Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-24-1999 Council Packet
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, MAY 24,1999,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. 6:45 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS ROLL CALL 1.TOWNLINE ROAD OPTIONS CONSENT AGENDA 2.Approve/Amend APPROVAL OF MINUTES *3. Regular Council Meeting of May 10,1999 *4. Reconvened Board of Review Meeting of May 10,1999 *5. Special Council Meeting of May 11, 1999 (Woodhill Country Club Public Hearing) PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - James White, Representative LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT - Lili McMillan, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 6.#1321 Orono Schools, 800 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Extinguish City Easement 7.#2169 Michael Renard, 1185 Tonkawa Road - Amendment of Variance 8.#2372 Barry & Janiece Haglund, 4590 North Arm Lane - Extend Effective Period of Preliminary Plat Approval - Resolution 9.#2438 Michael Sletten/Peter Achey, 4680/4720 Bay side Road - Lot Line Rearrangement - Request for Extension 10.#2466 James Renckens/John Winston, 3020 Watertown Road - Preliminary Plat Approval - Reconsideration 11.#2469 Steven and Jo Webster, 500 Orono Orchard Road South - Variances - Resolution 12.#2483 Trent Rezabek, 3200 Bayside Road - Variance Renewal - Resolution 13.#2484 Woodhill Country Club, 200 Woodhill Road - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 14.#2485 Alex and Cathy Johnston, 940 Brown Road South - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 15.#2487 Roberta A. Roth, 1251 Briar Street - Variances - Resolution 16.#2493 Katherine Taylor Homes, 692 Tonkawa Road - Variances - Resolution 17.#2494 Dan Andersen, 2885 Little Orchard Way - Variances - Resolution i AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, MAY 24,1999,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA 18. #2495 Bohland Development, having an interest in 1025 Browi- South A. Carriage Hill Final Plat B. Entrance Monument Pla.* *or Carriage Hill - Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 19. Water Meter for Golf Course Irrigation System 20. Adoption of 1997 Uniform Building Code with State Amendments 21. CDBG Joint Cooperative Agreement - Resolution 22. 1999 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payment 23. Authorization of Temporary Full-Time Work Schedule for Officer Tony Wittke 24. Authorization of Partial Refimd of Building Permit Fee 25. Call Bond Sale to Fund Sewer Projects - Resolution CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT ♦ 26. LICENSES * 27. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 1999 05/24 05/27 05/31 06/02 06/07 06/14 06/21 06/28 07/05 07/06 07/07 07/12 07/19 07/26 Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Council Work Session, 7:30 a.m. HOLIDAY - Memorial Day Observance Highway 12 Design Review Conunittee Meeting, 5:30 p.m. Park Tour, 5:00 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. HOLIDAY - July 4 Observance Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. Highway 12 Design Review Committee Meeting, 5:30 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. I \ Public A ttendance 6: j2</_'//Meeting D ate □□□ C ouncil Planning C ommission Pakk C ommission Other NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1. I ni~^^ it/(" CJ9^cX\j\r'^ 2. <r fScM A,/cJ. Al. ■ ^rdm^ Pu.-a i C'> td I. ^ ^ X^/2irJ ^1 7 7. 8.. 9.. 10. 13.. 14.. 15. mstM TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator May 24,1999 SUBJECT: Planning Commission Candidate Interviews The City Council will interview two Planning Commission candidates this evening beginning at 6:45 p.m. The candidates are Mr. Daniel Kluth and Mr. Steven Webster. Copies of the applications of each candidate are attached. From; STEVEN WEBSTER F«i; ♦1(612)4732302 To; Lb Fa^: (612)249*4616 Pag# 2 of 2 Friday. May 21. 1999 4 52 PM Stevens. Webster «*♦ 500 Orono Cicnard Road ♦ Orono Minnesota 55351 Office Phone 612-476-3465 ♦ Fax 612-473-5604 ♦ Home Phone 612-473-1606 ♦ Email websler®te1a com QUALIPtCATIONS A strong background design and historical documentation in Architecture Possess work experiences in residential developments, housing design and commercial property investments Knov/ledge of Real Estate trends and markets as well as analyzing demographics and forecasting future trends Based on my work experience I am able to counsel people and help them solve their problems by seeing the options and opportunities that are available to them. WORK HISTORY Realtor, Edina Realty Inc. 1990- Present Counsel families, investors and developers in determining their Real Estate objectives Market Real Estate through mass media direct mail, newspaper/magazine, and Internet Consult on residential design for present and future markets Project Manager, Landmark Design 1988-1990 Manage development design and implementation in field E D U CATION University of Minnesota Bachelor of Science Degree m Housing with a C«sign emphasis in Architectural Design REASONS FOR APPLICATION To help fellow Ororo citizens in the planning stages of desired changes to existing properties in Orono Decisions ate based on zoning guide line, past decisions from the Planning Commission, the City Counsel and Common Sense I feel with my professional background and present experience with the planning process i would be a good canidate for the Planning Commissioi i ROLE OF THE COMMISION Review applications that impact the Use and Aesthetics of the Orono area using governing codes, guidelines and personal common sense Having an active voice in the future design and strategies in the City of Omno I will make every effort to visit the sites of every applicant so my deci non is based on a full understanding of the proposal ELECTED POSITIONS Past Vestry Member for St Martins Episcopal Church 190<3-1999 Presently on the Foundation Board of St Martins 199/-2000 APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMISSION APR 2 8 1999 Cfl Y <jr VJ.-»C.\.0 GlTYof ORONO Municipal Ofllces Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 MsHing Address: P.O. Box 66 Ciystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 Commission Applying For: □ Parks Commission ^ Planning Commission □ Community Task Force (Name)________________________ Name f -J ♦ u'~j^______________________________ Address Fox 'sf-. Po8tOfflceg.ZiDCode LodKCy LtffrP. MAJ S^2SCX] Telephone (H) 9 (W) Resident of Orono I years. Work Experience: (9 g'S'-S R g ^ 7 *7 3 - Hercia.-t 4 Goo U MJr [9^3^ Pr^Se'n't A^tt^rr^e^ Lovtdln^r^ , ^ (Aoesst^^r 4 k(^,Education: r Uv\,i\/. a'F U/^i* s/Vt ^______ C?6»»V\ IcLo^dt^ /xj//(tg»»t toTp' f^%C. Civic and Volunteer Activities (past and present): ____< ^dclx/icar f*—^ oi Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 4734)510 Please state your reasons for wanting to serve on this Commission. (Phase be as specific as possibie. Use additionai sheet if necessary.) What is your view of the role pf the Commission?of the role o 1 Other Comments: (Use this space to inciude any further information you would like the City Council to consider, or that you feet is relevant to the appointment you are seeking. You may also attach oUter materials you would like the Council to consider.) _______S €■ -e ------------------------------------------------------------------- I understand this appointment may be discussed at a public meeting. I •NOTE:Volunteer commission member's name, address and phone number will become public information. 040lt*.> Reasons for wanting to serve on the Orono Planning Commission: Last year I spent time before both the Planning Commission and the City Council to get permission to put a small bathroom in our Game Building, which is a separate structure from our home. I worked with the city employees and some members of the Planning Commission to fashion a new ordinance which would allow plumbing in accessory structures under certain circumstances. I also sat through many Planning Commission meetings and working sessions and nbserved their work on issues unrelated to my own. I gained quite a bit of knowledge on the work of the Planning Commission through those experiences. 1 believe the Planning Commission could use my legal and engineering experience in evaluating difficult and complex issues. I have had extensive training and experience in both engineering and the law which I am willing to offer as a volunteer to the City of Orono. I am also a licensed Professional Engineer in the area of electrical engineering (Minnesota State Board of Architecture, Engineering, Land Surveying and Landscape Architecture, License No. 16531, 1984 - present). My view of the role of the Commission: The Comprehensive Plan foi ihe City of Orono embodies the vision liiai die citizens of Orono see as the future of their city. The elected members of the City Council are charged with making decisions which are in concert with the overall goals of the Comprehensive Plan and to revise the Comprehensive Plan as the citizens may demand. The City Council enacts ordinances for ensuring compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and seeks input from the Planning Commission and the city planning engineers on the enactment of such ordinances. In this role, the Planning Commission acts as an advisor to the City Council. The Planning Commission also works with the city planning engineers to ensure that individual building projects follow the ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan. Of course, the Comprehensive Plan can’t possibly be drafted in such a way as to predict every question which may arise. As such, the Planning Commission gives the citizens a forum to present their building plans to the Commission when their individual projects fail to pass muster under the I Addendum to the application of Daniel J. Kluth to the City of Orono for the Planning Commission / • * Comprehensive Plan and the city ordinances. In that case, the citizens have a right to present their case for exceptions and variances. In the case of such requests, the Planning Commission hears the citizens ’ cases and makes a recommendation to the City Council. That recommendation must be a careful and thoughtful review of each situation to save the City Council from the burden of rehearing every case. In this role, the Planning Commission members act as administrative judges making recommendations on individual cases. The Planning Conunission must also work in an effective and well-informed manner with neighboring communities and other government agencies to assist the City Council and the Mayor in reviewing and implementing inter-community projects. Again, the requests and demands of other government authorities need careful and thoughtful review. The Planning Commission must also act as a source of creative ideas in the event that proposed actions of the other agencies do not meet with the approval of our City Council members. In this role, the Planning Commission acts as a diplomatic liaison to other governments entities. Other Comments: I believe I can contribute to the well-planned growth of our city as a member of the Orono City Planning Commission. I believe that attendance at the Planning Commission Meetings and working sessions should be a high priority for ail members. My job is flexible enough to allow me to attend meetings at a variety of times and places. My experience with technology and the law provide me with unique skills which are needed on the Planning Commission. Addendum to the application of Daniel J. Kluth to the City of Orono for the Planning Commission COI INCH MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cu Y Of- um ONO DATE: May 21,1999 ITEM NO: / Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Townline Road Options m Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Attachments: 1 TmfRr Volume Tnform;»tion - Highway 12 and County Road 6 2. Traffic Volume Information - Townline Road 3. Letter from Bradley Beisel re: Access Problem Concerning Property Owned by Rudds and Slaughters 4. Letter from Marvin Johnson, Mayor of Independence The Cities of Maple Plain and Medina, along with Mn/DOT, are requesting the City's support for a plan to close and cul-de-sac Townline Road at its north end to enable a signalized intersection at Highway 12 and County Road 29 to solve a substantial traffic safe.ty problem. The closure is necessary because the existing railroad overpass bridge at Townline Road makes it impossible to create the fourth leg of the iniciaCCuon at Townline Road without spending several million dollars to reconstruct the railroad bridge. The closure of Townline Road would provide a number of benefits but would also have a number of disadvantages. Benefits The benefits of closing Townline Road are as follows: 1.Enables a substantial safety improvement (signalized intersection) at Highway 12 and County Road 29 to move ahead without the cost of replacing the railroad bridge. 2. Eliminates through traffic on Towmline Road. 3.Provides a new access to homes east of Townline Road and south of the railroad tracks, enabling the elimination of an at-grade railroad crossing and an access to Highway 12. Request for Council Action continued Page 2 May 21,1999 Townline Road Options__________ Disadvantages The disadvantages of closing Townline Road are as follows: 1.Eliminates the ability of Townline Road residents to use Highway 12 as an access to Maple Plain or to directly access Highway 12 as a route to the east. 2.Requires using County Road 6 as the route to the east and as the route to Maple Plain. 3.May increase traffic on Broadmoor Lane due to using Broadmoor as a shortcut to Maple Plain rather than using County Road 6. 4.In the absence of a plan to the contrary, eliminates emergency public safety access to Townline Road via Highway 12, requiring access from County Road 6. 5.Because there has not been substantial long-term transportation planning regarding Highway 12, County Road 6 and County Road 19, it is not clear whether the closure of Townline Road is the best long-term transportation solution. Traffic Movement Trade-Offs 1.Tnwnline Road traffic. The closure of Townline Road will result in overall reduced traffic on Townline Road, even with the inclusion of a potential 17 housing units developed on the Medina property, due to the elimination of through traffic. Current traffic counts on Townline Road show approximately 1,000 cars per day. There are currently 17 homes along Townline Road, including 7 on Creekwood Trail; an additional 17 homes in the Medina property would bring the total to 34. Using an average of 10 trips per day per household the 34 homes along Townline Road would generate approximately 340 trips per day. This is approximately one-third of the current traffic level on Townline Road. 2.Fjtst/west access. The 1998 traffic counts show approximately 18,000 cars per day on Highway 12 at Townline Road, and approximately 4,000 cars per day on County Road 6 at fownline Road. The closure of Townline Road would require traffic going eastbound in the morning to take a left onto County Road 6 vs. currently taking a right onto Highway 12. This traffic would then take County Road 6 to the signalized intersection at County Road 6 and Highway 12. Request for Council Action continued Page 3 May 21, 1999 Townlinc Road Options ____ Although a left turn is generally more difficult than a right turn, the level of traffic on County Road 6 is less than one-quarter of the level on Highway 12. The traffic moving east on Highway 12 during the morning peak hour is nearly continuous. The traffic moving east on County Road 6 in the morning peak hour has significant gaps, allowing access from Townline Road. The speed limit on County Road 6 at Townline Road is 40 mph but increases to 50 mph approximately 150 feet west of Townline Road. The speed limit on Highway 12 at Townline Road is 45 mph. Emergency Public Safety Access The Maple Plain Fire Department currently responds to Townline Road using Highway 12. If the access to Townline Road at Highway 12 was closed, the Fire Department would use County Road 83 to County Road 6 to Townline Road. This would add se\ eral minutes to the response time. Townline Road is 2700 feet in length north of Broadmoor Lane. There are currently 10 homes, and potentially an additional 17 homes, on this northerly section of Townline Road. With the closure of Townline Road at the north end, the only access to these homes is from the south. W'ith a lengtli of 2700 feet, there is concern about an obstruction across the road that would prevent access to the northerly portion of Townline Road. If there could be a secondary emergency access from the north, this concern would be addressed. Current Safety Issues vs. Long-Term Transportation Planning The traffic safety problem at the intersection of Highway 12 and County Road 29 is a serious current problem. Although closure of Townline Road would enable the current problem to be addressed quickly; because there has not been substantial long-term transportation planning related to County Road 6, County Road 19 and Highway 12, it is not clear whether the closure of Townline Road is the best long-term transportation solution. Traffic on County Road 6 and Highway 12 will continue to increase substantially. The County has discussed the need for a better north/south roadway in this area. It may be that the long-term solution to Highway 12 or a long-term solution related to a north/south roadway will make it desirable to reopen Townline Road at a future time. New Access Option for Properties with Access from Highway 12 Across the Railroad Tracks Several properties currently gain access to a public road through an at-grade crossing of the railroad tracks to Highway 12. This is a safety issue in relation to both Highway 12 and the railroad. The City of Medina has indicated that as part of the closure of Townline Road, and the subdivision of the approximately 15-acre parcel at the north end of Townline Road, a roadway would be provided i Request for Council Action continued Page 4 May 21,1999 Townline Road Options _______ through the Medina property to serve these properties and enable the elimination of the at-grade crossing and access to Highway 12. Mn/DOT has also indicated it will participate in the cost of constructing the road. City of Independence Opposition Late Friday afternoon, a fax was received from the City of Independence Mayor Marvin Johnson expressing strong opposition to the closure of Townline Road. The letter is attached. Conditions of Support If the Council determines that it will support the closure of Townline Road, staff rcconmiends placing two conditions on the City's support: 1.Provide some ability for emergency response by public safety vehicles from the north end of Townline Road. 2.Retain the possibility of reopening Townline Road if, at some point in the friture, this is required as an integral part of the overall transportation system. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion regarding the closure of Townline Road, with conditions if desired. INEPIN COUNTY MINNES A _ E G E N D INTERSTATE HIGHWAY U.S. HIGHWAY STATE HIGHWAY © COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY COUNTY ROAD ©© 1998 TRAFFIC FLOW Volumes represent Annual Average Daily Traffic (A.A.O.T.) 1997 Volumes (See Note 2) 1998 Volumes A 19000, 281 Senondtti LoKei D __________________________________ 1750 — >-oKe ■—* J 2725 zhj ^ ^ i4X>0 2500 moo 1 1 1 1 2350 \ 2W5 V. 4 ^ 3625 1 m1 t ■ i CKJubort 11 1 1 0 ^ f Vlok# I ^ 1 ■ 2750 Lok«isooo .Sorah i .S050 >ftfr KoHt on*y LOkti moo 2379 1 ____________«5£_J )---------------------2475 1950 lomiYO J Lcke .RoorixT 570, '.f' !M©i(F> >100 ^290 [MlOilNl 1525 iv' - Molf5450 lok« 3350 -‘1020 1410 14300 Ji- lUAIPiLE 4575 720 f®n onrw! 1200 3175 .2950 240< 4550 Rotrino woi LOH« J”“_.870 lcwv\ oo; I OSK .LQK« 7700 24JOO ^ *> 19900 1420 2950 3900 HOKlIMlTl^flST^ 307) 84 LM^Q L I Long LOk* L|^ ©i^©iN)jb 0 2031 84 ^8050 5700 2^ 3575 Wioi^totl L0k« ----------io3o< 'i; ,1875 ,550 ^Harrlsort Soy 11200 -4. irm M51 JIPRONQ/Csi iSTOO Boy.mUMtSTO Smitr* . Boy --r 15900 Lolc# Mlnn^r Lo«B«r Ic 110 »OMOFACIM8 IHhu ISO CocRt Soy •fom Soy A jlA^Lofoyottt soy 12900 ^0 ■ , - . . . <- > - • - f - UPOor V; J ■ Ph«lpf >«» V\ /S onei^wc 3350 l-OKdTT® 19 11 5) 36( Spurzen Lake aiiSpesiSeMij c>lc/^ Moon5450 Lake 3350 3925 457 720 ^ +1410 14300 1525^^ 4550 29 90 83 A? 120 1775,1700 4550 2600 4900 3^75 495 1430 7700 19 19900 1 10 1600 1420 6050 101 :*A : • *: : • ■ r'> ‘.v.-r-i i-?**'*.• • * .• • IStubbe ,. **Bay SCHOLLE, BEISEL & METCALF, U'D. MARK SCHOLLE BRADLEY N. BEISEL ROBERT S. METCALF LESLIE C SCHOLLE <l909 l9g8t May 19, 1999 Attorneys At Law 430 PiLLSBURY C enter 200 SoiTTH Sixth Street Minneapolis , Minnesota 55402-1488 Telephone 612/338-1330 Facsimile 612/349-6409 Celebrating 50 Years of Service to Our Clients City of Orono - City Administrator Attn: Mr. Ron J. Moorse P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 City of Medina - Director of Public Works Attn: Mr. James Dillman 2052 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55340 RE: Access Problem Concerning Property Owned by Rudds and Slaughters Our File No.: 6452-98CW OF COUNSEL STEPHEN C. SCHOLLE JOHN E. CRABTREE 111 0^ •••. ^ Um 2 1 Qjf y Oi* Dear Mr. Moorse and Mr. Dillman: On behalf of my clients, Jane and Glenn Slaughter and the Richard Rudd family, I want to reiterate our support for the Town Line Road project. I understand that this matter will be under consideration by the city of Orono at a public meeting to be held on May 24,1999. I ask that this letter be inserted into the official records of that meeting. The project as proposed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation involves the closing of Town Line Road to enhance the safety of Highway 12 in that area. It has ancillary benefits as well including the location of water main services south of Highway 12 from Maple Plain at Mn/DOT ’s expense and the establishment of a public access road connecting the property owned by my clients to Town Line Road. A portion of the expenses associated with the access road will also be bom by Mn/DOT under the current proposal. We urge the city of Orono to support this project. In connection with the foregoing, I am forwarding with this letter a copy of a "Supervisor ’s Road Order" dated August 28, 1912 issued by the city of Orono. This Order appears to establish a public cartway one rod on either side of the Orono/Medina boundary firom Town Line Road to the railroad tracks then across the tracks and to the center of Highway 12. To our knowledge, this has never been vacated. Mr. Ron J. Moorse Mr. James Dillman May 19,1999 Page 2 Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Very truly yours, SCHOLLE, BEISEL & METCALF, LTD. Bradley N. Beisel BNBrjmf Enclosure cc:Mr. Richard Rudd Mr. and Mrs. Slaughter Ms. Ann O. Peterson I inis ai awing is oniy a sKeicn. It is mode without any professional review. It W08 put together with informotion from 0 survey and plat maps. "V LO^S IVITIA iBAt USV p-tL CMSSIH«: ACCfS? • A I___■ I T|-||-»riii-,i,| [ m^nnmip m ^ SUPERVISORS ’ ROAD ORDER, TcgftKer with Ih, Surutyor ’s fleport and PM. th, Aiuard of Dama„n. and an Attract cf th. Fact, uMlng to tho PctiUcn and Supirohor,’ Noth, of Uoaring. of a Pood.MM-Mif^X^------- hy tho Suptrolaon of tho Tom -------------------- ^ ..............---------------------------------------------- OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION OF LANDS AS GIVEN IN THE PETITION. foNowf. vU: Tow.«« Mowlaf It A comet cop/ o^c ttoo4 Or^tr, ftorvc/or*i Report ftnil Plot, and Awnrd of Domagti dkil In mj oad recorded.A. D. ^ ......................................................................................................— ^ Taim Clerk. •5YT i Siiporvloori* HooU Order. 1^——_______________________ ______ • STATE OF MINNESOTA, Counljr oC.(^/^Orkfx,a.............Town or...^/2 .........ss; ^ Will Kt.AS,,upou llie |tclllloii ................................................Icftol ▼olcrt wlio own icul ctltilc or wlio *»ccin»y ren! cflnle tinil r ilie honieiicn.l or pre cm|ilIoil ln\ti of llie UoIUil Slnlet, or wmlrr coiilrncl fiom llie Blnle of Miimctoln. witliiii oitr lullr . / ..^ ■■ ■ ■ ■■ mm, I . .. , . .................................................................................................. .. .... .......... Of Itie 1^.1 i.roiK)ir.riu wild peUtion to I*......xJo^d,..,(hMZ........................................................................................... coplci oT r.ild pcUlion Imftiig Hrit duf/ |m«l^up In iUrce of llt« most pulillc n( oolij Town, ot Icnal Iwctil.^jt Mnjt nnr ncUiiii won liml lit rtlnllmi tlicrtto, proof of wlilcti potting wnt dulj tliown to tit hy nmdnvlt; wlikli irtU proposed ......... —••JfKt ***wl lUyrIlied In tnid iictjlloit iit follows, trlt: licglttnlitg %/<?; AND WIIllUllAS, ii|Mm rtctUIitg sntd |>e(ilinn, we ilM, wUMtt llilrly dnjs ilicrcndcc^iiike out n iiolk^jond fit llicrciii n ^ ^ .................................................... enusiug co|»Scs of tuck notice lo be |K>ttetl In tlirct public ploccs in tstd Town, at lestt ten doys prrrioui to sncli iiicclliig; oiul Imvlug met at tuck lime ami plnee ns alxive nniiied in sold notice, and being sallsncd lhat tlie applicant lioJ, at least tai dnys previous to tniil iinte ca^ mM notice of time and place of Iteming to be given to aU tbe oecupnnU of tlie land tbrongli whicli sitcb liigliway mlglit pose, by serving tlie same |iersonally or by copy left at tlie usual piece of obode of each of said occnpniitf, proof of wlilcb was shown hy oflidav^ VfC |uocccdcd to ciomlne i»crsoiinlly lucli lilgliway, and lieard any and nil rensoi^r or ngninst the.......................... ^------------------------ibe same, and licing of the oidnloo that suc^.----------_____________________________________....... was ncceiMry aiM |i^>cr, and that the proniclcd lliereby, we granted the prn^ of said jiclUlouers. and determined to......................................................sam cat^Cl a survey thereof to be made aceonling to tlie report and plat lierewith aceoni|Hiiiylag, the description of whicb asso.«..».........M..........M«.«4...«....M......................................................Is as follows, to*wltt TIegInatag ■ /yi-d jSyyy^^-cJj, • IT 18 TIIMRItrOKIt OKnnRItl) Af«» llliTISKMINItll, Tlwt lie same Is hereby and here .Otd.sseaso«OSS•seasesa ...............cstabOshed according to the dcKrlption Ust aforesaid, sail the yporl and ffiai hcrewti whieh is hereliy made a part of this Order, and It Is hereby declared to be a public highway......U<<£tOtf.....(JixycLti,, tlie said dcKilpltoii nliove given lieltig llwmtceafsaid rood. (^0/^,/** Clffii under our hamls tUis......8fe.g......nvl........^...^ oL.JU^/^Oida^__________A. I). Wrl.^/L .......... Uh accompaayhig, ......rods wute. ......................................... \ J Survoyor't Roporl and Plat To tlio Board of Supervisor of Ihe Town of...................................:...County of ..........................................and S'xite of Minnesota: The nutlettlgnctl linvtiig liceii cmptoycd hj jnii to iimke a tnrvcy of n rom' In laM Totrn, Mrotild report timt llte fnlloxtltig is t\ wrrcct sitnrcjr of tlie line tlicreof, ot made by me, under jonr tllreciloitt, to*wit: llr|>lnnlitg at.................................................................. of 8cction******•••«»•••••»• wiislil£!••••«•«••••••••»*••••«••••• Itange««•••*«•>•«••••••*••«•••• •tbence t iiniiino os fbltowSi wllli n vnrlntlon or»****«a«>«>«*(>*»*»*a*« degrees nnd...^.....,............niliitiUs: iNllaii IlDAniNO iP'f DIATANCIl ' t. « miMARKft .1 iii«t tlinl Itelow ls*A correct plot of tnM rood occording to sold survey. Poled at................................................................lliis.............. r-j|. r- ( •dOy A. P. 1 80>**» ..•..Surveyor....a ... M. ...M....M». ............... I **' iV I; • t I’? • y •0 I. I * ** *•• 9 *•• • •1 9 • •1 0 ■ •1• 1 i •• 9 * i 1 9 1 •. i 1 1 • 0• • • A f., i t i» • 0 • •» •1 • • • ' « 1 . 9 • • • • • ♦ •1• i I• t ? » 0 t .• 1 • o •! ; 999• • 9 • I •9 • • •• • ! • i -«J1 r •k* m i i i •f •# Awerd of linmagot. - •'ll STATE OF MINNESOTA, County of............_______Town of...........................sa: ; WlinRHA8| A fOAtl wAt Ia IU .....................•.....•.•.ilnj of -ti .A. D. IBO...., Iiy us, llic Stipertlsors of llte tnid Towti of..........................................................on tlie pcliltoii of f .legol Tolcfs wlio own renl cstoU or who occupy real cslate umlcr the homctUml or prc*cnipllon laws of tlw United• Mtaoaoa* • •o«oooo«ao*ooAooooo#*ao««| Stales, or umlcr coiilrhct from tlie State of Miiiiicsoto, witlilii one mile. ............................................................................................snUI road, which sold road ..............................................................................................Is set forth and desetHied In tlie foregoing Superrlsort* Order, innde by us, and. . WIlimHAS, A.part of Hie damages sitatalned by reoMn of the laying ______________said road has lieen ascertoined by the agreement of the owners of tlie lauds through wlilcb said rood pohses, with os, and a put t of the owners of tlie said lands hate In writing released nil claims tn damages; but not licing able to ogrM with tlie owners of the following descrllieit lands, cloloiiiig damages by reason of said highway passing through, ond the owners of some of tlie said lands being unitnowit, we have ^ assessed the damages to each of such Individual claimants with whom we could not agree, and awarded damages lo the owners of such laiuls through which such highway posses at arc iniknown, at what we deemed Just ond right; taking Into nceoimt and ctlbiinllng ilic odtantngcs ond bcnenii the rood wilt confer on Ific claimants and owners, at well as tlie disadvantauct. Vic have niscsKd and ownrdrd damages os foliows: owNiint 01* tJiNim untCRirTioN oi» uinda Rcctti>»^ Town n«Nn*t HNnt«R«i I i 4 t i 't And Ia esse of tlis following londs And chitmAnts isr dAmages, we estimate that tbe advantages ood bcaeflU said rood will confer. OA ibem Are equAt to a N dAmages snslalned by them by reason of loylof ...................................sold rood, to-wlt: OWNDAA OF LAND! ill I rM DBtCBtmON OF LAMOt A mIIon Town Ranm . t. I- '•T % •V •>- •1 “ A hi •• •s OtvoA under our bonds this..day of.A. 1). 180. Supervisms. f s •f 1 • i ■i j .! 5-21-1999 2:43PM FROM CITY OF INDEPENDENCE Si2 479 0528 CITY OF HENNEPIN COUNTY May 21, 1999 Honorable Mayor and City Council Members City of Orono P.O Box 66 Orono MN 35323-0066 SUBJECT Town Line Road Closure Dear Mayor and City Council Members Enclosed is a copy of the Independence Council discussion of 4-13-99 regarding Town Line Road The Independence City Coui^cil and 1 feel it would be a huge mistake to close Town Line Road at this time for several reasons 1.With a signal going in on Highway 12 and County State Aid Highway #83 this summer we need to wait and see how that will change the breaks in traffic from the west Maple Plain does have opportunity to add a street from North Budd through the Industrial Park This would allow more of those north of Highway 12 the to get cn or across Highway 12 at the signalized intersection of CS.AH 83 This is part of the City's comprehensive plan With a signal at CSAH 29 and Highway 12 wc are afraid that Perkinsvillc Road in Independence and Independence Street in Maple Plain (which are residential streets) would end up being major transportation routes for many people and would create new hazards - especially for the children in the area Maple Plain needs to take the initiative of closing some of its side streets first Tn fact, the City allowed a new entrance on to Highway 1 2 at the shopping center just west of CSAH 29 and Totvn Line Road, which has created a new hazard The unknown of how much development will take place in the portion of Medina cast of Town Line Road is of great concern to residents in Independence and Orono south of Highway 12. P. 1 1920 county road 90. MAPLE PLAIN. MINNESOTA 55359 - PHONE (612) 479-0527 - FAX (612) 479 0528 5-21-1999 2:4dPM FRa-1 CITY CF INDEPENDENCE 612 4.79 0528 P. 2 t t. 6.Not enough thought has been given to long-range planning for the future of where eSAH 29 will become CSAH 19. g We have not been fully informed of the accident records from the intersection : and in fact. 1 would question whether that intersection is any worse than the intersection entering into the shopping center. Residents of Orono and Independence arc the people who are really being impacted by this decision, and all cities need to appreciate the impact on the other cities’ residents. Sincerely yours. Marvin D. Johnson Mayor 5--2I-1999 2:54R1 FROM CITY OF IhJDEPEhJDENCE 612 479 0528 P. 2 10. PTSCUSSTON OF TOWN’ LINE ROAD. Councilmember Cook reported that he had attended t.he public meeting in Oronc that waa held :o allow citizens the oppo.'Tiinity to speak. Cook stated that there are three choices: Put in a stop light at this intersection: close To^-vn Line Road south of Highway 12; or build a frontage road or several one-way streets. He added that N/l!Nr>ot would like 2 traSc light at this intersection because it has such a high rate of accidents. Cook thinks the four cities will have to individually make a decisic.n and then collectively make a decision. ^fayor Johnson stated that no one knows how many nouses are planned for the l\ledina property. He felt that the Medina mayor was ve.w emphatic that the dosing of Town Line Road at Highway 12 was strictly for sarety reasons. Kc wants a tranic licht and a cul-dc- ja»,...... w.i £3iuaunjvor Ave. orlginaily *vh.lcu die road dosed and a cul-de-sac, but after the discussion at Orono he has changed his mind. He is concerned about the aocec rrailic cn i own Line Road and wr.o wouid oc paying for improvements. \fayor Johnson had a discussion with a police officer, who is concerned about emergency ser,ices to residents south of Highway 12 if the access to Towti Line Road is closed. If there is a train crossing County Road 19 the emergency vehicle would have to go over to County Road S3 to get over the railroad tracks, ind then would have to go East on County Road 6 to get to Town Line Road. Mayor Johnson thinks we .may not want to change anything at that intersection untii we see what happe.ns to the t.^ainc partem once the signal light is installed a: Hjshtvav !2 and Ccu.ntv Road 33 Council.member Smith thinks County Read 19 rr.zy so straight (where County Road 29 is now) eve.nruaily, and if it does it will change tranic patterns dramatically. We would be drawing people to Pagc.nkopfand Pcrkinsville Reads, and even past the elementary schccl. We couid be transferring the hazard from Towm. Line Road to another place if we aren t careful. Smith can see .no wisdom in closing Town Line Road; he thinks a sigzial light could possibly be a gooc adciticn. Mayor Johnson stated that if the proposed road were built from the Industrial Park to Budd Street, everyone from the north side of Highway !2 could get to the stop light at County Read 3j. Johnson reels that the Orono City Council is far from making a decision about Town Line Road. They need more information before they can make a decision. The Medina mayor was quite forcefbl in wanting a decision now. Emner thinks that a stop light at County Road 83 will make a huge difference in trafSic patterns. He is opposed to closing Town Line Read until we have had time to assess the traffic patterns once this stoplight is installed. 'i ti \ 4 5-21-1999 2:55PM FROM CITY OF INDEPENDENCE 612 479 0523 P. 3 R''’- ' YYS-'* ■ •'VC» < " 'f M.yor Johnson commented that he had Street and County Road 19. I, .vas noted that Maple Plain and Medina have both voted 10 approve the closing of Town Line Road at Highway 1-- Mouon by Mayor Johnson, second by !^Se'plltS^'" we are opposed to closingon local streets after the stop U^is placed at & -ed aye. MOTION COUNCIL meeting MAY 2 4 1999 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 3 CllY Ul- UttUNU ROLL The Council met on the above-ment'oned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members Charles Kelley, Richard Flint, Bob Sansevere, and Barbara Peterson. Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Lanette Wolf. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. (#1) CONSENT AGENDA Items 4, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, and 18a were added to the Consent Agenda. Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (*#2) REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 26, 1999 Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting of April 26, 1999, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Andrew McDermott, Representative McDermott said the park tour is scheduled for June 7th. Jabbour said he understands there is some concern about the City surveying by the end of Stubbs Bay regarding the approaeh to the public dock. McDermott said there is concern about what the City is planning on doing with the approach to the dock. Jabbour said it is his understanding that the City was asked not to trespass on a piece of land that the City had been using. He said part of the solution is for the City to use land to the side and now the people who made that recommendation are objecting. They suggested that the City fix the grade so people with wheelchairs or children don’t fall into the lake. Gappa said it would have to be surveyed and a plan proposed. McDermott said the Park Commission was under the impression that the City was going to fill the wetland and they just wanted the City to add a couple sections of dock to reach dry land. Page 1 1 i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 < . . PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Elizabeth T. Hawn, Planning Commission Representative, had no comment. Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to remove Item #4 from the consent agenda for action by the Council. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PUBUC COMMENTS Angela Sherlock, 625 Debra Drive, stated that two weeks ago someone tried to break into her house two days in a row during the daytime. She said she is a stay-at-home mother and this person tried to break in during a two-hour time period both days when she was gone from home. She said she feels that one of the road construction workers on County Road 6 is a suspect. She said she called the police and the police officer that responded told her that there are more break-ins when there is road construction going on, that the police don’t have time to do more patrol where she lives and that she should stay close to home while the construction is going on. She did not feel this was an acceptable response. She is putting in an alarm system, but she doesn’t feel she should have to do that. She said she moved to Orono to feel safe. She said the Police Chief did come out and talk to her and he was also concerned about the police officer ’s response. Sherlock said she would like to have more patrol in her area. Jabbour said he does not feel the officer ’s response was appropriate either. He asked staff to inform the Chief of Police of Sherlock ’s concerns. He said he feels more officers are needed for patrol. Buzz Forester, 3599 Crystal Place, expressed his concern about the residences on both sides of his property because they are dirty and rundown. He said nothing has been done by the City. He said he is very disappointed that nothing has been done. He said he has been complaining about the propert>' to the west for nine years. There are junk cars and garbage in the yard and the odor is intolerable. He said the property to the east of him has had a building permit for seven or eight years and the work is not finished. He presented photographs of the two properties. He said he is very frustrated with City staff because nothing gets done. He said the situation is getting worse. Jabbour said the two addresses had been referred to City staff and he asked what the status was. Gappa said that Lyle Oman would have to follow up. Jabbour explained the City’s procedure for following up on complaints. Page 2 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10,1999 (Public Comments, continued) Harvey Reder, 3596 Livingston Avenue, said that his property borders one of the subject properties. He said that Mr. Forrester has a legitimate complaint. Alexandra Swenson, 2285 Blaine Avenue, said she also has to look at these two properties. She said she has complained to the City, but nothing has been done. She said she lives in a beautiful area and she does not want to look at the garbage on the two properties. She wants something done as soon as poss’ble. Sansevere asked if someone can be forced to finish a house. Peterson asked what the time frame is for a building permit. Moorse said he would get that information. Forrester said that he talked to Lyle Oman about the permit and if one nail a year is pounded, the permit is good. He said the owner of the property lives in Inver Grove Heights and never shows up at the property. Flint said that when neighbors complain, the City should take some action and this situation is inexcusable. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#3) #2466 JAMES RENCKENS, 3020 WATERTOWN ROAD - REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF SUBDIVISION APPLICATION James Renckens and John Winston, applicants, were present. Gaffron presented the staff report. He stated that on April 12th the Council voted 2-1 to approve the preliminary plat subject to the platting of the 50 ’ road outlot along the north boundary* of tlie property, but granting a variance to the “back lot’ ordinance standards by allowing the creation of a flag lot. He said that the applicants are in opposition to platting the 50 ’ road outlot and are requesting that the Council move to reconsider the action of April 12. Staff met with the applicants on May 6 and concluded that there are issues presented which deserve additional staff research and consideration. The neighbors and interested parties have not been notified for reopening discussion. He said that if the Council wants to reconsider the matter, one of the two Council members who voted in favor of the motion on April 12, could make a motion to re-open consideration of the application. If the matter is re-opened, staff would recommend that it be tabled for two weeks so that all the interested parties can be notified. Page 3 ----^ \ ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 (#3 James Renckens, continued) Jabbour said he will abstain if the matter is re-opened, Flint explained his opinion that access to the property should be from Crystal Creek Road. Kelley said there should not be any discussion on this matter if it will be re-opened because the neighbors have not been notified. Flint moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to re-open #2466 for James Renckens and John Winston, 3020 Watertown Road - Preliminary Plat Application and table the matter for two weeks. Jabbour asked if the applicants would object to the matter being tabled for two weeks. Winston said they have met with staff and they are veiling to continue to work with staff. They are willing to postpone it for two weeks and work with staff in the interim. They would like to have it re-opened. Sansevere said that Renckens told him that at the April 12th meeting, the Council received misinformation and there were some inaccurate comments made that night that might have affected the way the Council members voted. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. (Jabbour and Peterson abstained.) (#4) #2477 GEORGE W. STICKNEY, 250 AND 340 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - PRELIMINARY PLAT George Stickney, applicant, and Mark Gronberg were present. Weinberger presented the staff report. He said the applicant has proposed an eight lot subdivision on the east side of Crystal Bay Road just north of the Luce Line Trail. The property is located in the RR-IB, single family residential district, two-acre minimum lot size. He said staff was presented a new plan today regarding the NURP pond in relation to the wetland delineation report. The NURP pond was to be located on Lot 5. It is proposed to be moved to Lot 2. Staff is concerned that a NURP pond in that area will not handle the drainage from the entire site which is the intent of the NURP pond. Since staff just received the proposal, there has not been time for the City Engineer to review the plan and drainage calculations have not been delivered to the City. Weinberger said that the City Engineer should have an opportunity to review the plan, especially since it will involve proposed culverts and other ways of piping the water into the wetland. Weinberger said there is also an issue regarding whether the entire wetland area should be considered against lot area because the Type 1 and 2 wetlands are an extension of the Orono wetlands. Weinberger said that the Page 4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 (#4 George W. Stickney, continued) DNR also needs time to review the new plan. Another issue is the request for a 10-foot easement for a bike trail. Kelley asked where the culvert underneath the Luce Line is located. Weinberger showed the location of the culvert. Kelley said he finds it hard to believe that the culvert is not located in the wetland. He said that water flow is a major issue for this property. Gronberg said that the wetland delineator went back to the property after the growing season started and marked off the wetlands. He said there is the same situation on the Old Cr>'stal Bay addition to the north where there are two different types of wetlands. He said in the past, the policy has been to place an easement over the Orono wetlands, drainage easements over drainage ways and then write additional easements to cover the other wetlands, but they are filed as a separate document. Jabbour said that staff would like to have additional time to figure out if the proposal will adequately handle the surface water drainage. Jabbour asked why staff just received this information. Weinberger said that the City just received the report from the wetland delineator. Stickney said that John Anderson had done the wetlands off from the best aerial photos and wetland maps that are available to the City. His report now says that most of the wetlands are Type 1 and 2 which are walkable wetlands. Jabbour said that staff is having a problem determining if the drainage is adequate and tlie City Engineer has not had a chance to look at it. He asked if the applicants would object to tabling the matter for two weeks. Elizabeth Hawn, Planning Commission Representative, said she is concerned about the City taking an easement instead of fee title for the bike trail because the property owner may be liable if there is an accident on the bike trail. City Attorney Barrett said he feels the property owner would not be liable because it is a City easement and a City constructed trail, but he can look at it further and give the Council an opinion. Page 5 \ i f ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 (#4 George W. Stickney, continued) Sansevere said that his property extends into the road in front of his property. He said that maybe the Council needs to have a clear understanding that any homeowners with trails or roads on their property will not have any liability. Gronberg said that on the property to the north, the City has an easement for the bike trail. Jabbour said that staff wants to make sure the water moves. Kelley said the water should move at the same rate that it moves now and it should not increase the flowage to the pipe underneath the Luce Line. Gaffron said he wants to make sure the City is consistent on the issue of how much of the wetlands is usable as dry buildable credit. He said there is no question that wetland delineators have found individual basins that have been noted as a covenant and given the ONMier credit for area, but he is not sure it is appropriate when the City’s maps show wetland areas that are larger than the ones delineated that he has deleted on the City’s 1975 inventory maps, to make those smaller and then have Types 1 and 2 around it. GafFron’s impression is that the City would expand the boundary of the regulated wetland to encompass the entire areas of Types 1, 2 and 7. Kelley would like the City Engineer to review the plan before the Council takes any action. Gaffron said that two weeks should be sufficient to review the issues. Stickney said he feels the subdivision is very well designed. Flint stated the Council should not spend a lot of time worrying about the easement versus fee title on the trail. He feels the City’s position should be that the property owner can do it either way. He said that typically the property owner wants the easement so he can count the property towards the minimum lot size. He said there are many easements for roads and trails in the City, but the City cannot cover the risk by tlieii insurance. Jabbour asked the City Attorney to review the issue. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, a motion to table #2477 for George Stickney, 250 and 340 Old Crystal Bay Road South, Preliminary Plat for Crystal Bay Preserve, for t>vo weeks. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 6 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 (#5) #2480 SPRING HILL GOLF CLUB, 725 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - PRELIMINARY PLAT - RESOLUTION NO. 4281. Tim Johnson and Thomas Crosby were present. Gaffron presented the staff report. He said that Spring Hill Golf Club was issued a Conditional Use Permit in 1997 and one of the conditions of approval was that they formally grant Conservation and Flowage Easements to the City over the various wetlands and drainageways on the property. He said there were also some new wetlands that were created and some ponding areas that were created from wetlands. Due to the number of wetlands and drainageways, and the complexity of their descriptions. Spring Hill has chosen to dedicate these easement areas on a plat. The request also includes the vacation of two pre-existing conservation and flowage easements which will be replaced by larger easements. Two outlots will be created that are not buildable, but could be sold to a neighboring property. A portion of tlie property is in Medina and the applicant has been advised to contact Medina regarding that portion of the property. Gaffron said there is an issue regarding the width of right-of-way for County Road 6. Hennepin County has requested an expansion of the County Road 6 right- of-way. The majority of the right-of-way for County Road 6 is 80 ’ which is the minimum requirement in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The County is requesting that Spring Hill dedicate additional right-of-way to accommodate any future roadway upgrading plus paths, utilities, snow storage, signage, etc. Hermepin County has designated this portion of County Road 6 as part of their bikeway system. The bikeway plan indicates to Cities that when there is a subdivision or platting process, the County would like to have additional right-of-ways granted. When the City complies with that, then the County will share 50/50 for any future acquisition costs. But if, at the time of platting, the County finds that the City refuses to require the additional right-of-way, then if it’s ever needed and the County has to acquire it, they want to charge the City 100%. Gaffron said this subdivision is unique because it is not creating any new buildable lots, it’s merely platting in order to create some easements for drainage purposes. Because of that there is no real connection between the need for additional right-of-way and anything that is being created by this development. He thinks there is a strong case to say that there is no basis for the City to require the additional right-of-way. Spring Hill has developed their course in a manner where they would suffer by having to give up ten feet of right-of-way along County Road 6. Jabbour asked if County is asking for right-of-way all along County Road 6. Gaffron said the Cou.'^ts is asking for the right-of-way along the entire length of County Road 6. Jabbour asked if Gaffron’s position is the same for the whole length of County Road 6. Page 7 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 (#5 Spring Hill Golf Club, continued) Gaffron said his position is that for the entire length of County Road 6, 80 feet is adequate and that is the case for Spring Hill as well as any other areas along County Road 6 that might develop under the City’s 1980 Comprehensive Plan which says that 80’ is the standard. Gaffron said that prior to 1980, the City did honor the County’s requests. When the 1980 plan was put in place and since then, the City has refused to grant the County the added rights-of- way when they are asking for more than the City’s Comprehensive Plan recommends. Part of the reasoning is that if the County wants additional right-of-way, they should pay the residents for it. He said that staffs recommendation is to approve the plat as it is proposed. Gaffron said the Trail Agreement indicates that Spring Hill will grant to the City an expansion of the right-of-way for the trail along Spring Hill Road and Tamarack Drive. The trail easement is not shown on the plat. Gaffron said staff recommends approval of the plat as it is proposed subject to the conditions stated in the staff report. Crosby said he would prefer the bike trail to be under a separate agreement because if the City and Spring Hill decide to change anything regarding the bike trail, it would be easier to change an agreement than it would be to change a plat. He thinks the issues regarding the trail have been agreed upon except for the part of the trail on the north side of County Road 6 by the maintenance facility. Jabbour said it is a difficult area for developing a trail. He asked if the agreement should be made a part of the final plat approval. Crosby said a survey needs to be done. He said they could give the City an agreement subject to undertaking the survey. He mentioned that Spring Hill also owns the property south of Outlot B. It was not included in the plat because it is located in a different section. It was more difficult for the surveyors to pick it up because the section line is the southern line of the outlot. It will be subje<'t to the same conservation easement as the outlot, but there will be a separate tax identification number. He said they would like to obtain final plat approval in two weeks. Jabbour said if the City grants preliminary approval, they must give linal approval, so all the conditions must be stated at this time. Barrett said that the conditions the Council places on the preliminary plat approval are the only ones that can he imposed for final plat approval. Flint said he did not object to an agreement for the bike trail versus having it on the plat, but he is concerned that the location of the trail has not been determined. He suggested that in the difficult area of the trail located at intersection of Tamarack and County Road 6, the trail be designated as 10 feet inside the boundary of the property and that would give flexibility as to whether it was located inside the boundary of the property or on the County right-of-way. Page 8 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 (#5 Spring Hill Golf Club, continued) Crosby said the problem is the County property probably goes to the base of the berm. Flint said the alternative when the trail was looked at a year ago was to put the trail on top of the berm. He was advised at that time that the trail could be put on the side of the berm with a terrace. That’s the only place the trail can be located unless the trees are removed from the top of the berm. Kelley wants to know where the trail will be located before final plat approval. He wants the location of the trail to be a condition of approval. Jabbour said the concern is that Spring Hill will choose to put the trail on the County property. Flint said the problem is if the trail is put on the County right-of-way, the County will not act within two weeks. Kelley asked if the City wants the trail on County right-of-way. Flint said that is why he suggested putting it on the ten feet inside the boundary of tlie proper'./. Jabbc'ir said the City will probably end up getting an easement and be guaranteed the »xail will be built on the applicanTs property and then if the applicant secures a way to get the trail built on the County property, they City could accept it. Kelley suggested building the retaining wall on the berm and putting the trail ten feet into the berm. Johnson said he understands the City has agreed to look into getting the trail located on County right-of-way. Gappa said he will be meeting with the County tomorrow, but the County will probably not give him an answer immediately. Jabbour asked if Crosby had a problem with the Council approving the application with a condition that there will be an easement given to the City ten feet into the property and there will be a trail constructed and the City and the applicant will work diligently to make sure that it works on the County ’s side. Page 9 k i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 (US Spring Hill Golf Club, continued) Crosby said the problem with a 10 ’ foot easement is that it would require a six to eight-foot retaining wall which would be very expensive. He asked if this was the only problem with the trail. Flint said there is one other spot where there is a problem with the slope. McDermott said that south of County Road 6 where Spring Hill and 6 meet, they talked about moving the trail a couple of feet inside the split rail fence. Flint said he thought there was spot where the trail needs a little work because it’s too steep. McDermott said that doesn ’t have anything to do with the right-of-way, it has more to do with the trail design. Jabbour asked if the public has the right to go beyond the fence and walk on Spring Hill’s land. Flint said that the fence is on the City’s right-of-way. They will leave the fence on the City’s right-of-way, but there will be two openings in the fence for access to the trail. Jabbour said he doesn ’t want citizens to feel like they are trespassing on Spring Hill’s property. McDermott said they talked about putting up a sign indicating this is a walking trail. He said there will be an obvious opening and there will be another fence on the golf course side so it won ’t look like you can wander onto the course. Crosby asked if the mayor could appoint one of the Council meis ♦ is vvci k with them on a solution for the trail. He asked if it is necessary to have ten feet foi ittn easement. Flint said the agreement says ten feet. It could be more or less than ten feet. Crosby said they would like to have the ability to negotiate the ten feet because if they put in a retaining wall, it will be substantially more difficult to do ten feet than six or eight feet because of the grade. Jabbour suggested approving the application subject to those conditions and then agree on the number of feet before final approval. Crosby said he would accept a preliminary approval subject to a satisfactory trail agreement including specifically the area south of the maintenance facility. Page 10 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 (#5 Spring Hill Golf Club, continued) Flint said the easement would be ten feet, not necessarily the trail. Crosby said he understands that, but if an easement is given without an understanding, the City could come back and say they want a ten-foot trail. Flint said that is not the City’s intent. Flint said they should discuss who is going to pay for that portion of the trail. Jabbour said he understood the applicant would provide the trail and build it. He said the only issue they were having a tough time with is how to cross the wetland. He understands there is a $20,000 gift to the City from Spring Hill that may be used in the future for pontoons or a bridge to cross the wetland. Flint said he understands that the trail is to be built by Spring Hill and the City will maintain it. Crosby said that is correct. He understands from Tim Johnson that the question was raised as to whether or not a portion of the $20,000 could be used for the Highway 6 problem. Jabboui said tliat was not his understanding. Crosby said the $20,000 came from the problem of trying to bridge the wetland. Jabbour said the City would like to reserve that for the future. McDermott asked if the City is getting an easement north of the wetland. He said he knows there is no trail at this point, but he would like to know if the City is getting an casement. Jabbour said he thought the City was getting an easement up to Medina. McDermott said that there needs to be a survey for the easement. Jabbour said the applicant is proposing to give the City a contractual agreement that is described by a surveyor for a trail up to the Medina border. Crosby said that is correct. Flint said he is inclined to agree with staff regarding the additional right-of-way for Hermepin County along County Road 6. He asked for the City Attorney’s opinion regarding the width of County Road 6. Page 11 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 (US Spring HiU Golf Club, continued) Barrett said this is an application for subdivision in lieu of a property description granting easements. He said there are no lots being created for development. The only difficulty he sees is raised in the staff report which is that the County takes the position that if the City refuses to grant the requested easement, then there is a 100% requirement at some point for the City to pay all of the acquisition or upgrade costs. Barrett said the City can tell the County that this subdivision is different, it is a device for description and not a development project. Crosby said technically this is not a subdivision in which the City has a right to require Park Dedication fees. The reason this is in the subdivision process is the agreement between the applicant and the City that it is easier to plat and define wetlands. Crosby suggested that the City send the County a letter citing the difference in the project because the entire project could have been done without platting. Gaffron agreed. He said that the Code calls Uiis a class one subdivision, bui ii is noi subdividing for the creation of lots and that is the key difference. Kelley said he agreed with Flint. Jabbour directed staff to send a letter to the County stating the City ’s position. Flint said he is bothered by the policy implications of what the City is doing with the lot to the south. It is his understanding that the City is getting the wetland easement over the lot. Gaffron said it is a wetland and that part of the final plat requirement will be that they define the wetlands and that they be covered by the same conservation and flowage easement. Flint asked if that will cover the triangular piece as well as the piece in the next section below it. Gaffron said that is correct. He e.\plained the reasoning for not including the lot to the south in the plat. Crosby said that the surveyors initially did the plat without including what is now proposed to be the outlot. He said he argued to exclude the area for the outlot from the plat, but staff would not agree because it was a common tax parcel with the property to the north. He said the reason this application hasn’t reached the final approval stage is because the wetlands have not all been designated. He said the conditional use permit requires a conser\'ation easement on the wetlands on the property south of Spring Hill Road. Kelley asked if they could put in a dock. Page 12 1 L. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10,1999 (#5 Spring Hill Golf Club, continued) Gaffron said that the conservation and flowage easement has language that does not allow any structures. Jabbour asked what the club plans to do with those two pieces of land in the future. Crosby said the applicant does not know what it plans to do with that property. Flint asked if the applicant can convey the property away. Crosby said it could be conveyed away. Jabbour said it could only be conveyed to an adjacent property owner. Gaffron said that is correct, but it could be changed. Flint asked if there will be language that says they can convey it to the adjacent property owner or to the City. Gaffron said that language can be added. He said language should be added to item 2 on page 4 of the resolution that states the property can be transferred to the City. Flint agreed. Gaffron asked if the Council members agreed with the wording of item 8 on page 4 regarding the easement for trail purposes. Flint said the City should require a separate survey for the trail. Gaffron said language can be added that states “and as defined by a survey to be supplied prior to final plat approval.” Crosby asked how many places along the trail it would go in further than ten feet. The easement could be granted within the ten feet except to describe those portions where it goes into the golf course. Flint agreed that the area in the north is the problem area. He said it’s okay if it’s a ten-foot easement along the whole trail and only survey it in the area where the trail goes back significantly. Page 13 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 {U5 Spring Hill Golf Club, continued) Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, a motion to approve Resolution No. 4281 Granting Preliminary Approval for the Platting of Property Located at 725 Sixth Avenue North, File No. 2480, as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#6) #2481 SPRING HILL GOLF CLUB, 725 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - REZONING - ORDINANCE NO. 187,2ND SERIES Tim Johnson and Thomas Crosby were present. GafFron presented the staff report. He said the Spring Hill Golf Club property is zoned RR- lB-1. Since the property will no longer contain focilities for a “study and research center”. Council required in Condition 1 of Resolution No. 3902, that Spring Hill Golf Club apply for rezoning of this property back to RR-IB. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 187, 2nd Series, an Ordinance Amending the Municipal Code of Orono by Listing the Legal Description of Certain Properties in the City as Rezoned from RR-lB-1 to RRIB. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#7) #2482 SPRING HILL GOLF CLUB, 725 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - CUP FOR GUEST HOUSE - RESOLUTION NO. 4282. Tim Johnson and Thomas Crosby were present. Gafffon presented the staff report. He said that at the time the Conditional Use Permit application for the Golf Club was approved, it was staffs impression that the existing caretaker house was going to be removed. The intent is to maintain the caretaker house, the garage and possibly the shed next to it for an employee and as a potential guest house. The house has been connected to a sewer system. The guest house conditional use permit standards are met. Jabbour asked if the house could be expanded. Gaffron said that since it is an existing building under a conditional use, an addition or a change would require Council approval. Crosby stated that the house is a one bedroom farm house that cannot be expanded without affecting the golf course. Page 14 J ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10,1999 (#7 Spring HiU Golf Club, continued) Sansevere moved, Peterson seconded, a motion to approve Resolution No. 4282 Granting a Conditional Use Permit Per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3(G) and Amending Resolution No. 3902, File #2482. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#8) #2495 STEVEN BOHL, BOHLAND DEVELOPMENT, 1025 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - FINAL PLAT - RESOLUTION NO. 4283. Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Application #2495, Bohland Development, 1025 Brown Road South, Resolution No. 4283 approving the Plat of Carriage Hill subject to the conditions noted in the Final Plat Resolution. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (5 Minute Recess) (#9) Expiration of Moratorium on LR-lC-1 Density Credit Gaffron said that if the Council takes no action on the Moratorium, it will expire on May 15, 1999. Jabbour recommended that the Moratorium be allowed to lapse. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Jabbour reported that he, Mike Gaffron and Lili McMillan attended the LMCD meeting. Gaffron answered questions from the LMCD members. Jabbour said he met with Hennepin Parks and he will meet with them again tomorrow regarding converting the Dakota Rail line to a trail. Jabbour said he and Council member Flint met with Mn/DOT ’s OfQce of Freight, Railroad and Waterways to obtain information about the Dakota Rail line. Sansevere mentioned that the Maple Plain Fire Department only has one defibrillator that is ten years old. He would like Orono to help them get one. Peterson said that the North Tonka Crime Prevention Coalition will be talking to the Orono Chief of Police at its annual meeting regarding the two new defibrillators for Orono. An Orono resident made a $1,000 donation in addition to the $4,500 donated by the Lions Club. Page 15 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 ENGINEER REPORT (*#10) EDGEWOOD HILLS SANITARY SEWER PROJECT A. Resolution No. 4284 Declaring Cost to be assessed, and to Order Preparation of Proposed Assessment Sansevere moved, Kelley secoLded, a motion approving Resolution No. 4284 Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessment for Edgewood Hills Area Sanitary Sewer. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. B. Resolution No. 4285 to Schedule Hearing on Proposed Assessment Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion approving Resolution No. 4285 Scheduling Hearing for June 14, 1999 on Proposed Assessment for Edgewood HiUs Sanitary Sewer. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#11) #WEBBER HILLS SANITARY SEWER PROJECT A. Resolution No. 4286 Ordering Preparation of Feasibility Report Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion approving Resolution No. 4286 Ordering Preparation of a Feasibility Report for the Installation of Municipal Sanitary Sewer to Serve the Webber Hills Area. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. B. Resolution No. 4287 Receiving Feasibility Report and Calling Hearing on Improvement Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion approving Resolution No. 4287 Receiving Report and Calling Hearing on Webber Hills Sanitary Sewer Improvement. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#12) AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS - STUBBS BAY ROAD PROJECT Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to authorize advertising for bids for the Mn/DOT Cooperative Agreement project for the closure of the TH12/Stubbs Bay Road intersection. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 16 is ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10,1999 (*#13) REQUEST FOR PAYMENT #7 - NAVARRE WATER TREATMENT PLANT REHABILITATION Sr.nsevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to approve Request for Payment #7, to Shank Constructors, Brooklyn Park, MN in the amount of 556,244.00. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*14) REJECT BID FOR HEAD SANITARY SEWER PROJECT Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to reject the bid from M&P Inc. for Head Sanitary Sewer Project. VOTE; Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (*15) APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSION VICE CHAIR Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to appoint Sandy Smith as Vice Chair of the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 5. Nays 0. (*16) AMEND PROGRAM FOR DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PERSONS 65 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER - RESOLUTION NO. 4288 Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to adopt Resolution No. 4288 Amending the Program for Deferment of Special Assessments for Persons 65 Years of Age or Older, and approval of the updating of the deferral application. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (17) PART-TIME POLICE OFFICER JEFFREY D. JOHNSON - PERA RESOLUTION NO. 4289 Jabbour moved, Flint seconded, a motion to appoint Jeffrey D. Johnson to the position of part-time police officer, effective April 19, 1999, at a starting rate of 512.62 per hour; and to adopt Resolution No. 4289 establishing his eligibility for coverage iu the PERA police and Fire Fund. Peterson stated she objects to the part-time position. Sansevere asked at what point the Council should discuss hiring more police officers. Jabbour said it will be discussed during the budget process. He has asked the Chief of Police and Ron Moorse to present a report on the future staffing needs of the Police Department that includes an analysis of full-time versus part-time. VOTE; Ayes 4, Nays 1 (Peterson objected). Page 17 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 (*18) AUTHORIZATION TO HIRE PART-TIME POLICE CLERK Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to authorize staff to hire a part-time police clerk. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*18A) HIRING OF PART-TIME COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to approve a request for Hillary Lebowitz to be hired as a part-time Community Service Officer at the pay rate of $8.53 per hour with no benefits or PERA membership based on the $5,100 maximum earnings stipulation, effective May 11, 1999. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT None. (*#19) LICENSES None (*#20) BILLS Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.1 ADJOURNMENT Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor i Page 18 . --- 1 3 Planning Commission Interviews May 10,1999 MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 Cl nr ur OHO/VO Mayor Jabbour asked the Planning Commission candidates to wait in the hallway until called for their interview. 1. Jay Nygard Jay Nygard introduced himself and talked about his background. Jabbour asked if Nygard had reviewed the City’s Comprehensive Plan and observed the way City government functions. Nygard said he had and tliat he had been observing city government in the past. He said that when he saw that a Long Lake/Orono combination committee had been formed, he decided to get involved. Kelley asked Nygard if he had an opinion on the way the City of Orono has been developed in the past 10 years. Nygard said he has seen good development and some that he has questioned, but overall he believes the city is headed in a positive direction by trying to maintain limited growth. He knows that some of his neighbors have had problems improving their property and he can understand their fhistrations. He said a big frustration for him is that his children must attend school in Mound because the Orono school is not big enough. Jabbour asked how he proposed the City keep limited growth, low density and open spaces without adding fhistration for those who want to put up large homes and large additions. Nygard said he would need to study the issue before expressing an opinion. He thinks the City has done a good of maintaining natural areas and developing park system. Sansevere said the Comprehensive Plan is being updated and he asked if there was any part of it that Nygard thinks should be changed. Nygard said he would need to attend the meetings before expressing an opinion. Jabbour said the City is at a crossroads and there are many people moving into the City that do not like the way the City is developing. Kelley asked Nygard if he had an opinion regarding commercial development. i Jay Nygard - continued Nygard said he has been curious about some of the commercial development, but he hasn’t attended any of the meetings and he did not think it would be appropriate to comment on it. He feels that, generally, the City has done a good job with commercial development. Kelley a«;ked if Nygard has enough time to commit to the Planning Commission. Nygard said he is a stay-at-home dad and he would be able to attend the meetings. Peterson said Nygard mentioned the possibility of Long Lake and Orono merging. She asked what he feels will be the hardest task for the two cities to agree upon. Nygard said the name will probably the hardest task. He said he remembers when residents of the two cities did not get along and he feels it is time for the two cities to consolidate. Jabbour told Nygard that five people applied for two positions on the Planning Commission. He does not want Nygard to be discouraged from volunteering if he is not appointed to the Planning Commission. 2. Jim Bull, Jr. Jabbour asked why Bull would like to be on the Planning Commission and if he has looked at the Comprehensive Plan. Bull said he would like to be on the Planning Commission because he views it as a way to help the community. He feels his skills and abil ties would fit the Planning Commission. In his job, he goes in and assesses situations for businesses, helps them find out what they need and helps them find solutions. In that process, he applies rules. He said this is similar to what the Planning Commission and Council do. He said the Council and Planning Commission are faced with challenges by citizens wanting to do things and the community growing and developing and trying to find a way to work that in to the health, safety and aesthetics that we want for development. He has not looked at the Comprehensive Plan. He said one of his first duties as commissioner would be to acquaint himself with the short and long-term planning of the City and the rules that would be applied. Kelley asked why he decided to live in the Orono area. Bull said he has friends in the area and he likes the people and the neighborhood culture. Jabbour asked what he thinks about the way the City has developed, what he likes and dislikes. Jim l:ull, Jr. - continued Bull said he thinks that development is under control and not developed in a disorganized manner. He said he doesn’t like the taxes, but that's part of paying for the services. He said he likes the idea of the merger with Long Lake. Sansevere asked if he likes large lots or would he want smaller lots. Bull said he likes the larger lots and the open space. He feels that is what attracts people to Orono. He would not \.auc smailwr ’ots. Jabbour told Bull that five people applied for two positions on the Planning Commission. He does not want Bull to be discouraged from volunteering if he is not appointed to the Planning Commission. 3. Martin Woody Jabbour asked Woody to tell the Council about himself. Woody said he has been an architect in Wayzata since 1985. He believes his background gives him good insight into how cities operate and the city’s planning process. He said he just moved to Orono, but he has lived in the Lake Minnetonka area all of his life. Jabbour asked if Woody has looked at the Comprehensive Plan and the way the city functions. Woody said he has not familiarized himself with the Comprehensive Plan, but he is familiar with zoning ordinances and tl^e development process. Jabbour said he was mostly concerned with the City’s philosophy and the City’s goals and obiectives. Woody said he is familiar with it. Kelley asked how he is familiar with it. Woody said he is familiar with it from being a member of the community and observing the de\clopmcnr Sansevere asked if Woody had designed any plans for Orono. Woody said no, he hasn’t done any work in Orono. Martin Woody - continued Flint asked how Woody feels about Planned Unit Developments. Woody said he feels they are a good way to get developments accomplished that can’t be developed any other way. He said that Planned Unit Developments with certain restrictions can make projects workable that don’t fit into normal zoning guidelines. Flint asked if he feels Planned Unit Developments will cause runaway development without control. Woody said the City can limit the amount of Planned Unit Developments that take place and put restrictions on them. Flint asked if Woody sees the PUD as a way to expand the number of lots or as a way to expand the number of houses. Woody said the PUD would allow for more intense development. Flint asked what the City would get in return. Woody said it depends on the property, but if Planned Unit Developments are done right, they can be beneficial to the City. Jabbour told Woody that five people applied for two positions on the Planning Commission. He does not want Woody to be discouraged from volunteering if he is not appointed to the Planning Commission. MINUTES OF THE RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING HELD MAY 10,1999 ____________________________________COUNCIL MEETING ROLL MAY 2 4 1999 The Orono Board of Review met on the above date with the follow^g memfeers^present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members Barbara Peterson, Charles Kelley, and Bob Sansevere. Council Member Flint was absent. The following represented City Staff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Hennepin County Appraiser Kim Jensen, Hennepin County Senior Appraiser Bill Davy, Hennepin County Appraisal Supervisor Keith Rennerfeldt, and Recorder Lanette Wolf. The Reconvened Board of Review was called to order at 6:30 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Peterson moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the minutes of the Board of Review Meeting held April 28,1999, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Mayor Jabbour stated that Hennepin County, at the request of the property owners, reviewed the 1999 Estimated Market Values on several properties in Orono, Hennepin County has submitted a list of those properties with their original 1999 EMV and a recommendation based on the County’s review. Jabbour asked if there was anyone who wished to speak at the Reconvened Board of Review. Paul Kaster, 2600 Casco Point Road, stated the assessed value of his property has been raised 81% over the past two years and he objects to the increase. Jabbour stated that Hennepin County recommended no change in the County’s proposed Estimated Market Value of Mr. Raster’s property. Davy stated that the Casco Point Road area did have an increase over the past two years due to the ratio of sales to assessed values. Jabbour stated he is sympathetic to Mr. Raster’s situation. Jabbour said he understands there has been an unsuccessful attempt to introduce legislation that would cap the property tax amount at a percentage of the gross income of a person who has lived in his home in excess of 10 years and is over a certain age. Kaster said there is a large disparity between the assessed value and the sale price of neighboring properties. He said that by using the high sales prices, any assessed value can be substantiated. He said he understands that the appraisers are following the guidelines set for them. Jabbour asked the assessor if unusually high sales are used to determine market value of neighboring properties. Davy said an unusually high sale price would not be used for market valuation. Page 1 ! •4 MINUTES OF THE RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING HELD MAY 10,1999 Jabbour asked if any of the Council members wanted to change the assessed value of Mr. Raster’s property. Sansevere commented that he would be in favor of legislation that would cap the property tax amount. Jabbour said he is concerned that residents cannot afford to stay in their homes in Orono. There was no one else present to speak to the Board of Review. Davy said he called all of the property owners on the list and informed them of the County ’s recommendation. Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to accept the recommendations made by the Hennepin County Assessor. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Jabbour complimented the County Assessors on their response to the Council ’s concerns. Rennerfeldt noted that no action was recommended on the following properties: Daniel Regan, 3410 North Shore Drive and Richard Flint, 1405 Sixth Avenue North. Their rights to appeal flirther to the Hennepin County Board of EnnnliVntion will be preser\'f*H . ADJOURNMENT Peterson moved, Sansevere seconded, a motion to adjourn the meeting of the Board of Review at 6:50 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 2 ! I V CITY OF ORONO COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 11,1999 MAY 2 4 1999 Cl I r (Jr OHUNO ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, City Council Members Barbara Peterson, Charles Kelley. Bob Sansevere, and Richard Flint. Representing City Staff were City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Administrator Ron Moorse, Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, and Recording Secretary Jackie Young. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend Flint moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 2. #2484 Woodhill Country Club, 200 Woodhill Road • Conditional Use Permit A. Presentation by Staff Mayor Jabbour noted that everyone in attendance at tonight ’s meeting will have an opportunity to speak, and requested that the people in attendance adhere to the agenda. (Council Member Kelley excused himself from the Council at 7:05 p.m.) Gaffron reviewed his May 5.1999 Zoning Administrator Report regarding an application by the Woodhill Country Club located at 200 Woodhill Road for an amendment to its 1968 conditional use permit to acknowledge certain basic rights of access to Woodhill Avenue and to impose certain new restrictions and conditions on Woodhill's access to Woodhill Avenue. This property is located In the RR-1B, Single Family Rural Residential, which permits golf courses, country clubs and tennis clubs as a conditional use within this district. Woodhill Country Club is authorized to operate a golf course and related country club activities via a conditional use perm!* issued by the City Council in 1968. The Club has obtained a number of additional conditional use permits for various improvements since 1968. Gaffron remarked that Woodhill Country Club back in May, 1998, did some grading work within the Club property and within the dedicated right-of-way of Woodhill Avenue to reopen a driveway access from the Club property to Woodhill Avenue, which access had been closed by the Club since approximately 1980. The City stopped the work upon being advised by local residents that it had occurred, and Woodhill Country Club was advised that certain permits and approvals would have to ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 be obtained by the Glut in order to retain the work that had been completed and for the access to Woodhili Avenue to be used. The City subsequently has held a number of public and non-public meetings between and among Club representatives. City Council, City Staff, and the immediate neighbors potentially affected by the reopening of the access. The City refused to permit Woodhill’s use of Woodhili Avenue without the proper conditional use review process. Woodhili refused to make such an application and in July of 1998, the Club filed a lawsuit against the City claiming that Woodhili has the right to open and use the Woodhili Avenue access without City approval. Gaffron stated Woodhili proposed a settlement procedure in which Woodhili would apply to the City for a conditional use permit to allow opening and use of the Woodhili access on a limited basis. Woodhili is requesting an amendment to their 1968 conditional use permit to acknowledge the following vehicular access rights: 1, the right to maintain unbanicaded access to Woodhili Avenue; 2, install a gate and maintain control of said entrance; 3, have access available at all times for emergency vehicles; 4, have access available from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., for Woodhili members and invited guests during days the Club is open; 5. have access available for transporting tractors to Long Lake for repair; 6, have access available for general access if County Road 15 access is temporarily blocked subject to notification of City and neighbors; and 7; have access available per the 1987 easement, which grants access to Lot 3, Block 1, Woodhili Ridge over Woodhili property to Woodhili Avenue if County Road 15 access is closed or otherwise denied. Woodhili Country Club is requesting of the City that the above rights not be revocable, nor for a limited period of time, nor be subject to further review by the City except as provided for in Orono’s Zoning Code Section 10.09, Subdivision 11, which talks about a petition involving 75 percent of the adjacent property owners. Woodhill's application also requests that the 1968 conditional use permit be amended to include the following triggers that will require further City review or further amendment of their conditional use permit: 1, conversion of Woodhili Avenue access into the main permanent Club access; 2, use of Woodhili Avenue as an access for delivery, taxi, service or other commercial vehicles; 3, use of Woodhili Avenue as a general public access; 4, use of Woodhili Avenue access at times other than allowed in #1 above; 5, expansion of Woodhill's driveway between the maintenance building and Woodhili Avenue; 6, paving of the driveway abutting Woodhili Avenue; and 7, signage, identification or directional signage, concerning Woodhili on Orono Orchard Road. Gaffron stated in addition Woodhili Country Club is requesting that the City confirms by conditional use permit amendment or by City Council resolution that Woodhill's right of access to Woodhili Avenue exists independent of any conditional use permit process and is not revocable through a conditional use process in regards to the 1987 easement agreement and in the event of permanent blockage of access to County Road 15 as a result of improvements to that road or resulting from closure actions related to the railroad right-of-way. City Staff Is assuming that use of th*5 Woodhili access for Club maintenance vehicles other than tractors and Club employees, except in relation to tractor servicing, are not being requested. Gaffron stated there may be additional items, uses or improvements which have r.ot been identified. Gaffron stated under Orono's City Codes and Comprehensive Plan, since 1968 golf courses and country clubs have been an allowed use in the RR-1B single family residential zoning district. In 1968, the Club was issued a conditional use permit which was identified as a non-conforming conditional use permit, but current City Staff is of the opinion that that was a misnomer and that Page 2 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY U, 1999 the Club in actuality was issued is a conditional use permit for a conforming use. Historically the City has required a new conditional use permit for any new physical improvements, i.e., new buildings, grading work, to an existing conditional use. This requirement has been applied across the boatd for all conditional use permits that have been issued by the City. Conditional uses includes those uses generally not suitable in a particular zoning district, but which may under some circumstances be suitable. When such circumstances exist, a conditional use permit may be granted. Conditions may be applied to issuance of the permit and a periodic review of the permit may be required. The City Council does have the authority to grant or deny conditional use permits and to impose reasonable conditions on them. Gaffron stated with regard to Woodhill's request, it is the City's position that the re-opening of an access to Woodhill Avenue after a nearly 20 year closure requires a new conditional use permit or an amendment to the existing conditional use permit for the following reasons: 1, the 1968 conditional use permit was issued based on a given se* of circumstances that existed at the time; 2, it can be reasonably argued that the 1968 conditional use permit to allow the Club to operate has not lapsed. It might also be reasonably argued that the tack of use of Woodhill Avenue as a secondary access to the Club for nearly two decades or more might be considered as a lapse in that specific aspect of the conditional use permit, 3, the conditions that applied when the 1988 maintenance building conditional use permit was granted have also changed; and 4, the proposed use of Woodhill Avenue by a non-residential user raises concerns of health, safety and welfare that the City is responsible for addressing, and which are properly raised within the format of a public review process when a conditional use is involved. Gaffron commented that one of the permits required is a permit for work in the public right-of-way for construction or reconstruction of this driveway approach per City Codes. City Code currently only permits one business driveway per development unless approved by the City, the driveway must be paved within the right-of-way, the driveway approach must be located at least ICO feet from a comer In a residential district, and the driveway must be ten feet from the side lot line. A land alteration permit is also required if the volume of land alteration is under 500 cubic yards, and if over 500 cubic yards, a cotiditional use permit is required. If City Staff concludes that the work may create negative impacts or are not in keeping with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, City Staff is authorized to refer land alteration permit requests to the City Council for volumes less than 500 cubic yards. It is the opinion of City Staff that while the volume of grading in conjunction with this access work is significantly less than 500 cubic yards, the proposal does potentially create negative impacts specifically related to drainage, noise, odors, visual Impacts and public safety, all of which should be reviewed by the Council given the neighborhood concerns that have been expressed. Gaffron remarked that Orono's Community Management Plan does encourage the retention and continued operation of private golf courses In that they provide aesthetic open space and natural vistas to the benefit of adjacent landowners and the general public. Gaffron noted that the City is in favor of the golf course existing at that location. The Rural Transportation Policies state that driveway locations and rural street or private road intersections will be limited for traffic safety, with the intent being to consolidate access points onto major roads. The City's Urban Land Use Policy states that commerical and industrial development will not be pennitted to adversely affect neighboring residential property. While Woodhill is not strictly a commercial or industrial use, certain aspects of its operation may have impacts that are not strictly residential in nature, and that is why private golf courses are a conditional use rather than a permitted use. Gaffron stated that the City of Orono does acknowledge that Woodhill Avenue served as a secondary access to Woodhill Country Club for many decades prior to the issuance of the 1968 Page 3 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 conditional use permit. The 1968 conditional use permit, however, did not specify whether Woodhill Avenue would continue to be used as a secondary access, and it was unquestioned that County Road IS was to be the access to the Country Club. Gaffron commented that the 1968 conditional use permit contains the following language: "Approximately 150 acres in Orono. Club house and various buildings for entertainment. Private club." In 1980, Woodhill Country Club closed off its Woodhill Avenue driveway access to most vehicular traffic and placed a chain across the entrance which became accessible only if the chain was removed by the Club. The Club informed the City in writing of its intent to voluntarily close the driveway, and stated that the Club reserved the right to use the entrance should it choose to do so in the future. In 1987, Woodhill Country Club, in conjunction with a private developer, subdi''ided the property south of Woodhill Avenue and created the five lot residential plat of Woodhill Ridge. The subdivision resulted in the following actions which are pertinent to this review: 1, created a new private road to serve Lots 1,2,4, and 5, extending southward from near the east end of existing Woodhill Avenue: 2, resulted In expansion of the dedicated right-of-way at the east end of Woodhill Avenue, apparently to incorporate the unused driveway leading from Woodhill Avenue into the Club property, so that said driveway would be within a public right-of-way rather than within one of the private residential lots; 3, resulted in upgrading of the existing Woodhill Avenue from Orono Orchard Road to a point just past the intersection with the new private road serving Woodhill Ridge, ending approximately 65 feet west of the Club’s property boundary, but apparently to provide a connection to the old chained-off driveway; and 4, resulted in the City's granting an access easement in favor of Lot 3, Woodhill Ridge over Club property to Woodhill Avenue in the event that County Road 15 access is blocked. In 1988, Woodhill Country Club applied for and was issued variances and a conditional use permit for a new maintenance building to be located approximately 160 feet east of the Wcodhill Ridge subdivision and adjacent to the old driveway connecting to Woodhill Avenue. The only reference In the Planning Commission and Council minutes as to use of the old driveway was a negative response from the Club's surveyor to Zoning Administrator Mabusth's question whether the Woodhill Avenue connection would have to be opened during maintenance building construction. Gaffron stated he will let Mr. McCarthy and the Club representatives address the reasons why a secondary access is needed, and the traffic impact to County Road 15 and the secondary access. City Staff has identified some potential drainage and grading issues, and portions of the proposed gravel driveway have a relatively steep grade and therefore are subject to possible erosion. The rates and volumes of stormwater runoff generated by this access driveway do not warrant a storm drainage pond nor other extensive stormwater management facilities. City Staff is recommending a paved driveway in that it would be less susceptible to erosion and sedimentation. City Code requires, since this is a business driveway, that all portions of the driveway in the right-of-way are required to be paved vith bituminous material. Other potential neighborhood impacts identified by City Staff include dust from the proposed gravel driveway. A resolution to this problem may be to limit the traffic speed to ten miles per hour as proposed and periodic watering or calcium chloride treatments could also be utilized. Staff feels the additional traffic generated by this access will have little noise impact on the Page 4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 neighborhood and would be reduced If the driveway was paved. Odors are a minor issue and should not pose any problem. There is no street lighting being proposed at this street intersection and headlights from vehicles entering and exiting at the new access will not shine directly at any neighboring homes. There also will be a minimal visual impact to the neighborhood by opening this access. Gaffron commented that Woodhill Country Club does not propose to install a gatehouse, but the Club is proposing to have a gate or chain across the access that would be opened at 7:00 a m. and closed at 8:00 p.m. The Club closed this access in 1980 due to security issues, and at least one neighborhood resident has expressed concerns regarding security. The City, independent of this proposal and this application, authorized a traffic management study for the segment of County Road 15 from North Shore Drive to Ferndale Road West for the purpose of analyzing traffic movement and access from cross streets, to look at methods to improve east-west traffic movement that could provide some relief to County Road 15, to look at the feasibility of providing a frontage road on the north side of 15 between Woodhill Road and Orono Orchard Road, and to look at the feasibility of installing a stoplight at North Shore Drive and at Orono Orchard Road. One of the conclusions of the study was that access to Woodhill Country Club would be vastly improved with the provision of a traffic signal at Orono Orchard Road. Gaffron noted that the City has received numerous letters from the neighborhood residents regarding this application and that those have been included as an exhibit in the City Council's packet for their review. In addition, included is a traffic study by Benshoof & Associates on behalf of the neighborhood residents as well as a letter from Attorney Bruce Malkerson on behalf of certain homeowners in the neighborhood. Gaffron stated the City should consider whether Woodhill Country Club has provided sufficient Justification to warrant consideration of a second access to the property and whether Woodhill Country Club has adequately demonstrated that other secondary acce.ss options are either not feasible or are inferior to the proposed Woodhill Avenue access. The members of the City Council should also consider whether the potential public health, safety and welfare concerns do not outweigh the benefits of allowing Woodhill Country Club an access to Woodhill Avenue. City Council should also address the other questions on pages 15 and 16 of the May 5,1999 Zoning Administrator's report in reaching an opinion on whether an amendment to the conditional use permit should be approved. City Staff is recommending that if the City Council determines that some limited use of the access is appropriate, some minimum conditions be attached to such approval. First, if the Club's access to County Road 15 Is closed for whatever reason for an extended period other than a short-term emergency situation, the City must have the right to reconsider the Club's Woodhill Avenue access conditional use permit to allow consideration of all alternatives for provision of proper and adequate access for the Club and other potential access users, and consideration of the impacts of those alternatives. Secondly, the City should establish triggers which will allow review of the Woodhill Avenue access conditional use permit, including but not limited to those proposed by the Club, a review based on the amount of actual traffic using the access, and a review after some given time period of the situation. Gaffron suggested that it the City Council concludes that approval of the access is appropriate. Council should direct City Staff to draft a conditional use permit approval resolution with appropriate findings and conditions for consideration at the May 24th Council meeting. B. Council Questions of Staff Page 5 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 There were no questions by the City Council Members of City Staff. C. Presentation by Applicants Edge Jackson, President of Woodhill Country Club, stated he is a resident of Orono and resides on Woodhili Road. Jackson commented that he has requested that the members of the Country Club refrain from contacting the City Council members regarding this application. Jackson stated due to safety concerns that the Club had regarding the use of County Road 15, the Club had decided to reopen the access to Woodhill Road, which the Club felt was within its legal rights. But the Club’s position resulted, however, in lengthy and expensive litigation with the City. Woodhill Country Club subsequently drafted a settlement proposal, which was presented to the City, and the Country Club elected to apply for a conditional use permit to reopen the access. Jackson remarked that the Club's proposal to the City takes into account the various safety concerns that have arisen with the high traffic volume on County Road 15 and the dangerous left hand turns onto County Road 15 from Orono Orchard Road and into the Country Club. If access to Woodhill Road is granted, it is the Club's opinion that there will be a minimum impact to the traffic levels currently experienced on Woodhill Avenue. Given the new environment that now exists in that area, it is Woodhill Country Club's view that this proposal is the best solution for all parties involved as well as the general public that currently uses County Road 15. Jim McCarthy, Attomey-at-Law with Lindquist & Vennum, reviewed his May 11,1999 letter regarding Woodhill Country Club's application for amendment to the 1968 conditional use permit. The Traffic Management Study by the City's engineering firm illustrates the dangerous traffic safety problem faced by Woodhill Country Club members and the general public on Highway 15 in front of Woodhili Country Club and at Orono Orchard Road. The average daily traffic count in June of 1998, was approximately 22,000 vehicles, which is estimated to increase to 27,000 near Orono Orchard Road in future years. McCarthy stated Woodhill is requesting that access be granted off of Woodhill Avenue to Club members from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., which will be secured at night by a security gate. Commercial traffic will not be allowed to access the Country Club through this road. The access is intended to help members to the west and north of the Club by providing an alternate traffic route. McCarthy remarked that the Zoning Administrator's report do not identify any significant safety issues with the Club's application related to traffic impacts on Woodhill Avenue; noting that the Club is willing to deal with any outstanding issues that still remain. McCarthy noted that the residents in the neighborhood prefer that the road not be paved, which is also the desire of the Country Club, but if the City requires a paved road, the Country Club is willing to abide by that condition. McCarthy commented that it is not the Club's intent to make this a<.cess look too desirable to avoid attracting higher levels of traffic than what is desired. McCarthy stated that the road was not regraded but a new load of gravel was spread over the road, noting that the grade of the road has remained the same for approximately 100 years, but that the Country Club is willing to work with City Staff if need be to alter the grade of the road. McCarthy remarked that Woodhill Country Club’s existing conditional use permit does not have any review triggers or provisions for annual reviews, and it would be the Club's request that this issue be discussed in further detail, noting that the Club at this time would strongly oppose that Page 6 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 condition. Since approximately 1917, Woodhill Avenue has served as the secondary access to the country club. The primary traveled access Is from Woodhill Road to County Road 15. From 1917 until 1980, Woodhill Avenue was used regularly by club members, guests, employees, and service and delivery vehicles. Since 1980, the Country Club has voiur'arily limited access to pedestrians, bicyclists, and very limited vehicular traffic, and indicated to the City in a letter written by the then president of Woodhill Country Club, that by taking that action the Club did not, in any way, want to limit its right to use the back entrance, should future circumstances warrant a change in the Club's decision. Woodhill maintains the position that use of this road has never lapsed and continues to be used today. McCarthy remarked that there is nothing in Orono's City Codes that requires an access be utilized at a certain frequency in order to keep that access open. McCarthy commented that the trafOc volumes on County Road 15 need to be addressed by the City, noting that this proposed access Is beneficial but will not greatly reduce the traffic volumes currently ' ..perienced on that road. However, this secondary access to Woodhill will provide a safe route of travel for those members of the Club that live to the west and north and is consistent with the City of Orono's Comprehensive Plan. One of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan is to provide for the safety of all Orono residents, and Woodhill Country Club feels this prOpooai iTicclS ludi yudi. McCarthy noted that the golf course Is considered to be recreational and open space and not commercial, and Woodhill's proposal to the City maintains that the golf course is recreational and is compatible with the rest of the neighborhood. Regarding the impact to the r«5ghborhood, McCarthy commented that the City Council should look ai Ihe whole picture, noting that this access is considered to be a secondary access by Woodhill and will have a minimal impact on the current traffic patterns already being experienced in the area. McCarthy stated that it is the opinion of the Country Club that Woodhill Avenue Is the best road to accommodate this secondary access due to the wider street and better sight lines that exist. McCarthy remarked that if the City Council reads the Benshoof report, there are only three negative impacts that Woodhill's proposal would create. First, the two residences located at the intersection of Orono Orchard Road and Woodhill Avenue have a limited impact from the restoration of the Woodhill Avenue access. The driveways for these two homes are located on Woodhill Avenue and their ability to use these driveways would be impacted by the motorists traveling to and from the Country Club. It would also be more difficult for them to walk or ride a bicycle along Woodhill Avenue. Secondly, the entrance from the Woodhill Fridge private road onto Woodhill Avenue does pose a significant traffic hazard due to extensive trees and brush that obstruct the sight distance. The owner of that property has agieed to trim or remove the bushes if needed to improve the sight lines. Thirdly, the Benshoof report states that W( jdhill Avenue is not wide enough to accommodate a motorist traveling in each direction plus a pedestrian or bicyclist traveling in one direction. McCarthy stated this road is 24 feet wide and is certainly capable of handling that traffic. McCarthy commented that Ed Axt of Parsons. Brinckerhoff is present tonight to answer any questions relating to their traffic study. Ed Axt, Senior Transportation Engineer with the firm of Parsons, Brinckerhoff. staled that Woodhill Country Club's conditional use permit amendment proposal will have a minimal impact on Woodhill Page 7 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 Avenue and the Woodhill Ridge development. It will improve safety for Woodhill families and will improve overail traffic safety in Orono, on Woodhill Road, County Road 15. and Orono Orchard Road. Axt stated in his opinion the proposal by Woodhill Country Club offers a safe and efficient secondary access. Axt stated he would be available tonight to answer any questions the City Council may have regarding his report. McCarthy commented that of the 18 ideas that are addressed in the County Road 15 Traffic Management Study conducted by Bonestroo, the one item that would improve safety conditions at no cost to the City involves the approval of this application by Woodhill Country Club. McCarthy stated this is a small, but critical step that would help improve the overall traffic safety for approximately 100 families that could utilize this secondary access. D. Council Questions of Applicant Mayor Jabbour inquired whether Woodhill Country Club is still of the opinion that the Club did not need to request a conditional use permit, nor needed to approach the City to exercise its rights to utilize a public roadway and to commence work within a City right-of-way. McCarthy stated the Country Club at the time thought it was commencing work on private property and not within the City's right-of-way and later found out that their understanding was In error. It is not Woodhill Country Cluo's position that they have the right to do work in the City's right-of-way. McCarthy remarked that if the use of this road changes dramatically in the future, Woodhill Country Club would address the City Council on that issue. McCarthy stated that the Country Club is willing to have some restrictions put on this secondary access, noting that approximately 25 percent of the Club's membership will be utilizing this road. Sansevere inquired how the Club is proposing to insure that this access is only utilized by members of the ciLh McCarthy stated that a gatehouse is not an effective security tool and that the people who would utilize this access would need to be very familiar with the road to find this access. Sansevere inquired whether a card system is something that the Club would consider. McCarthy commented that in their view a card system is something that would not work very well and Is expensive to install and maintain. McCarthy stated that the Club is willing to install a security gate which will be opened at 7:00 a.m. and closed at 8:00 p.m. Sansevere inquired whether the Club would be witling to limit the traffic to one-way. McCarthy remarked that the Club would like to keep the traffic flow two-v.ay. Sansevere questioned why the Club is proposing to limit the hours from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. McCarthy stateu that the neighbors have expressed concern over nighttime traffic, and this would limit the traffic to daytime hours. Sansevere inquired whether the Club employees who live on the north and west side would utilize this access as well. Page 8 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 McCarthy replied that the Club is not proposing that its employees utilize this access, noting that most of its employees amve at 6:00 a.m., before traffic becomes a problem on County Road 15. Jackson commented that the Club would like the hours of access to remain consistent to avoid traffic traveling down that road when the access is not open and will eliminate any confusion that might be caused if the hours varied. Jackson stated that the Club is also not interested in installing a sign at Orono Orchard Road in an effort to keep this road low proHle. E. Open Public Hearing i) Public Questions Pnirp Aftnrnou.of.l aur inmilrorl what tho arfiial arroano nf thp rliih ic nnfinn thaf thP application says 214 acres and the 1968 conditional use permit lists 150 acres. McCarthy stated that the 150 acres is what lies within the City of Orono and the rest is in Wayzata McCarthy commented that he does not know what the history of the acreage has been over the years. Malkerson remarked that the traffic study presupposes that 30 trips in and 30 trips out will be made on this road. Malkerson inquired how that number will be controlled and monitored. Mayor Jabbour questioned on what basis that number was arrived at and whether that number is accurate. McCarthy replied that the Club has set limits on the hours that the access will be opened and have estimated those numbers based on a review of the membership and where those members live. Malkerson Inquired why the Club was not willing to put a limit on the number of cars that would utilize this access. Malkerson suggested that routine traffic counts could be conducted as one possible means of monitoring the traffic flow in and out of this access. McCarthy stated that the engineer worked on averages and that the Club is not in a position to guarantee the number of trips. McCarthy commented that the Club has no reason to believe that those numbers are grossly inaccurate. Jane Delaney, 1350 Woodhill, inquired whether the Club determined how many members out of the 400 families that belong to the Club actually drive. McCarthy stated that some of the 400 familes are inactive. Traffic counts have shown that there is approximately 500 trips daily to the C uuntry Club. Shelly Storch, 1245 Woodhill Avenue, inquired whether it would be possible to monitor the traffic on a Saturday. Ed Axt, Senior Traffic Engineer, stated that the City of Orono conducted two traffic counts in August, noting that on one of those days the Club was hosting a wedding reception, which elevated the traffic count by 150 cars in addition to the traffic normally experienced. The counts showed that approximately 500 cars per day, 250 In and 250 out, traveled to the Country Club. Axt stated that the City's numbers were then incorporated within their traffic study. Shelly Storch inquired whether the Country Club has any figures showing the number of people who drink alcohol at the Club and also drive. Page 9 1 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 Jackson commented that Woodhill Cour .ly Club is a fi.fr;ily club and only has a small bar. Jackson stated that their members normally do not gather at La* and drink, and that the atmosphere of the club is more of a family gathering. Woodhill Country club at this time does not have speciHc numbers regarding the number of members who drink. Jerry Storch, 1245 Woodhill Avenue, inquired whether the traffic count distinguished in any wav the 25 percent of the membership that live to the west and north. McCarthy stated that the traffic count was not broken out to reflect those numbers. ii) Public Comments Jane Delaney, 1315 Woodhill Avenue, commented that their petition is representative of 45 households that are in opposition to this application, noting that the only ones who were in support of the application were members of the Country Club. Delaney stated that the residents were questioning why public hearings were not held before this time regarding this proposal. Delaney also stated that she used to walk in the area where the secondary access is proposed and in her opinion that road is more of a footpath and has not been maintained. Delaney also expressed concern that her driveway is located by the access, which will make it more difficult for her to exit her driveway due to the traffic going in and out of the Country Club. Brian Palmer, 1190 Lyman Avenue, spoke in favor of the application, noting that his family has used that secondary access when traveling on foot or bike for approximately 14 years. Palmer stated that the left-hand turn that is required off of Orono Orchard Road is dangerous and that this secondary access will provide a safer route of traffic to and from the Club for his family. Palmer commented that people need to be responsible drivers and to watch out for pedestrians and other vehicles on the road, but that this proposal will help improve the present traffic condition on County Road 15. Charles Maile, 1260 Woodhill Avenue, expressed his thanks to the City Council and City Staff for all their hard work regarding this issue. Maile commented that in his opinion annual reviews of this situation should be required as part of the conditional use permit due to the safety concerns that have been raised by the neighbors. Maile remarked that this access will increase traffic on Woodhill Avenue and would directly impact his family. Maile also raised concerns about the consumption of alcohol at the Country Club and the Woodhill Bam, noting that alcohol is being served within a short distance from his residence. Maile also commented that this application is proposing to put commercial and business traffic on a residential street, and encouraged the City Council to vote in opposition to this application. David Luther, 9900 Bren Road East, Minnetonka, stated they were in favor of tnis application, noting that they are the owners of the property located at 1250 Woodhill Avenue and would not be opposed to removing the vegetation and brush that exists on the corner if deemed necessary. Shelly Storch thanked the City Council members for all their efforts regarding this application, noting that she is strongly opposed to approval of this application due to the safety and equity concerns that have been raised surrounding this issue. Storch stated that Woodhill Country Club is a business that sells liquor and their proposal will bring that traffic through their residential neighborhood. Storch remarked that the Country Club should choose between selling liquor and having this access through a residential neighborhood. Page 10 I ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY II, 1999 Storch remarked that this secondary access will not help eliminate the traffic problems currently being experienced on County Road 15 but will have a great impact on their neighborhood. Storch presented a picture of Woodhill Avenue at the section where it curves, noting that a puddle routinely forms at that location and becomes an ice slick in the winter which causes a safety concern. Storch stated that this secondary access was not brought up by Woodhill Country Club at the time this area was developed, noting that they may not have purchased this land if this access was being contemplated. Storch commented that she has not seen vehicles using thii; access in the past, noting that this area is overgrown. Storch further remarked that at the time Woodhill Country Club was constructing this access, they were informed that this would be a temporary access, noting that the City was not initially informed that the Country Club was going to reopen this access. Jerry Storch, 1245 Woodhill Avenue, commented that being a citizen of America, inoivioual rights should be recognized and not pushed aside when those rights are being challenged by a business or corporation. Storch stated that the issue that the City Council should consider is whether this application is right or wrong, noting that the City currently does not allow other businesses to have a secondary backdoor entrance through a residential neighborhood. Storch stated he has a concern with the house that is located at the end of Woodhill Avenue, noting that this house has been sold approximately a year ago and remains vacant to this day. Storch remarked that the conditions that are being requested are not very enforceable in his opinion and the Country Club should be required to install a card system to insure that only members of the Country Club utilize this access. Storch indicated that currently a semi-tractor truck makes uC'iVcricS to the Club on a reguiur basis, arid l equcstcd tnat coiVtmcrcis! traffic not be sllOived to utilize this access. Storch commented that the main issue here is the number of cars that will be utilizing this access, noting that this proposal will not greatly reduce the number of cars on County Road 15 but will greatly impact traffic on Woodhill Avenue. Storch remarked that in his opinion he has a hard time believing that Woodhill Country Club will respect the neighborhood based on their previous attempts to construct the access without informing the City or the local residents. Storch indicated that it has been the neighbors' position that they will abide by the decision of the City Council, noting that they were not the initiators of this lawsuit against the City and have endured inflammatory remarks by people who support this application. Storch indicated that he hopes all parties involved in this matter will be able to put those differences aside once this issue is resolved and become friends once again. Bruce Malkerson, Attomey-at-Law, reviewed his May 4,1999 letter regarding the application by Woodhill Country Club, noting that pages 12 and 13 outline the standards and reasons why this application does not meet the City's standards and should be denied. If access is granted, then access should be limited by installing a security gate which is locked at all times and can only be accessed by Club members. Further, the access should be limited as outlined on page 9, Items A, B, C. and D, and should be designated as one-way to permit traffic into the Club. Malkerson suggested that speed bumps also be installed along Woodhill Avenue to reduce the speed of the vehicles that will be traveling dovm that road as a result of the secondary access. Malkerson remarked that it is within the City's authority to deny this application, and commented that if access from County Road 15 is cut off, then that is a different situation and should be reviewed. Malkerson requested that some type of review system be incorporated into the conditional Page 11 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 use permit to guarantee some control by the City over this property. Malkerson thanked Woodhili Country Club for electing to submit an application. F. Close Public Hearing The Public Hearing portion of this application was closed at 9:58 p.m. (Recess taken from 9:58 p.m. to 10:07 p.m.) G. Council Deliberation Mayor Jabbour thanked Woodhili Country Club for submitting an application for a conditional use permit, noting that the City was informed by the local residents that something was occurring in that area and the City had no information regarding what was happening. Jabbour noted that the members of the City Council have not taken any position on this issue other than requesting that an application for a conditional use permit be filed to allow the proper procedures to be followed. City Administrator Ron Moorse read a letter from William and Nadine McQuire of 315 Woodhili Road indicating their support for this application. Malkerson inquired since this letter was read after the public heanVg was closed, could the members of the public comment on its content. Mayor Jabbour indicated he would reopen the public hearing for the sole purpose of commenting on the letter that was read. (Public Hearing reopened at 10:12 p.m.) Jerry Storch stated he has difficulty with the letter because that house has been sitting vacant for approximately a year and It Is a matter of speculalicn as to what is going on there. (Public Hearing closed at 10:13 p.m.) Mayor Jabbour stated that it is up to the City Council to determine whether this application is appropriate, and if approved, what conditions should be imposed on the conditional use permit. Peterson indicated that she was disappointed in the fact that this process has become so difficult, noting that this is a matter that has not been taken lightly. Peterson stated that in her view this secondary access should be allowed based on the information that has been provided and that Woodhili Country Club does have a legal right to have this secondary access. Peterson commented that she would like to see some conditions placed on the conditional use permit. Flint indicated that this has been a difficult situation, noting that if he lived in that neighborhood he also would not want the additional traffic on that road, but that Woodhili Country Club does have a legal right to that access and he would vote in favor of their use of the access. Flint commented that he would like to see some restrictions placed on the conditional use permit and would like to have this situation reviewed periodically by the City. Flint remarked that perhaps one-way traffic is the best answer to this issue, noting that adjustments can be made if it is deemed that there is a problem. Flint indicated that he also is in favor of a stoplight at the intersection of Orono Orchard Road and Page 12 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 County Road 15 as a way to alleviate the traffic concerns in that area. Sansevere indicated that he does not have the full history regarding this matter, but is looking at what is fair and equitable to all parties involved. Sansevere commented that this access will not greatly reduce traffic on County Road 15, but will make travel safer for a percentage of the Club's members. Sansevere noted that the Club is not requesting full access and that some conditions are being proposed. Sansevere commented that he would like the Country Club to consider some type of card access system to restrict the use. Mayor Jabbour stated in his view Woodhill Country Club is entitled to use of this road, but that some restrictions need to be placed on the conditional use permit to aliow the City to have some control over what occurs on this property. Jabbour commented that Woodhill is attempting to limit the number of people who can gain access through Woodhill Avenue by its proposal. Jackson commented that he understands what the members of the City Council are saying, noting that the Country Club's Board of Directors is in attendance at tonight's meeting to gain a better understanding of all the positions involved. Jackson indicated that he does not have the authority to make substantial changes to the proposal without first holding a board meeting, but would like to be informed what the City Council is proposing as far as restrictions. Jackson remarked that Woodhill Country Club has come to the conclusion that this is the proper method for handling this issue. r.tu^cr Jabbour stated that the City is not requesting that Woodhill Country Club settle this issue tonight but is attempting to come up wi*h some conditions that should be placed on the conditional use permit that ail parties can live with. Jabbour indicated that the City has issued numerous conditional use permits where the right to review the permit has been reserved by the City. Gaffron commented that the City does nave the right to incorporate that condition into the conditional use permit. Mayor Jabbcur commented that the City does need to protect the rights of its citizens as well as the rights of the City. Sansevere suggested that this application be reviewed in approximately six months, noting that their busiest season will have ended. McCarthy commented that he does not feel this issue should be reviewed every year, and suggested that the City wait until County Road 15 is completed before a review is conducted. Peterson commented that, under the Club's proposal, the residents of Woodhill Avenue would need to adjust their lifestyles during the majority of the daytime hours, noting that she would be in favor of limiting the number of hours that the access is open. Flint stated that if the Country Club has the right to dismiss its lawsuit without prejudice and bring it back before the Court if they feel that they are being treated inappropriately by the City. Malkerson inquired whether the people in opposition to this application will have an opportunity to speak to these different points if the Applicant is able to comment on them. Mayor Jabbour stated that they are not going to reopen the public hearing section of this meeting, but that the comments by the Applicant will be limited to questions th^t the City Council may have regarding various items in their proposal. Mayor Jabbour commented that he would net be in favor of a card access system, noting that Page 13 } ik. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY II, 1999 they are expensive and experience mechanical problems. Jabbour stated that a one-way driveway is probably the best solution to limit the amount of traffic and to alleviate the safety concerns raised by having to make two left-hand turns. Jabbour remarked that this issue could perhaps be revisited in one to two years. Sansevere stated that he would like to see some type of guarantee that this road is only being accessed by Club members and not guests of a wedding party, for example, or other major social event that is held at the Club. McCarthy noted that the Club does not host very many weddings and that their proposal will not cause a major influx of people on this road. Mayor Jabbour noted that the original proposal from Woodhill Country Club did propose a one-way system. Flint suggested that a conceptual motion be made outlining the various conditions that the City is proposing to impose and then Woodhill Country Club will have an opportunity to review that motion before the next City Council meeting. Flint moved to conceptually approve Application #2484, Woodhill Country Club, 200 V.'ccdhill Road, and to authorize City Staff to draft a resolution for City Council consideration at their May 24,1999 meeting, subject to the following items that are outlined in Bruce Malkerson's May 4,1999 letter to the City Council: Item G, The Club shall install a gate across the road which shall be locked at all times (this is Club's request numbers 1 and 2 with a clarification), except when used as follows: A. Use of the road by emergency vehicles (police, fire, ambulance and utility). (This is Club's request number 3, page 1. B. Us« of the road for transporting Club tractors to and from Long Lake for repair. (This is Club's request number 5, page 1). C. Use of the road for general access if Woodhill Road access to County Road 15 is temporarily blocked (subject to reasonable notification to the City and the affected neighbors), but only during the period of such temporary blockage. (This is Club's request number 6, page 1). D.Use of the road under the terms of that certain Easement Agreement, dated October 5,1987, between the City, the Ciub, and MSM, which benefits one residential lot if County Road 15 access is blocked. (This is Club's request number 7, page 1). E. Usage of this access road is to be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m., to 8:00 p.m. The above approved uses would be called "Basic Rights," a term used by the Club. The City would reserve the right to review the permit periodically to determine what problems there were in the prior years and the City would maintain a right to modify the permit or add conditions, as allowed by Section 10.09, Subdivision 6,B. On page 2 of the application, the Club stated the City can delete the following uses from the 1968 conditional use permit. The following uses however, are not part of the 1968 Page 14 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 conditional use permit. In any event the Club can always apply for an amended conditional use permit in the future to include these items the Club agrees should not be part of any conditional use permit at this time. 1. Conversion of the Woodhill Avenue access into the main entrance for Woodhill on a permanent basis. 2. Woodhill Avenue as an entrance or exit by delivery, taxi, service, or other commercial vehicles. 3. Woodhill Avenue as an entrance or exit by the general public. 4. Woodhill Avenue as an access at time periods other than those allowed In the Basic Rights defined above. 6. Expansion of Woodhill's west driveway between the maintenance building and Woodhill Avenue. 6. Bituminous paving of the driveway abutting Woodhill Avenue. 7. Signage concerning Woodhill on Orono Orchard Road. The right of access to the Woodhill property exists independent of any conditional use permit process under the terms of the Easement Agreement. If all access from Woodhill to County RoaH IS is permanently blocked as a result of either Highway 15 alteration or improvement or because of the railroad right-of-way, the Club must apply for a conditional use permit so the City can decide if such use is warranted and if so, what conditions must be imposed in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens in the area and the users of the roads. Item H: 1. Access on the Club's driveway will be for members only, and only on the basis of one way, from west to east. 2. The City will monitor periodically and will have the right to modify if peak usage exceeds 100 trips per day. 3. The Club should install two-way stop signs at the intersection of Woodhill Avenue and Woodhill Ridge Road. 4. The Club will need to install speed bumps as determined by City Staff. 5. The access road should be bituminous within the public right-of-way. The City will review the permit after one year to determine what problems there were, and the City will maintain a right to modify the permit or impose additional conditions, as allowed by Section 10.09, Subd. 6, B. Second by Sansevere. Page 15 ; ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 11,1999 Malkerson commented that there is no way to prevent any person from utilizing this access when the road is opened, and recommended that a card system be required. Mayor Jabbour stated that he is not in favor of a card system due to malfunctions. Jabbour noted that the City will do periodic traffic counts and can review this conditional use permit if the traffic counts exceed the ailowabie limit. Malkerson stated he would like an opportunity to comment on these issues after the resolution is drafted. Mayor Jabbour commented this motion puts the burden on the Country Club not to encourage use of this road by aii visitors to the Country Club. Mayor Jabbour noted that it is bad public policy to prohibit the general public from using a public road and that any member of the public should be entitled to traverse down Woodhill Avenue but not all members of the public should have the right to gain access to Woodhill Country Club. Malkerson inquired whether commercial trucks would be limited. Flint answered yes. VOTE ON ABOVE MOTION: Ayes: 4. Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *(#3) Declaration of Excess/Surplus Property Flint moved, Kelley seconded, to declare Excess/Surplus Property; the water pressure tank from the Highway 12 water plant, and three used police squads; #1701993 Crown Victoria, #175 1996 Crown Victoria, and #176 1996 Crown Victoria. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Peterson moved, Sansevere seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 11:43 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Vee, City Cierk Page 16 I '4' .♦4 UKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 18338 Minnetonka Blvd. council MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 UII r urUHUNO Deq)haven, MN SS391 745-0789 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S NEWSLETTER Gregory S. Nybeck AprU28,1999 • Exotics This project is scheduled to commence on 6/14/99 and continue through 8/20/99. With the refurbishing of the harvesters this past Fall, it is anticipated the ten • ‘•r figgj should function like new equipment. Consistent with 1998, harvesting priorities \nv;g6r7>j6 will bc based on impediment to public boat navigation on the open water. The crew will assist Hennq>in County and affected cities in public access clean-up on weekdays and weekends. With zebra mussels as close as downtown Minneapolis, the LMCD is greatly concerned that recreational boaters may unknowingly transfer them into Lake Minnetonka. To create public awareness and to assist in preventing the spread of zebra mussels from infested waters, the LMCD is working closely Carmichael Lynch to formulate a new public awareness plan for 1999. Ideas being considered include television and print advertising, public access and marina signage, and a zebra mussel hotline. • Proposed ordinange change relatina to boat storaae density and multiple dock At its 3/10/99 and 3/24/99 meetings, the LMCD Board discussed an ordinance that would amend existing Code relating to boat storage density and multiple dock facilities on Lake Minnetonka. Three areas of the existing Code are being addressed in this draft Code amendment. They include: 1) to minimize the impact of multiple dock facilities, that utilize an outlet, on nearby properties, 2) to change the mechanism for measuring the amount of shoreline to credit when it is a meandering line, and 3) to change the General Rule from 1:50 to 1:100’. The LMCD Board tabled first reading of the ordinance amendment at its 3/10/99 and 3/24/99 meetings, and directed staff to facilitate a Workshop/Planning Session to get input from the member cities. A meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, 5/5/99, for 8:00 a.m. at Deq>haven City Hall. • Charter Boat Mggtingst A Code amendment was adopted by the LMCD Board at its 3/24/99 meeting that makes it mandatory for charter boats with liquor licenses to attend an ^nual training session. Working with Sgt. Ken Schilling from the Hennepin County Sheriffs Water Patrol, meeting dates of 3/30/99 and 4/6/99 were scheduled to facilitate 100% attendance by the charter boat licensee or authorized representative. The discussion at these mwtings focused on LMCD charter boat rules and regulatibns including general responsibilities, operational rules, and related liquor n Jes. No new or renewal liquor license has been granted for those charter boats who did not send a representative to one of these meeting dates. • 1QQQ Lake ]tftnnA>nnkfl Shoreline Count: Staff is preparing to conduct a shoreline storage count for watercraft beginning in June. This management plan project, which was conducted in 1998, is to be completed every two years. When the Report was presented last summer, executive DIRECTOR’S NEWSLETTER, 4/28/99, PAGE 2 ♦ staff was directed to conduct the project in 1999 to vaUdate the ^ults of the 1»8 Late . l^etonka Shoreline Count. Further detaUs of this project wiU be provided when available. 'sVre^'L to tegin work on the 2000 LMCD budget. In ac^rdance with Minima proposed budget through their representative on the LMCD Board and at a meeting m y June. On-fftinf Staff is close to completing the processing of all new and renewal without change applications for licensed multiple docks, charter boats, Uquor Ucenses, and s^event permits for Late Ntoetonka. Feel free to caU the offic you have questions or concerns regarding a specific license or permit. mi H ks Boathnyset The civil lawsuit filed by Mr. Hawks agamst the lmcu cnauenguig ruling of the 5/26/98 Hennepin County District court Mr. Hawks has prtiut^ tev^ by ^e^esota State Supreme Court of the decisioo of the Court of Appeals. Further details will be provided when available. . WAPnae! The LMCD WebPage address is: .-.i • 1 DRAt=T APPENDIX A DRAFT 2000 LMCD BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS ADMINISTRATION • $105,500 has been budgeted for Salaries for three full-time employees and one part-time employee at current salaries and hourly rate (line item la). Salary adjustments for these employees nave been budgeted as part of Contingency (line item 7). $18,960, a 5% increase from 1999, has been budgeted for Office Lease & Storage (line item 2a). It is projected that Office Lease & Storage expenses for 2000 will cost the District approximately $25,000. The balance of these expenses will be off-set by funds received from the Freshwater Foundation in the Fall of 1998 move. $11,000 has been budgeted for Professional Services (line item 2b). This includes funds for the 1999 LMCD Audit and for the District Bookkeqier. No reserve fund contribution has been budgeted for 2000. With a projected Administrative reserve fund balance of $118,530 by 12/31/99, the District should attain the agreed upon six-month reserve for the Administrative Budget by year-end of 1999. EWM/EXOTICS MANAGEMENT • It is anticipated that the MN DNR will fund the District with a grant of approximately $24,(XX) to assist in the management of Eurasian Watermilfoil. $15,000 has been budgeted for Zebra Mussel expenses (line item 2). These funds will be spent to improve public awareness of zebra mussels including television and print advertising, public access and marine signage, a zebra mussel hotline number, and other efforts. A reserve fund contribution of $6,000 has been budgeted. With a projected EWM reserve fund balance of $95,191 by 12/31/99, this would reduce the reserve fund balance for EWM to $89,191. By the year-end 2000, the District should attain the agreed upon 12 month reserve for the EWM program. No transfer is budgeted from the EWM reserve fund balance to the Equipment Replacement reserve fund for equipment depreciation. A transfer of $35,000 has been budgeted for 1999 from the EWM reserve fund to the Equipment Replacement fund. 1 4^ ■ V / .* LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 2000 BUDGET DRAFT :• • • • I • :• X .V X .V >.•**v *♦ • V.* V •X :v X- •X*' V ' ♦ X * • * 4 •' * X- • ♦ ^4 1. Administration a) LMCD Communities Admn Levy b) Reserve Fund Contribution c) Court Fines d) Li:»nses e) BWSE f) Interest, Public Funds g) Other Income SUB-TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 2. Exotics Management a) Lr^CD Communities Exotics Mgmt Levy b) Olher Public Agencies c) Pi ivate Solicitation d) Reserve Fund Allocation e) In'erest SUB-1 OTAL EXOTICS MANAGEMENT TOTAL REVENUES pjgl AOMIMI8TRATION 1. Pei sonnel Services: a) Salaries b) Planning/Special Projects Intern c) Enployer Benefit Contributions SUB-TOTAL PERSONNEL SERVICES 2. Contractual Services: a) O fice Lease & Storage Professional Services r:*JB-TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3. Office A Administration: a) Office, General Supplies b) Telephone c) Postage d) Printing, Publications, Advertising e) Maintenance, Office Equipment 0 Subscriptions, Memberships g) insurance. Bonds h) Public information. Legal Notices i) Mileage, Expenses, Training j) BWSE Expenses k) Wintemet 0 WobPage/tntemet Maintenance/Service SUB-TOTAL OFFICE & ADMINISTRATION 4. Casital Outlay: a) Furniture, Equipment b) Computer software & hardware; tnining SUB-TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 5. Legal: a) Legal Services b) Prosecution Services c) Henn. County Room & Board d) Recodification/Zoning SUB-TOTAL LEGAL 8. Contract Services/Studies: a) Mgmt Plan Implementation b) Boater Ed. Pilot Program c) Record Archival (Q Access/Channei Signage SUB-TOTAL CONTRACT SERVICES/STUDIES 7. Contingency TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES 1997 80,524 48.000 40.000 86.000 B,00U 1,000 67.500 24.500 1,000 12,000 12,000 117,000 111,418 18,646 130,064 17.160 10,000 27.160 4.500 2,000 5.000 2.500 2.000 300 7.000 2.000 1.500 1,000 10,000 20,000 28,000 3.000 51.000 5.000 5,000 7,500 1997 1998 1998 1999 1999 2000 Actual Budget Actual Budget YTD (3/31)Budget 80,524 109,640 190,640 109,208 32,380 98,179 0 0 0 15,000 0 0 43,173 40,000 40,591 40,000 11,659 45,000 105,103 100,000 105,671 100,000 85,473 105,000 2,240 2,100 210 2,500 11.398 8,oor 5,716 10,000 7,972 8,000 3,687 2,00w 15,624 2,000 49,111 2,000 243,885 259,640 279,482 278,306 186,805 260,679 67,501 64,500 64,500 42,000 12,454 66,000 23,854 24,000 23,854 24,000 0 24,000 0 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 5,500 5,500 30,000 0 6,000 8,021 12.000 10,362 8,000 9,465 8,000 99,376 107,000 104,216 104,000 21,919 104,000 343,261 366,640 383.698 372,308 208,724 364,679 91,884 95,480 96,161 102,500 24,678 105,500 0 3,869 0 0 0 15,477 16,618 19,373 18,668 4,975 19,979 107,361 112,098 119,403 121,168 29,653 125,479 18,272 10,988 29,260 3,035 4,006 3,175 2,187 2,470 1,034 6,705 2,099 1,280 794 262 2,279 17.952 10,000 27.952 5.000 4,140 4.500 2.500 2.000 450 6,000 2,000 1.500 26,800 26,785 28,090 1,000 2,500 22,451 10,823 33,274 2,428 3,381 3,221 857 1,655 1,130 6,706 695 1,871 1,394 274 1,143 24,755 12 1,071 18,000 10,000 28,000 4.500 4,440 4,350 2.500 2.500 450 7.000 2.000 1.500 2,100 300 1,000 32,640 1,000 2,000 11,000 2,541 3,500 1,083 3,000 15,268 31,028 3,180 0 49,476 6,050 0 0 20,000 30.000 3.000 7.500 60.500 10,200 0 10.000 25,999 49,497 2,288 0 77,764 10,071 0 0 20,000 32.000 4.000 7,500 63,500 0 0 0 6,042 2,882 8,924 1,268 1.495 1.496 0 76 99 0 114 458 539 75 0 5,620 383 0 383 4,610 14.171 1,270 0 20,051 4.171 0 0 17,500 6,050 20,200 10,853 6.000 18.960 11,000 29.960 4,000 4,440 4.000 3.000 2.000 1,000 7.000 2.000 2,000 2,000 300 1,000 32,740 1,000 2,000 3.000 20.000 35,000 4,500 0 59,500 0 0 0 20.000 0 0 10.071 20,000 4,171 0 24.576 10,000 900 10,000 290,946 278.308 69,702 260.679 1997 1997 1998 1998 1999 1999 2000 EXOTICS MANAGEMENT Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget YTD (3/31) .a Budget 1. WMd Harvesting Operational Exp.: a) Salaries & Employer Taxes/Insurance 35,000 22,034 32,000 25,351 30,000 0 28,000 b) Trucking Contract 21,000 12,804 15,000 14,484 15,000 0 16,000 c) Administrative 1,000 1,539 1,000 1,873 1,000 4 2,000 d) Operational Supplies 22,000 14,641 20,000 22,081 15,000 50 15,000 e) Contract Services 16,000 18,420 19,000 83,705 20,000 843 20,000 0 Heavy Growth Season Extension 7,000 0 8,000 5,353 8,000 0 8,000 SUB-TOTAL WEED HARVESTING OP. EXP.102,000 69,438 95,000 152,847 89,000 897 89,000 2. Zebra Mussel Operational Exp.:15,000 089 12,000 4,264 15,000 0 TOTAL EXOTICS MANAGEMENT EXPENSES 117,000 70,427 107,000 157,111 104,000 897 104,000 TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS 380.524 303,179 366,640 448,057 372,308 70,599 364,679 Save the Lake Program Income: a) Private Donations 27,000 33,873 30,000 30,000 25,000 4,045 b) Other Income 1,000 3,941 1,800 1,800 1,000 864 c) Interest 4,000 7,020 7,000 7,000 5,000 2,366 SUB-TOTAL SAVE THE LAKE INCOME 32,000 44,834 38,800 38,800 31,000 7,275 Save the Lake Program Expenses: a) Administrative 3,700 2,723 3,700 2,353 2,800 469 b) Program 28,300 18,316 35,100 16,796 28,200 3,682 SUB-TOTAL SAVE THE LAKE EXPENSES 32,000 21,042 38,800 10,149 31,000 4,451 INFORMATIONAL: EWM Equipment Depreciation 35,000 35,000 12,000 12,000 35,000 0 0 .. .-i: 4 ^ LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 2000 BUDGET DRAFT Hie following assumptions were made in the preparation of the draft 2000 LMCD Budget: 7 ' . ^ » . ______ Salaries (la) Executive Director Admin. Tech. Admin. Ass't. Admin. Clerk Employer Benefit Contributions (lb) P.E.R.A. (4.75%) P.E.R.A. Life Ins. Unum Life Ins. F.I.C.A. & Medicare Medical Ins. Office Lease & Storage (2a) Office & storage ($1,560/mo.) Off-site storage Telephone (3b) U.S. West AT&T Insurance, Bonds (3g) Property Inland Marine Municipal Liability Excess Liability w/ Waiver Bond Contingency (7) Salary Adjustments, etc. EWM Salaries & Employer Taxes/Insurance (la) Salaries F.I.C.A. & Medicare (7.65%) Insurance (Auto & Workers Comp.) Current $45,000 $23,000 $23,000 $11.60 per hour $5,011.25 $432.00 $(4.80 $8,070.95 $6,400.00 $19,979.00 $18,720.00 $240.00 $18,960.00 $4,:’00.00 $210.00 $4,140.00 $1:50.00 $1,100.00 $4,000.00 $1,500.00 $2.50.00 $7,000.00 $10,000.00 $23,250.00 $2,140.00 $2,610.00 2000 $45,000 $28,000 $23,000 $9,500 $105,500 $28,000.00 Zebra Mussel Program (2) The $15,(XX) levied for this program will be spent on proposals received from Carmichael Lynch to improve public awareness. Ideas being considered include televison and print advertising, public access and marine signage, and a zebra mussel hotline. Administration EWM/Exotics 1999 12/31/98 Balance Budgeted Reserve Fund Allocation Transfer to Equip. Repl. Fund $118,530 $0 $0 $150,191 $20,000 $35,000 i $118,530 $95,191 2000 10/^ 1 /QQ Ralanci*$118.530 $95,191 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION INCH meeting may 2 4 1999 I Y ur UHUNO Date: May 21,1999 Item No.: Department Approval: Aibninistrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron^jr''*^^^” Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1321 - Orono Schools, 950 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Requesting that City Extinguish Road and Utility Easement in Outlet A, Orono School Exp>ansion List of Exhibits A - Tom Crosby Letter 5-14-99 B - Plat Approval Resolution No. 2544 C - Excerpt from 1988 Developer’s Agreement D - Plat of Orono School Expansion In 1988 the Council adopted Resolution No. 2544 approving the plat of Orono School Expansion. This plat divided the 51 -acre tract on the east side of Old Crystal Bay Road into 4 large lots plus a road outlot, the purpose being to facilitate the School District's purchase of the entire property. The City required that the private road outlot (Outlot A) be platted to provide access to Lot 2, Block 1, which would otherwise be landlocked if for some reason the entire purchase was not consummated. The City also agreed, via a Developer's Agreement, that if the School District within 11 years acquires title to all 4 lots, the City would "upon the Developer's petition for combination of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, and Outlot A into a single lot, provide the necessary resolutions, approvals and other reasonable documentation, all in recordable form, to grant approval of such combination, to vacate, abandon and terminate the Easement in Outlot A...". Attorney Tom Crosby on behalf of the School District has submitted a letter to the City Attorney initiating such a petition and suggesting that a quit-claim deed by the City to the School District is the appropriate document for extinguishing the easement rights. Staff and the City Attorney have not yet had the opportunity to reach a conclusion as to the process for this extinguishment. It may require a a public hearing and formal vacation process, or it may require some lesser process. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to authorize staff to commence whatever review and approval process is necessary in order for the City to complete its obligations under the terms of the 1988 Developer's Agreement. • .• COPY Faegre & Benson llp COPY 2200 N orwest C enter . 90 South seventh Street Minneapolis , Minnesota 55402*3901 TELEPHONE 61 2-336-3000 FACSIMILE 612-336-3026 Thomas m. Crosby , Jr. TCrosby@fMgre com 612/336-3127 May 14, 1999 -''T.V Mr. Thomas J. Barrett Hinshaw & Culbertson 222 S. Ninth St. #3200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 •k •• ‘ Re:l.S.D. 278 City of Orono Dear Tom; I am working with the Orono School District to extinguish right of the City of Orono in an outlot created as a future access in the 1998 platting of the Orono School Expansion Plat. The property is located on the east side of Old Crystal Bay Road east of the existing Orono High School. ,<r, At the time of the plat, an agreement dated November 28,1.99^ was entered into pursuant to which certain understandings were set forth concerning Outlot A, the future access. An easement to the City across Outlot A was also executed. Enclosed is a copy of the 1998 agreement and the Outlot A easement. Also enclosed is a copy of the letter of Liz Van Zomeren of April 7, 1999 requesting that a title opinion be prepared. The purpose of this letter is to request that you accept an Owner’s and Encumbrances abstract showing l.S.D. 278 in title to all of the properties. Mike Gaffron has agreed to accept a combination of the several tax parcels as distinguished from a replatting of the property which would create a single lot from the five lots now involved. Because of the nature of the combination and because nothing is being granted to the City (in fact, the City will be relinquishing its rights in the outlot to the school district) the customary reasons for a title opinion do not exist. An Owner’s and Encumbrances abstract would save time and money for the school district. I expect that a quit claim deed by the City to the School District of the easement rights is the appropriate document. Minneapolis Denver Des Moines London Frankfurt 4 s j 1 f. y ElJ^- IAfn- r '■I i ■ |fc-- i ■,.’ I*-; f •fi * r» (; . n. May 14,1999 Page 2 Mike Gaffron asked that I bring these matters to your attention. Sincerely, Thomas M. Crosby, Jr. TMC:koecf Enclosures cc: Mike Gaffron Neal Lawson j Ml:4981SS.01 >r»ci ....•V*-. —i *. vr.*.. ..•---. r ■• •••* •. ,.* ■*»- ••••>. •.... .ys'Z -• .f City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2544________ A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OP ORONO SCHOOL EXPANSION WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and wncRSAS the Citv Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a plat by Tom Haislet, the subdivider; and KBBSBAS, the subdiviBion has been found to meet all '^“d'lrds of the RR-IB rural residential toning district that each lot is o size and configuration that will allow its use as a single fa^ly reside or an“her allowed use within the residential zoning district to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: j 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution #2513. 2. Creation of a new private road shown on the plat as Outlot A. 3 concurrent with the creation of this private road, the Subdivider has dedicated to the City a Road and Utilities the City temporary access, improvement and utility easemen s o Outlot. 4. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat, easements and covenants in the airiount of $150.00. 5. Payment to the City for the final plat application fee in the amount of $150.00. HOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Page 1 of 2 •• ^ ••• • .».♦••• , • •• «■••,* I"'/ •• *.** • '** * • • • • • •• *« ^ ■?• ••• • •■ • •••••• M •* *1 * ><|\ • * • • • • • • L citr . I OF l.PRONO City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2544 j.._--®rpersons with an interest in the plat (hereafter "Developers"), together with the City of Orono shall execute a Developer's Agreement that defines the guidelines for the future use of this property by the developers, and further restricts the City from requiring certain site improvements for a specified period of time if the developers fulfill all pertinent conditions of this agreement, and upon the recommendation of the Orono staff and City Attorney confirming that this agreement does satisfactorily protect the City s Interest in 'this matter further directs the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Developer's Agreement on behalf of the City of Orono. 2. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or the ^®9i8trar of Titles Office on or before May 28, 1989 together with a certified original copy of this Resolution and executed copies of the covenants and easements noted above. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, necessary to file a new application with the City of orono for subdivision review. Dated this 28th day of November, 1988. AT^ST: /Dorottiy M.^allin. jlJ~ Jamds R. GrabeJc, Tiayor Page 2 of 2 r DEVELOPER’S AGREEMENT FOR THE PLAT OF ORONO SCHOOL EXPANSION (Name o£ Development) ll INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 (ORONO) (Name of Developer) CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA THIS AGREEMENT, Made and entered into this 28th day of, November 1988, by and between the City of Orono, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter called "City"), and Independent School District No. 278 (Orono), an independent school district and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, (hereinafter called "Developer"), its agents, successors and assigns. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developer is the buyer of the Property hereinafter defined pursuant to that certain purchase agreement dated June 2, 1988, as amended by that certain First Amendment to Purchase Agreement dated September 26, 1988 (collectively, the "Purchase Agreement"). WHEREAS, Albin Thies and Arlene Thies, aka, Albin F Thies and Arlene L. Thies, respectively, husband and wife, and Sidney B. Phillips and Ruth L. Phillips, formerly known as Ruth L, Thies, ’'espec tively, husband and wife (collectively, th*’ Page 1 of 16 1 4 1 "Thies and Phillips")/ are the sellers pursuant to the Purchase Agreement and are the present owners in fee simple absolute of the Property. WHEREAS/ upon the closing of the transaction contemplated in/ and subject to the terms and conditions of/ the Purchase Agreement/ Thies and Phillips shall grant and warrant to the Developer (a) fee simple absolute title in and to that portion of the Property which will be legally described as Lot 2, Block 2/ and Outlot A, Orono School Expansion/ according to the plat thereof to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County/ Minnesota (the "Plat") and (b) a leasehold interest in T.ot 1/ Block 2, and Lots 1 and 2, Block 1/ of the Plat/ together with an option to purchase fee simple absolute title in and to said Lot 1/ Block 2, and Lots 1 and 2, BJock 1. WHEREAS/ the City Council has granted approval for the Plat on the condition that the Developer/ with the consent of the Thies and Phillips/ enter into this Agreement to provide for the terms and conditions upon which the Developer shall be obligated to install certain public roadway and utility improvements hereinafter described on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. WHEREAS/ the City Council has granted approval of the Plat on the condition that the Developer will grant to the City Page 2 of 16 an easament ("Easernent") in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A for public roadway and utility purposes over, under and across said Outlet A. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the Property and the mutual promises and conditions hereinafter contained, it is hereby agreed as follows: 1, Property Description: The real property ("Property") is located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and is presently described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, CRYSTAL CREST, according to the recorded plat thereof; and that part of Lot 2, lying east of the west 642.00 feet thereof. Block 1, CRYSTAL CREST, % acco)*ding to the recorded plat thereof. 2. Condition Precedent to Construction of Tmorovements; 2.1 The City shall not permit or require the use of Outlet A for public or private roadway or utility purposes without the prior written consent of the Developer, which consent shall be at Developer's sole discretion, and shall not have the right to construct or install or to require the Developer or any other person to construct or install any improvements for public or private roadway or utility purposes (collectively, "Improvements") over, under and across said Outlot A, unless (a) the Developer fails to acquire fee Page 3 of 16 simple absolute title to Lot 1# Block 2» and Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, of the Plat on or prior to the eleventh (11th) anniversary date of the day and year first above written and to make a request for combination pursuant to Section 2.5; or (b) the Developer or the Thies and Phillips or their heirs, representatives or assigns. Develops, as such term is hereinafter specifically defined, all or portions of the Property within such eleven (ll)-year period. The terms and conditions of this Section 2.1 shall control and the location of said Outlot A, as shown on the Plat, shall not be changed or otherwise affected notwithstanding any future development of the land located east of the Property. The Developer shall not be obligated to change or otherwise affect the location of said Outlot A or to construct or install any Improvements, except upon the occurrence of the contingencies set forth in Section 2.1(a) or (b). notwithstanding any request or demand by any developer of, or person having a legal or equitable interest in. the land located east of the Property. 2.2 Without limiting the sufficiency of any other evidence that Developer shall have acquired fee simple absolute title to Lot 1, Block 2, and Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, of the Plat, the Developer's recording of a deed(s) to such Lots from the Thies and Phillips or their heirs. representatives or assigns, as grantor, to the Developer, as grantee, shall be conclusive evidence that the Page A of 16 Developer has acquired fee simple absolute title to said Lots. . —j 2.3 The term •'Develops" as used in Section 2.1(b) shall mean and refer to any use of all or portions of the Property for purposes other than those purposes for which the Property is presently used. For purposes of example and not limitation, said term shall include use of all or portions of the Property for construction of residences. athletic fields, bleachers or other structures. Said term shall exclude use of all or portions of the Property for farming or agricultural purposes and for classroom activities and research, including, biology classes. provided that the Developer complies with safety. security and signage standards reasonably required by the City for such use. 2.4 If either of the contingencies set forth in Section 2.1(a) or (b) occurs, then the City shall have the right to require by written notice the Developer (and/or the Thies and the Phillips and their heirs. representatives and assigns, if at the time of such occurrence they have a legal or equitable interest in all or portions of the Property) to construct or install the Improvements to the extent reasonably determined by the City to be necessary given the extent to which the Page 5 of 16 w I I ii Property is then being used or Developed. Such construction or installation of Improvements,"if so e required, shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement and then applicable City, State and Federal ordinances, statutes, laws, rules and regulations. Upon completion of the construction or installation of Improvements, if so required in accordance with the immediately preceding sentence, the City shall upon the petition of the Developer enter into and record any necessary resolution, instrument or other reasonable documentation terminating this Agreement, but such termination shall not affect the Easement. In the event the Developer refuses to construct or install the Improvements, the City may do so after written notice to the Developer. The Developer (and/or the Thies and Phillips and their heirs, representatives and assigns, if at the time of the occurrence they have legal or equitable interest in all or portions of the Property) by this Agreement, agrees to pay all reasonable costs of the Improvements either directly, or to allow such reasonable costs to be assessed without objection against all portions of the Property in which the Developer, the Thies or the Phillips have a legal or equitable interest. Page 6 of 16 2.5 If neither of the contingencies set forth in Section 2.1(a) nor (b) occurs, or if the Developer acquires fee simple absolute title to all of the Property within said eleven (ll)-year period, then the City shall, upon the Developer's petition for combination of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, and Outlot A into a single lot, provide the necessary resolutions. approvals and other reasonable documentation, all in recordable form, to grant approval of such combination. to vacate, abandon and terminate the Easement in i Outlot A, and all other such easements, except those which adjoin the outer boundary lines of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 and Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, and to terminate this Agreement. ••aTWI 3. ^.f^strurt-inn Plans: If construction and installation _ _ _I—^ »^»* «• of any Improvements are required under this Agreement, detailed plans and specifications for the complete installation of the Improvements shall be submitted by the Developer for the approval of the City prior to the start of construction, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. The plans and specifications shall conform to all then current City standards for all applicable work. 4, rnnstrurt-ion of Improvements; If construction and Page 7 of 16 -J Application Date: 4/1/99 Completion Date: 4/1/99 60 Day Deadline: 5/31/99 COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 C/i nr OH Oho/vo REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 5/20/99 ITEM NO Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Planning Intern Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2169 Michael Renard 1185 Tonkawa Road Variance-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:32,648 s.f. or approx. .75 acres Application: The applicant seeks approval of a variance addition in revising the structural amount already approved in a 75'-250' hardcover variance approved in 1996 (File #2169). 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' from the property line, the new shed will be located 10.36' from the property line (no longer in side yard setback). This application requires the following variance approval: 1.Variance from Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 : To permit a variance addition to change the structure amount approved in hardcover variance to allow for a 12' x 21' shed to be located in the 75"-250' setback area. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 4 to 0 vote to: Deny the application as presented for reasons noted below: 1. There is no hardship inherit in the land to build a larger accessory building. i J 2. In 1996 the applicant received a hardcover variance to allow 26.7% in the 75'-250' lakeshore setback area. 3. The applicant is not increasing hardcover coverage but trading it for structural coverage in the 75'-250' lakeshore setback area. The existing garage and sidewalk will be removed and replaced with a larger garage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To deny the enclosed application. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To direct staff to draft resolution for the June 14, 1999 City Council meeting. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN SS323 PHONE:(612)249-4600 FAX:(612)249-4616 ZONING FILE #2169 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; May 18, 1999 TO: Michael Renard 1185 TonkawaRoad Long Lake, MN 55356 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION;Variance DATE OF MEETING: 5/17/99 VOTE;4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Denial for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: No hardship inherit in land to build a larger accessory building. Although hardcover would not increase on property, the proposal would increase the amount of structural hardcover within the IS- 250* lakeshore setback. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council May 24, 1999, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the ofiicial Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\CAROLE«:ACTIONU169 I *• • TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Commission Members FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern DATE:May 10,1999 SUBJECT: #2169, Michael Renard 1185 Tonkawa Road Variance Addition — Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:32,648 s.f. (Approx. - .75 Acres) Application: Applicant seeks approval of a variance addition in revising the structural amount already approved in a 75-250' hardcover variance approved in 1996 (File #2169). 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' from the property line, the new shed will be located 10.36' from the propertj' line (no longer in sideyard setback). This application requires the following variance: 1. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2; To permit a variance addition to change the structure amount approved in hardcover variance to allow for a 12' x 21' shed to be located in the 75'-250' setback area. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.22: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. #27 5P Michael Renard 1185 Tonkawa Road Variance Addition 5/10/99 Page 1 I mftamiifli'igi'i* 1 Hardcover Coverage: Total Lot Size 0-75' Setback Area 75 -250' Setback Area 32,648 s.f. .. • 9,675 s.f. Allowed: 0 Existing: 213 s.f. or 2.3% 22,m s.f. Allowed: 5,743.3 s.f or 25% Existing: 6,147 s.f or 26.7% Proposed: 6,231 s.f or 27.1% Structural Coverage: SUtd 'ftJailC V ro posinj Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 32,648 s.f Allowed: 4,897 s.f. Existing: 2,747 s.f Proposed: 2,831 s.f. 15.0% 8.4% 8.7% Statement of Hardship: 1. Staff feels a hardship does not exist in building a larger shed. 2. 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. A hardcover variance was approved in 1996 to allow the hardcover coverage in the 75-250' area to be 26.7%. The applicant wants to remove a shed and construct a larger shed increasing the hardcover amount to 27.1%. 2. The city will benefit with moving the new shed 10’ from the propert>' line and no longer in the sideyard setback. 3. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. M2/69 Michael Renard 1185 Tonkawa Road Variance Addition 5/10/99 Page! . • i 1 T 1 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the variance addition. The applicant is increasing the amount of hjtfdcover in the 75.V250 setback from 26.7% to 27.1% where 25% is the allowed amount. Attachments A Application B Site Plan/Survey C Building Plan D Plat Map E Location Map F Site Topography G Property Owners List H Permit Record I Resolution No. 3775 (File #2169-1996) ' ‘1 U2I69 Michael Renard 1185 Tonkawa Road Variance Addition 5/10/99 Pages ! . J * • • • *. cmr OF ORONO - variance application Initial Application Fee $250.00 (S50.00 per each additional vari^ce) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from ori^d application) Variance for non-confomiing structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application# ^ ^ ^ Date Receiv^ ^ Amount Paid yliln PROPERTY INFORMATION , She Address NSS xU \i-- Idress________________________________________________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.I oB - P3 ~ /3 - Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired. Ookicv ____________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ^ readential ___pother (specify). Zoning District: ___________________________ .(month/year) APPLICANT ^ A n ^ f) Name Address: J/&S ~7o7tkALJA PA. Phone (horned ____ Phonefwork) ______ City: GAb/iO _____Zip: S'S'SSC * I I f OWNER Cri* different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work). ilvrvnT?. 5 Address:City:Zip:, DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Estimated Construction Cost $ ^SSbc.,jfhcO ______________________________________________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) ' I '1 ‘ I V VMANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback: Lot Width . • • Front J‘-ide Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore •• ^ Other (specify)____________ ^/TtOOMh lOtHtA ^»yt***f ( V)o-rio-'*''^ • t if HARDSmP/DESCRIPTiON ^F UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: .n.«_ jgficdP •/£* ___ / i ffJLtJL icj.tl be Li.lti.a a H ^Jc Aego/ACtruAJp ■ : I . ♦[ 4 I i 6 •w •• *. .4. • •• t .* . %• y: fr,O I !^:?3r£ri| / oz V i' j L i t V. .,'D.. I.L. CHIPPEWA U ^OFORICIR 0 ^ 400 » iiHAvnr C/dn€7T^eoo WATZATA ORONO ICHRBTINEOR ' ^ I ^ii!!!L!^^^--..g 3'^ •90 •* WEAR cm mImppex- g^WOX _________o o|g ^ WATERTOWR •’[cc^ **0 0 S iV /^<r v^ • ■^Pciwco^^ BAYS DE ItO s(a*®^u M 2 WHITE • 9 Print’ « *‘v feig • OTi—Mi_ I •% • # ’ • •# (3r • • 5 ” • 111H i Ia. m fc-os * B- I « • ss < *s }2 «} z m_ is"mui iH H K H is HI •H S ZI c/» z o ^ « O H J o o ti M "-Sal to•H %o »10inSts SSSS ^ H n ui S HI Im S H 90 ZOO M 111 u ip s S• 83 J3g« S 8 lit h*mils« e ca H .1 ®g K) s N H H • ca CMH •• H 0 •00-1*5iSi®flS COoo to !cA ■g o §i §A® ||£N p **i§A • 0 H 3 1m 8 » IS IM S p p O zssflaH S • • . \ or N 5m i %0e •n I U 0 UJ Z 8 B M g rM < H Ul HI sm 2 a^sa 8a®® SS1SI3 ®gS?S2• ^ «g -sis & •*810H < siggs I NriHIO a. a. ♦ _ HZ Z oo a. 8 zo S8 88 8 SS 8 0 P Z Z 10 M ««/» 3 '^»oo8 8amm<z 1m VIZ z •-H ZSH^8 3-Si • ®is^s!ssliiiZ 0 H r Permit No. '■rl 4sF //SS ^J<y-rJ<aju3a, PERMIT RECORD Date Type of Permit ^10*i I'm //'^5 3-7^ •• • H. • •• 63a? • •», • • /yiecH^ 6"6~5?’b Q(sm3a:te <5-=\~lO ___________ l{)03a n-i4'% ■A^4mvu 6rv .c^■is^yn d^^jefluu^- JJ'...................... \ndU • /6 • /i3 - ^ Cd 7^^"%_______ ■ W / 6 '/^- ^ C:OuSUi^^ i^7o//-/7- 97 ^-"103 (o p J'^ • • * •^ • .•• • • • • .•• • • • « •, • • • « • • ’¥ • 9 d: \ «9r*<5^ iiS>, CITYof ORONO • .• fisiio RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL .. ■■ N6rS?7 5- . ■ -• ' , * •• •• • ^ *• % • • A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 (B) AND 2 FILE #2169 • • WHEREAS, Michael Renard (hereinafter "the applicant") is the O's^'ner of the property located at 1185 Tonkawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 853, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and * • • . ^ ^ WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to allow construction of an addiUon to the existing residence to be located 4' in front of the average lakeshore setback line where the existing residence is located 1 1/2’ in front of the setback line ^d where the code would allow no such encroachment and a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 seeking approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250* setback area of 403.7 s.f. or 1.7% for a total of 6,147 s.f. or 26.7% where only 25% is allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. ... This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2169. The property is located in the LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1 acre in area. The property consists 32,648 s.f. or .7d acres. Page 1 of 6 1 k • f . ) . * i :s • /• ^ • • • • ♦CITY of ORONO *• • • •.RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL . NO.. 3 7 7 5 ' *.. . ; • • 3. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on September 16, 1996, and recbramended approval of the average lakeshore setback variance of 4' and hardcover variance of 1.7% within the 75-250' setback* area based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A.The encroachment to the average lakeshore setback is minimal at 4 ’ and will have no negative impact upon the lake views of the adjacent residences. • B.The existing residence is located 1 1/2' in front of the average lakeshore setback line. C.The City has received written acknowledgment by both adjacent neighbors that they have been made aware of the plans for improvement and the City has received no cotnments from either neighbor. D.Hardcover in the 0-75' setback shall be reduced by 178 s.f. existing at 391 s.f. or 4.04% and proposed at 213 s.f. or 2.2%. E.Proposed total area or size of the residence structure is consistent with the size and areas of surrounding residences on adjacent properties at similar areas. F.The existing bituminous drive and backout apron is required to maintain safe access to the adjacent County Road. G.Structural coverage is proposed at 8.4% "where the code would allow 15%. . The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property axe peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance w'ould not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping vdth the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 6 X 'bo^lo CITY of ORONO •• RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ■ . NO. "3 77 5 • • t u ••. • • •• 5.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) approving an average lakeshore setback variance of 4' and a hardcover variance 403.7 s.f. or 1.7% \%ith total hardcover at 6,147 s.f. or 26.7%. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Applicant shall complete all hardcover removals as shown on site plan attached to this resolution as page 6. Hardcover removals, consist of 48 s.f. of concrete pad and 550 s.f. of landscape area with imderliner. All hardcover removals to be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction by the Orono Building Department. 2.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 23, 1997). 3.. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.^ The imdersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 6 • •T Hof'C’ CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION. OF THE CITY COUNCIL no; _3JL2-5__1.r * • • * • Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 23th day of September, 1996, ATI ;ST: 'Dorothy M(H^lin, City Clerk Edward J Property Owner(s) ahan, Jr., May STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23th day of September, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of Ae Ci^ of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. XL /a CAROLE A.HASEMAN ® NOXARY fU0UC-MWN£SOlAHaNtfwcouwnr % Ccfflflilsrlco E»ptfB M 31.2nOQ Notary Public ji Page 4 of 6 • • • I 5c4-U CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ■■ ■• NO. 3 77K ■ •• STATE OF MINNESOTA ) . ) ss» COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) , On this_^^A day of 199^ before me a Notary Public within and for said county. personaUy appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. 0,CAROLE A. HASEMAN NOTARYnj8UC40NNES01A HSmtHN COUNTY My Conunlsdon Expires Jw. 3 s O d mm:NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of___, 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of___, 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 6 '''7//////A ‘43J.--4-C 1$* li*AC V _____^—'A----------—/,i5:i?5A?nr*^«v/*ji’W-- • T - “/ta.:^. { t \ KV/71'W- i S'^Ko^^ 4>t (o0+ • • • • • . •« • . ¥ •ftvc6-5 6p Ae«M#ua/ BWi *. 1 i LAKE MINNETONKA Page 6 of 6 im REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COf IMCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 Cii r ur UHONO Date: May 21,1999 Item No.: ^ Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Agenda Section: Zonitig Item Description: #2372 Barry & Janiece Haglund, 4590 North Arm Drive West - Extend Effective Period of Preliminary Plat Approval List of Exhibits A - Extension Resolution B - Letter of Request by Applicants C - Resolution No. 4096 On June 8,1998, Council adopted Resolution No. 4096 granting preliminary plat approval of a plat proposed by applicants Barry and Janiece Haglund involving the property located at 4590 North Arm Drive West. That resolution specified that the effective period of preliminary plat approval expires on June 8,1999. The applicants have been in constant contact with staff regarding the City's acquisition of the North Arm Lane corridor as a public roadway which will provide the applicants with legal access to the property. That acquisition is nearing completion, but will not be completed before the June 8 deadline for final subdivision application. The Haglunds have requested an extension of the effective period of preliminary plat approval. Staff and the City Attorney concur that a 6-month extension to December 8,1999 is appropriate. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution extending the effective period of preliminary plat approval of Resolution No. 4096 to December 8,1999. i A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A PLAT PROPOSED AT 4590 NORTH ARM DRIVE ^VEST -FILE NO. 2372 WHEREAS, on June 8, 1998 the City Council of the City of Orono adopted Resolution No. 4096 granting preliminary plat approval of a plat proposed by applicants Barry and Janiece Haglund involving the property located at 4590 No^ Arm Drive West; and WHEREAS, the effective period of preliminary plat approval expires on June 8, 1999;and WHEREAS, the applicants have advised the Council that they are unable to complete the conditions of preliminary plat approval because the City is still in the process of formalizing the acquisition of the North Arm Lane corridor as a public roadway which will provide the applicants wi^ legal access to the property; and WHEREAS, the City, has reached an agreement with the owners of the North Arm Lane corridor which is expected to result in the City's acquisition of said corridor in a short time. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono that the effective period of preliminary plat approval for Barry and Janiece Haglund's proposed plat of property located at 4590 North Arm Drive West as originally approved per the conditions of Resolution No. 4096, adopted on June 8, 1998 is hereby extended to December 8, 1999. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 24th day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City C^erk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 1 of 2 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public May 20, 1999 Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono- P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN. 55323-0066 RE: Resolution of the City Council No. 4096 Dear Mr. Gaffron, Per our discussion, Mike, regarding point #10 on page 4 of the Resolution Granting Preliminary Approval of Subdivision (File No. 2372), Janiece and 1 would like to request an extension of the deadline specified for filing of the ^al plat iq>plication. Please advise. Thank- you. Sincere Barry HaguMd i CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ Q 9 6 >V RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4590 NORTH ARM DRIVE WEST - FILE NO. 2372 WHEREAS, Bany and Janiece Haglund (hereinafter the "subdividers") on April 22, 1998, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a two lot residential plat of property le gally described as: The South 854.50 feet of the West 280.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 6, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian; Hennepin County, Minnesota. (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Coihmission held a public hearing on May 18, 1998, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on June 8, 1998 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdivider noting the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the LR-IA Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of two acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2.The property contains a total of approximately 5.41 acres of land exclusive of right-of-way of North Arm Drive West. Page 1 of 7 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 9 6 J. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. There are no City-protected wetlands located on the property. A wetland delineation shall be completed for the small depressional area at the southeast comer of Lot 1 to determine whether that area qualifies as a protected wetland under WCA regulations. The proposed plat consists of two residential lots each meeting the minimum lot standard requirements of the LR-1 A, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, each meeting the minimum 2.0 acre lot area requirement and each meeting the minimum 200' lot width requirement as measured at the rear of the defined front yard. Both lots will be served by private wells and individual onsite sewage treatment systems. Septic system site evaluation and design information has been submitted confirming that each lot contains suitable primary and alternate drainfield sites to serve the existing and proposed residences. Lot 2 contains an existing residence structure and detached garage, both of which will continue to meet the required setbacks from existing and proposed lot lines. The detached garage will remain nearer the front lot line than the residence structure as allowed via variances granted by the City in 1991. Lot 2 will continue to access directly south to North Arm Drive West via the existing private driveway. Lot 1 will access directly east onto North Arm Lane, a gravel public road maintained by the City. North Arm Lane exists mostly within a 33' wide, privately owned parcel abutting the applicant's property and owned by the adjacent property owner to the north. The City claims a prescriptive easement right to the entire width of the maintained road and shoulders, but may not have rights to the entire 33' corridor. For this reason, applicemt shall obtain an access easenrient from the owner of the 33' corridor to allow' applicant the right to access the City road from applicant's property. The City expects that in the future North Arm Lane will be upgraded to be more in conformity with public road design standards than the existing narrow gravel roadway. In order to accommodate such future upgrade the City will require the dedication of additional right-of-way from this subdivision including 8.5' along Page 2 of? • • CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4 09 6NO. the east boundary and additional area near the intersection of North Arm Lane and North Arm Drive West, as shown in the sketch attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Additionally, to potentially accommodate a future cul-de-sac at the current terminus of North Arm Lane, applicant will be required to grant a road and utility easement for a portion of a cul-de-sac within the northeast comer of Lot 1, such easement subject to potential vacation or extinguishment should a cul-de-sac at some future date no longer be required due to the northward extension of North Arm Lane or other factors, at the discretion of the City. 9.Applicant will be required to provide drainage calculations to determine whether stormw'ater management facilities will be required. Applicant will also be required to obtain the approprite permits from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 9.The Orono Park Commission has recommended that no additional right-of-w'ay or trail easements are required from this developer since any fliture trail needs can be accommodated within the existing right of way. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Barry and Janiece Haglund per preliminary plat drawings by Mark S. Gronberg, a licensed surveyor of Coffin & Gronberg, Inc, dated April 22, 1998, subject to the following conditions: 1.Applicant shall dedicate on the plat 33' of public right-of-way for North Arm Drive West per the above-referenced preliminary plat drawing. Additionally, applicant shall dedicate public right-of-way for North Arm Lane on the plat as depicted in Exhibit A attached. 2.Applicant shall provide to the City evidence of an access easement in favor of applicant’s property over the 33' privately owned corridor adjacent to the east side of the property. 3.Lot 2 shall continue to access to North Arm Drive West via the existing private driveway. Lot 1 shall directly access North Arm Lane \na a private driveway as Page 3 of? . i Im CITY of ORONO shown on the preliminary plat drawings. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 9 6 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. . 10. Prior to final plat approval the applicant shall provide drainage calculations for pre- and post-development stormwater quantity and quality conditions and if warranted or if required by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, shall construct suitable stormwater ponds or vegetative buffers as the case may be, subject to a Developers Agreement to be executed between the City and the developer. Drainage easements shall be designated over all drainageways and stormwater ponds within the plat. Prior to final plat approval applicant shall provide a wetland delineation report for the property and if any WCA protected wetlands are found they shall be subject to covenants advising future property owners of the limitations on alterations of said wetlands. Subdivider is hereby advised that the City will not grant final plat approval until the MCWD has approved all grading and drainage improvements on the property. All identified primary and alternate sewage system drainfield sites within the subdivision shall be fenced off prior to any land alterations, and such fencing shall remain in place until such time that each Lot is developed. Subdivider shall develop covenants for each lot for protection of drainfield sites within each Lot. Covenants shall include protective language for alternate septic sites along with site plans locating both primary and alternative sites. Applicant shall include language alerting fliture property owners of need to protect sites on adjacent properties. Payment of standard Park Dedication Fee for Lot 1 Subdivider is hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval wall expire within one year of the date of Council approval, June 8, 1999. Should the subdivider fail to complete the filing of the final plat application within the year deadline, it shall be necessary for the subdivider to file a new preliminary subdivision application with file City. Page 4 of? • • CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0^6 -------- Filial Plat Submittals: The following list of fmal submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1. Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City's records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200'. Drawing to include: a. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin & Gronberg, Inc. dated April 22, 1998, except as modified below. b.Dedication on the plat of additional right-of-way for North Arm Lane per Exhibit A attached. c.Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10' wide along the exterior boundaries of property and 5' along the internal lot lines. d.Designation and dedication of drainage easements over detention ponds and drainageways as may be required. e. Naming of the plat. 2. Legal documents required: a.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b.The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c.Signed and executed Developer's Agreement and letter of credit for site drainage improvements if required. d.Signed and executed Drainage Easements to be taken over drainageway and detention areas within plat. Page 5 of 7 # ♦ ■ CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF JHEJplIY COUNCIL NO. _ e. Sigaed and executed Road, Drainage and Utilities Easement over the portion of cul-de-sac within Lot 1 as shown in Exhibit A. 3.Fees to be paid: Total due: $400.00* Final plat fee = $200.00a. b. Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents $200.00 c.*Park Dedication Fee: amount shall be determined as soon as City Assessor has placed a fair market value on the undeveloped land at the time of preliminary plat approval. The subdivider shall be advised as soon as Assessor's report has been filed with City. Per City ordinance, if the fair market value of Lot 1 exceeds $61,250 the required park dedication fee shall not exceed $4,900. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 8th day of June, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA-') ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument \vas acknowledged before me on this 8th day of June, 1998, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. CAROLE A HASEMAN NOTARY PUeUC-MiNNESOIA HENNEPIN COUNTY 'I My Commisslcn Expires Jjn. 31.20C0 K Pa Notary Public age 6 of? REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 Cl I Y Ur UHONO Date; May 21,1999 Item No = ^ Department Approval:Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Name: Michael P. GafTron Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Item Description: #2438 Michael Sletten & Mary K. Sletten and B. Peter Achey, 4680/4720 Bayside Road - Lot Line Rearrangement - Extend Effective Period of Preliminary Approval List of Exhibits A - Extension Resolution B - Letter of Request by Applicants' Attorney C - Corrected Language of Resolution No. 4205 D - Original Resolution No. 4205 E - Comments from City Attorney's office In November 1998 Council approved Resolution No. 4205, approving a lot line rearrangement for the Slettens and B. Peter Achey to provide a site for septic system replacement for Achey. The applicants have to date been unable to obtain the necessary consents for filing from mortgagees in New Jersey who have been unresponsive. The City Attorney has recommended that the effective period of subdivision approval be extended 6 months to November 23, 1999. Staff concurs. Additionally, the City Attorney has noted that certain language in Resolution No. 4205 as originally adopted must be revised in order to ensure the correct documents are filed. These are noted as corrections rather than an amendment to the Resolution, do not change the conditions of approval from what was originally intended by Council, and do not require formal Council acHon. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution extending the effective period of subdivision approval for Michael Sletten & Mary Kay Sletten aka Mary K. Snetsinger to November 23, 1999. A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT AT 4680/4720 BA YSIDE ROAD -FILE NO. 2438 WHEREAS, on November 23, 1998 the City Council of the City of Orono adopted Resolution No. 4205 granting approval for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement proposed by applicants Michael Sletten and Mary Kay Sletten aka Mary Kay Snetsinger (hereinafter "the subdividers") involving the properties located at 4680 and 4720 Bayside Road; and WHEREAS, the effective period of subdivision approval was set to expire on May 23rd, 1999; and WHEREAS, the applicants' attorney has advised the Council that they are unable to complete the conditions of subdivision approval within the 6-month effective period of subdivision approval because of a lack of response from certain mortgagees of the property located in New Jersey who must consent to the subdivision, and that a 6-month extension is requested. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orc;v'- that the effective period of subdivision approval for the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement by Michael Sletten and Mary Kay Sletten aka Mary K. Snetsinger of property located at 4680 and 4720 Bayside Road as originally approved per the conditions of Resolution No. 4205, adopted on November 23, 1998 is hereby extended to November 23, 1999. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 24th day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 1 of 2 { STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public 1 Page 2 of2 1 KOP€SKfl & flSSOCIfiT€S. Rfl. flnOflNCVS AT LfiUJ 12 SOUTH SIXTH STft€6T, »727 • MINN€flPOLIS. MINN€SOTft 55402 T€L€PHON6 (612) 337-5612 (V'Y 0 r ■•i-il C i' iy-/y Ta€fftX (612) 349-3808 city Up,.. May 19, 1999 Michael Gaffron City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal, MN 55323-0066 Re: City Resolution 4205 Dear Mr. Gaffron: It is my underst€uiding the above resolution dealt with the subdivision of land owned by Michael D. Sletten emd Mary K. Sletten. This letter is a recjuest for a six month extension of the due date for satisfying the requirements. The original due date was May 23, 1999. Would you please advise regarding the extension. Sincerely, Ronald L. Kopesxa \ RLK/jb A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT OF A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4680 BAYSIDE ROAD FILE NO. 2438 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe de\’ilopment of lAnd within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement by Michael D. Sletten and Mary Kay Sletten aka Mary Kay Snetsinger (hereinafter "the subdividers") of properties legally described as follows: See attached Exhibit A (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the subdividers have completed all requirements of the City for a Class I subdivision of properties to separate Parcel B from Parcel A to allow Parcel A to be legally combined with the adjacent property at 4720 Bayside Road. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City CouncU of the City of Orono hereby approves the Class I subdivision and combination of the above referenced properties by the subdivider as shown on the Certificate of Survey by Charles F. Anderson, a licensed surveyor of Lot Surveyors Co., Im;.., dated October 28, 1998, and attached to this resolution, subject to the following conditions: 1.Parcel B as described on the attached Certificate of Survey shall be combined with Tax Parcel No. 31-118-23 33 0006. 2.The aforesaid division as shown on the attached Certificate of Survey shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before May 23, 1999 together with a certified original copy of this resolution. Page 1 of 2 3.Subdividers shall grant drainage and utility easements to the City within 10' of both sides of the new lot lines. 4.Subdividers shall provide a title opinion to the City for the Property and Parcel No. 31-118-23 33 0006 and shall provide any consents or other documents required by the City Attorney with respect to the approved subdivision and required lot combination. 5. 1998. The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the division has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota this 23rd day of November, ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor SPATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota niunicipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notaiy Public Page 2 of 2 'D. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A 2 0 5 ^ A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT OF A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4680 BAYSIDE ROAD FILE NO. 2438 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and ^^T^EREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, tlie City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement by Michael D. Sletten and Mary Kay Sletten aka Mary Kay Snetsinger (hereinafter "the subdividers") of properties legally described as follows; See attached Exhibit A (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the subdividers have completed all requirements of the City for a Class I subdivision of properties to separate Parcel B from Parcel A to allow Parcel A to be legally combined with the adjacent property at 4720 Bayside Road. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the Class I subdivision and combination of the above referenced properties by the subdivider as shown on the Certificate of Survey by Charles F. Anderson, a licensed surveyor cf Lot Surveyors Co., Inc., dated October 28, 1998, and attached to this resolution, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. Upon approval of this division by the City Council, B. Peter Achey, owner of 4720 Bayside Road, shall apply to the City for the legal combination of Parcel B to 4720 Bayside Road (38-31-118-23-33-0006) as described in the above referenced survey. The aforesaid division as shown on the attached Certificate of Survey shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before May 23, 1999 together with a certified original copy of this resolution. Page 1 of 2 \L\UiA I j'i vh' ClTYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 2 0 5 3. 4. 5. 1998. ATTEST; Drainage and utility easements to be granted along 10' of both sides of the new lot lines. Title opinion addressed to City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the division has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota this 23rd day of November, STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. '7^ ---- Notaiy^blic site JAMIE L6EMAR N0MRYPUBUC4IINNES0rA HENNBW COUNTY My CoRunbsion Bqikes Jin. 31.2000 Page 2 of 2 5-04.-1999 9:31AM FROM IND PARALEGAL SERV 612 295 0398 P. 1 % • t HINSHj< A»PLBTON. U.1SCONSIN net.t.EV3.t.E. ILLINOIS BLOOMINOTON, ILLINOIS BMOKHELD. V.1SCONSIN CHAMJ.MON. ILLINOIS CHICAGO. ILLINOIS CSVSTAL LAKS. ILLINOIS FT. LAUDERDALE. FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA JOLIET. ILLINOIS LAKE OSNEVA. \MSC0NSW LISLE. ILLINOIS *!Tijn/lu rhldukct. to 1 Dept. ROCKJOKD. [LLtNOlS ST LGLIS.NCSSOURI Nancy Chadwick Direct: 612.295.0660 nchadwick@onrampinc.net SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA SPRD.GFIELD. ILLINOIS TAMPA. FLORIDA WAUKEGAN. ILL.'NOIS March 11,1999 Liz Van Zomeren City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Re: Resolution No. 4205 Our File No. 75i031 Dear Liz: Enclosed please find the certified copy of Resolution No. 4205 (the "Resolution ) that you sent to me for recording upon our receipt of any required consents from the land owner, Mick Sletten. When we last spoke. I understood that the Council approved the subdivision described in the Resolution wit i the understanding that Parcel B, as described in the Resolution, would be combined with tax parcel No. 31-118-23-33-0006 (4720 Bayside Road). With that in mind, the approval paragraph o^ the Resolution should identify the survey ... dated October 28, 1998, revised Januao' 6, 1999, knd attached ...” and the following changes should be made to the paragraphs describing the onditions of the Council's approval: 1 . Paragraph 1 sho ild read; ” 1 . Parcel B as described on the attached Certificate of Survey shall be combined with jParcel No. 31-118-23-33-0006." 2. Paragraph 3 shopld read: "3. Subdividers shall grant drainage and utility easements to the City within 10* of both sides of the new lot lines.' 3. Paragraph 4 should read: "4. Subdividers shall provide a title opinion to the CityJ. ^ dXiuuiu i^au. -r. -----------------------^--------- for the Property and Parcel No.,31-118-23-33-0006 and shall provide any consents or other documents required by the Cityj Attorney with respect to the approved subdivision and required m f * A *lot combination. Once these changes have been made, please return a certified copy of the Resolution to me. In the meantime, 1 am goii .g to send a letter to Mr. Sletten's attorney identifying the title requirements that must be satis ied prior to recording the Resolution. In addition to the title opinions and exchange deeds between Mr. and Mrs. Sletten and the owners of the adjoining parcel, we will also need a lega description for the new drainage and utility easements to be granted. I see that they are identified on the sur\ ey but the surveyor has not included a legal description of the proposed easement. U 5-04-1999 9:32AM FROM IND PARALEGAL SERV 612 295 0398 P. 2 Liz Van Zomercn March II, 1999 Page 2 0 • (0 I Thank you for your attelition to this matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. , Very truly yours. Nancy L. Chadwick Legal Assistant Enclosure cc: Thomas A. Barrett, Esq, Date of Application: 2/17/99 Date Complete: 2/17/99 60-day limit: 4/17/99 120-day subdivision limit: 6/17/99 COMMCIL MEETING MAr 1 4 1999 Cl I r Ur UnuNO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: May 21,1999 Item No.: Department Approval:Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Name: Michael P. Gaffiron Title. Senior Planning Coordinator Item Description: #2466 James Renckens and John Winston, 3020 Watertown Road - Preliminary Plat Application • Reconsideration of Council Action of April 12 List of Exhibits A - Council Minutes 4-12-99 B - Preliminary Plat Drawing C - Letters submitted by Applicants D - Staff Sketches - Access and Area Road Layout Possibilities E - Memo and Selected Exhibits of April 9,1999 F - Selected Minutes and Exhibits of Application #1457 - Crystal Creek Plat G - Submittals by Alan Carlson Dated 5-19-99 H - Fire Marshal Submittal re: Long Driveways On April 12 Council voted 2-1 to approve this preliminary plat application subject to requiring platting of the 50' road outlot along the north boundaiy' of the property, but granting a variance to the 'back lot' ordinance standards by allowing the creation of a 'flag lot' (Council chose to not require the 30' driveway corridor to Watertown to be platted as an outlot, which then allows applicants area credit for that corridor). Staff was implicitly directed to draft a preliminary plat resolution for adoption. Applicants subsequently submitted a number of letters outlining their position regarding the northerly Road Outlot requirement, and requested that Council move to reconsider the action of April 12. On May 11, 1999 Council voted 3-0 to reconsider the action of April 12, and tabled further discussion until the interested parties to the application could be notified. Notice was mailed to the property owner list on Wednesday, May 13. Applicants have indicated they are willing to access the north lot from the Crystal Creek Road cul-de-sac, and will work with the Crystal Creek homeowners association . Mr. Renckens has indicated he would, however, still wish to preserv'e the 30' access corridor to Watertown Road for potential future subdivision access. #2466 Renckens & Winston May 21,1999 Page 2 Summarj' of Applicants' Concerns 2. 3. 4. 5. The applicants are in opposition to the creation of a 50' outlot along the north property boundary for reasons stated in their letter of April 2, 1999: 1 . Makes it more likely a street will be developed; Street would eliminate existing privacy, thereby lowering desirability and value; City street provides undesired access to property; Makes surrounding properties more accessible, thus -increasing traffic -loss of privacy -loss of safety and security; Issues of fairness and public interest: -neighborhoods to west and east are opposed to creation of access street -City made it clear to Alan Carlson that he is solely responsible for getting access to Outlot B -Carlson can get such access from other directions, i.e. from properties to the east; Loss of acreage - 50' Outlot would use 0.52 acres, making future subdivision via backlots more difficult (same issue as loss of area with 30' driveway outlot); Loss of septic sites that would either be used initially or be needed for a future subdivision; Taking of roadway falls under two exceptions in subdivision code: a. Related to topographic restrictions b. Not necessary or desirable for coordination of the layout of this subdivision; Road will encourage tlirough traffic, and is not in keeping with "Minimum number of roadways necessary to provide convenient and safe access"; The taking of a road outlot is a condemnation because it is not related to to this subdivision, and lack of compensation makes it an unconstitutional taking. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. STAFF REVIEW OF ISSUES Clash of Philosophical Viewpoints Staff believes this issue stems in part from a philosophical difference between the point of view of the City attempting to accomplish its mandate to protect the general public health, safety and welfare; and that of the resident attempting to create a neighborhood that is private, quiet, and safe for the individual homeowner. While one might expect these two points of view to be in concert, in fact they can and do conflict when we are discussing road system design. !t #2466 Renckens & Winston May 21,1999 Page 3The City's goal (and obligation) is to establish a local road system that provides access to property, is adequate to allow for the expected and required levels of general and emergency services, and is efficient to maintain. Orono accomplishes this in its Rural area primarily via private roads, and provides corridors for future connections between private roads in order to establish a system that can be easily maintained and that will provide alternate means of access in times of emergency. The City also sets minimum design standards for private roads and long driveways in order to ensure that the required access by service, maintenance and emergency vehicles is feasible. The property owners' goal is a safe, private environment for families. To accomplish this, the typical property owner would prefer dead-end roads rather than connecting roads, and in many cases would prefer long driveways rather than home placement near the road. Topography, wetlands, parcel shapes and sizes, availability of septic sites, minimum lot standards established by code, impact on (or of) surrounding development, and many other factors must all be taken into account when designing a rural subdivision to create homesites. Balancing all these factors against the potentially conflicting goals of the City and the property owner is sometimes difficult. Zoning / Subdivision Code Excerpts Staff believes the zoning/subdivision code supports the position that a 50' private road outlot should be platted along the north boundary: 1.Council has the authority to require completion of improvements, including the creation of public and private roads and the granting of road and utility easements for Class 11 and 111 subdivisions per Section 11.10, Subd. 21. In Section 11.31, Subd. 1 "Lot Arrangement" the code states "The lot arrangement shall be such that there will be no foreseeable difficulties, for reasons of topography or other conditions, in securing building permits to build on all lots in compliance with the Zoning Chapter of the City Code and in providing driveway access to buildings on such lots from an approved street." The Fire Marshal has provided State Fire Code standards for fire department access roads that exceed 150' in length. A driveway from Watertown Road serving Renckens' proposed house location would be approximately 800' in length, it would require a 40' radius loop driveway turnaround, a 20' wide x 14' high clear area for its entire length, and be built to 9-ton standards for fire truck access. Are these unreasonable standards? Ask the family on West Farm Road whose million dollar home was a total loss because the FD couldn't access it through their 350' driveway. The newlv proposed access to Crystal Creek Road is a positive revision to this application. A future subdivision creating a lot that would use the 30' corridor to Watertown Road would likely have a 400-500' driveway. #2466 Renckens & Winston May 21,1999 Page 4 3. 4. Section 11.31 Subd. 2, "Lot Dimensions" states in part that "Where lots are more than double the minimum required area for the zoning district, the City may require that such lots he arranged so as to allow further subdivision and the opening of future streets where they would be necessary to serve such potential lots...". The current plat does not allow for further subdivision except by 'stacking' back lots, with long driveways and more difficult emergency and service vehicle access.. Section 11.31 Subd. 5, "Double Frontage Lots, Access to Lots and Front/back Lot Divisions" in Subd. 5(C), "Front/bark Lot Subdivisions" states that" ’Flag lot.and 'ea.sement back lots' as defined in this Chapter shall not be created. Front/back lot divisions shall be allowed only in conjunction with the creation of an outlot to provide access from the back lot to the public or private road. Such outlot shall not be allowed as creditable lot area for either the back ot front lots." Subd. 5(C)(la) states "Front/back lot divisions may be used when existing property dimensions are narrow and deep, such that lot width does not allow for a side by side split (that's not the case here, the property is 460' in width, could easily yield two 200'+ lots), but acreage is adequate to provide a front lot and a back lot without requiring an area variance when the area of the outlot access corridor is excluded." The primary reason applicants wanted to avoid creating a 30' driveway outlot extending from Watertown Road was this toss of creditable area, not for the current subdivision, but because without it a future subdivision would need a lot area variance. It seems to staff that creation of a back lot for this site is basically in conflict with the intent of this ordinance. Furthermore, Subd. 5(C)(lb) states that "Front/back lot divisions may be used for individual jot splits'but may not be used when subdividing a large parcel into numerous lots if creation of a back lot is merely a convenience to the developer rather than supported by unique site factors." When does a 'convenience' change into a 'unique supporting site factor'? Is lack of the adequate lot area to meet all code requirements a unique factor, or simply an inconvenience? Is the location of septic sites a unique factor? When septic sites are lumted by topography, does that become a unique factor? Is the need to provide stormwater ponding which can't be credited toward lot area, a unique factor? Part of the problem is that this property likely san ultimately support three lots, and the City risks 'piece-meal development' when the front-lot/back-lot ordinance is varied from, especially where future development of a back lot may be possible. Note also that based on applicants' request that the 50' road outlot be omitted, then a lot width variance is technically required for the north lot, which will have only 50' of width on Crystal Creek Road and 30' on Watertown Road where 200' is required. Which road frontage will define the front lot line? #2466 Renckens & Winston May 21,1999 Page 5 5. 6. 7. Applicants cite Section 11.32, Sub. 2(B)(4) which states "RoaJnms shall be laid on: to con form as much as possible to the topography, to discourage use by through traffic, to permit efficient drainage and utility systems, and to require the minimum number of roadways necessary to provide convenient and safe access to property." Applicants believe that the 50' corridor along the boundary will encourage through traffic. However, through traffic is not traffic generated by or within the neighborhood, but traffic using the neighborhood road as a shortcut. This is hardly the case where a horseshoe shaped road is anticipated, but might be the case if connections to Old Cr> stal Bay Road are made. However, convenient and safe access to property is best provided by roads that have more than one outlet, not by long cul-de-sacs (1400' in the case of Crystal Creek, or 140% of the City's maximum cul-de-sac length standard of 1000' per Section 11.33 Subd. 4) nor by extremely long private driveways. Applicants cite Section 11.32 Subd. 2(B)(6) which states in full " Cul-de-sacs shall be discouraged: proposed roadways shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be subdivided (exactly what was done with Crystal Creek), unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions (the 6-12% slope directly east of Crystal Creek's cul-de-sac poses no engineering problems for extending Crystal Creek Road, although it may not be what the applicant envisions as appropriate), or unless in the opinion of the City such extension is not necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the the existing layout or the most advantageous future development of adjacent tracts". In staffs opinion this entire code section is very relevant and applicable to the Renckens proposal. This section provides the City with the basis for making logical sense of road systems between and through adjacent subdivisions. Section 11.32 Subd. 6(H) "Construction of Roads and Dead-end Roads" is key to this discussion. It states: "7.Construction of Roads. The arrangement of streets shall provide for the continuation of streets between adjacent properties when such continuation is necessary for convenient movement of traffic, effective fire protection, for efficient provision of utilities, and where such continuation is in accordance with the City Comprehensive Municipal Plan. Ij the adjacent property is undeveloped and the street mu.st be a dead-end street temporarily, the right of way shall be extended to the property line. The City may limit the length of temporary dead-end streets in accordance with the design standards of this Chapter. 'I #2466 Renckens & Winston May 21,1999 Page 6 2.Dead-end Roads (Permanent). Where a road does not extend to the boundary of the subdivision and its continuation is not required by the City for access to adjoining property, its terminus shall normally not be nearer to such boundary than fifty (50) feet. However, the City may require the reservation of an appropriate easement to accommodate drainage facilities, pedestrian traffic, or utilities. A cul-de-sac shall be pre nded at the end of a permanent dead-end street in accordance with the City’s construction standards and specifications. For greater convenience to traffic and more effective police and fire protection, permanent dead-end streets shall, in general, be discouraged and where allowed be limited in length in accordance with the design standards of this Chapter. Crystal Creek Road was noi intended to be a permanent dead-end street. This is evidenced by: the fact that its length greatly exceeds the 1000' standard the fact that it was platted to the property boundary rather than stopping short of it the fact that no cul-de-sac was platted, but merely an easement granted for a temporary cul-uc-sac the fact that the March 19,1991 staff memo clearly indicates this is consistent with the City's planning to connect to a roadway system to the east - the fact that, as Carlson points out, the owners of lots in Crystal Creek had fair warning via their covenants that Crystal Creek Road could potentially be extended to adjacent properties Crystal Creek Road should, based on all of the above code sections, be platted through the Renckens property to the next property to the east, just as Council decided on April 12. Comprehensive Plan Excerpts The Transportion element of the Orono Community Management Plan also supports the creation of a 50' road outlot based on the following: BASIC TRANSPORTATION CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES, P.7-2: "The basic responsibility of the City b the protection of ib citizens’ health, safety and welfare". • • t a #2466 Renckens & Winston May 21,1999 Page 7 IBID., P. 7-7: "Roadway maintenance concerns are perhaps the most significant factor in long-range transportation planning for Orono... the planning concerns for new roadways include not only the initial cost-benefit question, but also the worry about spreading future maintenance capability beyond the reach of limited crews or limited budgets" From a Public Works perspective, maintenance of through streets is less costly and more efficient than maintenance of cul-de-sacs. RURAL TRANSPORTATION POLICIES, NO. 4. P. 7-12: "Rural residential developments will utilize private road feeders to supplement the existing public road grid. Because of topographical limitations, the historic shape of rural land divisions, and the low density of rural land use, most residential lots are best preserved (sic) by short dead-end roads running off the existing street sy stem. The low number of dwellings on each road, the dead-end configuration and the scattered road locations make public roadway maintenance excessively costly compared to any public benefit. Therefore, most new rural lots will be directly served by privately owned and mo '.ntained roadways. New public streets will be accepted where a 'through' configuration provides a general public benefit and/or where the number of residences justifies public maintenance expense." RURAL TRANSPORTATION POLICIES NO. 5, P. 7-12: "Private rural roadways will be constructed to rural design standards.... The length of dead end roads will be limited for public safety purposes." Crystal Creek Road was allowed to exceed the City's length standard because it was intended to connect through to the east in the future. RURAL TRANSPORTATION POLICIES NO. 7, P. 7-13: "Driveway locations and rural street or private road intersections will be limited for traffic safety. Rural traffic speed is generally faster than that in urban neighborhoods requiring greater sight distances and a lesser number of intersection conflicts for the same degree of traffic safety. Joint use of carefully located private roads will generally be preferred over direct access onto public highways from separate properties." The subdivision as proposed ultimately would result in an additional access point onto Watertown Road where only one now exists. • i f #2466 Renckens & Winston May 21,1999 Page 8 ORONO'S ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (Excerpts from descriptions of various types of roadways) P. 7-16, 7-17: Private Road: Maximum Service: Approximately 10 residential properties Dead -end: Length will be limited by public safety considerations Private Driveway Maximum Service: 1 residence typical; joint driveways allowed with maximum three residents per driveway in rural areas: more users require private road standards Driveway width: Will be regulated where more than one user is involved or for public safety purposes where there is excessive length between the residence and the public road In the opinion of staff, the above CMP excerpts strongly support the premise that Crystal Creek Road should be continued eastward to eventually connect with other area roads, for public safety purposes as w ell as for future efficiency of maintenance if the private road is someday converted to a public road. Whether or not the 50' outlet is required, access for the north lot should come from Crystal Creek Road (as now proposed) to avoid the need for an excessively long driveway. Further, staff strongly urges that the flag portion of the back lot be platted as a 30' outlet corridor for the following reasons: 1. Preserves the integrity of the back-lot/front-lot ordinance. 2. Preserves the appropriate setbacks for the north lot (i.e. the south east-west line of the north lot becomes a front lot line as the code intended) In staffs opinion the loss of acreage to a code-required 30' driveway outlot is not a hardship. Further, if the north lot is served from a 50' road to the north, there will be ample acreage to do a lot split with both lots having 200 feet of frontage on that road. The problem here is that Renckens' vision of future development of the north lot is to place the initial residence in a location making a side-by-side split impossible, and ultimately splitting off the south half of the north lot as a flag lot using the 30' corridor to Watertown for access (but needing a lot area variance to do so). Access to Outlot B, Crystal Creek Alan Carlson, original developer of the adjacent Crystal Creek subdivision, owns Outlot B, Crystal Creek, which does not abut any public or private roadway. The City has no apparent legal obligation #2466 Renckens & Winston May 21,1999 Page 9 to Carlson to provide access to Outlot B. Carlson acknowledged to the Planning Commission in 1991 (see minutes of March 18,1991) that he accepts all responsibility for providing it access. The plat approval resolution also makes it clear that it is the responsibility of the developer to acquire access to Outlot B. Applicants have suggested to staff that one of the reasons that Crystal Creek Road was platted ending at the Renckens property rather than continuing eastward within the plat of Crystal Creek, was that the tested draimleld sites within Lot 7 adjacent to Outlot B, would have been obliterated. It is a fact that those sites would have been rendered useless by a 50' outlot along the south end of Lot 7. It is not known whether other sites exist in Lot 7. This topic does not appear to be documented in City files. Mr. Carlson has provided a letter and a number of attachments included in this packet as Exhibit F, supporting the creation of the 50' outlot. Staff has provided 2 sketches showing how access might be provided to Outlot B. The first is a schematic for how Ciystal Creek Road could connect in a horseshoe shape to Wear Lane North and back down to Watertown Road. The second is one of the many schemes that might be drawn up for development (or redevelopment) of the properties betw een Crystal Creek and Old Crystal Bay Road, showing that access to Outlot B might be provided via methods other than an extension of Crystal Creek Road. However, it is not known when/if these properties might further develop. Neighborhood Development, Privacy, Safety The issues biuughl up by the applicants are typical of thoac lalscu by evciy luial icsidential development where the City must balance the residents ’ desires for privacy against the City's responsibility to provide a safe, cost-efficient, emergency-accessible road system. Orono has consistently required that road connections between subdivisions be platted, but has taken the position that those connections are for future use, and likely won ’t be constructed until such time that the residents demand them. Staff doesn't buy the idea that a horseshoe road system creates more traffic and is less safe than a cul- de-sac. The vast majority of traffic will be from the neighborhood, since this wouldn't be a shortcut to an>’\vhere. A majority of residents are not likely to take the long way around the horseshoe to get in or out. And if non-neighborhood traffic enters the horseshoe, it’s going to travel past a given house one time, not twice. A strong public safety case can be made for roads with two outlets as compared to cul-de-sacs. If a disaster strikes and the cul-de-sac is blocked near the entrance, nobody gets in or out, including emergency vehicles. A road with two outlets will still provide access to nearly the entire area. #2466 Renckens & Winston May 21,1999 Page 10 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Review all information submittted and reach a conclusion whether the 50' private road outlot along the north property bouridary should be required. Reach a conclusion as to whether Council's previous action to grant a variance to allow creation of a flag lot will stand. Determine whether it is appropriate that a flag lot connecting to Watertown Road will not use Watertown Road as an f ORONO OTY COUNCIL MEETING minutes for APRIL 12,1999 (#8)#2^5Roberf£ Resolunbn No. ^6( 7lrickson4t4 and 312 Westlal/'Street - Lot^nc Rearran ;ement - ded, to api rove ^pplicationyp2465,364 and 3 Approving ^ Sul^* Kelley moved, Sansevere secoL ^ lcfy.rianps/..Muj-4lC.deSejW ivUion of a Lot Granting of yanancesito Municips SuDdhision A6(Q(M; si' ^ysO. ^ \7 Section ag if a PortiMd Closiiig if a PortiM of WeVt^e Street. ction'^0^6, ^ Ayes 4, (#9) #2466 James Renckens, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road - 2 Lot Preliminary Subdivision James Renckens and John Winston, applicants, were present. Renckens said he objects to the requirement that two outlots be created. He is concerned about the availability of septic sites if the outlots arc created. He said the site is rollmg ^d high *0 th“ no*^^ rollJno in the middle and there is a wetland m the middle. The parcel is difficult to develop. He would like to build his home on the northern part of the property. There is one septic site in the northeast comer that he would like to use as a pnm^ site and it would be eliminated by the 50’ outlot. He said the ambiance of that comer is what atoacted them to the property and that would be mined if a road is installed. He requested that the Council eliminate the requirement for the outlots. Mayor Jabbour unseated himself for this item. John Winston said his property abuts the northeastern part of the parcel. He and his neighbors onnose the 50’ outlot across the northern boundary. They are not interested m connec mg Wear Lane to Crystal Creek Road. He said the original proposal for this parcel WM a subdivision for five lots. This proposal is for two loU. He feels the low densi^ is importmt and that the outiots are not necessary. He said they are not proposmg any roadway, only a driveway corridor at the southwesterly comer of the parcel. He would like “ character of this property that blends with the neighborhoods to *e east and the west He said there is property to the north that could possibly be developed. He does not feel that Mr. Renckens should have to provide access to that property by creatmg Outlot B. Sansevere asked staff why the ouUots were made a contingency of approval. Weinberger stated that the proposal creates a front lot and a b«k lot situation. The subdivision ordinance does not allow a flag lot to be created. The back lot is reqimed to have 150% of the zoning district requirements and the lot does meet those requueinents. The zoning code only dlows access to be granted to that property throng a platted outlot ^e disadvantage for the property owners in this situation is the for the lot area as part of lot 1, although the entire outlot would be m their ownership. The Page 9 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 12,1999 (#9) U2466 James Renckens, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road - Continued reason for platting the 50’ wide outlet to the north would be for a future access point for the lots to the north and for this property if it were to be divided since the lot area does exist. Sansevere asked why the outlet should be across Mr. Renckens’ property instead of the property above it. Weinberger stated that at the time the Crystal Creek subdivision was approved the outlet was platted from one side to the other. Part of the reason the outlet exists is there were some septic sites and some other issues with lot area and topography of the lots to the north. Lot 7 does not have access. There is a temporary driveway easement across Lot 6 from the temporary cul-de-sac on Crystal Creek to serve Lot 7. That was written in until the time a road is developed to gain access to Lot 7. At that time the driveway easement would be eliminated. Future planning is why the City staff and the Planning Commission have recommended the platting of an outlot. Sansevere asked if the outlot requirement was brought to Mr. Renckens* attention by the previous owner. Renckens said he has not talked with Mrs. Stubbs. He said he was aware of the interest the City had in the outlot, but it did not appear in his due diligence to be a serious interest because the outlot didn’t seem to serve any particular benefit. He said there is access to Lot 7 and there is a potential for Mr. Carlson to acquire property to the east to gain access to his property. He said there is opposition to the outlot from the Rolling Meadows subdivision as well as tlie Crystal Creek subdivision. Winston explained the reduction from three lots to two lots should eliminate the need for the outlot. Renckens said 22,000 square feet of trees would have to be removed to put in a cul-de-sac or roadway across the northern portion of the property. Alan Carlson gave historical information regarding the long-range plan for the 50’ outlot. The long-range plan was to extend Crystal Creek Road to Wear Lane to form a loop and provide access to the north. He owns 30 acres to the north that would be accessed by the outlot. He reviewed previous City actions that refer to the 50’ outlot. He wants the 50* outlot for access to his 30 acres. Flint asked how Mr. Renckens plans to gain access to the back of the lot. Renckens said he has access from Watertown Road via a 30 ’ strip that runs on the west side of the property. He has approached the Crystal Creek developers about gaining access from the private road, but he has not reached an agreement with them. Page 10 Ir . ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 12,1999 (#9) U2466 James Renckens, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road- Continued Flir.* '.rked how the developers could prevent him from gaming access from the road since it abuts his property. Renckens said tney can prevent it because it's a private road. Flint asked how the City would accomplish the long-range plan if it’s a private road, Renckens said the City would have to acquire the road from the Crystal Creek Development, pay for the cost of installing the road across the northern part of his property and would have to acquire additional land if the road were to continue to the east and pay for the cost of constructing that additional road until it connects with a public road. Renckens said previous applications for subdivision of this parcel had dLTerent intent for the properT/ than he does. His intended use of the property is to build a horae on the northern part of the property so it is secluded. KeUey said he was involved in the Crystal Creek subdivision and there is no doubt thatthe City Council and the Planning Commission always viewed that Crystal Creek Road and Wear Lane would connect. He said another issue involved is the property to the east and north that will someday be developed. Sansevere also questioned how the City would connect with a private road, Barrett said it is a private road. When the road was developed, the City took a public easement so that if the developers refrise access, the City can open the road for the public. Flint asked if the City could assure Mr. Renckens access to the back of his property through Crystal Creek. Barrett said that by declaring the public easement open, the City could grant access to the public over that road to the northern end of the property. Flint said that Crystal Creek is the logical access to the back of the property and he is not convinced that Mr. Renckens should have to provide the access to the east and north. Barrett said that with this applicaUon, the City has a strong right to the outlet. Flint said that there are a number of people with common interests and if they could work something out, perhaps the City wouldn’t have to take the 50 outlot. Carlson said he does not own Lots 6 and 7. Winston said that it’s true that Mr. Carlson does not own Lots 6 and 7. He said that when Mr. Carlson was able to create Lots 6 and 7 and not have the septic sites on those two lots taken Page 11 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 12,1999 (^9) U2466 James Renckens, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road- Continued away from him so he could develop the lots, he gained economic benefit from that and now he wants additional benefit from the 50’ ouUot. He said that the subdivision for Crystal Creek states that the subdivider is responsible for providing legal access to the property to the north. Renckens said he does not want to lose the septic sites in the northeast comer of the property that are within the 50’ outlet area because he would not be able to put his home in the northern part of the property. Kelley said that the City’s long-term vision at the time of the Crystal Creek subdivision was to link Crystal Creek Road with Wear lane. Sansevere asked if the expectation was to make the link across Mr. Renckens’ property or go into the property above it. Kelley said the intention was to take it from what is the Stubbs property. Flint said that the City has also been supportive of people that want to keep cul-de-sacs. Kelley said that is true, but the roads are usually platted to go all the way through new subdivisions. Flint said the City has the legal right to put the roads in, but the City hasn’t because the homeowners on both Sides prefer the cul-de-sacs. Kelley said that is true, but the easements are there so that if the City gets pressure from the neighbors, the roads can be made public. He said that it is good public policy to take the 50 outlot. Sansevere asked if Mr. Renckens was aware of the 50’ outlet when he looked into acquinng the property and if he was hoping the City would override it Renckens said he was aware of the issue with the 50’ outlet but he didn ’t think it applied in his situation. Winston said that when they reduced the subdivision fix>m three lots to two lots, it vvould be a reasonable basis to eliminate the 50’ outlot. He distributed informaUon regarding cul-de-sacs in the immediate neighborhood of the property that are not connected. Kelley reviewed the list and stated the reasons why the cul-de-sacs are not connected. Winston said the point is that there are a number of cul-de-sacs in the area that are not connected. He said cul-de-sacs are part of the character of the neighborhood and they arc trying to preserve that character. __________ Page 12 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING minutes for APRIL 12,1999 (U9) §2466 James Renckens, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road- Continued Renckens said this parcel has a lot of appeal. He is concerned about the future development of the area if the outlot is made into a road. He does not want to be in a busy area. Sansevere asked about the septic alternatives if the 50’ outlot is created. Renckens said the septic site is in the northeast comer of the site. He said the alternative is to remove the trees in the middle of the site. The only other septic site is near the wetland. The wetland has to be extended with a ponding area which vnW eliminate that septic site. Kelley asked staff how access would be gained to Watertown Road if the property was subdivided further. Weinberger stated that only two residences are allowed on a shared private driveway. Access for the northerly lot would have to be via the cul-de-sac on Crystal Creek Road. Mike Hilbelink stated that none of the property owners in the area are in favor of the 50’ outlot except for Mr. Carlson. He said the City didn’t take the outlot at the time of the Crystal Creek Subdivision and it appears to him that the reason was to preserve septic sites and two lots for Mr. Carlson. Mr. Hilbelink feels Mr. Carlson will benefit front the outlot and the burden is being put on the person developing this parcel. He said if this parcel had already been developed at the time of the Crystal Creek Subdivision, the outlot would have had to go to the north and Mr. Carlson would have lost two lots. Carlson stated that the road was put where City staff wanted it put. He was promised a 50’ outlot across the top of the Stubbs property '^^' d he wants it. Flint asked about Mr. Carlson creating his own problem when he sold off Lots 6 and 7 since that is what isolated his northern property. Carlson said Lots 6 and 7 were part of the entire plat and there weren’t any problems with septic sites. He again stated that he put the road where the City wanted it and he does not want to be denied access to his 30 acres. Hilbelink said this parcel could be sold and not subdivided. If that happened, the outlot could not be created. Kelley asked if Gaffiron was involved in the Crystal Creek subdivision. Gaffron said he had some involvement in the subdivision Kelley asked what the staff’s position was firom a long-term planning point of view. Page 13 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 12,1999 (U9) U2466 James Renckens, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road - Continued Gallon said he concurred with Kelley that the long-term view was for an outlot across the northern part of the Stubbs property to coimect with Wear Lane. Flint asked how Carlson would gain access to his 30 acres if this 50 ’ outlot is not available. Gaf&on said Carlson would have to provide access. The clear intent of the City back in 1991 was to continue a 50 ’ corridor across the top the Stubbs property. Steve Koehler, 35 Crystal Creek Road, said the Crystal Creek Homeowners Association objects to extending Crystal Creek Road because of increased traffic. He said there are drainage concerns as to how the water will drain into the Association’s property. He favors the flag lot concept. Sansevere asked if 50 ’ is the minimum that can be taken. Gaf&on said 50 ’ is the standard for a road serving this number of homes. Sansevere asked if today was the first Renckens heard that if the subdivision was two lots instead of three, the City would still take the 50 ’ outlot. Renckens said yes, that he had heard City staff didn’t like the length of Crystal Creek Road, that they liked the fact he was proposing to buy the property and not put in a road. He also understood that the 30 ’ outlot was only taken in the case of lakeshore property. Flint asked if staffs position is that the City should have both the 50 ’ and the 30 ’ outlots. Gaf&on said the 30 ’ outlot is driven by the idea that there is going to be access through or adjacent to a front lot and a back lot is being created by having the access there. City code does not allow the crealiou of a flag lot vvlilch is by defuution a lot that is continuous all the way down through that narrow corridor. The code states that a flag lot cannot be created, you have to create a back lot with an outlot corridor. Flint asked if the 30 ’ outlot is necessary if access to the back lot is through Crystal Creek. Gaffron said if the access is to the rear, the 30 ’ outlot would not be necessary. He said that in every subdivision where there is potential to connect to adjacent properties, the City would have them continue the road through their property to the next one. Kelley said that if the applicant has access from Crystal Creek, he can eliminate the 30 ’ outlot, move the lot line furdier south and make Lot 1 bigger so it could be subdivided in the future. Renckens said he could not subdivide Lot 1 to meet the subdivision cf'^'. Page 14 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING TvnNTlTES FOR APRIL 12,1999 (U9) »2466 James Renckens, having an Merest in 3020 Watertown Road-Continued Kelley said Renckens would not be subject to the back lot tequiiements if the City allows him access off Crystal Creek Road. Renckens said he would not want to have his house in ' have a driveway come through that accesses the center part of the property. Kelley suggested the applicant be allowed access from Crystal Creek Road so the outlet on Lot 2 would not be reqviired. Kelley asked for the Council ’s opinion on the 50’ ouUot. Sansevere said he is in favor of Mr. Renckens’ proposal. Flint said he is inclined to approve the Planning Commission ’s recommendation for the 50’ outlot. Kelley said he concurs with Flint. He asked if the applicant still wants *e access to Lot 1 to be from Watertown Road if the Council approves the 50’ oudot across the northemp the property. Winston said he believes they have to have the access to Watertown Road because they can’t foist themselves on the Crystal Creek Homeowners Association. Kelley said the City Attorney could give an opinion to the Association as to what he beUeves the City’s position would be. Winston said he does not believe the City wants to make Crystal Creek Road a public street. Barrett said the City may not want to, but it is an option that would be available. Renckens said he can’t bmld a home on Lot 1 if the 50’ outlot is created. Winston asked about the number of votes necessary for action on this item. Barrett said it requires a majority vote. Kelley asked for the Council members’ opinion on the 30 ’ outlot Sansevere said he can approve the 30 outlot. Flint said he would be willing to grant a variance to the requirement for the 30 ’ outlot Page 15 4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 12,1999 (U9) #2466 James Renckens, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road- Continued Flint asked for BaiTctt’s opinion on amending the outlot requirements and grant a variance for a flag lot. Barrett said the Council can amend the resolution, create a flag lot and grant a Variance. He said the variance would require two votes out of three. Flint moved, Kelley seconded, a motion to approve Application #2466,3020 Watertown Road, without the 30 ’ outlot on the southwest comer and granting a variance to allow access to Lot 1 without the 30 ’ outlot. VOTE; Ayes 2, Nays 1. Sansevere opposed. Jabbour abstained. (#1P) #2467^ofiland^evelopment^Jiavifiglinlnterest in^25^ro^ Road South - 6 - “'^^^ry Submvision'- Resolutions 4262/and^4268 ' ;teve Bohl, raplTcanf, was present Weinberg^presentedlfi?S^reo<irt. He said the applicarrf^roposing ^sU^ivide the proper^c^ed^5(j25 siuth Brown Road into six residential lots. Five of the lots would be served ^ d cuj^sac and one'lot would ^served off froni Brown Road. The applicant is requesting D^iminary pla^provaljnd'aConditional iWPermit to allow grading within five feet6f a lot line for a4ive^a/for Lot 1. The neighbors have agreed to the shared /driye^y for Lot 1. '^uiberger said this is a 45-^^site located in tlje two-dcre ' re^dential zoning di^ct'Approximately the site is wetland. One backjofwould be created with accwsjby an outlot Lots 2 throp^ 6 would have access throu^ Carnage Lane. ANURP poncLvvill be constructed less 4afi^20 ’ fronf^ lot line. Staff does^ot object to this-;;;, since the adia^nt properties are serve^th saifit^ewer. Suitable^c sites have been found on ^Isix lots. The City EnM^rha^yiewed the grading^ drainap plans and they are acceptable. Staff recommen^^df'^® City place drainap^db^conservation^asements over the^nd and the wetlands. Besaid the applicant has a^eedto the eas^ehts./f / X »S^th Brown^oad. He has a buyer/i W ______1 mm. )Ucation tp^ e(^lp4din at parcel. necessary., / / ?-OTCtt said thCiparcel would have to be giverl back to J^rinepin County, o^efed to o&er ^ public entitie^and then'Mr. Bohl could purohase th^property. / / Kelley said/e would be in favor of the ^lic^t obtaining the tax-footed,property. Scott Wtoon stated he is the possible^^Df the tax-forfeited p^i^He ask^^^^ process^^ obtaining the tax-forfeited parcel. Page 16 • • • •oa '-4 ,..:r '• V ••. .* ...’*• >. • * • • . f •‘^'f*l*** ^ , r • ' p ••• ‘4 • ,• • • . .. ... ’j. /i :aNOHd f 0N07 anNSAV MDVMVFIYI 20t i tHOASAHOS ONVl ‘SHaSKlONa IIAIO •* 3NOHO 5f NMiOO NoisiAioahs o3SOdoad SN3M0N3d *y S3F^Vr T5??nani iadah itti aivo 'ViOSMi JO liVXS 3U J) un 3H1 ONI I0AMS (Nn (NT lOKia 1MSS10M <09G3n iTO V PW I iVMI!sams8i!.'we?j«.aa«ffim Q3XOD jmua 0MIS3Q ILIS 3Ud3S 71Q 3US 3SOOH nossod V w«.l S*A»i"* ' ‘O'D • w td • «'m w .L> J. J.L « *lt • •# I • • James R. R enckens 4680 Forestview Lane Plymouth, Minnesota 66442 (612) 659-2380 • • April 2,1999 Elizabeth Van Zomeren City Planner/Zoning Administrator Orono City Hall 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Re: James R. Renckens Class ni Preliminary Plat Subdivision Zoning File No. 2466 Dear hds. Van Zomeren: On March 15, 1999, the Orono Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminar}' plat proposed by my wfe and me. The Commission's approval was made subject to three condiiions. Those conditions, and our responses to each, are as follows. • • 1. Provide 50' Outlet across north property line. We have chosen not to incorporate the recommended change into the preliminary plat that vrill be proposed to the City Council on April 12. We have a number of reasons for objecting to the 50' Outlot requirement. Please bear with us as we try to explain. First, creating a 50' Outlot along the entire Northerly property line makes it much more likely that a street will be constructed within the Outlot area. The construction of a street along the Nora property line would deprive our property of the privacy it now enjoys, and, for that reason alone, the property is less desirable and thus less valuable. Apart from value considerations, there are issues of safety and security. These considerations are adversely affected by the creation of a city street, which, in addition to providing undesired access to our property, would serve as its primary purpose to make other properties sitiwted to me North and East more accessible. With that increase in accessibility also comes more traffic and the resulting loss of privacy, safety and security. Creation of the 50' Outlot also raises issues vrith respect to fairness and the public interest. The neiehbors to our East in the Wear Lane neighborhood, as well as our neighbors to the W^ m the Crystal Creek neighborhood, are strongly opposed to the creation of such ari access street. \Yim respect to providing access to the North, the City could not have been clearer in statmg condition to the developer of the Cr>'stal Creek subdivision when it declared in ResoluUonNo.iSYO dated May 12,1997 approving the Crystal Creek subdivision: % » Ms. Elizabeth Van Zomeren April 2,1999 Page 2.. 7. Outlet B may be residentially developed in the future.... The subdivider shall be responsible for providing legal access to the property.• • • • The subdivider, in accepting the City’s plat approval, also accepted the above-stated condition, and is reasonably and legally bound to honor it now. Furthermore, there remains ample opportunity for the subdivider to acquire land to the East, and thereby obtain access to his property from Old Crystal Bay Road. That task is his responsibility, as stated in Resolution No. 3896, not the City's, and certainly not ours. If land is to be taken from any property to serve the subdivider's Outlot B, it should be taken from the subdivider's own subdivision, which, in this case, would be Lots 6 and 7 of Block 1, Crystal Creek. That would be eminently more fair than taking the land frorn us, especially since the subdivider profited from the creation of those Lots 6 and 7. The subdivider has caused his own problem, and should be responsible for its solution. Please do not make us solve it. Our next objection is based on the loss of acreage that we would suffer from the taking of the Outlot. The creation of a 50’ Outlot across the Northerly boundary of our property results in a loss of22,752.5 square feet of land, or somewhat more than one-half acre. That loss of acreage, not to mention the loss of acreage resulting from other Planning Comrmssion suggestions, makes it much less likely that the Northerly lot could be subdivided into two lots in the future, especially in view of the City's 150% requirements for back lots. Zoning District RR-IB standards require two acres of dry buildable area. Therefore, the minimum area for each such lot would need to be 150% of that acreage, or three dry acres. V/ith the taking of the Outlot, there is barely enough land^to accommodate nvo lots of three acres each, and this situation is exacerbated because we cannot divide the property on an equal 50/50 basis because of the topography and e.xisting natural conditions. This is tmly a significant problem for us. When we purchased the property* we expected, and we think reasonably so^ that we would have several subdivision alternatives for it in view of the acreoCTA. Hev/ever. afre: ::r.s*.*!^’"'’ "-ith surveyors, a land planner, the septic designer, as welf^' our architecrand builder, we have concluded that, as a result of terrain and wetlands, there are just nvo building sites in the Northern part of the property. All other alternatives would require the removal of the precious stand of pine trees, as well as substantial clearing and considerable, and expensive, alteration of the natural amenities. Another significant reason for our opposition to the 50' Outlot is that its creation takes away critical septic sites in the Northeast comer of the property. While these septic sites are not shown on our proposed subdivision, they are shown on an earlier application proposed by John Vogt and Mike Hilbelink. The City's taking of the 50' Outlot and the septic sites located there prevents us from situating our house in that area, which is our first and best choice for the location of our home. A further reason we oppose the Outlot is that there does not seem to be a.ny good reason to require it in the fust place, except, as I have heard, and to quote one of the members of the Planning Commission, "it would be nice to have". To quote another member of the PlanrJng Con^ssion, "if we don’t take this opportunity* to get the Outlot, we may never have another opportunity." Ms. Elizabeth Van Zomeren April 2,499^ Pages The taking of the Outlet, or the imposition of the Outlet requirement on this plat, is apparently based on that part of the City's Ordinances found in Section 1 1.j2. Subdivision where the following language is found: , * ... proposed roadways shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be subdivided.... However, the foregoing language is qualified by two exceptions; one exception applying where topography or other physical conditions mitigate agadnst the extension of the roadway, and another exception allowing the City to make a judgment call that the extension is not "necess^ or desuable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision ----'' Both excepaon^are-applicable m this instance. -The-extension of the roadway is in fact prevented by physical conditions, in this case frees and topography, and the layout is not necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of this subdivision with adjoinins subdivisions. Moreover, no roadway whatsoever is proposed wito r^ct to this subdivision. While a driveway could be located off of Crystal Creek Road, and while a driveway location is proposed from Watertown Road next to the proposed Lot 2, no roadway is proposed. That being the case, paragraph 6 of the Ordinance is not applicable. Instead, paragraph 4 of the same Subdivision 2 is applicable, which reads as follows. Roadways shall be laid out to conform as much as possible to the topography, to discourape use bv through traffic, to permit efidcient drainage and utility ^ systems, and to require the minimum number of roadwavs necessary to provide convenient and safe access to property. (Emphasis added) In view of our objections to the Outlot, and since both the Wear Lane and Crystal Creek neiffhborhoods also oppose creation of the Outlot, the City Council's focus should be on the lan^age of ^e above-quoted paragraph 4, and particularly the words "to discourage use by through traffic . Our final reason for opposing the creation of the Outlot is that the City's taking of tWs OuUot acreage amounts to a condemnation thereof because the taking is unrelated to the two-lot subdivision of the tract. While the taking may accommodate future public works with respect to properties to the West North and East, and while the property to the North would surely benefit from and be enriched by access over the Outlot, none of that is related to the two-lot subdivision that we propose. In .view of the taking of the Outlot, and because no compensation for the taking is propo^, the constitutionality of the Planning Commission's recommendation must be challenged. ™ sanctity of private property is well recognized under o^ laws. mUe private property ma> ^ for a governmental purpose, just compensation must be paid. The only justifiable reason to ^ propel is being taken is for perceived municipal uses at some future date, which m^cipal^ have nothing whatsoever to do with the uvo-lot subdivision proposed by at this time. Accordingly, our final reason for opposing the taking of the Outlot is that it would b unconstitutional to do so. Ms. Elizabeth Van Zomcren April 2,1999 Page4** 2. Provide 30' access Qutlot for back lot instead of "flag lot” design. • • • • * • , * • • We also oppose the 30’ Outlot suggested by the Planning Commission for reasons similar to those noted in our opposition to the Northerly Outlot. We oppose the creation of this Outlot because it removes critical acreage that could be credited to a subsequent division of Lot 1 to the North. The loss of area that results from the creation of this Outlot would be 10,680 square feet, or approximately one-quarter acre. Notwithst^ding the size of the lot, in the event of a further subdivision we run up against the three-acre minimi^ and site limitations previously mentioned. Thus, we need every square foot we can muster to satisfy the required acreage minlrmims. Another reason we oppose the creation of this Outlot is that there does not appear to be good reason to require it. Our understanding from conversations with City Staff is that historically this tj'pe of flag lot was opposed only when lakeshore was involved. However, that is not the case here. Further, with the potential for access to Lot 1 at its Northwest comer by way of an easement over Crystal Creek Road, there was even some question in Staffs mind, as expressed at the Planning Commission hearing, as to whether an Outlot should be recommended in this situation. Therefore, because the historic reason for opposing a flag lot is not present here, because there does not appear to be clear direction from Staff requiring the establishinent of an Outlot, and because creation of an Outlot adversely affects subsequent acreage computations wdth respect to a possible subdivision of the rear lot, the creation of this meaningless Outlot at the front is opposed. 3. City Staff to grant administrative variances for septic location, if appropriate. This requirement of the Planning Commission is not opposed. The requirement is advantageous to us, and is accepted. We will work with Staff to address this matter. Thank you for this additional opportunity to address these matters. Sincerely, Jim and Debra Renckens JRRAdd «• • • • • •WINSTON LAW OFFICE r April 14,1999 Richard N. Flint Gray Plant Mooty Mooty & Bennett, PA 33 South Sixth Street, #3400 Minneapolis, MN 55402-3796 RE: James R. Renckens Subdivision Application Dear Dick: Jim Renckens and I wish to thank you for giving us a sympathetic ear on Monday evening. While you ultimately voted against us on the rear outlot issue, it was clear to us that you were making every effort to understand and be sympathetic with our position. We believe, rightly or wrongly, that, had Charlie Kelly not spoken so adamantly against us, we would have been able to proceed without the outlot. Now, with the rear outlot requirement imposed, I am not sure that Jim Renckens will buy the property, and I would hate to lose him as a neighbor and resident of the City of Orono. I hope to talk to Charlie Kelly in the near future. I have known Charlie for a number of years and he is a friend. I was somewhat taken aback that he spoke so adamantly against us. In any event, thank you for giving us a fair hearing on Monday night. I am sorry your vote supported the imposition of the outlot. In view of the outcome, I have some concern that I did not effectively advocate my client’s position, a position which I support, being a resident of the same neighborhood myself. We are not opposed to working cooperatively wth the City where public works are for the benefit of the corrunimity or the particular neighborhood in question. Here, we feel strongly that the creation of a street would be of great detriment to the neighborhood and of no real benefit to the City. The creation of the outlot along the Northerly edge of the Stubbs/Renckens property devalues the same, and has immediate adverse impacts on the Crystal Creek neighborhood, and particidarly Lots 6 and 7. The thought that this outlot might at some future date be linked to the street in front of my house, and that the street in front of my house might be linked to a street serving properties to my West and North is of such alarm and concern to me that I have been distressed ever since I walked out of City Hall Monday night. This has not been a good week. I am deeply concerned that Mr. Renckens %vill now not purchase the property, and I wanted to have him as a neighbor and as a resident of the City of Orono. I am as distressed about the possible future loss of safety, securitv and privacy \vith the possible linkage of Wear Lane to other roads to 4420 IDS Cenler, SO Soulk 8lk Street, Minneapolis, MN 55402 Tel: 612/341-9800 Fax: 612/338-6351 i J . •• April T4,1999 Page 2 my North and West. With three small children at home who use Ae cul-de-sac in front of our home as a playground, I am already alarmed by the driving of the son of. one of my neighbors. I see that many times compounded should other lots and the. teenage sons of their owners have similar access to the road in front of my house. These are real concerns, as I try to flag down the offending driver, and yell at him to slow down. My concerns have nothing to do with snow removal concerns or "good city planning", but they are a great deal more important to me and my family than convenience to a snow plow operator. I have gone on too long, and I have made this more a personal diatribe than I had wanted. Accordingly, I dose by again thanking you for hearing us out Monday night. Sincerely, John B. Winstort JBW/krm cc: James R. Renckens Mayor Gabriel Jabbour Charles Kelly Robert Sansevere • • WINSTON LAW OFFICE April 14,1999 6-3 Council Member Robert Sansevere Orono City Hall 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 RE: James R. Renckens Subdivision Application Dear Bob: Thank you for hearing us out the other night and reacting favorably to our subdivision proposal. Both Jim Renckens and I are appreciative of your effort to listen to and understand our arguments against the outlots recommended by the Planning Commission. It was clear to us from your questions that you cared about our position and were willing to vote in favor of it, notwithstanding Charlie Kelly's strong support of the rear outlot. In that regard, I have known Charlie for many years and he is a friend. I was surprised that he spoke so adamantly against us. My intention is to address a letter to him as well, and to invite a meeting at which I or Jim Renckens and I can further express our concern, not only with respect to the outlot required by the Council at Monday evening’s hearing, but also the possible conneaion to Wear Lane. My neighbors and I strongly oppose that connection, and do not see how City interests are advanced when the residents of the community most affeaed by the road connection are all opposed to the same. It seems to me that whenever possible the "City’s interests" should be adapted and adjusted to fit the interests of the Cit/s residents. It was clear to me and Jim that you were sympathetic to that position, and we most appreciate your spealdng out on Monday evening in our favor. Keep up the good work. We are happy to see you on the Orono City Council, Sincerely, John B. V.^insto cc: JBW/krm James R. Renckens Mayor Gabriel Jabbour Charles Kelly Richard Flint 4420 IDS Center, 80 Soutk 8tk Street, Minne.polu, MN 55402 Tel: 612/341-9800 Fax: 612/338-6351 9 WINSTON LAW OFFICE • •C~H April 14,1999 Charles Kelly Compass Capital Management . 706 Second Avenue South, #400 Minneapolis, MN 55402 RE: James R. Renckens Subdivision Application Dear Charlie: I am writing to you, as you might have anticipated, to discuss with you further the James R. Renckens Subdivision Application and the outlot requirement imposed Monday night. The Coundl's decision has been troubling to my client and me ever since the vote went against us on the 50-foot oudot at the rear of the property. While I have appeared before the Orono City Council enough times to know the process, and while I have participated in the process, I always come away dissatisfied that a City Council hearing is not a good place to engage in a meaningful dialog vdth. respect to the issues that the Council may face on any particiUar evening. I would much rather sit down with Council members in a less formal environment with proponents and opponents alike and try to talk things out around a conference room table. That setting was not afforded us Monday night by reason of the process, and I understand the legal requirements that you are up against. Thus, let me take this opportunity to corrunence a less formal dialog. The rear outlot is a disaster for the property. You have heard our expressions of concern Mth respect to privacy, safety and security. You will also see copies of my letters to the other Council members, and partiailarly my letter to Mr. Flint where 1 again state my concern as a neighbor of the property. Further concerns involve our now hawng to leave the rear 50 feet untouched, as this area is to be a separate outlot, and carmpt be developed. That situation is exacerbated by our h.. dng to compute setbacks from the Southerly line of the outlot. Further, Mth this being a rear lot, my understanding is that the setback becomes 150% of the normal setback, and that, in this case, that would amount to 75 feet. In effect, the City’s taking of the 50 feet for outlot purposes creates a 125-foot wide no man’s land at the rear of the subjea property. But it is not just the loss of 125 feet or the resulting loss of use of the aaeage involved. What I would like you to do is to go back to Mr. Renckens' letter that is part of the City’s record. Jim's April 2 letter, copied herewith, well sets forth the arguments against the oudot. I would like you to focus on those aspects of the letter 4-120 IDS Center, 80 SoulK 8lli Street, Minneapolu, MX 55402 Tel: 6l2.341.9800 F«: 612.338.6351 April i4,1999 Page 2 interests of the community affected should the community be opposed to the imposition of the outlet, the City should conform its position to that of the community. When none of us wants a through street, and when none of us sees any benefit in a through street, I would hope that the City could see it within its power and discretion to avoid the through street. Charlie, I know you are sincere in your belief, and I know that you work hard for the City. My hope is that there is still some way that your sincerity and hard work and my own can coincide with respect to this issue. Thardeyou for further considering this matter. I will try to reach you by telephone to raise these matters again, but I wanted you to have tlds introduction in advance. Sincerely, John B. Winston JBW/krm Enclosure cc: James R. Renckens Mayor Gabriel Jabbour Richard N. Flint Robert Sansevere ' I1 James R. R enckens 4680 Forestview Lane Plymouth, Minnesota 55442 (612)559-2380 April 23, 1999 Ron Moorse Orono City Administrator Orono City Hall 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 APR 2 6 1599 QjX v vji-»Ci\'0 Re: James Pv. Renckens Class III Preliminary Plat Subdivision Application Zoning File No. 2466 Dear Mr. Moorse: On April 12, 1999, the Orono City Council recommended approval of the preliminary plat proposed by my wife and me with respect to the property at 3020 Watertown Road. The Council's approval, however, was made subject to the condition that an Outlot be platted along the northerly boundary of our property. After much reevaluation, we have determined that such condition presents overwhelming problems for us. We respectfully request, therefore, that the Council ’s hearing on our application for preliminary subdivision be reopened. Our request is made due to the foregoing »»..ioOn, because certain material information ^ presented at the April 12*^ meeting was factually incorrect, and because the full City Council did not have the opportunity to hear the matter. We also have new information to present to the Council that may be helpRil in its deliberations. Further. I can confirm that we are now the fee owners of the property having closed on the purchase from the Stubbs family as we committed. We requf ’ •* *his u.,iiier be addressed by the City Council at its meeting on Monday, May 10,1999. In b* v,e understand that at least one member of the Council who voted on this matter the evening of April 12'*' must move to reopen the hearing. Therefore, we will contact Council members Kelly, Flint and Sansevere in advance of that date to discuss our request. Thank you for placing this item on the Council agenda for further consideration. Sincerely, Jim and Debra Renckens JRR/ldd j 1 t>-( / >'3 (\W S.I*trrtU tfiA ■« .£ (a H '=> I - I. ..“ ♦: •. Date of Application: 2/17/99 Date Complete: 2/17/99 60 day limit: 4/17/99 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2466 James R. Renckens and John B. Winston 3020 Watertown Road Two Lot Preliminary Plat Subdivision Zoning District: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) Lot Area:11.94 acres total, 10.1 dry acres Application: The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 11.94 acre parcel into two lots. The rear lot. Lot 1, is considered a flag lot and is subject to backlot standards that require 150% of the lot area, front, rear, and side yard setbacks. There are several issues with the application as follows: 1. 2. The dedication of right-of-way for Watertown Road; The lot design for Lot 1 to have 30' of frontage on Watertown Road instead of a platted outlot; 3.The temporary cul-de-sac in the Crystal Creek to the west and the expectation that Crystal Creek Road, a private road, would be extended by platting a 50' outlot to the east in order for a connection to Wear Lane (public road) or another road to be created in the future. Lot 7 in Crystal Creek has a 15' easement over Lot 6 from the temporary cul-de-sac. The location of a stormwater management pond in the Crystal Creek subdivision that impacts the proposed location for a septic site on the front lot. Lot 2. An administrative variance from the septic rules may be needed. 5. The need for a stormwater management pond to be located north of the larger wetland. .........- Dale of Application: 2/17/99 Date Complete: 2/17/99 60day limit: 4/17/99 6. The possiblity of future subdivision of the larger lot, Lx)t 2, and possible access from the temporary cul-de-sac vs. a platted 50' outlot. 7. The amount of land required to be dedicated or used for ponding: Watertown Road 15,183.63 sq. ft. Access Outlot 10,680 sq. ft Stormwater Pond 8,713 sq. ft. TOTAL: 57,329.13 sq. ft. (1.3 acres) PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended that the subdivider provide a 50' outlot across the rear property line of Lot 2 and also provide a 30' outlot for Lot 2 instead of a flag lot design, subject to City staff granting an administrative variance for the location of a septic site on Lot 1. The subdivider has prepared a response to the Planning Commission's recommendation in Exhibit B. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To review the proposed subdivision and subdivider's response and provide direction to the subdivider regarding the requested outlots from Watertown Road and from Crystal Creek Road. No resolution has been prepared as the subdivider did not agree with the Planning Commission's recommendation. Attachments A Proposed Plat with PC recommendations B Letter from applicant C Notice of Planning Commission action D Staff letter to applicant E City Engineer's letter F Planning Commission staff report Renckens 3020 Watertown Rd. CC4/I2M Filename: Uz/ca2466 sHaNNYid anvi 'SMOASAans aNvn 'saaaNioNa iiaid ■nMl%HgMQHD ^ NlJjOO 6^-6 .OS--1 g NoisiAiaans Q3sodoyd SN3>10N3d *d S3»NVr jr//7’ HJUtVH JSMJ3I1 t«M “fTTTTTJ — 34VQ *V10S9Mn JO 31V1S 911 jO SMV1 941 H3QNn MAjAinS (Kn (l(V 119013 IVNOSSUOM QSSNlSn AW V RVI IVIU a3)OlH3 NMVMO isif i iJ >7 >14 i oiNoisia Ab 5T^ lOOitiO ou|| mnot •Ml Ouoit (Mint••UJ •• *|0«J0M11««| 690 i<«M K> 1t«« Ou|Xi lioipiiov^ lo^id MIS tMI JO HW tl ofiooM *01 1 0!M»u»wl *CC oo|P«S JO »\nno Ua^AMinos 0M1 Jo jroH litM OM) |0 'jooioiA oug OUI Ouoit potnvoui !• 1»oj 0L\\ Mmos MOJO pod lOiU u5i|<Jj73loQT3tJ5^ 31tS 0fXd3S 318ISSOd 3XIS 3SnOH 3iaSS0d 'j » V/«j l *09V S»A^ r» * O’D •I 1*V» .L* J. J.L V '#« 3 Ntl >0S*69 N___________ «fJorAVAjio)9 >ii9l7 2 • 47VUKVM5 T Su R z ^ zQ O o > LlI y § q: o "‘f \ / / ‘*4 / \A r11 / /m.V' //N :i!/ •#^•VvYI *M V / -*'* • iitt * rnOffttmj I-J s • «4I ---------'v. \ •«■ li's}' ttir», %, 5 FID nl*\ ------- 1^, x\ I \ \ rii \-.............. 1\\Q ^ ^n' ^ ^ " M4«-----•'------ L < \ • I / > 'O h \ H \..:>i v\ Kv_. '' \ \X \«* X J rt4« / / 5*“ 1] I V \ \ V ^Qd-^y n Ahv < K \ \ \ l_lJ / / / / / \\ \ \ \ r \\ /' /“X LJI# / / / / - XM,(--'I'’'\\S..\vD Y--»\\!>-> \}St \\\ ( ^ (V Ja ^ j\-T\ r \ •;v 00 > o r \ V TuriO„ ^ Nid „o /■ -I*--—., <;* './ •' r--:.-rr7>^vv - •* A ' / 3* - •-r. M« • « •« Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects March 8.1999 Elizabeth VanZomeren City Planner/Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re: Renckens Subdivision File No. 139-2466 Sc^essroo. Rcze^f, Anefe^'ik jtna Anoaatet. tnc is an Affirmative Acrion, £quat Opportunity Etr^oye rctpals: Oc:c G 3onestroo. PE. • Joseph C. Anderlik. PE • Marvm L. Sorvaia. PE. • Richard E. Turne*. P£ • Glenn R Cook. PE. • Robert G Schunicht. PE. • Jerry A. Bourdon. PE. • Rszert W Rosene. pe and Susan M. EOerim. C PA. Senior Consultants Associate Fnr^c sait Howard A Sanford. PE • Keith A. Cordon. PE. • Robert R. Pfffferie. PE • R c'^ard 'Jf Fcstf ?£ . David O Loskota. PE • Robert C. Russek. A.i A • Mark A. Hanson. PE. • Vicnaei T. Rau:—ann. PE • Ted K Fieid. PE • Kenneth P Anderson. PE. • .Mark R. Rolfs. P£ • S‘C’*ey P Wiiiiar^san. p£. L.S • Robert P Koismith • Agnes M. Ring • Michael P Rao. PE • A.iar Rick Sch/r.ct. PE O^f ces St. Pau Rochester. Wiiimar and St Cloud MN • Milwaukee Wi Wsosite ww wssrestroo com AC — Dear Liz: We have reviewed the pretiminaiy plat for the proposed two-lot Renckens subdivision. The site is located east of Crystal Creek Road, west of Wear Lane and north of Watertown Road in the southwest quarter of Section 33. We have the following cotiunents in regards to engineering matters. 1. Access: Access to Lot 1 is off of Watertown Road along a 30-foot wide corridor. The driveway to serve Lot 1 would be approxirruitely 700 feet long. The City should review the proposed access to Lot 1 and determine whether the 30-foot corridor and driveway length is appropriate. The southerly 33 feet of Lot 2 should be dedicated as Watertown Road right-of-way. An Outlot should be platted across the northerly 50-feet of Lot 1 to provide for a future extension of Crystal Creek Road and allow access to Outlot B and Lot 7. Block lin the Crystal Creek subdivision. 2. Grading: The location of the proposed westerly sepdc site on Lot 2 may be too close to the proposed driveway to serve Lot 1 and to the existing wetland in Crystal Creek. A grading and erosion control plan for the entire site should be submitted for review. Erosion control measures should be in place prior to any grading. Additional erosion control will be needed during construction of the homes and septic systems. 3. Drainage: The site lies within the Lake Classen drainage district as shown in the draft version of the City's Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). The southerly wetland on the property is identified as LC-P15 and classified as a moderately susceptible wetland in the City's SWMP. We recoiiunend constructing a water quality pond north of this wetland to treat runoff from the site and protect the wetland. The City's SWMP alse -identlfiua pioposed 16” stuiin st'wei tuii»cyiiig flows from Ihe northrast tn this pnnd/wrtland area. We fceemmend tha t a drainage eas ement be acquir ed at this time for future eonstruction of this itorm setvfi A drainage area map. drainage and ponding calculations should be submitted for review. Plans should be submitted to the Minnehaha Oeek Watershed Disuict for their review. 4. Easements: Drainage and utility easements should be provided 5 feet wide along all interior lot lines and 10 feet wide along the roadway right-of -ways. Drainage easements should be provided across ponding areas, wetlands and drainage ways. 5. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please contact me at 651-604-4863 if you have any questions regurding this maner. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa. City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 651-636-4600 - Fax; 651-636-1311 Date of Application/1 7/99 Date Complete: 2/17/99 120 day limit: 6/17/99 TO: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: RE: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/ Zoning Administrator March 2,1999 #2466 John B. Winston/James R. Renckens, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road Class II Subdivision-Two Lot Preliminary Subdivision Exhibits: A1 Application AA Notice to previous applicants A2 Legal Description AC Septic Report A3 Applicant's lette AD Previous Proposed Plat B Proposed Plat Survey BA Historical Information C Area Map Ca Road and Topo for Crystal Creek Cl Plat Map Cb Res. #2948 C2 &3 Mailing List Cc Exhibit A for Res. #2498 Cd Staff Report for Crystal Creek Ce Engineer’s letter Cf Res. #3896 Zoning Dbtrict: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acvcs; Comprehensive Plan: Rural Service/Rural Residential District LoC Area: 11.94 acres total, 10.1 dry acres 1/12466 Winston/Renckens 3020 Watertown Road PC-3/15/99 page~l Date of Application/17/99 Date Complete: 2/17/99 120 do}’ limit: 6/17/99 Proposed Lots: Lot Total acreage Total dry acreage Loti 8.43 acres 7.30 acres Lot 2 3.51 acres 2.73 acres Application: The applicants are proposing to subdivide an 11 .94 acre parcel into two lots. Lot 1 is considered a flag lot, subject to back lot standards. Lot 2 i.. a front lot. Both lots 1 and 2 are proposed to have access onto Watertown Road. RR>1B Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street 2 acres dry buildablc 200’50'50*30'50' Back Lot Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street 3 acres 200' 75'75’45’75’ The proposed subdivision is located in the RRl-B zoning district. The minimum lot area for the zoning ^strict is 2 acres. Backlots require a minimum of 3 acres. Lot 1 is a flag lot back lot. Lot 1 is required to meet the above back lot standards which are 150% of the requirements for the RR- IB district for lot area, front, rear and side yards. #2466 Winston/Renckens 3020 Watertown Road PC-3/15/99 page-2 Date of Application/1 7/99 Date Complete: 2/17/99 120 day limit: 6/17/99 The subdivision ordinance states that front/back lot subdivisions shall not be created. In Section 11.31, Subd. 5, it states "Front/back lot subdivisions. "Flag lots" and "easement back lots" shall not be created. Front/back lot divisions shall be allowed only in conjunction with the creation of an outlot to provide access from the back lot to the public or private road. Such outlot shall not be allowed as creditable lot area for either the back or front lots. Front/back lots shall adhere to the following standards: a. b. Front/back lot divisions may be used when existing property dimensions are narrow and deep, such that lot width does not allow for a side-by-side lot split, but acreage is adequate to provide a front lot and back lot without requiring an area variance when the area of the outlot access corridor is excluded. The area to be subdivided is 11.94 acres with 1.91 acres wet. There is sufficient land area for 5 building sites in the 2 acre zoning district. The parcel, however, does not have 1,000 ft. offrontage for 5 lots to meet the minimum lot width on a public street. The depth of the parcel is 1,170 ft. which would provide adequate lot width if the lots were platted in an east/west orientation. However, a new private north/south road platted at 50' right-of-way would be required along the east or west boundary line. The amount of lot area dedicated to a private road would reduce the total number of building sites and would cause either the lots in either Crystal Creek or along Wear Lane to technically become through lots. There are also not enough adequate primary and secondary septic sites to accommodate such a platting arrangement. Front/back lot divisions may be used for individual lot splits, but may not be used when subdividing a large parcel into numerous lots if creation of a back lot is merely a convenience to the developer rather than supported by unique site factors. The topography and location of the wetlands reduces the likelihood of a three or four lot subdivision laid out along a north/south private road. A back lot/front lot for this parcel may be accomplished without lot area variances. Lot 2 cannot be further subdivided. Lot 1 could be further subdivided if adequate septic sites and access is provided in accordance with City codes. #2466 Winston/Renckem 3020 Watertown Road PC-3/1S/99 page-3 Date of Application/17/99 Date Complete: 2/17/99 120 day limit: 6/17/99 Accessor}’ Structures Lot 2 would be platted to have the existing five accessory buildings. The maximum total s.iuare footage for a 3.51 acre lot is 3,200 sq. ft. The five accessory structures total 3,208 square feet of lot coverage as calculated by staff The actual total structural coverage of the accessory structures needs to be verified. If the lot coverage exceeds 3,200 sq. ft., either one of tlie buildings needs to be removed to meet the requirement or a variance will be needed. One building measures approximately 32' x 44' (1,408 sq. ft.), and is considered an oversized accessory structure. Oversized accessory structures are subject to setback requirements that are required to be filed in a covenant in the chain of title. The plat as proposed would not comply with the side yard adjacent to street (45') setback if the 30' flag lot is replatted as a 30' access outlot, as required by the subdivision ordinance. Historical Building The April 1997 inventory from the Minnesota State Historical Office notes a bam at 3020 Watertown Road listed as HE-ORC-029 in the standing structure inventory. The state information is included \n Exhibit BA. Septic Systems Steve Weekman has evaluated the proposed septic locations. His report is in Exhibit G. In the report he notes that the location of a stormwater pond in Crystal Creek results in a septic site for Lot 1 (formerly Lot 3) on Watertown Road being located only 58 feet from the pond where 75 feet is required. A variance for the location of the drainfield will be required. Park Dedication Fee The Park Commission has reviewed this proposed subdivision and has recommended accepting a park dedication fee in lieu of land. The Hennepin County Assessor has been asked to revizw the proposal and determine the fair market value of the undeveloped land. U2466 Winston/Renckens 3020 Watertown Road PC-3/15/99 page--4 Date of Application/17/99 Date Complete: 2/17/99 120 day limit: 6/17/99 Engineering Issues The City Engineer has provided a letter addressing several engineering issues such as access, stormwater management, grading and drainage for the previous 3 lot subdivision. He is reviewing the two-lot proposal. Dedication of Right-of-way Access to both lots is from Watertown Road. The south 33' of the parcel should be dedicated as right-of-way on the final plat. Access The City's subdivision ordinance limits the length of a cul-de-sac to 1,000 feet and the nun J .2 of units to be served at 10. Crystal Creek Road was built with a temporary cul-de-sac to serve 11 properties at a length of 1,400 feet. Therefore, this parcel cannot gain access from Crystal Creek Road. Both lots are proposed to have frontage and access from Watertown Road. The Code requires that the 30' portion of the back lot. Lot 1, be platted as an outlot, 30' wide, with a driveway at least 10' from v^ither lot line. The side yard adjacent to an access lot standard is 45' rather than 30'. Future access to an additional lot created from the back lot would also be required to be provided from the access outlot. No access from Crystal Creek Road shall be allowed. Cul-de-sacs The subdivision ordinance states that cul-de-sacs shall be discouraged. (Section 11.32, Subd. 2, B. 6). Proposed roadways shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be subdivided, unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions or unless in the opinion of the City such extension is not necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the existing layout or the most advantageous future development of future tracts. This parcel is adjacent to the cul-de-sac for Crystal Creek In considering this two lot subdivision, the Planning Commission and City Council should address whether a 50' outlot shall be required across the rear of Lot 1 in order to coordinate the layout of adjacent subdivisions. H2466 Winston/Renckens 3020 Watertown Road PC-3/15/99 page-5 Date of Application/17/99 Date Complete: 2/17/99 120 day limit: 6/17/99 Construction of Roads The subdivision ordinance states that the arrangement of streets shall provide for continuation of streets between adjacent properties when such continuation is necessary for convenient movement of traffic, effective fire protection, for efficient provision of utilities and where such continuation is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. If the adjacent property is undeveloped and the street must be a dead-end street temporarily, the right-of-way shall be extended to the property line. The City may limit the length of temporary dead-end streets in accordance with the design standards. It was anticipated that Crystal Creek Road would eventually be connected to Wear Lane, according to a recent discussion \^ i!h Jeanne Mabusth, former Zoning Administrator/Building Official (See Crystal Creek packet for staff reports and resolutions). Stormwater Management % The City Engineer is reviewing the subdivision for stormwater management concerns. Drainage and Utility Easements The City will require the subdivider to provide standard utility and drainage easements along the internal and external lot lines. Drainage and fiowage easements will also be required for wetland protection. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission needs to discuss the following issues: 1. Whether to accept platting of a back lot given the width of the parcel, wetlands, topography, and access 2. The proposed access to the back lot via a flag lot configuration vs. the Code requirement for a 30* access outlot 3. Future possible subdivision of Lot 1 and future access to the lot 4. The Code's requirement to consider the adjacent subdivisions and the need to create a 50' outlot across the rear of Lot 1 H2466 Winston/Renckens 3020 Watertown Road PC-3/15/99 page —6 •' ’ • • •• . . ' * • " ; > • planning CCMMISSICN XeCTIIIG HELD HAECH IS# 1991 fw •*>w i. ril.K 11457-ALAN CAtLSOH CONTINUCO “•••;• r.j-.or cnan!}« in th* plan. Tn« r«vis«4 plan now tbowo a •t.,r.f. aa wall aa a dralna9a aaaaaant batwoan Loca /.i J. B.5C/. 1. Tha original plan st vaad barming In cha aaptic .-•• j'.i on Loc 1* Block I* and Loc 1* Block 3* Tnac wob oo •r.r, -ri-jrc la no barming on tha vaae aida* Tnara will bo a z cwra .;n tha othac alda» axtandin) oown to tha pond. On plan* ua ahewad two outlota* Outxot B and anotbar It. Cctlot C. Staff au99aat>id that thoaa Outlota. ba .r.^z, ar.'i tha cavlaad plan ahowa that.** • 5-»1.T' • w ■.•w.• •,x • • • • • • :i • ^ •• Kolloy aakad Carlaon to axplain tha purpoaa of Outlot B.•V*- Carlaon rapliad* "Outlot B will provida accaaa to Ot.tlota C S. 1 do not intand to davalop Outlot C at thia tloa* but a* ti'.xr.j to ootaxn paraxaaxon from tha Corp of En9lnaara to put zikm traila in that araa. 1 would Ilka to bavo a tannia Court on ..t.st B."•y Maouath addad that S.aff had raquaatad Carlaon to ro«routo Z..J draxnaqawoy alo*.*; tha aaat* 'xcrdar •‘JO that It no loogar .r.zuCmuczB a propoaad houaa aita* and aaptic alta. Xt la now mown along cha adgaa of tna 'propaccy lina at a IS foot width up t ia 970 f)Ot aiavation. tna ankad Carlaon if tha araa ..7. «:cu.aclona for Lot 3* Block .3* taka into conaidatation tha • xa.r.igavay. i :> ICarlson atatud that tha drainagawayi waa a^cluda. :ry suxldable area for that lot. ^ J:. -•a V :5:tMabusch al] •i*uwr.enc sarvxnr ; liAsle tf Lot •Carlson s L.* V<* wl It, |v ♦, Maousth asked Carlaon wharan r-ilat'on to tr.a drlvewuy eas^ej r.ti.5 ~ust also ba axcluded* fi^ba^j .f Carlson replxad* "Th'x blkaltrail^lCs'^located IrMfftfStbXif : .*et. swucn of Lotx 1 and 2, Block 2. a''d ts excluded froa those I I ' • ‘ W-- Bellows asked Carlson how ha intends to access Outlot C if li developed. Cirl-aon replies. “X a a not a are at thia poxnc where tha *•: :vss point will be. but I would locate access wherever xt is :• ..>..ihle to do so. Ti.ere arc a number of properties to the east * r.ay n.j isuo tor access. Outlot D Increases the access - 2 - .r» V {puxi*r <Mri.aTr, &. . *• >7‘-" r’v.'V ' Vo.' .i. Xaon 1 nn lwa wcu tncr a wiiw ^ ^ •» - • • • . • • • ♦ » tAbusth said, "If it is where Mr. Carlson has indicated, the tennis court would cncrcach into the i.otland area." Kelley asked Carlson if he Intends to install ironuments at the entrance to the developnent. Carlson stated that he so intended and referred the Planning Comnission to the plan showing the nonunents. Kelley aiked Carlson if he intends to place lightj oi: the nonuments. Carlson Indicated that ho had not a-veo any thought to lighting. Kelley asked Staff if Carlson will obtain private casements for the maintenance of the monuments. .Mabusth replied, "That the resolution approving the original 4 •• • '%‘ % — ■ :-4 ■t :' a' 1 'toiy •* . .■':X< i ‘‘V • *,V-/ f;' ‘;5, v?» *. aC«At^. Direct Dial; 612/336-4633 INTERNET: acarljon®iniil.merchant-gould.coiti KIngsbridge Properties, Inc, 3100 Norwest Center 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 May 19,1999 G Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kellev Parkway Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Application to Subdivide the Stubbs Property Dear Mr. Gaffron: I think it is important to document some of the history regarding the planning for roads in Crystal Creek and the general Watertovsm Road-Crystal Bay Road area. When I worked with the City to plan the Crystal Creek road plan, the City’s long range plan was to extend the Crystal Creek road to its east and then hook up with another road extending north from Watenown Road. There were a number of reasons for tWs. First, because of the shear size of the land north of Watertovm Road, if cul-de-sacs were built from Watertown Road, they would be too long and would not comply with City standards. The Crystal Creek cul-de-sac road, which is rather short, was already too long for city standards. To eliminate the long cul- de-sac the City intended to extend Crystal Creek’s road to the east when Stubbs applied to subdivide their land. The road would then hook up with another road which connected with ^ Watertown Road. It was believed that the likely road to hook up with would be Wear Lane, anu another possibility was a road running along the east side of the Stubbs property. Also, for safety reasons the City wanted a road network m the area for multiple points of access to properties. The intent to extend the Crystal Creek road to the east is reflected in the Historical Information which you previously distributed to the Planning Commission and the Council, attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Resolutions noted that the Crystal Creek cul-de-sac was temporar>- and would be removed when the road was extended eastward. It also provided that the easterly-most lot in Ciystal Creek would have a temporary driveway easement across the au oininc lot. and would have a permanent access when the adjacent road to the east is constructed along the north side of the Stubbs property. The Resolution stated that my undeveloped land north of Crystal Creek would also hook up with the Crystal Creek road Mr. Michael P. Gaffron May 19, 1999 Page 2 “through A. Stubbs property," March 29,1991 Resolution. Your staff highlighted a number of pertinent portions in the Historical Information. You were absolutely correct when you said during the Council Meeting on April 12,1999, “[t]he clear intent of the City back in 1991 was to continue a 50-foot corridor across the top [of] the Stubbs property.” The City and I contemplated that persons living east of Crystal Creek would use the Crystal Creek road, and persons living in Ctystal Creek could use the roadway to the east. In particular, we assumed that the northern part of the Stubbs property would have the benefit of, and access off. Crystal Creek. Given the use of the Crystal Creek road, it seemed fair to require that the Stubbs property proved a 50-foot easement for access by Stubbs to its own property and for access to other properties located to the north and east of Stubbs. This plan makes great sense, and I note that the first application to subdivide the Stubbs property proposed an access off Crystal Creek’s road for the north of Stubbs property. It seems clear that Mr. Renckens should access the north end of his property off the 50-foot easement from Crystal Creek, As Mr. Kelly correctly noted during the April 12, 1999 Council Meeting, “If the applicant has access from Crystal Creek, he can eliminate the 30-foot outlot, move the lot line further south and make Lot 1 bigger so it could be subdivided in the future.” The property owners of Crystal Creek all had notice that the cul-de-sac is a “Temporary Cul-de-sac ”, and that the road would be extended to the east “through the land adjoining the property'” and hook up with my property' to the north. Exhibit B, Crystal Creek Declaration, Sections 3.1, and 3.4. They also knew that the easterly-most lot. Lot 7, Block 1, had a non-conforming temporary easement over adjoining Lot 6 until the main road “is extended into the land adjoining the Property'----” Sss Section 4.1. The owners of Crystal Creek had fair notice of City planning. Mr. Renckens had notice as well. This has been a very unusual subdivision. The first application to subdivide the Stubbs property was filed by John Vogt and Mike Hilbelink. Mr. Renckens apparently was not involved, but Mr. Winston was the attorney for Vogt and Hilbelink. According to the application, Stubbs w-as the owner of the property and Vogt and Hilbelink were the applicants. On January 19.1999, the Planning Commission voted that the 50-foot easement had to be provided at the north end of the property. At that point, Mr. Renckens* name appeared on the next application. That application said Mr. P,.enckens was the owner and Mr. Winston was designated as the applicant. On March 15, 1999, the Plaiming Commission again required the 50-foot easement. Rcnckens/Winston then took the matter to the City Council, and, on Apnl 12, 1999, the City Council voted to require the 50-foot easement. It now’ appears that Mr. Renckens was not in fact the owner of the property’ during this process. Mr. Winston’s unusual, to say the least, April 14,1999, letters to the Council members state that “I am deeply concerned that Mr. Renckens will now not purchase the property- ...” I understand from you that Mr. Renckens said he has now closed on the property. Mr. Rencke.-^/S wants to change the City- plan to his perceived benefit and the detriment of my land to the north and prior City planning. Mr. Renckens had fair notice of City plans before Mr. Michael P. Gaffron May 19,1999 Page 3 he purchased. First, anyone desiring to subdivide the Stubbs property could simply ask the City what its long-range plans were for the area. They would learn that the City planned an easement across the north end of the property. Next, Mr. Renckens knew before he acquired an interest in the property from Vogt and Hilbelink that the Planning Commission on January 19,1999, required the 50-foot lot. Also, he knew before he decided to purchase the property that the Planning Commission on March 15,1999, and the Council on April 12,1999, required the 50-foot easement. Mr. Renckens purchased with full notice of City requirements. Thank you. Very truly yours, A Alan G. Carlson AGC/vm Enclosures p • • c“5SSB?r^i H libricL^a i 4 'H ^JftM.29.19-33 3:31R1 hJI HISTORI-:!^ S«jC rw.OSZ P7T7T BK 345 KBU.OGGBI.VD. TOT • ST. PAm, MN 55MM906 fax transmission ,1number of pages inclvding cover ._l_ TO:_ FAX NUMBER'.^ (^igL-TO-0510 FROM: g ffjiiM-' ^Sei no-e.>^5 PHONE NUMBER: (651). P'1 CHECK HERE IF ORIG INALTO FOLLOW BY MAIL IF YOU DO not receive all pages , please CONTACT: (651) 296-5434 JW.23.1999 3:31PM tfl HISTOPIC hL S>:C tK>. 092 P.3/7 address: 3020 Watertown Road HISTORIC HAHE: Gable Bam field NUMBIA; 2713B-3WA-21*. INVENTORY NUMBER# KE-ORC-049 bh- PW^T.UATIO>J analysis HISIOMC context: R.lltcad. and Agricultural Davalcpmant. 1870-19A0 e___rViA raeton's 6C HISlOKXO ------------ ^ • HISTORICAI. NARRATIVE; Ratnlng l>as •>““ *'tssOa'and^mol .“"Tha"^ since the arrival of agriculture through the 18706, irnSaria^E and dairying gradually coning to pro.ln.nc. around th. turn of th. cantury.—-------- SlGSinCAHCB: fmlS’'ln'S^ ft^Jn! ‘Uchou^ broad o “u«a of this history have been about th. relation of poorly known. Nor la !*.r. It nay also b. »“'tSi“n^rrnoS*«rrexampl? of a^nc.-conmon lnp.rt«.t atchlrectural type. eligible for the national ’ Individual: Need Info.; X On Register: Contributing: Non- Contributing: level of significance : Local:State:National: pnrilMENTATTQ^ /NOTES 1995 Mather, D. and P. Nunnally p«-ftnnalssance Survey Report: Mn/DOT Draft Final Cultural J^esources Submitted to the S.P. 2713/B602, Hennepin and State Historic Minnesota Department of Transportation. ,^°P> Preservation Office, Minnesota Hiscor ca o • MAP(S1 uses quad: «« Form Prepared By: Shawna K. Gibson Date: October 1994 Crusted Cr^elc I nfcrmCtjtor'- C(K pkin Cb - Cc -'CilA-V i Ct>^ SMX^ ce CiU ^ngirve^ leH<^ 6c' acoi>‘J*> CuHoV. • • • •• • • • __- - ------«•*r* • . • . • • • • • 2fC3LTi:-‘*‘^- • • • f • ^ » W » -fV#' •««•••* • *—^l».v, s-*i • • • •\1 / • • • • • ;K- / -;' 4:-,>4'-i!<,. . . f • h\2J^ .%*h r/ ••V . C w * *___ ^ • f • 1 •• ^/ - • -y^K/ :f / - •■*' V/ ^ •l» i ^ '/>^V .'A -1^ set AOOiTONAi Notes A#0| octjuls 0« WCT Cl____I V4/ ^ < V. >-7i- 1 / >.--2t4V» I >' ^ •> 1 Si \^^ \)•'w: M-* i M>— i \m T m »*trnmm • ^M • a MM • ••M M » «M M M w« » %t |« M m*»M «« mt»M •-■ • tf M *• • *••• • «i •J* M "‘Sirnm *m% ffgtJg D ''V m M Wi* * ***** •. , - - — • •• M ' • »*»» ncr=rr-r (.ICU'HH _---- *- «* L*llJ>.*ii 1*1 •L*-^ [•» • I** *1— » « «»»» CMP* Cb CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2948 ________ . A RESOLDTIOH GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OP THE PROPOSED CRYSTAL CREEK PLAT FILE NO. 1457 HHBREASr Alan G. Carlson (hereinafter "the subdivider”) on March 22/ 1991 filed 6 revised formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a 12~lot residential plat of property legally described as follows: Exhibit Af attached/ (hereinafter "the property") and? HBBREAS, after due published and mailed notice, in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq, and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes/ the Orono Planning Commission held public he.arings on March 18/ 1991 and March 20, 1991 and the Council on April 8/ 1991 at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were .given the opportunity to spea)c thereon; and WHEREAS/ at their regular meeting held on April 8/ 1991, the Orono City Council considered the amended subdivision application of 12 lots, noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The subdivision as.amended from the original 16-lot proposal findf that each lot meets or exceeds the 2-acre minimum dry contiguous lo area standards. 3. Each of the 12 lots meets the required lot width,to the rear o the 50' front street setback line. Page 1 of 8 -I 0^0 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2948 1. XlTT^ccess to the 3.2-lot plat must be via cne interior plat road. Lot 2, Block 2 shall be served from the temporary cul-de-sac via a 15' driveway easement through Lot If Block 2. Owner of Lot If Block 2 shall grant temporary driveway easement in favor of Lot 2f Block 2 until the adjacent private road is extended along the southern boundaries of Lot 2f Block 2. 2, Prior to any land alterations for drainage or road purposeSf the following septic sites must be staked with fencingf such fencing to be installed 20' from the boundaries of each drainfield .test site as follows; Lot If Block 1 Lot 2f Block 1 Lot If Block 2 Lot 2f Block 2 Lot If Block 3 (southwest corner drainfield site only) Lot 3f Block 3 Lot 5f Block 3 3. Subdivider to grant underlying road and utility easements over private road outlots (Outlots A and D). 4. Outlet A shall be installed as a 28' roadway with curb (urban section). Temporary cul-de-sac shall be designated at a 100' diameter with actual traveled turnaround at an 80* diameter. 5. Subdivider to grant conservation and flowage easements over a wetland/flood plain areas defined at or below the 970 elevation. T e subdivider should also grant drainage easements over drainageways anc storm sewers not located within right-of-way of road outlots. Page 3 of 8 r CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE C!TY COUNCIL NO. 2948_________ 10.^ ifiedeveloper to create easements in favor of the Homeowners Association over Lots Block 1 and Lot If Block 3 for the purpose of maintenance and upkeep of the entrance monuments. The City approves the monuments proposed on plans dated December 19, 1989 f revised March 18, 1991 by Gerald M. Sunde entitled "Typical Monument Detail" that defines 5 1/2* high, 10 lineal feet in length, 3' wide monuments to be installed on each side of the entrance of the private road. The final installed height of these monuments cannot exceed a height of 6‘ measured from elevation of private road. 11. All final grading, drainage and road plans shall be done ir accordance with the directives of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit and the final report of the City Engineer before anj . land alterations or construction can begin. The subdivider shal) execute a developer's agreement that shall include all requirec improvements. The subdivider shall also provide a Letter of Credit tc be written to the amount of 150% of the cost of all improvements. Th< Letter of Credit must also be submitted prior to final plat approva. by the City. The subdivider is hereby advised that building permit, shall not be issued upon final plat approval until gravel road bas- has been approved by the City Engineer and required drainage ponds an controls have been installed and approved by the City Engineer. 12. On-site evaluator to provide written confirmation that th shifting of drainfields within Lot 2, Block 2 and Lot 5, Block 3 wil satisfy on-site septic standards of City Code. FINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the ^onii Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting the second and fourth Mondays of the month: Page 5 of 8 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2948 • - • V- designated wetland areas at or below 970 elevation (refer to original easement enclosed with former preliminary plat resolution). e) Signed and executed Developer's Agreement and Letter of Credit cover all required improvements. f) Signed and executed Road and Utilities Easement .over the private road outlots (Outlots A and - refer to previous f samples ). ? g) Signed and executed temporary Road and Utility Easement over portions of cul-de-sac not located within private road outlot. h) Private coyenants/creation of. Homeowners' Association in a form for filing to include division of ownership and responsibility for maintenance of the private road and- drainage facilities (refer to original documents). i) Executed drainfield covenant prepared for filing against each lot.to be amended per Item 8 in conditions of approval as noted above, j) Completed "Application for Private Road Name". Subdivider shall have the choice of naming the road within Outlot A and C (refer to original documents). ^ • I f. • • \ / • 1 \y\ • C. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due S300.00 L ^ . I . •>— I ..O ! a) Final plat fee «= 8150.-W ^00.00 b) Legal review and filing fees of $1D0.frO* ^00. i70 c) Par)c dedication fee = $3,200 already paid by subdivider Page 7 of 8 03/17/97 Pay SO. 00 - ik^ ^ I s ■ VS Cc Resolution .12^48 Exhibit A • «0# • * • / • •« * M ••*•• •* Tos From: Date: Subject Mayor Peterson & Orono Council Members Planning Commission chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Adjninistrator March 29, 1991 #1457 Alan Carlson, 3140 Watertown Road - Revised Preliminary Plat - Resolution The revised preliminary plat has been accepted under the former application number (#1457) and the required public hearing scheduled at March 18/20, 1991 meeting of the Planning Commission and Council April 8,; 1991 meeting. At the time of the filing of the revised subdivision application, Mr. Carlson also filed a separate conditional use permit/variance application for proposed improvements within commons outlot involving land alterations, insta 1 latriLon of tennis court, gazebo and trail system. Application #1630 was tabled by the Planning Commission until applicant had completed the permit review process with the Corps of Engineers for trail system. Applicant advised that Corps had no opinion concerning proposed installation of structures, within the plat. Please review staff memo dated March 14, 1991 for more derailed information on the filing of the revised preliminary plan. List of Exhibits for #1457 — Revised Preliminairy Subdivision Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit A - Resolution #2764, Preliminary Plat Approval, 3/12/90 • Carlson Letter 2/11/91 - Cook Report 3/11/91 - Gaffron Report 3/13/91 - Staff Sketch of Future Connecting Road Final Exhibit - Revised Preliminary Plan a) Preliminary Plat b) Grading Plan c) Road Profile/Typical Section/Elevation Monuments d) Location Map Review of Revised Preliminary Application - At the March 18th meeting, the applicant submitted a second revised plan addressing the issues raised in the staff memo dated March 14th. All lots meet the dry contiguous buildable 2-acre area. All lots meet the required lot width to '-he rear of the front yard setback line of 50'. The outlets are now redefined as follows: Zoning File #1457 March 29, 1991 Page 3 2. Monuments not to exceed 6* total height to be measured from final elevation adjacent to private road. m Bones troo Rosene Anderlik & Associates ^oO. •onnDoa M. •obMW.aom.f£ JuiphCAndcr^fX MiMlLSatvAiKC. ■cMidL'UwtPX Otm (L Ceek. M. T^alnM I. Ne^ PX lk6maSe^w40«PX SuudhlfbcrfrvCPA Engineers & Architects Kc0i A. Ooidorv f£. MindW jKfTyA.loudoaPX Mirk^KamoaKi. lMK.fkMLPJ. MchMl I toumna f J. A3Nftl.MdM.fi. OM) Q Udeci. PJL Thorrus W. fcccfson fl. McAJdClinch, n. Janwt K. Mjlind PI. P. Andcrsoa PI. M«ft A AdPIPX Aabcn C ftjiKti. AlA Thomas I. An0ui PX How¥Mi A SardM PX Oanwiiagempx MafkASc^PX PhAp X CasMoi PX lmciMafMi.PX MafkOUAtiPX Thomas X Andcma AlA Gafy P. tytanoec PX Macs a Jensaa PX LPh^pGMXPX Am C PUnaa ALA Agnes ax torta AiCP. XwyCX AwacAPX CacAoOMtPX MtftXOmOiOMcPX QaiyW.MohcaPX OMs A fhom L«0 M. PawMttty HaftanUOim March 11,1991 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, 'Minnesota '55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Re:Crystal Creek File No. 139-1457 Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the revised Crystal Creek Preliminaiy plan submitted on the Alan Carlson property. The private street (Outlet A) should be terminated in a cul-d-sac. This would be temporary and used until the property to the east is developed. The flooding and drainage casements should be shown on Outlot D. The construction of a flood control structure on Outlot C will be required. The drainage swale along the west line of lots 1 and 2 will be necessary. An easement over the 15" culvert on Lot 1 Block 2 and Lot 5 Block 3 will be required. The plan should indicate which typical section is to be used whjsrc on the street. The proposed monument location should be shown on the plan. The street plans and profile sheet should be completed. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:dh £4.4 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 4 t ••• • •CP CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 38 9 6 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF CRYSTAL CREEK FILE NO. 1457 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, tlie City Council has considered the final plat application of a tvir’elve lot residential Class III subdivision and plat by Kingsbridge Properties, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, (hereinafter "the subdivider"); and WHEREAS, per Resolution No. 2948 of the City of Orono, .the City Council approved the preliminary plat application for the twelve lot residential subdivision on April 8, 1991; and WHEREAS, the City Council has granted five extensions of the deadline for the preliminary subdivision application until the issue of a southern bypass for Highway 12 that would intersect the property was resolved; and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-IB, Rural Residential Zoning District finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that would allow its use as a single family residence to be fully developed \wthout the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, on November 26, 1996, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board of Managers approved Pemut #96-254 that granted conditional approval of the grading and drainage plans for the Crystal Creek subdivision; and WHEREAS, on March 18, 1997, Stephen Weekman, Orono ’s On-Site Septic Systems Manager, reported that all tested septic sites proposed in 1990/1991 preliminary review meet City and State standards; and Page 1 of 6 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -3^^ 9. 11. The subdivider has created a protective covenant for Lot 1, Block 2 that contains a wetland not included wthin the conservation maps of the City of Orono. The covenant shall include a site plan of Lot 1, Block 2 locating the area of the wetland. The subdivider has dedicated to the City a temporary road and utility easement over the cul-de-sac to be installed at the end of the private road. The easement shall be taken over portions of the 100 ’ diameter cul-de-sac not included within tlie 50' road outlot. The subdivider has created drainfield covenants to be filed against the Chain of Title of each of the twelve lots within the plat in order to ensure future owners are aware of the special limitations on the septic capabilities of each of the rural lots and the need to protect existing septic test sites both during construction and after construction. The covenant will include a site plan locating the septic sites and provide guidelines for the protection of those sites. 12. The developer has created casements in favor of the Homeowners Association over Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2 for the purpose of upkeep and maintenance of the entrance monuments to be installed at the intersection of Crystal Creek Road and Watertown Road. 13. The subdivider has executed a Developer's Agreement pro\iding for the installation of comprehensive improvements required as a condition of approval of the Crystal Creek subdivision. The subdivider has posted a Letter of Credit in the amount of $254,820.00 to ensure that these required improvements are completed to the City's satisfaction. Some of these comprehensive improvements include the following: A. All grading and drainage improvements as shown on Grading Plan pages C- 1 and C-2 by Sundee Engineering, Inc., most revised date January 8, 1997. B. Private road improvement as shown on C-3, Crystal Creek Road Plan/Profile by Sundee Engineering, Inc., dated March 5, 1997. C. Erosion control as shown on C-1 and C-2 of the grading plans by Sundee Engineering, Inc., most revised date January 8, 1997. Page 3 of 6 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3896 : D. The subdivider to provide plan/detail on drainageway to be installed along shared lot lines of Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 noting care must be taken when constructing this drainageway to prevent drainage tiom meandering or filling wth sediment and flooding adjacent septic sites. The City Engineer and On-Site System Manager shall approve Aese plans. 4. The subdivider shall be responsible for completing all conditions of the MCWD Permit #96-254 as follows: A. Execution of stormwater facilities maintenance agrecnient, a copy of which must be submitted to the City of Orono before land alteration commences. B. Stormwater ponds built and functional prior to all other site work. C. Activities iiicluding, but not limited to, mov/ing, yard waste disposal and fertilizer application shall not occur within the wetland buffer zone. D. Wetland buffer restrictions shall be noted on all property deeds. 5. Erosion control shall be installed as shown on final grading and drainage plans by Sundee Engineering, Inc. (see Finding 13, C above) and maintained until natural ground cover is restored. No building permits wll be issued until all drainage facilities have been installed and approved and a satisfactory road base installed. 6. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hemepm County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before Novernber 12, 1997 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of the easements and covenants noted above. Page 5 of 6 /m6735399 COMMON INTEREST COMMUNITY NO. S27 (A IMnnncd Community) CRYSTAL creek' (DECLARATION) THIS DECLARATION OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS. RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS (’‘Dcchiraiion”), is made and executed this 15"’ day of April, 1997, by Kinysbridue Propenies, Inc., a Minnesota corporation ("Declaranr) pursuant to the Minnesota Common Inieresi Ownership Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 5I5B for the purposes of creatiny th.e planned community of Crystal Creek.. WITNESSETH: WHERE.AS, Declarant is the owner of the real property (“Property”) described in Section 1.1.21 of this Declaration; and 0 •• WHERE.AS. Declarant desires to provide for the preservation and enhancement of the natural and built values and amenities and opportunities within the Property, in order to contribute to the personal and yencral health, safety and welfare of the property owners and residents therein and in the conununity and to provide for the maintenance of the private open spaces, and to this end, desires to subject the real propeny de.scribed in Section 1.1.21 hereof to the covenants, conditions, standards, re.Virictions, reserv'ations, easements, charges, assessments and liens set forth in this Declaration, each and all of which is and arc for the benefit of the propeny and each owner thereof; and WHERE.AS, Declarant has deemed it desirable for the efficient presert'ation of the values and amenities in the community to create tut agency to which should be delegated and assigned the power of maintaining open spaces, administering and enforcing the covenants and restrictions contained in the Declaration and collecting and disbursing the assessments and charges created by this Declaration;. and WHEREAS, Declarant has incorporated, under the laws of the State of Minnesota, Minnesota Statues Chapter 317A, as a nonprofit corporation, Crystal Creek Homeowners Association, Inc. for the purpose of exercising these functions; NOW, THEREFORE, Declarant declares that the real propeny described in Section 1.1.21 hereof is, and shall be, held, transferred, sold, conveyed and occupied subject to the foliowing covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, charges and liens (sometimes referred to as “covenants and restrictions”), which covenants and restrictions shall run with the real propeny and be binding on all panics having any right, title or interest in the hereinafter described propenies or any p^rt thereof, their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of each owner thereof: ARTICLE I DEFfNITIONS Section 1.1 Dehnitions. The following words, when used in this Declaration (unless the context shall prohibit) shall have the following meanings: DU.SSED 5091116. S </ 1.1.1 “Articles of Incorporation" shall mean and refer u') the .Glides of lnco.''poraiion c: the Association as they may exist from time to time. • 1.1.2 “.Assessment” shall mean and refer to those charge? made i-y the association from time to time, auainst each Lot within the Property for the purposes, and subiect to the terms, set fonh herein. L1.3 As.sociation shall mean and reier to Cr\'stal Creel: Homco’.vners .Association, Inc. a Minnesota non-profit corporation, and its successors and assigns. 1.1.4 "Board or "Board of Directors" shall mean and refer to the board of directors of the Association, which is the eoverninij body of the Association. 1.1.5 By-Law's shall mean and refer to the by-laws of the Association as they may e.xist from time to lime. 1.1.6 Cit)' shall mean the City of Orono, Minnesota, a municipal co:poraiion under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 1.1.7 “Common Expenses ” shall mean and refer to all expenses lawfttliy made or incurred by or on behalf of the Association in connection with the performance of any obiigation or fiinciion of the Association hereunder or under the Anicles of Incorporation or the Bylaw's. # 1.1.S County ’ shall mean and refe." to Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.1.9 “Crx ’stal Creek.” The propeny subject to this Declaration. 1.1.10 "Declarant" shall mean and refer to Kingsbridge Properties, Inc., and its successors and assigns, if such successor or assign shall acquire more than one undeveloped Lot from the Declarant for the purpose of development of Cr\'stal Creek as a whole, as opposed to constniction for sale of Dwellings on panicular Lots. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no individual or entity acquiring a Lot from the Declarant shall become the Declarant solely by such acquisition, but only by a specific assignment and assumption of the rights and obligations of the Declarant hereunder, which assignment and assumption shall not be effective unless the instrument of conveyance expressly sets fonh the same. In the event of such an assignment, the assigning Declarant shall have no funher obligatijsis to any Owner or the Association arising out of this Declaration. • 1.1.11 "Declaration ” shall mean and refer to this instrument, and all exhibits hereto, as the same may be amended from lime to time, and filed for record in the office of the County Rccorde.'’ and/or Registrar of Titles (whichever is appropriate). 1.1.12 "Dwelling" shall mean and refer to any dwelling on a Lot intended for use as a single-family dwelling. DUSSED S091M.9 1113 “Entrance Monument” shall mean one or more entrance monuments for Crvs’.al Creek to be constructed by the Declarant on the real propeny ieually described on Exhibit R attached hereto, and to be maintained by the Association in accordance with the provisions of this Declaration. 1.1.14 "Lot" shall mean and refer to any lot located within tiie Propeny which is platted as a residential lot and which is intended for use as, or used as, a site for a sniulc Dwelling, but shall not include any Outlet located within the plat of Cry stal Creek. 1.1.15 “Member.” Each Owner entitled to membership in the .Association pursuant to the provisions of ^^icle U. 1.1.16 “Mortgage ” shall mean and refer to a deed of trust, mortgage, contract for deed, or other security instrument granting, creating or conveying a lien upon, a security interest in, or a security title to any portion of the Pro' irty, or any interest therein. • 1.1.17 “Mortgagee ” shall mean and refer to any entity or person named as mortgagee in any mortgage deed granting a lien ("Mortgage ”) on any Lot. 1.1.18 “NURP Ponds/Drainage Ways” shall mean the areas reflected as Drainage Easements on the Plat of Cr^'stal Creek. 1 1.19 "Owner.” The record Owner or contract vendee of the fee simple title to any Lot. but excluding contract vendors, mortgagees or any others having such interest merely as security for the performance of an obligation. 1.1.20 “Private Roadway” shall mean the roadway constructed over Outlot A, Crx'Stal Creek, according to the plat tltereof on file or of record in the Office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.1.21 "Property” shall mean and refer to that real property legally described in Exhibit .A- attached hereto and made a part hereof 1.1.22 “Temporary Cul-de-sac ” shall mean a temporary cul-de-sac to be constructed over the area legally described on Exhibit D attached hereto. ARTICLE n MEMBERSHIP AND VOTING RIGHTS IN THE ASSOCIATION Section 2.1 Membership. Each Owner of a Lot is a Member of the Association. Membership shall be appurtenant to and may not be separated from ownership. Section 2.2 Vntinu Rights . The Association shall have only one (1) class of votin Membership; a DUSSED5091M.9 liiill II 'Tl—T“'“* Members shall be all Owners o:‘ one or more Lois. When more than one person or eniiiy shares ownership of a Lot, ir.e voie shall be exercised as ihey determine amone iliemselves. Section 2.3 Suspension of\*otim! Rights of Members. The riulu of any Member to vote •sliall be suspended during any period in which any such Member shall be delinquent in the payment of any assessment levied by the Association. Such rights may also be suspended, after notice and hearing, for a period not to exceed sixty (60) days for any infraction of any niles or regulations published by the Association. ARTICLi: 111 PRIVATE roadway AND TEMPORARY CUL-DE-SAC Section 3.1 Rdadwav and Utility Easements . Declarant hereby declares and creates a per))ciual, non-exclusive privnie easement over the Private Roadway for vehicular travel and for the installation and maintenance of utilit-ies, and declares and creates a temporary*, non-exclusive private easement for veliicular travel over the Temporar>« Cul-de-sac, wltich easements shall be for the benefit of the Lots and for use by the Owners and their invitees and other public seance providers, such as police, fire, bus and ambulance services, which road easement shall be extended to the owner(s) of Outlot B, if and when, Outlot B is replatted into residential lots. The temporarx' easement over the Te:nporar>' Cul-de-sac shall exist only for so long as the Temporary' Cul-de-sac is in use, and said temporary' easement shall terminate without action by any party hereto if, and when, the Private Roadway is extended through into the land adjoining the Property. Section 3.2 Ownership of the Private Roadwav . The fee title to the Private Roadway (Outlot .A) shall be owned and held by tlie Association, subject to the easements described in Section 3.1 above. In the event City shall determine it to be in the public interest to utilize the Private Roadway as a public street, the Association shall, after notice in accordance with applicable provisions of the City’s Code and Mimiesoia law, convey its intere.*.: in the Private Roadway (Outlot A) to the Citj' for no additional consideration therefor. Section j.j OxxTiership of the Temporary Cul-de-sac . The fee title to the land underlying the Temporary' Cul-de-sac shall be owed by the Owners of the Lots under which the Temporary' Cul- de-sac is located. Section 3.4 Maintenance and Removal of Private Roadwav and Temporary' Cul-de-sac . j.4.1 Declarant shall be responsible, at its expense, for initial construction of the Private Roadway' and the Temporary Cul-de-sac, which shall in all respects conform to the requirements of the City'. The Association shall pay for any and all costs incurred in connection with the maintenance, repair and replacement of the Private PvOadway and the Temporary'Cul-de-sac, and shall assess all such costs among the Owners of the Lots equally as a Common Expense Assessment. Maintenance shall include construction, reconstruction, resurfacing, snow removal, sanding and salting, as necessary', lighting, striping, and curbing as the Association shall determine necessary; provided, however, that all maintenance shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable provisions of the City of Orono Municipal OUSSED 5091(16.9 •f.« • •1 I Cone (the* Code”). Upon ilte termination of the temporarv* easement over the Temporary' Cul-de-sac. tne Association shall be responsible for the removal of the Temporniy Cul-de-sac and the restoration of the property lying thereunder, and the payment of all costs associated with such removal and restoration, which such costs shall be assessed to the Owners. 3 4.!: The plans, specifications and the awarding of connects for maintenance of the Private Roadway and the Temporars’ Cul-de-sac shall be approved in writing by the Owners of fifty percent (50%) of the Lots. 3.4.3 No Owner may exempt himself/herself from the liability for assessments by waiver of the use or enjoyment of the Private Roadway or by the abandonment of his/lier Lot. Section 3.5 Prohibitions of Use of Private Roadway. 3.5.1 No Owner shall obstruct or interfere whatever with the rights and privileges of other. Owners in the Private Roadway or the Temporar\’ Cul-de-sac and except for maintenance of the Private Roadw-ay or the Temporary Cul-de-sac, nothing shall be planted, altered, constructed upon or removed from the Private Roadw-ay or the Temporary Cul-de- sac. j.5.2 No Owner shall obstruct or interfere with the passage of any school bus or emeigency vehicle over or across the Private Roadway or the T* :nporar>- Cul-de-sac. 3.5.3 No vehicles shall be parked in the Private Roadw-ay or the Temporar)- Cul-de- sac for a continuous period of time greater than twenty-four hours. 5 N 4 No vehicular repair or maintenance may be conducted in the Private Roadway or the Temporary' Cul-de-sac. Section 3.6 Violation and Enforcement. 3.6.1 In the event the Ow-ners fail to conduct any required maintenance to the Private Roadway or the Temporary Cul-de-sac, it is agreed by all Owners that the City, may undertake such maintenance and assess each Lot an equal, proportionate share of the maintenance conducted by the City. Any .such maintenance conducted by the City will not result in the Private Roadw-ay or the Temporary Cul-de-sac becoming a public roadw-ay. Each Ow-ner will pay to the City its equal, proportionate cost incurred by the City within thirty (30) days after Owner’s receipt of such charges, or else such charge, including attorneys fees and costs in collection thereof, shall become a lien upon the Lot for which payment has not been made. 3.6.2 If an Owner shall violate any of the obligi-.tions, covenants, conditions or restrictions contained in this Declaration, the remaining Ow-ners shall have the riuht to enforce this Declaration, and in the event an Ow-ner’s violation results in dam.Tiie to the Priv.ste Roadw-ay or the Temporary' Cul-de-sac, Ow-ners may restore the Private Roadway or the Temporary- Cul-de-sac to its prior condition and assess the cost of such restoration acainst BUSSED 3091 S6.9 the \iolatinc Owner. .Any such assessment shall become due and payable upon the demand of any of said remaining Owners. .All of the remaininu Owners, or any of t’nem. shall have the richi and power to enforce this Declaration and to collect the cost of any maintenance required as a result of an Owners violation, in a leual proceedinu for that purpose. The prevailing pany in any such legal proceedings shall funhei be entitled to recover such rcasoiiiible attorney’s fees as the court may allow, together with all iicces.sarN- costs and disbursements incurred in connection therewith. Nothing contained in this Section is intended to alleviate any obligation of an Owner to pay assessments to the City, lit the event any assessments are le\»ied by the City as a result of violations of an individuai Owttcr or Owners, then such non-violating Owners may collect such sums paid to the City from any violating Owner, in accordance with this Section. ARTICLE IV PRIVATE DRIVEWAY EASEMENT Section 4.1 Prix'ate Driveway Easement. Declarant hereby declares and creates a'fifteen foot (15 ‘) temporary', exclusive and appurtenant driveway easement for vehicular travel, over, under and across that part of Lot 6, Block 1, CRYSTAL CREEK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying northerly of and adjoining a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Lot 6; thence westerly, along the southerly line of said Lot 6, a distance of 110.46 feet and said line there terminating. This driveway easement shall be appurtenant to and for the benefit of the Owner of Lot 7, Block 1, Cry'stal Creek, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin Count)’, Minnesota, and for the invitees of said Owner, and other public serv'ice providers, such as police, fire, and ambulance services. This temporar)* driveway easement shall terminate without action by any party, if, and when, the Private Roadway over Outlot .A is extended into the . land adjoining the Property such that the Owner of said Lot 7, Block 1, Crystal Creek is provided with legal and physical access to and from said Private Roadway. Section 4.2 Maintenance and Removal of Private Driveway. The .Association shall pay for any and all costs incurred in connection with the maintenance, repair and replacement of the Private Driveway, and shall assess all such costs among the Owners of the Lots equally as a Common Expense Assessment. Maintenance shall include construction, reconstruction, resurfacing, snow removal, sanding and salting. Unon the termination of the temporar)' driveway easement, the Association shall be responsible for Lie removal of the temporar)' driveway and the restoration of the property lying thereunder, and the pa)TTient of all costs associated with such removal and restoration, which such costs shall be assessed to the Owners. Section 4.3 Prohibitions of Use of Private Driveway. The Owner of said Lot 6, Block 1, Cry'Stal Creek, shall not obstruct or interfere with the rights and privileges of the Owner of said Lot 7, Block 1, Crystal Creek in its use and enjoyment of the Private Driveway. The Owner of said Lot 7, Block 1, Cry'Stal Creek shall not permit any person to park on the Private Driveway. BUSSED S091M.9 i ihe xiolntinu Owner. Ar.y such assessment shall become due and payable upon the demand 01 any of said remaininu Owners. All of the remaining Owners, or any of them, shall have the riel:; and power to enforce this Declaration and to collect the cost o!' any maintenance required as a result of an Owners violation, in a legal proceedittg for titai purpose The prevailing party itt any such legal proceedings shall ftinher be entitled to recover such rcasoitable attorney’s fees as the conn may allow, together with all necessar>- costs and disbursements incurred in connection therewith. Nothing contained in this .Section is intended to alleviate any obligation of an Owner to pay assessments to the City In the event any assessments are levied by the City as a result of violations of an individual Owner or Owners, then such non-violating Owners may collect such sums paid lO the City from any violating Owner, in accordance with this Section. ARTICLE IV PRIVATE DRIVEWAY EASEMENT Section 4.1 Private Driveway Easement. Declarant hereby declares and creates a'ftfteen foot (IS*) temporary, exclusive and appunenant driveway easement for velticular travel, over, under and across that pan of Lot 6, Block 1, CRYSTAL CREEK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying northerly of and adjoining a line described as beginning at the southeast corner of said Lot 6; thence westerly, along the southerly line of said Lot 6,~a distance of 110.46 feet and said line there terminating. This driveway easement shall be appurtenant to and for tlxe benefit of the Owner of Lot 7, Block 1, Crystal Creek, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and for the inx itees of said Owner, and other public service providers, such as police, fire, and ambulance services. This temporary' drivew'ay easement shall terminate without action by any party, if, and when, the Private Roadway over Outlot .A is e.xtended into the land adjoining the Property such that the Owner of said Lot 7, Block 1, Ciysia! Creek is provided w'ith legal and physi..al access to and from said Private Roadway. Section 4.2 Maintenance and Removal of Private Driveway. The Association shall pay for any and all costs incurred in connection w'ith the maintenance, repair and replacement of the Private Driveway, and shall assess all such costs among the Owmers of the Lots equally as a Common Expense Assessment. Maintenance shall include construction, reconstniction, resurfacing, snow removal, sanding and salting. Upon the termination of the temporary driveway easement, the Association shall be responsible for the removal of the temporary driveway and the restoration of the property Ivdng thereunder, and the pajanent of all costs associated w'ith’such removal and restoration, which such costs shall be assessed to the Owners. Section 4.3 Prohibitions of Use of Private Driveway. The Owner of said Lot 6, Block I, Crj’stal Creek, shall not obstruct or interfere with the rights and privileges of the Owner of said Lot 7, Block 1, Cr>'staJ Creek in its use and enjoyment of the Private Driveway. The Owner of said Lot 7, Block 1, Crj'stal Creek shall not permit any person to park on the Private Drivewav. ’ DUSSED J09I8«.9 article V NURP PONDS/DRAINAGE WAYS Section S. I F.Mements. The Declarent hereby grants and conveys to the Association^ an casement over, under and across the real property depicted on Exhibit jC attached hereto, and such additional real property of the Owners as is reasonably necessary to gain access to and from the KURP Ponds/Drainage Ways, for the purpose of maintaining, repairing and restoring the NUKP • Ponds/Drainage Ways in accordance with all applicable rules, regulations and sututes. Section S.2 Violation and Enforcement 5.2.1 In the event the Association fails to conduct any required imunlcnancc to the NURP Ponds/Drainage Ways or the Temporary Cut-de-sac, it is agreed by the Association and the affected Owners that the City, may undertake such maintenance and assess each Lot an equal, proportionate share of the maintenance conducted by the (Uly. Any such maintenance conducted by the City will not result in the NURP Ponds/Draiaage Ways becoming a public area. Each Owner will pay to the City its equal, proportionate cost incurred by the Gly within thirty (30) days after Owner’s rccdpl of such charges, or else such charge, including attorneys’ fees and costs in collection thereof, shall become a lien upon the Lot for which payment has not been made. ARTICLE VI ENTRANCE MONUMENTS Section 6.1 fiaicinCDlS. The Declarant hcrcliy grants and conveys an casement to the Assodition over, under and across the real property described on Exhibit B attoched hereto for the purpose of maintaining, repairing and restoring the Entrance Monumctits and the landscaping surrounding the Entrance Monuments. ARTICLE VII DUTIES OF ASSOCIATION Section 7.1 Mliintcniincc. by Awotiilipg. The Association shall provide the following maintenance: 7.1.1 Maintenance of any Entrance Monuments specific to Crysi ;d Creek, and the landscaping and grounds around the Entrance Monuments; 7.1.2 Maintenance, repair and replacement of the NUHJ» Ponds in accordance with all applicable lules, regulations and statutes. 7.1.3 Maintenance, repair and replacement, as necessary, of the Private Roadway and the 1 emporary Cul-de-sac, the costs for which shall be assessed among the Lots equally ^ Common P.xpcnsc Assessment. 7.1.4 Mainienance, for purposes of this Declaration, sltall include, but not be limited to, as necessary ’, any hazard and liability insurance deemed necessar\‘ by titc Association. Section 7.2 r-nforcenteni of Covenams and Restrictions The .Association shall be responsible for the enforcement of the covenants and restrictions contained in this Declaration. ARTICLE Vm ASSESSMENTS Section 8.1 Creation of Assessments. The Declarant, for each L(n owned by it, hereby covenants, and each OwTter of any Lot. by acceptance of a deed for a Lot, whctiier or not it shall be so expressed in the deed or any-conveyance, is deemed to agree to pay to the Association: (a) Annual Assessments, and (b) any Individual Lot Maintenance Assessments levied against the Owner’s Lot pursuant to the provisions of this Declaration. Section S.2 Purpose of Annual .Assessments. The Annual .Assessments shall be levied for the purpose of paying the costs associated with the duties of the Association as set forth in this Declaration, together with the incidental costs of operating the Association. Section 8.3 T.ew of Annual Assessments. The Annual Assessment must be fixed at a uniform rate for all lots. Section 8.4 Common Expense Assessments. Common Expense Assessments shall be allocated equally among all Lots. Section 8.5 Individual Lot Maintenance Assessments. In the event that any Owner violates any covenant or fails to penorm any term, covenant or condition contained in this Declaration, the Association may perform the act, remove the defect or correct the violation upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Owner and may levj' an assessment to pay the cost thereof (hereinafter, . “Individual Lot Maintehance Assessment") against such Owner’s Lot. Section 8.6 Rffect nf Nonpa\>ment of Assessments: Remedies of Association . The Annual Assessments and Individual Lot Maintenance Assessments shall be fixed as provided in this Declaration.' If any such assessment is not paid when due, it shall become delinquent and shall, together with interest at a rate of eight percent (8%) per annum, any cost of collection and any attorney ’s fees, become a continuing lien on the Lot and shall also be the personal obligation of the Owner of the Lot at the time the assessment is made. The lien may be enforced and foreclosed by action •n the same maimer in which mongages may be foreclosed in Minnesota. Each Owner, by acceptance of a deed ior any Lot, shall be deemed to give full and complete power of sale to the .Association and to consent to a foreclosure of the lien by advenisement. The Association may also bring an action at law against the Owner personally obligated to pay the assessment. Section 8.7 .SuhorHination of Lien to Fifst Mongages . The lien of .Assessments provided for herein shall be subordinate to the lien of any first .Mongage, and the sale or transfer of any Lot shall not affect the A.ssessment lien. However, the sale or transfer of any Lot pursuant to the DUSSEDS091M.9 8 r' 7.1.4 Malmenance, for purposes of ihis Declaration, shall include, but not be limited to, as necessary', any hazard and liability insurance deemed necessar\‘ by the .Association. Section 7.2 Hnforcenteni of Cov’enants and Restrictiops The .Association shall be responsible for the enforcement of the covenants and restrictions contained in this Declaration. ARTICLE Vm ASSESSMENTS Section 8.1 Creation of Asses.sments. The Declarant, for each Li*i owned by it. hereby covenants, and each Owmer of any Lot. by acceptance of a deed for a Lot. whether or not it shall be so expressed in the deed or any conveyance, is deemed to agree to pay to the Association: (a) .Annual Assessments, and (b) any Individual Lot Maintenance Assessments levied against the Owner’s Lot pursuant to the provisions of this Declaration. Section S.2 Puniose of Annual Assessments The Annual .Assessments shall be levied for the purpose of paying the costs associated with the duties of the .Association as set fonh in this Declaration, together with the incidental costs of operating the Association. Section 8.3 Lew of Annual ,Asse.<:sments. The Annual Assessment must be fixed at a uniform rate for all lots. Section 8.4 Common Expense .Assessments. Common Expense .Assessments shall be allocated equally among all Lots. Section 8.5 Individual Lot Maintenance Assessments. In the event that any Owner \nolates any covenant or fails to perform any term, covenant or condition contained in this Declaration, the Association may pe.-form the act, remove the defect or correct the violation upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Owner and may le\7 an assessment to pay the cost thereof (hereinafter, “Individual Lot Maintenance Assessment”) against such Owner’s Lot. Section 8.6 Effect of Nonpa\Tnent of .Assessments* Remedies of .Associ.atinn . The Annual Assessments and Individual Lot Maintenance Assessments shall be fixed as provided in this Declaration. If any such assessment is not paid when due, it shall become delinquent and shall, together with interest at a rate of eight percent (8%) per annum, any cost of collection and any attorney’s fees, become a continuing lien on the Lot and shall also be the personal obligation of the Owner of the Lot at the time the assessment is made. The lien may be enforced and foreclosed by- action in the same manner in which mortgages may be foreclosed in Minnesota. Each Owner, by acceptance of a deed for any Lot, shall be deemed to give full and complete power of sale to the*. Association and to consent to a foreclosure of the lien by advertisement. The .Association may also bring an action at law against the Owner personally obligated to pay the assessment. Section 8.7 Subordination of Lien to First Mortgages The lien of .Assessments provided for herein shall be subordinate to the lien of any first Mongage, and the sale or trr.nsfer of any Lot shall not affect the Assessment lien. However, the sale or transfer of any Lot pursuant to the BUSSED 5091K6.9 / foreclosure of a Firsi Moneaye, or pursuant to any other proceedinu or arranticnieni in lieu of such foreclosure, shall extinguish the lien of such Assessments ai to installments which became due prior to the en'ective date of such sale, transfer or acquisition by the Mortgagee to the end that no Assessment liability shall accrue to an acquiring Mortgagee except with respect to installments of Assessments becoming due after possession itas passed to such acquirine Mortgagee, whether such possession has passed at the termination of any period of redemption or otherwise. In the event of the e.xtinguishment of such Assessment lien as aforesaid, the entire amount of such unpaid Assessment shall be reallocated and assessed against, and payable by the Owners of all other Lots exclusive of such mortgaged Lot. No such sale, transfer or acquisition of possession shall relieve an Owner or a Lot from liability for any Assessments thereafter becoming due or from the lien thereof, or shall relieve the person personally obligated to pay the Assessments whicii were levied prior to the transfer of such propeny from the personal obligation to pay the same. Notwithstanding any provision herein, no land or improvements devoted to Dwelling use shall be exempt from said assessments, charges or liens. ARTICLE LX LOT USES AND RESTRICTIONS Section 9.1 Use. No Lot shall be used except for residential purposes; no Dwelling shall be erected, altered, placed or permitted to remain on any Lot other than one single family Dwelling, not to exceed two (2) stories in height, plus basement and an attached garage for at least two (2) cars and on-site parking spaces to accommodate at least two (2) cars. No garages shall be erected on any site except attached garages and no attached garage for more that four (4) cars sliall be permitted without the express wrinen approval of the Association. Any and all initial construction, or alteration to the exterior of any structure within Crs'stal Creek shall first be approved by the .Association prior to any construction or alteration. No Dwelling or other structure shall be erected, or the exterior altered until the constaiction plans are submitted and approved in writing by the .Association. Section 9.2 SubdKnsion . No Lot shall be subdi\nded or split by any means whatsoever into any greater number of residential Lots, nor into any residential lots of smaller size without the express writter- consent of the Association and appropriate government units except that if the Owner of a full Lot desi'es to construct a Dwelling using an area larger than thfe area of any one single Lot as originally platted, then the adjoining Lot may be divided and part thereof added to any one of more adjoining single Lots solely for the purpose or result of increasing the area on which a single-family Dwelling will be erected. No Dwelling shall be erected on a Lot which contains a lesser area that any original Lot as platted. The ma.ximum number of "units” that may be created by subdivision is zero (0). Section 9.3 Detached Vehicle Storage Stmenires. No vehicle storage btiilding or structure detached from the Dwelling shall be permitted, except structures that conform arciiiteciurally, using the same building materials and style as the Dwelling and with the approval of the Association. Storage of firewood, refuse, rubbish, and cuttings, will be contained within the garage or screened to prevent view from street or side and rear yard of adjacent properties. SUSSED S09IM.9 V Section 9.4 Govrnmgntai Stantiard.fi. AJI uses of the Lots shall, at a minimum, comply wiih zoning and other applicable ordinances and regulation of appropriate government units. Such re^iiations shall be conside.''ed as requirements in addition to any requirements cf the .Association Section 9.5 ^ Minimum Souarc Fooia ue and <;et Bad: Prnvisir>n«; The .Association shall have the riyhl to specifS- a reasonable ntininuim square footage for any Dwelling and to increase mini- •mum setbacks from those othenvise specified under local ordinance to help siuht lines, street scape and rear lot appearances. " ’ ‘ ^ Section 9.6 Mp Pei? and Animal!^. No birds, animals or insects shall be kept on anv Lot except dogs, cats and other common house pets provided that they are not kept, bred or maintained for commercial purposes. Cats must be restrained within a confined area when outside the home or garage. Dogs must be kept under voice control or kept on a leash or restrained within a confined area when outside the home or garage. The Association shall have authority to determine compliance with these provisions. Section 9.7 liomc Occppaiion . No profession or home industry' shall be conducted in anv DweHing or on any Lot without the specific written approval of the Association. Home occupations rnay be permitted within the home that do no: create a nuisance or excessive vehicular traffic wiihin the neighborhood. , Section 9.S Nuis^nggs . No clothes line or drying yards or pet control lines shall be permitted unless concealed by hedges or screening acceptable by the Association. No unsiuhily grouihs s.:all be permitted to grow or remain upon the premises. No refuse pile or unsightly objects shall be allowed on any Lot. In the event that an Owner of any Lot shall fail or refuse to keep it free from weeds, refuse or other unsightly objects, then the Declarant or the Association may enter upon such Lot and remove the same at the expense of the Owner. No Lot shall be used in whole or in pan for storage of rubbish, nor for the storage of any propeny or thing which will cause such Lot to appear unclean or untidy; nor shall a.ny substance, thing or material be kept on anv Lot which emits any foul or obnoxious odor, or which causes any noise which may disturb the peace, quiet conifon or serenity of the occupants of any adjacent propeny. The outside storage of an unlicenced or inoperable motor vehicle upon a Lot shall be considered a nuisance. No boat, trailer or camper shall be parked for more than 4S hours on any Lot or on Private Roadway or temporary' Cul-de-sac. • „. 9.9 No Leasing or Time share. No Owner shall be* permitted to Lease his or her Dwelling. Time share of “units” are not permitted. . Section 9.10 Fgnws flnd Boynjarv Wjtlh. No wall or fence shall be constructed on any Lot until the height, type, design, and location have been approved in writing by the Association Fencing for dog runs must be incorporated with the Dwelling materials, and may not extend toward the front yard beyond the rear wall of the Dwelling closest to the rear propeny line, and must be built of wood or identical siding materials as the home and be comparable with the original home desian. Decorative fences'walls constracted in firont yard areas must be 60 inches in height or less and be built of wood, uTOught iron or matenals identical to or compi-mentar)- with tite e.xterior of the home itself or else identical to the exterior of the home. Fencing or dog runs must be inco.'porated with the house materials anc must not extend toward the from yard beyond the rear wall of the house closest DUSSED S09I86.9 10 LSS.’.. ^ •• • to the rear propsny line and. subject to approval by the Association, must be consinicied of wood o: other identical or complementary ’ materials, as above-described. Chain link fenc:nu shall permitted only if insitie of and concealed bv wood fcncim:. Under no circumstances shall a boundary wall or fence be permitted with a height of more than si.x (6) feet. The height or elevation of any wall or fence shall be measured from the existing elevations on the propeny at or along the applicable point or lines. .Any question as to such heights may be completely determined by the .Association. The height limitations as set fonh in tliis paragraph shall not be applicable to tennis cotm enclosures, provided such enclosures have been approved by th.e Association. ,A refusal by the .Association to allow or permit a fence or wall (including tennis court enclosures and swimming pool fences) on any particular Lot in any particular location shall not be construed to be an abuse of discretion. Section 9.11 Storage Tanks . No permanent storage tanks of any kind shall be erected, placed or permitted on any Lot unless buried or effectively screened from view outside the Lot. Section 9.12 Temporary* Stmciures. No staicture of temporary character, trailer, basement, lent, shack, garage, bam or other btiilding shall be used on any Lot at any lime as a Dwelling, either temporarily or permanently. Section 9.13 .Atixiliarx ’ Siructtires. No detached dog kennels, runs or enclosures shall be permitted unless design and location of same shall be approved by the .Association. No detached storage buildings shall be permitted except those approved by the .Association as conforming in design and appearance to the Dwelling, and which are located in the proximity of the Dwelling or garage. Section 9.14 Drivewavs. Driveways must be constructed of concrete, bituminous or other hard surface material. Material and installation shall be subject to approval of the Association. Driveways must be installed xxathin one year of the date of a Certificate of Occupancy issued for any Dwelling constructed upon a Lot. Section 9,15 Exterior Lighting. All exterior lighting fixtures and standards shall be shown on submitted plans and shall comply with the overall lighting plan of the Declarant. .All forms of exte rior lighting shall be subject to approval of the Association. Section 9.16 Exterior Ornaments . Exterior ornaments including but not limited to precast concrete, plastic or wood figurines, wishing wells and windmills shall be prohibited unless approved by the .Association prior to insialiation or construction. Section 9.17 Antennas . Except with the prior written approval of the Association, no satellite dishes in excess of 24 inches in diameter, nor any exterior television or radio antenna of any sort shall be placed, allowed or maintained on any portion of a Lot, or the improvements or structures thereon. .Approval shall be based on acceptable appearance, small size and screening from view.. Section 9. IS Completion of Construction of Improvements. All construction work shall, upon approval of plans by the .Association, be earned on with di£:>atch; all improvements shall be con structed in coniormity with the then existing building codes of the City; .and all building plans shall be prepared by or under the supeA'isinr. of a registered architect, builder or qualified desinn professional. If any structure is begun after approval of the plans, and is not completed within one DUSSED 5C^IK6.9 .1 • nai.. ihe 1 ropeny harmonious with other propenles. including completion of :he exterior of the s.ru.ture. screening or covenng the stnicture or any combination thereof, or similar operations The arncum oi any such expenditure shall be the personal, joint and several obliuati;-:; of the OwnJc^^ ............................................................................................................................................................... Section 9.1 9 Etcair 10 Clirhina - it shall be Ihe responsibilitv or the Owner to renair or irOwntr's Lot.'"“ s'"' i"'provements made Section 9.20 ^wbrk- All Lots shall be sodded and,'or seeded within sis- r61 wmL-s of completion of the Dwcnmi. weather and season perraiiting. or as soon as possible in thrsubsaou'm bv he"'-'-'o°"' t' k rf''"""S "’0"'hs. Sod (or around cover apprVed e«eot areas o^" ' of the front and side yardsescept areas of preserved vegetation and esieiuling forty (40) feei beyond the rear wall o'f ihe or otmfd «"'■ The remainderUthi rear yard mav sodded seed or planted in a manner which will produce sufficient vigorous grass urowth or'uround cover which Led m . “r “PP"™,"" ’"<' S™""’ eharacter or soil protection as the sod placed or natural seed mixtures planted or planned for planting. AH Iss ’'"i ^P^’^P'PS- landscape materials shall be hardy and native to the area thltX ?s wee'fK P™^ to occupancy, or as Lon Aitcnr' f‘ n 1^*^ permits, and shall conform to general planting cuidelines ns set bv the •Association o- Declarant, and be maintained in good faith. ^ Section 9.22 Signage. No sign shall be placed on any Lot or within the Pronertv withnur ■ -^“ociation, except that one “for sale ” sian of tvLcai sire and direetioLrL? 'd' “"“I P"iod of Crystal Creek, the Declarant may place such directronal and advertising signs as it deems necessary or desirable for the sale of Lots'^ Section 9.23 Draipfields and Wetlanrii. Each Lot has two sewace treatment sites Iha, hav. rbLZLei' ‘th? • •• “f •- Lot nd ccuipmen, to enter upon the Lot of any other Owners. iLch Ow-ner musl ^n r.mirLrOr^S^Z bussed 5091M.9 12 ;; i. y Covenam in the form attached hereto as Exhibit E. which such Covenant shall be recorded aiiainst the Owners’ Lots. The Association has executed a storm facility maintenance aureemeni wuli the Minnehaha Creel: Watershed District for the maintenance of the drainage facility, a true and correct copy of winch is attached hereto as Exhibit F. The Association shall maintain and repair titc drainage faciluv witi; all applicable provisions of the City’s Code. General assessments shall be imposed upon each Owner of a Lot for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of the storm water facility maintenance facility agreement and for the general maintenance of the drainage facility in accordance with all applicable provisions of the City’s Code. To promote natural vegetation, maximize wildlife habitat, control erosion, improve water quality for the benefit of the Owners of the Lots, no person shall fill, install any structure, apply any herbicide, drain, burn, remove any trees, or undertake any activity which violates the rules, regulations or ordinances of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the U.S. Corps of Engineers, the City, or such other applicable laws and regulations. In addition, each Owner and future Owner of Lot 1, Block 2, Ci^stal Creek, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, is hereby notified that any and all land ali.-raiions which affect the Type 1 and Type II wetlands delineated on Exhibit G attached hereto, must be approved by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the U.S. Corps of Engineers and the City prior to submitting the plan for alteration to the City. This Covenant of Dedication concerning Type I and T^^pe II wetlands may be changed, modified or revoked only upon written approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, he U.S. Corps of Engineers and the City. ARTICLE X OWNER’S DUTIES WITH RESPECT TO LOT MAINTENANCE Section 10.1 Mailboxes . Each Owner shall maintain a mailbox of the design and type initially installed by the Declarant or as on file with the Association. The mailboxes shall be on the public right-of-way, and may be located in groups of two (2) or more. The Association reserves the right to install or repair an Owner’s mailbox and to le\w an Individual Lot Maintenance Assessment against a Lot, pursuant to the provisions of Anicle VIII hereof, should an Owner fail to properly install of maintain the same. Each Owner shall have a combined Mailbox/Lot Address Post or (when due to postal requirements) a separate Mailbox Post and Lot Address Post. Posts shall be obtained from a supplier designated by the Association or be constructed by a prior approved con.ractor/vendor in strict conformance with the Association ’s plans, details, and specifications therefor. Mailboxes shall be installed in locations specified by the Association. Section 10 2 Maintenance and Repair . In order to preserve the uniform and high-standafd appearance of the Propeny, each Owner undertakes responsibility for maintenance and repair of the exterior of his or her Dwelling, exterior yard area and private driveway on the Lot. Such responsibility for maintaining the Lot and improvements thereon shall include, but not be limited to the following; the maintenance and repair of exterior surfaces of all buildings on the Lot, including but without limitation, the painting of the same as often as necessary, the replacement of trim and DUSSED )09IR6.9 13 ;* • i0 cr.*.:!kinu, iht maimen?.nce or repair of roofs; gutters, down spouts and overhangs, the mainienance and repair of exteric.* windows and doors, necessarv’ painting, staining and repair of patio structures. In ina-.ntaining exterior yard areas and private driveways all Owners sitall be required to mow. trim, water or otherwise care for grass, trees or other plants located on a Lot and .siiall be required to remove snow from the private driveways, parking areas and walk-ways to the Dwelling. Maintenance, pamting and construction shall be in the original colors and materials, or according to approved color boards on file with the Association. Other colors and materials shall require approval by the Association. ARTICLE XI GENERAL PROVISIONS • Section 11.1 .Association Easement. The Association shall have a nonexclu.*!. . e easement to enter upon any Lot in order to perform any obligations or duties of the Association iiereundcr, or to exercise any right or remedy of the Association hereunder. Section 11.2 Enforcement. In the event any Owner fails to coniply with, the provisions of this Declaration, or the Bylaws or .Anicles of Incorporation of the Association or with decisions of the As.sociation or the .Association which are made pursuant thereto, such failure will give rise to a cause of action on the part of the .Association, or any aggrieved Owner for the recover^' of damnues or injunctive relief, or both. Owners shall have a similar right of action against the .Association. Enforcement of these covenants and restrictions may be by any proceeding at law in equity. Section 11.3 Severability. Invalidation of any one of these covenants or restrictions by judg ment or court order shall in no way affect any other provision which shall remain in full force and effect. Section 11.4 Rules and Reciilations. The Board of Directors of the Association may, from time to time, adopt such rules and regulations as the Board, in its sole discretion, deems appropriate or necessarj', including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, additional rules and regula tions concerning tlie use of parking areas, maintenance of the Common .Areas and additional rules and regulations concerning the appearance of each Lot and utilization of ponding areas. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Association may adopt rules and regulations governing the use of chemical fenilizers. Section 11.5 Riuhts of Declarant. Until the last Lot is sold and conveyed to an Owner other than a Declarant, the following activities by Declarant or with the written consent of Declarant will not be deemed violations of the covenants and restrictions of this Declaration: (a) The use of a Lot or Lots for model and sales office purposes; (b) The storage of a construction trailer, equipment, materials and earth during the initial construction of Dw'dlinus on Lots; DUSSED SC9IK6.9 14 (c) The display on Lois of sicns advenisinu the Piopeny, or new Dwcllinus, and ihe maimenance of lempcran’ fencing, walkways, landscaping and berming in ihe vicinity of model and sales uniis; (d) Complete improvement.*; indicated on the Plat, if any, under Section 10 of the Minnesota Common Interest Ownership Act. Section 11.6 Duration of Covenants and Easements. The covenants, restrictions, and ea.scmenis of this Declaration shall nm with and bind the land and shall inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the .Association or the Owner of any Lot subject to this Declaration, or their res))ective legal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns. The easements set forth herein sltall be perpetual. The covenants, restrictions, conditions and reservations imposed and created by this Declaration shall be perpetual, and considered e.xcmpt from the thiny (30) year durational limit set forth in Section 500.20, subd. 2a of Minnesota Statutes, pursuant to Minn. Stats. Section 500.20 subu.2a(5). The covenants and restrictions of this Declaration may be amended during the first twenty (20) year period by an instrument signed by not less than seveniy-fr\'e percent (75%) of the Owners and thereafter by an instrument signed by not less than sixty-seven percent (67%) of the Owners. Any amendment must be properly recorded. Section 11.7 Master .Association. Cr^’stal Creek is not subject to a “master association" as that term is defined in Minn. Slat. §5153.1-103(21). Section 11.8 Boundaries and “Unit” Identifier. The boundaries of each “unit", as that term is defined m Minn. Stat. §5158.1-103(33), are identical to the boundaries of the Lot. The “unit" identifier is the legal description of each Lot. Section 11.9 Numher of Residential “Units". The total number ofunits" to be created in Blocks 1 and 2 of Crj'stal Creek is twelve (12) Lots all of which will be restricted to residential use. Prior to the platting of Ouilot B, Cr)’stal Creek, the ma.\imum number of “units” permitted within the Crj'stal Creek subdivision is, twelve (12). Section 11.10 .Amendments. The provisions of Article III may not be amended or revised without the consent of the owner of the Outlot B, Crystal Creek. DU.SSEO 50918S.9 4 .n ♦ n-larJinn! nrNHSS NVIIERCOF. ihe undersigned, being the Declarant herein, has executed this D^(.la.a.ion o. Protective Covenants this /jT^ day of.April, 1997. KI.NGSBRIDGE PROPERTIES, MintjosDia corporation INC Title STATE OF MINNESOTA •• COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) )ss. ) Ktngsbndge Propenies, Inc. a Minnesota corporation on bThalfofihec^i °•ration. Notary Public This instrument was drafted by: Doherty, Rumble & Butler, P.A. 3500 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 VALERtEHATA * NQiMrrMsuo-iiiciEaon r?iOP TA'J'r.c =» ■•• Tw:.-.»c?f£A !*«»■; =!^-- K£.V IS tSST // • / • ' ' / i TAV^C ^ /m § BUSSED S091S6.9 w #• • • EXMTBITA (PROPERTY SUBJECT TO DECLARATION Lots 1. 2, 3, 4, 5. 6 and 7, Block 1; • • Is ■ •> EXHIBIT B (EKTR.\NCE MONTJMEKT EASEMENT AREA] .Thai pan of Lot 1 Block 1. CRYSTAL CREEK, according to the recorded plat thereof Sri disZ'-O ^ lying sou,heaM=rlv ofa lin. drawn from a poim on .he so.'„h line of sai„ Loi I disiam aO.OO fee. westerly of the somheas. corner of said Lot I to a ..oini on ihe east imt of said Loi I disiam 30.00 lee. noriherly of said soiiiheasi corner of Lot I.' That pan of Lot I Block 2. CRYSTAL CREEK, according to .he recorded plat thereof Henneptn County, Mnineso..a; lying southwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the south line ot satd Lo. I dtstarn 30.00 fee. easterly of .he sou.hwes. corner of said Lot ^0“ SI west hne of satd Lo. I dtstarn 30.00 fee. northerly of said sou.hwes. corner of Lot 1. r-f t /r'- t* ^ EXHIBIT C [KUdP BON'D EASENIENT AREAS] •i Ail ^1 EXHIBIT D (TEMPOR.-\RY CUL-DE-SAC EASE.N-IEKT AREA) That pan of Lot 6, Block 1, CRYSTAL CREEK, according to the recorded plat thereof. Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying within the circumference of a circle having a nidius of 50.00 feet. The center of said circle is the point of intersection of a line parallel with and 25.00 feet southerly of the southerly line of said Lot 6, as measured at a right angle to said southerlv line of Lot 6, and a line parallel wnth and 50.00 feet westerly of the easterly line of Lot 5. Block 2. said CR^ STAL CREEK, and its nonherly e.stension, ns measured at a right angle to said easterly line of Lot 5 and its extension. That part of Lot 5, Block 2, CRYSTAL CREEK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying within the circumference of a circle having a radius of 50.00 feel. The center of said circle is the point of intersection of a line parallel with and 25.00 feet nonherly of the northerly line of said Lot 5, as measured at a right ancle to said northerly line of Lot 5, and a line parallel with and 50.00 feet westerly of the easterly line of said Lot 5 and its northerly extension, as measured at a right angle to said easterly line of Lot 5 and its extension. J EXHIBIT E [DR.AJNFIELD COV'EN.ANT] THIS INDENTURE, is made as of the dav of ("Owners”). .. by recital S; WTIEREAS. the Owners are the tee owners of the land legally described as (the “Lot"): Lot . Block CRYSTAL CREEK, according to the recorded plat thereof. Hennepin County. Minnesota. 0™"°. Minnesota C CityV) has required the Owners to siun this enture acknowlcdginit and creating certain covenants against the Loti Ti n- ‘i’* i-°' I’as I'vo sewage treatment sites that have been apnroved bv the Citv si'« on the Lot. and must nii •e u fo'’ sood and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which ts hereby acknowledged, the Owners do intend to subject their Lot to the followinrcovenam^^^ 1. The Owners acknowledge and agree tliat the Lot has two sewatte treatment sites that understand that these two “sites are the only two feasible sites on the Lot, and must not be disturbed. ^ • *Sr«e and covenant that the existing natural topsoil on their Lot shall remain m place and wll not be subject to any traffic which will cause even the slightest compaction. • j ^ Owners agree that to protect those important sewase treatment sites from madvenent damage or destniction. they SH.M.L NOT permit any cars, Trucks or earth moving SeTpmenr Coastal Cr«k ^ 4. The Owners SHALL NOT construct any driveway, erect anv builditi" or permit earth moving equipment on the Lot without first; ' uu.iuin,, or permit eartn A.pecting a clearly visible fence during construction twenty feet from the bounciar>' oi us sewage treatment sites along that pan of the site that is beuveen the site and all areas which are assessable to eanh moving equipn.ent; B. Erecting a clearly visible fence during construction along that pan of the Lot line that is between an adjacent ONvner’s sewage treatment site and the areas on the Lot which arc accessible to eanh moving equipntcnt. 5. To assist the Owners in identif^ang the location of draiitfjclds, each drainfield has been • staked at its corners. Funher, the drainfield locations are shown on the Preliminary- Development _. _ r\'*____Piatt on file at the City’s ofl'ices. 6 The covenants and restrictions contained in this Indenture shall run with and bind the Lo- and shall inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the Crystal Creek Homeowner ’s Association or the Owner of any other lot located in the Cry'stal Creek development, or their respective leual representatives, heirs, successors and assigns. The covenants and restrictions imposed and created by this indenture shall be perpetual, and considered exempt from the thiny (30) year durational limit set fonh in Section 500.20. subd. 2a of Minnesota Statutes, pursuant to Minn. Stats. Section 500.20 subd.2a(5). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Indenture as of the day and year first above written. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ by ----------------------------------------- day of Notary Public This instrument was drafted by: Doherty', Rumble & Butler, P.A. 3500 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55A02 M • I • •• • EX n in IT F (STORM WATER FACILITY MAINTENANCE AGREE.NfENT) STORMWATER FACILITY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Tliis maintenance agreement is made this 18ih day of April. 1997. by and between Kingsbridge Properties. Inc., hereinafter referred to as ‘'Applicant/' and the Minndialia Creek Watershed District, hereinafter referred to as “MCWD,” to provide for the malr.icnancc of the stonnwater facilities constructed pursuant to Minnehaha Creek Wc.ershed District permit a|)plication number__________ W1-IERE.AS, Applicant has applied for a pennii from the MCWD pursuant to MCWD Rule B, application anached hereto as'Attachment 1; and *. WHERE.AS, the property which is the subject of this Agreement is legally described in Attachment 2 to this Agreement; and WHEREAS, MCWD Rule B provides, “A maintenance agreement shall be submitted for: storm water treatment ponds, outlet structures for such ponds, culverts, outfall structures and all oilier stormwater facilities. This maintenance agreement shall specify methods, schedule and responsible parlies for maintenance and must include at a minimum, the elements contained in the District’s Maintenance Acreement Form.” NOW, THEREFORE IT IS MUTU.ALLY AGREED by and berv,'cen the parties. 1. .Applicant shall inspect the stormwater retention and treatment basin(s) at a minimum of once a year to determine if the basin’s retention and treatment characteristics are adequate. A storage treatment basin will be considered inadequate if sediment has decreased the 'vet storage volume by 1/2 of its original design volume. Based on this inspection, if the stormwater basin(s) is identified for sediment cleanout. Applicant shall restore the basin(s) to its original design contours within one year of the inspection date. 2. Applicant shall inspect the grit chambers, sump catch basins sump manholes, outlet structures, culvens, outfall structures or other stormwater facilities for the project in tlie spring and fall of each year. Applicant shall remove all sediment and debris during the inspections such that the stormwater facilities operate as designed and permined. 3. Violation of the inspection and/or maintenance provisions of this Agreement is a violation of the MCVT) permit for the project for w'hich the MCWD may lake action against Applicant. 4. This Agreement is binding on the Applicant and the Applicant’s representatives, heirs, successors and/or assigns. In the event of a sale of the twelve (12) developed lots for the purpose of development of the propert)’ subject to this Agreement, this .Agreement may be assigned to the purchaser and Applicant shall have no further obligations arising out of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto execute this Maintenance Aarcement. ;/ (/. ////<;//>Date:Applicant STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. rni INTY Or ) The forecoina instrument was acknowledged before me this /£ day of 199^. by kfi-WAlERllMATA *■; ai(FWEfw«JC*wi*wtx ; Jr. ^_! Notary Public ................................. Date:MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF ) ss. . ) i The foregoing tammen. was aeknowledged before me this >yCr^Watershed District, a watershed district of the State of Minnesota. Notary' Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Charles C. Cudd Corp. 1802 Wooddale Dr. Woodbury', MN 55125 • . *\ EXHIBIT G [DELINEATION OF TYPE 1 AND T\T>E II WETLANDS] * ^ mm* 00% « r/»t • #^» • 0 « w w • ny^r\ \ / W I' L^O I 09 ’7ci I # «/% # ^1 » » r#»i^ OO-ffSff M„90,0S,69S HI & A . 4 4 /~» / W t WJti \^JL. 0_ 17 / LV4 i /_t r/ri •OOTC o!ma..^30O3^ .7,,.,.. NMOiym VM 0NV113A*.OO'SBr —0Nrni3M / r ^ 7*?--------' is3m / : ^-rtr ,/ \f^ o l~0l ^ o 1SV3 .'/J7 *__M.2S.GC,0N oocrc 3ovni;mo<; I - iSV3 ^\l.I-l- or9H ..... A<»^ ^^------------------------ f Too ce 2\v _ I 1SV3 I~0I 00963 3»00.0C.99N CO . S' ■7/ /...••-osgo-n c^/./'.^2.2C.9l-V 99 83C M.90.09. ^-7 < 03 — o\o>0l c.rO•rO -'I Kl • O)•-1 ii •C .'"I Ua,nc: c5 1 rx o «l •COo(T VJ o r* <1 1 01 1 3»ICC M,90.( 4 m • G*• o L7 3> •‘f c* P IL<* 1^ c. r^'» c. o *. f*. f*> li-» b-/ ft I'.' I - ••-•^. V* o O ®IS SJv ul* .2 IX ::i^- sir S3 in • •o •ro> c:l2 ii- ferj C* O *#• ••V. # tsj ?r: N-. r CO; ... . V . <1^-•• V/»'' •n : . ^ / •r ‘ •*•• I . iT. _ p«> •• ^ f • MaV-19-'99 09:32 AM W A Y2 AT A - F I RE . DEPARTMENT 612 404 S336 902.25.1 903.4.1.2 VcrliciU-llMMIKCS or uilllhv .sh;,I| Ih - JtK ic.iscf %vlivil. ill llu- «>|imiun nr llic Uiicf. vnilcil iliMniUT*; m vv,.Iil,v a,c „..i .......... to proviiic fire npp.iMtii.s mvess. 902.2.2.2 Surfncc. I-in- :ip|i:il;lln>: ;kcc *..; I v .k>:uiiv»l niul lll.iml:iiiK'il In MI]i|Kt|| tlio im|Hiscil Iu .k In o| life iipp.M.iiiis ;,in| .shall Ih - pruvi.kil nii.’i a Miilau'm. .t. In pim i,lo all ucalln i ,»ii. - inj: c.ipal»iliiu-s. 90i..2.2..^ lui ninti I.iduis. IIk ' Imiiiu^ lailms «i| a Im-app.iialiiN .scecss mail shall Ik - ns nppnival. ^ 902.2.2.4 Di-ail ciiiN. hi-atl-cml lin- a|>p.ir.iins access mmi Is in ^ excess nf U'^rcol ('15 7211 nnn) in Icnpih shall K- pioviilcil wilh appiovcil pmvisi.ms r..f ihi- imniiip arniiiul of fin- app:iiaUi>. 902.2.2.5 llri(lKi-.s. Wiu-n a l»inl|:c is rci|iiiicil In Ik - iiscti as p.nl nf a lire ap|iaraliis actess mad. il shall Ik - innslmclc.l ami ni.nm.niH-il m accnnl.ino.- v.iiji n.ilinnafU iicneni/cl sl.imi.mK Sec Aificlc W. .Slamlaul a. I. I. | he hiiilgo sh ill U- .U-sium-.l Inr a live load suflicienl locaiiv llir impMscil |o.i,fs «i| fin- Vehicle loatl liiiiil.s shall Uc poMcil a( hnlh enliaiircs ii* hriifucs when reipiircd l»y ihe cliief. W2.2.2.6 Ctradf. Ihe ^lailicni fur a fiie np|nii;iriis mmiI .•J.inll no! c-xcccil llie ina.xiiniiin aii|iiiivc«l. 902.2J Marking. See Set cinii *ini ..|, 902.2.4 Ohslrm tliiii anil niiilrnt of fiu- npinn aius iin, s>. 902.2.4.1 Ccnrral. ‘llu- u-i|inic>l uMihnl .i fiic app.i».ii-.s ;k ..tss m.lil -.li.ill mil he nlssinicKil in .iit> inaiiiu-|. im liiiliiij: paikinn iil vclnclos. Mimiiiiim Ui|iiiK-il wiiflhs ami clc.iiaiurs islahlislic.l miller .Scclini, ‘/IIJ 2.2.1 shall he iiuinMinc.l .il all liiiu s hilliaiircs In mails. Irails nr nlliei accessways wliii h haxe l-ci-ii cln^-il will pies am! haiMcis in accm.l.nice wilh .Si.iimi '^iL.^.4.2 Snail mil he nhsiiucled hy paikcil vehicles. 902.2.4.2 UilMirc «r JKTi-ssMa.vs. 1 he cine I is amh..ii/eil In le- i|iiiic llic insiallalinn ami iiiaiiilen.ma- nf^.iics m olh.-i appimal harricailcs .aeinss mails, Irails nr nlhci auc.sswavs. iinl im Imliiiu public .Mrecis. alleys nr hi):luc.iys. When icpiireJ. t;ales ami h.iiiUaili s shall he scciiieil tii an npprnveil ni.miu-r. K imiIs. trails .iml nihi-i .am-sswavs whii It li.ni- iK-cn^c nsevi ami nhs'.mcled in llic iiiaiinci picsciilu-d lu .Svciin., )l >-li:dl linl he (respassell ii|mii m used nnlcss aiillimi/eil hy Ihe nwMcr ami the chief. F..\( f.l I ION: riil>lic<il|iu-is .K line wiiliiu «...(«.• h ,iui\ Ijk U. gales il.H*rs. h.inic.iiles. chains. eiK lmines. sinus. i .^s nr^-ids w inch liayc Ken IllSl.illnl hy (|u.dcpailnu-i.l n, hi ds nrdcr «r under Us cniiiml .shall imi Ik - ri iunvcd. deslinycJ. I.impcicd wilh ni nllieiui.se imdesled m am in.mmi. F.\C r.PIlON: Wficif hv llie ilml «ir nnt.Mimil !. piitaio MlliccM .Hlinji uitliiii ilivir s, M|v ..f sfiiu ' 902.J Accc.s.s to niiilcliiitt U|ioiihi^s. 902.1.1 Rciiiiiicil accc,x.x. l-.Mctinr dnnis and npeiiiiim ............ hy this code or Ihe lluilding Cmlc si,all he luclinlrdmd aiccssihic for emergency acccs.s hy the liic dcpaiimcnl. ' An .ipprnvco access ivalkiv.iy Ic.idiiig from |„e ann.n ,ias access roads In exlermr o|K-nings ic.|uiieil hy diis code ni ihc DuiUlingClHlC.Sh.lll he provided when tecpiireil hy ihi- eliief. 901.1.1 Ma\n\vnami- of c.xU-iinr ilnor.s nml ..iKiiinns hy,,.. ajpmva l,y lUo clncf. l•.-^lcrinr ilmns which have been remleied m.,.ri.n.l.n„al and which rchiiii a fmiciinnal dnn, cxi'-m.' 1-28 T<4_ V.J / C. • . Oi P ‘13 ) hf-o ; O / / / ^ 1 c c e s S r M. /u. ^ •/ OlA, s'" c ^ sj/ ^ ^ e. if *-*a / c/ c. /*/ Vy.riic<^/ c / q,<A.cc. /Wr'^/M>eCL /vt -f'U, t/* n • hv g MAY-19-'99 09:32 AM W A Y2 ATA . F I RE . HEP ARTMENT 612 404 S336 L 1^0-f c^. '//6 " • 2. / 2.* i U, . {3 <u. ^ • ff. Oat - COIINCIL MEETING Deadline Date: Waived by Applicant MAY 2 4 1999 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cn r ur uhonQ DATE: 5/19/99 ITEM NO.: \\ Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item DescWs^tion: #246^ Ste' en and Jo Webster 500 Oi ono Orchard Road Variances Zoning District:RR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acres) Lot Area: (Existing)38,346 s.f. Application: The applicants are requesting variances for an addition to the e.xisting residence. The lot was developed prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance resulting in a structure that is not able to support an addition without encroaching into the required 50' setbacks. A detached garage located over the north property line will be removed contingent on a building permit being issued. This application requires the following variances: Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B): To permit a side yard adjacent to the street (alley) setback of 5’ where 50' is required; to permit an 17 side yard setback where 50' is required; and to permit a 36.8' front yard setback where 50' is required. The Zoning Code requires a 30' setback for garages with access ser.’ed towards a street. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planni: g Commission recommended by a 4 to 0 vote to: Approve the variances as prei.ented, STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval based on the finding noted in the Staff Report, COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. 1 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PHONE:(612)249-4600 FAX;(612)249-4616 TO:Steven and Jo Webster 500 Orono Orchard Road Wayzata, MN 5539} ZONING FILE #2469 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 18, 1999 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING: 5/17/99 VOTE:4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as revised. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council May 24, 1999, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available fi'om the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS\WPWIN60AVPDOCS\CAROLEU>CACTIO>^2469 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #2469 WHEREAS, Steven Webster and Jo Webster (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 500 Orono Orchard Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lots 1, 2, 3, 22, 23 and 24, Block 13, Minnetonka Bluffs, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held public hearings on April 19, 1999 and May 17, 1999, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdh'isio ’’ (R) tn permit a 5' setback to the platted alley where 50' is required; a 17' side yard adjacent to street (Dickenson Street) setback where 50' is required; and a 36.8' front yard setback, where 50' is required and to permit a garage with a 5' setback to the right-of-way where 30' is normally required to allow a residential and garage addition to the existing residence. Minnesota: NOW, therefore , be it resolved by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2469. Page 1 of 5 2. 3. 5. The property is located in the RR-IB Zoning District, where 2 acres or 87,120 s.f. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of 38,346 s.f The Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 17, 1999 and recommended approval on a vote of 4 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings rsf fact: A. The lot was developed prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. B A detached garage is located over the north property line. This non- conforming structure will be removed before construction begins. C. The addition will only encroach 2.1' closer to the property line. D. The alley is not located entirely within the platted right-of-way creating a greater distance for safe maneuvering of vehicles. E.Only one additional property (540 Orono Orchard Road) requires the alley for access. F.The City maintains the alley as a public right-of-way and has no intention to relocate the alley. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 4 11 i 6.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit a 5' setback to the platted alley where 50' is required; a 17' side yard adjacent to street (Dickenson Street) setback where 50' is required; and a 36.8' front yard setback, where 50' is required and to permit a garage with a 5' setback to the right-of-way where 30' is normally required to allow a residential and garage addition to the existing residence. Approval was subject to the following conditions; 1.The existing detached garage shall be removed prior to completing a final inspection on the residential addition. The property owners shall apply for and receive a demolition permit from the City Building Department prior to removal. 2.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 24, 2000). 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 ' L Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instniment was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) On this day of 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) On this day of ^ 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 TO;Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE;Mav 10. 1999 SUBJECT;#2469 Steven and Jo Webster 500 Orono Orchard Road Variances Zoning District;RR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acres) Lot Area; (Existing)38,346 s.f. Application;Last month the Planning Commission tabled the application for variance for Steven and Jo Webster. The direction by the Planning Commission was to create a greater setback for the proposed garage and residential addition from Dickenson Street and the alley. TTie applicants have redesigned the plan to move the garage off the property (alley) line to 5 ’ and had the garage located 17' from Dickenson Street where 7' was proposed. The existing house is located 19.1' from the side property line. The additions are required to meet a 50' setback from both the Dickenson Street property line and the alley. The lot was developed prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. Most of the existing structure is located within the required yard setbacks._______________________________ This application requires the following variances: 9 Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B): To permit a side yard adjacent to the street (alley) setback of 5' where 50' is required; to permit an 17' side yard setback where 50' is required; and to permit a 36.8' front yard setback where 50' is required. The Zoning Code requires a 30' setback for garages with access served towards a street. Attachments: Revised Site Plan April Planning Report »2469/2m 500/U0 Orono Orchard Road Lot Line Re arrange me nOVacation/Vanances 5/17/99 Page I « • I Pertinent Facts: 1.The enclosed survey, completed by Coffin & Gronberg has provided evidence that the 'paved' alley is not entirely within the 'platted' alley. The Webster's could back out of the proposed garage without entering directly to the alley. It is important to note that their is only one other user of the alley (540 Orono Orchard Road). 2.Similar variances were granted on the property for an addition, but a building permit was not issued within one year of Council approval and the variances expired. 3. 4. The City plows and maintains the alley. The Websters have a detached garage that is located over the property line by. 3' on the north side of the lot. The garage opens directly to Dickenson. A garage located on the alley would provide a safer access point rather than backing out of the garage directly onto Dickenson Street. ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards RR-IB (2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Rear Yard Side Yardl Adjacent to Street Street Yard Required 87,120 s.f.200’50'30 ’50' Proposed 38,346 s.f.150 ’5'17'36.5' The Webster’s prop>erty, located at 500 Orono Orchard Road, has access directly to Dickenson Street. A new garage arrangement would take the access point off Dickenson and onto the alley. However, the City does require a 30' setback for garages that face the street. Because this is an alley it seems to be reasonable to allow a setback of less than 30’ as only one other property will be using the alley for access. 02469/2470 500/540 Orono Orchard Road Lot Line Rearrangement/Vacation/l^ariances 5/17/99 Page! f • » STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the variances to allow garage and residential additions to property located at 500 Orono Orchard Road based on the following; 1. 1 he lot was developed prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The location of the garage on the alley is more desirable than the existing situation which requires the property owners to back out dirctly in vehiclur traffic on Dickenson Street. 3.The existing garage is located over the property line. A condition of approval is the garage be removed upon completion of the new addition. »2469'2470 300/340 Orono Orchard Road Lot Line Rearrangtment/VacatiGn/Variuncts 3/17/99 Page 3 /.*'• .*..*• • it-* f’ • ; •: * : 'g* • ..i\b:. • •. o-X- •. ^ i •. • • 'V^J'. :<:. i ••'.•■• ■ '<•;*•. ■, 1 • •* . T t— ---------------------------- **. .*»'' ■•''• ,. ..- *-«~ • ■ • • . * * . '** , * • ■ > ■/ .' t'4 • * *^ *,V..Y5v,’' •■•i'V */.V 't t sV ... /•'•v.%i.S; • ^ i •.- ,'i•‘V r-. /»-A-5^ •V " VC* •'* •. « • • \ T !■ .'•'•V .n'-s *\ip >•* * ..jttO *;*•*•>* •'.V-.‘-- Vrt'i -:V‘r-;i ’;! •• .;;'t >•■••;< :/-! r^ .:: r.'j , •* ... * ' «I «. /.^..» .•«• , • — • ■ :• .’V''» «• /« -?■•» wi ;■'••■ \-y *'•••• i# ** • ^ w.; >i :<A' * \l /i ;.. i * '■ .' • • *• / • .. .1V / V^v "• >• 2 /-• •:-r »’L\: vt^Av?e •V •.•/.•i'vi?'f;.'' .: S 'i-vr??- ..,:!;Vv:*;4H • I? 'll'**'• '^’* > .^** * 'j' ‘ •' •' 4 *••• < !irj»• . Ml dWf * *. \ i‘ •'•V‘,V •• TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator March 11,1999 SUBJECT: #2469/2470 500 Orono Orchard Road Sketch Plan Review and Variances Zoning District: RR-1 B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acres) Lot Area: (Existing)38,346 s.f. Application:The applicant has proposed a lot line rearrangement for properties located at 500 and 540 Orono Orchard Road. Steven and Jo Webster, property owners of 500 Orono Orchard Road, have requested the City consider a lot line rearrangement, vacation of the alley, and variances to permit construction of a garage within the required yard setbacks. The 540 Orono Orchard Road lot is owned by Kent and Sandra Larson. To permit a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement the Larson’s must be a co applicant. They have not communicated to the City support of the change in access to their property. They would be required to construct a driveway with access from Orono Orchard P,oad. This property uses the alley for its only access. The Webster's at 500 Orono Orchard Road have proposed a garage and residential addition that would place the garage on the property line adjacent to the alley. (Please see the attached site plan). The garage :*s required to meet a 50' setback from the property line, however variances have been granted that allow structures to be located closer to alleys elsev/here in the City, but none have been approved that would place a building on a property line. This application requires the following variances: Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B): To permit a side yard adjacent to the street (alley) setback of O' where 50' is required; to permit an 8' front yard setback where 50' is required; and to permit a 36.8' side yard adjacent to the street setback where 50' is required. 92469/2470 500/540 Orono Orchard Road Lot Line Rearrange me ni/\"acatlon/\*ariances 4/19/99 Page I Pertinent Facts: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 500, 540 and 550 Orono Orchard Road all have legal access and rights to the alley. The portion of the alley South of the Larson property is not developed. The amount of traffic using the alley is limited to only the Larson's. Variance approvals to allow residential additions would move the access to the V/cbstcr's property onto the alley rather than Dickenson Street. The majority of property owners in the locality support vacating the alley. Before variances for the garage and additional living space can be considered the issue of access to the subject properties should be resolved. The alley is maintained and plowed by the City. The Miimetonka Bluffs subdivision was platted in 1 887. The Larson's must be a willing applicant as the City cannot force a lot line rearrangement or a change in access to the 540 property. The enclosed survey, completed by Coffin & Gronberg has provided evidence that the 'paved' alley is not entirely within the 'platted' alley. The Webster's could back out of the proposed garage without entering directly to the alley. It is important to note that the Larson's are the only other user of the alley. ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards RR-IB (2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Rear Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 87,120 s.f.200'50'30'50' 500 38,346 s.f.150'50'30'50' 540 25,400 s.f.100'50'30'50' Sewer Units Both properties have been assessed and provided with sewer units. 92469/2470 500/540 Orono Orchard Rood Lot Line Rearrangcment/Vacation/Variancts 4/19/99 Page! Access The 540 Orono Orchard Road lot has access from the alley only. Thr alley is in itn;?*ned and plowed by the City of Orono. The Webster’s property, located at 500 Orono Orchard Road, has access to directly to Dickenson Street. The property is not served by the alley. A new garage arrangement would take the access point off Dickenson and onto the alley. However, the City does require a 30' setback for garages that face the street. Because this is an alley it seems to be reasonable to allow a setback of less than 30' as only one other property will be using the alley for access. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff could support an alignment that would allow for a shorter distance than required between the new garage and the alley. The City has approved similar requests in the past. No buildings are allowed to be located on a property line as proposed by the applicant. The main concern is backing of vehicles directly onto a public alley. The site plan provided places the attached garage directly on the property line (alley). State Building and Fire Codes do not allow structure to be located within 3' of a property line. The applicant shall provide revised plans meeting minimum Building and Fire Code standards, and implementing plans in keeping with the intent of the Rural Residential Zoning District. Attachments A B C D E F G H 1 J K Application Description of Request Location Map Section Map Property Map Site Survey and Topography Site Plan Elevation View Floor Plan Property Records Permit Record §2469/2470 500/540 Orono Orchard Road Lot Lina Raarrangement/Vacation/Variances 4/19/99 Pagiy J A CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # ^ Date Received________ Amount Paid_________ PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Jyon fKJ.UIVW r-Evawwj i_g { wn i ■ ■ ----------------------------—------------------ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) OZ- m t.3 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_^crf.e.v-^‘'C . /'7 I (do) Cdo nbj) also own the adjacent parcels of land. • • Present use of property; residential ___mother (specify)_______ Zoning District:____________________________________________ _(month/year) APPLICANT Name Jo Phone (home)/Z-' O ^ Phone(work)_^^2L_flZ^_r:2Zj^ Address: '■Ton ‘ * t» t I . r^/*l (Kl City:Zip: ^<39/ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ^______V V Phone (hoine). Phone (worlt)^\ Address:CityT Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ ---- Describe request in detail: ~/^ foei4 ~ —t^x "tO- (attach additional sheets if necessary) ' VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage \C Setback;Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) -ca.H^ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: |-li?Lvs.t- Do.- ' jtJfi ’ —Ct^ri.\\Z- J a'ccJs.) l.Lu^/<icgL .pr(’t\r.n‘L 'iC I '/ ■' j 1 i-' ^ <■ 11 Atl/y /.VI icir.r .<■; Cv 7 (attach' additional sheets if necessary) I1 1 B years. In lhaflim° our°r°rrtly1!as'^g°row ®''®^ *'>« 'as* 5 N..la ^«o.bed^oom heme has been maximized in evely^^^^ifbin we hive 7etfg!Zi"enTdd'St woSS bl a^'i^fcn Orl^!d R^dlhmb"icu m^loTinto ®"® at S40 Orono hazard to my family and to the users of the alleyway. ‘ an unnecessary on the south ^d^of tot 22 fo^ Orchard Road 12 feet everyone involved. ^ ° home. This solution would benefit IhemTornTZ^Iie ^ ®wner. a safer access to the embankment that is on the Fast Side of me 3116^^ ongoing down liability that SSey^harhad^y^its ?nh^^^^embankment. ’ ^ mnerent placement in proximity to the * atSsXitf f7,ht'Xtw«h Tbe currsn, The new driveway being proposed in OrliSin^i* for drivers in the alley, areas by trees and la^?sS?^S bti"ers'^''°" ’'>® ®®P®^®'®<' ®" P'ay W^?terfha4 ‘ t^en.'hi^vw it'sVufu^derS^^^^ '“'If!'’®"'?’® ®"‘‘ many homes along Orono Orchard Road that were"?n ta i** '"®al intent was to serve atatus 01 the alley should be re-evaS ^ RMd ha^sTriJi^iJeesMo 0^^^^ adjacent to 540 Orono Orchard years. I have had Mr. Nelsmi and everyone exS^XoTiJil ®r®"®’' be to move the last 50 feet of the^Lto^ylo tfle east the excavation of the new foundation for om orooer Jthoto ^ k and position the driveway\alleyway to me Mst Fr^m be enough soil to fill In make the area safer for our chS because ^®'P ^ well as a place for us to park o^?a" ot^^rrJ - from MVrk^GroX^ra I had an®arSd draw'’ certified survey I obtained home. When we get to a sototionl^^ifh^r^i^^ ®^'sting upon solution. surveyed in conjunction wim me agreed ■cJ 6C HO • • / ■» ■faitdg€f p ■JUkt-, \ iir*- ^ • • ] — •• ^ • V A tlMPM •~rV ]33 33! Lm eRGNO RO lARD s BARRETT AVE rv 3) — TT fVI«P- Oi^ TT 0 50 79 dl)TT "sr "srpsr k) s ^0 fwt tw rv Ml '5 i ■•••%. %• .1#1 # I*. «• /i •*•r LJ *— K» Ak oS$ — CB SD 90 90 90 n jfi^ CO CO HANLON AVE ip6 "IT 56 "IT TT ~w rw >• 1 «3? 1 t aOJ —o| •>'CJ»-UJ£ S5 «*«o« -i'. .-L--W«A K M. ^ K• >« V »> s K in a? -.x\*.nx-v“4.’ V CP ^ y JL A t Jf •2* rw J J L/f Uf •• • ^ Crono • •• 0iTc\aOcV"cI' ^ocx. 5 A \/enu6. f,. ••i .1* •. .»» SU (S 15 F, r. k \ o 3: Z3 3 CD ’O OOc % CD i/ia q: 16-FEB-1999 17:58:22 =====™=-==================- -~p Hennepin COMPLETE Tax Report _J ?ID # : 021172331004 6 PROPERTY TYPE; RESIDE’ ’'L TAX YEAR: 1998 Property Information ^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ADDRESS : 540 DAKRETT AVB 55391-9606 CITY/TWN : ORONO MAIL CITY : WAYZATA SCriOOL DIS : OROMO ADDITION : MINNETONKA BLUFFS LOT. BUS- LEGAL DESC ; LOTS 19 20 AND 21 . PARCEL SZ ; 150 X 129.4 ACRES . .UU YEAR BUILT : 1915 Owner/Taxpayer Information OWNER NAME: JAFFRAY ROBERT T JT OWNER : JAFFRAY VICTORIA 11 TAXPAYER ADDRESS 540 BARRETT AVE ORONO MN 55391- Market Vaijt?s LAND : BLDG : TOTAL: 44,000 114.000 158.000 Taxes • Effective 1998 | Subrecord Values BASE T/OC : 2,501.51 TA: W/ASSMT: 2,530.58 I WATERSHED: MINNEHAHA CREEK I DELINQUENT: CURRENT I GREEN ACRES/OPEN SPACES: N'J Sales RECENT DATE : 05/13/98 RECENT PRICE: 254,000 oowmiic rnnv •RECENT CODE : WARRANTY DEED PREVIOUS CODE . PREVIOUS DATE : PREVIOUS PRICE: EKvelling Characteristics Gross Sq Ft 1477 First Fir SF Secnd Fir SF Year Built Bedrooms Baths Family/Livg Rm Dine/Othr Rm Kitchen Fireplaces Heat Air 916 561 1915 2 1 1 / / 1 FORCED HOT AIR Bldg Style stories Bldg Shape Bldg Cond Bldg Constr Roof Type/Cover Ext Viall Gar Cap/Type/Sf Deck/Patio Sf Porch 0/S/G Sf Pool/Pool Sf Lot Width/Depth Lot Zoning VERY GOOD N/A GAMBREL / METAL METAL / / / / 150/128 »> ROOM SCHEDULE «< ____ Biiist_ 1st 2nd —3rd Pnpmnd byi WEBSTER STEVEN. CRS on Ftbnmv 19. fW 16-FED-1999 17:50:35 ==Hennepin COMPLETE Tax Report PID # : 0211723310006 PROPERTY TYPE: RESIDENTIAL TAX YEAR; 1998 Property Information AE'DRESS CITY/TVJN MAIL CITY SCHOOL DIS ADDITION LEGAL DESC PARCEL SZ YEAR BUILT 550 ORONO WAYZATA ORONO MINNETONKA BLUFFS LOTS 6 7 18 AND 19 100 X 256 1915 ORONO ORCHARD RD ZIP: 55391- LOT: ACRES BLK: .00 Owner/Taxpayer Information OWNER NAME: NELSON LAWRENCE E JT OWNER : TAXPAYER ADDRESS LAWRENCE E NELSON 550 ORONO ORCHARD RD S WAYZATA MN 55391- Market Values LAND : BLDG : TOTAL: 53,000 53,000 106,000 Taxes - Effective 1998 1 Subrecord Values TAX • 1,417.94 I WATERSHED: MINNEH.AHA CREEK TAX W/ASSMT: 1,437.44 I DELINQUENT; CURRENT ™ ' I green acres/open SPACES; NO Sales recent date : RECENT PRICE: RECENT CODE : 01/96/90 91,000 PREVIOUS DATE : PREVIOUS PRICE: PREVIOUS CODE : Dwelling Characteristics Gross Sq Ft 880 First Fir SF Secnd Fir SF Year Built Bedrooms Baths Family/Livg Rm Dine/Othr Rm Kitchen Fireplaces Heat Air 712 168 1915 3 1 / / 1 GRAVITY Bldg Style Stories Bldg Shape Bldg Cond Bldg Constr Roof Type/Cover Ext Wall Gar Cap/Type/Sf Deck/Patio Sf Porch O/S/G Sf Pool/Pool Sf Lot Width/Depth Lot Zoning VERY GOOD N/A GAMBREL / METAL METAL 1 / DETACHED / / / / / 100/ 270 312 96 »> ROOM SCHEDULE «< CWS on Fabnwfy 19,1999 To The Planning Commission of ORONO: I, Aj , have no future interest in using the platted alley from Dickenson to my properly for access. I would have no objections to the vacating of the alley. Sincerely \ ..y. 'f'i: ^ Lc t c K. U Print Date c^-/& - ^9 ’I .1 It ; • i V* 16-FEB-1999 17:50:35 ==Hennepin COMPLETE Tax Report PID 0 : 0211723310049 PROPERTY TYPE: RESIDENTIAL . TAX YEAR: 1998 Property Information ADDRESS CITY/TWN MAIL CITY SCHOOL DIS ADDITION LEGAL DESC PARCEL SZ YEAR BUILT OROHO ORCHARD RD500 no OHO WAYZATA ORONO MINNETONKA BLUFFS LOTS 1 2 3 22 23 AND 24 150 X 256 1947 ZIP: 55391- LOT: ACRES BLK: .00 Owner/Taxpayer Information OWNER NAME: WEBSTER S & J JT OWNER ; TAXPAYER ADDRESS STEVEN S & JO ELLEN WEBSTER 500 ORONO ORCHARD RD S WAYZATA MN 55391 I Market Values LAND : BLDG : TOTAL: 50,500 72,500 123,000 Taxes - Effective 1998 I Subrecord Values I RAqE TAX • 1,754.21 I WATERSHED: MINNEHAHA CREEK TAX W/ASSMT: 1,776.84 1 DELINQUENT: CURRENTTAX W/AS&Mi. ^ acres/open SPACES: NO Sales RECENT DATE : RECENT PRICE: RECENT CODE : J2/29/93 129,900 PREVIOUS DATE : PREVIOUS PRICE: PREVIOUS CODE : Dwelling Characteristics Gross Sq Ft 1336 First Fir SF Secnd Fir SF Year Built Bedrooms Baths Family/Livg Rm Dine/Othr Rm Kitchen Fireplaces Heat Air 1336 1947 2 1 1 / / 1 6 FORCED HOT /vIR Bldg Style Stories Bldg Shape Bldg Cond Bldg Constr Roof Type/Cover Ext Wall Gar Cap/Type/Sf Deck/Patio Sf Porch O/S/G Sf Pool/Pool Sf Lot Width/Depth Lot Zoning EXCELLENT N/A GABLE / PITCH & GRAV* WOOD 2 / DETACHED / 528 / / / / 150/ 220 »> ROOM SCHEDULE «<_ Pt9piufd hy wfr siER STEVEN. CRS on Mntmrv 18. m9_ To The Planning Commission of ORONO: 1, \\Aij\Cl^O/J platted alley from DIckensor would have no objections to the vacating of the alley. , have no future interest in using the platted^liey from Dickenson to my property sAj£Z^_orv^2-^^for^ccess. I Sincerely / < 0 f Sign / 'Print Date 16-FEB-1999 17:50:35 == PID # Hennepin COMPLETE Tax Report C211723310011 PROPERTY TYPE: RESIDENTIAL TAX YEAR; 1998 Property Information j ADDRESS CITY/TWN MAIL CITY SCHOOL DIS ADDITION LEGAL DESC PARCEL SZ YEAR BUILT 570 ORONO VJAYZATA ORONO MINNETONKA DLUEES LOTS 16 AND 17 100 X 127.8 1947 ORONO ORCHARD RD ZIP: 55391- LOT:BLK: ACRES .00 Owner/Taxpayer Information OWNER NAME: H/vNKINSON ROGER J JT OWNER : TAXPAYER ADDRESS ROGER J HAWKINSON 570 ORONO ORCHARD RD S WAYZATA Ml'I 55391- Market Values LAND : BLDG : TOTAL: 42.000 83.000 125,000 Taxes - Effective 1998 I Subrecord Values B/vSE TAX : TAX W/ASSMT: 1,649.26 I WATERSHED: MINNEHAHA CREEK 2,066.46 I DELINQUENT; CURRENT GREEN ACRES/OPEN SPACES: NO Sales RECENT DATE RECENT PRICE RECENT CODE PREVIOUS DATE : PREVIOUS PRICE: PREVIOUS CODE : Dwelling Characteristics Gross Sq Ft 2050 First Fir SF Secnd Fir SF Year Built Bedrooms Baths Family/Livg Rm Dine/Othr Rm Kitchen Fireplaces Heat Air 1336 714 1947 5 o 1 / / 1 FORCED HOT AIR Bldg Style Stories Bldg Shape Bldg Cond Bldg Constr Roof Type/Cover Ext Wall Gar Cap/Type/Sf Deck/Patio Sf Porch 0/S/G Sf Pool/Pool Sf Lot Width/Depth Lot Zoning GOOD N/A GAMBREL / METAL STUCCO 1 / DETACHED / 292 / 29 / / / 100/ 128 292 »> ROOM SCHEDULE «< wPttST FR STEVEN. CRS on February ie, 1999 16-FEB-1999 17:52:50 ~#12 PID # Hennepin COMPLETE Tax Report ; 0211723310010 PROPERTY TYPE: RESIDENTIAL TAX YEAR: 1998 Property Information ^DRESS CITY/TWN :-IAIL CITY SCHOOL DIS ADDITION LEGAL DESC PARCEL SZ YEAR BUILT 1390 ORONO WAYZATA ORONO MINNETONKA BLUFFS LOTS 13 14 AND 15 127.75 X 150 1920 FOX ST ZIP: 55391-9326 LOT: ACRES BLK: .00 Owner/Taxpayer Information OWNER NAME: WITCHER JONATHAN D JT OWNER : WITCHER GRETA M TAXPAYER ADDRESS 1390 FOX ST ORONO MN 55391- Market Values LAND : BLLG : TOTAL: 44.000 66.000 110,000 Taxes - Effective 1998 I Subrecord Values 1 BASE TAX • 2,576.22 I WATERSHED: MINNEHAHA CREEK T^W/ASSMT: 2,596.46 , sUs: NO Sales RECENT DATE : 10/12/98 MCENT CODE*^: WARRANTY DEED PREVIOUS CODE PREVIOUS DATE : PREVIOUS PRICE: Dwelling Characteristics Gross Sq Ft 1470 First Fir SF Secnd Fir SF Year Built Bedrooms Baths Family/Livg Rm Dine/Othr Rm Kitchen Fireplaces Heat Air 861 609 1920 5 2 1 / / 1 WATER Bldg Style Stories Bldg Shape Bldg Cond Bldg Constr Roof Type/Cover Ext Wall Gar Cap/Type/Sf Deck/Patio Sf Porch O/S/G Sf Pool/Pool Sf Lot Width/Depth Lot Zoning AVERAGE + N/A GAMBREL / METAL STUCCO 1 / DETACHED /280 / / /76 / 128/150 »> ROOM SCHEDULE «< hy: WEBSTER STEVEN. CRS on FabtuatV 19,1999 To The Planning Commission of ORONO: Diatted allev from Dick •) 0 . have no future interest in using the platted alley frorn Dickenson to my property at 'T'^0 for access. I would have no objections to the vacating of the alley. Sincerely < J' Signimm J Print Date 16-FEB-1999 17:55:10 ========-=============== . 1• 1 PID # Honn<‘pin COMPLETE Tax Report : 0211723310013 PROPERTY TYPE: RESIDENTIAL TAX YEAR: 1998 Property Information ADDRESS CITY/TWN 'AJKIL CITY SCHOOL DIS ADDITION LEGAL DESC PARCEL SZ YEAR BUILT 500 ORONO WAYZATA ORONO MINNETONKA PI.UFEr. HANLON AVE ZIP: 55391-9636 50 X 129.48 1949 LOT: ACRES BLK: .00 Owner/Taxpayer Information OWIJER NAME: BEIIMETT P £ M JT OWNER : TAXPAYER ADDRESS PAUL A & MEGAN M BENNETT 500 HANLON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391-9636 Market Values 1 1 Taxes - Effective 1998 1 1 Subrecord Values LAND :37,000 1 1 BASE T/X :1,483.25 1 1 WATERSHED: MINNEHAHA CREEK BLDG : TOTAL:0 0Oo o o o o o1 1 TAX W//^SMT:1,503.36 1 1 DELINQUENT: CURRENT GREEN ACRES/OPEN SPACES: NO Sales • RECENT DATE :02/25/97 PREVIOUS DATE :07/10/91 RECENT PRICE:125,000 PREVIOUS PRICE: RECENT CODE :WARRANTY DEEl'PREVIOUS CODE : Dwelling Characteristics Gross Sq Ft i«1710 Bldg Style Stories First Fir SF 1080 Bldg Shape Secnd Fir SF 630 Bldg Cond AVERAGE + Year Built . 1949 Bldg Constr N/A Bedrooms 5 Roof Type/Cover GAMBREL / METAL Baths n L.Ext Wall METAL /Family/Livg Rm / 1 Gar Cap/Type/Sf / Dine/Othr Rm /Deck/Patio Sf 320 /32 Kitchen 1 Porch 0/S/G Sf // Fireplaces Pool/Pool Sf / 128HeatFORCED HOT AJR Lot Width/Depth 50/ Air Lot Zoning A i ♦ Bmst » ROOM SCHEDULE «< 1st 2nd 3rd Pnpsnd by: WEBSTER STEVEN. CRS on Mntanf 1§, 19§§ To The Planning Commission of ORONO: l<sr yf;i . have no future interest in using the platted alley from Dickenson to my property at for access. I would have no objections to the vacating of the alley. Sincerely Sign / Print Date 16-FEB-1999 17:52:50 ====#10 PID # Hennepin COMPLETE Tax Report 0211723310009 PROPERTY TYPE: RESIDENTIAL TAX YEAR: 1998 Property Information ADDRESS CITY/TWN MAiL CITY SCHOOL DIS ADDITION LEGAL DESC PARCEL SZ YEAR BUILT 1380 FOX ST ORONO WAYZATA ORONO MINNETONKA BL'IE'l-.i LOTS 10 11 AMD I’ 150 X 127.75 1920 ZIP: 55391-9326 LOT: ACRES BLK: .00 Owner/Taxpayer Information OWNER NAME: MEYER HERBERT D JT OWNER : TAXPAYER ADDRESS HERBERT D MEYER PO BOX 12 WAYZATA MN 55391-0012 Market Values LAND : BLDG : TOTAL: 44.000 87.000 131,000 Taxes - Effective 1998 base tax : 1,912.72 TAX W/ASSMT: 1,936.82 Subrecord Values WATERSHED: MINNEHAHA CREEK DELINQUENT: CURRENT GREEN ACRES/OPEN SPACES: NO RECENT DATE : RECENT PRICE: RECENT CODE : PREVIOUS PREVIOUS PREVIOUS DATE : PRICE: CODE : Dwelling Characteristics _ _ _ _ _ _ Gross Sq Ft :1701 Bldg Style : Stories ‘ First Fir SF Secnd Fir SF Yeir Built Bedrooms Baths Family/Livg Rm Dine/Othr Rm Kitchen Fireplaces Heat Air 1134 567 1920 4 2 / 1 / 1 5 FORCED HOT AIR Bldg Shape Bldg Cond Bldg Constr Roof Type/Cover Ext Wall Gar Cap/Type/Sf Deck/Patio Sf Porch O/S/G Sf Pool/Pool Sf Lot Width/Depth Lot Zoning GOOD N/A GAMBREL / METAL STUCCO 4 / DETACHED / / / / / 129/ 150 750 48 > > > RQOM„ SCHEJDULE_ <<^ Piepaied by: wPas^P STEVEN. CWS on f 9^ary19jjm STEVEN S & JO ELLEN WEB 500 ORONO ORCHARD RD S WAYZATA MN 55391- S/NDRA S LARSON 1540 6TH AVE N LONG LME MN 55356- OP*(.:>A/o HP. LAWRENCE E NELSON 550 ORONO ORCHARD RD S WAYZATA MN 55391- ROGER J HAWKINSON 570 ORONO ORCHARD RD S WAYZATA MN 55391- h < i Pnoaitd bv: WEBSTER STEVEN. CRS on Ftbruatv 1$. Iff9 ^oo (Qi.0^0 y^cj «s ^ Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline: 4/12/99 4/12/99 6/11/99 COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 Cl I r U»- OHONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 5/20/99 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Planning Intern Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2483 Trent Rezabek 3200 Bayside Road Variance-Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acre) Lot Area:49,005 s.f or approx. 1.1 acres Application: The applicant has requested a variance renewal for a front yard setback variance for the property located at 3200 Bayside Road. The previous resolution (File #1371) was adopted March 1989 and expired on March 13,1990. The applicant has proposed to construct an 8' x 12' entryway on the south side of the existing residence. The existing residence is located entirely within the required front yard and street side setbacks, therefore any additions to the existing residence requires a v^ance. This application requires the following variance approval: 1. Variance from Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) : To permit a front yard setback variance to allow an 8' X 12’ entryway to be constructed on the south side of the house 18.4' from the front yard where 50' is required. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 4 to 0 vote to: Approve the application as presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. i . 1 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PHON£:(612)249-4600 FAX:(612)249-4616 ZONING FILE #2483 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; May 18, 1999 TO: Trent Rezabek 3200 Bayside Road Long Lake, MN 55356 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION;Variance I DATE OF MEETING; 5/17/99 VOTE:4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS; Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council May 24, 1999, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCSCAROLE\PCACI ION\2483 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #2483 WHEREAS, Trent A. Rezabek (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 3200 Bayside Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legdly described as follows: Lot 14, Auditor’s Subdivision #203, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 17, 1999, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit construction of an 8'xl2' entryway addition to his existing residence. The addition will be located less than the required 50' setback from the front street lot line. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1.' This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2483, 2.The property is located in the LR-IA Zoning District, where 2 acres or 87,120 s.f is the minimum lot area. The property consists of 1.1 acres or 49,005 s.f Page 1 of 4 3. 5. 6. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 17, 1999 and recommended approval on a vote of 4 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A.The existing residence is located entirely within the required front and side street setbacks and any addition to the existing residence requires a variance. B The existing residence is unusually close to the front and side street lot lines, which is unusual for properties in the LR-IA Zoning District. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely aifect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit construction of an entryway addition to the existing residence which will be located 18.4' from the front lot line where a SO' front setback is normally required. Approval was subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 4 1.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 24, 2000). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 3.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 1.' . if It !*t. ■ ■ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 4 of 4 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern DATE:May 10,1999 SUBJECT: #2483 Trent Rezabek 3200 Bayside Road Variance Renewal -- Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acres) Lot Area:49,005 s.f.* (Approx. 1.1 Acres) ♦(65,340 s.f.- casement *= 49,005 s.f.) Municipal Sewer Application: The applicant is requesting a variance renewal for a front yard setback variance for the property located at 3200 Bayside Road. The previous resolution (File #1371) was adopted March 1989 and expired on March 13,1990. The applicant is proposing to construct an 8* x 12' entryway on the south side of the existing residence. The existing residence is located entirely with^ the required front yard and street side setbacks, therefore any additions to the existing residence requires a variance. This application requires the following variance: 1. Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B): To permit a front yard setback variance to allow an 8' x 12' entry way to be constructed on the south side of the house 18.4' from the front yard where 50' is required. U2483 T>ent Rezabek 3200 Bcyslde Road Variance Renewal 5/10/99 Page 1 1 ANALYSIS Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.23: LR-IA One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. Lot Area and Yards: ♦ Area is 65,340 s.f. - 33' easement = 49,005 s.f. Structural Coverage: Statement of Hardship; The applicant should be asked for his testimony regarding this issue. U2483 Trent Rexabek 3200 Bayside Road Variance Renewal S/10/99 Page 2 LR-IA (2 Acres) Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Adj. to Street Required 87,120 s.f.200'50’50’ Proposed 49,005 s.f*165’18.4'33.8’ Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 49,005 s.f Allowed: 7350.75 s.f 15.0% Existing: 1892.50 s.f 3.9% Proposed: 1988.50 s.f 4.1% Tssues for consideration: 1, The existing residence is located entirely within the required front and side street setbacks, and therefore any addition to the existing residence requires a variance. 2. The existing residence is unusually close to the front and side street lot lines, which is generally unusual for properties in the LR-1A zoning district. 3. Other issues raised by planning commission. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variance. The special conditions applying to this structure are peculiar to this property. Granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. Attachments A Application B Site Plan/Survey C Addition Plan D Plat Map E Location Map F Site Topography G Property Owners List H Permit Record I Approved Resolution (File #1371 -March 1989) I §2483 Trent Rezabrk 3200 Bayslde Road Variance Renewal 5/10/99 Page 3 \ \ \ cmr OF ORONO - variance application ■ Initial Application Fee . $250.00 • • ■ ($50.00 per each .additional, variance) . . Renewal Variance Fee $150.00^ ’ (no change from ori^phal ap^cation) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION ^ /xj She Address ^ ^___ Application# ^ Date Received Amount Paid /SO ^ t Property Identification Numberfl^I^) '7-.-2^-/^—0 00*7' /Ma/0.5etu^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired______/O/^ ______________________ I (do) (Oo n^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: i/readential Zomng Kstrict: L.h - / /? .(month/year) other (specify). APPLICANT Name ~y7^/r/ Phonefhome) _ ____________ Phonefwork) >______ Address: City: /Oyp /iO Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work). Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST. Estimated Constmction Cost $. De.?rnbe reqijest in detail: _____ f-y-7% I /-» — (attach additional sheets if necessary) 's •!VARIANCES REQUIRED , __Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage >■ . y ' ■Setback: \x Front Side __Rear __Average Lakeshoi^ ^ Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difidculty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance vnth Zoning Code requirements:________________________:________ - (attach additional sheets if necessary) f. •• ‘ v..*v^;C^r- Siliisj'^.lis^.' V|<^‘nj V- «:3 sc ^ •-.. C>Cj Cb GL •-I5cnUi -<to lU g*-0•I 1 s:; Sn ^ !■^ XI A«^ M a X3 m •4 « ra «e * «j" I r Sb *•• •— IXJ o D % - • dD n i''1 • • i" :3 3 J § • • §Ma.I c I V XI cx*4 e « *• o So u C •J n X C § ?e -3 o "3a c2 sJ1 O «• ;3 :«3 • •• I ;'j ........r's.-:r^'5-?r-tr-rjTisr v<"T-’ N *. ■iii-l<t$ •is dV31 --O0S? t2 *• 3 If r -rn ' lisJd • * •• -^ .V • . • • •**• . , } • • •# .-.• • m .0 • SVO•i •‘.2? <Q- c j!. *•5^^ c0*‘.'vP*o • • 1% .*W> €J? .*s *•- * • ^ . r ■J : 5 . ilfei J 6 \2) Lm f'r cv) *7t /Cl'' V U ^ '' •V *' f"\ }) Vs ■'C, ' 11 J vit'?“^pr. -....-» / • « . •• • •* • • ••. •— : £ tCr ^•X^ . ^-. • • a • • • » . * \ ■'....■'■" O ^-=#*.< Ci tsi 7/ rM-___1----r *“XI •. • • • v: 14 4| . •• • • • • 1 • •• 637 (21) c^' 57 75 i 31 1 1 lu 1 h -<r...1....^ j h 0 ••PART 1 1 207 SO*OF LOT 16 (5) i '= 1 1 1 1 i • ^ (6) 21 57 . 75 ,L___242 •t;1 M l ■| • 31 r 2n—' Kin o'A'V’J33.25 ......... mmM L V. Va%VV«!4* ::X:: t-r^^vXrSry 193 R N8 ;42'I5 ’W 213 240 480 % S'.‘V,I f,**• l•^» » • • •— • * ^^WUUJU T** * • CBESTV IEW* AVE 4JBl. ' STUBBS BAY RO N OLD ‘W WEARUS WEAR CRYSTAL co RANDERRO o o W3XV0 RD 8 OLD CRYSTAL BA^ _ oUoLOEN VIEW _ DR «\ ♦ /% • -MM BATE 03/30/99 BATCH SOS • HEMIEPXN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFOu.UTZON SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST •L -SO 04>117-23 23 0006 PROP'AOOR 00346 LEAF ST OWNER NAIC T J TERRY 6 6 J 6EHRXN6 TAXPAYER • . THOMAS TERRY NAIC/AODR . 340 LEAF ST LONO LAKE HN 65354 36 04-X17-2S 32 0007 ' PROP ADDR *. 03190 SUSSEX RO OWNER NAME J 0 KENNEY 6 H J KENNEY TAXPAYER ' JOHN D KEfMEY/NARY J KENNEY NANE/ADDR .3190 SUSSEX RO LONO LAKE HN 65354 PROP ADDR 36 06>117o2S 14' 0004 03240 ■ BAYSXOE RD OWNER NANS DOB BOYLAN TAXPAYER DONALD K BOYLAN . ' NANE/ADDR 3240 BAYSXDE RO . LONO LAKE HN 55354. • 6 • • ,36 0S>117*2S 41 0017 PROP ADDR 03226 BAYSXOE RO OWNER NANS R B 0 V O -SHELOON • RONALD B SHELDONTAXPAYER •• V NAHE/AODR 3225 BAYSXOE RO LONO LAKE HN 55354 • •, .* • • • ••* .•*1 • • O 6 J • . • • . • • • I • • 000936 04-117-23 23 00340 LEAF ST H C FURCHNER JR ETAL. HENRY FURCHNER 340 LEAF ST LONO LAKE NN 55354 30 04-117-23 32 0006 03140 SUSSEX RO KYLE N LEWIS KYLE H LEWIS . <.14055 37TH AVE N PLYMOUTH. NN 65447 38 * 05-117-23 14 O0O7. 03200- . DAYSXOE RO . T A REZABEK I S L REZABEK TRENT A REZABEK 3200 BAYSXOE RO LONO LAKE HN 55354 36 05-117-23 41 0016 032U BAYSXOE RO J. A 6 T J F LUNOELL. JANES 6 TRACEY LUNOELL 3211 BAYSXOE RO LONO LAKE HN 55354 REPORT NO. PX435401 PAGE 7 36 04-117-23 -23 0010 00400 LEAF ST R A 6 0 C RYAN ROBERT A 6 DELORES C RYAN 400 LEAF ST LONG LAKE HN 55354 30 05-117-23 14 0003 00345 LEAF -ST TONY EXDEN COMPANY TONY EXDEN COMPANY 4100 BERKSHIRE LA N PLYMOUTH MN 65444 36 05-117-23 14 0059 00375 LEAF ST D H CROWTHER 6 S J CROWTHER D H CROWTHER 6 S J CROWTHER 375 LEAF ST' LONO LAKE HN 55354 TOTAL BATCH 603 OOOU • •■4 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS XT APPEARS TNXS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF DATE BY O VI QO'"4 ^ I • •. 1ft • 0 td. 7 TT f • 5-/5'^"? «•• •5522336 City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2589 X \ ^ y. • • A RSSOLDTIOI9 GRANTING VARIANCES TO NimiCIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23IT SUBDIVISION 6 (Bl FILE NO. 1371 WHEREAS, Robert Kir.kema (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3200 Bayside Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 14, Auditors Subdivision #203, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 permit the construction of additions to additions will be located less than the required 50 setbac)c from the fJ^ont street lot line and less than the required 50' setbac)c from the sloe street lot line. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1371. 2. The property is located in the LR-IA Single Family La)ceshorc Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on February 21, 1989 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon'the following findings: a. The existing residence is located entirely within the required front and side street setbacks, and therefore an., additions to the existing residence require a variance. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances uniev' to this property not created by the landowner. c. Granting of the variance will not alter the ersent.* character of the locality. d. ' The special conditions apply.ing to thi.s strLc..u*e peculiar to this prop-rty. 1 y.i *m City of OROJNO • RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2589_ _ _ _ _ e. The exiBbin9 residence Is unusually close to the front and side street lot lines, which Is unusual for properties In the LR- lA zoning district generally- f• Granting of the variance is necessary foT" preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. g. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any w?»y impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the zoning code. h. The granting of this variance will not merely serve as convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. A. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposec variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in xeepinc with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLDSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council will be located 33.8' from the side street lot line where a 50* side strec. -:'='tback is normally required, and 18.4' from the front lot line ^^ere a - . L ren: setback .is normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. Anv changes tc the site plan (attached herein as Exhibit A) wh: viiiViace the residential additions closer to the affect^ lot 1-- than the proposed .«:etbacks will require additional review by the C. Paae 2 of 4 L lOpONO? City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2589_ _ _ __ 2. Authorities granted by this variance run ^ith tl« Yx°erciled'’by Ulth the antlicant, but are permissive only and must oe exerciseo oy application for a building permit wijhin ®f* ^*“',^1 aate^?March Council approval, or this variance will expire on that dote (March 13,1990). 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of ‘he terms and coSe“thall"^a^t^^?aticaS*irtem^^^^ shall be punishable as a mlsdemeanore 4. The undersigned applicant has read, heirs! by the Orono City Council on this 13th day of Marchp TTi operty Owner TATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) OUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SSe gllUn( Valror t city Clerk ofjhe C^Sf^°"S»^eh.'l^"of'’?h" unicipal corporation and said Instrument was executed on behalf “y- . k. 9btan^ V ub Sc -; Ia TTsOiCf-ER .•e^ - *•••• ‘t-'l’A KLSn !?:m CCj :ri ^ ___________ My etg«»et 3 Pace 3 of 4 I iI City of OROIVO X RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2589 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this IMt day of t^lfLY'OJ^198^? bafore me a Notary Public within and for said county^ personally appeared -ttr r'e/>n A?r> /:iiv Lf~ nnA known to me to be the person(s) described in andjviiwntt ww •.%. person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument^ and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. 7 NOTARY PUBLIC i MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 198_» before me n Notary Public within and for said County, personaTly appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoinginstrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. transfer entered •’£/7 D‘ fROrrBTV Tit K ri:FUCRECC/»OS NOTARY PUBLIC APR ^ H MY COMMISSION h'/VCKi'S L.0fFU7V Taac 4 of 4 •f-4 Date Application Submitted: 4-14-99 Date Application Considered Substantially Complete: 4-30-99 60-Day Review Period Ends: 6-29-99 "^'CIL MEETING MAT 2 4 1999 CUT Ur UHONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: May 21, 1999 Item No.: ^ O Department Approval:Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Name: Michael P. Gaf&on Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Item Description: #2484 Woodhill Country Club, 200 Woodhill Road - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution Attached is a draft resolution granting a CUP to Woodhill Country Club for driveway access to Woodhill Avenue. This draft has been reviewed by the City Attorney and was transmitted to the applicants and to the various attorneys involved on Tuesday May 18. It has not been revised since that transmittal. Late this morning staff was advised by Mr. McCarthy of the unexpected passing of Edge Jackson's mother. As a result, the Club's formal response to the draft resolution is expected to be delayed. The Club has requested that this item be removed from Monday night's agenda, presumably for placement on the Council's next regular meeting which is June 14. Staff advised Mr. McCarthy that the Council had not yet been provided the draft resolution, and that based on Council's direction of May 11, staff would keep this item on the agenda, provide copies of the draft resolution to Council, and recommend tabling without discussion per the Club's request; and that staff would also contact the interested parties to advise them this item will be tabled without discussion to the June 14 meeting. McCarthy indicated that the Club objects to this item being placed on the May 24 agenda, and objects to the Council being provided with the draft resolution. 1 advised him I would note that for the record. This afternoon he submitted a letter to Council which is included in your Council Information (blue pages) packet, requesting tabling. As of this writing we have also received a letter with written conunents on the draft from the neighbors' attorney Mr. Malkerson, which are similarly included in the Council Information section of your packet. Between now and the June 14 meeting, staff and the City Attorney will review the comments from the various parties and may revise this draft prior to the June 14 meeting. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council is requested to table this application without discussion to the June 14 Council meeting at the request of the applicant. Staff will advise the interested parties today or Monday of the expected action to table to avoid their unnecessary attendance at the May 24 meeting. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB FOR A DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO WOODHILL AVENUE FILE #2484 ^44 WHEREAS, the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted zoning and other r'^'gulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, Woodhill Country Club (hereinafter "applicant" or "the Club"), a Minnesota non-profit corporation, is owner of the property addressed as 200 Woodhill Road, a portion of which is located within the City of Orono, such portion being legally described in Exhibit A attached and referred to hereinafter as "the property"; and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City for an amendment of its 1968 conditional use permit (CUP) per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28 Subd. 3, to: a) acknowledge certain basic rights of access to Woodhill Av enue; and b) impose certain new restrictions and conditions on Woodhill's access to Woodhill Avenue; and WHEREAS, litigation concerning the access is pending, and this application has been tendered by the applicant in an effort to resolve the litigation; and WHEREAS, on May 11, 1999 after due published and mailed notice, the City Council held a public hearing on this application and received information and comments from the applicant and applicant's consultants, from the City staff and the City's consultants, and from the public including residents and representatives of the Woodhill Avenue neighborhood. # Page 1 of 7 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as zoning file #2484. The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. Within the RR-IB zoning district, golf courses and country clubs are a permitted use via conditional use permit (CUP). Woodhill Country Club operates under a CUP granted by the City on September 13, 1968. The 1968 CUP does not explicitly address the use of Woodhill Avenue as a secondary access to the property, nor do any of the subsequent CUP approvals granted to Woodhill Country Club for the various site improvements or operation changes which have occurred since 1968. The applicant desires to formalize its right to use Woodhill Avenue as a secondary access to the property for the safety of its members. The City Council finds that the Club's use of Woodhill Avenue as an access road may create certain negative impacts to the existing Woodhill Avenue neighborhood unless some limitations on the Club's use of the access are established. The City Council desires to place reasonable limitations on Woodhill Country Club's use of Woodhill Avenue as an access in order to ensure that the health, safety and welfare of the existing residential neighborhood served by Woodhill Avenue is adequately protected, and to formally establish the City's rights to review ’ and place reasonable controls on any access to the property which may have an impact on the various existing residential neighborhoods surrounding the property. The traffic levels on County Road 15 make access to the Club difficult, particularly from the west and north, due to the need to make left turns across heavy traffic onto County Road 15 and from County Road 15 to Woodhill Road. Page 2 of 7 4 I 9.The use of Woodhill Avenue as an access to Woodhill Country Club will change the character of Woodhill Avenue, which has functioned as as a dead-end street for the past 20 years. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby grants to Woodhill Country Club an amendment to its 1968 Conditional Use Permit to allow limited access via Woodhill Avenue subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. The Club shall install a paved driveway (to be hereinafter referred to as "the Woodhill Avenue access") within the dedicated right-of-way of Woodhill Avenue extending from the eiisterly end of the City-maintained portion of Woodhill Avenue, to the easterly end of the dedicated right-of-way. The Club may construct a gravel or paved private driveway within the property to connect the Club's interior driveway system to the Woodhill Avenue access. The Club shall obtain an after-the-fact staff-administered land alteration permit as well as a permit from the Public Services Director for work within the right-of-way prior to recommencing construction on the Woodhill Avenue access. The Club shall install a gate across its private driveway at the western boundary of the property, which gate shall be locked at all times except when used as follows: A. B C. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access by emergency vehicles (police, fire, ambulance and utility). Use of the Woodhill Avenue access for transporting Club tractors to and from Long Lake for repair. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access for general access to the property if the Woodhill Road access to County Road 15 is temporarily blocked (subject to reasonable notification to the City and affected neighbors), but only during the period of such temporary blockage. Page 3 of? D. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access under the terms of that certain Easement Agreement, dated October 5, 1987 between the City, the Club, and MSM, which benefits one residential lot if County Road 15 ac :ess is blocked. 3. E. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access as an entrance only (i.e. one way, from west to east) for private passenger vehicles between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. during those days that the Club is open. The City reserves the right to periodically determine whether problems with use of the access have occurred, and reserves the right to modify this CUP or add conditions, as allowed by Orono Zoning Code Section 10,09, Subd. 6(B), However, the City does nol reserve the right pursuant to Orono Zoning Code Section 10.09, Subd. 6(B) to permanently close the access. The following uses are not explicitly or implicitly allowed by the 1968 CUP nor by subsequent CUP's granted to the Club since 1968, and are specifically no! approved at this time, but may be applied for by the Club via a CUP amendment in the future: A. Conversion of the Woodhill Avenue access into the main entrance to the Club on a permanent basis. B. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access as an entrance or exit by delivery, taxi, service, or other commercial vehicles. C. D. E. F. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access as an entrance or exit by the general public. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access at time periods other than those allowed in the Basic Rights defined in Condition 2 above. Expansion or paving of the Club’s westerly interior driveway between the maintenance building and the Woodhill Avenue access. Placement on Orono Orchard Road of any identification or directional signage concerning the Club. Page 4 of 7 4.City staff shall monitor use of the Woodhill Avenue access during its first season of operation and shall report to the Council any problems or concerns that are encountered. The City reserves the right to review and amend the CUP after the 1999 golf season, to address any problems prior to the 2000 golf season. Further, the City will periodically, for an indefinite period of time, meter the amount of traffic using the Woodhill Avenue access. If the peak daily traffic count exceeds 100 trips per day at any time within the first year of operation or in subsequent years, the City shall have the right to review and amend this CUP; including review of the need for a card access gate at the Woodhill Avenue entrance. The Club shall make or be responsible for the following improvements in conjunction with its construction of the Woodhill Avenue access; A. B. C. D. E. F. G. Installation of eastbound and northbound stop signs at the intersection of the public and private portions of Woodhill Avenue (See Exhibit B). Installation of eastbound "10 MPH" speed limit signs within the Woodhill Avenue access. Installation of westbound "Do Not Enter" signage at the Club’s interior driveway near the maintenance building. Installation of speed bumps along the Woodhill Avenue access at location(s) to be approved by the Public Services Director. Paving of the Woodhill Avenue access (driveway portions within dedicated right-of- way). Removal of vegetation within the right-of-way of Woodhill Avenue or Orono Orchard Road that may impede adequate sight distance, subject to approval of the Public Services Director and the abutting property owner. Installation of appropriate stormwater facilities (culverts, ditches, etc.) as may be required by the City Engineer. H. Provision of a driveway design and grading plan acceptable to the City Engineer. Page 5 of 7 6.If all access from the Club to County Road 15 is permanently blocked as a result of either County Road 15 alteration or improvement, or as a result of closure of the Woodhill Road access by the owner of the railroad right-of-way, the City recognizes the Club's right of reasonable access, but reserves the right and authority to determine via the conditional use permit process whether such permanent access should be provided by allowing a full access to Woodhill Avenue, or via some other method or location, and what conditions must be imposed on that access to protect the health, safety and welfare of all citizens in the area and the users of the roads. 7.Authorities granted by this conditional use permit run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for the required land alteration permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this conditional use permit will expire on that date (May 24,2000). 8.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resoluti on shall consu '.ute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 9.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 6 of? i J # APPLICANT ACCEPTANCE: Authorized Representative of Woodhill Country Club STA'I E OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) )ss. ) On this day of , 1999 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 7 of? Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline 4/15/99 4/15/99 6/14/99 COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 Cl IY Oh* ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 5/19/99 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2485 Alex and Cathy Johnston 940 South Brown Road Conditional Use Permit—Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District Lot Area:9 + acres (5.11 acres dry: 4.55 acres dry contiguous) Application: Applicants have filed an application for a conditional use permit to allow a "guest house". A bam exists on the southeast portion of the property that the applicant is remodeling to install a guest apartment. The bam is classified as an oversized accessory stmcture as it exceeds 1,000 s.f. However on a property with 5.11 dry acres the lot is allowed one oversized accessory stmcture up to 2,200 s.f. The bam is 1,664 s.f. in size. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 4 to 0 vote to; Approve the conditional use permit for a guest house based on the request satisfies all Code requirements for approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a guest house conditional use permit based on the findings and conditions in the attached draft resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PHONE:(612)249-4600 FAX:(612)249-4616 ZONING FILE #2485 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 18, 1999 TO;Alex and Cathy Johnson 940 Brown Road South Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: May 17, 1999 VOTE:4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1.Property owner files a restrictive covenant on the property for an oversized accessory structure. 2.Final plumbing inspection be held uniii a septic system has been installed and approved by the City. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council May 24, 1999, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Conunission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\CAROLEVPCACnONU48S A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3 (G) FILE #2485 WHEREAS, Alexander Johnston and Catherine Johnston, (hereinafter "the applicants") are tlie owners of the property located at 940 Brown Road South within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as: Exhibit A attached, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and die City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 17, 1999, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a conditional use permit to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (G) for a guest house. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2485. The property is located in the RR-IB Zoning District, where 2 acres or 87,120 s.f. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of 9 acres of which 4.55 acres is dry contiguous. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 17, 1999 and recommended approval on a vote of 4 to 0. Page 1 of 5 1 j r 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. A property is required double the lot area for the zoning district to allow a guest house. The property is located in the RR-IB, 2 acre zoning district. The subject property contains 4.55 acres of dry contiguous buildable land. B. The use of the bam as a guest house will not exceed the 2 acre per "dwelling unit” density. C. The guest house meets ali required principal building setbacks. D. The bam is 1,664 s.f. qualifying as an oversized accessory stmeture requiring a restrictive covenant being recorded on the chain of title. E. The property has a non-conforming septic system tliat is scheduled to be replaced in 1999. Prior to a final plumbing inspection, the septic must be installed and approved by the City. 5. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow a guest house will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its iu?e depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the affect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (G) for a guest house, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The property owners file a restrictive covenant on the property for an oversized accessory structure and a guest house. The final inspection for the plumbing will not be approved before the septic system has been replaced and approved. Authorities granted by this resolution are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval or this conditional use permit will expire on that date (May 24, 2000). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of May, 199'>. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public P?ge 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 4 of 5 1 EXHIBIT A Page 5 of 5 I CITY OF ORONO COVENANT FOR OVERSIZED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THIS COVENANT, made and entered into this day of ^ 19__, by Alexander Johnston and Catherine Jo’inston, property owners, (husband and wife), (hereinafter referred to as "Applicants") and the City of Orono, a Miimesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Applicants have made application to the City for an accessory structure on property in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, legally described as: Exhibit A attached, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, City staff have reviewed Applicants ’ application and have found that the structure requested is defined within Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) of the Orono Municipal Code as an Oversized Accessory Structure ("OAS"); and WHEREAS, Applicants are aware that according to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(3)(c), specific conditions exist for an allowable OAS: and WHEREAS, Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(3)(c) allows issuance of a permit for relocation of the subject OAS conditioned upon the execution of this Covenant and its filing in Applicant's chain of title; and WHEREAS, in order to identify all parties within an interest in the subject property, the Applicants are required to provide title information to City staff as requested. All parties with an interest in this property shall sign this covenant. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES TO THIS COVENANT AGREE TO THE FOLLOWING: 1 Applicants' request for one (1) Oversized Accessory Structure ("OAS") on the Subject Property is approved conditioned upon the execution of this Covenant by the City and the Applicants. The following conditions shall control the existence of the OAS: No future subdivision of the Subject Property will be approved that places the OAS within a lot that has no principal structure. Page 1 of 4 Should Applicants wish to subdivide the Subject Property, the OAS may remain without a principal structure for a period to be determined by the Orono City Council. If no principal structure is fully constructed and completed on the property by the end of the determined period, the OAS must be removed. Should Applicants subdivide the Subject Property, the OAS and the principal structure shall be located within the same lot, which meets the minimum lot area requirement based upon the size of the accessory building, which lot area requirement is detailed in Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(2) of the Orono Municipal Code. Setback requirements as defined in Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(a) shall also apply. 1 CITY OF ORONO: By: Its Mayor By: Its City Clerk ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument *vas acknowledged before me this 24th day of May, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono on behalf of the municipal corporation. Notary Public APPLICANT(S): By:___________ By: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (APPLICANTS) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ ________________________, 19 ___, by Alexander Johnston and Catherine Johnston (husband and wife) as their free act and deed. day of Notary Public- Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT A -qISw cTth. North«»t Ouart»; th«K« Sou^y dong toM W«t to a ^ -"ti Sdl;2i^, Ou.rt« .t il^. H-*-.. 0«rt« »-~. W-..1, *., «M S»». ... to i^SiW of tw5rrin«. .oc^dlna to »»>• Gov^wrtant Survey thereof. Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ORONO COVENANT FOR OVERSIZED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THIS COVENANT, made and entered into this day of ^ 19__, by Alexander Johnston and Catherine Johnston, property owners, (husband and wife), (hereinafter referred to as "Applicants") and the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Applicants have made application to the City for an accessory structure on property in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, legally described as: Exhibit A attached, Hennepin County, ^finnesota (hereinafter referred to as "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, City staff have reviewed Applicants' application and have found that the structure requested is defined within Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) of the Orono Municipal Code as an Oversized Accessory Structure ("OAS"); and WHEREAS, Applicants are aware that according to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(3)(c), specific conditions exist for an allowable OAS; and WHEREAS, Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(3)(c) allows issuance of a permit for relocation of the subject OAS conditioned upon the execution of this Covenant and its filing in Applicant's chain of title; and WHEREAS, in order to identify all parties within an interest in the subject property, the Applicants are required to provide title information to City staff as requested. All parties with an interest in this property shall sign this covenant. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES TO THIS COVENANT AGREE TO THE FOLLOWING: 1 Applicants' request for one (1) Oversized Accessory Structure ("OAS") on the Subject Property is approved conditioned upon the execution of this Covenant by the City and the Applicants. The following conditions shall control the existence of the OAS; No future subdivision of the Subject Property will be approved that places the OAS within a lot that has no principal structure. Page 1 of 4 3. Should Applicants wish to subdivide the Subject Property, the OAS may remain without a principal structure for a period to be determined by the Orono City Council. If no principal structure is fully constructed and completed on the property by the end of the determined period, the OAS must be removed. Should Applicants subdivide the Subject Property, the OAS and the principal structure shall be located within the same lot, which meets the minimum lot area requirement based upon the size of the accessory building, which lot area requirement is detailed in Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(2) of the Orono Municipal Code. Setback requirements as defined In Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(a) shall also apply. This Covenant shall be binding upon current and future owners of Subject Property, and shall be filed within the chain of title of the Subject Property. Page 2 of 4 ! TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:May 10,1999 SUBJECT:#2485 Alex and Cathy Johnston 940 South Brown Road Conditional Use Permit-Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District Lot Area:9 + acres (5,11 acres dry: 4.55 acres dry contiguous) Application: Applicant has filed a conditional use permit to allow a "guest house". A bam exists on the southeast portion of the property that the applicant is remodeling to install a guest apartment. The bam is classified as an oversized accessory stmcture as it exceeds 1,000 s.f. However on a property with 5.11 dry acres the lot is allowed one oversized accessory stmcture up to 2,200 s.f. The bam is 1,664 s.f in size. A condition of approval shall be the property owner file a restrictive covenant on the property that states the following: A.No future subdivision will be approved that places the stmcture within a lot that has no principal stmcture, except that the City in its subdivision approval may grant a finite time period in which the oversized accessory stmcture may remain without a principal stmcture, in order that a principal stmcture may be constmcted. At the end of this time period the oversized accessory stmcture must be removed if no principal stmcture has been constmcted. B. If the property is subdivided, the oversize accessory stmcture and principal stmcture will be located together within a lot that meets the minimum lot area requirement for the given size of accessory building. C.In subdivision approval, the setback required for the oversize accessory stmcture as defined herein shall remain. Such covenant shall be binding on current and future property owners and shall be filed in the chain of title of the property. 1 Site Analysis The property contains about 9 acres of which 4.55 acres is dry contiguous buildable land. Another 0.56 acre remnant piece is located adjacent to the dry buildable portion of the lot and essentially is contiguous since a culvert has been placed over this portion of the proj>erty for the driveway located to the south. Lots in the RR-1B district require two acres for the site to be considered buildable. A guest house CUP requires an additional two acres to maintain the zoning requirements for density in the locality. The property contains 4.55 acres dry buildable area. Guest houses must meet minimum principal building setbacks and be located behind the principal residence. The RR-IB zoning district requires the following: RR-IB (1 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Required 2 acres 4 acres for a guest house 200'50’30'50’ The bam meets all required setbacks. Septic Steve Weckman has approved a septic design for the property which includes the guest house. A bedroom addition has been placed on the principal residence with the condition the final inspection for the addition be held until the septic system has been replaced and approved by the City. The same condition shall be placed on the Conditional Use Permit request. A final inspection for the plumbing in the guest house shall not be approved until the septic system has been installed and is approved by the On-Sitc System Manager. Home Occupation A home occupation is any gainful occupation meeting all of the following requirements when engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling, when there is no employed assistant when that occupation is conducted within the principal stmcture only, when evidence of the occupation is not visible from the street. No signs other than those permitted in "R" Districts are present, no excessive stock in trade is stored on the premises, over the counter retail sales are not involved, and entrance to the home occupation is gained from within the structure. A professional person may use his/her residence for consultation, emergency treatment or performance of religious rites but not for the general practice of his/her profession when such general practice will involve the need for more than three off-street parking spaces for the occupant and visitors. Issues for Discussion 1. The property shall have a restrictive covenant placed on the chain of title stating the requirements for an oversized accessory building. 2. The proposal meets all requirements for a guest house lor lot area and structure setbacks. 3. The property does not have a conforming septic system. However the property owners have submitted a septic design that has been approved by the City. A condition of approval shall be the final plumbing inspection be held until the septic system .las been installed and approved by the City. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval for a guest house Conditional Use Permit for property located at 940 South Brown Road based on the structure meets the yard requirements established by the Municipal Code for a guest house CUP subject to the following conditions; 1. 2. The property owner files a restrictive covenant on the property for an oversized accessory structure. A final plumbing inspection be held until a septic system has been installed and approved by the City. Attachments A B C D E F G Application for Conditional Use Permit Location Map Site Topography Plat Map Survey Elevation View Property Owners List /A Applicatioii #* mff' Date Received Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address VJION ^ _ A ‘?‘VD 5. JZJoniQCiu___ Type of Application to be Filed LOin<!$TT,) -jOdiJii:ctibL 3 ^ / Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) APPLICANT Name fl:Ux ^ CA^jhii JohH‘Sf^VA Address S. (hrniL)f\ dd Phone (home) ~%6 _____ Phone (work ) ^*^{6 - *1L p \<J City lA)(^JjY^ Zip OWNER (if different than appUpant) Name ■7^'^----- Phone (home). Phone (work). Address City Zip, DMe^roperty Acquired qI (month/year) (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 Accessoiy Use $250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee 3 a OTHER applications _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule 2 mFU' ks M *8 0 THOtW^Wy r V 1 OCVUILA COUM - '- • 'g‘Orono, SI8I lOiaVIEW CR .................... 6CJI0 WOOD HR.L Line mm 400 MM600H WAT ORON ecnml S ** O^EIQ \ ’40 ^00 •^1 *,'Vi *-«•'.'; • >\;iJ * XjS V •8HEENTlRU!»y ; . *. .,. ns PRONQ\ i««« > 1600 • • • • •• '^09 V*5 1 '* s(Z9) ? S TWIT 33 S n»«P€iofB)i a| king ST THAT PMtT OOMRSmtM TO l< r 10. WJL 0. IITM> sne *L->3 w i V j *** V'V ~ •• .*» V- •• .*. (U) orwT I (16) out/ fmr 9 TUCT I (3) ?vr Cf n 1IUC1 i» I t (3) .• • ‘'T'vS t- 1- > / 'I O ! RUN DATE 04/12/99 ■ATCH 507 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATION SYSTEN PROPERTY ONNERS LIST PROP ADDR OWNER MAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR SO 10-117-2S 11 0001 00030 ADDRESS UNASSX6NED SUAD N AZHARI SUAD H A2HARX 1745 FOX ST HAYZATA HM 55391 . SO 10-117-23 11 0002 00030 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED nCLEOD CNTY REC RAIL AUTH DAKOTA RAIL INC 25 ADANS ST N HUTCHINSON HN 55350 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 10-117-23 12 0002 00920 BROWN RD S N J STRAND t C J B STRAND NICHOLAS 0 COLETTE STRAND 920 S BROWN RD S WAYZATA HM 55391 SO 10-117-23 12 0003 00930 BROWN RD S CARY D FRETHEXH ETAL CARY D FRETHEXH 930 BROWN ROAD HAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR SO 10-117-23 12 0005 01005 HERITAGE LA S L 0 L X LARSm STEPHEN L 0 LUCINDA X LARSON 1005 HERITAGE LA WAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 IS 0001 01000 BROWN RD S J A 0 P A ABBOTT ET AL JANES A 0 PATRICIA ABBOTT 4671 GENOA OR AMELIA ISLAND FL 32034 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER W^AMM SO 10-117-23 13 0009 01035 HERITAGE LA B C BJERKE B'N P BJERKE BLAIR C B NANCY P BJERKE 1035 HERITAGE LA HAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 13 0010 01005 HERITAGE LA JANES A SNYDER ETAL JANES A SNYDER 1005 HERITAGE LANE HAYZATA HN 55391 PROP'ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 10-117-23 21 0002 , 00030 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 30 10-117-23 21 0007 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSXGNED E S BORHAN 0 J E CORWIN JULIUS HENOEL C/0 BURT H CORWIN 400 1ST AVE M HPLS HN 55401 SB 10-117-23 24 0002 REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PACE 21 SO 10-117-23 12 0001 00060 BROWN RD S DAVID H SKEIE 0 WIFE DAVID H SKEIE 860 BROWN ROAD SOUTH HAYZATA HN 55391 . SO 10-117-23 12 0004 00940 BROWN RD S A I C JOHNSTON ALEXANOER/CATHERIHE JOHNSTON 940 BROWN RD S HAYZATA HN 55391 ID » I 30 10-117-23 IS 01025 HERITAGE DEAN B PATTERSON DEAN B PATTERSON 1025 HERITAGE LA WAYZATA HN • 55391 0000 LA If•i 30 10-117-23 14 0014 01700 SHORELINE DR IRWIN L JACOBS ET AL IRWIN L JACOBS 1700 SHORELINE DR HAYZATA HM 55391 30 10-117-23 24 0001 01025 BROWN RD S E S BORMAN 0 J E CORWIN JULIUS HENOEL C/0 BURT H CORWIN 400 1ST AVE NO HPLS HN 55401 I Application Date: 4/20/99 Completion Date: 4/20/99 60 Day Deadline: 6/19/99 COUNCIL MEETING MAr 4 1999 Cl I y Oh OHO/VO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 5/20/99 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Planning Intern Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2487 Roberta J. Roth 1251 Briar Street Variance-Public Hearing Zoning District:RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 Acre) Lot Area:10,500 s.f. Application: The applicant has proposed to remove an existing house and construct a new one on the existing foundation. The current foundation was replaced in 1985. The applicant seeks approval of a variance for lot area, lot width, front yard setback, side yard setback and side adjacent to street setback. The property is located within 500+ feet of French Lake. The review of hardcover was addressed in June, 1996 when the applicant applied for and received approval to construct a detached garage on the property. (The existing hardcover is 2,349.2 s.f. or 22.3%). The amount of hardcover for this property will not increase with replacement of the house. This application requires the following variance approval: 1. Variance from Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) : To permit a lot area, lot width, front yard, and side yard variance to allow a 1,008 square foot house to be built on an existing foundation. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission reconunended by a 4 to 0 vote to: Approve the application as presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PHONE:(612)249-4600 FAX:(612)249-4616 ZONING FILE #2487 NOTICE OF PLANNE nG COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 18,1999 TO:Roberta Roth Box 159 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING: May 17, 1999 VOTE:4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council May 24,1999, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X;\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS'CAROLE\PCACnONU487 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #2487 WHEREAS, Roberta J. Roth (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 1251 Briar Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; Lot 1 and the North Half of Lot 2, Block 3, Crystal Bay Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 17, 1999, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning tWs application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit removal of an existing house and construction of a new one on the existing foundation. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, 1. 2. 3. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2487. The property is located in the RR-IB, Zoning District, where 2 acres or 87,120 s.f. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of .25 acres or 10,500 s.f The Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 17, 1999 and recommended approval on a vote of 4 to 0. Page 1 of4 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact; A. The existing foundation is located in the front yard, side yard, and side yard adjacent to street setbacks. B. Replacing the structure will not increase hardcover or overall structural coverage. C. Replacing the structure will not further intensify development on the lot. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Plaiming Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby ^ants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit removal of existing house and construction of a new one on the existing foundation which encroaches front yard, sid'. yard and side yard adjacent to street setbacks. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 24, 2000). Page 2 of 4 Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of May, 1999, ATTEST Linda S, Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instniment was acknoA^edged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City, Notary Public Page 3 of 4 F STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said counQr, personally s^peared known to me to be the pcrson(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared Vnnwn to to be nerson^^^ described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 4 of 4 '4 1 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, Planning Intern DATE:May 10,1999 SUBJECT:#2487 Roberta J. Roth 1251 Briar Street Variances — Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District (2 Acres) (Property is located within a shoreland area approximately 500+ feet from a natural environment lake, French Lake.) Lot Area:10,500 s.f. Municipal sewer Application: The applicant has proposed to remove an existing house and construct a new one on the existing foundation. The current foundation was replaced in 1985. The applicant seeks approval of a variance for lot area, lot width, front yard setback, side yard setback and side adjacent to street setback. The property is located within 500+ feet of French Lake. The review of hardcover was addressed in June, 1996 when the applicant applied for and received approval to construct a detached garage on the property. (The existing hardcover is 2,349.2 s.f. or 22.3 %.) The amount of hardcover for this property will not increase with replacement of the house. This application requires the following variance: 1. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B): To permit a lot area, lot width, front yard, and side yard variance to allow a 1,008 square foot house to be built on an existing foundation. U2487 Roberta Roth 1251 Briar Street Variance 5/10/99 Page 1 i [ ANALYSIS Pertinent Ordinances: Section: 10.28 RR-IB One Family Rural Residential Zoning District. Lot Area and Yards: RR-IB (2 Acres) Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adj. to Street Required 87,120 s.f.200'50'30'50' Proposed 10,500 s.f.75'35.5'25.9'15.2' Structural Coverage: Statement of Hardship: Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 10,500 s.f.Allowed: 1,575.0 s.f. Existing: 1,429.2 s.f. Proposed: 1,429.2 s.f. 15.0% 13.6% 13.6% The applicant has included her statement of hardship in Exhibit A. The applicant should also be asked for her testimony regarding this issue. H2487 Roberta Roth 1251 Briar Street Variance 5/10/99 Page 2 J V r ' issues for consideration: 1. The existing house will be replaced over a newer foundation. 2. Replacing the structure will not further intensify development on the lot. 3. Other issues raised by planning commission. * Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variance. An existing foundation will not increase hardcover or overall structural coverage, There is not another location on the property where the applicant could construct a house without encroaching into setbacks. The house must be placed over existing "newer” foundation. Attachments A Application B Site Plan/Survey C New House Plan D Plat Map £ Location Map F Site Topography G Property Owners List H Permit Record U2487 Roberta Roih 1251 Briar Street Variance 5/10/99 Page 3 A Application # ^ ^ ST Date Receiv ^ Amount Paid ZS'O .» .* • cmr OF ORONO - variance application• • . . Initial ApplicationFee - $250.00.. .(S50.00 per each additional variance) . Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from ori^al application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) •• • • i PROPERTY INFORMATION She Address ' /Z.57 B/j/^ 6j Property Identification Number (P.I.D.1 Ih-It n-2./ Attach legal description to a^Ucation if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired _______________________(mon^year) I (do) (do not) also own adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: )[ residential ___pother (specify) Zoning District:, RmiL t •• %*!} Address: 12 SI BR Ik OWNER Of different than applicant) Name h Address:City:. Phone fliome"! V2fa - PhoneCwork) ^*70. *1 ~ j __Zip: \ Phone (home)______________ Phone (work)___________ _______________Zip:_______ V ;•} *-i c\vm^0£MiL "..il DESCRIPTTON OF REQUEST . . Estimated Construction Cost $ . (ThDescribe request in detsil; R/UL/iU//} (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED . X Lot Area X. Lot Width Setback:Xfront ___Hardcover X. Side ^ Rear Lot Coverage Average l^eshore 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): ^ t • t •• ••• •i • #• ••• ^ • •• . *• • : • • •• « » - if 3i S09'26*30^£140.0 ..••• s V O.^-- • .:-'8 • • A ^ . •Ju *.. ts > ^ •• ...........^• a r ^ r ^#1 P ' Housk c 81 ,,, /|. 0.9T t <* •• •• •••^ 2 • • • • t. •• !• •‘ •! I t I f I* I I % 9 • >• I I V ;• ; .I*... N87*26'30“i/W.0 *. t • .# . •oy • • •• • •;s • • • • . • f. 3 • 8. 15 rspo V} CU Ili C ‘ §J ? . <• • •. • : I • • • %« •.V • ,» » LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES;. Lot*1 and the North half of Lot*2, Block 3, Crystal Bay‘Minnetonka. •• • ; • •• • .»• • ^.. o:'denotes iron marker set •: denotes iron marker found jf- *r» y. .. Bearijigs shown are based upon an assumed datum*. • • • V/ • •oo * ✓ • • • # This .survey intends to show the'boundaries of the above ‘y*/ .described property, and the location of an existing house yand shed thereon. It does not purport to show any other-. improvements or encroachments. • * • I i«Tbe HtMtluiumd ll Model Home On Display mm ■•V * 4.- -C■ T ^5:»- -= •:, •;,' •, pS. ^ v; ?\v 7-' ^ ■-•. iTri-^jj.r<' —t rruj -V;:-' » p-.^i?ii/piaiBfrai ^7.' II •V. k£ sis i.‘irr :i ri m 'i - -i^—> Tt X The Merickel fiorthwood 11 is a spacious two bedroom ranch style home, it features a cathedral ceiling over the large living room, dining and kitchen area with flat ceilings In the bath & bedrooms.Thehome has ample cabinets & plenty of closet space. It Is Ideal for the budget minded home buyer or as a vacation retreat. 1,008 sq. ft. Home • “* •**'s,.. vv^. .'i n i •t 1 : •• •• ,•• t !i j • . ••• • •‘■S MERICKEL'S P.O. Box 471 Wadena, Minnesota Dial 218-631-3570 Located V4 Miie West on Highway 10 • • 17b • • • • • • •/3-//7-Z3'23 N a' S 50 .247.8 \ 1 59.6 OUTLOT B /i o IWTSrillK^— 4 —a a V o ^^ AC 75) 8 . V K \ 16 140 7. /<5-i(7-23-3i T 140 l«! N 140 4 a IM te-140 \ 140 B 140 12 » ( B N 11 I (39) CD ::d I—I B NNETONKA 140 B 2,/X33) V *\ 8 i40,„V n| . 7 140 140 V\ 8 V CRYSTAL IB 208 to 122 (44) R 208 co(18) 00' ' (19) §— 0to (17) 208 72 50 CaI 00 00 . 800 FRENCH LAKE '..IGREENTL^^ MS' ?T&pS^ •* • *® •••A ORONQ 1600 Smith Bb •*»• **.•- • • •4«* i •* iasitm MINNEtONKA • •• • • ••• . .;; §)§5fcBo}s-i M /if •*! C • Vr • 2800 Island • •.•••• •• • • \ / Bracketts Point • • • • • • • . -J •• •• • * •• * .. .=4 : . • •• • •. .-.. v^.V:‘£:;r;. \V . ' .. • ♦• •.•.. .• •• <. • ... . i • • • . • I • • ••.*».• \• , • ••..I .* • •. t 4 • Potn Charm \ V RUN OATS 05/19/90 BATCH 502 PROP AOOR SO 10-117-23 23 0004' 00030 ADDRESS UNASSX6NED ONNER NAHE HICHAEL M CASHHAN SR ET AL TAXPAYER' MICHAEL W CASHHAN SR NANE/ADDR 1205 FRENCH CREEK CXR HAYZATA MN 55391 SO 10-117-23 31 0030 PROP ADOR ■ 01270 BRIAR ST OVNER NAHE JOHN C RANCE TAXPAYER JOHN C RANGE HAHE/ABDR P 0 BOX.IOS ' CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 SO 10-117-23 31 0043 01291 BRXAR ST K CURLEY S.H KELLETT KEVXN CURLEY NAHE/ADOR 1291 BRIAR ST S PO BOX 41 CRYSTAL BAV HN 55323 PROP AODR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER . PROP ABM SO 10-117-23 31 0102 01261 BRXAR ST NAHE ' ROBERTA JEAN ROTH TAXPAYER ROBERTA JEAN ROTH ’ NAHE/ABM 1251 BRXAR ST CRYSTAL BAY HN 55391 PROP ABM OWNER NANS TAXPAYER NAHE/ABM HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST TOTAL BATCH 502 00012 30 10-117-23 31 0036 02160 CRYSTAL AVE H S J BLUE MARCUS J K JUDY A DLUE 2160 CRYSTAL AVE HAYZATA HN 55391 30 .10-117-23 31 0039 01250 BRXAR ST UURXE A PEARSON UURXE A PEARSON 1250 BRXAR ST HAYZATA HN 55391' 30 10-117-23 31 0073 01245 ARBOR ST' KAREN E BJERKENG KAREN E BJERKENG 1245 ARBOR ST HAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 32 0004 02220. FRENCH CREEK CXR A H AYERS 0 E AYERS A MERRILL AYERS 2220 FRENCH CREEK CXR HAYZATA HN 55391 • REPORT NO. PX4354C1 PAGE' 2 30 10-117-23 31 0037 01290 BRXAR ST DEAN TLUNDBLAO DEAN T LUNDBLAD 1290 BRXAR ST HAYZATA MN 55391 30 10-117-23 31 0042 01261 BRXAR ST GIL PRXNTUP GARY N PRXNTUP P 0 BOX .104 1261 BRXAR CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 30 10-117-23 31 0093 02170 MINNETONKA AVE H I J NC CLELLAND MICHAEL P HC CLELLAND 2170 MINNETONKA AVE N P Of BOX 45 . CRYSTAL DAY HN 55323 SO 10-117-23 32 0005 02235 FRENCH CREEK CXR B S I J SXKKA . BAUXT I JASHXNDER SXKKA 2235 FRENCH CREEK CXR HAYZATA HN 55391 • * % • • • . U- O A G ^irW 24 b • • ). . ' r) . ■T • « • » / 351 Bnsr s\r. PERMIT RECORD Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline 4/21/99 4/21/99 6/20/99 COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 U1Y UH OHONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 5/19/99 ITEM NO.: \(^ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2493 Katherine Taylor's Homes, Inc. 692 Tonkaw'a Road Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:15,883.8 square feet (.36 acre) PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 4 to 0 vote to: Approve variance to construct a second story deck and spiral staircase to the existing residence, Deny variances to permit a two stall detached garage near the street property line. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending denial of the application for additional structure for the garage. The lot would be developed beyond the 15% allowed for this lot. Staff is recommending approval of the variance for the deck above the attached garage. The hardcover will not increase and the structure will meet the required 10' side yard setback for the Tuning district, and it will provide access to a sliding glass door being located on the second floor. Application: The applicant has requested several variances to construct a two car garage where a one car garage exists, and 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 application requires the following variances: 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2): To allow 4,765.2 s.f. (49.7%) of hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback, wherv 4,765.2 s.f. (49.7%) exists and 2,397 s.f. (25%) is allowed, to permit the addition of 6.6' by 23.6' deck and spiral staircase to be constructed above the existing two car attached garage. The hardcover will not increase because the deck will be located over existing hardcover (driveway in front of the garage). However this does warrant a variance due to the site plan would be changed and the deck intensifies the hardcover on the lot. 2.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2): To allow 1,756 s.f. (70.2%) of hardcover in the 250-500' lakeshore setback, where 1,063 s.f. (42.5%) exists and 750 s.f. (30%) is allowed, to permit the construction of a two stall detached garage 30' from the right-of-way and 10' from the side lot line. The garage would replace the existing one stall garage located 10' from Tonkawa Road. The applicant has stated they would construct a second stall on the existing garage rather than building a new garage. This option would require setback variances. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PHONE:(612)249-4600 FAX:(612)249-4616 TO: Katherine Taylor's Homes, Inc. 1665 County Road 24 Medina, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETBVG: 5/17/99 ZONING FILE #2493 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 18, 1999 COPIES TO: Barbara Pugh 692 Tonkawa Road Orono, MN 55356 VOTE:4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: To approve variances to permit 4,765.2 s.f. (49.7%) hardcover in the 75-250' setback for a second story deck and attached spiral stairs on the existing residence. To deny a hardcover and structural coverage variance to permit a two stall detached garage at the rear of the property. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council May 24, 1999, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X;\APPS.WPWIN60\WPDOCSCAROLEUX:ACTIONV2493 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L)(2) AND DENYING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L)(2) FILE #2493 WHEREAS, Katherine Taylor’s Homes (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in 692 Tonkawa Road and Barbara Pugh is owner of the property located at 692 Tonkawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: The northwesterly half of Lot 7, Parten's Point, First Division, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 17, 1999, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2): to allow 4,765.2 s.f (49.7%) of hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback, where 4,765.2 s.f (49.7%) exists and 2,397 s.f (25%) is allowed, to permit the addition of 6.6' by 23.6' deck and spiral staircase to be constructed above the existing two car attached garage; and Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2): to allow 1,756 s.f (70.2%) of hardcover in the 250-500' lakeshore setback, where 1,063 s.f (42.5%) exists and 750 s.f (30%) is allowed, to permit the construction of a two stall detached garage 30' from the right-of-way and 10' from the side lot line. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Page 1 of 5 1 2 FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2493. The property is located in the LR-IB, Zoning District, where 1 acre or 43,560 s.f. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of .36 acre or 15,883.8 s.f The Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 17. 1999 and on a vote of 4 to 0 recommended approval of a variance to permit an attached deck to the residence and recommended denial of variances to permit construction of a two stall detached garage on the property. The Orono Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The deck meets all required setbacks for the zoning district. B The hardcover will not increase in the 75-250' lakeshore setback, C.The two stall garage would increase the amount of structural coverage on the lot to exceed 15% as allowed by code. The property contains a two stall attached garage and a one stall detached garage. E. The detached garage is a non-conforming structure. F. Additional garage space will significantly increase the amount of hardcover on the property. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the property owner, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial Page 2 of 5 property right of the property owner; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City, 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2): to allow 4,765.2 s.f (49.7%) of hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback, where 4,765.2 s.f (49.7%) exists and 2,397 s.f (25%) is allowed, to permit the addition of 6.6' by 23.6' deck and spiral staircase to be constructed above the existing two car attached garage; and denies variances to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2): to allow 1,756 s.f (70.2%) of hardcover in the 250-500' lakeshore setback, where 1,063 s.f (42.5%) exists and 750 s.f (30%) is allowed, to permit the construction of a two stall detached garage 30' from the right-of-way and 10' from the side lot line. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the property owner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 24, 2000). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned property owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of May, 1999, ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public (■ Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) On this day of 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) On this day of . 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 r TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:May 10,1999 SUBJECT: #2493 Katherine Taylor's Homes, Inc. 692 Tonkawa Road ___________Variances-Public Hearing _________ Zoning District: LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:15,883.8 square feet (.36 acre) Application: The applicant has requested several variances to construct a two car garage where a one car garage exists, and 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 application requires the following variances: 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2): To allow 4,765.2 s.f. (49.7%) of hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback, where 4,765.2 s.f. (49.7%) exists and 2,397 s.f. (25%) is allowed, to permit the addition of 6.6* by 23.6* deck and spiral staircase to be constructed above the existing two car attached garage. The hardcover will not increase because the deck will be located over existing hardcover (driveway in front of the garage). However this does warrant a variance due to the site plan would be changed and the deck intensifies the hardcover on the lot. 2.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2): To allow 1,756 s.f. (70.2%) of hardcover in the 250-500' lakeshore setback, where 1,063 s.f. (42.5%) exists and 750 s.f (30%) is allowed, to permit the construction of a two stall detached garage 30* from the right-of-way and 10* from the side lot line. The garage would replace the existing one stall garage located 10' from Tonkawa Road. The applicant has stated they would construct a second stall on the existing garage rather than building a new garage. This option would require setback variances. Option A - New two stall detached garage Option B - Add a second stall to the existing detached garage U2493 Katherine Taytor*s Homes 692 Torkawa Road Variances 5/17/99 Page I 3. Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B): To permit a 30’ street setback for a two stall garage where 35' is required by the Zoning District. 4. Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C): To permit structural lot coverage to exceed 15% on the lot. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.24, LR-IB Zoning District Section 10.22, Subd. 2: Allowed Hardcover Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(1): Allowed Hardcover i^249} Katherine Taylor*s Homes 692 TonkaMfa Road Variances 5/! 7/99 Page! •f i £ T.ot Area and Yards ANALYSIS LR-IB (1 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 43,560 s.f.140’75’10'35’ Proposed 15,883.8 s.f.51'NA 10’30’ Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0-75’3,796 s.f.259.2 s.f (6.8%) none (0%) 259.2 s.f (6.8%) none 75-250’9,587.8 s.f.4,765.2 s.f (49.7%) 2,397 s.f (25%) 4,765.2 s.f (49.7%) To permit a change in hardcover 250-500’ Option A 2,500 s.f 1,063 s.f (42.5%) 750 s.f (30%) 1,756 s.f (70.2%) To permit additional hardcover 250-500’ Option B 2,500 s.f 1,063 s.f (42.5%) 750 s.f (30%) 1,323 s.f (52.9%) To permit additional hardcover Structural Coverage i^249} Katherine Taylor's Homes 692 Tonkayva Road yariances 3/17/99 Page 2 Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 15,883.8 s.f Existing: 2,230.6 s.f 14.0% Proposed A: 2,764.6 s.f.17.4% Proposed B: 2,607.6 s.f 16.4% The additional structural lot coverage for A is from the following: New deck = 157 s.f. New garage = 572 s.f. Removal of the existing one stall garage = 195 s.f. The additional structural lot coverage for B is from the following: New deck = 157 s.f. Expanded garage = 220 s.f. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant has included a letter of proposal included as Exhibit B. The applicant should also be asked for his testimony regarding this issue. Issues 1. 2. 3. The residence does not have a basement, the applicants are requesting additional storage space. The applicant is requesting the expansion of a one car detached garage within the setbacks established on the property and the addition of a deck on the rear of the house. The deck is additional structure and intensifies the amount of hardcover, however it is placed above existing hardcover. The applicant has proposed two options (A and B) for a two car detached garage. Option A is for a garage that meets the side yard setback requirement and moves the structure 30' from the right-of-way. This option creates more hardcover and structure than option B. Option B has added an additional stall to an existing non-conforming structure. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending denial of the application for additional structure for the garage. The lot would be developed beyond the 15% allowed for this lot. Staff is recommending approval of the variance for the deck above the attached garage. The hardcover will not increase and the structure will meet the required 1 O' side yard setback for the zoning district, and it %\ ill provide access to a sliding glass door being located on the second floor. U249} Kalherine Taylor's Homes 692 Tonkawa Road Variances 5/17/99 Page A Attachments n I* A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q Application Letter of Request/Hardship Statement Existing Site Survey Proposed Garage Addition - Option A Elevation View - Option A Dimensions - Option A Proposed Garage Addition - Option B Elevation View - Option B Dimensions - Option B Hardcover - 250-500' • Option A Hardcover - 250-500' - Option B Elevation View for Deck Addition Elevation View for Deck Addition (Side) Property Owners List Site Topography Location Map Plat Map §2493 Katherine Taylor's Homes 692 Tonkavn Road Varlanees 5/17/99 Fag! 5 J 4 A Application # ^^193 Date Received */~21- ^ *f Amount Paid ^SO CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from ori^nal application) Variance for non<conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION She Address 2.. f P. - Property Identification Number fP.I.D.) 1ST Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_________________i_________________________(mont ^^^^e^) I (do) (do not ) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: U^esidential ___pother (specify) Zoning District:'?_______________________________ Phone (home).APPLICANT Name • Phonefwork ) _____ Address: PCt *2A^ Citv: _____Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name fU6+t__ Address: Phone fhome ^ I Phone (work ) I o>\ ^Citv:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ Estimated Construction Cost $ ^0/OPQ l^^g)0O ______ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width \r Hardcover Setback:Front Side Rear Lot Coverage It ■'Average Lakeshore Other (specify) X:i ■HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: -« ^><Sg AT7^g>affP______:_________:Okl (attach additional sheets if necessary)U A .. • '1 /• /' \/ ' V ■ \r.-/. jj .'B/ V *.EiBHERINEltaflKS / VERY DISTINCTIVE HOMES / ("f% ' - Q-^ u,) , ; • ■ ; • m % m ~ I^y^fpjr P5ll6:T2? *1H6 ^ ‘TWC Tvte« (Niu. 1^^ ^ t(m wwuY ~ ^IW1V^»&•.^Trt^ ^^/M6^- IHg HsfAe _____ pfc.o«3r>i^ yMW IMVUU is^ ^ ^V ^f^tse u^ P6«ViifCP 'TttS ©<W9TVJ^' ' - >PPW?5^ WB ^ % ^'\Y\/i/AMy^ V '• ^ < ‘ f *is#: £atheriii£ T»yk>t*a 665 County JIomI 34 Medwi.MN 55356 Coiy Miskowic Office (612) 473-1160 PzgfJ (6J2) 908-7878 ,V':4^$ lame (612) 536-9965 Fax (613) 473-341 Katherine T aylor ’S Homes , iNc; . ■ / 1665 Coont]r Road 24 »:« Medina, Minneioia 5)3)6 >:* 612-475-I160 *••» fax 6*2-473-34l4 MS Coatrictor s Liceau ^4*38 it i rr^TirapIn *' .^r* ff • ‘J Jf (. *»,V‘V.r .■y ^ // b •*» >aA) ilA»* ^•y' ?T IV. s«»*»\ i/a-\ \ I K •« .V %o\ • « t 0T96 b! : 2 § V V vo/ft \.HardcoverPercentage1 S? « 11^" 33 cvr•Oi rj voT . s 3 O 1 1 1 LandscapeAreasK•Cl 159.2____Llfi_____1 i11Decks\____________________»0• VO n*• VQcn»o 1 jConcrete1[_______________________________________________1 ?«V| 1 Drive waj11 2,959.2 2 il i i . \I t) 1 1 • 5^1 11House1 ftj S% •*% 1 Parcel .4rea In ZoneVO 8 0> CQ • vr> CT^ 1 LakeshoreSetbackZone8 1 «o Js «o 0 lo 1• 0l / I / .Is s? .5 Vi r ii -5^ § 842^00 00 r ^ /a; ‘1 ^ i • lu © /y // l l #•(0'f* .. .i-v-.j //. •• • ••** ; Af* ir. (L^'' QL=i5i' • * IL •• '■V.,' CLT-% iiti ■•• * '^^‘*y** -r;X:El. PU6H-McCreight Residence (Option A)KATHY TAYLOR KATHERINE TAYLOR'S HOMES, INC 1665 COUNTY ROAD 24 MEDINA, MN 55356 612-475-1160 F--------11,-----------------------------------------------------26*----------------------------------- , . ___ OVfi ---------------------------------'+4*6.--------=“ 1 4 1----v/yy/y/yy/////////////// '^/////////////y///////////////^////y/y//7 y c\ 777777777777y o Ci <> X X /. <3:/, 6ARA6E 21'x2V O z g- z O ENTRY _3’6x21'_ 2a z y/////////X>//////////////////////////A//////w//////////////77/^ --Ifl Katherine Taylor Homes Proposed 6araye for the PU6H-McCreiyht Residence 6^12 Tonkatua Rd., Orono © 7 I < i '%\o // /? -'w ' "l ’ r.CV V..) ;.) .!•■■ . , . :.*wi "j Ji2Bc.- r - *•>. f.-. 'A ‘ ' // (iJ y V \ \\ N X \ \X \ - -- —__________________________________________ 1 1 —1 1 : —1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 —1 1 • 1 1 — • • 1 1 - • • •mmmrn • * PU6H-McCreight Residence (Option B) KATHY TAYLOR KAIHERINE TAYLOR'S HOMES, INC 1665 COUNTY ROAD 24 NA,MN 55356 612-475-1160 i <>_________________________________ I N EXI5TIN6 6ARA6E I 1Tdx«»'10 CH O (Catherine Taylor Homes (OPTION B) Proposed Oaraye Addition for the PU6H- McCREIOHT Residence 6*12 Tonkaiua Rd. Orono ^ PROPOSED 6ARA6E I 21 ‘4x<1'6 i M. O W ^ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSfljaJ* SETBACK ZONE: (CmCLE ONE) 0-75’75-250’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZO;^. A. House Length Width X X X B. Garage I&.&• \0,^ C. Driveway ^2. X X & D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic 1*2.X X X G. Other A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE \0t3> + B + B _____ PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length Width X X X B. C. Garage Driveway 'Urn n.'L '22. X X 1*2^ D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other total HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 1154^ * B *20^ ^50-500}500-1000 .3 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 3^S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. \0(o^ X 100 X 100 _ S.F. _ S.F. -^23 __yo % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ^CiL S.F. S.F. cs a S.F. S.F. A B L 0 •» *1 S.F. S.F. /<7T^ ‘'*7'h S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. X 100 - S.F. A S.F. B % SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSfl^fiT 75-250’ (250-500) 500-1000 EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway la.^. ^2. X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paiio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic nz X X X G, Other A A TOTAL HARDCOVER FN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B it 100 + B _______X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway •2Z.to T2T X X \Z:____ D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _ 1^2^ - B X 100 s S.F. s S.F. t=S.F. s S.F. \‘1&S.F. • S.F. SB ZS>(^S.F. S.F. ss S.F. SI S.F. ss S.F. 8 36.S.F. =S.F. B S.F. S.F. m S.F. m S.F. »^23 % B •/o XX • S.F. • S.F. 8 S.F. 8 S.F. «S.F. • • S.F. 8 S.F. J>fO 8 S.F. 8 S.F. a S.F. 8 S.F. 36.S.F. 8 S.F. 8 S.F. s S.F. •1523 S.F. m S.F. 8 32.•/o A B A- a ORONODOPY mJN DATE OA/16/99 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIA35901 PACE 37 BATCH 511 PirOP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR SB 05-117-23 33 0010 00580 TONXAWA RD MELINDA LEE MELINDA LEE 660 TONKAWA RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 33 0011 00684* TONKAWA RD J P 8 K A ROESLER JOHN P 8 KRISTI A ROESLER 684 TONKAWA RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 33 0012 00690 TONKAWA RD M S BRADLEY 8 0 M BRADLEY MICHAEL S 8 OLIVIA M BRADLEY 690 TOraCAWA RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 05-117-23 33 0013 00692 TONKAWA RD BARBARA PUGH BARBARA PUGH 692 TONKAWA RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 33 0014 00700 TONKAWA RD T H SPOONER 8 J H SPOONER TED H SPOONER 10085 SUMAC CIR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 38 05-117-23 33 0015 00712 TONKAWA RD THOMAS P GOODYEAR THOMAS P GOODYEAR 712 TONKAWA RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 i •r PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 05-117-23 33 0019 00645 TONKAWA RD TEMPLE ISRAEL OF MINNEAPOLIS TEMPLE ISRAEL OF MINNEAPOLIS 2324 EMERSON AVE S MPLS MN 55405 38 05-117-23 34 0002 00720 TONKAWA RD P J MIDDLETON ET AL P J 8 K J MIDDLETON 720 TONKAWA RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 511 00008 * / is • I X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATIDN OF ZNFORHATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE OH THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF NY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE • ^ _ \ \ ✓ U(t«r 929.6 Site NI6H eiLnii ST 5CHHSTI»ii os «*ninoini - 7, tooiw MMcnn •. ^ . T * ^ •• % :> • V.. *-,w •- 400 r^SjngC^ *tgi,521 Line ■TrsH SATS Df RO WHrU! ElM J- \ ' '*‘c^morth o Wi \ rax rax 8CC U r j’ • M \0AHL 80^ *1- V iForest LArjAV •w A •MID T I •W j*: y* '£a/Ee !•. VD :VlV >-S •• » ,• cMBiar \voos • ^ -w « W1W ' ^ •* «r- * __ •• •. / * «^ • • ORONO cr>'. - .ilOMIIS -—.■ : ‘.wtiiT .vu »* —. V ^ • 4. ^ V- ' > -%r ’ 7 » -■ V ‘ _• I Q »>ia«TBI0MI CKSOM AVI 0 RO o CO -Ilf ^ITW ■ Spring cmr. UMiaSSTl ^ysNOAiuati o LTMC 240 ,. minnetonk; ... Application Date: 4/21/99 Completion Date: 5/4/99 60 Day Deadline: 7/3/99 COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ci i y uhqno DATE: 5/19/99 ITEM NO.: y'9 Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: ^2494 Dan Andersen 2885 Little Orchard Way Variance-Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District (2 Acre) Lot Area:2.0 acres Application: The applicant has requested 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' side yard setback. It was the subdivider’s intent the building be removed, however the applicant has requested the stable be moved to a conforming location on the lot. The building would be moved away from Little Orchard Way to the rear of tlie lot meeting all required yard setbacks. Setbacks were applied as regulated in the Zoning Code, 30' for side yards and 50' for front and rear yards. Because the lot is located at the end of a cul-de-sac the lot has five sides. The front yard was determined to be that portion of the lot adjacent to the cul-de-sac (Little Orchard Way). The side yards are the south and eastern lot lines, and the lot has two identified rear lot lines. The applicant has requested the City allow the west property line to be identified as a side lot line to allow a 30’ setback ratlier than 50' as required for rear yards. This application requires the following approvals: 1. 2. Variance from Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) Accessory Buildings: States accessory- buildings are not allowed to exist on a lot without a principal building. The property owners will move the existing stable to the rear of the lot from its non-conforming location. Establishing a 30' side yard setback for the west property line. The Little Orchard Addition defined this property line as a rear lot line requiring a 50' setback. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION; The Planning Commission recommended by a 4 to 0 vote to: Approve the application as presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION; To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PHONE:(612)249-4600 FAX;(612)249-4616 TO: Dan Andersen 2730 Fembrook Lane Plymouth, MN 55447 TYPE OF APPLICATION: DATE OF MEETING: 5/17/99 Variance ZONING FILE #2494 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 18, 1999 COPIES TO: VOTE:4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council May 24, 1999, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS\WPWINW\WPDOCSX: AR0LE'J>CACT10N\2494 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (A) AMENDING fHE ESTABLISHED YARD DESIGNATION WITHIN THE LITTLE ORCHARD SUBDIVISION FILE #2494 WHEREAS, Daniel Andersen (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in the property located at 2885 Little Orchard Way and Scott Jagodzinski and Jackie Jagodzinski are owners of the property located at 2885 Little Orchard Way within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 3, Block 1, Little Orchard, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"), and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 17, 1999, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) to permit an oversized accessory building to be relocated on the property absent of a principal structure. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, i-INDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2494. 2.The property is located in the RR-IB, Zoning District, where 2 acres or 87,120 s.f is the minimum lot area. The property consists of 2.0 acres. Page 1 of 5 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 17, 1999, and recommended approval on a vote of 4 to 0. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The final subdivision approval for Little Orchard designated front, side and rear yard property boundaries for each lot within Little Orchard. Lot 3, Block 1 is located on Little Orchard Way which ends in a cul-de-sac. The lot was determined to have two rear yard property lines; however, the south property line will :erve as the font yard when the lot is developed. The west property line was established as a rear yard requiring a 50' setback; however, it will function as a side yard once the lot is developed. B C E. The fi^ont yard shall be extended to include the entire south property line. The stable located on the property is a significant historic structure that is approximately 90 years old. 1 he stable is located near the fi'ont of the property. Property owners will relocate the building to the rear of the lot allowing a suitable building site for a new residence. The stable is an oversized accessory structure requiring a restrictive covenant to be recorded on the chain of title. F.Accessory structures are not permitted to be located closer to the front property line than a principal structure. Relocating the building to the rear of the property will allow a suitable building site without requiring variances. G. The stable is existing within the side yard setback requirement of 30'. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor Page 2 of 5 pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the property owners, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the property owners; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) to permit an oversized accessoiy building to be relocated on the property absent of a principal structure. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Property owners to file a restrictive covenant on the property notifying future property owners of the oversized accessory building. The residence shall be constructed on the lot that will not orient a back yard to the west property line and the front yard classification be extended to include the entire southern property line. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the property owners, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 24, 2000). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned property owners have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Miimesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. ) On this day of ,199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 CITY OF ORONO COVENANT FOR OVERSIZED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THIS COVENANT, made aiid entered into this day of , 19__, by Scott Jagodzinski and Jackie Jagodzinski, property o\vners, (husband and wife), (hereinafter referred to as "Applicants") and the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City"). WITNESSETH; WHEREAS, Applicants have made application to the City for an accessory structure on p-roperty in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, legally described as: Lot 3, Block 1, Little Orchard, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, City staff have reviewed Applicants' application and have found that the structure requested is defined within Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) of the Orono Municipal Code as an Oversized Accessory Structure ("OAS"); and WHEREAS, Applicants are aware that according to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(3)(c), specific conditions exist for an allowable OAS; and WHEREAS, Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(3)(c) allows issuance of a permit for relocation of the subject OAS conditioned upon the execution of this Covenant and its filing in Applicant's chain of title; and WHEREAS, in order to identify all parties within an interest in the subject property, the Applicants are required to provide title information to City staT as requested. All parties with an interest in this property shall sign this covenant. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES TO THIS COVENANT AGREE TO THE FOLLOWING: 1.Applicants' request for one (1) Oversized Accessory Structure ("OAS") on the Subject Property is approved conditioned upon the execution of this Covenant by the City and the Applicants. 2. The following conditions shall control the existence of the OAS: No future subdivision of the Subject Property will be approved that places the OAS within a lot that has no principal structure. Page 1 of 3 3. Should Applicants wish to subdivide the Subject Property, the OAS may remain without a principal structure for a period to be determined by the Orono City Council. If no principal structure is fully constructed and completed on the property by the end of the determined period, the OAS must be removed. Should Applicants subdivide the Subject Property, the OAS and the principal structure shall be located within the same lot, which meets the minimum lot area requirement based upon the size of the accessory building, which lot area requirement is detailed in Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(2) of the Orono Municipal Code. Setback requirements as defined in Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C)(a) shall also apply. This Covenant shall be binding upon current and future owners of Subject Property, and shall be filed within the chain of title of the Subject Property. Page 2 of 3 CITY OF ORONO: By:. Its Mayor By:. Its City Clerk ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 24th day of May, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono on behalf of the municipal corporation. Notary Public APPLICANT(S): By:. By:. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (APPLICANTS) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ _______________________, 19___, by Scott Jagodzinski and Jackie Jagodzinski (husband day of and wife) as their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 3 of 3 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:May 10,1999 SUBJECT: #2494 Dan Andersen 2885 Little Orchard Way Variance-Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 Acre) Lot Area:2.0 acres Application: The applicant has requested 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' side yard setback. It was the subdivider’s intent the building be removed, however the applicant has requested the stable be moved to a conforming location on the lot. The building would be moved away from Little Orchard Way to the rear of the lot meeting all required yard setbacks. Setbacks were applied as regulated in the Zoning Code, 30' for side yards and 50' for front and rear yards. Because the lot is located at the end of a cul-de-sac the lot has five sides. The front yard was determined to be that portion of the lot adjacent to the cul-de-sac (Little Orchard Way). The side yards are the south and eastern lot lines, and the lot has two identified rear lot lines. The applicant has requested the City allow the west property line to be identified as a side lot line to allow a 30' setback rather than 50' as required for rear yards. This application requires the following approvals: 1.Variance from Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) Accessory Buildings: States accessory buildings are not allowed to exist on a lot without a principal building. The property ovraers will move the existing stable to the rear of the lot from its non-conforming location. 2.Establishing a 30' side yard setback for the west property line. The Little Orchard Addition defined this property line as a rear lot line requiring a 50' setback. U2494 Dan Andinen 2885 Little Orchard iray VarLmct 5/nm Page \ ANALYSIS T.ot Area and Yards RR-IB (2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Side Yard Street/Rear Yard Required 2 ac.200'30'50' Existing 2 ac.\1T NA NA The lot was granted a variance for lot width as part of the subdivision approval. A building permit can be issued without Planning Commission and City Council approval should the plan conform to requirements of the Zoning Chapter, e.xcept lot width. ANALYSIS Variance STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant has included his statement of hardship and description of request as Exhibit B. The applicant should also be asked for his testimony regarding this issue. Accessory Building (Stable) The building to remain on the property has been located on the site for a long period of time. It is a non-conforming structure as a result of the location of the building within the required side yard setback. Relocation of the stable to the rear of the property will place it within the building envelope. It also moves the structure away from Little Orchard Way to the rear of the property where an accessory building normally is constructed. Code requires principal buildings be located closer to the front lot line than accessory buildings. Relocating the stable to the rear of the property allows the lot to open for construction of a residence. The stable is located only 62' from the front lot line. A variance would be required to construct a house behind the accessory building because accessory buildings can not be located closer to the front lot line than the principal building (Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D). ^2494 Dan Andercen 2885 Little Orchard ffdy Variance 5/17/99 Pag^2 The stable is 1,152 s.f. Any accessory building over 1,000 s.f. is considered for zoning purposes an oversized accessory building and is subject to the following: In all "R" Districts no accessory building shall exceed 1,000 square feet of footprint area except that accessory structures in excess of 1,000 square feet will be allowed under the following conditions: 1.Not more than one Oversized Accessory Structure (OAS) shall be permitted on any property. An "Oversized Accessory Structure" is defined as an accessory structure of footprint area in excess of 1,000 square feet. 2. Oversized Accessory Structures are regulated by the following table: Lot Area 2.00-3.00 acre Maximum Individual Accessory Structure Footprint Area 1,200 s.f. Maximum Allowed Total of All Accessory Structure Footprint Areas* on a Property 2,400 s.f. 3. Any Oversize Accessory Structure shall be subject to the following conditions: No such accessory structure shall be located within a required yard area (principal structure setbacks must be met). Further, no such structure shall be nearer the front lot line than the front line of the principal residence on the property, and no such accessory structure shall be located less than 30' from the side or rear lot line regardless whether less sLict principal structure setbacks apply. b) The maximum height for such accessory structure shall be 30' or the defined height of the principal residence structure on the property, whichever is less. Such structure shall be allowed only when the property owner agrees and covenants in writing with the City as follows: i. No future subdivision will be approved that places the structure within a lot that has no principal structure, except that the City in its subdivision approval may grant a finite time period in which the oversized accessory structure may remain without a principal structure, in order that a principal structure may be constructed. At the end of this time period the oversized accessory structure must be removed if no principal structure has been constructed. U2494 Dan Andersen 2835 Little Orchard Way Variance 5/17/99 Page 5 i ii. If the property is subdivided, the oversize accessory structure and principal structure will be located together within a lot that meets the minimum lot area requirement for the given size of accessory building. iii. In subdivision approval, the setback required for the oversize accessory structure as defined herein shall remain. Such covenant shall be binding on current and future property owners and shall be filed in the chain of title of the property. Property Setback The applicant has requested the subdivision approval be amended to allow a rear yard to be reclassified as a side yard. The property line in dispute is the west line. Building a house with the rear of the house facing west would result in the activities associated most with a back yard being located in what may become a side yard in the future for a property owner to the west. Back yards function differently than side yards for "family activities". Staff is comfortable wth the proposal if the property owners agree to a condition a house will be built with the rear of the house being oriented to the north. Therefore the west property line will serve as a side yard. A second condition would be to extend the front yard setback to 50' along the entire south lot line since it will serve as a front yard. If the Planning Commission agrees Staff recommends the final Resolution recognize this as a building standard to be met by present and future property owners. Issues for Discussion 1.When the Little Orchard Addition was approved it was the City's understanding the stable and other outbuildings within the subdivision would be removed. The stable is an asset to the property and the owners wish to keep the building, but are subject to moving the structure and placing a restrictive covenant over the lot for an oversized accessory building. 2. 3. Is it the City's position the west property line should serve as a side yard? A Condition of reclassifying the property line should be that the residence must be oriented not to use that portion of the property as the "rear yard". It would make sense to construct a residence facing the south. §2494 Dan Andersen 288S Little Orchard P^ay Variance 5/17/99 Page A I STAFF RECOMMENDATION 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 (#2494) on file with the City of Orono, and the property owners file a covenant on the title for the oversized accessor}' building with the conditions noted in the Staff Report. Staff recommends 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. Attachments A B C D E F G Application Statement of Hardship Location Map Plat Map Plat of Little Orchard Survey/Site Plan Property Owners List ii U2494 Dan Andersen 2885 Little Orchard IVay Variance 5/17/99 Page 5 \w Application# Date Received Amount Paid ^ oO — cmr OF ORONO - VAglANlS: APPLICATION InitiaLApplic^on Fee^^^^^O.OO ($50.00 pleach additional variance) Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from ori^al application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION . Site Address 'L9i9^r Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) - oCrpY_ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired ^ ^------------- I ^3o> (clo not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) Present use of property: residential ___pother (specify). Zoning District:________ rt _______________ APPLICANT Phone fhome ’l Phone(work )~^*^3n^ ~ %’yoO Zip: ; '.<'1 V ' 4 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _____ Phone (home). Phone (work). Address:City:.Zip:.V» .|* / ^ Estimated Coiistruction Cost $DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ^fZ.•%v * ^ •c: (attach additional sheets if necessary) VAMANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback: ___Lot Width Front Side Hardcover Rear ___Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HLARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or pia-tical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventmg compliance vrith Zomng Code requirements: -----------— --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) NCO CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. ‘I ^^ t •• I ^ m ^ ^ ^ «!■»« ^ O « Ja ^ t\ Jk « ^ ^ ^ VA »• «* (A ak •-• .% «a Aab A .a.* X a/o R j:o2;vls D MAY 0 4 1999 CiTY 0.- CaO.X'O May 4,1999 Paul Weinberger 2750 Kelly Parkway Cry'stal Bay, Mn 55323-0066 RE: Zoning Application Dear Paul I received your letter on April 27 1999, the reason for this request is to define the set backs on lot 3. As it shows the city of Orono has given me three back yards. The way the lot sits the north is the back, the east and west are the sides, and the south is the front. Given this information as I have discussed with Mike Gaffron this request seems to be quite reasonable. The name of the legal owner which I represent is Scott and Jackie Jagodzinski 7320 Hillsdale court Chanhassen Mn, 55317 The request is not based on the location of the stable. It is based on the fact that I have three back yards. It is very important that the house sits on the lot correctly. And the front of the house does not look into the side of the house on lot 2. Also the new location of the stable does not hinge on any set back, this request is merely to fix what could be a mess at a later date, as the developer of this land the city of Orono and my self have gone to great lengths to insure that this project sets an example on how' projects in Orono should be done. I have included all the labels needed for this project. Please call 199 if yo9,would like to discuss this over the phone. Thanks for your help. Sinccrel Dan Andersen '5 l‘3-369-3700‘ 612-559-3800 I ST ORONO 4qo VOOONJivU O'* RCHAMO— o HIGH WCAXCM CO^ wo 0 thobough Mip] J:C3 MMSJtSn OfyiH u 10R8VICW CM COUI 10 '***»«*, ><-•.• ••S'; %*-m SATS WNrre 400 ASM600R WAT ORON \ 800 •>* * %• \ V / y “• _•• • • > .T. — PRONQ • V‘\ 1600 **** /v-r*/ • — • • • -.y. ••. ••.•^*v*» 'j /• V-/ • •• •• • ' «.• •• ..■>7 ‘.^T » -*ir \ -’‘W % ?.• V • V •; . LITTLE ORCHARD <L n, \ ■’X X X V #»orwf e««f i|p.« ^ c#»1 i«» /. S«c #. i: rf7. # ^Jl if !• t#4r NOCVO'OOr. O ^•*«^** kvn 0^ Mr »LS. I4MJ • r«if W »i*^094 VC^XflL • • #... . ? CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Oi*.: * \ PROPERTY DESCRIPTION; Lot 3, Block 1. UTTLE ORCHARD. Hennepin County, Mlnneioto occordlng to the record plot thereof . , V 7T I htff^ cfdtfy IHot this sunrty. rtpon «plon, or rtpoH «os prtportd by ms or uodsr my direct tupsnrision ond thot I om o duly RcQistcrsd Lond Surveyor ur»der the lows ol the Stole of M«nnesolo. //> Dele''mM-Lend Surveyor .Reo. No. 14343 Denotes proposed contour Denotes existing contour * •* Denotes buHdlng setback line -------Denotes drainage de utility easement O denotes iron monument found endderMtes iron pipe mortied R.L.S. No set 14343 O denotes toil borir«g O denotes percolotion lest hole Requested By: ANCO CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. Date; 7/9/98 Drown By.Scole: C C.R.F.■11OloChecked By: enelesers ssoourrs ■d lend turveyers. Ins. • eitt Olvlstsn Siiffsle IN. MSU rti: M2-47ar fss: ee2-3U2 Kevised; Job No. 97503-3 Application Date:4/26/99 COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cl l Y Ut-' OHONO DATE: 5/21/99 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2495 Steven Bohl/BohLand Development Zoning District: Comprehensive Plan: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) Rural Residential Summary: The City Council approved the plat of Carriage Hill on May 10,1999 prior to delivery of the mylar copies to Ae City, and receiving Hennepin County's approval of the plat. A few minor changes to the plat have occurred including revised legal descriptions and correcting lot dimensions. However the lot arrangement and road layout have not changed from the Preliminary Plat Approval. An issue that must be resolved prior to filing the plat is a property exchange between proposed Lot 6 and the adjacent property owned by Keenan G. and Jean Ledell Richardon located at 1000 Willow Drive South. This lot is not included as part of the plat. The sur\'ey revealed that a fence located between the Carriage Hill property and the Richardson property did not follow the actual property boundary. Steve Bold has worked with the Richardsons to agree on a property exchange that would allow the fence to be located entirely with the Richardson's property. It is the legal opinion of the City a Class I subdivision for a lot line rearrangement is included as a requirement for filing of the Carriage Hill plat. A condition of Preliminary Plat approval the applicant shall meet all platting requirements as determined by the City Attorney. The plat can be approved with the provision the subdivider completes a Class I subdivision for the lot line rearrangement. A second concern is the plat shows BohLand Development, Inc. as the fee owner of the propert>'. However they are not the property owner according to the title opinions provided to the City. BohLand Development, Inc. will be the fee owricrs on the property before the plat is filed. The plat cannot be filed until BohLand Development closes on the property. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To reconsider the Final Plat application. CARRIAGE HILL C.R. DOC. NO.• m t fx ^ »t r ftr. « /I mmmmrn M ntf# _ Ummrn^wmtt C5— .'0*IMW. ORAPHIC 8CAU T «»!■»» W( IM K icV\ co«r _pro^^Vy \ SwmE?’^ t,I 'THi!’'-500*at’J0V • «77.7» Mi* «C t KS—D*i>«ricco« ,»inuoir oHive • .ji^s ' \______— V - _____ * Joii4^ Ch. I f«i.f #«,. ^ H M m€ %f m0f mmk ^ ^ ^ ^ «N l^n «n IM ...rr.';:-iH • • yr.ofTK:---- •• •* tt#Mr£5rN^00£ i til % 9 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF CARRIAGE HILL FILE NO. 2495 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing imder the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of the land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a six lot plat by Steven R. BoW, Dohland Development, Inc. hereinafter ("the subdivider"); and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet the intent of the RR-IB, Single Faiiiil> Rural Residential Zoning District, finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its use as a single family residence to be fully developed by granting lot width variances to Lots 3 and 4, where 200' is the minimum lot width requirement; and WHEREAS, the subdivision includes a Class 1 subdivision of a lot line rearrangement between the developer and Keenan G. Richardson and Jean Ledell Richsu^dson, owners of property located at 1000 Willow Drive South legally described in Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 4267. 2. Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements. 3.Dedication to the City of flowage and conservation easements providing for limitations on the use of the wetlands described therein as shown on the plat as "drainage easement." 4.Dedication to the City of right-of-way for Willow Drive South and Brown Road South. 5. Payment to the City of a park dedication fee of $29,400. Page 1 of? 4 • ' 0 9 « 6.Payment to the City for the final plat legal review and filing of the plat, easements and covenants in the amount of $400,00. 7, The MCWD shall approve the Grading, Drainage and Street Construction Plans. 8. Conditional Use Permit granted for grading along the property line per Resolution No. 4268. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Carriage Hill, Hennepin County, Mmnesota, legally described in exhibit B, subject to the following conditions: 1. Submitted Letter of Credit for 150% of the site improvements based on the City Engineer's estimate. 2. Only Lot 1 shall not have access to Outlot C, Carriage Lane. 3. Lots 2,3,4,5 and 6 shall have access to Outlot C, Carriage Lane. Lots 2,3,4,5 and 6 shall not have access to Willow Drive or Brown Road South. 4.A lot width variance is granted for Lots 3 and 4 which front on a cul-de-sac and which do not meet the required 200' width at the 50' setback. 5.The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles on or before November 10, 1999 together with a certified original copy of this resolution. 6. 7. The private Outlot C shall henceforth be known as Carriage Lane. The private road shall be privately owned and maintained per the appropriate access easenient/maintenance documents to be executed by the subdivider. The subdivider has created a homeowners association which shall be responsible for maintenance of Carriage Lane located in Outlot C. 8.Outlot B shall be owned and maintained by the owner of Lot 2. The Outlot B shall serve as a private driveway for Lot 2. No other lots shall use said Outlot B for access. Page 2 of7 \ 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Subdivider shall concurrent with road construction, construct stormwater management improvements generally as shown on the Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Street Construction Plan dated April 21, 1999 subject to any revisions of said plan as ma> be required by the City Engineer. Tlie final Grading, Drainage and Street Construction Plan must be approved by the City Engineer prior to release of Final Plat for filing. The private road in Outlot C and required drainage and stormwater improvements shall be constructed to City requirements, subject to a Developers Agreement executed between the City and the developer, and subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. No building permits will be issued until the private road base work, all improvements and septic sites protected by fencing material have been completed by the developer and approved by the City. Subdivider shall plant boulevard trees along the private road per the requirements of Section 11.60, Subdivision 2 and are subject to review by the City's landscaping consultant. All identified primary' and alternate se'vage system drainfield sites within the subdivision shall be fenced off prior to any land alterations, and such fencing shall remain in place until such time that each Lot is developed. The subdivider has proposed easements for monument signs located on Lots 5 and 6 adjacent to Outlot C. The subdivider is advised a monument sign plan must be provided to the City and approved by the City Council. Prior to City release of the plat for filing the subdivider shall provide title opinions acceptable to the City Attorney, and applicant shall meet any other title requirements as may be required by the City Attorney. Mortgage consent is granted by Mortgagee for the 1100 Willow Drive South property described in Exhibit B. The subdivision includes subdivider agrees to filing a Class I subdivision for a lot line rearrangement with the 1100 Willow Drive South property prior to filing of the plat. Page 3 of 7 The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 24th day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 7 EXHIBIT "A" • > LEGAL DESCRIPTION That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and Government Lot 6 in Section 10, Township 117, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the northeast comer of said Government Lot 6; thence South 00 degrees 04 minutes 55 seconds West assumed bearing, along the east line of said Government Lot 6. a distance of 61.43 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence North 00 degrees 04 minutes 55 seconds East., aloiig the east line of said Government Lot 6 and said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of I33d.l2feet to the intersection with the easterly extension of the south line of King Street, a.s dedicated on the plat of MINNETONKA VIEW, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence North 89 degrees 41 minutes 50 seconds West, along said south line and said easterly extension, a distance of 173.00 feet; thence North 00 degrees 04 minutes 55 seconds East, parallel with said east line of the Norihea.st Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 33.00 feet to the north line ».)f said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 41 minutes 50 seconds West, along said north line a distance of 1154.93 feet to the northwest comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence South 00 degrees 08 minutes 30 seconds West, along the west line of .said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 622.71 feet to the north line of JOIIN.STONS FRENCH LAKE SECOND ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence South 89 degrees 42 minutes 52 seconds East, along said north line, a distance of 37.26 feet to the northeast corner of said JOHNSTONS FRENCH LAKE SECOND ADDITION; ihcnce South 02 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds East, along the east line of said JOHNSTON.S FRENCH LAKE SECOND ADDITION, a distance of 224.10 feet; thence .souiherly, continuing along said east line, along a tangential curve, concave to the east, having a central angle of 26 degrce.s 30 minutes 01 seconds, a radius of 669.62 feet, for an arc distance of 309.71 feet; ihcnce vSo»..lh 54 degrees 45 minutes 18 seconds Ea:?t, continuing along said east line, not tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 83.06 feel; thence South 35 degrees 36 minutc-s 55 seconds East, continuing along said east line, a distance of 96.43 feet to the most easterly coiner of said JOHNSTONS FRENCH LAKE SECOND ADDITION; thence North 53 degrees 30 minutes 36 seconds East, a distance of 243.02 feet; Ihcncc South 44 degrec.s 51 minutes 12 seconds East, a di.stance of 248.84 feet; thence South 47 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a distance of 284.00 feet to the center line of Willow Drive; thence South 35 degrees 40 minutes 44 seconds East, along said centerline a distance of 630.17 feci to a line tliat bears Soutli 41 degrees 04 minutes 55 .seconds West from the point of beginning; thcncc North 41 degrees 04 minutes 55 seconds East, a distance of 833.84 feet to the point of bcgiiming. Except ihercfrora that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter ot Section 10. Township 117, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, corresponding to Lot 10, Block 6, MINNETONKA VIEW, now vacated together with the southerly half of the east west vacated alley as delineated in Block 6 and dedicated on said plat, lying between the northerly extensions of the east and west lines of said Lot 10 and together with the northerly half of vacated Rose Street as dedicated on said plat, lying between the southerly extensions of the east and west lines of said Lot 10. i EXHIBIT "B" PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTION TOR RICHARDSON PARCEL That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northv cst Quarter and Government Lot 6 in Section 10, Township 117, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows; Commencing at the southwest comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest • Quarter, thence North 00 degrees 08 minutes 30 seconds West, assumed bearing along the west line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 389.76 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 22 seconds Bust, a distance of 426.62 feet to the most easterly comer of JOHNSTONS FRENCH LAKE SECOND ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof and the acnial point of beginning; thence North 53 degrees, 30 minutes 36 seconds East, a distance of 243.02 feet; (hence South 44 degrees 51 minutes 12 seconds East, a distance of 248.84 feet; thence South 47 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a distance of 284.00 feet to the centerline of Willow Drive; thence North 35 degrees 48 minutc.«5 55 seconds West, a distance of 275.73 feet to the point of beginning. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^^6-^ _ . A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A PLAT AT 1025 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - FILE NO. 2467 WHEREAS, Steve Bohl on behalf of Bohland Development (hereinafter the "developer") on February 17, 1999, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a sbc (6) lot residential plat of property legally described as: Exhibit A attached, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the Municipal Code of Ordinances, Chapter 10 (Zoning Code) and Chapter 11 (Subdivision), the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on M^ch 15, 1999, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on April 12, 1999, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of Steve Bohl/Bohland Development, noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located in the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning ■ District requiring a minimum of two (2) acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. 3. The Comprehensive Plan designates tWs area as "Rural Residential." The site data is: Acres Sq. Ft.' Site Area 45.1 1,965,764.6 Wetlands 23.0 992.224.8 Pond 0.4 17,037.0 Net Area 22.0 956,502.2 The wetland is a Type 2 and Type 3 marsh, designated "PEMC for palustrine, emergent on the National Wetland Inventory Map. Page 1 of 8 lAflBl CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The site will drain west under Willow Drive South into the wetland surrounding French Lake. The lot area data is: Total Lot Acres So, Ft.Drv Acres Sq. Ft. 1 20.8 903,071.4 6.0 260,180.5 2 9.3 406,070.3 3.6 157,146.2 3 4.4 190,102.3 2.0 87,219.5 4 2.3 101,430.4 2.0 88,536.3 5 2.4 106,800.0 2.0 87,762.5 6 2.0 87,134.8 2.0 87,134.8 Each lot meets the minimum lot area requirement. Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 are subject to a 26* wetland setback. Lot 1 is proposed to have a driveway in King Street, a public street, to be shared with the adjacent property located at 775 Brown Road South. Lot 1 will have an address on Brown Road South. Part of Lot 1 is located within 1,000 feet of Long Lake Creek as noted on Sheet 5 of 8 dated 2-19-99, most revised 3-26-99 by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. A conditional use permit is required for grading the driveway for Lot 1 within 5' of the property line. Lot 2 is proposed to have access from Outlot B, a 30' outlot from the cul-de-sac for proposed Carriage Lane. The front yard for Lot 2 will be along the extension of the outlot as shown in Sheet 4 of 8 dated 2-18-99, most revised 3- 26-99. The lot line adjacent to Willow Drive South will be considered a side yard adjacent to street. Lot 2 will not have access to Willow Drive South and will not be considered a through lot. Part of the lot is located within the 1,000 feet setback from French Lake. Lot 3 is proposed to have access from the proposed cul-de-sac for Carnage Lane. Part of Lot 3 contains a wetland. Page 2 of 8 J 1 CITY of ORONO '*;;r ^V.i&K RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 42 6 V SHO NO. 9. 10. 11. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Lot 4 is proposed to have access from the proposed cul-de-sac for Carnage Lane. Lot 4 will not be considered a through lot and will not have access from Brown Road South. Lot 5 is proposed to have access from proposed Outlot C, "Carriage Lane.” No access will be provided from Willow Drive South. The property line along Willow Drive South shall be considered a side yard adjacent to street. Lot 5 is stormwater management pond (NURP Pond). Lot 6 is proposed to have access from Outlot C, "Carnage Lane." No access will be provided from WiUow Drive South. The property line adjacent to Willow Drive South will be considered the side yard adjacent to street. 12. Outlot B shall serve Lot 2. The outlot shall be in the ownership of Lot 2. Outlot C, "Carriage Lane," will serve Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6. Lot 2 will have access to Outlot C, "Carriage Lane," via Outlot B. The subdivider shall be required to execute covenants to define responsibility for construction and maintenance of Outlot C, and to define future financial obligation for repair and maintenance by a homeowner's association. Right-of-way will be dedicated for 33’ for Brown Road South and 66' for Willow Drive South. Outlot A may be deeded to the adjacent property owner at 845 Willow Drive South. The exception, Lot 10, Block 6, Minnetonka View (vacated), which was tax- forfeited in 1982 and conveyed to the City of Orono may be sold to the developer for inclusion in Lot 4. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided. The property is not located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Lots 1-6 contain suitable septic sites for primary and alternate drainfields to serve single family residences. Septic sites shall be located 7o from water supply wells and wetlands. Also septic sites shall be locate from impervious surfaces and property lines. Page 3 of 8 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 18. Single family residences can be constructed on Lots 1-6 without further variances. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat for Bohland Development at 1025 Brown Road South per the plan set, Sheets 1-8, as prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. dated 2-18-99 as revised, subject to the following conditions; Outlot B shall be owned by the owner of Lot 2. No access shall be provided from Outlot B to Lot 3 or Lot 6. Outlot B shall be landscaped to provide adequate screening from traffic on behalf of Lots 3 and 6. Lot 1 shall have access to Brown Road South via a driveway in King Street. Lots 2-6 shall have access to Willow Drive South via Carriage Lane. Outlot C, "Carriage Lane" shall be platted at 50' right-of-way. The minimum paved width shall be 24' rural section subdivision. The subdivider shall provide an underlying road and utility easement over Outlot C to the City. Standard n®rime^er, drainage and utility ftasements shall be granted over the entire plat (5' along interior lot lines, 10' along exterior). Drainage and grading improvements to the property shall be constructed per the drainage and grading plan approved by the City Engineer, subject to a Developer's Agreement. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The subdivider shall grant conservation, drainage, and flowage easements over the wetland and stormwater management pond. 6. Subdivider shall protect drainfield sites via fencing prior to construction of driveways and drainage improvements and it shall remain in place unti construction is completed. 7. Subdivider shall dedicate 33' of right-of-way for Brown Road South and 66' of right-of-way for Willow Drive South. Page 4 of 8 [iiii v!;r CITYof ORONO '^Esiao^ 8. Outlot A to be deeded to the adjacent property owner, 845 Willow Drive South. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4 a fi 7 9. Subdivider to pay the park dedication fee, as determined by the County Assessor, per Section 11.62. 10. No building permits shall be issued until the construction of driveway and drainage improvements is completed, 11. The subdivider shall obtain appropriate permits from Hennepin County and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). All areas within the county right-of-way disturbed during construction shall be restored. 12. Trees shall be planted along Carriage Lane and Willow Drive South per the plan. Sheet 8 of 8 dated 3-24-99. 13. Subdivider to provide a letter of credit for 150% of the site improvements based on the City Engineer's estimate. 14. The City shall grant a conditional use permit for grading within 5' of the property line for Lot 1 per Resolution # 4268 The subdivider is hereby advised that the preliminary subdivision approval will expire within one year of the date of Council approval, April 12, 2000. 16. The subdivider is hereby advised that the City cannot grant filial plat approval until a permit from the MCWD has been approved for all grading and drainage improvements. FINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS The following list of final submittals shall be submitted to the City two (2) weeks prior to the regularly scheduled City Council meeting: 1. Record plat drawings in the form i -f two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=200'. Drawing to include: 15. Pace 5 of8 CITYof ORONO ^m^ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 42 6 7 -NO. A. Lot lines per survey by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., Sheet 4 of 8, dated 2-18-95, most revised 3-26-99. B. Dedication of all drainage, utility, conservation and flovvage easements. C. Dedication of 33' for Brown Road South and 66' for Willow Drive South. D. Naming of plat. 2. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: A. Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B.The applicant shall provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C. D. E. F. Signed and executed drainage, conservation and flowage easements. Signed and executed Developer's Agreement and Letter of Credit. Signed and executed Road and Utilities Easement over Outlot C. Signed and executed covenants defining responsibility for construction and maintenance for Outlot C, defining future financial obligations. G. Completed application for private road name. 3. FEES TO BE PAID: A. Final plat fee: $200.00. B. Legal review and filing fee: $200.00. C. Park Dedication Fee 6 new lots x $4,900 — $29,400. Page 6 of 8 I CITY of ORONO m fv.6'RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __A ^ ^ “3C ij Adopted by . the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 12th day of April, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk GabrieKJabbour, Mayois^ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of April, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. SS* HLNi’tF!?: CCJ'iTV a, Notary Public - 2; ‘ Page 7 of 8 • • • t •• • CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ ^ ^ ^ - * EXHIBIT A PROPOSKO LEGAL DESCRIPTION That pofl of ihc Norlhecsl Ouarler of the Northwest Qucrter end Govcrnme.-it Lot 6 in SecUen to. Tow.nshtp n7. Ronge 23, Hennepin County. WInnesoto. described os follows: • « Commencing ot the northeost corner of said Government Lot 6; -thence Sou^ 00 degrees 04 minutes 55 seconds V/esV, assumed bearing, dong the cost line of soid _ ® 6. o distonce of 61.43 feet to the cctud point of beginning? thence North 00 degrcM 04 minutes 55 seconds Eost, dong the cost line of sold Government Lot 6 end sold N^hcost Quorler of the Northwest Quarter, o distance of 1336.12 ^^iTiJiMMrTriNtrA. eosterly extension of the south line of King Street, os dedlcoted on the plot of MINNCTONKA VIEW, occording to the recorded plot thereof; thence North 89 dcgf’ce® m seconds West, dong sold south line ond sold easterly extens on, o distonce of 173.00 feel, thence-North 00 degrees 04 minutes 55 seconds Eost, porollel w1^ sold cost line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, o distance of 33.00 feet to the north line soid Norlhcosl Quorler of Ihe Northwest Quortcr; thcncc North 89 mmutes ® . seconds West, olong sold-north line a distance of 1154.93 -<n soid Northeost Quorler of the Northwest Quorler; thence South 00 t seconds West, oiong the west line of soid Northeast Quarter of the • distonce of 622.71 feet to the north line of JOHNSTON'S FRENCH I^E .SECOND ADOI^, occording to the recorded plot thereof; thence South 89 degrees 42 minutes 52 se East, dong sold north line, a distance of 37.26 feet to the northeast ® ^ ®'__ JOHNSTON'S FRENCH LAKE SECOND ADDITION; thence South 02 degrees 05 mlnut« 3Q seconds Eost, along the cost line of sold JOHNSTON'S FRENCH LAKE SECOND ®.. . distonce of 224.10 feet; thence southerly, continuing dong soid east line, ®*°®9 ° curve, concove to the east, having o central ongte of 26 degrees 30 * -- * radius of 669.62 feel, for on ore distance of 309.71 feet; thence South 54 jf - . minutes 18 seconds Eost, continuing dong sold east line, not longwl t® the last curve. Q. distonce of 83.06 feet; thence South 35 degrees 36 minutes 55 seconds Eosl. continuing dong soid east line, o distonce of 96.43 feet to the most eosterly comerof soid JOHNSTON'S FRENCH LAKE SECOND ADDITION; thence North 53 degrees 30 minutes 36 seconds Eos.; o dislonc. of 243.02 South « 51 ! Eosi. , dlstonc, of 248.84 feel: th«.c.'Soulh^47"I° distance of 284.00 feel to the center line ........... -...... ^ »v,ni /mlnules 44 seconds Eost, dong said centerline a distance of 630.17 feet to^ oj beers' South 41 degrees 04 minutes 55 seconds West from the point of beginning, ^ North 41 degrees 04 minutes 55 seconds East, o distonce of 833.84 feet to the pomt oi beginning. Except .therefrem Lot 1C. Block 6, said MINNETONKA VIEW Page 8 of 8 Apr*-09-99 03:14P Control No. CITY OF OROHO PRIVATE ROAtWAY REQUEST A.The iuhject of this request iS; an existing private roadway. a propoaed private roadway which la to be created as a condition of pending subdivision approval. B.The owner(s) of this Private Roadway and/or all abutting property will be (are) the owner(s) of the following described property: C. The above owner(s) hereby request that this Private Roadway be known * v following name; Choice No. 1 # Choice No. 2 Choice No. 3 (List three choioea in order of preference. The City Council will approve a name provided no conflict exists with existing names or naming policy. If all names have a conflict, you will be asked to make new choices. The approved name will be used for all mailing address and official idantification purposes.) 0.The above owner(s) hereby request the City of Orono to install the following standard street end traffic signs and said owner(s) hereby agree to reimburse the City for all costs of said Installation. (Such signing may be required as part of a separate Developer's Agreement and/or subdivision request.) standard city street name sign(s) - number required , / / _standard "STOP" sign(s) - number required standard traffic 8lgn(s) described below; - number required The above owner(s) do hereby acknowledge the (future) existence of said private road, and that the City of Orono has no obligation to Biaintain or service said private road, and that the City of Orono does not intend to acquire or open said private road as a public roadway. Signature(s) of owner^); Q/2.1 PrcL . Date Date Date Date /' * P.03 k.. i ;r--^ '; ■ *■! .-‘V,);f , Hennepin County X An £q u jI OPDor (unily Employer W •■ « April 12,1999 Ms. Liz Van Zcmeren City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ;iPR 1 5 }^99 Ci I Y Or O, lOi'.Q <.e : Proposed Plat - Carriage Hill CSAH 146, NW quad of Willow Drive Section 10, Township 117, Range 23 Hennepin County Plat No. 2491 Review and Recomniendations Dear Ms. Van Zomeren: Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require county review of proposed plats abutting county roads. We reviewed the above plat and make the following comments: • The developer should dedicate 40 feet of right of way from and along the centerline of CSAH 146, South Brown Road. This action will accommodate any future upgrading as well as utilities, snow storage, etc. Enhancing the King Street entrance as a shared private driveway is acceptable. No other direct access to CSAH 146 will be permitted. • All proposed construction within county right of way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to access, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Permits Section at 745-7601 for the appropriate permit forms. • The developer must restore all areas, within the county right of way, disturbed during construction. Please direct any response to Dave Zetterstrom at 745-7643. As a matter of procedure, we request that the City Clerk inform us of the City Council’s action on the right of way and access provisions. Sincerely, Thomas D. ^hnson, P.E. Transportation Planning Engineer TDJ:DKZ:jrh cc: PeteTulkki Brad Moe Trantporlafloa Department 1600 Prairie Dtive Medina, MN 55340-5421 (612)745-7500 FAX; (612) 478-4000 TDD: (612)852-6760 Rtcytltd Poftr r. ROAD, DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made and entered into this__ by and between Bohland Development, Inc., a Minnesota corporation day of . 19 hereinafter referred to as "Grantor(s)" and the City of Orono, a municipal corporation, its employees, interests and assigns, hereinafter referred to as "Grantee". WITNESS, THAT Grantor(s), ii» consideration of tlie sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration given by Grantee, the receipt of which is acknowledged by Grantor(s), do(es) hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey to Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual easement for public ingress, egress, access, road, drainage and utility purposes, over, under, above and across the land located in the Slate of Miimesota, County of Ilennepin, legally described as follows: Outlot C, Carriage Hill including, but not by way oflinnlation, a full and free right and authority to enter upon said land to conslmcl, inslall, niainlain, operate, repair and rcconslmct a sanitary sewer interceptor, lift station, main or line, a water main or line, gravel or paved road and any and all appurtenances, including drainage control structures and drainageways, incidental and related thereto, (such arc hereafter collectively referred to as the Improvements), and the Grantee shall hav^ the right to make such use of said land as is reasonably necessary and advisable to the construction installation, maintenance, operation and repair of the Improvements. In addition to any other remedy the Grantee may have, the covenants and restrictions contained herein may be enforced by injunction. Granlor(s) covenant that they are in fee title to the above property, have a lawful right and authority to convey and grant this casement, and that the land is free from all encumbrances except: Gianlors have executed this document the day and year set forth above. Page 1 of 2 4 c J GRANTOR BohLand Development, Inc., a Minnesota coq)oration By: Steven R. Bohl Its: President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) I The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of V*T<>aNV^ , 19 <\«\ by Steven R. Bohl, the President of BohLand Development, Inc., a 'imieSr' ------r*u ------------------------------Mimiwota corporation on behalf of the corporation. r V . r MtCHAatHOEKSTRA li01MimjBUC4liNNESOTA CoontainMvM S1.2000 This instrument was drafted by: POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH & KAUFMAN, LTD. 3300 Piper Jaffiray Tower Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 333-4800 Page 2 of 2 1 I LOWAGE AINU CONSERVATION EASEMENT AGREEMENT AND WAIVER OF DAMAGES TJ IIS INDEN rUllE, niatle nud eiilered iiilo this___day of ..19____by and between __Doh Land Development, Inc., a Minnesota corporation jiTTeirs assigns, and successors llicreinaacr collectively icrened to as the Grantor(s)] and the City ofOrono! its successors and assigns, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hercinaficr referred to as the Grantee.) WI i NESSC'ITI, Grantor(s), for and in eonsideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other valuable consideration, hereby covenant, grant, gift, quit claim Oiid convey to grantee tire right to restrict aitd granlor(s) agree to linrit and preclude the use, improvement and developmcirt, urrder the conditiorrs and covenants herein contained, the following described Land in the County of Ilctuiepirt atrd State of Miruresota: over the wetland and stormwater management pond as depicted on the plat of CARRIAGE HILL as follows:• • 1. Grantor(s) hereby covenant(s) and agret A. D. C. D. No structures shall be constructed, erected, or j>laced upon, above, or beneath the Land including without limitation, fences, fireplaces, steps, docks, piers, hardcover or roads of any nature whatsoever, or any other structure or irnproveirrcirt inconsistent with the iratural state of the land. No trees, shrubs or other vegetation shall be destroyed, cut or removed from the Land except as authorized by written consent of Grarttce. No earth, loam, peat, gravel, soil or any other natural material or substance shall be moved or reinovcd from the Land and there shall be no dredging or c.xcavation of any nature whatsoever or any change of the topography of the Land without th"^ written consent of Grantee. No soil, sand, gravel or other substance or materia! as laudfill shall be placed, dumped or stored upon the Land and no waste, trash or garbage shall be placed, dumped or stored upon the Land. Page 1 of 3 F. 2. F. No use shall be made of the Land except uses, if any, wliich will not change or alter the natural condition of the Land, and no use which would tend to change tlie drainage, flood control, water conservation, erosion control, soil conservation, fish and wildlife habitat characteristics shall be made of the Land or the water situated thereon. Grantee may enter upon the Land for the purposes of inspection and enforcement of the covenants contained herein and to cause to be removed from the Land without any liability any structures, uses, materials, substances, or unnatural matter inconsistent with the covenants contained herein and the natural state of the Land. Graiitor(s) hereby grant, gifl, quit claim and convey to Grantee, a perpetual flowage easement and right and privilege to trespass with water over and upon any or all of the Land. Grantor(s) herein do hereby remiss, release, acquit and forever discharge, forever, the Grantee and any and all of its officers and employees of and from any and all claims, demand or causes of action of any kind or nature whatsoever wliich may arise or accrue by virtue of any flowage or trespass willi water within terms of these agreements. in addition to any other remedy the grantee may have, the covenants and restrictions contained herein may be enforced by injunction. Grantor(s) do not intend that the public should have any interest in the above land by virtue of this indenture or otherwise, except as hereinabove set forth. The Grantor(s) herein certify that the land herein described are free and clear of all encumbrances except: 3. All provisions hereof shall run with the land and shall extend to and bind the heirs, successors, representatives, grantees or assigns of the respective parties hervto. BohLand Development, Inc., a Minnesota ■corporation- en K. BohlBy: Steven Its: President Page 2 of3 r STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF FIENNEPIN ) V This inslrunicnt was acknowledged before me tills day of _____,19 by Steven R. Bohl, the President of BohLand Development, Inc., a corporation under the laws or Minnesota on behalf or the corporation. STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: This iiislrumeiit is drafled by: City of Oroiio r.O. Box (56 Crystal Day, MN 55323 Page 3 of3 } • Date of Applicadon: 2/17/99 Date Complete: 2Jl7f99 60 day lixmt: ^117199 COUNCIL MEETING APR 1 2 1999 REQUEST FOR COXJNCIL ACTION CITY Of unuixu DATE: ITEM NO.: /O Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2467 Steve Bohl/Bohland Development 1025 Brown Road South Class m Preliminary Plat--6 lot subdivision Zoning District: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) Application: The applicant is proposing to subdivide the property located at 1025 South Brown Road into six (6) residential lots. The Comprehensive Plan desi^tes this area as Rural Residential. It is located outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (NWSA). The properties to the south are sewered and a sewer project is planned for the properties directly to the north. There are several issues with the application as follows; 1. The dedication of right-of-way for South Brown Road and Willow Drive South, 2. The 50' x 200' tax-forfeited parcel next to South Brown Road. 3. The parcel to be identified as OuUot A across Willow Drive South to be deeded to the adjacent property owner. 4. The grading for a driveway within 5' of the property line for Lot 1 requires a conditional use permit. The applicant has worked with staff to incorporate the City Engineer ’s, Landscape ArcWtect s md Planning Commission's comments. The blueprints that are included in the City Council's packets include the latest revisions. •5 0 J Daceof Applicadoa: 2/17/99 Date Complete: 2/17/99 60 day limit: 4/17/99 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended approval, subject to incorporation of the conditions in the staff report. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:i To discuss the tax-forfeited parcel for inclusion in Lot 4 and provide direction to staff. To review the two resolutions, one for the preliminary plat, and one for the conditional use permit for grading the driveway for Lot 1 and amend or adopt the resolutions. Attachments RESOLUTIONS A B C D E F Letter from applicant Notice of PC action Staff drawing of Planning Commission's comments Memo from Landscape Architect Memo from Westwood Engineering re:Wetland delineation Staff report to PC dated March 15,1999 (see staff report for list of exhibits) Development, Inc. A City of Orono Liz Van Zomeren City Planner 1150 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, Minnesota 55323 March 31,1999 1 RECEIVED MAR ^ 1 1999 C\TY Or ORONO Thank you for the acceptance of our Preliminarylblat application and the commits we received following the Planning Commission Meeting. We are submitting revised plans for the City Council Meeting. The changes should address the comments made by City of Orono staff, the engineer and landscapers. There are two areas that I would like to have you consider in reference to the planners and landscapers comments. The planner suggested that we include a street design and construction with “urban” specifications. This alternative, in my opinion, is not necessary and is inconsistent with previous developments, and does not fulfill the characteristics of a more rural/ acreage smaller subdivision. I am requesting that the most commonly used street design and stormwater management practices be implemented. Carriage Hill is the name of the development and is characteristic of the topography, history and feel for the neighborhood. TTie homes will be built on acreage homesites with a country or rural feel. This is what the market accepts and is desiring. Three ot the homesites arc already under contract for sale pending development approval, all three of the potential homeowners prefer a 24’ street with grade ditches which is more typical for the setting. They prefer the landscaping comments regarding trees along Willow Drive and up along Carriage Lane. Our application shows the design with surface storm water management allowing flow to a NURP pond and eventually into French Lake. This plan has also been submitted to Jim Hafher at Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. After conversations with Jim, he commented that in this situation, continuing to allow water to surface drain, combined with the permeable sandy soil is a beneficial BMP that allows for an increased ability to improve water quality. This is in contrast to dumping all of the water off the roofs, drives and street into catch basins and into the pond without having the opportunity to increase water quality with the surface flow and on-site absorption. The more impervious the surface reduces the opportunity to improve water quality especially with the sandy soils. 420 Upland Lane North • Plymouth, MN 55447 • Phone (612) 476-4459 • FAX (612) 476-4459 The pond may need to be increased for additional water quantity if a sub-surface storm sewer system were installed which would make lot line rearrangement more difficult i>torra sewer systems also require maintenance compared to surface stormwater management. I am familiar with Crystal C-«k, one of the projects, and maybe the only smaller resi ential development in Orono with sub-surface storm water management and curbs t^illar Homes, a homebuilding company that I own is currently building in this neighborhood. The curbing easily becomes damaged. The site needed this type of storm v^ter management due to the topography, and ultimately reduces the character of a non- urban streetscape. BohLand Development is currently completing a twenh/-lot subdivision in the City of independence that provides surface storm water management and is an important characteristic to feel of the neighborhood and improves water quality. At buyers already interested in purchasing in Carriage Hill, comments from the MCWD, and to maintain the characteristics of a non-urban streetscape, I am requesting that we approve the application that we have submitted. ^her Ranges to the revised plan includes adding trees along Willow Drive and Carriage I^ne. The exception to the landscapers comments would be to eliminate the additional landscapmg along the back of lot 4 adjoining Brown Road. This request comes form the purchaser of this lot. He is requesting that additional trees not be added because of the many mature trees that are already in place and keep as much remaining sunlight as possible in his backyard. The otlier exception would be not to add any trees around the cul de sac portion and alorig the outlet access to lot 2.1 would prefer to leave this up to t e landscape plw for the individual homeowners and will approve all landscape plans prowded according to the Homeowners Association By Laws. Any trees on these portions of the lots will probably be destroyed during construction. The following is response to additional recommendations from the Planning C datedMarch 16,1999.ommission 1 . I have submitted the CUP land alteration application and paid the appropriate fees for lot 1. The tree inventory inside the grading limits for lot 1 will be completed for the Final application. A larger scale grading plan has been submitted showing the 6 ’ addition to the existing driveway and the proposed grading detail for lot 1. 2. The driveways for lots 5 and 6 will have access from Carriage Lane. 3. Landscape (see above) 4. Lot 2 yar^ and setbacks shown as determined by staff and Planning Commission. 5. Engineering. Changes made according to suggestions with the exceptions as explained above. f 6. We also discussed the possibility of the City of Orono deeding the “exception piece” along Brown Road to include with this plat. The buyer for lot 4 is interested in this becoming part of his lot. Outlot A as shown on the plan could be deeded to the o\^ers of the adjoining property. I would like to suggest that the City of Orono deed without cost the “exception piece” and in turn BohLand Development deed outlot A to the adjoim'ng property owner at no cost. This proposal would make this a cleaner plat and resolve any further issues between property owners. Please note that the property lines for the exception piece (Richardson’s property) along Willow Drive have been altered. We found that the Richardson ’s, and our property, had discrepancies between the two legal descriptions. BohLand development and the Richardson ’s are exchanging the north and easterly property boundaries to resolve the discrepancy. This will be resolved along with the filing of the plat. Please consider these options and forward to the City Council for review. Sincerely, Steven Bohl BohLand Development #24 13 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 PHONE:(612)249-4600 FAX:(612)249-4616 ZONING FILE #2467 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: March 16,1999 TO:Steve Bohl 420 Upland Lane Plymouth, MN 55447 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Subdivision DATE OF MEETING: 3/15/99 VOTE:5 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below: 1.Need conditional use permit for grading driveway for Lot 1. (Need more detail at larger scale.) 2. Need to have access for Lots 5 and 6 from Carnage Lane, not the cul-de-sac. 3. Incorporate landscape architect's recommendations for screening on lots and right-of- way. 4. Lot 2 yards and setbacks as identified. 5. Incorporate City Engineer's comments. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of the above information. Deadline for the April 12th meeting is April 1. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X;\AP?S.V.'P%TN60'\\TDOCS'CAROLE\PCACmON\2467 ■yil r' •••• •••••« - ^ _,---------•fVW' ’ttw* will b*- Oh C£r-^j(«cfiK/ariviMfl«Ma^ bwfife^ dnvoJOj^ (>a OiA^of oy<^ fjT Urf D- NCWlfONt w Westwood & I I I rnof«- deku ‘1 ■lb*' dnVev^t|. Ste/* BoW file#-fhc pAperv^orfc. ■feir ilrve Cor^diHonai Uo< pc/Kitl. (dO^’^ site. a/W -iijpe df •f^ be f'Crywvhod. NOT FOR COKSTRUenOH •fC *>Q__ —■ ■ MM MM ■■ ^ mK t ■ W/JAl SONLAND OeVILOrMIKr. MC «M«mAMUAM nVMPUm. MBMSUTA IM49 CAMIAMMLL nUUmKARY OSADmoriAN rwr Wtm/99 «Mt. MO . • •• • P 03;'14/99 13:49 FAX 612 337 S601 DSU, INC. f 'v 5 DAHLGRBN SHAROmW WD UBAN T> 121001 Po Fax NM To UZ. From Prionea V mAIIX tHCORFOXATIO « I / CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH . SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55401 612-339 3300 PHONE 612-337-5601 FAX '‘ILL C%#<4 .:b / DATE:14 March 1999 TO:Elizabeth Van Zomeren Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Fax 612-249-4616 LL O FROM:Wallace L. Case, ASLA Landscape Architect/Planner A • . p ! RE:Review of Preliminary Plat Submission Drawings Class III Subdivision Preliminary Plat Bohland Development 1025 Brown Road S. Application # 2467 in response to your request, we have visited the site, reviewed the Preliminary Plat Submission Drawings for the proposed Carriage Hill Development and have the following comments. LOT 1 ISSUES The proposed development of Lot 1 raises several Issues that need to be addressed. Access: The developer proposes providing access to Lot 1 from Brown Road S by widening an existing driveway that serves an existing home to the north. 1.Existing access at this location is provided by a very obscure, narrow cut through a 8 to 12 feet h?gh embankment. The existing narrow cut and a high concrete retaining wall Immediately along the north side of the existing drive limits visibility into and out of the drive. The proposed plans for accessing Lot 1 call for a 0;UOBSM 601\CARH1399\399CARHL.MEM 1 03/14/99 13:49 FAX 612 337 5601 DSU. INC.®0Q2’ 2. 3. Tree removal: widened and combined drive which will increase the visual ‘ prominence of the drive, and Improve visibility to and from the drive. However, the sight distance to the north needs to be reviewed. The building site for Lot 1 Is located on a wooded island surrounded almost entirely by wetland. The proposed driveway for this location is approximately 480 feet long. It is west facing, has a maximum grade of '• o percent, and requires approximately 100 feet retaining wall {approximately 5 high) along each side where it crosses between the wetland edges. Depending on the height of this wall, it may require a railing along the top for safety and to meet code. The proposed grading for the drive would result in a diversion of surface runoff onto the adjacent northern property. Appropriate drainage rights must be secured from the owner of that property. 1. 2. This driveway In combln'^tion with the building site and septic field will require the removal of approximately .96 acres of woods. The developer should provide more detailed Information about the size and type of trees that will be removed or affected by the development of this lot and drive. Several large mapie/basswood trees located along Brown Road S just south of the proposed access point would be removed or affected by the proposed access design. If possible large/significant trees should be preserved and lnco:porated Into the grading design of the Lot 1 and the access point. The Subdivision Regulations Indicate that trees shown as retained must be protected and preserved. The root zones of trees and woods to remain are to be fenced and rnai.ntained as off limits to construction activities. Any damage to trees to be preserved is to be treated by trained arborist. Wetlands Encroachment: The nature and source of the wetland boundary shown on the plans was not identified. A field wetland delineation and survey should be provided where the drive crosses or where septic fields are proposed at the minimum 75 feet setback from the wetlands. The grading plan shows a -2- •03/14V99 13:50 FAX 612 337 5601 DSU. INC.@003 possible 9radin9 encroachrfient into the 26 feet wetland buffer at the Lot 1 crossing area. LANDSCAPING; In accordance with Section 11.60, Subd. 2 of the Orono Subdivision Regulations, as a requirement of subdivision approval, the City Council may require that the subdivider plant shade trees on the property along the project roads or abutting roads. The requirement calls for planting one shade tree {2 inch caliper) per every forty feet of frontage and Identifies that the trees planted shall be long-lived shade trees. 1. The entire southern part of the site is currently an open field with volunteer trees at the fence line along the existing roads. After development, the view from the adjacent streets will be of the rea.' yards and private spaces of the new homes. The visual appearance of the project as viewed fi'om the public streets and adjacent properties would be improved by the addition of shade trees along the southern 650 feet of Willow Drive, the rear yard of Lot 4 along Brown Road S, and both sides of Carriage Lane. We recommend the City require the developer to plant deciduous shade trees at 60 feet spacing along the right-of-way of Carriage Lane and southern 650 feet of Willow Drive. We also recommend that the City require the developer to plant an evergreen or ornamental tree buffer in the rear yard of Lot 4, and groups of ornamental/overstory trees around the proposed drainage basin in the southwest corner of the site. 2. Lot 2 functions as a flag lot and it will require approximately 150 feet of driveway between the side yards of Lots 3 and 6. The City should require the developer to provide an adequate landscape buffer along the sides of this drive. BUILDING ENCROACHMENT The plans shown an apparent encroachment of two existing buildings onto Lot 4. This encroachment should be verified and appropriately resolved with the adjacent land owner. BPPTIC RVRTFM SETBACK The minimum septic field setback; from existing wetlands and water bodies is 75 feet. Upon completion, the proposed drainage pond in the southwestern part of the site will act as a small pond or wetland and will drain to the southwest under Willow Drive. The septic field for Lot 6 is setback approximately 50 feet from the NWL elevation of this basin. 5- 03/14/99 13:50 FAX 612 337 5601 DSU. INC.@ 004 • • The septic field locations must be fenced off and protected from construction ' activities. eRQSIQN CONTROL The developer must ensure that erosion control be provided, monitored and maintained wherever needed until the vegetative cover In the disturbed areas of each lot has been fully and finally restored. If you have questions regarding these comments, or if I can be of further assistance, please call me at 339-3300. DAHLQREN, SHARDLOW, AND UBAN, INC. Wallace L. Case, ASIA Landscape Architect/Planner f -4~ —ri- • 03/15/99 17:04 FAX 6129375822 WTSTFOOD PROF. SERVICES @1002 Wtstwood Piofess'ional Services, Inc.w March IS, 1999 7531 Os.vt ti«n Ffairtt. UN SSi44 Mr. Sieve Dohl Bohland Development, Inc. 420 Upland LaneN. Plymoutli, MN 55447 Phont:CI2-1J7-51S0 fji: 512-937-552J toil r'itt: t t88-337 S:SO £.na I: »pie««Uc:‘ipt.Con' Ref: 98795 Re: Wetland review process for Carriage Hill Renldentlal Development, Orono, MN Dear Steve: This letter is to summarize the wetland review process wc initiated last fall for the Carriage Hill Residential Development and identify the actions we will lake to complete the wetland review process prior to final approval of tlie proposed development. Westwood Professional Services reviewed the propeify in tlie field in November, 1998 to identify existing wetland boundaries and assess the extent to which wetlands constrained site development. The development area includes part of DNR Protected Wetland 27-864W, which we understand will be avoided. A partial wetland delineation was completed in November to identify wetland boundary locations in selected areas and allow concept p inning to advance. Because wc understood that each residential lot must include u minimum of two . cres of upland, wc mapped the wetland boundaries that were not delineated. Upland acreage was then calculated for each future residential lot. Wetland boundary mapping was completed in AutoCAD and was based on a combination of field observation of existing conditions, aerial photograph interpretation, and topographic mapping. It will be necessary to complete the wetland review process with the City of Orono and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District befo: c final approvals are obtained. The wetland boundary delineation will be completed using the Corps ojEngineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and we will request confirmation from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District that the wetland boundaries arc acceptable for local administration of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, os amended. Wetland boundary flags will be located by Land Surveyors and the approved wetland delineation will be used to confirm that all proposed residential lots include at least two acres of upland. The Site Plan will be reviewed to ensure it complies with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and City of Orono requirements for wxtland buffers and setbacks, respectively. Any concerns that arise at that time will be resolved in coordination with the watershed, cit>*, or other agencies, as appropriate. Please call me if you have any questions regarding this approach. Sincerely, . WESTWOOD PROFESSION.^L SERVICES, INC. Senior Environmental Scientist Ofsigrirg ihi Futu*f Todjy 13^2 MflrcU*? PC iHa I 0 /£ TO: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator RE:#2467 Bohland Development, having an interest in 1025 Brown Road South (PID# 10-117-23-24-0001) Class in Preliminary Plat Subdivision —Public Hearing Exhibits: A B r D E F Application Plat map Owner’s list Zoning map Section Map City Engineer’s report (BLUEPRINTS) tj ▲ X I J K L Water Quality review Septic Report Topo Map MUSA map Webber Hills project map Preliminary Plat drawings Zoning: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres, unsewered) Comprehensive Plan:Rural Residential Application: The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 45.1 acre parcel lying between Willow Drive South and Brown Road South into 6 parcels for single family residential development. The parcel is located outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and is planned for rural residential development at 2 acres, according to the Comprehensive Plan. The subdivision will require a conditional use permit for grading within 5* of the property line to create a driveway for Lot 1 and may also require a variance to grade/fill within 26' of the wetland. The septic sites for Lot 5 may require a variance from the 75' setback from the NURP pond. This application will also require the dedication of right-of-way for Brown Road South and Willow Drive South. The subdivision is also subject to drainage, flowage and conservation easements for the wetlands. A park dedication fee will also be required. M467 Bohland Development Class III Subdivision PC-3/15/99 page-1 DESCRIPTION OF AREA The proposed subdivision is bordered by Willow Drive South and Brown Road South. The p^el is 45.1 acres with 23 acres of wetland in the middle of the site. The parcel is located partially within 1000' of Long Lake Creek and within 1000' of French Lake. The surrounding area is folly developed with single family homes that were constructed during the 1900's through the 1950's. TOPOGRAPHY The wetland area in the middle section of the parcel has an elevation below 932. The area north of the weUand rises from 932 to 959.2 at its highest elevation. The southern portion of the parcel rises from the 932 elevation to a high point of 967.2. Both the north and south areas drain into the wetland. The southern portion of the parcel has been used for agricultural purposes and is characteristic of a field. The northern portion of the parcel is heavily wooded. ZONING The parcel is zoned RR-IB, Rural Residential District. The minimum lot area requirement is 2 acres. The minimum setback requirements are noted in the table below. Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Rear Yard m Side Yard Side Adjacent to Street 2 acres, dry buildable 200'50'50'30'50 ’ Wetland Setback No building, excavation or grading or filling is allowed in or within 26' of the wetlands. The proposed grading for the driveway to Lot 1 appears to encroach into this required setback. Septic Setback The minimum setback requirrnents for septic systems is 75' from wetlands and water supply wells. Septic systems shall be a minimum of 20' from hardcover surfoces, property lines, buildings and buried pipes. The proposed septic sites for Lot 5 are too close to the NURP pond. The septic sites should be 75 from the NURP pond. §2467 Bohland Development Class III Subdivision PC-3/15/99 page-2 PARCEL INFORMATION Property Identification: The subdivision includes the following parcels: 38 10-117-23 21 0001 38 10-117-23 21 0007 39-10-117-23 24 0001 The above parcels are under the ownership of E.S. Borman and J.E. Corwin. Julius Hendel is listed as the taxpayer. The tax data indicates that it has been previously taxed as vacant residential land. Exception: A 50' by 200' strip of wetland is shown as an exception along the east property line of the proposed subdivision. This parcel of land was tax-forfeited in 1982 to the State of Minnesota. It was conveyed to the City of Orono for drainage purposes. Greg Gappa, Public Services Director, has indicated that it is not needed by the City. If Ae City made this parcel available to the applicant, the entire wetland area west of Brown Road South could be included in a conservation and flowage easement agreement. Proposed Lots: LOT INFORMATION Lot Total Dry 1 20.8 acres 5.7 acres 2 9.3 acres 3.6 acres 3 4.4 acres 2 acres 4 2.3 acres 2 acres 5 2.4 acres 2 acres 6 2 acres 2 acres U2467 Bohland Development Class III Subdivision PC-3/15/99 page-3 r Lot Area: Wetlands: NURP: Net Dry Buildable Area: 45.1 acres 23.4 acres .4 acres 21.3 acres The proposed subdivision creates six lots that meet the minimum lot area requirements of 2 acres of dry buildable land. Loti Lot 1 is the largest parcel with 20.8 acres total with 5.7 acres dry buildable. Due to the configuration of Lot 1 and access from King Street, Lot 1 may not be further subdivided. A portion of Lot 1 is located within 1000' of Long Lake Creek. This part of the lot is subject to hardcover requirements. No more than 35% of the lot area in this setback from Long Lake Creek may ^ hardcover. Access to Lot 1 is proposed by constructing a private driveway in King Street. The City Engineer questions whether two separate driveways should be allowed next to each other instead of a shared driveway. The amount of grading to install a driveway also requires review by MCWD because there may be an impact on the wetland. Construction easements and retaining walls may also be necessary. Because this is not ordinary and customapr grading next to a property line, a conditional use permit in addition to a land alteration pemut will be necessary. Lot 2 Lot 2 is a 9.3 acre parcel with 3.6 acres dry buildable. The proposed lot could not be filler subdivided. The lot will have frontage on Willow Drive, however, access shall not be allowed vi? Willow Drive. Therefore, the setback from Willow Drive should be considered a side y^ aqj^ent to street. The proposed subdivision indicates that this lot will be served by an outlot (148' x 30*) ^ the cul-de-sac. The City Engineer recommends that the City discuss whether this is acceptable. 'Die odd shaped lot creates a problem for determining how to define Ae yards and corresponding setbacks. Should this lot be considered a backlot because it is behind the existing residence w Willow Drive and served via an outlot from the cul-de-sac? Septic sites on this lot will need to be at least 75’ from the wetliid. Lots Lot 3 is 4.4 acres with 2 acres dry buildable. This lot cannot be further subdivided. It is proposed to be served by the cul-de-sac. The septic sites need to be 20' from the property lines and 75 om the wetland. The outlot that provides access to Lot 2 will require that a 50’ setback be provided next to the outlot. #2467 Bohland Development Class III Subdivision PC-3/15/99 page—4 Lot 4. Lot 4 is an odd-shaped lot that is technically considered a through lot because it has potential access from Brown Road. This lot also surrounds the exception that should be sold to the developer and included in the lot. Lot 4 is proposed to be served by the cul-de-sac. The final resolution should state that no access will be allowed from Brown Road. ^ • Lots ^ Lot 5 is proposed to be 2.4 acres with 2 acres dry buildable. This lot is proposed to have the NURP pond. It is also proposed to be served by the cul^e-sac even though it has potential access from both Willow Drive and die pri\'ate road, '’Carriage Lane ”. Access shall be proWbited from Willow Drive and the driveway for this lot shall be from Carriage Lane, not the cul-de-sac. Lot 6 Lot 6 is proposed to be 2 acres of dry buildable land. This lot has frontage on Willow Drive and Carriage Lane. The driveway is proposed from the cul-de-sac. The driveway shall be installed from Carriage Lane and access from Willow Drive shall be prohibited. This lot will be subject to two side yard adjacent to street setbacks, from Willow Drive and die outlot/cul-de-sac. The septic sites need to be at least 20 ’ from the property lines. ACCESS The subdivider proposes access for Lot 1 to be provided via a driveway in King Street. King Street is platted as a dead end street Currently there is a driveway in King Street that serves 775 Brown Road South (Simpson residence). The subdivider is proposing to construct a driveway next to the existing driveway. The City Engineer has raised concerns about this proposal. (See Exhibit F). The other five lots are proposed to be served by a private road, "Carriage Hill Lane", from Willow Drive South. Lots 2,5, and 6 have frontage on Willow Drive, however, access shall not be allowed from these lots directly to Willow Drive. Lots 1 and 4 also have possible access to Brown Road. Access to Lot 1 shall be from King Street and Lot 4 shall not be allowed to have a driveway curb cut on Brown Road. The subdivider has shown Lots 3,4,5, and 6 as having driveways from the cul-de-sac. Lots 5 and 6 should be served from Carriage Hill Lane. Lot 2 is proposed to have access from an outlot platted at 148' in length and 30' in width. The City Engineer has concerns about an outlot being platted from the cul-de-sac. ^2467 Bohland Development Class III Subdivision PC-3/15/99 page-5 Carriage Hill Lane shall be platted at a 50' right-of-way with a payed width of 24'. The length of the private road is approximately 350' firom Willow Drive South to the center of the cul-de- conformance with the subdivision requirements. :-sac m STORMWATER MANAGEMENT The subdivider has proposed a NURP pond in the comer of Lot 5. The proposed location of the NURP pond is too close to the property line. It should be at least 55' from the property line so that a septic site on the adjacent property could be located 20' from the property line without requiring a variance. Allowing the NURP pond to be located on or adjacent to the property line impacts the adjacent property's ability to locate a septic site in the future. The NURP pond is also too close to the septic sites for Lot 5 and does not have an adequate bench of 10:1. Septic sites are required to be at least 75* from a wetland or pond. The City Engineer ha-s recommended that the storm sewer be constructed to route storm flows from the street to the pond. All storm pipes are recommended to be reinforced concrete pipes instead of corrugated metal pipes. The pond needs to have an outlet structure.t^t provides 1' of skimmmg to remove floatables and debris. Permanent erosion control should be installed downstream from the pond to prevent sedimentation into French Lake. SEPTIC SYSTEMS The parcel is not within the MUSA line. The Crystal Bay sewer project is to the south of the proposed subdivision. The Webber Hills sanitary sewer project is proposed for the area to the north of this subdivision. On-site septic systems are proposed for this development. The septic sites are required to be 75' from the wetlands and NURP pond and at least 20' from property lines and hardcover. Staff has not been able to verify the septic information because the ground is still frozen. This preliminary plat shall not move forward until Steve Weekman, On-Site Septic Systems Manager, has been able to approve each proposed primary and secondary site. Any site that does not meet the City’s requirements may require that the preliminary plat and proposed lots lines and ponding area be revised. DEDICATIONS The subdivider shall be required to dedicate 33' of right-of-way for Brown Road (County Road 146) and 66' of right-of-way for Willow Drive. This will leave Outlot A separated from the proposed #2467 Bohland Development Class III Subdivision PC-3/15/99 page-6 subdivision. Outlet A should be made available to the abuttting property at 845 Willow Drive South for legal access. EASEMENTS The subdivider shall provide standard drainage and utility easements alorig interior and exterior property lines (5' interior and 10' exterior). The subdivider shall also provide drainage, conservation and flowage easements across the wetland. Road and utility easements and maintenance agreements will be required for the private road. Carriage Hill Lane. VEGETATION MAP The subdivision ordinance provides in Section 11.60 for the preserv'ation of natural features and amenities. The subdivider shall provide a vegetation map that shows the number and location of existing trees on site to be preserved. The ordinance provides that the City may require the subdivider to provide shade trees along the perimeter of the subdivision; one shade tree may be . planted every 40 feet. The proposed preliminary plat has been sent to Wally Case, DSU landscape architect for review. His comments will be provided at the Planning Commission meeting. The Park Commission reviewed the proposed preliminary plat at their March meeting and requested land for a buffer strip along Willow Drive to plant trees for screening of the houses from the road. However, staff does not recommend that the City accept land for tree planting. Staff prefers to wzdt for the landscape architect's recommendation for screenin'" and buffering in accordance with the subdivision ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To review and discuss: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. King Street and proposed driveway, grading, filling and conditional use permit Lot configuration and setbacks Proposed access, driveways and outlet Septic sites and setbacks from NURP pond Design and setback for NURP pond Vegetation and landscaping Outlot A and exception area #2467 Bohland Development Class III Subdivision PC-3/15/99 page-7 A Application it Date Received 7“?7 Amount Paid a CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIYISION APPLICATION • * •* * • * . . . PROPERTY LOCATION v, i c Site address ^ ^ Property Identification Number (PID)« —----------------------------------------------------------------------------- *■ ■ --------------------------- Please check one - Property "yc abstract or Attach legal description to application. applicant Name 0*^ Address >vc( , City iP(^/x»>coV*N.. torrens? 00^7 <e U 7 / <*7 P3 { 3 <)*- OWNER (if different than applicant) Name >4++%.tL*- S^‘^V’7 Phone (home) Phone (work) ^/7'3- ^ Address City Zip Phone (home) Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District PROPOSAL \Ja Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels .1 Residential; no. of units____ Other (specify)_________ I Division for Tax Purposes __ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites ^ - Existing Units C> New Units Cr____ Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) / Units per “7 Acres ^ .Sq.Ft.DryBuildableLand Residential Other (specify) J ^n?fnvnnvi riaterial required for complete preliminary application 1. Paj-menloffees (refer to •applicatior'fees" listed below. 2. Completed application form. 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. 350' (you must obtain this list firom Hennepin County Department of Finance A^03 ^ning S^a^^* application, please attach a Mparate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. hn^IUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE eTNAL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Prehminaiy Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Develops Agreement and Letter of Credit Zoning Ofificial's Signature_________________________________ Date L APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check DC] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & m) $250.00 - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $350.00 I Sub^dsion Application (Class I & II) $350.00 --------Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 + $25.00/lot (Class III & all non-residential) _____Final Plat Application (Class m) $200.00 _____Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdiidsion onty $75.00 Subdivision w/easements and covenants mirt $200.00 lalals Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) Renewal of Class I and II SiWivision Application $200.00 (No change firom original application) Renewal of Class III, Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change firom original application) Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $ 150.00 (No change firom original application) lin. ft. X .50 " $ B. Special Improvement Fees: _____Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + $.50/lineal ft.; _____Proposed Public Roads $900.00+$.50/lineal ft;_____lia ft. x .50 - $ _____Request for City to Accept E»sting Private Road $900.00 _____Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub _____Proposed Watermtin Extension $250.00 + $25/stub _____Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 —t. .1 On*Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) _ $50.00/per lot x ^ new lots C. Flexible Application Fces/MIsc. Fees Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdmsion$ 100.00 _____ PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit ______ ^e applicwt hereby agrees to provide alt information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney. Plannmg Commission Md CouQcil MgessanMo ppocesa^tfil^application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature 3(?o Owner's Signature Date Date Apphemt rai^ submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meetmg. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an appliemt is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. REC£iVSD MAR 2 3 1999 CVr^ Or OHOMO Application# , Date Received^ Amount Paid crry of orono - general land use application PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address_____S Type of Application to be Filed C oa 4« Al4<cc.Vtt^ Property Identification Number (P.LD.) ______________ APPUCANT Name Oe Address M>o i.^ Phone fhomel ^7C ______ Phone fwork^ "?^ QSO ^ City _____Zip H o OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (wprk). Address City Date Property Acquired I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest Hous^Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use « , .j. ; $250.00 Land Alteration VHhf« S’ °f p’Of^-'^T ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodpldn ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining wadis within 75' of lakeshore y PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal 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 Zip. (month/year) REQUIRED SUBMm’ALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. __Completed Application Fonn. __Describe request in detail. __Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you • must obtain this list, labels and map firom Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). __Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surv^or) - refer to handout for survey information. . Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. __Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations ‘’nvolve changes in elevation (grades). __List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). __Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). ___ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11” X 17” OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: Date_____________________ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s rignature Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City stafl^ consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City o£Qces 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each montL Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Pluming Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. .•« mm DATE 02/0^/99 HENNEPIN BATCH 504 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 36 10-117-23 21 0001 00038 ADDRESS UNASSI6NED E S BORHAN 8 J E CORWIN E S BORHAN $ J Z CORWIN C/0 BURT H CORWIN 400 1ST AVE N 6224 HPLS HN 55401 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 10-117-23 21 0006 02195 FRENCH UKE RD W SINRLER 111 t H G WHARTON SINKLER III HARGHERITA G HARRIS P O BOX 67 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 HARRIS 8 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 10-117-23 22 0002 00845 WILLOW DR S 0 A 8 A E ANDERSON OILBERT A ANDERSON 845 S WILLOW DR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 22 0016 ^ 80038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEDPROP AODR ^- - OWNER NAHE CHARLES S 8 SUSAN H LANNOH TAXPAYER CHARLES S LANNOH NAHE/ADDR 870 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 10-117-23 24 0001 01025 DROWN RD S E S BORHAN 8 J E CORWIN JULIUS HENDEL C/0 BURT H CORWIN 400 1ST AVE NO HPLS HN 55401 PROP ADOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 10-117-23 24 0004 01105 BROWN RD S JERRY L CHRISTENSON JERRY CHRISTENSON 1105 BROWN RD S WAYZATA HN ' 55391 COUNTY PROPERTY TNFORHATION SYSTEH PROPEKTY OWNERS LIST 38 10-117-23 21 0002 00038 ADDRE'.S UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL DAY HN 55323 38 10-117-23 21 0007 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED E S BORHAN 8 J E CORWIN JULIUS HENDEL C/0 BURT H CORWIN 400 1ST AVE N HPLS HN 55401 38 10-117-23 22 0004 02245 FRENCH LAKE RD T J BUNEVIK ET AL THOHAS j BUNEVIK 8 CHRISTINE CRAHLIN6 BURNEVIK 3630 NORTHERN AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 22 0017 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED R 8 J DAYTON ROBERT J 8 JOAN L DAYTON 1 FRENCH LAKE RD \»AYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 24 0002 01045 BROWN RD S S D VANDEVEIRE ET AL STEVEN D VAN DE VEIRE 1045 S BROWN RD WAYZATA HN 55391 ' 38 10-117-23 24 0005 01115 BROWN RD S SUZANNE KATHLEEN LEJA SUZANNE KATHLEEN LEJA 1115 BROWN RD S WAYZATA HN . 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PACE 13 *. 38 10-117-23 21 0004 01000 WILLOW DR S KEENAN C RICHARDSON ET AL KEENAN C RICHARDSON 8 JEAN LEDELL RICHARDSON 1000 WILLOW DR S WAYZATA rai 55391 38 10-117-23 22 0001 00825 WILLOW DR S PHYLLIS FADDEN PHYLLIS FADDEN 825 WILLOW DR S • WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 22 0012 02250 FRENCH LAKE RD LUCY HCDONALD WHITNEY ET AL CRAIG S 8 LUCY H STANDISH. 2250 FRENCH LAKE RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 23 0805 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED R C 8 N LUX ROBERT C 8 NANCY LUX 1209 FRENCH CREEK DR WAYZATA HN 55391 . . 38 10-117-23 24 0003 01085 BROWN RD S ROBERT BERRETT ROBERT E BERRETT 1085 BROWN RD S WAYZATA »l 55391 • ! 38 10-117-23 24 0006 01135 BROWN RD S D A CLEW BPS CLEW DUANE A 8 PATRICIA S CLEW 1135 BROWN RD S WAYZATA tW 55391 o RUN DATE 02/04/99 BATCH 504 FROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER ' NAHE/AODR SO 10-117-23 24 0007 01155 ’ BROWN RD S J A STEZNHETZ/C J STEINHETZ JOHN A K CAROL J STEINHETZ P O BOX 92 CRYSTAL HN 55323 . SB 10-117-23 24 0012 01005 WILLOW DR S HARTHA L SPENCER NARTHA ALICE LEIGH SPENCER 1005 WILLOW DR S WAYZATA HN 55391 SB 10-117-23 24 OOIB 01145 WILLOW DR S BETTE PERL BETTE PERL 1145 WILLOW DR S WAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 24 0033 01130 WILLOW DR S S S D HCWILLIAHS SHIRLEY 0 DORCAS HCWILLIAHS 1130 WILLOW DR S CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEH • PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 30 10-117-23 24 0000 01140 WILLOW DR S D B LIESCH 0 C H LIESCH DAVID B 0 CARLA H LIESCH 1140 WILLOW DR S WAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 24 0016 01099 WILLOW DR S GLORIA K RODER GLORIA K RODER 1099 WILLOW DR S WAYZATA rm 55391 30 10-117-23 24 0019 01220 LAKEVIEW AVE DOUGLAS PAUL SCHNOOR 0 WIFE DOUGLAS t NORHA SCHNOOR 1220 LAKEVIEW AV WAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 24 0034 01055 WILLOW DR S D 0 J KAYE DALE R 0 JOAN KAYE 1055 WILLOW DR WAYZATA HN 55391 REPORT NO. PZ4S5401 PACE 14 30 10-117-23 24 0011 OHIO WILLOW DR S C A SUESS I J J KEHNA JANES KEHNA/CANDEE ANN SUESS 1110 WILLOW DR S WAYZATA HN 55391 SO 10-117-23 24 0017 01115 WILLOW DR S TODD N 6ABRIELS0N ET AL TODD N 0 SUE E OABRIELSON 1115 WILLOW DR' S WAYZATA HN 55391 SB 10-117-23 24 0032 01120 WILLOW DR S JUDITH A GRAUNKE JUDITH A GRAUNKE 1120 WILLOW DR S WAYZATA HN 55391 i ^'4 TOTAL BATCH 504 00047 * ,^1 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE* ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. / . *. DATE n> )' V • RUN DATE 02/0A/99 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST BATCH 504 PROP ADOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR PROP ADOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR SB 03-117-25 3S 0001 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OP ORONO P 0 BOX 44 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 3B 03-117-23 34 8004 02155 SHEVLIN DR J t J PAULSON JEROHE T B JUDY X PAULSON 2155 SHEVLIN DRIVE WAYZATA HN 55391 3S 03-117-23 34 0019 02140 SHEVLIN DR F 0 LARSON B J H LARSON FRANK G B JENNIFER H LARSON 2140 SHEVLIN DR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 03-117-23 34 0029 02015 WEBBER HILLS RD RICHARD W PULA ETAL RICHARD W PULA 2015 WEBBER HILLS ROAD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 11 0002 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HCLEOD CNTY REO RAIL AUTH DAKOTA RAIL INC 25 ADAHS ST N HUTCHINSON HN 55350 38 10-117-23 12 0003 00930 DROWN RO S ■GARY D FRETHEIH ETAL GARY D FRETHEIH 930 BROWN ROAD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 03-117-23 33 0004 00740 WILLOW DR S R W FULLERTON ET AL ROBERT FULLERTON B CAROLINE KNOLL FULLERTON 740 WILLOW DR S WAYZATA HN 55391 38 03-117-23 34 0007 02175 SHEVLIN DR ■ K P RAKOS B H H GUSTAFSON K P RAKOS B H H GUSTAFSON 2175 SHEVLIN DR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 03-117-23 34 0027 02055 WEBBER HILLS RD D R B H H WILLIAHS DAVID R/HARGARET H WILLIAHS 2055 WEBBER HILLS RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 03-117-23 43 0004 00740 ‘BROWN RO S T R BROWNE B S R BROWN^ THOHAS R BROWNE 740 SO BROWN ROAD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 12 0001 00840 BROWN RD S DAVID H SKEIE B WIFE DAVID H SKEIE 840 BROWN ROAD SOUTH WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 12 0004 00940 BROWN RD S ABC JOHNSTON ALEXANOER/CATHERINE JOHNSTON 940 BROWN RD S WAYZATA HN 55391 REPORT NO. PI4'.5401 PAGE 12 38 03-117-23 34 0001 00775 DROWN RD S H D SIMPSON B S H SIHPSON H D SIHPSON B S H SIMPSON 775 DROWN RD S WAYZATA HN 55391 38 03-117-23 34 0018 02170 SHEVLIN DR R P WIENS B J A WIENS ROBERT P B JULIE A WIENS 2170 SHEVLIN DR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 03-117-23 34 0028 02025 WEBBER HILLS RD E'J VOLDEN B C H OUCHARHE E J VOLDEN B C H OUCHARHE 2025 WEBBER HILLS RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 03-117-23 43 0005 00800 BROWN RD S R A VICKERMAN ET AL WA EST RUTH ANNE VICKERHAN 800 BROWN RD S WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 12 0002 00920 BROWN RD S N J STRAND B C J B STRAND NICHOLAS B COLETTE STRAND 920 S BROWN RD S WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 13 0001 01000 DROWN RO S J A B P A ABBOTT ET AL JAMES A B PATRICIA ABBOTT 4471 GENOA DR AMELIA ISLAND FL 32034 « I f»*» smn icn oroi AS iMiCAfii-sa IS «tsc< AAfils KING S •'%(«£ # '<!« 2 II. 2t JOmSTONS FXEICI UXE ' 0^1: ►rir 11*1 V ’ n i» M •b in l> A! r§. *t ^ in •1* ft I ITl i*' •"S^ .n \$• ■*i3,!.1* ^ ITS I' ;i:a* IfS s. * » A*.iLk» a: < " j »..^« 1 Qi^^*Jr "• w>t \ ^ “ \ s IX' ^no X l«0*JL in \“ R 331)> ” no f IM ' A /ft ^ * * ^ m Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik& \ Associates Engineers & Architects March 9.1999 Elizabeth VanZomeren • City Planner/Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Carriage Hill Subdivision File No. 139-2467 Bonestroo. Rosene. Andertik snd Associates, tnc is an Affirmative Action/Bqual Opportunity employer Principals: Otro G. Bonestroo. PE. • Joseph C. Anderilk. P.E. • Marvin L Sorvala. RE. • Richard E. Turner. P£. • Glenn R. Cook. P.E. • Robert a Schunicht. PE. • Jerry A. Bourdon. PE. • Robert W1 Rosene. PX and Susan M. Eberlla CPA., Senior Consultants Associate Principais: Howard A. Sanford. PX • Keith A. Gordoa PX • Robert R. Pfefferle. PX • Richard W. Foster. PE. • David O. Loskota. PE. • Robert C Russek. A.I-A. • Mark A. Hanson. PX • Michael T. Rautmana PX, • Ted KXIefd. PE. • Kenneth P Anderioa PE. • Mark R. Rolfs. PX • Sidney P Williamson, PX. LX • Robert F. KotsmJth • Agnes M. Ring • Michael P Rau. PX • Allan Rick Schmidt. PX. Offices: Sl Paul. Rochester. Wllimar and St. Cloud. MN • Milwaukee. Wl Website: wwwi>one stroo.com Dear Liz: We have reviewed the preliminary plat for the proposed six lot Carriage Hill subdivision. The site is located west of Brown Road South (C.R. 146), east of Willow Drive and south of the Webber Hills neighborhood in the northwest quarter of Section 10. We have the following comments in regards to engineering matters. 1. Access: The proposed access location for Carriage Lane appears acceptable. We recommend that Carriage Lane be constructed to a 24-foot paved width in accordance with City standards for a private street serving 3 to 6 units. We also recommend that Carriage Lane be an urban street section with concrete curb and gutter and storm sewer. The City should review and determine whether the 150-foot driveway across Outlot B to Lot 2 is acceptable. Final plans should include a typical street section for both Carriage Lane and the driveway to Lot 1. Access to Lot 1 along King Sureet is adjacent to an existing driveway serving the property to uic uuiili. Dues It make icraz to have two separate driveways side by side or would a combined access be more appropriate? The proposed plan for the access to Lot 1 appears to require some extensive grading. Construction easements or retaining walls may be required to construct this access. It also appears that the construction of this access will impact the wetland and wetland buffer. Plans should be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) for their review. Geotechnical recommendations and street design should be provided for our review. 2. Grading: A grading and erosion control plan for the entire site should be submitted for review. Erosion control measures should be in place prior to any grading, particularly along the wetland and ponding area. Additional erosion control will be needed during construction of the houses and septic systems. 3. Drainage: As stated in # I above, we recommend that storm sewer should be constructed to route storm flows from CKr - the street to the pond. Based on the drainage calculations submitted, it appears that the existing 12-inch CMP under Willow Drive will remain in place. The CMP will act in conjunction with the proposed 15-inch CMP. We n^kll piPO recommend that all storm pipes be RCP rather than CMP. We recommend that the pond have an outlet structure that provides 1-foot of sidmming to remove floatables and debris. Some Type of permanent erosion control f^Cf- measures should be installed downstream fiom the pond to prevent sedimentation in French Lake. We have attached "'dllT'lbrCfldi additional comments from our water resources department regarding water quantity and quality. 4. Utilities: City sewer exists Just south of the site on Willow Drive. The City should review and detemune whether they intend to ever provide sewer service to this area. 5. Easements: Fmal platting should include 33 feet of dedicated right-of-way for C.R. 146 and 66 feet of dedicated right-of-way for Willow Drive. Does Outlot A have any impact on access to the lot south of Willow Drive? The drainage and utility easements shown appear to be acceptable. Additional easements may be required if sanitary sewer is provided. 6. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 651-636*4600 ■ Fax: 651-636-1311 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 Attachments Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono Memo 1/1 Bonutroo £s Rosen* Andert{k& |\] I Assodates ftiglWB trt 4 A/tftffctt Project Name: Carriage Hill Development To: Tom Kellogg Client: CityofOrono File No: 139gen - #2467 From: Heather A. Olson Date: March 3, 1999 Re: Stormwater quantity and quality review Remarks: General This review concerns the Carriage Hill development as detailed In the plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services Inc. dated 2/19/99. This site is located east of Willow Drive In the northwest quarter of section 10. The site consists of six 2+ acre lots located on approximately 45 acres. The site will drain west under Willow Drive into the wetland surrounding French Lake. Water Quality The proximity of this development to both French Lake and the adjacent wetlands, increases the irnportance of erosion’control and treatment for the runoff from this site. We offer the following recommendations. 1 . Heavy-duty silt fencing should be installed on each lot along the construction limits. All silt fencing shall remain intact until there is vegetation established on the entire site. 2. The rear yard drainage from lots 1,2,3 and 4 drain into the adjacent wetland without being treated. A 26 ’ wetland buffer has been indicated on the plan, please submit a typical section and description for City staff to review. 3. There is some concern for the drainfield/septic system located on Lot 5 block 1. It appears to encroach upon the proposed water quality ponding. It is recommended that the ordinance for the 75 ’ offset be enforced for this ponding area. The discharge from this drainfield will Impact the nutrient loading within the proposed pond which outlets into French Lake. The soil borings should also be submitted for city staff to review. Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderllk and Associates ________________ 2335 West Highway 36 # St. Paul. MN 55113# Phone: 651-636-4600 # Fax: 651-636-1311 Memo 1/11 Bonestcoo ffa Rosen* VH Andedik& |\H Associates 4 A/chIttett 4. Excavation of temporary sedimentation ponds and the use of BMPs should be (n place during each lot construction to reduce the erosion to the adjacent wetland. ^ f . Water Quantity The topography of this site prevents the entire site to drain to a single ponding area. We offer the following recommendations: 1. It Is recommended that the impervious surfaces, (house, driveway, and yard) and any land disturbed during construction be routed to drain into the street and into the proposed ponding area. This wdll reduce the amount of untreated runoff draining directly to the adjacent wetland. 2. The 100-year HWL for the proposed pond does not seem to provide sufficient freeboard for Willow Road. The elevation of the low point on Willow Road should be established and submitted to city staff. 3. The cover for the outlet structure under Willow Road should bo evaluated. 4. It is difficult to determine from the grading plan whether a maintenance bench above the pond NWL Is being provided. At a minimum there should be one provided around inlets, outlets, and at any point where dredging operations might occur. 5. The ponding area should also have a 10:1 aquatic bench at the ponds NWL. The ponding area illustrated on the plans does not appear to have this feature. 6. The Installation of an Emergency Over Flow (E.O.F.) is recommended for this pond. The E.O.F. should provide overland drainage for the pond during storms that exceed the 100-year event, and or when the outlet structure becomes obstructed. The EOF should protect adjacent homes and roadways. Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderllk and Associates 2335 West Highway 36 # St. Paul, MN 65113# Phone:651-636-4600# Fax:651-636-1311 TO:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator FROM: Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager DATE;March 4,1999 SUBJECT: Septic Review for Application #2467,Carriage Hill - Subdivision The proposed six lot subdivision requires the use of on-site sewage treatment systems. Site evaluation/design has been completed for primary and alternate drainfield sites on each lot. Due to frozen gound conditions, staff can't verify the accuracy of the soil borings or recominend approval of the subdivision at this time. The information submitted by Westwood Professional Services identifies two drainfield sites on each property meeting all City and State standards. Staff approval of the septic plan will be granted once the City can verify the soil information and complete system design information is submitted by Westwood. The stormwater drainage pond on the southwest comer of the property must be redesigned to meet • • . ,^1. - -A- - •- nru r» mo to ii JJ iUUt bClUidOK irom lUC iU maw AAJI^IWMWWA AMt^AW. — future setback conflicts when septic system upgrades are required on adjoining properties, Based on the above infonnation, staff recommends approval of the application on the conditioii tiiat the soil information is verified by Staff and all final septic system design information is provided. The city requires the drainfield sites to be fenced off prior to any grading or land alteration. A . I) A ' ^----------------- rartXXOC TTT wm PirtXX^ a-ii -i I ■5? PartX - if iPartn Part Xin L*nsLik€lis^oHiin fer« 1 V"ZM mm vm City ofOrbno Minnesota J Party / Part XXV Part XIV MUSA BOUNDARY .•£>fv>>: m PartXVni pVrtxxvm fa —■■■i..—rasbr / / »(• lr» r*«« CURRJEKTMUSA fMtl FmO r«tm r«tiv FirtV FirtVI Pvtvn PMtvm Pvt DC PMtX PMtXl p«txn p«txui PMtXlV Part XV Part XVI Kmaa/Fiical LakiOMm Oraat ScknMiiHiM fiHk KKkbtny KcnfckCMt Cbtrf CWw/Fwwia la Orw . Mdok BialMlMO LaMTW. Fcntfato IBqr • ' »||b«i7l20MyirWk« HoitfiSMSMliaplM aSOBwaMRniNfrtk Fikn«rHilbA4IUIo« LonfUMkarfifTf^* SiaUaBay PwfXVU FirtXVin NaakaPkapov P«tXDC NwAUatLaka F«tXX LoofUkaCowfeyaak FartXXX CaalUatLika FartXXn OkaoaOKkaaif FviXXin FasRUfa FmXXIV WckkcrHOb Pvt XXV Edtn*ao4Kmi PkrtXXVI BcackcliPaial PwfXXVn Faakm PvtXXVa B«7?U|WK«twao4 PmiXXDC OiaMScMiMackcjr Altai PMtXXX DOkMaPiapotp Frapaat^MUSAAMMaa PartXXXI Max««0 Bay Alta * *Afiocxcd 10 Qqt of Loaf Uka OUatLiUlS 4-1444) (tooLflUS 4-I44Q) (RMLillU 44440) (RnoLimi 44440) (XnaLflUS 4-1440) OmaLfUIP II4S4I) OUMLfUn 114241) OMLHISI 24249) 0Uaal.i212l M2-t9) (RaaaLfHn 24241) (lUaaL 42427 24240) QUarfaimi 24442) OUnLOltS 24442) (Ranl.f22t2 24442) (lUaaL 12212 24442) (XnoLi2l22 S4042) aM.i»a 1B4242) (l(onl.i224l I4424D tRoMLf27fl 1041-fO) (IUaal.t27fl 104144) (Raaal.«27fl 104040) (Raaal.i27fl 104040) (XaaaLnifl 104040) (RaaaLfTTPI 104040) ilUaaLi27fi 104040) (RcaaLf27fl 104040) (RaaoLilTII 104044) (IUMLi27fl 104040) (IUaiCf27fl 101040) OUaoLiJTfl 104040) D/VHLGRE^SHARDLGW ANDTJBA?! «. COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cl rv OH OHONO DATE: 5/21/99 ITEM NO.; I'S) Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2495 Steven Bohl/BohLand Development Zoning District:RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) Comprehensive Plan:Rural Residential Summary: BohLand Developement, Inc. has applied to the City for approval of an entrance monument plan for Carriage Hill. A condition of approval for the Carnage Hill subdivision was the subdivider submit an entrance monument plan and design for approval by the City Council. The plan and underlying easements are attached as Exhibits A and B to the draft approval resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt the enclosed resolution approving the entrance monument plan for Carriage Hill A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR AN ENTRANCE MONUMENT PLAN FOR CARRIAGE HILL FILE NO. 2495 WHEREAS, Steven Bohl, BohLand Development, (hereinafter the "subdivider") received approval for the plat of Carriage Hill (hereinafter the "subdivision"); and WHEREAS, a requirement of final subdivision approval an entrance monument site plan must be approved by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has submitted an entrance monument plan for the Carriage Hill subdivision; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on May 24,1999, the Orono City Council considered the entrance monument plan for Carriage Hill and noted the following findings; 1.The monuments will be located within Lots 5 and 6, Carriage Hill adjacent to Outlot C (private road named Carriage Lane). 2.The subdivider has established a maximum size for each monument to be 3 feet in width, 3 feet in . jngth and a height of 5 feet. 3.The monuments shall include only maintenance free materials such as concrete, stone, and brick and of a subdued apprearance. 4.A white three rail wood fence will be constructed from the monument extending 20 feet in length parallel to the established lot lines for Lots 5 and 6 as shown on the site plan, attached as Exhibit A. 5.The subdivider has created easements, attached exhibit B, which shall be in favor of the Homeowners Association over Lots 5 and 6, Carriage Hill for the purpose of maintenance and upkeep of the entrance monuments. Page 1 of 4 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono, hereby approves the entrance monument design and site plan subject to the following conditions: 1. The subdivider to create easements in favor of the Homeowners Association over Lots 5 and 6, Carriage Hill for the purpose of maintenance and upkeep of the entrance monuments. 2.The location and size of the entrance monuments shall be as shown on the site plan attached, as Exhibit A, to this resolution. 3.The applicant shall apply for a building permit for the entrance monuments prior to construction. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 24th day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999 by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 2 of 4 Exhibit A ^arria ge HILL <oKiVe 3T4J ( *^ncc ' be o bPf\0 ---o'- cP' I d\S N54®19*16"E 25.00.^ oC / o*§0^ ^ 8 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Exhibit B April 26,1999 104 Mitly Drive. Suite 3 Buffalo, MN 5S313 LEGAL DESCRIPTION • Proposed Monument Easements Phone: C12-CI2-2SS7 Ui. si:::2-2639 Toll Free; 1-8S8-682-2S87 Email; wpsC'^estwcodps.com That part of Lot S, Block I, CARRIAGE HILL, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the most westerly comer of said Lot 5; thence northeasterly along the northwesterly line of said Lot S a distance of 25.00 feet; thence southeasterly angle left 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 25.00 feet; thence southwesterly angle left 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 25.00 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 5; thence northwesterly, along said southwesterly line, a distance of 25.00 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO That part of Lot 6, Block I, CARRIAGE HILL, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County. Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the most southerly corner of said Lot 6; thence northeasterly along the southeasterly line of said Lot 6 a distance of 25.00 feet; thence northwesterly angle right 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 25.00 feet; thence southwesterly angle right 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 25.00 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 6; thence southeasterly, along said southwesterly line, a distance of 25.00 feet to the point of beginning. i i OciigtBng the FuM«Tod*r...since 1972 . .. / I h', ■ <l V i *1 1 »l-’L---- .1 • Vi f I ?T^lf J'^'; . -(•■• ^<yA''^c^V'■'-'•'.■-•.. -i". .'*•.* ♦*• **'ij**f'**•*'4•jj'n/*>j m<x-:pUr-i:' flivv';" v;--;Vv ^ T; Tv-. ■:.■ ^-r'«‘:r^:-.':: y y-S^x-.rr- - ■ - t // ^V'>!}v • wWy.* . v M!T - . ' . i'-i ' »^iVuVHv-'s<•••;. JtftV-..- • :•• '•T'-' • - * ; * U‘ . *>', -4^^ - -___________ _ . %#.••• <irl* ^ I* «. • ” • - V - - ' ••49 ^ iC; • ■ ' t V*-’ ' ?-4*rii' **' «2 ^ ■IM 1£* ' Str'' -C5: ^ r -u ■ >•* •• j. *. ^ , ‘‘- i:.:. ^ ■'< ^ .' / ' • ■'». LiSsil?? V. ".* '^.•1 I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: May 24. 1999 ITEM NO.; H Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed;Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report Item Description: Request to Purchase Water Meter for Golf Course Irrigation System The final DNR water appropriations permit for the golf course irrigation system well requires that both the amount of water pumped from the well, and the amount of water used for golf course irrigation be recorded. The well pumps water into the golf course pond, and then the irrigation system pumps water out of this pond. This method reduces ground water usage as runoff from the golf course is reused. The DNR permit condition limits the amount of ground water pumped to not exceed the amount of water actually used to irrigate the golf course. This condition prohibits the use of groundwater to supplement the pond and creek during dry periods. There is a water meter to measure the flow from the well into the pond, but a second meter is needed to measure the flow pumped through the irrigation system. This requires a 6" water which is a fairly expensive meter. The cost for the purchase and installation of this water meter is $2,153.96. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve purchase of a water meter for the golf course irrigation system from Bergerson and Caswell Inc. for $2,153.96 to be paid for from the Golf Course Fund, and to amend the 1999 Golf Course Capital Outlay Budget to include this expenditure J HAY 06 •■?3 0Z5 27PM BEP6EPS0M CASICLL P.l BERGERSON = CASWELL INC. Commercial • Municipal • Residential Submersible & Jkrbine Pumps Environmental Drillers AAlUtTV Well Drilling, Abandonment A Repair Since I94S CfrHjUd ttbU OfilUrs Cenified Pump Inssallm May 6,1999 ORONO PUBLIC GOLF COURSE Attn: Mr. Ron Steffenhagcn PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 RE:INSTALLATION OF WATER METER IN IRRIGATION SYSTEM Dear Mr. Steffenhagcn; ,, Bercerson Caswell Inc. Appreciates the opportunity to assist you in your well and pump needs. 1 have looked at your new pump station, and thought that there would be a way to detemiine the total now from your pond to the irrigation system. But as you have informed me this issue was overlooked when the system was installed. Below I will itemize two options for your installation, that will include the same type of propeller water meter but will be mounted into your system in two different manners. PROJECT COSTs Option ^ 1; Bolt-on Saddle McCrometer Flow Meter Installed $ 1,126.75 Option #2:Weld-on Flanges & Flanged McCrometer Flow Meter Installed $ 2,022.50 Both of tliese options are the same type of propeller flow meter but the second one has flanged ends for removal, rccalibration, and reinstallation. If you have any questions, require additional information or would like to order one of the abo\ e options, please do not hesitate to contact us at 479-3121. Thank you ^ ^ a/ ^ Sincerely. BE^ERSON=CASWELL INC. __I /TO Tim D.tJcrqu Project Managef^ S3.% iVyfV*' '(o'r- W\A\er iptivvy he'iist n<fV ms ImiuitnalSu.SU^te Plain, MN55359 (et2)479-5t2t Fw(47*-2ie3 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: May 19,1999 ITEM NO.: %) Department Approval: Lyle Oman, Building Official Bruce Vang, Field Inspector Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Adoption of 1997 Uniform Building Code with State Amendments List of Exhibits A - DraftOrdinance Adopting 1997 Uniform Building Code The Uniform Building Code is updated every three years and the State of Minnesota adopts the Code with Amendments generally one to two years after the Code is issued. The State then refers the approved Code to cities for their review and adoption. Once the State adopts the Uniform Building Code, cities enforcing the State Building Code are required to adopt the Code having some options in choosing certain Appendix chapters. Staff recommends adopting the same Appendix chapters approved in 1990 and 1995. The Appendix chapters are listed in the draft of the ordinance presented for Council's review and action this evening (Exhibit A). The City now enforces the 1994 UBC. The State of Minnesota adopted the 1997 UBC on October 5, 1998. Staff will also prepare the necessary ordinance amendments for its contract cities. Spring Park and Minnetonka Beach. The 1997 UBC does include an increase in the Fee Schedule proposing an approximate 11 % increase in permit fees. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt Ordinance No._____, Second Series and to adopt the updated version of the Minnesota State Building Code (1997 UBC). _____ Ayes,______Nays. To further direct staff to prepare an amendment of the Orono Fee Schedule for Council's action at their June 14,1999 meeting to rcftect an increase of approximately 11% in building permit fees. k ORDINANCE NUMBER ____, SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE. THIS ORDINANCE: PROVIDES FOR THE APPLICATION, ADMINISTRATION, AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE BY REGULATING THE ERECTION, CONSTRUCTION, ENLARGEMENT, ALTERATION, REPAIR, MOVING, REMOVAL, DEMOLITION, CONVERSION, OCCUPANCY, EQUIPMENT, USE, HEIGHT, AREA, AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL BUILDINGS AND/OR STRUCTURES IN THIS MUNICIPALITY; PROVIDES FOR THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS AND COLLECTION OF FEES THEREOF; PROVIDES PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION THEREOF; REPEALS ALL ORDINANCES AND PARTS OF ORDINANCES THAT CONFLICT THEREWITH. This municipality does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Application, Administration and Enforcement. The application, administration, and enforcement of the code shall be in accordance with Minnesota Rule Part 1300.2100 and as modified by Chapter 1305. The code shall be enforced within the extraterritorial limits permitted by Minnesota Statute 16B.62, Subdivision 1 when so established by this ordinance. The code enforcement agency of this municipality is called the Building and Zoning Department. A Minnesota certified Building Official must be appointed by this jurisdiction to administer the code (Minnesota Statute 16B.65). SECTION 2. Permits and Fees. The issuance of permits and the collection of fees shall be as authorized in Minnesota Statute 16B.62, Subdivision 1 and as provided for in Chapter 1 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code and Minnesota Rules Parts 1305.0106 and 1305.0107. Permit fees shall be assessed for work governed by this code in accordance with Chapter 1 of the Uniform Building Code 1997 Edition. In addition, a surcharge fee shall be collected on all permits issued for work governed by this code in accordance with Minnesota Statute 1613.70. SECTION 3. Violations and Penalties. A violation of the code is a misdemeanor (Minnesota Statute 16B.69). SECTION 4. Building Code. The Minnesota Slate Building Code, established pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 1613.59 to 1613.75 is hereby adopted as the building code for this jurisdiction. The code is hereby incorporated in this ordinance as if fully set out herein. Page I of2 A. The Minnesota State building Code includes the following chapter of Minnesota Rules: B. C. 1 , 2. 3. 4. c. d. e. f. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 1300 Minnesota Building Code 1301 Building Official Certification 1302 State Building Construction Approvals 1305 Adoption of the 1997 Uniform Building Code including Appendix Chapters: a. 3, Division 1, Detention and Correctional Facilities b. 12, Division 11, Sound Transmission Control 15, Reroofing 16, Division 1, Snowload Design 29, Minimum Plumbing Fixtures 31, Division 11, Membrane Structures 1307 Elevators and Related Devices 1315 Adoption of the 1996 National Electrical Code 1325 Solar Energy Systems 1330 Fallout Shelters 1335 Floodproofmg Regulations 1341 Facilities for the Handicapped 1346 Adoption of the 1991 Uniform Mechanical Code 1350 Manufactured Homes 1360 Prefabricated Buildings 1361 Industrialized/Modular Buildings 1370 Storm Shelters (Manufactured Home Parks) 4715 Minnesota Plumbing Code 7670 Minnesota Energy Code This municipality may adopt by reference any or all of the following optional appendix chapters of the 1997 Uniform Building Code as authorized by Minnesota Rule Part 1305.0020 subpart 2: 3, Division 111, 1992 One and Two Family Levelling Code; 33, Excavation and Grading. This municipality may adopt by reference any or all of the following optional chapters of Minnesota Rule: 1306, Special Fire Protection Systems with option 8 (Group M, S, or F occupancies with 2,000 or more gross square feet). SECTION 5. Effective Date of Ordinance. This ordinance shall be published in the Laker/Pioneer newspaper and shall be effective upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at its regular meeting held the 24th day of May, 1999 by a vote of____ayes and_____nays. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 2 of2 r. COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cl rv OF ORONO DATE: May21,1999 ITEM NO Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: CDBG Joint Cooperation Agreement - Resolution As part of the City's participation in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program, the City enters into a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County. These agreements run for a tluee-year period. The Joint Cooperation Agreement for fiscal years 2000 - 2002 is attached, as well as a resolution authorizing the execution of the Joint Cooperation Agreement. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt a resolution authorizing the execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City of Orono and Hennepin County for participation in the Urban Hennepin County Commumty Development Block Grant Program in fiscal year 2000 - 2002. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ORONO AND HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM IN FISCAL YEAR 2000 - 2002 WHEREAS, the Citv of Orono, Minnesota and the County of Hennepin have in effect a Joint Cooperation Agreement for purposes of qualifying as an Urban County under the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Programs; and WHEREAS, the City and County wish to execute a new Joint Cooperation Agreement in order to continue to qualify as an Urban County for purposes of the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Programs. BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the current Joint Cooperation .^greement between the City and the County be terminated and a new Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and County be executed effective October 1, 1999, and ^at the Mayor and the City Administrator be authorized and directed to sign the Agreement on behalf of the City. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 24th day of May, 1999 by a vote of_____ayes and_____nays. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 1 of 1 m Hennepin County ' ill' An Equal Opportunity Employer May 6, 1999 >« «• -- ^ . i » . *•. M'Y 1 ' Mr. Ron Moorse Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 G i;'...j Dear Mr. Moorse: Accompanying for your review and execution is the Urban Hennepin County Joint Cooperation Agreement for FY 2000 - 2002. The agreement sets forth broad shared powers for carrying out housing and community development activities. The U.S. Departmer.t of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires the agreement in order for Hennepin County to qualify as an urban county and be the recipient of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and the HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) entitlement funds. A draft gray-line copy of the agreement is enclosed, which details all revisions to the current agreement. There were two significant changes. One is to increase the threshold for participation in the Consolidated Pool from $50,000 to $75,000. The second is to add a clause to Section VI that gives cities that reach metropolitan city entitlement status before July 16, 1999 the choice of opting out of the program or to defer their status and stay in the county program. Under the Hennepin County agreement, any city with metropolitan city status will receive funding using the HUD entitlement formula or the county formula, whichever is greater. As a comi.nunity participating in the Urban Hennepin County program, your city would not be eligible in FY 2OOO - 2002 to apply for grants under the small cities or state CDBG programs. Your community will automatically participate in the Hennepin County HOME program and will not be eligible to receive HOME funds through the state or other consortiums. Please execute the city signature page of the agreement to indicate your continued participation in the Urban County Program. Return only an original copy of the city signature page with the city seal and a copy of the authorizing resolution by JUNE 30» 1999. Office Of Planning & Development Development Planning Unit 10709 Wa>7ata Boulevard, Suite 260 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55305 (612) 541-7080 FAX:(612) 541-7090 TDD/TTY;(612) 541-7981 Recycled Paper 'n Mr. Ron Moorse May 6, 1999 Page 2 A sample council resolution is enclosed. A copy of the county signature page will be provided after execution by the county. Please contact Mark Hendrickson at 541-7084 if you have any questions about the agreement or the Urban County Program. I look forward to continuing our cooperative efforts in addressing suburban Heimepin County housing and community development needs. Sincerely, --------------- Gary L. Cij|ininj?ham Director Enclosures; Cooperation Agreement Draft gray line agreement Sample resolution Contract No. A18637 JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," A-2400 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55487, and the cities executing this Master Agreement, each hereinafter respectively referred to as "COOPERATING UNIT," said parties to this Agreement each being governmental units of the State of Minnesota, and made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59: WITNESSETH; COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree that it is desirable and in the interests of their citizens that COOPERATING UNIT shares its authority to carry out essential c immunity development and housing activities with COUNTY in order to permit COUNTY to secure and administer Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership funds as an Urban County within the provisions of the Act as herein defined arid, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutually agree to the following terms and conditions. COOPERATING UNIT admowledges that by the execution of this Agreement ‘hat it understands that it: 1. May not also spply for grants under the State CDBG Program from appropriations for fiscal years during which it is participating in the Urban County Program; and 2. May not participate in a HOME Consortium except through the Urban County. I. DEFINITIONS The definitions contained in 42 USC 5302 of the Act and 24 CFR §570.3 of the Regulations are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof, and the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them; A. "Act" means Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). B. "Regulations" means the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act, including but not limited to 24 CFR Part 570. "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. "Cooperating Unit" means any city or town in Hennepin County that has entered into a cooperation agreement that is identical to this Agreement, as well as Hennepin County, which is a party to each Agreement. "Consolidated Plan" means the document bearing that title or similarly required statements or documents submitted to HUD for authorization to expend the annual grant amount and which is C. D. developed by the COUNTY in conjunction with COOPERATING UNITS as part of the Community Development Block Grant Program. F."Metropolitan City" means any city located in whole or in part in Hennepin County which is certified by HUD to have a population of 50,000 or more people. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize COUNTY and COOPERATING UNIT to cooperate to appropriations for the Federal Fiscal Years 2000,2001 and 2002 and from any program income generated from the expenditure of such funds. lU. AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement is for a period commencing on October 1,1999 and the end of the program year covered by the Consolidated Plan for the basic grant amount for the Fiscal Year 2002, as authorized by ^.^and for such additional time as may be required for the expenditi^e the County for such period. COUNTY may notify COOPERATING UN^ pnor to the qualification period that the Agreement will automatically be renewed unless it is oartv Either COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT may exercise the option to terminate the Agreemrat at the Ke Urban County qualification period. If COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT fail to ^Jf^cise that will not have the opportunity to exercise that option until the end of a subsequent Urban , period. COUNTY will notify the COOPERATING UNIT in writmg of its right to elect to be excluded by the . specified by HUD. and HOME funds allocated for use in COOPERATING UNITs jurisdiction. Nomithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this Agreement may be teiminated «1>' the pro^m “dllring Lch ^ withdraws its designation of COUKH' as an Urban County under the Act. This Agreement shall be executed by the appropriate ofTicers of COOPERATING UNIT and COI^ of Planning and Development, and in no event shall the Agreement be filed later than June 30,1999. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall take all actions necessary to assure compliance wth the applicaTcerSn"; r^.red by Section 104(b) of the TUle I of the Housm^ Act of 1974 as amended, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 the Fair Housing Act, Section iw of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; and other applicable laws. B. C. rV. ACTIVITIES COOPERATING UNIT agrees that awarded grant funds will be used to und^ke ^d carry out within the terms of this Agreement certain projects involving one or more of the essential activities eligible for funding under the Act. COUNTY agrees and will assist COOPERATING UNIT in the umiertaking of such essential activities by providing the services specified in this Agreement. The parties mutually agree to comply with all applicable requirements of the Act and the Regulations and other relevant Federal and/or Minnesota statutes or regulatioris in the use of basic grant amounts. Nothing in this Article shall be construe d to lessen or abrogate COUNTY s responsibility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act., including the development of the Consolidated Plan, pursuant to 24 CFR Part 91. COOPERATING UNIT further specifically agrees as follows: A. COOPERATING UNIT will in accord with a COUNTY-established schedule prepare and provide to COUNTY, in a prescribed form, requests for the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds consistent with this Agreement, program regulations and the Urban Hennepin County Consolidated Plan. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that, pursuant to 24 CFR §570.501 (b), it is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including the requirement for a written Subrecipient Agreement set forth in 24 CFR §570.503. The Subrecipient Agreement will cover the implementation requirements for each activity funded pursuant to this Agreement and shall be duly executed with and in a form prescribed by COUNTY. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that it is subject to the same subrecipient requirements stoted in paragraph B above in instances where an agency other than itself is undertaking an activity pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. In such instances a written mrd Party Agreement shall be duly executed between the agency and COOPERATING UNIT m a form prescribed by COUNTY. COOPERATING UNIT shall implement all activities funded for each annual program pursuant to this Agreement within Twenty-Four (24) months of the authorization by HUD to expend the basic grant amount. 1. Funds for all activities not implemented within Twenty-Four (24) months shall be transferred to a separate account for reallocation on a competitive basis. Implementation period extensions may be granted upon request in cases where the authorized activity has been initiated and/or subject of a binding contract to proceed. COOPERATING UNIT w ill take actions necessary to assist in accomplishing the community development program and housing goals, as contained in the Urban Heimepin County Consolidated Plan. COOPERATING UNIT shall ensure that all programs and/or activities funded in part or in full by grant funds received pursuant to this Agreement shall be undertake affirmatively with housing, employment and business opportunities for minorities and women. It shall, in implementing all programs and/or activities funded by the basic pant amount comply, with all applicable Federal and Minnesota Laws, statutes, rules and regulations with regard to civil nghts, affirmative action and equal employment opportunities and Administrative Rule issued by the COUNTY. D. E. F. 2. G. COOPERATING UNIT that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes action by COUNTY to comply with its fair housing certification shall be prohibited from receiving CDBG fiinding for any activities. H. COOPERATING UNIT shall participate in the citizen participation process as established by COUNTY in compliance with the requirements of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. I. COOPERATING UNIT shall reimburse COUNTY for any expenditure determined by HUD or COUNTY to be ineligible. J. COOPERATING UNIT shall prepare, execute, and cause to be filed all documents protecting the interests of the parties hereto or any other party of interest as may be designated by the COUNTY. K. COOPERATING UNIT has adopted and is enforcing: 1. 2. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in nonviolent civil rights demonstrations; and A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring cn^cc to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such nonviolent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction. COUNTY further specifically agrees as follows: A. COUNTY shall prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies, on an annual basis, all plans, statements and program documents necessary for receipt of a basic grant amount under the Act. B. C. D. E. F. COUNTY shall provide, to the maximum extent feasible, technical assistance and coordmating services to COOPERATING UNIT in the preparation and submission of a request for funding. COUNTS’ shall provide ongoing technical assistance to COOPERATING UNIT to aid COUNTY in fulfilling its responsibility to HUD for accomplishment of the community development program and housing goals. COUNTY shall, upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer local housing rehabilitation g.*ant programs funded pursuant to the Agreement, provided that COUNTY shall receive Twelve percent (12%) of the allocation by COOPERATING UNIT to the activity as reimbursement for costs associated with the administration of COOPERATING UNIT activity. COUNTY may, at its discretion and upon official request by COOPERATING UI^, agree to administer, for a possible fee, other programs and/or activities funded pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. COUNTY may, as necessary for clarification and coordination of program administration, develop and implement Administrative Rules consistent with the >.ct. Regulations, HUD administrative directives, and administrative requirements of COUNTY. B. C. D. E. F. 1. V. ALLOCATION OF BASIC GRANT AMOUNTS Basic grant amounts received by the COUNTY under Section 106 of the Act shall be allocated as follows: A. COUNTY shall retain Ten percent (10%) of the annual basic grant amount for the undertaking of eligible activities. The balance of the basic grant amount shall be made available by COUNTY to COOPERA'nNG UNITS in accordance with the formula stated in part C and the procedure stated in part D of imis section for the purpose of allowing the COOPERATING UNITS to submit funding requests. The allocation is for planning purposes only and is not a guarantee of funding. The COUNTY will calculate, for each COOPERATING UNIT, an amount that bears the same ratio to the balance of the basic grant amount as the average of the ratios between: The population of COOPERATING UNIT and the population of all COOPERATING UNITS. 2. The extent of poverty in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of poverty in all COOPERATING UNITS. 3. The extent of overcrowded housing by units in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of ov'ercrowded housing by units in all COOPERATING UNITS. ;. In determining the average of the above ratios, the ratio involving the extent of poverty shall be counted twice. Funds will be made available to communities utilizing the formula specified in C of this Section in the following manner: COOPERATING UNIT qualifying as a Metropolitan City (having populations of at le^t 50,000) will receive annual funding allocations equal to the HUD formula entitlement or e COUNTY formula allocation, whichever is greater. Other COOPERATING UNITS with COUNTY formula allocations of S75,000 or more will receive funding allocations in accordance with the formula allocations. COOPERATING UNITS with COUNTY formula allocations of less than $75,000 wll have their funds consolidated in a pool for award in a manner determined by COUim. Only *e COOPERATING UNITS, whose funding has been pooled, will be eligible to compete tor these funds. The COUNTY shall develop these ratios based upon data to be finished by HUD. The COUN^ assumes no duty to gather such data independently and assumes no liability for any errors m the data furnished by HUD. In the event COOPERATING UNIT does not request a funding allocation, or a portion thereof, the amount not requested shall be made available to other participating communities, m a manner determined by COUNTY. 1. 2. 3. VI. METROPOLITAN CmES Any metropolitan city executing this Agreement shall defer their entitlement status and become part of Urban Hennepin County. This agreement can be voided if the COOPERATING UNIT is advised by HUD. prior to the completion of the re-qualification process for fiscal years 2000-2002. that it is eligible to become a metropolitan city and the COOPERATING UNIT elects to take its entitlement status. If the agreement is not voided on the basis of the COOPERATING UNIT’S eligibility as a metropolitan city prior to July 16,1999. the COOPERATING UNIT must remain a part of the COUNTY program for the entire three-year period of the COUNTY qualification. vn. OPINION OF COUNSEL The undersigned, on behalf of the Hennepin County Attorney, having reviewed this Agreement, hereby opines that the terms and provisions of the Agreement are fully authorized under State and local law and that the COOPERATING UNIT has full legal authority to undertake or assist in underling essential community development and housing assistance activities, specifically urbajLl^ewal aijd'^ub^ly-assisted housing. J Vm. HEP4NEPIN COUNTY EXECUTION The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on 1999, and pursuant to such approval and the proper County official having signed this Agreement, the COUNTS ’’ agrees to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: Assistant County Attorney Date: _____________ COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA By: Chair of its County Board And; Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator ^ Attest: Deputy/Clerk of the County Board DC. COOPERATING UNIT EXECUTION COOPERATING UNIT, having signed this Agreement, and the COOPERATING UNITS governing body having duly approved this Agreement on__________, 1999, and pursuant to such approval and the proper city official having signed this Agreement, COOPERATING UNIT agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Joint Cooperation Agreement, contract A18637. May 7.1999 CITY OF By: Its Mayor And: Its City Manager ATTEST:: CITY MUST CHECK ONE: The City is organized pursuant to: Plan A PlanB Charter 8 COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cl IY Oh' OHONO DATE: May 21,1999 ITEM NO: lent Approval: ^ Tom Kuehn Department Approval: Name Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: 1999 Interftind Transfers and Loan Payments Attachment: Schedule of 1999 Interfund Transfers and Loan Payments Each year the Council is requested to authorize transfer of monies between funds. This has historically occurred at the end of the year. However, to aid the cash flow of certain of these funds, the authorization request will be done during the first half of the year, beginning this year. The transfers and loan payments transactions fall into two categories: 1. ) Budgeted Transfers - Items designated in that year's budget when originally adopted for the purpose of providing support from one fund to another. 2. ) Fund Obligations - (a) Payments from one fund to another to reimburse expenses incurred by one fund on behalf of another. This is generally for City portions of special assessments, or for equipment capital outlay, (b) Loan pay ments from one fund to another. Loans are generally made to construction funds for the purpose of payment of expenses incurred prior to the sale of bonds and the levying of special assessments. In addition certain loans are necessary to fund major undertakings when the fund incurring the expense does not have adequate cash flow available to complete the project. This would include such situations as the loan from the Building Capital Outlay Fund to the Water Operating Fund for the Navarre water plant rehabilitation project. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of transfers as indicated on the attached schedule PROPOSED MOTION: - Moved by,____, seconded by,____, to approve the inter fund operating transfers, loan payments and special assessment payments on City owned property as presented, effective April 30,1999. Ayes ___, Nays ___. SCHEDULE OF 1999 INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND LOAN PAYMENTS FROM FUND TO FUND AMOUNT PURPOSE General Imp and Equip Outlay $ 95,000 Annual operating treuisfer for capital equipment purchases, as budgeted. General 1995 G. 0. Refunding Bond Debt Service (for 1985 Improvements) $ 3,650 Budgeted payment, 14th of 15 for special assessments re: sani tary sewer on City owned property in Crystal Bay (Principal $3,080, Int $570.) Bal o/s 12-31-99; $ 3,080. General Imp and Equip Outlay $ 8,400 Budgeted payment, 3rd of 5 for police records computer system. Building Outlay 1991 Public Facility Revenue Bonds Debt Service $ 130,000 Annual operating transfer for debt serv ice support of HRA Building Bonds, as budgeted. Water Operating Building Outlay 1o1Initial payment on loan for Navarre water treatment plant rehabilitation project not scheduled yet as the project is not complete. COUNCIL MEETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MAY 2 4 1999 Cn Y UF OHONO DATE: May 21,1999 ITEM NO: 25 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:m.Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Authorization to Allow Officer Tony Wittke to Work a Full-Time Schedule on a Temporary Basis Due to an injury to Officer Steve McNally, it is necessary to place Officer Tony Wittke into a full time work schedule until Officer McNally is able to return to duty. It is expected this will occur on June 7,1999. Officer Wittke is currently serving as a part-time police officer. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to authorize Officer Tony Wittke to be placed into a full-time work schedule on a temporary basis effective May 18, 1999 at a pay rate of $14.13 per hour, to continue until Officer Steve McNally returns to duty. I COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cl I Y Ol- OHONU DATE: May 21,1999 ITEM NO: 'pk Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Adminisoator's Report Item Description: Authorization of Panial Refund of Building Permit Fee Attached is a memo from Lyle Oman, Building Official, regarding a refund of fees to Tony Eiden Company for work which was cancelled per the Uniform Building Code, Because the refund is larger than $1,000, it requires authorization by the Council. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to authorize the partial refund of fees to Tony Eiden Company in the amount of $ 1,659.8 1. f. r f TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Ron Moorse, City Administrator Lyle Oman, Building Official PO' May 18, 1999 Refund Permit #11195 Please refund the following fees to Tony Eiden Company for work which was canceled per Uniform Building Code Section 107.6: Base Fee Plan Review State Surcharge $1,887.27 X 80% = 1,226.71 X 0% = 150.00x 100% = $1,509.81 0.00 150.00 t ►' " I ‘ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 Cl IY UH OHONO DATE: May 21,1999 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Resolution Providing for the Sale of General Obligation Improvement Bonds The City has three sanitary sewer projects that require funding through a bond issue. These are the Shoreline Drive/Heritage Lane project which was completed in 1998, and the Orono Orchards and Edgewood Hills projects which are to be completed in 1999. The total amount of the bond issue is $1,190,000. It is recommended the Council adopt the attached resolution which calls for the competitive sale of bonds on June 28, 1999. Attached is a letter from Carolyn Drude of Ehlers Associates, the City's bond consultant, setting out the estimated capitalization schedule for the bond issue. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution which cedis for the competitive sale of bonds on June 28, 1999. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $1,190,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1999 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $1,190,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1999 (the "Bonds"), to finance the construction of various sewer improvements in the City; and WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ("Ehlers"), as its independent fmancial advisor for the Bonds and is therefore authorized to solicit proposals in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City CouncU of City of Orono, Minnesota, as follows: 1.Authorization. Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to solicit proposals for the sale of the Bonds. 2.Meeting: Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet on June 28,1999, for the purpose of considering sealed proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 3.Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds, and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 24th day of May, 1999 by a vote of _____ayes and______nays. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, Citv Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 1 of 1 r J 1. MAY. 21. 1999 1 1:31AM EHLERS K ASSOC.NO. 39S0 F’. 2 EHLERS «. ASSOCIATES INC May 21,1999 cc; Tom Kuehn, Finance Director Ron Moorse City Adniinistraior Orono City Hall P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Re: $1,190,000 General Obligation Improventent Bonds, Series 1999 Following our meeting on May 19 ’\ we have prepared the loHowing estimated capitalization schedule for a bond issue to finance sewer improvement.^: Con.struction and engineering: Shoreline Drive/Heritage Lane Orono Orchards Edgewood Hills S 341.000 560,000 219.000 Subtotal Capitalized interest Legal, fiscal, administrative costs Funds needed Plus allowance for discount bidding (an interest cost) Bond Issue SI.120.000 28.000 25.000 SI,173.000 17.000 SI. 190.000 Attached is a resolution for the Council’s consideration at th-iir May 24 , competitive sale of bonds on June 28“’. We will receive bids in our office early m the day on June -8 and bring a bid tabulation to the Council meeting that evening for con.^ideration. Faegre and Benson, bon counsel, will prepare a resolution for that evening which will award the sale, set the terms and conditions of the bonds and provide for their paymert. Executive Vice President/Direcior N:\Oneral\PERSONAL\CD\orono..W LEADERS IN RUBL<C TIn ANCE 0?POrti#rii> \___I 3050 C«ntr# Pomtt 0fiv», R'j><villv, UN SSlli llOS 651 657 8500 ?i» 651 607 8555 «.«■*.#hl*M-inc com 4 I 1 •. COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CU Y OH UHONO DATE; May 21,1999 ITEM NO Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval Agenda Section: Licenses Residential Kennel License 1.Eric and Kristal Wilson 2683 North Shore Drive Garbage St Refuse Collector's License 1. Craig Baldy Baldy Sanitation 5906 Henry Street Maple Plain, MN 55359 2. Pamela Tesch BFI - Browning Ferris Industries 9813 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55437 3. Douglas Hawkinson Cleanway Sanitation, Inc. P.O. Box 220 Long Lake, MN 55356 4. Donald Rachel Veit Container Corp dba Veit Disposal Systems 14000 Veit Place Rogers, MN 55374 COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses. L Owner: MAY u 4 1999 KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION rmarO Amn Effective Januaiy 1,194^to December 31. Q\<^__K tfit. hi I Property Address: l/o/fti <,h<>r-C brlVt^___“? ( (include city and zip) Mailing Address (if different):____________________________________________^-----1- Phcne: (horned _______(work)___^ RESn)ENTIAL Kennel License Fee^25.00 (payment must accompany application)------^ Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time: ^-------------------------------------------- (over 6 months of age) Principal Breed: ^ ^ Purpose for more than 2 dogs: Dogs normally kept: ^^inside kennel structure COMMERCIAL Kennel License Fee; $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business:____________________________ Business Activities: (example: boarding, breeding, veterinaiy care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name). (phone). Dog mns/exercise areas are:inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigend hereby grants the City permisssion to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time durmg the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. Applicant Date For City Use Only Kennel inspected by // ^ c-/s>/~Date /9 9 Recommends Approval i^'Denial_ . i License Year - - - CITY OP ORONO Pate Rpceived V//6/y / __ _ _ _ P.O. Box 66 &PR 1 61999 Fee Paid -^^.cO _ Initials— • Crystal Bay/ MN 55323 473-7357 Q-j-iV O? OR0.\0 gahbage s repose collector-s license application The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Oronc and herewith ^kes application for a Ucense to do so. , . i^ALh^ fT/rr/aA>. _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ _Business/Pirm- - - - - -37- — Address_ _ _ ___ _^^(citv) (State) (Zxp Code)(Street) , ^ 'Business Phone Number —^3a ^-- - - - -- Applicant's Name - - - Address_ _ ___ _ __—1 - - - - -(citv) (State) (Zip Code) Phone Number -_c33S^ T«>i-5vi/iual Partnership _^2<s— CorporationCheck One: __ _ __ Individual - - - - Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono - -L- - - --—; ^ Description of Vehicles (attached ^ist if more): Loaded ert- License Nurab^ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _—- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9 *- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - --- - - - - - - - ■ General area of City served /C/^ -- - - - - - --- - - - - Schedule of Collection charges/ dates — Approximate number of customers in Orono _z^2__^- - - - - -j- - - -- Location of dumping area ^'J^^VoR'T^V^^plVckw^N'TOl^ COMPLETE, YOO MOST ENCLOSE THE POLWWIBG: surety bond in the amount of 51.000 • i°5ii"*ciruse ^ Annu®al“fe“is°i LT ta«s” reqSre? by \°.w!* The \\°o™"™atTon _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _— roR'^'oSs'o^il After reviewjf^application, • , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - lignarure mv City oSiclal Date CITl’ OP ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 License Year Date Received Fee Paid y999 Initials GARBAGE & REFUSE COLLECTOR'S LICENSE APPLICATION MAY 0 f )999 The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City il'f' herewith makes application for a license to do so. Business/Finn Addre s s H. Business Phone Number 99^/ ^ (State) (Zip Code) Applicant's Name Address (St re y^J! ___ ;treet ] ' (City) Phone Number ^v A (State) (Zip 05de) Check One:Individual Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono Partnership _Z- - - y Corporation Description of Vehicles (attached list if more): Loaded Loaded Year Mfgr. Cross Wt. Rear Axle Wt. Size/Yards License Number 0/0 h £xc±: General area of City served (f ^ It e fj — * Schedule of Collection charges/ dates fjL^ /Jot— Approximate number of customers in Orono _ _ _ __ Location of dumping area j^/w ~ Pyi'ij — IN ORDER FOR THIS APPLICATION TO BE COMPLETE, YOU MOST ENCLOSE THE FOLLOWING: Surety bond in the amount of $1,000. Proof of insurance in the amount of $100,000-$300,000-$50,000, and 10-day cancellation clause. Annual fee is a $30.00 flat rate fee, plus $15/truck, and a $30.00 transfer fee (if applicable). I am the owner and operator of the above business and I have paid all license fees and tasQbs required by law. The above information is correct. f^- - - - -- Applicant Date _ _ _ _ W mm mm ^ • mm mm mm ^m mm mm mm mm mm mm ^m mm mm mm mm ^m mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm ^m mm mm mm mm ^m FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends: Approval _ _ _ _ _ _ Denial _ _ _ _ _ _ Other (specify) ^y.^t /Itz/y *> —- -—. ^nat^re Q&^City Offis^ial Date 4 citx of oroho P.o. Box 66 Crystal Bay# MN 55323 473-7357 n!zcr*?’;':n MAY \ '?. tW CVCt" v>r License Year , Date Received Fee Paid ____ TQQQ Inxtials « RBPUSB COLLECTOR'S LICENSE APPLICATION The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and SSrewith ma\es application for a license to do so. Address- - -(streett - - - - - -icItTl (State) Business Phone Number 612-479-2003__- - - --- - - - (Zip Code) Applicant's Name dougias ha wkinson Address ________ flfis .tcwnline RD (street) Phone Number 612-4 /9-2003 >T.R PI AIN. MN 55359 - - - -^ (City)(state)(Zxp Code) Check One:Individual mm Partnership Corporation Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono 1 1994 MCNEILUS 48,000 36,000 2C YDS License Wutnber YM91220 _____ General area of City served NORTH east schedule of Collection charges/ dates -------THURSP£>X Approximate number of customers in Orono Location of dumping area —nbrc__ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ COMPLETEr YOU MOST ENCLOSE THE FOLLOWING:IN ORDER FOR THIS APPLICATION TO BE surety bond in the amount of 51,000. f^"Annu*.l*ft“is°f rar;;;;-nVr-;;iVp-«aTo7;r;he «x%‘‘rnfo'rratTol,7''s ‘«r7777!^^law. The Date POR CIK DSE ONLY."A^^rreview^of ^appli cation , «t«ff reco^ends: . Approval City Of Other (specify) Date i .1 \ • • • jT CITT OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 MAY ' 4 W Q\|Y o.' On'J.\:0 License Year _ Date Received Fee Paid _ _ _ Initials * BBF0SB COLLECTOR'S LICENSE APPLICATION The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the Ct^ / of Oreno and herewith makes application for a license to do so. Business/Pirm VEIT container corp dba veit disposal systems. Address UOOO VEIT PLACE______________ROGERS --------------(Street) (City) (State) Business Phone Ntimber ______612-428-2242----------------- (Zip Code) Applicant's name DONALD RACHEL. PRESIDENT Address 10492 BICE AVE NW (Street! Phone Number 612-963-3098 MONTI CELLO. (City) SS7A? (State) (Zip Code) Check One:Individual Partnership Corporation Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono -5- --- - - - -- Description of Vehicles (attached list if more): Loaded l/oaded year Mfgr. Cross wt. Rear Axle Wt. Sire/Yards License Number SEE ATTACHED LIST AS REQUESTED BY CUSTOMERSGeneral area of City served ___ Schedule of Collection charges/ dates - -AS REqUESTED VARIES IN ORDER FOR THIS Approximate number of customers in Orono Location of dumping area VONCO landfill. i90ro_coum^ROAD_c^^^ ^09 MPLICATIO^T^^ *00 MOST ENCLOSE TEE FOLLOWINO: surety bond in the amount of $1,000. Proof of insurance /^°“''ls°a $100,000-$300,000-050,000, and I®"**®* °(if Applicable).$30.00 flat rate fee, plus $15/truc)t, and_a_$JJ)_._00 transfer_f« _ _ _ _ i wiTthroVnVr and operator of the above license fees and taxes r?5uAr^ by law. The above information x^^orrect. Applica: iO ;CHEL ~ Date MAY 10, 1999 wyiw'oSB'o^Y. After review^of^application, ^ ________ t /z //*??--------------------- gna ^Of^icial Date 19 May 1999 Med 9:12 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045987 045987 JOHNSON, MARY ANN Totals Check Number 045987 Check Number r*5983 045988 KASEMAN, CA?.0LE A. Totals Check N-rrJDer 045988 Check Number 045989 k 045989 MOORSB, RCKALD J. Totals Check Number 045989 Check Number 045990 045990 VEB, LINTA S Totals Check Number 045990 Check Number 045991 045991 KOEKN, THOMAS M. Totals Check Number 045991 Check I.amber 045992 045992 OLSON, RONALD J. Totals Check Number 045992 Check Number 045993 045993 PETTIT, SANDRA K. Totals Check Number 045993 Check Number 045994 045994 ANDERSON, BRUCE L. Totals Check Number 045994 Check Number 045995 045995 BOBZIEN, SUE A. Totals Check Number 045995 Check Date 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 Page l Check Amount 643.92 643.92 791.65 791.65 1,578.85 1,578.85 1,092.29 1,092.29 1,005.84 1,005.84 4.36 4.36 786.95 786.95 296.32 296.32 780.49 780.49 COUNCIL MEETING Z1 MAY 2 4 1999 WI Y OHQNO 19 May 1999 trad 9:12 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045996 045996 BORIS, SCOTT M. Totals Check Number 045996 Check Number 045997 045997 CARLSON, MICHAEL B. Totals Check Number 045997 Check Number 045998 045998 CHESNICK, GARY B. Totals Check Number 045998 Check Number 045999 045999 CORNICK, JAMBS L. Totals Check Number 045999 Check Number 046000 046COG lz:qouski, jay c. Totals Check Number 046000 Check Number 046001 046001 ERICKSON, KURT R Totals Check Number 046001 Check Number 046002 046002 FARNIOK, CORREY L. Totals Check Number 046002 Check Number 046003 0460C3 FISCHENICH, DAN T. Totals Check Number 046003 Check Number 046004 046004 FISCHER, CHRISTOPHER K Totals Check Number 046004 Check Number 046005 Check Date 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-S9 Page 2 Check Amount 1,094.34 1,094.34 105.50 105.50 1,484.73 1,484.73 1,545.09 1,545.09 1,366.85 1,366.85 1,248.91 1,248.91 1,325.51 1,325.51 1,104.40 1,104.40 900.48 900.48 19 May 1999 Hed 9:12 AM Qieck Register City of Orono Check Number Eo^loyee Name Check Number 046005 046005 HAKSINQ, CAROL J. Totals Check Number 046005 Check Number 046006 046006 JOHNSON, JEFFREY Totals Check Number 046006 Check Number 046007 046007 JOHNSON. BRADLEY P. Totals Check Number 046007 Check Number 046008 046008 MCNALLY, STEVEN A. Totals Check Number 046008 Check Number 046009 046009 MCNICHOLS. DAVID L. Totals Check Number 046009 Check Number 046010 046010 NORONCEYNSKI, JAMES Totals Check Number 046010 Check Number 046011 046011 PERSELL, WILLIAM R. Totals Check Number 046011 Check Number 046012 046012 SCHOBNHOFF, JOHN B. Totals Check Number 046012 Check Number 046013 046013 TQMCHECK, LAWRENCE P. Totals Check Number 046013 Check Number 046014 Check Date 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May>99 19-May-99 19-May-99 Page 3 Check Amount 387.68 387.68 810.07 810.07 1,184.86 1,184.86 292.28 292.28 565.76 565.76 1,510.37 1,510.37 702.87 702.87 1,493.25 1,493.25 260.31 260.31 i 1 i 19 May 1999 Nad 9:12 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 046014 046014 TOMCZYK. MARK N. Totals Check Number 046014 Check Number 046015 046015 NITTKE, ANTHONY A. Totals Check Number 046015 Check Number 046016 046016 HOBCHST, ROBYN A. Totals Check Number 046016 Check Number 046017 046017 BOTTENBBRG, NENDY C. Totals Check Number 046017 Check Number 046018 046018 GAPPRON. MICHAEL P. Totals Check Number 046018 Check Number 046019 046019 GAPPA, GREGORY A. Totals Check Number 046019 Check Number 046020 046020 OMAN* LYLE B. Totals Check Number 046020 Check Number 046021 046021 VANG* BROCB L. Totals Check Number 046021 Check Number 046022 046022 NBCKMAN* STEPHEN J. Totals Check Number 046022 Check Number 046023 Check Date 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 Page 4 Check Amount 1*258.74 1,258.74 645.64 645.64 635.13 635.13 699.98 699.98 1.161.19 1*161.19 1*565.93 1*565.93 248.55 248.55 993.71 993.71 70.19 70.19 19 May 1999 ffed 9:12 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 046023 346023 WEINBERGER, PAUL B. Totals Check Number 046023 Check Number 046024 046024 BRINKKAUS, JOHN F. Totals Check Number 046024 Qieck Number 046025 046025 DBBAERE, DONALD L. Totals Check Number 046025 Check Number 046026 046026 GREGORY. JAMBS D. Totals Check Number 046026 Check Number 046027 046027 HANSEN, STEVEN C. Totals Check Number 046027 Check Number 046028 046028 OBERAIGNER, SCOTT G. Totals Check Number 046028 Qieck Number 046029 046029 OBRIEN. RANDY L. Totals Check Number 046029 Check Number 046030 046030 PALMER. GREGORY A. Totals Check Number 046030 Check Number 046031 046031 RATHBUN. BARRY J. Totals Check Number 046031 Check NUi^r Q46032 Check Date 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-'JO 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 Page 5 Check Amount 802.42 802.42 1.115.06 1.115.06 1,073.82 1,073.82 688.01 688.01 755.13 755.13 619.56 619.56 221.20 221.20 819.05 819.05 899.89 899.89 1? 19 May 1999 Ifed 9:12 AH Check Register City of Orono Check Humber Employee Name Check Humber 046032 046032 SKREBH« DALE S. Totals Check Humber 046032 Check Number 046033 046033 ABRAHAMSON, FRED W. Totsis Check Number 046033 Check Humber 046034 046034 ALLEN, MI J. Totals Check Humber 046034 Check Number 046035 046035 DOCXBH, THOMAS H. Totals Check Number 046035 Check Number 046036 046036 MCINTYRE, WILLIAM E. Totals Check Number 046036 Check Number 046037 046037 OAS, DANIEL 0. Totals Check Number 046037 Check Number 046038 046038 FBTBRSON, JACK W. Totals Check Number 046038 Check Number 046039 046039 RAIOS, VICTORIA K. Totals Check Number 046039 Check Number 046040 046040 ROSS, JOHN A. Totals Check Number 046040 Check Number 046041 Check Date 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 .9-May-99 19-May-99 Page 6 Check Amount 734.54 734.54 158.60 158.60 34.15 34.15 386.44 386.44 231.04 231.04 178.09 178.09 282.47 282.47 88.21 88.21 113.78 113.78 t'. * ' % 4 .i 19 May 1999 Med 9:12 AM Check Register City of Orono Page 7 Check NUaber Employee Haine Check Date Check Amount 19 May 1999 W«d 9i47 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Humber Date Name Check Humber 58900 56900 CITY COONTY CREDIT OHIOH 19-May-99 CITY COOHTY CREDIT ONION Totals Check Number 59900 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Check Number 58901 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 58901 58901 58901 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OP LAKES FIRST NATICHIAL BANK OP LAKES FIRST NATIC»IAL BANK OP LAKES Totals Check Humber 58901 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Check Humber 56902 GREAT HEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. 58902 19-Hay-99 GREAT HEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. Totals Check Number 58902 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. Check Humber 59903 XCMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 58903 19-May-99 XCMA RETIREMENT TRUST f 457 Totals Check Humber 58903 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Check Humber 58904 LAN ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE ^ 58904 19-May-99 LAN ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Totals Check Humber 58904 LAM EHFOROCBHT LABOR SERVICE Check Number 58905 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT 58905 19-May-99 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT Totals Check Humber 58905 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT Check Humber 58906 MN DEFT OF REVENUE 58906 19-May-99 MN DEPT wF REVENUE Totals Check Humber 56906 KN DEPT OF REVENUE Check Number 58907 MN MUTUAL LIFE 58907 19-May-99 KN MUTUAL LIFE Totals Check Number 58907 MN MUTUAL LIFE Check Humber 58908 MN STATE RETIREMENX-DEF COMP 58908 19-May-99 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Totals Check Humber 58908 MH STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Transaction Amount 7,339.00 7,339.00 3,330.05 3,330.05 7,849.83 14,509.93 800.68 800.68 275.00 275.00 457.08 457.06 179.51 179.51 3,326.91 3,326.91 703.00 703.00 227.00 227.00 Page 1 Comments SAVINGS W/H k TRANSFERRED PICA k MEDICARE M/H PICA,MEDCR CITY SHARE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING DEFERRED COMP N/H DEFIED COMP If/H UNION DUES HH SKRESN 80010755723 STATE TAX N/H DEFERRED COKP N/H DEFERRED COMP N/H I 1J 19 May 1999 Ned 9:47 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Nusiber Date Kama Check Number 58909 58909 PSBSCO/OBRA 19-May-99 PEBSCO/OBRA Totals Check Number 58909 PEBSCO/OBRA Check Number 58910 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 58910 19-May-99 PEBSCO/US CONF OP MAYORS Totals Check Number 58910 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS Check Number 58911 PBRA 58911 58911 19-May-99 19-May-99 PERA PERA Totals Check Number 58911 PERA Check Jiumber 58912 UNITED WAY 58912 19-Hay-99 UNITED NAY Totals Check Number 58912 UNITED NAY V «id Total Transaction Amount 179.84 179.84 2,421.50 2,421.50 4,425.62 5,858.21 10,283.81 31.00 31.00 40,734.28 Page 2 Comments OBRA DEFBWED COMP H/H USCM DEFERRED COMP W/H PERA EMPLOYEE H/H PERA CITY SHARE CHARITY DONATIONS N/H ‘v; 20 Hay 1999 Check Register Page Thu 2:51 PM City of Orono • Qieck Transaction NuiAber Date Name Amount Coaments Check Number 58914 AIR POWER EQUIPMENT CORP 58914 20-May-99 AIR POWER EQUIPMENT CORP 587.85 REPAIRS NAVARRE COMPRSSR Totals Check Number 58914 AIR POWER EQUIPMENT CORP 587.85 Check Number S8915 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE 58915 19-May-99 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE 17.76 ON CALL PHONE 58915 19-May-99 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE 17.77 ON CALL PHONE Totals Check Number 58915 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR/BELLEVUE 35.53 Check Number 58916 ALL STAR 1ELECTRIC 58916 20-May-99 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 266.32 INSTALL WELDER RCPT 58916 20-May-99 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 2.609.87 WIRING-KATOLIGHT GENERATO 58916 20-May-99 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 51.00 PERMIT 58916 20-May-99 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 343.44 INSTALL WELDER REC 58916 20-May-99 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 35.00 PERMIT 58916 20-May-99 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 35.00 CHECK ENTRY HTR - PD Totals Check Number 58916 ALL STAR ruJCTRIC 3.340.63 Check Number 58917 ALLEQRA PRINT k IMAGING 58917 I9-May-99 ALLEQRA PRINT L IMAGING Totala Check Number 58917 ALLBGRA PRINT & IMAGING Check Nu-ber 58918 ANCHOR SCIENTIFIC 58918 19-Mey-99 ANCHOR SCIENTIFIC Totals Check Number 58918 ANCHOR SCIENTIFIC Check Number 58919 ANDERSON. NANCY AND RICK 58919 19-May-99 ANDERSON. NANCY AND PICK Totals Check Number 58919 ANDERSON. NANCY AND RICK Check Number 58920 ARNE. GERALD AND KARLA 58920 19-May-99 ARNE. GERALD AND KARLA Totals Check Number 58920 ARNE. GERALD AND KARLA Check Number 58921 ASPLUNDH COFFEE 58921 58921 19-May-99 19-May-99 ASPLONDH COFFEE ASPLUNDH COFFEE Totals Check Number 58921 ASPLUNDH COFFEE 32.64 32.64 NO PARKING SIGNS 336.00 336.00 ROTO-FLOATS 250.00 250.00 REFUND APPL 2489-ANDERSON 200.00 200.00 REFUND APPL 2478-ARNE -25.00 152.00 CREDIT OH ACCOUNT COFFEE 127.00 i 20 Hay 1999 Thu 2i51 PM Check Number Check Number 58922 Date Name 58922 AT a T - 20-May-99 AT a T Totals Qieck Number 58922 AT a T - Check Number 58923 AUGIE5 NOBILE CHEF Check Register City of Orono Transaction Amount 34.33 34.33 Page 2 Comments BASE LD CHGS a FEES 58923 20-May-99 Totals Check Number AllGIES MOBILE CHEF 58923 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF 20.08 20.08 HOT DOGS, CHEESEBURGER Check Number 58924 58924 BCA/TRAININO a DEVELOPMENT 20-May-99 Totals Check Number BCA/TRAININQ a DEVELOPMENT 58924 BCA/TRAINING a DEVELOPMENT Check Number 58925 BIFFS INC. 80.00 80.00 INTERVIBN TRNO-MCNICHOLS 58925 58925 19-Kay-99 19-Hay-99 Totals Check Number BIFFS INC. BIFFS INC. 58925 BIFFS INC. 83.45 66.76 150.21 PORTJUBLB - GOLF COURS PORTABLE - BIDERNOOD Check Number 58926 BROHNELLS. INC 58926 19-May-99 Totals Check Number BROWNELLS, INC 58926 BROWNELLS, INC Check Number 58927 BUDGET PRINTING 108.55 108.55 GUN HAINTENENCE SUPPLIES 58927 58927 58927 20-May-99 20-May-99 20-May-99 Totals Check Number BUDGET PRIirriNG BUDGET PRINTING BUDGET PRINTING 58927 BUDGET PRINTING 72.82 35.15 236.34 344.31 DARE CERTIFICATES SIGNS BOOKS-3HOLE,BLUE COVERS Check Number 58928 BUREAU OF ATF 58928 20-May-99 Totals Check Number BUREAU OF ATF 58928 BUREAU OF ATF 250.00 250.00 FED ALCOHOL TAX Check Number 58929 CARGILL SALT 58929 20-May-99 Totals Check Number CARGILL SALT 58929 CARGILL SALT Check Number 58930 58930 CARLSON EQUIPMENT 20-May-99 Totals Check Number CARLSON EQUIPMENT 58930 CARLSON EQUIPMENT 1,472.74 1,472.74 91.38 91.38 SOFTENER SALT LUTES 20 May 1999 Thu 2:51 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 3 Check Transaction Number Date Name Amount Cement* Check 58931 CARVER NURSERY S8931 20-Kay-99 CARVER NURSERY 1*000.00 SPROCE TREES-PtI GROUNDS Totals Check Number 58931 CARVER NURSERY 1*000.00 Check Number 58932 CORNZCK, JAMES 58932 19-May-99 CORNICK. JAMES 15.00 MEALS - P.D.I. Totals Check Number 58932 CORNICE, JAMES 15.00 Check Number 58933 CYS UNIFORMS 58933 20-May-99 CYS UNIFORMS 83.50 SHIRTS - TOMCHECK 58933 20-May-99 CYS UNIFORMS 66.45 PANTS - J. JOHNSON 58933 20-May-99 CYS UNIFORMS 43.45 SHIRT - J. JOHNSON 58933 20-May-99 CYS UNIFORMS 16.50 TALOR PANTS • J. JOHNSON 58933 20-May-99 CYS UNIFORMS 226.60*BOOTS, JOCT - MCNALLY 58933 20-May-99 CYS UNIFORMS 53.95 PANT • J. JOHNSON 58933 20-Nay-99 CYS UNIFORMS 13.00 RPR LINira Totals Check Nusiber 58933 CYS UNIFORMS 503.45 Check Number 58934 DCA 58934 19-May-99 DCA 142.80 ADM FEB - 4/99 58934 20-May-99 DCA 21.87 COBRA ADM FEB 58934 20-May-99 DCA 800.00 COBRA SET-UP FEB Totals Check Number 58934 DCA 964.67 Check Number 58935 DCA - HIRE ONLY 58935 19-May-99 DCA - HIRE ONLY 488.99 FLEXIBLE SPENDING 58935 19-May-99 DCA - HIRE ONLY 136.06 FLEXIBLE SPENDING Totals Check Number 58935 DCA - HIRE OHLY 625.05 Check Nusber 58936 DQffiOUSKZ« JAY 58936 19-May-99 DEMPOOSKI, JAY 20.00 REFURBISH BADGES Totals Check Number 58936 DBMBOUSKI, JAY 20.00 Oieck Number 58937 DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION 58937 20-Hay-99 DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION 61.98 MICROFILM-STRT FILES 58937 20-May-99 DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION 292.96 COUNCIL/PLAN COM-MICROFIL 58937 20-May-99 DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION 292.95 COUMCIL/PLAN COM-MICROFIL 58937 20-May-99 DEPT OP ADMINISTRATION 42.60 ZOMINO FILB-MICROFILM Totals Check Number 58937 DEPT OP ADMINISTRATION 690.49 Check number 58938 EARL P. ANDERSON & ASSOC. 20 May 1999 Check Register Thu 2i51 PM City of Orono Check Tranaaction Number Date Name Amount Commenta Check Number 58938 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC. 58938 20-May-99 EARL P. ANDERSON k ASSOC.72.60 SIGNS 58938 20-May-99 BAKL P. ANDERSON t ASSOC.533.60 SIGNS a POSTS Totals Check Number 58936 EARL P. ANDERSON k ASSOC.606.40 Check Number 56939 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 58939 19-May-99 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 291.60 BEER FOR RESALE Totals Check Number 58939 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 291.60 Check Number 56940 ESS BROTHERS k SONS 58940 20-May-99 ESS BROTHERS k SONS 585.75 EXTENSIONS. SEALS 58940 20-May-99 ESS BROTHERS k SONS 714.62 EXTENSIONS. SLS. RNG 56940 20-May-99 ESS BROTHERS k SONS -715.68 DEDUCT DUP PYMT Totals Check Number 58940 ESS BROTHERS k SONS 584.69 Check Number 58941 FAST SIGNS 58941 19-May-99 FAST SIGNS 64.97 BANNER-75TH ANV 56941 19-May-99 FAST SIGNS 148.04 BANNER-75TH ANV Totals Check Number 58941 PAST SIGNS 213.01 Check Number 58942 G k K SERVICES 58942 20-May-99 G k K SERVICES 8.52 UNIFORM - STEFFENHAC 56942 20-Hay-99 G & X SERVICES 14.02 UNIFORM - RATHBUN 58942 20-May-99 G k K SERVICES 86.44 MATS - PH 58942 20-May-99 G k K SERVICES 42.01 MATS - ADM 58942 20-May-99 G a K SERVICES 42.01 MATS - COUNCIL CHBR 58942 20-May-99 G & K SERVICES 73.22 UNIFORMS Totals Check Number 58942 G a K SERVICES 266.22 Page 4 Check Number 58943 GALL'S INC. 58943 19-May-99 GALL'S INC Totals Check Number 58943 GALL'S INC 65.93 85.93 BLANKETS Check Number 58945 GENUINE PARTS CO. 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.Iw OIL HD30 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.2.88 SPAFK PLUGS 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.1.28 GASKET 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.10.19 SHOP SUPPLIES 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.14.00 RAIN X. DOME LMP. 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.52.66 FUEL FILTERS 20 May 1999 Check Register Thu 2:51 PM City of Orono Check •Transaction Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 58945 GENUINE PARTS CO. 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.7.35 BULB 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.7.44 GLAZE 58945 20-May-99 GEI!UINE PARTS CO.4.77 MISC SUPPLIES 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.7.81 AIR FILTERS 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.9.19 BELT, PLUG 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.5.80 SEAL KIT, GASKET 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.23.22 GAUGE, COUPLING, 58945 20-May-99 GENUINE PARTS CO.19.99 OIL FILTER Page 5 Totals Check Number 58945 GENUINE PARTS CO. Check Number 58946 GOLF CAR MIDWEST 58946 20-May-99 GOLF CAR MIDWEST Totals Check Number 58946 GOLF CAR MIDWEST Check Number 58947 GRAFIX SHOPPE 58947 58947 19-Hay-99 19-Hay-99 GRAPIX SHOPPE GRAFIX SHcrPE Totals Check Number 58947 GRAFIX SHOPPE Check NVrlrer 58948 HAT4EL BUILDING CENTER 58948 20-May-99 HAMEL BUILDING CE:rrER Totals Check Number 58948 HAMEL BUILDING CENTER Check Number 58949 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE 58949 20-May-99 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE Totals Check Number 58949 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE Check Number 58950 IHPRATECH 58950 58950 20-Hay-99 20-May-99 IHPRATECH INFRATECH Totals Check Number 58950 INFRATECH Check Number 58951 J.R.'S APPLIANCE DISPOSAL INC. 58951 20-May-99 J.R.'S APPLIANCE DISPOSAL INC. Totals Check Number 58951 J.R.'S APPLIANCE DISPOSAL INC Check Number 58952 JOHNSON, KIM 177.31 1,400.00 1,400.00 223.00 36.95 259.95 100.29 100.29 110.67 110.67 10,618.20 9,523.40 20,141.60 1,400.00 1,400.00 58952 19-May-99 JOHNSON,KIM 59.00 Totals Check Number 58952 JOHNSON.RIM 59.00 GOLF CART LEASE GRAPHINS-CSO VEHICLE LISENCE PLATES-NEW SQDS PARK SUPPLIES STUMP KILLER CLEANINQ - CASCO PT I6I TQ^VISE - CASCO PT Ikl CLN UP DAY-APPL DISPOSAL SHIRTS - BOBZIEN I 20 May 1999 Thu 2:51 PM Chec)c Register City of Orono Qieck Nuihber Date Name Check Number 58953 58953 58953 XD & COMPANY 19- May-99 KD k COMPANY 20- May99 KD k COMPANY Totals Check Number 58953 KD k COMPANY Check Number 58954 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC 53954 20-May-99 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Totals Check Number 58954 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Check Number 58955 LAKE MINNETONKA PICTURE CO 58955 20-May-99 LAKE MINNETONKA PICTURE CO Totals Check Number 58955 LAKE MINNETONKA PICTURE CO Check Number 58956 LARSON PUBLICATIONS 58956 19-May-99 LARSON PUBLICATIONS Totals Check Number 58956 LARSON PUBLICATIONS Check Number 58957 LONG LAKE BIG A AUTO PARTS 58957 58957 58957 20-May-99 20-May-99 20-May-99 LONG LAKE BIG A AUTO PARTS LONG LAKE BIG A AUTO PARTS LONG LAKE BIG A AUTO PARTS Totals Check Number 58957 LONG LAKE BIG A AUTO PARTS Check Number 58958 LONG LAKE CHAMBER OP COIMERCE 58958 19-May-99 LONG LAKE CHAMBER OP CC Totals Check Number 58958 LONG LAKE CHAMBER OP COMMERCE Check Number 58959 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT 58959 58959 20-May-99 20-May-99 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT Totals Check Number 58959 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT Check Number 58960 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT 58960 20-May-99 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPtCNT Totals Check Number 58960 LONG LAKE TPACTOR EQUIPMENT Check Number 58961 MAP 58961 20-May-99 MAP Tlransactlon Amount 26.00 6.00 32.00 90.52 90.52 73.35 73.35 61.20 61.20 7.86 28.31 1C.07 46.24 50.00 50.00 41.50 •15.09 26.41 27.82 27.82 83.13 Page 6 Comments DUMP CONCRETE ASPHALT DUMP PWR OUTLET ASSEMBLY PILM PROCESSING ADV POR SBOIETARY SEAPOAM SUPPLIES 8610 SPRAY BOTTLE LL CHAMBER MEMERSHIP CUTQUIK WHEEL CREDIT ON ACCOUNT SEALS UNDERGROUND LOCATE 20 May 1999 Thu 2:51 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 58961 M&P Totals Check Number 58961 M&P Check Number 58962 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT 58962 20-May-99 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT Totals Check Number 58962 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT Check Number 58963 MCCOLLISTER 6 CO 58963 58963 19-May-99 19-May-99 MCCOLLISTER & CO MCCOLLISTER 6 CO Totals Check Number 58963 MCCOLLISTER & CO Totals deck Number 58967 MIDWEST ASPHALT Check Nusiber 58968 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 58968 58968 20-May-99 20-May-99 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY MINNEAMLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Totals Check Number 58968 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Transaction Amount 83.13 848.47 848.47 391.44 -50.00 341.44 149.98 27.00 13.50 40.50 Page 7 Comments WTR PUMP - STREET SWPR OIL. HYDRAULIC FLUID DRUM RETURN Check Number 58965 MEDICA CHOICE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 178.55 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 357.11 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 178.56 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 603.52 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 357.11 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 357.11 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 3,035.40 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 .MEDICA CHOICE 714.22 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 l9-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 178.55 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 1,249.86 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 178.56 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 178.55 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 915.23 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE 58965 19-May-99 MEDICA CHOICE 8,495.24 JUNE HEALTH INSURANCE Totals Check Number 58965 MEDICA CHOICE 16,977.57 Check Number 58966 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS 58966 19-May-99 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS 20,183.23 SEWER SERVICE 6/99 58966 19-May-99 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS -1,355.00 PR YR COST ALLOC Totals Check Number 58966 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS 18,828.23 Check Number 58967 MIDWEST ASPHALT 58967 20-May-99 MIDWEST ASPHALT 149.98 ROAD PATCH OXYGEN, ACETYLENE MEDICAL OXYGEN inrT‘.cr* f 20 May 1999 Thu 2:51 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 58969 58969 MN DEPT OP ECONOMIC CECURITY 20-May-99 MN DEPT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY Totals Check Number 58969 MN DEPT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY Oieck Number 58970 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 58970 20-May-99 MN DEPT OP HEALTH Totals Check Number 58970 MN DEPT OF HEALTH Check Number 58971 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 58971 58971 20-May-99 20-May-99 MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF RE'/ENUE Totals Check Number 58971 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Check Number 58972 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY 58972 58972 58972 20-May-99 20-May-99 20*May-99 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Totals Check Number 58972 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Check Number 58973 MR AUGIES COFFEE SERVICE Transaction Amount 203.20 203.20 23.00 23.00 21.00 1,405.00 1,426.00 Page 8 Comments UC CHGS - J. ROSS OPER CERT - OBRIEN APRIL SALES TAX APRIL SALES TAX 23.00 OPER CERT - GREGORY 23.00 OPER CERT - OBBRANGER 23.00 OPER CERT - SKREEN 69.00 58973 20-May-99 MR AUGIES COFFEE SERVICE 49.50 COFFEE Totals Check Number 58973 MR AUGIES COFFEE SERVICE 49.50 Check Number 58974 MTI DIST CO. 58974 19-May-99 MTI DIST CO.144.84 GC SUPPLIES Totals Check Number 58974 MTI DIST CO.144.84 Check Number 58976 NAVARRE HARDWARE 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 29.52 BATTERYS, MISC SUPPLIES 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 25.53 PADLOCK 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 29.81 TORCH KIT 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 6.36 PINE SOL 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 5.71 SPINKLER PARTS 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 2.01 BULB FOR GENERATOR 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 7.40 TWINE, PLANTER 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 12.68 KEY AND RING 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 3.72 PIN PUNCH 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 6.39 BULK NUTS 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 1.59 ANT TRAPS 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 14.89 TRASH BAGS 20 May 1999 Check Register Totals Check ffumbar 58977 OFFICE DEPOT Check Number 58978 OLD DOTCK FOODS INC. 58978 19-May-99 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. Totals Check Number 58978 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. Check Number 58979 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR 58979 20-May-99 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR Totals Check Number 58979 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR Check Number 58980 PONBR SYSTEMS 58980 20-May-99 POHER SYSTEMS Totals Check Number 58980 PONER SYSTEMS Check Number 58981 POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC. 58981 S898I 19-May-99 19-May-99 POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC. POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC. Totals Check Number 58981 POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC. Check Number 58982 PRAIRIE OFFSET 58962 19-May-99 218.07 14.28 14.28 319.50 319.50 51.99 51.99 931.35 762.00 1«693.35 Page 9 Thu 2t51 PM City of Orono Check Transaction Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 58976 NAVARRE HARDWARE 56976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 6.78 KEYS* PUNCH 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 4.15 GARDEN STAKES 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 8.90 CLEANERS 56976 20-May-99 tU^VARRS HARDWARE 57.40 4 SHELF UNIT 56976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 30.16 SIGNAL HORN« CLEANING 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 1.91 LIGHT BULB 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 5.22 MISC SUPPLIES 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 19.14 EXT CORDS 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 4.15 BULK BOLTS 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 12.65 5 QT POTS 58976 20-May-99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 0.16 SCREW Totals Check Number S6976 NAVARRE HARDMARE 296.25 Check Number 58977 OFFICE DEPOT 58977 19-Msy-99 OFFICE DEPOT 117.83 OFFICE SUPPLIES 58977 19-May-99 OFFICE DEPOT 144.02 OFFICE SUPPLIES 58977 19-Msy-99 OFFICE DEPOT -6.81 CREDIT FOR RETURN 58977 19-Msy-99 OFFICE DEPOT -8.34 CREDIT FOR RETURN 58977 19-May-99 OFFICE DEPOT -12.88 CRBOIT FOR RBTORN 58977 19-May-99 OFFICE DEPOT -15.75 CREDIT FOR RETURN "■v CHIPS FOR RESALE TOW/DISPOSAL-1735 FAGBRN BEARING HOUSING APRIL JANITORIAL SRVC APRIL JANITORIAL SRVC PRAIRIE OFFSET 747.34 PURCHASE ORDERS I 20 May 1999 Thu 2:51 PM Check Humber Date Name Oieck Register City of Orono Transaction Amount Page 10 Comments Check Humber 58982 PRAIRIE OFFSET Totals Check Number 58982 PRAIRIE OFFSET 747.34 Check Number 58903 PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS 58983 58983 20-May-99 20-May-99 Totals Qieck Humber PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTOiS PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS 58983 PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS 600.00 100.00 700.00 2ND YEAR MAINT-DICTATION 2ND YEAR MAINT-DICTATION Check Number 58984 RC IDENTIFICATIONS 50984 19-May-99 RC IDENTIFICATIONS Totals Check Number 58984 RC IDENTIFICATIONS 3.73 3.73 ID CARD - CHAMBERLAIN Qieck Number 58985 REED VENDING 58985 19-May-99 Totals Check Number REED VENDING 58985 REED VENDING 66.50 66.50 CANDY FOR RESALE Check Number 58986 RIPP RESTRAINTS 58986 19-May-99 Totals Check Number RIPP RESTRAINTS 58986 RIPP RESTRAINTS 43.95 43.95 TRAINING VIDEO Check Number 58987 SCHARBER & SONS 58987 58987 58987 50987 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 Totals Check Number SCHARBER k SONS SCHARBER k SONS SCHARBER k SONS SCHARBER k SONS 58987 SCHARBER k SONS 47.52 5.03 48.14 6.02 106.71 BELT GC EQUIP SUPPLIES WHEEL MOWER PARTS Check Number 58988 SNYDER DRUG STORES 58988 58988 58988 58988 20-May-99 20-May-99 20-May-99 20-May-99 Totals Check Number SNYDER DRUG STORES SNYDER DRUG STORES SNYDER DRUG STORES SNYDER DRUG STORES 58988 SNYDER DRUG STORES 14.90 44.70 69.28 55.91 184.79 POLAROID FILM FILM FILM, PUFFS FllH Check Number 58989 58989 58989 TEMPORARIES-TO-GO 19-May-99 19-May-99 Totals Qieck Nl^ber TEMPORARIBS-TO-GO TSMPORARIES-TO-GO 58989 TEMPORARIES-TO-GO 184.38 237.50 421.88 TEMP HELP me END 5/9/99 TEMP HELP WK END 5/16/99 Check Number 58990 THE HOUSE DOCTOR 20 Hay 1999 Thu 2:51 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Oieck Number 58990 58990 THE HOUSE DOCTOR 20-May-99 THE HOUSE DOCTOR Totals Check Number 58990 THE HOUSE DOCTOR Check Number 58991 THORPE DIST CO. 58991 19-May-99 THORPE DIST CO. Totals Check Number 58991 THORPE DIST CO. Check Number 58992 TRACY TRIPP FUELS 58992 20-May-99 TRACY TRIPP FUELS Totals Check Number 58992 TRACY TRIPP FUELS Check Number 58993 TREADWAY GRAPHICS 58993 19-May-99 TREADWAY GRAPHICS Totals Check Number 58993 TREADWAY GRAPHICS Check Number 58994 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO. 58994 19-May-99 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO Totals Check Number 58994 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO Check Number 58995 TWIN CITY STRIPING 58995 20-Ksy-99 TWIN CITY STRIPING Totals Check Number 58995 TWIN CITY STRIPING Check Number 58996 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 58996 58996 58996 58996 58996 58996 58996 58996 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 19-May-99 UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNLIMITED UNLIMITED UNLIMITED UNLIMITED UNLIMITED UNLIMITED UNLIMITED Totals Check Number 58996 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Check Number 58997 UNIV OP MINNESOTA 58997 19-May-99 UNIV OP MINNESOTA Totals Check Number 58997 UNIV OF MINNESOTA Transaction Amount 70.00 70.00 291.60 291.60 2.738.91 2.738.91 37.95 37.95 587.74 587.74 7,100.00 7,100.00 158.43 168.00 47.65 43.65 87.30 78.43 38.74 247.54 869.71 330.00 330.00 Page 11 Comments UNPLUG FAUCET-2530 OBR BEER FOR RESALE 2785 GALS - UNLEADED BIKE BOTTLE - DARE RE? SPRING-PW GARAGE DOOR STREET STRIPPING TROUS^, SHIRTS. MOROWCZ TROUSERS. SHIRTS. TOMCZYK TROUSERS. FISCHNECH TROUSERS. CHAMBERLAIN TROUSERS-PERSELL SHIRT. PANTS-CHESWICK SHIRT. CLOTCH-CHAMBERLAIN PANTS, SHRT, BLT-ERICKSON CLRKS INSTITUTB-HASEMAN 20 May 1999 Check Register Thu 2:51 PM City of Orono Check Transaction Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 58998 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE - LIFE 58998 20-May-99 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE - LIFE 89.70 MAY AD&D 58998 20-May-99 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE - LIFE 14.10 MAY AD&D 58998 20-May-99 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE - LIFE 410.40 MAY LIFE 58993 20-May-99 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE - LIFE 65.80 MAY LIFE Totals Check Number 58998 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE - LIFE 580.00 Qieck Number 58999 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 58999 58999 20-May-99 20-May-99 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Totals Check Number 58999 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Check Number 59000 VBSSCO INC. 59000 59000 20-May-99 20-May-99 VESSCO INC VESSCO INC Totals Check Number 59000 VESSCO INC. Check Number 59001 W.W. GRAINGER INC. 59001 20-May-99 W.W. GRAINGER INC. Totals Check Number 59001 W.W. GRAINGER INC. Check Number S9002 WEII.-BERGER* PAUL 59002 59002 20-May-99 20-May-99 WEINBERGER, PAUL WEINBERGER, PAUL Totals Check Number 59002 WEINBERGER, PAUL Check Number 59003 WILLIAMS LAWN SERVICE 59003 20-May-99 WILLIAMS LAWN SERVICE Totals Check Number 59003 WILLIAMS LAWN SERVICE Check Number 59004 YOCUM OIL CO INC. 59004 59004 20-May-99 20-May-99 YOCUM OIL CO INC. YOCUM OIL CO me. Totals Check Number 59004 YOCUM OIL CO INC. Grand Total 77.12 45.94 123.06 37.11 351.47 388.58 7.63 7.63 38.94 171.60 210.54 1,300.00 1,300.00 -624.78 1,238.51 613.73 96,686.77 Page 12 LOGIS-PHONE LINE TOWER TO PW PHONE LINE: RPR NAVARRE CHLOR PMPS RPR NAVARRE CHLOR PMPS PUNCHES MILEAGE MILEAGE- TRNG IN WI PARK MOWING 4/99 DIESEL FUEL DIESEL FUEL I r-t ikformation ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL MBETINO MAY 2 A »W OF CITY OF ORONO COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 01 1 Y Ul- UtiUNU ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Elizabeth Hawn, William Stoddard, Dale Lindquist, and Janice Berg. Commissioner Charles Schroeder and Commissioner Sandra Smith arrived at 6:32 p.m. The following represented City Staff: Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, Senior Planning Coordinator Mike Gaffron, and Recorder Jackie Young. Chair Hawn called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. OLD BUSINESS 1. #2410 PETER BOYNTON, 1973 EAGERNESS POINT ROAD - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Hawn noted that this Item has been removed from tonight’s agenda. 2. #2444 BRIAN AND SUSAN SCHEBLER, 1354 REST POINT CIRCLE • VARIANCE Weinberger that the Applicants had previously appeared before the Planning Commission at their March 15,1999 meeting where the Applicants were requested to reduce hardcover on this property. City Staff recommends that the gravel parking area located on the north part of the property retrain In that It Is used for parking by the home owners and provides a snow storage area for the Public Works Department. The rock located around the driveway protects this portion of the property from erosion as much of the drainage in this area follows the slope and is a difficult area to maintain due to the steep slope that exists. Weinberger stated the Applicants have reduced the hardcover somewhat on this property, and hardcover In the 75-250 ’ zone is 29.9 percent or 5,593 square feet, with the deck comprising 195 square feet. City Staff recommends approval of this application to allow an after-the-fact variance to permit a detached, ground level deck located on the lakeside of the residence. Schebler stated he has reviewed the survey and could possibly remove some hardcover which does not consist of gravel. Lindquist inquired how much of the 5,593 square feet is comprised of gravel In the 75-250 ’ zone, Weinberger stated that the gravel comprises 720 square feet. Lindquist noted that 4,675 square feet is allowed under City Ordinance, with hardcover currently being at 4,775 square feet without the gravel. Schebler noted that they were told at the last meeting that the gravel should not be removed. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the gravel should remain. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2444 Brian and Susan Schebler, continued) Schebler stated that there is some rock iandscaping, patio blocks, and underlayment that could be removed to reduce the hardcover by an additional 50 square feet. Lindquist commented he does not have a problem with this application as presented tonight. Stoddard stated he was in favor of this application. Smith inquired whether the Applicant should be required to remove the hardcover that he is proposing. Lindquist remarked that it is minimal in his opinion and the Applicant should be allowed to keep that hardcover since he Is accommodating the Public Works Department by allowing snow storage on his property. Schebler stated that he is willing to remove the underlayment In that area but that the gravel will probably need to remain as erosion control. Schebler remarked that they will be removing this stone curbing and the little platform that exists in that area, which will bring the hardcover below the acceptable limit. Lindquist moved, Stoddard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2444, 1354 Rest Point Circle, to allow an after-the-fact variance to permit a detached, ground level deck, with the understanding that the stone curbing, rock, and platform be removed. Schebler stated he is willing to remove these items, but it could take him a couple of years to complete the process. Smith inquired whether Lindquist would be agreeable to amending his motion to include the stipulation that any proposals for new hardcover would not be looked favorably upon by the Planning Commission. Lindquist amended his motion, Stoddard seconded, to include the stipulation that any proposals for new hardcover for this property would not be looked upon favorably by the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 3. #2468 BRUCE AND BETSY NUSBAUM, 3480 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES Bruce and Betsy Nusbaum were present. Weinberger stated this application was tabled at the March 15,1999 Planning Commission meeting to allow the Applicants t -'.« to submit revised plans in an effort to reduce structural coverage. The Applicants are now proposirg !p remove one stall from the garage, remove the walkway around the garage, and to keep the profc.->ed new residence as is. Weinberger stated the existing curb cut, which currently is 50 feet, will be reduced to City's standard of 20 feet, with the new residence being comprised of approximately the same amount of structural coverage that currently exists on the property. Staff is recommending approval of this application, with variances to allow 2,012 square feet of hardcover in the 75-250' setback, or 30.2 percent, with the current hardcover in that area being at 45 percent. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting 344 square feet of hardcover in the 250-500' setback, or 46.3 percent, where City Ordinance oniy allows 30 percent. Hardcover currently existing in that area comprises 90 percent, Page 2 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2468 Bruce and Betsy Nusbaum, continued) which the Applicants are willing to reduce in an effort to keep structural coverage as proposed. Nusbaum indicated he has no comment regarding his application. Schroeder indicated the revised plan is a definite improvement from the prior plan, noting that structural coverage is only slightly over what is currently allowed with hardcover being reduced. Smith inquired whether the Planning Commission would like to see the structural coverage be reduced to the allowable 15 percent, which was the direction given by the Planning Commission at their prior meeting. Stoddard indicated he does not have a problem with the application as presented tonight, and inquired whether approval of this application might set a precedent. Stoddard commented that in his view Country Road 15 does pose a hardship and the Applicants could possibly be given credit for that hardship. Hawn commented that she rarely will approve an application for new construction if the structural coverage is over 15 percent, noting that if this application is approved, the Planning Commission is not approving it based on the reduction in hardcover but on the hardships that exist on the property. Hawn noted that County Road 15 and the high water table on this property do present hardships to the Applicants, and that she would be inclined to grant the application reluctantly due to the hardships that exist. Hawn indicated she was pleased that the Applicants have proposed to reduce the existing hardcover on this property. Lindquist stated he does not have a problem with this application. Schroeder commented that Hawn raised a good point and that this application should be approved based on the hardships that exist. Smith stated that the revised plan is an improvement, but noted that some structural coverage could perhaps be eliminated by reducing the size of the screened-in porch. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2468, 3480 North Shore Drive, to allow variances for new construction exceeding 15 percent structural coverage and variances to hardcover in the 75-250' setback and 250-500' setback, based on the fact that this lot is affected by County Road 15 and the high water table which constitute a hardship unique to this property and are not found to be precedent netting by the Planning Commission, and further subject to the stipulation that no new hardcover or structural coverage will be looked upon favorably by the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 2, Smith and Berg Opposed. 4. #2457 PAULA AND DAVID LINDBERG, 1392 BALDUR PARK ROAD - VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Paula and David Lindberg, Applicants, were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants were encouraged to redesign their proposal to limit structural coverage to 15 percent and to reduce hardcover at the prior Planning Commission meeting. The Applicants are proposing ro remove the existing residence and foundation to construct a new residence. Weinberger stated this lot has two sides located on Lake Minnetonka, so it does have Page 3 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2457 Paula and David Lindberg, continued) two 0-75' setback zones. The revised plan is proposing to have an attached garage, with the house being moved more towards the center of the lot. The new structure would be completely out of the 0-75* setback zones, with the driveway requiring 1,050 square feet of hardcover in the 0-75' setback. The plan proposes 1,808 square feet more hardcover than the maximum allowed by the ordinance, but this lot, however, has two 0-75' setbacks. Weinberger stated that economic consideration and design preferences are not considered a hardship under state law. Weinberger noted that the Applicants have reduced hardcover on this tot by making the garage a tuck-under garage, removing some of the proposed decks on the new structure, and reducing the living space. Lindberg had no comment on his application. There were no public comments. Hawn inquired vrhat portion of the hardcover is comprised of driveway in the 75-250' setback. Hawn indicated her recollection of the last meeting was that they wanted the Applicants to get the residence to 25 percent with the driveway being excluded. Weinberger stated total hardcover would be 3,786 square feet, with the driveway being 770 square feet. The allowable hardcover In that zone was 3,797 square feet. Lindquist indicated that the Applicants have complied with the request of the Planning Commission. Smith inquired whether the hardcover would be under the 25 percent limit with the driveway being excluded. Weinberger stated hardcover would be slightly under the 25 percent. Stoddard noted that this lot is three times larger than the lot in the other application. Hawn inquired whether a permit would be necessary for excavation. Weinberger stated a conditional use permit would not be necessary as the excavation would be outside the 75' lakeshore setback and the amount of fill will not exceed 500 cubic yards. The Applicants are allowed to receive a staff issued land alteration permit. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2457, 1392 Baldur Park Road, as presented, to permit construction of a new residence with a variance to hardcover in the 75-250' setback, a variance to the south 0-75' setback to allow a driveway, and further subject to the stipulation that no new hardcover or structural coverage will be looked upon favorably by the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. #2477 GEORGE STICKNEY, 250 AND 340 OLD CRYSTAL BAY SOUTH ROAD SOUTH - CLASS III SUBDIVISION, 7:06 p.m. - 7:32 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Page 4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2477 George Stickney, continued) George Stickney. Applicant, was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing a subdivision of property located on Old Crystal Bay Road just north of the Luce Line Trail. The proposed subdivision will consist of eight lots, with the existing residence at 250 Old Crystal Bay Road being retained and located on Lot 2. The residence located at 340 Old Crystal Bay Road would be removed. Weinberger stated all the proposed lots meet the minimum requirements for the RR-1B zoning district, with each lot being comprised of a minimum of two acres with the exception of Lot 2, which is comprised of three acres. Lot 2 would need to have the bam and accessory structure which will need to be removed upon approval of the subdivision based on the structures being located within the street yard setback. Septic Inspector Steve Weckman has inspected the proposed subdivision and has determined that all lots do meet the minimum setback requirements for septic systems and have adequate septic sites available. Weinberger stated City Staff normally requires on all subdivisions that a road is platted through the subdivision for future connection, but in this case that is not possible due to the Luce Line Trail being located to the south of the property. This property also contains some DNR park land and the property to the north is fully developed v^ich would not allow a future road connection. The Applicant is proposing to construct a cul-de-sac, which is appropriate for this site, but variances will be needed for three of the lots, Lots 3, 4, and 5, as the lots do not meet the minimum 200 feet required lot width at the street. Weinberger commented this is not unusual in the case of a cul-de- sac as it is difficult to conform the lots to meet the 200 foot lot width. Weinberger stated one issue that the developer needs to be in agreement with is that each lot be served by driveways directly off the private road and access would not be allowed onto Old Crystal Bay Road. The Applicant has indicated that he is in agreement with this condition. Weinberger stated the City has received a letter from the DNR and the City Engineer as well has recommended certain items be incorporated into this project. The City Engineer is requesting that the 36 inch pipe located under the Luce Line Trail that a new restrictive outlet of 27 inches in diameter be installed in that location to allow a certain amount of drainage to occur under the Luce Line Trail and thereby raising the level of water by a few inches. The DNR had requested the City to comment on that issue to insure that the Luce Line Trail will not flood, but the C'ty Engineer has determined that the level of the trail is located high enough where it «‘boii‘r not t- f'ected by the new pipe. Smith inquired whether Weinberger was referring to the trail for pedestrians or the horse trail, which is at a lower elevation. Weinberger remarked he was referring to the pedestrian/bike trail in that area. The City Engineer is also recommending that a ten foot easement be dedicated along the west property line adjacent to Old Crystal Bay Road, which would be utilized for a future bike trail and would straight the trail out in that area. City Staff is also requesting the standard drainage and utility easements be provided five foot along all interior lot lines and ten foot along perimeter lines, and submittal of a detailed drainage and grading plan for this subdivision. The County Assessor has determined the value of the six new sites is approximately $600,000 for the land, which would amount to $4,900 for each lot in park dedication fees. City Staff is also recommending a ten foot trail easement dedication be required as part of this application. Pages ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2477 George Stickney, continued) Stickney commented that it was their goal with this subdivision to preserve the natural features of the property as much as possible, noting that they will require a covenant that any trees removed as part of the development will need to be replaced. Hawn inquired whether there were any public comments regarding this application. Pat Dougherty. Old Crystal Bay Road, stated he has no particular difficulties with this proposed subdivision, but expressed a concern over the amount of land developed to the north and the increased water runoff problems they have been experiencing since that time. Dougherty requested that that issue be addressed. Stickney commented that he would be willing to review the drainage to see if steps could be taken to correct the problem. Weinberger stated City Staff would like to see more water runoff to the drainage pond. Stickney remarked that there will not be a horse housed on Lot 2 due to a covenant that will be in effect with this subdivision. Lindquist commented that the Applicant should be aware that City Staff is recommending a ten foot easement in addition to the park dedication fee for this subdivision. Hawn noted that the City is not in possession of the septic reports for this subdivision. Stickney stated that the septic inspector has been out to the property and has not found any major issues involving the septic. Stickney remarked that it was his understanding that the reports had been submitted to the City and was not sure why the City does not have them at this time. Hawn inquired how frequently variances are given to lots that do not meet the 200 foot setback at the street. Weinberger stated that variances to street width are typically granted on a cul-de-sac due to the fact that if the lots were required to meet the 200 foot street width, that the lots would not function well with the other tots and would have an unusual configuration. Stoddard inquired whether this was a subdivision or preliminary plat approval. Stickney stated it was a preliminary plat application. Stoddard moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2477, 250 and 340 Old Crystal Bay Road South, Class III Preliminary Plat Subdivision, to permit variances to the 200 foot street width for Lots 3,4, and 5, subject to the conditions outlined in the April 19,1999 Planner's Report and the April 5,1999 City Engineer's report, and further subject to the incorporation of any recommendations by the DNR and Hennepin County regarding the drainage into the final plat application. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 6. #2474 SUSAN WILSON, 325 BROWN ROAD SOUTH/251 0 ABINGDON WAY, LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT Page 6 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2474 Susan Wilson, continued) The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Steven and Susan Wilson, Applicants, were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting a lot line rearrangement to change the lot line 60 feet to the west to have the trees located along the east property line on the 325 South Brown Road property, v\4iich would allow that lot to have platted access to the Luce Line Trail. The property located at 2150 Abingdon Way will continue to have two suitable septic sites that can meet the 20 foot setback requirement from the east property line. The rearranged iot line will not make either lot non-conforming for lot area or setbacks or change the existing building pads. City Staff recommends approval of this application subject to the property owner providing a new 10 foot drainage easement along the new east property line for 2150 Abingdon Way as well as the other conditions outlined in the April 19,1999 Planner ’s Report. Mrs. Wilson commented that the land might be sold and they wanted to insure that the trees in that area will not be cut down. Smith noted that this was an unusual situation, but questioned whether the City would be running the risk of having other property owners construct alleys to other desirable locations. Weinberger stated the City has seen proposals similar to this requesting walkways down to Lake Minnetonka, but this is the first application requesting a walkway to the Luce Line. Weinberger remarked that another alternative to preserving the trees would be to grant a conservation easement, but noted this lot line rearrangement is really not creating a flag lot. There were no public comments. Lindquist commented he does not have a problem with this application. Schroeder inquired whether any variances were necessary with this application. Weinberger stated it was simply a lot line rearrangement and would not require any variances. Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2474,325 Brown Road South/2510 Abingdon Way, Lot Line Rearrangement, with the understanding that a new 10 foot drainage easement along the new east property line for 2150 Abingdon Way will be required. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Mr. Wilson inquired whether they would be able to be put on the May 10th City Council agenda. Weinberger stated they would need to submit the existing and proposed legal descriptions, along with the new easements shown on the survey, by the end of next week Wednesday. Mr. Wilson requested that this item be set on the May 24th City Council agenda. 7. #2479 Peter Andrea Company, 555 Stubbs Bay Road, Class ill Subdivision, 7:41 p.m. *8:19 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mark Gronberg, Architect, was present. Page 7 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2479 Peter Andrea Company, continued) Hawn noted that the representative for the Peter Andrea Company will not be able to attend tonight's meeting until later, and inquired whether there was anyone in the audience that was here for this application. Several people in the audience indicated that they would like to comment on this application. Gronberg stated that Jim Deanovic would not be able to make it until approximately 8:15 p.m. A resident in the audience requested that this application be held at the scheduled time and he could have the opportunity to speak when he arrives. Lindquist commented that in his view the Planning Commission should proceed with this application. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to subdivide a 46.75 acre parcel into seven residential lots in the five acre zoning district. The parcel is zoned RR-1A, Rural Residential District. Each of the seven lots will consist of approximately five acres dry buildable. Weinberger remarked there are a number of issues that still need to be addressed before this application can be approved. The Applicant is proposing access through a private road located off of Stubbs Bay Road ending in a cul-de-sac. City Code requires roads to be platted through in order to insure future connections to landlocked parcels, and the developer is required to plat access outlets for future road extensions to the west. However, the proposed interchange for Highway 12 and County Road 6 will make access from the north difficult if not impossible. This property also contains some wetlands which are not located in Orono. It is City Staffs position that the wetland not be mitigated if an alternative exists for access to Lot 3. The developer will also need to incorporate a stormwater pond and conservation and drainage easements will be required over the pond. Weinberger stated the Applicant will also need to submit information on driveway access to Lot 6, a wetland delineation report, and septic reports before this application can be approved. City Staff is recommending that this application be tabled to allow the Applicant time to address the nine issues identified on page five of the April 19,1999 Planner's Report and to give City Staff time to review the required reports. Smith inquired why this application was being heard tonight if there were some many outstanding issues remaining to be resolved. Weinberger stated that the application was accepted by the City with notice being given to the neighbors approximately two weeks ago. City Staff was expecting submittal of this information prior to tonight's meeting. City Staff also had concerns that need to be addressed by the Planning Commission regarding the location of the madways. Gronberg commented that the future roadways for this development are a concern, noting that if the land to the west Is ever developed, rezoning would be necessary, and there would be an opportunity at that time to create roads to the west. Schroeder commented that in his opinion he cannot contemplate rezoning to two acres at this time for that area. Pages ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2479 Peter Andrea Company, continued) Gronberg noted that there is 33 feet of right-of-way along Orchard Park Road. Weinberger stated the right-of-way had previously been dedicated from properties and City Staff is looking for right-of-way dedication for this subdivision to insure future road connections. Schroeder inquired what the Applicant has platted for the roadways. Weinberger stated there is a 33 foot wide corridor along some of the properties, with a 50 foot right-of-way is needed in this area. Weinberger commented that it would be fair to both developers to have 25 feet of right-of-way on either side of the platted road. Weinberger noted that no development is being planned at this time to the land to the west. Hawn inquired whether there were any public comments regarding this application. Jim Whelan, 14425 - 38th Avenue, Plymouth, stated he also owns property near this subdivision, and expressed concerns that the proposed corridor for Highway 12 will landlock his property. Whelan commented he is interested in access off Stubbs Bay Road or somewhere else if possible. Whelan stated access from the south is not possible due to the low land located there. Waylon commented he has written a letter to MnDot regarding his access. Kevin Holmes, 585 Stubbs Bay, commented that he was glad to see the Planning Commission make provisions for wetlands and roads in new developments, but would like to see some information regarding the easements. Holmes stated in his view Outlet B will not be buildable due to the Highway 12 corridor. Hawn remarked that it is difficult to answer most of these questions at this time due to the lack of information that has been provided by the developer. Hawn stated these issues will have to be addressed at a future Planning Commission meeting and that the residents wilt be notified of that hearing. Donna Cause, 480 Stubbs Bay Road North, expressed concerns regarding driveway access and the need to preserve some trees in that area which act as a windbreak. Cause commented she would also like to see the drainage problems adequately addressed for this area. Weinberger stated the developer will need to submit a drainage and grading plan that is acceptable to City Staff, which will be reviewed by the Planning Commission at the time the preliminary plat is approved. Gronberg stated they would be willing to work with the neighbors regarding some of these issues. Gronberg noted that some of the work regarding this development has been delayed due to the weather. Hawn inquired whether the representative for the Applicant would be agreeable to tabling this application in accordance with Staffs recommendation. Gronberg indicated he would agree to tabling this item, but would like some direction on how the roads should be platted. Lindquist stated in his view the property on the northern part will need a right-of-way or easement to access that property from the cul-de-sac. Page 9 L ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2479 Peter Andrea Company, continued) Gronberg inquired whether he was iooking at an easement for a driveway or a roadway. Lindquist commented it should be platted as a roadway. Stoddard commented that an easement will probably need to be taken along the west side of property to prevent an 1100 foot parcel from being landlocked. Stoddard stated there may also need to be a dedicated road to the west of Outlot B. Hawn remarked that the developer may want to design this development to eliminate the backlot if possible. Weinberger stated the road will possibly end in a cul-de-sac in this area and then it would be platted through to the end of the property which would create road access to all the lots in the subdivision. Schroeder commented that that road may be necessary to allow Waylon access to his property as well. Weinberger stated that is one of the reasons for this road. Gronberg stated he is willing to work with City Staff on this issue. Hawn moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2479, Peter Andrea Company, 555 Stubbs Bay Road, to allow the Applicant time to address the issues raised in the April 19,1999 Planner's Report and provide the necessary information. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (Recess taken from 8:20 • 8:33 p.m.) (Hawn excuses herself from the Planning Commission). 8. #2480 SPRING HILL GOLF CLUB, 725 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH, CLASS II SUBDIVISION. 8:33 p.m. - 8:38 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Tim Johnson, Representative for Spring Hill, was present. Gaffron stated the Applicants are requesting approval of a preliminary plat. No new lots are being proposed with this subdivision, but as one of the conditions of approval with the Spring Hill Golf Club conditional use permit issued in 1997 required that the golf club grant conservation and fiowage easements to the City over the various wetlands and drainageways on the property. It was determined that this could be most effectively done after the wetland alterations and drainageway reroutings were completed. Gaffron stated the Applicant will need to contact Medina to see whether separate plat approval action is required by the Medina City Council. Gaffron stated that Hennepin County has been informed of this application, and Cit> Staff has been informed that Hennepin County will request an additional 10 foot right-of-way on either side of Page 10 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2480 Spring Hill Golf Road, continued) County Road 6. Cunentiy the right-of-way is 80 feet wide where the County is requesting 100 feet. This stretch of County Road 6 is designated on the Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan as a bikeway. Gaffron stated if City does not require the additional right-of-way at the time of a plat, then the City is required to pay 100 percent of the costs for the lateracquisition of the right-of-way. if the right-of-way required by the City at the time of plat, then the costs are split 50/50 between the City and the County. City Staff recommends approval of this application subject to the conditions outlined in the April 15,1999 Planner's Report. Johnson had no comment on this appiication. There were no public comments. Schroeder inquired whether the Golf Club would be inclined to grant the additional right-of-way. Johnson indicated that it would destroy some of the work already completed. Lindquist commented that perhaps the attorneys will need to be involved in this issue. Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2480, Spring Hill Golf Club, 725 Sixth Avenue North, Class II Subdivision, subject to the conditions outlined in the April 15,1999 Planner's Report. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (Items 9,10,11, and 12 follow items 13 and 14. 13. #2481 SPRING HILL GOLF CLUB, 725 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH, REZONING, 8:39 p.m. 8:43 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Tim Johnson Spring Hili Golf Club Representative, was present. Gaffron stated the Applicant is requesting a rezoning of this property back to the underlying RR-1B, Single FAmiiy Rural Residential District, since the portion of the property zoned RR-1B-1 will no longer contain facilities for a "study and research center". Currently there are no other properties in Orono zoned RR-1B-1. CHy Staff does not have a problem with this appiication and recommends approval of the rezoning. Johnson had no comment regarding this application. There were no public comments. Smith stated she does not have a problem with this application. Page 11 r ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2481 Spring Hill Golf Club, continued) Stoddard moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2480, Spring Hill Golf Club, 725 Sixth Avenue North, for the rezoning of the portion outlined in the April 14,1999 Planner's Report from RR-1B-1 to RR-1B, subject to the conditions contained in the April 14,1999 Planner's Report. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 14. #2482 SPRING HILL GOLF CLUB, 725 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 8:43 p.m. - 8:57 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Tim Johnson, Spring Hill Golf Club Representative, was present. Gaffron stated at the time of the conditional use permit for the Golf Club, plans showed an existing Spring Hill caretaker house, which at the time was thought to be likely to be removed. The conditional use permit did not contain the appropriate language to allow the caretaker house to be retained. Condition three of Resolution No. 3902 requires an amendment to the conditional use permit if additional accessory buildings are proposed. Because it will act as a "guest house*, the caretaker house also requires a Guest House Conditional Use Permit. Gaffron stated the property does meet the required setbacks and lot size requirements to allow the caretaker house to remain on the property. The Golf Club is proposing to utilize the caretaker house as a residence for one or more employees of the Club, which would appear to be covered under the definition of a "guest House" in Section 10.20 Subdivision 3(G) as an accessory separate dwelling for the sole use of the occupants of the primary dwelling, including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests. City Staff is recommending approval of this application. Johnson stated this was an oversight on the part of the Golf Course and it has been their intent all along to retain the caretaker house. There were no public comments. Smith commented that to her understanding the caretaker house was to be removed after a period of time. Johnson stated there was a farmhouse originally on the property which was removed. The Golf Club does not intend the caretaker house to be used overnight by its guests but will be occupied at this time by a caretaker. Gaffron stated that City Staff Is recommending that the caretaker house not be rented out and shall be occupied only by employees of the Club. Stoddard commented that in his view the guest house only allows the structure to be occupied by family members or owners of the property. Gaffron remarked that the code reads non-paying guests. The City has provided for caretaker units at marina areas for security in the past, and City Staff is viewing this as the same situation. Smith commented she does not want to see this caretaker house be utilized as a hotel for Page 12 i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2482 Spring Hill Golf Club, continued) overnight guests of the golf club. Stoddard remarked that the City would not be in a position to regulate the use of the structure unless complaints are received. Schroeder stated the use of the structure is governed under Section 10.20, Subd. 3(G), which allows for domestic employees or their non-paying guests. Schroeder noted that this was a small structure and would not be able to house many occupants. Lindquist commented he does not have a problem with this application. Smith inquired whether the Planning Commission wanted to establish this structure as a guest house in the event that the golf course experiences more growth over the years. Johnson stated the Golf Club has provisions in its by-laws regulating the growth of the club, and that they are interested in providing some lodging for a caretaker. Smith stated she would like this issue to be revisited if the use of the caretaker house should change in the future. Gaffron stated the conditional use permit does give the City control over the use of the structure and requires the Applicant to come back if the use of the structure changes. Hawn commented from the audience that this house will not accommodate many guests. Stoddard stated in his view the standard language would be sufficient in this situation and that further restrictions are not necessary. Schroeder moved, Stoddard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2482, Spring Hill Golf Club, 725 Sixth Avenue North, allowing a Guest House Conditional Use Permit as defined in Section 10.20, Subdivision 3(G), and further subject to the other conditions outlined in the April 14,1999 Planner's Report. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Smith Opposed. Smith stated she was opposed to this application because she would like to see the provision included which would require the Planning Commission to review the conditional use permit before the use of the structure is changed. (Hawn returns to the Planning Commission at 8:58 p.m.) 9. #2473 MATTHEW B. HERMAN. 3825 CHERRY AVENUE - VARIANCES. 9:00 p.m. - 9:08 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidvait of Pubication were noted. Matthew Herman, Applicant, was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting a variance to permit the construction of of 263' by 4' boardwalk across an undeveloped City right-of-way to connect a landlocked piece of property to his property, which is legally combined, with lakeshore rights. The proposed walkway would connect from the residence across a platted right-of-way, which will not be developed because it Page 13 t ORONO PLAN MINUTES F- (#2473 Matthew B. Herman, continued) exists In a wetland, and would extend to the ^«,riure In 1990, the City Council granted a sin)ilaFapprd>P®''^S lh*s APP"®?*'' was never built. The previous owner had reque^^^Je «or watKw®VS- proposing to construct a four foot walkway, whict^'^® y<\iWn a weltano. variance is required because the City does not at P'®^® add Weinberger stated the DNR will also need to issped SJmKed tor lh‘»s a variance from the Lake Minnetonka ConservatiP ^ ^rmU tor iWs pfo^ The DNR has written a letter indicating they woul^ watVoway do'r^' walkway based upon the City's approval. The adj^®® Lake Minnetonka across the wetland. ^ ;i^venue it Weinberger stated the issue Is the potential impac»f '°.Tthe'vrir\tef someone tries to access the right-of-way. but this i <*®^’'®i.Q\<i-harm'es® someone tried to access It with a snowmobile. Cit?^'®^ *.11-^ wttP'® ® ** am the with the property owner, which is typical In any coi^ P®^lhe watioway to >wan right-of-way. City Staff would also request that sigl o®®*^ j^dKa. public of a structure between the end of Cherry Avr W*r'oe ttcantoWa\t^\r^9t»'® City Staff is recommending approval of the applicai tt'O APP appropriate permits from any agencies that have jufh'S prop® Herman had no comment regarding this application There were no public comments. qoq 4 Stoddard inquired whether the Applicant is proposinuct trie a foot elevation. . . t AWe M'one'ohKa. Weinberger stated it vrauld be similar to a dock that «t »nlo Lindquist commented he is not opposed to the applicce simWar app approved by the City In the past. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to recommencvat <>* 'lermW j* and Matthew B. Herman, 3825 Cherry Avenue, grantinjrtance* » wettan • gfdtn9 75 feet of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka and to pbir'*®' .. f^om any ®'"* r further subject to the Applicant obtaining the appte pa^* Jurisdictions over this project. VOTE: Ayes 6, Naj 10. #2475 RONALD P. ZELINSKY. JR.. 320 TURNHAOAD 9:22 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication notad- Ronald Zelinsky, Applicant, was present. ^ a 4 ft* bv 36’ sw»mtn*®®,^foposed and Weinberger stated the Applicant Is proposing to construaan 1® ^ ^ 33* setback ^ 12* by 16' pool house in the side yard adjacentio street yaniv<be' Page 14 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2475 Ronald Zelinsky, continued) a 100' setback is required. This property is iocated within the RR-1A, One Family Rural Residential District, which has a minimum of five acres. This property consists of 2.8 acres. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to install plumbing in the pool house, which would require a plumbing in accessory building conditional use permit. However, to qualify for plumbing in an accessory building, the structure must be conforming in location, size and height. In this case the structure is encroaching approximately 66 feet into the front yard setback and the building would be located closer to the front lot line than the principal structure. City Staff is recommending denial of the pool house due to the fact that it would not be able to meet all yard setbacks. The Applicant is been informed of that Issue and would be agreeable to working with City Staff on other options for the pool house. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to construct a berm approximately six feet high on the property with landscaping in an effort to screen the pool and to minimize the noise level. Other locations were explored for possible location of the pool, but after inspection of the property, this area was deemed the most desirable due to the location of the sewer and septic lines, utilities, a garage, and trees iocated on the other sections of the property. City Staff is recommending approval of the portion of the application dealing with the pool subject to review and approval of a land alteration permit by City Staff, not to include the moving of more than 500 cubic yards of fill. Weinberger stated the proposed work does not appear to involve the moving of more than 500 cubic yards of fill. The Applicant will also need to submit a survey depicting the existing and proposed topography for this project. Weinberger noted that the pool is located on an old septic site and the Applicant should be aware that the old septic items may need to be removed as part of this project. Weinberger stated if the Applicant wishes to construct the pool house and include plumbing, he will need to submit a new application requesting a plumbing in accessory building conditional use permit. Zelinsky stated he has been attempting to comply with City regulations as much as possible concerning this project, but was not made aware of the fact that a conditional use permit would be required for the pool house to install plumbing until today. Zelinsky indicated that he would not be pursuing the pool house at this time. Lindquist inquired how far back the pool would be located from Chippewa Road. Weinberger stated the setback from the edge of the pool to the street is 66 feet. Lindquist noted If the Applicant complied with the setback requirement, the pool would be located within the residence. Hawn inquired whether there were any public comments concerning this application. Desyl Peterson, 4385 Chippewa Lane, stated she is the neighbor to the south, and is in favor of this application with the understanding that a six foot berm with landscaping be constructed. Peterson commented she could understand the rationale for placing the pool in this location. Lindquist inquired whether the only variance for the pool is to the 100 foot setback and to the side yard setback. Page IS ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2475 Ronald Zelinsky, continued) Weinberger indicated yes. Smith inquired whether the landscaping has been included in the project costs. Zelinsky Indicated that those costs have been included In the project. Stoddard indicated he would be in favor of the application. Stoddard commented that he was glad Mrs. Peterson was able to attend tonight's meeting, noting that he is always interested in hearing the comments from the adjoining property owners concerning any proposed project. Smith inquired whether structural coverage was an issue in this application. Weinberger stated structural coverage only applies to properties less than two acres. Lindquist movec, Schroeder se dea, to recommend approvai of Application #2475, 320 Tumham Road, granting of a variance to the side street setback and granting of a variance to the front street setback, subject to the submittai, review and approval of a grading and drainage plan prior to the issuance of a land alteration permit being issued by City Staff, with the understanding that the proposed pool house with plumbing is not being approved at this time. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Hawn noted that if more than 500 cubic yards of fill are moved, the Applicant will need to apply for a conditional use per nit. 12. #2472 SANDRA S. LARSON, 640 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD - VARIANCE, 9:23 p.m. • 9:30 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Public.ation were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Larson, Applicj^nts, were present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to construct a covered porch to the west side of the existing residence and to screen the existing deck on the south side of the structure. The house is located only 15.9 feet from a platted alley, which would require variances to the 50 foot setback from the alley. No building permits were ever issued for the deck or variances granted. Weinberger stated the lot is undersized, consisting of .59 acres, and lies within the RR-1B zoning district, which has a minimum of two acres. City Staff is recommending approval of this application based on the conditions outlined in the April 12,1999 Planner's Report. Weinberger stated the setback in question is the result of a platted alley that is us»'^ Trots'/ by the Larsons and is not developed beyond a certain point on the property. Weinberger n^> (d that there is a potential for a change to future access to the property which will be discussed in the next application. Mr. Larson indicated he had no comment regarding the application. Smith indicated that if the alley is vacated, these variances would not be necessary. Stoddard commented he would like to discuss the issue of the alley, and inquired whether the Page 16 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2472 Sandra Larson, continued) Applicants would be Interested In vacating that alley. Larson indicated at the present time they would be more interested in working with the present alley rather than pursuing vacation of the alley. Larson commented that they would be willing to discuss other options for the alley. Steven Webster, 500 Orono Orchard Road South, indicated that the intent was to give the Larsons enough land to accommodate a driveway that would access onto Orono Orchard Road, which would eliminate the need for the alleyway. Webster commented that if the alley were vacated, it would extend his property and would also alleviate some safety concerns he has regarding his children having to cross the alleyway. Webster stated he is proposing to construct a garage which would be located on the property line. Hawn inquired what the Larsons' view of the proposed vacation of the alley and structure Is. Mrs. Larson stated they do have some reservations regarding the proposed structure in that it would be located on a hill and would require a total right turn into the structure. Lindc vlst inquired what the City's policy has been regarding vacation of alleys. Gaffron remarked this situation is unique in that the City maintains this alley for use by one or two property owners and also has roadways that the City does not maintain. Gaffron commented that City Staff might be willing to support vacation of the alley if there are no other proposed uses for this alley provided adequate access into the property is obtained. Berg moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2472, Sandra S. Larson, 540 Orono Orchard Road, to permit a variance to the rear yard setback to allow an existing deck to be enclosed 15.9 feet from the alley and to permit a covered porch to be constructed 44 ’ from the alley where 50' is required based upon the recommendations outli,ned in the April 12,1999 Planner's Report. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW 15. #2469/2470 STEVE AND JO WEBSTER, 500 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD, SKETCH PLAN/ VARIANCE Steven and Jo Webster. Applicants, were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are proposing a lot tine rearrangement for properties located at 500 and 540 Orono Orchard Road. The Applicants are requesting that the City consider a lot line rearrangement, vacation of the alley, and variances to permit construction of a structure within the required yard setbacks. City Code requires a 50 foot setback to the alley, a 50 foot setback to the front yard setback, and a 50' setback to the side yard adjacent to the street setback. Weinberger remarked that there are a number of issues that need to be addressed regarding this proposal. The proposed structure would move the access point off of Dickenson and onto the alley. Currently only the propertly located at 540 Orono Orchard Road has access from the alley. The alley was not constructed In the location where it was originally platted. Weinberger commented that there does appear to be adequate space to back out of the proposed garage and into the alley. Page 17 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2469/2470 Steve and Jo Webster, continued) City Staff could support additional structure on the property based on the fact that the Applicants are proposing to remove an existing garage which is currently located partially on Dickenson Street. Staff could support an alignment that would allow for a shorter distance than required between the new garage and the alley in that City has approved similar requests in the past. However, Staff is not in support of allowing structures to be located on a property tine as proposed by the Applicant. Lindquist commented that if the alley is vacated, it does allow for more options. Currently the Applicant is looking at a three foot setback from the alley. Webster inquired whether the alley can legally be replatted. Lindquist stated the proper process must be followed for a lot line rearrangement, noting that he would probably vote to deny the application as presented tonight. Weinberger commented the Planning Commission could vote on the variances with the understanding that the alley may be vacated in the future. Webster stated he did not want the alley to become an obstacle in this proposal. Mr. Larson indicated he is willing to work with the Websters, noting that he does not feel he should incur the cost for vacating the alley. Smith commented that there are issues to this application that are troublesome and need to be resolved. Hawn remarked that the alley issue should really be resolved first. Hawn indicated in her view the proposed structure is located too close to the alley. Smith indicated she was In agreement with Hawn. Stoddard remarked that the Planning Commission would probably look at this application differently if the alley were replatted. Berg stated that the Planning Commission can only deal with what is presented tonight. Gaffron remarked that the alley could be reptatted, but the Applicants might incur some expense if utilities need to be relocated. Gaffron commented that this application is proposing to remove an existing garage that lies within the right-of-way and relocate it near the alley. If the alley is not relocated and the Applicants use the alley to back up, it may create some visibility issues. Webster commented that in 1993, the r anning Commission had passed a variance for the building which is now located on the City’s rigwi-of-way, and this proposal is improving what currently exists. Berg stated she would like to see some written documentation on that variance before she would take it Into consideration. Lindquist commented that the way the application is being presented tonight. It will probably be denied. Hawn inquired whether the Applicants would like the Planning Commission to go ahead and vote on this application or whether they would like it to be tabled to allow them additional time to revise their Page 18 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2469/2470 Steve and Jo Webster, continued) plans. Webster indicated he would like the Planning Commission to table the application and would consent to waiving the 60 day limit. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to table Application #2469/2470, Steve and Jo Webster, 500 Orono Orchard Road, to allow the Applicants time to submit revised plans and to extend the 60 day time limit. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 16. #2476 CHRIS DIESEN, 1100 TOWNLINE ROAD, TWO LOT SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN. Chris Diesen. Applicant, was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing a two lot subdivision for property located at 1100 Townline Road. The property consists of 13 plus acres in size, vrith 11 acres being dry buildable. The existing residence will remain on the property following the subdivision. The Applicant is proposing to split the property up to create two lots, both of which will exceed the five acre minimum for this district. Weinberger stated variances are required to lot width for both lots, and the existing septic system on the property has been determined to be non-conforming. Septic testing needs to be completed on the south property with two suitable septic sites being identified. Septic testing has been completed on the northern lot with two sites having been identified. However, one of the site locations may be in conflict with the proposed driveway. Diesen stated he has had both sites tested and one site has been determined to be suitable on the southern lot. Weinberger indicated there would be a shared driveway for this subdivision and easements would need to be granted. Mr. Diesen commented there should not be a problem with the shared driveway as it will be family members residing on both lots. Weinberger stated that the wetlands still need to be delineated, but otherwise this appears to be an acceptable plan. Stoddard commented that the Applicant should try to avoid any variances to side yard setback. Diesen stated that some sites were tested but were slightly over the six percent grade. Hawn inquired what the difference is between a seven percent grade and a six percent grade as far as septic is concerned. Gaffron remarked that they are not substantially different, but the City elected to go with a six percent grade some years ago. Gaffron stated that the septic sites are likely to be approved by Steve Weckman. Hawn stated that the Applicant should continue to work with City Staff regarding this application. Page 19 4 ■ I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (#2476 Chris Diesen, continued) There were no public comments. Stoddard commented that the Applicant may want to look at the lot width to see if variances could be avoided. Lindquist suggested the Applicant limit it to one curb cut and no side yard variances. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Items 17,18 and 20 follow Item 19. 19. PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MARCH 15.1999 Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve the minutes of the March 15,1999 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4-0-2, Berg and Stoddard Abstained. 17. REPORT OF PLANNiNG CO.MMiSSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS ON MARCH 22,1999 AND APRIL 12.1999 Smith indicated she attended the March 22nd City Council meeting, but it was not reflected in the minutes. Lindquist stated he attended the April 12,1999 City Council meeting, and the application concerning Big Island was tabled pending a new lot line rearrangement. 18. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Hawn inquired whether Gaffron thought the Planning Commission should attend the session entitled Comprehensive Plan Review - Do You Know Everything You Need to Know. Gaffron encouraged the members to attend if possible. Gaffron stated with the staffing shortage being experienced at the present time he wiil not be able to complete work on the City's comprehensive plan by the end of June as had been hoped. The City has hired an interim who is expected to start work the beginning of May, which will provide some relief until a second assistant zoning administrator is hired. In response to Planning Commission queries as to how they might help with the Comprehensive Plan, Gaffron remarked that it would be helpful if the Planning Commission members would comment on issues they wouid like to see addressed or revised in the comprehensive plan. Moorse is preparing a list of questions for discussion. Gaffron also suggested that a Planning Commission subcommittee be formed to review this issue. Gaffron noted this would be the first major revision to the City's comprehensive plan since 1980. Schroeder inquired how this revision might affect Orono. Gaffron commented that the City Council's view of this revision is to mereiy make a slight ten Page 20 J ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (Comprehensive Plan, continued) degree correction to what currently exists and not to do a major revision of the comprehensive plan. Schroeder stated that this would be a great oppotunity for the members of the Planning Commission to become familiar with the comprehensive plan. Gaffron stated that the City Council would like to have the Planning Commission involved in this process and would like the Planning Commission to follow the recommendations contained in the comprehensive plan as much as possible. Richard Flint. City Council Representative, stated that it is the desire of the City Council to have the Planning Commission participate in the revision and invited the Planning Commission members to attend their Thursday morning workshop meetings to discuss this issue. Hawn expressed some frustration over the fact that the Planning Commission has been consulted in the past on previous zoning code revisions and no final vote has ever been taken by the City Council on the finished product and they have not been given any insight on whether their input has been useful or not. Flint stated that the City Council has heard similar concerns by the Park Commission that their input is not really heard. Hawn commented that the home occupation ord *ance is one example where the Planning Commission reviewed the inforrr.ation and gave their input but nothing definite was ever done regarding the ordinance. Berg commented that she would like to see resolution of some of these issues and will continue to review any upcoming issues in the interests of the community. Schroeder stated that he understands that the Planning Commission acts as a recommending body to the City Council, but that the members of the Planning Commission really need to be informed as to what is contained in the comprehensive plan so they are able to act with authority on the applications. Lindquist commented he would like some feedback on the input by the Planning Commission as well. Stoddard stated that in his view the Planning Commission should be involved in this process and commented he was in agreement with a subcommittee being formed to review this issue. Hawn remarked that it is the goal of the Planning Commission to be as effective and useful as possible to the City. Flint indicated that the City Council does not rule with a single voice and that the members of the City Council do look at whether these applications have been passed by a unanimous vote or not and the various concerns raised by the Planning Commission when a vote is taken on them. Lindquist stated that he would be willing to attend the Thursday morning workshops if this item is scheduled to be discussed. Schroeder stated he would like the City Council to consider a subcommittee for this item. Page 21 i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1999 (Comprehensive Plan, continued) Gaffron stated that the Council work sessions are providing direction from the City Council on the comprehensive plan. Once the Council's speciHc goals or objectives are established, then the Planning Commission could be consulted to provide their input on the proposed revisions. Hawn, on behalf of the Planning Commission, extended her thanks to Charles Schroederforhis many fine years of service on the Planning Commission. 20. SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON APRIL 26,1999 AND MAY 10.1999 April 26 - Lindquist May 10 - Hawn ADJOURNMENT Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 10:42 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Elizabeth Hawn, Chair Page 22 1 i TO:Mayor and City Council FROM: DATE: Ron Moorse, City Adminisfrato May 18,1999 COUNCIL NIEETINO MAY 2 4 1999 Cl IY OHOlMU SUBJECT: Timothy and Amy Landon, Surface Water Drainage Complaint The attached letter from Timothy and Amy Landon of 1375 Vine Place indicates their property has been damaged by surface water drainage from the public street. Mr. Landon believes a recent overlay of the road and curbing along the edges of the road have caused more water to run to his property. In fact, the curbing was in place prior to the overlay and prior to Mr. Landon purchasing the property. Historically, a significant amount of surface water drains to his property, which is the low point of the area. In 1998, staff suggested minor regrading on his property to direct water from the road away from his house to the comer of his property. Mr. Landon wants the City to regrade the road to direct the water away from his property. It is not clear whether the water from the street is causing the water problems within his home. Both the side yard and the backyard are very flat. There is a significant amount of drainage coming from the adjacent property and also coming off his roof. Staff has requested the City ’s consulting engineer obtain elevations for the street and for Mr. Landon's property to determine the cause of the water problem. Based on that information, staff will determine whether there is a solution to Mr. Landon's problem that can be implemented by the City. May 14,1999 City Manager City of Orono Dear Sir, MAY 1 4 1999 Once again, I am writing you in regards to my city street, Vine Place. You may recall my letter from July 16, 1998 and my tele phone calls around that time. 1 believe a problem still exists with the way the road was resurfaced. As 1 walk up and down my street 1 notice that all of my neighbors “above me”, in both directions, have a curb. Not to mention, the road itself has a dip or channel down the middle and not the crown that your office says exists. This channel sends all of the water from the roadway toward my driveway and lot. 1 have photos from last year, and this year, of the rivers of water running down the street and across my yard. I have been forced to move all of my furniture and my office out of my lower level, “again” this year, due to water. I believe your road is turning my lakeshore lot into a very costly drainage ditch. The water is trying to established a memory or route to find its way to the lake and is damaging my home in the process. I am writing you today to request that you pay for the damage the street has caused to my home and family and also ask you to properly drain the street. I think back to when 1 first purchased my home an individual was suing me for $7,500 in both small claims court and then district court for a dock space for which he had no lease. It was truly ridiculous. I am sure you remember Mr. Appleman! On a much more serious note, I am asking for an amount of money from you of no less than $50,000 for: 1. The damage to my home and property. 2. The loss of value to my home and property. 3. The loss of enjoyment of my home for my wife and children. 4. The loss of income due to my office being out of commission. 5. The health issues involved with water in the basement. I am requesting that you respond to this letter within 30 days of this date. I have discussed this matter with legal council and I am prepared to go forward on my families behalf on June 14, 1999. Sincerely, ^ Z- Tim Landon cc: city planner city attorney mayor city council COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 Ct I Y Ut< UhUNU MINUTES OF THE REGUL7iR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON APRIL 19, 1999 The reqular lUGSting of ths Bosrd of Education of Orono Indspondant School District No. 278 was held on Monday, April 19, 1999. Present: Jack Veach Dick Lewis Peg Swanso.. Martha Van de Ven Dave McKown Thomas Mich Neal Lawson Board Chair John Maresh arrived while the meeting was in progress; therefore Board Vice Chair Jack Veach opened the meeting. UPON MOTION by Dick Lewis, seconded by Martha Van de Ven, the consent agenda was approved as follows: - approved the minutes of the April 5, 1999 regular meeting; approved the Computer Technician Coordinator contract for 1998-2000; called for bids for site work for the new middle school and high school; accepted $4,516 from the Orono Youth Baseball to provide for a double wide batting cage at the high school; approved the Activity Fund Quarterly Report - 3rd quarter, 1998-99; approved the bills as covered by vouchers 109161 through 109551 and office checks as covered by vouchers 6528 through 6546; accepted the resignation of Corey M. Johnson, Orono Hign School teacher, effective at the end of the 1998-99 school year. Motion carried. Board member Maresh ahsent. Dr. Mich reported that plans are underway for summer curriculum work with effort in the area of professional development as well as continuation of the work in curriculum identification and improvement; that on Tuesday, April 20, he would be addressing the PTO; that 1999 marks the 50th year of the Orono School District and acknowledgement of this event will begin at the groundbreaking ceremony for the new middle school on May 26 and he encouraged Board members to be thinking about possible activities/events that could be planned for the fall of 1999; that the legislature continues to meet and he updated the Board regarding activities that are taking place. Dr. Thomas Mich and Board members John Maresh, Jack Veach, Peg Swanson, Dave McKown attended the National School Boards Association conference in San Francisco on April 9-11 and they provided highlights of the convention. The Board commended Peg Swanson for her work with MSBA as well as NSBA. Dr. Mich and Neal Lawson provided an update on the facilities planning/construction. Mr. Lawson stated that he wanted to thank Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, the city and their staff for the assistance provided in obtaining the conditional use permit for the District's building project, the permit was approved by the Orono City Council at its regular meeting on April 12, 1999. Dr. Mich reminded the Board of the upcoming information meeting to be held on J^ril 29 at Orono High School at which the architect will review the design plan for the new middle school and the media center at the high school. He also stated thot planning has begun for the groundbreaking ceremony, to be held May 26 at 10:00 a.m., for the new middle school and in conjunction with this event the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Orono Schools will also begin. The 2000 Series Policy/Procedures was presented for a second reading. Minor revisions were discussed that will be incorporated into this series. UPON MOTION by Jack Veach, seconded by Dave McKown, the Board of Education approved anc adopted the 2000 Series Policies/Procedures with revisions as noted above. Motion carried. The 4000 Series Policy/Procedures was presented for a second reading. Revisions that were discussed will be incorporated into this series. UPON MOTION by Jack Veach, seconded by Dick Lewis, the Board of Education approved and adopted the 4000 Policies/Procedures with revisions as discussed. Motion carried. Dr. Mich review/summarized the direction that the Board of Education had given to administration at the workshop session held on April 5. He stated that administration# during the summer# will begin working on the various components by program that will serve to support the achievement of the mission as discussed. Ms. Melanie DeLuca# Community Education Director# provided background information to the Board on the Healthy Communities/ Healthy Youth Collaborative and the initiatives that have developed from this group. She stated that her purpose this evening was to request authorization from the Board for our District to join the communities of Hopkins, Wayzata# Eden Prairie and St. Louis Park and become a part of the service area for Teens Alone whose mission is to provide free and immediate services including crisis intervention# short term counseling# facilitation of safe shelter# and community outreach to west suburban teens and their families in order to reduce conflict and reunite families. She provided information to the Board as to the way the program operates administratively as well as in the counseling area stating that this service is meant to be a compliment to the services already provided in the schools such as psychology services# social services# etc. and it is a service available to anyone who resides in our community or attends the Orono Schools. Ms. DeLuca answered questions from the Board for clarification purpose. UPON MOTION by Jack Veach# seconded by Dave McKown# the Board of Education# serving as fiscal agent for the Healthy vx iianunities/Healthy Youth Collaborative, authorized Melanie DeLuca to sign a letter of agreement with Teens Alone to begin service on July 1# 1999. Motion carried. Regarding long-term substitutes that have been employo^d during the 1990-99 school year# Dr. Mich explained that continuing contract law in the State of Minnesota requires that a resolution for non renewal of contract be adopted or the individual will remain an employee under the laws governing continuing contract. Each of the individuals named have been contacted by their respective supervisors and are aware that the Board is required to take this action. Member Jack Veach introduced individual resolutions relating to the termination and non-renewal of the substit’-te teaching contracts of the following teachers, waived the readii.^- or the resolutions, and moved adoption of each indivudal resolution; Victoria J. Barrack, Kerri M. Doyle, Dana L. Dragseth, Jennifer K. Justen, Kristy B. Lieder, Sharia M. Peterman The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolutions was duly seconded by Dave McKown and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Lewis, Van de Ven, Veach, Maresh, Swanson, McKown and the following voted against the same; None whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. INDIVIDUAL RESOLUTIONS ON FILE IN DISTRICT OFFICE UPON MOTION by Dick Lewis, seconded by Peg Swanson, the meeting was adjourned. Motion carried. COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 PHU/VUCITY of OR<w0 Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 6o Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 May 2u, 1999 To: Project Area Residents; The Navarre Water Treatment Plant rehabilitation project has been completed, and the iron and manganese filter and softeners are operational. Thank you for your patience during this project. Completion of this project will provide for a consistent filtered and softened water supply for many years. Residents with water softeners may wish to reevaluate the use of their water softeners. For residents that have rented temporary softeners during this project, use of these softeners can be stopped at this time. Over the past several years, the level of softening produced by the Navarre Treatment Plant has varied from 4 grains to 25 grains because of problems with the softeners. The water will now be softened to a consistent 4 grains of hardness, a desirable level. ! have City softened water at my home softened to 4 grains of hardness, and the water quality is excellent. Over softening of water down to no hardness is unnecessary and should be avoided. With home water softeners it is possible to over-soften the water. Over softened water is very corrosive and can cause leaching of copper and lead from the plumbing in the house, resulting in elevated levels of copper and lead in the water. To reduce the possibility of excessive levels of lead and copper in the water, over softening should be avoided. Also, hot tap water should not be used for cooking, as hot water can contain elevated levels of lead and copper from the water heater. It is also recommended that, before using water for drinking or cooking, the water should be run for approximately 30 seconds or until it feels cold. This will clear out any elevated levels of lead or copper that may have occurred as the water was sitting in the pipes. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, GregtJiy A. Gappa Director of Public Services Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 f .yl.s A COUNCIL MEETING MAr 2 4 1999 Cl I Y Uh UhO/voClTYofORONO Municipal Offlces Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 May 20,1999 RE: Femdale Road North Improvements County Road 6 to Trunk Highway 12 Dear Resident: As you are all well aware, the Femdale Road North project ha* commenced and your summer of disruption has begun. We are aware of the concern and frustration many of you have already experienced and we are trying to react in a positive manner. After the initial milling of the existing road surface, we had a period of extremely wet weather winch along with the traffic created some rather severe pot holing. The contractor altered his initial techniques somewhat in an attempt to keep the road surface more passable and will continue with these efforts. We will be replacing the existing 40 mph speed limit signs with 20 mph construction zone speed signs as this is more appropriate for the construction conditions. This slower speed will also aid in keeping the dust down during dry periods We will also be adding some advanced warning signage along Wayzata Boulevard similar to what we have along County Road 6 in a further attempt to divert potential through traffic. Both Orono and Plymouth police officers will also be monitoring the through traffic and issuing tickets as warranted. We will also begin to use a portable arrow sign to help direct local traffic in and out of the neighborhoods in a more safe and consistent manner depending on where the contractor is working. Please be apprised that we are attempting to divert the local traffic from the contractor's immediate work area as a safety precaution to both the motoring public and the coptractor. While there may appear to be a path open for through local traffic, the contractor needs sufficient room to safely operate his equipment to install the public utility improvements. There may be occasional exceptions to the contractor’s operation such as allowing school buses to proceed through the construction area and, of course, emergency vehicles as necessary. We realize that this is and will be a huge inconvenience for many people when the nearest alternate route is County Road 101. Hopefully we can modify this temporary closure procedure after the utility construction is completed. Telephone (612) 2494600 • Fax (612) 2494616 Residents - Femdale Road North May 20, 1999 Page 2 In addition, we will be implementing a Construction Hotline telephone number which you can call to get up to date information on the status of the contractor's work and your access options. This hotline phone number which vn]\ contain a daily updated recorded message is 612-S09-SS14. For your information, we are enclosing a street map of the area and the hotline number. Thanks again for your understanding and patience as we work together to complete this very difficult project. If you have an> further questions, please contact me at 612-249-4621. Sincerely, OfpA Gregory A. Gappa Director of Public Services Enc. cc: Gary Cheswick, Orono Police Chief % iI'm Mhe \ferndale road oonzN CONSTRUCTION HOTLINE: 509-5514 \4TH AV N HOlLANoii RO I3TJ btH AV N 13-^ AV N juTHAy ILlUH AV N 2l !4^ ^5Sz. Hadley Lake IpTH KL BTH WN mm 'yPS2r^/;7). -srn wucv ^ - Queensland ^ \ Park X 6C h3a V ^ :^rH :hJD^ 2AfD tJ- CT. \«VJ ..KS'-s!*’. • l;j SHAOYVW ‘4 L^ > • *: • # ■s;s5 ^ A or\C^ COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 HUNUGlTYofORdl^d Municipal Ofllccs Street Address: 2750 Kelley ParKway Orono. MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Ctystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 May 20,1999 Ms. Maude Wyffles 110 Orono Orchard Road South Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Deal- Ms. Wyffles: Tliis letter is in response to your recent letters and phone calls regarding the Orono Orchard sanitaiy^ sewer project. Project Assessment The project assessment will be $16,000 per unit. The a?tual project cost is approximately $25,000 per unit. The City is using general tax revenue to provide a substantial subsidy for this project. Historically, the City has assessed 100% of the costs for sewer projects. Past projects, except the 1992 Stubbs Bay project, and the 1997 North Lake project have been assessed for all costs. Assessments for recent fully assessed projects have ranged from $17,000 to $32,000 per unit. Minnesota State Statutes require that assessments cannot be greater than the increase in property value that is attributable to the proje* l. Assessments cannot be based on the value of the property to be assessed. All of the properties in this project area, regardless of market value, are receiving the same benefit of having sanitary- sewer service available. We believe that the $16,000 per unit assessment is conservative and the actual increase in value to the property’ may actually be greater than $16,000. For properties that do not have suitable sites for the installation of a conforming septic system and would be forced to install holding tanks or expensive experimental systems, the benefits received from the installation of sanitary sewer are tremendous. A summary of the minimum benefits provided by sewer installation is listed below: $12,000 benefit from not having to install a new mound system. $2,000 benefit of sewer providing a permanent solution. Septic systems have a limited life and there is the possibility that future regulation changes may render a septic system non- conforming. Also, many lots only have room for one septic site with no alternate site available in case of system failure. Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 Ms. Maude Wyffles May 20,1999 Page 2 $2,000 benefit of having the lot area that would be used for a septic system available for other uses such as swimming pools, house additions, garages, etc. A new' mound system requires both an initial and replacement area each approximately 50' by 100' size. Installation of septic systems also often results in tree removal which can be ver>' detrimental to the value of the property. $16,000 total benefit from installation of sanitary sewer. There are some lots that do not have a site available for a septic system and would require a holding tank wdth high long-term maintenance costs. For these properties, the benefit of sewer far exceeds the $16,000 amount. Sewer Main Location A sewer main will be directionally bored adjacent to your south property line. Directionally boring the sewer will result in minimal site disturbance. This sewer main will be on the adjacent property. Our original intent was to obtain a temporary construction easement on your property to allow the contractor more room to work. A review of the sewer main location shows that we will not need any easements on your property for sewer installation. Permanent and temporary easements will be obtained from the adjacent property owner for sewer installation. In response to your point that your assessment should be less because the sewer line is closer to your property, all properties are assessed the same amount based on the same benefit of receiving sewer service. The location of the sewer lines is not relevant in determining the benefits received from the project. Project Exclusion The City does have a policy that properties with new totally conforming septic systems can be excluded from the project. Conditions of exclusion require connection to the sewer in event of system failure or changes in rules making the septic system noncompliant. A connection fee equal to the full cost of the project must be paid upon connection to the sewer system. Your property is not eligible for exclusion because your septic system is non-conforming to the current regulations. The system was installed in 1974 and is listed on the septic system inventory as having a medium potential for failure. Current regulations require a 3' separation between the bottom of the drainfield and the seasonal high water table. The bottom of the drainfield is lower than the seasonal high water table, so the system is not even close to being compliant. Ms. Maude Wyffles May 20,1999 Page 3 The City is being very proactive in providing sewer at a highly subsidized price to provide a permanent solution for the many properties in this neighborhood with non-conforming septic systems. There are other areas in Orono with non-conforming septic systems in which people would like to have sanitary sewer and cannot get it. In summary, it is the City's position that this project will provide substantial benefits to the Orono Orchards area by providing a permanent solution to replace non-conforming and failing septic systems. The City is also reducing the project costs from approximately $25,000 per unit to $16,000 per unit. This is a reasonable assessment in conformance with state law as the benefits received from this project will be substantial for all properties. Please contact me at 249-4621 should you have any further questions. Sincerely, Gregory A. Gappa Director of Public Services cc: Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator To: From: Mayor and Council COUNCIL MEETING MAY 2 4 1999 Mike Gaflron, Senior Planning Coordinator IY ur UrtUwu Date:May 21,1999 Subject: Letter received re: Woodhiil Country Club Attached are letters received today from Mr. McCarthy and from Mr. Malkerson. 1 i 05/21/99 15:11 NO.205 P0O2 LINDQUIST & VENNUM p.l.l.p. 4200 IDS CfNTCff INOENVCA 80 SOUTH E ighth S trcct Unooust . vinnuu 8 CiMSteNSCH px.l.p. Minncapous . Mnncsota SS402.2209 000 tTTH S tuct. sure 2128 T((.tPH0Hfi; 012471-3211 OS nv«P, COLOWOO 00202-6401 FAX: 612-8714207 T6HPHONE; 3066734600 ATTCRNEVSA tIaw Jamn P. MeCtrthy (612) J7I -3238 jmccanhySi'iidquiii-com May 11,1999 VIA F.\CSIM1LE AND U.S. MAIL The Honorable Mayor Gabriel Jabbour Members of the Orono City Council 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN RE: No. 2484:Woodbill Country Club Application for Amendment to 1968 Conditional Use Permit Dear Mayor Jabbour and Members of the City Council: I am writing on behalf of Woodhill Country Club concerning the form of resolution on the Woodhill Country Club matter. Following the public hearing on Woodhill ’s re()uest, Mr. Jackson called a special meeting of Woodhili's Board of Trustees. Unfortunately* he and I did not receive a copy of the proposed form of resolution in sulHcient time for review and presentation to the Woodhill Board. Having now had the chance to review it, the resolution, as initially drafted by staff, is clearly unacceptable to the Club. We believe that it is inconsistent widi the resolution verbally articulated by the council members at the council meeting and contains gratuitous insertions that were not adopted by the Council members at the Council meeting and are contrary to the material presented at the meeting. Both because of the inability of the Board to review an acceptable form of resolution and because of the unfortunate and unexpected death of Edge Jackson ’s mother yesterday, Woodhill requests that any consideration of the form of resolution be tabled and postponed unui the next City Council meeting on Monday June 14, 1999. Wc informed the staff of the postponement request today and requested that the stafTs draft form of a resolution not be forwarded to the council until Woodhill has the opportunity to provide comments. Uocvnoy768M 05/21/'99 15:11 NO.205 P0O3 LINDQUIST & VENNUM p.llp. Woodhill agreed to a standstill in the litigation if an acceptable resolution and permit were issued by May 30“. Obviously this will not happen under the circumstances. In a continuing effort to resolve this matter, we, as counsel for the Club, will agree to an extension of the litigation standstill period. In the intervening time, we will attempt to work with counsel for the City and the city staff to arrive at a form of resolution that is acceptable to all parties. *4 LINDQUIST & VENNUM P.L.L P. [ ames P. McCarthy TD^>f«/V1b cc; Clifford Greene Thomas Barrett Michael Galfion Edge Jackson . s Does ll2i32UM 03/21/99 FRI 10:50 FAX 6123441414 MALKERSON GILLILAND To: Fax#: From: Subject: Fax Transmission MALKERSON GILLILAND MARTIN LLP 1500 AT&T TOWER 901 MARQUETTE AVENUE Minneapolis, MN 65402 Bruco D. Malkerson, Esq- Direct Dial: 612-344-1699 Fax: 612-344-1414 Mike Gaffron 249-4616 Phone: 249-4600 Bruce D. Malkerson Woodhill Avenue Residents Our File No. 1258-001 Date: Pages: May 21,1999 !0 ^ including this cover sheet. COM>TENTS: Enclosed is my letter to the Council. Could you please place it in the packet. I will mail the original to you. Thank you. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS FACSIMILE MESSAO-t li mu VSE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE PLEASE I.MMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE, AND RETUR.N THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. @001 05/21/99 FRI 10:50 FAX 6123441414 MALKERSON GILLIUND Malkerson G illiland Martin LLP Suite I500 at «lT towe« 901 Maroucttc avcnuc MiNNCAPOLIS, H iNNCAOTa BS402-3 20S TCUBPHQ nc 612-344-IMI FACSIM11.C 6l2«344*l4i4 Bruce D. Malkerson, Esq. Direct Dial (612) 344-1699 May 21,1999 Mayor and City Council City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Re: Woodbill Country Club — Residents on Woodhill Avenue To te Heard on May 24,1999 Dear Mayor Jabbour and City Council: As you may recall, I represent Shelly and Jerry Storch, Jane Delaney, Reed Larson, and Charles and Marla Malle. They are Orono residents who live on Woodhill Avenue w'ho would be directly and adversely impacted by any temporary or permanent use of a proposed newly constructed access road by Woodhill Country Club (the “Club ”) which exits upon the quiet, dead-end residential street that provides the only access to their homes. Mr. Gaf&on provided to me a copy of the proposed resolution. My comments related thereto arc set fortli hereinafter, which are keyed to the enclosed resolution. AlUiough my clients and 3 could offer additional evidence to rebutt some of the arguments submitted by the Club at the hearing on May 11, 1999, we will not do so since the public hearing is closed. Similarly, my clients and I would like the Council to reconsider the “concept” direction given by the Council to the City staff related to the one-way access, number of car trips, etc., use of a card access gate. However, you know our concerns so we will not repeat them. To focus just on the draft resolution, I recommend the following changes: 1. “Properly” is a defined term throughout so it should be capiulized 2. “Presently ” should be inserted since the City is addressing present conditions. 3. “Or Paved” should be deleted since the City, neighbors and the Club agreed the 24614 12002 / 05/21/S$ FRI 10:50 FAX 6123441414 MALKERSON GILLILAND Mayor and City Council May 21,1999 Page 2 access road going up the hill should be gravel. “Or Paved” conflicts also with paragraph 3(E) of the resolution which was the Club ’s proposal. 4.“Basic Rights” should be deleted since given the Council action in paragraph 2 of the resolution, the language is not needed. 5.The language proposed by me is needed to clarify the Cit>'’s rights so as not to undermine the City ’s rights in paragraph 2. Additionally, we recommend that a minimum number of days be established for monitoring in the first year, e g. on weekend days, swim meet days, special event days and weekday days. 6.Speed bumps were to be placed for sure on Woodhill Avenue and possibly on the access road, so this clarificatioa is needed. Wc would like the opportunity to respond to any changes submitted by the Club and/or City staff. If the Club has not decided to agree to the terms of the resolution, I recommend the resolution include findings of facts supported by the record to support the denial of the balance of the Club ’s applicadon. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, , /\ l/l A ^ Brucc D. Malkerson Enclosures cc; Ronald Moorse, City Administrator Mike Gaffron Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Tom Barrett, City Attorney Shelly and Jerry Storch Jane Delaney Reed Larson Charles and Marla Malle 2M14 0003 1 t 05/21/S9 FRI 10:50 FAX 6123441414 Lllf Ur JULKERSON GILLIL-LM)oiccHyHQiQ VP/\ofyy ' 121004^ ly ;vc/vo i>ivrpyi A RESOLUTION ORANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB FOR A DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO WOODKILL AVENUE FILE #2484 /• WHEREAS, the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted zoning and other regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; und WHEREAS, Woodhil) Country Club (hereinafter "applicant" or "(he Club"), a Minnesota non-profit corporation, is owner of the property addressed as 200 Woodhil) Road, u portion of 'Miich is located within the City of Orono, such portion being legally described in Exhibit A attached and .referred to hereinafter as "thefi^operty”; end WHEREAS, the applicant hus made application to the City for on amendment of its 1968 conditiorud use permit (COP) per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28 Subd. 3. to: a) acknowledge certain basic rights of access to Woodhil I Avenue; and b) impose certain new restrictions and conditions on Woodbill's access to Woudhill Avenue; and WHEREAS, litigation concerning the acccKS ix pending, and this application has bean tendered by the applicant in an effort to resolve the litii^ation: and WHEREAS, on May 11.1999 after due published and mailed notice, the City Council held a public hearing on this application and received information and comments from the applicant and applicant's consultants, from the City staff and the City's consultants, and from the public including residents and representatives of the Woodhiil Avenue neighborhood. Page 1 of? «“J441414 ^,^^,,MAMRSON GILLILA^, „laoos • # ? * ♦ %^ A> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOEVED by the City Council ofOrono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1,* 'lUs application was reviewed as zoning file 1/2484. 2.Tlie property is located within the RR-ID Single I'amily Rural Residential Zoning District. 3.Within the RR-IB zoning district, golf courses and country clubs are a permitted use via conditional use permit (CUP). Woodhill Country Club operates under a CUP granted by the City on September 13, 1968. a>4.Thn 1 968 CUP does not explicitly address the use of Woodhill Avenue as a secondary access to the property, nor do any of the .sub.sequcnt CUP approvals granted to W«*dhUl Country Club fbr the various improvements or operation changes which have occurred since 1968. (D 5.The applicant desires to formall'/e its right to use Woodhill Avenue as a secondary access to the ^operty for the .safety ofits members. 6.The City Council finds that the Club's use of Woodhill Avenue as an access road may create ceruiin negative impacts to the existing Woodhill Avenue neighborhood unless sonic limitations on the Club's use of the access are established. 7. CD -(S)« The City Council desires to place reasonable limitations on Woodhill Country Club's use of Woodhill Avenue as on access in order to ensure that the henith, safely and welfare of the cxi.sting residential neighborhood served by Woodhill Avenue l.s adequately protected, and to formally establish the City's rights to review and place reasonable controls on any access to the property which may have an impact on the various existing residential neighborhoods surrounding the property. __. pR«SefdTCy The traffic levels on County Road 1 Sirnakc access to the Club difficult, particularly from the west and north, due to the need to make left turns across heavy traffic onto County Road 15 and from County Road 15 to Woodhill Road. Page 2 of7 . 05-21/99 FRI 10:51 FAX 6123441414« I I W| W|\W|1W ^I MALKERSON GILLILAND .ty'twiw w^/»(U.I @006 • * V •>*/ '0»- 9. The use of Woodhil] Avenue'as an access to Woodhill Country Club will change the character of Woodhill Avenue, which has functioned as as a dead-end street for the post 20 years. CONCLUSIONS, OkDER AND CONDmONS Based upon orie or more of the above findings, the City Council of Oronu, Minnesota hereby grants to Woodhill Countiy Club an amendment to its 1968 Conditional Use Permit to allow limited access via Woodhill Avenue subject to the following conditions; 1. G> 2. CD d erred to os '’the Woodhill Avenue extending Iroin the ‘fhe Club shall install a paved driveway (to be hereinafter re Avenue occcss") within the dedicated right-of-way of Woodhill easterly end of the City-maintained portion of Woodhill Avende, to the easterly end of the deduced right-of-way. The Club may construct a grave)(or pavii^brivate driveway within thoj^periy to connect the Club's interior driveway system to the Woodhill Avenue ucce.ss. The Club shall obtain an nttcr-thc-fact staff-administered land alteration permit as well as a permit from the Public Services Director for work within the right-of-way prior to redommencing construction on the Woodhill Avenue access. I^e Club shall install a gate across its private driveway at the western boundary of the property^ which gate shall be locked at all time.s except when used as follows: A. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access by emergency vehicles (police, fire, ambulance and utility). a B. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access for transporting Club tractors to and from Long Lake for repair. C. ■ Use oFthe Woodhill Avenue access for generol access to the ^operty if the Woodhill • • Rokd access to County Road IS is temporarily blocked (subject to reasonable notification to the City and affected neighbors), but only during the period of such temporary blockage. Page 3 of? 05 =21- 99 FRI 10:51 FAX 6123441414 MALKERSON GILLILAND „1 or or\oi-io ^ w • cc.*t7*tv Io o.*/ lu/7T @007 U .W^/WQ nw.c»7 1 3. J? •4 % D.•Use of the Woodhill Avenue access under the »crms of that certain EasMnent Agreeinent, dated October 5, 1987 between the City, the Club, and MSM. whic:h benetlts one residential lot if County Road IS occess is blocked. E.Use of the ’Woodhill Avenue access as an entrance only (i.e. one way. from west to east) for private passenger vehicles between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.ni. during those days that tile Club is open. The City reserves the light to periodically detennine whether problems with u.sc of Uie access have occurred, and reserves the right to modify this CUP or add condilionK, as allowed by Orono Zoning Code Section 10.0.9, Subd. 6(B). However. Uic City docs nd reserve the right pursuant to Ormo ^ning Code Section 10.09, Subd. 6(B) to permanently close the access. The following uses arc not explicitly or implicitly allowed by the 1968 CUP nor by subsequent CUP's granted to the Club since 1968, and ore spec! fically igg approved at thi.s time,'but may be applied for by the Club via a CUP amendment in the future: A.Conversion of the Woodhill Avenue acce.*:s into the main entrance to the Club on a , • permanent basis. B.U.se of the Woodhill Avenue access as an entrance or exit by delivery, taxi, service, or other commercial vehicles. C. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access as on entrance or exit by the general public. D. Use of the Woodhill Avenue access at time periods oiher than those allowed in the* ifiasia RighU UcfnnJCl in Condition 2 above. E..Expansion or paving of the Club's westerly interior driveway between the maintenance building and the Woodhill Avenue access. F.Placement on Orono Orchard Road of any identificotion or directional signage concerning the Club. Page 4 of? 4 i 05/21^.199 rei 10:52 FAX 6123441414 _ .. ILILKERSON GILLILAND liL.^ \ 4. 5. ' 000? •1_J* .WO/UO tl7f r • A«i.clcVLdWi To*^W^ jJO City Slafl' ghell monitor use of the WoodhUI Avenue access during its first siaSqn of operation and shall report to the Council any problems or concerns that are cncounieredJThe City tcscrvcs thc right to review and amend the CUP after the 1909 golf season, to address any problems prior to the 2000 golf season. Further, the City will(^odicall^ for an indeftniie period of time, meter the amount of traffic using the WocHJhilTAvSue &ess. If the f^ak daily traflic count exceeds 100 trips per day at any time within the first year of operation or in subsequent years, the City shall have the right to review and amend this CUPr includ>ng.review of the need for a card access gate at the Woodhtll Avenue entrance, j2-4VUuJtSiJ'ttt The Club shall moke or be responsible for the following Improvements in conjunction with its construction of the WoodhilJ Avenue access; A. Installation of eastbound and no^bound stop signs at the Intersection of the public ' and private portions of Woudhill Avenue (Sue Exhibit B). B.Installation ofeastbound "lOMPH" speed limit signs within the Woodhill Avenue access. C. D. Installation of westbound "Do Not Enter" signage at the Club’s interior driveway near ^ m<U»K.n.nc« building. ^ Installation of speed bumps along the Woodhill Avcnueiaccess at location(s) to be approved by the Public Services Director. E. Paving of the Woodliill Avenue oe<»ss (driveway portions within dedicated right-of- way). F.kemoval of vegetation within the right-of-way of Woodhill Avenue or Orono Orchard . Road that may impede adequate sight distance, subject to approval of the Public Services Director and the abutting property owner. G.Installation of appropriate stormwater facilities (culverts, ditches, etc.) as may be required by the City Engineer. H. Provision of a driveway design and grading plan acceptable to tlte City Engineer. Page 5 of7 6123441414 ^ ^,^^^,MAl^RSON GILLILAND,@009 IC.^I l_r .V»/VK> wo.071 % / 6. 7. 1 r nil access from the Club lo County Road 15 is perrnunently blocked as a result of cither County Road 15 alteration or improvement, or as a result of closure of the Woodhill Road access by the owner of the railroad right-of-way. the City recosni.i&es the Club's flidtt of reasonable access, but reserves the right and authority to determine via the conditional use peimit process whether such permanent access should be provided by allowing a full access to Woodhill Avenue, or via some other method or locotion, and what conditions must be imposed on that access to protect the health, safety and welfm e of all citizens in the urea and the users of the roads. Authorities granted by this conditional use permit run with thc^operty not with thc^J^ applicant, but are pennissive only and must be exercised by appliuution for the required land alteration perrhit within one year of the date of Council appruvol, or this conditional use permit will expire on that date (May 24.2000). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and cunditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically tenninute any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 0.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution, and bn behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Cotmcil of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regulor meeting held on the 24th day of May. 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 6 of? I A •Jt ‘O'” eUM414l4 „.„4^?6Ir^S0N GILLIUJ®, ^ , ' ® 1m IS •VW/VU nv/.v^t applicant ACCEPTANCE: Authorized Representalive of Wbodhtll Country'Club STATE OF MINNESO l A J ) M. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of May, 1999 by Oobriel Jnbbour and Linda S. Vec, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, u Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 1999 before mo a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared __________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he(thcy) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 7 of 7 .! i r WEST SUBURBAN MEDIATION CENTER 1011 First Street South, Suite 200, Hopkins, MN 55343 (612) 933<0005 Fax: (612) 933-6046 Mav 10. Mayt>r and C’ily Council City ol’Orono l»() 1)0x66 Crystal. Bay. MN 55.123-0066 n 1599 0\\'i - 0>1C>'0 Dear Mayor and C’ity Council: l or over the past two years, in preparing quarterly reports to the cities in our service area, we have used statistics provided by our computer. In reviewing the llrst quarter rep<»rt for 1 999, we discovered the computer information was incorrect. Luckily, we also keep a ca.se log in a notebook. We have now manually gone over the ca.se log at least for 1 998 and 1 999. I hc correet number t)fca.ses involving Orono residents in 1 998 is three (3). The lust quarter report dated April 22'“' which listed one case is incorrect. There were six (6) cases llrst quarter. All of them were Housing Court unlaw ful detainer cases (landlord/tenant) and ail were mediated with agreement. The use of mediati»>n to re.solve disputes provides a valuable resource to per)ple in our communities. Sinccrelv. Susan A. Nel.son l !.\ecutive Director 1 I; 4