Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-21-1999 Planning Packet
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, June 21,1999—6:30 p.m. 2780 Kelley Parkway—Council Chambers AGENDA Council Representative: Bob Sansevere AUDIENCE MEMBERS: Please sign in for the public record at the front podium if you wish to address the Planning Commbsion. Applicants wiU 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 July 12, 1999, City Council meeting unless otherwise noted by the Chair. OLD BUSINESS Review of these items will commence prior to or between scheduled public hearings. #2488 #2492 Gregg Klohn, 4455 North Shore Drive, Variances. (Staff Report: Paul Weinberger; Presenter: Mike Gafifron). Rick and Gail Luzaich, 2490 Old Beach Road, Afler-the-Fact Variance and Conditional Use Permit. (Staff Report: Paul Weinberger; Presenter: Mike Gaffron). NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS #2496 #2497 #2499 #2500 #2501 Patrick and Jeanne OTlanagan, 3895 North Shore Drive, Variances. (Staff Report: Paul Weinberger; Presenter: Mike Gafifron). Gail S. Briner, 1760 Shadywood Road, Variance. (Stafif Report: Paul Weinberger; Presenter: Mike Gafifron). Thomas and Marilyn Swanson, 1740 Shadywood Road, Variances. (Staff Report: Paul Weinberger; Presenter: Mike Gafifron). Orono Schools, 795 Old Crystal Bay Road North, Variances and Conditional Use Permit Amendment. (Staff Report: Paul Weinberger; Presenter: Mike Gafifron). City of Orono, 3601 Bayside Road, Variances and Conditional Use Permit. (Staff Report: Paul Weinberger; Presenter: Mike Gafifron). I . SKETCH PLAN REVffiW #2498 Molly and Draper Jafiray, 2620 Fox Street, Sketch Plan. (Staff Report: Paul Weinberger; Presenter: Mike Gaflfron). PLA|iN ING COMMISSION COMMENTS 9. Report of Planning Commission representatives attending Council meetings on May 24, 1999 and June 14,1999. 10. Other issues for discussion. Planning Commission approval of minutes for May 17, 1999. Selection of representatives for City Council meetings on June 28,1999 and July 12,1999. ADJOURNMENT Public Attendance Meeting D ate :2l~ ? '7 □ C ouncil d Planning C ommission & Park C ommission □ Other NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER •5 1 y Auj^ h‘40, SL «^ cU^CV-%-V * /1471 _ rl (^0 ^ 9 7 -----------------------:------------:------------------------------------ 4 ZV)// A ---------- 7Z ^ V" *7 C tx f^y:\r^/.A^c C k -c / ^ H.-----------------L------------It------—----- S Vi r >x(Pv^ xT T 1 roK ^1* O Njsj;' T ~r cV 0 tniftA I MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern June 14,1999 SUBJECT: #2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variances Application: Last month the Planning Commission tabled the application for variances for Gregg Klohn. The direction by the Planning Commission was to allow more time for the applicant to allow him to review other possible locations on his property to rebuild his damaged garage. The applicant has waived the 60 day time limit. Upon review of different options and meeting with staff, the a;^licant would like to stay with his original plan. The location of his well and a power pole make it difficult to locate the garage on the northeast section of the lot. Also, it the garage were to be located on the northeast section of the lot, a turn around area would be needed adding to the areas hardcover amount. The applicant has also stated he would remove a shed when he replaces the garage which changes the proposed hardcover amount in the 250*500' area. The existing hardcover is 2,021 s.f (32.8%) and the new proposed is 2,111 s.f. (34.2%). Attachments: May Planning Report Planning Commission Minutes \ ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2494 DAN ANDERSEN, CONTINUED lot line to allow a 30 foot setback rather than 50 feet as required for rear yards. When this subdivision was approved, the front yard was determined to be that portion of the lot adjacent to the cul-de-sac. The side yards are the south and eastern lot lines, and the lot has two identified rear lot lines, which are the west and north property lines. The Applicant Is proposing to re-establish this property line as a side property line or, In essence, granting a variance to allow the 30 foot side yard setback. City Staff had a concern regarding the actual function of the lot if the westerly lot line Is re-established and the house Is constructed to face directly to the east and located directly on the setback line, this would then essentially serve as a rear yard. Weinberger indicated he has spoken with Dan Andersen regarding this and Mr. Andersen would like to see language Included In the resolution recognizing that this is a side yard and shall function as such at the time the property is developed and a house is constructed on the lot. City Staff recommends approval of the variance to permit an accessory structure to remain on the property subject to the condition it Is located as shown on the surv*ey/slte plan dated July 9,1998, and that the property owners file a covenant on the title for the oversized accessory building with the conditions noted in the Staff Report. City Staff is also recommending approval of the request to amend the Little Orchard plat to reclassify the west property line from a rear yard to a side yard based on the condition a house is constructed on the lot that will not orient a back yard to the west protecting the property to the west, and the front yard classification be extended to include the entire southern property line. Andersen stated the house will be situated to face at an angle. Andersen noted that the bam Is in good condition and that Is why they would like it to be relocated rather than removed. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2494,2885 Little Orchard Way, granting a variance to permit an accessory structure to remain on the property subject to the condition it is located as shown on the survey/site plan dated July 9,1998 on file with the City of Orono, and the property owners file a covenant on the title for the oversized accessory building with the conditions noted in the May 17,1999 Staff Report, and to recommer>d approval of the request to amend the Little Orchard plat to reclassify the west property line from a rear yard to a side yard based on the condition a house is constructed on the lot that will not orient a back yard to the west protecting the property to the west, and the front yard classification be extended to include the entire southern property line. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Recess taken at 8:58 p.m. - 9:01 p.m.) (#7) #2488 GREGG KLOHN, 4455 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES, 9:02 p.m. -9:17 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Gregg Klohn was present. Page 14 \ r'' ( ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2488 GREGG KLOHN, CONTINUED Sts iTfxsiK ;;ris. sSback requfred setback Is three feet and the rear yard is 10.9 feet, which does meet the ffirnX“'o7.h1t “““ would like the garage door to face the street. ««»aue. proposed by Weinberger is viable but he has not considered that fhl^« ^ before tonight. Klohn stated that If he constructed a garage in that location, the roof ^ ®S appealing as a garage constmcta^24’^^^ flarage Is constructed Into the hill, he would like to Klohn requested that the Planning Commission approve his application as submitted. Lindquist indicated he apreed with Staffs recommendations. Lindquist staled that It could be located ten feel from the side yard setback. Klohn remarked that In his opinion it would probably be 6.5 feel. Page 15 A ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2488 GREGG KLOHN, CONTINUED Klohn stated he would tike the application to be tabled. Hawn inquired whether he would be willing to waive the 60. day time limit. Klohn indicated that would be fine. Berg moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #2488,4455 North Shore Drive, to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans, and to extend the 60 day time limit to 120 days. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW (#11) #2490 CHARLES AND SUE VAN EECKHOUT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Charles Van Eeckhout was present. Gaffron stated the Applicants are requesting to subdivide a 20 acre parcel to create nine sewered building sites ranging from 1.0 acre to 1.8 acres in area. This proposal would require rezoning the area from RR-1B, Single Family, 2 Acre, to R-1A, Single Family, 1 acre; extension of the sanitary sewer from the City of Long Lake; expansion of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area; variances to the back lot ordinance; creation of a private road In a substandard corridor; variances to lot width; creation of a shared driveway crossing of Long Lake Creek; construction of a road or driveway through at least two delineated wetlands; creation of a wetland outlet for Park; and constru(4ion of an 800 foot private driveway extending from the private road to serve Lot 4. Charles Van Eeckhout stated that he has owned the property for the past 29 years. Van Eeckhout stated that he has done other subdivisions within the City of Orono and has made it a point to avoid the need for variances as much as possible. Before purchase of this property, Van Eeckhout commented that he checked with the City of Orono regarding what regulations existed regarding possible subdivision of this area and that this proposal encompasses essentially what he was told he could do at that time. Van Eeckhout stated that in 1975, the City rezoned this area, which changed this area from a one acre density to two acre, and that rezoning should be considered as a taking of value, and that this property should be allowed to be developed under one acre standards as he was originally told. Van Eeckhout remarked that he did not receive any compensation for the taking, which In his opinion decreased the value of his property. Van Eeckhout noted that a lot of new rules and regulations have been adopted by the City over the years, and requested that the Planning Commission rezone this area back to what it originally was at the time of purchase. Gaffron commented that the City of Orono would disagree with the opinion that the rezoning was a taking. Van Eeckhout stated that he has quarter acre lots to the north adjacent to his property, one acre lots on the northwest, and one acre lots to the south, and wetlands to the east. Van Eeckhout remarked that in essence his property was spot zoned at the time the area was rezoned. Van Eeckhout commented that this subdivision would contain one acre lots, which In his opinion are Page 16 1 \ c; \ 7 TO;Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern DATE:May 11,1999 SUBJECT: #2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variances — Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Are.27,000 s.f. (.62 acres) Application: The applicant has proposed to rebuild a garage that was damaged in the May 1998 storm. The new garage would be constructed in the same area of the existing garage. However, the new garage is proposed to be 4' wider and 5' longer than the existing garage (will be 14' x 24'). The applicant seeks approval of a variance for side yard setback and rear yard setback. The existuig and proposed garage is located within tlie 250'-500' lakeshore setback. A variance was granted in 1998 (File #2424) for hardcover to be 2,164 s.f. or 35.1% instead of the allowed 30%. The applicant then constructed an addition smaller than approved and removed a shed that are also located in this hardcover area. This reduced the hardcover to 2,021 s.f. or 32.8%. The proposed garage increases the hai Jcover'amount in this setback area 151 s.f. to 2,172 s. f. or 35.3%. This application requires the following variance: 1. Section 10.24, Subd. 5 (B): To permit a side yard and rear yard setback variance to allow a 336 s. f. garage to be built in place of a damaged garage. 2. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 L (2): (Allowed Hardcover in the 250’- 500' lakeshore setback). Existing on the lot is 32.8% of hardcover. The garage construction would add 151 s.f. of hardcover totaling 2,172 s.f. (35.3%). H2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variances 5/10/99 Page I ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards: LR-IB (] Acre)Lot Area Lot Width SidcyaidAdj Lot Rear Yard Required 43,560 s.f 140’10’30 ’ Proposed 27,000 s.f.98'3 ’10.9’ The new garage would encroach into the side yard adjacent lot and rear yard setback requirements for the LR-IB zoning district Hardcover : Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0’-75’5,968 s.f.0 s.f.0 s.f.0 s.f. 75’-250’14,875 s.f.2,831 s.f. (19%) 3,718.75 s.f. (25%) 0 s.f same as existing 250'-500'6,157 s.f.2,021 s.f. (32.8%) 1,847.1 s.f. (30%) 2,172 s.f (35.3%) 500’-1000'0 0 0 (35%)0 The new garage would increase the hardcover amount on the property in the 250’-500' area. The hardcover would increase from ?2.8% to 35.3%, where 30% is the allowed amount. (In 1998 the hardcover allowance was approved to be 35.1% in this area). Structural Coverage : Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 27,000 s.f Allowed: 4,050 s.f 15% Existing: 2,855 s.f 10.6% Proposed: 2,863 s.f 10.6% H2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variances 5/10/99 Page 2 Statement of Hardship The applicant has included his statement of hardship in Exhibit A. The applicant should also be asked for his testimony regarding this issue. Issues for consideration : 1. New garage could be built on northeast section of lot and not require variances for setbacks. 2. Other issues raised by planning commission. StafT Recommendation! Staff recommends denial of the variance. A new garage could be built on another location (northeast) of the lot, be within all the setbacks, and be close to driveway. Attachments A Application B Site Plan/Survey C New Garage Plan D Plat Map E Location Map F Site Topography G Hardcover Calculations H Property Owner ’s List I Permit Record #2488 Gregg Klohn 4455 North Shore Drive Variances 5/10/99 Pages * : • • • ? • **5 • • • r . J ^ i - Application # “Zr^i S S-- Date Rccclyed V- ..Amount P^d. 2^0^ R' CITY OF pRONO - VARIANCE ^PLICATION • .Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee .$150.00-... .. (no change fifoni ori^al application) - , Variance for non-confom^g structures ’ $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee)• # • • • •. . • -I ^ • •• • -i. :•- •» PROPERTY FORMATION . Site Address */¥ST’ SA Property Ideatificatioo Number ~ 11*7“3.5 •• % /- --------------— Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ^^________^(montb^w)pate Propertjr^cqiured. I (do) also ov Present^^f property: ___ ZoningDistrict:_____t other (specify)_ :V . .1 APPLICANT ; ^ ■ Name Address: Sh*'*- % OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ^ TcVi-on>^/ Phone (home't . * Phpnefwodcl^^ '^if 'ITd^ City: ______Zin: <S3t*^ •? n V. f C Phone fliome^ Phone (work)__ Address: P City: DESCRIPTION Ol’ REQUEST _ Zip: g»T7&*/ Estimated Construction ^st $ Describe request in detail: To <Rto*^»’«>o ChttA-ct. 'Tj'i&r .0^rn\^-^f_o •Ru Snn»^ ScxL Ar^AC(^9fi!^ _______ (attach additional sheets .if necessary) VARIANCES REQUr^D Lot Area • ___Lot V^dth Hardcover Lot CSoverage V/SeSetback:Front i^ide l/k«Avei^e Lakediore Other (specify) * HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTiON OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY COOTinONS Describe undue hardship or practical ^culty or unusual property conditions preven^ compliance with Zoning Code requirements: TVyj #>4r -fk . rf^'c n ajj aXhv pU<* -h -fU. ojkr (attach additional sheets if necessary) •. t • ••• • /RANK R. CARDARELLE (612) 941*3031 Land Surveyor Eden Prairie. MN 55344 C«vtificate Survey For crnon Kinim 4455 North Shor^. Drive Orono# Book 349 Page 2 _ File. 6 , • i • . y • avtijr f4«l W*'a • *v« enn*ei *# • twrrf #1 r«* Wr«*»** e* 4^ ^ except rond IV.th <r#a i Novortibnr .it07t»rv«y«lkf M m Wij, ;q Sufyn lltll l^a Wanaal^ f anf M aM IvA ^rnnkh. Cord*r«ll« Stale Rag. No. 6508 -O Vs fCc^ t • v>o - * r g \5p-r.v-- i its OO HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 75-250* 250-500*SETBACK ZOiNE: (CIRCLE ’500-1000' EXISTING hardcover TM A. House ■• ••• • *. - '< ' ' ■' • • Length Width • • •• • • • • X . X. X • •• : % •. •• • B. • Garas* • • C. Driveway • I* — • • r \ • * «• *.• • X X D. Sidewalk .i X ■X • • \ f E. Fado/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Flasdc X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE .TOTAL PROPER nr ARE A IN ZONE ____________ + B'X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN 7.nNTt A. House ‘ ______ X Length Wdih X X X • « B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk . > • •* • • X X rr E. Pado/Dcck X X F. Landscape .Underlain. By Plasdc X X X G. Other • ••A TOTAL HARDCOVER* IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ______ ■ + B X 100 • > • • •• •' SF. 0 SF. . •: s.F. I r> • S.V: ■■ - •.*. V o - C\ 21 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. 7o S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. G I of.?, S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B A B KAPJ)COVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ EXTSTTNG HARDCOVER tN , A. House " ••• ♦ •. 'v^ Leofft 250-500*500-1000' width • .• • • • • • B‘. Garass • • C. .Dri%'e-ay D. Sidewalk E. Pado/Deck F. Lar.dsca-em Ucderlaia By Plastic' G. Other X X. • -X • • % • • •.• • V X X ‘« •X • •• • • • • » *.• • • • % ff • • X X X X X « • • « TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE O^'h/ + B‘ /<r^O^ X 100 FRO?u.-? 0 'KAkDCOVER TN ZONT. A. House Length Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk X X X E. Patio/Deck • • F. Landscape .Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X • • • • •• • ••A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE • I- B X100 - • • • • I • 320 Urx ^(0 ■ 32-b Z/*) y/o A */ SF. 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.E. S.F. •2 ^3/ S.F. S.F. ^9-5% % ' • 7 p-*, Vi 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. S.F. % A B A B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET •k SZ73ACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ 75-250* EXISTING HARDCOVER W -------- , •. . A. House . • •• "T~ • *• • • • • • • • X. •X V \ • • ^ G 5oo:,-,o.-. 2 of 3 _ S.F. S.F. S.F. . •S,F.*' . "• • *• V B.Garage T ft • •ft • nr S.F. C. •# Driveway • •.' *•• •• ••• ' . • • . ■ . ft * 1• ^ • • • i.*.• S.F. .•:----- . X V s..S.F. D.Sidewalk'• • .1 *.• ft ft • ft • • - *• ft ft ft m ft S.F.• ‘ -X n •S.F. E.Pado/Deck ‘iUe.O ft • ft • ft «• ft ft • S.F.'♦ cs.S.F. •F.Landscape ••• • • • ••% ••• ft • ft ft ft > ftft S.F.Underlain X e S.F.By Plastic • X S.F. G.Other • X • ft ft S3 ft S.F. •TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE ft ft ft * * . S.F. .TOTAL PROPER ry AREA LM ZONE • •-S.F.A hH +B L»l^ / X 100 ft ft 7« PROPOSED HARDCOVFR tn ynisnr ft ft ft A.House • X ft •, S.F. Length •: • X • wda ; • a • • • ft S.F.• •• X ft ft ftft • ft . «a ’ S.F.t X fin S.F. B.Garage AyiA>^ft • 0 ft S.F. C.Driveway X ftft ft ftft ft /rf2-, S>. X S3 S.F. ' ■ D.Side walk • • • • • • • • * • • X . ^• . • « ft » ft • S3 .'c/o S.F. • «.X ^S3 S.F. E.Patio/Deck • X *m ft ft S.F. X S3 S.F. F.Landscace* • V • ' • . X ft • • •• ft ft ft S.F. Underlain.X S3 S.F. By Plastic X S3 S.F. G.Other X ft • ft ft S.F.• • •• • •total 'i’ardcover ' in zone ft• • ft••ftft• ft ft ft ft S.F. total property area in zone ft ft S.F. * A • -21 + % B u fSn X 100 • • . f 35~>/'% *•’ A B A B •L * h V- RUN DATE 04/21/99 • * • BATCH 501 , • ; . SB 07-117-23 31 0001 PROP ADDR 04445 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME CAYLE ERNEST HimO TAXPAYER OAYLE E HITTXO ■NAHE/ADDR . 4445 NORTH SHORE DR . HOUND HN 55304 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 31 -0002 04455 NORTH SHORE OR 6RE6C D KLOHN 6RE66 KLOHN 4455 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND NN . 55364 REPORT NO. PI43540X PAGE 11 38 07-117-23 31 0003- 04465 NORTH SHORE DR J L THEISEN JR ET AL TRSTEES BARBARA A/JOHN L THEISEN JR 4465 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 L PROP ADDR- •OWNER NAie TAXPAYER * NAHE/ADDR 38 07-117-23 31 0004 .04485 NORTH SHORE OR JOHN D 8 DEBRA H KNODEL JOHN D I DEBRA H KNODEL 4485 NORTH SHORE DR •HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0005 04495 NORTH SHORE DR BARBARA J ANDERSON BARBARA J ANDERSON 4495 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0009 04480 NORTH SHORE OR JOHN J 6R0TANS' JOHN J CROTANS 3200 29TH A6E N E HPLS HN 55418 • I L • ' • '< * PROP ADDR . . OWNER NAME TAXPAYER L NAHE/ADDR 38 07-117-23 31 0010 04470 NORTH SHORE DR JOHN J CROTANS ET AL JOIM, ILZE A PETERIS CROTANS 4470 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN. 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0013 04448 NORTH SHORE DR HURIEL 0 SENN HURIEL C SENN 4448 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 * 38 07-117-23 31 0039 04460 NORTH SHORE DR D D DREWS B L K DREWS D D DREWS A L K DREWS 4460 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 • • PROP ADDR OWNER NAIC TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 07-117-23 31 0041 00038 .ADDRESS PENDING . HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND COUNTY OF HENNEPIN PUBLIC ROAD USE STATE DEED R91287 C5-19-51) 38 07-117-23 34 0003 04425 NORTH SHORE OR DANIEL J DICKEY ETAL NORHA J DICKEY 4425 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 34 0004 04435 NORTH SHORE DR CORDON W LUNDHAN CORDON W LUNDHAN 4435 NORTH SHORE.DR HOUND HN 55364 . C • FROP ADDR .. OWNER NAHE- \ TAXPAYER .TOTAL BATCH NAHE/ADDR C .. 501 00012 • . PERMIT RECORD T ••• . . Permit No 33/? • •••■ MM. _£S^^ /n^kcr fo /jn^ ULX?. Date /A-ze, - s & ^ -/t-7/ UX^. 79 i-.n- /O'/3~ ?!/ //-/ 9- 9Z 99 ff Type of Permit # 7/, '■ ^ I • • • • * • • • • • » .:»V •'/ • • • • • . • • F" • . . *1 •*'< ••• •*• r ^ • ✓ • -s' .e • • •• A • • • • • • # • • -• • -• . • •" i . • I • , . • •. * • • • • • • • • • • •TO:FROM: DATE; Chair Ha^vIl and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City AdministratorMichael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator^^^^ June 17, 1999 SUBJECT; #2492 Rick & Gail Luzaich, 2490 Old Beach Road - After-the-Fact Variance and CUP - Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential District List of Exhibits A - Revised Plan Submitted by Applicant B - Restoration Parameters Recommended by Forestry Consultant Peter Bedker C - 60-day Review Period Waiver D - Memo and Exhibits of May 10,1999 E - Draft May 17 Planning Commission Minutes On May 17 Planning Commission reviewed the proposed restoration plan offered by the applicant and generally concluded that the plan was not appropriate. Planning Commission tabled the proposal and suggested that applicant prepare a revised plan after consultation with staff and the City's consulting forester. The City retained Peter Bedker, Ph.D., a consulting forester, to review the property and recommend parameters for restoration of the site. His report and recommendations are attached as Exhibit B. X \ Prior to receipt of Bedker's recommendations, applicant's landscape architect, Gary Mueller, submitted a revised landscape plan proposal incorporating a single retaining wall at the base of the slope, and still requiring regrading of the entire slope. This plan proposes a small number of replacement trees along the sides of the property. Staff is advised that Bedker and Mueller have discussed Bedker ’s recommendations, and apparently agree that their individual approaches or strategies for restoring this sitearf quite divergent. It might be f^ to say that the applicant’s plan is a good landscape plan, but it is not a restoration plan. The City’s goal is to have the lakeshore restored to a wooded, natural appearance as quickly as possible. Brief Summary of Forester's Comments and Recommendations - A total of 17 trees with stump diameter 12" or greater were removed from the lake side of the residence. These were primarily maples and lindens. The value of the trees removed is estimated at $48,100 using standardized appraisal methods. It would generally be unreasonable to expect restoration costs to exceed this amount. .. : * • * •f 9 #2492 Rick & Gail Luzaich June 17,1999 Page 2 It wouldn't be practical or reasonable to transplant the site with large trees. However, 29 trees of 2-inch caliper (maples and lindens with a few red oaks) on a 25' average spacing would replace the 14,450 s.f. lost canopy in a period of20-25 years. Spacing should be staggered to provide a natural look. Larger 4.0-4.5 inch caliper trees should be placed at the top of the slope to soften the and obscure the roofline of the existing residence as viewed from the lake. A majority of the existing stumps and root systems should remain in place to stabilize the slope. Planting witliin the slopes should be done by hand to avoid soil disturbance. Bedker indicated to staff that the retaining wall at the base of the slope is qq! necessary for stabilization of the slope; it is purely an aesthetic item. There are a few areas where ruts from the tree removal equipment have started to erode. These should be filled and sodded ASAP. He indicated there is no strict need to place larger trees at the base of the slope, as they will not assist in adding to the visual restoration. Brief Review of Revised Proposal Applicant's revised proposal was submitted without the benefit of Dedkefs recommendations. The revised proposal includes 4 birch clumps at the base of the slope and a half-dozen maples along the 2 sides of the site. Other proposed plantings are primarily shrubbery, either along the edges of the lot or on the lake side of the retaining wall, llie apparent reason for the 5' retaining wall is to slightly decrease the slope above it. The proposal results in the following hardcover changes on the site per the calculations of the applicant's landscape architect: Existing Allowed Proposed 0-75' Zone 0.5%0%3.0%(2.5% increase) 75-250' Zone 31%25%32%(1% increase) 250-500 ’ Zone 15%30%15%(no increase) Lack of Conformity with Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code The applicant's revised proposal makes no attempt to, over time, restore the site to its original appearance. It appears to be a second generation attempt to provide a landscape plan that meets the r #2492 Rick & GaU Luzaich June 17,1999 Pages applicant's goals for the property. The City's philosophical goals and policies for its lakeshore are stated in the Comprehensive Plan very clearly on pages 3-18 through 3-23. General Policy 9 on page 3-20 states: "9. LAKE SHORELINES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALTERATION. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clearcutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or or wave action erosion, natural stone rip rap shoreline protection will be encouraged." Urban Area Policy 2 on Page 3-22 states: "2. RETENTION OF NATURAL VEGETATION WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBANIZATION AS VISIBLE FROM THE LAKE. BuUding heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitions against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes. Retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion,in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation." These policies have been in effect since 1980, and Orono's Shoreland ordinances and tree protection ordinances as noted in the May 10 staff memo have long been in place to implement these policies. Staff' Recommendation : * The applicant's revised plan does not meet the goals set forth in the Comprehensive Plan, and does not come close to matching the recommendations of the City's forestry consultant for restoration of this site. The revised plan should be rejected. Planning Commission should consider the following options: 1. Vote to deny the request for a CUP for retaining walls, and recommend to Council that the applicant be required to submit a restoration plan that substantially meets the recommendations of the City's forestry consultant. Staff would forward the application to Council’s June 28 meeting unless applicant wishes additional time to generate another plan. This action will send the application forward to Council more speedily, potentially getting restoration started sooner, but Planning Commission may lose the chance to review and approve the next plan that is generated. OR 2. Table the request, and provide applicant with additional direction as to what parts of the plan are deficient, and direct that a further revised plan be submitted for Planning Commission review at the July 19 meeting. This action will result in an additional month delay before restoration can begin, but allows Planning Commission to review the next plan that is generated. Landplan Associates, Inc. Landscape Architects/Site Planners 9311 Rich Valley Blvd. Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota 55075 (612)450-0984 June 2,1999 City of Orono Mr Paul E. Weinberger Assistant Zoning Administrator 2750 Kelly Parkway Orono, Minnesota 55356 RE: Conditional Use/Land Alteration Permit City of Orono Case No. 2492 Rick and Gail Luzaich 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minnesota 55391 Dear Mr Weinberger: Pursuant to the decision made at the Orono Planning Commission meeting held on Monday, May 17, 1999, to table action regarding the above referenced case pending receipt of a revision plan, please find the following enclosed: Revision Planting/Construction Plan...............................................................6 copies Revision Hardcover calculations....................................................................... 1 copy As requested, the terraced retaining wall system previously proposed has been deleted. A single wall has been substituted therefor. Deciduous trees have been added and the planting plan revised to accomplish the objectives of ensuring slope stability and creating a natural appearance. If you have any questions, please call me. Gary M h/^ller Registered Landscape Architect R Luzaich I t » HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Rick and Gail Luzaich Property 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minnesota 55391 Revised June 2,1999 EXISTING CONDITIONS 0’ - 75’ae< o A Concrete Masonry Unit Stairway 1.5 Ft X 40 Ft 60 Sq Ft A Total Hardcover in Zone Computer Measured 60 Sq Ft B Total Property in Zone Computer Measured 13,690 SqFt Percent 0.5 Percent Desired 0 .................75’ - 250’061 M A Concrete Masonry Unit Stairway 1.5 Ftx40 Ft 60 Sq Ft A House/ Garage ’>Computer Measured 4,795 Sq Ft A Concrete Walk/Porch Computer Measured 400 Sq Ft A Concrete Patio Computer Measured 655 Sq Ft A Concrete Driveway/Curb Computer Measured 2,130 Sq Ft A Rock Mulch Planting Beds Computer Measured 2,415 Sq Ft A Total Hardcover in Zone Computer Measured 10,455 Sq Ft B Total Property in Zone Computer Measured 33,510 Sq Ft Percent 31 Percent Desired 25 Maximum HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Rick and Gail Luzaich Property 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minnesota SS391 • Revised June 2,1999 EXISTING CONDITIONS Page 2 of 2 Set Back Zone...................................................250’ - 500 ’ A Sport Court/Retaining Walls 35 Ftx65 Ft Court 2,415 Sq Ft A Concrete Driveway/Curb Computer Measured 2,565 Sq Ft A Rock Mulch Planting Beds Computer Measured 1,000 SqFt A Total Hardcover in Zone Computer Measured 5,980 Sq Ft B Total Property in Zone Computer Measured 39,385 Sq Ft Percent 15 ^ 1 Percent Desired 30 Maximum HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Rick and Gail Luzaich Property 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minnesota 55391 Revised June 2,1999 PROPOSED CONDITIONS O' - 75’ A Concrete Stairway 5 Ft X 40 Ft 200 Sq Ft A CMU Retaining Wall 210 Lin Ft 210SqFt A Total Hardcover in Zone Computer Measured 410SqFt B Total Property in Zone Computer Measured 13,690 Sq Ft Percent 3 Percent Change 2.5 Increase Qa# 1 • ...............75'-250'Ovl J A . t Concrete Stairway 5 Ft X 40 Ft 200 Sq Ft A House/ Garage Computer Measured 4,795 Sq Ft A Concrete Walk/Porch Computer Measured 400 Sq Ft A Concrete Patio Computer Measured 655 Sq Ft A Concrete Driveway/Curb Computer Measured 2,130 SqFt A Rock Mulch Planting Beds Computer Measured 2,415 Sq Ft A Total Hardcover in Zone Computer Measured 10,595 SqFt B Total Property in Zone Computer Measured 33,510 SqFt Percent 32 Percent Change 1 Increase i HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Rick and Gail Luzaich Property 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minnesota 55391 Revised June 2,1999 PROPOSED CONDITIONS Page 2 of 2 Set Back Zone.....................................................................................................250* - 500* Sport Court/Retaining Walls Concrete Driveway/Curb Rock Mulch Planting Beds A Total Hardcover in Zone B Total Property in Zone 35 Ft X 65 Ft Court Computer Measured Computer Measured Computer Measured Computer Measured Percent Percent Change 2,415 Sq Ft 2,565 Sq Ft 1,000 SqFt 5,980 Sq Ft 39,385 Sq Ft 15 0 • V* ■i i i- 4 mmmr W TreescapesCommunity Forestry Consult/inf^ 1214 Third Avenue NE Buffalo, Minnesota 55313 (612) 682-9562 Voice & Fax 500 ’ SqFt SqFt FROM: RE: June 16.1999 Paul Weinberger Assistant Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Peter J. Bedker, Ph.D. Consulting Community Forester Luzaich Restoration Plan Parameters 2490 Old Beach Road Application #2492 that should be used to design and evaluate restoration plans for the Luzaich Observations and Background riiimptefJnf of the property identified a total of 16 trees with stump residence. On-site nnrtSf f 'dentified an American linden stump (21 inch diameter) located 32.5 feet northeast of the f ^ n residence that was not indicated on the survey. Species composition of and 6y rfn 1°{Acersacchamm), 47% American linden {Tillia americana) {Quercus rubra). Understory trees included sapling and seedlings of these species as well as ironwood {Ostrya virginiana) and American elm {Ulmus americana). hlinhf ^ estimated based on measurements of stump wai^^ Hh estimated 6,950 in^ of cross-sectional area of trees were removed. The total value of the trees removed was estimated to be $48,100 using methods established by the Council of Landscape Appraisers (1992) and the Minnesota Society of Arboriculture Plant Appraisal Committee H Plant I realih Care Monagcmeiit ■ Tree Management Plans Tree Inventories Hazard Tree Assessments Mr. Weinberger - June 16,1999 Page? (Simons 1996, Simons 1999). Since the trees were missing, average values (70%) were used for condition, contribution and placement with the exception of Tree 14. This tree had extensive decay in the stump therefore the tree had no value. Table 1 presents species, stump height stump diameter, estimated DBH and estimated value for each of the significant canopy trees. The total area of canopy removed is estimated to be 14,450 fl^. This estimate is based on the following average crown diameters: American linden Red oak Sugar maple 50 feet 50 feet 40 feet This area represents the union of crowns with the above diameters centered over their stump locations. The trees were located on a northeastern slope facing the lake. The steepest part of the slope represents an 18 foot vertical change of grade and ranges from 27 percent to 60 percent from west to east In a few locations, equipment ruts were left during tree removal and the ruts have begun to erode. This slope also creates issues of access and limits the type of equipment that may be used on site. In addition, the access from the front yard to the back is only 10 feet wide. Comments 1. It is my opinion that the circumstances of the unauthorized removal of trees dictates that the restoration plan be consistent with the “Reasonable and Practical Replacement Cosf method of plant appraisal (Council of Landscape Appraisers 1992). This method establishes the appraised damages are the “cost to replace the number, size and species of trees destroyed to the extent that 1) replacement serves to substantially restore the character and quality of the property ... and 2) the cost of replacement is not greatly disproportionate to the resulting restoration..." 2. It is not reasonable or practical to transplant large trees as part of this restoration. The alternative is to establish a approximate time frame for the restoration and to plant trees that with anticipated growth will largely restore the quality and character of the site within that established time frame. A reasonable time frame is 20 to 25 years. 3. With growth, 2.0 inch caliper trees planted on average with a 25 foot spacing would reach crown closure in this restoration time frame. Twenty-nine trees planted at this 25 foot spacing would be requires to completely replace the 14,450 ft^ of canopy removed. 4. The kinds of trees planted should be consistent with the those that were removed (i.e. largely sugar maple and American linden with a few red oaks mixed in). These trees are readily available in 2.0 inch caliper. L Mr. Weinberger-June 16,1999 Pages 5. The above spacing should be staggered somewhat to provide for a more natural look. 6. At the top of the slope and towards both sides, larger 4.0 to 4.5 inch caliper trees should be planted. These trees by established standards should have an average height of 16 to 18 feet and 18 feet and greater, respectively (ANSI Z60.1-1990). These trees should provide sufficient to begin to soften and obscure the roof line of the Lusaich residence from the lake as soon as they are planted. The peak of the east gable is 18 feet above grade and the peak of the gable end in the center of the house is 26 feet above grade. 7. Existing stumps and root systems should be left in place. They will continue to stabilize the slope and prevent erosion. Any engineered solution would replace the natural character of the site. The exception to this are three stumps located in the center of the house at the top of the slope, these may be removed with a minimum of concern. 8. Planting within the slope should be done by hand with a minimum of soil disturbance. The above parameters should provide sufficient guidance for developing a landscape restoration plan for the Luzaich residence. Unfortunately, it will still take time for the landscape to recover. Please call me if you have any questions, or if I may be of further assistance. Consulting Community Forester Mr. Weinberger’ June 16,1999 Page 4 Table 1. List of significant trees removed from the Luacich residence, 2490 Old Beach Road. • Tree Species Stump Height (ft) Stump Diameter (in) Estimated DBH (in) Estimated Value 1 Sugar maple 4.5 15.7 15.7 $1,600 2 American linden 3.5 20.4 19.5 $2,200 3 Sugar maple 2.1 21.0 18.8 $2,200 4 American linden 0.8 16.2 23.3^$3,200 (five stems)0.8 13.2 0.8 13.2 0.8 12.6 0.8 14.4 5 Sugar maple 1.5 18.0 13.6 $1,300 6 Sugar maple 0.7 15.6 11.7 $1,100 7 Sugar maple 0.7 19.2 cx>CNK400 (two stems)0.7 31.2 8 Sugar maple 1.0 26.5 20.3 $2,500 9 American linden 0.7 33.0 25.5 $3,500 10 t t Northern red oak 4.5 30.6 30.6 $5,100 11 Sugar map!o 1.0 25.0 19.2 $2,200 12 American linden * C* .i 20.4 41.2 $7,700 (five stems)1.6 1 22.8 2.8 22.2 2.0 12.0 2.4 21.6 13 Sugar maple 1.5 19.2 14.5 $1,400 14 American linden 0.7 24.0 18.4 $0 15 American linden 1.5 24.6 18.8 $2,000 16 American linden 0.8 45.0 35.0 $6,100 17 American linden 0.5 21.0 16.0 $1,600 Total $48,100 area of the combined stems. " ! GlTYof ORONO Municipal Oflices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Maitlni Address: P.O.Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 WAIVER FORM Rick and Gail Lu2aich 2490 Old Beach Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Zoning Application #2490 2490 Old Beach Road I am requesting suspension of the review of my application for after-the-fact conditional use permit and variances. I release and waive any of the City ’s obligations to proceed and conclude review of my application in a timely maimer which includes any statuatory obligation for timely review. ^ocLuzaich ^ ^Date Date Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 t; TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:May 10,1999 SUBJECT: #2492 Rick and Gail Luzaich 2490 Old Beach Road After the Fact Variances and Conditional Use Permit—Public Hearing Zoning District: LR* 1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:55,215 square feet (1.27 acre) Application: The applicants request variance and conditional use permit approvals for lakeshore land alteration including grading and construction of retaining w^ls within 75' of the lakeshore and within a bluff impact zone; and further request after-the-fact approval, including approval of a restoration plan, for intensive vegetation removal within 75' of the shoreline and within u bluff impact zone. In early spring the property owners removed about twenty mature trees within both the 75' lakeshore setback, where no vegetation removal is allowed, and within the bluff impact zone. The applicants have provided a restoration plan that includes a series of retaining walls that will protect bluff from erosion and provide planting areas. A number of perennial plantings and small trees are proposed in the plan which will be located on the hillside between the retaining walls. Most of the vegetation located on the interior of the lot will be shrubs. The property edges will be lined with a series of Techny Arborviteas. The landscaping plan has not addressed the restoration of the type of trees removed or the restoration of trees on the interior of the property. The type of restoration proposed is not consistent with the surrounding properties nor is it consistent with what had existed on the property prior to removal. Basswoods, maples and oaks make up the shoreline and bluff regions along this portion of the lake. The applicant's landscape plan does not propose any natural tree replacement. The Comprehensive Plan addresses the issue of maintianing a natural appearance along lakeshore properties. The Plan states minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitations against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes. Retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. Rick and Call Ltaatch 2490 Old Beach Road After the Fact Variances and Condlilonal Use Permit 5/17/99 Page ! This application requires the following variances: 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2): Lakeshore Hardcover and Land Alteration Regulations: Within 75 feet of the shoreline (929.4') there shall be no excavating, filling, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. Within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 30% hardcover. The proposed plan would increase the amount of hardcover in the 0-75' setback from 200 s.f. (1.5%) to 4,120 s.f. (30%) to allow a series of retain walls along the bluff. The amount of hardcover would also increase by 405 s.f. within the 75-250' setback. 2.Section 10.22, Subdivision 3 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (I) (1): Tree Removal Regulations* Wo live tree within 75 feet of the shoreline with a diameter of six inches or more shall be removed without first obtaining a permit from the City. Such permits shall be issued by the City staff provided that at least a like number of replacement trees of a size and nature found acceptable to the staff are planted, any question involving the number of trees to be replaced will require approval. 3.Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (I) (2): Intensive Vegetation Clearing: Intensive vegetation clearing within 75 feet of the shoreline and on steep slopes within the Shoreland Overlay District is prohibited. Limited clearing of shrubs and trees less than 6 inches in diameter and cutting, pruning and trimming of trees of any size is allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling site and to accommodate the placement of permitted stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, beach and watercraft access areas, and permitted lock boxes, provided that the screening of structures, vehicles or other facilities as viewed from the water, assumipr stunmer, leaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduced. This application following Conditional Use Permit: 1.Section 10.03, Subdivision 19: A Conditional Use Permit is required to allow the grading and placement of retaining walls within the lakeshore setback. Vegetation must be made available to adequately screen structures, including buildings and retaining walls, from public waters. The proposal will also change the natural grade witnin the 75' lakeshore setback, requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 92492 Rick and Gall Luzaich 2490 Old Btach Road AJltr tht Fact Fariances and Conditional Use Permit 5/17/99 Page! Pertinent Ordinances: • Section 10.22: Regulations for the Lakeshore Residential Zoning Districts • Section 10.22, Subd. 2: Allowed Hardcover • Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(1): Allowed Hardcover • Section 10.56: Shoreland Management ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB (1 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 43,560 s.f.140'75 ’10’35 ’ Hardcover Distance Total Area in Existing Allowed Proposed Variance from Shoreline Setback Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover Requested 0-75 ’13,690 s.f. ’200 s.f. (1.5%) none (0%) 4,120 s.f. (30%) none All the new proposed hardcover will result from the series of retaining walls being proposed for the slope. Structural Coverag e Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 55,215 s.f.5,920 s.f.10.7% The applicants are not proposing any sU^ctural alterations or additions on the property. §2492 Rick and Gail Luzalch 2490 Old Beach Road After the Fact Variances and Conditional Use Permit 5/17/99 Page 5 Issues for Discussion 1.The vegetation proposed is not consistent with the types that were removed without obtaining a permit and are not compatible with the vegetation on surrounding properties. The Code states no live tree within 75 feet of the shoreline with a diameter of six inches or more shall be removed without first obtaining a permit from the City. A requirement of the permit is at least a like number of replacement trees of a size and nature found acceptable to the Staff, Planning Commission and City Council be planted. 2.The landscape plan does nut address tree replacement on the interior portion of the lot along the lakeshore and near the residence. 3.The majority of the plantings within the slope are smaller shrub style plantings. No mature trees have been proposed that would help to screen the residence from public water view. 4. The applicants should provide revised hardcover calculations for the 75-250' lakeshore setback and the 250-500* lakeshore setback. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending denial of the landscaping plan. The plan does not address the types and sizes of trees removed. The plan should include plantings of mature basswood, oak and maple trees throughout the lot, especially along the lakeshore and on the hillside. Attachments A B C D E F Application Location Map Plat Map Site Survey Landscape Plan Tree Removal Survey §2492 Rick and Call iMzaich 2490 Old Beach Road dfier the Fact Variances and Conditional Use Permit 3/17/99 Page 4 I Attachments A B C D E F G H I J Application Location Map Plat Map Site Survey Landscape Plan Tree Removal Survey Grading Plan Hardcover Retaining Wall Plans Property Owners List U2492 Rick and Gail Luraich 2490 Old Beach Road After the Foci Variances and Conditional Use Permit 5/17/99 Pages /^Ay ^ l ^}s aJOO^ A Application # 2 *^^Z. Date Received~ Amount Paid ' 0_____ A^^ixiir-^Ut Pc<.4* CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION ax> £>aacO^ 'eoacP./otowo , Type of Application to be Filed 05AAl^XoAft.L \)b£. f \Pdy'h=6f-eCf‘lc^ ' Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) «PsV ee -ooo^ Phone (home )(&^ (*" • Nam e ^\CA(s OJi^ CTfViL LOZo^C^ Phone (work )(o^- gSS~- Address^i^O QLb iiD City C7rt>AO Zip.<Tc.3>c7^/. LozaIc&i OWNER (if different than applicant) Name . A^A,^ Address Phone (homeX Phone (workX City Zip. Date Pro I (do) Acquired lol lU»[q8- also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request wth CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250,00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest -House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$300^00- Commercial/Industrial Use $250.00 Land Alteration - Q'4 9^fT'i ''Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore 51 9 K 6 PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change fi’om original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee % ^ 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 hKM<J t c* f LA.i^DSCAif1£. 1R.ICM A/fiwcxXV feuk/Ci / “77 ^______________ “ifeXomiio^ %Oji w I c«i <«r W^ell Mdxi^- eoo f"~ FKEJIC I Pan/i=iVX^^’v"'-v:AV-|•CU0«\ \- „._...•. ;r. V S r; ^-;:^5i»i 1 • ^ • MJ',V^ ^MINNETONKA '».^j>r‘v T»: **r j*.vi. ■ .: • • ‘/'.♦•jv:; fV- • •• • * •• * • i.*. X 4 ^ e & t, fj'L •% ff) <§> • I OJ •• • •. t ^ •^25 W A.s»» 2 ? - 3m «• •2 • •- #• e ___ I:• O ‘ A A A • — » ss M « AA• • •» 5 I 1?* f s § A -I 2St O A u • W A •»• • nmm ^ e m A » A A m • •• A ' A —A A • » • B •% • •« •< ■ 3 A • 7 7"= » > A •• B 8 B AW •• » * A • pA •S-'•A8 • »• A B l^ii . At • A A r 2a A Amm m A HBA* W •• M •* *' 1 • • • * ‘ . *• • <« ’ • * .. . ' N •• . .• • V / .. > * I ?. .. N • «.. ' ; r% * • ; • ivV'V'V • • .* *' •* • •• • *. J W I • I liw U/L- I r^lL- I \ 1 • •'I *'*,•• ''.vJ1*1|ni.^ -'I.* •* •! *.• ♦ *'1 hi- .e*v A*;'**..• •• * V-. l * ^ •. 9 11 • / 1 I A•• 1 Li* ■ / • • '•« 'I •‘V - -y T^v• *•• t .*. I* *• *• ** • raCK LUZAlCH • IN LOT 4. SHORE HILLS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA . . . • * *^ 1^ 1 r •.: . • • • •*•. *.1 ■•,'. * .* *• .* , I|.•• «• * »• * 1 1 **. ‘ ■ 1 * ‘1 » : • •. * ■•\,*f , 1 1 1 • • • .. I •« 1 • • O' • 1 ■: .* .//• L* • * * ♦ *r •.*LAKE • ^• i (Kii^ 'iti MINNETONKA . ssa-\ • ' • s. <SSSi cm§r V • V % ^ N. N X ' V. V V N N ^ ' S 'n '•. 'o^ \ V. N ', ' %<V • - « N • I • l>- S • \ N ^5? ■sL ''«B.Nijui V -tnim ' 's '^ sPM w # • •. J !•'..........-............................9S8--,. -r- — - , N. ^ SStv • •■. • • ‘-‘* \ \ \ V *'• ». V **'964 •.V , »’• !• / .• (9e5^) : donoltt existing spot elevatlcn* 972-------- denotes eidstiog egntour line, m in seo level dolum teo level datum ■ # V 1^ COFHN k GSONBERG, INC ■p^nxiM ocKna UM> auKn« sne MMXS 482 TAUMMCK AVEMC, LONB UUC, Ml 983M • 12-47>-4141 Lyg-9gy? T>j*^JX* iwoncATBH, « nKnWAS mtPMU tv ME OR UMXR MT OMCCT SIKRVBMM AlO MAT I AM A 0U.V UCCNKO morCtaONAl OOKtR AN) UNB MvncR «Moi DC un or rc stak <r mmmu OAtt yVJW: ri2» OATC joe NO. 8»-142 * HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET R Luzaich Property 2490 Old Beach Road Orono, Minnesota 55391 April 20,1999 EXISTING: Set Back Zone:O' - 75' A CMU Stairway 1.5 Ft X 40 Ft 60 Sq Ft B Total Property in Zone Set Back Zone: 75* - 250* Computer Measured Percentage • 13,690 SqFt • 0.45 • A CMU Stairway 1.5 Ft X 25 Ft 40 SqFt A Concrete Patio \ , Computer Measured 885 Sq Ft A House/ Garage Computer Measured 4,795 Sq Ft (r ' A Sport Court 25 Ft X 45 Ft 1,125 Sq Ft V; • A Concrete Driveway Computer Measured 1,960 SqFt i •: A Concrete Walk/ Poioh Computer Measured 120 Sq Ft • A Total Hard Cover in Zone Computer Measured 8,925 Sq Ft C'J: . •- B Total Property in Zone Computer Measured Perccutage 41,525 SqFt 21.5 •• ? Iv J J ,\’i > l?|l^ljgfst , .1) ,a;i; r 5., ,•..: Rn/M.M.\’G WAIJ SYSTEMS ^ GRAYiiymiscHmc 4 J SETBACK/BATTER KEYSTONE UNITS. WALL HEIGHT FINISHEU GRADE / of Z BACKSLOPE OR SURCHARGE mmm‘ ••/.••/.••A*/.*/.'/.*. f- .-Iv-« —I* • y rr!TlS!5^ EMBEDMENT >- 'V. . -J LOW PERMEABILITY SOIL (RETAINED SOIL ZONE j UNFTCORERLL UMIT OF EXCAVATION LEVELING PAD 7 DRAINAGE COLLECTION PIPE (IF REQUIRED) V < NOTES: > > > > >/'; ••■•'>. 5 i ,}HS-^; : 7 :• Wail Height (H) is the total height from top to bottom. Minimum wall embedment is 6' (150mm) or Height/20. Subsurface soils must be capable of supporting wall system. Unit core fill is 3/4* (20mm) clean crushed stone. Leveling pad is crushed stone base material. All iDackfill materials are compacted to 95% max. density. Rnished grade must provide positive drainage. TTie syrnbol indicates location ard length of geogrid as measured from the connection ^ K • J f • : /V.‘ \( pins to the end of the geogrid. * l i Ri Sf«m.»«. • M M« If ei# aOBMify M luT* Sa^mUSrTSrSKVMMi^ Ml M If a «mIM en^w. 0 t«T OVITOK ItfTAMMO wall fVSTlMl MC § mSKDISE RETAJNir.G WALL SYSTEMSm lyi> ih\ ^rf h lERRACE APPIICAIIONS X 2 <.f X \o \f HUH2 • FOR APPUCATIONS V/HERE THIS SLOPE IS GREATER THAN 1:1 CONSULT A QUALIFIED ENGINEER TO DETERMINE THE CORRECT DESIGN SOLUTION. 2 X HI (MINIMUM) MINIMUM SPACING OF TERRACED WALLS TO ALLOW DESIGN AS INDIVIDUAL GRAVITY WALLS. II I ii Im. • r ■j : • } - An area of design that affects many site appiications is the use of terraced walls. The upper terrace wail can put pres sure on the lower terrace If the walls are too close together. Multiple terrace walls In close proximity to each other, can have structural stability Issues related to the lower walls not having the capacity to carry the loads developed by the upper walls. QUESTION: How far apart do the terrace walls have to be to perform as individual gravity walls? i ANSWER: As a rule of thumb, the minimum distance between the wall terraces must be at least equal to twice the he-ght of the lower wall. EXAMPLE; If the lower gravity wall Is 5 feet (1 .5m) tall, then the minimum recommended spacing betv/een terraces is 10 feet (3m). This rule also applies to walls with more than two terraces. The distance between any two terraces must be at least equal to twice the height of the lower adjacent terrace wall. Note: This simple rJe of thumb does not address global stability where walls are built on steep slopes or over poor soils of low fnclion strength. If these conditions exist, then contact your local Keystone representative or a local engineer. QUESTION: What if there isn't enough room to space the terraces according to this a'le? (2 x HI MIN.) ANSWER: The wall can still be built, but the effect of the upper terrace on the lower terrace and overall stability must be taken into account when designing the wall(s). When the terraces are close together, the design analysis may model the structure as a si gle taller wall to account for the added load from the upper terrace wall on the lower wall(s). • r> TYPICAL DESIGN OF CLOSELY SPACED TERRACED : WALLS WITH GEOGRID REINFORCEMENT. GEOGRIO DESIGN TO MEET REOUIREMENTS FOR UPPER WALL NEEDS ONLY. IF SETBACK IS<H1 GRID DESIGN LENGTH . HI ♦ H2I ^ •*•••••• I GEOGRIO DESIGN TO CARRY LOADS A ■ FROM UPPER 4 LOWER WAaCONDITIONS. .A • r. im aes.mt RUN DATE OA/XS/99 batch' 501 RROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR L I, PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR L PROP AODR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR C. L PROP ADDR OWNER NAME • ■ TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIASS401 PACE 1 SB 21>117-23 21 OOOA 02065 HAPLER1D6E LA C H-SHOOT 111 0 C A SHOOT CHARLES P CECILIA SHOOT III 2665 MAPLE RIDGE LA EXCELSIOR HN 553S1 SB 21-117-2S 22 OOOA 024B0 OLD BEACH RD ROBERT W MACDONALD ROBERT W MACDONALD 24B0 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATA HN. S5S91 SB 21-117r2S 22 0007 02510 OLD BEACH RD KEITH G OLSON ETAL KEITH 0 OLSON 2510 OLD BEACH ROAD WAYZATA MN 55S91 , SB 21-117-23 22 0010 02560 OLD BEACH RD JAMES R KREY JANES R KREY 2560 OLD BEACH RD ■ WAYZATA HN 55391 SB 21-117-2S 22 0019 025S5 OLD BEACH RD T N S A A COOUTE THOMAS H B ALICIA A CODUTE 25S5 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 21-117-23 21 0005 02605 HAPLERID6E U ERIC H PAULSON ERIC H PAULSON • 2605 MAPLE RIDGE U EXCELSIOR 55331 SB 21-117-23 22 0005 02A90 OLD BEACH RO S B t D L LIEFSCHULTZ GAIL L LUZAICH 2490 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATA MN 55391 SB 21-117-23 22 BOOB 02530 OLD BEACH RD LAUREL PARTRIDGE-STAUBLY UUREL PARTRIDGE-STAUBLY 2530 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATA MN 55391 36 21-117-23 22 0017 02455 OLD BEACH RD L LUNDQUIST t D LUNDOUIST LARRY B DONNA MAE LUNDQUIST 2455 OLD BEACH RO WAYZATA HN 55S91 38 21-117-23 22 0020 02585 OLD BEACH RD ALISTAIR D JACQUES ALISTAIR D JACQUES 2585 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATA HN 55391 SB 21-117-23 22 0003 02440 OLD BEACH RU L A BARBETTA B J K BARBETTA UWRENCE A BARBETTA 2440 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATA HN 55S91 SB 21-117-2S 22 0006 02496 OLD BEACH RD G K CARLSON SDH CARLSON GERALD K B DIANE CARLSON 2496 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 21-117-23 22 0009 02540 OLD BEACH RO D H SCHNEIDER B H H LEAF D H SCHtfEIDER B H H LEAF 2540 OLD BEACH RD WAYZATA HN 55391 SB 21-117-23 22 OOIB 02505 OLD BEACH RO K C SHERMAN B J D SHERMAN KIRK D/JACQUELINE 0 SHERMAN 2505 OLD BEACH RO WAYZATA HN 55391 . I TOTAL BATCH 501 00014 4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2485 ALEX AND CATHY JOHNSTON, CONTINUED Alex Johnston wa^oresent. Weinberger stated th\Applicanl is requesting a conditional use permit to alloj^i^ "guest house". This property is located^ the RR-1B, One Family Rural Residential Distiirt^^hlch is a two acre • zoning district, and is conaprised of 5.11 acres dry and 4.55 acres dry contiguous. A bam exists on the southeast portion ^he property that the Applicant is rernodellimo install a guest apartment. The bam is clas^fied as an oversized accessory structuj^s It exceeds 1,000 square feet. ^ Weinberger commented that as\condition of approval the P^erty owner will be required to file a restrictive covenant on the properlWhat states, in part, th^mo future subdivision will be approved that places the structure within a lot llwt has no principaL^iructure, and if the property is subdivided, the oversize accessory structure and ^ncipal structurewll be located together within a lot that meets that minimum lot area requlrem^l for the given size of accessory building. Weinberger stated that the property does riot haj/§ a conforming septic system. The Applicants have submitted a septic design that has beemmproved by the City, but a condition of approval shall be that a final plumbing inspection b^'^until the septic system has been installed and approved by the City. \ . based on the existing structure meets all ____ jyest house conditional use permit subject to tne conoiiions inai a resincuv^covenant Is filed on th\property for an oversized accessory structure and that a final plumWr^ Inspection be held untiKa septic system has been installed and approved by the City. Alex Johnston had no cq \ lent on his application. I \ hawn commented th^here does not appear to be any areas of corilenllon with this application. There were no pdblic comments.\ \ Lindquist nfwed, Stoddard seconded, to recommend approval of Appj|cation #2485, 940 BrowjnRoad South, to allow a guest house conditional use permit si^bject to the structu^meeting the yard requiremerits established by the Municipal Code for a guest hous^onditional use permit subject to the following conditions: The prr.n^y owner file^^ restrictive covenant on the property for an oversized accessory structute as outlined on P^e 1, Items A, B, and C, of the May 10,1999 Zoning Administrator’s Report, aft^hat inai plumbing inspection be held until a septic system has been installed and approved y the City. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Item #7 follows Item #10. (#8) #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, 2490 OLD BEACH ROAD - VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 7:23 p.m. - 8:17 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Rick and Gall Luzaich were present. Page 7 V I ; #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED Phil Reznlck, Attomey-at-Law, was present. ' •• • • • • Weinberger staled the Applicants are requesting variance and conditional use permit approvals for lakeshore land alteration, including grading and construction of retaining walls v^thin 75* of the lakeshore and within a bluff impact zone; and further request an after-the-fact approval, including approval of a restoration plan, for intensive vegetative removal within 75 feet of the shoreline and within a bluff impact zone. No restoration at this time has been completed. Weinberger noted that the members of the Planning Commission have had an opportunity to look at the property. Staff has concerns regarding the removal of the trees within 75 feet of the shoreline due to possible erosion into the lake. The Applicant is proposing to construct a four foot retaining wall to extend along the slope. Staff has issues regarding the proposed landscaping plan as it does not contain any provisions for replacement of the trees that have been removed. Staff is requesting that reforestation be required as part of this application. Wally Case, Landscape Architect, has had an opportunity to review the landscaping plan and is recommending that this property be reviewed by a forester to determine what trees would be best for this type of soil. City Staff Is recommending denial of the proposed landscape plan.and requests that the Applicant submit revised plans. Currently the stumps have not been removed. Staff would also like to have the opportunity to review this application over time to insure that proper restoration of this area is achieved with similar trees. • Reznlck Inquired whether the City was requiring a replai iling of mature trees approximately the same size removed or if the Applicant could replace this type of trees with a smaller size tree. Weinberger stated that the City is requesting that the Applicant replace the trees with fairly mature trees, noting that it is not possible to replace some of the larger trees. Reznlck expressed a concern regarding the cost of replacing the trees and suggested that the City look at what Is right for the property rather than punishing the property owners. Reznlck noted that the Applicant has been charged with a misdemeanor. The Applicants are willing to cooperate with the City to accomplish the restoration, but they would like to keep this property in line with the other surrounding properties. Reznlck presented photographs to the Planning Commission and noted that the other properties do not have the lake hidden from their view. Reznlck requested that the Planning Commission address the house plan, noting that the Applicants would like to start work on this property In the near future. Reznlck Indicated that they would like to remove the stumps and replace with some shrubbing, and expressed a concern that the equipment that would be needed to replace the trees could cause the soil to be disturbed further. Hawn indicated that she would like to see this property restored as quickly as possible to prevent erosion. Hawn noted that the City has allowed rift-raft in cases where erosion has occurred, but that the retaining walls are probably not going to be looked upon favorably by the Planning Commission. Hawn staled that the Applicants will need to gel together with the City foresters to determine what Is most feasible for this property. Luzaich staled that he Is fine with restoring the property, noting that he has spent money trimming ■ and pruning the other frees on his property and had merely removed what he thought was old Page 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 (#2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED unhealthy trees. • • , Stoddard remarked that the Planning Commission has to act on what Is before It tonight, noting that the Planning Commission Is merely a recommending body and that any plans would need to be approved by the City Council. Stoddard commented that the Applicant should work with City Staff on the reforestation, noting that he would like to see some mature trees planted to screen the neighbors' view as well as the proposed hardcover reduced. Luzaich stated they had proposed the retaining walls In an effort to save the hill. Weinberger commented that the stumps could possibly be removed but that the roots should remain to help hold the dirt in place with new plants and trees planted. Reznlck Inquired whether anything could be agreed to tonight. • Eric Paulson, Old Beach Road, stated that he has lived In this area for the past 21 years and belongs to the Lafayette Bay Association which has been proactive In trying to preserve the natural beauty of Lafayette Bay. Paulson remarked that the property owners were perhaps Ignorant of the laws regarding removal of trees by the lakeshore. Gaffron remarked that the City of Orono did not and would not Issue a permit to allow this type of tragedy to occur, noting that the City was not notified of this until a week after the work had already been completed. Gaffron stated that the City of Orono is adamant in its position that this type of land alteration not occur near the lakeshore and that It Is Impossible to get back what has been lost Weinberger stated that Wally Case Is recommending that this property be reviewed by a forester who will review the file and look at the types of soils and determine what types of trees could be planted. Weinberger staled that they would like to have this process started sometime this week. Hawn Inquired whether the Applicant's landscape planner could meet with the forester. Gary Mueller, Landscape Architect, staled he would be able to meet with the forester, noting that they are willing to discuss this property and the recommendations that they have. Mueller requested that the Planning Commission provide some guidance as to what they feel should be provided for this area. Hawn stated that retaining walls are not the answer. Stoddard staled that hardcover should be reduced and that he would like to see some larger trees planted. Lindquist remaiked that the Comprehensive Plan Is clear and that ever^^hlng possible should be done to restore what was lost. Lindquist stated that they should meet with the City's forester as soon as possible to resolve this issue. Lindquist commented that this application will need to be tabled since the proposal is not acceptable as presented tonight. Berg commented that she Is In agreenrient with the other members of the Planning Commission and would like to see some larger trees planted In this area to help restore what was lost. Luzaich inquired whether the stairway down to the lakeshore was okay. Page 9 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEEXmC MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED Stoddard stated that he should work with City Staff to determine the appropriate width of the stairway, noting J^hat the Planning Commission Is not attempting to deny access to the lake by the • Applicant. Mueller stated that they would like to remove the stumps, grind them down to the point where they are no longer protruding, which will require some minor grading of the slope. Mueller st' led that they would also like to eradicate the poison Ivy and other nuisances that occur on the bank. Mueller Inquired whether they could commence work on the retaining wall as a means to prevent erosion, noting that they will have a civil engineer out to Inspect the site to Insure that the wall will stay In place. Mueller commented that they would like to have a better understanding of what type of trees and size of trees the CHy would like to see for this area, noting that It Is Impossible to replace some of the larger trees. Hawn stated that they would like to see as laige of trees planted as possible that have a good chance for survival, and that perhaps the forester would be In a better position to address that. Mueller Inquired whether this application could proceed to the City Council on the condition that agreement Is reached with City Staff on a level of treatment that Is appropriate for this area. Stoddard stated the Planning Commission can vote on this application or table the application, noting that the Applicant will not be able to do any grading or retaining walls. Mueller inquired whether the stumps could be removed. Lindquist stated that in his opinion no work should be done given the history of this application until It has been approved. Lindquist remarked that he would not be comfortable approving any work on this property until City Staff and the City’s forester has had an opportunity to look at this situation, and that In his opinion this application should be tabled. Stoddard indicated they could spray the poison ivy. Mueller inquired whether all the weeds could be sprayed. Stoddard stated that only the poison Ivy may be sprayed. Hawn commented that the weeds may be cut. Hawn Indicated that this application will probably be denied If voted on tonight. Weinberger Indicated that this application requires variances and a conditional use permit that needs to be acted upon regardless of the landscape plan. City Staff Is willing to work with the Applicant on this matter. Luzaich requested that his application be tabled. Hawn Inquired whether the 60 day time limit needs to be extended. Weinberger inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to waive the 60 day iimliatlon. Luzaich Indicated he would be willing to waive the 60 day time period. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #2492, 2490 Old Beach Road, Page 10 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED with the understanding that the Applicant will work with City Staff and the City's forester on an appropriate plan of action for restoration of the lakeshore and bluff area, and that the 60 day time period is waived. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#9) #2493 KATHERINE TAYLOR HOMES, 692 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES, 8:18 p.m. - 8:47 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Katherine Taylor was present. Barb Hugh, property owner, was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant Is requesting several variances to construct a two car garage where a one car garage exists and to attach a deck to the second garage on the property. The property is served with two garages, the first Is a one stall detached located on Tonkawa Road and the second Is a two car garage attached to the house. This property Is located In the LR-1B, One Family Lakeshore Residential District, which has a minimum of one acres, and this property consists of .36 acre. ' The Applicant is proposing to construct a deck off the back portion of the two car garage with a spiral staircase located next to It, which would allow access to that area. Currently there are building permits issued to this property for the remodeling of an office area above the existing garage. The deck becomes an Issue because It Is new hardcover located over existing hardcover, and any time that structural coverage Is placed over non-structural hardcover, it requires a hardcover variance. The addition of the deck would not Increase the hardcover on this property, nor would It increase the amount of structural coverage allowed on the property. The deck would bring the structural coverage to 15 percent. , The Applicant has proposed two options for the garage. Option A would move the garage back to the required 30 foot distance for a garage loading space of a right-of-way. However, the setback In this area Is 35 feet, so it would still require a variance to the street yard setback. This option Increases structural coverage to 16.4 percent, exceeding the 15 percent allowed. This option also allows the occupants of the property easier access In and out of the garage during the winter months when the steep driveway approach prevents safe access into the property. Hardcover would also Increase In the 250-500' setback. Currently hardcover is at 42.5 percent. Only a small portion of the residencu Is lo-aled within the 75-250' setback. The Applicant is proposing hardcover In the amount of 70.2 . percent In the 250-500' setback. Weinberger stated Option B would utilize the existing location of the one stall garage. The Applicant would construct a second stall to the existing one stall garage. This maintains the garage within the, required setbacks on the property, but still would require hardcover and structural coverage variances. This option would not Increase the hardcover as substantially as Option A. This option simply places an addition on the existing garage, which Is located approximately two to three feet off the property line. The new garage proposed in Option A would meet the 10 foot setback. City Staff has reviewed this plan and have determined that the Applicant could construct a two stall garage that would be located 10 feet from the street property line and 10 feet from the side property .line if the doors are faced away from the street. However, this option probably cannot be dene since City Code requires a distance of 30 feet from the garage doors to the street. Tonkawa Road is a Page 11 » • 3 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Commission Members FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern DATE: SUBJECT: June 7,1999 #2496, Patrick D. and Jeanne L. O'Flanagan 3895 North Shore Drive Variance — Public Hearing 2U>ning District: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area:6,032 s.f.* Municipal sewer (♦7,722 s.f. - 1,716 s.f. street easement) Application: The applicants have proposed to locate an existing detached garage, 14.2’ x 22.2’, onto their property. The proposed detached garage was relocated to the lot as is. Because it is an existing structure and not desigi^ to be attached to the residence, it is difficult to attach it to the residence on the property. The applicants are also proposing to construct two decks onto the existing residence. The proposed decks are to be located on the south side of the house, 8 ’ x 18', and the west side of the house, 6' x 23’. The applicant seeks approval of a variance for side yard setback of an accessory building, rear yard setback, and crowding principal building. The property is located within the 500'-1000' lakeshore setback of Lake Minnetonka. The proposed detached garage is to be located 6* from the side lot line where 10' is required. The proposed deck on the south side of the residence, 8 ’ x 18', is 24' from the rear setback where 30' is required. The proposed deck on the west side is located between the proposed detached garage and existing residence. The proposed deck is 6' wide where 1 O' is required for accessory structures located by the principal building (crowding principal structure). This application requires the following variances; 1. 10.03, Subd. 12; To permit a crowding principal structure variance to allow a 6’ wide deck to be constructed between the existing residence and the proposed detached garage where 1 O' is required. 2. 10.03, Subd. 15(F); To permit a side yard variance to allow the accessory structure (detached garage) to be located 6' where 10' is required from the side lot line. U2496 Patrick & Jeanne O'Flanagan 3895 North Shore Drive Variances 6/7/99 Page I 3. 10.25, Subd. 6(B): To permit a rear yard variance to allow construction of the proposed deck, 8' X 18', on the south side of the residence 24* from the rear lot Ime where 30' is required. ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards: LR-IC (1/2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Side Yard Rear Yard Front Yard Required 21,780 s.f.100'10'30'30' Proposed 6,032 s.f.52'6' (Garage)24' (Deck)38.6' . The proposed detached garage would encroach the side yard setback requirements for an accessory structure. The proposed deck (south of the residence) would encroach the rear yard setback requirements for the LR-IC zoning district. Hardcover Coverage : Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback t \ Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 500'-1000' 6,032 s.f.2,111 s.f. 35% 1,416 s.f. 23.7% 2,013 s.f. 33.37% Structural Coverage : Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 6,032 s.f.Allowed: 1,500 s.f. Existing: 936 s.f. Proposed: 1,251 s.f. 024P6 Patrick A Jeanne O'Flanagan 389S North Shore Drive Variances 6/7/99 Page 2 » Statement of Hardship : The applicants have included their statement in Exhibit A. The applicants should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for consideration: 1. The lot is small for the LR-1A zoning district. 2. The property is not currently served by a garage. 3t. What height or grade tiie west deck between the detached garage and residence will be built. 4. Other issues raised by Plenning Commission. Staff Ref.nmmanHatinnr Staff is recommending approval of the variances. Attachments A Application B Site Plan/Survey C New Garage Plan D Plat Map E Location Map F Site Topography G Hardcover Calculations H Property Owner's List I Permit Record ».1 U2496 Patrick A Jeanne O'Flanagan 3895 North Shore Drive Variances enm Page 3 /Q Application # '2,^^ Ip Date Received" 5/l %/H f Amount laid -^Z9C cmr OF ORONO - variance appucation 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 She Address Property Identills^uon Number (P.I.D.) 1*7- li'i - .^3 0003 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired I ^ 4 _______________________ I (do) ^ono^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) Present me'oFproperty: X residential Zoning District: LR- I Q other (specify) fTifjinlOJ^ ( ^ U'joL.'k./€ APPLICANT 3cA/\//ve Ci Name Phone (home) Phone (work)_ ]£2Az2112. Address: ^ DA City: Ia /A'^KA Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name A( K h AiriL Address: Phone (home)_ Phone (work)_ City:Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 300*00 Describe request in detail: A 6 6^A.^A6-^ A a J^ 6 6~C K._____ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area X Setback: ___Lot Width Front X Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverag 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: (A AJ \Afi A LC N S MA 1 i __ LOT ___________________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) *fs/rf jnth/year) ±1 oo -O ^ t Coverag< L^cshore :««r <Li preventing AA)b .. /. \ • ♦• •• ••• Lot 2. Section 17, Township 1 !/, Range 23. described os beginning at nolnt the North line of said Government Lot 2 distant 1179./5 feet West frof^^ meonder corner on said North lino; thence West along said North lino 52 feet; thence ^uth at U8.5 feetY ^ East at a right angle 52 feet; thence North at o right ongle U8.5 f. to th® point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota. o 74 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 (^4) 23S *5 o o o rsj (Nj 16 o 17 8 18 8 rvj 1----------CO20020 8 21 8 OJ OOZCVJOsJo-i s ^ ” v«j /(49)(80)1 1 1 1 /74 50 30 50 11 50 50 \50 50 1 klso o 24 S (54) 11-4-91 25 o rvj (55) (56) 26 S o 1 i SJI 1525.72 R^S ...... « 1 • i 199.9 i 148.5LO CO (6) 65 LO CO (39) 57 • « « • • * • • • • 4 M ;x;s2:sii ( !) 2: (1 714.15 WEST i) , 111. ; TRACT A (40) TRACT B 184.27 .28 WEST CT C 279.71 rO (43) •• TTro orooo lO in •o CO Psl o («) .x^o •••*•••••1097.85 (13; 300.59 WEST 777.8 65. 5 (22) 16 (23) 263.4 15 (21) 262.3 ir> t^ 405 29 (32) Oo (31) 405 oo ^J/\ ^bJ <}g, 220.77 ■Sf, m in 1 (34) 195.56 6 r \ r- 25 ^Arpt ^nirrKif A m \ oFORi cm 0 400 IV. ElM.. r.’ ' .• •*^ .***•’ >• ■**. ^AHCif an . -A-AMCHRO . SCO >V*. i» 7> < ••••-. ^ ^^:Ndrtb -a- ORONO wtAR cm CTfFt*. TtW II HIGH EILEEN ST 3/^ ^ wAnuTomi *• » ' SOMcASET I EATS I lAYS BE HO CT FOX FOX mxtn\Kh Line mmi '^r„o ^DAHL HO '■'i .* ___ ».y »• i • •• 5c:/:V O ^ . f/»\ V-*.* ; ^y^jsf >> XHORTiY N cittjKur OHMS S • ’rv “ -V .-.BOHNS _ FOINT g ' . ■^ ••i* •• • : ^*"' ORdNO^, -■W • • .• J \ :. JSIEUSaSOi mL ^jsjsaa-oaoTEMm ■7. s V ' .i; . sJi :y^. ..BohM.Point \ ,' Crystal I V\ .••7^ :.' --r-C: •• v^:.V :•■ •iV ♦ / orrMMjL ^ V a wflNNETO m CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 07cn I wiotiwj Orono, Mu ^5356 Mallint Address: r.u. oox 00 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 HARDCOVER QRPI^ANCE ■ In 1975, the Orono City Council adopted an ordinance limiting the percentage of lot area that can be covered with impervious surface ("hardcover") such as roofs, driveways, sidewalks, etc. on properties located within 1,000 feet of a lake. Studies have shown that sediments, oils, and debris carried into the lake from highly urbanized are^ have a detrimental impact on the quality of water in the lake. The intent of Orono's ordinance is to ensure that rainfall run-off will be cleansed by filtering through grassed or vegetated yard areas before entering the lake. Hardcover Zones - Allowed Percentages: 0-75 0% 75-250' 25% 250-500' 30% 500-1000' 35% Hardcover includes: - Roofs - Sidewalks - Paved or gravel driveways - Patios & decks (includes slatted decks) - Tops of retaining walls & rock walls - Decorative landscape areas underlain by plastic sheeting or fabric - Any other surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the ground r^sTRucnoNS for completing hardcovxr calculation worksheet 1. Circle which setback zone (0-75', 75-250', etc.) the calculation is for. f ‘T'1a? ^...7 2.For each item of hardcover within that zone, enter the length and width, and multiply to get square footage (s.f). 3. Add up all the square footages to get total square footage of hardcover. 4. Divide by the total area of property within the zone and multiply by 100 to get percentage of hardcover in the zone. 5.If changes in hardcover are proposed, you should do a "before" worksheet and "after worksheet. If either results in percentages greater than those allowed, contact City staff before proceeding with your project planning! Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 L RUN DATE 04/22/99 BATCH 510 PROP ADDR ' OMNER NAME ; TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR • N I •PROP AOOR. OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER ' NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR . OMNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR « • 36 06-11/-23 33 00^8 03898 NORTH SHORE DR ROGER GRAflNING E WIFE ROGER GRAHNING 3898 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 30 17-317-23 22 0002 03865 NORTH SHORE DR H A E H A DODRATZ HARK A E NARY A DOBRATZ 3065 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 3(; 17-ll''-23 22 0007 0:^925 HliRTH SHORE DR L E F CHRISTINE LYNN R CHRISTINE 3925 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 17-11 '-23 22 0039 03905 . N IRTH SHORE DR HONARD R ALTON III . HOWARD R ALTON III 1635 CONCORDIA ST ORONO HN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI43540I PAGE 27 38 08-117-23 33 0049 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED D H ENGLUHD ETAL COL E HRS D'N ENGLUHD 5101 SPRING ROCK CT FAIRFAX VA 22032 38 08-117-23 33 0050 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED D H ENGLUHD ETAL COL E HRS D H ENGLUND 5101 SPRING ROCK COURT FAIRFAX VA 22032 38 17-117-23 22 0003 03895 NORTH SHORE DR MICHAEL R DAHL PATRICK O'FLANAGAN 3895 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA m 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0006 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED LYNN E FAITH CHRISTINE LYNN E FAITH CHRISTINE 3925 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND HN 55364 38 17-117-23 22 0012 01635 SHADYWOOD RO RALPH E HILLER ETAL RALPH E HILLER 1635 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0013 01645 SHADYWOOD RD RALPH HARVEY FTAL RALPH HARV/EY 1645 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0040 01635 CONCORDIA ST HOWARD R ALTON III HOWARD R ALTON III 1635 CONCORDIA ST ORONO HN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 510 00011 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPEJTTY TAXATION# TO THE BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE . \ • I- % d rtTtw Trnii^fmTi [011*1 roira FriiKTcllMC •KlUi]p:U«Wt] ANALYSISLot Area and Yards: LR-IC (1/2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeshore Setback Required 21,780 s.f.100*75' Existing 10,700 s.f.61' 1 40' Proposed 10,00 s.f 61' j 40' Hardcover:• Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0'-75'4,800 s.f 0 s.f 0% 573 s.f 11.94% 573 s.f 11.94% 75 ’-250’5,900 s.f 1,475 s.f 25% 3,105 s.f 52.63% 3,105 s.f 52.63% Structural Coverag e: Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 10,700 s.f Allowed: 1,605 s.f 15% Existing: 2,115 s.f 19% Proposed: 2,115 s.f 19% U2497 Gail Briner 1760 Shadywood Road Variances 6/7/99 Page? Statement of Hardship : The applicant has included her statement of hardship in Exhibit A. The applicant should also be asked for her testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: 1 . Replacing an existing deck, hardcover amount will not increase. 2. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation : Staff recommends approval of the variances. Attachments A Application B Site Plan/Survey C New Deck Plan D Plat Map E Location Map F Site Topography G Hardcover Calculations H Property Owner's List I Permit Record U2497 Gail Briner J 760 Shadywood Road Variances 6/7/99 Page 3 Application # • ^ ^ ^ Date Receiver ^// 9 / ? 9 Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 (S5C 00 per .each additional variance) *PSi50.00 (no change from ori^al application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address pGo . Property Identification Number (P.I.D.^ \~~12.1002.2- Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date PropertyAcquired _________________________________ I (do) jSo aiso own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: y residential ___pother (specify) Zoning District: rAuntg.pQ( (month/year) 1"^L. :ANT /I • 1 o ■ Phone(home^*|i . 0 oh4* * l3e4M^i APPLICANT Name Address: Wv» \\ v^rrvcA. rr»n. OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Egre ts Phone (worklP^ :• ^ I p (go ^vc.t.y'ujjacCity: o p>^m q___________Zip:____________' ^ Address: i"? c»o Phone (home"! 4>-»/ - ____ Phone (work)_____________ City: r~~^ tg~<L>fvi o Zip: a q ?1 I ", ' EstimatedDESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ *3 Describe request in detail: |^Ia<-c (attach additional sheets if necessary) \ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage y Setback: _X_ Front ___Other (specify)_____ X. Side Rear Average Lakeshore HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing ^ compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ^o rr/A (attach additional sheets if necessary) 6 • • • • • • • m • • I C^TIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR GAIL BRINER OF LOT 17' SHADY WOOD HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA • V t UOJf w Vff “tzz— MTWO . CA»Act 2Ul —1 vu 2 iU tmne mse ■ in nid Ml 1 •r/ivwrdUA s.<b- -\ ^1 tsj r / >■' \ < i 1 V yjr ;\ ««.«t «tUB r\ \ • \7t*A J3 \- \ • UCAL 0€SaS>rON or PRC mSCS: Ul 17. snotfy Wood Thit shows Ui« botfwterUs of tho sbovt d«scrb«4 proporty. ond tho locoUoft ol on osioUng houso. gorogo. ond ol othsr vMio *hordeovor” thorooa N dots not purport to show ony other improvo* inonlj or oncroochmonlj. o ! ¥on morlier Aoorings Wwwn or# bestd iipon on oosunod dolun • w #2497 ;4se*o ITiiT -TOO*SAft SCKMBtO* --------------------------1----------- -----1------1 COFm k GR0NBSR6. INC oomuM AMcm n Miai 4« ttIMUOC JWMiC tO« MIH ttSM i13^7>-4t41 • IOCS* corrr rmai n« »cercAfo% e« «mr •as r*o«ocs tv K OB uoo tfV •wt I AM A BlAV UOOOi BO sc uBi V sc *«« r s*if f lit SCMJE I'■5c OATC 5/13/W JOt 99164 •• • •— m o I ( > ! • f t « I ■ * » » i »_____I »_____I_____I_____\_____:--------- • ill I i I • I I i I ; I I j I ! I * * ....Vi--;H-:^cL c! i..I..i-T- h;44^j • L'-h J—1_ ' • I ' I . . !i » i . J. I FX: .4 »- _ '---------------- pm-r: I------- .2>IO. ^'iiotrr ^------ . . T— -I • I• 4-H--j~J - + J-|- -j----- I'’-*----....i--i -I- -! / ! i I I I •1- — L................. ,4m •••-•«>••«>•• I ...-.i., ! II 1 ' I i r L lei5.bAe^4^<:^‘r4 -f -I—1 f... »—T ...c ... J....I JL» • » i -X..U...4....L...I .r •.-I .. -i. .4. . !— i I t f .—, ------\ . . \............I I I-...-1 -1-- .\.... rj i\;>rnoH 1 1 1 1r \ i ! 1 1 [V-1.___!____!____... .*!-------1 ^ i1___!___1____1 1!___1___;___i___!___:___1 ! I • • • m • m—t «• - • -------•.— ____i ^ • mm mm »• . ..I. "r I I I i I *•« .. J --t j 1_I i»l** . •» '»■ ... ... - -------------f - —I — ... I •I • 1 1 ... I --^3 . -i> VU-'lTfe4-.QM! — -..L.1 .1.....i-i-J- • • I ! I -I.U. • .'i:'1 'fl! 1 : • ■4-i 1 i!• V »•.» •• »• • •| I I ! I %60. 1^ (13) g/ •6 o /s 235.4 »\ / ^ o/•o (O (14) °/ _ 225.3 6 ^ \ • 99. VW MLi 199. 22 I s 0 12HII 200. 13 -------s 185.25 N 98.29 V 120 \ *\ • \ 1 (9)\ y \___12/\ 130 V (J)\ b CHIPPEWA U ORONO WEAJ1 cm MPPfll- VIWOR OFORl CIR 0 HI6H j;; WATERTOWN Irt ufo C EHEEN ST 400 «• Vr-ELM, - 1*^ *. • ^ V • 1 J s'-f-:< ;v '. - •:.- ** -.. *0.— CM I •• SOMERSET ^CEWOO^ ___ 3 • • « • • Une BAYS I BATS < ^'Hny f--; -'•:. FOX ours&*?:^.-,-A? .0 - •.’•rr-'M* -' ^ % •— ,^> • X SK N- j ,,:. 1-*,^-----^ <k '. -VVi^ df^ ir*^' * V ' 5;^ X\ ;:*••• AV :l' ‘>s ^-S'VATor/, 1:4 FOX A.'. : WHITE \ • * -« V ; ?; • . ,\ C\ 1 '•>:;>'?'A SlA s.\: Forest "3AV .* •\ * • ■ • • -I •^>eRAilDVlEWU\AyE . •- •• ■>;vVw ■ .■•.♦ V* V.--:'.VxA*%. P ^r?r; ?.:♦*;^'T' - ■ • * . •- \ ’ f. lr.'., WitakerfS]^ %°'>j z ' *• V ^ '>1^* ^ ^ *ii*jr*T*t^ • *• rV'» • .-\ y ^ • ♦..'» A*/ 99 h «l '■M-y. '■ ’’i) ;i'>—V «t*c-* :• V •-■.■ •. hs^ lint X » m .•\\mm/wooo CMtRATj O ' Vi ORONb^ Arm Vxx- !{ J600 / - • ruw ••. ' .;. :;X . \U » . A m m. ^ _ ,^M *,• ■*■-••-<»•: i:'.- ISLAND -* ••* Fno^ri ‘‘ : • sV-'- .X'-*':/rXA'V-. ^A -.r-BUDOd. Ull . Point ,, ^ i-iHo«uiipn lICKSON AVE \ V - 'X-TV: ‘•. - sir: ^ • •*•,••* W. • • •*<•*. X'* ... 'X’X-XV Sir; . :.: v.».;-’j.. y y\ L J :• *. ; •' • / /J &sssUlQ aTHOM« ^ • • « M n 9 8 f^iio **800 ■ *r • ^ •• •-• •* L-t r r.*- •• • •' •m:/• V' • /■ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ^-7^ 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE _ A- House _____________ X _____________ . - //8 S.F. f Length Width D. Garage C Drivc'.v?*/ D. Sidewalk E.Patio/Dcck X X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric G. Other X X •X X X X X L/^ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A Sl3_ _ _ + B » PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE' A House _____ X LentU) •B. Garage C_ Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape By Plastic Or Fabnc i I X X • X X X X X X X X a / 4^00 xlOO Width 33 at Z3 S73 sl: I erf A S.F. S.F. . SF. S.F. * S.F. S.F.' S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _S.F. _S.F. 7/. ^4 % A B 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. C :.05 \£C G. Other X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A .. . . + B X100 - S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B 8je->M£e. Cor /7, WoaO a:mm BATE 05/17/->9 BATCH 607 PROf ABBR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ABBR PROP ABBR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ABBR PROP ABBR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER ‘ NAME/ABBR PROP ABBR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ABBR I' • EPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SY.'.TEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST SB 17-117-23 :>1 0002 00II5S AOORESU UNASSXONEB AO FXNKELSTEIN AR HUR « DOROTHY FXNKELSTEIN 99: 3 104TH AVE N MAI LE GROVE MN 55309 30 17-117-23 21 0007 OO'iSB ADDRESS UNASSICNED HEIOSPIN FORFEITEO LAND Cl Y OF ORONO P I BOX 06 CR rSTAL BAY MN 55323 30 17-117-23 21 01750 SHAOYWOO OR-TCHEN S SHAW 6R rrCNEN S SNAW 17 !0 SHAOYWOOO RO WA 7ZATA MN 55391 0021 RO 30 17-117-23 21 0024 01760 SHAOYWOOO RO OARYL R CARLSON' DARYL R CARLSON 1780-SHAOYWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 ua REPORT NO. PZ^35^0I PAGE 32 38 17-117-23 21 0003 00036 ADDRESS UNASSICNED AID PZNKELSTEZN ARTHUR 8 DOROTHY FXNKELSTEIN 9933 lOATH AVE N . HAPLE GROVE HN 55369 38 17-117-23 21 0006 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITEO Ltm CITY OF ORONO . . P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY KN 55323 30 17-117-23 21 0008 01795 SHADYWOOD RD L 8 D PILGRAN LEROY 8 DELPHZE PZLGRAH BOX 81 NAVARRE KN 55392 38 17-117-23 21 0020 01780T SHADYHOOD RO T B 8 H L SMANSON THONAS B 8 HARILYN L SHAN!;ON 1740 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA KN 55391 38 17-117-23 21 0022 01760 SHADYWOOD RD GAIL S BRZNER GAIL S BRINER 1760 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA KN 55391 38 17-117-23 21 0023 * 01770 SHADYWOOD RD B J 8 T J PETERSON BRADLEY 8 TRACI PETERSON 1770 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA KN 55391 38 17-117-23 21 0025 01790 SHADYWOOD RD DONALD J URBAN DONALD J URBAN 1790 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA KN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 507 OOOU I CERTIFV THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORNATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTKENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO TICE BEST OF KY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATC i t I • * # . • •? I TO:FROM:DATE;SUBJECT:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern June 7,1999#2499 Thomas B. and Marilyn L. Swanson 1740 Shadywood Road Variances - Public HearingZoning District: LR-1C One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area:20,250 s.f. (.93 acres) Municipal sewer and water Application: The applicant has proposed to assemble a temporary screen enclosure, 10' x 17', on an existing deck. The screen enclosure will be assembled in the early spring and taken down in late fall. The applicant seeks approval of variances for lakeshore setback and hardcover. The screen enclosure and existing deck are located within the 0'-75' lakeshore setback. The structural coverage increases with the assemblage of the screen porch, however the hardcover amount does not change. This application requires the following variances: 1 t 1. 10.22, Subd. 1 (A): To permit a lakeshore setback variance to allow a 10' x 17’ screen porch on an existing deck to be located within 75' of the lakeshore. 2. 10.22, Subd. 2 and 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(l): To permit a hardcover variance to allow 1,973 s.f. (21.5%) in the 0'-75' lakeshore setback area where 0 s.f (0%) is allowed. The screen porch will be assembled on an existing deck, therefore net increasing the hardcover amount. U2499 Thomas & Marilyn Swanson 1740 Shaefywood Road Variances 6/7/99 Page / 1 ANALYSIS T.ot Area and Yards: LR-IC (1/2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Side Yard Lakeshore Set Back Required 21,780 s.f.100’10’75’ Existing 20,250 s.f.166’10’55’ I^ardcover Calculations: Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0 ’-75’9,150 s.f.(0%)1,973 s.f (21.5%) 1,973 s.f (21.5%) 75’-250’11,100 s.f.2,775 s.f (25%) 3,722 s.f (33.5%) 3,722 s.f (33.5%) Structural Coverage : Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 20,250 s.f Allowed: 3,038 s.f (15.0%) Existing: 2,503 s.f (12.4%) Proposed: 2,673 s.f (13.2%) Statement of Hardship: The applicants should be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. U7499 Thomas & Marilyn Swanson 1 740 Shadywood Road 6nm Variances Page 2 Issues for consideration: 1. The screen porch will be temporary, from spring to late fall. 2. The screen porch will be located on an existing deck. 3. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: • Staff is recommending approval of the variances. Attachments A Application B Site Plan/Survey C Plat Map D Location Map E Site Topography F Property OvMiePs List G Permit Record ».1 H2499 Thomas & Marilyn Swanson / 740 Shadvwood road Variances 6/7/99 Page 3 • • ■/\ ■ Application # Date Received Amount Paid Z SC CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) xv.encwiu variance ree $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 l'j4o Property Identification NOmber CRI.D.) 11- Date Property Acquired /0/93 applicmAttach legal description to application if not included on required survey. f land. Present use of property; residential ___pother (specify)________ Zoning District: LQ-^[C^____________________________________ Xmonth/year) I (do)r(do not) also own the^djacent parcels of land APPLICANT 'TUon\/^^ B, SudAf/SdV Name 1. Soa/ Address: L a. ii/oori OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (horne d V7/ ____ Phone (work)__________________ City:_________________Zip: f / U.ol Phone (home), Pho.ie (work) Address:City:Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $____ Describe request in detail: ^rl/}^Ur^ UtA-CJo^Utr^ i til If n' ^ (attach additional sheets if necessary)•T^ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width V Setback; T Front Side Hardcover ____.Lot Coverage 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 additional sheets if necessary) • • • • •• Certiftcatcof Survey for for Arthur end Dorothy Flnkelsteln of Lots 14 and 15. Shady>Wood Hennepin County. Minnesota Zone 0-75- 75-250 Total area 9t50t Sq. Ft. moot Sq. Ft. Hardcover 23474 Sq. Ft. 4640t Sq. Ft. X hardcover ■ 25.6 X 41.6 X I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct representation of a survey of the bound aries of Lots 14 and 15, Shady-Mood, the location of all existing buildings. If any, there on and the existing location of all wood tltbers, concrete, plastic covered planted areas, and wood decks thereon. It does not purport to show any other loproveaents or encroacheents. COFFIN I 6R0NBERG, INC. Scale: Date-: 0 : 1 Inch ■ 20 feet July 19. 1985 r«vi ‘*«jT-*3*es Iron Barker : jrtcjc #4/ Hark S. Gronberg Reg. No. 12755 Gordon R. Coffin Reg. No. 6064 Engineers and lard Surveyors long lake, Hlnnesota 5 ^r-27 9 #54^9 C *. ....................... >A fr f AOT s9. -^.' w. *. •• .r - ’ •I —W •'• - f L/*>C:^‘o?.W Skogsberg Point SgA/@ • >•.•:• •: ■;. "is .\*j ;BOHNS •MOIT ^.•; • •• :.v O ,,:.r: .Sy<-. -\ <•«« ^ ‘S^PfeORONOre ^.••#. ... . ««.* •.. .^Shad^ ISLAND ■• > .* . * -V •. Fagerntss Point. 4. • ^ ♦ • • •• '•’W'. 'i-'- • •rv.^ .V • • ; • T •> •• * ^ J« • rx 4<. • ••*. :• ^^{c^^u^ j n. IKKSON AVE S-SaOHMAkf 7 5*s«% J!££«»A»f u I TOk^ s. V •; \ • ’v 10 IU> O 077 Jl on »v;* “* on**# T=r’*s \k M1N^ .M.VIA }j^Sprinf! 3ia.PtsljB / //i l-OUMMIU >«KLE».r^( )Park CA^AJIJtt ot rw « su in i 3 fir • «i umn \n M /^ » r): j^^GOOSE • ■' ”'^::^ISLAND <i\SH0R£LI«l o Cr.\ o iO CO • W-'.f: .• -.... RV •%»• i A>i?-r*. Carman • c‘<6 \V, • • \' cSsw ORO .V • • Permit No . • -AB-5. U13L vy/3 Ltr\C'i- f « V7sr» 'P7DG PERMIT RECORD Date ‘j-to-i.r /• /'3-g/ • •* 7- 3^ -.f 5 ! » » Type of Perr.it PAAr HOOSF HGOKUi> /^lOO/r/OA/ . Hook a/' /. fAinn? >v>»s'Tir>e. 4- M" ■*44^ ;■■■ . ■ « ■ ■ ■ ■———. Reiioof^ :« ’<0 c L RUN DATE 05/19/99 • * • BATCH 507 PROP AODR .OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR 51! 17-117-23 21 0002 0U0S8 ADDRESS UNASSI6NED A A D FINKELSTEIN ARTHUR « DOROTHY FiraCELSTEXN 9<)33 lOATII AVE N HtVPLE GROVE HN 5D369 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY ZNFORHATXON SYSTEK PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 50 17-117-23 21 0003 0003B ADDRESS UNASSZGNED A A D FXNKELSTEZN ARTHUR’ A DOROTHY FZNKELSTEIN 9933 104TH AVE N HAPLE GROVE HN 55369 REPORT N). PI635901 PA;E 31 36 17-117-23 21 0005 01719 FAGERNESS POINT R3 UUREEN E DARLING UUREEN E DARLING 1719 FAGERNESS POINT RD WAYZATA HN 55391 L L’. ■ C C . • • • . *• . 3n 17-117-23 21 0006 PROP ADDR . 00036 ADDRESS UN/VSSX6NED ONNER NAME HliNNEPIN FORFEITED LAND TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO NAHE/AODR P 0 BOX 66 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR CRYSTAL DAY MN 55323 36 17-117-23 21 0019 01720 SIIADYWOOD RD M E PEMBERTON ET AL TRUSTEE HALTER H/NARILYN E PEMBERTON 1720 SHADYHOOD RD HAYZATA HN 55391 311 17-117-23 21 0022 PROP ADDR * *01760 SHADYHOOD RD OWNER NAME GAIL S BRINER TAXPAYER . GAIL S BRINER NANE/ADDR 1760 SHADYHOOD RD , * HAYZATA HN 55391 . t • 36 17-117-23 21 0007 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNET HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND cmr OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 36 17-117-23 21 0020 01760 SHADYHOOD RD T B 6 M L SWANSON THOMAS B 6 MARILYN L SWANSON 1760 SHADYHOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 21 0023 01770 SHADYHOOD RD B J 6 T J PETERSON BRADLEY I TRACI PETERSON 1770 SHADYHOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 21 0016 01710 SHADYHOOD RD JOHN P FITZPATRICK JOHN P FITZPATRICK. 1710 SHADYHOOD RD HAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 21 0021 01750 SHADYHOOD RD GRETCHEN S SHAW 6RETCHEN S SHAW 1750 SHADYHOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 507 00011 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS FEPRESENFED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMAIION AS CT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECOR3S OF THk HENNEPIN COUNTY DEI ARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEI •tLJLtI . 1 • • • r N). PZ43540X PA;E 51 TO: Exhibits: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City AdministratorPaul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator#2500 Orono Independent School District #278 795 Old Crystal Bay Road (High School)Conditional Use Permit Amendment-Public Hearing 00011 COR IS »Esr Application Applicant Letter of Request Existing Survey Existing Site Plan Proposed Layout and Grading Plan High School-Geometric, Paving, Signage and Striping Plan Grading and Utility Plan Approved Landscaping Plan Elevation Views Proposed Floor Plan for Media Center City Engineer Comments Property Owner Notification List Zoning:RR-IB Comprehensive Plan: One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) Institutional/Urban Service Area Application: In April of this year the Orono Independent School District #278 was approved to make improvements to the student and faculty parking lots for the high school as well as construct a new Middle School and gymnasium. The school district also is proposing an application for a Media Center addition to the existing High School. The Media Center would be located on the northeast side of the School and would be one story in height. Please refer to the enclosed attachments for the proposed location of the addition. Tlie Planning Commission and City Council did review a site plan showing the proposed location of the Media Center addition when the Conditional Use Permit and variances were granted to permit a new parking lot arrangement on the site. However this is the first application for this phase of the project. M247I Orono High School Conditional Use Permit Amendment June 21.1999 pagt^l The applicant has indicated the addition will be constructed together with the other improvements on the Orono campus. PARCEL INFORMATION Property Identification Number; (High School) 33-118-23-21 0001 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota ZONING Minimum Zoning Requirements Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street 2 acres, dry buildable 200'50'50'30 ’50' » I The Media Center will meet all required setbacks for the RR-IB zoning district. The addition will be located approximately 180' from the Old Crystal Bay Road right-of-way Zoning Requirements for Schools The RR-IB district is intended to provide an area for low dc v'’ty residential development and limited agricultural uses. Schools are allowed in this district as a conditional use. The Zoning Code requires that no building or parking area be located within a required yard. The Zoning Code allows building in the district to be a maximum of 30' in height. The proposed addition is under that height allow by the Code. The building height is one story plus parapet totaling 16'-8" above grade on the west side of the building. All setbacks have been met by the proposal. ^2471 Orono High School Conditional Use Permit Amendment June 21. 1999 page-2 ' . ! ♦ ; wijfwniw roira r!M^f:TiTtP.irtlMirtlUMlPIItlllltltrniiTt iircirtw Mirtiurt rtimomoif I •) Ctl K«11 li 11 Ut Nil Ctl^WIiTiniTiTil^ rinfriTiKt] -y Application # ^ Date Received"1 ^ Amount Paid ^ crry of orono - general land use application PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ni n r.RY<;TAi ray roah n Type of Application to be Filed CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Property Identification Number (P.IJD.) Phone (home)_APPLICANT Name ISP #278 C/0 WOLD ARCH. & ENG. phone (work) 651-227-7773 Address 305 ST. PETER ST.____________ .City ST. PAlll . Zip ss.TSfi-0n4fi OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)___ Name INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #27ft Phone (work)___ Address685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD N. City LONG LAKE, MN 1>.0. box 46 ' ------------------------ Date Property Acquired____________________________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____SI75.00 Residential Accessory Use S250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore _____PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _____$150.00 Renc>val Fee (no change from original application) _____After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee 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 ZiD65356-0046 (month/year) ^ V. ^ •; pmnl iiLysi.y: May 18,1999 305 St. Peter Street St. Paul . MN 55102 FAX 651.223.5646 715-H Tollcate R oad Elgin. IL 60123 847.608.2600 FAX 847.608.2654 NET: HTTP/Zv CW.WOLDAE.COMMichael P. Gaffron ■ Senior Planning Coordinator 2750 Kelly Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 Re: Independent School District #278 Orono High School Media Center Addition Commission No. 99016 Dear Mr. Gaffron: Independent School Disti'ct #278 is pleased to submit the attached Conditional Use Permit application for the Orono Hi^ School Addition. The High School Addition features new media center space for high school students. These spaces total approximately 7,800 gross square feet in accordance with the referendum. The attached documentation supports the conditional use application, as well as items referenced in section 10.09, Subd.. 3 of the Orono zoning ordinance: 1. The High School Ad( 4* gross square feet and one story. 2. The building height: one siufy pius parapet totaling 16’-8 ” feet above grade on west side of building. These numbers are in accordance with sections 10.21 and section 10.75M of the zoning ordinance. 3. Schematic building elevations are included. It should be noted that the site work for this project was submitted and reviewed by the City of Orono, on February' 17, 1999, and was assigned application #2471. The work we are currently submitting for is only for the Media Center addition. Therefore, only sheets C 1.1-Cl.2, and C1.7-C1.10 are submitted for reference only. Respectfully submitted, WOLDARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS R. Scott McQueen, AlAR. Scott McQueen, AlA Associate rr %j £f««/ EmpUjtr Letter to Michael P. Gaffiron Page Two Enclosures: Schedule Of Drawings (City C.U.P. Submission Packet) Sheet C1.1 Partial Topographic Survey-Ice Arena/High School Site Sheet C1.2 Site Removals Plan Sheet C1.6 High School-Geometric, Paving, Signage and Striping Plan Sheet C1.7 High School-Grading and Utilities Plan Sheet C1.8 Middle School and High School-Landscaping Plan Sheet C1.9 Construction Details Sheet CLIO Construction Details Architectural Plan Site Lighting Legal Description (See sheet Cl.O) Certified Property Owners List cc: Jay Pomeroy, AJA Pat Arlig, Arlig Environmental Kevin Sullivan Vaughn Dierks George Gorbatenko, Jr. Susanna Strand « ean/990l6/n)ay99 tf ^N BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK ^ 6516361311 05/28/99 15:A6 0 :01/C 1/1 Bonestroo ^5 Rosene ■ Anderlik & Associates ’ Engineers & Architects Bm„stfoe.itostf»e.*/Hiemk Afior,.u.-t ir« « OppofM»ty f. Olio G86rt«!t'0C-Pt..W«rpn< l>P *«L‘,|on ft . Oltn«<t e Tufnfr. Pf • Tdriw B C om, ft • too»ft O. ^ ' ffODert W. #o«ent. PC imh J Sul^ M. C I^A.. .nnv» RUh-.d W. fOlttr. ft. . 0;.v.<l o ft • BoOrr. C Pu »«a AlA . A^^ wa T. fl*«im.AA. ft . rcoit».cui ft • r p S.rtnnrPWail4mfoaM.LS. •»0C.mM«fl5A ’>t'‘* A9nr»M*-"fl*‘^'*’•-• Allan kicn Schmidt. PF. OfUti St Patil. Pocnesicf d/.nm<r o*ki Si t U.uil MM • M.Uv.^ui#e, Ul itVbfiic* vyw>*^^neiif60 May 28, 1909 Mr. Paul Weinberger Assistant Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Rc: Orono Middle School Flic No. 139-2471 Dear Paul: 28. The ovete\l e'«)i''8 P'“' “PP'”'* ^u"* f™"< '““''y Please contact nte at 651-604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this matter. mSirorROSENE. ANDERLIK A ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc; Greg Gappa, City of Orono Lyle Oman. City of Orono ------------------------T--------;A-<t Paul MN 55113 - 651-636-4600 • Fax; 651-636-1311 2335 West Highway 36 ■ 5t. paui, rviiM • • •K fI ‘ r I Q Hi 'ii'iiii' i'l ■H.-i" ‘-v ' • li - V r-lA «n jurBj^rt I ,CTIX'- 2«t=jE^ »-->sC%s|»»A'; ~X'\I I.- B'lvTim: y. V II Xj Xel / I.- I ViI V 11 il!/f \\ —-- m mmmmmm* •N 9 \ ,/f I •N o t i. H II •.,«!-------- O'\)U • © ‘r ••'.'A-..r.Vi/;,s i' * V ^ /1' .» ' < .' 4 ^ ‘ ' ***^^^B •: / ’ '"r; 4 J, ' ' ''’f’ ''"‘w 'V i . .., ;' ll^l! gl !H i T> M iim kM.ifm imyim isi? dl.T^.P Ik ♦V^VML*ip 4/,>v 2^-j:gjsg Si : ggg^i • • • M i!^S wnM lvfvM ‘S2 P* 6 ii 1 Jl 11 •I ^a ©liii IUl|lllli!ii! • ®®® ‘ H| r*mo MMI’i!I'y I i Hi i ? 4 j. I V rU i M' }jf ii' ■ i {|i ri i?n sj« in* ’-I I i «I li ill 1 ^ fii i li! {t I ;! I! h IH ! I I fi f i ! r' |i i • • • JB || ii|j II !I HI I I ill!ii I • t i 11i! Si1 B (• P •\ 0 ( 1 1 & I1 0 0» «• «> If 1-!■J!\\\ 1 k k ;n 1 %«‘ II I<•H ll ii 1 li il !!!! !!!!M 2*2*■ ■\ \ < 9 •• •1 b| li i 1 ^ !iii s 1 1 !f i i s 1 < !i 122 M 1 * ? ‘Uli Mumh (/) Ho m X (A » Co H C Xm tno Xmoc 5o zo >zo c 5 ■D !;z “S' k £/) ?■ Z ^ii 1/ - N N^ — Vj Ifn ■I '7 •{V % • L UVm Od0z aparap^pis.^ Zo 713 § 0 Sz S < oz /•SKij:s. > «> > , ( W _.Vt n >j « § IM \zJ s: w O o tsJ % W BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK ^ 6516361311 05/28/99 15:A60:O1/C 1/1 Bonestroo Rosene Anderllkfit Associates ’ Engineers & Architects #»fiVn;o.Wi OiioO BoMtifoo. i*t • Jo»rpn< Amu*fn». i>» •«.«-..» I w»vAi> rt • fcItnJd f Turner. Pf • f'le^n R Coon, n . woert 0 icnorncm P£ • irrry a nouMWn. n «0D«rr W Roianr tl. m>C Sui.w> M. tOci..^ CTA RUhjid W. P01t«f. PE. • DaviO O lotkni *. • RnOr.t « Puv..», AI A. . A H ^ M„h,.rtT. 0*u«.w»aa.PE . fcOKHeUI HE , Krnnrth P PC • Mjjk (I SOlft C i-rtrcy P W-lllynuon. P.t. LS • Patcrr I Kt-iwmin • Agnri M diryi • r ........ Aiiin kicn Schmidr. PC- St Paul. Pocheiicf u^»U V* I l•.ull WM • ..<u: tie. Ul WVbf'le ’wwWb^AellfCO May 28, 1999 Mr. Paul NVcinbcrticr Assisiiml Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re:Orono Middle School File No. 139-2471 Dear Paul: 28. TO. ove,.U 8,»Jing api»B« «c«Ptabl.. W. .rlon co„,™i shu.,id bcj,. p;b« ";,7d?.lcult.ro„" ..commendations »td pavement design have been submined. Please contact nte at 651-604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this matter. BONF.STROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK Sc ASSOCIATES, FNC. 7^ Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa. City of Orono Lyle Oman. City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN lillT. 65I-636-4600 • Fax: 651-635-1311 •; ! L j • / RUH DATE 05/24/99 BATCH 502 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AODR ^ PROP ADDR . OWNER NAME TAXPAYER' ^ NAHE/AOOR K ' PROP ADDR OWNER NANS . TAXPAYER ' NANE/AODR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR •PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR PROP ADDR t • OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR 38 28>X18-25 SI 0001 02040 . SIXTH AVE N STONECATE FARH INC STONECATE FARN INC 8851 FLYING CLOUD OR EDEN PRAIRIE NN 55344 38 28-118-23 31 0006 02005 SIXTH AVE N J F HAGEN 8 S N HAGEN JEFFREY F 8 SHELLEY N HAGEN 2005 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-2S 32 0008 05045 SIXTH AVE N J 8 B RYDER JOHN D 8 BARBARA Y RYDER 3045 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 33 0003 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO INOEP SCH DIST B278 ORONO INOEP SCH DIST R278 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 S3 0010 03085 JANESTOWN RD 0 8 B URSON CARY A LARSON 3085 JANESTOWN RD LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 34 0003 00795 OLD CRYSTAL BAY Ml N SCHOOL DIST NO 278 ORONO SCH DIST NO 278 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD LONG LAKE NN 55356 HENNEPIN.COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 28-118-23 51 0004 02995 JANESTOWN RD J 8 K SWANSON JANES T SWANSON 2995 JANES TOWN RD LONG LAKE NN 55356 58 28-118-25 51 0007 02885 SIXTH AVE N C R 8 G L TIHN CHARLES 8 GERRY TXNN 2885 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 32 0009 05025 SIXTH AVE N B A 8 F A NCKEE BRENT 8 ANGELA HCKEE 3025 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 33 0008 03065 JANESTOWN RD J P 8 S K KOOB JOHN P 8 SUSANNE K KOOB 5065 JANESTOWN RD LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 33 0015 03050 JANESTOWN RD J R 6RABEK 8 P u 6RABEK JANES R 8 PENELOPE J CRABEK 3050 JANESTOWN RD LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 42 0002 02700 SIXTH A'vE N JOHN LEIN JOHN H LEIN P 0 BOX 177 LONG LAKE NN 55356 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 6 • • 38 28-118-23 31 0005 02945 JANESTOWN RD H 8 J WAHLIO . MICHAEL. J 8 JO ELLEN WAHLIC 2945 JANESTOWN ROAD S LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 31 0008 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED LORRAINE N NIICHEL LORRAINE N NIICHEL NO 4 JANESTOWN ROAD LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 33 0001 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO INO SCHOOL DIST NO 278 ORONO IND SCHOOL DIST NO 278 685 OLD Ck-YSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 53 OOOV 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED JANES R GRABEK ET AL JANES R GRABEK 3050 JANESTOWN RD LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 34 0002 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED JANES R GRABEK ET AL JANES R GRABEK 3050 JANESTOWN RD LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 28-118-23 42 0004 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNEl ROGER A FAZENDIN ET AL LOU 8 JEANNINE BEASLEY . 1265 MAPLEWOOD DR LONG LAKE NN 55356-9530 . • RUN DATE 05/E4/99 « • BATCH S02 ^ HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PROP ADDR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP ADDR . OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER nahe/addr: 30 20-110-23 42 0005 ' 00030 ADDRESS UNASSICNED INDEPENDENT SCHL DIST R270 ATTN SUPERINTENDENT INDEPENDENT SCHL DIST R270 005 OLD CRYSTAL DAY RO N LONG LAKE MN 55350 SO 20-110-23 43 0000 00030 ADDRESS UNASSICNED INO SCIKML DIST NO 270 IND SCHOOL DIST NO 270 AOMIN OFFICE- SUPERINTENDENT 005 OLD CAPITAL BAY RO N LONG LAKE HN 55350 total BATCH 502 00024 30 20-110-23 43 0005 00770 OLD CRYSTAL DAY RD N IND SCHOOL DIST R270 (ORONO) ATTN SUPERINTENDENT » IND SCHOOL DIST 1270 (ORONO) 005 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE KN 55350 30 33-110-23 12 0007 02700 KELLEY PKWY H R A CITY OF ORONO H K A CITY OF ORONO 1355 BROWN RD S WAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PACE . 7 30 20-110-23 43 0000 00030 ADDRESS UNASSICNED ALBIM F THIES ET AL ORONO INOEPENDT SCH DIST 278 005 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO N LONO LAKE MN 55350 30 33-110-23 21 0001 00705 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N SCHOOL DIST NO 11 ORONO SCHOOL DIST 1270 005 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONO LAKE HN 55350 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AM ACCURATE AMD REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS SnS SiSpiN CoStY MPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE, BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. n ■ \ • « 4 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Bonestrco. Rosene, Anderhk and Associstes. Inc. Is an Affirmative Actioev'^quat Opportunity employer Principals: Otto G. Bonestroo. RE. • Joseph C. Anderlik. RE. • Marvin L Sorvaia. RE. • Richard E. Turner. RE • Glenn R. Cook. RE • Robert G. Schunlchi. RE. • Jerry A. Bourdon. RE. • Robert W. Rosene. RE. and Susan M. Eberlin. C.R.A.. Senior Consultants Associate Principals: Howard A. Sanford. RE. • Keith A. Gordon. RE. • Robert R. Rfefferle. RE. • Richard W. Foster. RE. • David O. Loskota. RE. • Robert C. Russek. A.I.A. • Maik A. Hanson. RE. • Michael T. Rauimann. RE. • Ted K.FIeld. RE. • Kenneth R Anderson. RE. • Mark R. Rolfs. RE. • Sidney R Williamson. P£.. LS. • Robert F. Kotsmith • Agnes M. Ring • Michael R Rau, RE. • Allan Rick Schmidt. RE. EnrJneers & Architects Offices: St. Paul. Rochester. Wlllmar and St. Cloud. MN • Milwaukee. Wl Website: wwwiioncstroo.com May 28,1999 Mr. Paul Weinberger Assistant Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ;j 1 ‘rv9 .* .0 Re:Orono Middie School File No. 139-2471 Dear Paul: We have reviewed the grading plans for the proposed Orono Middle School. The site is located east of Old Crystal Bay Road, south of County Road 6 and north of Orono City Hall in the southeast quarter of Section 28. The overall grading plan appears acceptable. We recommend that swales b: graded between the nvo ball fields to direct drainage north and south. This would serve to minimize sending .•> rmwater flows from the easterly ball field across the westerly ball field. All proposed erosion control should be in place prior to any grading activity. We will prepare a final review of the utility and storm sewer plans once storm sewer calculations, pond calculations, geotechnical recommendations and pavement design have been submitted. 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 Lyle Oman, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 651-636-4600 ■ Fax: 651-636-1311 1 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator 7 DATE: SUBJECT: June 7,1999 #2501 City of Orono 3601 Bay side Road Conditional Use Permit and Variance Zoning District: LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acre) Exhibits A B C D E F G Application Survey Plat Map 1950s Air Photo Location Map Hardcover Calculations Property Owners List Application: The City of Orono has maintained a municipal dock and walking path for many years on the north end of Stubbs Bay. A recent survey on an adjacent property has determined the dock and path leading to Uie dock ai'e not located on City owned property, but rather on the adjacent property to the east. The City of Orono has a 30 ’ wide platted right-of-way leading from Bay side Road to Stubbs Bay 'Oak Street' of the Bay View Park addition. Relocating the dock and walking path within the undeveloped Oak Street (Please refer to Exhibit C) will require filling a small amount of wetland for the path. The enclosed air photo showing the City dock and walkway is from the 1950s. Orono has maintained the dock for public use since it was originally constructed on the Stubbs Bay site. Until recently the City was unaware the dock was not located on public property. i!250l City of Orono 360! Bayside Road Variance and Conditional Use Permit 6/21/99 Page I This application requires the following: 1. Conditional Use Permit to permit greater than 10 cubic yards of fill within 75' of the OHWL of Stubbs Bay. 2. Variance to allow 180 s.f. (15.0%) of hardcover where no hardcover is allowed. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.03, Subdivision 19: Filling of more than 10 cubic yards within the shoreland area of Lake Minnetonka requires the City Council grant a conditional use permit. The total fill for the project is 21.11 cubic yards of fill. The fill would create a base to accommodate a walking path to access the dock. The proposed walking path will be consistent with the existing path located on the site. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1): To permit 180 s.f. (15.0%) hardcover within the 75’ setback from the (OHWL) where no hardcover is allowed under normal conditions. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'1,200 s.f.0 s.f.0 s.f.180 s.f.To permit a 180 s.f. walk path. Permit Request from Minnehaha Creek Watershed District The proposed project requires a permit to be granted by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for filling of the wetland. Jim Hafher, of the Watershed District, has stated the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) allows filling of wetlands up to 400 cubic feet if the City demonstrates the project has no other alternatives to avoid filling of a wetland and the project minimizes the amount of fill required for the project. Prior to any work within the wetland the Watershed District must issue a permit for the project. B2501 CityofOrono 3601 Bayside Road Variance and Conditional Use Permit 6/21/99 Page! % - f r Surrounding Properties The dock is located south of Bayside Road on Stubbs Bay. There are no residences located immediately adjacent to the dock. The adjacent properties located north of Bayside Road are zoned LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential (2 acre nunimum lot size). The immediately adjacent lot to the dock site is owned by the property owner to tlie north side of Bayside Road. The lots shown on the enclosed plat map below the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka remain on record, however all are tax forfeited properties. Issues for Discussion 1.The dock is owned and maintained by the City of Orono. It has been provided as a public dock for many years for use by the public. 2.Relocating the dock will require filling a small portion of wetland for access to the lake. The amount of fill requires the City issue a Conditional Use Permit. 3.The dock is for pedestrian use only, not for boat storage. No parking is allowed along Bayside Road. 4.There is no increased impact to adjacent property owners. The dock and walkway \vill replace what has existed for many years. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit and variance request to relocate an existing dock based on the following: 1. The dock has existed as a public structure for many years. 2. The dock will be located on public property and continue to serve as a public access to Lake Minnetonka. 3.The amount of fill required for the project will not exceed what is necessary to provide adequate public access to the dock. i^250! City of Orono 3601 Bayside Road Varlc.nce and Conditional Use Permit 6/21/99 Page 3 J Application # I Date Received Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPUCATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address <r1 M E>&S Ba V lL<0Ab Type of Application to be Filed C?, U, Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)______________________ APPLICANT p Name C\l\j T Uy^onffName ^ QT UV cTiQ___________^Phone ( Address gg keHt'y Po\ricvv/£ay City OroY\a Phone (home) 611- 24 ^-*5 ^ Phone (work)^ / I • ^ 00 Zip s ^ ^ ^4 Phone fhome^l 611- 0^ Phone (work)~5jZ«- Zi p ^ OWNER Of different thM applicant) Nam e Cl tv di OY'p)n0 ___________ AddressTJIS ’Kg)ley ?(\»'t^WAy City Orof\6 Date Property Acqmred___________________________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 75,00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $300.00 CommerciaPIndustrial Use V k $250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grad ’mg and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls witiiin 75' of lakeshore «d ) (month/year) C u P (s>L; ^ > JO c( \l O-Vl <^^^JUL K ok.y “^ c.oowiV' PWD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change fi’om original application)" Afler-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee 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 / / ft I i ; iij Birr* va5*40'« ••• ••• • • m. 2 - C%\1 11 i-i) .»£• *.69 « .37 B* 19) s "Xz yrx . ^■^ .’ ) j •:k y.. ' ^ %./ -5 • • • .* f .I/. '...» \ .* e •»« \ -»« '5 .-1(U5)' 4 / 2 3,•\ 3 1 K *...««•.jh • : * 1 • . i '», 91 ^ 1 ! ' * ■' .w t -1 • u*.!•...• ‘;rmkk ;• (:ioi (CHRISTINE UT\J ■H.T. *2.5 ■ \i sf tr I’3) / • > ??.T5l 9 •>. . ■»* I-. Ti 15 •• 1 •4/%• *1 3 P\7P 'HC ■'. -oi 9 \ 9 ; r!e is ' i > t A (li) j^2*5.«8 'S - MO- -a-V • ic - ...^ ••:o I ;:j5 j___ :6) . / / / { / HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE O rr opened JHg6TB4C-«ARDCOVER IN ZONE . A. House _____________ Length 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. •Si^alk E Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underl^ By Plastic O. Other X X X 30 X X X X X X X X X 180 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONp f BO + B O X 100 - JSO /zap SE SE S.F. SE SE • SE SE SE SE S.F. SI. SE SE S.F. SE S.F. S.F. % PROPOSED HARDCOVER !N ZONE A. House _____________ X Length ,Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By PlL'tic G. Other X X X X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _ __ + B _ _ X 100 - S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SE S.F. S.F. SE SE SI. SI. SI. SI. S.F. % A B A B I*. r . • r r rI RUN DATE 05/27/99 BATCH 002 PROP ADDR , OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR «• PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR PROP AONR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWieil NAHE TAXPAYER NAH:/AOOR PROP AOOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP AOOR OWNER NAHE TAXPUER NAH-/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST RIIPORT NO. PX435401 PACE 1 SB 05-11/-23 12 0010 03500 BAYSIOE RD K R « L T OLSEN KEVIN R O.SEN 3560 BAYS IDE RD LONO LAKE HN 55350 38 05-117-23 12 0011 00165 BEDERWOOD DR 6E0RCE S TERP 0E0R6E S TERP 165 BEDERWOOD DR LONO LAKE HN 55356 38 05-11/-23 13 0011 00220 BEDERWOOD DR ALXSHAH S AZAD ALISHAH S AZAD 200 BEDER'HM)D DR LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 IS 0017 03560 BAYSIDE RD KYLE FAHILY LTD PTHRSHP RICHARD I KATHLEEN A KYLE 1140 TONKAWA RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0047 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED KYLE FAHILY LTD PTHRSHP R KYLE 8 K A KYLE 1140 TONKAWA RD LONO LAKE HN 55356 36 .05-117-23 IS 0048 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED K R 8 L T OLSEN KEVIN R OLSEN 3500 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 21 0011 03640 BAYSIDE RD HERBERT T OLSON 8 WIFE HERBERT 8 JANE OLSON 3640 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 21 0012 03625 EXLEEII ST JOHN G PIDGEOH 8 WIFE JOHN 8 HA6DALEN PIDGEON 10912 GLEN WILDING LANE BLOOHINGTON HN 55431 38 05-117-23 24 0039 00038 7DDRESS UNASSXGNED HERBERT 1 OLSON 8 WIFE HERBERT 1 OLSON 3640 BAY! IDE ROAD LONG LAKI HN 55356 38 05-117-23 24 0117 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HH 55323 TOTAL BATCH 002 00015 .38 05-117-23 12 0»12 00165 BEDERWOOD UR HARGARET H WILLIAKi HARGARET H HILLXAHS 185 BEDERWOOD DR LONG LAKE HN 553.i6 . 9 38 05-117-23 13 0041 03558 BAYSIDE RD J W t J P BARTLETT JEFFREY f JO ANNE BARTLETT 3568 BAYSiDE ROAD LONO LAKE HN 55356 if SB 05-117-23 IS 0049 00222 BEDERWOOD DR JEFFREY 0 HUELLER JEFFREY D HUELLER 222 BEDERWOOD DR LONO LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 24 0023 00036 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HERBERT T OLSON 8 WIFE HERBERT T OLSON 3640 BAYSIDE ROAD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 24 OUS . 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 ic i h TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE: SUBJECT: June 9,1999 #2498 Molly and Draper Jaffer>' 2620 Fox Street Sketch Plan Review Zoning District: RR-1 B One Family Rural Residential District (2 Acre) Lot Area:4.1 acres Attachments A B C D E Application Location Map Section Map Existing Survey/Siie Plan/Topography Registered Land Survey No. 1249 Application: The applicants have requested a Sketch Plan Review for a two lot subdivision for property located at 2620 Fox Street in Orono. The existing 4.1 acres is developed as one residential site with access being gained from Fox Run. The proposed lots would create a property boundary along an existing drainageway. The benefit to dividing the lots along the drainageway is to minimize the amount of drainage easement area to be dedicated. Areas dedicated for drainage purposes arc not considered dry buildable land outside of the standard 5 ‘ drainage easement typically dedicated along property lines within a new subdivision. Access The front lot line for the existing lot is defined as that part along Fox Street, however the driveway access is from Fox Run. The concept plan would maintain the existing access to Fox Run and create the front lot line along Fox Run. The new lot (Lot 1) would front on Fox Street. Easements Utility and Drainage easements shall be shown as 10’ along the exterior lot lines and 5' on the internal lot lines. §149% hiotfy and Draper Jafferay 2620 Fox Street Sketch Plan Review 6/21/99 Paget The City also will require drainage easements over wetlands on the property. No wetlands are designated as "Orono" wetlands based on the wetland inventory completed in 1974. Septic The applicants shall complete septic evaluations to be submitted with application for Preliminary Plat. Septic testing must be completed on both properties resulting in two sites on each lot. Lot Area and Yards RR-IB (2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Side adj/Street required 1 acres 200*50’3u JU Lot 1 2.085 ac.321’NA NA NA Lot 2 2.018 ac.529’19.6*NA NA * The lot area does include all drainage areas and the pond located on the property. Pertinent Facts 1. Under the proposed lot arrangement Lot 1 is 2.085 acres, and Lot 2 is 2.018 acres No drainagewiys or wetlands have been subtracted from this gross area. 2 This subdivision would be classified as a Class III subdivision because flexible zoning is required for Lot 2 as the existing house is located 19.6' from the propert>* Ime where 50' would be required for a front yard setback. A building is located within the required rear jriuu ufLui 2. 3.A small pond is located on the southeast comer of the property that was constmcted on the site. The pond could be filled or relocated on the property. 4. The drainageway may require one of the lots to be under the two acre minimum lot size required for subdivision in the zoning district. §2498 hioUy and Draptr Jqffkray 2620 Fax Sot€t Sketch Plan Re\i€\¥ 601/99 Fate! Issues for Discussion 1. ^ ■ 3. 4. 5. 6. A delineation should be completed to determine if the septic sites are an adequate distance from each of the proposed septic sites. Septic testing shall be created on both lots prior to application for Preliminary Plat. Will the subdivision require alteration of the drainageway allowing drainage along property lines? The survey should provide more detailed drainage information. The proposal requires variances to be granted for existing structures located on Lot 2. A lot area variance may be required for one of the lots should one lot result in less than 2.0 acres dry buildable. Is the proposed lot division consistent with the locality? Applicant is advised to contact Staff regarding all submittals required for Preliminary Plat application. ik249% Molly and Draptr Jaffiray 2620 Fox Street Skttch Plan JUyiew 6/21/99 Page 3 Application # bate Recdyed iT- 1 1-^ S Amount Paid i CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISIGN APPUCATION PROPERTY LOCATION She address 2-0 . _____________ _______________ Property Identification Number(]^) OW - / I ^ COI Q Please check one - Property sabstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT . . ,, Name iVU)![' Address ^Vo 7, Chv \AJrjL\j^Za <! •*- _______________________________________ ^ jo 4^ry ’ Phone (home) yy(p~0Q3>Ss rfev >1 YnM Zip5^^/t>hone (work) 2S§!^3^/^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _____ Address City__Zip Phone (home) Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size '2-0 • »4.> Present use (check) Present Zoning District Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels . Residential; no. of units !_ Other (specify)_________ PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New.Building Sites ___Existing UnitsNumber of Building Sites P- Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) New Units Total Units Units per Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) ni (O-n-5® L07 ^ LOr 16 J9KS FOX STREET LCT // 5 THIS ITEM MS BEEN MICROFIIMEO ii£blSTui£0 UKu SGnVoI HO. BoniBPZN coofn, tamsotk Z barvbj cartiZy that in aeoordanea vitb tba prcTlaioos of Quptar 306, MLmofota Sututoo of 1749 aa awsdad, I birs soPT«7ad tbe fcllcvlrs- doteribod tract of land in the OoMuty of Haanapia and State of MUmaaota, to vltt lot 15, auflivvc'a SobdlTlaloo Ibabar 229# Bnoapla Oountr, MLnnaaota; and that tho aurraj ahonn baraoo it a oorraot daxiaaatiOD of aald aonrej. 90 pV CoffinQordoo land tervajror and Flanaar —• — Long laka, Klnaatota Tbia raclatarad land aurraj vma approrad and aeoaptad bgr tba Villaga Council of (b^o, MLnna- tota, this ___ daj of _______ A.D. 1967. VILLACS CCKWCIL OT ORC0O, KDOIGSGrA ftr - aafor B|r dark Sctlat 1 inch ■ 130 fact Data t iprU 12# 1967 o I bw aoniawot oJLH I Judicial landoark Dear Inc 3 shovn nr? N & 11 \ ** 1 1 • 1 1 /' 1 L111 1 1 ii 1 1 / 1 / A m-n^—h'o»noXIS ---------------------^ ,.,. _______ '\' fc\l.^j:........'Tv • \ vv\ V ■*^v * \>\ * s PJ-N ’. \ ■^•58' ------------ ' • \\ V • _________• VI *. V\mA N* \ ^ V 'ft \ *» 'O/ / tV/•'V ■'''a/ / ' ' X 'V M § / , / I y 7 . / • • • m «k % ^ iV y /.-'y / I iQr» / r _. —/ > _____// ' _____J ^ .................. ^ ^ _________---------------------------------- » — ^ 7^*" “ ” V'i'. • — — " — — —— ^ mmmm ^ / L«L — I _____/ ’A \ I I I I I I I f , «« O ^i^ • * / I i«»« • • • / N 0t*09 ’00“ W* I \ ••' I \ / F « I 1 I • XT#I S99J7 *«<«•«• *•' .tfy ‘..A r •«••• • • « »mm < t 8 8 '3 M • . ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Elizabeth Hawn, Commissioners William Stoddard, Dale Lindquist, amd Janice Berg. Commissioner Sandra Smith was absent. The following represented City Staff; Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, Senior Planning Coordinator Mike Gaffron, and Recorder Jackie Young. Council Member Charles Kelley was present. Chair Hawn called the meeting to order nt 6;2a p.m. OLD BUSINESS (#1) #2469 STEVEN AND JO WEBSTER, 500 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH - VARIANCES Steven and Jo Webster were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants appeared before the Planning Commission at their April meeting twhere they were directed to revise their plan to create a greater setback for the proposed garage and residential addition from Dickenson Street and the alley. The Applicants have submitted a revised plan which places the proposed garage five feet off the property line and seventeen feet from Dickenson Street. The existing house is located 19.1 feet from the side property line. Weinberger noted that the only other user of this alley is the property to the south. The City currently owns and maintains this alley. Variances to the side yard adjacent to the street is required to permit a setback of five feet where fifty feet is required; to permit a 17 foot side yard setback where 50 feet is required; and to permit a 36.8 foot front yard setback where 50 feet is required. The Zoning Code requires a 30 foot setback for garages with access served towards a street. City Staff has determined that this revised plan is more in conformance with existing codes and that it is Impossible to place an addition on the residence except for one small section of the property without encroaching into a setback. Weinberger staled the existing garage located on the property line will be removed. Webster commented that the little room that is located between the house and the garage will be incorporated Into the house to allow for an extra five feel. Webster stated they are putting the house at an angle on the lot to try to take advantage of the southern exposure. Lindquist stated he does not have a problem with the application, noting that this plan Is a real improvement over the previous plan. Hawn remarked that she appreciates the efforts the Applicants have made to revise their plans. Stoddard inquired how the potential land deal Is proceeding. Webster stated that they have made an offer, and inquired whether the Planning Commission could Page 1 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2469 STEVEN AND JO WEBSTER, CONTINUED recommend that this land be sold. Stoddard stated that the Planning Commission is not In a position to recommend that. Webster stated that if the Websters assumed the cost of the property line rearrangement, they probably would be in favor of that. Webster remarked that he has proposed to deed them up to 20 feet to Incorporate into their own driveway if they so choose. Hawn inquired when the existing garage would be removed. Webster replied that that structure would be removed right away. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Stoddard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2469,500 Orono Orchard Road South, to permit variances to a side yard adjacent to the street (alley) setback of five feet where 50 feet is required; to permit a 17 foot side yard setback where 50 feet is required; and to permit a 36.8 foot front yard setback where 50 feet is required, and to allow a setback less than 30 feet for the garage with access off the alley. Approval is contingent upon removal of the present garage. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#2) #2169 MICHAEL RENARD, 1185 TONKAWA ROAD • AMENDMENT OF VARIANCE Mr. and Mrs. Michael Renard were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting approval of a variance addition in revising the structural amount already approved in a 75-250 foot hardcover variance approved in 1996. The Applicant is proposing to remove an existing shed and its associated hardcover and replacing it with a larger shed. The existing shed Is currently located 2.36 feet from the property line, with the new shed being located 10.36 feet from the property line, which would remove it from the side yard setback. Weinberger stated a hardcover variance was approved in 1996 to allow the hardcover coverage in the 75-250' area to be 26.7 percent. The Applicant is proposing to remove the shed and to construct a 12' by 21' shed. The proposed development would not increase the amount of hard cover. The existing shed is 12' by 14'. The Applicants are proposing to remove a sidewalk to help reduce hardcover. Structural coverage is not an issue on this lot. The City will benefit with moving the new shed ten feet from the property line and no longer in the side yard setback. City Staff recommended denial of this variance addition with the understanding that hardcover would be increased on the property. Staff also has concerns about trading concrete for structural coverage. Renard had no comments regarding his application. Lindquist inquired whether Staff would be recommending approval if the hardcover would remain at 26.7 percent. Weinberger stated they would still be recommending denial of this application because the hardcover still exceeds 25 percent and no hardship has been demonstrated. Page 2 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2169 MICHAEL RENARD, CONTINUED Tonkawa Road, for an amendment to variance based on the fact that no hardship has been demonstrated. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Item #3 follows Item #6. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#4) #2483 TRENT REZABEK, 3200 BAYSIDE ROAD • VARIANCE RENEWAL. 6:50 p.m. > 6:56 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Trent Rezabekwas present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting a variance renewal for a front yard setback variance for the property located at 3200 Bayside Road. The previous resolution was adopted in March of 1989 and expired on March 13,1990. The property was subsequently so.'d and the addition never built. The Applicant is proposing to construct an 8' by 12' entryway on the south side of the existing residence. The existing residence is located entirely within th } required front yard and street side setbacks, which requires a variance for any additions to the existing residence. This property is located within the LR-1A, One Family Lakeshore Residential Distrirt, which has a minimum of two acres. The property is comprised of approximately 1.1 acres. City Staff is recommending approval of this application, noting that special conditions applying to this structure are peculiar to this property. Weinberger stated that it is impossible to construct an addition without encroaching into the setback. Hawn inquired whether the addition would be constructed on a cement pad. Rezabek stated that an engineer will be out to look at the building pad to determine whether it is a floating pad. Rezabek remarked that he probably will remove the old pad and put in a new foundation. Weinberger stated that the Building Code would require a new foundation with footings. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Peterson seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2483, 3200 Bayside Road, to permit a front yard setback variance to allow an 8* by 12* entry way to be constructed on the south side of the house 18.4' from the front yard where 50' is required. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Item #5 follows Item #3. Page 4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 (#6) #2487 ROBERTA A. ROTH, 1251 BRIAR STREEET > VARIANCES, 6:58 p.m. - 7:03 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Roth were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are proposing to remove an existing house and construct a new one on the existing foundation. The current foundation was replaced in 1985. This property Is located in the RR-1B, One Family Rural Residential District, which has a minimum of two acres. The property is comprised of 10,500 square feet. The Applicant applied for and received approval to construct a detached garage on the property. Variances are needed to lot area, lot width, front yard, and side yard setbacks. City Staff is recommending approval of this application since the hardcover or overall structural coverage will not increase. Mrs. Roth stated that the residence was not kept up and they would like to replace it with a new structure, noting that it is not worthwhile to make improvements to the existing house. Hawn inquired whether the building inspector has had an opportunity to inspect the foundation. Mr. Roth remarked that he has requested that Lyle and Mike from the City come out to inspect the property but they have not done so at this time. Weinberger stated that it is the building official’s opinion that it will meet current codes. There were no public comments. Stoddard moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2487, 1251 Briar Street, to permit variances to lot area, lot width, front yard, and side yard setbacks to allow a 1,008 square foot house to be built on an existing foundation subject to the foundation being certified as to structural soundness by the City ’s Building Inspector, and to allow the existing garage to remain on the property during the time of construction. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS (#3) #2479 PETER ANDREA COMPANY, 555 STUBBS BAY ROAD NORTH, CLASS III SUBDIVISION, 7:04 p.m. • 7:14 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was not present. Hawn noted that the Applicant was requested to submit some required information before tonight’s hearng. Weinberger stated he did speak with the Applicant this afternoon regarding tonight’s meeting, noting that the Applicant did not indicate whether he would be present at tonight’s meeting. City Staff is recommending that this item be tabled until next month. Hawn moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2479, Peter Andrea Company, Page 5 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2469 PETER ANDREA COMPANY, CONTINUED 555 Stubbs Bay Road North, to the June 21st meeting. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Hawn Inquired whether there were any members present In the audience who had wanted to speak regarding this application. Six to eight people indicated that they were here tonight regarding this application. Hawn commented that this application should be removed from tabling to allow the people in the audience to comment on this application. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant can be contacted to see if he would be attending tonight's meeting. Weinberger stated he attempted to contact the Applicant prior to the meeting but was unable to reach him. Weinberger remarked that the Applicant was to have contacted him to tell him of his plans for tonight. The Applicant indicated that he does intend to submit revised plans. A resident in the audience commented that this was the second time that the Applicant has not appeared. Lindquist stated that the Planning Commission does not have much choice but to table this application. Lindquist inquired whether the residents would be notified of the next hearing. Weinberger stated that the neighbors are required to receive notice of the hearings. Lindquist commented that the Planning Commission has no assurance that the Applicant will appear at the next hearing either, but that they will be required to reappear at the next hearing if they wish to speak to this application. Hawn stated that the Applicant is proposing to revise his plans, which hopefully will alleviate some of the concerns that the neighbors may have. Lindquist commented that he would like to see the neighbors involved somewhat in the planning of this subdivision, noting that there are issues regarding access onto Stubbs Bay Road and how that will impact the properties on the other side of the road. Hawn requested that the people who are in attendance leave their name with Mr. Weinberger. Weinberger stated that it is the intent to develop the street into a cul-de-sac temporarily and it is the City's position that 27 feet be dedicated in the event that a road to the north is needed to serve those lots. Weinberger noted that a portion of the property will be dedicated to MnDot at the time the new interchange is put in. Weinberger stated that City Staff is aware that one property will become landlocked once the new Highway 12 improvements are completed. Hawn requested that her motion be reinstated to table this matter. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONTINUED (#5) #2485 ALEX AND CATHY JOHNSTON, 940 BROWN ROAD SOUTH > CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 7:15 p.m. - 7:22 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Page 6 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2485 ALEX AND CATHY JOHNSTON, CONTINUED Alex Johnston was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a "guest house". This property is located in the RR-1B, One Family Rural Residential District, which is a two acre zoning district, and is comprised of 5.11 acres dry and 4.55 acres dry contiguous. A bam exists on the southeast portion of the property that the Applicant is remodeling to install a guest apartment. The barn is classified as an oversized accessory structure as it exceeds 1,000 square feet. Weinberger commented that as a condition of approval the property owner will be required to file a restrictive covenant on the property that states, in part, that no future subdivision will be approved that places the structure within a lot that has no principal structure, and if the property is subdivided, the oversize accessory structure and principal structure will be located together within a lot that meets that minimum lot area requirement for the given size of accessory building. Weinberger stated that the property does not have a conforming septic system. The Applicants have submitted a septic design that has been approved by the City, but a condition of approval shall be that a final plumbing inspection be held until the septic system has been installed and approved by the City. City Staff is recommending approval of this application based on the existing structure meets all the yard requirements established by City Code for a guest house conditional use permit subject to the conditions that a restrictive covenant is filed on the property for an oversized accessory structure and that a final plumbing inspection be held until a septic system has been installed and approved by the City. Alex Johnston had no comment on his application. Hawn commented that there does not appear to be any areas of contention with this application. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Stoddard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2485, 940 Brown Road South, to allow a guest house conditional use permit subject to the structure meeting the yard requirements established by the Municipal Code for a guest house conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: The property owner files a restrictive covenant on the property for an oversized accessory structure as outlined on Page 1, items A, B, and C, of the May 10,1999 Zoning Administrator's Report, and that a final plumbing inspection be held until a septic system has been installed and approved by the City. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Item #7 follows Item #10. (#8) #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, 2490 OLD BEACH ROAD - VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 7:23 p.m. - 8:17 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Rick and Gail Luzaich were present. Page 7 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED Phil Reznick, Attomey-at-Law. was present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting variance and conditional use permit approvals for lakeshore land alteration, including grading and construction of retaining walls within 75' of the lakeshore and within a bluff impact zone; and further request an after-the-fact approval, including approval of a restoration plan, for intensive vegetative removal within 75 feet of the shoreline and within a bluff impact zone. No restoration at this time has been completed. Weinberger noted that the members of the Planning Commission have had an opportunity to look at the property. Staff has concerns regarding the removal of the trees within 75 feet of the shoreline due to possible erosion into the lake. The Applicant is proposing to construct a four foot retaining wall to extend along the slope. Staff has issues regarding the proposed landscaping plan as it does not contain any provisions for replacement of the trees that have been removed. Staff is requesting that reforestation be required as part of this application. Wally Case, Landscape Architect, has had an opportunity to review the landscaping plan and is recommending that this property be reviewed by a forester to determine what trees would be best for this type of soil. City Staff is recommending denial of the proposed landscape plan and requests that the Applicant submit revised plans. Currently the stumps have not been removed. Staff would also like to have the opportunity to review this application over time to insure that proper restoration of this area is achieved with similar trees. Reznick inquired whether the City was requiring a replanting of mature trees approximately the same size removed or if the Applicant could replace this type of trees with a smaller size tree. Weinberger staled that the City is requesting that the Applicant replace the trees with fairly mature trees, noting that it is not possible to replace some of the larger trees. Reznick expressed a concern regarding the cost of replacing the trees and suggested that the City look at what is right for the property rather than punishing the property owners. Reznick noted that the Applicant has been charged with a misdemeanor. The Applicants are willing to cooperate with the City to accomplish the restoration, but they would like to keep this property in line with the other surrounding properties. Reznick presented photographs to the Planning Commission and noted that the other properties do not have the lake hidden from their view. Reznick requested that the Planning Commission address the house plan, noting that the Applicants would like to start work on this property In the near future. Reznick Indicated that they would like to remove the stumps and replace with some shrubbing, and expressed a concern that the equipment that would be needed to replace the trees could cause the soil to be disturbed further. Hawn indicated that she would like to see this property restored as quickly as possible to prevent erosion. Hawn noted that the City has allowed rift-raft in cases where erosion has occurred, but that the retaining walls are probably not going to be looked upon favorably by the Planning Commission. Hawn slated that the Applicants will need to get together with the City foresters to determine what is most feasible for this property. Luzaich stated that he is fine with restoring the property, noting that he has spent money trimming and pruning the other trees on his property and had merely removed what he thought was old Page 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 (/l^2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH. CONTINUED unhealthy trees. Stoddard remarked that the Planning Commission has to act on what Is before it tonight, noting that the Planning Commission is merely a recommending body and that any plans would need to be approved by the City Council. Stoddard commented that the Applicant should work with City Staff on the reforestation, noting that he would like to see some mature trees planted to screen the neighbors' view as well as the proposed hardcover reduced. Luzaich stated they had proposed the retaining walls in an effort to save the hill. Weinberger commented that the stumps could possibly be removed but that the roots should remain to help hold the dirt in place with new plants and trees planted. Reznick inquired whether anything could be agreed to tonight. Eric Paulson, Old Beach Road, stated that he has lived in this area for the past 21 years and belongs to the Lafayette Bay Association which has been proactive in trying to preserve the natural beauty of Lafayette Bay. Paulson remarked that the property owners were perhaps ignorant of the laws regarding removal of trees by the lakeshore. Gaffron remarked that the City of Orono did not and would not issue a permit to allow this type of tragedy to occur, noting that the City was not notified of this until a week after the work had already been completed. Gaffron stated that the City of Orono is adamant in its position that this type of land alteration not occur near the lakeshore and that it is impossible to get back what has been lost. Weinberger stated that Wally Case is recommending that this property be reviewed by a forester who will review the file and look at the types of soils and determine what types of trees could be planted. Weinberger stated that they would like to have this process started sometime this week. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant's landscape planner could meet with the forester. Gary Mueller, Landscape Architect, stated he would be able to meet with the forester, noting that they are willing to discuss this property and the recommendations that they have. Mueller requested that the Planning Commission provide some guidance as to what they feel should be provided for this area. Hawn stated that retaining walls are not the answer. Stoddard stated that hardcover should be reduced and that he would like to see some larger trees planted. Lindquist remarked that the Comprehensive Plan is clear and that everything possible should be done to restore what was lost. Lindquist stated that they should meet with the City's forester as soon as possible to resolve this issue. Lindquist commented that this application will need to be tabled since the proposal is not acceptable as presented tonight. Berg commented that she is in agreement with the other members of the Planning Commission and would like to see some larger trees planted in this area to help restore what was lost. Luzaich inquired whether the stairway down to the lakeshore was okay. Paged ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED Stoddard stated that he should work with City Staff to determine the appropriate width of the stairway, noting that the Planning Commission is not attempting to deny access to the lake by the Applicant. Mueller stated that they would like to remove the stumps, grind them down to the point where they are no longer protruding, which will require some minor grading of the slope. Mueller stated that they would also like to eradicate the poison ivy and other nuisances that occur on the bank. Mueller inquired whether they could commence work on the retaining wall as a means to prevent erosion, noting that they will have a civil engineer out to inspect the site to insure that the wall will stay in place. Mueller commented that they would like to have a better understanding of what type of trees and size of trees the City would like to see for this area, noting that it is impossible to replace some of the larger trees. Hawn stated that they would like to see as large of trees planted as possible that have a good chance for survival, and that perhaps the forester would be in a better position to address that. Mueller inquired whether this application could proceed to the City Council on the condition that agreement is reached with City Staff on a level of treatment that is appropriate for this area. Stoddard stated the Planning Commission can vote on this application or table the application, noting that the Applicant wilt not be able to do any grading or retaining walls. Mueller Inquired whether the stumps could be removed, Lindquist stated that in his opinion no work should be done given the history of this application until it has been approved. Lindquist remarked that he would not be comfortable approving any work on this property until City Staff and the City's forester has had an opportunity to look at this situation, and that in his opinion this application should be tabled. Stoddard indicated they could spray the poison ivy. Muoller inquired whether all the weeds could be sprayed. Stoddard stated that only the poison ivy may be sprayed. Hawn commented that the weeds may be cut. Hawn indicated that this application will probably be denied if voted on tonight. Weinberger indicated that this application requires variances and a conditional use permit that needs to be acted upon regardless of the landscape plan. City Staff is willing to work with the Applicant on this matter. Luzaich requested that his application be tabled. Hawn inquired whether the 60 day time limit needs to be extended. Weinberger inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to waive the 60 day limitation. Luzaich indicated he would be willing to waive the 60 day time period. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #2492, 2490 Old Beach Road, Page 10 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, CONTINUED with the understanding that the Applicant will work with City Staff and the City's forester on an appropriate plan of action for restoration of the lakeshore and bluff area, and that the 60 day time period is waived. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#9) #2493 KATHERINE TAYLOR HOMES, 692 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES, 8:18 p.m. - 8:47 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Katherine Taylor was present. Barb Hugh, property owner, was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting several variances to construct a two car garage where a one car garage exists and to attach a deck to the second garage on the property. The property is served with two garages, the first is a one stall detached located on Tonkawa Road and the second is a two car garage attached to the house. This property is located in the LR-1B, One Family Lakeshore Residential District, which has a minimum of one acres, and this property consists of .36 acre. The Applicant is proposing to construct a deck off the back portion of the two car garage with a spiral staircase located next to it, which would allow access to that area. Currently there are building permits issued to this property for the remodeling of an office area above the existing garage. The deck becomes an issue because it is new hardcover located over existing hardcover, and any time that structural coverage is placed over non-structural hardcover, it requires a hardcover variance. The addition of the deck would not increase the hardcover on this property, nor would it increase the amount of structural coverage allowed on the property. The deck would bring the structural coverage to 15 percent. The Applicant has proposed two options for the garage. Option A would move the garage back to the required 30 foot distance for a garage loading space of a right-of-way. However, the setback in this area is 35 feet, so it would still require a variance to the street yard setback. This option increases structural coverage to 16.4 percent, exceeding the 15 percent allowed. This option also allows the occupants of the property easier access in and out of the garage during the winter months when the steep driveway approach prevents safe access into the property. Hardcover would also increase in the 250-500* setback. Currently hardcover Is at 42.5 percent. Only a small portion of the residence is located within the 75-250* setback. The Applicant is proposing hardcover in the amount of 70.2 percent in the 250-500* setback. Weinberger stated Option B would utilize the existing location of the one stall garage. The Applicant would construct a second stall to the existing one stall garage. This maintains the garage within the required setbacks on the property, but still would require hardcover and structural coverage variances. This option would not increase the hardcover as s'lbstantially as Option A. This option simply places an addition on the existing garage, which is located approximately two to three feet off the property line. The new garage proposed in Option A would meet the 10 foot setback. City Staff has reviewed this plan and have determined that the Applicant could construct a two stall garage that would be located 10 feet from the street property line and 10 feet from the side property line if the doors are faced away from the street. However, this option probably cannot be done since City Code requires a distance of 30 feet from the garage doors to the street. Tonkawa Road is a Page 11 ORONO Pi.ANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2493 KATHERINE TAYLOR HOMES, CONTINUED fairly busy street and would present a safety issue. A variance is needed to allow hardcover to remain at 49.7 percent in the 75-250* lakeshore setback, and that would permit the addition of a 6.6 foot deck by 23.6 feet located directly on the attached garage with a spiral staircase. The deck does meet the required setbacks in the zoning district. The second variance being requested would allow for the provision of a two stall detached garage located nearTonkawa, which would also require a variance to the hardcover. The Applicant is claiming a hardship on this property due to the high water table and the fact that the residence was constructed without a basement. This would allow the Applicant some additional storage space. City Staff is recommending denial of this application for additional structure for the garage. The garage would bring the structural coverage above the 15 percent allowed for this lot. City Staff is recommending approval of the variance for the deck above the attached garage. The hai^cover would not increase and the structural will meet the required ten foot side yard setback for the zoning district, and it will provide access to a sliding glass door being located on the second floor. Kathenne Taylor stated that the Applicant is getting married in July and are looking at combining two households and are in need of additional storage space for vehicles. Taylor noted that the new garage would have better conformity to the required setbacks than the existing garage. Taylor stated that retaining walls exist behind the existing garage due to a steep hill. If the garage is located further back, more driveway would be needed. Hugh stated that the staircase also would serve as a fire escape. Hugh remarked that they would like to construct a new garage due to the fact that they are in need of additional space for the storage of vehicles, noting that the foundation of the garage needs to be redone. Hugh stated that more variances are required for the existing garage than would be for the new proposed garage. Hawn requested that the Planning Commission members comment on Option A first. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that they were in favor of the deck. Hawn requested that the Planning Commission members comment on Option B. Bei^ commented that she understands the need for the new garage, but noted that the hardcover would be increased. Lindquist stated that unfortunately some lots have already reached th<» maximum on hardcover and no further Improvements can be made. Taylor inquired whether the hardcover could be done differently. Hawn stated that the Planning Commission rarely approves structural coverage over 15 percent. Stoddard stated that he concurs with the 15 percent limit, noting that to reach the maximum 15 percent allowed, the Applicant could add 158 square feet of hardcover, and that he would like to see the Applicant try to reduce hardcover on this property. Page 12 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2493 KATHERINE TAYLOR HOMES. CONTINUED Hugh commented that she has reduced the size of the driveway. Hugh expressed frustration that the hardcover limit promotes outside storage of vehicles and other items. Lindquist stated that unfortunately hardcover needs to be limited somehow. Lindquist commented that a hardship needs to be imposed by the land, noting that a steep slope does exist. Hugh inquired whether she would be permitted to add 158 square feet of hardcover. Stoddard stated she would be allowed to add 158 square feet In structural coverage. Hugh inquired whether wood chips were okay. Hawn stated that wood chips are fine but that rock and plastic underiayment are considered hardcover. There were no public comments. Lindquist stated he would be In favor of the deck but not the garage. Hawn moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of the portion of Application #2493, 692 Tonkawa Road, to permit the construction of a deck above the attached garage over the existing hardcover, with an attached spiral staircase, and to grant a variance to the hardcover in the 75-250 ’ lakeshore setback. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Hawn moved, Berg seconded, to recommend denial of the portion of Application #2493, 692 Tonkawa Road, to permit the construction of a two stall detached garage 30 feet from the right-of-way and 10 feet from the side lot line due to the structural coverage being in excess of 15 percent. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#10) #2494 DAN ANDERSEN, 2885 LITTLE ORCHARD WAY - VARIANCES. 8:48 p.m. - 8:58 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Dan Andersen was present. Lee Statman was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting a variance for an undeveloped lot within the recently approved Little Orchard Addition. When the subdivision was approved, a stable remained on the lot located near the front yard setback line and encroaching into the required 30 foot side yard setback. It was the subdivider’s intent that the building be removed; however, the Applicant has requested the stable be moved to a conforming location on the lot. The building would be relocated to the rear of the lot meeting all required yard setbacks. Weinberger stated a restrictive covenant woutd need to be placed over the lot for an oversized accessory building because it exceeds 1,000 square feet. The Applicant is also requesting that the City allow the west property line to be identified as a side Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2494 DAN ANDERSEN, CONTINUED lot line to allow a 30 foot setback rather than 50 feet as required for rear yards. When this subdivision was approved, the front yard was determined to be that portion of the lot adjacent to the cul-de-sac. The side yards are the south and eastern lot lines, and the lot has two identiried rear lot lines, which are the west and north property lines. The Applicant is proposing to re-establish this property line as a side property line or, in essence, granting a variance to allow the 30 foot side yard setback. City Staff had a concern regarding the actual function of the lot if the westerly lot line is re-established and the house is constructed to face directly to the east and located directly on the setback line, this would then essentially serve as a rear yard. Weinberger indicated he has spoken with Dan Andersen regarding this and Mr. Andersen would like to see language included in the resolution recognizing that this is a side yard and shall function as such at the time the property is developed and a house is constructed on the lot. City Staff recommends approval of the variance to permit an accessory structure to remain on the property subject to the condition it is located as shown on the survey/site plan dated July 9,1998, and that the property owners file a covenant on the title for the oversized accessory building with the conditions noted in the Staff Report. City Staff is also recommending approval of the request to amend the Little Orchard plat to reclassify the west property line from a rear yard to a side yard based on the condition a tiouse is constructed on the lot that will not orient a back yard to the west protecting the property to the west, and the front yard classification be extended to include the entire southern property line. Andersen stated the house will be situated to face at an angle. Andersen noted that the barn is in good condition and that is why they would like it to be relocated rather than removed. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2494,2885 Little Orchard Way, granting a variance to permit an accessory structure to remain on the property subject to the condition it is located as shown on the survey/site plan dated July 9,1998 on file with the City of Orono, and the property owners file a covenant on the title for the oversized accessory building with the conditions noted in the May 17,1999 Staff Report, and to recommend approval of the request to amend the Little Orchard plat to reclassify the west property line from a rear yard to a side yard based on the condition a house is constructed on the lot that will not orient a back yard to the west protecting the property to the west, and the front yard classification be extended to include the entire southern property line. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Recess taken at 8:58 p.m. • 9:01 p.m.) (#7) #2488 GREGG KLOHN, 4455 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES, 9:02 p.m. • 9:17 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Gregg Klohn was present. Page 14 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2488 GREGG KLOHN. CONTINUED Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to rebuild a garage that was damaged in the May, 1998 storm. The new garage would be constructed In the same area of the existing garage. The Applicant is proposing to construct the new garage four feet wider and five feet longer than the existing garage, which would make it 14* by 24'. Variances are required for side yard setback and rear yard setback. The existing and proposed garage is located within the 250-500' lakeshore setback. A variance was granted in 1998 for hardcover to be 35.1 percent instead of the allowed 30 percent. The Applicant then constructed an addition smaller than approved and removed a shod that was also located in this hardcover area. This reduced the hardcover to 32.8 percent. The proposed garage would increase the hardcover in this setback area to 35.3 percent. Weinberger stated that it is possible to locate the new garage in a spot that would meet the two side yard setbacks and that he would like the Applicant to respond to that possibility. The proposed side yard setback is three feet and the rear yard is 10.9 feet, which does m''et the setback required. City Staff is recommending denial of the variance due to the fact that the new garage could be built on another location of the lot and be within all the setbacks. Klohn stated the existing garage was destroyed by the storm last year which has prompted his application tonight. Klohn commented that there are easements along North Shore Drive. Klohn stated that he would not need to request a variance if he replaces the existing garage, but he would like the garage door to face the street. Klohn remarked that the location proposed by Weinberger is viable but he has not considered that possibility before tonight. Klohn stated that if he constructed a garage in that location, the roof of the garage would be located close to the ground and might not look as appealing as a garage that matches the house. Klohn stated if the garage is constructed into the hill, he would like to construct a 24' by 22' garage. Klohn requested that the Planning Commission approve his application as submitted. Lindquist indicated he agreed with Staffs recommendations. Hawn indicated she also was in agreement with Staff, noting that a two car garage would exceed hardcover and possibly structural coverage. Weinberger commented that the property could handle more structural coverage, noting that this proposal would bring it up to approximately 10 percent. Klohn commented that he could perhaps construct a deck on top of the garage if it was located into the hill. Klohn stated that it would probably still require a variance to the side yard setback. Lindquist stated that it could be located ten feet from the side yard setback. Klohn remarked that in his opinion it would probably be 6.5 feet. Hawn stated that this application would probably be denied as presented, ard inquired whether the Applicant would like the Planning Commission to table this application tc allow him additional time to review his options. Page 15 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2488 GREGG KLOHN. CONTINUED Klohn stated he would like the application to be tabled. Hawn inquired whether he would be willing to waive the 60 day time limit. Klohn Indicated that would be fine. Berg moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #2488,4455 North Shore Drive, to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans, and to extend the 60 day time limit to 120 days. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW (#11) #2490 CHARLES AND SUE VAN EECKHOUT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH • SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Charles Van Eeckhout was present. Gaffron stated the Applicants are requesting to subdivide a 20 acre parcel to create nine sewered building sites ranging from 1.0 acre to 1.8 acres in area. This proposal would require rezoning the area from RR-1B, Single Family, 2 Acre, to R-1A, Single Family. 1 acre; extension of the sanitary sewer from the City of Long Lake; expansion of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area; variances to the back lot ordinance; creation of a private road in a substandard corridor; variances to lot width; creation of a shared driveway crossing of Long Lake Creek; construction of a road or driveway through at least two delineated wetlands; creation of a wetland outlet for Park; and construction of an 800 foot private driveway extending from the private road to serve Lot 4. Charles Van Eeckhout stated that he has owned the property for the past 29 years. Van Eeckhout stated that he has done other subdivisions within the City of Orono and has made it a point to avoid the need for variances as much as possible. Before purchase of this property. Van Eeckhout commented that he checked with the City of Orono regarding what regulations existed regarding possible subdivision of this area and that this proposal encompasses essentially what he was told he could do at that time. Van Eeckhout stated that in 1975, the City rezoned this area, which changed this area from a one acre density to two acre, and that rezonIng should be considered as a taking of value, and that this property should be allowed to be developed under one acre standards as he was originally told. Van Eeckhout remarked that he did not receive any compensation for the taking, which in his opinion decreased the value of his property. Van Eeckhout noted that a lot of new rules and regulations have been adopted by the City over the years, and requested that the Planning Commission rezone this area back to whal it originally was at the time of purchase. Gaffron commented that the City of Orono would disagree with the opinion that the rezoning was a taking. Van Eeckhout stated that he has quarter acre lots to the north adjacent to his property, one acre lots on the northwest, and on<* acre lots to the south, and wetlands to the east. Van Eeckhout remarked that in essence his ^loperty was spot zoned at the time the area was rezoned. Van Eeckhout commented that this subdivision would contain one acre lots, which in his opinion are Page 16 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2490 CHARLES AND SUE VAN EECKHOUT, CONTINUED sufficient lots, noting that two acre lots would cost more, and that due to environmental concerns because of its location by Long Lake Creek, this area should be connected to City sewer. A large number of trees also exist on the property which cannot be cut down. Van Eeckhout stated that he would like to have a forester out there to review the situation to determine whether some of the trees can be cut down to help the undergrowth grow back. Van Eeckhout stated he is willing to work with City Staff on these issues. Lindquist remarked that he understands Van Eeckhout's position on the taking, but that is an issue for the City Council. Lindquist commented that in his opinion this area should remain zoned at two acres. Hawn stated she is in agreement with Lindquist and that the Pianning Commission does not do rezoning. Hawn remarked that this area might be a potential site for a PRD and might lend itself to some cluster development. Van Eeckhout commented that in his opinion under this sketch plan there is sufficient spacing for the proposed residences, noting that he would not have a problem with doing a PUD on this area as he has presented it tonight. Stoddard stated that he also concurs that this is an issue for the City Council to determine, noting that the Planning Commission is a recommending body and it does not appear that the Planning Commission would recommend rezoning of this area. Stoddard remarked that the City also needs to make a determination on whether this area should be included in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Hawn noted that this application is driven by v^ether or not the Applicant can rezone this property and that issue should be resolved first before further consideration is given to this sketch plan. Gaffron staled that the area south of the Luce Line is zoned two acres, noting that Fox Ridge was developed back in the 1960s. Stoddard commented that the Applicant will also need to determine the type of wetlands that exist on the property. Van Eeckhout stated that in his opinion this area is incorrectly zoned wetland and he has farmed the wetland area on a regular basis. Van Eeckhout remarked that the wetland is six feet above the water ievel. Van Eeckhout commented that in his opinion this area can adequateiy support nine structures. Lindquist stated that in his opinion this area will probably remain zoned at two acres. Hawn noted that it has was the consensus of the Planning Commission in a meeting regarding the comprehensive plan not to extend sanitary sewer to prevent denser housing. Hawn suggested the Applicant look at a PRD. Van Eeckhout noted that a PRD would require extension of the sewer. Hawn slated that a PRD probably would require extension of the sewer. Page 17 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2490 CHARLES AND SUE VAN EECKHOUT, CONTINUED Gaffron remarked that if the Applicant took the total buildable acreage of the property and divided it by two, the Applicant might be able to put a maximum of seven homes on this property, and that clustering may help to preserve some of the natural features of the area. Van Eeckhout commented that the City should take a long-range view as far as it relates to sewer issues, noting that in his opinion eventually sewer will more than likely be needed in Orono. Gaffron stated this application will go before the City Council at their June 14th meeting, noting that no formal action is needed to be taken by the Planning Commission on this application. (#12) #2491 DEBORAH SHOLL, 4100 WATERTOWN ROAD - SKETCH PLAN Deborah Sholl was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting a sketch plan review for a Class 111 Subdivision for property located at 4100 Watertown Road, which consists of approximately 37 acres. Approximately two acres is classified as Orono Wetlands and appear on the City Wetland maps. The Applicant is proposing to create two parcels, with one parcel being approximately 14 acres, 12 acres dry buildable, and the other west parcel would be 23 parcels. Weinberger stated that there was a conditional use permit on this property to allow the keeping of domestic animals for commercial purposes and to allow the continued use of the property for a public riding stable. Following sale of the property, the commercial use of the property has ceased. The property also contains two residential properties on one lot without a conditional use permit for a guest house. The lot was combined with another five aae lot to the northeast in January of 1996. Weinberger remarked that two oversized accessory buildings are located on the property. Oversized accessory buildings are allowed in this district subject to the condition that not more than one oversized accessory structure shall be permitted on any property. An oversized structure is defined as an accessory structure of footprint area in excess of 1,000 square feet. The total footfrint area for the two accessory buildings is 14,497 square feet. A number of variances would be required for this subdivision due to the oversized accessory buildings. Variances would be required to permit two oversized accessory buildings on one 12 acre lot where one is allowed; to permit two oversized accessory buildings larger than the 3,000 square feet maximum allowed for oversized accessory structures: and to permit 14,497 square feet for all accessory buildings where 6,000 square feet is allowed. Variances are also needed for setbacks to the houses and the guest house. There are also some structures located on the property without a principal structure. Weinberger stated that the use of an accessory building for keeping animals for non-commercial purposes is a permitted use provided it is for the non-commercial use of the property owner or resident and meets the available area standards, which requires that a minimum of two acres of open pasture must be available for a single horse and one additional acre must be available for each additional horse. Weinberger stated that Watertown Road is a City owned right-of-way. The Subdivision Code requires the north 33 feet of Watertown Road be dedicated to the City. The portion of the property dedicated is not considered as lot area. Page 18 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2491 DEBORAH SHOLL, CONTINUED It is City Staffs conclusion that the property should support additional residential lots in the future to the west If an access road is added and suitable septic sites are located. The concern is the use of the oversized arena and bam on a 12 acre farm rather than the existing 37 acres. Shell stated she would like to subdivide this property, noting that the bam and arena are presently being leased and riding lessons are provided. Sholl commented that a septic report has been submitted and that she has replaced one septic system for the residence located on Orchard Park. A plan has been submitted for a second septic site for the existing main house which would be located within the proposed lot line. Sholl remarked that the bam is able to hold 16 horses and she has some people that are interested in using the property as a horse farm. They are looking to house approximately five to six horses at this time. They are not interested in purchasing the whoie parcel. Stoddard Inquired when the bam and arena were constructed. Sholl stated that the bam is approximately 75 to 80 years old and the bam was added on in approximately 1970. The arena was constructed in 1970. Lindquist inquired if the property located on Orchard Road was being rented. Sholl stated the house is being rented at this time. Lindquist inquired whether Orchard Road would be split off. Sholl remarked that it is not her intention at this time to spiit that parcel off. Lindquist commented that the accessory structures raise several issues with this application as well as leaving the residence on Orchard Road, noting that he probably would not approve it the way it is being presented. Shoil stated that building is taxed as non-homestead. Lindquist stated that he does not have a problem with the barn, arena and house, but that the use of the buildings may pose a problem. Lindquist stated the property on Orchard Road should be split into two parcels or the buildings should be removed. Hawn commented that adequate pasture land Is required for the housing of horses. Stoddard suggested that the Applicant meet with City Staff to discuss these issues, noting that if the Applicant wishes to keep the guest house, she will need to make that conforming and the Applicant will also need to determine how many horses will be housed on that property in order to calculate the appropriate number of acres. Lindquist commented that the Applicant should meet with City Staff to help bring this sketch plan into conformance with City Codes. Sholl commented that the bam and arena have been grandfathered In to her knowledge. Gaffron stated that once the lot lines are changed, the buildings may need to be removed or reduced, noting that he would need to obtain the opinion of the City Attorney to verify whether these Page 19 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 #2491 DEBORAH SHOLL, CONTINUED buildings are grandfathered in. Weinberger stated that there have been other applications regarding this property and all have been tabled due to the Issues regarding the accessory buildings as they relate to the property lines. Sholl inquired whether a condition could be imposed on this property that no conditional use permit would be issued. Gaffron commented that a future City Council could change that condition if they so desired. Hawn commented that the horse farm fits in with the character of Orono and that the Applicant should consider additional acreage for the housing of horses. Charles Kelley, Council Member, stated that in the past when this bam and arena were used for horse shows, parking along Watertown Road was a problem. Kelley commented that the environmental issues regarding the disposal of the waste from the horses should also be addressed. Sholl stated that presently the waste is hauled away and is stored temporarily on the eastern side of the property. Stoddard stated that the Applicant will need to make a determination on whether to keep the guest house along with a determination on how many horses will be housed there. Lindquist remarked that the Applicant should meet with City Staff and review the variances required to see if any of them could be avoided. Gaffron stated that the conditional use permit was based on the entire 37 acres being considered one parcel. Sholl commented that she would like to keep the bam, arena, and house on one lot. Snoll noted that if 21 or 22 acres are needed to keep that as one lot, she may not proceed with the subdivision. Gaffron stated that the City's table regarding oversized accessory structures does not go beyond 6,000 square feet and that number will need to be calculated. Kelley stated the Applicant will need to make a determination on whether she wishes to keep the commercial use of this property, which will require more acreage, or to give up the commercial use and go with fewer acres. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Items #13 and 14 follow Item 16. (#15) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR APRIL 19.1999. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve the minutes of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of Aprii 19,1999, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Page 20 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 ► (#16) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON MAY 24,1999, AND JUNE 14.1999. May 24,1999 - Berg June 14.1999 - Stoddard (#14) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Hawn reminded the Planning Commission members of the upcoming housing seminar on Thursday. Gaffron stated that three Planning Commission members have indicated that they will be attending this seminar. Gaffron remarked that a study was conducted last year of 12 cities and has different options that the City of Orono may want to review. Berg commented that she serves on a committee that addressed affordable housing and has not seen any study. Gaffron stated that this study does not specifically address affordable housing but housing needs in general for this area. ADJOURNMENT Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 p.m. Elizabeth Hawn. Chair Person Page 21 :• •• • . . ... 11 UiU ^r^o. ;o Project Update An Update on Ferndale Road from the City of Plymouth, June 10, 1999 Project Overview Femdale Road is being reconstructed to a two lane roadway with concrete curb and gutter and storm sewer improvements and an 8-foot wide bituminous trail on the east side of Femdale Road from the Luce Line Trail to County Road 6. A concrete sidewalk is also being constmcted within the City of Wayzata from the Highway 12 bridge to the Luce Line Trail. Construction is scheduled to be completed by September 15, 1999. The road contractor for the Femdale Road project is S.M. Hentges and Sons, Inc. of Jordan, MN. What Has Been Done Since the May 18 letter mailed to residents in the Ferndale Road project area, the contractor has completed all of the storm sewer pipe work and installed sanitary sewer north of n'** Avenue to serve the St. Edwards Episcopal Church within the City of Orono. Watermain connections also have been completed to serve St. Edwards Episcopal Church and the Ferndale Place development north of n*** Avenue. Minnegasco also has installed some new gas main. U.S. West has been installing some new telephone lines which needed to be relocated because of the new storm sewer. What Needs To Be Done Tentatively beginning Tuesday, June 15, the contractor will be starting roadway excavations at the south end of Femdale Road near the Highway 12 bridge. This work consists of removing the existing roadway materials down to approximately 2-feet below the new surface of the proposed roadway. The excavated material will be trucked off-site and traffic delays can be expected. As the contractor continues northerly, sand will be placed in the roadbed and capped with a rock surface. This operation will continue up to County Road 6. Roadway excavation is expected to take four to five weeks to complete. The next step will be to place new concrete curb and gutter, retaining walls, a 3- inch bituminous surface between the concrete curb and gutter and paving of the trail. Finally, the boulevard ?reas will be restored with seed and sod followed by the final layer of blacktop on the roadway. Caution Please do not drive through the areas still under constmction if at all possible. For residents in the Ferndale North area, please use Brockton Lane to get to either County Road 6 or Wayzata Boulevard. If it is necessary to drive through an area where work is in progress, please use extreme caution and watch for workers and engineering personnel. Also, please explain to your children that for their own safety they should keep away from the construction area and the large, heavy equipment. Project Hotline The City of Plymouth has initiated a telephone hotline for people who want daily updates. For a recorded message giving the most up-to-date access information as provided by City ’s Field Inspector, call 509-5514. The hotline will tell you where the road may be closed and what is the best access route to and from neighborhoods adjacent to Femdale Road. Questions If you have any questions, please call: • ^y^uthS/£^l^eei(^Q^clWian, d"( . ....__ 2.4^-4 a 1Tom Kellogg, Projea Engineer with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Assoc., Inc. at (651) 636- 4600 • Leo Pawelsky, Projea Inspeaor with Bonestroo, Rosene, An^rlik 6c Assoc, at (651) 604-4804 Thank You Road construaion is a headache for everyone traveling in the area, but it is particularly frxistrating for those who live in the projea area. The City of Plymouth thanks you for your^ patience and cooperation.