Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-15-2000 Planning PacketORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 15,2000->6:30 p.m. 2780 Kelley Parkway-Council Chambers AGENDA Council Representative: Barbara Peterson AUDIENCE MEMBERS: Please sign in for the public record at the front podium if you wish to address the Planning Commission. Applicants will be asked to move to the front table to answer questions when the Chair announces the application. The Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council. If action is taken on any items on this agenda, they will be scheduled for the June 12,2000, City Council meeting unless otherwise noted by the Chair. PUBLIC HEARINGS Review of these items will commence prior to or between scheduled public hearings. OLD BUSINESS 1.#2569 W.Duncan MacMillan and William Waldron, 1860 Fox Street, After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 p.m. 2.#2585 Thomas and Kathleen McCaffrey, 4265/4355 Chippewa Lane, Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). 7:30 p.m. 3.#2587 Richard R. Rudd, 4575 VVayzata Blvd., Subdivision for Platting a Public Road adjacent to a proposed 6 lot plat located in City of Medina. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). NEW BUSINESS 4. 5. #2578 #2579 David and Lorraine Lundberg, 900 Dakota Avenue, Variance. (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg). James and Candace Kemna, 1110 Willow Drive South, Variances. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). i L_ 6. 7. 8. #2580 #2581 #2582 Timothy Pattrin, 1360 Railroad Avenue, Variance. (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg). John and Kristin Gehring, 1687 Concordia Street, Variances. (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg). Francis and Susan Ann Koubsky, 4784 North Shore Drive, Variances. (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg). 9. 10. #2583 #2584 Roxann Beisch, 3436 Livingston Avenue, Variances. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). Andrew and Tracy Rascher, 4705 North Shore Drive, Conditional Use Permit and Variances. (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg). PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 11.Report of Planning Conunission representatives attending Council meetings April 24, 2000 and May 8, 2000. 12.Other issues for discussion. 13.Planning Commission approval of minutes for April 17,2000. 14.Selection of representatives for City Council meetings on May 22,2000 and June 12,2000. ADJOURNMENT Public A ttendance MEE'fiNG D ate . ^ //-frAiO □C ouncil U.Planning C ommission □PARK C ommission □Other _________ Please fill out the information t REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS, . ■. :•.■ NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1.CrT\ ^ 2./vfelfL I <f /r S ^ l ^ 1b() Pi.k^CC^J 10. / 4. L/ T 1 ^'■ 7 OO r^C^\LAJ^C — —7"^ (l LA/ i >vT r/ ‘T •*' / i / 3 I //£:«< /_____________ 1 Ip til 5/<'C.J-A ^ 5 L^^C' ^r- ^ L, E/. /nP u 11 12. 13.. 14. i i.�� �-- � rasa. _g_� -� -,aonl��.9.--�_,_� -., �i . jb ... _,_(-. � . -� II 11 �:.::..l·-·· .... � .. cu.r .. __.. ' .. .. -�-.�� • 1TI_ Ill • • •. ••�s�,• I --=--- ,,�� i 'l� I A I " / ·b · .. :··--· "y� � . r �� I I �--.Q� _,_ •--�;: ---Jl._ 7 :ka:�r ·�_>2 , ,.. '· '· r:, 4000 ,�� ..._. 1.--·---. • . / � ?RM -�----· �". •---1-- ?4nrt " ?tV-.n __ .., Lt.c.EJ T�--:A ., .,.✓ __. •/ ✓• .. ,K._ __ • WAY. ORO�O PLANi'lNG COi\[\\,llSSJO� ·1onday, �lay 15, 2000-6:30 p.m .2780 Kelley Parkway-Council Cbambce.n AGENDA Council Representative: Barbara Peterson AUDIENCE i\lEi\mERS: Plr:ise sign in for the public record at the front podium if )'OD wisb to ad Applicants will be asked to move to the front table to answer quario application. The Pl2nn1ng Commission is an advisor)' body to the City item.son this agenda, they '";n be scheduled {or the June. 12, 2000, City C noted by the Chair . PUBLIC HEARINGS Review of tbe.se items will commence prior to or bet wtt.n scheduled pubU OLD BUSINESS I.#2569 \V. Duncan �1ac:Vfillan and Wilham Wal, Use PenniL (Staff: Paul \Vcinbe:rger). n.1860 Fo SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 p.m. 2.#2585 :30 p.m. 3.#2587 NEW BUS[l'.;'ESS #2578 5. 6. 8. 9. 10. 25i9 #2580 #2581 #2582 2583 #2584 Thomo.s and Kathleen �kCaffrey, 4165/4355 Cbjpp Rearrangement. (Staf f: Paul \Veinberger). Richard R. Rudd, 4575 \\'ay2at.a Bl,·d., Subdivision a proposed 6 lot pl:lt located in City of MC'dina. (S David and Lorraine Lundberg, 900 .Dakot:l A,•r.nue. ', Jame.s and Candace Kernn3., 1110 \ViUow Ori Weinbe-rgc.r). Timothy Pattrin, 1360 R:lilroad Avenue, Variance. (! John and Kr.sun Gehring, 1 Cooc:ordia Street1 Franci.s and Susan AM Koubsky, 478-' Nor1b Sbo Bonenbcrg). Roxo.nn Beisch, 3436 Li, in2Ston Av•rnue,, Variances. Andrew and T arfances. (St:1 �er, 4705 North Sbore I y Bo PLAi.,�G COt\L"IISSIOi'i CO'.\L\r£NiS 11. 12. 13. Report of Plaaoiog Commission rcpresenJativcs attending Council 2000 Other issues for discussion . Planning Commission approval of minu.ces for April 17. 2000. 14.Selection of represeoratives for City Council !Xlfftmp on �1a ADJOUR1�1ENT 3200 / TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner April 17,2000 #2569 W. Duncan MacMillan and William Waldron I860 Fox Street After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit Zoning:RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential, 2 Acre Minimum lot size Application: After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit to permit excavation of greater than 500 cubic yards of fill to dredge a pond. List of Exhibits: A B C D E F G II Wetland Alteration Guidelines: Pond Excavation Letter to property owner (Dated February 29,2000) Application Site Survey Plat Map Property Owners Notification List City Topographic Map City Protected Wetland Map Application Summar>': Several weeks ago the City of Orono became aware of a pond that was being dredged on a property owned by William Waldren at 1700 Fox Street. The pond was dredged by the property owner to the south for a natural pond.________________________________ ANALYSIS Pertinent Code Sections: Section 10.03, Subdivisions 19-21 require a conditional use permit for land alteration activities greater than 500 cubic yards. #2569 W. Duncan MacMillan and William Waldron 1S60 Fox Street After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit April! 7, 2000 pag€-l Surrounding Properties: The survey indicates the land alteration is located across the east property line. Craigbank Associates is the owner of the second property this pond has impacted. Mr. MacMillan is a percentage owner of that lot. Mr. MacMillan also owns the property' located south of the pond. Existing topography restricts any view of the pond from other adjacent properties or the road. Preexisting pond: A small open water pond did exist, as show'n on the site survey prior to the expansion. It is not clear whether the pond was natural or was dredged. The pond was located at the south end of a non-Orono wetland. In 1974 the City of Orono defined certain wetlands that were primarily Types 3,4,5 and 6 as protected. Those wetlands identified by the City of Orono are protected and no land alteration is permitted within the wetland and the 26’ around the wetland. Expansion of the pond occurred in a wetland that the City has not identified as protected. No variance is required for the expansion. Conditional Use Permit Standards: Section 10.09 Standards for Granting of a Conditional Use Permit The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a conditional use permit as the use permit was applied for or in modified form, if on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the City makes the following findings: 1.That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan. The Conditional Use is for land alteration of greater than 500 cubic yards. The land alteration has occurred in a wetland that is not an Orono protected wetland, therefore not requiring any variances. 2.That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; No fill has been placed within the wetland to change its capacity and normal water level. Staff has requested additional information regarding the grades within the pond. The depth at the ponds edge and center had not been provided as of the time of this report. It is believed the pond has a maximum depth of 6-7 feet. 3.That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. 1^2569 W. Duncan MacMillan and William Waldron 1860 Fox Street Aftcr-ihc-Fact Conditional Use Permit Apriin, 2000 page-2 L Because the pond is not located in a protected wetland, no variances are required. A conditional use permit is required only because land alteration greater than 500 cubic yards had occurred as part of this project. Protective Covenant: The wetland shall be subject to a protective covenant filed in the chain of title of the affected property, as an advisory to current and future property owners that the wetland is subject to WCA regulation. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions; 1. o 40** Applicant applies for a land alteration permit, A protective covenant is filed in the chain of title of the affected properties as an advisory to property owners the wetland is subject to WCA regulation. 3.A final as built survey, indicating finished elevations of the pond is submitted to the City and accepted by the City Engineer. 4.Verification a MCWD permit has been approved for the pond construction. Planning Commission Options for Action: 1.Approval of the after the fact conditional use permit, stating condtions. 2.Denial of variances, stating reasons. 3.Table, requesting further information and provide direction to the applicant. 4.Other Action. #2569 W. Duncan MacMillan and William Waldron 1860 Fox Street After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit Apriin, 2000 pagt-3 A CITYofORONO Municipal Ofllces street Address 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address; P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Wetland Alteration Guidelines: Excavation of Ponds 1.Excavation of ponds in upland areas (not within nor within 26' of a Type 1 thru Type 8 wetland) requires a staff-issued land alteration permit if not more than 500 cubic yards, and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) if more than 500 cubic yards. Such grading may require a permit fom the MC WD. 2.Excavation of a pond in a WCA wetland that is not a City-protected wetland, will require MCWD approval as well as a City land alteration permit (and a CUP if over 500 c.y.), and may require U.S. Army Corps of Engineers approval. 3.Excavation of a pond in or within 26’ of a City-protected wetland, will require a Variance and Conditional Use Permit approval regardless of the amount of excavation; likely will require MCWD and Corps approval; and may require DNR approval if it is a DNR-protected wetland. 4.City approval of pond excavations will take into account the applicable requirements and review considerations as defined in Zoning Code Sections 10.55 and 10.56. 5.The City wili generally not approve a Var/CUP application for a decorative pond in City-protected wetlands unless such pond is designed to meet minimum wildlife habitat specifications, which generally include: -Pond surface area of at least 2500 s.f.-10:1 perimeter bench to a 1' depth -Depth of approximately 4-5'-Excavating a small portion of a larger wetland 6.Approval for ponds excavated in City-protected wetlands will normally require the use of erosion control measures, vegetation restoration, and the granting of a conservation and flowage easement to the City. 7.Information required in order to make application for a Var/CUP for pond excavation includes but is not limited to: Complete General Land Use Application with fee/propert>’ owner list/plat map -Property survey -Wetland delineation report (must use a professional delineator) -Grading plan (existing and proposed contours) -Vegetation restoration plan -Indication of spoil disposal site Glossary:WCA; Wetlands Conservation Act MCWD; Minnehaha Creek Watershed District DNR; Minnesota Department of Natural Resources var; variance CUP; Conditional Use Permit Telephone «12) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 »e February 29, 2000 William Waldron 1860 Fox Street Wayzata, ^*n 55391 Dear Mr. Waldron: On a recent building inspection, it was noted that there was excavation and grading occurring in a wetland. On February 14,2000, a field inspector from the city went out and took pictures of the site. The pond excavated on the property appears to also encroach on 1700 Fox Street. Typically, a five foot setback is required firom property lines for any land alteration or grading. The land alteration, as performed on the property, requires permits from the City of Orono. It is also likely a conditional permit will be required. There are two options for the site. One option would be complete restoration of the impacted wetland back to its original state. The second option would be an after-the-fact conditional use permit for land alteration for the pond. The following information is required in order to make an after-the-fact permit request: I.Complete after-the-fact conditional use permit application and $500 application fee. 2.Certified property owners list, plat map and mailing labels for all properties with 350 of your property. This information is available from the Hennepin County Department of Finance. You can contact their office at (612) 348-5910. 3.Wetland Delineation Report (Must use a professional delineator) 4.Grading plan showing previous and existing contours shall be shown on a certificate of survey indicating the change in grade on the property. Telephooe (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 2494616 il^ii kT>iir;Jfi:>;W>C»HltlUMj] [•UllWIIWlMilJ rtTiMi rii^fiii [tjfiiMlWL [tliili iMk^RTTTi iTTTdTSTAmrSTaifl ! \ I# N I?. ■• •■ ^■nvrtMHw \y Application # ^ 5(g ^Date Received ^Amount Paid j S'CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATIONPROPERTY LOCATION ^ ^Site Address l^CO FOK ^------j------Type of Application to be Filed dUP Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)2 0 Q P.'Z--------- APPl TCANT (home)_££2^2ir5^:i^C> . -r..Phone (work) Address Kl igekrr/.yaOP t-^City —Z'P_SS3aA_ OWNER (if different than applicant). Phone (home) y 7 ^ -6» 3 / ‘-f_ M.n,. {Ij\L.U^L.fJMCoP-d^/___ Phone (work) Address F^/\ Date Property Acquired City Zip _______________(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERi\nTS - $ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application " $175.00 Residential Accessory Use $250.00 Insti.utional (church, school, etc.) $225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ______$300.00 CommercialAndustrid Use X $250.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated weUand or floodplain ^ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls^withiu 75 of l^eshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) X After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee A 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 V ---WALDRON .... .. - - I I I I I --. ADDITION '• (tJlfl� , __ ...,. .. _ _,._ ·-· -"?--c=.':-.. _____ .., __ 11,I , A r1' ·•.•• . ·. • • . • .. _,.. ... --:""'. .. .. �••-OC............. .._.. ............. _.... _ .......................... ........ --� . . ·" .......... :...•• . . .. -. . :.:· ·-······-·--····�:-· �,, . ' ; ' I \-I/ • ... • • • • .­.. . � .. --. . . .• • • • • . . ,• .. ,.,,,. #-Z ,t,,,OffONO. WNNtSOTA tTI)P()(;RAPHICSURVEY -­_,.-- I..W.LlltlOJCCT NO. all00-405 • L 0 • *•• •• 0 £ 1 •/ RUN DATE IS/IA/RR BATCH SBl BROP AOOR ONNER NAHC TAXPAYER ' NAHE/ADOR SB RS-llT-ES SI 0001 00AA5 BROWN RO S ERIC H SMITH ETAL XVANETTE SMITH AA5 BROWN RO S LONO LAKE NN 5535A. HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST SB 0S-117-2S SI 0002 OOBBS BROWN RO S BEVERLY SMITH SILBERHANN BEVERLY SILBERHANN BBS BROWN RO S WAYZATA MN 5S391 REPORT NO. PIBSSBOl PACE 1 SB 0S-1I7-2S SI OOOS 005B5 BROWN RD S P J B T A HILL PETER J A THEIA A HILL 505 BROWN RD S LONE LAKE HN B5S5B PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYff NANE/AODR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB BS-117-2S 31 OBBB B212B FOX ST C R KRANTZ ETAL CURTIS R KRANTZ 212B FOX ST LONG LAKE NN S535B SB BS-117-2S SB 0015 020B0 WEBBER HILLS RD K R B S IGNATIUS KERRY R IGNATIUS 20BB WEBBER HILLS RD WAYZATA HN 55S91 SB 0S-117-2S B2 0002 OIBBO FOX ST WILLIAM L WALDRON WILLIAM L WALDRON IBBO FOX ST WAYZATA MN 55ST1 SB 0S-117-2S B2 0009 01B20 FOX ST W DUNCAN MACMILLAN TRUSTEE W DUNCAN MACMILLAN 1B20 FOX ST WAYZATA HN 55391 SB 0S-117-2S B2 OOIB OOBSB ADDRESS UNASS16NED JOHN B B LINDA F NASSOPUST JOHN B B LINDA F NASSOPUST CITY CENTER SUITE BBOO SS BTH ST S MINNEAPOLIS MN 55B02 SB 0S-117-2S SB 0013 02090 WEBBER HILLS RD K H KRUEGER B P K KRUEGER TR KEVIN N KRUEGER 2090 WEBBER HILLS RD WAYZATA MN 55391 SB 0S-117-2S B1 OOOS 01700 FOX ST CRAIGBANK ASSOCIATES CRAIOBANK ASSOCIATES PO BOX 9300 DEPT 2B MPLS MN 55BB0 SB 0S-117-2S B2 0007 01B60 FOX ST WILLIAM L WALDRON WILLIAM L WAtORON IBBO FOX ST WAYZATA MN 55S91 SB 0S-117-2S B2 0012 OOBBO BROWN RD S J B S L F NASSOPUST JOHN B NASSOPUST CITY CENTER SUITE BBOO S3 S BTH ST MPLS NN 55B02 30 OS-117-23 B3 0001 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNED SUAD H AZHARI SUAD H AZHARI 17B5 FOX ST WAYZATA MN 55S91 SB 03-117-23 SB OOIB 020B0 WEBBER HILLS RD J D HOUG BSD H0U6 JAMES D B SUSAN B HOUG 2000 WEBBER HILLS RO WAYZATA HN 55391 SB 03-117-23 B1 0005 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASS16NED LONGRIDGE ASSOC LONGRIDGE ASSOC C/0 ROBERT J TNEILER P 0 BOX 5B2B MPLS HN 55BB0-5B2B 3B 03-117-23 B2 OOOS OIBBO FOX ST JOHN C SKOGLUNO TRUSTEE JOHN C SKOGLUNO C/0 BAKER MANAGEMENT SO BTH ST S RB900 MPLS MN 5SB02 SB 0S-117-2S B2 OOlS OOOSB ADORESS UNASSIGNED JOHN B B LiraiA F NASSOPUST JOHN B B LINDA F NASSOPUST CITY CENTER SUITE BBOO S3 BTH ST S MINNEAPOLIS NN 55B02 SS 03-117-23 B3 0002 01925 FOX ST J WAGSTRON ASHDOWN WATSON J WAGSTRON ASHDOWN WATSON 1925 FOX ST WAYZATA HN 55591 f f •• r,r» MAR 9 >- jnop Q\lY Ui* UnUNO RUN DATE •S/IA/RR BATCH Btl HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OMNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIASSARl PACE 2 PROP AHM OHNER NAHi TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SO 0S-117-2S AS OMS OiMO OROMN RO S H J OTT I S B OTT HICHAEL J OTT -ABO BROUN RO S HAYZATA MN BSSAl TOTAL BATCH 501 00019 r J. I r • I .« pw- I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS Of THE HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTNENT Of PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST Of NY KN0MLE06E AND BELIEf. BATE- . ViaR^AAAkfl r bJ .'Am4 CT- mm m?6 *.' 1 :■•<'.t ;•».: ii ., T. t> Wt^. BiS^ ' . J-. Tftfei fA‘ 'ii im. i/ gp»> 'i&ixw^ Amku.- W-:-%W^.ii.:>^jMM4^. v-WM i ^y.\'V] ^,h K> m \ am V ^ ■.r 'n ^ r:jk 5m ,r'V ^1m y'i ‘ •> J * Q TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner May 10,2000 Thomas and Kathleen McCaffrey Fred and Joyce Shemanek 4265 and 4355 Chippewa Lane Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Zoning:RR-1 A, One Family Rural Residential, 5 Acre Minimum lot size Application: To rearrange a common lot line to transfer 1.80 acres from property located at 4355 Chippewa Lane to 4265 Chippewa Lane. Lut of Exhibits: A B C D E F G H Application Plat Map Property Survey/Site Plan Letter from Mike Gaffron (Dated 3/27/00) Zoning Map Legal Descriptions Site Topography Property Owners List Application Summary: The applicants have proposed to transfer a portion of4355 Chippewa Lane to 4265 Chippewa Lane. The existing 4355 parcel is a legal conforming lot consisting of 6.92 acres and having a lot width of 370'. The transfer of 1.8 acres will result in a 5.12 acre parcel meeting the minimum lot size for the zoning district. However the proposed lot division would transfer approximately 125' of frontage to the adjacent parcel leaving only 245' of frontage where 300’ is required. The second lot is almost 1 acre is size and would increase in lot size to 2.80 acres. The lot would have 327' of frontage on Chippewa Lane. Thomas and iCathlecn McCallrey Fred and Joyce Shemanek 4265 and 4355 Chippewa Lane Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement May 15. 2000 pag*-l ANALYSIS Total Area 7.92 acres Lot Area: (Existing)4265 Chippewa Lane 4355 Chippewa Lane 1.00 acre 6.92 acres Lot Area: (Proposed)4265 Chippewa Lane 4355 Chippewa Lane 2.80 acres 5.12 acres Required Minimum Lot Size 5.00 acres Area, Lot Width and Yard Requirements Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 5 acres 300 feet 100 feet 50 feet 100 feet Access: Access to the properties would not change as a result of the proposed lot line rearrangement. Each lot would front on Chippewa Lane. Septic Sites: Applicants have completed septic testing for the properties that has been reviewed by Staff and preliminarily approved. The proposed 4265 parcel has identified septic sites to be located to the west of the house. The sites are located within the area to be transferred to the adjacent property. Additional testing was not completed on the property to identify additional sites on the lots. At issue is the identified sites do not allow the 4355 parcel to maintain at a 300' width. Sites have been identified near the east property line for the 4355 lot. Surrounding Properties: All property located around this site is in the RR-1A zoning district (Please refer to the attached zoning map Exhibit E.) The draft version of the updated Comprehensive Plan has guided the future land use of this site and all adjacent properties to be rural residential and rural service. Thomas and Kathleen McCaf&ey Fred and Joyce Shemanek 4265 and 4355 Chippe\%a Lane Subdivision of a Lot Line Reairangement May 15. 2000 patt-2 j All lots located on the north side of Chippewa Lane are between 1 and 2 acres and only 1 of the 7 lots has frontage of 300'. Lot Width Variance: Because the larger lot would result in less than 300' of frontage along Chippewa Lane a variance is required for lot width. The property is a legal conforming lot for lot area and lot width prior to subdivision. The only lot on the south side of the Chippewa Lane that is non-conforming is the 4265 lot. Primary Issues for Discussion: 1. 2. 3. Orono has approved lot line rearrangements in the past. In most cases when lots did not meet the minimum lot size requirements and the subdivision was approved the properties had existed as two residential sites in the past. The proposed lot line rearrangement does not increase the density between the two lots. Under the existing zoning no future subdivision is possible. Technically, the lot would require a variance for lot width since the lot would become substandard. The lot line rearrangement results in the 4355 lot being reduced in lot width to less than 300'. This is significant because as the lot exists it is a conforming lot (lot area and lot width). The Subdivision Code does not address creating lots with walkways to access public land. Proposed is to provide a 10' wide walking access to the Luce Line Trail for the 4265 lot. Planning Commission Options for Action: 1.Approval of variances based on the Statement of Hardship. 2.Denial of variances, stating reasons. 3.Table, requesting further information and provide direction to the applicant. 4.Other Action. Thomis ind Kathleen McCaffrey Fred and Joyce Shemanek 4265 and 4355 Chippewa Lane Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement \fay 15, 2000 pagt-3 k Application it Date Received Amount Paid ^' A %^0 CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site address ”0^ J r y / J. Sli6eJi\'/S/e ^ of _ Property Identification Number (PID) Please check one - Property ^^jfabstract or-^^^.^orrens? Attach legal description to application. applicant Name ----------3 ------7 —r^/ /r -- ^: T-z-f.Phone (home)^ 4^7^Address Q\xs /^aJ Zip____Phone (work) ^/j: 334> SY3 ^ OWNER (if different than applicant)ylv uiiicicm Luou appuwoiiw;y Name e C/^tyr*^ Sn /\ Address 4/3^^^________ .Zi£___ (attach list if more than one)S'JS''Y Phone (home) V7?‘ o^/S' , Phone (work)_________ EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check)l/' Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ Present Zoning District \ PROPOSAL ______Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites __Existing Units __New Units Total Units «% 1'‘ V-' . >\ Number of Building Sites \' • >■ Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per___Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)_________ e 1.1^ “HI 7_____1 ^ i /w—--------ry^; ^ 1 (»» 1 5 y—-—\ >v (me>i»RimnK,W! N ®a |0) o Si Q So I €A i I * IN.IHL bt 1/4 ui- bLCIIUN o Ila-Zb ENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA C 370.10 CHIPPEWA LANE N 89*28’40" E 200.01 o< o o\ '1 / A r GlTYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley ParVway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 ^ \\ y ■T‘>- ^>« 'i -A ,4'7 March 27,2000 Tom Wolff 12903 18*^Ave. S. Burnsville, MN 55337 • Re: Lot line rearrangement at 4355/4265 Chippewa Lane (Shemanek & neighbor) Dear Mr. Wolff: Enclosed please find a subdivision procedure packet for use in making the appropriate application for approval of the lot line rearrangement as we discussed. This application, in which the 4355 parcel remains conforming (5 acres, 300' width) and the 4265 parcel remains substandard as to width and area but gains in lot area, will be reviewed as a metes and bounds subdivision and will not require a plat. The application will require submittal of the application form, the required $350.00 fee and certified property owners list, plus a survey showing existing and proposed boundaries and indicating existing and proposed legal descriptions. The survey must show existing improvements, buildings, etc. to confirm that all setbacks will still be met. It will also be important to confirm that a secondary drainfield site will still be available for the home at 4355 within its remaining 5 acres. This type of application typically requires one appearance before the Planning Commission (public hearing") and one appearance before the City Council. The next deadline for applications is Wednesday April 19 for the May 15 Planning Commission meeting. Final Council action would likely be scheduled for June 12. Please feel free to contact me or Planner/Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger at 612-249-4600 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ^ -j",- /// Michael P. Gdffrbn Senior Planning Coordinator end. cc: Paul Weinberger Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 0 -PENDE CE• ORRIS T. BAKE. - PARK RESER V - ST 5 er&. � F EXISTING SHEMANEK PROPERTY That part of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter which lies West of the east quarter thereof and East of the West 421.7 feet thereof and north of the railroad right-of-way. EXCEPT the North 217.00 feet of the West 200.00 feet of the East 530.00 feet of said South Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, Section 31. Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian. EXISTING MCCAFFREY PROPERTY The North 217 feet of the West 200 feet of the East 530 feet of the South One-half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, Section 31, Township 118, Range 23, according to the Government Survey thereof. PROPOSED PARCEL A (REMAINING SHEMANEK PROPERTY) That part of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of SecVon 31, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian which lies /Vest of the east quarter thereof and East of the West 421.7 feet thereof and north of the railroad right-of-way. EXCEPT the East 10.00 feet thereof; ALSO EXCEPT the North 368.00 feet of the West 314.50 feet of the East 324.50 feet thereof. PROPOSED PARCEL B (TO BE ADDED TO MCCAFFREY PARCEL) The East 10.00 feet of that part of the West three fourths of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 31, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, which lies south of the North 368.00 feet thereof, and north of the Luce Line Trail right-of-way; ALSO The South 151.00 feet of the North 368.00 feet of the West 314.50 feet of the East 324.50 feet of the West three-fourths of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 31; ALSO The North 217.00 feet of that part of the East 324.5 feet of the West three-fourths of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 31, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian which lies west of the East 530.00 feet of said South Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter u *1J a •• # **“•^ i . . •• . .* r J .........___...__a }96.7 X I 021 • I 00 X 00 PROf Aom ONNER NMtE TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 3S Sl-118-23 45 0115 •••58 ADDRESS tlNASSlCNEO . H F I e KNAPP / MILLXAN F I EVELYN KNAPP •5 CRXSTOFORX CXR IMPLE PUXN KN 55559 HENNEPXN COUNTY'PROPERTY INFORNATXON SYSTEH PROPERTY OMNERS LXST 58 51-118-25 44 OOOl •••38 ADDRESS UNASSICNED STATE OF HINN STA1E OF NINN (DNR) (LUCE LINE TRAIL) {;i/ I ^••V in REPORT NO. PI4S5481 PAGE 30 TOTAL BATCH 550 00020 ChipPCuJCL 3t-,H- X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATXON OF XNFORHATXON AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION^ TO THE BEST DATE J V. RUN DATE O^/OA/90 BATCH 550 PROf ADDR OHNER NAHE taxpayer NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER HAHC/ADOR PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST SB 31-116-23 A1 0013 0A1A5 HATERTOHN RD ^ H R t H E PLANK ^ HXCHAEL R t HARY E PLANK 327 NORTH CARRINGTON BUFFALO NY 6203^ SB 31-11B-23 A2 0006 OOOid ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF HINN STATE OF HINN (DNRI CLUCE LINE TRAIL) SB 31-11B-2S A2 0011 0A305 CNIPPEHA LA . J L CORNICK i D L CORNICRV JANES B DEBRA CORNICK 4305 CNIPPEHA LA NAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 W 31-11B-23 42J»014 ^ TURNNAtrRD!elxnsky P^LXNSKY JR tNHAH ^PLE PLAIN HN n ^.55359 SB 31-11B-23 42 0017 043B5 CNIPPEHA LA J H FRXTZLER ET AL J HARC FRITZLER ✓ DESYL L PETERSON 43B5 CNIPPEHA LA HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 3B 31-11B-23 43 0002 0003B ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF NINN STATE OF NINN (DNR) (LUCE LINE TRAIL) SB 31-11B-23 42 0001 04245 CNIPPEHA LA ROBERT LEHIS SORENSEN J D B C H GRANGAARD ✓ B509 CARDIFF LA EDEN PRAIRIE NN 55344 .36 31-11B-23 42 0009 04325 CNIPPEHA LA DANIEL P B REBECCA J SCHULTZ DANIEL B REBECCA SCHULTZ 4325 CNIPPEHA LA HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 3B 31-11B-23 42 0012 04220 CNIPPEHA LA . PAHELA GAIL ANDERSON ^ PAHELA G ANDERSON 4220 CNIPPEHA LANE HAPLE PLAINS HN 55359 36 31-116-23 42 0015 04360 CNIPPEHA LA L E NARTINEAU/J H HARTINEAU LARRY E B JEAN H HARTINEAU 4360 CNIPPEHA LA HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 36 31-116-23 42 0016 00320 TURNNAH RD J L B R P ZELINSKY JR J L B R P ZELINSKY JR 320 TURNNAH RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 36 31-116-23 43 0011 00145 TURNNAH RD DEAL SAVINGS BANC DAVID A DETERS l/ 145 TURNNAH RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 29 36 31-116-23 42 0002 04265 CNIPPEHA LA > T J B K L HCCAFFREY ^ THOHAS J HCCAFFREY 4265 CNIPPEHA LA HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 36 31-116-23 42 0010 04315 CNIPPEHA LA GREGORY NALLDIN GREGORY NALLDIN 4315 CNIPPEHA LANE HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 J \^01336\ 31-116-23 42^0 00320^ TURNNAH RD J L B R P^ELINSKY JR J L 320 HAPL B iyf(NNAH RD 1 PLA ZELINSKY JR PLAIN HN\55359 36 31-116-23 42 0016 04355 CNIPPEHA LA F E JR B J E SHEHANEK ^ FREDERICK E SHEHANEK JR RT 2 BOX 16 HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 36 31-116-23 43 0001 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF HINN STATE OF HINN (DNR) (LUCE LINE TRAIL) 36 31-116-23 43 0014 00165 CRISTOFORZ CIR J R B J K LESSER ✓ JOHN LESSER 165 CRISTOFORI CIR HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 o rvi • » 3 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner May 11,2000 #2587 Robb R. Rudd 4575 Wayzata Boulevard West Preliminary Road Plat in Orono Zoning:RR-1 A, One Family Rural Residential, 5 Acre Minimum lot size Application: The propert>' owner has made an application with the City of Orono to plat a segment of a road that is intended to be a public road over a lot located at 4575 Wayzata Boulevard West. The total length of the road, in Orono, would be approximately 450' ending in a cul-de-sac at the east end of the property. List of Exhibits A B C D E F G H I Application Concept Plan Rudd Property/Proposed Roadway Request for Council Action - Greg Gappa (April 10,2000) City Council Minutes (April 10,2000) Existing Driveway Access Plat Map Zoning/Location Map Property Owners Notification List Background Orono, Medina, MNDOT, representatives of the Burlington Northern Railroad and adjacent property owners have been discussing providing access to several properties in Orono that currently have direct access to Highway 12 over the Burlington Northern railroad tracks. Access to the properties has been in place for many years and continued by a licence agreement between the railroad and the properties. Please refer to Exhibit F indicating the location of the railroad crossing and potentially “landlocked” parcels. The railroad has indicated that their long range goal is to eliminate this crossing for safety reasons. It is also an objective for MNDOT to eliminate direct driveway access to Highway 12. «2587 Robb R. Rudd 4575 Wayzata Boulevard West Preliminary Road Plat in Orono Stay i5, 2000 pait-l Representatives from all agencies involved and the propert>' owners have considered several options to develop a permanent and safe access for properties that could potentially become landlocked in the future. A concept plan was reviewed by the Orono City Council on April 10, 2000 that has proposed a public road with access to Townline Road in Medina. The road would provide access to a proposed 6 lot plat in Medina and to the 4 existing lots in Orono. This option would eliminate the access over the railroad to Highway 12. Greg Gappa ha.s noted in his memo to the City Council, dated April 10, 2000, (Exhibit D) that MNDOT has offered to pay for the road construction and provide access to the properties that will lose access across the railroad provided that the Cities or property owners provide the necessary right-of-way and easements. Also, please read the attached minutes from the Council meeting. This proposal would create the road segment in Orono to provide access to the properties. It appears the property owners to the east (Slaughter and Hickey) have existing easements in place over the Fraizer property to accommodate a shared driveway. Proposed Plan The proposed road layout and lot layout are attached as Exhibits B and C. The plan shows a road that will serve a proposed 6 lot subdivision in .Medina and provide access to the potentially landlocked properties in Orono. The Medina property is zoned for single family residential use at a 30,000 s.f. minimum lot size. The properties in Medina would be served with sewer and water which is available in Townline Road. No utilities will be extended to properties in Orono. The proposed road in Medina will be public and it is recommended by Staff the road in Orono will be public as well, primarily due to maintenance issues. Only the last 450' of the road will be in Orono. Road Access from Townline Road Townline Road currently has access to Highway 12 under the railroad. MNDOT has also discussed closing the access due to safety issues. This would require all access to the new road in Medina to be from the south along Townline Road. Townline Road would end in a cul-de-sac before the railroad tracks. This would require the residential traffic to pass by the Creekwood Trail neighborhood. However closing the access to Highway 12 would eliminate thru traffic connecting from Highway 12 to parts of Orono and Independence via Townline Road. Surrounding Properties The properties located in Medina are zoned for a minimum lot size of 30,000 s.f. A proposal has been made by the applicant to have that subdivision completed this summer. The lots in Orono are all zoned for a 5 acre minimum lot size, and guided by the Comprehensive Plan for single family residential. With the exception of the Rudd property, no lots in Orono will be impacted for zoning purposes by the proposed road. The Rudd property would maintain a dry buildable area of 02S87 Robb R Rudd 4575 Wayzaia Boulevard West Preliminary' Road Plat in Orono Xfay 15, 2000 pagt-2 approximately 7-8 acres. If the dry buildable area is less than 10 acres dry, the property would not be able to subdivide into two 5 acre lots. The total frontage along the proposed road is only about 500' which does not provide the total lot width required in the zoning district. New lots require a minimum lot width of 300' in the RR-1A distict. Road Standards Because most of the proposed road is in Medina it is appropriate to create a right-of-way to standards in Medina to maintain consistency. Medina will require a 60' right-of-way which is shown on the preliminary plan. The road width and size of cul-de-sac will also be developed to standards set by the City of Medina. The cul-de-sac shall be a minimum paved width of 80' and a minimum right-of- way width of 100'. Ponding and Grading The applicants are developing a ponding and grading plan for the road. This is an on-going project involving the platting of the land to the north in Medina. They have proposed a NURP pond south of the road, in Orono. The pond would collect runoff from the new road and from the newly platted area to the north. The ponding calculations and grading plan, when complete, shall be submitted to both cities for review and approval prior to the final plan set being approved and recorded. Final Approval and Time Schedule Medina’s schedule is to have the plat approval process completed by July 1st, so the process for securing ftmding from MNDOT can begin. Both cities must approve the plans prior to recording. A final plan set to the City of Orono shall include, at a minimum, the following information: 1. 2. 3. 4. 0. 6. 7. Final grading and erosion control plan set Stormwater calculations for the drainage area that w'ill drain towards the pond in Orono List of all easements that are recorded on the Rudd property Easement documentation indicating legal access to the Slaughter and Hickey properties over the Fraizer property Final construction plans for the road Final plat drawing for recording the right-of-way Applicant shall dedicate to the City an easement for the NURP pond. «2587 Robb R. Rudd 4573 Wayzau Boulevard West Preliminary Road Plat in Orono A/ay ly 2000 page -3 7 % .• Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plans and to proceed to the June 12,2000 City Council meeting for preliminary approval. Final approval could be complete by June 26th. Planning Commission Options for Action: 1.Recommend approval of the preliminary plan and forward to the Council. 2.Recommend denial, stating reasons. 3.Table, requesting further information and provide direction to the applicant. 4.Other Action. «2S87 Robb R. Rudd 4575 Wayziu Boulevard West Preliminary- Road Plat in Orono May 15, 2000 pagt-4 ilWlarirfilimiAllii li 0 t Application # 2. G S'! DateReceiTccf ‘-jjiQ Amount Paid 4lH •CO A CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site address ^^^7*9 WLWZct.-hl .^7^1 vd - QVtiV^O Property Identification Number (PID) /^1 i ^I DDD^__________ Please check one - Property ____abstract or _____torrens? Attach legal description to application. applicant / Name Kfi\S Kur>D___________________ Address Ir^Dl pAv^kC City_____jynnft , Phone (home) ^7^ ’ & Mto Zip ^^(Phone (work) t/7^- 2Z-72- fOWNER (ifdifferent than applicant) ^'o O A X\ Name ^\CJhav^(\ R. RuC\d /K.Kud CV Address lcf)7 l?>r-l<^ City LifhQ LOKe (attach list if Wre than one) MKJ _______Phone (home) _^£Z^_lZSC4? Zip^9^Phone (work) ^7-^ '2^72- EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) « r «; C; ii V Number of Building Sites Existing Units • $i New Units Total Units ir-• Proposed Gross Density Units per Acres Minimum Lot Size Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land 'I Proposed Use (check)Residential k' Other (specify) ) r -4 . r t \ \ 1 -A ^V .. ' -/ /;W// 4 / Cr I • ^ \ \ \\ / 't.V ' * / r' !t -r*fr>'!UJ;^>!t / / 3 i ! ;.. '< •••'#/ ^ ■■'. ‘‘..4( /. •/'<^/ l>;.—:/'?^ ■ 'vn r / V ti!f / ^/ t'.-fr / / ^y// / ^ / -,•-7; 7 ' '. 0! !'t^! />.7/:^/ ^ 1X7 / '' //rv •!' !i/ c ' ^ ?n? ??C »J ? - S t 2o ^ i i 03 v*s |<oP I I r; 1/ _______________________________________ —__ ____WMHI «*l»* «■••• •^■■>^^ M ^ ^ ^ ^S8d ‘J3‘57'iV JfJ.5t o \ V - V>• =*■ _ ^ ‘-'J U.I Ci \ \ V -- \4^ 4 N \ N. • (/I L'J c:) ^ \ \ V •- ‘-'J "" > •'•J Ft <> ^V '*“‘"'"^11 meeting APR 1 0 2000,REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION I r uH ORONO DATE: April 10, 2000 ITEM NO.: /3 Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Engineer’s Report Item Description: Update on Townline Road Access D Background Information We have received a concept plan for a proposed access road east of Townline Road. This issue has teen discussed at several previous Council meetings. There are four properties in Orono and one property in Medina that currently have access to Highway 12 via a shared driveway across the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks. These properties only have a "licence" from the railroad to cross the tracks which is not a guaranteed permanent option. Our understanding is that the railroad could revoke this licence at any time, thus leaving the properties landlocked. The railroad has indicated that their long range goal is to eliminate this crossing for safety reasons. Also, MNDOT’s goal is to eliminate the driveway access to Highway 12. An access road from Townline Road to serve these properties appears to be the best solution. To help facilitate closing the shared driveway access onto Highway 12, MNDOT has offered to pay for the construction of a new road to provide alternate access for these properties. MNDOT will pay for the road construction provided that the Cities or property owners provide the necessary Right of Way and easements. Concept Plan The attached concept plan shows a platted road that will serve a proposed subdivision in Medina and also provide access to the landlocked properties in Medina and Orono. The property in Medina is zoned for single family residential at a 30,000 square foot minimum lot size with sewer and water. There is e.xisting sewer and water utilities in Townline Road. City of Medina staff has indicated that this will be a public road in Medina. Because only a small percentage of the Road is in Orono, we are recommending that the road in Orono up to the cul-de-sac also be a public road. To have only a small segment of piivate road at the end would not be practical or feasible for maintenance purposes. For routine maintenance of this road, our recommendation is that an agreement be reached with the City of Medina for Orono to provide snowplowing for this road. Orono currently mainiains Townline Road and has trucks in the area. This area is isolated from the rest of the City of Medina by the railroad tracks, and when the Townline Road railroad underpass is closed access from Medina to this area will be difficult. We currently have agreements s in place with the City of Medina for trading different segments of roads for plowing depending on which City has easier access. The public road would be platted with a 60-foot wide Right of Way and cul-de-sac at the Rudd’s east property line. Sixty feet is a standard Right of Way width in Medina, so it makes sense to continue this width to the end of the road. The proposed concept is for two driveways off of the cul-de-sac. One driveway will serve the Fraizer property. The other driveway would be a shared driveway to serve the Slaughter and Hickey properties. Our understanding is the Slaughter ’s and Hickey’s have an access easement for a driveway across the Fraizer property. A copy of these easement documents should be provided to the City for our review to verify that there is a legal access for all of the properties. The road in Orono should be built to the same standards as the road in Medina. Varying the road standards for the small segment of road in Orono is not practical. Project Schedule This project will require plat approval in both Orono and Medina. Medina ’s schedule is to have the plat approval process completed by July 1“, so the process for securing funding from MNDOT can be started. Our understanding is that the proposed schedule for the road construction with MNDOT funding is scheduled for 2003 at the same time the new traffic signal is installed at the Highway 12/ County Road 29 intersection. We are recommending that this road be constructed as soon as possible to eliminate the hazardous driveway on Highway 12.The proposed schedule !: for the Council to review and provide comments on this concept plan at this meeting. Rudd .>■ •.''• ill then submit an application for preliminary plat approval for the May Orono Planning Commi:»3ion meeting on May IS'**. Preliminary and final plat approval could then be completed by rtisi'Touncil in May and June to meet the July 1“ deadline. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Review and discuss proposed concept plan for a new access road east of Townline Road ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 10, 2000 10.2000 Joint Use Dock Licenses—Continued Pheasant Lawn HA, Walters Port Maintenance and Improvement Association, Victoria Estates and Kelly Cove HA (subject to completion of covenants) for the period of Januar>' 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000; and to Sandy Beach, Carlson/Nelson/Gage and Big Island Vets Camp for the period January 1, 1999 to December 31,2000. Mayor/Council Report, Items 11, and 12 appear after Item 13, ENGINEER REPORT 13.Concept Plan for an Access Road East of Townline Road Gappa stated that the neighbors have been working with Orono, Medina, and the railroad company to find a solution to the Townline Road access issue. There are 4 properties in Orono and 1 in Medina that currently have access to Highway 12 via a shared driveway across the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks. The Railroad would like to remove the crossing and Mn/DOT wants to eliminate the driveway access to Highway 12. An access road from Townline Road to the properties is the best solution. Mn/DOT has offered to pay for the road construction provided the Cities and property owners provide the necessary Right-of-Way and easements. Townline Road crosses city lines between Medina and Orono. The goal is to get this to the Planning Commission next month and have the preliminary and final plat approval by July 1,2000. Gappa stated that the zoning code states 3 houses require a road, but he questioned if that was necessary since the homes have shared a driveway for years and no more houses will be built off that road. Staff recommendation is to allow a private driveway to serve these houses. Medina has stated that Townline Road will be a public road, and he recommended that the cul-de-sac in Orono also be a public road and that it has the same width as the Medina section. He also stated that Orono and Medina have agreements for the switching of road plowing and the best solution would be for Orono to plow the road in exchange for plowing of another road. Medina would take care of other maintenance, such as sweeping and patching. Kris Rudd of 001 Park Lane, Long Lake stated that she and her neighbors planned the road and feel it is a good idea. Jane Slaughter of 4545 Wayzata Boulevard, Orono mentioned thai the Railroad had r i 1 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 10,2000 13.Concept Plan for an Access Road East of Townline Road —Continued agreed to pay for one of her neighbor’s driveway extensions. Mayor Jabbour stated that the neighbors, Medina, Mn/DOT, and the Railroad came up with the proposal. The neighbors want to know if Orono will cooperate through platting and subdividing, and would they make the new access road in Orono a public road. This is an area of the City where new roads are supposed to be private. He stated that if it does not cost the City anything, they are happy to make this a public road. Ed Otto, a land surveyor working for Kris Rudd, stated that they anticipate the Kearns property and the Rudd property that’s in Medina will be a regular 505 subdivision plat. He doesn’t see that working quite as well in Orono and would like to see them use a State Statute 164 right-of-way plat. Mayor Jabbour asked who will build the road. Gappa stated it would be built by the property owners through a development agreement. Otto stated he would draw the plans. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Mayor Jabbour asked the Council to pass a resolution recognizing Dave Childs’ contribution to the City of Orono. Sansevere moved, and Peterson seconded, to pass Resolution No. 4455 commending Dave Childs for his outstanding service to the City of Orono. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ENGINEER REPORT, CONT. *11. Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Project A.Declare Cost to be Assessed and Order Preparation of Proposed Assessment—Resolution No. 4452 B.Schedule Assessment Hearing —Resolution No. 4453 Flint moved, and Peterson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 4452 declaring cost to be assessed and ordering preparation of proposed assessment for the Webber Hills Saniatary Sewer Project. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. Flint moved, and Peterson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 4453 scheduling a I I I ....... . I I I I • 0 "' ----- T; er•t h: '" , .. -r; •r•• 1..: 1 ,,, •I._ ,­.. -.. 4 I " 'I •r - 1 , " ', ., "',. v,- .. '" ,,. .,., , r· , fh: .,., ,,... .. ,,, . ,.. I fl._: t., .• '. - I"'\ ,. v,·.,., .,. , fl(_ -t. ._ .,.,. •• V4 .,._,. �-- HUNIING10N FARM ur p 1l f '" N . di' • • .,.,_ "'t: I I tlftd , ..,,_, J Ml . to I� J• \ of ( 0, . I 6, fl. 4 IO I ' ... ' ' t '"' p,n C 0 .,. .. , . I I ., ◄I 4 •I •r 3/1 . ,.. . ·- 0 •. . 0 .. -- I • Chris /00 D N.A. Rudd 1·=100· I I I !�!J-. f C) 0 :J 0 (1) -0 r+ 77 ,,. • f ' ' I c.l' ,-... b,.N • • 0 '° • ,... _, � ••,19•.11 __ ___,; __________ ......., __ ��--4-.. ·-- :I ,,- � -Q f, ...�. ..,. . .,. . - ---·--· -----­• 1t,(i !,, ,'0 R£ 5 � IDI .•11&1••1•1 0 . ,. )• UI_, .... � C 0 c::, � ,, � 111 . tf\r »C: G' � m -,a -� - () -,:. ,... ..., - , -- ,... 171.81 ---------- �� "',,"' 1ft � "'"'"' ?: II I I I I • ....... I ' • I I >, -i ,. (.' (.I CII .,. . I :PENDENCE• 8 ORRrs . BA' R � KR SE E STE ·--■----■ RR ·1A WA A R· BATCH 5t2I BMI PBOP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 5S 3R-118-2S 51 0003 •4SS5 NAYZATA BLVD W OAKY L A BEVERLY A FRAZIER OARY t BEVERLY FRAZIER A55S MAYZATA BLVD M HAPLE PLAIN MM 55359 3B 30-118-23 31 0008 08575 NAYZATA BLVD H ROBB R RUDD ROBB R RUDD 8575 NAYZATA BLVD N HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 30-118-23 31 0005 08585 NAYZATA BLVD N GLENN A A JANE L SLAUGHTER GLENN A A JANE L SLAUGHTER 8585 NAYZATA BLVD HAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 3B 38-118-23 32 0001 81188 TONN LINE RD NAB THEXS HXCHAEL L TMEIS 1180 TONNLXNE RD HAPLE PLAIN HM 55359 38 30-118-23 32 0003 81100 TORN LINE RD H DIESEN ET AL N/LIFE EST MARTHA E DIESEN 1100 TONNLXNE RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 30-118-23 32 0008 81880 TORN LINE RD CAN KXCKHAFER CHARLES A MAXINE XICKHAFER 1080 TORN LINE RD MAPLE PLAIN NM 55359 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 38 38-118-23 32 8005 81828 TOWN LINE RD T J LUMIESKI A J P WAHL T J LUNIESKI A J P NAHL 1828 TONN LINE RD HAPLE PLAIN HM 55359 38 30-118-23 33 8808 88788 CREEKNOOD TR RICK VOGELGESANC RICK V0GELGESAN6 8780 CREEKNOOD TR HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 30-118-23 33 0005 08880 CREEKNOOD TR J F A V H O'NEILL JANES F O'NEILL 8888 CREEKNOOD TR MAPLE PLAIN HM 55359 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 30-118-23 38 0001 88838 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO KIP A NELSON KIP NELSON 8588 WATERTOWN RD HAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 38-118-23 82 0888 80038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO BURLINGTON NORTHERN RY B N A SANTA FE RR CO PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 981089 FORT NORTH TX 78181 80 30-116-23 21 0008 00080 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HENN CO PARK RES DXST HENN CO PARK RES DIST P 0 BOX 298 HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 88 38-118-23 23 8088 88888 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED RICHARD R RUDD ET AL RICHARD R RUDD 2325 MAYZATA BLVD M P 0 BOX 79 LONG LAKE MN 55358 80 30-118-23 23 0005 08088 ADDRESS UNASSICNED GREAT NORTHERN RY B N A SANTA FE RR CO PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 981089 fort north TX 78181 80 30-118-23 23 0008 00080 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED D W KEARIN A H 6 KEARIN DAVID N KEARIN 1282 TOMNLINE ROAD HAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR 88 30-118-23 23 0009 80888 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED BURLINGTON NORTHERN INC B N A SANTA FE RR CO PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 981089 FORT WORTH TX 78181 TOTAL BATCH 502 00016 /1 ».* r..-y .VA. ».* //i' i:: .V »•. •) A ^I ( TO;Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Wendy Bottenberg, Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE:May 15,2000 SUBJECT:#2578 David and Lorraine Lundberg 900 Dakota Avenue Variance — Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1 A One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre) Lot Area:32,508 s.f. (.75 acre) List of Exhibits A B C D E F G H I J Analysis Worksheet Application Site Plan/ Survey Floor Plan/Elevations Hardcover Calculations Plat Map Location Map Photo of Property Property Owner ’s List Permit Record Pertinent Code Sections 1.Section 10.23, Subd. 6(B): Side Yard: The minimum requirement for side yard setback in the LR-1A zoning district is 30 feet. Variance Request: To permit a side yard setback of 11' where 30’ is required. Application Summary: The applicants are proposing to construct a 26' x 26' two-story garage addition to the existing residence. The addition will consist of a two stall garage on the first floor and a master bedroom and bathroom on the second floor. The proposed addition ties into the existing first and second story floor plans with the bedrooms located on the south end of the residence. The proposed garage addition will use the existing driveway. The property is serviced with sewer and a private well. The locations of the sewer line and the well were determinants in placement of the garage addition. The well is located on the north side of the residence and the sewer line runs parallel to the driveway (Shown on Exhibit C). ^2578 David/Lorraine Lundberg 900 Dakota Avenue Variance 5/15/2000 Page I I The adjacent residence to the south is approximately 60 feet from the adjoining property line. The property is located within 1000' of Long Lake. The additioa will result in an increase of structural coverage on the lot to 2,136 s.f. (6.6%), where 1,460 s.f. (4.5%) exists and 4,876.2 s.f, (15%) is allowed. The addition will result in a reduction of hardcover coverage in the 500-1000' setback area to 4,068 s.f. (12.5%), where 4,100 s.f. (12.6%) exists and 11,378 s.f. (35%) is allowed. 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.The location of the sewer line and well limits where garage can be located. 2.The 500-1000' hardcover on the lot is decreasing with the removal of shed and fish house. Also, there is a section of landscape material under rock that could be removed, although hardcover is not an issue on this property. 3.The structural coverage on the lot is increasing but still well below the allowed 15%. 4.There are several mature trees located west and northwest of the house, which the applicants wish to keep. 5.Conformance to existing house floor plan and driveway limits placement of garage. 6.The residence was built prior to current zoning standards. 7.The 3/4 acre lot is small compared to the LR-1A zoning district 2-acre standard. 8.The residence to the south is approximately 60' from the adjoining property line. 9.Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation; Staff recomm.cnds approval of the variance for side yard setback. M2578 David/Lorraine Lundberg 90G Dahota Avenue Variance 5/15/2000 Page 2 rw 1--------.V .-•’‘IT-r.\frrrr-J^II i m III TUH i r I I I I r %III i 'n-.rMt-m-kr Lot Arw: ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LR-IA Lot Area Side Yard Setback Required 87,120 s.f. (2 acre)30' Actual 32,508 s.f. (.75 acre)11' Structural Coverage ; Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 32,508 s.f Allowed; 4,876.2 s.f (15%) Existing: 1,460 s.f (4.5%) Proposed: 2.136 s.f (6.6%) Hardcover Calculations: Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed hardcover Existing hardcover Proposed hardcover 250-500' 32,508 s.f 9,752.4 s.f (30%) 4,100 s.f (12.6%) 4,068 s.f (12.5?^») 6 Application #J157Z Olx) Date Received Amount Paid 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 INFORMATION Site Address 9oo 0<<V.oV<k ^___________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.S " //3.*^ ' OO/y'________ Attach legal description to applicatmn^ not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired ^ //_____________________________^(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjifcent parcels of land. Present use of property Zoning District:// residential other (specify).rr>* APPLICANT I Phone (home ’) Name r)oLoirj C. Lu q Uiw>.:A<. /4. j^jL^one(work ) Ql 1 - ) Ciw:Zip:Address: *^^oo A OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ______________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ ^ \ '>• Address:. City:.Zip:. 9 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: __ Estimated Construction Cost $,I' (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback:Front Lot Width Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Averaee Lakeshore W Other (specify) HARDSfflP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficult or unusual woperw condiUons preventing compliance wijh Zoning Code requirements:/^ ^ / (attach'additional sheets if necessary) jSupPOf"^ <^C\\ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ex»s-Hin^| non^orvfof mi oc ‘g'xNO'-p ‘5V^Vioo Co'ill h^ ret^osrcJl 6 M>) ^ AtVioun-i" of, V\^rdco\r€r' LOiW fec\^^C^<d • ^ -Hpr«dsWip “Vd ^'ilouj 5i<i^ '^(Xt'd <^"P ^lo^orbon O'F SCccr€^ -OCcKT^iory OP -^k\5\^<^C\ lpL^”c|e —t‘^rrrorrr\anC^ “Vt? ^5<i s-Hr\(r| 4^'oorp\cX!rv ^^jara^c) 4- -'“Vr>|aoc^r ^oVonn \\'s-eri'2 O-r »i -5ofvei-(H/i>/od^ — V^arctcoW’r —fr . -S^cw^/ as-bull-I- -oto A\^o r\eeo ; ■“ CLppW Ci^'^Cn “Porm \£-M€‘r -4-rocr\ ixc\n \ tS+/la.bl^3-Ron^^44enr,<?pi ‘^ (foorriy --fee 11^.... Ilftl rERTlFlCATE OF SURVEY RESIDENCE C|(J0 OiAkoT>^ /\u£ 6onr,, AA jo t7s:3ob MTb - ‘■/C H’ if'-’-jK u,i ;; nv. t^GAL i/cSCRtPflONS W 3, BlotH, JOHNSTON’S RiARBANGEMEKH' OF AIBEE'S long LAK.E ADDITION, «vcM»d«n^ io Vht recorded pUV 4htr«oV. Htftfttpio Coonttj, WInnesoTfl. (qqd)V- A , m OF ORO'iD . K ^!: a!\: (•r..niir.'''.. pi am irwsL....... . nATfc- A'^ Is K S? O .5 \ O ’'fk'kSi-ifc.o n.o s t/0 *. ■~ c . ^ — 140.0?-' GENERAL NOTES Tii!J %S ¥M •^ •-.. • Dtnotes iron monument Denotes croee chiteled In concrete Denotes eiietiog epot elevation Denotee proposed epot elevation 4-------- Denotee surface dralnoge Dashed contour lines denotes proposed features Solid contour lines denotes existing fsoturss AT.T.-METRO LAND Proposad lop of foundal on •l•votion “ eltvotlon * •lovalion a Propotad boMmont floo Proposod faroQi door benchmark : SURVEYORS 1 Nrabrear' f» *0«l »«r»«r, p»«« or r«P«f* «ei srsperse bf s»e or under w/ direct eupemiiofi ond lhat 1 ow • dwtj PapItUfad Land Survtiar uadaf Ih* laaa al lha Stofa ol Minnaaoia. SCALE 1 •' : 30' 2340 oonfdts Street Long Loke, Minneeoto 55356 Ph. -175-1433 '^LLLv y/. 72^^ 'tbl 1?!l— nco. NO. ^ ^02^_DATE I J a t / V I c. FILE NO. SU70-A V0\<5) oo Ir •\3 o tlI -nr ^'•^■' o7rt-Q ' ' '''••)} f ff ■’ lb ^ • 4- .r I •V A 3 .-■y <?» -I V I h c ^1 <!'v *?Ai-V V » ( s>‘•r- >N J r^“‘ k ZC-' ■%. sO^ ■;;/ e\i % Cf;4»t»r P\«>A *l0o I>^.*^oW^^^ V- *!/»' S' V lE^CV4^;nor^ ^00 A\r^. iMi 1 1 r if__ ■A*'/lr A +Prope»5«4 r* .r(^0' ^J/lO/OO J' Q Q3 J ruJfti11 ■■! iniMn Milf o ••• •.•V .HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’75-250’250-500’ YrgTTNG HARDCOVipi IN ZONE A.House W X iOO-100 Leofth fccch B.Garage C.Driveway D.Sidewalk E.Pacio/Deck lie' X X X cDO 10 Jlr> 'rlcNC. 16 F.Landsc^ _ Underlain ____________ By Plastic ____________ Or Fabric ., ^-fil^hhCUM d J ^ G. Olhet :^luui—---------S. X X X X X X X X X TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^/rc ^ A.House pcvch —B. Garage C.Driveway D.Sidewalk Leogih-4^/Cf X X X / 5- /3- E.Patio/Deck IDm F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric TO cl M’ X X X X X X X X X G.Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PR^^^ AREA IN ZONE B ■■iSIS'cS'xIOO ,3lj>8 //W S.F. Width • /O 8 /.,n S.F. 8 S.F. 8 S.F. . 6=••S.F. •_• ,•#f •■ mr ■■ •• •• • S.F. 8 S.F. • 8 •S.F. 8 -S.F. An ^'jno S.F. i(/^8 S.F. V •• •//;/) .8 S.F. 8 S.F. 8 S.F. • j A*! * 56 ’ 8 ---------- S.F. E • 4(00 S.F. A#S.F. ^j'AtyZ S' X100 iQ. lo •• //VV S.F. Width IC^8 (fb _S.F. lb 8 S.F. 8 S*P « • icnU)S.F. 8 c/qu,S.F .AD 8 A4D.S.F • • •8 S.F ' *8 •. •S.F • 8 SCO _S.F —W-----8 __S.T -----T-------l&O ^ Un /OiO 5.1 5.1 A B S.F. urlo^S.F. ^S.F. !I? -* V r -TN *1 . -rf. - . * i -** •« // i' /.*til MUOOm OOOS TR / (O \ / ,» 1 o \3 DAKOTA Long Lake 'THsrfitAit x: .’•ALydiard •f •.LrOIAAO m -^ ’** “lA ,.l>/rUKERO TuQloob C t?'-' 600 nkn vmr !/ lOAr, V •• •. nKKSO^ffiiing • •IWD- . 'Vl‘»;^BiWn;^•V ^..7f4|/*- O’ono Golf Course •< .911^^ BUing • Wayzata Country Cli ^ “• * •.N(U Id AVE •'.4 Bi\/q •••-•* . K* * .♦. it; g ^ Coi^ryCUbBB If Coui 'a Vza ^y J I b H(i i/uyi ‘ ^ hii * ',^K/ //»ll U' ;I /'1/ i •;: ' , ^ L MM BATt M/lt/tt BATCH BM rMM> ABBH BMNIH KAMI TAHPAVtl NAHC/ABBR M Zi-llB-25 SS •••! flAM L0N8 LAKE BLVB J H BAinNiR • A L OARONER ANITA L OARONER MO* LQNB LAKE BLVB LONO LAKE NN S55SA HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORNATXON SYSTEN PROPERTY ONIMRS LIST SR 2A-11S-2S S5 RtlA ••94# BAKOTA AVE O P I K N ARNE OERALB P I KARLA N ARNE •4R BAKOTA AVE LONO LAKE NN S55S6 REPORT NO. PX4S5401 PAOE 12 SR 2A-11R-2S 5S RR17 •••2A BAKOTA AVE LECH OENE OANRON 1 NXPE LECH A NANCY OANRON 92R DAKOTA AVE LONO LAKE NN SS55# PROP ABBR ONNER NANI TAXPAYER NAHE/ABBR ONNER NANi TAXPAYER ONNER NANR TAXPAYER NANl/ARDR SO 2A-110-2S SS RRIO ••9R# DAKOTA AVE BAVXD C LUNDBERO ETAL BAVXD R LORRAINE LUNDBERO 9RA BAKOTA AVE LONO LAKE NN SSSSR SR ZA-110-2S SS ORZS ••91R DAKOTA AVE T • R STEXNKE TNONAS A 1 KARl A STEXNKE 919 DAKOTA AVE LONO LAKE NN BSSSi SO 2A-110-2S SS MSS •••SO ABORESS UNASSXONEO S B 0 S 0 HDRRXSON SCOTT B 0 SHERYL 0 NORRXSON 1S2S OTN AVE N LONS LAKE NN SSSS« SR 24-U0-2S SS RRIT ••OOR DAKOTA AVE T J HARRXSON 0 J N ALBAUOH T J HARRXSON S J N ALOAUOH ••• DAKOTA AVE LONO LAKE NN S5SSA SR 24-110>2S SS ••24 ••9SR DAKOTA AVE TNONAS C ODEAN ETAL TNONAS C QBEAN 9SS DAKOTA AVE LONO LAKE NN BSSSO SR 24-110-2S SS RR22 ••9«R DAKOTA AVE S R KNUTSON OJA KNUTSON SCOTT R R JULXE A KNUTSON 9*0 DAKOTA AVE N LONO LAKE NN 55S5R SR 24-11R-2S SS RR29 •140S SXXTN AVE N N PEARCE R B A PEARCE TRSTES NXLLXAN S BARBARA PEARCE 140B CO RB NO A LONO LAKE NN BBS4B TOTAL BATCH SR4 •••!• X CERTXPY THAT THE PACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATXON OF XNFORNATXON AS XT APPEARS TNXS DATE ON THE RECOMtt OF THE NENNEPXN COUNTY OEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATXON« TO THE KST Of NY KNONLI AND BELXEF DATE Kl Tf />/.*/• ) f 3 4 ^ r*. ? •. Pernit No. {?! 40 L 3~! L> ■ypC) I.'1 ^SSl PERMIT RECORD Date 6>-c- rs \a -•& ?> 9' /!- 5 -9c O /0'‘S-'^^ /0-an'‘^l rr Type of Permit txAgg *y^f=-T\\ir i9-g£j^ yihui -3-4 c Adjacent ?roperty Owners' Acknowledgement Form [print !iame(s)] of f^€0 /juT* [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ____also referred to as Land Use Application No. V* I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) ain (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. LX Prope^^O^er” ____ Date Qiifi/* ^lAAAki>^ (Pfoperty Owner V-/5-00 Date ^^ID^^^t^i^^^^P^^^^t^^tit^^*^^*******************'********************************* I (we) [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ___________________also referred to as Land Use Application No._________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, 1 (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. 8 51 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorsc, City Administrator FROM: DATE: RE: Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner May 10,2000 #2579 James and Candace Kemna 1110 Willow Drive South Variances Zoning:RR>1B, One Family Rural Residential, 2 Acre Minimum lot size Application: 1) Variances to permit an addition to front of house and outdoor porch that would encroach further into the SO' front yard setback and into the 30' side yard setback 2) variance to permit an addition to the detached garage that encroaches into the 15' side yard setback required for accessory structures of750-1000 s.f. List of Exhibits: A B C D E F G H I Application Plat Map Neighborhood Layout and Site Topography Survey/Site Plan Site Photos Side Elevation View Front Elevation View Hardship Statement Property Owners Notification Form Application Summaiy: Property owners have requested variances to permit an addition to the front of the existing residence which already encroaches the front and side yard setbacks. An additional variance is requested to permit an addition to a detached garage. The addition to the garage would create a building larger than 750 s.f. requiring a minimum 15' side yard setback. A variance would permit the garage to encroach into the setback.________________________ *2579 Junes and Candace Kemna 1110 Willow Drive South Variances M<V IS. 2000 patf-l 11^'- i • ANALYSIS Pertinent Code Sections: 1.Section 10.28, Subdivision 5(B) To permit a front yard setback of 23* where 41.1* exists and 50' is required, and also to permit the addition within the 30* side yard setback. The existing house is 8.2' from the west lot line. No encroachment closer than 8' is proposed, however the structure will be expanded within the required side setback on both sides of the house. 2.Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (E) Minimum side yard setback for an accessory structure: 15' Proposed side yard setback:T Existing:8.5' The existing building is 24' X 24' (576 s.f.). Code requires only a 10' setback for detached garages under 750 s.f. A 24' X 10' addition would expand the building to 816 s.f. thus requiring a 15' setback. Accessory buildings greater than 750 s.f. require a 15' side yard setback. 3.Section 10.75, Subdivision 4 (C) In any ‘*R ” District, where the average depth of at least two existing front yards for buildings within 150 feet of the lot in question and within the same block front is less or greater than the minimum front yard depth required for the district, the required front yard shall not be less than the average depth of such existing front yards; however, the depth of a front yard shall nor be less than ten feet nor be required to exceed fifty feet. Structural Coverage: Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 21,247 s.f.Allowed: 3,187 s.f. Existing: 1,536 s.f. (7.2%) Proposed:2,166 s.f. (10.2%) #2579 lunes ami Candace Kemna 1110 Willow Drive South Variances May IS. 2000 pagt-2 <.t.a.rI I'ar«Mr■ Hardcover Calculations; Distance from Total area in Allowed Existing Proposed shoreline setback hardcover hardcover hardcover 250-500*14,247 s.f 4,274.1 s.f 3,209.5s.f 3,839.5 s.f (30%)(22.5%) (26.9%) 500-1000*7,000 s.f 2,450 s.f 0 s.f 0 s.f (35%)(0%)(0%) Surrounding Properties: Please refer to Exhibit C which shows the location and setback for surrounding prop<‘*^ies. The right of way line is where the front yard setback is measured from. Homes have beer constructed all setback at an average distance of 40-45* frx)m the property line. A line is drawn on Exhibit C to indicate the average distance from Willow Drive South for each home on the east side of the road. The Zoning Code has a provision that states lots in any “R” district, where the average depth of at least two existing front yards or buildings within 150* of the lot and within the same block the required fix)nt yard shall not be less the average depth of existing front yards. Technically, the building would need a variance to encroach closer to the street than those on adjacent properties. It is believed the intent of 10.75, Subdivision 4 (C) is to create a consistent appearance to the neighboihood, and would not allow one house to block the view of the street from another. The proposed two story structure would encroach 18* beyond the average distance of adjacent buildings. Garage Location: A second variance is requested to ^eimit an addition to a detached garage. The addition to the garage would create a building larger than 750 s.f requiring a minimum 15* side yard setback. Based on the size of the existing garage the building is only encroaching into the setback by 1.5*. The intent of the ordinance to require a greater setback of 15* for larger buildings, is to limit massing close to property lines. Statement of Hardship: The applicants have submitted their Statement of Hardship attached at Exhibit O. M2S79 James and Candace Kemna 1110 Willow Drive South Variances May IS. 2000 page-3 Primary Issues for Discussion: 1.The typical setback for the neighborhood has been established as 40-45' from the lot line. Should a variance be approved to permit additional encroachment into the setback? 2.The garage is nearly in conformance, 8.5' off the property line, as a 24' X 24' building, however an additional 240 s.f. would require the building to encroach further toward the property line, to a setback of about 7' where 15' would now be required. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of variances to permit additional structure ahead of die existing setback due to the following: The Municipal Code has a provision that states lots in any “R” district, where the average depth of at least two existing front yards or buildings wi^n 150' of the lot and within the same block the required front yard shall not be less the average depth of existing front yards. Technically, the building would need a variance to encroach closer to the street than the adjacent buildings. The intent is to create a consistent appearance to the neighborhood, and would not allow one house to block the view of the street from another. The existing residence is 41' from the front property line where 50' is required for lots in the RR-IB zoning district. Approval of variances would enhance a non-conforming building. The proposed 27' front setback (23' if covered porch is included) is less than Orono’s Vi acre zone front setback standard of 30 and 1 acre front setback of 35'.) Planning Commission Options for Action: 1. 2. 3. 4. Approval of variances based on the Statement of Hardship. Denial of variances, stating reasons. Table, requesting further information and provide direction to the applicant. Other Action. #2579 Junes and Candace Kemna 1110 Willow Drive South Variances May 15, 2000 page~t IMiMH A Application U Date Received VA?/®© 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) Amount Paid ^ ZS'C PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address \\\Vs So-, xY\n. 35^ Property Identificadon Num^r fP.I.D.) /O •/7.*i QOU_______ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Propei W Acquired ^ 3__________ I (do) not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ^^residentiiJ ___pother (specify). (month/year) Zoning District: R APPLIC.\NT Phone (home ’!~10S3 Name fCCtnd<TiCg./tg/MAcPhone (work ) l(e'i S9-1 \ AddressTuxQ Or. So.City: VAJox|7<ctt\.Zip:t I -‘j J ?m OWNER (if different than apj^ant) Name i<gXV>DO. V\\J\Af Address: \Uf) tuAVOuJ Dru Pr. ban ■ Phone (home) Phone (work) DESCRIPTION OF REQUE^ Describe request in detail: City:^CCW.— Zip:.Vf^j_ t Estimated Construction Cost $____________. bstunatea I ; s (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width X Setback: y Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverag<^3 Average Lakeshore Other (specify) K-i’*» HARDSfflP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficult or unu^l property conditions preventing compliance \vith Zoning Code requirements: AjTO/'W q /T________________— (attach additional sheets if necessaiyO ‘iiri ' i lo-ioa^' 9H-s We? ////P iO-odruJ hru. S. j^D Z^- ID 955.6 c too Se 0 Coot NW1 /' Til HENNEI Or 0 n 0 Date of k«a %• f lXV v Ti ■ k 9t4~^ HC aerial MAf Kt,,4 Ci*»- SO wmi' •• .CK a; I •■*-*'^v mA% / / t>ropo5^di rcH*'eV- .^i ScJbL ?il<) s f. g ‘<-<'«%*' nv E I of Z E 2 of Z. Lx ti (r)x Jf ' {n \\ ? s /. .SIDE ELEVATION G) (9 IS} * JRONT ELEVATION G3 G3 to G) <S CE> G)• • o>to in ui (D ^ 4 o z jH Kemna Living Trust Trustee’s: James Jay Kemna and Candace Ann Kemna 1110 WUlow Drive So. Wayzata,MN 55391 952-473-7053 AprU 12,2000 City of Orono Long Lake, MN 5S3S6 We are proposing to add an 18* addition to the entire front of our house, including basement. This addition would give us a dining area, which we currently do not have. Our two children are growing Cast and all we have is a five foot square nook for all of our dining needs. Our variance is necessary because our neighborhood and our property are zoned for two acre minimum sized lots, but our lot is less than 3/4 of an acre. Our second proposal is to extend our existing garage (O* toward the back yard to protect and enclose all of our accessories. Eg: boats, lawn mowers, bikes, etc. This would eliminate building an additional storage building on the property, which would divide up our current large yard area we enjoy using. Sincerely, emna H •UN BATE HENNEPIN CmiNTV PffOPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OMNERS LIST REPORT NO. PXASMtl PAOE 1 BATON SRX ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ASDR PROP Al ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NMK/ABIM TAXPAYER NAME/ABDR TAXPAYER NANE/ABOR SB 1B-117-ES 24 BBB2 B1B4B BROMN RO S S B VANOEVEXRE ET AL STEVEN 0 VAN BE VEXRE lt4B S BROUN RO NAYZATA HN SSSYl SB 1B-117-2S 24 BBOS BIBBS BROMN RO S ROBERT BERRETT ROBERT E BERRETT 1BB5 BROMN RO S NAYZATA NN 5SS91 SB 1B-117>2S 24 BBB4 BUBS BROMN RO S JERRY L CHRISTENSON JERRY CHRISTENSON IIBS BROMN RO S NAYZATA HN SSS91 SB XB-117-2S 24 BBB5 Bins BROMN RD S SUZANNE KATHLEEN LEJA SUZANNE KATHLEEN LEJA lUB BROMN RB S NAYZATA HN 55S91 SB 1B-117-2S 24 BBU BlllB NXLLOM OR S C A SUESS B J J KEHNA TRSTES JANES KENNA/CANBEE ANN SUESS lllB NXLLOM OR S NAYZATA HN 55S91 SB 1B-117-2S 24 BBIB B1B99 NXLLON OR S OLORU K ROOER CLORXA K ROOER P 0 BOX 172 CRYSTAL BAY HN S5S2S SB XB-117-2S 24 BBI7 BUIS NXLLON OR S TBBB H BABRXELSON ET AL TOBB N B SUE E OABRXELSON ms NXLLOM OR S NAYZATA HN SSS91 SB 1B-117-2S 24 BBIB B114S NXLLON OR S BETTE PERL BETTE PERL 114S NXLLOM OR S NAYZATA NN 5SS91 SB 1B’117>2S 24 BBS2 B112B NXLLON OR S JUOXTH A ORAUNKE JUOXTN A ORAUNKE 112B NXLLON DR S NAYZATA HN SSS91 *a SB 1B-117-2S 24 BBSS BllSB NXLLON OR S S B B NCMXLLXANS SNXRLEV S DORCAS NCMXLLXANS USB NXLLON DR S CRYSTAL BAY HN 55S2S SB 1B-117-2S 24 BBS4 B212B CARRIAGE LA PILLAR HONES INC PILLAR HOMES INC 212B CARRIAGE LA NAYZATA NN 55S91 TOTAL BATCH BBl BBBll X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORNATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OP PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF NY KNONLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE /O ' -J M.Chf-’ \^}W )0 ■ r----- k TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Wendy Bottenberg, Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE:May 15,2000 SUBJECT:#2580 Timothy Pattrin 1360 Railraod Avenue Variance - Public Hearing 2^ning District: LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:22,137 s.f. (.51 acre) Lbt of Exhibits A B C D E F G H I J Analysis Woricsheet Application Site Plan/ Survey Floor Plan/Elevations Hardcover Calculations Plat Map Location Map Photo of Property Property Owner ’s List Permit Record Pertinent Code Section 1.Section 10.23, Subd. 6(B): Street Side Yard: The minimum requirement for street side yard setback in the LR-1A zoning district is 50 feet. Variance Request: To permit a side yard setback of 23' where 50' is required. Application Summary: The applicants are proposing to construct a 624 s.f (24' x 26') attached garage addition to the north side of the existing residence. The property is located on the comer of Railroad Avenue and Spates Avenue. The existing driveway will be used to access the proposed garage. The proposed garage will be located 23' from Spates Avenue. Spates Avenue is not a heavily traveled street. The property is serviced with a well. The well, along with a three season porch and deck are located on the east side of the residence (behind it). The existing garage will be remodeled into a master bedroom/bath, laundry room and a 1/4 bath. The property is 1/3 in the 250- 500' hardcover zone and 2/3 in the 500-1000' zone. M2580 Timothy Pattrin 1360 Railroad Avenue Variance 5/15/2000 Page! •^ The garage will result in an increase of structural coverage on the lot to 2,160 s.f. (9.76%), where 1,536 s.f. (6.94%) exists and 3,320.5 s.f. (15%) is allowed. The garage will result in an increase of overall hardcover coverage to 4,480 s.f. (29.9%), where 3,556 s.f. (23.7%) exists and 5,250 s.f. (35%) is allowed. 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. Issnea for Consideration ; 1.The structural coverage on the lot is increasing but still well below the allowed 15%. 2.The 500-1000' hardcover on the lot is increasing but still well below the allowed 35%. Hardcover is not an issue with this application. 3.The lot is small compared to the LR-1A zoning district standard. 4.The well and pipe are located behind (east side) the residence. 5.The deck was constructed in 1990 meeting all setback requirements. 6.The property along Spates Avenue has mature trees that the applicant plans to keep. 7.Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Recommendation ; Staff recommends approval of the variance for street side yard setback. M2380 Timothy Pattrin 1360 Railroad Avenue Variance 5/15/2000 Page 2 1 A ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area; LR-IA Lot Area Street Side Yard Setback Required 43,560 s.f. (1 acre)50’ Actual 22,137 s.f. (.51 acre)23’ Structural Coverage; Hardcover Calculations: Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 22,137 s.f.Allowed: 3,320.5 s.f. (15%) Existing; 1,536 s.f. (6.94%) Proposed: 2,160 s.f. (9.76%) \ Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed hardcover Existing hardcover Proposed hardcover 250-500'7,137 s.f 2,141 s.f. (30%) Os.f Os.f 500-1000’15,000 s.f.5,250 s.f (35%) 3,556 s.f (23.7%) 4,480 s.f (29.9%) t \ s 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 INFORMATION Site Address AppUcatioD # ZS SO Date Received Amount Paid ~ Property Identification Number fP.I.D.i H Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired (o J ft _____________ I (do) (^~n^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___pother (specify). Zoning District:____________________________________ .(month/year) APPLICANT Name Address: fi n ALi i./L Phone (home) ^ 7 / Phone (work) "7 VC~-Q OWNER (if different than applicant) Name City:Aay Phone (home). ____ Phone (work)_ Zip:3 t H-f\ Address:City:.Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: /f/JJ Estimated Corjtruction Cost $_____ etail: frcAa ^/it I Iff (attach d&ditional sheets if nccessar>)' VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side HnrJcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: /■<’ 4^ h (attach additional sheets if necessary ) CERTIPICATE OF SURVEY FOR: Tim Pattrin 1360 Railroad Ave., Crystal Bay, Mn, 55323 C. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All that part of Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 ofSecdoD 10, Towndiip 117. Range 23. described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southerly line of Lot 6 of Elbridg; S. Barnes' First Subdivision distant 20S.08 feet Southeasterly from the Southwest comer thereof, thence Northwester^ to said Southwest comer, thence Southwesterly along the Easterly line ofthe right-of-way of the Great Northern Railway '‘*9.06 feet; thence deflecting left 90 degrees to an intersection with a line drawn through the point of beginning at ri^i angles Southwestern from the Southerly line of said Lot 6; thence Northeasterly to the point of begmning; subject to that pat thereof tying within Central and Railroad Avenues. x\V LEGEND:/ Scale: I irjch ■ 40 feet Bearings are assumed •Denotes Iron Pipe Found •6 P.P. - Denotes Power Pole M - Denotes Current Measured Distances D • Denotes Original Deed Measurements Area-0.52 Acres 4 certify that this CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY was prepared by me and that I am a duly Real W Land Surveyor under the laws of the Stotc of Minnesota. As surveyed by me ly of 7fi>c0.s ! ^ \ -------------- ' Garv L. Bhekbr, Land Surveyor, Mn License No. 10948 i Aiy SCALE l/4*=r-0* l;. ,.. /• ‘.. «’ - •’v- I ^ i I C7 ?. •••• E ; 14 hardcover calculation worksheet ^ SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ 75-250’ 250-500’Q00-_ip00^ & 7YTCTTNG HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House 4^ji LtOgih Width X X X . B. Oarige •■ •• C.Driveway _X X sn D.sidewalk X X E.Patlo/Deek X X F.Landscqw Underlain By Plastic Or Fibcic X X X O.Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - A + B X100 . PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______X (^4 Lco|di WU(h X X X B.Garage C.Driveway 3l L <34 X X m D.Sidewalk X X E.Patlo/Dwk m X X o16p F; Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X O.Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE . -4, A +B X100 ____S.F. 160^ SSn 3^tSah 16.m /55L /goo IfxCC^O 43W S.F. S.F. S.F. 5c^/-S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJr, S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.A f__S.F. B % SJF. 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. % -t._____________ A*. ‘.1 • -.^0. .»-' { Kwrcaberg ^BOO niMCH UKE no *• • • it?'-'' -X* 'm tV •V •••m/f jF •.«••V -> . (^cO <<4>.. r«\ y^^'* •■•••’• * x*'’ - •. ' *•.• * ••« '» K.• . *•• • f.i i • ' ... *. . * • •I ’. ••••-. • / ••*•*•.., Bohns Point ; Crystal Bay * •» .• .• •. qrono A 1600 Smith B •. ' • • •*.’••- V r * .. 3r,-* .• .. •.*:• I » %v Bracketts Point *. •• * ! * • •> • iT» ? • •’ mm T •*.•. • •' iLv- *• :.'•••.■. *•.rf* .■*I* .‘.>■••;•’•"• !• . - •.,• .V*-.. If 15 t.•• ^ •' •% 5*54 9 V.« i : '* • • •«# / M untin it on Point •• •4 f •• • • L, m iMi- •;• : v' ' . " vv>.*:.^^ • ,*• 5*^ . * , ».*' - v<*. ; t I?v -H w C'k-' .•w "- V r*' ' ■ ^ . . , A' V • RIM DATE M/17/ER HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEN PROPERTY OMNERS LIST REPORT NO. PZASMtl PACE S7 DATCN M7 PROP AOOR OMNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SO 10-U7-2S 11 ttOE •OtSO ADDRESS UNASSIONED NCLEOD CNTY REO RAIL AUTH DAKOTA RAIL INC SS ADANS ST N HUTCHINSON HN SSSSt 30 10-I17-2S 51 tool 02010 SHORELINE DR mCNELLE HARIE NUDSON-NILLER NICHELIE NARIE HUDSON-HZLLER 2010 SHORELINE DR NAYZATA NN 55391 30 10-117-23 31 0002 02000 NORTH SHORE DR K S L ERICKSON KEITH R ERICKSON 2000 NORTH SHORE DR NAYZATA HN 55391 OMNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SO 10-117-23 31 0003 02000 NORTH SNORE OR L 0 OODPREY 0 N J OOOPREY LYLE O I NORNA J OODPREY 2000 NORTH SNORE DR NAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 31 0005 01390 RAILROAD AVE OLAl HANSON ETAL OLAZ HANSON DOX 129 CRYSTAL DAY HN 5532S SO 10-117-23 31 0000 01500 RAILROAD AVE SHARON V EVANS SHARON V EVANS 1300 RAILROAD AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 OMNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 30 10-117-23 31 0007 01300 RAILROAD AVE TINOTNV J PATTRIN SR TINOTNV JON PATTRIN SR 1300 RAILROAD AVE fO DOX 51 CRYSTAL DAY NN 55323 SO 10-117-23 31 0000 02055 SPATES AVE NARIETTA H ANDERSON ET AL NARZETTA H ANDERSON 2055 SPATES AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 SO 10-117-23 31 0090 02000 SPATES AVE NARY A STINSON NARY A STINSON 2000 SPATES AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 # •.*** I:• :% V • TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SO 10-117-23 31 0095 02000 SPATES AVE TIC NORSE TERRY D NORSE 2000 SPATES AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 50 10-117-23 31 0090 02000 SPATES AVE HARRIET SPATES TOURANOEAU HARRIET SPATES TORANCEAU 2000 SPATES AVE NAYZATA HN 55591 TOTAL DATCN 507 00011 1 CERTIFY THAT THE PACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OP INFORNATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE I OP THE HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTNENT OP PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE REST OF NY KNONLEDOE AND RELIEF. DATE I* H Permit No. mo ^21^_ _ _ _ PERMIT RECORD Date 9- 9- (,3 n-4.7 9-IS-so i2LL^-S&_ //- L iL \'H£>0 ^OuJiroati'■ Type of Permit /irT /yi^CM- SAC, -i K I '■ O' \ I r 5*. -f-if f 1 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FRC. I:Wendy Bottenberg, Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE:May 15,2000 SUBJECT:#2581 John and Kristin Gehring 1687 Concordia Street Variance ~ Public Hearing Zoning Dbtrict:LR*1C One Family Lakeshore Residential District (.5 acre) Lot Area:14,313 s.f. (.33 acre) List of Exhibits A B C D E F G H I J K Analysis Worksheet Application Site Plan/ Survey Floor Plan/Elevations Topographic Map Hardcover Calculations Plat Map Location Map Photo of Property Property Owner ’s List Permit Record Pertinent Code Sections 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 1: Lakeshore Setback: The shoreline setback for lakeshore lots shall be 75 feet. Variance Request: To permit the principal structure to be located 42' from the lakeshore where 75’ is required. 2.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 ( L)(l): Hardcover in the 0-75* Setback Area: Within 75 feet of shoreline there shall be no excavating, filling, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures. Variance Request: To permit 1,012 s.f. (26.7%) of hardcover v^ere 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed and 999 s.f. (26.3%) exists. 3.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2): Hardcover in the 75-250' Setback Area: Within 75-250’ of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. Variance Request: To permit 2,321 s.f. (26.2%) of hardcover where 2,212 s.f. (25%) is allowed and 2,183 s.f (24.7%) exists. ^^258I John/Kristin Gehring I6S7 Concordia Street Variance 5/15/2000 Page I Application Summary: The applicants are requesting variances to tear down an existing residence and build a new residence in approximately the same location on the lot. The proposal involves moving the new residence back a few feet to 1^ more in alignment with adjacent properties, conformance to side yard setbacks and structural lot coverage. •The new residence will result in an increase in hardcover coverage in the 0-75' setback area to 1,012 s.f. (26.7%), where 999 s.f. (26.3%) exists and 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed. •The new residence will result in an increase in hardcover cover.age in the 75-250' setback area to 2,321 s.f. (26.2%), where 2,183 s.f. (24.7%) exists and 2,212 s.f (25%) is allowed. •The new residence will result in an increase in structural coverage to 2,150 s.f (15%) where 1,918 s.f (13.4%) exists and 2,150 s.f (15%) is allowed. Stafl/ApDlicant Discussions: Plan #1: The first plan was submitted on April 17,2000. From the onset, the applicant wished to conform with zoning codes as best as possible. The first set of plans had several issues dealing with lot coverage, hardcover coverage and lakeshore setback. The applicant decided to take the plans and redesign them. Plan #2: In May of 2000, the applicant came forw-ard with a second set of house plans. This set of house plans is the latest. The redesign eliminated the lot coverage variance meeting the current zoning standard of 15%. However, lakeshore setback and hardcover coverage variances in the 0-75' and 75-250' setback areas are still required. Staff has discussed with the applicant that an average lakeshore setback variance is not required, however location of the propos^ residence does not meet DNR minimum recommended standard for General Development lakes of 50'. Orono zoning ordinance requires residences to be 75’ from the lakeshore. However, because this lot and the two adjacent properties are the only three lots on Concordia which arc 50' wide, in 1995 the adjacent property to the north was granted variances to construct a new residence 50' from the shoreline so that new residence would not be inconsistent with its adjacent residences. The three residences are in alignment with each other. In 1995 the applicants constructed a detached garage on the property meeting all required setbacks. 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. 02581 John/Kristin Gehring 1687 Concordia Street Variances 5/15/2000 Page 2 Taaues for Consideration; 1.The proposed residence will meet the required side setback of 10' on a lot that is 50' in width. 2.The improvement would be consistent with recent improvements on adjacent properties. 3.The lakeshore view windows of the adjacent residences will not be negatively impacted by the proposed new construction. 4.Lots in the Concordia neighborhor >d were developed prior to zoning standards for residential development of lakeshore properties. The subject property and two other lots on Concordia are the only SO' wide lots in the neighborhood. 5.Staff sent the current proposal to Ceil Strauss of the DNR for comments. At this time the City has not received any comments regarding this application. The structure does not meet the DNR-recommended 50' minimum setback for General Development lakes. However, if the structure is moved back 8' to meet the 50' standard, it will no longer be in alignment with adjacent properties. 6.The structural coverage on the lot is increasing but still meets the allowed 15%. 7.The 0-75' hardcover coverage is increasing slightly and is above the allowed 0%. 8.The 75-250' hardcover coverage is increasing slightly and is above the allowed 25%. 9.Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. PiscussioD The City has not taken full advantage of past opportunities on Concordia Street to move residences back to the 75' line as they were rebuilt. As a result, neighbors now have an expectation that the "standard" is to be in line with the neighbors. The Planning Commission may wish to discuss their future expectation for this neighborhood, given that there are still a few older cabins which could undergo removal/reconstruction. It is staffs opinion that if a setback variance is granted, the house should at least meet a 50' setback; Planning Commission must decided whether the stated hardships support something less than the full 75' setback. Options of Action To either deny or approve the current proposal as presented; OR To table application providing applicant additional time to address any concerns raised by Planning Commission members. #2581 John/Kristin Cehring 1687 Concordia Street Variance 5/15/2000 Page 5 _..... V • 4 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area; LR-IA Lot Area Required 21,780 s.f. (.5 acre) Actual 14,313 s.f. (.33 acre)^ Structural Coverage ; Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 14,313 s.f.Allowed: 2,150 s.f. (15%) Existing: 1,918 s.f. (13.4%) Proposed: 2,150 s.f. (15%) Hardcover Calculations; Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed hardcover Existing hardcover Proposed hardcover 0-75’3,792 s.f. Os.f. (0%) 999 s.f. (26.3%) 1,012 s.f. (26.7%) 75-250’8,847 s.f.2,212 s.f. (25%) 2,183 s.f. (24.7%) 2,321 s.f. (26.2%) 250-500’1,674 s.f.502 s.f. (30%)202 s.f. (12.1%)202 s.f. (12.1%) k'mryaipto ja.n ifiTurm iTT~r~r T imma'fif ni ¥i i 'iri i-. fcmMtt-t-i;— ■- ^------- ..-«w-■..-.«*rKMmi<t&<k>^.w^Br#fMHXnan£h.- «nnr ^ ~ i tn ^ uifir t ~mi ir rmi tniiri m ■ i*iBi ■ in i r it^i im m irTnti tii ~tn m — r« i n i^i i It ~ i i ■i • rimi it i ~tr ii~i ■rim i ni"'4 r 6 01^) Application It ^ j Date Received W/ 7/»c Amount Paid >^3 C C 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 INFORMATION Site Address /f. Property Identification Number tP.l.D.) Attach legal description to application if not included required surve^ Date Proper^ Acquired ___________________________________(month/year) I (do)<(3b ^) also own th^ adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential Zoning District:I C other (specifi). APPLICANT Name Address:j4-. Phone fhomel 0iC3 ____ Phone fworiO ____ City:Zip:/^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ___________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construcdon Cost $ iBOjQOO Describe request in detail: ^ CtiktkiJi ____________________________ (attach additional sheets if necessar>) variance :^ required Lot Area Lot Width y/ Hardcover \/ Lot Coverage Setback:Front 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: ________________________ ^/ ^-»**^attaCh:a<Witionaksheet^^necessar>) Yt O yL REQUIRED SUB\UTTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be cnmidcrcd complete: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8V2" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/a" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/a" 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 owncr(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour 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 thi. application, and certifies that the information supplied is (ru^ and coirect to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature IS pue and copect to the best of his/her 1 Date ^jnjc OWNER'S SIGNATl The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and 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. ■1 V Variance Application 1687 Concordia St.4/16/00 Description of Request: We are proposing to remove the existing 1 Vi story cabin, and the entire sidewalk on the lake side, and build a new home in the same general area. The new home will bring the property in compliance with side setback requirements. The current cabin is just 18 inches from the property line at the structure’s northeast comer, and 36 inches from the property line at the northwest comer. We desire to build at a line denoting the average lakeshore setback of the structures on either side, for the reasons outlined in #1 and #3 below. Description of Hardship: Our variance requests are based on the following hardships: 1.If we were to build the new house starting at 75 feet from the OHW mark, the structure would be partially located in a swale which holds water mnoff from the road and adjacent properties during heavy rains and in spring. Our property is at the bottom of a hill, and plays a major role in collecting and filtering water runoff from the neighborhood before the water enters the lake. We inquired about the city ’s willingness to address the issue of water management in the neighborhood in 1995 and in subsequent years (see attached photos from 1997), but no action was taken. 2.Due to the resulting high water table, we are unable to build a basement in this home. Also, since the maximum elevation is 30 feet above grade, we are limited to the^ square footage we are able to build two stories. Given these limitations, we designed a 4 bedroom house, all rooms of relatively modest size. If we reduced the size of the house further, the resulting room sizes would be reduced to the point of being smaller than the current standard in new construction (especially bedrooms), and would possibly impact their frmctionality. 3.Building at the 75-foot line would violate the spirit of the Average Lakeshore Setback requirement, which state*^ that a house may not be built in front of adjacent property owners. Locating our stmeture at 75 feet would mean that both neighboring structures would be located forward of the front of our house. In the case of the house to the North (the Palm home), 2/3 of that house would be located in front of our house if we built at the 75-foot line. Looking at the side yards, there will be 20 feet on the North side between our house and the Palm home, and 30 feet on the South side between our house and the Belawski home. This creates privacy issues for the neighbors, a **tunner ’ location for our home and undesirable sight lines for us. // cr-'-i J ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING CO, S300S.llwy.No.l0l Minneteiika. MN SS34S Plmae (612) 474 7964 Fu (6)2) 474 8267 SURVEY FOR: JOHN GEHRING y !•h ‘A iv'u 'Mi V "t ?• f .. •• • ^ jyEmflfi: Apia.DRAFTED: April 10.2000 * fi f ••r ' ij • V -• .f / ^■«»* •• 1J IJMAI.miSCRirnOK; The NotOi so ftal of At South too flEct of Lot M. ColM^ Addkkn to Sludywood Lake Minnetonka. UMrrATT0N84N0 I Thowhn*1 liH iRdlimUTrtit*1~—-*-~r**"t-*— **r*~*—Theacopeof oufianrkaadoaaool iadode daiannlnlnp wfaat you own, wfakfa b a legal nwtla’. Pleaae check (ha l^iaaiilpanawllhyounacoidaorcooiiihwMi c oiiipc<anl lapalcoiiaaa l,ifBoceaaaiy,>oiaahaiuia taN k ie oanad, and that any flMMen of noMd, auch aa eaacnwiila, Ihat you wUi shown 00 (he wmy. Of aari^fhn old mwiiiinaHaloaaikl^cormii of (ha property. 4.Showk^alamienaonAaailealaalectedlocaliaaalogivaaaowindkaliaooflhelopofnphyof Oh dto. 11a alavadanaAowaielale only to te>hcadnnaik provided oolhiaaoivey. Urotbal honchaaA and check M laaal one olher (c»«we ibowB on (be map when detonnioing nther alavalk» IbrnaeonMeaiia. 5.DiHMMionaaflhaailalinigan|aanrtW4iii«Bironiredlotbendiiig.iheactualdkiicailooaof GRAPHIC SCALE 6.Showinf (ha localionoraprapoaad'fwi '^^jMlk'g and yaid stadias for your nview and for (he ioviewofa^toroinBMalaiaaencia'^‘.'teyha«rfti)wl8diclkm. STAWDAM) SYMBOLS A OOHVEKnOtn *«*Danalaa l/Z*IDpipawhhplaa(ic|iliig(w4..t«S(a(a LktnaaNumber923S,ad,iinleiaodierwiae mo or rauMMnoN • tU7uvrunn • om.7 PCM or mar - aau OMBC MIOIBe MOUK • asu CAWOH; Ihmahy aartOyiha lida—toy waaproparodbyrneocundcrniydircci gy/znAa liPaikarPi^Apjs. 2 a RPC Arcnit0c ttt 5909 lUMfltf 01 tt*OKf««V VN *«urt& mfcmttmjifkm. MPEX wm tiiu 1 2 neoR n/M5 CLCVAnOlO OAfAnPIC/ rM ■««aj •mkt t m Mtk 1 C\ U WEST ELEVATION 1/4"=T0 rjT’iV(' j:xo M (C V- 'fn , ••• V/' 7 t< i; EAST ELEVATION 1/4"=rO KDC ArcniP0Ct« «X» fMU b1 •HomrtwiM ne«e «M4e3IOtO fAlU r«uic» OnAMdtCSflCMV •f. INPDC INOlt tllU 1 riooK nAN5 2 ELCVATOI& 5 aCVATIOMd ____«rf ^ ^ _ cE? al^a* ftmT «■■ I—‘aw —fc -4% »I * ivr M M «WiM I f •mm % 9 mn\irittm Ml %i8S.. u •! . I %■% -V r.'' \i'- \ / • / A •.#- )] f • <• .V/-V jS -J *r . 'f.VT'- ■«. ...,. ..‘■,.i—.<{i« :!—r..«'*rr*"' \. A W|A«. • NORTH ELEVATION 1/4“=1’0 SOUTH ELEVATION 1/4"=V0 ROC ArctiildC t0 aoo9 tvMjtr M fwnmv* Ml m4§9^wm OfivnuncMiNki WtflMfOIW w. INDEX tMfft* ma m%i 4^00; * MflY-09-2 07:43 B2BXCHANGE> INC 612 903 9850 P.01/04 May 8,2000 To:Wendy fiottenberg From: John & Kristin Gchring 1687 Concordia St. Re:Revised Calculations Total Area Existing Allowed Proposed Variance Requested 0-75 3792 999 26.3 % 0 OVo 1012 26.7 Vo Construction in 0-75 fl zone 75-250 8847 2183 24.7 % 2212 25% 2321 26.2 % Hardcover 250-500 1674 202 12.1 % 502 30% 202 12.1 % None Totid Structural Hardcover Existing House 1168 fiara^e 7S0 Total 1918 +14.313 Proposed:House 1400 Garage 750 Total 2150 f 14.313 13.4 Vo 15.0 Vo Notes: 1.In the 250-500 foot zone, no change in the 12.1 % hardcover is proposed. The existing hardcover is A0% of allowed hardcover. 2.The garage is actually 750 square feet. Hie surveyor noted on the survey that he measured to the siding when he calculated 766 square feet. 3.The proposed structural coverage for the house docs not include a roof over the steps on the west and south entries. On the East entry, 50 square feet is covered and therefore structural hardcover. 16 square feet is uncovered stairs, and therefore is not structural hardcover. 4. 5. Please correct the spelling of “Kristian” to read “Kristu j" on agenda. Also attached is the revised hardcover calculations for all 3 zones. ... kb MPY-09-2 07:44 B2BXCHANGE. INC HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK 20NE: (CIRCLE ONE) 612 903 9850 P.02/04 S^/ • ••••m •. [ff A.House —---------- Pt.<KlS»w Unfili X X X B.Oerase C.Driveway X X D.Sidewalk \yi00(|X X E.Patio/Deek X X F.Landicape U&deriain ByPlastle X X X G.Otber tfk. U)(IlU total prop ^^ty area in zone B A.House UcfA X X X B.Oarage C.Driveway X X D.Sidewalk X X E.Paito/Deck X X F.Laodseape Uiideriala By Plastie X X X O.Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total pR opefjy area in zone A JL&VX +B X100 75-250*25-500*500-1000f* a&=\_S.F. WUA S.F. S.F. s _S.F. ,S.F. C _S.F. m ____S.F. m ^S.F. _S.F. M _____S.F. _S.F. ■1 ~S.F. »^S.F. A\_S.F. P S.F. 31^‘Z.X 100 S.F. «tS4 _S.F. Width ^SJF. a _S.F. _S.F.a SI _S.F. ,P S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A&S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. BV S.F. A B VOVZ^ aoai2- S.F. S.F. % A B i___I >akiiI MUM h, MAY-09-2 07:44 B2BXCHPNGE. INC SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75*7S-250 ’ 612 903 98S0 P.03/04'-7 '• 250-500'500-1000' EXISTING HARPCOVER IN Z A. House ____________ •:vL f22i Lcnitti Wk5ih X X X B.Oarage •* • •• C.Driveway nso X X D.Sidewalk X X E.Patio/Deck X X F.Landscape Underlain By nestle Or Fabric X X X O.Odier ^ tennsl 4/ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PRORERTV AREA IN ZONE A *B e&^-n xlOO - •PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A.House _____________41U Leii|<h Width X X X B.Oarete C.Driveway «7gO X X no^ D.Sidewalk X X E.Patio/Deck X X F.Landsc^ Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G.Other S.F. S.F. 8.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _S.F. [___S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P. s.p: S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A -PSai B .8M1 XlOO - •2.2a\S.F. S.F. % A B A B i ii MAY-09-2000 07:44 B2BXCHANGE. INC HAIU)COVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 612 903 9850 P.04/04 ........................ setback ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'75-lSO’ [ft A.House ____________ LrafOi 50O-UWO’ •jtjigg/ B.Oii«ce C.Driveway p.SldrveUc E.Parie/Dcclc F.I Mtlscepe Underlain By Plastic X X X O.Other X X X X X X X X X total hardcover in zone TOTAL W«^TY AMAIN zone^ y,^r,4 xlOO A.House Lesg*WMdl B.oarsfe C.Driveway D.Sidewalk E.Patio/Deck F.Landseape Uoderlaifl By Plastic X X X X X X X X X X X O.Other total hardcover in zone total property area in zone I +B X100 « 202. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ,S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P. S.F. S.F. S.P. S.F. >.F. S.F. A S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 8.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. I S.F. S.F. A B J)D>S.F. S.F. % A B TOTAL P.04 r«.i U fSt.J tSf . J i\'C=3 'j u \V l' •Jl.9 Wij Mf.«\Q. n tM. \ \L—--- fJJ.4 fif.t fu. n iJi.f fU.f ;.*?••» V fM.« >*«f.§ •««.9 tsc.t 9M.I. IJJ.S /* u rH* i\ 94/.•.94/./ ■9J9.9 »».• y 931.I '9J9.I ^914.S 9JS.9 9IS.t 911.9 9J1.0 tr ■K. 994./ 99J 9 \\ I /»|4.9, Vr ::5>. ^2 \ 99/. 9 U'' //* /4-V^y A (' >Jt.J »9iJ.J ■9991 4 919.9 ‘949.9 V 12^' t ‘999.1 »9J4.9JI \ )(f!' J • N \ \ \ \ ••t** 919 9 RED OAX «• SvOAt*—.\ '^^^V^orest \r. 5h200 SlA s^y rarest i * BmmDviEw|jAyE “•y^T /® S kogsberg Point g * '•* s. • B acut •«T^ O M «> • West \ J600 ■flfl ShadJ^ood Point DEERING Aiojcwe/ f-C* SSiliL %»«4 BOHNSi fOiRT*- 9 • >' S - •.”DS V V A1 Fagerness Point I'BtOIVlMn. >>D&0rE«AMI r-<i ii55£»A»i =^^=1:2: ®" *V/^**2^“o!L*|mi^ i-i Spring Park Crystal So/ i .:' Vl • .. V • yyj m — ^ •Mi lti_^ ^GOOSE ISLAND GSCHQEdKIX SHORELINE o<3A o <0CO 1 ITMC IV AVI If |0«g sap Lfm pnnn “* Carman V ' -AC;Bay ^ ORO SPRAY ;ISLA^ r* f ff A FNvr ••• (r ( C' r [ (' I (_ [ I {l j r ::::> ti .c { t �tLt ) r I I I r f C SI C '\ I • . -: \ ,. . � ·-�· . r·�· \f"' .. ' ·-�J.. . . '\ '.J ,. \l RUN DATE tVM/Tf HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATXON SYSTEN PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIASMOX PACE 20 MTCN S0« PROP ADORf OWNER NANS TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 50 17-117-25 22 0020 01721 CONCORDIA ST JANES T NYSTRON JANES T NYSTRON 1701 NADISON ST N E NPLS NN SSA15 50 17-117-25 22 0021 01705 CONCORDIA ST JANET JACOOSON SACHS JANET SACHS 7505 17TH AV SO RICHFIELD NN 55023 30 17-117-25 22 0022 01405 CONCORDIA ST T L PALN I N A PALN THONAS L PALN 1605 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA NN 55591 3 OWNER NONE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR 50 17-117-25 22 0025 01495 CONCORDIA ST 0 J t D R RELAWSKI DONALD JONN DEUWSRI S019 COLORADO AVE N CRYSTAL NN 55022 50 17-117-23 22 0020 01407 CONCORDIA ST J N OENRINC/K REINRE CEHRINO JOHN 0 RRXSTXN CEHRINC 1407 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA NN 55591 30 17-117-25 22 0050 01700 CONCORDIA ST D J BELAWSRZ ADC RELAWSKI DAVID J i DAYNA C RELAWSKI 1700 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA NN 55591 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAMR/AOOR 50 17-117-25 22 0051 01490 CONCORDIA ST ROiERT N ENFIELD RORERT N ENFIELD 1490 CONCORDIA ST NN 55591 50 17-117-25 22 0052 01400 CONCORDIA ST LID SEROK LINDA D SEROK 1400 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA NN 55591 50 17-117-25 22 0040 01455 CONCORDIA ST HOWARD R ALTON 111 HOWARD R ALTON III 1455 CONCORDIA ST ORONO NN 55591 PROP ADDR TAXPAYCR NAME/AOPR M 17-U7-RS 22 AMS A1A7S CONCORDIA ST NCLCN K TRAINOR NEIL J a lAROARA L TRAINOR lA7f CONCORDIA ST MAVZATA NN 55S91 TOTAL BATCH 5BS taaia X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS'REPRESENTEO ARC AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORNATXON AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECOROS OF THE IffiNNEPXN COUNTY OEPARTHCNT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF NY RNOMLEOCE AND BELIEF DATE n n )') ••.-f ,V */ Tf ... 'J VN I, <'< I •^ 'V' Permit No. 22or,. 16'1'/ PERMIT RECORD Date 7-18-7,-?. J/-�1 =9,S .. ._. . . -------------------------- ' ... J TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner May 15,2000 SUBJECT:#2582 Francis and Susan Ann Koubsky 4784 North Shore Drive Variance — Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:18,073 s.f. (.41 acre) Lbt of Exhibits Analysis Worksheet Application/Applicant Letter Site Plan/ Survey Access Map > Residences Using Park Avenue Topographic Map Floor Plan/Elevations Plat Map Hardcover Calculations Photo of Property Location Map Property Owner ’s List Permit Record . i Pertinent Code Sections 1.Section 10.23, Subd. 6(B): Front Setback: The minimum requirement for front setback in the LR-IB zoning district is 35 feet. Variance Request: To permit a front setback of 10' where 35' is required. Application Summary: The applicants are proposing to remove the existing access at North Shore Drive and construct a garage/room addition and deck at the northeast comer of the existing residence. The deck will replace an existing one that will be removed for the garage/room addition. Access to the property will now be via “Park Avenue ” (addressed as Tonkaview Lane) along the north lot line. The topography is steep at North Shore Drive making access during winter months a hazard for both applicants and the public who drive North Shore Drive. The garage/room a ddition will meet all required setbacks except for the street setback at the north lot line. No other variances will be required. M2582 Francis/Susan Ann Koubsky 4784 North Shore Drive Variance 5/15/2000 Page I In 1996 the applicants submitted a proposal for a garage addition and deck at the northwest comer of the existing residence. The application was tabled due to issues regarding phasing the addition and removal of the driveway. The application did not proceed to the City Council. Review Exhibit D, applicants’ property is identified at No. 5 on the map and is the next to the last property served by the private ^ve. The property defined as No. 4 on the map obtained a building permit for a new residential constmction in 1 and has been assigned a Tonkaview address. The applicants should also change their address to Tonkaview Lane with the relocation of the access to the property. The property is located within 500' of Lake Minnetonka. The garage/room addition will result in an increase of stmctural coverage on the lot to 2,139 s.f (11.8%), where 1,260 s.f (6.9%) exists and 2,710.95 s.f. (15%) is allowed. The garage/room addition and deck will result in a decrease of hardcover coverage in the 75- 250' setback area to 0 s.f. (0%), where 6,234 s.f. (28%) exists and 1,558.5 s.f. (25%) is allowed. The garage/room addition and deck will result in an increase of hardcover coverage in the 250-500' setback area to 3,540 s.f. (29.9%), where 2,475 s.f. (21%) exists and 3,551.7 s.f (30%) is allowed. Tlie lot is a through lot, defined as a lot which has a pair of opposite lot lines abutting two substantially parallel streets, and which is not a comer lot. On a through lot, both street lot lines shall be front lot lines for zoning purposes. For this application, the front yard setback variance is for Park Avenue. Park Avenue has been used as an alley in the past, however for this application it is considered a street. The garage/room addition will be located 10' from the property line where 35' is required. Statement of Hardship; The applicants have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit B. The applicants should also be asked for tlieir testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration; 1 .The pattern of residences accessing from Tonkaview Lane is consistent with adjacent properties. 2.The applicants’ driveway is the next to the last driveway at the west end of the drive which will now serve a totd of six properties. This driveway is 600' long and privately maintained within the platted right of way. At this level of use, is there any neighborhood or City support for the City taking over its maintenance? It2582 Francis/Susan Ann Koubsky 4784 North Shore Drive Variance 5/15/2000 Page 2 t L 3.The structural coverage on the lot is increasing but still well below the allowed 15%. 4.The 75-250' hardcover on the lot is decreasing to 0%, well below the allowed 25%. 5.The 250-500' hardcover on the lot is increasing but below the allowed 30%. 6.Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation! Staff recommends approval of the variance for front yard setback and the relocation of access to **Park Avenue” Further, staff recotmnends that the neighborhood erect a nameplate sign on Tonkaview Lane. it2582 Francis/Susan Ann Koubsfy 4784 North Short DrNe Varianct 5/15/2000 Pages Distance from Total area in Allowed Existing Proposed shoreline setback hardcover hardcover hardcover 75-250'6,234 s.f.1,558.5 s.f.6,234 s.f.Os.f. (25%)(28%)(0 %) 250-500 ’11,839 s.f.3,551.7 s.f.2,475 s.f.3,540 s.f. (30%)(21%)(29.9%) « •e> ('/a') 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 # B 2. Date Received " *//19/00 Amount Paid C PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Shcfrf,5334? V Property Identification Number (P.I.D.i 0'7-’/f'7-Z3 32. OOIZ^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey, Date Property Acquired V/________________________________ I (do) kfolioft also own the adjacent parcels of land. .(month/year) Present use of property: X residential Zoning District: / 6___________ other (specify). APPLICANT^*iji^c^s £.eiuj^t'cL Kxn.*Jo^ic^ v- Name Susctvs Arttn Knu.hsk*^______ .Address: Phone (home! _____ Phone (work ) City: C?rorvo_________Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _______________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ c f Address:City:.Zip:. jt t»a DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Z^.oCO.to Describe request in detail: v-/Hfr^ci^MusL____________ ■' • ■)•• .y(attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage (■'Q Setback:Front Side X 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: Sha.t ______ (attach additional sheets if necessary) r Frank and Susan Koubsky 4784 North Shore Drive Orono, MN 55364 612-472-1896 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: We are requesting a rear setback variance in order to accommodate a two-stall garage and a small additional room. The garage doors would open at an angle to the drive and will easily accommodate at least two additional off street parking spaces. HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS: We are planning to build a garage using the Park Avenue (or the alley) access to our property because of the present hazardous driveway access on North Shore Drive. Our driveway’s very steep pitch, combined with the location of it being on a sharp curve with limited sighting distance created by the steep topographies on both the north and south side of North Shore Drive, creates a serious hazard to our and the general public’s safety. It is our desire to start a family and we do not feel comfortable using this driveway with children in the car, not to mention the fact that it is a very busy road with many excessive speeders, which would create a dangerous situation for playing children. We currently have to cross the county road to receive and send our mail, and have had many near misses with speeding cars. We have also had our cars slip out into oncoming traffic when it has snowed and the driveway gets slick. Because of the above-mentioned hardships, our only alternative is to build a garage accessing the alley. Because of the steep topography of the front of the lot, it leaves us with limited space in the back. The land is flat and very suitable for building. It may not meet the setback guideline, but the stmeture is conforming to the adjacent property sightlines and, most importantly, very safe. 6 '1 : \ \ ' \ •Tv. • i ii i i 1 (LOl^) CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR FRANK AND SUSAN KOUBSKYLOTS 7,8&9, BLOCK 3. BERGQUIST & WICKLUNO'S PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA ( i)!ii\ \ (.Kt t\r.l K(.. 1\^ 1 f i i c • '' sT 1°^ 1 r»«h»-or-trfaw D i-tmm Stuart Whitman 4735 Tonkaview Lane Larry/Valerie Greenhagen 4739 Tonkaview Lane Don/Chris Schanzenbach 4736 North Shore Drive James E. Thompson 4750 North Shore Drive Tim Olson/Lisa Wallace 4757 Tonkaview Lane Francis/Susan Koubsky 4784 North Shore Drive Troy Keepman/Jennifer Murphy 4798 North Shore Drive D • f 1030.5 X V » \ » \V* » s^^\io33.7 > yJVT/ \ 1 * \v Cl L—X 7 /vrv^ 1027.7 X 1025.0 JLA^ /O^O X 1024.6 H ,>CAA4 1034 IL X\ ^ 7 -w ■ *g rS09^ ile lill i'^ialrtil^i^P ■I m\l y^if m«a/ijMlLllA^ ft : : ; •>• MOBKl^ . f. <\L ‘>w^ • ’ 5-:. •■ '/•'•l"'?'-^ •> 1“ -!r ■■ ■■:•^ k* > < * . S’^ •''- •lit ^ , -4 tek' >^rF-jg 1,i I. ip: Ji i-‘S,S'* ^ !A*irhai.--5 II• 'J ? .1 ........................... . [. . !;..',U' J.<l'i i7S5Ji^i2^ ^■A.‘v I i%4 X -, {VJ i 1 ♦.»• im . I o 7-//7-o?j?-^ -3 G LOTI <5»A (10)7^ (30) (20,,k-3 M >i Uj f• %\ ;••*?- *•••.• .. i J F\^ ' N 7 •W' r I Length X X X HARDCOVER CALCULA’nON WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’d^-2S0!l>250-500’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ___________X ______________- Width 500-1 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. D.Garage C.Driveway X X 1151 S.F. S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E.Patio/Deck X X S.F. S.F. F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. O.Other S.F. A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE +B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X B.Garage C.Driveway D.Sidewalk E.Patio/Deck F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic Length X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100 X 100 Width 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. A B / i: V * N i ••X ' ^ .) e.) 1») G.(}ther TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE (l**^*^^ p TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE / - ^ B (3%%H X 100 - Q S.F. S.F. A S.F. B HARDCOVER CALCULATION VVORKS^fiET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’75-250* RXISTINC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length Width B.Garage C.Driveway D.Sidewalk E.Patio/Deck F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic G.Other X X X I?*!.*? iS. X X X X X X X X X ■^r A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 'Ldi +B +B X too X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________X Length Width 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 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ ^ _ +B It X 100 500-1000* S.F. -S.F. S.F. —S.F. S.F. S.F. —S.F. S.F. S.F. VlV’S.F. S.F. 'LM S.F. —S.F. S.F. -S.F. S.F.A —Ll£^S.F. %H ' •; %A . ft \ S.F.^Vi ' y-. . S.F. —S.F.% . • » -S.F.v\\ ••. i S.F. .. * f S2)7 S.F.r ! —S.F. S.F. S.F. -f S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. —S.F. -S.F. S.F.A S.F.B •/# r fr>) M H VH Ai' ViciC /L'C Mmk i^V '/*S .,f • * A • •* .** mm ': • f i : V X* ■ <■ V.} *' •• ¥<>y ,y- t •>.r •'41 ‘Tt^? k-^ • \ • 4 » * . v-T : .> ■■ ^ ‘^V-••■•V. C.*r!r' 4C0 CNirPCWA u ORON ■Anoc qwmcm o HIGH CaCEN ST 1 / *2 ITM V’.-* :.i t. Lakeviev .•je* Course WEST IHAHCM HD SCO % ELM,.45V b1*—- @ % /s. ^^\t.\ '' Norti ‘ ‘ swahovicwUUveV ^ . S- SkogsbergPdnt •Lake fjpD FOX M ' . .•'T? * •i- -.f-- r .• ■• **.r^* •f ; ri.t. » - V. •' * ;;? \;. •v: ' v.-v A ^^ T 4* V ••■••• .•:>:• ®isi^ enilMr® West -g . o . • •'— % ^ ^ • ••*jr •.•/ ••^ ORONO i4rm 5AadJBaot/ /’ma/..••• S.PEERING jSLAND Pa9tPHMll^rmmiL \Crystal •• iUN MTi •S/t7/ti MTCM its ONNEi HUm TAXfAVERmm/naon TAMPAVIt NMC/ABM M I2-117-M 41 ••§! Mtn NlNNtAPOLXS AVE C S THOttAS A E n TRADER C S THOdAS t E N TRADER 4D01 HINNEAPOLXS AVE HOUND HN 5SVo4 St t7-iiy £S St-mi D47S7 TONRAVXEM U T 0 OLSON A L N WALLACE T 0 OLSON A L N WALLACE 47S7 TONKAVXEW LA HOUND HN SSSM HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATXON SYSTEN PROPERTY OWNERS LXST SO A7-117-2S 2S f«27 •4745 TONKAVXEW LA D A A P E AFFELDT DWXOHT A PATRXCXA AFFELDT 4745 TONKAVXEW U NN 55S44 REPORT NO. PX4554tl PACE 15 ••• SO •7-117-2S 32 OtU •4704 NORTH SNORE DR S A SCHAUER APE KOUOSKY S A SCHAUER APE KOUOSKY 4704 NORTH SNORE DR HOUND HN 55S44 SO tT-llT-XS S2 ••!• •4750 NORTH SHORE DR JANES R TNOHSON ETAL JAMS TNOHSON 4750 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND NN 55S44 SO 07-117-2S $2 tOlS •4740 NORTH SHORE DR T D KOOPHAN A J A HURPNY J A HURPNY A T D KOOPHAN 4740 NORTH SNORE OR HOUND HN 55S44 •1 • Vt ' •, % >'•!1 / •t * OWNER NANR TANPAVER NAHi/AOOR TAMPAYER NAHE/AODR SO •7-117-2S 32 •421 •47S5 NORTH SNORE 01 0 R EVERSON P N E EVEI OARRY A NARXE EVERSON 4755 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55S44 SO 07-117-2S 32 OAST •4755 TONKAVXEW LA R L DROWN A K H JENAL ROOERT DROWN/KATNERXNE JENAL 4755 TONKAVXEW LA 55344 SO •7-117-23 32 ••22 •4775 NORTH SHORE OR D E DOLL A S E DOLL OOUCLAS E A SANDRA E BOLL 4775 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55344 TOTAL BATCH 545 •••!• SO 47-117-23 32 SSSS •4745 NORTH SHORE DR HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 DOR 44 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 K ' \ ;■..') >/•)•'-V ■;J X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION .OF XNFORHATXON 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. y y> ^/^8/dOwi SaaZ:i/A( ’e - W.' % Permit No. 7/ PERMIT RECORD Date /S/^ /m _______ . !6<fL 9-^I-A-7 lU^'I /O /-/fiv ^O'i V-/V- 75 ^(i’O 9 7-^3^77 Type of Permit naa.^ f TO;Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE; RE; Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner May 10,2000 #2583 Roxann Beisch 3436 Livingston Avenue Variances Zoning:LR-IC, One Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2 Acre Minimum lot size Application: Variances to permit construction of a one-stall detached garage to replace an existing one stall garage on the property. Lbt of Exhibits: A B C D E F G H Application Plat Map Site Survey Site Photos Sketch of Proposed Garage Hardship Statement Hardcover Calculation Worksheet Property Owners Notification Form Application Summary: Property owner has proposed to remove existing detached garage and construct a new garage. The existing garage is located over the rear property line and on the west property line. The applicant has stated the hardship is the existing garage has a dirt floor and is located on the lowest point between the adjacent properties. Following rain the water runs into and through the garage, making the garage usable during dry times in the summer. In the winter, the ground swells with frost and the doors cannot be opened. Filling the low portion of the property was discussed, but it is the only place on the properties that is collecting water. Fill would force the water in another direction. The proposed site plan would allow the garage to be located out of the low area and place the structure within the property lines. I^25S3 Roxann Beisch 3436 Livingston Avenue Variances May 15. 2000 pagt-f ilil i Ami ANALYSIS Pertinent Code Sections: ]. Section 10.25, Subdivision 6(B) 2. 3. Minimum side yard setback for an accessory structure: Proposed side yard setback: Existing: 10' 5' On property line If the Planning Commission does recommend approval of a side setback variance, it should not be for less than 5' from the lot line. The logic behind requiring at least a 5' setback is a result of the Code requirement to maintain a minimum setback to all other structures of 10'. The adjacent garage located at 3438 Livingston Avenue is 3' off the property line. If the garage is replaced in the future it should be replaced 5' from the property line, thus resulting in a 10* separation between buildings. Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 to permit 8' between accessory buildings where 10' is required. Section 10.22, Subdivbion 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (2) to permit an additional 152 s.f. hardcover on the property. Allowed hardcover in the S00>1000' lakeshore setback: 1,575 s.f. (35%) Proposed hardcover in the 500-1000' lakeshore setback: 1,968 s.f. (43.4%) Existing:1,816 s.f. (40.3%) Hardcover to be removed:concrete pad (for new driveway)40 s.f. part of existing rear deck 88 s.f. garfje 200 S,fr Total Hardcover to be removed 328 s.f. New hardcover:driveway extension 200 s.f. garage 280 s.f. Added Hardcover 480 s.f. M2S83 Roxam Bcik K 3436 Livingsttm Avenue Variances S4ayl5.2000 pagt-2 . 1 !.■ r- [if Structural Coverage : Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 4,500 s.f.Allowed: 1,500 s.f. Existing: 877 s.f. Proposed: 957 s.f. Hardcover Calculations; Distance from shoreline 500-1000' Total area in setback 4,500 s.f. Allowed hardcover 1,575 s.f; (35%) Existing hardcover l,816s.f. (40.3%) Proposed hardcover 1,968 s.f. (43.4%) Surrounding Properties: All properties surrounding the subject lot are zoned LR-IC. The applicant's property has a 50' lot width v^ch is consistent with all other properties in the locality. The property locat^ to the west had a variance approved in 1998 to permit construction of a new one-stall garage. The garage is shown side by side to the existing applicant garage in the photo attached as Exhibit D. Most lots along Livingston Avenue, with garages, have detached garages located behind the house. Garage Location: The proposed location of the garage is not consistent with adjacent properties because the garage would be located 12' off the rear property line. The minimum setback required for garages from the rear property line is 1 O'. Most other garages do not meet the minimum setback required by code. This garage cannot be located closer to the rear property line due to the low area that collects water after rainfall. However the 12' setback is in keeping with the setback established for garages in the zoning district. #2383 Roxuui Beisch 3436 Livinftlon Avenue Variances h4aylS.3000 pagt-J i i i Statement of Hardship: The applicant has submitted her Statement of Hardship attached at Exhibit F. Primary Issue for Discussion: The proposed setback from the side lot line is 5' where 10' is required. Due to the size of the lots in the locality (Navarre) is it more appropriate to permit a 5' setback to preserve the backyard of the lot? Staff Recommendation: To approve the variances noted on page 2 subject to reducing the size of the existing rear deck to the size indicated on the site plan based on the applicant's Statement of Hardship. Planning Commission Options for Action: 1 .Approval of variances based on the Statement of Hardship. 2.Denial of variances, stating reasons. 3.Table, requesting further information and provide direction to the applicant. 4.Other Action. 1 W25>3 Roxann Bcuch 3436 Livingston Avenue Variances kkiyl5.2m pagt-4 A Application # ^ ^ 83 Date Received /l^loO CITY OF ORONO - VARUNCE 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 Aftcr-thc-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Amount Paid 2.SO PROPERTY INFORMATION a Site Address (—.< ui V\ ti fi^—*A.Ai------- Property TH«»nrifirfltinn Number fP-IrP.") / 1 - M7■ 2.S----—O0 .2A-------------------------- Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired _____I \ f ______________________________^(month/year) Present use of property: X. residential Zoning District:__________________ other (specify). APPLIC Name V\V\ Address:LVJ< \Af^<Syiv.City: V OWTS'ER (if different than applicant) Name _____________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost ^ Describe request in detaU: I (o y ASL y my cJ ir^C QVCtefr po4 (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED ^^ ^ LotArr-,Lot Width __X Hardcover -----^Lot Coverage ——50c -|OCC» y Setback: __ Front yC, Side Rear —Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions prevenUng compliance with Zoning Code requirements:^---------------------------------------------------— (attach additional sheets if necessary) 4 B ■ 5^ 5(li 5tl^ 1-^ io2 9 2 ITT s s _ 7^ (14Y)(65) 7 \ J50lj5Q in lo S'" 17 ) I (73) »! sa •”18 (74) -1^ 2(^®2r 22^ 2^ 2 J 25- 2^. 27^^-- (75)(76) (77) (78)(79):(80) (5)(15) (81) 2^ 50 5Q ! 5Q 50 50 : J5Q_.-5Q._^()_L5Q s s s s i ,s j j ,s 12n 11" 10^ 9 ) , (89) (88) (87) 6^ 5S 4 (85)? - (83) l86)„\ (99)_ lan It f-C"^ w ^ Tr ^ ^ ft 01 §• 3o 3 C3 3 C'O ..90.0 „ jsf ^ 1 - :e r”S ^ cn r® I t JU O vJ» § r5. «3 ^ S' 5” ® o2L25. ^ Jn 1^ 5 ^n/* -rL o _ ^ r» iT* T T* ^ j::- I «Cm >r»(n > •• D •VI •':r r.y/ r -v- •., < :►. Ssfe',? ! Tt Be Rewweo L .'MZl* L'"' N 'Vf *: A ’ hi V'S<J ^ ^111 \ \ ‘. i .hy -: S jg-: ^|li§iQ...............'C E*i I "I I ■ -,. ff ) ..>;;P^'. • •: ■’ .•.! i i-' »T*> • >■ ;v'i^ -iiM. V./,. . ^ .• '/• :> .■ ^VA\‘/ 1 , ■ ' I » -^^ aiip-* . Vv "'Bia»B- U-'V ^ i ■-^\ ■•. i IV; V .- ' i N iX> xvlJ ‘■-?-‘ ■ *' ^ * *--^1 v*>5^ ^ > • V ' ‘ '.' •''y-I' , -.j ■^h\' • V 'vVi '' M X-« V D -2 .f2 3'5l- t 0 m^' mgm i W * fV A .• »v V ^* .^, w >*«> ^r.'- ^ 5 ■•' ! '•^L.■^ r -f 1: ••: •-C, A . l><~ >s<'V ~ ■ - . I f-.''^»/V< ' , 'iSi •V- *’ ’ ’I® I . V.' •* ';-'-v'5 . * l>^‘ : • r • V ., ■ '« !.- •• ^ V >'>' - “ fil___^ l_'ji|f--i..^I ‘ f < ^ ^ • BatSOBV caai^JI »:srr.«£ra«a s.'^1 •'. 4, % •*•*■%1^**J* i I ‘ ,'7 \c.-‘ M-; ■; /-r ■:' -'"'">•■,.,•- *. \. ---.i — -.- •.^^! 1- •r- ■ V • •\.'! ' Dy._.{. j r > A' 7'.. .*i, -*'.v ' - ‘•-n--':3-'-:V: MCNARPSDesign # 52941 LmJ *** Take thia aheet to the Building Materiala counter to purebaao your matoriala You selected a garage with these options: 14' Wide X 20' Deep X 8' High Gahle roof w/ 4/12 pitch truaa eonatruetion. 12" gahle/12 “ eave overhanga. 5/8" OSB Roof Sheathing. 25 yr. Biltmore, Slate Shinglea. White Vinyl Soffit. White Vinyl Faaeia. White Aluminum Regular Roof Edge. White vinyl overhead door jamb. 8" Pine Groovod Vertical Siding. 4/18/2000 *** ? 7 ^ // .V' -------- . *\ ...»t * 4«; ;• >* *4 . ... ..' Front Vieir |i!#|1101 Today's cost for materiais estimated in this design: $ 2214.52 Baae garage without optiona: $ 1168.47 *Tho huo prioo inctudee: 0* Eavo/0* 6ahto Ovorhaiiga, 2X4 Wall Studa, 7/16 OBS Roof Shoutking, 20 yr. Rherglaaa Oaaale - Onyx llaelt Shingloa, Pino Fuata, Oalvanlxed Ragular Roof Edge, I* Toxturod VoftUal Hardboord SMn|« No Service Doora, No Ovarhead Doora, No Window, or Any Other Optiona. 3436 Livingston Avenue Wayzata, MN 55391 The lot is a very small and slopes down on the north end, making it lower than the adjacent properties on either side. The existing garage is approximately 12’ X 16 ’ with a poured foundation and a dirt floor. It is located over the property line on the backside (north end). When it rains, the water runs into and through the garage, making it usable only during diy times in the summer. In the winter, the ground swells with frost and the doors cannot be opened. I would like to have a garage located within my property lines, on higher ground with a concrete floor. >"•>> HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’75-250*250-500* EXISTING HARDCOVTR IN mivr A. House ___________X Length Width X X X B.Garage C.Drivewayy yjAlti! PATt 0 X X D.Sidewalk X X X X F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G.Other A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _____________+B ___ __________^ B X too X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN TONE A. House __________X Length Width X X X B.Garage C.Driveway/X X D.Sidewalk X X F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G.Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _ > B X 100 - ZOO I 8IU'nstc L02. ■z %0 gsy ISl S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. •/o % 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. G A B / y ^ S S.F. A S.F. B % RUN BATE M/2R/RR •ATCN SRI ONNER NANE TAXRAVER NAHE/AODR RROR AOOR ONNER NANE TAXRAVER NANE/AODR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR % ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NAME/AfiOR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR TAXPAYER HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATXON SYSTEN PROPERTY ONNERS LIST REPORT NO. PXASMRl PACE X M 17>1I7-ES AS •SIRS SAYVXEN PL R P NEYERS I J E HEYERS RICNARP P 1 JANICE E NEYERS 219S BAYVXEW Pi NAYZATA NN SSS91 SO 17-117-2S OS WZ •2290 SHAOYNOOO RD DAVn T FXCX OAVXO T FXCX 2290 SNAItVNOOO RD NAYZATA NN SSS91 SO 17-117-2S OS •••0 •229S SNAOVNOOO RD X N t S A ROOENALD KEVXN N S SNXRLEY A ROOENALD 229S SHAOVHOOO RD NAYZATA NN SSS91 SO 17-117-2S OS •••§ •SOOS CRYSTAL PL A S L ROOENALD ADELDERT N ROOENALD SOOS CRYSTAL PLACE NAYZATA NN ISS91 SO 17-I17-2S OS •••0 •3009 CRYSTAL PL E L NATTSON A C A NATTSON E L NATTSON • C A NATTSON S009 CRYSTAL PL NAYZATA NN S5391 SO 17-U7-2S OS •••7 •S0S7 CRYSTAL PL STEVEN J LENXS STEVEN J LENXS S0S7 CRYSTAL PL NAYZATA NN SSS91 SO 17-1X7-2S OS aoio •S0S2 LXVXNDSTON AVE NXLLXAN R NAXNELL XX A NXFE NXLLXAN R NAXNELL XX S0S2 LXVXNOSTON AVE NAVARRE NN BSS9X SO 17-117-2S OS ••19 •SOOO LXVXNOSTON AVE PATRXCXA J COAR PATRICXA J eOAR SOOO LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN S5S9I SO 17-117*2S OS OOZO •SOSO LXVXNOSTON AVE SUZANNE CAOLA SUZANNE CAOLA SOSO LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN SSS91 SO 17-U7-2S OS OOZl •SOSO LXVXNOSTON AVE ROMANN N OEXSCH ROXAMI N SEXSCN SOSO LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN SSS91 SO 17-X17-2S OS 0022 •S022 LXVXNOSTON AVE D A SERNA I D L SHELDON D A SERNA SDL SHELDON 3022 LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN S5S91 SO 17-117-2S OS 0923 •SOlO LXVXNOSTON AVE ROSENARY P RURNASTER ROSENARY P DURNASTER SOlO LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN S5S91 SO 17-117-2S OS OSOZ •SOSS LXVXNOSTON AVE JEFFREY A KLEHAN JEFFREY A XLENAN SOSS LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN SSS91 30 17-U7-2S OS OaOS •SOSS LXVXNOSTON AVE OVSEN DRUCE DENNIS V A EVELYN N BRUCE SOSS LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN SSS91 SO 17-117-2S OS ••M •SOOS LXVXNOSTON AVE DENNIS L HEOER DENNIS L HEOER SO*S LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN SSS91 SO X7-117>2S OS SOOS •SOOS LXVXNOSTON AVE CAROLYN H TXLLOTSON CAROLYN N TXLLOTSON SOOS LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN SSS91 SO 17-117-2S OS OlOl •SOTS LXVXNOSTON AVE SARANNE N ANDERSON SARANNE N ANDERSON SOTS LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN SSS91 SO 17-117-2S OS OISO •SOOS LXVXNOSTON AVE SHERYL A PATTEN SHERYL A PATTEN SOOS LXVXNOSTON AVE NAYZATA NN SSS91 f 3 EZ' 1C: TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Wendy Bottenberg, Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner May 15,2000 SUBJECT:#2584 Andrew and Tracy Rascher 4705 North Shore Drive Variance/CUP --Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential Dishict (1 acre) Lot Area:30,063 s.f. (.69 acre) List of Exhibits A B C D E F G H I J K Analysis Worksheet Application and Letter of Request Site Plan/ Survey E.xcerpts from Comprehensive Plan Cit> Engineer ’s Letter Hardcover Calculations and Map Plat M^o Location Map Photo of Property Property Owner ’s List Permit Record Application Summary: The applicants are seeking a conditional use permit to replace an existing retaining wall and install two additional retaining walls within the 0-75' setback. Retaimng walls are considered hardcover, therefore a variance is also needed for hardcover in the 0-75' setback area. The 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[Jj). 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]). U2584 Andrew/Tracy Rascher 4705 North Shore Drive Variance/CUP 5/15/2000 Page I -3 --- m |[nconsistencv with Comprehensive Plan; 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 inconsistent See attached excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies and views on altering shoreline areas. (Exhibit D). Engineering Review; The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed retaining wall layout from an engineering standpoint and recommends that no new retaining walls be constructed on the site between the home and the lake. It is his opinion that the existing retaining walls could be repaired and restored with minimal disturbance to Ae existing slope. (See Exhibit E). 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. fnitues for Consideration ; 1.\^'iil granting of the variances alter the essential character of the land? 2.Is lakeshore erosion at this site so substantial as to warrant the extensive retaining wall system proposed? 3.Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation ; Based on the goals and policies cited in City of Orono Community Management Plan and opinion of the City Engineer, staff recommends approval of variances and conditional use permit for repair of existing retaining walls in the 0-75' setback area, but denial of the proposed new walls. Options for Action : 1.Recommend approval of variances and conditional use permit for wall repairs per staff recommendation. #2584 Andrew/Tracy Rascher 4705 North Shore Drive Variance/CUP 5/15/2000 Page 2 2.Recommend approval of variances and CUP for repairs and construction of new walls per applicant’s proposal. 3.Table for further review or further specific information. 4.Recommend denial of variances and CUP for both repair and new walls. 5.Other. r - §2584 Andrww/Tracy Rascher 4705 North Shore Drive Variance/CUP 5/15/2000 Pages ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area: Hardcover Calculations; a LR-IA Lot Area Required 43,560 s.f. (1 acre) Actual 30,063 s.f. (.69 acre) Distance fiom shoreline Total area in setback Allowed hardcover Existing hardcover Proposed hardcover 0-75'15,750 s.f.0 s.f. (0%) 859 s.f (5.45%) l,032s.f. (6.55%) 75-250'15,517 s.f.3,879.25 (25%) 4,081 s.f. (26%) 4,081 s.f (26%) NO CHANGE i I \ i ■l i -ii r B-l Application tt - Date Received 40 9- Amount Paid ^ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^905“ Ns^uc.— ----- Type of Application to be Filed (XI Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)-cc>SJ_ applicant Phone (home) Name O fc-t/^ Address P o.T-// ______ Phone (work)(i^< ?3> City ______Zip I— AHHr^cs ^XPS-Orlo^City ----------------- Zip ------ Date Property Acquired /t»^utgwy / >(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES^^ONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - S 75.00 For each variance request with 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 *s S.. - $250.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or inore I .*• ; •> Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshorc PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule • • x $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee 1 OTHER APPLICATIONS , c x $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 e:: N i .M 'i \ Description of Permit Request Requesting Land Alteration Permit to replace existing retaining walls that are in a state of failure, add two additional walls to ease grade in back yard to give a more maintainable yard, and help with directing water runoff to ease erosion. Current walls and stairs are in a state of failure and are dangerous. A.The nails in timbers are exposed. We are concerned over the safety of ourselves, our young baby whom will be crawling and walking soon, and the potential for quests harming themselves; leading to lawsuits. B.Flagstone in stairs has become very unstable. Walking on them poses a constant threat of loosing balance or tripping over them due to their poor condition. C.Our home is on a very steep slope and it is essential to maintain the integrity of the walls to ensure minimal erosion into the lake. We are responsible homeowners who would like to keep our property in good condition with the necessary improvements By replacing the existing retaining walls before they collapse we will be able to prevent further sediment from contaminating the lake. WiA the addition of walls lower down the slope we will be able to lessen the steep grade and control water runoff speed and direction, ensuring that runoff is free of sediment before reaching the lake. We sympathize with the cities Land Alteration guidelines. However, we believe these modifications are in everyone’s best interest, especially in preserving the lakes integrity. We are prepared to add any additional planting materials to hide the retaining walls as to keep our property looking as natural as possible. Sincerely, Q-ILL Andrew & Tracey Rascher e-2 »•• i/ •• XL'.•.r 2 L 4705 North Shore Drive OCSCnPIKM Lot 1, aock I.•imSTAHA cove Hutiph Coiintik MlmitMlo Plol bMrbMs il •Otfiolit Iron monumont hoTfby corUfy U>ot Ihlo rtporl voo proporod py mo or ondor' m'y dPoet iMpon^tlofi ond Ihol I om • didy Rodlolorod Lofid Surmfor yndor Iho Lows of tho SUU ila Roy. Noi 0140 Sfcoto: I .*••% BRANDT ENQINEERINQ A 8URVEYINQ 1600 West 143rd Street, Suite 206 Burnsville, MN 55306 (612)435-1966 •>* ...........MH«—i-r>r> .r\ O (U 2 / »• ••• NwW(S*W»U4* Sfcolet 1" ■ 20' I >7 f /•. < <; - ■: }' XK MM 4705 North Shore Drive OCSCfOPIKM Lol I. BMi 1. TRISTAHA cove H«ifMpbi County, IlIfNittotO Plot boorinot shown o Oonotst Iron monumont I hortby ctrUfy thol this tun«|^ piofi, or rsport wos prsporod by mo or un^ my «roet supsr%lslon ond thot I om o OOly Psflolirsd Lond Survoyor undsr tho Loot id Iho Stoto of liioossol Rs9. No. 8140 »t BRANDT ENQINEERINQ A SURVEYMQ 1600 West 143rd Street, Suite 206 Burnsville. MN 55306 (612)435-1966 RR«-.i-nn ENVIRONMENT JUNE, 1980 6.THE WETLANDS AND MARSHLANDS OF THE CITY WILL BE PROTECTED AND PRESERVED HABITATS, AS UNIQUE OPEN SPACES, AND AS THE ONLY ECONOMICALL PRACTICAL METHOD OF FLOOD PROTECTION AND STORM WATER RUNOFF FILTRATION. The Harza Study, the 208 Hater 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. 7.PROTECTION OP THE CITY'S MARSHLAND, WETLANDS AND DRAINAGEWAYS SHALL i:j:LUDE 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. •9. RESOURCES WILL ALLOW REASONABLE ACCESS, USE AND ENJOYMENT WHILE PREVENTING OVERCROWDING AND EXCESSIVE ENCROACHMENT. In conformance with Mn. DNR Shoreline Management regulations for recreational development lakes, the City will prohibit overly dense within 1,000 feet of Lake Minnetonka. Lake use regulations Will be promoted to limit excessive boat density and overuse of sensitive *Y**use regulations will be developed to provide reasonable control over building density, land alteration and lakeshore encroachment ^E 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 soil or wave action erosion, natural stone rip rap shoreline protertion will be encouraged. AMn^rnwr DISCOURAGED BECAUSE OF ADVERSE SHORT-TERM ®xisted naturally. Dredging will be permitted in limited where absolutely necessary to maintain existing •ccess permanently lost by something beyond the desir^I landowner. Periodic low water conditions or the owner's diiruBtfn draft watercraft are not sufficient reasons fordisrupting sensitive lake beds. CMP 3-20 gNVIRQNMENTAl JUNE, i960 15.EROSION CONTROL PLANS AND PROGRAMS WILL BE REQUIRED IN ALL 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 as 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. * URBAN AREA POLICIES FOR NATURAI RFSOURCE MANASPMPNT 1. 2. 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. ^^SIBLE^PROM^T^ VEGETATION WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBANIZATION 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 will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. DIRECT RUNOFF INTO THE LAKE WILL BE MINIMIZED. Standards will be established and maintained to limit the amount of impervious hardcover ^® closeness of the shoreline. Maximum hardcover will be limited to 30% of each parcel within 1,000 feet of the shoreline P®^®cant to Mn. DNR recommended shoreline practices. URBAN WETLANDS 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. PRACTICES WILL BE DESIGNED TO IMPROVE STORM WATER QUALITY. Salt use for winter street treatment will be minimised. j promptly remove road sands and salts before environmentaldamage occurs. CMP 3-22 •AND USE JUNE, 1980 3. 4. 5. 6. nr>wTOPMENT DENSITY HILL BE LIMITED THROUGHOUT THE CITY TO A LEVEL WHICH WILL NOT OVERLOAD THE NATURAL SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE AND FILTRATION SYSTEM. Orbanix*tion incraases the speed and quantity of surface runoff while decreasing the water quality. Developed land use densities will be determined by comparison between known levels of volume and pollution generation and known marshland capacity for ponding and nutrient assimilation. the wetlands AMD MARSHLANDS OF THE CITY WILL BE PROTECTED AND PRESERVED AS WILDLIFE HABITATS, AS UNIQUE SP^S, ^D AS TOE ONLY ECONOMICALLY PRACTICAL METHOD OF FLOOD PROTECTION AND STORM WATER RUNOFF FILTRATION. Wetlands, drainageways and floodplains will be protected from encroachment and from alteration or destruction by filling, qf^ding, excavation or drainage. Wherever possible, the City will acquire open space and flowage ease­ ments for conservation of these lands. protection OF LAKE RESOURCES WILL ALLOW REASONABLE ACCESS, USE enjoyment WHILE PREVENTING OVERCROWDING AND EXCESSIVE ENCROACHMENT. In conformance with Mn. DNR Shoreline Management regulations for recreational development lakes, Orono 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 sensitive bays. Land use regulations will be developed to provide reasonable control over building density, land alteration and lakeshore encroachment. LAKE SHORELINES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALTERATION. Shorelend areas, whether bluff, beach or floodplain, are sensitive environmental features with significant impact on lake water quality, aesthetic values and land use function. These same factors act to draw development which can be destructive if not properly regulated. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reason­ able in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clear- cutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, material stone rip rap shoreline protection will be encouraged. CMP 4-13 I AND USg JUNE, 1980 11.A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF NATURAL WOODLANDS AND OPEN SPACE WILL BE RETAINED ON EACH PROPERTY. Retention of the natural environment requires careful siting and preservation of trees and open space on <>ach urban property. 12.LAND USE STANDARDS WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBAN ENCROACHMENT ON LAKE MINNETONKA. Minimum lot width 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. ^.1 i 13.RETENTION OF NATURAL VEGETATION WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OP URBANIZATION AS VISIBLE FROM LAKE. Building heights will be limited to than the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with pro­ hibitions against clearcutting or excessive thinning of rvg«t«vlon. Natural vegetation will be preserved on elopes and retaining walls will be discouraged e«;.ept when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. RURAL LAND USP PQI ICIPS 1.ORONO'S RURAL SERVICE AREA WILL BE RESERVED FOR PERMANENT LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE. Orono*s rolling rural area is not suitable for commercial agriculture. Likewise, the delicate balance of storm water nutrient loading vs marshland assimilative capacity preclude expansion of the urban service area without major environmental problems for Lake Minnetonka. Therefore, the ideal land use for that portion of Orono located outside of the Urban Service Area (MUSA) is the planned low-density rural residential land use. Commercial and industrial uses will not be permitted in the rural area. CMP 4-19 KoaCWifa 1/1 Bonestroo Rosene ■Anderlik & 1 \| 1 Associates Engineers & Architects Bonestroo. Rosene. Anderlik end Associetes. Inc. Is an Affirmative Action/ Equal Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned Principals: Otto G Bonestroo. PE • Marvin L Sorvaia. PE • Glenn /?. Cook. PE. • Rooert G Schunicht. PE. • Jerry A. Bourdon. RE. Senior Consultants: Rooert W Rosene. PE. • Joseph C Anderfik. PE • Rich <rd £ Turner. PE • Susan .M Eoeriin. C PA Associate Principals. Howard A. Sanford. PE. • Keith A Gordon. PE • Robert R. Pfefferle. RE. • Richard W Foster. PE • David O Loskota. PE • Robert C. Russek. A I.A. • Mark A. Hanson. RE. • Michael T Rautmann. PE. • Ted K Field. RE • Kenneth R Anderson. RE. • Mark R Rolfs. PE. • David A Bonestroo. MBA* Sidney R Williamson. PE. L S • Agnes M. Ring. .MBA.* Allan Rick Schmdt. PE Offices: St Paul. St Coud. Roches:*^ and Wiilmar. MN • Milwaukee. Wl May 9,2000 MMsbsIte: www bonestroo com Wendy Bottenberg Assistant Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Rascher Retaining Wall File No. 139-98*000 Dear Wendy: We visited the site at 4705 North Shore Drive today to review the existing site conditions. The area located between the home and the lake is landscaped with various short retaining walls constructed of stone and timber. Several large boulders have been placed along the shoreline. A series of stone steps provides access from the home to the lake. All existing landscaping in this area appears to have been in place for some time. The entire area between the home and the lake is mostly vegetated with visual no evidence of slope instability. It is our understanding that the property owner wants to install a series of retaining walls between the home and the lake as shown on the plan you provided. The construction of these walls as shown on the plans would require substantial regrading on the existing steep shoreline. It has been City policy to discourage the construction of retaining walls along the lakeshore and to encourage a natural looking frontage. We recommend that no new retaining walls be constructed on the site between the home and the lake. It is our opinion that the existing retaining walls could be repaired and restored with minimal disturbance to the existing slope. Silt fence should be installed prior to any construction/restoration activity to minimize sediments from washing into the lake. Any disturbed areas should be revegetated immediately following construction to stabilize the slope and minimize erosion. It may be necessary to use fiber blankets on any steeper disturbed slopes to protect the newly seeded areas until the vegetation has been established. 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 S51I3 • 651-636-4600 • Fax; 651-636-1311 1 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) BXISTINC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A.House 75-250*250-500* So% 500-1000' m rX Lcng;th Width X X X B.Garage C.Driveway X X D.Sidewalk SO X X E.Patio/Deck X X F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G.Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE +B jg tso PRQPQSEn HARDCOVER IN ZONE A.House Length Width X X X B.Garage C.Driveway X X D.Sidewalk X X E.Patio/Deck X X F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G.Other SU»»4 aUS TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE lO'AOk B ISISC^ 12^ s as X 100 I5SD JSl X 100 - S.F. S.F. S.F. ST. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.® S.F. S.F(I) S.F.^ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.® S.F. A ig ISO S.F. -—%% . S.F.@ / 1' ; S.F. • •-y S.F. S.F" r) S.F. S.F. ^ S.F .F. •*. Ko S.F. S.F. s.K^ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.e S.F. A S.F. B % 1 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) RXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONB A. House ______ 0-75’ 0 7* 250-500* 30% 500-1000' S.F.© Length X X X Width S.FJ© S.F. S.F. B.Garage C.Driveway X X J1.SM s.f.(5) .F.(j^ D.Sidewalk mo X X gUiO E.Patio/Deck X X S.F S.F. S.F^ S.F. S.F. S.F. \ /o. / / \ 'O \.0 \ «r<\?i«»'<’ X, A'Vy^V-' '■—; i v^''\vv^'^ ^^ V r^' - 5& v'^NiyyvXvV.'O.N.'''vV.*, •> >< V^6>/ ( 'V / ' ^ 0 O O V NvV^y“ o o v\'>^ x/ ‘■f 1^' 3 - - ("'flii •v N •s k X # V V V N. V -VJ N 'S V N.K •22? 7.r s H,l.ltv <•'■_... ^r* S yut f-f. N -•/ 's N'•r Lot Aftff^ = Gjr»P w«u.tf DbtVfiH/Ay - $io6w^t<;" <AI,)l{f #0f«: p#wh>sr» W^>AJ» T ftv i>a jio wAtUi • \<*±------ 7VIAL C3V/rA<tf ’ '^V) f.n !-. «.*>« cr iir;'.' Sfcole: 1'V ■JJ.C-) : •;' ■^'■■> / t‘* M 4705 North Shore Drive OCSCniPTION Lot I. Block I. imSTANA cove Hennepin County, Utnncoolo plot beorinot ihovm o Otnolot iron monumtnl I Kcreby certify thol this survey, plon, or report eoa prspored by me or under my dbect supervision orul tnoi I om o duly llo^lored Lond Surveybr urrder tlie Levs of the Stole of Minnesoto. Pft .R,«. Ho. «I40 BRANDT ENGINEERING & SURVEYI l.»no W.'.l M5rd T.liocl. ,;'.iiilo 7* Burnsville, MN 55306 fihiiliiiiiiittt^iiiikiiiil^ / A £!>2 u3 i ” ^1 i 6 (21), v4 • ✓ ?l ;V J J L 'w « r Sf e fl) ^(28)«2 ^ 1, PT OF^LOT79PTOF ffi (50)jLOTar"^ T 6 / «.\v 38.2 (25) m ^ %RISTA^i^% ■a N rlf4' (2) 35 1 i3^? S ^ \% 1 ri2i . *•• • *♦* -----------—.-.>■—>~n 11 fir Ai I 11 Am hlk-n d ...>Lta i»-if *aflM^i- RUN DATE tS/17/tt HEHNEriN COUNTY PROPERTY IHFORHATIOH SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PXASMfl PACE 1 •ATCN SRI PROP AMM OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SR R7-117-2S S2 0012 OIMO REST POINT LA J H HOUTNAN R K J HOUTHAN J H HOUTNAN R K J HOUTNAN 1540 REST POINT LA NOUND NN 55364 30 07-117-23 32 0003 04725 TONKAVIEH LA EOT CHRISTIANSON EARL 0 TERRY CHRISTIANSON 4641 tonka view LANE hound m 55364 50 07-117-23 32 0004 04735 TONKAVIEH LA STUART V HHITNAH STUART V HHXTNAN 4735 TONKAVIEH LA HOUMI NN 55364 PROP AMW OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 50 07-117-23 32 0009 04736 NORTH SIRWE OR CHRISTINE J SCHANZENBACH CHRISTINE J SCHANZENBACH 4756 NORTH SHORE DR hound NN S5564 SB 07-117-23 52 0014 04739 TONKAVIEH LA LARRY A 6REENHA0EN ET AL L OREENHACEN t V CREENHA6EN 4739 TONKAVIEH LANE hound HN 55364 SR 07-117-23 32 0016 04731 NORTH SHORE DR DENNIS A NEYER DENNIS A NEYER 4600 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND NN 55364 PROP ADOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SR 07-117-23 32 0017 04725 NORTH SHORE DR J P HENRY ETAL J P HENRY 4725 NORTH SHORE DR hound NN 55564 50 07-117-25 32 0010 04731 NORTH SHORE DR DENNIS A NEYER DENNIS A NEYER 4680 NORTH SHORE DR hound HN 55364 30 07-117-25 32 0019 04745 NORTH SHORE OR HERNAN CRAWFORD ETAL HERNAN CRAWFORD 4745 NO SHORE DRIVE hound NN 55564 O')Vi.' }* PROP ADOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR 50 07-117-25 52 0020 04755 NORni SHORE DR JONH FRIDAY JOHN FRIDAY 4755 NORTH SHORE DR NN 55564 30 07-117-23 32 0025 04625 TONKAVIEH LA R H SHELTON 0 H L SHELTON R H SHELTON 0 H L SHELTON 4625 TONKAVIEH LA hound HN 55364 30 07-117-23 32 0026 04629 TONKAVIEH LA J R ABRAHANSON/D ABRAHAHSON JANES R 0 DAWN ADRAHANSON 4629 TONKAVIEH LA NOUND HN 55364-9631 ll:, Ci?m TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 30 07-117-25 32 0020 04655 TONKAVIEH LA OENNIS A NEVER DENNIS A NEVER 4600 NORTH SNORE OR hound NN 55364 58 07-117-23 S2 0029 00030 ADDRESS UNASSICNED DENNIS A NEVER DENNIS A NEVER 4600 NORTH SHORE DR hound NN 55364 SO 07-117-23 32 0030 01373 BEST POINT RD K E ANDERSON OAK KRANER KIRK ANDERSON 1573 REST POINT RO hound HN 55564 PROP ADOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER HAME/AOOR SO 07-117-23 32 0039 01550 REST POINT RO LBS ORABILL URRV 0 SHARON ORABILL 1550 REST POINT RO hound NN 55364 SB 07-117-23 32 0050 04600 NORTH SHORE DR DENNIS A NEVER DENNIS A NEVER 4600 NORTH SHORE DR hound HN 55364 50 07-117-23 32 0052 01315 REST POINT LA K J OROVER ASK OROVER KEVIN J OROVER AND SUSAN K OROVER 1515 REST POINT LA HINNETRISTA NH 55364 ]h RUN DATE RS/ir/t* ■ATCH S»1 PROr ADOR OHNiR mm TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR PROP AODR OWNER NANS TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR St t7-117-2S 32 ttSS M«75 NORTH SHORE DR TYLER C CORRXN TYLER C CORRXN AMS NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN SSSM St t7-117-23 S2 ttSt M7tS NORTH SHORE DR A H t T K RASCHER ANDREW H t TRACY K RASCHER 47tX NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55SM HENNEPXN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 36 07-117-23 32 ttSA 013A5 REST POINT LA JOSHUA D URAN JOSHUA URAN 1345 RESTPOXNT LA NOUNO HN 55344 30 07-117-23 32 0054 04045 NORTH SHORE OR STEPHEN C 0 JOANNE A WARD STEPHEN C HARD 4045 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55304 REPORT NO. PX435401 PACE 2 30 07-117-23 32 0050 04005 NORTH SHORE OR TYLER C CORRXN TYLER C CORRXN 4005 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55304 30 07-117-23 32 0001 01371 REST POINT LA KENNETH H 0 RENEE 0 ECCERT KENNETH W 0 RENEE 0 ECCERT 1371 REST POINT LA HOUND HN 55304 PROP AODR OHNIR NANI TAXPAYER NAHI/AO0R total DATCH 501 00024 5 THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTHEHT OP PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE REST OP NY KNOWLEDGE AND RELIEF. OATE.^^^1^^ ft r i (X) r i «*4 I .•/ •■‘v,1 I’iItj.V.v.-:.:! ( y Permit No f Hi. I^YiUK K PERMIT RECORD Date Type o£ Permit 9>Q!±n ______ /4/^S'aa-^<y fLtUl ^/UJ^ . /fpV ................... Ll^<JU ^ imS 1>\_5^i//l^ O C_* 3>48'l 7 "*7 '?8(i>o 8 -/7-73 II kle69___s ■=>- 3o^/'e^ h ' ^0 3u 3 D ii'Q^lc 96 30i(j '^Jl6^ K1 ir (c~^i PjLbc^ SS'C'S.n-^'m 0 /I < - s^t-1 ^<J3 •••♦ •• , ' •i ■ ^ ilRAFT ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 17. 2000 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Elizabeth Kawn, Commissioners Daniel Kluth, William Stoddard, Dale Lindquist, Jay Nygard, and Janice Berg. Commissioners Daniel Kluth and Sandra Smith were absent. The following represented City Staff: Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, City Council Members Bob Sansevere and Barb Peterson were present. Chair Elizabeth Hawn called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS OLD BUSINESS («1) #2486 ELAINE ERICKSON. 1270 SPRUCE PLACE • VARIANCES, 6:31 p.m. • 6:46 p.m. Elaine Erickson. Applicant. Nancy Anderson. Daughter, and Jeff Olson. Son. and Al Hirsch. Contractor, were present. Bottej'.berg stated ihe Applicants appeared before the Pi^ tii.'g Commission at their February 14, 2000 meeting where the application was ta^'et: to allow the Applicants time to redesign and move the proposed residence to conform '",ore with Orono’s zoning code. T.ne Applicants have submitted revised plans which eliminates ttie need for a hardcover variance in the 0-75' setback area, a variance to lot coverage and the conditional use permit. A variance is still required for hardcover in the 75-250’ setback area. The proposed residence and deck have been relocated outside of the 0-75’ setback area. Bottenberg noted the walkway and steps in the 0-75' setback area will remain, which will keep the hardcover at the existing amount Bottenberg stated the proposed residence and garage consis* of 1,499.5 square feet, which is slightly smaller than originally proposed, with the second story deck having been moved to the lower level. The proposed changes keep the residence under the allowed 1,500 square feet and eliminates the need for a variance to lot coverage. Bottenberg stated a variance to hardcover in the 75-250' setback area is need required to allow 46.93 percent hardcover in this area, with existing hardcover in this area being 27.58 percent, with 25 percent being allowed. Nancy Anderson stated tey are trying to accomplish this project in accordance with Orono’s codes as much as possio>e. Erickson requested that she be allowed to construct a small deck on the proposed residence. Erickson commented she has lived in the existing home for the past 25 years and v^ould like to continue to enjoy her view of the lake. Erickson stateo they have scaled down the house as much as possible, noting she is not able to walk up and down stairs which necessitates the ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17, 2000 (#2486 Elaine Erickson, Continued) need for a one*levc?l home. Anderson commented her mother did have polio as a child. Hawn inquired whether a conditional use permit is still needed for grading within five feet of the property lines. Bottenberg stated a conditional use permit is still required for the grading. Hawn inquired whether there was any further information regarding the removal of a wall. Anderson stated they have not really addressed that issue, noting that the block wall e/ists along the property line and is partially covered with dirt. Anderson stated the neighbors are waiting to see what happens with this application prior to commencing any work on their pioperty. Anderson stated in her view she does not anticipate the neighbors would be opposed to grading in the area of the property line. Anderson noted the neighbors are currently in Florida. Lindquist inquired whether the deck would be constructed on the lower level. Bottenberg indicated the proposed deck is to be constructed on the lower level of the house. Hawn noted the Planning Commission is generally very strict in enforcing its structural coverage limits. Anderson commented they have reduced the house as much as possible, with the goal of the project to provide one-floor living for her mother. Stoddard noted there were some issues of concern raised by City Staff. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant has a problem with relocation of the well. Anderson stated they do not. Anderson sta.ed the sheds will be removed as well. Hawn noted this is a small, strangely configured lot. Hawn indicated the reasoning behind the limit on the structural coverage was to help protect the lakeshore and runoff into the lake, which sometimes creates hardships for the property owners. Lindquist inquired whether the Applicant was aware of the issues of concern outlined in the Planner ’s Report. Anderson stated she was. Hawn stated they will need the consent of the adjoining neighbor in order for the conditional use permit to be approved. Anderson stated in her view the neighbors are In agreement that some grading work needs to be completed in that area in order to address the drainage problems currently being experienced. There were no public com.nents regarding this application. Lindquist stated he would not have a problem making approval subject to the conditions outlined Pii}:e 2 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17, 2000 (#2486 Elaine Erickson, Continued) in the Planner's Report. Weinberger stated typically the Applicant needs to submit drainage and grading plans for this property for review and approval by the City Engineer. Anderson commented the application process has been an expensive one. Anderson stated the drainage currently is a problem and anything would be an Improvement over what currently exists. Anderson noted they will take the appropriate steps to comply with the conditions. Hawn stated the City would like to see the Applicant achieve the best results possible with the improvements made to the drainage. Weinberger recommended the Applicant work with their own engineer regarding the drainage and grading, with their plans being submitted to the City Engineer for his review and approval. Anderson stated they will comply with the conditions requested by the City. Lindquist moved, Stoddard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2486, Elaine Erickson, 1270 Spruce Place, granting of a variance to hardcover In the 75-250* setback area and a conditional use permit to allow grading within five feet of the prcnerty line, and further subject to the five conditions outlined in the April 17, 2000 P .;iner*s Report, with the grading and drainage plans being submitted and approved by the City Engineer prior to the Applicant appearing before the City Council. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#2) #2513 CONNIE PIEPHO, 540 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANc:? j, 6:47 p.m. - 6:59 p.m. Connie Piepho, Applicant, and Mike Mulvany. Contractor, were present. Weinberger stated the Applicant has appeared ‘wice before the Planning Commission with a request to construct an inground swimming pool within the average Iskeshore setback. The pool could not be placed on the property without relocating a future septic drainfield site. The septic site woulo be required to be shifted 30 feet to the north, which results in the site being located within 75' of the water supply well on an adjacent property. The Applicants were requested to revise the plan an:! find an alternative site for the pool. The second plan proposed to have the pool located on the other side of the property. However. City Staff had some concerns about the location of the pool in this area due to the close proximity to the adjacent residence. The Planning Commission tabled that proposal to allow the Applicant and the adjacent property owner time to discuss their options further. Weinberger staled the plan before the Planning Commission tonight is proposing to locate the pool as reflected in their first proposal, which allows the Applicants two options. Option one is to enter into an agreement with the adjacent property owners that would require the Applicant to pay to relocate the neighbor's well should it become necessary to replace the septic to the alternate site. This would be accomplished by having money being placed in escrow to relocate the well. This agreement is acceptable to both parties. Weinberger stated the second option available to the parties is for the City of Orono to grant a variance to the septic code and permit a drainfield site to be located less than 75* from the neighbor's well but not less than the Sia’.e requirement of 50'. Weinberger staled the affected properly owner will need to be contacted regarding this option prior to a variance being issued. Pii^c 3 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17, 2000 (#2513 Connie Piepho, Continued) Weinberger stated option two appears to be the best option for the parties since it has the least impact on the adjacent residences. City Staff is recommending approval of the application with a variance being granted to the septic code. Pieoho stated she has spoken with both neighbors who have indicated they would prefer to have a variance to the septic code. Piepho stated she understands they will need to be contacted personally in regards to this proposal. Mike Mulvany. Contractor, stated in his view option two is the best choice. Hawn commented she is hesitant in granting a variance to the City's septic code, noting that Orono's septic code is more stringent than the State's. Hawn stated the Planning Commission should take into consideration any possible health concerns that may result by granting the variance. Hawn stated in her view a variance should not be granted if it compromises someone's health. Hawn commented she is not aware of the reasons for the City's 75' requirement versus the State's 50', Weinberger stated Septic Inspector Pence has indicated that part of the reason for the 75' setback is that residences were being located 75' from the septic site, and when additions were added to the homes, they would generally involve the need for a variance to the septic site. Weinberger indicated the State of Minnesota has determined that a 50' setback from a well is appropriate. Weinberger stated City Staff will be looking at reducing the 75' setback requirement to 50' to conform to the State standard. Gaffron indicated the reasons City Staff will be reviewing this issue in the near future is because it has been determined that there are no health issues that would be impacted by having a 50' setback versus a 75' setback: two. the State currently has the right to issue well permits: three, well contractors typically go out and only meet the 50' setback, with the City not being notified until afte r the well is in that the 75' setback has not been met. Gaffron stated it is difficult to enforce a 75' setback when there are no health concerns at issue. Gaffron stated he would recommend goirjg to the 50' setback, with elimination of the City's 75' requirement. Stoddard commented he does not have a problem with a 50' setback and would be in favor of option two. Berg and Lindquist indicated they would also be in favor of option two. I 'awn noted approval of this proposal would be contingent upon approval by the neighbors. Weinberger stated discussions have been held with the adjoining neighbors who have indicated very clearly that they are willing to work with the Applicant on this proposal. Weinberger noted City Staff currently does not have their approval in writing, which will need to be obtained. Hawn commented it was her understanding the primary septic site is in very good shape at this point in time. Piepho stated the septic site is only six years old and is in good shape. There were no public comments regarding this application. Pa«c 4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17, 2000 (#2513 Connie Piepho, Continued) Stoddard moved, Nygard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2513, Connie Piepho, 540 North Arm Drive, to permit construction of an inground swimming pool within the average iakeshore setback, and to grant a variance to the septic code and permit a drainheld site to be located less than 75' from the neighbor's well, subject to the neighbors* approval in writing prior to work being commenced on this project. VOTE: Ayes S, Nays 0. (#3) #2549 DAVID LOVELACE, 220 BIG ISLAND - REQUEST FOR DOCK ACCESS, 7:00 p.m. < 7:37 p.m. David Lovelace, Applicant, was present. Gaffron stated this item appeared before the Planning Commission on November 15,1999, where it was tabled to allow the Big Island property owners time to review the options and hopefully reach a neighborhood consensus of a dock location, with this issue being resolved by mid April. Gaffron stated City Staff has not been informed of any consensus from the neighborhood, with the City being obligated at this time to resolve this issue for the Applicant. Gaffron stated the plat of Moorse Island Park, which is the eastern half of the island, created a number of Iakeshore lots, a number of inland lots, an interior right-of-way system with a number of alleys, roads and public areas extending from it to the Iakeshore. All of these right-of-ways were donated and dedicated to the public use forever on the original 1887 plat. Gaffron stated it is his opinion the only reason the rights-of-way were platted this way was to provide for access to and from the lake. These platted corridors exist today as undeveloped walking trails, which on occasion have been used for vehicular access. Gaffron noted some of these pathways are outside the dedicated right-of-ways, with the majority of the right-of-way boundaries not being visibly marked. However, utilities are generally located within the right-of-ways on Big Island. Gaffron stated Orono's zoning code recognizes the special access needs for Big Island inland lots and established regulations for where and how the island right-of-ways may be used. These regulations apply only to the RS District and not to the mainland. Iakeshore property owners with inaccessible shorelines may also need lake access. Inland lot owners need a place to land a boat in the summer, it is not unreasonable to provide a location where inland lot owners can dock a boat for e>'ended periods while they are on the Island. However, owners of lots abutting the Iakeshore should not be burdened with providing this access to the inland owners, while at the same time inland lot owners should not have the ability to hinder the public's use of the right-of-ways or access points. Gaffron stated City Staff has reviewed each and every one of the access points found on Big Island. Tonight's application deals with providing access to Parcel 2. Gaffron noted only two of the nine access points are suited for vehicular access, with Access Point C being 90* wide and Access Point H being 16 ‘ wide. Gaffron stated due to topography issues, the other access points are unsuitable for vehicular access. Access Points A and B are located on the north end and are fairly remote from most of the properties it could serve. Gaffron stated Access Point C is wide enough to accommodate a small number of conforming setback seasonal docks for inland owners while not blocking vehicular access. This right-of-way is the widest and historically the most used vehicular access for the Island and has an informally established dirt road leading to the interior right-of-ways Gaffron stated the City’s surveyors have finished their review of Big Island this afternoon and have determined that the undeveloped roadway Pauc 5 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17, 2000 (#2549 David Lovelace, Continued) is located primarily on the Uran property. Gaffron indicated he has not viewed the site since the survey stakes were placed. Gaffron stated Access Point D is 50 feet wide, with a portion being vacated in approximately the 1950s. This access point is not suitable for vehicle access and has merging lot lines. LMCD code requires a ten foot setback, with this area potentially only being able to have a Hve foot setback due to the merging lot lines. Gaffron stated there is a potential for two lots to be located in this area, with no defined pathway. Gaffron stated Access Point E is not suitable for vehicular access and would require a substantial stairway system due to the steep bank in the area. Access Points F and F-2 require additional survey work to determine whether the right-of-way currently extends to the shoreline. Access G Is steep but would provide a relatively pedestrian friendly access point. Access Point H has a very narrow right-of-way capable of vehicle access but has suffered severe erosion over the years from over-use and abuse. Due to its narrow width, this access point is too narrow to have a dock that would meet LMCD's minimum setback requirements while still maintaining usability for vehicles. Gaffron stated in conclusion it his opinion that the two most viable access points would be Access Point C or Access Point D. which are both wide enough to permit more than one dock. Gaffron stated he would not recommend docks at any of the other possible access points. Gaffron stated due to the erosion being experienced at Access H, he would recommend the Public Works Department look at the situation to see what restoration would be appropriate and to limit its access by erecting a chain or gate. Gaffron noted there currently are vehicles on Big Island, which will need to be looked into further. Gaffron stated it is City Staffs recommendations, one, that inland parcels 1 and 2 be allowed dock access at Access C; two. inland parcel 3 continue to be allowed a dock access at Access D; three, inland parcels 4 through 8 should be assigned future access at Access D if they request it, subject to LMCD regulations; four, inland parcel 9 could be served by a dock at either Access D or Access E; five, accesses A, B. F. G. and H do not readily lend themselves to providing dock access to inland lots and should therefore remain dock-free; and six, access H has a recent severe erosion problem which needs to be addressed, and may result in gating or closure of that access by the City for all but emergency and incidental service vehicle uses. Lovelace indicated his view of the situation is basically the same as what he stated in November Lovelace stated one of the original proposals was to allow him access through Access Point C. Lovelace indicated the neighbors have attempted to resolve this issue but were unable to reach a firm consensus on where access should be. Hawn indicated that some members of the Planning Commission have had an opportunity to tour Big Island. Hawn commented in her view Access Point C seems to make the most sense. Lovelace inquired whether it was City Staffs proposal to have two docks located at Access C. Gaffron indicated separate docks could be provided for Lovelace and Scheftel at Access C. Scheftel indicated she would prefer to have only one dock at that location and would not object to sharing a dock with Lovelace. Mrs. Uran stated she would not be in favor of improving the road since the majority of the roadway lies within their property and they would prefer to limit the amount of traffic on the road. Lindquist inquired whether the Urans are in agreement with Staffs recommendations. Pajtc 6 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2549 David Lovelace, Continued) Mrs. Uran stated she is in agreement with the recommendations, but questioned whether both dock and vericle access need to be provided at separate locations since vehicle access is only possible during the winter months. Gaffron stated the City needs to address permanent dock access for the inland lots. Hawn commented the City is looking at the topography and the suitability of the land in order to provide access to the inland lots. Mr. Uran stated he has concerns about people traveling over his land to gain access to the inland lots. Gaffron stated the City needs to take steps to address the erosion in this area as well as how to access the inland lots. Gaffron reiterated that Access Point C is wide enough to accommodate two docks. Gaffron noted that he only became aware of the location of the roadway this afternoon, which will need to be further addressed. Mr. Uran inquired how access relating to construction on Big Island will be handled. Gaffron stated that issue will also need to be further addressed, noting that they are primarily looking at providing an access point to enable the inland property access to their land. Hawn commented there are other issues on Big Island that need to be addressed as well relating to the amount of debris and vehicles on the Island. Hawn stated the residents of Big Island need to comply with Orono's standards as well as the residents on the mainland. Mrs. Uran commented that the two are separate and should not be compared. Hav/n reiterated that the residents of Big Island need to take care of the Island. Hawn inquired v/hether the Urans would be in favor of one dock or two docks at Access C. Mrs. Uran stated she would prefer one dock at this location. Hawn stated in her view it appears that bo‘n Lovelace and Scheftel are entitled to their own dock at Access Point C. Scheftel stated she is willing to share a dock with Lovelace. Hawn questioned whether the City is looking at insuring the rights of each individual property owner to have access to its own dock. Gaffron stated it is the City's intent to provide a public accessway to the inland properties, and whether it happens via one dock per property owner or a shared dock will require the property owners to comply with whatever the City deems to be appropriate. John Eiden, 330 Big Island, inquired whether Access Point 0 would be acceptable. Gaffron stated this is a possible future access point on the south end of the island, but due to the merging tot lines, there may not be sufficient room to have more than two docks at this location. 1 Page 7 r I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17, 2000 (#2549 David Lovelace, Continued) Hawn inquired whether City Staff is looking to provide access to all the inland properties at this time or just for Lovelace. Gaffron stated the application tonight is to arrive at an access point for Lovelace. John Erickson commented that although Access Points G and H are not ideal, they were apparently at one time intended to provide access and should not be closed off. Erickson stated the City should take some steps to improve those access points. Gaffron stated there are some potential issues that exist with those access points as it relates to setback requirements by the LMCD. Gaffron stated if there is a need for vehicle access and a dock, there is not sufncient room to allow both. Mrs. Uran reiterated that vehicle access is only necessary during the winter months, noting that vehicles supposedly are not allowed on Big Island. Gaffron stated the City apparently has never officially banned vehicles from Big Island. Mayor Jabbour, 985 Tonkawa Road, stated there is the misperception that he is involved in this situation, noting that his property is located near Access Point H, which is not in close proximity to Access Point C. Jabbour stated due tu the ten foot setback requirement that must be met on both sides of the dock, it is not permissible to have a dock at this location unless a hardship is demonstrated and a variance is approved. Jabbour stated it is his opinion the road locateo near Access Point H should stay open to allow for access to other properties and that the road near Access Point G that is depicted on the map is very impassable and simply does not exist. Jabbour pointed out the City must comply with the LMCD requirements in providing an access point to the inland property owners. Erickson stated it is his view that if the road has been platted, it should stay platted. Gaffron stated if the City decides to vacate a road, the road is no longer dedicated to public right-of- way and goes back to the adjoining property owner. Gaffron stated the City does not have any intention of vacating the road near Access Point H. Mayor Jabbour stated in his view it would be bad public policy to close that road, noting he is in favor of keeping the road open. There were no further public comments regarding this application. Lindquist stated it is his personal feeling there will be future requests for docks on Big Island, and recommended going with Staffs recommendations one and two. Berg stated she would like to see two docks if so desired Hawn commented she would like to see two docks at Access Point C Stoddard suggested removing recommendation number five, with that item being addressed in the future. Stoddard stated he is okay with the other recommendations of City Staff. Nygard indicated he is in favor of City Staffs recommendations Pji}»c 8 i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2549 David Lovelace, Continued) Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2549, David Lovelace, 220 Big Island, request for dock access, per City Staffs recommendations one and two as outlined in the April 12,2000 Planner ’s Report and as follows: One, Inland Parcels 1 and 2 (Scheftel, Lovelace) should be allowed dock access at Access C; and two. Inland Parcel 3 should continue to be allowed a dock access at Access D. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Hawn inquired whether the residents of Big Island would be interested in having a garbage barge arranged. Lovelace stated he would be very interested in having a garbage barge come to the Island, noting he has spoken with his neighbors on Big Island who have indicated they would be willing to help clean up the Island. (#4) #2565 HENNEPIN COUNTY, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES, 7:38 p.m. - 7:59 p.m. Greg Nowlan and Greg Chock appeared. Weinberger stated this apolication was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its January meeting where the Planning Commission recommended denial of the application due to concerns relating to the City's comprehensive plan, water quality of Lake Minnetonka, the proposed non-conforming use, and the height of the building. Hennepin County has submitted a revised proposal for the salt and sand storage facility which has reduced the height of the storage building to 20 feet from the proposed 42 feet. The proposed building would be 60' by 120' in size, still requiring a variance for an oversized accessory buildv'^g. The County has indicated they have explored other options for the site, but at this time it is not feasible to relocate the entire site. Weinberger noted the salt and sand that would be stored in the shed is already being stored on the site, either in the existing building or outdoors. Most of the material must be delivered in the evening or overnight, with some limited daytime deliveries. Weinberger stated a Zoning Code Amendment is necessary to allow the maintenance facility to exist in the LR-1C zoning district. The facilitv was constructed at a time when the property was zoned for commercial purposes, however, that zoning was changed to residential in the early 1970s, which has resulted in a legal non-conforming use of the property. A variance to permit hardcover within the SOC-1000' setback from the OHWt of Lake Minnetonka is needed. The amount of hardcover proposed would result in a reduction of hardcover from 61 percent to 57 percent. Weinberger noted 35 percerit hardcover is allowed In this area. A variance to permit the sand/salt storage facility to exceed the maximum allowed size for an accessory structure is also required on this application. Weinberger stated a conditional use permit is also necessary *o pemrit grading on the proeprty and construction of the stormwater management pond. Chock stated they have attempted to address the concerns of the Planning Commission, noting the height of the building has been reduced. Nowlan stated the proposed building would have an open face on the south side to allow for Page 9 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2555 Hennepin County, Continued) maneuvering of the trailers in and out of the building. In response to an inquiry by a concerned citizen. Chock stated the proposed building will be a masonry style building. Paul Larson, 3877 Shoreline Drive, expressed concerns regarding the proposed expansion of the non-conforming of this property. Larson inquired where the milfoil harvesters will be stored once the building is constructed. Nowlan stated the harvesters would be located in the northwest comer of the lot. Larson also raised concerns regarding noise and the amount of traffic that will be produced as a result of this operation, noting that this is primarily a residential area and is not the ideal spot for this facility. Larson requested the Planning Commission consider placing restrictions on the operation during the nighttime hours. Larson commented in his opinion the site should also be cleaned up of debris and fallen trees. Berg inquired whether the services would be expanded at all as a result of the new building. Chock stated they would like to store their materials inside the new facility and eliminate the after hours deliveries of salt. Nowlan pointed out there are a few other businesses along County Road 15, which help shield this facility from the neighborhood, as well as a number of trees. Stoddard stated in his view some consideration should be given by the Planning Commission to the public use of the facility. Stoddard indicated he is not in favor of expanding the non-conforming use nor is he in favor of granting a hardcover variance on this property. Stoddard thanked the Applicants for reducing the height of the building to 20 feet. Hawn stated she is in agreement with Stoddard, noting she has additional concerns regarding salt and sand runoff into the take and wetlands in the area. Hawn noted the City has made a commitment to upgrade the residential area of Navarre and that she would have a difficult time approving this application. Lindquist stated he is not in favor of granting any variances on this property. Berg stated in her view this is not the proper location for this building Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend denial of Application #2555, Hennepin County, 3880 Shoreline Drive, for a Zoning Code Amendment, Variances, Vacation, and Commercial Site Plan due to the residential nature of the surrounding neighborhood and the proposed expansion of a non-conforming use on this property, and it is considered an expansion of a non-conforming use. VOTE; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#5) #2564 WILLIAM SCOTT DAMPIER, 3550 IVY PLACE - VARIANCES, 8:00 p.m. • 8:32 p.m. William Dampier, Applicant, was present. Gaffron stated this application appeared before the Planning Commission at their March meeting Page 10 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2564 William Dampier, Continued) where they recommended denial of this application based on excessive lot coverage. Staff has had a number of discussions regarding this application in which the Applicant has suggested some alternative methods for revising the nature of the deck to enable it to be deflned as non>structural for lot coverage purposes. The Applicant is proposing to add a retaining wall around the north and east Sides of the deck at a height and width that would technically allow removal of the deck railing, which currently is about nine feet above grade at its highest point. The majority of the deck is less than six feet above grade, and would be entirely less than six feet above grade once the retaining wall/terrace was built If the deck is not included in the lot coverage calculation, lot coverage, by the house and proposed addition becomes conforming at 14.9 percent. A railing may be removed if the deck is less than 30 inches at the perimeter. The Applicant is proposing to raise the grade to make the deck less than six feet above g ade and theretoie it would no longer be considered as structural cove'sge. Gaffron stated construction of a retaining wall would require a variance since a section of the deck is approximately three to four feet from the property tine. Gaffron stated the Planning. Commission should also consider whether the existing deck with railing constitutes visual bulk and massing of structure to the extent that it should be included in lot coverage. If the Planning Commission does not feel it should be included in the total lot coverage, one option is to recommend approval of the retaining wall/railing removal concept, which would eliminate the need fo.<‘ a lot coverage variance. Another option would be to recommend approval of the variances for the side setback, hardcover and lot coverage for the proposal with the deck left in its present condition with the finding that there is justification/hardship for a lot coverage variance. Dampier stated he understands the Planning Commission has the authority to recommend removal of his deck, noting when the deck was replaced he was led to believe that he was in compliance, which has since been found to be erroneous. Dampier stated with removal of the deck, he would be left with an area where the ground cover is very sparce due to the amount of shading as well as the established root systems from a numbei of trees in the area. Dampier stated his neighbor has addressed this same problem by placing down plastic underlayment with rock. Dampier commented he has attempted to grow grass in this area as well as experimenting with various plants and ground cover that tolerate shade well, which has not met with much success. Removal of the deck would also result in the premature death of two to three trees in the area. Dampier stated by constructing the retaining walls and planter system, he would be able to address the drainage problems that he is currently experiencing. Dampier stated his proposal to raise the ground level addresses the issue of lot coverage and is a possible solution to his problem. Dampier indicated he is attempting to find a solution tc this situation and address the concerns of the Planp-ng Commission. Lindquist inquired whether the proposal by Dampier was to leave the deck as is. remove the railing, and construct a retaining wall system with planters. Dampier stated it is. Hawn noted the Applicant is proposing to build up the ground elevation which would make the deck less than six feet off ground l^v J. Dampier stated the railing is above six foet, with only the northwest corner of the deck consisting of approximately one square foot being over six teet in elevation. Page 11 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2564 William Dampier, Continued) Stoddard commented he tikes the efforts the Applicant is taking to comply with the 15 percent structural coverage. Stoddard inquired whether the deck could be shifted over to the left and brought down lower to address some possible safety issues due to elimination of the railing. Dampier stated his only access to the lakeside section of his property is through a narrow section that exists in that area. Dampier stated he has already lost two trees as a result of the big storm that occurred in this area several years ago and he would like to avoid losing additional trees. Stoddard suggested the Applicant consult with an arborist about the placement of fill in the area of the trees. Dampier stated he has spoken with a landscape architect who has indicated the trees will survive with the amount of fill he is proposing in this area. Hawn commented in her view raising the elevation of the ground level is a contrived solution and defeats the purpose of the ordinance. Hawn stated in her view the amount of mass being suggested with this latest proposal is actually greater than what currently exists and would also place the mass closer to the adjoining neighbor. Hawn suggested the Applicant consider a two-level deck with a stairway. Hawn stated the Planning Commission needs to have a map depicting the proposed changes to the deck and ground level. Dampier inquired whether the Planning Commission would have any objection to the deck being removed. Hawn indicated s^e would not. Dampier reiterated if the deck is removed, he would be left with bare ground level in this area. Hawn stated it is her feeling the Applicant could still have a deck in this location. Lindquist inquired whether a portion of the deck could be removed. Dampier stated he would rather remove the entire deck than a portion of the d^:ck. Dampier stated if the deck is lowered, he will be endangering some of the trees in the area. Dampier stated due to the costs he has already incurred, he is committed to this project, noting he would be willing to remove the deck if there was no other choice. Lindquist stated it appears the Planning Commission is looking for the Applicant to eliminate at least a portion of the deck, noting the planter system does add more mass to the property. Berg commented in her view the Planning Commission should take into consideration what the Applicant will be left w'fh if the deck is removed. Hawn stated in her view an acceptable plan can be reached Dampier commented in his opinion he has compromised on this proposal as much as possible. Lindquist remarked the Applicant will need to readdress the issues relating to the deck once more. Berg stated the Planning Commission does not have the ability to design a deck for the Applicant. Berg stated the Applicant will also need to lock at the impacts the removal of the deck will have on Page 12 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2567 Walfred Properties, Continued) again by the Planning Commission. The City Council expressed concerns relating to the size of the proposed building, which was approximately 12,000 square feet and required a total of 105 parking spaces on the property. The removal of the second story reduced the number of parking spaces lequired on the properly to 60, which eliminated a total of 17 parking stalls outdoors and the 28 underground parking stalls. Removal of the second story results in a building consisting of approximately 11,900 square feet. Weinberger stated the benefits from reducing the total size of the building results in lower usage of the property, less traffic, and less hardcover. This property is located within the shoreland area, with the northern one-third and southern one-third of the property being located within 1,000 feet of the lakeshore. Variances are still necessary on this property with the revised proposal, although hardcover has been reduced and green space increased. Weinberger stated the second issue the City Council provided direction on was to revise the proposed trail on the property due to concerns expressed by the Park Commission. A trail was originally to connect Olive Avenue to Shadywood Road. The Park Commission had recommended consideration of a pedestrian trail between this property and the Culver's site. The benefit to a trail in this location is that it will provide a direct connection between the Olive neighborhood and the controlled intersection of Shadywood and Shoreline Drive, which provides a safer access than the northern entrance. The trail also requires construction of a retaining wall along the pond, with the height of the retaining wall being determined following submission of a grading plan for the site. Weinberger noted the height of the building is reduced from 30 feet to 23 feet for this site. Proposed signage for this site does conform with Ci-:> standards for the B-1 district, which allows 380 square feet. The Planning Commission at its March meeting had recommended that the proposed drug store use become a permitted or conditional use in the B-5 District. Variances are required to permit hardcover greater than 35 percent in the north 500-1000 ’ shoreland setback and to permit greater than 35 percent hardcover in the south 500-1000 ’ shoreland setback. A conditional use permit is required to allow grading within five feet of the property line. Tom Reinen stated they have attempted to address the concerns raised by the City Council and has revised their plans in accordance with their recommendations. Reinen stated the overall green space area has been increased by the elimination of 17 outdoor parking spaces. Reinen stated one issue that still needs to be addressed is the location of the bike/pedestrian path. With the elimination of the parking along the north/west part of the property, the green space in that area has been increased to 30 feet. Reinen stated they would like to locate the trail in that area as originally proposed since it would be a more pedestrian friendly area to work with than what they originally had. Hawn inquired whether the developer had considered relocating some of the parking area to the area where they are now proposing the bike trail to accommodate the recommendations of the Park Commission. Rev>c«n stated they have not considered that option, with that area being considered as a buffer >'tween the residential area and the B-5 area. Lindquist inquired whether the grade of the proposed trail will still be 10 to 11 percent if constructed on the northern part. Page U ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17« 2000 (#2564 William Dampier, Continued) drainage and landscaping. Dampier stated in his view his neightrar would rather not have the deck removed due to the erosion and water runoff problem that will be created. Stoddard commented he is in favor of the Applicant having a deck, but he would prefer the north side be brought in somewhat to eliminate safety concerns. Hawn recommended the Applicant redesign his deck. Hawn stated she has a concern regarding the size of the planter system being proposed. Stoddard indicated he is okay with Gaffron's recommendation on this project. Lindquist stated he also is okay with Gaffron's recommendation. Hawn stated she would like to see the amount of mass being proposed reduced rather than increased. Hawn stated in her view it appears the members of the Planning Commission would like to see the deck brought in from the north somewhat, but that the Applicant needs to submit a revised drawing illustrating exactly what is being proposed. Nygard indicated he is in agreement with Gaffron's recommendation Dampier pointed out if the deck is considered structural coverage, he would not be entitled to have a deck. Hawn stated she would like to see the height of the deck as low as possible, with the planter system being as low as possible as well. Hawn Inquired whether the Applicant would like to have his application tabled. Dampier indicated he would like it tabled There were no public commenis regarding this application. Hawn moved, Stoddard seconded, to table Application #2564, William Scott Dampier, 3550 Ivy Place, to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#6) #2567 WALFRED PROPERTIES. 2380 and 2364 SHADYWOOD ROAD, 3326 NAVARRE LANE AND ADDRESS UNASSI6NED (17-117-23 44 0078), ZONING CODE AMENDMENT, VARIANCES, VACATION AND COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN, 8:33 p.m. - 6:03 p.m. Tom Reinen, Project Architect, and Bob Weigert, Project Engineer, were present on behalf of Walfred Properties. Weinberger stated this application appeared before the Planning Commission at its March meeting and before the City Council at its April 10th meeting where direction was provided to the Applicant. The Applicants originally were proposing a two story building, with the first floor being a retail Snyder Drug operation and the second floor being clinic use, with 28 underground parking stalls. The City Council provided some direction to the Applicants and requested this matter be reviewed Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2567 Walfred Properties, Continued) Reinen stated it would be. Reinen stated as it exists now, there is a fairly significant slope. Lindquist inquired whether there will be a stairway constructed in the area of the slope. Reinen stated there are no plans to have steps at this time. Hawn inquired how people will be prevented from taking a shortcut to Culver's if the trail is located in the area the developer is now proposing. Reinen stated there are significant enough wetlands in the area that would deter people from cutting across that area. Reinen stated additional plantings could also be added in that area as a deterent as well as a fence. There were no public comments regarding this application. Stoddard commented he liked the proposed changes by the developer, noting he is in favor of a drugstore at this location. Stoddard stated the issues remaining appear to be minor and can be addressed prior to final plat approval. Stoddard commented he would like to see the architectural appearance of the building blend in more with the surrounding residential neighborhood. Reinen indicated the structure is broken up with the placement of windows. Stoddard stated he would like the developer to give some additional thought to the type of materials being utilized on this building. Hawn inquired whether all of the underground parking is being eliminated with the revised proposal. Reinen indicated they have eliminated the elevator and the underground parking Lindquist noted the pedestrian trail still needs to be addressed. Reinen stated the City Engineer did express some concerns regarding the utilities, and inquired what concerns need to be addressed in that regard. Weinberger stated the City Engineer had concerns because the footings and the trail will be located over the utility lines. Weinberger stated if there is a problem with the utilities, the trail would need to be removed for a period of time and then later on reconstructed. Weinberger noted there is also a concern with the proposed trail only being five feet as opposed to the standard eight feet. Reinen stated with the previous proposal the pervious percentages were 29.7 percent, with the impervious being 70.3 percent. With the latest proposal, the pervious is improved to approximately 33.2 percent, with impervious being reduced to 66.8 percent. Hawn stated the hardcover could be further reduced with construction of the underground parking. Reinen stated in their view underground parking would not be practical. Gaffron stated two issues with the trail alignment are bothersome in that, one, there is a crossing point in the middle of a parking lot as opposed to along the street or sidewalk, which means that drivers will not be expecting pedestrian traffic in the middle of a parking lot; and two, if the eastern parking spaces are relocated to the northwest comer of the lot, the trail would still be located Page IS Nanjnfi^Afi Ar-a ,-ni"Min .-m, >.•----^ ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17, 2000 (#2567 Walfred Properties, Continued) between either a driving lane and a series of parking stalls or between two series of parking stalls, which is not an attractive nor safe location for a trail. Gaffron stated he would prefer to see the trail along the northwest edge or along the edge of the parking lot to alleviate safety concerns. Gaffron acknowledged children in the area may attempt to take a shortcut across the parking lot. which could be eliminated in some fashion. Berg stated she is not in favor of the location of the trail proposed by the Park Commission since in her view it is not the best spot for the trail. Hawn inquired whether there was sufficient room for semi-trucks to exit and access this property. Reinen stated the trucks would be going counter-clockwise and should have plenty of room to maneuver. Hawn noted the Planning Commission has already voted on the inclusion of the drugstore use in the B-5 District, and inquired whether another vote on that issue would be necessary. Weinberger stated City Staff would like the Planning Commission to l evote on that matter since a revised plan has been submitted. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2567, Walfred Properties, 2380 and 2364 Shadywood Road, 3326 Navarre Lane, and address unassigned (17-117-23 44 0078), for a commercial site plan review for construction of a Snyder's Drugstore on the Grace Baptist Church site in Navarre, with the following conditions: 1.The proposed structure will be a one-story building; 2.The total parking for the facility will be limited to 60 parking spaces; 3.The trail access will be on the northeast side of the property; 4.The setback along Shadywood Road will be 20 feet; 5.Drugstore use will be a permitted use within the B-5 District; 6.Developer is to take the appropriate steps to make the other trail on the south side inaccessibie; 7.Ponding on the property needs to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer; 8.Vacation of easements for Navarre Lane; 9.Rezoning of the portion of Navarre Lane which includes the pond to B-5; 10.Lighting, signage, and landscaping plans need to be reviewed and approved by City Engineer; 11.Relocation of utiiities subject to review and approval by City Engineer; 12.Developer obtains a signoff from the Homeowner's Association. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Stoddard stated he would like the City Council to address the location of the trail. Stoddard indicated in his view one square foot of signage per square foot of frontage was too intensive for this area and needs to be further reviewed by the City Council. (Recess taken from 9:03 p.m. • 9:10 p.m.) Page 16 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17, 2000 (#7) #2569 W. DUNCAN MACMILLAN AND WILLIAM WALDRON, 1860 FOX STREET, AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Due to the absence of the Applicants, this item was not heard at this time and follows Item #13. NEW BUSINESS (#8) #2570 GEORGE STICKNEY, 2590 COUNTRYSIDE DRIVE - VARIANCES, 9:10 p.m. - 9:20 p.m. George Stickney, Applicant, was present. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting variances to permit construction of a tennis court and a ten foot fence. The Applicant is proposing to construct a tennis court 30 feet from the rear property line where 50 feet is required, and a second variance is required to permit the fence around the ter court to be 10 feet in height where 6 feet is permitted. Weinberger stated the properties located to the north at 2575 and 2605 Thoroughbred Lane would experience the most Impact by the encroachment into the rear yard setback. The tennis court is proposed to be located approximately 235 feet to one of the residences and 270 feet to the other adjoining residence. The tennis court would be located about 20 feet lower than the two residences on Thoroughbred Lane. Generally tennis courts are constructed in a north/south fashion due to the location of the sun in either the east or the west sky. Weinberger stated in order to accommodate a court on this property and properly align the court, it is necessary to encroach 20 feet into the rear yard setback. There is a large portion of the property that is not developed to the rear of the house that could not be used for a tennis court due to the primary mound septic system being located in that are. Weinberger no grading within 20 feet of the septic site is allowed. Weinberger stated the Applicant has addressed the hardship associated with the height of the fence by indicating a six foot fence would not be adequate to contain tennis bails from going outside the court and onto the adjacent properties. Weinberger noted this residence is located dose to the end of a cul-de-sac and is not in dose proximity to other residences. Stickney stated the two variances he requires are to the setback and to the height of the fence. Stickney stated he is proposing to construct the tennis court at a lower grade which will have lesser impact on the two adjoining residences as well as plant a number of trees In the area as a buffer. Hawn inquired whether he has spoken with any of his neighbors regarding this projed. Stickney stated he sent a letter to all the neighbors and has spoken to all but one. Stickney noted he has not heard any negative comments regarding this projed. Stoddard inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to reduce the height of the fence at all. Stickney stated with the proposed grade, the tennis court and fence will not be visible to the adjoining residences. Stickney reiterated he will be planting a number of pine trees in this area to ad as screening, and he will provide a planting schedule to Staff prior to meeting with the City Coundl. Page 17 i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17, 2000 (#2570 George Stickney, Continued) Nygard inquired whether any other tennis courts have been constructed in Orono with a fence that exceeds six feet. Weinberger stated it was his understanding there have been some tennis court fences erected that exceed six feet. Weinberger noted a variance is needed for the ten foot fence. Weinberger stated in iight of the fact that a variance is being requested, City Staff could require certain types of trees be planted around the tennis court area. There were no public comments regarding this application. Hawn requested a landscape plan be submitted for review and approval prior to City Council approval. Stickney indicated he would be willing to comply with that request. Hawn moved, Stoddard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2570, George Stickney, 2590 Countryside Drive, granting of a variance to permit construction of a tennis court 30 feet from the rear property line and granting of a variance to permit the fence around the court to be 10 feet in height where 6 feet is permitted, subject to the Applicant submitting a landscape plan for review and approval by City Staff prior to the application being heard by the City Council. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0, Nygard Abstained. (#9) #2571 DOUG AULT AND JIM GINTHER, 2739 SHADYWOOD ROAD, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE, 9:21 p.m. - 9:35 p.m. The Applicants were not present. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting a co. iditionai 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 feet of the OHWL of lake Minnetonka. Weinberger indicated the dock lots were created as part of Registered Land Survey No. 415. Currently both Applicants have a 50 percent interest and one dock slip. Weinberger stated the variance to hardcover is required due to the expansion of the existing gravel parking area. Weinbergar stated basically the Applicants are requesting a similar conditional use which was previously approved for some of the other lots in the area in 1985. At that time a subdivision occurred in that area where it was assumed that each lot within the subdivision would have a dock lot for storing of a boat. None of the dock lots were ever legally combined with the residential lots nearby and eventually were sold off separately and are held in private ownership. Weinberger noted Tract U, which is the subject of tonight's application, was recently turned into non-residential ownership. Jim Zimmerman, 2735 Shadywood Road, stated he has some concerns he would like to note on the record. Gaffron stated since the Applicant is not present at this time, and although the neighbors have waited patiently to comment on this application, he would question the appropriateness of taking comments at this time without the Applicants being present. Page 18 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2571 Doug Ault and Jim Ginther, Continued) Hawn stated this situation has occurred in the past where in the end the Planning Commission was advised to take public comment since it was noticed to the public. Lindquist stated it was his understanding of the Planning Commission's past practice to table the application if the Applicant is not present. Hawn commented they are attempting to avoid the need for the neighbors to return more than once by allowing their comments to be heard and be made a part of the record. Lindquist stated they will not be discussing the issues involved in this application, noting that the Planning Commission will be reviewing this item more thoroughly when the Applicant Is physically present. Lindquist stated there are a number of issues that will need to be addressed prior to any approval being given on this application, which in all likelihood cannot be resolved tonight without the Applicant being present. Gaffron commented as long as the Planning Commission understands the ground rules of listening to the neighbors' comments and not discussing the issues, it would be appropriate to proceed. Lindquist pointed out that it may be necessary for the neighbors to reappear before the Planning Commission again. Jim Zimmerman stated that he personally, along with Richard Gay, have a number of concerns relating to this request. Zimmerman stated he has been working with City Staff on resolving what the real rights and issues are relating to the non-conforming docks. Zimmerman stated there has been a continuing escalation of usage of these docks, to the point where they have become second homes to the people who own the docks. For $200 a year, a person may have a 20 foot strip and dock on Lake Minnetonka, which has resulted In people spending the weekend essentially on their boats. Zimmerman stated the purpose of the non-conforming docks was to provide docks to the 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. Zimmerman stated until the City is able to determine who owns what and what easements have been granted and who has what rights, the City should limit use of these non-conforming docks. Zimmerman indicated they have retained the use of an attorney to review this situation, who is currently working with City Staff and the LMCD In order to resolve some of these unanswered questions. Zimmerman stated they are willing to continue to cooperate with the City in order to resolve these issues. Lindquist stated he appreciates the efforts the local residents are making in this regard, noting that this application needs to go through the whole process. Richard Gay. 2735 Shadywood, inquired whether the property currently is non-residential. Weinberger stated the owners have recently acquired the property and are requesting a conditional use permit. Zimmerman commented the present owners have owned this proeprty for at least the past seven years. Weinberger stated he was informed by Ault that he has just recently purchased the property. Page 19 im<ai ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2571 Doug Ault and Jim Ginther, Continued) Gaffron noted in 1985, when the other conditional use permits were approved, the City required at that time that people who lived outside the neighborhood to go through a conditional use permit process. Since 1985, the owners of Tract U have resided in the neighborhood, which was then subsequently sold to someone who resides outside the area and has necessitated the request for a conditional use permit. Hawn stated the conditional use being requested is not the same conditional use that has been granted with respect to this variance. Gaffron stated that is correct. Gay stated they are interested in getting a resolution to who has what rights and address any other unresolved issues. Gay stated another issue of concern is a fire hydrant located in close proximity to a driveway which was expanded and parking in that area which would prevent emergency vehicles from accessing that hydrant. John Ericson inquired whether the entire situation relating to the docks will be studied at this time. Hawn stated the Planning Commission will only be reviewing this property at this time. Weinberger stated what makes this a unique situation is that this is a continued use of a do<^ located on property which has a principal structure and which may have some grandfather rights where the other lots are vacant and do not have a principal structure. There were no further public comments regarding this application. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #2571, Doug Ault and Jim Ginther, 2739 Shadywood Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#10) #2572 STEVE MORKRID, 2314 SHADYWOD ROAD - VARiANCES, 9:35 p.m. > 9:39 p.m. Steve Morkrid, Applicant, was present. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Bottenberg stated the Applicant is proposing to remodel the second story and raise the roofline of the existing house, which involves removing the roof and bumping out the walls of the second story, thereby eliminating the dormers. The roofline wilt be at a slightly different angle and slightly higher than presently exists to help eliminate leaking that presently occurs into the house. Bottenberg noted the structural coverage on the lot will not be changing but requires a variance to allow 26.7 percent lot coverage where 15 percent is allowed. Bottenberg stated the existing hardcover in the 500-1000' setback area is not changing since the footprint of the house is not changing, but a variance to iakeshore hardcover is required because the existing hardcover of 37.11 percent exceeds the allowable 35 percent. A variance is needed to permit a front yard setback of seven feet for the second story expansion where 30 feet is required. Bottenberg noted the existing first story is seven feet from the lot line. City Staff is recommending approval of the variances. Page 20 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2572 Steve Morkrid, Continued) Morkrid indicated they would like to add another bedroom to accommodate a new set of twins. Dan Lager, Contractor, stated the proposed addition will help to improve the appearance of the house and eliminate the leaking currently being experienced into the house. There were no public comments regarding this application. Hawn moved, Nygard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2572, Steve Morkrid, 2314 Shadywood Road, granting of variances to lot coverage, lakeshore hardcover and front yard setback to permit remodeling of the second floor and raising of the roof line, subject to the condition that the existing hardcover, structural coverage and front yard setback not exceed what is currently existing on the property. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#11) #2573 DAVID AND MARTI BLODGETT, 1380 REST POINT ROAD - VARIANCE, 9:40 p.m. - 9:58 p.m. David Blodgett. Applicant, was present. The Certificate of Mailing and Affadavit of Publication were noted. Bottenberg stated the Applicants are requesting approval of a height variance for a six feet privacy fence located in the rear yard of a lakeshore lot that does not abut a major thoroughfare. Rest Point Road is not considered a "major thoroughfare". Since the fence exceeds the allowed 3.5 foot height. City Code requires that It meet the rear yard setback of 30 feet. The Applicant has designated on a survey the area requiring variance approval, which is a section beginning from the street lot line and continuing along the southeast side lot line. The fence along the street lot line will not exceed 3.5 feet. Bottenberg stated some posts and some of the fence boards have already been installed, noting the City Building Official did request that the Applicant cease all work until the necessary variance approvals were received. Bottenberg stated in 1989, a height variance for a six foot fence was granted to the property owner at 1374 Rest Point Road, and in 1996, a height variance for a 6 to 6 1/2 foot fence was granted to the property owner at 1375 Rest Point Road. City Staff is recommending approval of a height variance to construct a fence. Blodgett stated where he is requesting the six feel height variance is on the side of the property. Blodgett indicated they had commenced the project In good faith based on some information received from the City, which apparently the City has since changed requiring a 30 foot setback. Kendall Nygard expressed concerns regarding the number of fences being constructed along Rest Point Road and the tunnel effect that is being created Nygard stated Rest Point Road Is a steep and narrow road, with the fence proposed by the Applicant possibly causing a driver ’s line of vision to be impaired as they come over the hill. Hawn pointed out the fence in the front will be 3.5 feel in height, with the request for the variance to the fence being constructed on the side property line, which may block a person's view of the Page 21 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2573 David and Marti Biodgett, Continued) street. Hawn stated In her opinion the majority of the fence should not obstruct a ? jrst n's view. Stoddard commented It sounds like the City ’s application forms did not delinr .lo the ^ • uack requirements. Bottenberg Indicated the information the Applicant is referring to is attached as Exuibit I. Blodgett indicated they would like to construct a fence in order to obtain some privacy and is consistent with the other fences in the neighborhood. Blodgett stated he was attempting to avoid the need for a variance until he was notified of the 30 foot setback requirement. Nygard expressed concerns that the Applicant has commenced to construct a fence which exceeds the City's standards even though he has been informed of the height restrictions. Nygard stated some other issues for consideration is a parking spot that is elevated next to a retaining wall, and a fence would obstruct the vision of a person traveling over the hill if a fence is constructed on top of It. Nygard noted the fence is to be 3.5 feet from the ground level. Blodgett stated his fence posts and boards have not yet been trimmed to meet the 3.5 foot requirement. Nygard inquired where the Applicant was measuring the 3.5 feet from. Blodgett stated the only place he was out of compliance was in that 30 foot section. Nygard commented it is his opinion there are other sections of the fence that exceed the City's requirements. Hawn stated the building Inspector can inspect the fence to see whether it exceeds the City's requirements. Nygard stated all of the boards currently installed by the Applicant exceed 42 inches, noting he has installed 48 inch boards. Nygard stated the fence needs to be measured from the ground level. Lindquist suggested the fence be inspected by the building inspector to insure compliance. Hawn agreed that this matter should be reviewed by the building inspector. Hawn stated it is up to the Planning Commission to give direction to the Applicant on what requirements need to be met regarding his proposed fence and that it is up to the building inspector to see that the requirements are then complied with by the property owner. Blodgett commented he is attempting to have a fence that is consistent with his neighbors.] Hawn expressed regret that the Applicant apparently was not given all the information necessary In order to comply with the setback requirements, noting that there is not ample Justification for changing the City standards at this time. Hawn stated the Planning Commission needs to consider whether this fence will create a tunnel effect along this road. Lindquist stated he has voted for other fences in this area, noting he will support this fence. Lindquist stated the concerns raised are legitimate issues. Hawn moved, Stoddard seconded, to recommend denial of Application #2573, David and Pasc 22 I i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2573 David and Marti Blodgett, Continued) Marti Blodgett, 1380 Rest Point Road» for a height variance to construct a six foot privacy fence located in the rear yard of a lakeshore lot, with the request that the building inspector review and measure the fence to insure compliance with the 3.5 foot requirement. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 1, Lindquist Opposed, Nygard Abstained. (#12) #2574 TOM MICHELETTI, 519 FERNDALE ROAD NORTH - VARIANCES, S:58 p.m. - 10:13 p.m. Tom Micheletti, Applicant, was present. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Bottenberg stated the Applicant is requesting approval of a height variance to construct a nine foot privacy fence on his property. Since the fence exceeds the allowed six foot (weight, City Code requires that it meet the side yard setback. The proposed fence will be constructed out of cedar slats and a metal gate on the street side of the house. The Applicant is proposing to construct the fence at nine feet to match the eave height of the house. Bottenberg noted the property is fairly isolated with the neighboring properties being a golf course and DNR protected land. Bottenberg noted the Applicant has relocated the proposed attached garage, which eliminates the need for any variances on that portion of the application. Micheletti stated he would like to construct a nine foot fence in an effort to address a severe deer problem that he is experiencing with his yard and garden. Micheletti stated he has spoken with representatives from the DNR who have indicated they are not opposed to the fence. Micheletti stated a nine foot fence is needed because deer can easily clear a six foot fence. Micheletti commented he also experiences a lot of golf balls in his yard, which he hopes will be reduced by the nine foot fence. Hawn commented this application is different from the one just heard, but that sight lines are still an issue. Micheletti indicated the fence will be set back from the road 60 feet or something in that neighborhood. There were no public comments regarding this application Lindquist indicated he does have a problem with a nine foot fence. Nygard commented in his view the fence would appear as a wall In front of the house. Lindquist stated the City's ordinance allows a six foot fence to be constructed. Lindquist acknowledged that a six foot fence may not solve all of the Applicant's problems. Hawn inquired how far into the property the fence would need to be constructed in order to exceed the six foot limit. Gaffron stated the Applicant would need to meet the 30 foot side yard setback and the 50 foot front yard setback in order to construct a fence that exceeds six feet. Page 23 •i airmiiAa ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2574 Tom Michelettl, Continued) Hawn commented there is a question of setting a precedent if this appiication is approved. Lindquist moved to recommend approval of Application #2574, Tom Micheletti, 519 Femdaie Road North, for a height variance to permit construction of a nine foot privacy fence. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to consider a seven foot fence. Micheletti stated he has spoken with the DNR who has indicated that deer can clear fences up to eight and a half feet in height. Nygard reiterated approval of this application could possibly set a precedent, and in order to grant a variance, a hardship which is created by the land must be demonstrated. Micheletti stated they are attempting to improve the property and has been told the deer problem is the responsibility of the City. Micheletti commented in order to property address this problem, they need the cooperation of all parties involved. Hawn noted the Planning Commission did approve a ten foot high fence for a tennis court. Hawn seconded Lindquist's motion based on the fact that this fence is specifically intended to protect a garden which is threatened by the deer population living in an area protected by the DNR. VOTE: Ayes 2, Nays 3, Nygard, Stoddard and Berg Opposed. Nygard moved, Berg seconded, to recommend denial of Application #2574, Tom Micheletti, 519 Ferndale Road North, for a height variance to construct a nine foot privacy fence. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 2, Hawn and Lindquist Opposed. Hawn indicated she voted in opposition to the motion recommending denial because in her view there is a specific and reasonable use being requested for the nine foot fence and the same consideration should be given to a fence to deter deer as to a fence for a tennis court. Micheletti commented in his opinion his request was reasonable. Berg noted the Planning Commission is merely a recommending body and that the Applicant has the option of appearing before the City Council to plead his case. Micheletti stated the basic nature of a variance tends to set a precedent. (#13) #2575 JAMES AND JILL CORNELL. 2145 WATERTOWN ROAD - VARIANCE. 10:14 p.m. 10:17 p.m. James and Jill Cornell. Applicants, were present. Bottenberg stated the Applicants are proposing to construct a 816 square foot second story addition to the existing residence. The addition will only be on top of the southern section of the existing residence and not the entire residence. Bottenberg noted the existing residence was constructed before current zoning standards were adopted. The septic system is currently compliant and has a capacity for four bedrooms. This addition will not add to the total number of bedrooms. Page 24 I i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2575 James and Jill Cornell, Continued) Bottenberg stated a detached garage was constructed on the property in 1989, which did not require any variances. Structural coverage and hardcover is not an issue on this property. City Staff is recommending approval of the application. Cornell commented the neighbors' view of this addition will be screened. There were no public comments regarding this application. Hawn moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2575, James and Jill Cornell, 2145 Watertown Road, granting of a variance to permit encroachment into the rear yard setback to allow the construction of an 816 square foot second story addition to the existing residence. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS, CONTINUED (#7) #2569 W. DUNCAN MACMILLAN AND WILLIAM WALDRON. 1860 FOX STREET AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The Applicants were not present. Hawn moved, Nygard seconded, to table Application #2569, W. Duncan MacMillan and William Waldron, 1860 Fox Street, due to the absence of the Applicants. VOTE: Ayes 5. Nays 0. SKETCH PLAN (#14) #2576 BRENSHELL HOMES. 1181 WILDHURST TRAIL, SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Steve Bentley. Brenshell Homes, appeared. Weinberger stated Brenshell Homes has filed a sketch plan to create a four lot subdivision of a 6.87 acre parcel located within the LR-1B zoning district. Three of the proposed lots would require variances for lot width and direct access to Wildhurst Trail. A fourth lot with access to a driveway located in the platted but undeveloped Garden Lane is also proposed. All lots meet the minimum one acre requirement as shown. Weinberger stated the major issues relating to this proposed subdivision include a major ravine that intersects the north end of the property. The City will be requesting a drainage easement over this ravine. City Staff will also need to review the proposed building pads in relation to the topography to see whether they are suitable. A major portion of this property drains to the south and east, with some concerns about erosion occurring on the east side of Wildhurst Trail due to stormwater flows. Grading and drainage plans must be submitted to City Staff and to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for review and approval. Weinberger stated another issue would relate to whether this should be a private road versus a public road. Staff does not support direct access for the lots to Wildhurst and has concerns with Page 25 1 1 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 (#2576 Brenshell Homes, Continued) driveways being located on the road when alternative access is available through Garden Lane. City Staff is recommending that all access for the development be via a new road constructed by the developer through Garden Lane with a cul-de-sac serving any lots within direct access. Lindquist inquired whether there will be access to Saga Hill Park from Garden Lane. Weinberger stated at this time Garden Lane could be used as access to the park. Weinberger stated other access and parking to the park has been provided through the property formerly owned by Palmer and the Covenant Church. Weinberger noted he has not reviewed the plan in much detail at this time. Steve Bentley, Prudential Homes, stated he has received a significant amount of information from City Staff relating to prior developments proposed for this site and has revised the plans somewhat to address Staffs concerns. Bentley stated basically they are proposing a road off of Garden Lane for access to this development. Bentley stated they currently have a builder lined up for this project and are very interested in proceeding forward with their proposal. Bentley commented in light of the prior proposals, they are considering the possibility of a lift station and connection to sanitary sewer from Tonkaview Road. Bentley indicated he does not have a problem with any of the issues raised by City Staff and is willing to continue to work with the City to resolve those issues. Bentley stated it is his understanding that park access is through Tonkaview and will not need access off of Garden Lane. Bentley stated they are anticipating the road would become public based upon the comments on the prior applications. Gaffron recommended that the road become a public road, with the cul-de-sac paved diameter being 80 feet. Stoddard inquired what the lot width for each lot would be. Bentley stated a variance to lot width will probably be needed on three of the lots due to the limited amount of frontage available. Gaffron recommended Bentley speak with the Public Works Department regarding sewer connection and the possibility a lift station may not be needed. Gaffron noted that the City Engineer will also be requiring stormwater calculations for this area. Hawn commented she likes the limited amount of driveways being proposed for this subdivision. Hawn indicated there has been some interested expressed in the past for clustering in this area. Bentley indicated he will be obtaining more detailed engineering drawings. Bentley stated he would be willing to look at clustering for this area. Gaffron stated in his view it is doubtful the City Council would grant any building variances. Gaffron suggested the developer do a preliminary sketch showing the clustering as an option. Bentley stated he will continue to work with City Staff to resolve the issues. Page 26 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#15) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS ON MARCH 27.2000 AND APRIL 10. 2000 This item was not discussed. (#16) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Hawn stated any members of the Planning Commission that would be interested in attending the Sensible Land use Coalition seminar need to register with the City by April 24th. Lindquist reported on the joint meeting with the Long Lake Planning Commission, noting that the mooting went well. A second meeting has been scheduled for sometime in June to discuss how Orono foresees the corridor along Highway 12 being developed. Nygard stated both Planning Commissions are to create a list comparing the two cities for discussion at the next meeting. Gaffron indicated he will create a list for review and comment by the members of the Planning Commission. Gaffron stated the list is to help identify the areas where the two cities agree and disagree. (#17) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MARCH 20, 2000 Lindquist moved, Nygard seconded, to approve the minutes of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of March 20,2000, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0, Stoddard Abstained. (#18) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON APRIL 24.2000 AND MAY 8. 2000 April 24.2000 • Nygard May 8,2000 • Smith ADJOURNMENT Hawn moved, Lindquist seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 10:50 p.m,