘a -.V" *■*t ' V |!■^^ Jesperson Law Office 1012 Grain D cchanoe Builoino 400 Sooth Fourth Street Minneapous , Minnesota 554 1 5 (612) 332-035 I UOHN R. Jesperson ArroRNEY At Law May 5,1999 Mr. Lyle Oman City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, Mirmesota SS3S6 Re; 440 Big Island* Orono. Minnesota Dear Mr. Oman: Enclosed as we discussed is the building permit application, hardcover worksheet and survey for the shed located on the Thorkelson property on Big Island. The hardcover worksheet was completed by the surveyor. Also enclosed are scale drawings of the structure that were prepared by Mr. Peter Thorkelson. As we discussed, the shed is intended for the storage of the Thorkelson’s small ATV, lawn mowers, gardening supplies, supplies and tools. The interior of the structure is not finished. It does not contain any electrical fixtures, sinks or drains. A large door is located on the back of the shed, below which is located a ramp. This is the primary access into the structure for lawn mowers, tools and other gardening supplies. A screen porch is located on the front of the structure, to provide a sitting area during warm summer months, when the cabin (located near the lake shore) is too warm. I presume the appearance of the screen porch caused some confusion, as the building has the appearance of a small cabin. However, a further examination reveals the building is being used in a manner consistent with the intent stated on the permit application. 1 1 B Mr. Lyle Oman May 5,1999 Page 2 Please feel free to contact my office if you have any questions about the enclosed permit application, or if you require any additional information. i;' ly Yours, Johi^ ;Jesperson I JRJ:u enc. cc:Mr. Willmar Thorkelson Mr. Peter Thorkelson ' I fl 53^ . r.i ' * liiri llMi ll■Alllil lit I i. ^ma Aim. I SURVEYING A ENGINEERING CO. Fat (•1^411124? zTE, BILL A MAXINE TIIORKELSON C&iaifil ApnlM.I9f9 »it laiMflUl t Mm MMi M m4 Ui 4 m4 *t S««li Hair •# Ul Y. Mam IM PMk Sct«^ A4Mm. tlMMpta CMy, mi imcim 9ikmmiMf Iwt af *« aWva Itfal 4aarf<niaa. na Wa M iBilaia 4namWa| wim faa aaa^ aMcH i» a awMt. liir^aa a m iaar laaaMi ar tmmM mm mmpnm tefal caaMd. m *« kli tawaa^ aai tel aiqr aMM af laaaiC aaA aa MiamM. *ai/famfpltea aiaFc fvajraai la amfc te canwa aFte piaftfiy. aaCIqf lMBia.Mcateaa4aNaartelaite]faarmk« aa4 ftr *• mkm ^wmktm lUASOffiSKOSSSi p^paateflaairplilaalHHflUliiituStea UcaaaaNaatevflJ5.atiaalcuatendacaalc4 4i«mr«air«fara4k|raiaaraateaqf4imiai^anteaaa>i4teil ata iaraaiahifcmmliwaaiaiwiwteUaaafteSiiiaalMteaaaia. Ha^tUI (..■ : ^ ' ■ •:.■.*■ MBCIMC Om |7Mttaa. iM« cuMacn aiaaa ■ ■ ■•'•■ •' ■ Y-. ■ •_• • ' .■ i>} r'ji'l/i ’ mms' V.< : \ .r ■ >,'••Sil iv*/ '■-/ '/, V y .•' J ^ V n/'—''V- -5-'- ^I ^•0>. / JO0 NO 99 "tU>^r»3rKr-_tr» g-hW.f-.J j ^ .p i r ' t L D foT^O' .%;mj CITTof ORONO Municipal Oflices alffi Streat Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 April 19, 1999 Willmar L. Thorkelson 4851 Dawnview Terrace Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 Re: Work without Permit - 440 Big Island, Orono, MN Dear Mr. Thorkelson: It has come to the attention of this department that you have recently constructed a cabin on your property at 440 Big Island in Orono. This letter is to notify you that the City requires building permits for the construction of buildings. Therefore, the City must require you to remove the building or submit a building permit application along with building plans, a survey showing the location of the building and hardcover, calculations. A review will be done and if found to be in compliance with building and zomng codes, a permit can be issued. A deadline of May 3,1999 has been established for submittals. If this deadline is not met, the City will initiate legal action. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, Lyle Oman Building Official LO/ch Enc. Permit Application Hardcover Worksheet cc: Bruce Vang, Field Inspector Michael P. Gaffion, Senior Planning Coordinator Paul Weinberger, Asst. Zoning Administrator Telephone (S12) 473-7357 • FAX 4734)510 D 6 w w !!ii CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parlmay Orono. MN S53S6 Mallinc Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 August 8,2000 Willmar Thorkelson 4851 Dawnview Terrace Golden Valley, MN 55422 Re: 440 Big Island Dear Mr. Thorkelson: On 5-5-99 this office received an After the fact building permit application for a shed that was constructed on your property on Big Island. The permit cannot be issued for the shed in its present location. A 30' setback is required from the side property line along Moslin Avenue. One comer of the building would be required to be moved 6.28 feet further away from the property line. The City must require you to obtain a permit and move the shed to meet the setback or to remove the shed from the property. A deadline of 9-1-00 has been established for compliance. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, Lyle Oman Building Official LO/hs Tdephooe (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.ci.oronojnn.us * », M-r itLl. '. »& x««t7J 7t. ■ *-'*' -lip iiiP llii «:• :' ‘:^=-'.' - ■'=1 , vV,r..,:p '•■vir \ ■{ •aV ■ ‘ . ■ ,'/' : r^-,.. .-y t > -■■ > 3-, / y I '■ .,-«o Tin if i>.-<>tw«fy<i^tinir<laa»-^T^'W'm*«-tj-.^ -m ^:-'. r'---; ;/'4ii(fV-^ '- :-! Mm-mpi m :i««: . •> 7 xh--p:w> ^p'. ■mmm.jMMm M ..' •'.••;• •;>*■••' ■ ■■ . . :•• •••. “i^ '■/-//••i ■^•?_.-'.5.'; .f'’ : • • ■ 1^.i\ MmPP ^:P -P'P-P' •::v ■, .^: ■:3i•^.;v^:^v•.^ 4 mmyM W'yyyy&y-pp i mpp FLOOR PLAN Stdle. Y=/' J it! V'oooft V ATV ST0RA6f storage ____________/u 1 # DOO^V* “N. V iCRE^FA/I / PoACrf (o , 000/^ 1 _____^ t.b^. .•■■- -.V .7'V IN© ^j-', =ifc front V/fW T'/ V ■5to.Vt. ^" = / ' V • 'V - : ' 'iWiaiil m:ligs,,,:-* W- m mmm- m IP'. ' -VI t/ A 27-iz .!su k 7' I I ft t'' 7 /oV" oveRML 'J r fTT*—r ^ L# 1> p20 7' wm f. ’ .jJJp** ■■ ^ - ' ; ' > Ji • ' ■■ V'^vV''-j;-: :.:'v,^I *«m C;4.;..... -1 i I BACKV/fW 5to.\.C. 4 : ^ » ■S^i^.^-■■ *'■ .I'.' ^:k-rM 'Ll>1^ I 27-^‘ L •; I m7\ ■*- L \ mk ■^m- '^: *> V: :»q?a v?g 1.^ yM ^\'V SIDE VIEW 5caL<i z./^V ?s» %. V, • % II . /Sc.oX<i Vh =1 :sL 7 ^^o'ofWak D ■: /:^m ■£ r.«- ^-^^^iliMii iti iHiiiii III II >1 m- "IT' ' W'-:V 0 Hr:-♦ V- ■' M"Mm': »‘l •• ■ V ' *i mmm ilii 'f ^ s G % • ^ ^' .. i O FOOTING Plan ALL Foof/f^^S (Xrc ^"di*.miFcr <xh^‘f(l'(Jccp ir\fo anunj -----0 - © ..0----- 0 0 <$)G •-• . ...................................... /-S Q ^ f^J 8 • - - ■>*.< } fctw t iti % *33 'p i*i • Hi # f •“■ y liiM I *• i % ♦. *' /• . i ••» W*. V I.' .'.y : •*' - Tti-y Ti» ^ • ;•' ■ .'T*. .-»3P Mi V?« •• ■ <.*.'■• >y\'i'j'-r'C'il'ji?^ •Vv >■' ■ r.' , <1 • '.‘K ''vi.- • ■■"y. •' • vsl.''-,i '.-K •• -If, : ■■'r'^.’r^^''^- .. ^\» \ < i\ri -a; ■ ^.- 3. 1^ TTT ‘ v ’ *'V m PiM is a«wi i P fWteipL. ,.-4V’jsgC^^ I .3v‘.'. %H7'B|.- - ‘' IfllP ■ V ■ .} -(i,l TOtf. n B-'*Vi ’-*r''ii'.Im • ViC** rJl C<« n.'s'l %v ’'.'K< |.:f':l B ■'m I B*Clfe-' I ' • ■ • i '. ri» / • r i_ I ^ , • ' s / •< V,.. -.vt C.r;v^v • 7*» ' ‘;s>' ^ Wi- >;■ 'i-V ■ 'A K ■■: ' • ^ ■S \i^-. •A • ‘ “.-<9^ I' /• u'..r ,» fe^:-, . m^i'?€. 4vL'i^»3ans»L'f» * :-. •m ^ * £»s IM:/;Vi- . V '-I^ i C- !? RJ.ffl s • ■* • -^%r-^\ PII,il ‘4|ra V\^' V ' I'-V'***V.VivV^ 1 K ! m miAifl I":' ’ •? • V i: t; »’• i'A*i. ^V"-♦ ’ J .. :<^ ?..cv^r RrCu^-V. 1 f r .' 1 ';' /' . . S (-'■ /*, c 'lUO ^«;' ’■ ■■ ■ ■ 6i*& ;;4:' I •«vfai^ •> ^ tX *.^ jr!' V-. :|ij* r :t^•'\ '* W!>?? ■’-.?r5’*!' ^ •/1 (vr^ • ‘.V- . ' 'V .v’ mmm: -£yjf0^^: ^2 .,-r' - :.. ( »' ^ *, j 'r^>m s r I'Aj\U\LC i « .*1i&^ ■' . j:v • : «-V » i-7’«?; T m V ..' t ' tio'-'-'r ■ ■^-’ V.;^- ,. •Tt'-' V-.-- 1 •fV:-if?^-W. <ae^ }br >'.V‘ •; V - v> - ■ - '•-r-.-f;; I *w>V •- w fi ■■■. ■ ‘ -^v*l <;s ^}. ■■• V ’• • j r / t \ 'J 't • <^ ■ ■ • i' / • 1 . ^.'-A'•^ • ; - j ■'^ **tt«.4v«** . 'll ^-• jIARDCOVER calculation WORI^ffiJET ^£TBACKZON£: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75 7^25 SCO-IOOO' _____firj TyARDCQVER ^ A. House _ cut S.F. Les|(ti Vr'diJ X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Carase C. Driveway X X S.F. S.F. D. Slde**^ S.F. S.F. it E. Pailo/DecV:X X S.F.' S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other total hardcover in zone - total proper^ ARE .-^ in zone ^ X ICO - S.F. S.F.32_1£l3. fEQSi S.F. A. House Len|(h Width X X S.F. S.F. S.F. X S.F. B. Gartjs X C. Driveway X X SS S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Fatio/Deck X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other total hardcover in zone total property area in zone A____________- * ® • X100 » A B A B I F 1008.07 320.78 3CTH208.W <0* I d-Ai^ ^.■>x -Hii V.- / lV^•i r.lc f ' * \ ». < : .' ‘^. ^ s:;'✓ V., i V.. ,-.;v T. C, RUN DATE fV15/*«HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. Pl'iSS^Ol PACE IS MTCN StS ^Il'ROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SO 25-117-2S S2 1002 •MAR BIG ISLAND NANCY L FARNES NANCY L FARNES 2710 F0X6ATE OR MINNETONKA HN 55305 SO 2S-117>23 32 0010 OOAAO BIG ISLAND NANCY L FARNES NANCY L FARNES 2710 F0X6ATE DR HXNNETOMKA HN 55305 SB 23-117-23 32 0011 OOAAO BZ6 ISLAND NANCY L FARNES NANCY L FARNES 2710 FOXGATE DR MINNETONKA MH SSS**' PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/M)DR SB 23-117-23 32 0037 00370 BIG ISLAND eWENDOLYN S LARSON ETAL 6WEND0LYN S LARSON AfOO JANES AVE S RICHFIELD HH 55023 SB 23-117-23 32 0004 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO VIVIAN J mLSON ETAL VIVIAN J NELSON 1025 SHENANDOAH CT RB PLYHOUTM HN 55007 SB 23-117-23 32 0006 00310 BIG ISLAND NANCY LEE FARNES NANCY LEE FARNES 2710 FOXGATE DR MINNETONKA HN 55305 m PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SB 23-117-23 32 0007 00310 BIG ISLAND NANCY LEE FARNES NANCY LEE FARNES 2710 FOXGk.'E dr MINNETONKA MN 55305 SB 23-117-23 32 0063 00020 BIG ISLAND M B FRUEN A n H FRUEN ‘MICHAEL FRUEN 9011 13TH AVE N MPLS MN 55041 SB 23-117-23 32 0065 00010 BIO ISLAND RICHARD H FRUEN ET AL GREGORY B O'CONNOR 1925 86TH ST W UPPER INVER GROVE HEIGHTS MN 55077 : ^ A "T.w PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SB 23-117-23 32 0067 00030 BIO ISLAND FLIZABETH ANN BRENNAN riNOTNY C LOVETT 19000 STATE HWY NO 7 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 30 23-117-23 32 0070 00050 BIO ISLAND GABRIEL E JABBOUR W OF MINNETONKA INC 21 UNIVERSITY AVE N E MPLS MN 55413 30 23-117-23 32 0071 00440 BIO ISLAND W L 1 P A THORKELSON W L 1 P A THORKELSON 4051 OAWNVIEW TER GOLDEN VALLEY MN 55*22 .J • PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR TOTAL BATCH J 505 00012 •7 5 N V-/ :y ') I •>.V.V /) r u / \i ) . ' PP ^ PERMIT NO. bvy? STREET FILE: bu., / z. <i DATE PERMIT RECORD TYPE OF PERMIT /}J.f^^AjnA^^QJL . I 'i Application Date: 9/20/00 Deadline: 11/19/00 mpptING ocr 2 3 2000 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Onwu DATE: October 19,2000 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2629 Keith Nord 1245 Lakeview Avenue ’ riance Zoning Dbtrict: Lot Area: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) 14,490 s.f. (.33 acre) List of Exhibits: A B C D E F G Resolution Site Plan Plat Map Front Elevation View Structure Dimensions Site Photo Hardcover Calculation Worksheet Application Summary: The applicant requests variances to permit construction of a one stall garage attached to the existing residence. The existing residence was constructed in 1958 prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. Required setbacks for the property are 50' from the front property line, 50' from the east property line, 30' from the west property line and 50' from the rear property line. Variances requested are to permit the garage addition 26' from the front property line where 50' is required and 6' frorn the east property line where 50' is required because the east line is adjacent to a platted, undeveloped street. A site plan showing the property and setbacks is attached as Exhibit B. The property is located in the Crystal Bay neighborhood where most lots are similar in size and dimension to the applicant's property. A platted, but undeveloped, alley is located immediately east of the property. The City of Orono has no intension to open the alley for construction of a public right of way. The alley is used for utilities (overhead electric poles). Hardship: The house was built 29.8' from the front property line in 1958, before the 50' setback for new construction was adopted. The house was placed on the lot with the sides being parallel with side lot lines and 29' from the front property line. No addition could be placed on the house without requiring variances. The existing floor plan and driveway location favors placing the garage where it is proposed on the plans. • ’4 '••T '» Jr •• Request for Council Action continued Page 2 October 19,2000 #2629 Keith Word ___________ A 6* setback is proposed to the side lot line and the additional 12' of right of way there would be a total of 18' to the nearest residential property across the alley. Vacation of the alley was discussed at the Planning Commission meeting. It is the position of Staff and the Planning Commission *he entire neighborhood should jointly apply for a vacation of the alley. If the alley were vacated at some time in the future, 6' would go to each adjacent property owner. Utility easements would be required over the entire 12' because the alley is used for utilities. There would be 12' between the center of the alley to the comer of the proposed garage addition. Typically, staff will recommend a minimum 10' setback for lots under */a acre in the RR-IB. two acre zoning district. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommended 5 to 0 to approve the variances to permit the garage to 26' from the front property line where 50' is required and 6* from the east property line where 50' is required because the east line is adjacent to a platted, undeveloped street. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the resolution approving the variances as proposed. ' • 1 4 ----- r I A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B), FILE NO. 2629 WHEREAS, Keith Nord, (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 1245 Lakeview Avenue within the City of Orono hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lots 17 and 18, Block 1, Maxwell ’s Addition to Crystal Bay Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit a 16* X 24.5' residential addition to the existing house located 6' from the east property line where 50' is required adjacent to a right-of-way and a 26' setback to the front property line where 50 ’ is required; and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 16, 2000, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2629, f f 2. The property is located in the RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 16,2000 and recommended approval by a vote of 5 to 0. 4.The Planning Commission made the following fmdings of fact: Page 1 of 4 f f - "S.L 'W ‘*'v' 5. B. C. D. E. !fk1-F. A. The property was developed in 1958 prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. The existing house is located 29.8' from the front property line and 22.4 ’ from the east property line. The setbacks on the property leave a minimal building pad that could not be used for additions to the existing structure. The orientation of the house and location of historical access limits the addition to the east side of the house. The property is located in the Crystal Bay neighborhood where most lots are similar in size and dimension to the applicant's property. A platted, but undeveloped, alley is located immediately east of the property. The City of Orono has no intention to open the alley for construction of a public right-of-way. Vacation of the alley was discussed at the Planning Commission meeting. It is the position of Staff and the Planning Commission the entire neighborhood should jointly apply for a vacation of the alley. If the alley were vacated at some time in the future, 6' would go to each adjacent property owner. Utility easements would be required over the entire 12 ’ because the alley is used for utilities. There would be 12' between the center of the alley to the comer of the proposed garage addition. G. The height of the house will not be increased by the proposed addition. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances will not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 4 '•3 r 1 5 ■; n ■■H 6.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit a 16' X 24.5' residential addition to the existing house located 6' from the east property line where 50' is required adjacent to a right-of-way and 26' to the front property line where 50' is required. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Authorities granted by the variances 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 these variances will expire on that date (October 23,2001). r 2. ?:• Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of the variances shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 3.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, his successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. ATTEST: Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of October, 2000. Page 3 of 4 I 14 140 |Q 13i/14te (73) 140 r (72) 14Q i MINNETONKA AVE lyCR YST/^N 14to 2^ ■ (32) 11 (39) 10 (38) 9 (37) 14fc V T ) 168.3512 S 168.35 1 3 160.131)^ 1S7fit^) hr io 11 5? 2 '**’151.RP) g: 1A«a.<23) S 10 w ^ 3 36 8 14& ,\(36) * irt' "jT 1A0 ^ i*«'°^** f 7 140 ‘ '■ S (34) 132.51 6 OS) 14® 14^1 o: <S .^8^8^ CRYSTAL AVE oi27?vr^ 118 J « >5 .426) joi (?7l6_.5v ^ * CD•(18L' § (18) S (103) T, 8 (17) "■ n / 1 (79) 3 (84) (81) & S» PARK 44-0rr ' 'tsiiflHBR-* ' ‘ i4i;,i ^ .'^.yisiE ■■■ ■'. •-.* rn^mam ii'lifeiy . \ 'i Kwm r-:« r- X*C ■'-lia $• ’r f^•A % ^1: , \ ‘ ' I a ^ ‘ ; . Ji0 >** . f i: .V .;^'i H*v M ^ ‘ v.t^r 4 ■ ^Pi’y!^4= - O . ->^« r.T’,<S<^-0 '•i >>. it'WW' 4\ . ;/' T'^' ■ »^ . .» •4_ • * t l^ t ■ K(l\. <1C_ ■—■HIM wg- %T/*r**#L.*» I M^L-LlUi'T^ .*-c^ \fC . - Vi^. J Sil .>-------1;- Sl»—» »• v :m ' ^... ' : S wV^ Ax 0. > *^xir^ ' ^j/jlpiklu • ^^SSL ^ s: •1 * . ?;■ •• L . . ^•«r•/-r,.V4-.- * ^BBy^-.-r-cT'WJ' • I %•;■«. L<:K*t-f.-: -:.v--, nr %. % ■. ■ ■'-? ■.. : :^>- * -\» -^*“ : *'•• '*--Cv "?9.0?OSEP A^it)\T\OKi Z. OC ^TVOI^l hardcover calculation worksheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250* 250-500* a 500-1000* a HARPrOVER TN A. House ay -C.S.F. (2> Length Width X X X B. * Garage C. Driveway 3^X X /S D. Sidewalk a/ 3rrf X X y/9 E. Pitio/Deck JU X X /3 /yp' F. Landscape Underlab By Plastic ax. Aoa G. Ober X X X ►/ X 'a -as- A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B /yy9o X 100 - X 100 - /ys> /y / PROPOSED HARDCOVER TN ZONP A. House Length Width X Xm-X - B.Garase a 9 / ar X _ m ^ j ■■C.Driveway X •X - D.Sidewalk X• • X - E. • Patio/Deck X X - F.Landscane X * Underla’in X * •Bv Plastic X - G.Other X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE s-fis ^ B yyypo /yypo X 100 SJ. S.F. SF. SF. SF. SF. (g) SF. ^ SF. © SF. ^ SF.^ IF. © lF.(g> SF. SF. SF<£; S.F. SF. S.F. % A B SF. S.F. S.F. SF. SF. SF. S.F. SF. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. SF. S.F. ' SF. Op % A B 1 1 ii k»».’. ’•' • •. ^ ,* » i".' iUN DATE A9/12/00 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATIOH SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST DATCH SRI mOf ADDR OWNCR/NANC TAWAVER NAt«/AOOR SS lt-117-25 2A RPia •HAS WILLOW UR S iCTTE PERL KTTE PERL HAS WILLOW OR S WAY2ATA NN 55391 55 19-117-23 2A 0019 01220 LAKEVIEW AVI DOUGLAS PAUL SCHNOOR t WIFE DOUGLAS I NORHA SCHNOOR 1220 LAKEVIEW AV WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 10-117-23 2A 0021 01205 LAKEVIEW AVE LESLIE A HANSON LESLIE ANN HANSON 1205 LAKEVIEW AVE WAYZATA NN 5S391 30 10-117-23 2A 0022 01212 ARBOR ST J R CADY t S R CADY S R CADY t J R CADY 1212 ARBOR ST WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 50 10-117-23 24 0024 01245 LAKEVIEW AVE DAVID N BENSNAN DAVID N BENSNAN 1245 LAKEVIEW AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 31 0064 01205 BROWN RD S ROGER A DAY ROGER A DAY 1205 DROWN RO S WAYZATA HN 55391 ) PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANR/ADDR 30 10-117-23 31 0066 01241 BROWN RD S N T BROWN ONE BROWN NONICA T t HICHAEL E BROWN 1241 BROWN RD S WAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 31 0069 01230 ARBOR ST P 6 HARTIN I C H HARTIN P C HARTIN i C H HARTIN 1230 ARBOR ST WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR TOTAL BATCH 501 00012 REPORT NO. PI435401 PACE 1 SO 10-117-23 24 0020 01165 BROWN RD S DARREN K I SHELLEY L KNOP DARREN K I SHELLEY L KNOP 1165 BROWN RD S WAYZATA HN 55391 ■I 30 10-117-23 24 0023 01225 LAKEVIEW AVE W A JOHNSON I A H FARNHAH W A JOHNSON 1 A H FARNHAH 1225 LAKEVIEW AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 3S 10-117-23 31 0065 01223 BROWN RD S CURTIS R QUADY ETAL CURTIS QUADY BOX 127 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 30 10-117-23 31 0099 01240 ARBOR ST L S KENNEN t J H KELLAR LEONARD S KENNEN JANICE H KENNEN 1223 ARBOR ST WAYZATA HN 55391 i f » iT T,» : i •. V .»*. ^..• J ». P I* <1 j**' ' • r Application Date: 9/20/00 Completion Date: 9/20/00 60 Day Deadline: 11/20/00 i^jictrTING ocr 2 3 2000 Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Zoning Adminstrator/Planner REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CiT y ur* omo/vu DATE: 10/19/00 - # ITEM NO.: / Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description://2630 Gregg and Stephanie Larsen 1380 Rest Point Road Variance Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshorc Residential District (I Acre) Lot Area: 14,500 s.f. (.33 acre) List of Exhibits: A Resolution B Resolution No. 2217 C Tape Minutes (Verbatim of PC Meeting 10/16/00) D Staff Report and Exhibits of 10/16/2000 Application Summary; The application proposed is two fold. First, the applicants are seeking a conditional use permit to replace existing retaining walls. Tliere are currently three retaining walls within the 0-75' setback. The applicants are proposing to combine the upper two walls as one and keeping the lower one (closer to the lake) making two walls rather than the three that currently e.xist. Retaining walls are considered hardcover, therefore a variance is also needed for hardcover in the 0-75' setback area. The second part of the application is to construct a brick patio on the lakeside of the existing residence replacing a wood deck that the applicant has already removed. The removed deck was 135 s.f. Retaining Walls: 1. Varianceforlandalterationswithin75'oftheshoreline(10.22,Subd.2; 10.55,Subd. 8,10.56,Subd. 16(J]). 2. Hardcover within 75' of the shoreline (10.22, Subd. 2; 10.55, Subd. 8, Subd. 16[L]). 3. Conditional use permit for land alteration (10.03, Subd. 21,10.56, Subd. 16 [5]). Patio: 1. Hardcover in 75-250' zone for patio ( 10.22, Subd. 2,10.56, Subd. 16[L][2]) PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission at their October 16 meeting held what became a confusing discussion with the applicant in attempting to decipher the request and its impacts. In the end, it was Planning Commission ’s intent to start from the total hardcover amount that existed on the date of the survey (5,811 s.f.); subtract out the portion that is existing landscape plastic/fabric (1,727 s.f.) which applicant must remove; and add back the amount of deck square footage that was removed prior to the sur\ ey (135 s.f.). It was incorrectly stated that this resulted in a hardcover allowance of 4,506 s.f. when in fact the calculation results in a hardcover allowance of 4,219 s.f. This error was found by staff October 19. (The incorrect figure of 4,506 resulted from subtracting the plastic/fabric fron. the proposed 75-250' hardcover rather than from the existing hardcover). I 9 r- L Request for Council Action continued Page 2 October 19,2000 #2630 Gregg and Stephanie Larsen The motion as stated in the draft minutes was to allow hardcover in the 75-250' zone at a level of 4,506 s.f. (49.8%). The motion verbatim by Commissioner Lindquist was as follows: "I’d like to make a motion to approve Application #2630for Gregg and Stephanie Larsen, 1380 Rest Point Road, variance to build a patio no bigger than was previously - we’re approving a variance, basically a hardcover variance, not to exceed 4,506 square feet in the 75-250 ’, and to approve the variance in the 0- 75 ’ up to 882 square feet This does include removal ofthe existing 1,727squarefeet of landscape fabric in the 75-250 ’ and also any landscape fabric in the 0-75 ’. ’’ The motion was then modified to add the six recommendations from the City Engineer ’s letter, and that a landscape plan be submitted for screening of the walls. The motion was approved on a vote of 5-0. During the Planning Commission discussion, and after the 4,506 s.f. figure had been arrived at, the applicant asked whether he could trade existing driveway to get a patio larger than 135 s.f. There was no clear answer to this during the discussion nor in the motion. ANALYSIS OF REQUEST Staff suggests it would be inconsistent to allow such a driveway-for-deck tradeoff when hardcover is so excessive on a site. If the driveway hardcover is non-essential, then it should be removed and not credited toward some other form of excessive hardcover. No specific plan for driveway reductions has been submitted by the applicant. Council should also consider the history of past variances on this property, which unfortunately was not presented by staff during the Planning Commission review process. This site received a variance in 1987 to allow a room and attached garage addition. Hardcover allowed by that variance (see Resolution No. 2217, Exhibit C) in the 75-250' zone was 2833 s.f for the house/garage/porch, 810 s.f for driveway, and 100 s.f. for landscape areas, for a total of 3,743 s.f. The existing house-garage- porch in 2000 has not changed significantly e.xcept for removal of the 135 s.f deck, but the existing driveway has grown from 810 s.f to 1,299 s.f without any City approvals. ISSUES FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER 1.Should the applicants’ 75-250' hardcover allowance (absent any contemplated driveway removals) be 4,506 s.f based on the incorrect number arrived at during the Planning Commission meeting, or the corrected number of 4,219 s.f? Staff Recon..i.codatioD: 4,219 s.f. -I I* Request for Couti'^il Action continued Page 3 October 19,2000 #2630 Gregg and Stephanie Larsen 2.Should the applic2int be allowed to trade existing driveway (which significantly exceeds the driveway allowance approved in 1987) for additional deck in excess of the 135 s.f. deck that previously existed? Stan’RecommendatioD: No, based on the 1987 approval which allowed much less driveway than currently exists. 3.Should the excess driveway that currently exists be allowed to remain in light of the 1987 allotment? (1,299 s.f. existing vs 810 s.f. allowed in 1987) StafTRecommendation: The driveway access already exceeds the maximum 20' width allowed by Code Section 6.05 Subd. 9B. The 30' width allowed in 1987 is warranted by the narrowness of Rest Point Road and the fences which restrict visibility along it, as well as the lack of on* street parking due to the narrowness of the road. All portions of driveway in excess of 30'x27' as approved in 1987 should be removed. Unfortunately, the current owner will be penalized for actions or inactions of his precedent owners, which Council may wish to consider... STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1.Approve the 0-75* variances for replacement of retaining w-alls as proposed, subject to a vegetative screening plan to be approved by staff prior to issuance of a land alteration permit for the walls. Approve a 75-250' hardcover variance as follows: a) Applicant to remove 1,727 s.f of plastic/fabric from landscaping areas. Applicant to reduce driveway from 1,299 s.f to 810 s.f Applicant allowed to replace the former 135 s.f deck with a new 135 s.f patio. Final 75-250' hardcover as follows: Existing house/attached garage/covered porch 2,650 s.f Driveway after removals 810 s.f Concrete & wood steps 135 s.f New Patio 135 s.f. Total 3,730 s.f (41.2%) b) c) d) COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Option 1. Refer application back to Planning Commission for further consideration of information that has come to light since the October 16 meeting. Option 2. Adopt the attached resolution based on the above Staff Recommendation. 1 W . i i if. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2, SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8, SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (C) (5), SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (J) AND (L), GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 21, SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L)(2) FILE NO. 2630 WHEREAS, Gregg J. Larsen and Stephanie B. Larsen, (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1380 Rest Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 6 and the Westerly 40 feet of Lot 7, Subdivision of Lot 14, Rest Point Park, Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City to permit the construction of retaining walls by the lakeshore requiring variances to Municipal Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2, 10.55, Subdivision 8 and 10.56, Subdivision 16 (J) and (L) to allow hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone; and a variance to Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C)(5) to allow replacement of retaining walls which are prohibited in the shore setback zone; a conditional use permit for lakeshore alterations per Section 10.03, Subdivision 21; and a variance per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2) to allow hardcover in the 75-250 ’ zone in excess of the 25% that is normally allowed. 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 October 16, 2000, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application w’ere given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2630. Page 1 of 6 4 2. 3. 4. k .(• - -4 f *•A. ^'\. ) t 9*5 This propert>' is located in the LR-IB Zoning District, where 1 acre or 43,560 s.f. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of approximately .33 acres or 14,500 s.f. The Orono Planning Comiui .sion reviewed this application on October 16,2000 and recommended approval specified conditions by a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact and recommendations: A.The property currently contains an existing deteriorating retaining wall system at the lakeshore. Replacement of the retaining wall system is necessary to prevent erosion of the lakeshore yard. B.The existing retaining walls are located within 60' of the shoreline but do not extend the full width of the property. C.The existing retaining wall system hardcover is approximately 8.5%. The proposed retaining wall will comprise approximately 8.0% hardcover in the 0-75' zone. The retaining wall system accounts for about 2/3 of the hardcover in the 0-75' zone. D.The applicants have agreed to provide a suitable planting and vegetation plan which will provide adequate screening to the new retaining wall. E.Hardcover in the 0-75' zone should not exceed 882 s.f. and no additional hardcover shall be allowed in this zone. F.Based on the hardcover numbers provided by applicants surveyor, existing hardcover of 5,811 s.f. in the 75-250' zone should be reduced by removal of all landscape plastic/fabric from the property (1,727 s.f.) but applicant should be allowed to replace the 135 s.f. deck that was removed prior to the survey and hardcover calculations. 5. The City Council finds that this property was limited to 810 s.f. of driveway hai dcover as a condition of prior variance approval in 1987, and that the driveway Page 2 of 6 iimriiHifiiii AMU, r" '.'v 6. 7. 3r,P yi 8. today is 1,299 s.f. in area per applicant’s surveyor’s calculations, which is not in compliance with the prior approval. The Council finds that the conditions of the 1987 approval are appropriate, and the applicants should remove driveway hardcover back to 810 s.f. Final allowed hardcover in the 75-250' zone should be 3,730 s.f. (41.2%) which reflects 2,650 s.f. for the existing house/garage/covered porch, 810 s.f. for driveway, 135 s.f. for existing concrete and wood steps, and 135 s.f. for anew patio to replace the previously removed deck. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow construction of a retaining wall system will not to be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the propert)' will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and reconunendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2,10.55, Subdivision 8 and 10.56, Subdivision 16 (J) and (L) to allow hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone of 882 s.f. (11.7%) where no hardcover is normally allowed; and a variance to Section 10.56, Page 3 of 6 l]v; ^Vvr- 5 Subdivision 16(C)(5) to allow retaining walls in the shore setback zone where they are normally prohibited; and a conditional use permit for lakeshore alterations per Section 10.03, Subdivision 21; and a variance per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2) to allow 3,730 s.f. (41 .2%) hardcover in the 75-250' zone where 2,261.5 s.f. (25%) normally is allowed. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Shrubs or some other form of natural vegetation, not less than two feet in height, shall be planted and maintained permanently between the retaining wall and the shoreline. A landscaping plan shall be submitted by the property owner and approved by City Staff prior to such plantings. 2. 'iti. Council approval is based on the site plan attached to this resolution as Exhibit A which depicts required hardcover removals and allowed hardcover. Any amendments to the site plan may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 3.The property owner shall obtain the appropriate building and land alteration permits for the retaining wall prior to construction. 4. Applicants are advised that the City will not look favorably on future additions to hardcover in the 0-75' and 75-250' zones. 5.Authorities granted by these variances and conditional use permit run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (October 23,2001). 6.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of these variances and conditional use permit shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23 fd day of October, 2000. Page 4 of 6 .r.' 1' 4FV-. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23 rd day of October, 2000 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of,., 2000, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared .known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) Notary Public ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of.,, 2000, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared .known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 <S». ■ % Br IkI""' f. '■‘VIfe.fr.' K; ■> Q s ^ o / n b) c) d) Approve a 75-250’ hardcover variance as follows: ^ O a) Applicant to remove 1,727 s.f. of plastic/fabric from landscaping areas. Applicant to reduce driveway from 1,299 s.f. to 810 s.f. Applicant allowed to replace the former 135 s.f. deck with a new 135 s.f. patio. Final 75-250’ hardcover as follows: Existing house/attached garage/covered porch 2,650 s.f. ■■ Driveway after removals 810 s.f. Concrete & wood steps 135 s.f. New Patio 135 s.f. Total 3,730 s.f. (41.2%) . ' } * D CITY OF. ORONO City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2217_ _ _ _ _ _ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 & 2 AND SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) PILE #1157 WHEREAS, Walter P. Krake (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1380 Rest Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 6 and the Westerly 40 feet of Lot 7, Subdivision of Lot 14, Rest Point Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) and Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to permit the construction of a room and attached garage addition which will resul.t in 38.8% hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, and resulting in a street setback of 28’ where a 35' street setback is normally required, and resulting in an encroachment of 4' into the average lakeshore setback zone where no encroachment is normally allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREPORB, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, r>. > BINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1157. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 15, 1987, and upon applicant's revision of the hardcover proposal from 48.6% down to 38.8%, voted 3-3 on a motion to recommend approval of 38.8% hardcover and the street setback and average lakeshore setback variances as proposed. 4. The encroachment of 4' into the average lakeshore setback r.one will result in a 3 degree view reduction to the property to the east. However, due to the existing topography, screening, and proposed privacy fence, the 4' encroachment has little or no effect on the lake views enjoyed by the neighboring properties. 5. The street setback of 28' where 35’ is required, results from the extention of the existing front line of the house which is already 26.4' from the street. This setback will still allow for auto backup and parking area within the property boundaries. Page 1 of 4 L City of ORONO CITY OF • ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2217 6. Applicant has revised his proposal dovmward from the 48.6% 75-250' hardcover originally proposed to the 38.8% level. 7. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 8. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon­ strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow construction of a room and attached garage addition that will increase hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone to 38.8% where hardcover is normally.allowed, and a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to allow an encroachment of 4' into the average lakeshore setback zone where no^ encroachment is normally allowedf and a variance to Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit a setback of 28' from the street lot line where a 35' street setback is required, '•ubiect to the following conditions; 1. Prior to construction of the proposed additions, applicant shall remove the existing 12'x20' garage. Prior to final inspection of the additions, applicant shall remove areas of existing driveway gravel along the northeast property corner and this shall revert to grassed area. 3. Final allowed hardcover on the property shall be as follows in the 75-250' zone: House/Garage/Porch/Etc. Parking/Driveway Landscape Areas 2,833 s.f. 810 s.f. 100 s.f. 3,743 s.f. or 38.8% (Per Exhibit A attached) Page 2 of 4 ,• t CITY OF d City of OROrVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2217__________ PRONO 4. Applicant is advised that any future proposals to increase hard­ cover will not be approved, but might be approved only with concurrent removals of existing hardcover so that there is no resultant net increase in hardcover. 5. Applicant is advised that the existing storage building near the lakeshore is a non-conforming structure and is subject to the ordinances pertaining to such structures. 6. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 13, 1988). 7. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution*sha 11 constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby.agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 13th day of July, 1987 /Torothy M./'I^llin, .City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor perty Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2217 ( STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this _ before me a appeared day of .rSCL-\^_ _ _ _ _ _^ . _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, 1987 otary Pub^c within and for said county, personallyNotary Pub^c within and for s \/a.tLQ.hA ne. Lgc?^ KrcUie- to b^the person(s) described iknown to me to b^ the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. ICNNIPIN COUNTY STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) 6S • COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this a Y /(a nJc___ of { / , 198|2r before me tary Public w.-s —------------------------- person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) execute’ the same as his (their) free act and deed. NpTARY PUBLIC — MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 4 of 4 POIMT |?€SOU>ir/^AJ /vu. E)CHI&IT A RO^D '/CO.OO, M55"36'£ T f 4e —»i I I /0»0- U : • ■4 ■■ ’■'Sf MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday* October 16,2000_________ granting the variances. Day reiterated his request to have the alley vacated. Lindquist noted this matter will appear before the City Council October 23"*. Lindquist requested City Staff notify the neighbors in attendance at tonight’s meeting be given notice of the City Council meeting when this application will be heard. (#15) #2630 GREGG AND STEPHANIE LARSEN, 1380 REST POINT ROAD, VARIANCES, 9:09 p.m. - 9:42 p.m. Gregg and Stephanie Larsen, Applicants, were present. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Bottenberg stated the Applicants are proposing t\vo different things in their application. First They are seeking a conditional use permit to replace existing retaining walls. There are currently three retaining walls within the 0-75 ’ setback. The Applicants arc proposing to combine the upper two walls as one and keeping the lower, which is currently closer to the lake, which would make tw'o walls rather than the three that currently exist. Retaining wails are considered hardcover; therefore, a variance is needed for hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback area. Bottenberg stated the second part of the application is to construct a brid^ patio on the lakeside of the existing residence replacing a wood deck that the Applicant removed. The patio will be approximately 12’ by 30’ and a smaller portion will be 3’ by 10’, for a total square footage of approximately 387 square feet. The deck removed was 135 square feet. The replacement and combination of the retaining walls will reduce the hardcover coverage in the 0-75 ’ zone from 922 square feet or 12.2 percent to 882 square feet or 11.7 percent. The Applicants have no intent to remove the shed and ramp which account for 3.7 percent of the hardcover in the 0-75 ’ total number. , j PAGE 30 • ' -^-3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _________Monday, October 16,2000_________ Bottenberg stated the lakeside patio of approximately 278 square feet will increase the hardcover coverage in the 75-250 ’ from 5,811 square feet or 64.2 percent to 6,098 square feet or 67.4 percent. The Applicants have already reduced the hardcover coverage by removing landscape plastic under rock. However, according to the survey, there still is a considerable amount of landscape fabric in the 75-250 ’ zone. That landscape fabric is approximately, 1727 square feet. If that is removed, it would reduce the amount of hardcover from 5,811 square feet to 4,371 square feet or get it down to 48.32 percent. Bottenberg stated the 1980 City of Orono Community Management Plan contains a number of general land use and environmental protection goals and policies with which the proposed land alteration would be consistent. Without the retaining walls in the 0-75 ’ zone, erosion would be a problem. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed retaining wall layout from an engineering standpoint and recommends new retaining walls be constructed on the site between the home and the lake. It is his opinion that the existing retaining walls should be replaced. Staff recommends the retaining wails be reduced and vegetation and screening requirements should be addressed by the Planning Commission. The second portion of this pertaining to the patio. Staff lecommends approval of a variance to build a patio of no greater than the deck that was previously there that was removed of 135 square feet. Lindquist inquired whether the Applicant had anything to add. Larsen stated one thing that is not covered in here is that part of the - and I didn’t cover in my Letter is that part of the proposed patio would be under some existing eaves on the house, which extend approximately two feet out from the house, and I think that should be counted as hardcover as well because that is pre-existing. So really the new patio would be more like a 10 ’ by 30 ’ patio as far as additional hardcover. That would reduce it by an additional — actually the patio portion is 30 ’ voider than the smaller patio portion in front of the porch, which PAGE 31 H- r»i- • I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday^ October 16,2000_________ is ten feet, so that is a total of 40’ times the eave depth of approximately two feet, so that could be approximately 80 more feet of hardcover that - Lindquist inquired what hardcover calculations the Applicant is looking at. l^*sen stated Advance Survey. Lindquist stated the Planning Commission has to go by the hardcover calculations that the survey shows. I don’t know whether the eaves or not are included. Larsen inquired whether those are usually counted. Gaffron stated they usually are not. Larsen inquired that they are not usually counted as hardcover. Gaffron stated he didn’t think so on this one because they didn’t show up. Larsen stated if they were covered, let’s not forget about them. Lindquist stated he hears what the Applicant is sa>ing, but - Larsen stated it was an after thought, just the other day I thought - Lindquist stated that ’s why he asked who did the hardcover calculations. They were probably done by the surveyor. Stoddard inquired whether the Applicant was okay with the Larsen stated, oh, yes, they did the hardcover .was okay with the — Larsen stated, oh, yes, they did the hardcover. Stoddard inquired whether the Applicant was okay with the six items that the Bonestroo Engineer has recommended; the silt fence and the tjpe of boulders to use. Larsen stated, oh, yes. I talked to my landscjq>er and he was going to try to make it tonight but he couldn’t. We’re going to use oblong boulders, he said, that would lock together as opposed to round boulders. Stoddard stated, I guess it kind of comes do%vn to the size of the brick pavers. Larsen stated they have removed a lot of hardcover and Acre’s - we’ve removed a stairway PAGE 32 IL MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _________^nday, October 16,2000 that ’s accounted for. I don’t know if you saw it in your packet. I was told by Wendy that the stainvay, maybe we couldn’t get credit for that because that ’s within the 75’ setback of the lake, but regardless, I guess, it’s hardcover. Lindquist: I guess you can see where they show the existing, and then they show the proposed. fif you look on page, well, it’s the fourth page where it shows the hardcover calculations, and it shows how many square feet? Do you find it? Larsen: Yeah. Lindquist: And we look at the 0-75 ’, the total area in the 0-75 ’ setback, the amount that ’s Allowed, the amount that is existing, and then the proposed. Larsen: Right. Lindquist: And this is really what we call - Larsen; The survey was done after I removed some of those things. I have taken pictures of those things. You saw those in your packet. I don’t know if that counts for anything. Like the stairway I removed. Lindquist: We’d like to say yes, it counts, but in reality we took at what ’s on here. Berg: And how it calculates out. We have no way to calculate what you took out. Lindquist: That ’s right. It’s like when somebody tears down a house and starts over, it’s a new structure, we don’t worry what was there. All of a sudden it’s all new. Berg: So this hardcover calculation was calculated prior to you taking that stuff out. Larsen: The calculation was actually taken from the current sur\ey as it’s shown right now, but the things that 1 removed were done prior to me having the survey done. Lindquist: We don’t count plastic that ’s in gardens and under rock and so forth. Larsen: You don’t count tliat as hardcover. oK Lindquist: No. We don’t allow it either. You’ve got a lot of plastic and it’s allowed as fru as a covering underneath rock and landscaping and so forth. We don’t count it and we don’t PAGE 33 i 5 .sd.-' MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 16,2000_________ allow it. Larsen: You don’t count it as hardcover? Lindquist: No. Ga£&on: It’s counted as hardcover, but in the 0-75’, it’s not supposed to be there, so we don’t &ctor it in in the decision making process. In the 75-250’, when you’re over the 25 percent limit, again it’s not legitimate to have it there generally according to the Code, so that it’s - it’s not taken into account in the trade-oflf process if you want to call it that. Stoddard: For instance, you can ’t trade plastic for wood decks or garages. So you’re saying that dtere could have been — right now what ’s existing in the 75-250’ is 5800 square feet and approximately 64.2 percent, and you’re saying it was larger than that, Larsen: In the 0-75’? Stoddard: No, in the 75-250’, where it says the existing is 5800 or 64.2 percent, which is kind ofa- Larsen: It would have been bigger by - Stoddard: On the fourth page of the documentation. Larsen: Well, again, it’s not shown on the survey, but did you see my photographs in the packet. Those are the hems that I removed prior to the survey. Stoddard: My question is, was it more than 5800 then? Larsen: Yes, if these were included in. Stoddard: And you got it do\Mt to 5800 or 64 percent? Larsen: Yes. Stoddard: What size of patio would you be able to have if we kept it at 64.2 percent or 5811 square feet? Larsen: Zero. Stoddard: Are you sure? I’m not sure. PAGE 34 m f^' tt MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _________Monday, October 16,2000 Lindquist; He’s talking roughly 280 square feet. Stoddard; Which is about 100 square foot patio that you will be able to have, and Staff recommended an - Larsen; I’m not following you. Stoddard; I’m just thinking outloud what you can have based on the things we’ve looked at. Larsen; Okay. Lindquist; Any other questions? Anyone else have any questions? Stoddard; Is there any other hardcover you can give out that might be - Larsen; I guess I’ve got kind of a limiting lot. It’s not very deep, and I’ve got - everything is pretty much being used. I mean, wo’ve got a pretty wide driveway that we can trim a little off of that, but it’s - we’ve got a three car wide garage and it’s not much wider than that. We do have a lot of that landscaping febric that I would be happy to remove and plastic, but, I mean. it amounts to several hundred square feet, and I would think that there would be some kind of credit even if it’s not foot for foot, but, I mean, several hundred feet, like 700 or 800 square feet of that. It must be worth a couple hundred feet of patio, wouldn’t it. Stoddard; You would think that’s a good deal, but historically we are not able to do that or set that precedent. I’m just trying to see what we can do to maybe ~ I’ve been out there and you’re doing a lot and a lot of good things are to come. Larsen; Is there any credit we can get for the reduction on die areas that are not shown in the • 4 survey? Lindquist; That have already been done? Larsen; With the pictures and the measurements and all that stuff. Berg; No, because that isn’t calculated in what we have here. Our calculations arc on what is on your survey, so therefore that would just put you over further. Stoddard; Yeah, right. PAGE 35 J I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 16,2000_________ % mT: ^ * Berg: See — No. We’re going ofif what we have here. Larsen: Okay. Stoddard: We’re thankful you got down to that and that you got down to 64 percent. The red light goes ofif when you get to 50 percent. I’m trying to look at these pictures and - Berg: It doesn’t help. Lindquist: I guess the other thing we’d like to see if this does go forward, that all of the existing plastic that you have in both the 0-75’ and 75-250’ be removed. I think we’re going to require that as part of the application. Larsen: That csui be done. Stoddard: We can ’t design this for you. We can try to — How tough -1 don’t know what your plans are. How hard is it to give up some of that asphalt driveway? I can ’t — I mean, I remember pulling in and parking my car but - Larsen: I guess 1 would rather give up a few feet of that patio, like maybe make it maybe instead of 30 feet, maybe make it 25 feet wide. That would be 50 some feet right there and maybe that would be the first compromise, but maybe if there’s - and again, this goes back to whether we get credit for eaves or not, but maybe there’s - Lindquist: Are you looking at getting it down to that two hundred and some square feet? Stoddard: No, I don’t think for my purposes I want to get it down that far. I’m just trying to help get it down some and - • • • Larsen: Well, wo can maybe trim a foot ofif or something, but that ’s - Stoddard: And I can ’t remember how many - Bottenberg: Point Road is very narrow. Lindquist: West Point Road is not an easy place. Larsen: I don’t think there’s a conforming lot on there. Stoddard: Just throwing out, the 12* by 25’, that would get it down to about 300 square feet. PAGE 36 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _________Monday, October 16,2000 you know. It would trim another 87 feet off. What are your opinions on that? Kluth: I remember some times where we’ve had Applicants come back several times because we had offered them that they build on the existing site the same size. I can remember a couple vividly that we were holding the line on that, ^ere people wanted a couple of feet here and there. So I’m - I’m in favor of holding the line as we have in the other applications, which is to offer the Applicant the same size deck that vfas taken off but not to increase that hardcover. That’s my thought. Stoddard; What he’s saying is literally allow a 100 square foot patio. Berg: 135. Stoddard: That’s not the math 1 get, though. Kluth; Well, I will just say the size of the deck that was taken off. The survey shows it to be 135, so whatever it was. Lindquist: Do you follow what we’re asking? Larsen: I hope you understand that the deck that we’re getting credit for has been removed already as well. Berg: Yeah. The deck you removed was 135 square feet. Right? Kluth; Right. Berg; And that’s what we’re recommending - Larsen; And that’s not shown on the survey right now. Berg: That’s what you had and that’s what’s calculated in our hardcover, the new. We have the proposed here, and that’s calculated, and the proposed is in what you had and we’re asking you to get down, to go back to the 135 square foot. Stod-’ard: I was lost there, you lost me. You’re saying - Larsen: Ijust looked down and I seen the hardcover calculation. We still have a porch there that s the same size as the deck that we already removed. Ijust didn’t want anybody to think PAGE 37 1 tB MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 16,2000_________ that v/e were taking that porch off. The covered porch is still there and that’s going to remain. That’s going to be enclosed into a three season porch. The deck that was beyond there that actually filled the comer between - let’s see - that would be south of the house, up to the left of the house- Kluth; The proposed patio is not - there isn’t an existing deck there now? Stoddard: Based on these calculations - if we looked at tliese calculations, what t>pc of Ifardcover- Larsen: That is the deck that is on the photograph in the packet that was removed, and that’s the one I think you’re referring to as &r as the credit, because the other porch was going to be - has a roof over it, the roof line comes down, and it’s going to be enclosed into a three season porch. Stoddard: What docs the survey show? Docs the survey show that being removed? Larsen: No. But it happens to be the same size. Lindquist: I’m confused. Berg; I’m confiised as to what’s going on here. Lindquist: We’re looking at a total of existing hardcover of 5,811 square feet. Larsen: That is not including the deck that Wendy just drew in that was recently removed shown in a picture in your packet of the same size as the porch. That’s probably where the confusion is. And that was removed. Berg: 135. Lindquist: The problem is, we don’t know what is existing. When the survey was done, we have to operate off of what your surveyor showed what was existing. Where arc we going? you’re trying to put some parameters aroundi^^and say, hey, we can go so £ar before - Kluth: The before picture, you don’t have as much credit on your before picture. You don’t have the deck that was taken out. You don’t have the square footage in your before calculations. PAGE 38 t i i • m / y: ■ r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _________Monday, October 16,2000_________ you’re not getting proper credit here. Larsen: It wasn’t shown on the -1 mean, he can’t do that because it wasn’t shown, but it’s clearly in the pictures here. Stoddard: But the survey that he gave us looks to me like it was 135. Larsen: That’s the covered porch that’s still there. Stoddard: So he already took that off Larsen: If you look at the photograph - Stoddard: I see the photograph where it says the deck was removed. Larsen: The upper right-hand comer- Berg: This is the deck down here then. Kluth: The deck was removed before they did the existing hardcover calculation. Larsen: Yes. The upper right-hand comer there of that photograph, you can see the roof coming down and chairs sitting there, those are underneath the existing porch which says 135 square feet. Kluth: And the deck that was removed was the same size. Larsen: Yes. Kluth: And so my proposal, which we’ve followed in other applications, is that we - we’re willing to give you what you had before, and what you have not done in this application is show that before you .Started this project you actually had 135 square feet of existing hardcover that’s not shown in your calculation. Larsen: Right. Kluth; So I can’t decide how much, you know, under our previous guidelines, I can’t decide how much new patio you should have based on how much you used to have. Larsen; So the photographs- Kluth: You’re trading deck for patio. PAGE 39 *1 i * r.‘ ■ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 16,2000_________ Berg: It hasn’t been calculated in your - Larsen: You can see it if you compare it to the other one, can’t you? Berg: So then the 5811 is inaccurate. Nygard: You have to add 135 square feet to that. Berg: You have to add 135 square feet to that. Stoddard: It’sjust not listed. Beig: That comes up to 5947. So then we take — 150 square feet, that’s what we can have. Right? Kluth: No, that’s what they’re over by. Larsen: The upper left-hand picture shows a chain link fence and all those railroad ties, and that was a dqg run that went all the way down to the lake and so on, and I removed that as > -• well. Berg: I think that’s the problem. Kluth: We’d like you to remove all that other hardcover as well if we’re going to grant you a variance. y Lindquist: What we’re saying, I think, when we get all done here, we’re willing to allow you 5,946 square fiwt of hardcover, and you figure out where it’s going to be. Larsen: How do I - do we - on a building permit or something for the patio do you say, okay, here’s the size and here’s where I’m trimming it back or - Berg; No. To go on to the Council, you’re going to have to have that shown how you’re going to ~ how that patio is going to fit in. Larsen; So you have to show it on the survey? Lindquist: Right. Kluth: City Staff maybe they can work with you to correct this application. Lindquist: What do you guys think? PAGE 40 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _________Monday, October 16,2000 Bottenberg: Well, when you’re saying 5,811 square feet, that’s including the landscape fiibric as hardcover. Lindquist: No, no. We’re not talking about any fabric or plastic. We’re talking about hardcover. Bottenberg: It’s included in the hardcover calculation from the surveyor. Lindquist: The plastic? Bottenberg: Yes. Larsen: 1727 square feet. Bottenberg: Right. Beig: Okay. So we take that off. Lindquist: Are you willing to take out all the plastic? Larsen: Is that like a compromise for getting the patio or — Stoddard: No, it’s to take care of the incorrect - Lindquist: Is it part of the hardcover calculation? Bottenberg: Yes, it is. If you subtract the 1,727 square feet, you get 4,371 square feet. Stoddard: And what percent is that? Bottenberg: 48.32 would be the hardcover. Nygard: And then you have to add the 135 to the deck he already tore out which isn’t on the survey. So add 135 more to that. I end up with 4506 for total hardcover. Lindquist: What percentage is that? Berg: Hardcover excluding plastic. Bottenberg: 49.8 percent. Lindquist: How many square feet is that again? Are you guys sure you’re right now? Nygard: Yeah, 4506. Stoddard: Does that give them their 387 square foot patio that they’re requesting? PAGE 41 1 -4 i ■ ■■. t MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _________Monday, October 16,2000_________ Berg: No. Larsen: Explain the number for structural coverage. Kluth: We can ’t send this on. Lindquist: Yeah, we can ’t. Kluth: We’re sitting here doing this on the fly. The proposal or the analysis, the woricsheet. is not complete. We can ’t fix it all here. Go back and rework this proposal and show what truly was there before. Nygard: Is there any way to split this application so we can get going on the retaining wall. It sounds like we’re in agreement to replace your retaining wall. Stoddard: A quick question. Who did the hardcover calculation worksheets. You or your surveyors? Larsen: Surveyors did it. Advanced Surveying. Stoddard: They didn’t know or they incorrectly included that. Larsen: No, because it wasn ’t there. Nygard: Did they incorrectly include the landscape plastic as hardcover? Lindquist: Can we move and move the block wall -1 take it you want to do this wall? Larsen: I’d like to do the whole thing. Lindquist: Well, I’m not willing to move ahead on die rest of this due to the hardcover calculations. How comfortable are you, Paul? • • Weinberger: Well, the calculations are on page - I’m sure you’re looking at the analysis worksheet, which is page four, and I think some of the confusion is regarding existing versus proposed. The number in the last sentence of the paragraph under hardcover calculations, it states, if this is removed, and that ’s referring to all of the landscape fabric, the hardcover on the property is 4,371 square feet. However, that ’s the existing number right now. You have to keep in mind the deck has already been removed, so that 4371 does not include the 135 PAGE 42 ( n i NflNUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _________Monday, October 16,2000 square feet that the deck was before it was removed. So if they’re working with a new number, the final number that you need to look at in comparison is 4,506 square feet, which is 135 more than that 4371 Wendy has on there. So the existing is 4371, and that ’s absent landscape fiibric or plastic, and 4506 would include replacement ~ equal replacement of a deck or patio of 135 square feet. And I guess the rest of the discussion is, you know, if the Planning Commission is in a position to approve more than 135 square feet, then you can just do your calculation based on that. Lindquist: I would be comfortable going with 4,506 square feet, giving you a deck, and then you would have to do calculations regarding the hardcover, including removing all of the existing plastic. Stoddard: And what Size deck would that give them then? Berg: 135 square feet. Nygard: Patio. Larsen: So you’re saying if we reduced hardcover in other areas, we could have as big a patio as we want basically as long as it was 4506? Lindquist: That would be your max. That ’s the e.xisting. We’re saying you cannot increase the amount of hardcover. That ’s what we’re saying. Larsen: Okay. And that ’s just in the-that ’s in the 75-250 ’? Lindquist: Right. Larsen: Okay. Lindquist: Are you guys comfortable? Stoddard: Yeah. Kluth: I’m comfortable with that. I mean, do you understand why we’re doing that? You’re already over. You’re already over. We’re not looking to make you tear your garage out because you’re over. PAGE 43 • • y 'h rk r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 16,2000_________ Larsen: Is there any way to get credit for those stairs we removed, because we're not going to put any back there because we don't think they're needed. And that was - the stairs were - Berg: You know what, we can't go - we're going back now. We can't go back. What you had there, you took out. We're going on what we have here now, and we're just letting the waters - what we're saying is we're going to allow 4506, and that's it. Lindquist: You figure it out. Berg: The stairs, we're glad you took them out. We may have asked you to anyway. Lindquist: I’d like to make a motion to approve Application #2630 for Gregg and Stephanie Larsen, 1380 Rwt Point Road, variance to build a patio no bigger than what was previously - we’re approving a variance, basically a hardcover variance, not to exceed 4,506 square feet in the 75-250’, and to approve the variance in the 0-75’ up to 882 square feet. This does include removal of the existing 1727 square feet of landscape fabric in the 75-250’ and also any landscape febric in the 0-75’. Stoddard: Dale, would you possibly add the six reconunendations in the Bonestroo letter of October 9,2000. Lindquist; Oh, yes. Larsen: What does it mean when the Minnehaha Watershed District should review and approve the plans? Berg; You have an opportunity to have the Minnehaha Watershed District review and approve your plan. Lindquist: After the Cky approves it, the Minnehaha Watershed District will approve it also. Larsen; You just kind of go down there and show diem the plans or - Weinberger: There should be - if you bring a copy of the plans to the Watershed District - Arc you ^uniliar with where their offices arc? They’re right here in Orono, in the Navarre area, the Freshwater Building. They’re in there. A copy ofthe plan shouldjust be submitted PAGE 44 •1 1 ^ 1; & My: : ■ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _________Monday, October 16,2000 to the Watershed District, and they’re probably, if they approve it, issue some type of staff permit for any of the lakeshore work that may have to be done with the retaining wall. Lindquist: This will also include conditional use permit to replace the existing retaining wall in the 0-75’. Nygard; I would propose - We didn’t talk about screening of the retaining wall, but I would just mention that I would like the retaining wall screened with natural vegetation and such. Lindquist: We would like to see some type of landscape plan submitted as well. Stoddard: I’ll second that motion. Lindquist: Any other discussion? All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Nygard, Stoddard, Lindquist, Berg, and Kluth: Aye, Lindquist: All those opposed? Motion carries. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#18) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 18, Nygard moved, Kluth seconded, to table the minutes of the September 18,2( Planning Commission meeting. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#16) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REP^ENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS SEPTEMBER 25,2000 AND OCTOBER 9,2< Berg stated she attended tlie October 9,2000 City Council meeting, with the Brenshell Homes Resolution having been approved. Weinberger stated that matter did appear before the Technical Evaluation Panel on the PAGE SC J 7*. TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 16,2000 SUBJECT:#2630 Gregg and Stephanie Larsen 1380 Rest Point Road Variance/CUP — Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area: 14,500 s.f. (.33 acre) List of Exhibits A Analysis Worksheet Application and Letter of Request Site Plan' Survey Excerpts from Comprehensive Plan City Engineer ’s Letter Hardcover Calculations and Map Plat Map Location Map Photo of Property Property Owner ’s List Permit Record B C 0 E F G H I J K Retaining wall project as proposed requires the following City approvals: 1.Variance for land alterations within 75’ of the shoreline (10.22, Subd. 2; 10.55, Subd. 8, 10.56, Subd. 16[J]). 2. 3. Hardcover within 75' of the shoreline (10.22, Subd. 2; 10.55, Subd. 8, Subd. 16[L]). Conditional use permit for land alteration (10.03, Subd. 21,10.56, Subd. 16 [5]). Patio project as proposed requires the following City approval: 1. Hardcover in 75-250' zone for patio (10.22, Subd. 2,10.56, Subd. 16[L][2]) Application Summary: The application proposed is two fold. First, the applicants are seeking a conditional use permit to replace existing retaining walls. There are currently three retaining walls within the 0-75' setback. The applicants are proposing to combine the upper two walls as one and keeping the lower one (closer to the lake) making two walls rather than the tluree that currently exists. Retaining walls are considered hardcover, therefore a variance is also needed for hardcover in the 0-75' setback area. The second part of the application is to construct a brick patio on the lakeside of the existing residence replacing a wood deck that the applicant removed. The patio will be approximately 12' x 30' and a smaller part to be 3' x 10' for a total of approximately 387 feet. The deck removed was 10’X 13.5’(135 s.f.). #26J0. Gregg/Siephanie Larsen 1380 Rest Point Road Variance/CUP IQ/16.'2000 Page 1 ^ *■ 1^.. The replacement and combination of the retaining walls wll reduce the hardcover coverage in the 0-75' zone from 922 s.f. (12.2%) to 882 s.f. (11.7%). Applicants have no intent to remove the shed and ramp which account for 3.7% of the 0-75' total. The lakeside patio of approximately 278 s.f. will increase the hardcover coverage in the 75- 250’ zone from 5,811 s.f (64.2%) to 6,098 s.f (67.4%). The applicants have already reduced the hardcover coverage by removing landscape plastic under rock. However, there still is a considerable amount of landscape fabric in the 75-250' zone.(According to survey). Removal of the landscape fabric (1,727 s.f) would reduce the amount of hardcover from 5,811 s.f (64.2%) to 4,371 s.f (48.32%). Comprehensive Plan ; (Retaining Walls) The 1980 City of Orono Community Management Plan (“Comprehensive Plan ”) contains a number of general land use and environmental protection goals and policies with which the proposed land alteration would be consistent. Without the retaining walls in the 0-75’ zone erosion would be a problem. See attached excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies and views on altering shoreline areas. (Exhibit D). Engineering Review;fRetaining Walls) The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed retaining wall layout from an engineering standpoint and recommends new retaining walls be constructed on the site between the home and the lake. It is his opinion that the existing retaining walls should be replaced. (See Exhibit E). He also notes the unpredictability of boulder walls as compared to other wall types. Statement of Hardship ; The applicants have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit B. The applicants should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: 1. Will granting of the variances alter the essential character of the land? 2. Is lakeshore erosion at this site so substantial as to warrant the retaining wall system proposed? 3. Hardcover in the 75-250' zone is over what is allowed, should the patio square footage be limited to the square footage of the deck which existed on the property? (Removed deck - 135 s.f versus proposed patio - 387 s.f). 4. What is the visual impact of one 4' retaining wall as compared toQie existing two 2' walls? What degree of screening should be required? lt2630^Gregg Stephanie Larsen 1380 Rest Point Road Variance/CL'P 10.1 6/2000 Page 2 \ r f r I- i. 5. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation; Retaining Walls: Based on the goals and policies cited in City of Orono Community Management Plan and opinion of the City Engineer, staff reconunends approval of variance and conditional use permit to replace the existing retaining walls in the 0-75' setback area. Planning Commission should address vegetation/screening requirements. Patio: Staff recommends approval of a variance to build a patio of area no greater than the deck that previously existed (135 s.f.). Options for Action; 1. Recommend approval of variances and conditional use permit for wall replacement per staff recommendation. Recommend approval of variance for patio per staff recommendation. 2. Recommend denial of variances. 3. Table for further review or further specific information, advising the applicant what other possible revisions will make the application acceptable. 4. Other. ^2630 Gregg/Stephanie Larsen 1380 Rest Point Road Variance/CUP 10/16.1000 Page 3 1 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area; LR-IB Lot Area Required 43,560 s.f. (1 acre) Actual 14,500 s.f. (.33 acre) Hardcover Calculations; Distance from Total area in Allowed Existing Proposed shoreline setback hardcover hardcover hardcover 0-75'7,533 s.f.0 s.f.922 s.f.882 s.f. (0%)(12.2%)(11.7%) 75-250'9,046 s.f.2,261.5 5,811 s.f.6,098 s.f. (25%)(64.2%)(67.4%) Replacement of the retaining walls lowers the hardcover coverage in the 0-75' zone. The addition of the patio increases the hardcover in the 75-250' zone. However, there is 1,727 s.f. of landscape fabric in the 75-250' zone. If this is removed the hardcover would be reduced to 4,371 s.f. or 48.32%. fi i/-'0t. r- L ■ f lie'"' p B 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 E^ORMATION - Site Address ----------------------------- Property Identification Number cn-» i n A.ttach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Application # ^ ^ C? Date Received 9-^(f^- CyO Amount Paid ^ 3>O<0-- (month/year) lOUVA* other (specify). Zoning District: / J2, ~ \ applic ^t Name AddressT^^S City: OW*NER (if different than applicant) Name___________!____________ Phone Phone (venrif^ L11 ---71 q -^^*73 1 Zip:.SS3a4 Phone (home). Phone (work). f ■ •*» Address:.City:. description of REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $. \0,QQ^ Describe request in detail: ^12^ >c ^------------------------------------^ -----fiMrtSi------------------- (attach additional sheets if recessaiy) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width Setback:Front Side ^ Hardcover Cf»4h)^___Lot Coverage Average LakeshoreRear ^ Other (specify) HAFDSHIP/DESCIUPTION of unusual oreventing Describe undue hardship or practical difBculty or unusual property P compUance with Zoning Code (attach additional sheets if necessary) - •* • i i To: The City of Orono From: Gregg and Stephanie Larsen RE: 1380 Rest Point Road - Retaining Wall Replacement To Whom It May Concern: We are requesting a variance for work to be done within the 75’ set back from the water on Lake Minnetonka. Our property currently has three retaining walls on the slope down to the lakeshore. The upper two retaining walls each average two feet in height with an approximately two foot terrace between them. The third, and closest wall to the lake is about four to five feet tall. All the walls are about 75 feet in length. The walls are constructed of a combination of railroad ties, limestone rocks and fieldstones. All three retaining walls are in very poor condition. They pose a safety hazard for people in the yard and, eventually, they will fail and collapse allowing the yard to wash into the lake. We also have a deteriorating set of stairs on the slope to the l^e. We are proposing to replace the existing retaining walls and stairs on the property. Our plan includes using 24 ”-36 ” boulders to build the walls. This would create a more permanent remedy for the situation. The new retaining walls would be safer, and more aesthetically pleasing. The new steps would be constructed of a natural material such as cedar timbers or granite slabs, depending on our budget. Our goal for both items, if possible, is to reduce the overall amount of retaining wall and step area that is currently on the property. We are proposing to combine the upper two walls in to one four-foot wall. The lower wall would remain in the three to four foot range. We also propose removing permanently approximately two-thirds of the original steps. The slope of the land on the top portion of the original steps is such that the steps are not necessary. In fact, we have already removed most of the unnecesj a'.-v steps. These proposals will reduce the overall hardcover on the property Thank you for your time. Gregg and Stephanie Larsen B 3 .■ tvs To; The City of Orono From: Gregg and Stephanie Larsen RE: 1380 Rest Point Road - Patio Variance Request We are proposing to construct a brick paver patio on the lakeside of our home. The dimensions would be 12 ’ by 30 ’ running along the front of our living room with an additional 3’ by 10 ’ section in front of the porch. The area of the patio would not exceed 387 square feet. The patio would not encroach on the 75’ waterfront setback. Our current hardcover exceeds the maximum amount allowed. However, the new patio will replace approximately 100 square feet of current landscaping (see photo attachment). Also, we have recently removed approximately 278 square feet of hardcover that is not shown on the new survey (see photo attachment). This along with the 40 square feet of reduced hardcover from our proposed retaining wall replacement brings the total amount of the hardcover reduction to 418 square feet. This is more than the amount of the proposed patio square footage of 387. Our goal is to complete this patio along with the retaining wall replacement in one project this fall. y. Thank you for your time, Gregg and Stephanie Larsen f. O s •r% 'i;:- /• > S•r • * ✓ . -A. 1380 Rest Point Road Patio \ ariance .. V I . .• » !^-r : h.' - Jai. . ^ ■-.u. s '^ :■. . ‘ «• »-> • Recently removed deck 10’ x 13.5 ’ (135 square feet) Recently removed landscape stone with plastic underlay approximately 5 ’ x 20' (80 scpiare feet) 'i •' 'vZ»‘ ■k~-' fel": nSfSiai -i- V--* fW ‘ •: • : '•■•i:\-.. ' r' • ^ . •• - • v» \ *1 . i V * ^ f*' .TVT.’Recently remoxed steps 3' x 2T (63 square feet) Patio woiild replace current landscape stone \\ith plastic iinderlax t unninu on a\era»»e 30" out from house for the entire leiv^th uf proposed palio location (appro\imatel\ 100 square feel) U'o UUII.U T/limi LAIU>U«.liKl:00 ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING CO. SMlIHiy.NsLlOl MiMMoU.MN5534S flione(612)474 79(4 Fu(612)474W67 sunvEN^Fon; GREGG LARSEN nmVEYED: Scpnkcr, 2000 DtlAfTEft Scpttnbo 19,2000 KgVISED: Tir n"" - -****>- ‘^------^-*^1 —-----n»iki UQ£U2BSUEDS2t&GtoaEwBii^ HBasas.^. ____ >_--------------------M mmmII with CMBfiCim Icitl COVMd. 1. 4. _ ia^ftvfaMaii «c dcoMd ImpofttflL MW mmmM «r MOMMiii 10 ««k Ow conien of ikt prepcfty. in4 fcr ifce irrlew of Vua:i^aK*:;jITAHPAIU)SYMIKm*(------------------- •••DwilaMriDpIpt iii*plllr,fcHt«rtiHSIilf U(CMcNiifiik(*fUJ,ic(.ii«lca -------------------------------------.mwjn-j «7 i>e » yk '■ ww i«« fMfr* «v «u »» » ri »•» «r« • STMnwi^c • Mi _ wi tm% m r«oi «mui «t ■ftui {9^ ■It- ^,-d GRAPHIC SCALE «• ( 01 mr) 1 iMh - to n. > V • • A^O. d?7JJP .. ’t * •-;- D cMVTPnNMENX JUNE, 1980 i 7. the wetlands and marshlands of the city will be protected and preser^d AS WILDLIFE HABITATS, AS UNIQUE OPEN SPACES, AND AS THE ONLY ECONOMICALLY PRACTICAL METHOD OF FLOOD PROTECTION AND STORM WATER RUNOFF FILTRATION. The Harza Study, the 208 Water Quality Management Study, and Orono’s Surface Water Management Plan all recommend this approach to permanent water quality management for Lake Minnetonka. In addition, the Orono Plan goes on to identify individual wetlands and marshlands that require protection as part of the City's storm water management program. It is the policy of this plan to effectuate the policies and recommen­ dations of the 1974 Orono Surface Water Management Plan. PROTECTION OF THE CITY'S MARSHU\ND, WETLANDS AND DRAINAGEWAYS SHALL INCLUDE PROTECTION OF ADJOINING LANDS AND PREVENTION OF DRAINAGE, FILLING, DREDGING OR WETLAND'S VEGETATION REMOVAL. Ordinances will establish setbacks for all land alteration or construction. Wherever possible, the City will acquire open space and flowage easements for conservation of these lands. PROTECTION OF LAKE RESOURCES WILL ALLOW REASONABLE ACCESS, USE AND ENJOY>SNT WHILE PREVENTING OVERCROWDING AND EXCESSIVE ENCROACHMENT. In conformance with Mn. DNR shoreline Management regulations for recreational development lakes, the City will prohibit overly dense development within 1,000 feet of Lake Minnetonka. Lake use regulations will be promoted to limit excessive boat density and overuse of sensitivi bays. Land use regulations will be developed to provide reasonable control over building density, land alteration and lakeshore encroachmen LAKE SHORELINES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALTERATION. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clearcutting will be prohibited. In areas-of or wave action erosion, natural stone rip rap shoreline protection wi be encouraged. . 10. LAKE BED ALTERATIONS WILL BE DISCOURAGED BECAUSE OF ADVERSE SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM EFFECTS ON WATER QUALITY. Dredging of lake beds releases large amounts of otherwise trapped nutrients and silt which adversely affects water quality for long periods of time. Dredging of new chaivnels or inlets will not be approved to provide riparian access where none existed naturally. Dredging will be permitted in limited circumstances only where absolutely necessary to maintain existing natural riparian access permanently lost by something beyond the ^ control of the landowner. Periodic low water conditions or the owner s desire for deeper draft watercraft are not sufficient reasons for disrupting sensitive lake beds. CMP 3-20 pi^yiPONMENt JUNE, 1980 11. r* 13. or within designated marshlands and where floodplaLs lt’e"st*oS“?h«win L^butnabie land, ji'^^slrtUions alteration will be strictly and to avoid costlyto avoid flood level increases on other properti flood damage or pollutioa. dangers. NATURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION WILL BE REQUIRED information, Se^HSmENT proposals. This will include control ::tiur.:^i:n^^i^nrr“ritS^ra?i Tera or private. The extent of each be required of probable environmental impact. to La^ Minnetonka larger projects than of °"®?: ^nl concern increaseor a major wetland increases, so will the care in direct proportion. ON-SITE WATER RETENTION FACILITIES WILL ^SHiS^pROjECTs'^WHL^ residential , commercial or industrial development PROJECT necessary to maintain or improve the existing stom wator PATTERNS. Whenever a development s locatxon, . * ^^he speed of would tend to increase the quantity of runoff, in „iii be «no«, or dacrsas. the quality <>' -"““j .rf^clant fo L^ntai required to provide on-site retention facilities ®'* . reducing existing situation or to improve the resulting w!l quantity, reducing speed and/or improving quali y. ritv byL permitted to adversely impact it's "Pi^bbors, or the City. by^^^___ changing drainage patterns or by otherwise adversely aff 9 water drainage. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT BE PERMTTED ^T,T‘P.o^be'^subdivided environmental protection. no land J„*°the proposed or built upon which is held unsuitable by the C y ^«rmations use because of flood hazard, inadequate * ®°“^_^®^tential, with severe limitations for development, severe er disposal unfavorable topography, inadequate water supply health capabilities, or any other feature likely to be harmf subdivisio: «f.ty, or w.lfar. of the future residents of the ‘jy .«^ct or of the community. Ho land use will be allowe peroitt the neighborhood’s air or water resources nor will any to emit noise, dust, electiical or radiation /ollution. CMP 3-21 pNVTRQNMENTAL JUNE, 1980 15. EROSION CONTROL PLANS AND PROGRAMS WILL BE REQUIRED IN AI.L LAND ALTERATION PROJECTS. Each contractor will be required to minimize the probability of soil erosion on site and/or siltation damage downstream. The smallest amount of bare ground shall be exposed for an short a time as possible. Temporary ground cover will be required until permanent cover is provided. Sediment traps will be required on slopes and between construction sites and public roadways. Fill must be compacted and stabilized for permanence. IIRRAN AREA POLICIES FOR NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 3. 4 . 5. LAND USE STANDARDS WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBAN ENCROACHMENT ON LAKE MINNETONKA. Minimum lot widths will space out docks and structural encroachments while increasing areas of natural vegetation. Lake use regulations will limit the number of boats per property and the amount of public waters available for private docking and boat storage. RETENTION OF NATURAL VEGETATION WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBANIZATION AS VISIBLE FROM THE LAKE. Building heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitions against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes. Retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. 4 DIRECT RUNOFF INTO THE LAKE WILL BE MINIMIZED. Standards will be established and maintained to limit the amount of impervious hardcover in proportion to closeness of the shoreline. Maximum hardcover will be limited to 30% of each parcel within 1,000 feet of the shoreline pursuant to Mn. DNR recommended shoreline practices. ALL EXISTING URBAN X^TLANDS WILL BE MAINTAINED AND PROTECTED FOR SURFACE WATER RETENTION AND FILTRATION. The existing urban runoff exceeds the capacity of the urban marshes to assimilate all nutrients, therefore additional pollution hazards would be created if any wetlands would be lost. Additional steps to improve nutrient assimilation include on-site retention on all new developments and storm water recycling through the existing marshes. CITY MAINTENANCE PRACTICES WILL BE DESIGNED TO IMPROVE STORM WATER QUALITY. Salt use for winter street treatment will be minimized. Snow removal practices will locate temporary storage sites where they will not overload the natural drainage system or where foreign matter, especially salt, will not directly enter a marsh or lake. Spring cleanup will promptly remove road sands and salts before' environmental damage occurs. CMP 3-22 ^ i Bonestroo Rosene ^ S Anderlik & \ Associates Engineers & Architects October 9,2000 Bonestroo. Rosene, Anderlik and Associates. Inc. Is an Affirmative Acflon/Bqual Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned Principals: Otto G Bonestroo. PE. • Marvin L. Sorvala. PE • Glenn R Cook. PE. • RoDert G Schunicht. PE • Jerry A. Bourdon. PE Senior Consultants; Robert W. Rosene. PE • Joseph C. Anderiik. RE. • Richard E Turner. PE. • Susan M Eberlm. C.PA. Associate Principals; Howard A. Sanford. PE • Keith A. Gordon. PE. • Robert R. Pfefferie. PE • Richard W. Poster. PE. • David O. Loskota. PE. • Robert C. Russek. AI A. • Mark A. Hanson. PE. • Michael T. Rauimann. PE. • Ted K field. PE. • Kenneth P Anderson. PE. • . lark R. Polfs. PE. • David A Bonestroo. M B A. • Sidney P Williamson, PE.. LS. • Agnes M. Ring. M.B A • Alan Rick Schmidt. PE Offices; St Paul. St Cloud. Rochester and Wilimar. MN • Milwaukee. Wi XMebsicc; wwwbonestroo com 0t: Wendy Bottenberg Assistant Zoning Administrator Citv of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re; Larsen Retaining Wall File No. 139-2630 Dear Wendy; We have reviewed the proposed plan for retaining wall improvements to the Gregg and Stephanie Larsen property located at 1380 Rest Point Road. The plans call for the removal of existing stone and wood retaining walls and replacing them with boulder retaining walls. The plans also show the construction of a brick paver patio adjacent to the lakeside of the home. We have the following comments in regards to engineering matters: • Silt fence should be in place prior to any grading or removal activities, • Boulder retaining walls should be constructed with angular rocks to provide wall stability. Boulder ■ 1 walls constructed with round rocks tend to lack stability, similar to stacking marbles. The wall design should incorporate a drainage filter material and drain tile behind the walls and be constructed with the - proper batter to provide wall stability. • The area between the two new walls and any other disturbed areas should be seeded and covered with a fiber blanket immediately after grading to prevent erosion. Staked sod is an acceptable alternative to seed and fiber blanket if sod is available. • new walls shall not exceed 4-feet in height without an engineered set of plans submitted for review. • The plans shouid show proposed elevations for the patio and identify any associated grading. • The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District should review and approve the plans. Please contact me at (651) 604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg / Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 i ( 4 I ■. HARDCOVER CALCLXATION WORKSHEET (S)75-250’250-500* fiytSTTNC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House ______________ X Len(th WtdUi SWc<i B. ' X X X C Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Palio/Dcck X X F^eV.VA3<xUs F baHdscapr ___ Underlain ___ By Plastic X X X j^eeA Sireps, PcOf- ft G. Other' TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ------ * B X 100 y^nposgn hard cover in ZONE A. House Unglh Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X Retv%c>r€. R-e-V. (aJcv U s E. 1*atttrt)etk______________* X ^ A 4- y\ ev^ (ZaR \^<^\\ !> „ F. .feeadseape.____________ Underlain „ ________— ^ By Plastic _______________ * G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE Toj^L^TY .N ,100 F 500-1000’ S.F. S.F. S.F. SJr. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S32-..S.F. SJ^. o Ml S.F. I S.F. m; . •> yi.y *5 ^3^ S.F.A,.^ 12.? ^ ^ S.F. % B,' ' f S.F. S.F. C'Q\£f ‘VI __S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. 4-^ 'JL- S.F. __S.F. S.F. S.F. • SJ. 3 S.F. % A B I : HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75*250-500’500-1000* F.XTSTTNG HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ LeofOu ^OfcS^ W> WM'Ji X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Pallo/Deck X X F. Landscape __________ Underlain ___ ________ By Plastic ____________ G. Other ^ X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE c;gsi \ * B _£ fPOPOSED hardcov er IN ZONE A. House Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck Kjpty Pcv4-ro X X F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B ____ -S.F. m I'bS .S.F. 9 ST. as S.F. K S.F. B ST. BB m ST. B ST. m ST. m S.F. m S.F. m \n9.1 S.F. m S.F. m S.F. . 13S S.F. Fiftll S.F. m <^OACs ■ S.F. X 100 «C.A.2^JH S.F. Bt S.F. B S.F. B S.F. S.F. m S.F. m S.F. ST. ST. S.F. S.F. — loo S.F. B S.F. •S.F. ST. m •S.F. m S.F. X 200 -C.1.A % A B A B oi-\n Or ^0 ♦* * ** • ''Norti i -k A * *r • *'\*'^‘*rv* V •*• ••■ •*,... * •#*•* •• •. • •; \ f. ^ t;**. ?•■* r* > r >/ \ \ v"’ —^y. V ^ « * •*•..•* *\ \ « • ••«* e‘ *S •» •*•• • .•i- * * • • \-.-r • *- ------- P \ V * Carman ^<j> .’* — ''%VpR( \ W3A^^ ^ a____ r 3 lo^' IZdisi K'liit PcACi W -r V y ;j '/i^' - MS S3|S: ^ V ■ V ' .r -‘“ J iEI m§ .Tm 1?5» ' V ‘** >v-^ -r^-t sr;r»*« .J- -(i .jL- ^JT /?)K(' PcAvf ^cnc( 1 mr^. ^'■-" t' •. fe: r^‘'> '•1^7 5??-i;;-: ■ -';, - /ji' •« jgv lii'r ' -‘.1 •: ‘ •■'■•i'‘ ':•• . v| ^ ?V 'ill r^?= -------—•!•'—^ ‘■•i i... 5;^. . LiJiL \*» r , ^ ' ,1 ^ V ‘‘ JL* £r^«'- m v»ri rr* . ' ^ •-■-" • •i' -i-v'v> RUN DATE If/lA/li ■ATCH 5*S HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY IHFORHATIOH SYSTEH PROPERTY OMHERS LIST REPORT HO. PMSSAOl PACE 10 PROP AOOR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 30 07-117-23 31 0020 01350 REST POINT CIR RICHARD L ANFINSON RICHARD L ANFINSON 1350 REST POINT CIR HOUND NN 55304 . PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 30 07-117-23 32 0031 01300 REST POINT CIR D 0 J OOIES JR DAVID D I JENNIFER OOIES JR 1300 REST POINT CIRCLE nOUND HN 55304 PROP AOOR ONNER NANC TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 30 07-117-23 32 0030 01373 REST POINT RO K E ANDERSON OAK KRAIIER KIRK ANDERSON 1373 REST POINT RO hound HN 55304 PROP AOOR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 30 07-117-23 32 0001 01371 REST POINT LA KENNETH N A RENEE 0 EOOERT KENNETH M I RENEE 0 EOOERT 1371 REST POINT LA hound HN 55304 PROP AOOR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 30 07-117-23 33 0002 01400 REST POINT RD DAVID A NILLIANS ETAL DAVID A NILLIANS 1400 REST POINT RO NOUND NN 55304 F'1I. PROP AOOR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 30 07-117-23 33 0005 01300 REST POINT RO PAN NALSH PATRICK J WALSH 13TP REST POINT RD HOUND NN S5304 30 07-117-23 32 0002 01340 REST POINT LA J H HOUTNAN A K J HOUTNAN J H HOUTNAN A K J HOUTNAN 1340 REST POINT LA HOUND HN 55304 30 07-117-23 32 0034 01305 REST POINT RO THONAS NICHOLAS OERSCHEIO THOHAS NICHOLAS OERSCHEIO 1305 REST POINT RO hound NN 55304 30 07-117-23 32 003T 01350 REST POINT RD LAS 6RAB1LL LARRY A SHARON 6RABILL 1350 REST POINT RD hound NN 55304 30 07-117-23 32 0002 01354 REST POINT CIR B A SCHEOLER A S 0 SCHEOLER 0 A SCHEOLER A S B SCHEBLER 1354 REST POINT CIR hound NN 55304 30 07-117-23 33 0003 0140* REST POINT RD L R HORN A N HORN LESTER R A NYRTLE HORN 1400 REST POINT RD hound NN 55304 30 07-117-23 33 0000 01300 REST POINT RD J T NYOARD A K H NYCARD J T NYCARD A K H NYCARD 1300 REST POINT RD hound NN 55304 30 07-117-23 32 0030 01310 REST POINT LA E 0 A C L REINHART ERIC D REIHHART 1310 REST POINT LA HOUND HN 55304 30 07-117-23 32 0037 01375 REST POINT RD H B A L K CERLICHER HICHAEL B a LYNNE CERLICHER 1375 REST POINT RO HOUND NN 55304 30 07-117-23 32 0000 01300 REST POINT RD J K LANCHANS A S LANOHANS JAHES K A SHEILA LAHCHANS 1300 REST POINT RD HOUND NN 55304 30 07-117-23 33 0001 01410 REST POINT RO ROBERT 0 BREDESON ROBERT C BREDESON 15 E ST ALBANS RD HOPKINS HN 55305 30 07-117-23 S3 0004 01390 REST POINT RD L K JOHNSON SCO JOHNSON LYLE K JOHNSON 2737 IRVING AVE SO NPLS NN 55400 30 07-117-23 33 0007 01300 REST POINT RD C J LARSEN A S B LARSEN STEPHANIE B A CRECC J URSEN 1300 REST raiNT RD hound HN 55344 RUN DATE RVIA/Rt MTCH C*5 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PX<i35A01 PACE 11 PROP AODR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR M •7-117-2S S3 00*9 •Xm REST POINT RD B CAVENOER A C CAVEWER BARBARA A COLLINS CAVENOER 925 WINOENORE CURVE PLY^IOUTH NN 55991 PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER ' NANE/A80R SB A7-117-2S S3 0B12 •1S79 • REST POINT RO 0 R BLOON I T A BLOOH 6E0R6E R A THERESA A BLOON 1S79 REST POINT RO HOUND NN 55359 ' * 91 : * p 4 • : V’ • ‘V’rv w r \ 'i .4 t v. . • •f tc 0 . ..si'-' » % As>’ 'W' {iJ) I Wst*'a r-!'. p k... V' * ^*<ro 38 07-117-23 33 0010 01^05 REST POINT RD C LAVENDER 8 D LAVENDER COLLINS CAVENOER i BARBARA CAVEIOER 1A05 REST POINT RD HOUND NN 5536A 36 07-117-23 33 0011 013L5 REST POINT RD D H I J L RAHN DAVID N 8 JODI L RAW 1365 REST POINT RD HOUND HN 5536^ TOTAL BArCH 503 00022 ■ ^'4* ' . ,fr» » V ‘ rn.%* ks . ■'1^^ Z CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORNATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE R.CORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF . ^ I ^ ^ ^ DATE 'f- . t.. 'N \r. e Permit No 3933 S/Sb ^?0 ygo7 <f/Q V5 / / ' *\‘ /S5© 'PiCST ^>inf Ecac:i K PERMIT RECORD Date 6-7V Type of Permit ■*S£'CugR M /i^7£: //'7S /jLTtz/ty9T?0/V^ __eL£h^ <V-7fe ra PettMi i 9/-77 (?-J-&i RSmoOFZ 1 (leA/au AT6~ o^dJl- u .1 Oxk y r. ;/-7 n X*tr(lSk.o 1/ t! r- as »*cpT\NG UC[ 2 3 2000 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cl I < ur Ono«o DATE; October 23, 2000 ITEM NO n Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Ser\’ices's Directors Report Item Description: School Zone Traffic Control for Old Crystal Bay Road Attachments: 1. Commissioners Order on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 2. Minnesota State Statues Section 169.06 3. A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Counts 4. Map of Old Crystal Bay Road, TH12 to CR6 5. Map of Turn Lane Improvements, Option 1 5. Map of Turn Lane Improvements, Option 2 Introduction This item has been discussed at a previous Council meeting and there were some concerns about the recommendation to install a new 4-way Stop sign at the High School and Middle School driveways The Council also has had an opportunity to view the peak hour traffic situation after this item was discussed at the Council meting. The opening of the new middle school, directly across the street from the high school, and the changing of the high school start time has resulted in traffic congestion, during peak times. The high school now starts at 7:50 a.m., and the middle school starts at 8:00 a.m. Previously, the high school started at 7:30 a.m., and the middle school started at 8:00 a.m. The time change was made to allow for both the high school and middle students to ride on the same bus. The buses unload students at the high school first then cross old Crystal Bay Road to unload students at the middle school. The school bus traffic, combined with the large number of students being dropped off by parents at school, resulted in major traffic congestion and gridlock conditions on the first several days of school. This resulted in two hazardous situations with pedestrians crossing Old Crystal Bay Road and southbound traffic on Old Crystal Bay Road backing up onto County Road 6. The traffic backup on the county road was extremely hazardous because of the high speed traffic on this highway. Page 1 of 6 r r Peak hour traffic counts were completed from 7:15 a.m. to 8:15 a.m. by public works personnel. A total of 833 vehicles passed through the Old Crystal Bay Road/South Driveway intersection during the morning peak hour. If this peak hour volume existed for at least eight hours per day, a traffic signal would be warranted, but this peak volume only occurs for less than two hours per day. However, this is still a substantial number of vehicles that are unable to safely pass through this intersection without improvements to the existing traffic control measures which consist of stop signs at the driveway exits. Permanent Four Way Stop Sign We have experimented with several different solutions to this problem and have developed a traffic control system that appears to be acceptable and in fact is working. This solution requires a 4-way stop sign at the new south middle/high school driveway and crosswalk. Without this stop sign, vehicles have a difficult time entering and exiting the parking lots and when the parking lot backups extend onto Old Crystal Bay the whole system becomes gridlocked. With the 4-way stop sign, the drivers are forced to stop and take turns passing through this intersection area. This keeps all of the vehicles moving at slow steady speed and kept the traffic backups confined to Old Crystal Bay Road and off of County Road 6. The stop signs also provide safer conditions for the pedestrians in the crosswalk. Basically, the plan is to have the middle school vehicles use the south entrance for both entering and exiting the parking lot and to circulate in a counter clockwise direction through the parking lot. This provides room for traffic queuing in the parking lot at the driveway exit stop sign and limits conflicts with the buses at the north driveway. The high school parking lot circulation is to enter at the north driveway and exit at the south driveway. This plan will require monitoring the north bus entrance driveway and periodically directing traffic to facilitate school bus movements across Old Crystal Bay Road. This monitor can also restrict pedestrian crossings at this driveway. This driveway monitoring should be the responsibility of the school district. The 4-way stop sign can be installed under the provisions of Stop Sign Warrant 2B-5 No. 1 in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic control Devices Manual which allows for installation of stop signs at intersections where "application of the normal right-of way rule is unduly hazardous" Without the installation of this 4-way stop sign three hazardous conditions exist; an unsafe school pedestrian crossing, insufficient gaps in the Old Crystal Bay Road traffic for vehicles to safely enter or exit the driveways, and traffic backups onto County Road 6, a heavy traffic and high speed County Road. The Four-Way stop sign is working well and has received a favorable response from the school district and police department. This new stop sign has reduced speeds along this road resulting in safer conditions for pedestrian crossings and safer access from tlie numerous driveways along this section of Old Crystal Bay Road. Before installation of the stop sign numerous vehicles were exceeding the normal 40 m.p.h. and the 25 m.p.h. school zone speed limit. We have not received any complaints about installation of this new stop sign. Page 2 of 6 Per the CUP resolution for the new middle school Condition No. 10, the school district is responsible for the installation costs for a flashing light warning system at the new crosswalk if deemed necessary by the City. The City would then be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the system. The 4-way stop sign and stop ahead signs have been inplace for seven weeks and visibility of the Old Crystal Bay Road stop signs has not been a problem. Our recommendation is to not install any flashing red lights on the stop signs at this time. The City still retains the right to require future installation of warning lights if necessary. The length of Old Crj'stal Bay Road between Highway 12 and County Road 6 is only 3/4of a mile with stop conditions at both ends. The traffic signal at the Highway 12 intersection is red almost all of the time, so this can effectively be considered a stop condition. The location of a stop sign in the middle of this short segment of road with stop conditions at both ends is not a major inconvenience and based on the lack of complaints appears to be acceptable to motorists. Also, most drivers probably expect to see stop signs in school zones as this is typical in most areas. No Passenger Loading and Unloading Signs We are also recommending installation of "No Passenger Loading and Unloading" signs in the no parking area along Old Crystal Bay Road in the vicinity of the Orono school ’s campus as there are numerous students being dropped off along the road shoulder. Parents are doing this to avoid the traffic queuing in the parking lots, at the designated drop off locations, in front of the schools. This is extremely hazardous as students are walking along the road shoulder and crossing Old Crystal Bay Road in numerous locations. Council approval for installation of these signs is required. Temporary Four Way Stop Sign r At the previous Council meeting, there were concerns expressed about the installation of this Four-Way stop sign. The biggest issue was the installation of the stop sign to handle a situation that is only a problem for hour in the mornings and afternoons on school days, and the remainder of the time motorists on Old Crystal Bay Road are stopping for no apparent reason. However, this stop sign does provide benefits other times. It allows for safer pedestrian crossings at all times, and enhances safety at other heavy traffic times such as evening school activities such as sporting events. The potential hazards at events when it is dark are greater, so the stop is necessary to increase safety. The suggestion that a temporary, Four-Way Stop sign only be used during peak traffic times was made. The use of temporary traffic control devices is not recommended except for eme-gency conditions. The installation of road signs and signals is governed by the "Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devises" as published by the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Page 3 of 6 Highway Administrallo/!.. This policy has been in effect since the early 1970's. (See attached Uniform Traffic Control Device, Order No. 54014) Authority for adoption of the manual is given in Section 169.06, Minnesota State Statutes. Section 2B-5, Warrants for Stop Signs states "For other than emergency purposes portable or part-time STOP signs shall not be used.” The use of part-time stop signs creates a hazardous situation because it contuses driver expectations. Motorists expect consistent traffic control conditions. They get used to certain conditions and expect these conditions always to be the same. Changing traffic control devices creates a hazardous situation. For example, a parent routinely drops their children off for school in the morning and there is a four-way stop sign on at the drivew'ay intersection. When they exit the driveway, the traffic on Old Crystal Bay Road has to stop. Now, if this same parent has to pick up their children from school, during the middle of the day, when the Old Crystal Bay road traffic does not have to stop at the driveway intersection a hazardous situation is created. The parent will exit the driveway expecting the traffic on Old Crystal Bay Road to stop. If they are involved in an accident, the City could be exposed to potential legal liability. The issue of temporary stop signs being used in the past was discussed. At one time, there were many temporary and nonstandard traffic control signs and devices being used. This was the main reason that the uniform traffic control manual was developed to standardize traffic control devices and rules for their use. Since this manual has been developed, the number of nonstandard traffic control devices being used has greatly diminished. Based on the recommendation against temporary stop signs in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the potential legal liability in not following this recommendation, the staff recommendation is that a temporary stop sign not be used. Traffic Signal Another possible option discussed was the installation of a temporary traffic signal that would only be operational as stop-and-go signal during peak periods and would flash at other times. Another variation that was suggested is that during peak hour times the signal flash all red, which effectively operates as a Four-Way stop condition, and at other times flashes red at the driveways and yellow on Old Crystal Bay Road. This results in a temporary, Four-Way stop condition which has been previously discussed and not recommended. The use of a temporary traffic signal is not recommended for the same reasons as a temporary stop sign is not recommended, it confuses driver expectations. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Section 4B-19 Continuity of Operation states "A traffic signal installation shall be operated as a stop-and- go device qi; as a flashing device ” In the past, many Cities u.<:ed flashing traffic control devices during nighttime hours, but w ith the mandated use of the traffic control manual and traffic actuated signals this practice is almost nonexistent today. Page 4 of 6 LO'L Installation of a traffic signal requires that at least one of twelve signal warrants, listed in the manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, be satisfied. These warrants relate to such items as minimum vehicular and pedestrian volumes, interruption of continuous traffic, and accident history. However, it must be noted that satisfaction of a signal warrant does not mandate the installation of a traffic signal as an engineering study may conclude that other measures will solve the problem. The Average Daily Traffic on Old Crystal Bay Road ranges from 4,200 v.p.d. just north of the Highway 12 intersection to 1,800 v.p.d. south of the County Road 6 intersection. The minimum vehicular volume warrant requires at least 500 vehicles per hour for eight hours per day. This equals 4,000 vehicles in eight hours. The traffic on Old Crystal Bay Road is not even close to meeting this warrant. The minimum pedestrian warrant requires that for a minimum of eight hours per day there are at least 600 vehicles per hour and 150 pedestrians per hour. The school pedestrian situation is also no where close to meeting a signal warrant. The installation of a traffic signal will require the construction of left turn lanes and left turn arrows. Without a turn lane and turn arrow, left turning vehicles will be unable to turn on a green light because of the continuous volume of oncoming traffic. This will result in gridlock as the left turning vehicles block the through traffic. The system functions with the Four-Way stop sign because the left turning vehicles are allowed an equal chance to move through the intersection. Also, as previously discussed the installation of traffic control devices not recommend by the uniform traffic control manual exposes the City to potemial legal liability. Based on the fact that the school traffic situation fails to satisfy, by a wide margin, the requirements for traffic signals in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and exposes the City to potential legal liability, the staff recommendation is to not install either a temporary or permanent traffic signal. School Start Times The issue of reinstating the previous school start times of a Vi difference between the high school and middle school start times could possibly be a solution. However, it is uncertain if this will allow removal of the stop sign. The most problematic traffic movement situation would still be the middle school students being brought to school by their parents. This requires two traffic movements to both enter and exit the parking lot. The high school students arriving in their own cars, only require one movement to enter the parking lot which is a lesser problem. In past years, there always was a northbound traffic backup at the middle school start time because of the left turn into the middle school parking lot. The new middle school location requires a southbound left turn into the parking lot which will result in a southbound traffic backup. Because of the closer distance to County Road 6, the middle school start time may still result in traffic backups onto the county highway. There is no guarantee that the different start times will solve the problem, and to accurately determine this without changing the start times could be difficult. Page 5 of 6 It__ Changing the start times could have financial implications for the school district and further discussions with district officials should occur before any action is taken. Additional Turn Lanes on Old Crystal Bay Road Although the Four-Way stop is functioning adequately, additional turn lanes on Old Crystal Bay Road should also be investigated further. The attached maps show several options for turn lanes in the area of the High/Middle School driveways. With the Four-Way stop sign in place the system is functioning adequately now, but there are still traffic delays and queuing during the peak time periods. The functioning of the system during inclement winter weather is still not known. Snow and ice conditions could result in traffic backups onto County Road 6. Additional traffic lanes will provide more space for queuing of cars on Old Crystal Bay Road. However, additional traffic lanes would not eliminate the need for the Four-Way stop sign. Funding for any improvements also needs to be discussed further. Old Crystal Bay Road is a State Aid Route, so State Aid funding could be used for road improvements. Summary The school district should also continue all possible efforts to educate parents and encourage more school bus ridership as an easy and cost-effective solution to this problem. There appears to be an abnormally high number of students being driven to school by their parents In summary, formal action needs to be taken by the Council regarding traffic control for the Orono School campus on Old Crystal Bay Road. The stop signs that are being used have not been approved by the Council and are technically only authorized to correct an emergency hazardous traffic situation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve installation of a 4-way stop sign on Old Crystal Bay Road at the south middle/ high school driveway, pedestrian crosswalk, based on Stop Sign Warrant 2B-5 No.l. in the Minnesota Manual on UniformTraffic Control Devices Manual. Motion to approve installation of "No Passenger Loading and Unloading" signs to the no parking area along Old Crystal Bay Road in the vicinity of the Orono school’s campus. Page 6 of 6 __ I |>n A f • ra- > 1 C UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE ORDER NO. 54014 WHEREAS, the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, has published a Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, and 1 WHEREAS, such Manual has been approved by the Federal Highway Administrator as the National Standard for all highways open to public travel in accordance with Title 23, U. S. Code, Sections 109(b), 109(d) and 402(a), and WHEREAS, such Manual was developed with the cooper­ ation of the American Association of State Highway OfHcials, NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to authority vested in me, and as provided in Minnesota Statutes 1971, Section 169.06, Subdivision 1, I do hereby adopt and prescribe such Manual as the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices For Streets And Highways Of The State Of Minnesota, subject to such amendments and addenda which are herewith adopted, and which may also be adopted from time to time in the future by Commissioner’s Order. % This Order supercedes Order No. 32517 dated February 16, 1962, Order No. 49894 dated September 15, 1971 and Order No. 50987 dated April 21, 1972. Dated at St. Paul, Minnesota this 20th Day of December, 1973 C Ray LapJ^^^d^ Commissioner of Highways SlMt 5'IAIUFC I • • . • >•*> SIGNS AND SIGNALS 169.06 SIGNS, SIGNALS, MARKINGS. dons for a uniform ® manual and spccifica- chapterforusc upon highways P«)vision^f thisso far as possible conform to Ae system system shall correlate with and don of State Highway Officials. T^e American Associa- wording of minimum-maintenance road cfinc include the design and dons by the commissioner as herein providid kHf manual and specifica- cluding section 14.386. . exempted from chapte7l4. in- r PHMc K-::^ui2, THKFflc COUfm n \ s ~ £>'.\s fK.fvv ■tii cn jzto G Busts 4 C\ V IPM/ SC)U\j4 H)6^A Sl P-.Oi/L DW l,9P(3 \)<c'fW(\islOc\y I,f \ MO CAtS M ^)n-^ h ‘0 V/ S CJ \ V'. I'm 1 0 D L F 5C\i^0 0L X)W I /- Si!V PA>L,Vqi,!4 -\l6n I vi VuL \ o r4 C^' SCP.c)r;:. OLV rv.-a'PLi i c. :-•■ op: Ct, G M lit CAR.LS0kl FIELD 0 !s\ LV By? PAB>ASkG F Mk: LOi SCALE l"-'-AOO H X 1 a iLki L AKi F «r ' >• tow \0W Busts CARS CA(l C7PT1^M 1 OS w t idoudiita 6IILK) LAKIH or\\ok\s faon-T B low jlr^ oo 1 SOU^W O?'\\0 Vi rH :S cars CAh.? I (3^ - :> I BMSts OKlLV i Middle 5CHQD Ll wi REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION mcctING UCI 2 3 2000 Cl IT ur Oho/vu DATE: October 23, 2000 ITEM NO.: ji Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Giq>pa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Extension of Hennepin County Agreement for Mapping Data Use On July 12, 1999 the Council approved a resolution authorizing the City to enter into an agreement with Hennepin County for use of computerized mapping data generated by the County. This agreement expires on December 31, 2000. We are recommending approval of the attached resolution authorizing the extension of this agreement until December 31, 2001. COUNCD. ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve resolution authorizing extension of the agreement with Hennepin County for use of computerized mapping data. I '■*' L A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF ORONO TO EXTEND AN AGREEMENT FOR THE USE OF HENNEPIN COUNTY'S ELECTRONIC PROPRIETARY DATA BASE WHEREAS, the County has developed an eioctronic proprietary geographical digitized data base which was designed using an automated mapping facility software product which proprietary geographical digitized data base is hereinafter refci red to as "Electronic Proprietary Data Base (EPDB)" and which is described in the Hennepin County Conditional Use License Agreement attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono desires to use the County's EPDB in the course of conducting the City's business; and WHEREAS, the County intends that any additions and modifications to the EPDB relating to the County remain wholly compatible with the County's EPDB for the period of the copyright and information added to the data base by either the County or the City shall be made available to either party; and WHEREAS, in acknowledgment of the Entity's above stated purpose, the County is agreeable to provide to the City the EPDB described in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the parties agree that the execution of this Agreement is necessary in order to adequately protect said EPDB. WHEREAS, on July 12, 1999 the City Council approved Resolution No. 4321 authorizing execution of the agreement with an expiration date of December 31,1999. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the City Council authorizes extension of the agreement through December 31,2001. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono this 23th day of October, 2000. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Page 1 of 1 Agreement No. A18439 HENNEPIN COUNTV' CONDmONAL USE LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made by and betu'ccn the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, Taxpayer Services Department, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the “County”, and the City of Orono, herein^er referred to as the “Entity”. For purposes of this Agreement, the address of the County is A703 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0073 and the address of Entity is 2750 Kelley Parkway, Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the County has developed electronic forms of certain data bases and an electronic proprietary geographical digitized data base hereinafter referred to as EPDB ; and WHEREAS, the Entity desires to use the County’s EPDB in the course «..f conducting the Entity’s business; and WHEREAS, in acknowledgment of the Entity’s above-stated purpose, the County is agreeable to provide to the Entity the EPDB, and WHEREAS, the parties agree that the execution of this Agreement is necessary in order to adequately protect said EPDB; and WHEREAS, the County exclusively owns the EDPB which is the subject of this Agreement and has the authority and legal right to grant Entity a license to have and use the EPDB as provided in this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the EPDB is trade secret or confidential information imder the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and is governed by Minnesota Statutes sections 375.86 and 13.03 as well as other applicable state and federal law. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, as well as the obligations herein made and undertaken, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows. Forml (10/98) 4 1. 2.1 3.1 Section 1 SCOPE OF AGREEMENT 1.1 This License Agreement shall apply to the EPDB, which Hennepin County will provide to Entity, after a specific request has been made to County. Section 2 GRANT OF LLMITED LICENSE The County hereby grants the Entity a non-exclusive, nontransferable and nonassignable limited use license to use the EPDB which includes self developed computer software under Minn. Stat. § 375.86. Said license shall commence on the date of approval of this Agreement by the County and shall extend throughout the term of the Agreement unless terminated sooner, in accordance with the provisions hereof. Section 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION RESERVATION OF TITLE The Entity acknowledges and agrees that the EPDB is the exclusive property of the • County, including, but not limited to, any and all indexes, and includes commercially valuable information which reflect the efforts of skilled development experts and required the investment of considerable amounts of time and money, and that the County has treated the EPDB as trade secret and confidential information, which County entrusts to the Entity in confidence to use in the conduct of the Entity’s business. The Entity further acknowledgestuid agrees the EPDB is a creative selection, coordination, arrangement aiid method of arrangement of data which is identified as being subject to copyright ^ protection; is self-developed computer software under Minn. Stat. § 375.86 and is an entire or substantial and discrete portion of a pattern, compilation, method, technique, process, data base or system developed with significant expenditure of funds by County under Minn. Stat. § 13.03. The Entity agrees that the County owns and reserves all rights, protection and benefits afforded under federal copyright law in all EPDB furmshed to the Entity as unpublished works, as well as all rights, protection and benefits afforded under any other law relating to confidential and/or trade secret information resnecting said EPDB, and that the Entity will abide by all relevant laws, rules, regulations and decisions which afford protection to the County for its confidential and trade secret information and said copyright. This Agreement does not effect any transfer of title in or to any EPDB of the County. The Entity acknowledges that it is granted only a limited right of use of such EPDB, which right is not coupled with an interest, and the Entity^ shall not assert nor cause or cooperate with others to assert any right, title, or interest in any EPDB of the County. I w Section 4 PROTECTION OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION 4.1 Obligations of Confidentiality, Limitations of Use. The Entity shall neither disclose, furnish, sell, resell, transfer, duplicate, reproduce nor disseminate, in whole or in part, the EPDB of the County and its unique design, arrangement or method of arrangement in its electronic form furnished to the Entity to (1) any other person, firm, entity, organization, or subsidiary, except as expressly authorized hereunder; or (2) any employee of the Entity who does not need to obtain access thereto in connection with the Entity s exercise of its rights under this Agreement. The Entity may have and use the EPDB on a corporate-wide basis and shall have the rights to use the EPDB on a Imuted number of sites, provided the equipment on which the EPDB is maintained supports only equipment operated by the Entity and the EPDB is used only for the conduct of the Entity’s own internal business by Entity employees. All employees having access to the EPDB shall be mformed of the requirements contained in Section 4 herein. The Entity shall not otherwise copy or reproduce any EPDB of the County. Under no circumstances may the entity disclose or disseminate any EPDB to any other public or private entity. The obligations of the Entity to protect confidentiality wliich are established by this Agreement apply to the EPDB itself and not to any graphic representation or products produced by die Entity while using the EPDB. Any authorized consultants, contractors or agents of Entity must properly execute and file a separate EPDB Conditional Use License Agreement with Hennepin County. The Entity expressly agrees to use the County’s EPDB in the ordinary course of its business and all such use shall bear a notice of copyright by Hennepin County. 4.2 Secure HandUng. The Entity shall require that all EPDB be kept in a secure location at 2750 Kelley Parkway, Crystal Bay, MN 55323 and maintained in a manner so as to reasonably preclude unauthorized persons from having access thereto. The Entity shall devote its reasonable efforts to ensure that all persons afforded access to EPDB protect same against unauthorized use, dissemination or disclosure. Entity agrees it will not knowingly or negligently allow its employees, agents or independent contractors to copy, sell, disclose or otherwise make the EPDB available to others. Entity agrees to immediately notify the County by telephone and in writing if Entity becomes aware of any unauthorized duplication, sale or other disclosure. Entity further agrees to prevent unauthorized disclosure by taking appropriate security measures including, but not limited to, providing physical security for copies of the EPDB and taking all steps Entity^ takes to protect information, data or other tangible and intangible property of its own tnai Entity regards as proprietary, confidential or nonpublic. Except for off-site backup, the Entity shall not remove or cause or allow to be removed from the Entity s place of business or the place of business of any EPDB or any copy thereof without the prior written consent of the County, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 4.3 Assistance of the Entity. At the request of the County and expense of the Entity, the Entity shall use good faith and reasonable efforts to assist the County in identifying any % r ,4. A use, copying, or disclosure of any EPDB by any current or former Entity personnel — or anyone else who may have come in possession of said EPDB while the same was in the Entity’s possession — in any manner that is contrary to the provisions of this Agreement so long as the County shall have provided the Entity with information reasonably justifying the conclusion of the County that such contrary use may have occurred. 4.4 Survival of Confidentiality ObUgartons. The Entity’s obligations respecting confidentiality of the EPDB shall survive termination of this Agreement for any reason and shall remain in effect for as long as the Entity continues to possess or control any EPDB furnished by the Count)-. In addition, the County shall remain entitled to enforce its copyright and propriety interests in all EPDB. Section 5 TERM, TERMINATION 5.1 The Entity and the COUNTY agree that this Agreement is in effect during the period commencing J anuary 1,1999 and terminating December 31,1999. This Agreement shall commence from the date hereof, unless sooner terminated by either party with cause upon three (3) calendar days’ written notice to the other. The expiration or termination of this Agreement shall automatically and without further action by the County terminate and extinguish the license. In the event of any such expiration or termination, the County shall have the right to take immediate possession of said EPDB, and all copies thereof wherever located, and without demaind or notice. Within five (5) days after expiration or termination of this Agreement, the Entity shall return the EPDB and all copies thereof to the County, or upon request by the County, the Entity shall destroy all of the same and all copies thereof and certify in writing to the County that the same has been destroyed. 5.1.1 It is agreed that any right or remedy provided for herein shall not be considered as the exclusive right or remedy but shall be considered to be in addition to any other right or remedy hereunder or allowed by law, equity or statute. 5.1.2 The County’s failure to insist upon strict performance of any covenant, agreement or stipulation of the Agreement, or to exercise any right herein contained shall not be a waiver or relinquishment of such covenant, agreement, stipulation or right, unless the County stipulates thereto in \s7iting. Any such written consent shall not constitute a waiver or relinquishment of such covenant, agreement, stipulation or right. 1 6.1 1 > 7.2 i' Section 6 INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 7.6 The Entity acknowledges and agrees that unauthorized disclosure or use of the EPDB or any part thereof could cause irreparable harm and significant injury to the County, which may be difficult to measure with certainty or to compensate through damages. Accordingly, the Entity agrees that the County may seek and obtain against the Entity and/nr any Other person or entity injunctive relief against the breach or threatened breach of the foregoing undertakings, in addition to any other equitable or legal remedies which may be available. Section 7 OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS 7.1 No Agency. The parties hereto are independent contractors, and nothing herein shall be construed to create an agency, joint venture, partnership or other form of business association between the parties hereto. No Waiver. No delay or omission by either party hereto to exercise any right or power occurring upon any noncompliance or default by the other party with respect to any of the terms of this Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof unless the same is consented to in writing. A waiver by either of the parties hereto of any of the covenants, conditions, or agreements to be observed by the other shall not be construed to be a waiver of any succeeding breach thereof or of any covenant, condition, or agreement herein contained. All remedies provided for in this Agreement shall be cumulative and in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other remedies available to either party at law, in equity, or othenvise. 7,3 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. • 7.4 Entire Agreement. This License Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties, and there are no understandings or agreements relative hereto other than those that are expressed herein. No change, w'aiver, or discharge hereof shall be valid unless in writing and executed by the party against whom such change, waiver, or discharge is sought to be enforced. 7.5. No Assignment. Neither party shall assign, sublet or transfer this Agreement, either in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the other party, and any attempt to do so shall be void and of no force and effect. THE ENTITY AGREES THAT THE COUNTY IS FURNISHING THE EPDB ON AN “AS IS” BASIS, WITHOUT ANY SUPPORT WHATSOEVER, AND WITHOUT REPRESENTATION OR ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED » •• vrh 7.7 7.8 WARRANTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT IN ANY MANNER LUVUTED TO, FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, MERCHANTABILITY OR THE ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS OF THE EPDB. THE COUNTY’S SOLE LIABILITY AND THE ENTITY’S EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR AN*Y SUBSTANTIAL DEFECT WHICH IMPAIRS THE USE OF THE EPDB FOR THE PURPOSE STATED HEREIN SHALL BE THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT. THE COUNTY DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE EPDB ARE ERROR FREE. THE EPDB WERE DEVELOPED FOR THE COUNTY’S OWN INTERNAL BUSINESS PURPOSES AND THE COUNTY DOES NOT REPRESENT THAT THE EPDB CAN BE USED FOR NAVIGATIONAL, TRACKING OR ANY OTHER PURPOSE REQUIRING EXACTING MEASUREMENT OF DISTANCE OR DIRECTION OR PRECISION IN THE DEPICTION OF GEOGRAPHIC FEATURES. THE COUNTY DISCLAIMS ANY OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, RESPECTING THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT OR THE EPDB. In no event shall the County be liable for actual, direct, indirect, special, incidental, consequential damages (even if the County has been advised of the possibility of such damage) or lost of profit, loss of business or any other financial loss or any other damage arising out of performance or failure of performance of this Agreement by the County. The County and the Entity agree each will be responsible for their own acts and omissions under this Agreement and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of the other party under the Agreement and the results thereof. The parties’ respective liabilities shall be governed by the provisions of the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466, and other applicable law. This paragraph shall not be construed to bar legal remedies one party may have for the other party’s failure to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. Notice. Any notice or demand shall be in writing and shall be sent registered or certified mail to the other party address as follows: To the Entitv:City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Crystal Bay, MN 55323 A w 7.9 7.10 7.11 To Hennepin County; Hennepin County Administrator A-2300 Government Center (233) Minneapolis, MN 55487-0233 Copy to:Robert L. Hanson Hennepin County Chief Information Officer A-1900 Government Center (190) Minneapolis, MN 55487-0190 Copy to:Patrick H. O’Connor Director, Taxpayer Services Department A-600 Government Center (060) Minneapolis, MN 55487-0060 Whereas Clauses. The matters set forth in the “Whereas” clauses on page one of this Agreement are incorporated into and made a part hereof by this reference. Survival of Provisions. It is expressly understood and agreed that the obligations and warranties of the Entity under Sections 3,4,5,6,7.6, and 7.7 hereof and the obligations and warranties of the Entity and the County which by their sense and context are intended to survive the performance thereof by the Entity and the County, shall so survive the completion of performance and termination or cancellation of tWs Agreement. Authority. The person or persons executing this License Agreement on behalf of Entity represent that they are duly authorized to execute this License Agreement on behalf of ^ Entity and represent and warrant that this License Agreement is a legal, valid and binding obligation and is enforceable in accordance with its terms. • * i-b COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL ENTITY, having signed this agreement, and the County having duly approved this agreement on the day of _____, 1 99^ , and pursuant to such approval, the proper County officials having signedrois'^ontractl the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forA. • Approved as to form andjPKCCUtion Forml (10/98) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STAmOF MINNESOTA 3Uty/County Admini;Assistant/Deputy/County Admimstrator CITY OF ORONO City Clerk / IvJaMger 8 —-jr.--wT. t«wr-r.. '.I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: October a 2 3 2000 ui nr u^ ITEM NO,I Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services's Directors Report Item Description: Navarre Parking Lot Paving Assessment - Resolution As part of the Navarre Parking Lot paving project, repaving of a privately owned parking area directly adjacent to the public portion of the lot was completed. This peeking area is located directly behind the Shoreline Drive building. Instead of being billed directly for this work, the property has requested that the costs be assessed against the property over a three-year time period. The owner has agreed to waive his rights to an assessment hearing. The assessment amount will be $2,500. The assessment interest rate will be 8% which is the standard rate used for delinquent fee assessments. Council approval of the attached resolution adopting the assessment roll is required. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve a resolution adopting the assessment roll for the Navarre Parking Lot paving project. J H ^*1 ► if IP- > ‘ r- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE NAVARRE PARKING LOT PAVING PROJECT Whereas, the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota has authorized completion of the Navarre Parking Lot paving project; and Whereas, the petitoner has agreed to waive any and all rights to appeal the specical assessment, with regard to any procedural or substantive rights, rights to a public hearing, rights to any notices under Minnesota Chapter 429 or any ordinances of the city, tind the constitutions or laws of the State of Minnesota or the United States; and Whereas, the property owner of3382 Shoreline Drive has requested assessment of the costs for the Navarre Parking Lot over a three year period; and Whereas, the City has obtained from the Hennepin County Auditor, levy number 15030 for this assessment; and Whereas, the City hereby authorizes and directs the Hennepin County Auditor to levy the assessment over a three year time period at an 8% interest rate. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 3 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2001 and shall bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2001. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota hereby authorizes and directs the County Auditor of Hennepin County to assess properties identified in the attached assessment roll, made a part hereof, for the amounts appearing along with such properties, plus eight percent (8%) interest added as directed. Said amounts to be collected along v^ith property taxes beginning in 2001. Page 1 of 2 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on October 23,2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor I> ..I 'I'i* ■f : ■Kt; . Page 2 of 2 MM -i»-- ^ >-->r-.<*» r»w»"— ^ fli mmmm Assessment Roll for Delinquent 2000 General Service Fees i 19-Oct-OO MankipaUty: ORONO Levy Number: 15030 Municipal Code: 38 Levy Description: Navarre Parking Lot Paving Total Project Assessment: S 2,300.00 Interest Rate: 8%Number of Years Payable: 3 IT Vi PIDS Addition Total Lot Block Name Code Principal Street Property Address if Mailing Street Address Mailing City Address Units 17-117-23 44 0100 $2,300.00 Glass Partners II 3382 Shoreline Drive 3382 Wa-^er Lane Mound, MN 55364 $2,300.00 1''-J'V - iSr *m I y. : ■ ..i : o V-:. Iiilti4ll[tfai-T iUifii I uro • # m Mm n : r i, .*• REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION roiu,^„ mp^ing 2 3 2000 I O h O/VO DATE: October 23, 2000 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Request for Payment, Willow View Subdivision This request for payment is per the conditions in the Final Plat Resolution for this subdivision. This request is for of the costs of the water main from the new middle school to the subdivision west property line, and the costs for water main extensions to the north and south property lines of the subdivision property. Costs for the public trails in the subdivision are also included. The developer paid the entire park fee dedication for the subdivision, and this payment is reimbursement for the public trail costs. We have reviewed this information and recommend payment of these costs for the water main and public trails, in the Willow View Subdivision, to the Bancor Group. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Payment, Willow View Subdivision to the Bancor Group, in the amount of $69,214.16 If - •0? f p-Li' -.-K, &' V -J-C k- ... ■ ©SSOCtATES ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS, INC. TTO I .• • • ^ • ... September 29,2000 Mr. Greg Gappa City of Orono PO Box 66 Orono, MN 55323-0066 Mr. Paul Weinberger City of Orono PO Box 66 Orono, MN 55323-0066 Re: WILLOW VIEW Otto Project No. 99286 Dear Paul and Greg: Enclosed is a copy of Pay Request Number Three for the Willow View Project. This Pay Request includes costs for which the City had agreed to reimburse The Bancor Group. A breakdown of these costs follow: WATERMAIN CITY A) Connection to School TOTAL SHARE 765 L.F. @ $16.00/L.F...............................$12,240.00 ......$6,120.00 12" X 8" Wet Tap ......................................$ 2,000.00......$1,000.00 B) Watermain Extensions to Property Lines 895 L.F. @ $16.00/L.F....................................................$14.320 00 TRAIL 4218 S.Y. @ $10.90/S.Y ............................................................$45,976.20 Subgrade Correction.................................................................. TOTAL - $69,214.16 On behalf of The Bancor Group, I am requesting that the City of Orono reimburse The Bancor Group $69,214.16 for their portion of construction costs associated with the Willow View 9 WEST DIVISION STREET - BUFFALO. MINN. 55313 - (763) 682-4727 FAX (763) 682-3522 Development. If you have any questions or need additional information, do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Otto Associates Engineers and Land Sup^ors, Inc. tin P. Campion,^.E. Project Engineer End. cc: Dave Newman, The Bancor Group Tom Kellogg, Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlink & Assoc. I 1.' r P: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MCFTING UCI 2 3 2000 DATE: Octob^!2^^5(W0^''‘^ ITEM NO.: ^ / Department Approval: Name Grcgoiy A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Change Order Number 1, Navarre Park Improvements Project This change order is for installation of water service with a yard hydrant to the project, and a deduction for installation of modified play area concrete curbing. The contractor suggested an easier and more cost effective method for forming and construction of the curbing. This results in a savings of $4,865 for the curb installation. We have reviewed the information submitted by the contractor and fmd the proposed change acceptable. When the contract for the park improvements was awarded the Council authorized the installation of water service with a yard hydrant at an estimated cost of $5,000. This was requested by the Park Commission to allow for future installation of landscaping in the park. Without water available, it will be very difficult to find area residents to help maintain r\ny landscaping. The change order amount for this item is $6,000. The change order increase for the two items is $1,135 for a revised contract amount of $96,464 We have reviewed this information and recommend Council approval of Change Order Number 1, Navarre Park Improvements for the water service and modified concrete play area curbing in the amount of $1,135 to Koolmo Construction. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Change Order Number 1, Navarre Park Improvements for Koolmo Construction, in the amount of $1,135. 1 r L m Bonestroo Rosene Andertik& ^\]t| Associates lA9ln«€fS 4 Architect! Owner: City of Orono. 2750 Kelly Pkwy., Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Date October 5. 2000 Contractor: Koolmo Construction, 1334 - 146ih Lane NW, Andover. MN 55304 Bond Company: Amwest Surety Insurance Co» (MN), 600 S. Hwy. 196 Ste. 655, Mpls, MN, 55426 Bond No: 120001269 .u.I ,. • CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 NAVARRE PARK IMPROVEMENTS BRA FILE NO. 139-99-109 Descriodon of Work The contract provides for construction of new playground facilities and site improvements at Navarre Park. During the project, water service with a yard hydrant was added and the design of the play area curb was modified. The City of Orono and Koolmo Construction, Inc. have mutually agreed to the additional compensation for the water service with a yard hydrant and the reduction in the unit price for concrete play area curbing based on the modified curb design. Therefore, it is hereby mutually agreed that an overall contract increase of SI,135 will be made to the monies due the contractor for the work as described in Proposal Request Number 1 and Proposal Request Number 2 and the quotation from Koolmo Construction, Inc. No.Item Unit Contract Ouantity Unit Price Total Amount 1 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Water service and yard hydrant as described in Proposal LS I $6,000.00 $6,000.00 2 Request No. 1 Concrete play area curbing (8''xl8**) - Deduct from LF 278 -$35.00 ($9,730.00) 3 contract Modified concrete play are curbing LF 278 $17.50 $4,865.00 Total CHANGE ORDER NO. 1:$1,135.00 CbHife Order Na 1 ■4 i A • • ^ . .1 /I *r r# 'i Original Contract Amount Previous Change Orders This Change Order Revised Contact Amount (including this change order) $95,329.00 $0.00 $1,135.00 $96,464.00 Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. -y/A^A. Date: lo.^.oo Approved by Contractor: KOOLMO CONSTRUCTION Approved by Owner: CITY OF ORONO /O- '^-oc Date Date cc: Owner Contractor Bonding Company Bonestroo & Assoc. •» i' £ i ■I f V- .1 I \ Chinge Order No. 1 \ « REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION OniiMr'ii n/ifr^TING ucr 2 3 2000 DATE: Cl I Y Uh OHO/VO October 19,2000 ITEM NO:Q. Department Approval: Name Tom Kuehn Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Certification of Delinquent Utilities and General Service Fees Attachments: (A) Resolution providing for the collection of delinquent sewer, water, recycling program fees, septic inspection fees, and general service fees. (B) Assessment roll. Each year the city certifies to the county, all unpaid annual service charges for the septic inspection program, the unpaid recycling program fees, all delinquent sewer and water accounts of $50.00 or more, and the delinquent general services for false alarm fees and developers improvement fees, to be collected with the following year's taxes. In addition to the outstanding amounts delinquent, eight percent (8%) interest is added to all accounts and an administrative fee is added to the septic accounts. At this time the total to be assessed is $ 69,104.16, including administrative fees. This amount will be decreased by any payments received up to the final payment date of November 29, 2000. A copy of the assessment roll is attached for your review. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adoption of resolution providing for the collection of delinquent charges for the 2000 sewer and water utility services, the septic inspection program, the recycling program, the false alarms, developers improvement fees, and other general service fees. WPWT>tO\WrDOCS\TOM\Ci:RTJ«OOU«.wpd ! • P A RESOLUTION FOR THE COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT 2000 SEWER AND WATER UTILITY SERVICE CHARGES, RECYCLING PROGRAM FEES, ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGES FOR THE ON-SITE SEWAGE TREATMENT (SEPTIC) INSPECTION PROGRAM, AND GENERAL SERVICE FEES Whereas, the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota has enacted certain ordinances under Minnesota Statutes, therefore pursuant to Chapter 3, Chapter 12, Chapter 9, and Chapter 10, Orono City Code pertaining to payment and collection of sewer and water charges and annual service charges for recycling and the on-site sewage treatment (septic) inspection program, and false alarm fees, and developers improvement fees; and Whereas, the charges identified in the attached list of properties are delinquent in nature; and VHiereas, the City has obtained from the Hennepin County Auditor, levy number 14997 for the delinquent accounts; and Whereas, the City hereby authorizes and directs the Hennepin County Auditor to extend upon the property tax lists of the County and further collect said assessments thereon, as provided by law; and Whereas, the City hereby authorizes and directs the Hennepin County Auditor to add eight percent (8%) interest, as directed, to all amounts due. Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota hereby authorizes and directs the County Auditor of Hennepin County to assess properties identified in the attached list, made a part hereof, for the amounts of delinquent utilities/fees appearing along with such properties, plus eight percent (8%) interest added as directed. Said amounts to be collected along with property taxes collected in 2001. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on October 23,2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor RESO-OIIO^DELINQUE iXS Page 1 of 1 ... — PiD 0211723210019 0211723210023 0211723240003 0211723310011 0211723310019 0211723310028 0211723310047 0211723430026 0311723210015 0311723310002 0311723330004 0311723340023 0411723110011 0411723210003 0411723210007 0411723220003 0411723220020 0411723220026 0411723230004 0411723230010 0411723340013 0411723420017 0411723430002 0411723430003 0511723110002 0511723120001 0511723120021 0511723130017 0511723130032 0511723130035 0511723130052 0511723140031 0511723140039 0511723140057 Account Number Amount 4 70145-00-5 4 50060-01-6 4 50280-00-3 2 50570-00-1 2 21340-00-8 2 40539-00-5 4 50450-00-8 2 21165-00-5 4 12150-00-3 4 10465-00-4 4 82275-00-2 4 82095-00-4 4 12565-00-9 4 82845-00-5 4 80080-00-8 2 83195-00-0 2 10160-00-8 2 40200-00-6 2 40370-00-4 2 40400-00-0 4 23070-00-4 4 82780-00-5 4 22765-00-6 4 22675-00-2 4 33405-00-9 4 33445-00-1 4 13485-00-7 2 13560-00-3 2 23405-00-6 2 23407-00-8 2 23415-00-9 2 10325-00-5 2 70340-00-4 0 10350-00-9 83.08 83.08 83.08 384.93 189.26 482.78 83.08 384.94 83.08 83.08 60.00 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 384.94 495.55 384.94 189.26 384.93 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 384.94 384.94 287.10 384.94 384.94 384.94 58.42 Address 145 SMITH AVE 60 ORONO ORCHARD RD S 280 ORONO ORCHARD RD S 570 ORONO ORCHARD RD S 1340 FOX ST 539 KEENE AVE 450 ORONO ORCHARD RD S 1165 FERNDALE RDW 2150 COLIN DR 465 BROWN RD S 2275 WEBBER HILLS RD 2095 WEBBER HILLS RD 2565 COUNTRYSIDE DR 2845 WATERTOWN RD 80 WEAR LA 3195 WATERTOWN RD 160 CYGNET PL 200 LEAF ST 370 LEAF ST 400 LEAF ST 3070 FARVIEW LA 2780 WHITE OAK CIR 2765 FOX ST 2675 FOX ST 3405 HIGH LA 3445 HIGH LA 3485 CHRISTINE DR 3560 BAYSIDE RD 3405 EASTLAKE ST C7 EASTLAKE ST 341 > EASTLAKE ST C CRESTVIEW AVE 340 TONKA AVE 350 CRESTVIEW AVE Page 1 Name CAMPBELL. BETH ANN WHITELEY, DOUGLAS E. RAICHE, VICTORIA H. HAWKINSON. ROGER J. LITWIN, ALLAN N. PAINE. BEVERLY CARNETT. KEVEN BOWMAN II. BRADLEY C. SHAUGHNESSY. C.K. SILBERMANN. BEVERLY JOHNSON. THERESA HAWES. JACK N. MICH. THOMAS B. KNAPPENBERGER. SW & GM DE SANTIS. GARY RITTER. THOMAS C. J. OLSON/ P. DA BERNARDI BELLAMY. LOUIS R. KROLL. KENNAN K. RYAN. ROBERT A. SILUS. DAVID KLING. RICHARD A. ROUX. YVES D. SLOCUM. PETER J. REILLY. KEVIN M. BRADEN. MP HAGBERG. CARLTON KYLE. RICHARD KRONHOLM. MARK HOLZEM. REBECCA L. JARNIG. CARL A. SULLIVAN. WILLIAM L. PETERSON. BRAD D. THADDEUS ALLARD r I 0511723210023 0511723230004 0511723230013 0511723230014 0511723230040 0611723120008 0611723220009 0611723220019 0611723220023 0611723230004 0611723330004 0611723410021 0611723430009 0711723120019 0711723140007 0711723140018 0711723140020 0711723140060 0711723140062 0711723210013 0711723220016 0711723230002 0711723240045 0711723310001 0711723310016 0711723310023 0711723320003 0711723320027 0711723320030 0711723320054 0711723320056 0711723330004 0711723330005 0711723330010 - Account Number Amount 2 13750-00-4 384.94 0 13965-00-6 87.62 2 80340-00-7 187.10 2 80348-00-5 384.94 2 80309-00-4 384.94 4 14375-00-6 60.00 4 14645-00-8 83.08 4 14775-00-4 83.08 4 50150-00-7 83.08 4 50330-00-5 83.08 4 84700-00-9 83.08 2 40480-00-4 384.94 2 50770-00-5 384.94 2 20945-00-6 384.94 2 41025-00-2 144.26 2 51055-00-4 384.94 2 51015-00-2 384.93 2 51169-00-8 438.20 2 51160-00-9 287.10 2 81001-00-4 101.26 4 84701-00-0 83.08 2 51060-00-2 384.94 0 81006-00-9 58.60 2 54445-00-6 297.71 2 61347-00-7 189.25 2 61348-00-8 289.26 2 74725-00-7 384.94 2 74635-00-3 284.94 .2 61310-00-1 384.94 2 61345-00-5 384.94 2 54685-00-2 384.94 2 61398-00-3 384.94 2 61396-00-1 189.25 0 61405-01-3 56.72 Address 3750 BAYSIDE RD 3965 BAYSIDE RD 340 WESTLAKE ST 348 WESTLAKE ST 309 WESTLAKE ST 4375 BAYSIDE RD 4645 BAYSIDE RD 4775 BAYSIDE RD 150 NORTH SHORE DR W 330 NORTH SHORE DR W 4700 WEST BRANCH RD 480 LINDEN AVE 770 NORTH ARM DR 945 FOREST ARMS LA 1025 LOMA LINDA AVE 1055 NORTH ARM DR 1015 NORTH ARM DR 1169 NORTH ARM DR 1160 NORTH ARM DR 1001 WILDHURSTTR 4701 WEST BRANCH RD 1060 NORTH SHORE DR W 1006 WILDHURSTTR 4445 NORTH SHORE DR 1347 REST PT CIR 1348 REST PTCIR 4725 TONKAVIEW LA 4635 TONKAVIEW LA 1310 REST PTLA 1345 REST PTLA 4685 NORTH SHORE DR 1398 REST PT RD 1396 REST PT RD 1405 REST PT RD Page 2 Name VALERIUS. GARY JOHN GRAHAM HARRER, TIMOTHY R. OLSON. ROBERT A. PERL. GREGG S. WHITE. STEVE PFEIFFER. JOHN J. EVAN. MELVIN DZUBAY. STEVEN LINDEEN. KRISTIAN R. KRAHL. JACK D. GRADY. LISA M. LONGSETH. JON GOTTSCHALK. MICHAEL K. WHITMAN. WENDY DAHL. RONALD D. CONRAD. RONALD C. ROESLER. KRISTI KELSEY, KENNETH FERRELL. NANCY L. TRAPP. ROBERT L. VON BANK. DUANE A. FG JORGENSEN WITTIG. GAYLE E. PINEGAR. WILLIAM E. HANKISON. KEITH O. CHRISTIANSON. EARL BOON, MARK H. REINHART. ERIC D. URAN, JOSHUA D. CORBIN. TYLER C. KOLTES, MARY WALSH. PATRICK J. COLLINS CAVENDER “i ► . V 0711723340003 0711723410014 0711723410030 0711723410054 0711723410086 0711723410090 0711723430008 0711723440020 0711723440021 0711723440026 0711723440062 0711723440088 0811723130001 0811723230020 0811723230024 0811723310005 0811723320016 0811723330027 0811723330063 0811723330068 0811723330075 0811723340050 0811723410002 0811723410007 0811723410009 0811723430008 0811723430014 0811723440006 0911723120005 0911723210002 0911723320004 0911723320008 1011723240002 1011723310004 Account Number Amount 2 54425-00-0 2 51245-00-5 2 21305-00-1 0 51368-00-1 2 51345-00-2 2 51355-00-5 2 54203-00-8 2 34167-00-7 2 34175-00-8 2 34174-00-7 2 54056-00-2 2 34166-00-6 2 71066-00-3 2 41127-00-1 2 41038-00-8 2 11376-00-0 2 71300-01-4 2 13907-00-0 2 51525-00-0 2 53970-00-6 2 51540-00-1 1 53655-00-4 2 53210-01-2 2 53260-00-4 2 53268-00-2 2 53510-00-0 0 53490-00-7 2 13220-00-0 4 50850-00-6 4 50885-00-0 2 53048-00-2 0 53160-01-0 4 11045-00-9 2 52080-00-7 384.94 117.10 384.94 310.56 189.26 270.21 101.64 384.94 384.94 384.94 384.94 384.94 287.04 101.29 287.10 102.70 287.10 384.94 384.94 189.26 384.94 652.93 353.49 384.94 384.94 188.70 79.40 384.94 83.08 166.16 189.26 39.70 83.08 189.26 Address 4425 NORTH SHORE DR 1245 NORTH ARM DR 1305 ELMWOOD AVE 1368 NORTH ARM DR 1345 NORTH ARM DR 1355 NORTH ARM DR 4203 NORTH SHORE DR 4167 HIGHWOOD RD 4175 HIGHWOOD RD 4174 HIGHWOOD KD 4056 NORTH SHORE DR 4166 HIGHWOOD RD 1065 TONKAWA RD 1127 LOMA LINDA AVE 1038 LOMA LINDA AVE 1376 BALDUR PARK RD 1300 SPRUCE PL 3907 CHERRY AVE 1525 MINNIE AVE 3970 NORTH SHORE DR 1540 NORTH ARM DR 3655 NORTH SHORE DR 3210 NORTH SHORE DR 3260 NORTH SHORE DR 3268 NORTH SHORE DR 3510 NORTH SHORE DR 3490 NORTH SHORE DR 3220 BOHNS PT LA 850 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S 885 OLD CRYSTAL BAY S 3048 NORTH SHORE DR 3160 NORTH SHORE DR 1045 BROWN RD S 2080 NORTH SHORE DR Name DICKEY. DANIEL J. HOVLAND, ROBERT G. CARLSON. CHARLES E. JOHN WALKER SHEKELS. SCOTT TULLY. CHRISTOPHER WAHTERA. FREDERICK HALVERSON. MERLIN L. HALVERSON. MERLIN L. DEVAAN. G.D. RENO. ROGER C. RUMSCH. ROBERT KYLE. RICHARD ROTH. DALE F ANDERSON. ROBERT B. WANG. JACK R. KYLE. RICHARD CLARK III. GERALD MERNICK. JOEL ZWART. TIMOTHY L. LINDGREN. EDDIE A. HAGEN. AL LIBBY. DENNIS L. TORBERG. DANIEL J. MILLER. DENNIS HART. STEVEN M. JOHN JONES ALLEN. RICHARD D. HALE. RAYMOND D. DEVELOPMENT. ANCO LAND DEPIETRO. JAMES MICHAEL WALLACE VAN DE VEIRE. STEVEN D. LA QUEY. KERMIT M. Page 3 *1 ’/■ v/'ui 4 / I ►^': *• PID 1011723310006 1011723310007 1011723310033 1011723310036 1011723310050 1011723310072 1011723320007 1011723330001 1011723420018 1511723210004 1711723220025 1711723220028 1711723220029 1711723230017 1711723230019 1711723240025 1711723240027 1711723310017 1711723310030 1711723310034 1711723310037 1711723310040 1711723310041 1711723340023 1711723340026 1711723340034 04 128 04 • • I 1711723411 17117234K 1711723431 171172343 1711723430011 1711723430044 1711723430051 1711723430056 Account Number Amount 2 61380-00-2 2 61360-00-6 0 11271.00-8 2 12160-00-6 2 11395-00-5 2 11245-00-3 4 21285-00-8 4 52385-00-3 2 71900-00-3 4 72060-00-7 1 11800-00-8 1 11750-00-6 1 21755-00-4 1 11940-00-7 1 21825-00-2 1 71972-00-6 1 71990-00-0 1 73725-00-8 1 73660-00-8 1 73645-00-7 1 73685-00-9 1 73765-00-0 1 72100-00-6 1 12255-00-5 0 43600-00-1 1 43690-00-8 1 42160-00-5 1 42180-00-1 1 72293-00-3 0 13449-01-2 1 13485-00-7 1 43525-00-5 1 43599-00-0 1 43536-00-9 384.94 384.94 74.97 482.78 384.94 384.94 83.08 83.08 189.26 83 08 633.57 486.35 486.35 492.84 486.35 367.51 453.17 497 26 557.4/ ^0 613.30 324.88 687.04 496.66 36.31 698.17 246.43 139.52 542.57 22.63 581.35 612.41 546.86 531.76 Address 1380 RAILROAD AVE 1360 RAILROAD AVE 1271 ARBOR ST 2160 CRYSTAL AVE 1395 BROWN RDS 1245 ARBOR ST 1285 FRENCH CREEK DR 2385 NORTH SHORE DR 1900 SHORELINE DR 2060 SHORELINE DR 1800 CONCORDIA ST 1750 CONCORDIA ST 1755 EAGERNESS PT RD 1940 CONCORDIA ST 1825 EAGERNESS PT RD 1972 SHADYWOOD RD 1990 SHADYWOOD RD 3725 TOGO RD 3660 TOGO RD 3645 TOGO RD 3685 TOGO RD 3765 TOGO RD 2100 SHADYWOOD RD 2255 BLAINE AVE 3600 LIVINGSTON AVE 3690 LYRIC AVE 2160 KENWOOD WAY 2180 KENWOOD WAY 2293 SHADYWOOD RD 3449 CRYSTAL PL 3485 CRYSTAL PL 3525 LIVINGSTON AVE 3599 LIVINGSTON AVE 3536 LYRIC AVE Page 4 Name EVANS. SHARON V. PATTRIN, TIMOTHY J. STEVEN JOHNSON BLUE. MARCUS J. KALEY. PHILIP F. BOLDINGH. JOHN M. KENNEDY. STEVEN C. . OWNER/OCCUPANT NELSON. MORRIS A. PETERSON. JAMES H. HANSEN. PAUL D. BOZONIE. PAUL J. BOZONIE. PAUL J. THOMPSON. ERIK A. BOZONIE. PAUL J. HOLMLUND. TIMOTHY HOLMLUND. TIM BARTH. JAMES LARSON. DONOVAN REED. REBECCA KIRCHENWITZ. GARRETT S. PRAHM. MICHAEL H. ALBERTSON. ROBERT V. MORRIS. JOE & TERRY MARIE INGBRETSON LAGIESKI. JOHN J. DIMMICK. BROOKS COPELAND. JULIE R. RODEWALD. KEVIN W. EL MATTSON REUTHER. PLAIR N. SOBERG/PUGH MCKINNEY. ZELMA H. HENKE. CHARLES L. r M ' ^ 1711723430064 1711723430069 1711723430074 1711723430076 1711723430087 1711723430090 1711723430095 1711723430098 1711723430104 1711723430120 1711723430122 1711723430129 1711723430132 1711723430138 1711723430144 1711723440033 1711723440059 1711723440079 1711723440096 1811723140008 2011723110031 2011723120014 2011723120021 2011723120022 2011723120054 2011723210024 2011723220002 2011723220012 2011723240013 2011723240030 2011723240040 2011723310010 2011723310055 2011723310073 Account Number Amount 1 43443-00-2 1 43477-00-5 1 43472-01-3 1 43444-01-6 1 43473-01-4 0 43499-00-3 1 73468-00-2 1 73412-01-4 1 43551-02-6 1 13435-00-2 1 13447-00-7 1 72237-00-9 1 72213-00-9 1 53590-01-7 0 72229-00-8 1 12305-00-7 1 53320-00-9 1 72341-00-3 1 12300-00-2 0 21973-00-2 1 72465-00-0 1 12447-00-8 1 12454-00-8 1 12428-00-3 1 42503-00-8 1 22580-00-3 1 73935-00-5 0 12776-00-7 1 22700-00-3 1 12645-00-0 1 22720-00-9 1 13759-00-3 1 12917-00-4 1 21918-00-9 t 512.31 266.54 678.66 730.81 495.05 63.01 542.82 1,108.76 626.92 414.71 553.46 427.68 515.71 373.55 208.07 598.79 492.84 577.23 752.73 117.82 624.55 666.50 624.87 166.90 716.99 348.47 761.25 81.64 659.63 414.62 129.83 612.10 613.90 167.85 Address 3443 LIVINGSTON AVE 3477 LIVINGSTON AVE 3472 LYRIC AVE 3444 LYRIC AVE 3473 LYRIC AVE 3499 LYRIC AVE 3468 SHORELINE DR 3412 SHORELINE DR 3551 LYRIC AVE 3435 CRYSTAL BAY RD 3447 CRYSTAL BAY RD 2237 SHADYWOOD RD 2213 SHADYWOOD RD 3590 NORTHERN AVE 2229 SHADYWOOD RD 2305 BAYVIEW PL 3320 NAVARRE LA 2341 SHADYWOOD RD 2300 BAYVIEW PL 1973 EAGERNESS PT RD 2465 SHADYWOOD RD 2447 CARMAN ST 2454 CASCO PT RD 2428 CASCO PT RD 2503 KELLY AVE 2580 DUNWOODY AVE 3935 SHORELINE DR 2776 CASCO PT RD 2700 ETHEL AVE 2645 CASCO PT RD 2720 ETHEL AVE 3759 CASCO AVE 2917 CASCO PT RD 2918 CASCO PT RD Page 5 Name HEGER, DENNIS L. SCHULTE, MARK B. GLEASON, JAMES E. MITTELSTAEDT, FRANK L. FLYNN, TOM C. MARK SCHMID HOLMAN. SANDRA GERM-TOM PARTNERSHIP HARRISON. ANITA L. BROWN. SCOTT A. MARTIN. TODD C. KANTOLA, TRACY L. BREMER. SCOTT HUNTER. DEAN W. PATRICK DONELAND BLOCK, GENE H. PASCUZZI. PAUL J. GANGELHOFF. LOUISE A. BELCOURT, JASON A. MANLY BROTHERS 1ST NATIONAL BANK ANDERSON, TERRY A. ROBERTS. JOHN C. SKORO, STEPHEN J. KUPFER, JOHN NAFUS, JOHN A. BEDELL. JAMES D. CAMILLE WESEMAN JENSEN. CURTIS R. GREENE, ALAN K. HAMBLET, JOHN W. MADDEN. BRUCE D. BULLOCK. LORI FAWBUSH, JEFFREY L 4 2011723320008 2011723320015 2011723430013 2011723430022 2011723430035 2011723430043 2011723430053 2111723220008 2111723240054 2111723240065 2211723310029 2211723310032 2211723310033 2311723220009 2311723220018 2311723230031 2311723230033 2311723320002 2311723320027 2311723320028 2511823340007 2511823440015 2611823310004 2611823310009 2611823330016 2611823330019 2611823330024 2611823330030 2711823330007 2711823420010 2711823420015 2711823430022 2811823330012 2811823330014 Account Number Amount 1 12825-00-8 1 12805-00-2 0 13237-00-0 4 4 4 13205-00-9 13040-00-2 13277-00-2 13271-00-6 1 52530-00-7 1 72785-00-7 1 72740-00-0 10570-00-9 10620-00-1 10610-00-8 4 10750-00-7 4 10120-00-6 4 10140-00-2 4 10230-00-6 4 10460-00-9 4 10300-00-4 4 10310-00-7 4 50521-00-7 4 30200-00-3 4 71300-00-1 4 71065-00-3 2 20940-00-1 2 20880-00-6 2 20930-00-8 2 41586-00-6 4 20744-00-1 2 41840-00-9 4 41865-00-0 4 81990-00-3 4 43155-00-6 4 43175-00-2 252.81 333.66 91.64 583.72 707.73 692.60 564.81 754.54 194.11 598.61 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 521.27 86.19 424.94 302.03 83.08 424.94 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 Address 2825 CASCO PT RD 2805 CASCO PT RD 3237 CASCO CIR 3205 CASCO CIR 3040 CASCO PT RD 3277 CASCO CIR 3271 CASCO CIR 2530 OLD BEACH RD 2785 SHADYWOOD RD 2740 SHADYWOOD RD 570 BIG ISLAND 620 BIG ISLAND 610 BIG ISLAND 750 BIG ISLAND 120 BIG ISLAND 140 BIG ISLAND 230 BIG ISLAND 460 BIG ISLAND 300 BIG ISLAND 310 BIG ISLAND 521 NORTH STREAM RD 200 HOLLANDER RD 1300 SIXTH AVE N 1065 TAMARACK DR 940 DAKOTA AVE 880 DAKOTA AVE 930 DAKOTA AVE 1586 LONG LAKE BLVD 744 DICKEY LAKE DR 1840 LAKEVIEW TER 1865 LAKEVIEW TER 1990 WEST FARM RD 3155 JAMESTOWN RD 3175 JAMESTOWN RD Page 6 Name YORKS. DAVID J. FROMMELT, ROGER H. JEFFORY BROWER CONISTON ESTATES INC. MOGAN, JOHN H. GEINERT, LEE NEUVILLE. PATRICK J. PARTRIDGE-STAUBLY. LAUREL CASEY. THOMAS J. PAGONIS, ELAINE T. ROBB. SELDEN HILL. WEBSTER A. PLUNKETT. KENNETH K. DEGGENDORF. JEAN A. URAN. JOHN D. URAN. JOHN D. HALES. MRS. FRED BIG ISLAND PROPERTIES KELLOGG. DANIEL YAEGER. BILL DEVINE. TIMOTHY HOLLANDER. JOHN M. SHEEHAN. JOHN R. GRAHAM. JENNIFER J. ARNE. GERALD P. HARRISON. TIMOTHY J. ODEAN. THOMAS C. GRONWALL. STEVEN C. PETTIS. GERALD L. MERNIK. WILLIAM Z. ASKE. KARL R. BRACHMAN. ARMAND E. GATEHOUSE. JULIE AWES. MICHAEL '4% PID 2811823330015 2911823410005 2911823440001 3011823330004 3011823330005 3111823110010 3111823120011 3111823140008 3111823210003 3111823240001 3111823330007 3111823340007 3111823340012 3111823410005 3111823420009 3111823420010 3211823210005 3211823220003 3211823320001 3211823440009 3311823130011 3311823340004 3311823420005 3311823430006 3311823440016 3311823440019 3311823440032 3311823440035 3511823330003 3511823330004 3511823430023 3511823440005 3611823330009 3611823410004 Account Number Amount 4 43050-00-4 4 73240-00-4 4 73225-00-3 4 14700-00-8 4 14680-00-5 4 30760-00-6 4 74360-00-6 4 50505-02-1 4 84560-00-3 4 84480-00-2 4 14740-00-0 4 40135-00-3 4 14440-00-9 4 84085-00-9 4 14325-00-1 4 14315-00-8 4 70605-00-8 4 73825-00-5 4 83940-00-6 4 83405-00-4 1 4 4 4 2 82785-00-0 32900-00-5 70380-00-6 50160-00-0 30051-00-5 2 82480-00-4 2 80051-00-0 4 70040-02-9 4 50105-00-7 4 50025-01-9 4 41180-00-2 4 80875-00-6 4 50010-00-8 0 50245-00-6 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 630.25 83.08 83.08 83.08 384.94 125.50 384.94 83.08 83.08 83.08 83.08 60.00 83.08 97.80 Address 3050 JAMESTOWN RD 3240 SIXTH AVE N 3225 SIXTH AVE N 4700 CREEICWOOD TRAIL 4680 CREEKWOOD TR 760 HUNT FARM RD 4360 SIXTH AVE N 505 ORCHARD PARK RD 4560 WATERTOWN RD 4480 WATERTOWN RD 4740 BAYSIDE RD 135 LUCE LINE RIDGE 4440 BAYSIDE RD 4085 WATERTOWN RD 4325 CHIPPEWA LA 4315 CHIPPEWA LA 605 STUBBS BAY RD N 3825 SIXTH AVE N 3940 WATERTOWN RD 3405 WATERTOWN RD 2785 WAYZATA BLVD 2900 WATERTOWN RD 380 SILVER MEADOW DR 160 OLD CRYSTAL BAY N 51 HACKBERRY HILL 2480 WATERTOWN RD 51 WILLOW DR N 40 TRUFFULA TRAIL 105 ORONO ORCHARD RD N 25 ORONO ORCHARD RD N 1180 LYMAN AVE 875 WAYZATA BLVD 10 MYRTLEWOOD RD 245 NORTH FERN DALE RD Page 7 Name PAGE. JULIE M MORSETH, DANIEL K. HEUPEL, NEIL C. VERNOR, JAMES O'NEILL. JAMES F. MARTIN. JEFFREY J. FLIES JR.. DONALD SHOLL. DEBORAH M. NELSON. KIP A. SWEEZO. TIMOTHY M. D. DUNN/ L. YOGERST ANDERSON. DAVID J. THOMAS. BRAD N. C. DALE/G. PAULSON SCHULTZ. DANIEL P. HALLDIN. GREGORY KROGNESS. STEPHEN M. ALEXANDER. MICHAEL A. MELIN. JEFFREY V. ESKOLA. SCOTT E. MILLER. JOHN GUIMOND. SHARON RAE TROUTMAN. MARK &GENISE COE. LEANN MIELKE. RICHARD J. WRIGHT. GREG WILSON. MICHAEL S MYERS. PHILIP &MARY HELLING. MATTHEW SPENCER. KEITH J. ALLENBURG. JOHN E. NEW HORIZON CHILD CARE MATTESON. JAMES DARRELL BECKSTROM 4 . fr 0^-% PID Account Number Amount Utility Charges 67379.16 PID invoice Number Amount 3411823210002 0511723340012 1111723230015 2711823440016 3111823420016 0411723110006 0511723410023 2511823410001 2011723310060 V0211723330002 ^0211723240012 3311823430024 3611823130007 1011723420024 1711723440100 1711723430099 3411823210018 1152 1267 1275 1290 & 1107 1318 1356 1049 1066 1069 1071 1085 1086 1089 1109 1114 1138 1173 550.00 50.00 50.00 100.00 50.00 250.00 150.00 50.00 50.00 75.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 General Services 1725.00 69104.16 Address Address 2160 WAYZATA BLVD 855 PARTENWOOD 1510 GREEN TREES ROAD 1801 WEST FARM ROAD 4355 CHIPPEWA LANE 2475 COUNTRYSIDE DRIVE 425 OXFORD ROAD 300 COUNTY ROAD 2970 CASCO POINT ROAD 1465 FOX STREET 1245WOODHILLAVE 120 GOLDEN VIEW DRIVE 507 FERNDALE ROAD N 1955 SHORELINE DRIVE 3380 SHORELINE DRIVE 3400 SHORELINE DRIVE 2103 SUGARWOOD DRIVE Page 8 Name Name JOHN ZADURSKl SAIKH GUL GEORGE DANKO JAMES & JUDITH PIERPONT FRED SHEMANEK EUGENE HITE CARL & SALLY KEIL DOUGLAS DAYTON JERRY MARTINSON KAARE AND CYNTHIA BIRKELAND GERALD & SHELLY STORCH JOHN HALLSON HAMED SAIJADI SAILOR’S WORLD NARROWS SALOON NAVARRE HARDWARE RANDALL HOGAN 1 r ocr 2 3 2000 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cl I y u»- omuno DATE; October 20,2000 ITEM NO: ^ Department Approval: Name RonMoorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: /-I Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Resignation of Bob Cooper from the Position of Part-Time CSO Bob Cooper has resigned from his position as Part-Time Community Service Officer to pursue other career opportunities. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to accept the resignation of Bob Cooper from his position as Part-Time Community Service Officer. 'll i .11—■ y < • T '- ’v ! ;1 1 •- .-j r L i' T REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cniiM/^ii »*cpt\nG OCT 2 3 2000 cut ur UrtONO Date: October 16,2000 Item No: ^ Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Seetion: Name: Title: Gary Cheswick Chief of Polie rt Item Deseription: Hiring of Part-Time/On-Call Community Service Officer Exhibits:None DISCUSSION With the resignation of Robert Cooper, an opening exists for a part-time Community Service Officer. Interviews were conducted with Joseph Lee being selected as the best candidate. Mr. Lee is a resident of Maple Grove, just completed a seasonal position as a Public Service Officer with Hennepin Parks, and has a strong interest in the position. He hopes to make law enforcement a career. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Request Joseph Lee be hired as a part-time Community Service Officer at a pay rate of $10.00 per hour with no benefits or PERA membership based on the $5100 maximum earnings stipulation, effective immediately. x:\apps\wpwin60\wpdocs\suc\council ac2 I * f r REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION rmcptinG UO’I 2 3 2000 Ll I Y Of" UttUivu DATE: October 18,2000 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Administratcr Reviewed:m Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Appointment of Data Practices Compliance Official The 2000 Legislature approved a change to Chapter 13, the Government Data Practices Act, which requires cities to appoint or designate a Data Practices Compliance Official, effective December 1. The Data Compliance Official will be responsible for receiving questions or concerns regarding problems in obtaining access to data, or other data practices problems within the City. Cities are already required to have a person designated as the Responsible Authority for issues related to data practices (M.S. 13.03, Access to Government Data, Subd. 1). The Legislature also provided that the city’s Responsible Authority may be the Data Practices Compliance Official. Staff Recommendation Since Chief Cheswick is currently the designated Responsible Authority for the City of Orono regarding data practices, it is staffs recommendation to also appoint Chief Cheswick as the Data Practices Compliance Official for the City of Orono. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution appointing Gary Cheswick, Police Chief, as the Data Practices Compliance Official for the City of Orono. ii\ MT’’-' !■ ■.m A RESOLUTION APPOINTING GARY CHESWICK, POLICE CHIEF, AS THE DATA PRACTICES COMPLIANCE OFFICIAL FOR THE CITY OF ORONO WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 13.05, Subdivision 13 requires that the City appoint a City employee to act as its Data Practices Compliance Official to receive questions or concern regarding problems in obtaining access to data or other data practices problems within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council shares the concern expressed by the Legislature about access to City data and wishes to satisfy this concern by immediately appointing a qualified Data Practices Compliance Official as required under statute. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Orono hereby appoints Gary Cheswick, Police Chief, to serve as the Data Practices Compliance Official to receive questions and concern regarding problems in obtaining access to data or other data practices problems. . Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 23rd day of October, 2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor iJi iiiiAfcrfWtn III!tTMi fff i ■ * i k^*5- % i^icpTlNG UUI 2 3 2000 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION i y ur u^^UNU DATE: October 18,2000 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name LinVee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Appointment of Additional Election Judges for the November 7,2000 General Election - Resolution Council adopted Resolutions #4508 and #4523 appointing election judges for the September 12 Primary Election. Additional judges are needed for the General Election. Attached is a resolution listing the names of additional qualified persons who have indicated their willingness to serve as election judges at the General Election to be held on November 7,2000. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the attached resolution appointing additional election judges for the General Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7,2000. McpTlNGi;i 2 3 2000 IY UP Orio/vu »er 18,2000 \ Section: linistrator's ember 7,2000 September 12 I is a resolution less to serve as ?' P wr A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ADDITIONAL ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 7,2000 BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to Minnesota Election Laws 204B.21, Subd. 2, the following persons are appointed as election judges for the General Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7,2000: or the General Hi llj Christopher Adams Chris Albrecht Julia Albrecht Judy Carlson Wayne Carrier Mary Lou Doherty Ann Hommeyer Charles Hommeyer David Jellison Janie Stark R. William Toward Janette Weaver Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held October 23,2000. ATTEST: M Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 1 of 1 S ' •• ••cpjiNG REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 2 3 2000 s,.. . w-r OHONO DATE: October 18,2000 ITEM NO: P J Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Establish Date and Time for Canvassing Board Meeting The City Council must select a date and time to convene as the Canvassing Board to certify the remits of the municipal election being held in conjunction with the General Election on November 7,2000. This meeting must be held within seven days of the election according to State Statute. in the past, the Canvassing Board has met within a few days of the election, completed its work, and adjourned within IS to 20 minutes. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion by Council to select a date md time for the 2000 Canvassing Board meeting. LV r^nnr>„ H/ICPTIMG REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION UCI 2 3 2000 DATE; OctofeeM^'2W'''^ ITEM NO: ^ ^ Department Approval: Name RonMoorse Title City Administrator Adminbtrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Long Lake Fire Station Replacement - Resolution The Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department provides fire services to a substantial portion of Orono. Because the current Long Lake fire station will be taken as right-of-way for the Hi^way 12 upgrade project, a process is underway to develop a plan for the replacement of the fire station. This involves the selection of a site, the design of the building, and determii ig how the building will be funded. A fire station planning committee made up of representatives L »m the City of Long Lake, the Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department, and the Cities of Orono and Medina, has been meeting to address these issues. The City Council, at its October 12 work session, discussed a set of parameters to guide the City ’s involvement in the fire station project, and directed staff to draft a resolution reflecting those parameters. The resolution is attached for Council consideration. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution setting out the parameters for the City ’s involvement in the Long Lake fire station replacement project. I fciii k ^ ? yi.;' A RESOLUTION SETTING OUT THE PARAMETERS OF THE CITY OF ORONO’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE REPLACEMENT OF THE LONG LAKE FIRE STATION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01. The Long Lake Fire Station needs to be replaced because it is being taken as right-of-way for the Highway 12 upgrade project. 1.02 A committee with representatives from the Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department’s fire service cities is in the process of selecting a site for the new fire station. 1.03 Mn/DOT will fund a portion of the costs of the new fire station. 1.04 Orono has traditionally been fiscally conservative in its finances, including funding for public facilities. 1.05 The City of Orono pays 72% of the Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department costs. 1.06 It is important that the fire station planning committee and Mn/DOT have an understanding of the parameters of the City of Orono’s involvement in the replacement of the Long Lake Fre Station. Section 2. COUNCIL ACTION. 2.01. The Orono City Council does hereby adopt the following parameters regarding Ihe City ’s involvement in the replacement of the Long Lake Fire Station: A. No land is to be detached from the City of Orono and annexed into the City of Long Lake for the Long Lake Fire Station site. Page 1 of2 1 i B. The Long Lake Fire Station should be located in the City of Long Lake. C. D. E. F. The City of Orono will not use its powers of eminent domain to acquire a fire station site if it involves requiring a family to sell their home. The City of Orono needs to have substantial input into the design of the fire station, in terms of ensuring the facility is a modest, functional facility that meets the needs of the Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department, at a cost that is in line v,ith Orono ’s conservative fiscal philosophy. This could include reviewing opportunities for using/sharing existing facilities in Orono and/or Long Lake to meet some of the fire facility needs; as a way to limit the size and cost of the new facility. If the fire station is built in Long Lake, the City of Long Lake should sell bonds to provide financing for the project. If the fire r:tation is built in Orono, Orono will sell bonds to finance the project, and wll lease the station to the City of Long Lake and the Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held October 23,2000. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 2 of 2 I t _ ■['>»tm 5*;f» ?v rrM.».«„ »,cpTiNG REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Utl 2 3 2000 Ul I Y Ut OHO n O DATE: October 19,2000 a?ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Special Assessmem Deft. Application For Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project - Resolution Attachment: A. Municipal Code Section 2.62 - Deferment of Special Assessments B. Resolution No. 4467 C. Proposed Deferral Resolution for Ruth Vickerman, 800 Brown Road South Ruth A. Vickerman, 800 Brown Road South, is applying for a deferment of special assessments for persons 65 years of age or older for the Webber Hills sanitary sewer project. Ms. Vickerman meets the criteria established in Municipal Code Section 2.62, and qualifies under the income and asset guidelines set out in Resolution No. 4467. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the deferment of the special assessment for the Webber Hills sanitary sewer project for Ruth A. Vickerman, 800 Brown Road South, in the amount of $19,250 for a period of five years. Ms. Vickerman may reapply in October 2005 for an additional five year deferment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving a special assessment deferment for Ruth A. Vickerman, 800 Brown Road South, for the Webber Hills sanitary sewer project in the amount of $19,250 for a period of five years. ^■r r A § 2.61 stating time and place of sale and generally describing property co be sold at least ten days prior to the date of sale by publication once in the official newspaper. Such sale shall be to the person submitting the highest bid. E. Receipts From Sales of Surplus Property. All receipts from sales of surplus property under this Section shall be placed in the General Fund. Subd. 4. Persons Who May Not Purchase - Exception A. No employee of the City who is a member of the administrative staff, department head, a member of the Council, or an advisor serving the City in a professional capacity, may be a purchaser of property under this Section. Other City employees may be purchasers if they are not directly involved in the sale, if they are the highest responsible bidder, and if at least one week's published or posted notice of sale is given. B. It is unlawful for any person to be a purchaser of property under this Section if such purchase is prohibited by the terms of this Section. SBC. 2.62. DEFERMENT OP SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. Subd. 1. The Council may defer the payment of any special assessment on homestead property owned by a person who is 65 years of age or older, or who is retired by virtue of permanent and total disabUity, and. the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record the deferment of special assessments where the foj-lowing conditions are met: A. The applicant must apply for the deferment not later than ninety days after the assessment is adopted by the Council. ij„..B. The applicant must be 65 years of age, or older, or retired by virtue of permanent and total disability. C. The applicant must be the owner of the property. D. The applicant must occupy the property as his principal place of residence E. The applicant's income from all sources shall not exceed the low income limit as established by the Department o Housing and Urban Development as used in determining t eligibility for Section VIII housing. Subd. 2. The deferment shall be granted for as period of time as the hardship exists and the condition aforementioned have been met. However, it shall be the city o applicant to notify the City Clerk of any change in his status cna would affect eligibility for deferment. ORONO CC (4-1-84) r'• rii^ § 2.62 Subd. 3. The entire amount of deferred special assessments shall be due within sixty days after loss of eligibility by the applicant. If the special assessment is not paid within sixty days, the City Clerk shall add thereto interest at 8% per annum from the due date through December 21 of the following year and the total amount of principal and interest shall « 1 the County Auditor for collection with taxes the following year. Should the applicant plead and prove, to the satisfaction of the Council, that full repayment of the deferred special assessment would cause the applicant particular undue financial hardship, the Council may order that the applicant pay within sixty days a sum equal to the number of installments of deferred special assessments outstanding and unpaid to date (including principal and interest) with the balance thereafter paid according to the terms and conditions of the original special assessment. Subd. 4. The option to defer the payment of special assessments shall tent.inate and all amounts accumulated plus applicable interest shall become due upon the occurrence of any one of the following: A. The death of the owner when there is no spouse who is eligible for deferment B. The sale, transfer or subdivision of all or any part of the property. C. Loss of homestead status on the property. D. Determination by the Council for any reason that there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment. SEC. 2.63. PERMANENT REGISTRATION OF VOTERS. Subd. 1. Statute Adopted. The system for the permanent registration of voters provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 201, is adopted for the City. Subd. 2. Voters Must Be Registered. No person shall be permitted to vote at any election held in the City unless he is registered to vote as provided by Minnesota Statutes. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 (Sections 2.64 through 2.98, inc?*’sive, reserved for future expansion.) ORONO CC (4-1-84 ’ are: CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ TION AMENDING THE PROGRAM FOR DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PERSONS 65 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER $ WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono is the official governing body of the City of Orono; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 435.193 through Section 425.195 authorizes the City of Orono, upon proper application, to defer the payment of special assessments against any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older on January 1 of the payment year and for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments; and WHEREAS, Section 425.194 authorizes the municipality to establish an interest rate to be added to the deferred assessment which shall be payable in addition to the deferred assessment; and that Orono had adopted such a program under Ordinance 2.62 (1984 recodified). Resolution 1093 (dated November 13,1979), Resolution 1779 (dated June 10,1985), Resolution 2864 (datedAugust 27, 1990). Resolution No. 3894 (dated April 28,1997) and Resolution No. 4288 (dated May 10, 1999). WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the deferral of assessments should be granted to any person otherwise qualified who makes proper application to the City of Orono on forms prescribed by the County Assessor of Hennepin County and by the Orono City Council and for whom the City Council determines that it would be a hardship to make the payments, based upon the following criteria: NUMBER OF PERSONS IN HOUSEHOLD i>L\XlMUM INCOME 1 Person S35.I50 2 Person S40.150 3 Person S45.200 4 Person 550,200 5 Person S54.200 6 Person 558,250 7 Person 562,250 8 Person 556.250 Page 1 of2 I'' CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 4 5 7 Assets, not including homesteaded property, must be $50,000 or less. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO IN A REGULAR MEETING ASSEMBLED, that the assessments against any homestead property ovriied by a person 65 years of age or older and for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments, be deferred for a period of time not to exceed five years subject to the aforementioned financial criteria, upon submission of an appropriate application signed by the qualified person, and which may upon expiration of initial or any subsequent renewal deferments may be reapplied for, and subject to &e applicant meeting all the necessary criteria upon reapplication be deferred for an additional period not to exceed 5 years; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the right of deferment is automatically terminated imder Section 435.195 if: 1. The owner dies and the spouse is not otherwise eligible; The property or any pait thereof is sold, transfeired or subdivided; 3. The property should lose its homestead status; or 4. If for any reason the City determines that there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held May 8,2000. ATTEST:Gabriw Jabbour, Mayor /i■ ^ 'Emda S. Vee, City Clerk • Page 2 of2 I «-■ A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERMENT FOR THE WEBBER HILLS SANITARY SEWER PROJECT FOR RUTH A. VICKERMAN WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered a local improvement project known as Webber Hills Area Sanitary Sewer Improvement, for which special assessments have been levied against the benefitted properties; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Resolution No. 1093, Resolution No. 1779, Resolution No. 2864, Resolution No. 3175, Resolution No. 3894, Resolution No. 4288, and ResolutionNo. 4467 which established a policy and procedure for deferring such special assessments for persons 65 years of age or older who have limited income and assets and for whom payment of such special assessment would constitute a financial hardship; and WHEREAS, Ruth A. Vickerman has made application for deferment of the above noted special assessment pursuant to the provisions of Resolution No. 4467. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby finds that the applicant has demonstrated a hardship consistent with the provisions of Resolution 4467, and hereby orders deferral of the payment for the levied special assessments as follows: APPLICANT:Ruth A. Vickerman ADDRESS:800 Brown Road South LEVY NO. PROPERTY l.D. NUMBER LEVIED AMOUNT AMOUNT DEFERRED 14992 03-117-23 43 0005 $19,250 $19,250 Deferral of payment for principal and interest shall be for a period of time not to exceed five (5) y ears with the first payment of principal and interest due in collection year 2006. Page 1 of 2 1^# u Interest at the rate of 6.25% per annum shall be added to the deferred assessment. Deferred principal and interest shall be payable at the time of the first payment due in collection year 2006. The remainder of the principal and interest shall thereafter be payable in accordance with the adopted assessment roll. This right of deferment is automatically terminated in collection year 2006 or upon the occurrence of any one or more of the following conditions, whichever may occur first: 1. The owner dies and the spouse is not otherwise eligible; 2. The property or any part thereof is sold, transferred, or subdivided; 3. The property should lose its homestead status; or 4. If for any reason the City determines that there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment. 2000. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota on the 23rd day of October, ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor If the applicant wishes to reapply at the end of this five (5) year deferment, the applicant must reapply to the City of Orono for deferment of special assessments in October 2005 to keep the assessment from being included with the real estate tax due and payable in 2006. Signature of Applicant Date Page 2 of 2 k MrcTiNG OCI 2 3 2000 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cl IY ui“ Onoivu DATE: October 20,2000 ITEM NO: 3 d> Department Approval: Name Lin Vee TiUe City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval There are no licenses. CITY OF ORONO Check Register 10/18/00 9:42 AM Page 1 3/ Pay Period gI 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 Check # Employee Name 048278 JOHNSON. MARY ANN 048279 DODGE. RACHEL M. 048280 MOORSE. RONALD J. 048281 STURMAN. HEIDI N. 048282 VEE. LINDA S. 048283 KUEHN. THOMAS M. 048284 OLSON. RONALD J. 048285 PETTIT. SANDRA 1C 048286 ANDERSON. BRUCE L 048287 BOBZIEN. SUE A< 048288 BORIS. SCOTT W. 048289 BUDIG. STACIE M. 048290 CARLSON. MICHAEL B. 048291 CHESWICK. GARY B. 048292 CORNICK. JAMES L 048293 DEMBOUSKI. JAY C. 048294 ERICKSON. KURT R 048295 FARNIOK, CORREY L 048296 FISCHENICH, DAN T. 048297 FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K 048298 JOHNSON. BRADLEY P. 048299 JOHNSON. JEFFREY 048300 MADSON. ADRIENNE M. 048301 MCNALLY. STEVEN A. 048302 MCNICHOLS. DAVID L 048303 MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES 048304 PERSELL. WILLIAM R. 048305 SCHOENHOFF, JOHN B. 048306 TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. 048307 TOMCZYK, MARK W. 048308 WITTKE. ANTHONY A. 048309 COOPER. ROBERT M. 048310 HENDRICKS. RONALD J. 048311 BOTTENBERG. WENDY C. 048312 DAVIS, MARC L 048313 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. 048314 GAPPA. GREGORY A. 048315 MEYER. WILLIAM C. 048316 OMAN. LYLE E. 048317 PENCE, CHRISTOPHER M. 048318 WEINBERGER. PAUL E. 048319 BRINKHAUS. JOHN F. 048320 DEBAERE. DONALD L 048321 GREGORY. JAMES D. 048322 HANSEN. STEVEN 048323 OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G. 048324 OBRIEN. RANDY L 048325 PALMER. GREGORY A. Check Date Check Amount 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18W) 10/18/00 10/18AX) 10/18/00 10/18AX) 10/18/00 10/1 aw 10/18W 10/18W 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18AX) 10/18/00 10/18AX) 10/18AX) 10/18AX) 10/18AX) 10/18W 10/18/00 10/18/00 lo/iaoo 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18AX) 10/18AX) lo/iaoo 10/18W 10/18W 10/18W 10/18W $581.19 $878.86 $1,661.29 $677.04 $1,220.55 $1,394.47 $30.42 $418.33 $312.76 $67667 $968.08 $663 57 $441.65 $1,568.91 $1,497.21 $1,321 36 $1,293.16 $1,816.60 $1,498.35 $1,260.01 $1,394.06 $920.75 $488.73 $1,315.92 $570.79 $1,543.98 $467.33 $1,319.02 $521.04 $1.300 83 $880.28 $204.70 $564.19 $1,122.43 $1,176.05 $1,187.38 $1,656.05 $554.13 $9371 $994.06 $1.263 23 $1,183.83 $767.86 $876 18 $949.89 $593.98 $309 65 $795.75 i^/ic PTING UCI 2 3 2000 CM Y ur UHO nu Pay Pariod 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 ¥Raport Total a %■ CITY OF ORONO Check Register i Chack i Employaa Name Check Data Check Amount 048326 RATHBUN, BARRY J. 048327 SKREEN, DALE S. 048328 ABRAHAMSON, FRED W, 048329 BIX. MILTON, H. 048330 MCINTYRE, WILLIAM E. 048331 OAS, DANIEL O. 048332 PEICKERT, GARY J. 048333 ROSS, JOHN A. 048334 STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD E. 048335 STORK. JOHNT. 048338 NICKESON, ANDREW K. 048277 VOID 10/18/00 $1,21536 10/1 SAX)$970.41 10/18AK)$162.63 10/18A)0 $183.57 10/18AX)$98.36 10/18/00 $86.59 10/18AX)$18501 10/18AX)$81.56 10/18/00 $1,242.08 10/18/00 $195.02 10/18AK)$71.20 10/18/00 $0.00 $49,68867 10/18^)0 9:42 AM Page 2 L )■ 10100 Primary Cash PaldChk# 062613 Paid Chk# 062614 PaidChk* 062615 Paid Chk« 062616 PaidChk* 062617 Paid Chk* 062618 PaidChk* 062619 Paid Chk* 062620 Paid Chk* 062621 Paid Chk* 062622 Paid Chk* 062623 Paid Chk* 062624 Paid Chk* 062625 CITY OF ORONO Check Summary Register Name Void CiTY COUNTY CREDIT UNION FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT MN DEPT OF REVENUE ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST PEBSCO/OBRA PEBSCOAJS CONF OF MAYORS PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT UNITED WAY WISCONSIN SCTF Check Date ^ \ 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18A30 10/18AK) 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18/00 10/18A)0 10/18/00 lo/iaoo 10/18AK) Total Chocks Wednesday, October 18, 2000 Page 1 of 1 Check Amt $0.00 $7,529.00 $18,054.02 $300.00 $0.00 $190.12 $3,689.17 $1,772.68 $122.49 $2,590.00 $10,504.92 $28.00 $184.62 $44,965.02 4* er CITY OF CRONO Friday, C Check Summary Register Name Check Date Check Amt .......................iv Paid Chk#062627 A-1 RENTAL 10/23/2000 $27.00 Paid Chk#062628 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 10/23/2000 $1,292.05 Paid Chk#062629 AUGiES MOBiLE CHEF 10/23/2000 $15.20 Paid Chk#062630 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO.10/23/2000 $149.50 Paid Chk#062631 BANCOR GROUP 10/23^000 $69,214.16 Paid Chk#062632 BCAn-RAINING & DEVELOPMENT 10/23/2000 $180.00 Paid Chk#062633 BEERNINK, LESTER 10/23/2000 $1,100.00 Paid Chk#062634 BERGERSON-CASWELL iNC.10/23/2000 $1,656.91 Paid Chk#062635 BiFFS iNC.10/23/2000 $502.47 Paid Chk#062636 BLACKOWIAK&SON 10/23/2000 $336.37 Paid Chk#062637 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 10/23/2000 $293.94 Paid Chk#062638 BORIS. SCOTT 10/23/2000 $65.05 Paid Chk#062639 BUDGET PRINTING 10/23/2000 $59.41 Paid Chk#062640 CHAMPION AUTO STORES 10/23/2000 $26.61 Paid Chk#062641 CiTY OF MINNETONKA BEACH 10/23/2000 $41.34 Paid Chk#062642 CITY OFWAYZATA 10/23/2000 $3,730.98 Paid Chk# 062643 CLEAR VIEW 10/23/2000 $1,011.75 Paid Chk# 062644 COFFIN & GRONBERG INC.10/23/2000 $1,336.00 Paid Chk#062645 CYS UNIFORMS 10/23/2000 $782.89 Paid Chk#062646 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW & UBAN 10/23/2000 $152.00 Paid Chk#062547 DAKOTA CO. TECHNICAL COLLEGE 10/23/2000 $295.00 Paid Chk#062648 DCA-WIRE ONLY 10/23/2000 $497.89 Paid Chk#062649 DELTA DENTAL 10/23/2000 $1,104.40 Paid Chk#062650 DEMBOUSKI, JAY 10/23/2000 $31.69 Paid Chid^062651 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE-NOTRN 10/23/2000 $80.00 Paid Chk#062652 DEVELOPMENTAL RESOURCES. INC 10/23/2000 $99.00 Paid Chk#062653 DISCOUNT STEEL INC.10/23/2000 $64.20 Paid Chk#062654 ELECTRIC PUMP 10/23/2000 $2,430.65 Paid Chk#062655 ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS 10/23/2000 $161.77 Paid Chk#062656 ESS BROTHERS & SONS 10/23/2000 $251.34 Paid Chk# 062657 GAPPA. GREG 10/23/2000 $94.25 Paid Chk# 062658 GENUINE PARTS CO.10.23A2000 $265.04 Paid Chk#062659 Void 10/23/2000 $0.00 Paid Chk#062660 GOLF CAR MIDWEST 10/23/2000 $1,500.00 Paid Chk#062661 HACH CHEMICAL CO.10/23/2000 $112.24 Paid Chk#062662 HYDRO SUPPLY CO.10/23/2000 $67964 Paid Chk#062663 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 10/23/2000 $34.08 Paid Chk#062664 INFRATECH 10/23/2000 $696.05 Paid Chk#062665 JOHNSON. JEFF 10/23/2000 $35.97 Paid Chk#062666 KATH FUEL OIL 10/23/2000 $37.49 Paid Chk#062667 KD 6 COMPANY 10/23/2000 $20.00 Paid Chk#062668 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC 10/23/2000 $108.00 Paid Chk#062669 LACAL EQUIPMENT INC 10/23/2000 $288.00 Paid Chk#062670 LAKE MTKA CONSERVATION DIST.10/23/2000 $8,249.64 Paid Chk#062671 LONG LAKE FLORAL 10/23/2000 $111.50 Paid Chk#062672 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT 10/23/2000 $95.47 Paid Chk#062673 M-R SIGN CO. INC 10/23/2000 $675.54 Paid Chk#062674 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS 10/23/2000 $19,308.00 Paid Chk#062675 MIDWEST ASPHALT 10/23/2000 $104,04304 Page 1 of 2 Name Paid Chk# 062676 MINNCOMM - UTIL Paid Chk# 062677 Paid Chk# 062678 PakJ Chk# 062679 Paid Chk# 062680 Paid Chk# 062681 Paid Chk# 062682 Paid Chk# 062683 Paid Chk# 062684 Paid Chk# 062685 Paid Chk# 062686 Paid Chk# 062687 Paid Chk# 062688 Paid Chk# 062689 Paid Chk# 062690 Paid Chk# 062691 Paid Chk# 062692 Paid Chk# 062693 Paid Chk# 062694 Paid Chk# 062695 Paid Chk# 062696 Paid Chk# 062697 Paid Chk# 062698 Paid Chk# 062699 Paid Chk# 062700 Paid Chk# 062701 Paid Chk# 062702 Paid Chk# 062703 Paid Chk# 062704 Paid Chk# 062705 Paid Chk# 062706 Paid Chk# 062707 Paid Chk# 062708 Paid Chk# 062709 Paid Chk# 062710 Paid Chk# 062711 Paid Chk# 062712 Paid Chk# 062713 Paid Chk# 062714 Paid Chk# 062715 Paid Chk# 062716 Paid Chk# 062717 Paid Chk# 062718 Paid Chk# 062719 Paid Chk# 062720 Paid Chk# 062721 Paid Chk# 062722 Paid Chk# 062723 MINNEAPOLIS COM & TECH COLLEGE MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY MN DEPT OF REVENUE MR AUGIES COFFEE SERVICE MUNICIPALS NAVARRE HARDWARE Void Void NORTH STAR TURF NSP OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. OMAN. LYLE OSTVIG TREE INC OTTEN BROTHERS PERRrS SANDBLASTING PIONEER POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC. PRAIRIE OFFSET PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE REED VENDING RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATION RICKS SUPERVALUE SCHARBER & SONS SIGNS OF THE SEASON SNYDER DRUG STORES STANTON GROUP STATE OF MINNESOTA - BCA SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY SUBURBAN TIRE INC. TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY TRACY TRIPP FUELS TRI STATE PUMP TWIN CITY STRIPING ULTRAMAX UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIV OF MINNESOTA US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST INTERPRISE VERIZON WIRELESS VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER VILLAGE CHEVROLET W.W. GRAINGER INC. WARNING LITES OF MN WESLEY BENDICKSON WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE WINTERNHEIMER, ALISSA YOUNG. JACKIE Check Date 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 10/23/2000 Total Checks Check Amt S8.172.90 $195.00 $128.70 $1,493.00 $49.50 $99.00 $420.44 $0.00 $0.00 $210.38 $1,183.60 $2 52 $103.67 $3,706.20 $72.11 $660.00 $405.47 $1,752.48 $161.24 $606.15 $52.10 $45.80 $15.20 $1.28 $169.33 $94.16 $188.80 $510.00 $400.00 $232.60 $5.85 $2,292.19 $1,221.57 $900.00 $144.00 $76.39 $140.00 $941.82 $617.18 $343.11 $26.38 $335.31 $178.59 $712.69 $600.00 $111.95 $175.00 $400.00 $253,697.18 frilTiiiTirt”*.; IMOM ■‘7 ,:-B information UCI 2 3 2000 Qjn Y ur OiiUNU items . I . ♦ COUNCIL MEETING I'COHwrii Mf-ET\N® UCT 2 3 2000 c» ^ OF cutut- ohono •A r>' Mary Liz Holberg state Representative District 37B Dakota and Scott Counties Minnesota House of Representatives Ronald Moorse City of Orono Administrator PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 UUI 2 3 2000 September 15,2000 I r ur unUNU Dear Ronald: SUBJECT: Town Hall Meetings on Metropolitan Council Operations and Performance The Metropolitan Subcommittee of the Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee will be conducting a series of Town Hall meetings this fall. The meetings are intended to provide an opportunity for citizens and local government officials to testify about the need for, effectiveness of, and possible modifications to the Metropolitan Council's structure and responsibilities. The information gained will be used to build a base for use by the Legislature. The meeting schedule and locations, include: September 27 October 5 October 12 October 18 October 26 November 1 Vadnais Heights Fire Hall, 3595 Arcade Avenue, 7 p.m. Woodbury City Council Chambers, 8301 Valley Creek Road, 7 p.m. Anoka County Board Room, 2100 3"^ Avenue N., 7:30 p.m. Prior Lake City Council Chambers, 16776 Fish Point Road, 7 p.m. Lakeville City Council Chambers, 20195 Holyoke Avenue, 7 p.m. Plymouth Community Center Ballroom, 14800 34* Avenue, 7 p.m. Each hearing will include a brief explanation of the current statutory authority for the Council and of several bills which were introduced during the last session. We will then take testimony from the members of the audience. Due to time constraints, priority will be given to individuals who sign up to speak prior to the meeting. Please contact Blair Tremere, Committee Administrator, at 651-296-5376, if you have any questions, or if you would like to testily. I look forward to hearing your comments. If you are unable to attend please feel free to contact me at anytime. Sincerely, r:.: • I i- 5.:- Representative Mary Liz Holberg, Chair Metropolitan Council and Agencies Subcommittee CiT'i wr UnO» 12195 Upper 167th Street, Lakeville. Minnesota 55044 (612) 435-8723 State Office &iiiding, 100 Constitution Ave.. St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1298 FAX (651) 296-7189 TTY (651) 296-9896 email: rep.maryllz.holberg® house.leg.state.mn.us NOT PRINTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE (651) 296-6926 • t 4 s FALL 1 2 3 2000 ^ ur OrtUiMU THE MAYOR’S CORNER The Police Chief ivill be missed! It is at this time I must report the retirement of an individual valuable to the City of Spring Park- Directly affecting the residents of Spring Park will be the January 2001 retirement of Orono Chief of Police, Gary Cheswick, after 32 years police service. He has been an outstanding leader to the force and a good friend to Spring Park. Gary has served as Chief of Police the last five years. Orono is a seventeen member police department where the Chief directs the policies to three Sergeants and then to the patrol as a whole. For over 20 years, Spring Park contracted its police service from the City of Orono. The type of superior police service we receive is done in a very customer oriented manner. We have always required that our ordinances are enforced in a positive manner and 1 feel through our ' long-term relationship with the Orono Police Department we have achieved success in this area. A major contributor to this success has been the leadership by Gaiy Cheswick as Chief of Police. Another reason for our success is the joint meeting of our Spring Park Police Commission and Orono Chief of Police. Everv' month there is a meeting PMK to review the previous month's activitv' not only to see how "things are going" but to also locate where adjustments need to be made. This t>pe of communication is crucial to ensure the safety of our residents and to ensure the cost effectiveness of our police budget. As I mentioned earlier, Gary has been an outstanding leader and an excellent person to work with and we wish him the best in his retirement! On another matter, you will notice that our fall pick-up will be later in the season. This year is will be the first Saturday in November. We are trying a later date to see if this helps ease our resident's leaf removaL Please be sure to let our staff know if this works better. COUNCIL & PLANNING COM.MISSION NEWS The cooification of the City's Ordinances is completed. All of the outdated language has been removed and replaced by POLICE CHIEF TO RETIRE Orono Police Chief Gary Cheswick will be retiring as of January, 2001, after serving the community for 32 years. He began his career with the Minnetrista Police Department in 1968 and was paid $15.00 each time he was on duty. Cheswick was hired by the Orono Police Department February 1, 1969, when the department was ( ymprised of sis officers covering the cities of Orono, Maple Plain and Long Lake. The Orono Police Department began covering the City of Spring Park in 1981. Cheswick was promoted to Sergeant in March of that year and then to Lieutenant in October, 1986. When Chief Sullivan left the department in 1995, Cheswick was promoted to Acting Chief of Police and was given the permanent position in 1996. During Chief Chcswick's career, he was involved in many major investigations, including a kidnapping of a local resident that made national headlines. There have been many amusing anecdotes, but the moments in his career that stand out the most were those in which he felt he was making a difference in someone's life. Over the years. Chief Cheswick has been a mentor to many people who later went on to become police officers themselves. After retiring this winter, Cheswick is planning to tend to his small farm, spend time with family and friends, fish, play golf and relax. When Chief Cheswick retires, the community will not only be losing a good peace officer but also a good friend. The City of Spring Park wishes him a healthy and happy retirement. mm. DONATIONS A very special I'HIANTC YOU, to the Mohawk Jaycees of Westonka for donating $4000 to the Ciri's Beautification Fund. The money comes from profits from the pull tabs from Spring Park businesses. Another special IHAML. YOU to Bob Shanley, who on behalf of the Mound American Legion, donated flags to the City for the flag holders on Shoreline Drive. m PUBLIC SAFETY NEWS Be prepared for Minnesota's harsh printers. Winter usually comes whether or not we want it or are ready for it The following "\^inter advice" was submitted by Police Chief Gary Cheswick. h.ccTING UCI 2 3 2000 Oi I T ur UhUNO LONG LAKE FIRE STATION REPLACEMENT PROJECT OPEN HOUSE Please attend a project open house sponsored by the Long Lake Fire Station Replacement Committee. Committee members and project consultants will be presenting infonnation regarding the construction of a new Long Lake fire station. The existing fire station will be acquired by MnDOT for Highway 12 right-of- way needs. The meeting will focus on the site selection process, project funding, and the space needs analysis prepared by the project architect. A key factor in the committee’s site selection effort has been to minimize fire fighter response time. To accomplish this, the committee is focusing generally on sites along Brown Road, Willow Drive, and Watertown Road. WHEN: Thursday, November 2, 2000 - 7:00 P.M. WHERE: Long Lake Fire Station - 1964 Park Avenue WHO SHOULD ATTEND: Anyone interested in learning more about the process for replacing our current fire station. For more information about the open house or the project, please contact Long Lake City Hall at 473-6961. • 1^: * tiMG ^A>-'-:/'.. A' UCI 2 3 2000 CITY of ORONO' ^'’uvu Municipal Offices \\Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Fire Marshal Activity Report October 11,2000 Buildings or properties with pending fire code violations. Day Care - Good Shepherd Church - 3745 Shoreline Drive Fire alarm system update Gray Freshwater Society - 2500 Shadywood Road New fire sprinkler system Fire alarm system plan OK'd 9/25/00 Snyder Drug - Co. Rd. 19+15 New building project Fire sprinkler plan OK'd 10/3/00 Orono Middle School - 800 Crystal Bay Road Pre-plan meeting with L.L. Fire Dept. 10/2/00 Minnetonka Center For The Arts - 2240 North Shore Drive New Building Project Complaint, Inspection 8/31/00 LaFayette Club - 2800 Northview Road Addition and remodel project Other fire code related projects - Jimmy's Lounge Mtka. Beach - Maintenance Garage Telephone (613) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616