Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03-19-1984 Planning Packet
mi PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1984 7:30 P.M. 1275 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - COUNCIL CHAMBERS Council Representative - John Hanunerel ATTENDANCE PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:30 p.m. #804 Painters Creek Development Corp., 4680 Bayside Road Subdivision & Conditional Use 2.7:45 p.m 3.8:00 p.m 4.8:30 p.m 5.8:45 p.m ACTION ITEMS 6.#797 New (Countryside Drive) - Subdivision Subdivision Subdivision Vacation Conditional Use Permit 7. #806 Willow Proper ies, 2600 Wayzata Boulevard Subdivision 8. #811 John Ericson, 1620 Shadywood Road Variance 9. #814 John Ericson, 3482 Lyric Avenue Variance 10. #817 Steven Raster, 2675 Fox Street Conditional U&e^ f't^rmit 11. #820 Lonie Fisk, 493 Park Avenue Variance SKETCH PLAN REVIEW 12. #822 Howard Johnson, 1635 Concordia Street Subdivision ADJOURNMENT SSION MEETING , 1984 7:30 P.N. ra - COUNCIL CHAMBERS /elopment Corp., 4680 Bayside Road :ional Use a Homes, 155 Willow Drive South - Subdivision 888 Plentywood Road 200 Leaf Street irook Street/Tonka Avenue leaf Street Fayzata Boulevard rood Road Jtreet rordia Street A "■'1 J \ K » m.‘:v »• W: t. ♦ * > > ’S TO: PROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator March 13, 1984 Application^-^Planne^^^^^^ ‘’®''®loP“ent (pro) to create 10 Zoning District - RR-IA LIST OP EXHIBITS Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit P Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J - Application ~ Plat Map - Property Owners List : HSH - Planning Commission Minutes (January 16, 1984) Commission Minutes (Pebru^y 7 iolt - Mabusth memo to Council (March 10, 1983) 1984,’?o deny°Le^rezoni^no oT^h® recommendation on January 16, the applicants Lve revised ^he^r®nr«n'’®''V density) 10-unit PRD with In avera«‘’deL'^?r=/V „ T- - - - ' ' '10-unit PRO With aVVv;Va “gril;s^"tTo/V.O?^ Total Area — 72+ acres Number of Ownership pads - 10 S EirlF S additional area given to ou^ll? a I-excluded and50.00 acre requirement)? "P ^he wlln^Outlol ^fs'’°d?vel%ed^7l^;|fld not rec“"® O^velopment. If and outlots designated as density credit for liriulrlnt^lfD.*' of %oYd^ an'd^’dllillgef ® submitted to the City Engineer for review Ht:- I mc:i m Pi; r> A I have ; sites, my confi Lots 8 a seasons] my borin about 3' not make develope process• requiren In revie only to ' permit, in a sub Commissi should n> cul-de-s Based on Based on setback locatior allowing a PRD). envelope slopes a Another i 4740 Baj February 49* X 238 Administ availabl drainfie reaffirm Note tha within t A reconmu the foil 1. Crea the prop 2. Owne Hennepin 3. Form pads” fo required rty), 4680 >rmit (PRD) create 10 4) 3) nuary 16, density), il is for a 4 acres pace for il-de-sac uded and iJce up the If and - for the >r review A Page 2 I have reviewed the report submitted on septic system drainfield sites. I note that proposed Lot 9 has not been tested. In addition, my confirmative borings indicated the proposed drainfield sites on Lots 8 and 10 are in Hamel Loam soils which have an extremely high seasonal water table and are not suitable to use for drainfield. Also my boring on Lot 7 indicated seasonally saturated soils at a depth of about 3', requiring mound systems rather than shallow trenches. I did not make confirmative borings on the remaining lots; however, the developer's agents have been made aware of the problems and are in the process of reevaluating the sites as necessary to meet the On-Sitd Code requirements. In reviewing each building site, I note that Lot 10 has direct access only to County Road 84 and would require a separate County entrance permit. It has been the City's policy in the past to require all lots in a subdivision to be accessed off interior roads. Does Planning Commission see this as a problem? Hennepin County has indicated there should not be a problem with Lot 10. Lots 1 thru 9 would access via the cul-de-sac. Based on topography. Lots 1-4 contain slopes averaging 10-15 percent. Based on the proposed drainfield site locations, adhering to the RR-IA setback standards, would place major restrictions on acceptable house locations for these lots. Planning Commission should consider allowing less stringent setback requirements (this is allowable under a PRD). It is also strongly recommended that you require a building envelope for lots 1 thru 7, all of which may be quite restricted due to slopes and drainfield locations. Another unresolved issue is the previously unapproved Dunn property at 4740 Bayside Road. Referring to Planning Commission minutes of February 7, 1983 (Exhibit I), Planning Commission recommended that a 49' X 238' parcel be added to the Dunn property. Also refer to Zoning Administrator Mabusth's memo dated March 10, 1983, listing the options available in order to provide area adequate to handle future drainfield needs for the Dunn's. Planning Commission is asked to reaffirm their position on this issue. Note that this revised proposal includes new building sites only within the Orono School District. A recommendation to approve should be conditioned on the resolution of the following issues prior to Council approval: 1. Creation of a parcel (specify or reaffirm size) to be combined with the property at 4740 Bayside Road. 2. Owners of the property shall dedicate 33' of right-of-way to Hennepin County for County Road 84. 3. Formal designation of building envelopes within the "building pads" for at least Lots 1 thru 7, addressing what setbacks will be required. :.r >’ J f f '.•-il- V: : mm A 4. Cr« Outlet includ< f orma 1 ! used f< 5. Res Council 6. Sul 7. Sul outlet 8. Su; wetlani 9. Co 5 2 :3rain£ield additionr d sites on emely high eld. Also a depth of les. I did wever, the are in the i-Sitd Code ect access y entrance re all lots s Planning :ated there ess via the .5 percent. 0 the RR-IA :able house 1 consider rable under a building cted due to jroperty at ninutes of ided that a r to Zoning :he options lie future s asked to sites only solution of nbined with -of-way to "building ks will be y-j-- I '■4': 4 a-.: V-’ is:.- mm A Page 3 4. Creation of open space easement over the plat road and cul-de-sacr Outlet A, Outlet B, and whatever additional areas are necessary to include 50.0 acres for the 5.0 acre density credit. All areas formally dedicated as density credit for this subdivision shall not be used for density credit in developing Outlet C in the future. 5. Resolution of all On-Site drainfield problems with staff prior to Council approval. 6. Subject to City Engineer's review of road and drainage easements. 7. Subject to underlying road and utility easements under the road outlet. 8. Subject to Conservation and Flowage Easement over designated wetlands areas to be described by angles and bearings. 9. County approval for access to Lot 10. .V- I- 7. CITY OF ORC SUBDIVISION applicant N M A property; n. OWNERS Mi A( (2 ' •< 4"' PROPERTY LOC St > I.L Le (P f r-f- f ^ «■fe- existing LAN Nui Oe^ Pre Pre PROPOSAL ge 3 ;ul-de-sac, scessary to All areas shall not be Euture. iff prior to easements. er the road designated ,} ■i:. m. FM I > i CITY OF ORC u vjy Lr2 71983 !JjtelTYOrBr. SUBDIVISION AjipLICftTION FORM~"^ applicant Name painter'« by Jy feelPe Vj^JA ul , MX/oC Mailing Address *atiaa Telephone m?> ■>R->.Ac-,r^ IQO.TT. fingno M «»tt aall. 8t. suit. 22U, (Attach list of more than one)- - - - - - - - - - - property location Address McCulley Road and CSAH No. 84 Legal Description see attached (PID) existing land use Number of Tax Parcels Development Size 66.6 6.0 72.6 Present Use (check) Present Zoning Dist. Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify) open PROPOSAL lot line rearrangement only (no new building sites) r> . 1;^ vg @ • .4*• i e<i’ r.f V, aft • AAi: ISlT^rec'd by \a fee rec' a>00 too »UN OAU II/IS *tATCH 00) S MOT AOOt ownt mm E TAXPAYm I NAttE/AOOK 1 u MOO AOM fl OUNC* HAHC I TAXOAVCR I NAflE/AOOO 0 n 000^ AODO OUNCO NAnC TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OUNCR NAnc TAXPAYER NAnC/AOOR PROP AOOR OKNER NAtlC 9 TAXPAYER J NAflE/AOOR 1 C PROP AOOR 0 OUHER HAnE I TAXPAYER P NAflE/AOOR R P RUN OATE ll/IS •ATCN 009 PROP AOO# 0 OHNER NAI« J TAXPAYER J NAflE/AOOR 0 fl PROP AOOR OWNER NAfiS Tl TAXPAYER C NANE/AOOR ti Cl 7 PROP AOOR R OUNER NANC J TAXPAYER Ji NAflE/AOOR A N VUN OAU 11/lS/aS*iATCH OfiSPW AOOR OUNC* NAHC TAX^AYCR HAflE/AOM fl-117-IA 11 0001mil« T PAIK ETAL liilNC T FALK 1019 TUSCAIIY PLACE MINTER PARK PL 32700 PROP AOOR OMNER NAnC TAXPAYER HAMC/AOOR V 04-117-23 21 0001 0%449 0AY910E RO E N HENNINGS ETAL MOOKS KENNETH C RT C BOX OlA rUPLE PLAIN m S53SO PROP AOOR OWNER NAfIC TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 30 04-117-21 22 0003 00100 NORTH SHORE OR H THELftA L UNITE THELftA L UNITE too NORTH SNORE DR fUPLE PUXN HN S53S0 PROP AOOR OWNER NAnC TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 31-110-23 31 0004 L PRXrPCOELfUR 0 A HELEN ROOERT K LEEDS 1279 WXLLON&ROOKS OR WAVZATA HN SS391 110-23 PROP AOOR OWNER NAflE TAXPAYER NAHC/AOOR SKX TONKA INC JOHN BURRELL 100 N LA SALLE ST SUITE 2211 CHICAGO ILL 40402 PROP AOOR OWNER NAHC TAXPAYER KANE/AOOR 30 31-110-23 33 0004 04720 BAYSXOE RO B PETER ACHEY ETAL NR B PETER ACNEY ROUTE 2 BOX BOB flAPLE PUXN NN SS3S0 HCrtlEPlN COUNTY PROPERTY INPORNATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PX43940I PAGE 430 04-117-23 12 0001 04MO BAYSIOE RO 0 L BRISCOE API BRISCOE 01-0143 OAVIB L BRIKOE 4340 BAYSIOE RO ORONO m 99399 30 M-117-23 12 0003 04399 BAYSIOE RO NUt«APOLXS POMCATXON IT AL nilMEAPOLIS POIMIATION 021 MARQUETTE AVt SUITE 400 MPLS MN 99402 30 04-117-23 21 0004 0449S BAYSIOE RO BOB KELLEY GERALD P KELLEY 4499 BAYSIOE RO OROiO m 99399 30 04-117-23 21 0009 04949 BAYSIOE RO HUGO S CARLSON HUGO S CARLSON 4949 BAYSIOE ROAD MAPLE PUIN MN 99359 04-117-23 X T 0 n L GEPPRE IRVIN T GEPPRE 4449 BAYSIOE RO ORONO MN 993S9 30 04-117-23 22 0000 04449 BAYSXOE RO R S 0 n U OLSON ROBERT S OLSON 9010 HILLSBORO AVE N MPLS m 99420 31-110-23 31-110-23 THE CITY OP ORONO CITY OP ORONO BOX 47 CRYSTAL BAY MN 95*23 STATE OP MIN»I STATE OP MINN 30 31-110-23 33 00C4 04400 BAYSIOE RO SKX TOIOCA lie JOHN BURRELL 100 N LA SALLE SI SUITE 2211 CHICAGO ILL 40402 30 31-110-23 33 0009 04440 BAYSXOE RO B t N CUPP BOBBIE t NEVA CUPP 4440 BAYSIOE RO mPLE PLAIN MN 99399 30 31-110-23 33 0007 04740 BAYSXOE RO LESLIE J RAYMOlO 0 OUMI A L YOGERST 4740 BAYSIOE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN S53S9 RUN OATS ll/lS/03 BATCH 003 NEtMEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 30 31-110-23 42 0004 04309 CHXPPEUA LA J R MILLER ETAL J MARC PRXTZLER 430S CHXPPEUA LANE MAPLE PUXN MN 9S3S9 31-110-23 43 0009 NATURE CONSERVAICY NATURE CONSERVAICY 320 HENNEPIN AVE E MPLS MN 95414 34-110-24 44 0004 THE CITY OP ORONO CITY OP ORONO BOX 44 CRYSTAL BAT MN 95323 70 34-110-24 13 0001 00340 CO RO HO 19 N EUGENE L JOHNSON ETAL EUGEK L JOHNSON 340 CO RO 19 MAPLE PLAIN rtl 95359 70 34-110-24 44 0009 04920 CO RO NO 19 N JOSEPH U SCHMITT ET AL JOSEPH U SCHMITT 4920 CO RO 19 MAPLE PUXN MN S9399 TOTAL BATCH HENNEP Ms. Jec Zoning City of P. 0. I Crysta] Dear M: RE Pn CS Se He Re Minnes propos accept -The h segn€ -For f feet centc -The ] -Becai plat Divi for 1 Henn -Any perm entr : V ;-'S I ST] ,V.. r CM u I--•occ mX X ■ ; ± ^ w,. , . * » •• • . • ^** * • • • • • 2 B •• *--r* • ..• ;*s * • • i* # • ^ • ■ f > - • ^ '- I t •r ■'•m- '■■'pJ. 4^-" " f 4< |4( i5 ••■ f ■V 11 (.--/ t • U' ■. • V . ••P5' - : r:-■ EX!-i!B!T ^ HENNEPIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 f"* c. 935-3381 TTY 935-6433 March 2, 198^ Ms. Jeanne Matusth Zoning Administrator City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota u/: "" ‘I hi 55323 ^ V /‘lAR- f<; Dear Ms. Mabusth: RE f-Liv 6/984 * J • ’ I•M f! j: .::>•; \ f «4 ^ ^ Proposed Plat - "Painters Creek" dated 2-2M-84 eSAH 8M NE Quadrant of McCaulley Road Section 31, Township 118, Range 23 Hennepin County Plat No. 11M8R Review and Recommendations acceptable with consideration of these conditions. -The Hennepin County Department of Transportation SystOT Study recommends this segnent of CSAH 8M be returned to municipal jurisdiction. -For future improvanents to CSAH W the developer ^fMt^ right of way along CSAH 84 making the right of way 40 feet from the center of CSAH 8^. -The location of the street access is acceptable to Hennepin County. J»:’8iJ:54rr irss,;.W£:k.«,‘s^S5 Hennepin County Maintenance Division needs 6 sets of the detail pla . ■^rmrt^rforrbeli^nrnraXy^ns^Tc^ron.^ entrance permit forms. HENNEPIN COUNTY on cquqI opporlunity ctnployef ^ Ms. Jean *’ March 2,-All pro permit drainag Mainten -The dev right 0 Please d Sincerel Janes M. Chief, P JMN/LDW: cc: R. E r (V- -61984 • t r ■ • • i j: .1-^ ! . • . ‘ County review of It and found it reoomraends this te an additional 7 feet from the tunty rmit based on the ounty Maintenance access location he site. The plans. County entrance e Division for )UNTY 3loycr • 4 i t- ! ■i 1*^ f, ?; P.r // •* Ms. Jeanne Mabusth - 2 ’ March 2, 19W-All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes but is not limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. See our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms. -The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. Please direct any response or questions to Les Wei gelt. Chief, Planning and Progranming JNW/LDW:pl cc: R. Bastyr & Assoc. Inc. wm • ■; V 'P ■ : •• r. • •• ■ . A-'- .V.-I. ■ ;;r. ■ ‘v' ...VJ ■■ : v:- ^£0MllUNEHi WATERS P.O. Box 387, Wayzai BOARD Of MANACCRS: David H. Cochran, Prca. ■ Albert 1. January 3 Ms. Jeann' Zoning Adi City of 0 PO Box 66 Crystal B Re: No. Dear Ms. The Minne comments The preli streets a adequatel Hydr voli Dra' dra' Please b< formally Should y< Very tru EUGENE A Engineer I) approved utility >t limited to, raping. See our Lon within County f.'r-'v; } EXH»o> >/MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 ins»c^iC». « • l»Kt MINMTONRk ■OAftO OF MANAbCRS: David H. Cochran. Praa. • Albeit 1. Uhmaiv • |ohn t. Thomat • Michael R. Caiioll » Camille D. Andie 1 n January 3, 1984 \Ls© \M Li } rS''] ‘>r^------------------ |;i ! : ! Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota f I j I j JAN - 5 1984 % .•: ! j »••• • ••...... 55323 Re: No. 804, Painters Creek Development, Corp. Dear Ms. Mabusth: The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is in receipt of your request for comments regarding the above mentioned sjodivision. The preliminary plat proposes to drain stormwater runoff from the public streets and lawn areas to the wetland located on Outlot D.^ In order to ^ adequately review this proposal, the applicant must determine the following: Outlet size and invert elevation for the wetland outlet. Existing wetland normal water level. Existing wetland 100 year high water level. Hydrologic calculations to determine the change in runoff rates and volumes as a result fo the proposed development. Proposed wetland 100 year high water level. Drainage easements for the wetland area, storm sewers, and overland drainage courses. Please be advised that no construction is authorized until the District has formally reviewed this proposal and a permit has been issued. Should you have any further questions, or problems, please advise. • • Very truly yours. EUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES Engineers for the District Clifford Reep W -. : J.j V • *•/ i i 1. m-. ’ ^- ■ I' •. * V: ^ -- r\ Z17 MINUTES O;ATTENDANC] (^soTJ pain' i5EV]^LOPMEl 4680 bays: rezoning, AND CONDI: PUBLIC HEJ 7:30 - 8:4 R-tCTS william T mills ATTENDANCE 7:30 P.M. ^80^PAINTERS CREEK development 4680 BAYSIDE ROM) REZONING, SUBDIVISION AND CONDITIONAL USE PUBLIC HEARING 7:30 - 8:45 P.M. ^ ni:,iiTlNU Or JANUARY 16, 1984The Planning Conunission met on the above date. The following members were present; Chairmadam Goetten, Adams, Kelley, McDonald and Rovegno. Zoning Administrator Mabusth represented the City Staff. Council Representative Frahm was present. City Engineer Cook arrived at 9:00 p.m. Chairperson Goetten announced that now was the time and place for the public hearing concerning the proposed rezoning, subdivision and conditional use permit for the Painters Creek Development Corporation. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. Ron Bastyr, Planner for the Painters Creek Development Corporation, and Jeff Martineau, Realtor, were present. The following neighbors were present: Steve White of 4245 Bayside Road, Glen Neddermeyer of 707 Minnetonka Highlands, David Dunn of 4740 Bayside, Lucy Yogerst of 4740 Bayside Road, Romonah Barbeau of 4080 Bayside Road, Rick Stueland of 4080 Bayside Road, Bonnie and Jerry Kelley of 4495 Bayside Road, Fred Poison of 4010 Bayside Road, Bob and Bonnie Cuff of 4660 Bayside Road, Bob and Margaret Olson of 4645 Bayside Road, Bernard Hames of 4455 Bayside Road, J.M. Fritzler of 4385 Chippewa Lane, Peter and Chris Achey of 4720 Bayside Road, Kenneth Brooks of 4465 Bayside Road, and Mr. and Mrs. Hugo Carlson of 4565 Bayside Road. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that the subject property is a 72 acre parcel; 6 acres of wetlands. Mabusth noted that applicant is proposing a 20 unit PRD subdivision. Mabusth noted that it is currently zoned 5 acres and the applicant is proposing 2 acre rezoning with the current plan showing 3.3 unit density. Mabusth noted that it is a Planned Residential Development (PRD). Fred Poisson of 4010 Bayside Road asked how many lots could be built on right now with the current standards without the proposed rezoning. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that with the current 5 acre zoning they would be allowed 13 units. i, ■- •• '.W: L4 a*' XNUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 16, 1984. PAGE 2 804^^PAINTERS CREEK DEVELOPMENT Lucy Yogerst of 4740 Bayside Road (lot size .96) asked where the proposed berming would be placed. Ron Bastyr stated that some of the berming would be done out in the field during construction but that they do propose berming along Bayside Road to screen the development from the road. Bastyr stated that substantial berming would be placed along their proposed roads within the subdivision. Brstyr stated that right across the street is a 2 acre •. ning district and that most of the lots around there are under 2 acres, so that their proposal would fit right in. Bernard Hames of 4455 Bayside Road (10.34 acres) asked what market research has been done in the ability to sell these homes and at what price do they intend to sell the homes at. Hames asked what the square footage of the homes was anticipated. Jeff Martineau, realtor, stated that the price range of the homes would be from $200,000-500,000 homes. Martineau stated that from his experience in real estate that there is a great demand for these types of homes and for this type of well-done development. Martineau stated that the square footage would be approximately 2,500 for a one story home and 1,200- 1,400 per floor for a two story home. Ramonah Barbeau of 4080 Bayside Road stated that if trees were going to be removed, would that hurt the possibility for septic systems be constructed. Ron Bastyr stated that there would only be a minimal amount of trees removed and that their preliminary septic testing turned out good and that 2 acres allows enough room for alternate sites as well. Bob Olson of 4645 Bayside Road asked who the developer was and what experience the developer has in this type of development. Ron Bastyr stated that the developer is the Painters Creek Development Corporation. Bastyr stated that in this type of development they have no experience. Lucy Yogerst of 4740 Bayside Road stated if the object was to keep everything in character, why 20 homes instead of 13 home sites, why rezone it to 2 acres when 5 aero minimum would be dense enough. Ron Bastyr stated that they chose the lots individually and that they felt that 13 was too few. Bastyr stated that they were looking at economics too. 1984.PAGE 2 (lot size .96') asked d bo placed. :he berming would be ruction but that they i Road to screen the Jastyr stated that placed along their ubdivision. Bastyr et is a 2 acre ; ning >ts around there are osal would fit right 1 (10.34 acres) asked ne in the ability to .ce do they intend to ed what the square .pated. that the price range 1,000-500,000 homes. experience in real nd for these types of 1-done development, re footage would be tory home and 1,200- r home. Road stated that if would that hurt the be constructed. uld only be a minimal at their preliminary nd that 2 acres allows s as well. 3ked who the developer loper has in this type lopcr is the Painters Bastyr stated that y have no experience. id stated if the object racter, why 20 homes one it to 2 acres when 5 lough. cy chose the lots : that 13 was too few. king at economics too. NUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 16, 1984. PAGE 3 PAINTERS CREEK LOPMENT Lucy Yogerst of 4740 Bayside Road asked what happened to the last application for this piece of property. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that that application was formally withdrawn. Margaret Olson of 4645 Bayside Road (18 acres) stated that she wasn't in favor of the rezoning and feared that it might invade their privacy. Ron Bastyr stated that this development would be unique because of the substantial berming which would keep the privacy. Margaret Olson of 4645 Bayside Road stated that it is not just the privacy but also the possibility of sewer coming down Bayside Road. Chairperson Goetten stated that is why it would be 2 acres which would allow enough room for septic systems. Peter Achey of 4720 Bayside Road (1.06 acres) stated that Orono's own Zoning Code paragraph 34.001, says that "R-IA requires that districts shall have immediate access to highways and public sanitary sewers.” Achey stated that the RR-IA requires a 5 acre minimum lot size to stear away from sewer. Achey stated that is the reason that there still is the 5 acre zone so that sewer won't be required. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that there are sections in the Comprehensive Plan where it specifically states that the City is aware that to really sustain a rural lot, 2 acres is completely adequate to satisfy a septic system with an alternate site. Mabusth stated that the 5 acre zone is there because the people in the area wanted it that way and that it really isn't a necessity, but that it was the peoples desire. Mabusth stated that there is no worry of sewer going down that street. , Peter Achey of 4720 Bayside Road stated that in the City's own publications that it was estimated in 1975 that it would cost approximately $10,000 per acre to sewer that area. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that i t would cost more today. Chairperson Goetten stated that she didn't think anyone has given, or will give any indication, that they want sewer in this area. S'- ' ■V • H ■ •; I f ■ • f MINUTES 01 dj??^PAIN1 DEVELOPMEl 1 i 84.PAGE 3 ed what happened see of property. ted that that 18 acres ) stated )ning and feared Dpment would be ming which would stated that it is iibility of sewer ?hy it would be 2 room for septic 06 acres) stated iph 34.001, says cts shall have public sanitary •lA requires a 5 om sewer. Achey till is the 5 acre 2d. d that there are Plan where it is aware that to es is completely with an alternate :re zone is there 2d it that way and it that it was the t there is no worry tated that in the estimated in 1975 0,000 per acre to that it would cost she didn't think indication, that .ir m m <; m i ^ • • A >• ■■t% ■f ? V ^INUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 16, 1984.PAGE 4 PAINTERS CREEK DEVELOPMENT iiilSsiiirli they probably will be forced to have sewer by the Metropolitan Sewer Commission. Hugo Carlson of 4565 Bayside Road stated that the McCulley Farms homes had no trouble selling with the Council zoned that area for 5 acres for the benefit of the community only 10 years ago. Carlson asked why change it now. Sr {H stated\hat°f^'h^^ undeveloped land. Poisson has always been his understanding that changed because of a philosophical change on the City s part or because there is a real hardship in the case of the property owner. Poisson stated that there IS no hardship here and why should it be resoned to help someone make money. Poisson stated that it PRD thlt the City. Poisson stated that any that comes in has to meet current standards to hL statL*thiV^® happen to it. Poissonthat right now the neighbor can put one house on the property next to him and if it was rezoned the didn^t°th‘i°nk^‘^ t “■*' stated that he.-w ^ right to change that massive of a whic^ woX involved in a referendumWhich would take it back to two acre zoning. boundaries built in. Mabusth stated that it is indeed stated thnf ^ zoning district. Mabusthstated that it is bounded by McCulley Road, luce line it wa^ nature conservancy, that they felt It was a locked in area. Mabusth noted that it is two stree^^V^I """ right across thestreet. Mabusth stated that rezoning also has to be stfS."'' """ Metropolitan CouncU as par state Marc Frj tzJcT of 4 385 Chippewa Lane (5.5 acres) asked 11 tiU* .St reot.s v/oro to bo private streets. 84.PAGE 4 id that this area a ci*eek that has :ontent flowing lin area. Achey iGd to have sewer n. stated that the elling with the e was opposed to :ed that after a for 5 acres for 10 years ago. Bd that he lives )ject property. >perty and the land. Poisson srstanding that -hical change on eal hardship in son stated that .d it be rezoned stated that it stated that any ent standards, jage next to him o it. Poisson put one house on as rezoned the n stated that he at massive of a in a referendum zoning. >) asked if this ler neighboring lat it could set thrust of this it had natural lat it is indeed rict. Mabusth Joad, luce line ^ that they felt that it is two ight across the also has to be as per state 5 acres) asked rcots. I8o£j »ainters creek ELOPMENT NOTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 16, 1984. PAGE Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that wi«th this application they were requesting a public street. Marc Fritzler of 4385 Chippewa Lane stated that he wasn't against any of the houses being put in there but that when he bought his property knowing that its a five acre minimum. Fritzler stated that there is no way that they can place those houses on the hill out of his site and that he is still against it. Chairperson Goetten stated that even if the 5 acre zoning district stayed the same that eventually that property will be developed and that you will see the houses that are on the hill. Marc Fritzler of 4385 Chippewa Lane stated that he bought in this area because he liked the 5 acre minimum. Bob Olsen of 4645 Bayside Road stated that this development doesn't fit in with the rural setting of the surrounding properties. Fred Poisson of 4010 Bayside Road stated that he thinks it fits into the setting of the surrounding properties but that the density should be what the present zoning is. Peter Achey of 4720 Bayside Road stated that he feels the same way but that the density is too intense the way its proposed. Roveqno stated that this is the best plan that the_ Planning Commission has seen for this piece of property. Rovegno stated that if they stay with the five acre zoning that they would end up with a boxy type of development. Ron Bastyr stated that there would be a 3.3 acres per lot including the common areas. Bastyr stat^ed that they actually could place more building sites in the development, but that they felt this plan was the best. Fred Poisson of 4010 Bayside Road asked if it would be appropriate at this time to ask what the average lot price would be. Martineau stated that the average lot price has been approximately $45,000. Fred Poisson of 4010 Bayside Road asked what the general proportion of lot costs to the total property cost after the house is on it. ■ ' ' • ■ i.f -: ■ : |®. ♦ • ¥ :'h 4 />IINUTES o; AIN' ELOPMEI 984 PAGE sd that wi*th this a public street. rie stated that he tig put in there but :nowing that its a d that there is no ; on the hill out of inst it. Vsjn if the 5 acre It eventually that t you will see the ne stated that he liked the 5 acre stated that this e rural setting of ated that he thinks ounding properties the present zoning :ated that he feels too intense the way best plan that the or this piece of [ they stay with the 3 up with a boxy type ) be a 3.3 acres per Bastyr stated that Llding sites in the s plan was the best. asked if it would be lat the average lot lot price has been )ad asked what the a the total property Vi- X. ■■ • W -I f. " u t t.' '#■ 4 -. I •' -i i .. m ^^IMOTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 16, 1984.PAGE _ AINTERS CREEK ELOPMENT iJIfate M^-4-v;,vV ; ■ ■ -. It percentage L^mnrrboft^ ^300-400,000 houses that y^ou are Martineau stated that they have talked on many different occasions about these lots, and the developer has stressed that he wants to do it right. good, but how does the City control them. Bob Cuff of 4660 Bayside Road (1.2 acres) as)ced if the Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that there was no feasibility study being done. ^:nere was no Bob Cuff of 4660 Bayside Road stated that he had inside ® feasibility study has been done by if this development goes in as proposed, there will be sewer going down there. tnere wiii ce Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the Citv knows nothing about such a study being conducted!^ Bob Cuff of 4660 Bayside Road stated that he didn't it"atT!cr^e"s^. installed. Why not leave Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that there is a County Road 84 but notfor this area, but for the Stubbs Bay area. Met°cUncU’'thal^^v '"’a" with thecouncil that you do start waiving flaas for services such as sewer. McDonald stated that^Orono wou?d 'sou"' those Io?s Chnjrperson Gootten closed the public hearina nt R-4*^ C<'x'- continued nn.oncj the PKinninq ^ f/J j. ] 1 Oli nK'li:l 1 5; . NOTES < // ^i^PAi] developm: PAGE leau stated that average lot of “$300,000 home. Jted that if in properties will tain percentage 300 and you can 5s that you are alked on many ots, and the to do it right. tated that the ing offered are them. that the City a developers this will be a s) asked if the lity study that 3e Road. at there was no t he had inside as been done by ssion and that t there will be that the City ig conducted. that he didn’t Why not leave Tat there is a load 8 4 but not ' area. Dning with the ing flags for :ed that Orono hat those lots oaring at 8:45 ] the* Planning :• S m m - h V « ‘’ti m mT^S OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 16, 1984./ ^S^^PAINTE] // DEVELOPMENT I I#;:-- PAGE 7McDonald stated that she felt that there is a need for the hobby farm type area in Orono and that this 5 acre zoning was designed exactly for that use. McDonald stated that she was also concerned with the pollution in Painters Creek and that with this proposed density It could get worse. ^ Adams stated that he sensed a great deal of opposition on the part of the public but that he personally liked the looks of the development. Adams stated that the developers could come in and meet the letter of the law and the development probably wouldn’t look as nice. Adams noted that the development would be well screened and that the extra 7 houses wouldn’t be that noticeable. Chairperson Goetten stated that at the last meeting she was in favor of the application but that the neighbor opposition concerns her. Goetten stated that this IS a very well-designed plan and that she was concerned with what the future will hold with this piece of property. Kelley stated that when he first saw the plan he was overly impressed too but hearing the publics comments stirred the real reason he joined the Planning Commission. Kelley stated that the density should be reduced. McDonald stated that by approving the rezoning it could set a precedent. Goetten read for the record sections from the Comprehensive Plan: Although the typical two acre rural residential is appropriate for the entire rural service area, the northwest corner of the City is planned for a lower density of one-unit per five acres . The citizens have a traditional desire for more intensive rural guasi- agricultural activites which require and support the larger minimum lot density. Thus historical land use and not environmental concerns have determined the land use classification." "Rural residential one-dwelling per two acre. This IS the typical rural residential density developed and planned to be permanently self supporting in all of Orono s rural service area. No rural density will be allowed greater than one unit per two acre except for those existing residences and existing housing clusters as identified in the CSPP. New rural development may include housing clustering when environmental and site conditions allow provided the ovoiaJl density within the development conforms to these requirements . k Sv;. V ^m i _ _“ •• - i - tm•■31 i liMmm paint:DEVELOPMEN #805 JOHN 2640 WATEf PRELIMINAP PUBLIC HE/ 9:25 - 9: 84.PAGE 7are is a n<eed for that this 5 acre use. McDonald th the pollution >roposed density al of opposition •ersonally liked stated that the .etter of the law t look as nice, would be well /ouldn't be that he last meeting n but that the Goetten stated and that she was hold with this the plan he was ublics comments J the Planning snsity should be :he rezoning it ions from the residential is rvice area, the ned for a lower le citizens have ve rural ,quasi- and support the lorical land use determined the :wo acre. This :y developed and rting in all of density will be acre except for Lsting housing ?P. New rural lustering when ow provided the nt conforms to >■5 ymmrn i. ■ • V • •4 I PAINTERS CREEK DEVELOPMENT #805 JOHN HALLSON 2640 WATERTOWN ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 9:25 - 9:26 P.M. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the 5 acre was established because it was what the people wanted.Chairperson Goetten read for the record a letter from the Assistant Director of Land Stewardship from the Nature Conservatory (attached to these minutes). Bastyr stated that if the rezoning wasn't approved that the lot would be sold and that this development probably wouldn't go through. Rovegno moved to table the conditional use permit and the subdivision application until Council decides whether the rezoning will be approved or denied. McDonald seconded. Vote: Ayes, (5), Nays (0). Rovegno moved to deny the rezoning based on the finding that it is not in the best interest of the physical development of the City and based on the neighbor opposition, but further ask the applicant to continue with this type of plan but with a lesser density. McDonald seconded. Vote: Ayes (4), Nays (1). Adams minority opinion - Adams felt that this was a reasonable development for Orono. Adams noted that the school districts encourage development because it increases the number of students. Adams stated that the Planning Commission is often biased in keeping Orono at the lowest possible density and that may not always be in the best interest of the community. John Hallson was present. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. There was no one present in the audience for this application. McDonald moved to recommend approval of the two-lot plat of John Hallson, finding that all lot standards of the RR-IB zoning district and the Orono On-Site Septic System Code have been met subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of Lot 2 access location by the Public Works Coordinator, John Gerhardson. 2. Dedication of 33' of right of way for Watertown Road. 1 » f Im;: (m V- iT t ■ : . .. ^ /.^m:.L,ATING/'/ThMinncso January Jeanne A Zoning A City of I 1335 Broi Orono, Ml Dear Ms. f Thank you Pointer's As ovners prefer tha west bound. Sincerely, 3#^ Jeffrey R. Assistant I Land Stew JRWrjn, i’o.iid III 1 c If MkM \\ 'I* I * llX.'kMx-. I • l»« • V •. ■> r . . . . • i . ___________________________________________________________________________‘ ^ r>* J4^ ^Bd that the 5 acre the people wanted. jcord a letter from ‘Wardship from the these minutes). ig wasn't approved t this development Dnal use permit and 1 Council decides proved or denied. (5), Nays (0). >ased on the finding St of the physical ‘d on the neighbor jlicant to continue a lesser density. (4 ), Nays (1). ilt that this was a Adams noted that elopment because it Adams stated that biased in keeping .ty and that may not f the community. >n. ng Administrator mailing and the 5 no one present in oval of the two-lot all lot standards of )rono On-Site Septic :t to the following ation by the Public son. f way for Watertov/n .... ... . ■^1 m Si: y X" iMi /The Nature c;;;~„ ancy r^xr January I3, 1934 1 IM D V^*7 fJ #; .•. * f J/'t; I ,s 1984 j;; ‘•1:• a! Jeanne A. Habusth Zoning Administrator City of Orono 1335 Brown Road So. Orono, MN .j Dear Ms. Mabusth: Pointers Cree“fevelop.-,ent.“^^^" Proposed zoning change for the property immediately east of fv, 1 ^ • prefer that the proposed location nf 4.°^ question, we would vest boundary. location of any structures be shifted awa; ^rolour Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Veigel Assistant Director of Land Stewardship JRW;jm no.tui.ii iiuvn-^.^. < M MU\\\\ Kl t,\H\ • Imi I* \ ll.tn, ' III \:i, M I t.i . I * »'‘l NM k5 k t MfOK K Hull, I |l.et|,,|, IM.. II.. •Vpi.iiM,, A...l„.,|„ii., Q*. (ilcif, .ViuiiMil III UillMtn J ir < M Ifll, Hon (iii\ NI.II* (Mt, I.M.,.,. ,M„ ..........^ * • 't.u, \\ f,.t, ,,| ^ ‘‘ ^ K I ••• ‘V... .1 \ I-•“ » ■ ••'dlM;-.;,.;. Vj;,., ■fef. ' ^ h ^Vji ti u.xxxM'mmism m .n ^ Mm 'It4V P I" r. X-V'} REGUAI 1722 SK 4740 BA VARIANC ON OF THE MINUTES !134 IM D W f S]^>) yj . f jj J/’K' I s 1984 ^! - ? !• i!^ £WLQFjmffo1 for the •n, we would '3y from our * ^ VJ W JL_fexhibit 1722 SKI TONKA, INC. 4740 BAYSIDE ROAD VARIANCE Kilbo said that in his 8 years here there have been no personal injury accidents attributable to, the parking lot or the parking in this area. There have been 5 to 8 Pi's east or west of the area but those have been caused by speed and/or DWI' s. He went on to say that if this parking area is closed that come opening day there will still be 150 fishermen coining here and from his experience other years they will park somewhere on other streets and on private property and they will continue to fish here and on the railroad trestle. Also, if they do peirk on private property his men can't tag or tow the cars, that this would be the responsibility of the property owner. Mr. Gabriel Jabbour asked if the City could even consider vacating any of the shoreline based on previous court rulings. City Attorney Malkerson stated that the Minnesota Supreme Court says in effect how can it possibly be in the public interest to vacate shoreland. Jabbour stated that therefore this area has to stay publ ic and if there is a traffic problem, this road has been designated a scenic parkway so the City and County should consider lowering the speed limit. Senator Gen Olson was present and she stated "There is an extremely strong and very retailatory belief of stereotype in the legislature that the people along Lake Minnetonka want to keep it private and are just waiting for an indication that this is so. Brad Van Nest has not overstated the emotion of the legislature." Van Nest stated to Mr. Gregory that he understands his concerns and the problems, but that the timing of this application was incredibly poor and that if this area is closed the problems won' t go away, they will get worse because there will be no local control. Hearing no further public comments, Acting Chairman Goetten then stated that this public hearing was left open and continued until the next Planning Commission meeting on March 21, 1983. Mr . Brent Primus, Mrs. Lee Primus, and Mr . and Mrs. #725 BOE 3420 SH( CONDITK re have been :able to^ the rea. There the area but : DWI’s. He ea is closed till be 150 experience re on other d they will Dad trestle. arty his men would be the ir . y could even ine based on he Minnesota t possibly be Doreland. area has to roblem, this kway so the ng the speed 3 she stated / retaliatory ture that the to keep it in indication ot overstated e understands lat the timing poor and that ^ron' t go away, 11 be no local ents. Acting : this public unti 1 the next rch 21, 1983. nd Mr . and Mrs. 1725 BOB SKINNER 3420 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Dunn were present regarding this variance at 4740 Bayside Road.Planning Commission members felt the unique circumstances surrounding the ownership of the subject lot would prevent their asking for 100% satisfaction of all RR-IA lot standards. The Dunns and Ski Tonka have worked out a purchase for a land corridor to the north and west of the lot. Staff has confirmed that this area is adequate to handle all future septic and building expansion needs. To ask for an addition of 1 acre would be a financial burden for the Dunns and require needless charity on the part of the applleant. Goetten moved, Sime seconded, to approve the lot area and lot width variance application of Ski Tonka, Inc.subject to the following conditions: 1. Filing of a lot line rearrangement subdivision with the City, creating a 49' X 238' parcel to be combined with the property located at 4740 Bayside Road, this subdivision and combination will now bring the property up to 1.3 acres. 2. Access to the larger parcel shall be via McCulley Road. 3. The owners of the subject properties as a condition of that subdivision must quit claim deed 33' of right of way to Henneoin Countv. Hjahwav Department. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0) Mr. Bob Skinner was present regarding his conditional use permit. Mr. Skinner reviewed with the Planning Commission the changes he would like to make to the property. McDonald moved, Goetten seconded to table this conditional use application pending review by others and to submit to the planning commission by March 1, 1983 the following items; :■ -t?- V- - ^ > i «l 4 mm::■I -V = ■ d.-i' f; I < * TO: PROM; DATE: SUBJE Zonin Sub jei Area Requij Exist: Width Requir Existi Applic List o Exhibit Exhibil Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit E.xhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Backqrot; In acr< same was Ton} Durii five the { If tl parcG addit /'Ni ?\ce at 4740he unique blip of the g for 100% rds. a purchase fest of the s area is id building >n of 1 acre Dunns and r t of the Dve the lot ion of Ski onditions: r rangement 49' X 238' located at ision and y up to 1.3 all be via rties as a niit claim * i Countv. arding his ?r reviewed ges he would table this I review by jmmission by ••L i '-k i #1 sk.;.y 1 % m ir J -4f- I i . TO:from : DATE: SUBJECT Kalter R. Benson, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator March 10, 1983 *722 - Ski Tonka, inc. 4740 Bayside Road Zoning District - rr-ia Subject Property Area Required - s acres Existing - 1.13 acres 0.96 (exclusive of Bayside Road rig,bt of way) Variance Width Required - 300' Existing - 218' Application - “nfter-the fact" ir»t- List Of .. . . . .List of Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibits A - Ai^icationD ^ r>_ _ r ’ Owners ListC - Plat Map G - Vogerst/D^n^^LetLr 1983H - Gaffron Memo ' January 11, 1993 I “ Oberhauser Letter - March 7 iqpt J - Planning Commission Minutes' K - Existing Lot Sketch ^ " f^ebruary 7, X 218' Corrir1r>r*M - TentLf^®’ Sketch « - one acre"ad"dlu:n"sk%"tir°"‘ 1983 Background gn Applleaf ion w^s convi^vr>/^ K » ^ ^ w3s solci on sl oonf*^ ^ tnst Tonka-s ownersh% During that four-.,.,, - • . °«ner. ^“°^.,the property was retoned TIr-Ia" f th"o°L°bie^ro%^“"^r^ P-iod that parcel, thorf5^00?^^^ anfseLrat^^f - ° 1”°®" advised by the City . n i: -.5;^ .’ J . • , " v’..' A •• •-• M > ' V . im ■■ m-k ••X.- •1 'V. - . 'm #722MarchPagestaff that t Based the ow owner, applic and al The Du cooper they k have w additi Dunns that t: not af set as. Road. conceri be ava; of the The Di additic resider they ha to five The Dun 42074 s v/ithin there i The se plante not no it cou septic where The He for th ing ac is not SGctio safe a ■ y^yyr. 1^:: Variance iriance ing a one- n that The property ed in ski snt owner. RR-IA, period that of the City. ^ the larger ide an by the Citv - bKi Tonka, Inc. March 10, 1933 Page 2 . r division of the Ski Tonka property that this common ownership issue must be resolved. pioperty thl^ownershio^of'^tho that surrounded the history of ^P ! a / f - ?Ue-^e?rriot-?e" ^^^d^ :^?^:urskrTrn^rt:^sejrtL°"?ai^^r^^^?c:rt: --rshipthe north. coope^uCe^'^Loughout thrrlviIw‘'orthl^lppiication ‘’^''Ltu^ j:s sjtrsf s"!r”‘s (Exhibit G"?''®!%sherthe “®' nofafford''®'! ^eslured int^buylng acreagi that^fhey^coulf" addi>?^n2f 1 that they were most interested in acquirinq tr'"ri®- neeL'di:^e‘LIu-r^"ce°?.om®tL"1i^rtha^ liSinS ’’5?'*EP«"2 • “Hi lot «•• ft S2i"i “iiS.'S!tLT“ ■ “■S".i™r;iJrShSt; fstSh, planted’'arerwith^lO-l5rs?opr"®TL®t'®t^^ performed in a garden/ not note the season^ water Km. incomplete as it did it could not K®p?ac®Lln®Kif iKation? KflddltKKr^re'rK'"''' KKKtKKKrL'Lre llvlK“"'"' ?Sr tK"pKpoL°K^^"^^S:L^gKK'Ss^in1%cKKr®U" ?Kd" iKn:K1eKsi^SLK^Lu®K®Kt^:id°-iaclKrKo‘ oK® lTeTc.tlsrnrll:t llT topogr“®aph^° pr^^veK^®'; ■■V • .f-.. . .• *: •••• •.-. ■.• •;• ■■*.• •■ "f . • “ ;• ■•■. ', . ■■ .... ...^ #722MarchPage The s Front Requi Exist There may bi expan: the h< the 31 How mi •;y; •••■•-^: nka property history of the original dth variance aimon ownership orth. ve been very Naturally, operty. They to purchase asked the uring the review lat they could 2sponsibility to af 4740 Bayside not be of Ls area will Ldential uses 1 acquiring existing :he City that : that is subject lot area of i located ' a sketch. in a garden/ •lete as it did ^as required, area for he north. Dunn property find the exist- further v/est the inter- prevents a Required - 109' Existing - 30' #722 - Ski Tonka, March 10, 1983 Page 3 Inc.The setbacks of the existing house'are as follows: Setback Rear Setback Side Setback Required - 100' Existing - 140' Required - 50' East side - 30’ West side - 160 There can be no future expansion to the east of the house but there may be expansion on the north and v/est side of the house. The expansion to the west must extend along the existing front line of the house. The City could not permit any further encroachment into the 30' front yard. How much area should be set aside for the future use of 4 740 Bayside Road a) 49' X 218’ corridor along north property line (realign north-south dimension to match lot to immediate east) (Exhibit H) confirms that this is adequate area to solv’e all future septic needs. Per Oberhauser letter (Exhibit F) will this corridor permit expansion of the existing house? There is adequate area now to permit expansion to the west and north on the house. If a new house were to be built on the site, will there be an adequate sized building envelope? Review Exhibit L. The area of the lot IS 52,756 sq. ft. or 1.2 acres - no change in lot width. A building envelope of 118’ X 42' - a limited building envelope for the RR-IA zoning district in consideration of the normal rural uses of Such lots. The applicant and the Dunns have discussed the purchase of a parcel running 20' wide along the west property line and 49' wide along the north property line (see Exhibit M). The Planning Commission approved the acquisition finding this a fair compromise not wishing to create financial burden on the Dunns or make a charity case for Primus. Review Exhibit J, the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of February 7, 1983. One Acre Addition Review Exhibit N. The building envelope is more consistent with rural residential uses. The lot is consistent in size v/ith the RR-IB zoning district on the south side of Bayside Road. More than adequate area to meet all future septic needs. The addition of one acre would satisfy the standards setforth for lots of single separate ownership in a rural residential district per Ordinance 31. 203. **■ 'f i: 1. m * #722 - March Page 4 31 re wh ar dw 1) 2) Fo Mr re th it st Staff As I r acre b Baysid Victor The Ci Primus acre o two ac rural suitab Mr. Ob light zoning Counci / de Setback quired - 50' St side - 30' St side - 160' house but there house. The g front line of ncroachment into e of 4740 Bayside Road realign north-south ate area to solve (Exhibit F) will house? There is St and north on the site, will there be hibit L. The area change in lot width, jilding envelope cf the normal rural purchase of a parcel nd 49' wide along lanning Commission npromise not wishing a charity case ^e Planning Commission 2 consistent with Ln size v/ith the Lde Road. More 2ds. The addition 1 for lots of L district per ■ -i h ■ Mrf. m #722 - Ski Tonka, Inc. March 10, 1983 Page 4 31.203. In "R" Districts of Greater Than One Acre. A lot of record in any "R" District in the City in excess of one acre, which does not meet the requirements of this Zoning Code as to area or width only, may be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes if the Council finds: 1) it is at least one acre in size, and the average width of the lot is at least 100 feet; and 2) it is either served by public sanitary sewer or meets all the septic system requirements of the City or other government body; and ♦ 3) it otherwise meets the requirements of this or other applicable ordinances. c) Four Acre Addition Mr. Oberhauser has stated for the record all of the reasons for requiring a four-acre addition (review Exhibit I). I do not think that we need sketch such a plan for your review; needless to say, it will bring 4740 Bayside Road well within the RR-lZ zoning standards. Staff Recommenda' ion As I recommended to the Planning Commission, ask that a minimum of one acre be set aside for the future use of the property located at 4740 Bayside Road, (similar to the one acre outlet set' aside in the Victoria Estates plat for the one acre lot with an existing house) . The City should not concern itself with the purchase of that land. Primus/Ski Tonka, Inc. must file for a subdivision creating a one-plus acre outlet for the exclusive use of 4740 Bayside Road. The total two acre area will now be consistent with minimum lot standards for rural residential development. Staff has confirmed adequate and suitable area for future setpic needs. I could not agree more with Mr. Oberhauser*s position but I have offered a practical solution in light of the findings of this review, the objectives lUV' intent of the zoning code and the nature of an after the fact applic .r )n. Council Action Give conceptual direction to staff so that a resolution may be presented for Council action at your next meeting. Advise the applicant that he need not wait for formal action on the variance application to file for a lot line rearrangement subdivision with the City. The application must be filed by Tuesday, March 29, 1983 to enable staff to call for a public hearing at the April 18, 1983 meeting of the Planning Commission wmm:: . ■ i*H.- CITY OF ORONO NOTICE The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at 1275 Brown Road South on Monday, March 19, 1984, at 7:30 P.M. on the matter of Painter's Creek Development Corp.'s application for a proposed Planned Residential Subdivision of ten units of property located at 4680 Bayside Road. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices. City of Orono By: Planning Commission /s/ Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator n the Council 9, 1984, at nt Corp.'s vision of ten time. Written iew in the City !v TO: FROM; DATE: Planring Commission Jeanr.e A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator March 15, 1984 SUBJECT: #816 Lake Minnetonka Homes, Countryside Drive Preliminary Subdivision ZONING DISTRICT - RR-IB AREA - Total Area = 74.39 acres - Outlet A drrSuiStb!e‘’^®" ‘'“'^"tryside = 10.78 acres application - Subdivision - plat - 5 lots PUBLIC HEARING - 7:45 p.m. LIST OF EXHIBIT.^ Exhibit A B C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L - M - N - O - P - - Application - Property Owners “ Planning Commission Minutes 8/15/83 - Council Minutes 9/12/83 “ Council Minutes 9/26/83 Council Minutes 10/11/83 - Conry Letter 3/8/84 Zoning Administrator's letter 3/5/84 - Conry letter 3/12/84 - Engineer's letter 3/12/84 - Denial Resolution of 769 - Gaffron report 2/29/84 - Planner's sketch Drainage plan ^tal Development Plan submitted 654 and 769 Preliminary Plan Application #816 Review of Application »769 “i"“tls®rei?lwfnfAppUcat?In^?n'Exh?Sit^ acted^orbreounci^® ?he“DolL ‘‘'t resolution was never Ssefin Portion®l?'fee°moniel no^ ^83 >/84 654 and 769 ncil a note as never action a be sub- r the ap- anxes not •ri . f- . -f • ;i:. 'f*'■ i % -i Ifl*1! h r • I Planning Commission March 15, 1984 page 2 ? enclosed the subject resolution (Exhibit K) because it df»v<a 1 forth Council*s position in denying the total plan submitted with both Applications 654 and 769 th^tota]®d»5°T®^ of 654 specifically addressed the fact that’ «iv plan was not receiving approval only the Exhibit r^^*^T°h Manor. Review Conry’s response, sketch*^ the referenced planner's *1 ~ attempt to address Council concern but Sir development where the totalnu^er of developed lots would not be affected. A total de- velopment plan could be designed where the negative effects facing lots would be reduced by the use of cul de acred designation of larger, deeper thilf ioicerns°“"Ti^ revised plans thit addressedthese concerns. The applicant refused and continues to do so i/laikedViivieed"r^i'i‘^S"''^,'® current application noting that the appticatiorn stated that I do not want the application delayed before the Plannina Com mission because of Conry's refusal to submit a new plan ^ in tharrreiiSol^’V°®"^"'?"' Commission Sitt’asf S ! addresses Council's con-cern - -F-i* t-nau auuiresses council's con- iSctor Srf 5 to future lots via surrounding collector streets prior to Council's review of current proiSLl? Before we get into the review of AoDlicatinn im#; council meeting stating he had no authority to sneak for- ship."°^ deeded to other members of the limited partner- Review of Application #816 The second stage plat contains five, two acre lotc* a»v,o plat road will be extended westward 300'+ wi<-h a existing to be constructed between lots I'and 2^ block 3 ^The^drv^bntid® fi«t“eview®*' of the retention pond - same as in ‘ Plann March page Septi< The ei at 10 desigr origir for th To tab until staff: JAM:jl iuse it 5 total md 769. :t that >nly the >onse , : * s i but :al il de- •ects il de deeper dressed > do so. ting that ated that ng Com- . In ask J existing :ary cul 1 require- i pond is :y build- i as in I 's con ' ■ t 9B i ing col-- ' posal. e is one ■ ^ 1 tatement -'-'kv .■ peak for fes that iitlot A v.-vSF rtner-:MR ? lilli S'i'- J % ; ! ■ ■ |i V . •‘i ■i.V X. I':-* '^v;, il i - • I Planning Commission March 15, 1984 page 3 Septic testing shall be required per Gaffron memo Exhibit L design standards. The enaineer w?i? "i®®* city original drainage plan submitSd ®°nfirm if ^ for this review! submitted m Application #654 is adequate Staff Rcommenda<-ir>n "■ nlw^sltls^foc^tiofo?^ Other lots and confirm,4?^^'^^?u^ tested areas on performed last summer in^aro^^^^ land alteration not affected thosHues. '■ trr%'dSce“nu"J:S:'”!f®"''-®®® ®n<5 ®n collector streets. accesses onto surrounding JAM:jl libit L. i radius leet City :irm if is adequate de Manor viewing 3r on :ion : has in rounding fO o o o: o 10 K> Z Z Z O lA n O O K lO^______^ O >- H _ H ^ <0 Z to a z z S ^CM UJ X z o z I H O O H 2 rH 3 UJ lAl U O H ^ to H I- S 2 •^gSSo^o ^ CO CD iO Zo CM o o o to o a a ^ -J a CM Oo q: 3 -J^ o < h- H* to q: UJ CM UJ • H r CO < o^ 3 tn lO to O 10 q: io ocnz o -> ei I X to o to O -) CM <t -t CO CM to O Z UJ UJ t- < < >•a o o a: cj Z < ^ O Z CM -J a CO^ o >o CM oo cr O 10 o cr O to o q: to o < to Z -1 10 z O IO ^ 3 <Z lO ^ 2 3 IO ^ O K 3 ^ o h- UJ o »- cn (D Z to d: M M CM UJ ••o CO < 3 UJ UJ H H q; UJ 1 <1 <o in <* a ato H H (D to in -J to cr cr 3 -i to o q: cr to o cr cr to O UJ UJ Ch UJ UJ o O «> < < O Id ^ H H o o IO CD CD (^ Z ^ Z Z CO z .j «J Z CO CM o o o CO CM M M ^ O CO CM < < ^ O Kl O cr DC CM -J to O UJ UJ CM -J to o 3 3 CM -J UJ tt z: Q <o z < q: CL UJocr 3 CL O QC o cr a UJ < V \ < UJa c X << z H to o Ma • ^ Q O St- I UJ CD M tjl-ss to CO N CM U H < 00 moo oc • ro CO “O •!- CO or o in C 3 CO CVJ o 1 4-> . 00 Z<u * r-*4-> -J 1 CO 3 CO O • ^ LL. 00 CO • CO CVJ CL ir>moo CO CO O -1 li.z in M q:CO <o 1 E UJ CVJ (U>• Z 1H 3fv n 00■B VJ UJ r—c . a >-ir*(U • O h-1 q:ssa CO >- o 00 rd r s CO O L o oo CO CO COoo I 00 T3 C Qc: T 4- C i 3: 0 0 2 -M S. 01 u 4-> ^ E I CO 00 CO O r- 00 I— CO -r- CM 3 •r 3 <D S- E •o to s.5 z a <c ^ i- <ic O. 0) c o c > i- 3: o: Q. O H E i lit lAin UJ 2 §O I lil > C9r z h C) j -i inKl o in •J I CL Q. in 111 lU H H < in in CM 3 Kl >n in o Z inmom \ in q: .j in i m o < ^ H in p i li 3 UJm oCM -J in in 1 -< 3 3 2 c CO 1-4 ^ -J 2 = 8 Im Kl ^ino 00 O lO o XoID dUiO O M M CL ^ UJ OCfle r o o < q: o 8^!S? dC < lU CL UJ CL £ O Z X < £ r r rI*'-V • ' ilto' PI J- jt: 4 Ll > - -f.-' ■ 1 '!0-i ^ . •• m o M CL • lUS8 k"- g lU QC UJ I-in >-in § M r inct M O -i z in M QC dC o UJ a >• o I- £S >•& t dC Z CL ZM CL UJ iUJ r%. LOoo CO CO CO CM C 00 I CO 00 CO LO LOoo CO CO CO CM I CO 00 CO r— . LO O JZ -O LO c cno: CO • nj 3 LO TJ T- ftJ C LO CZ O ^ ^ to o C 3 U 4-> • 2 CZ 2: S. Z q Q)S •f-> • • 4J L. Z cao CO OJ * * QJ 4-» -J O ^ cO *10 3 oQ oO C/) ^ O • • O C7) ^ U- CJ ^ C CO • • CO O CM Q. S CM ^ <D 0# 4-> to <U TJ O U) CZ O S- LO q; ^ C 01 r- «J CO Q. O i-H E 01 • r- < L. z: TO 4J U 0) -M 3 L. CZ OJ O 3 ^ O h4 0) CO ^ N O OJ >>*r* 0> ^ CO r-' I— CO CD LjJ r— 00 LO LOo LO 0) LOOoLO CO o > CO •r- LOo• lO L. LO^ C C -O LO CO QOL T- 'r-CX CO 33-M C L. L. ^ CO <0 c • ^ z CO 5 r- •r— r— -o • §1 CO O 2Z 2: -M o 2:CM 1 CO *r-(U k CM L. • •L. •»00 r— OJ101 LU LU 0) 0)Ol ^00 4->-M ^r—• CO CO CO CO CO 1 •r- -r—CO oO C LOO .— r- O Oi CO 00mCO00 I— 1— 00 C •(U CO€)ro •!- -t- n 0 00 Q Qr-NCMo 00 CM 3 3 CM CO • \CO <v • CJ L.1- E 1.s- E T5 m •O (O 1. T>“O CO L. ^ Ul o 1 ■5 Z <U TJ T3 Z 0) <h-o ^ , >»^< i. <tJ "v..L.COO«c Q. 0) Q. <U Ql CD CL (U 2 H < 0 C X E (. 2 <T3 10 0 C L.X E ITS ITSttCDQ. 0 t— Z Q. 0 I— Z 's*•• Ol Co f» Mk.? % V ■ m I r"'. •i JUk ii -J iTlNUTES OF MCDONALDS (#7^LAKE I I^SWILLOW SUBDIVISIO! PUBLIC HEAl 10:15 - 10: M^INOTES MCDONALDS (CONT) Page 7 Rovegno noted that this is a good opportunity for good planning and that this should be looked into carefully. He noted the need for a drainage plan for the subdivision application and suggested that the application be tabled. Rovegno moved to table this application on the Planning Commission’s agenda sending the application to the Council with consensus that the project seems reasonable if the technical details are capable of being accommodated and that whatever studies are necessary be done so that the Planning Commission can do a complete review and particularly the public comments raised on safety. Goetten seconded.,. Vote: Ayes (5), Nays (0). (#76^LAKE MINNETONKA HOMES M5^^WILL0W DRIVE SOUTH SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 10:15 - 10:20 PM Dick Conry was present. Mabusth noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. Bill Wear of 36 Hackberry Hill was present from the audience for this application. Mabusth noted staff's only concern was the access issue. She noted the proposed plan for 13 lots achieving access onto the surrounding collector streets with a total of 8 new curb cuts with some shared accesses, Kelley noted his concern for so many lots gaining access onto the surrounding collector roads. He noted that in the future Watertown, Willow and Old Crystal Bay Road will get more traffic than they do now that the City should start planning for that now. He noted that some of the proposed accesses should gain accesses from the through road or a new cul de sac. Dick Conry noted that he had spent a great deal of time to make the most marketable plan. He stated that the proposed roads now added up to a mile and a half, and i f he was asked to add more road it would cost him more. Mabusth noted that the City Engineer stated that the surrounding collector roads could handle the additional traffic which would develop from this plat. Bill Wear of 36 Hackberry Hill noted his concern with the drainage. He stated that there is a blocked culvert and that blocked drainageway raised the water level within Hackberry Hill. yTBS OF A- ■VPt : } ^ .11 t t r. • II LAKE MiNNETi (CONT.) 13.Page 7 Drtunity for good be looked into drainage plan for jgested that the lication on the I the application he project seems 5 are capable of ver studies are ig Commission can arly the public Nays (0). I the cer ti f icate )lication. Bill from the audience was the access an for 13 lots tiding collector with some shared ny lots gaining ctor roads. He Willow and Old t than they do now ng for that now, tsses should gain new cul de sac. :eat deal of time i stated that the ind a half, and i f d cost him more. stated that the Id handle the p from this plat. his concern with e is a blocked raised the water homes Page 8 No second. Motion failed. orthos "pla\^ aonr^phase II Prope^y^and th'a'r^he"^ t^°e ™r" developing the rest then*^^hA subdlvLiln. a whole new ; s.i£r€"VH ‘"Hr,v ~ ri sr' 1. retention ponds, etc. drainageways, 2. 3. buildability of a sustain an on-sitrseX"*°;;/t?;;" " 5«‘>‘>-00. each lot at 4. const^rucUon.'^" ""^ineer prior to 5. 6. 7. issue rol^d ¥o?^an°y^ ^litufe-d^v'^Al-”^ conector*^'’?oadr cannot ac^*" surrounding cuts, then application these curb Commission for another revi^eT" 8. Private road to meet all city standards. Sime seconded. Vote: Ayes (4), Nays (1). um ■. . . -; .* ■ //;t*ES OF 1 AKE MINNETO (CONT.) #695 GUENTHE 1428 BALDUR VARIANCE #760 WILLIAM 1535 BOHNS I CONDITIONAL Page 8 coming out in a lot more d that the City one to develop I could be the m. letonka Homes may affect the lie in Orono, J just phase II cuts for the comes in for a whole new at (phase li) ing all lot ar.d the Orono and that the lor plat of 40 ' following eas of all 40 rainageways, lability of a a lot cannot each lot at jeer prior to :b cut issue 1 reexamine t. surrounding these curb to Planning /VES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 15, 1983 Page 9 AKE MINNETONKA HOMES (CONT.) #695 GUENTHER ROTH 1428 BALDUR PARK ROAD VARIANCE #760 WILLIAM ULRICH 1535 BOHNS POINT ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Kelley minor i ty opinion - Kelley noted that ther6 is a need to address the appropriateness of the curb cuts in the northeast corner of this plat and also the total development. He felt there request was in excess of what the City should grant. Guenther Roth's plant manager, George Stodola, was present. Mabusth noted that Mr. Roth cannot accept the garage going on Lot 8 and Mr. Roth prefers the garage to go on Lots 17 and 18. George Stodola noted Mr. Roth's concerns with the Planning Commission's previous motion. He noted that Mr. Roth doesn't want to be so limited that he cannot update his property. He stated that Mr. Roth is requesting that the garage be put on Lot 17 and 18. Goetten moved to deny Mr. Roth's request to put the garage on Lot 17 and 18 but to approve the two stall, single story garage on Lot 8 subject to the following conditions: 1. Detached garage to be placed on Lot 8. 2. Owner must obtain a demolition permit for removal of existing garage on Lots 17 and 18. 3. All roof drainage to be directed away from lake towards Baldur Park Road. 4. Building Official will determine if soil borings are necessary for a floating slab. 5.Owner is placed on notice that the City will not approve future improvements to this property if they require variances. 6. Applicant must tear down existing garage prior to issuance of building permit. Rovegno seconded. Vote: Ayes (5), Nays (0) . William Ulrich was present. Mabusth noted that in her memo she addressed all the questions that Planning Commission had requested at their last meeting. Planning Commission found no further problems Goetten moved to approve a conditional use permit for William Ulrich for the installation of a seawall along the lagoon area of his property and 20' of Gerard Blohorn's property subject to the following conditions: 4 f i# P ^ 'i L ‘ ■REGULAR MEET #763 MILTON RESOLUTION #765 RUDOLPH 875 PARTENWO VARIANCE #769 LAKE Mil HOMES, INC. 155 WILLOW DI PRELIMINARY S m tiat ther6 is a e curb cuts in Iso the total 5 in excess of Stodola, was cannot accept h prefers the “rns with the • n. He noted mited that he that Mr, Roth Lot 17 and 18. St to put the the two stall, the following ot 8. it for removal 18. iway from lake f soil borings City will not Is property if arage prior to lays (0) . ted that in her that Planning 5t meeting. problems. use permit for h seawall along 20* of Gerard ;he following ’■REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 12, 1983 PAGE 7#763 MILTON SEIFERT RESOLUTION #765 RUDOLPH HOCH 875 PARTENWOOD RD VARIANCE #769 LAKE MINNETONKA HOMES, INC. 155 WILLOW DRIVE SO. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Councilmember Adams moved, Councilmember Hammerel seconded, to adopt Resolution #1523, A Resolution And Agreement Granting An Extension Of 30 Months For The Removal Of A Lakeshore Cabin Located At 1856 Shadywood Road. Motion, Ayes (3), Nays (1). Acting Mayor Frahm voted nay. Zoning Administrator Mabusth asked that Council table the application because the Hoch's have placed the dock already on the property with no principal structure and with no final approval from Council. Mabusth noted that staff has asked that the dock be removed and as soon as the dock has been removed that staff will bring the application back for formal presentation. Councilmember Hammerel moved, Councilmember Adams seconded, to table Rudolph Hoch's variance application per staff's recommendation. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that Dick Conry had notified staff that he wouldn't be able to attend the meeting and that he has asked that Council review the application without him. Mabusth stated that Conry also noted that if Council has any problems with the review to table it. Planning Commission Representative Kelley noted that they are developing that property piece by piece and that the lots that are being developed now are interior lots and he felt that there was access problems to be solved before acting on this application. Kelley noted that there must be an alternative plan to accommodate more of those lots so that they won't access onto Watertown, Willow and Old Crystal Bay Road. Councilmember Adams noted his same concern with approving these lots in stages. Adams noted that there is a need for a feeder road because of the tremendous pressure placed on the contractor who needs access onto the main collector roads. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that the other option is a lengthy cul de sac which is also not acceptable: Thi s issue wa sal so addressed by the City Engineer who stated that the three collector roads were able to handle the proposed curb cuts. Wm f'.:--. J:-: ■■ :> -• §M ‘: . r ' & lyt' jGULAR meetii• I '^769 LAKE MlN • .. • .»rl* ‘ RESOLUTION #1 #770 RON GEHF 1396 BALDUR E VARIANCE #773 RICHARD 3995 NORTH S CONDITIONAL I PAGE 7 mber Hammerel Resolution And Months For The 1856 Shadywood : Counci1 table ive placed the no principal from Council. at the dock be n removed that :k for formal Imember Adams I’s variance ion. Motion, Dick Conr y had to attend the cil review the :ed that Conry ^lerns with the ley noted that e by piece and >w are interior Problems to be tion. Kelley itivf plan to at they won't 3 Crystal Bay concern wi^ch ns noted that Bcause of the ctor who needs lat the other 1 is also not sed by the City Hector roads cut s. • m IT I r h JUGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 12, 1983 PAGE 8 • I A #769 LAKE MINNETONKA RESOLUTION #1524 1770 RON GEHRING 1396 BALDUR PARK RD VARIANCE #773 RICHARD ZUCKMAN 3995 NORTH SHORE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT City Engineer Cook noted that another option is running another road through which wouldn't be roads. Cook noted that from a safety point view those additional curb cuts don't pose a hazard. meeting. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that Ron Gehring had signed off on the Resolution. Councilmember Hammerel moved, Councilmember Grabek seconded, to adopt Resolution 11524, A Resolution Granting A Variance To Municipal Zoning Code Section 34.552 to permit construction of a principal residence on a property that consists of 12,870 sf instead o e required 21,780 sf and has 50 feet of lot width instead of the required 100 feet, subject to staff s resolution. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). Richard Zuckman, Scott Mann and the current -wner Mr. Maciosek were present. Mabusth noted that Mr. Zuckman is in the process of buying the land. Richard Zuckman noted his concerns with staff’s recommendation and noted his problem with the phasing out of the buildings. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that at one time or another all the structures may be removed. Mabusth noted that at one time any of those struct * es may be deemed uninhabitable. Mayor Frahm noted that there are 7 reside^*_.ial u v*; j on an acre and a half and that the City snoul evAvtually bring the property back to code maybe by setting a phase out schedule. Councilmember Grabek.noted that the City should put the applicant on notice that if the Building Official deems any of the structures uninhabitable the buildings wUl have to be torn down immediately. m 1 t * 1. m'y REGULAR MEETl RESOLUTION #1 #780 GERALD B 4195 FOREST L VARIANCES #769 LAKE MI RICHARD CONR 155 WILLOW D PRELIMINARY pV.r- PAGE 8lion is running good planning, desirable with nge plan shows mbers on those point of view i a hazard. member Grabek netonka Homes 5n attend the lat Ron Gehring Imeinber Grabek , A Resolution \q Code Section ;ipal residence : instead of the t width instead :t to staff's (0) . rrent owner Mr . )ted that Mr. the land. s with staff's with the phasing lat at one time or •moved. Mabusth trucf w. es may be residt-pi .ial City should ode maybe by City should put lilding Official nhabitable the , immediately. m li'K S,. C i ^^9 ' »,•» 4.g'9'i m mm J^EGUIAR MEETING OP THE ORONO COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 26, 1983.PAGE RESOLUTION #1561 #780 GERALD BLOMS 4195 FOREST LAKE DRIVE VARIANCES Councilmember Frahm stated that he wouldn't be willing to consider the "no future variances" clause to be removed if the applicant is pushing the limits right now. Frahm stated if the applicant can come up with something else then he would consider it. Robert Luesse stated that he would be willing to consider porous pavement and asked that Council table the application so that he and staff could work out the details. City Attorney Malkerson stated that the Council could change it to read "the City wishes to put all future owners of this property on notice that as of this date the City does not feel that other variances will be warranted in the future". Malkerson stated that way it wouldn't be a restriction it is just putting everyone on notice of the limitations. Council agreed with this. Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember Hammerel seconded, to table Robert Luesse's variance application to afford additional time to work with staff in order to resolve limitation on future use of his property. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). City Attorney Malkerson stated that if Planning Commission denied the fruit cellar addition portion of the application that the resolution should state the reasons for denial of that portion of the application. Nancy Bloms was present. Mabusth stated that the Bloms had read the Resolution and found no problems. Councilmember Frahm moved. Mayor Butler seconded, to adopt Resolution #1561, A Resolution Granting A Variance To Municipal Zoning Code Section 34.452, to permit construction of a new residence. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0) . #769 LAKE MINNETONKA HOMES/ RICHARD CONRY 155 WILLOW DRIVE SO. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Richard Conry was present. Mabusth reviewed Council' s concerns with the traffic and/or road plans at the last meeting with the applicant. Richard Conry stated that when they were working with the 93 acres they tried many different road plans and that this one was the best one that the planners came up wi th. % XEGULAR MEETING I.PAGEle wouldn* t be willing ances" clause to be ling the limits right rant can come up with )nsider it. would be willing to ed that Council table iff could work out the hat the Council could es to put all future i that as of this date er variances will be ;rson stated that way it is just putting nations. ir Hammerel seconded, ance application to ith staff in order to se of his property. d that if Planning ir addition portion of :ion should state the n of the application. isth stated that the td found no problems. r Butler seconded, to solution Granting A ie Section 34.452, to dence. Motion, Ayes . Mabusth reviewed fic and/or road plans pplicant. hey were working with ferent road plans and t the planners came up ■m: 4 S' L'% ■. V' mi XEGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 26, 1983.PAGE 8Mayor Butler noted that he is asking for five curb cuts on Watertown Road with shared driveways. Councilmember Adams stated that he sees a gross assumption that all platted lots can use existing roads which is contrary to the rural planning concepts. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that rather than relying on long cul de sacs the developer could have through roads in the plat. Mabusth stated that now is the time to address the road issue because later the City may have no say in the issue. Richard Conry stated that if he was asked to change the plan that he would still come back with the same plan. Conry noted that this may be the last part of the staging plat anyway. Councilmember Adams stated that if the City took over all private roads and made them City roads it would be a big project. Mayor Butler stated that there must be a different plan with either a cul de sac or a through road so that some more lots can be picked up internally rather than relying on City roads. Councilmember Adams agreed and stated that the developer is trying to rely on City streets and that is contrary to all of the rural concepts in the past. Councilmember Frahm asked how feasible shared driveways are. Frahm noted that in the future the property owner may wish to have his/her own driveway and petition for another curb cut. Richard Conry stated that they spent 4-5 months on getting the right plan and that they felt this one was the right plan. Conry noted that they have followed every rule required by the City. Conry noted that the City Engineer did approve of this plan. Councilmember Frahm stated that if the City approved this plat that they would be setting a precedent for future developers. Richard Conry stated that he is not the owner and that J he doesn't have that much control over the property.^^ City Attorney noted that Conry's sister appears to be the controlling owner and should have signed the application.* SbllilKiii^PlHIii /y" '‘Pv' ' ’"■1/. L '?-S^K.; ,* ViMiSiiiiMW;.5--.‘- ■■■:: . :. . :-^ . :■mA ^ v ^-:»v-=»\-- '■m-•■ai REGULAR MEETING OP THE ORONO COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 26, 1983.PAGE RESOLUTION #1562 #774 JOHN ALLENBURG 865 PARTENWOOD ROAD VARIANCE \/^ RESOLUTION #1563 - ORDERING PLANS & SPECS POR CARMAN BAY SEWER CounciImember Adams moved, Councilmember Frahm seconded, to deny Richard Conry's subdivision application based on the fact that by approving this four lot plat (contiguous lots) would put the City in a position of having no alternate way of developing the rest of the lots except with curb cuts onto surrounding collector streets and finding that traffic hazards created by such a plan would be totally unacceptable to the City. City Attorney Malkerson asked that the application be tabled so that he may review the application for legal issues. Councilmember Adams moved, Councilmember Frahm seconded, to table the application until October 11, 1983, subject to City Attorney review. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0) , Abstained (1) . Councilmember Grabek abstained because of his late arrival. John Allenburg was present. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the applicant has abided by the hardcover limitations and has not increase hardcover. Mayor Butler stated that in recognizing the restraints of the property and that you cannot get 75' away from the lake why not move the garage as far away from the water and channel as possible. John Allenburg stated that architecturally the living areas are on the other side and by putting the garage there they would lose whatever light access they have to those areas. Allenburg also noted that the runoff was a concern too given the proposed location of the garage addition with the existing topography this was environmentally the best location. Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember Adams seconded, to adopt Resolution #1562, A Resolution Granting A Variance To Municipal Code Sections 34.201 and 34.202, to permit construction of an attached garage within 75' of the lakeshore. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). Mr . and Mr s. Edward Lehman were pr esent. Ci ty Eng ineer Cook stated that after many meetings the property owners did approve the City plan to do the design work. it: h •* J ■m .A * 4 m r V*V Regular Meeting o #700 THOMAS VICKE ?769 LAKE MINNETOl WILLOW DRIVE•m. ^ SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #1567 #711 LARRY GRABIL 1358 REST POINT L VARIANCE #775 CARL PARTEN 1025 TONKAWA ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDI\ ^ ...... ■ ■ ■' PAGE jncilmember Frahm iry*s subdivision : by approving this lid put the City in a y of developing the tsonto surrounding at traffic hazards Lly unacceptable to the application be plication for legal Line il member Frahm i until October 11, iew. Motion, Ayes uncilmember Grabek r ival. ling Administrator has abided by the ncrease hardcover . zing the restraints t get 75* away from s far away from the cturally the living putting the garage ht access they have ted that the runoff ied location of the topography this was n. Adams seconded, to lution Granting A 5 34.201 and 34.202, ched garage within yes (4), Nays (0). snt. City Engineer tings the property do the design work. m i I $ i ■4 X /... • • Regular Meeting of the Orono Council, October 11, 1983 1700 THOMAS VICKERMAN Page 2 r .rr Councilmember Grabek moved, Councilmember Hammerel seconded to approve the "After the Fact" Conditional Use Permit and Variance for Mr. Vickerman and the City Council would not require removal of the cement pads at the bottom of the access stairs located within 75 feet of the lakeshore. Staff to draft a resolution to be presented at the next City Council meeting. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0) . =769 LAKE MINNETONKA HOMES 155 WILLOW DRIVE SOUTH SUBDIVISION w Lake Minnetonka Homes contacted the City office and stated that their application was incomplete and asked the City Council to table their application. They will present another preliminary plan to the Planning Commission at a later date. Motion by Mayor Butler seconded by Council- member Frahm to table Lake Minnetonka Homes application per their request. Motion, Ayes (4) - (0). RESOLUTION #1567 #711 LARRY GRABILL 1350 REST POINT LANE .'ALLIANCE Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember Grabek seconded to adopt Resolution #1567, A Resolution Approving A Variance To Municipal Zoning Code Sections 34.201, 34.202 And 34.452. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0). #775 CARL PARTEN 1025 TONKAWA ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed with the City Council the subdivision request of Carl Parten. Mr. Carl Parten and his son, Dan Parten, were present. Councilmember Frahm moved, Councilmember Adams seconded to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving this preliminary sub division contingent on the recommendations of the Planning Commission and an access easement for sewer maintenance. Staff will also prepare a resolution allowing the issuance of a building permit at preliminary approval time subject to the resolution of the sewerage matter. Motion, (5) - (0). 5unci1- Homes , Ayes Grabek 57, A lieipal 2 And ith the f Carl :>n, Dan r Adams are a / sub ions of asement also ance of al time ewerage - ,V: • » March 8, 1984 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Orono The Members of the Planning Commission City of Orono Mrs. Jeanne Mabusth Zoning Administrator City of Orono Re: The Overall Development Concept Plan of Outlot A, Countryside Manor This letter is written to express the views of the three partners of Dicon, a Minnesota limited partnership, owner of Outlot A, Countryside Manor, and of the applicant of Subdivision 816 Countryside Manor Second Addition, Lake Minnetonka Homes, regarding their wishes as to how they would like to see the remainder of the approximate 74 acres of Countryside Manor be developed. It should be made clear that there are no plans at this time to completely de velop the entire site, however, in an effort to comply with the requirements of the City Council, a concept plan for the entire site was submitted in July of 1981. A partner of Dicon, Richard Conry, has submitted plats to the City of Orono in previous years. In those plans a great deal of concern was ex pressed by the city that a minimum number of roads be constructed. The reason for this policy v;as to minimize the effects of hard surface cover rain water runoff and to minimize the potential maintenance costs that the city may in herit. This policy was very definitive and left little, if any, room for negotiation. With the above city policy in mind, a partner in Dicon, Richard Conry, and his planner/surveyor, Gary Gabriel, from DeMars Gabriel Land Survey, Inc., met with the planning director to ask for guidance. They were told that this con cept plan must contain the absolute minimum lineal footage of road. Gary Gabriel asked about any concerns of curb cuts along the perimeter lots border ing Old Crystal Bay Road, Watertown Road and Willow Drive. The planning direc tor told both Gary Gabriel and Richard Conry that these roads were collector roads with very little traffic and v/ere therefore "no problem.” He made the statement that curb cuts were preferable to additional interior roads. Upon presentation of this concept plan to the Council, concern was expressed regarding the perimeter lots not having interior road access. The Countryside Manor plat was given approval with the exception that the Council did not The He The Me Mrs. V approx shoul< In 0u‘ for PI Plann appro' hazari Engin< The C< to th' repre given some by in given the p able deny ney r revie do no any c welfa At th Vario mitte exper mitte and c submi cant this probl plat confc The < sidei lots facii 'm Plan of Outlet ners of Dicon, de Manor, and of ition. Lake like to see the developed. to completely de- he requirements ubmitted in July ats to the City oncern was ex- cted. The reason over rain water he city may in- ny, room for ird Conry, and his rey, Inc., met >ld that this con- '■ road. Gary leter lots border- fhe planning direc ; were collector 1." He made the ior roads. ’n was expressed The Countryside jncil did not 1 ti h'A a: l#‘ t’-- ■fj- ■. > ■?... fm vvvy-: r *''• P. • A#" The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council The Members of the Planning Commission Mrs. Jeanne Mabusth/Page 2 approve of the concept plan. The concept plan was to be further discussed should a Phase II plat be submitted. fSr''“ph^sfll%e“cS'p"n%Sn;d'unch::9:r^^^^^^ Planning Commission a°letter'^f?om‘*the City'’Engi'nee^ tha^no°traffic grrrert^e^^bj the at ach^a letter from the City Engineer leaves no doubt that traffic is not a conce . The Council wanted to explore the of extending^the^^^^ to the north in order to ^rejected that idea for reasons representative ?Je conve?Ltion’continued to the point whereby given later on in tnis lecter. , .. pntire site should be served denv the olat. This motion was amended to table the plat until the C y ney reviewed the application. A consultants of the partners. welfare reasons. Cariois alieJna^ive^wereTrawnlnd^edrlSra^S «drawn'’aga?n.^'’A plan w?s"sibl mitted concept plan made any sound planning sense. A 9 --i-i-iaiiw anM nf nirnn'5 oartners produced a unanimous consensus that the origina y p^iMe^Jf irap^Tthe northeast lots from future internal road »c«ss That plat application is before you now. It contains no variances and explicitly conforms to the city's subdivision requirements. Tho annlnrant and the below Signed partners of Dicon urge the council to recon- I?Lr"aiJ acLpt the coniept pl^ as submitted for the following reasons: 1. Double Facing lots First and foremost in our minds is the fact that if the lots are serviced by interior roads, all of these lots will then become double facing lots (double road frontage lots). It is basic in any planner s min discussed t subdivision inal. The ts, however, at no traffic from the City ul-de-sac roads partnership idea for reasons e point whereby uld be served the reasons approval of T would not be I was made to the City Attor- :ome of that le partners, 'esolution. In ilth, safety and he City Council. A plan was sub- and planning originally sub- f the applicant originally d that the appli cision through liminate the d access. That id explicitly council to recon- ng reasons: ie perimeter become double nner’s mind : •!;..i ..j Y* * - 1 m • .vAi 0- i * Y i- .m.. The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council The Members of the Planning Commission Mrs. Jeanne Mabusth/Page 3 that double facing lots are to be avoided at any cost. The reasons are not solely economic. Lake Minnetonka Homes, Inc. consulted Mr. George W. Orning on this concept plan. Mr. Orning is a former professor of urban geography at the University of Minnesota. Most recently he was a committee member of the National Residential Council of the Urban Land Institute. He feels that the city's position on this concept plan is “unfortunate." The idea of internally servicing lots in any subdivision is acceptable only if the traffic on the perimeter streets is such that a curb cut would produce a traffic safety hazard. As previously stated, the City Engineer does not feel that there is a traffic safety hazard. Among his other comments are: A) Double facing lots produce a safety hazard for the residents of those lots. The hazard is created by both the front yard and the back yard bordering on streets. There is no “back yard" in which children can play away from any traffic. B) Additional roadway means additional traffic. By having double facing lots, a developer is nearly doubling the amount of roadway required to service what could have been serviced by the original perimeter roadway. C) Mr. Orning feels that double facing lots are detrimental to the development of neighborhood community spirit. In the city's document: A resolution denying Lake Minnetonka Homes, Inc.'s application for subdivision. Findings of Fact, (hereinafter referred to as “Resolution"), Paragraph #16 and Paragraph #17 reads as follows: 16. A sense of community is lost v/hen the proposed plat divides or separates 13 lots from the 27 interior served lots. 17.The Police Chief, Mel Kilbo, has advised that with the loss of community by the physical platting or separation of properties, there is also a lessening in the degree of familiarity amongst neighborning property owners and a de crease in a neighbor's responsibility for the protection of surrounding properties. Contrary to Paragraph 16 and Mr. Kilbo's opinion, Mr. Orning points out that the back yard is where community spirit is developed. By having double facing lots, a developer is producing the exact effect that Mr. Kilbo speaks against. By having double facing lots, the perimeter lots are separated from the neigh bors by an interior road. They will have no front yard and no back yard neighbors. Their only neighbors would be those on either side of them. By not having double facing lots, neighbors' back yards are contiguous. As men tioned, the back yard is the prime place of neighborhood interraction. Again, Mr. Orning felt that the concept plan before you is the best that can be developed, lie did not consider any of the economic issues regarding the subject of double facing lots. He stated that he would be willing to meet The H oi The Mei Mrs. Ji with tl Finallj sonallj of dou] tive t( which < counci facing SHKSdSIS? city wi roads. By sen to appt sition the Res cern e> to the road ri this pa 2,500 1 square These t As to t asons are not Drge W. Orning an geography at member of the feels that the sa of internally affic on the fic safety that there is jble facing lots hazard is created There is no B) Additional 5, a developer lat could have ig feels that jorhood community letonka Homes, rter referred to lows: divides s. the loss of of J a de- :tion )ints out that ig double facing speaks against, from the neigh- ) back yard of them. By )uous. As men- "action. best that can egarding the ing to meet f . :! fc : t V •' H f* '*/ • a •'■sic- ■f’•lit •i^mr: • ■ The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council The Members of the Planning Commission Mrs. Jeanne Mabusth/Page 4 with the council to express his views if the council so desired. Finally, the present and past planning staff of the City of Orono both have per sonally expressed to Richard Conry that they are personally opposed to the idea of double facing lots. When the council asked Mrs. Mabusth to suggest an alterna tive to the original concept plan, she submitted a sketch showing internal roads which created double facing lots. She expressed her view to Mr. Conry and to the council itself that she thought the idea of internal roads that created double facing lots *.;as “a bad plan." 2. Economics A. For the City: The council is aware that there is a high probability that someday the city will be responsible for the maintenance and snow removal of the interior roads. The current concept plan has a total of 4,400 lineal feet of roadway. By servicing the entire land with internal roads, the lineal footage increases to approximately 6,900 lineal feet, or almost one-half mile of additional roadway. B. For the Developer: The applicant and*the owners of the land understand the council's po sition is that economics for the developer is of no concern to them, however, in the Resolution, Paragraph 13, the subject of economics is brought up by the con cern expressed for the developer's property values through the following sentence: "In the long range analysis, the Planning Commission believes these regulations will aid in raising property values for the subdivider and will affect many economies in the platting and development of a logical subdivision." IllThe addition of 2,500 lineal feet of road surface would add $88, to the cost of the development. The addition of 2,500 lineal feet of additional road right-of-way removes 125,000 square feet of land from the development. In this particular development, it removes two building sites. The addition of 2,500 lineal feet of 26 foot wide hard cover roadway adds an additional 65,0i square feet of hard cover surface, which will require additional holding ponds. These three factors added together comes to a substantial sum of money. Ill As to the question of property values, we would ask each council member: "Would you buy a double facing lot?" ’■m t yyAm The Hon The Mem Mrs. Oe total Cl is 1,361 Old Cry! curb cui E 1,360 li traffic lineal 1 C the atta existed 1959. k built in proposed 0 1 the appl cuts as : southwesi Watertowr facing, 1 5. 5. •W- ; Ki 0 both have par sed to the idea uggest an alterna- g internal roads Conry and to the created double that someday the the interior t of roadway, tage increases dditional roadway. he council's po- hem, however, in t up by the con- ollowing sentence: eves these ubdivider ipment of a luld add $88,000 ;et of additional levelopment. In ‘ addition of litional 65,000 holding ponds. ^ money. member: ' i\ ■rjT m ^ . a f'>' i N : &: V' -., :4^-: '• ■» •’-je■ • t The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City The Members of the Planning Commission Mrs. Jeanne Mabusth/Page 5 Council 3. Curb Cuts A great deal of concern has been expressed regarding the eight total curb cuts that the concept plan creates. Our feelings are as follows: A. There is one curb cut added to the Old Crystal Bay Road. There is 1,360 lineal feet of road bordering the property on Old Crystal Bay Road. Old Crystal Bay Road is a very lightly traveled road; adding one driveway curb cut in 1,360 lineal feet does not appear unreasonable. B. There are two curb cuts added to Willow Drive. There is also 1,360 lineal feet of roadway on Willow Drive. Willow Drive has even lighter traffic than Old Crystal Bay Road. Again, adding two curb cuts to 1,360 lineal feet of road does not appear unreasonable. C. There are five curb cuts added to Watertown Road. Please review the attached concept plan. The yellow marks indicate curb cuts that have existed on Watertown Road since the property was acquired by the partners in 1959. We would assume that they have existed since the original homestead was built in the 1800's. There are currently six actively used curb cuts. The proposed concept plan would reduce that number to five. 0. 10 In the Resolution, Paragraph 10: Council questioned the ability to enforce the use of shared driveways. The city may be asked to approve 13 individual curb cuts instead of the proposed 8 curb cuts. We would ask why the council would not have this ability. We as the applicant and as the landowners have no objection to a requirement of curb cuts as shown on the concept plan. As a matter of fact, we encourage it. 4. Lots Adjacent to Watertown Road and Willow Drive It is highly desirable to have the rear of the house facing south/ southwest. The concept plans provide that these lots on Willow Drive and Watertown Road will be south/southwest facing. By making these lots double facing, the rear yard direction would be north/northeast. 5. 5. Regarding Resolution Paragraph 5: The Planning Commission advised the council in their approving recommendation that if the second stage plat is approved a proposed, the city would be forced to approve a future platting of Outlot A that would require 8 lots located along the north east boundaries of the property to access directly on the surrounding collector streets. The Horn The Mem Mrs. Jei conside make sei four adi stated i six to 1 opposite Road. 1 north ar for an c le eight » follows: 1. There Bay Road. *i veway s also n lighter 1,360 se review t have rtners in mestead was ts. The a red ual curb y. We as ent of curb ge it. cing south/ ve and s double proving d a platting north- he my. W 4 % ^ • " -f •: VV> ' w 4 a. A i1 1^’ / > V.: • y-Mil WM The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council The Members of the Planning Commission Mrs. Jeanne Mabusth/Page 6 That concern has been eliminated by the plat revision now under consideration. 6. 9. Regarding Resolution Paragraph 9: Council asked the applicant to revise the final road and access plan with either extended cul-de-sacs or a through road so that more lots can be picked up internally rather than rely on city's collector streets but the applicant refused. Close inspection of this request will reveal that it does not make sense for the following reasons: A. By extending both the cul-de-sacs north, one would only make four additional lots serviced by the interior roads. B. Only two curb cuts on Watertown Drive would be eliminated. As stated above, the concept plan is reducing the present number of curb cuts from six to five. C. The four lots would be double facing. D. An additional 500 lineal feet of road would be required just to service these four lots. E. The four lots serviced by the interior roads would be facing the opposite direction of the adjacent lots which would be served by Watertown Road. This would create a staggered effect in which one house would face north and the next house would face south, and so on. This would truly make for an odd looking development. 7. 11. Regarding‘Resolution Paragraph 11: The final road «ind access plan submitted by the applicant for the 93 acre property is in conflict with Comprehensive Plan, Part II Chapter 7 - Rural Transportation Policies - Item 4. 4. "RURAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WILL UTILIZE PRIVATE ROAD FEEDERS n SUPPLEMENT THE EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD GRID. Because ov' ';*,pographical 1 imitations, the historic shape of rural la;t^J y and tbe low density of ruraT land use, most new'rur*^'’ residential lots are best preserved by short dead-eh? roads' running off the existing street system. Ine lownumber ofdwellings on each road, the dead-end configura- TTFn and~thi~scattered road locations make public roadwav ■■ The Hono The Memb< Mrs. Jeai We would is that a considere roadway m 8. A. B. n now under I and irough •ather :ant : does not )nly make inated. As F curb cuts from ired just to )e facing the ^ Watertown ^ould face Id truly make Meant for the *lan. Part II lYATE ROAD shape of landuse. by short Theem. configure- oadwav mm 4 ■ -%A f! mmmmt ■ ■’V •» Sr./ • :».-i •. . J ' .V mm • • The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council The Members of the Planning Commission Mrs. Jeanne Mabusth/Page 7 maintenance excessively costly compared to any public benefit. Therefore, most new rural lots will be Hirectly served by privately owned and maintained road ways. 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. We submit that the stated conclusion of the Item No. 4 is erroneous. We would ask the council to consider the last sentence of Item 4. Our opinion IS that any road looping around this land to pick up internal access v/ould be considered a "through" configuration, and that this road would make public roadway maintenance excessibly costly compared to any public benefit. Regarding Resolution'Paraqraph 13: The final road and access plan submitted by the applicant for the 93 acre property is in conflict with the Zoning Code, Chapter 39. Section 39.010. r » 39.010. Statement of Purpose. In order to safeguard the best interests of the city and to assist a subdivider in harmonizing nis interests with those of the city at large, this chapter is adopted in the hope that adherence to it will bring results beneficial to all concerned. U is obvious that piecemeal planning of subdivisions will bring a disastrous disconnected patchwork of patt~ern and pooFTTretiT^ pi traff^ uni ess i ts design and arrangement are correlated — ^^ster pi an study, aiming at ^ uni f ied scheme of community interests. U is, therefore, necessary for the council to make certain regulations and requirements which contribute to the safety, convenience and pen^ral welfare of the community... .V"l ‘ ' - - ■ - V -- -- -_ ” ^ ' W w ^ w ■ VI \»WIIIUIU P range analysisT the Planning nCommission believes jhe^ regulations will ai(f in raising property values fnr thp subdiv ide and will effect many economies in the platting and development of a logical subdivision. ----- We submit that: No intersection would be added. The statement says that joint use of "carefully selected private roads will generally be preferred over direct access onto public highways from separate properties. a.-. . tei-m t vV I / m ■ y'\ ■ ■■’ ’• # The Hone The Memt Mrs. Jea 9. 14 Manor, trend in reductioi eliminating 10. 20. that owns thi id- lefit c 4 is erroneous. Our opinion ess would be ke public fit. cant for the Chapter 39, the best armonizing hapter is esults wi11 bring or circula- correlated community cil to make to the e community. elieves for the ting and ted private )nto public m m■J! I T m i c. ■ ^ •« «II tr^fUfcri ' tel* % • t The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Citv Coimrii ^ could 3. Willow Drive, Watertown Road and Old frv/ctai n. d j are not public highways but rathe? conector s??ee?s I?afn-c%a'?lt;""’‘ Pcoble. with 9. 14. Marking Resolution Paragraph ^A• S3 acre property"is^i^^conflict^with^ applicant for theSection 39.130. ^onnict with the Zoning Code, Chapter 39, 39.130. Gener^ Requirements- Rin^irr r.. as ^ size^ blocTs is deemed desT^i« ^'?;^^e»^^ble,latvhjde tHat the subiJivision mav~~hp nTann7^~’—council in order ^ the automobile, the trpnrr~TVi~u.....;^ .fhe increased use towa^ a longer len^ c7“bTo?r l^^diyision has bein' ^ devoted to stroiFc-percentage trend' - statemenrin^this''section that'w" H** Countrysidetrend m residential subdivision h^c k understand is that "tho r«»tioa o,«. •' ““ •“ ■ •ii.ir.xin, “ “'■••'• i» ^^’ .B^garding Resolution Paragraph 20: paJlS^Sr^he ?u"blic"rL??d''?{;at ”hrr°'’''" tOo^aheirevisions that would inSoS^I ott^e^Tl^iJ" ' that owns the*'la?rha?e"sigLd'’thiriett??.®” P^^tners of the entity . * **." 4. f'f' I" 4 t- '■ : • :■ % • 1 ■ -.... 'dl mmM IT' r '■*'v ;•• i ► V., :-.y 1^ H V r ' • I The Honor The Membe Mrs. Jean 11 23 of the ow 12 22 Outlot A. applicatic outlot onl the City c applicatic approval c to any put 13. 24. 14. hard surfai is 63,700 . of 32 aver. 15. 19. ble lected. Road BtS. ant for the Chapter 39, latitude in order i^pe of eased use L ^as been percentage Blocks ountryside that “the block and a streets by has uthority e 4 lot e entity • » The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council The Members of the Planning Commission Mrs. Jeanne Mabusth/Page w 11. Regarding Resolution Paragraph 23: 23.It is the council's position that we do not have a legal application before the city until the owner of Outlot A, Countryside Manor signs the application. A new application with the signature of the general partner of the owner is before you. 12. Regarding Resolution Paragraph 22: 22. The City Council is being asked to approve a subdivision of Outlot A, Countryside F'lanor not just of 8 plus acres involving the 4 residential ots. The City Council now has a new application that involves 5 lots plus Outlot A. In any case, both the July 20th, 1983 application and the present application asks for a plat that involves 4 (5) residential lots and a large outlot only. There are no variance requests and the subdivision ordinance of the City of Orono was explicitly followed. In the July 20th, 1983 subdivision application and in the present subdivision application, we did not ask for approval of the additional 30 lots concept plan nor did we ask for any access to any public streets whatsoever. 13. 24. Regarding Resolution Paragraph‘24: The applicant has not introduced any evidence contrary to any of the above findings of fact. The applicant has claimed only that he has no control over the property that he proposes to subdivide. We are submitting that evidence in this letter. 14. Hard Surface Cover The addition of the interior roadway would increase the amount of hard surface covering from 114,400 square feet to 178,100 square feet. This is 63,700 additional square feet of hard cover surface and is the equivalent of 32 average size house footprints. 15. Regarding Resolution Paragraph 19 and Paragraph 21: 19. The council has asked the applicant's authorized representative to make specific revisions in the proposed plat but he has re fused to do so. wm q h 1 y mm • •41 The Honor The Membe Mrs. Jean fleets th four subd each and Commissio of the at the appli told. remained tants of can be si welfare c owner. 1 more marl marketabi hand thal cant refi gal A, artner ion of involving /es 5 lots plus the present and a large rdinance of 1 subdivision t ask for ^ any access f to any imed only )ses to )e amount of Feet. This • equivalent sentative has re- • t gPWPP iliXW • t The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council The Members of the Planning Commission Mrs. Jeanne Mabusth/Page iP 71 Richard Conry or the applicant in the original Countryside nlnSr ^at was asked to make revisions in the original plan involving the area within Outlot A and they were made. 1 believe that the statement of Paragraph No fleets the attitude of the tPP]’S,="VLrv’has ’’p atted he harconformed to four subdivisions in Orono that P’^“a;i„,ent. the Planning each and everyish request of the^^ „ecLions the desires of each Commission, and the City tounci objection was ever raised by srst?;* t'.. •• “ told. tants of the ^fffely Ind convln'en^e fnd general can be submitted boch for the healt » nuprall marketability of the land- welfare of the community" and ^°r the best over j subdivision is It is for this and all of the above given reasons that the appli cant refused to make the revision as stated in Paragraph 19. To quote from the Zoning Code, Chapter 39, Section 39.010: 39 010 Statement of Purpose. In order to safeguard the best ?ntereks^5T^ity iSdVassist a subdivider in harmo^--9 Adopted in the hope that adherence to it will bring results beneficial to all concerned •1+ ic nhvimis that biecereal planning of subdivisions will_ brigS. fS’jgSllPsj?,|s.S5af®^3^ |?5gTvTBeF~aiia~wTl1~^fect mw economies in the platting and development of ^ log ical sudpivisjoiL* •. % • • % ;' V •. n r % (I tv- m Mab. m ■% . . ■ - . : 1 . J. / . * v-1- v: ,', -.rH • t The Honora The Member Mrs. Jeann system th planner (i thinks tha therefore and that y Sincerely, LAKE MINNt Richard C( ysi de il plan le. rately re in the formed to lanning of each raised by d as was iw '84 has ►aid consul- plan that general ►f the land- )division is lots, the )0S hand in inning. at the appli- 9.010: d the best harmonizing chapter is results will bring )or circula- » correlated lumty to malce tKe mmunity the and •. • * • • II w&i iii k:-- 'fe-. • •• t The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council The Members of the Planning Commission Mrs. Jeanne Mabusth/Page 1| The key word is "logical." The requested internal roads system that creates the double facing lots are not logical. therefore respectfully request that you approve the plat as submitteo and that you approve the concept plan as submitted. Sincerely, LAKE MINNETONKA HOMES, INC., Applicajit DiCON, A Minnesota Limited Partnership Loretta 6. Fritz, General Partner Richard Conry, President Patricia C. Dickey, Limited Partner Richard Conry, Limited Partner ■MHM wm '■ W'j m 4'; 1*^. 2335 W. 7*—i St. Pt^. At PU^: 6f2 - 636-4tt MN.WUU f-800~ August I City of Box 66 Crystal Attn: Ms Re: Fill Cour Dear Jcc We have tive to The thr€ tors on than 30C the two Road and safety c The alte lots abu alternat of stree We would side Man Yours ve BONESTRO Glenn R. GRC:11 6609b roads Not one ultant Vie mi tied .imited Partnership ineral Partner Limited Partner ted Partner AtiJU/ilUi Jr Ai^iociateA., 9i 2335 W. 36 ^/, Pt it/, 55ff3 Pi^: 612-636 ttSOO MNWmtU 1-800-622-6513 August 26, 1983 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Mn. .‘.5323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-769 Countryside Manor CnniulitHO Olio C. Bonetiroo, P.t. Bobert N'. Boienf^ P,C. Jotrph C. Amdfitik, P.E» BfdJofB A. Lemberg, P.£. Mt€h§fB C. Tytner, P,£. Jemn C. €)fson, P.£. AUG 2 91983 I Cfemm B. Cook, P.£. Betih A Co'Boo, P.£. ThvmtM £. fiojiti, P.£. BKherd M'. Potter, P,£. Bober I C. Srhynicbt, P,£ Mervin L, Sorycte, P.£, Dvnotd C. Byrgerdt, P,P. Jerry A. Boyrdon, P,£. Merk A. Menton, P.£. Ted A'. Field, P.£ M*cheet T. Beyimonn, P,£. Bober I B. PJefJerte, P,£. Cberlet A. Etiekton Leo Af. Pet^efsk} Hutlan Af. Ohon ; : *1 ; I If %. • • • CITY OF ORO Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the overall plan for the Countryside Manor development rela tive to street layout and property access. The three existing streets which border on the plat are identified as collec tors on the City Comprehensive Plan and will have an estimated ADT of less than 3000 in the year 2000* This relatively low volume would indicate that the two access points on Willow Drive, the five access points on Water Town Road and the one access to Old Crystal Bay Road will not result in any traffic safety concerns. The alternative to the proposed plan is to extend the cul-de-sacs to serve the lots abutting Water Town 'toad and minimize the number of access points. This alternative would eliminate five access points but i^ould increase the length of street with very little benefit. We would recommend that the concept plan for the development of the Country side Manor be approved. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. • *% CITY OF ORONQ i m rvl d March 5, 1 Mr. Richar< Lake Minnel 21350 Excei Excelsior, Dear Mr. Cc Once agair a comprehe In the abs previous p property, to future the unname for future Your letter testing rep submitted b locate the The previou alterations The evaluat test sites Please cont application Commission Sincerely , a Jeanne A. M. Zoning Admii BLII.iJlSt; A4 ASM SMS(. — ^ inT m Jit S2§ ■ —■ m I • J if ssx ill s f .■^r* ” •. * . ^* ^ i* *.:♦.• •■ ■ • ■•- .■ ••* • • •• t • • .'•!>• • -V*-— • • i • • •• •. >• . ■ *'A. • .-i* V. ' •« *. • • • A .;•*:/ t '.-■f :m^■7v; ms>m y CITY OF ORONQ CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66^Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 •Municipal Offices •v-^» On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka March 5, 1984 Mr. Richard Conry Lake Minnetonka Homes, Inc. 21350 Excelsior Boulevard Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 Dear Mr. Conry: Once again, I strongly suggest that your current application include a comprehensive plan that designates access roads for all future lots in the absence of a total development plan and in light of Council's previous position regarding access for the total development of the property. Council may condition subdivision approval by limiting access to future lots via interior plat roads. Based on the current proposal, the unnamed north/south road of 300'+ would serve as the only access for future development of the northeast portions of the property. Your letter of February 17, 1984, does confirm that addtional septic 1+ 2. Block 3 will be tosubmitted by Gary Gabriel. Please also direct the site evaluator locate the actual tested sites on Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2. The previously tested sites may have been seriously damaged by land carried on in the first stage of development. test^sliefare^sun original Please contact my office if you have any questions. Your subdivision scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning commission at their meeting of March 19, 1984 at 7:45 p.M. Sincerely, 'V-fcvs.a (i. Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator bul ')in (;&/.oMN(; 4737357 • .\SSI SSIN(. administration « I INANCt - 473 73i8 ITBLIC WORKS 473 7 35<» ;:v li -li 'i'iVV'1 y . % .4' % tvv' V P- iV-f. tv r V ■:v'_. N' La Minnc Hoi DESIGNERS « March 12, IS Jeanne A. Me City of Oror P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay^ Dear Mrs. Me Attached foj Countryside Minnetonka I To review: phase 2 add: a resolutioi perimeter 1< After recei^ to see if I way to plat perimeter 1< interior ne: and paid fo; corner. Thi access is d< its three b< the best pi. 21350 Iui Im I.!( h ”■ Utr " '•: ;v-.. .’:.•=• ORONO I 55323•Municipal Offlccs cation include all future lots, t of Council's cpment of the ^ limiting access current proposal, tie only access 5 property. itional septic ck 3 will be i evaluator to 5t 1, Block 2. naged by land It. t the original >ur subdivision fore the Planning ?.M. -IC WORKS 47.V7 »S‘* ■A U <m. :V; ‘ *»• h K ;* >*?* !5 V/.-- •m t :V LakeMinnetonka Homes OF ORONO DtSKjNERS&BUILOERS ■■‘7 'A-*- if V... ^ ♦ *jiv4**. jiiit ‘iX**A %S « March 12, 1984 Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mrs. Mabusth Attached for your review is a letter from all three owners of Outlot A, Countryside Manor, and the applicant of Countryside Manor phase 2, Lake Minnetonka Homes, Xnc. Also attached is ten copies of this letter. To review: Lake Minnetonka Homes, Inc. applied in July 1983 for a 5 lot phase 2 addition to Countrysdie Manor. The outcome of that application was a resolution to deny. The central issue was and still is the question of perimeter lots being served by interior roads. ^fter receiving a copy of the resolution to deny, I did some soul searching to see if I was so involved that I may be ignoring a better more marketable way to plat the concept plan of Outlot A. The question was whether the perimeter lots would be more marketable (more desirable) if servc-ced by an interior neighborhood road. I spent a great deal of time getting free and paid for advice from every developer and planner/surveyor I could corner. The consensus of opinion was unanimous; the idea of interior road access is desirable when practicable, however, with Countryside Manor, with its three bordering lengthy collector streets, and with its geographic lay, the best plan is the one that was originally submitted. 21330 LxiclMof [xccl'-iot. MS 55331 (612) 474-7496 f«icH fnrmhi'* him tv ini'riM'MHf'ntU ,inr( Jeanne A. March 12, Page two I flew to of outlot Patricia < double fac farm ever are double servicing and oursel Since the to the pla you would to be ente this lette me know an* The copi mail tra the orig Friday, have tim< Sincerely, Richard Com REC/ew Encs. s of Outlot A, phase 2, Lake his letter. 983 for a 5 lot at application was the question of )me soul searching »r more marketable as whether the Lf serviced by an getting free 2yor I could of interior road ryside Manor, with ts geographic lay. (612) 474-74% f-' ■■’i 'm f 4- 4 Air. mm rnypt^mMmrn Jeanne A. Mabusth March 12, 1984 Page two 0,1“ “ r.T.’ Ml- farm ever be fully developed, we do not want to have to ml-keriotf 1 t aervie ® interior JoaL and perimeter lots would be a bad plan for both the citv and ourselves. . Our opinion and requests are given in the attached Ltter. -.idTp*. r-f. to the planning commission and councU mfmbeii Tyou would distribute them niior members. I would appreciate it if to be entered into thfiloid of ^he m ^ «i=h the letter this letter to the mLbers of iithe^ If you can not distribute me know and 1 will hand deliver them. ^ commission or council please let mail travelin^baik f^ora *iiiina'’wiih^Mii!^Fiii^ Fridiyi^^Again^^rLvrdii '''’®"d^L^^ received, hopefilly^n Thursday have time io review! the unsigned copies so that members would m Sincerely, y ^ Le>^>-v Richard Conyy mx:y -M V RE c/e w Encs. ‘•i tr ^3^ '■V- i 'J I .ri ir &04t€4i 2$$5 It/. %. &. Pmmt, Mi» Pimm».6f2 ‘6 Marc) City Box ( Cry St Attn: Re: F C BONESI Glenn GRC:1.1 9759b ' - '■ .'‘ '■ ' v':. ■ r of the owner ler partner, 5 which creates that, should the cet lots which Lor roads the city itached letter. Ivance dist 'bution >reciate it if ih the letter lot distribute il please let al is in the I will deliver Thursday or members would 2335 It/. ^*mJk 36 St. Pmtd, 55ff3 6f2-636-3600 ^tuU^UiA S /Uioeiaiu, 9i Ci HCi Otto C. Honestroo, P.E. Hoben H\ Rosene, P.E. Jose$th C Andtfhk, P.E. Bradford A. Lemberg. P.E. Richord E. Tymer. P.E. James C Obon, P.E. March 12, 1984 Ctenn R. Cotfk. P.E. Keith A. Cordon, P.E. Thomas E. Noyes, P.E. Richard W. Foster, P.E. Robert G. Schunicht, P.E. Marvin L. Sorveto, P.E. Donald C. Hargordt, P.E. Jerry A. Boyrdon, P.E. Mark A. Hanson, P.E. TedK. Field, P.E. Michael T. Raytmann, P.E. Robert R. Pfejferie, P.E. David Loskota, P.E. Charles A. Erickson Leo M. PawHsky Harlan M. Otson City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Mn. 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-816 Country Side Manor 2nd Addition Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the preliminary plat for the Countryside Manor 2nd Addition. de^^n ** lengthened to at least 275 to meet City sign standards. The street section should be In accordance with City stand ards and a storm drainage plan will be required. Uon^surverwiu‘te''?e^u?«dr ‘' If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:ll 9759b organi zoning the Ci seq. develo s ubdiV corpor proper descri City st applic City o propose more of this ai Th SL Gc th ar cc On Co Th re Chnm M, Coifk, P.E, Keiih A, Cof^iom, P,£. Thomm £. f^oyes, P.E. Rkh^ W, fotfff, /* £. Robert C, Schutikht, P,E. AlifWff £. Sonmh, P,E, DomkiC, Roriprdu P*B* Jerry A. Bowdoo, P.£. Merk A. Homwti, P.E. TedE. Eietd, P.E. Michoel T. Rout menu, P.E. Robert R. Pfefferie. P.E. David Loskota, P.E. Charles A. Ericksoii Leo M. PawHsky Marian M. Oison id Addition, meet City i City stand' an evalua- f •; 4?' f f i' :. \ -¥, Hi —I „^lli. city of ORONO L CITY OF ORONOii RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A RESOLUTION DENYING LAKE MINNETONKA HOMES, INCORPORATED'S APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION nro^ni-, ^ Wheteas, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation g nized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and zonina andCity Council of the City of Orono has adopted hh2 r?f. K subdivision regulations pursuant to the powers vested in sea for Statutes Sections 462.357 et. seq. and 462.358 et. seq. for purposes of ensuring the orderly, economic and developemnt of land within the City; and economic and safe QiiKHi i • ^es considered an application forsubdivision made by Lake Minnetonka Homes, Incorporated, a Minnesota corporation, (hereafter "applicant") dated July 20 1983 ?or property owned by Dicon, a Minnesota Limited Partnership and leqallv described as Outlet A, Countryside Manor, hereafter the property; and ri hw City Council has reviewed the reports of the applican^t^;^*^^ consultants, the comments and exhibits submitted by the rii-t, f n It Resolved that the City Council of the __ ^ of Orono hereby denies Lake Minnetonka Homes, Incorporated's mor^nfof Outlot A, Countryside Manor based upon one or till °appHcationr'"" ' concerning this property and findings of fact 1. pbdi^7fn°a\t^a^cLd^\^e?;^ theVl^^ntVeVu ”p^ cons\der:tTon"/ 2. On August 23, 1982, the City Council of Orono approved the plat of Countryside Manor that created 6 residential lets and Outlet a! 3. The approving resolution for the Countryside Manor olat recognized Outlot A as follows: ^ i^anor plat 4 -iryV-- ■ -.a u mi ter- L< 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. W 1 t. 1 0 tl ti f< si Ic si Tl r< Pt Ol be cc Tt re tc 1. 2. 3. In St t r de le Co I th. Coi sul Coi pit moi co] orporation lesota; and las adopted 5 vested in 62,358 et• and safe cation for I Minnesota 1983, for ind legally >perty; and rts of the tted by the icil of the rporated's jpon one or operty and ! proposed by Gary L. . This is t 15, 1983, - for their the plat of Outlot A. anor plat ............................. uppi, L'CITY OF ORONO 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. J City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO____________ .. ^ sub3ect to all requirements of current zoning andthe Comprehensive Plan. v^«ixuy anu The second phase platting of Countryside Manor is proposed as strLt^ served by 8 curb cuts onto the surrounding collector The Planning Commission advised the Council in their approvino recommendation that if the second stage plat is approved as Outfnh^K Vh^h City would be forced to approve a future platting of Outlot A that would require 8 lots located along the northeast directly on the surrounding The Planning Commission asked for a report from the City Engineer reviewing the total road/access plan for the 93 acre property and to specifically address the issue of the proposed ^0015 cuts: 1. One curb cut onto Old Crystal Bay Road 2. Five curb cuts onto Watertown Road 3. Two curb cuts onto Willow Drive sLte!: August 26, 1983, Glenn Cookstates the additional curb cuts "will not result in any safetv traffic concerns” for the surrounding collector streets as less"than" 3sn^ Comptehensive Plan, will have an est ima tefADT of less than 3000 in the year 2000, Council advised the applicant that in the platting of a property there are many standards setforth in the zoning code and suSdfvfsffrap^HcauL^f'' """ considered with each Council asked the applicant to revise the final road and access plan with either extended cul de sacs or a through road sf fhff more lots can be picked ip internally rather than rely on cifv's collector streets but tne applicant refused. ^ > erne but is an showing y as far as lopment of zoning and roposed as Dutlot A is 3 of the 30 collector approving >proved as latting of northeast irrounding y Engineer operty and :urb cuts: jlenn Cook iny safety reets, as ted ADT of I property code and wi th each ind access id so that on City's > n m . t T y ^ , V ft!'.- tr ■mmm WM --I I I iiy^wViV City of 0R0]\0 L CITY OF ORONO 12. 13. •I’ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO____________ 11.submitted by the applicant for the 4. "RURAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WILL UTILIZE PRIVATE ROAD FEEDERS TO SUPPLMENT THE EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD GRID ^cause ^^pographical limitations, ^he historic shape of £ural J^d divisions, and the low density of rural land use—SoTF new ru_r^ residential lots^rJTesTpresefv^^ r££^^nning o^^he^xistinq street system. The low nUmber of ,i^£iti2ns £uyjc—oadway mainTiHalTei excessively costly compared to any public SeHeiit. "Therefore most new rural lots will be d 1 rVctly ^ST^bTpFuTJtely owned and r-t^^ouoh-'r streets will be accepted where ^o'^^^gualation provides a general public benefit and/or where the number of residences justifies public maintenance expense. puoiic The final road and access plan submitted by the applicant for the Cha^bte®r'’7°‘’®r^ i" conflict with Comprehensive Plan, Part iT, P er 7 - Rural Transportation Policies - Item 7. 1*- driveway locations and rural street or private road INTERSECTIONS WILL BE LIMITED FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY? Rura tragic speed ^ generally faster than that in urban "nei^Forhood reaui^ ^W^diFtFRcii^nd-a-T^seF^TOintersection con f 1 i ____^-r-rr,- , .llHillEli ^in^ersectiQ-nlomi^^ ft^ 9A located private roads wi'ii aenerll lv hZ fpoper taccess HLg£^gi£li?Fw^ The final road and access plan submitted by the applicant for the L^^Yo^'^rs^riB? toning CoYe, cYaptY? sl? 39.010. Statement of Purpose. In order to safeguard the best interests of the City and to assist a subdivider in harmonizina his interests with those oftheCitvatlirnp hhicr.K ♦. adopted in the hope that adherence to it will bring ^results beneficial to all concerned. ^ results «i I a j aa 1 , [V /■’ - \ ■ f f-./ ^V • • 15. 17. 18. iT L Co L a 14. ore tOVs oT: 16. A SG sepc of shared idual curb nt for the n, Part II [VATE ROAD use, most : dead-end number cf ■» and the intenance herefore, owned and 3ted where c benefit s public nt for the , Part II, 'ATE ROAD j1traffic gTiborhood lumber of c safety. erally be for the apter 39, the best rmonizing hapter is I results CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO y RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __ "TC 1 Prelaterto-a .lESiaTiDT^ng^nt^ Sir^o-sIfi^taiTrriluiaT^^ necessa^-ToF-tF? contribute tF~Thc heal th—^-,f requirements whTcK ^fare^ tKe^mmlFi^ ^ Planning Commission Felanalysis, the rTisinq pr'FB'ertv eai,.^V„ regulations will aiH-TT economiel Tri Fho pTa'tTTno —li~r—AY^lar arid will effect many ?ir5dTll?rFn .— — and development-^ T~T^qT^ 93^ac^^"pro%\Vy^Vrn^c:nf ‘’u" theSection 39.130. Zoning Code, Chapter 39, 39.130, General Requi rem^nt s • Rlorlf- r -i • . tu^ as to^Tii~3~f bTock^ i c Considerable lati- order that the suFdTv \ githe Council in dpiel^^FSpPFopriate to-thF-^^^fTT^^i^TT^^ — 21 the aut^n^iie, the Tr'ehd'Trrr^f i'^ increased use toward ^ longer 1pnn>h b~f hi .'■■T'rTi'ifi has been devotid tF^eitsF^ndiT -^g- P«tcentaqe to 1000 feet and T?00 feet Tri letTTFl-----Q£onditions, blocks up- - - - - - - - - - -- ££££ in jenght may be acceptabTiT- - - a^^e^se^I'ontTJ^uftinq Ci'iv"/°% <^ttectCouncil would establish ty streets ^ Potential 13 lots, development within the City o^rtoed. Pt«oedents for future conflict with the TransDorcedents that were in complete Comprehensive Plan and hhp . tforth in the Ci ty* s platting cod^ purpose of the Cit^s separates 13°7oTs "/rom'’ te7ior'°se°rved ^°t community by^thVphys^ica^^^ advised that wiuh the loss of there is also a iVa^sening in t^e'^d^ ^'^P^^^ion of properties, neighborying property owners and 77 familiarity amongst responsibility for th^e protect^n ^f7u7r7u7di7g ^ro^'^^L^! of Llk7Mi7neto"nk,7Homes tL'*a7?^‘^ Conry, the President has also signed as one of the t7er7/“^7*' ^oory partnership, Pioon that in7Ur7^7ot7ysid^e^Ln^^7 m Wl- - L< 19.Tl tc tc 20.Ri St me Pr 21.Ri pi th 22. Th A, re 23. ap; Co I 24.Th< the he 25.In not Die bas pla whe app wi t Adopted ATTEST: Alberta ; 11 bring and poo r ement are scheme of ^or ts which general sfs^ ETTe 1 aid in ^ect many logical t for the -Pter 39, Le lati- • uncil in e type of ?ased use has been r centaqe • locks up leT 3 direct 13 lots, future :om"plete e City's • City's /ides or loss of •er t ies, amongst ighbor s er t ies. es ident d Conry Limited no r , CITY OF ORONO 1 J City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. to makeTpVciffc^revL^ons^ authorized representative 20.Richard Conry, President of Lake Minnetonka t u 21. 22. A^^Co^un^trv^?Hi^M^^®^^^ asked to approve a subdivision of Outlot residentirr?ots!"°'^ ® involving the% ippUcatfon"rf:‘e'\hr CUv°^ntn' ^ countryside Manor signs the^pplVcatL:. 24. tl^: :^?ii7"nding%":f facr^'^Thl to any of he has no control over the property ^hat'^h^^^posertrsuM^vlde' s?c:n ?n"^lS£iH{££"f within outlot A. countryside Manor, "he^^ro'perty'tol/drvfd^S" Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 11th day of October, 1983. ATTEST:CITY OF ORONO Alberta M. Strom, City Cic Mary c. Butler, Mayor FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: A brief ; "ghost ti previous side of C trench d Septic t€ 2, Lots Because used by lots, I the acti origins: obliterc jresen tat ive J has refused r Inc. has author i ty to f the 4 lot ryside Manor in involving on of Outlot Iving the 4 ve a legal Outlot A, ry to any of Bd only that subdivide. uncil still s, Inc. and is deni-al is 5tal access f questions ight of the ! revisions t>e divided 3ber , 1983. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Septic System Inspector February 29, 1984 Subdii?sLn“"®’=°"’'^ - Countryside Drive "ghost town” indicates^that two^’of th expansion of the previously evaluated. ThUr arl th» .J P>^°P°sed new lots have been Side of Countryside Drive Both in<- easterly lots on the north trench drainfields with the use of curtain dra^ins!^^®® ^ 1 ^ _ _ _ A .. ,— required. US^ by® K?te^v°a\ui?or in'ku^^ort lots, I would strongly recommend th^»^ar»ni two previously tested the actual tested liles oTthe survev'^ ®Th" to locate original Dicon plat because tect* k"*! a problem on the A TO: PRC DAI SUB ZON ARE DRY LIS' EXH The orig Marc paid advi wish lot divi into Brie Exhii a 30 to tl and 1 OUtl( lots The j Wintc A ion of the have been the north >r shallow : 2, Block required. han those ly tested to locate on the ost part i Jl - {PMMk TO:Planning Conunission FROM;Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator DATE;March 14, 1984 SUBJECT; #818 Craig Winters, 888 Plentywood Road - Preliminary Subdivision ZONING DISTRICT - RR-IA AREA - 121.75 DRY BUILDABLE LAND TOTAL - 58.82 Acres outlot and RW County Road 6)(exclusive of road application - plat - 9 residential lots, 6 outlets LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Application Plat map Property Owners list Applicant's addendum Plentywood Plat Septic Report - Gaffron Cook report 3/12/84 M.C.W.D. 3/5/84 Hennepin County Highway Dept. 3/5/84 Preliminary plans The purpose of the current subdivision is two fold. First, the original Plentywood plat (lot line rearrangement) approved in advised that all back taxes have been paid. The applicant wishes once again to formalize the original subdivision of a arrangement. Second, the applicant proposes the to the north. The lot line rearrangement was to cielr^the t?tle ^:urreit^"i:irarrrhe^Z!nla lots. The Peters property in the current plat is lot 1 block l Plann March page Review iv= Lrst, the 5ved in 5e of un- .'e been :ant i of a :he I plus acres Note I off icre lot the title i of the horro stead , block 1. e actuul Planning Commission March 14, 1984 page 2 Review of the eight lot plat: Septic - I have enclosed Gaffron's review (Exhibit F). Clearly, we will require additional septic test data before we can confirm the proposed lot lines. Outlot G has been proposed as is rather than a residential lot (lot 2, block 3) because of the inability to locate suitable on site septic areas. The rural outlot has 4.98 acres of dry buildable. It cannot be considered buildable. An open space easement should be required for Outlot G so that a future owner can easily ''remember” that it is unbuildable until replat and confirmation of suitabr^e septic area and an approved septic system design is submitted. Many of the percolation tests can be redone according to acceptable and approved procedures - some proposed mounds sites may prove potentiril shallow trench sites. Portions of lot 4, block I's aJternate site are located within the road outlot and lot 1, block 3. Lots 1 and 2, block 2 test sites are located within power utility easements. If trucks must trespass over area, these cannot be suitable sites. Road - Private - Hennepin County appro/es the access locc'tion (Exhibit I). Review Exhibit G, Cook recommends that the curve at 5 + 00 should have the radius length in creased to 275 feet, the road paved with 3” bituminous surfacing and 8" base class 5 gravel, ditches 2' below center- line crown and drainage plan provided with culvert sizing. Cook's comments on rearrangement of lots 1 and 4 are not valid since lot 1 is a developed lot with existing access on County Road 6. Gaffron confirms no need for sepNc concerns. M.C.W.D. - The M.C.W.D. (Exhibit H) has reviewed the plat and has the following comments; Drainage easement over area below 960 elevation involving lots 2 and 3, block 1; lot 1, block 2, outlets A, B, B and E. Deteri ine high water level in drainage plan for 24" sized CMP - designate drainage easement below that determined high water elevation involving lot 2, block 2; lots 1 and 2, block 3 and outlot F. Bench mark must be designated in final grading and drainage plan. Plan: Marc: page ir .-mm >it F). data )utlot G \1 lot :ate suitable acres of Le. An open ;o that a ibuildable ; area and jrding to 3ed mounds Portions (Within the 5lock 2 test 3. If trucks Le sites. :cess ^commends length in- iminous ' below center- irt sizing. I are not valid :ess on 'tic concerns. i the plat bion involving 3ts A, B, B for 24" sized t determined 2; lots 1 ing and Planning Commission March 14, 1984 page 3 Lot Configuration a) Dry, buildable area - In consideration of the area requirements of the RR-lA zoning district and Section 31.841(a) - how are we to respond to the following lot area findings: Lot 4, block 1 - 4.48 acres of dry buildable Lot 5, block 1 - 4.95 acres of dry buildable Lot 1, block 2 - 3.82 acres of dry buildable Lot 2, block 2 - 3.35 acres of dry buildable Outlet G, block 3 - 4.98 acres of dry buildable Required lot width - 300' - All lots satisfy 300’ of lot width at building site but lot 3, block 1; lots 1 and 2, block 2 and lot 2, block 3 are shy the required width along the road. As the Data schedule confirms the average lot width along street is 230.56'. Setbacks from existing structures - The required setback for barns housing animals is 150' from neighboring property lines. The barn is 140’ from front lot line of lot 4 (90' plus 50' road outlot,. Future Pedestrian Easement - Applicant should advise the City how this path is to be used. if this is to be a gravel psth, setback variance must be granted to 26' setback standard. Staff Recommendation To table action on the subdivision application pending resolution of the following: Re test septic area per Gaffron memo dated 3/7/84. 2) Per Planning Commission's directive realign lot lines as follows: a) Adjust all lots to meet 5 acres dry buildable. 1. Combine lots 1 and 2, block 2. 2.Realign lot line between lots 3 and 4, block 1 so that obvious high buildable area is ex panded to allow for both septic and house sites JAM;jl Planning Commission March 14, 1984 page 4 (note house on lot 3 is located within septic area). Road outlot could be moved north - do away with outlot G. 3. Amend road plans per Cooks' report. 4. Submit drainage plans for sizing culvert “ CMP 24" - determine high water level for east section of plat per M.C.W.D. letter. 5. Applicant should be asked to consider use of PRD with marginal load such as this. n [>ved art 1 for ter. use of o . ■;'r • 1 S> .. m ■v,‘'-:=. ■.%- ■, o fO o Ma • UJ g s Ip4s CM Ul < 0 M I0 Ie in iu ir> ^8g 0 DC iU »0 xa*"? •• •• § In X M 2 F 3: w w p a *> CO ^ . ^ 0 CL3 c K) r S3 lA UJ -J lA R$2 « *5* 6 5 2 IU X2§2|5! J fSiSCM o p r ^ S ^ 2 O 0 *1 IU ^ 2 S 90 ^ $ o n O II. C9 lA !j CM to lA CM I0 <1^ CM 0 fA U U ocao ec oc o Sii^ . Q: < IU ft UJ c. n liiii fA CM I 0 I 2 8 0 0 M Mo o IU UJ > > ec ocUJ IU 0 0 IU UJ oc DC 5•J 0 8 CM N ^ 3 Io 0 o 0 8 0 0^2 -J .J < M IU IU N ^ o * W M M O -I ft tt 0 a 22$2 o 0 CM o 0 ooc c^ p 5 § S “•J o 0 o 5: 0 o 0 d: ^ o 0. a M M oroo < aoa iL r o < a o 2 0 < >• \ n; < 0 0 a r OH - 0*" S2 0 O 0 a 0 0 ^ 0 OC2 o 0 < VgggoE 2g22Siu7 £25^ *5 8 N O O 0 § 0o CM 0 0 CM I V >- ig 0 0 PS 2 gg K HIe 0 M M 0 S S 0 0 0 O 0 CM 4- 0 CM 1 0 o 0 0 0 iioago O M H CJ 0 g o UJ 0 0 oc r > N loK'" X M M u 55->£ 0 0 X 0 ' Jj £ 0 O 0 *• _ < _ 0 0 ^ 0 X CM 0Ih n 3 X .N ^ X .2 ge < a o sfS? & H ^ ^ii?! 0o o X -I o < IU CM > H •A < 0 CM . JL X0 M _ ^ 0 O 3 0O IU 0 > 0 < < 0 0§_ M H C4^ 7 luuigS 0 O tt OC O IU o S 0 0 5 o 0 a a ^ o 0 IU 0 o 2^0 0 o o: Ne 0 CM I0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 _ M IU Q: M tt X Ul < — o K -J X X < a IU IUu 2 o ^ < < o a g£?2 0 < O H o Z IU o IU z •^ > O < 0 2 0 0 CM I 0 M 0 X I IU^ u 0 0 M0 a ii0 0 0 0 0 0 o ^ IU Z Ul Ui UJ Z UJ > £ g^U. ?3 0 0 < 0 Z X -M o 0 ^ ^ tto ao E I CIC Cloc o IU < 5^5 5:5 N Oo Z IU IU O 0 O mJa <f 0 0 0 O zo H0 0 IU IUoCM > >^xgg''z 2R ‘^“SS r* u u a zI o 8 S « 5 R ^0 O «J *J IU 0 O Q 0 Z^ w z 5 o 22 S ft ft 0 M 0 O < < ^ Z 0 O IU M > Z ^ < O 0 ^ 0 0 0 0 0 7^3§S!20 M < ^ 0 IU IU IU 7 0 0^^ SinSa^-*«§iS58iSSgg5!S 0 < H 4U 0 CM I 0 I •H 0 0 0 O iU g m2 O U 0 IU 0 O ococ^ IU IU o 88» a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 ouo IU CKax oo «< a pO Z Ui < < >• \ ^ a < IU a IU a X o X X 5 a :< < z a o H Es. CD C ro • E VO VO ^ c.un r—CO o o C 01 Ln .CA oo o O CDc.u>• a H OC VA O lUra c U 0 o CVJ JZ o •Ul e to c.• 21 CK lu Ul X ErnsI JEANNE 19 FEBI PAGE 2 3. NAME REAl 6. OWNE 4. WHE1 PROF 5. CURF AT 1 ALO^ OR E FAMI CONC CONC A SI AND 7. JANE ON T THE PROP AS S IT I OUTL BLOC AND AND BUIL A PEI INAR ThCC BY Tl SION mimimil■m r r P'ft- i'i%/. -.-S 'k, . M IS cw f III H Ernst Associates JEAtsRsE MABUSTH 19 FEBRUARY 1984 PAGE 2 jll Tt" * I »; oo 3. NAME AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF PERSON HANDLING PROPOSAL (OWNER, DEVELOPER, REAL ESTATE AGENT, ETC.) OWNER - JANETTE C. AND CRAIG G. WINTERS 473-3690 WHETHER OR NOT A PURCHASE AGREEMENT HAS BEEN SIGNFD OR IS PLANNED - PROPERTY IS ALREADY OWNED BY JANETTE C. AND CRAIG G. WINTERS 5. CURRENT STATUS OF PROPERTY - WHAT IS IT USED FOR? AT THE PRESENT TIME THIS PROPERTY HAD ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE AND THE REMAINING PORTION IS EITHER WETLAND OR BEING FARMED FOR AGRIQA_TURAL USES. THERE IS PRESENTLY ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AND ONE STORAGE SHED FOR FARM EQUIPMENT. THE CONDITION OF THE BUILDINGS ARE NEW WITHIN THE LAAT 5 YEARS AND ARE IN GOOD CONDITION. 6. A SITE PLAN SHOWING PROPERTY, BUILDINGS AND PROPOSED SUBDIVIDING LINES AND TOPO MAP WILL BE PROVIDED FOR REVIEW BY CITY STAFF. 7. JANETTE C. AND CRAIG G. WINTERS^ PRIMARY GOAL IS TO GET SUBDIVISION APPROVAL ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY AND SELL FUTURE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THE WINTERS Af^ PRESENTLY PLANNING Oti BUILDING ON LOT 1, BLOCK 2 OF THE NEW PROPOSED SUBDIVISION PLAN LAYOUT. THEIR INTENT IS TO SELL ALL OF THE LOTS AS SOON AS A MARKET WILL ABSORB THEM. IT IS THE OWNERS' INTENT TO SET UP A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION TO MAINTAIN OUTLOTS C, D, E, F, AND G. THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION WILL ONLY APPLY TO BLOCKS 1, LOTS 2,3,4 AND 5, BLOCK 2, LOTS 1 AND 2, AND BLOCK 3, LOTS 1 AND 2. THE OWNERS' INTENT IS TO SET UP COVENANTS AND GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW AND CONTROL OF ARCHICTURAL STYLE AN© MATERIALS, COLOR OF FUTURE STRUCTURES BUILT ON EACH LOT. A PEDESTRIAN GREENWAY EASEMENT HAS BEEN DESIGNATED ON THE PROPOSED PRELIM INARY PLAT FOR POSSIBLE FUTURE PEDESTRIAN PATH AND BRIDI.E TRAIL SYSTEM. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PEDESTRIAN PATH AND BRIDLE TRAILS WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE OWNER AND FUTLRE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE PLENTYWOOD FARM SUBDIVI SION. ■ • • i/ELOPER. 1 “ E LOCATED WETLAND >Kk.E CNT. THE RE IN GOOD LINES DN APPROVAL [AL LOTS. OF THE NEW f THE LOTS MAINTAIN f APPLY TO , LOTS I FOR REVIEW STRUCTURES ED PRELIM- SYSTEM. DETERMINED RM SUBDIVI- TO: PROM: DATE: SUBJECT; I have r followint 1» Bl< Avenue No appeared dry build submitted Lot 2, Bio existing exists no] based on Lot 3> B1 acres of which 2. ( generall; tested ar suitable mound bas alternat( located o alternate being pre allow. Note the di and I woulc come to us this reasc designated location. Lot 4, b: acres of ( suitable located r C, the pr within th and 2 ind depth of trenches (Perc hoi trench be TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator Michael p. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator March 7, 1984 Review*^^^^ Winters - Plentywood Farm - Septic Testing foUoJinrcomrentsf submitted and wish to make the jwiKuJ^orth ~ The existing residence at 4220 Sixth appeared to existing system was inspected in December 1982 and dry b^ildaMe 1*-^ condition. Because of the 12.5 acres^7,1 Dui-iaaPle available, alternate drainfield site testina wa«; not submitted and need not be required for this plat nesting was not lot includes the existing Winter residence. The exLts north of"theh°^^^^^ driveway. An alternate site bas^d^r^'ef p°ercola"tir r:?e"' """ HLV of Trv ^ K1 in soils report) This lot contains 7.91 whilh 2 06 acre. K '•- ®- ®’'=l“‘3es designated wetlands) of oeilra 11V e '^®®ignated by the site planners as soiilsg nerally suitable for innovative drainfield systems Th#s avoao 1°*^' wuh the prilary site being being presln\ ^frTt^^ al^llolirexpec^^lhaV^rool^ ground on the lot delL^ller;.' drainfield sues be legally lira?? *^^/o "’® "’^nnei to alert potential developers of thei^location. (Perc tests taken 11-12-83, borings ll-ul^S-lsr • - ‘‘S a^^tVo"fn^-rpe°L\"e?tVw “eil\t°k-a^^ a^ trenches could be no rre"lLT U »^rerp S'’ln\^^^ trenlh boulm!)®‘'^^°®''‘’ the proposed f-mm rn^m .'"■rsi vlflQr-'"’I k: bl • \1 ■/I J-% r”^ :l / iwK-n •f'i t /; This 1< that tl upper £ necess. Lot 5. acres < site pi locate( holes ] 4.0 - 4 rate of site ra site wc that a 1 much pr about a fastest 10 perc Lot 1 . B to be i] allows lines, Slopes j is repo] 36" WHY' same tii Lot 2. B acres oj innovat: percent SIte age overall. If testj sites fc Lot 1. B acres dr systems. Mottling 3' to mot mottling deep-thi Lot 2. B] buildabl Primary . mottling rate. A. requires But, this taken foi rator Testing > make the 4220 Sixth 5r 1982 and 12,5 acres ng was not snce. The mate site und system bains 7.91 tlands) of as soiils The areas site being squiring a ope at the J cannot be ge. A new Jicated as >erc rates on the lot L probably tes. For e legally of their 3) ains 4.48 generally ested are ler Outlot 1 located borings 1 taken at a nown that mottling, ! proposed mm PI W'-m- that t-h^ retested to provide an alternate site. I suggest upper soil taken at a shallow depth to determine whether ^es'of^drv b..7iH°Kl ® This lot contains 4.95 siteolannf.^a.^^'^t**!,^ which 3.61 acres are designated by the focItLd to th- wes? for innovative systems. The areL tested arl holes 1-4 central portion of the lot. The primary site. 4 0 - A 8 fibt ®''«raging 80 mpi with mottling observed at r^Lof ^ ^he alternate site was found to have an average perc rate Of 72 mpi and mottling at a depth of 3 5 feet gir,r.e=4-4.K ^ ^ L't: wrufd" 12%r°cVn; atThe edger Ve^'aYter^tt^esite would appear to range from 6 to 10 percent slooes n- i iiifc.it, much prob\em?tThTs^oca^^^^ ^°Nftfthat 10 Perce';\-^‘or:rch"'^o\Ve°r^,!^1p-°rL^^:^^?S4^^^^^ lines, this drainfield'^\ocrtionunacc%^^^^^^^ maintaining the is°repVr?ed ml?" perc rate for entire area 36" WHY? Trenches could he a 4.2' to 4.5’. Perc tests taken at same time. deeper than 18"! Peres and borings percent in primary site + 12 oereen^^ ® “"^es from 2 percent to 8 lvera!!!'M"ot^^infa\TF4-^r^4-‘ * 4#5 ^tpiT 11H3 ry sxt0# yet dgitcs tsken 49 •• Sites f^^"^sha^^ot"t%e^nX/y^\'emt^^ P^rt^ a‘’n^d ^i^^g-ft Tam^^Ll^ if«s'dry°buildable? of °wL\'h \'.Vl ?c^r°es’'is suitlble^or^^"*^®^ t*®® M^tmng ran\TrromS‘"o to‘'5 “o'net""nr"°"’ to^plrce^t? Block 3 ~ (Lot 2 on soils report) Thic! lof- Vi^e •? va ^ Prilfrv'si?e taken for driveway. (Perl l“4f-83 ® bo7^ng^°^^l^2l-8l^' .k'-’ li t • ?a' ,r‘- Outlot becaus This c create have a outlot stipul proven replat Summar In al fo Pe re In ba at 4.Ma: th< 5.In wil to Based c additic redo an incorre Lot 1, Lot 2, Lot 3, Lot 4, Lot 5, Lot 1, ] IP........I III............. I suggest e whether lounds are ains 4.95 ed by the ested are ary site, served at rage perc e primary ilternate is likely thout too at 4 2“ or t the two gs within 1-83). 3 appears easement ning the tire area taken at borings Ides 3.35 able for :ent to 8 Iternate 57.2 mpi en at 42“ ceptable me time. des 5.68 novative percent. 6.6 mpi, len 3‘ to ip to 2' L-26-83) ores dry systems. squired, his perc at 3.5' 3und ok. d may be 4: -•iV- 'M: 1 \\ r- -1 in soils report) - Outlot G is proposed as an outlet because soils and water table could not show acceptable perc rates. outlot on high ground (not wetlands) would seem to create a lot which is unbuildable unless further testing shows it to drainfield sites, it is under 5 acres (4.98). This fall under some type of open space easement with p a ions that the site is unbuildable until such time as it can be capable of supporting a suitable septic system, at which time a ^cpiat would likely be necessary. Summary and Conclusions: 1.In most cases, percolation tests were taken deeper than the allowable trench bottoms or deeper than the standard 12-18“ deoth for mound systems. 2.Perc tests in many cases were not performed to completion (last 3 readings vary by no more than 10%). 3.In some cases, borings were done after the perc testing; this is backwards. Borings should indicate what depth to do perc testing 4. Many of the proposed mound sites are too steep for mounds based on the slow perc rates. 5.primary and alternate drainfield sites are within a power line easement which presumably subjects the sites to vehicular traffic. recommend that the site evaluator perform additional testing in order to provide adequate drainfield sites, and incorrectl^ or “do^oHlet^code! °Pini°n were done PRIMARY ALTERNATE Lot 1, Block 1 Lot 2, Block 1. Existing Existing Mound - ok 12.5 acres to test - no need Lot 3, Block 1 B - retest B, C retest Lot 4, Block 1 A - consider testing shallower for shallow trenches Located outside of lot - retest Lot 5, Block 1 A - consider retesting A, B, C retest shallower for shallow trenches Lot 1, Block 2 A, B retest outside NSP easement A, B retest outside NSP easement V. f' 1r 1 ij -■r S'-- 4^: I r''' Lot 2, £ Lot 1, E Lot 2, B Outlot G A - Perc B - Perc C - Slop n outlqt : rates. seem to ws it to This nt with t can be h time a han the 3" depth (last 3 this is testing sased on tes are le sites perform :es, and ire done o need e of tside PRIMARY ALTERNATE Lot 2, Block 2 A, B retest Peres too deep and . under NSP easement relocate - retest Lot 1, Block 3 A, B retest Peres slightly too deep, but are acceptable for 2' deep trenches Lot 2, Block 3 A, B, C retest A, C retest Outlet G no sites no sites A B C Perc tests too deep based on mottling Perc tests not stabilized Slope too steep for mound at reported perc rates ■ ; -V.:' i 1' ■# ■V 5v'- t K-.-v ■V L 2935 1U. Jfif St. fimml, 5i 6t2-636-U60 March 12, City of 0 Box 66 Crystal B Attn: Ms. Re: File 1 Plent' Dear Jeani We have nu tlon. Th« The street inches of the centei sizing. We would 1 both lots be provide If you ha> Yours ver) BONESTROO, Glenn R. C GRC:li 9762b sp and .« sement itest Ly too 2335 %U. 36 Si, PmtU, Afimmattim 55ff3 PUma: 6f2-636-4600 Dear Jeanne » HoHMsUoa, /IndejUik A Auoclaiu, 9hc, Cknn #r. Coof, P.C» Keith A. Corthti, P,£, Otto C. Booe$troo» P,E. Robert 9P. Roitne, P.C, Jo3eph C. Andertik, P.E, Bmdford A, Lemberg, P,£, RicherdE. Turner, P,E, James C. Otson, P.E, March 12, 1984 Thomms £. Noyes, P,E Rkhord W. Foster, P,E. Robert C. Sehunkht, PE. Marvin L. 5t>rvata, P.E. Donatd C. Burgardt, P.E. Jerry A. Bourdon, P.E. Mark A. Hanson, P.E. Ted K. Field, P.E. Michael T Rautmann, P.E. Robert R. Pfe/ferie, PE. David Loskota, PE. Charles A. Erickson Leo M. Paweisky Marian M. Otson City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Mn. 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-818 Plentywood Farm Addition We have made a review of the preliminary plat on the Plentywood Farm Addi tion. The curve at 5+00 should have the radius length increased to 275 feet. The street section should consist of 8” of Class 5 gravel base and three Inches of bituminous surfacing. The ditches should be a minimum of 2' below the centerline crown and a drainage plan should be provided along with culvert sizing We would recommend that the configuration of lot 1 and 4 be altered to allow both lots to enter on Outlot C. The on-site system evaluation survey should be provided for all lots. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:11 9762b r k.'i MIIUIUEH WATERS P.O. Box 387, Wayzat. ■0«R0 OF MWMCRS; Ottfid H. Cochran, Pres. • Albert L. March 5, Ms. Jeanne City of Oi PO Box 66 Crystal B< Re: Preli Preli Dear Ms. ^ As reque above pr permit a final gr include adjacent In additio Plentywood 1.Outlo Lots Lot 1 The f parce 2.Out 101 Lot 2. Lots ! The ov of th€ 3.The fi for el Cknm Co€jk, P.£. iTfilA A, Cof4(m, P,£. Tkomu £. Nojfts, £.£. £Kk§f^ W. foffff. P,£. Poberi G. SrAMfi«r*l. P.£. MtfWfi L. Sorvtit, £.£. Dtmtki C. P,E. Jerry A. Bomrdon^ P,E. Merk A. Hmsan, P.E. Tedk\ FM. PE. Mkkeel T, Eettimetm, P.E. Beben B. P/efftrie, PE. Devkt LoakrUQ, PE. CMflrs^. Erkksott Leo M. Pewebky Merhn A#. OUofi 1 Addi- 275 feet. :hree 2* below th culvert to allow ty should ' 4i•.•I-T't 't ' *1 . *. * : wmPlHtO BCUK0»llY MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 iOARO OF WUM6CRS: Di«id H. Cochun, Prw, . Albert L. Uhnun • )ohn t. Thomat • Michael R. Carroll • Camilla 0. Andre lARC MINRCTORHA March 5, 1984 I •i • J •• * ."1. 7 t . / 7 ' • - Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 • » ‘ r/li'l - /: :r<,r. ^ .1 ! < ilii ■[]J 0 ' I ; : Re: Preliminary Plat of Plentywood Farm - #818 Preliminary Plat of Painters Creek - #804 Dear Ms. Mabusth: As requested in your letter dated February 27, 1984, we have reviewed the above preliminary plats and have concluded that the projects will require permit approval from the District. The owners should file for permit when final grading and drainage plans are available. These plans should also include erosion control measures which will prevent sediment transport into adjacent wetlands and waterways during the grading and restoration period. In addition. District staff offers the following comments: Plentvwood Farm - #818 1.Outlets A, B, D and E Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 Lot 1, Block 2 The final plat should show drainage easements for low areas on these parcels below elevation 960. 2.Outlet F Lot 2, Block 2 Lots 1 and 2, Block 3 The owner should determine the high water level for these parcels in view of the proposed 24" CMP and show drainage easements in the final plat. 3.The final grading and drainage plan should show a bench mark reference for elevation. Ms. Jeanne Page Two March 5, 1! Painters Ci 1. Outlo' The 01 B bell final 2. The p- for w 3. The f for e Both of th Since impr watershed concerned are review Thank you planning. 473-4224. Very truly EUGENE A. Engineers Michael A. bt cc:Board G. Ma •># ^ f ^ ' • / / / I the |u i re ; when ilso t intc iriod. s in view plat. Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Page Two March 5, 1984 Painters Creek - frBUA Outlet B The owner should determine the high water level. That portion of Outlet B below the 100 year level should be shown as drainage easement on the final plat. The proposed street and cul-de-sac should drain to Outlet B, if possible, for water quality considerations. The final grading and drainage plan should show a benchmark reference for elevation. Both of the proposed developments are within the Painter Creek watershed. Since improvements have been ordered to reduce the rate of runoff from the watershed as a whole, we anticipate the Board of Managers will be primarily concerned with water quality considerations at the time permit applications are reviewed. Thank you for this opportunity to review these projects in the early stages of planning. Should you have any questions, please contact Steve Miller or me at 473-4224. Very truly yours. tUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES Engineers for the District Michael A. Panzer, P.E.'^ cc: Board G. Macomber Ms. Jeanr Zoning Ac City of C P. 0. Box Crystal B Dear Ms. RE Propo eSAH Secti Henne Reviei Minnesota proposed | acceptabl( -The ri( Hennepi this ti -The 1( -Any n( an apf entrar -All pr util it 1imite landsc -The de County m of Outlet »nt on the if possible. reference bershed. from the primarily plications rly stages of Her or me at HENNEPIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 65343 i 1/“6k*. V '♦fvoo 935-3381 March 5, 1984 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Zoning Administrator City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Ms. Mabusth: Proposed Plat - "Plentywood Farm" eSAH 6 Directly Opposite Orchard Park Road Section 30 and 31, Township 118, Range 23 Hennepin County Plat No. 1171 Review and Recommendations •The right of way shown, 50 feet from the center of CSAH 6 is acceotable to ■The location of the proposed public street is acceptable to Hennepin County. '•'9'’^ of '•o'loTes an approved 1- prior to beginning construction. This includes but i« nnt limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development and landscaping. See our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms. ’JSSn?rr]ghrorway"'*°''® construction within Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt. Sincerely,/Q. (Sdames M. Wold, P.E. Chief, Planning and Programming JMW/LDW:jfe ©lOWUff^ K?IR-7I98 .CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY an CQuol opportunity employer m ■tr. sJ TO: PROM; DATE; SUBJECT: ZONING d: AREA - 5 1 4 applicat; The appl: Both lot; of land % for a sm< lot line on Leaf i Septic t€ alternate enclosed the pond septic si setback i I have sk Lot 2 sui be served easement Planning applicatj limitatic If applic testing s JAM:jl County review of and found It acceptable to pin County at ^nepin County. :cess requires ice Division for in approved . but Is not It, and Forms. ilon within li-- 1^- ,■ Mi Va. TO: PROM: DATE: Planning Commission Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator March 13, 1984 SUBJECT: #819 William Mills, 200 Leaf Street Preliminary Subdivision ZONING DISTRICT - RR-lB AREA - 5,19 total acres 1.19 acres wet 4.00 acres dry APPLICATION - Subdivision - plat - 2 lots - Public Hearing 8:30 P.M. The applicant proposes the division of Lot 7, Swan Lake Addition. Both lots appear to satisfy all lot standards for a subdivision of land within the RR-IB zoning district. All structures except for a small shed meet the required setback from the newly created lot line (required setback is 10'). Each lot has adequate access on Leaf Street. Lot 2 is shy 10' of the required 200'. Septic test information has not been submitted for Lot 1 nor the alternate site test information for Lot 2. Please review the enclosed staff sketch that designates the required setbacks from the pond (75* setback) and well (75' setback). An alternate septic site could not be located on lot 2 and meet the required setback from both well and pond. I have sketched an alternate plan that will afford newly proposed Lot 2 suitable area for an alternate septic site. Both lots can be served by the existing driveway. Lot 1 would grant an access easement in favor of Lot 2. Planning Commission should table all action on the subdivision application until the applicant has had time to evaluate the septic limitation for Lot 2 and decide if staff's proposal is acceptable. If applicant decides to go with staff sketch then on site septic testing should be performed within the newly defined lot lines. f f ‘1.>• ♦•«■ » a:*'8 \\ r- ------ 1 ^tt ■1 ^ B • I'c 1 V a.* m *'H » ■ ^ V 1 *’• 1o \ » m• ^ • B K % V \ %- 0 \. % T V . |k *w / \ 0 y ! f ) 1* I-------- PI fO: FROM DATE SUBJ] ZONIf APPL] In tl McLa: in tl 18 f€ feasj in it the t of a The a; on Ma: of th< Brook ferre< Upon T revert Additj The ap Brook corrid for th Staff no pla of the would utilit :B 271 till OF ORONO i- > • • • •^-USEZ ^ 4^ fi r- O N Ct). O 5 : r^ 0i I c c r r~ c c c t c 'i w\ l-r.; 3h' !i A ^ TO: FROM: Planning Commission Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator DATE: SUBJECT: March 14, 1984 #821 Scott McLain, 225 Tonka Avenue Vacation of the westerly 100 feet of Brook Street as platted in Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka ZONING DISTRICT - LR-lA APPLICATION - Vacation of an unimproved platted road In the process of selling their home on Tonka Avenue the *^esidence encroS 4 felt 18 °5 street and their garage (14 Let x feasible for^thlLw^ Street. It would not be If aLIrlill applicants reguest the vaclILn platted ferredf*^ vacated, conveyed, or otherwise trans Upon vacation the entire 20 feet wide , °"ly the westerly 100 feet ofPil2L?ILIsL for the property to the inukediaL“lrtl!‘'‘^°" of the potential of sewerina*^lL consideration would alk that upln tL "^ighborhood, we utility easement to the City! execute a road and p'^ ■» Plar Marc page Staf of S wide plat the ■' JAM: j 4 :• street letonka the feet (14 feet X d not be property to clear he vacation was platted owned all tion of rwise trans- f way will 3, Bayside feet of i access I and Brook le City has sideration >od, we >ad and Planning Conunission March 14, 1984 page 2 reconunendation - to approve the vacation application of Scott McLain vacating the westerly 100 feet of the 20 feet wide unimproved platted right of way of Brook Street as Addition to Lake Minnetonka based onthe following findings: The City finds no public need or use as an access road in the westerly 100 feet of Brook Street. The above described area of Brook Street has never been improved, maintained or used by the City nor its residents. Building permits for the construction of the foundation for the residence (1955) and for the garage (1958) were issued by the City. Moving the house and garage is not economically feasible. ^ Approval is based on the following conditions: 1. Upon vacation, applicants to execute an underlying road and utilities easement granting special rights and use to City. Upon vacation, applicants must combine vacated portion of Brook Street with homestead lot (lots 1 and 2, block 3 Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka). JAM:jl cation e 20 feet as ased on s the sr lying rights ed lots 1 ketonka). slO U) & H o: a a lAJ q: lU Og CM NCM < ►“ Ul ‘ ^ V£ S in in in :c: :i^ V£ q: u < mj w CM X I iO n* M X O O X lU ^ o I o o M < in tt K X -i o in < < ^ X X in o ^ u u z m M M ^ o e tt o: in «J Kl CM N 22 M M I in Ul U.o o UJ UJ . < H H cn in h- Ul inro in in Ul H CM O o o z S u < CD Ul “»=o:Ul >• ^ a < a lu a ^ o z X 5 g K 01UJ ti 6 H O Kl CM I N I in o o Kl CM I n* in Kl in in -J z < o H CO Ul u. X H U. O Kl < Ul H *i X X <n o < Z O CD -Io< ^ pa ^ z UJ H O O O DC -J M M gg U. Ul O' cn CJ -J ^ D. in X Ul Kl > CM CO O Kl O V UJ CD U U O -j MM Q.c r o. c X o o a o g K UJ g UJ Ul 0 o Kl “ •H Ul Kl S CM CO 1 >- n- < M CD DC X a «s in CM O 6 CO I in o: < CO S Kl C Z O LO O DC Kl cn in -j Ul in d: o < M DC < X CD -J OVOX K n* o < ^ o: Kl o Kl CM I h* I in CO Kl I in DC CD I in ^ UJ X o o ^ CD U ^ Z Kl < M ^ O e X DC Kl ^fSi < DC H Ul UJ CD CO in Kl X Kl o H < a HUi CD O H cnUl CO z X UJ Ul < -J < < -I X u. < H cn o cn o < ^ X CM cn <Kl r V -• 5 ^CM Ul o o M in e Ul CO CO o a o Kl o > in X X X -J z in M Kl Ul Ul lii Kl < in Kl -J V X Kl Z Z > 0^^ Ul V z o < X o X X < ^O Ul < X V UJUl Ul <r Kl M cn _Kl Ul CD <V H z in CM CO cn D Ul z CM ^ < CO CO u in 1 V cn cn o £1 H < < -iMN < O M K X H X U. -) -) X •-« CO X «i CO III Ul Qm ^ -I < V < H CO O V CO CO Ul o < CO z %o XX M < UJ lU CM CO CO CM UJ Kl > M VM X u CO in Kl in in Kl CM < N Ul X H M Z M CO o X o M V X X M U I CO «c in o in X VK CM «i z CO o UJ Ul >35 < Ul o o o CM ^ N CM 2 g§ Kl CM ____o cn CO XM M O O Ul I in M CO Ul X X CD Ul Ul CD -i JC CM P V CO cn Ul cn Ul Kl 6 Kl -J W' O UJ CM > o < o ^ 3Sf UJ M M CM cn I lU 2b <V Ul in Kl in in 2 ^ I in o in CM CO O Kl < N Xlii UJ Z Mo X Ul ^ X U M SK > UL M h- Ul X CO X O Ul < C$ O X -j Z CO o u M in z M o ^ O O X O CM HUJ <^ Ul CO •4 > < ^in o o inKlO (7 Klin^3 inin^ Ul Ul in M U K> Z COKl P lu < 3CM CO X D Ul 3 I UJ N X M U I in tSi in Kl CM o o u Ul lu in X X Kl CO CO CM o o X KlM Ul COKl XCM u. n • < —1 ^Kl < O CM ^ X 1 Z < N O CO O <fX ^< ^ in o >M cn «sCM cn 1 VUl Z r V cn o N < ^ ^ << cn Ul ^ H cn •1 ^CQ ^ X X ^0^ -J o1 << u. 3 1 o X z 1 lA tt X < □in V o r in Kl UJ ChCMu.CM CMinOMOinoV Kl o 3 o Kl o KlX in UJ ininKl > ••Kl Z 22 in Kl z z inX<in o c0 o 0^o o a - •: VI ••■A . *' fP"' - '1tT-. o V Ul ZM O X VM X CM ^ u. CO Kl Kl O UJ X M cn cn Ul V X u. < < CD -j V X o C9 P CM Z iz ^ aUJ Kl -J Kl CM I N cn cn M M O O UJ o o o < < M CO Ul Kl CM I N CO CO M M o o < < I in CD □ CM _ CM O O CO o u u Kl o CO cn CO Kl X X CO Ul Ul cn CO Kl oUl Ul Kl .j in M CO UJ X X COUl Ul CO CO Kl lU Ul Kl ozs X UJ X o X r oX o a < X oUJ <O Z UJ < V N < V \< Ul X < UJa zz X UJ a z :< <O Z X -t< z X :^ < zVa o H UJ X XX o O < X Q aSS| o cs 2X Z < Z X O H Ul X X o < aS X ^ X o X o X o Ul < V \< Ul X X X < < X H iUii ^" l■lii^al s E Kl Ul CM > 3^ lU M M K» ^ CM CO I UJ V X^ u HUJ z z o o cn cn inKl in in Iino in CM O o Kl O < < X z X X u Si X Ul O X CD < o o X X < < CO U. O X CM UJ CM > 3^ UJ ^ M Kl V X CM cn Ul I UJ V K* X 1-4 UJ ^ Ul > <inKl in in I in Ul o in %o zCM X CO o O Kl O -) -) X 3 Ul Ul H M 52 SiUl X _z"SX m o X CM O m4 Ul CM >zUl V ^ 2 M Kl H CM cnI Ul h* X u I in UluV_ o Z -)UlV ••Vo cn inro Ul in §i >H Ul CO Z Ul < X -i 1 inCM *e CO O CO CO5 in z o cn o CO Kl O O O CM ^ CMN.CMO UJ XCMX Z o UJ o o <X qH-o o z UJ < < > \o X . X < UJua UJ CL Zzo ?X <5X <CO gc§< z Im^tmmssssssi •J2z O iU CM > Zo < -n lAofA ^ 3 <lAZ N ^ M Z lA > 111 Ui K Z M 3 _ CM lA O X HI Z I HI ^ U M S a H > ^ U IH M H HI ft cn ^ I o HI < 8«,5“8^^ X Q _ CM u M lA 5 O O M o ^ o m o q: o CM «J Ch Hi Hl H (0 HI HI •-« M U h-> z cn lA H Hl< lAn lA lA CM o> rA rA CM I K I lA IS lAKl ggo® CO in X M M O O HI Z S3S = ____in HI = *5S K q: CO ^HI Hi X X CM OP P CO X cn in m oCO •A HI HI m ^ HI CK r o < 3== aS O CK Oo: o HI < >- \ < HI CL r X < < X H >A HI CM > ^ s ^ M lA ? CM in I HI tt^ u lAm lA lAz z o o u in tn ^ _ ^ ^ S S< < lA £ X HIumc ou I 10 < lA O O O lA h* CM CO O lA O gSoi< < H. O X X QC -I CM HI CM > ^ S ^ M lA K CM in I HI N tt U lA CM Q: Of 3 Hi HI HI M M I-in HI HI HI tt Z Z X X lA O O %o CM HI > lA lA *4 HJ ® a ^ HJ ^ M lA H CM in I HJ ^ u I O lA lA CM CO o lA O ^3 o HJ z r n M £ HI > H •« H Hi I- in X o in HI < z -I “so n -J •c o o in lA CM HI Zz r o o < z o o Z HI < Z < HI a HJ z X O Z X <f< < z O H m CM >- < CO CMo o HJ ^ > ^ < .ilg n •" r I lA cn in 10 o O M MCO 2 s z CM Z Z CO o HJ HJ lA lA O O O CM lA Kl lA lA incn M < HI •J Z lA Hi CM > ^ 3HI 0^ M > lA H cM in I HJ h* Z ^ U I lA O lA CO CM CO O fA O o o in in z z HJ HJee < < ^ «J HJ HJ in in in in D 3 z z lA lA HJ lA > lA < Si > H Hi in X HJ < Z -I ^ CO lA :: CO o CM -J Z ^ UI Z aO Z > M> H lA O < lA K tA O Kl O Z lA 3 Z lA > lA ^ Z Z Z > lA Z <•M M O O < > in in rA ►- z z 3 _ CM in HJ HJ HJ z I HJ p n M XK z 2 X >•M u < < H HI 0^ in I lA O lA CO CM CO OlA O Z Oo < HJ HJin cn in in z D z z HJ Z U lA CO CM < O•r z o £ o z HJ U CM HJ U. M3 CK CM CM O HJ •H < lA < CM X I X N O ^ H I lA O O •A CM CO O fA O <»o lA fA lA lA Z Z O O in cn z zHJ HI Hi ““Sg “fH. U. '4 Xxx|t in in P' HJ HJ 2= ^ S< < Kl “f "I CM o u f- <ID H'OK- >• >- fSS Hi HJ COCM Oo HI ^ < cn cn CD o CD OM MI z z z N O 10 CD lA O O O O -J -i lA < < CM Z Z CO O HJ Hi lA O CD CD lA < M) lAKl lA lA < HI O -I ^ CD lA CM lA HI 4A >O < Hi HJ O *J -J 3 -i -*^ HJ M M PM M IJ U > D Z lA f- -J -J CM cn I HJ «V «9z ^ ^ ^ u z z T o olA z z e o < < ^ X X CM U U O M M Z Z lA Kl HJ lA 5" |g in X u o z ^ q CM ^ CMoo fA CM I I lA COKl 5 z SB X X in inM M is HI HJo o <h lA Kl lA O lA Z li in z cn M in HJ ^s: lA < CM X CM HJ < fA < ■M H I lA CO Kl Oo Kl M M Z Z < < z z •J .J in in HJ HJX X < < -) 1 lA lA HJ g = Ui -J “3 3 Z Kl Kr- in z z zoZ X o a; r oz o o < z o 6 R 5z <a Z z •<O Z M < >• N < >• \< >• N< z z < z O' < UI Z X Z Z Z X a Ui CL z X <O X X o 5j ^ i< X H Z X < Xz a H c: :c < z a o»- ^ M Hi Hi >-1 syZ z XM HJ h- in HJ Z HJ X HJ Z H>u zHI Z Z H Z O O X V J AA I r REqf \tJ I ;-L/ • w «•.-• Ccrtiflrnto of rurv*»y fc.r J<*rr yjartinc'n; of Lctc I 'irto r<loo*i Payrldo addition tc unmi “• %ri HrT.nc!!;: County, Ki:»ii«r»cln i ^ tij i - ^ -li 04 ilT ***** * • ••• • t iu%t • nq I t J »ZS Z5 12: _URQQK... £»i%f •»'«4 3 ^ ** « C ^ . • jf • 4 1 W 5*5 ' / Vf ■:j ^ • 9 1 I WovJtC '*^1 401 O O —---o o z C»i»t in^ 5h«<i .o< V »<• (ok> ^ u > <1 < z o r 12s 25 *» » h'*r*-t y f'crM Jy ’r.^t t^.i;. iu *i ti i.*.' it.ti r'^>rx*nrt ro'xm or.tAtii.'n •, « •• ur-.M/ r,- t.r. :> ur;d<.ri»*;< o: j-\v I jmj MlorK 1, I Vir.r;» V.ti-/i '•t.o t.>? lurii;*.r. : :' uli «;x: .t.r., i •« •:;u:\.»•••.•#• f.f'V •;ti:or ;r Wifits or oriCrcarnckunts «xcev>t ar* exi::tinf' orjvvvay. (UmXN h. rCKH! CG., INC. • •t>.inlcn K. Cofflr. He, . n/T Ir^ ri :'>iri<ur K.'irk w. .jrrnl<T,; ?x-. . V.t.'-' L-if:: iv:rv*}yor.‘i *ird I’l.mi.ur:) uM>t . f ir.i. rf)tii o (VI mm • ■ i • • 20DC First Bank Place West Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 Teecnone 612-333-0543 - s.’sn L LeFevere -e'r.en P Lelier , Ee-nis 0 Bnen E Drawz Zi. z J Kennedy .C"" 5 Dean 3 e" E Purdue = c's'd j Schielfer ''s'es L LeFevere -e'ced P teller ill .e“'e. J Strand ‘.'s',, w BjOrklund .I" ‘3 Kresse; _ 3s. e’lloian 3 L Lavorato c'se' 1^ Naso .-•'e P Komarek -Cs" N Encksen E ;sde*n D Moran E' s' ~ Rice _'."s 'e S Ciugg .s"r;J Tnorrscn. Jr. M. C C 0 B< C r: L. T] t; M; t< d< S' T1 a] tl i< o\ B] 11 VJi B] bj wl W€ b2 m< tl 1£ 1£ TI Tl: pa ITlv a] i o CV4 Lrl\\fic UfI<T Kniiirdv (nirini M Draw/ A I’loltsviiiii.il Ans<m i.itiiiti 2000 First Bank Place West Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 e:ep^one 612-333-0543 0 a.’tn L LeFevere "•e'r.en P teller . "e'nisO Bnen E Drawz Za. c J Kennedy -C'" 5 Dean Z a" E Purdue = :'5'd j Schieffcr Z'a’es L LeFevere -e'ce'i P. teller ill -e“'e, J Strand '.'a',, w Bjorklund .C" J Kressel Ee-e'iJoian L tavorato z'a<r' P Naso .-•'e P Komarek • >1 E D Moran 5' a' ~ Rice _:”3 'e S Ciugg .a"*: J Thorr.son. Jr. t:HAND DELIVERED February 28, 1984 Mayor City Council City of Orono Orono City Hall Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 RE: Vacation of a portion of Brook Street Ladies and Gentlemen: This office represents Scott and Debra McLain in connec tion with the above-captioned street vacation. My clients own Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County. These two lots are developed as a single parcel with a home, garage, and storage building. This property was platted on March 1, 1912 by John Bjorhus and Helen W. Bjorhus, his wife. According to a copy of the plat, and the relevant portions of the Abstract (cop ies attached) all of the land underlying Brook Street was owned by Mr. and Mrs. Bjorhus at the time of platting. Brook Street was never developed or opened for public travel in the area adjacent to the McLain property. The McLains were not aware that some of the buildings encroached on Brook Street until the fall of 1983, when it was discovered by Jeff Martineau, a sales associate with Eberhardt Company, who discovered the problem while marketing the property. We have attached a survey which indicates an encroachment by the dwelling of approximately four feet and an encroach ment of the garage of approximately 14 feet. It appears that a permit to construct a basement for the home was issued on October 10, 1955, a permit for the garage was issued on October 13, 1958, and a permit to move a storage shed onto the property was issued on June 30, 1964. The property is clearly unmarketable in its present state. The McLains have a purchase agreement for the sale of the property which is contingent upon removal of the encroach ment. Since moving the house and garage is not economic ally feasible, we have requested that a portion of Brook - r i Ma] Cil Pac Feh Str ask sma to We RJS/ Enel :onnec- Ltion Dts are and in Bjorhus ipy of :t (cop- reet was ting. 3lic travel McLains led on Siscovered Jt Company, Dperty. Dachment encroach- appears a was ;e was a storage 4. nt state. B of the encroach- conomic- f Brook ,yA ‘ * V n f • • d Mayor City Council Page 2 February 28, 1984 asked*'that^Snly®the°westlrly*'loo^fe''t^h'’"'®"*''small portion is needed bv the vacated since a .o tt. north to .riS;.' Ko.“: we request that the street vacation be approved. Sincerely, LeFEVERE, LEPLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEJf & /DHAWZ u^ • Schieff RJS/rat Enclosures:Plat Land Use Application Check for $200.00, filing fee TO: PROM: DATE: SUBJECT Applical List of Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit The appl Center, applicat acknowle conditio required A site pi general states th The Polic problems iRKimiPi e e a r TO:FROM:DATE:Planning CommissionMichael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning AdministratorMarch 12, 1984 SUBJECT: #797 New Thought Center, 525 Leaf Street Conditional Use Permit Application - Conditional Use Permit to operate a church in a residential zoning district List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Exhibit K Exhibit L Exhibit M Exhibit N - Application with attached letter “ Plat Map - Site Plan and topography map - Alan P. Olson letter (1-3-83) ■ Building Permit 4-26-83 - access stairs for side entrance - Inspection Report 4-27-83 - Inspection Report 5-18-83 - Department of Revenue letter to Walter R. Benson 7-29-83 - Olson letter 8-2-83 - Olson memo 9-9-83 reference Exhibit I - Olson letter 9-19-83 - Olson letter 9-29-83 - Mabusth letter 10-26-83 - Mabusth letter 12-15-83 The applicant is Reverend Glenn Chaffin on behalf of New Thought Center, Inc. - Church of Religious Science. Applicant has made application at the City's request, although applicant does not acknowledge that a conditional use permit is needed because of a conditional use permit which was issued in 1969. The application is required as a result of a number of factors; A) A conditional use permit for church purposes was approved in 1969; the ownership of this property has changed since then, and per Alan P. Olson's letter of January 3, 1983, the church usage appears to have ceased for a period of 6 months or more in 1977 or 1978, requiring a new application to establish for the record the current use of this property. B) No certificate of occupancy for the chapel is in evidence, and the Building Inspector has some concerns regarding the safety and security of the occupants of the building relatinq to the Fire Code. ^ A site plan of sorts has been submitted by the applicant showing the general location of buildings and parking areas. The applicant states that of f-street parking area is provided for as many as 150 cars. The Police Department indicates there have been no parking or related problems at this property. This sit applicat establis the cond Religiou itor urch in a e entrance inson w Thought has made does not ause of a Lcation is 5 approved iged since 1983, the »months or ration to property. evidence, irding the j relating kowing the applicant 1 150 cars. >r related ' / mi. % I^il p. I -a. • ■ • : ^ • •• i I •. This site has been used for church purposes since 1908. The current application confirms that the current use is for a church and establishes that fact for the record. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for New Thought Center, Inc. - Church of Religious Science, with the following conditions: 1) Prior to final Council approval, the property shall be brought into compliance with the Fire Code requirements pursuant to an inspection by the Building Official. 2) Prior to final approval, the septic system serving the property shall be inspected by the On-Site Manager and be brought into compliance with any applicable requirements. . IXXIATIONAddress t Legal Des applicant Mailing Address * OWNER Nam Mailing Address Present Z< Zoning Or< Specify 0: is to be CG Explain y< pursuant to iith.this. a eydl right Specii e current urch and proval of Church of shall be lirements Lai. rving the er and be Lrements. ♦ * •. tOCATION OF PROPOSAL (or property) Address i oaf street, Lake. Mn.Legal Description Addn. lot 12. Block 001 applicant Name N pui Thmighf r^ntpr Tnr ,Tel #. Mailing Church of Religious Science Address 525 Leaf St., Long Lake, Mn. OWNER Name New Thought Center Inc.. Mailing Church of Religious Science Address 525 Leaf St. . Long Lake . Present 2Soning / ^ _____ Tel #473-0350 CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION _ _ $50.00 a) Res. Acc. Use\/ $100.00 b) Institutional(Church, Sch. etc.) _ $100.00 c) Duplex Cr/Blg d) Land Alteration (grading, fil ling) * w ^ _ $150.00 e) Com/Ind. Use _ PRD/PID - See fee schedule Variance $100.00 Present Use rhnrrh Ike Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request Specify Ordinance Requirements Please note the attached letter dated 10/16/83 which Is to be considered a part of our application.___________________________________ Explain your request and reasons for same This application is being submitted pursuant to City's request for same. We are doing so in order to show our cooperation yith.thjs. administrative request. Th\supplication do^s not constitute a waiver of any legal rightb tu the need fur d cUiiiJi Liunal udc pcniilL. " VARIANCE required - extent of nonconformity Lot Area _ _ Setback Front_ _ Side Width Other, explain Specify hardShips<to property iuuiniTYnPORnMn mmm•; -- jW m OCT 2 61983 wmmmm'U \:r: . -m r; ^.................'■^4 4b...ii; Church of Religious Science n!lY OF Mr. Walter R. Benson City Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 October 20, 1983 Dear Mr. Benson, Pursuant to the request made in your letter of 9/19/83 and subsequent letter of 9/29/83 by Jean A. Mabusth, we are submitting the enclosed Conditional Use Permit application for processing. We also make this letter a part of the application.^ilin^ this Conditional Use Permit application with an explanation. This action on our part in no way constitutes an admission of a legal need for issuance of a current Conditional Use Permit and does not constitute a waiver of any legal rights in the matter. As we have pointed out before and which your city records will confirm, a church use has been made of this property, 525 L®®^„5tree^^^^ sinc“^aFTeast 1908 and that a further Conditional Use Permit was approved in 1969. Pursuant to Municipal Code of Orono, Section 32.410, a Conditional Use Permit issued for a particular use and not for a particular person or firm. New Thought Center Inc., Church of Religious Science, uses the property for church uses and is expressly, as provided for by city code not required to apply for review of this use of the property. Please refer to the Zoning Code of Orono, Section 32.490 and our letter of December 31, 1982 to Alan P. Olson, City Planner. In addition we are requesting that any retroactive so that our tax exempt status for 1981 and 198Z can be cleared up once and for all. We received tax exempt status until this whole business with the conditional use permit began. Our church is a duly recognized religious organization with many affiliate churches throughout the United States and all are recognized tax exempt religious organizations. ri\[i®(inwos!n> J 1 • OCT 2 P198''' CITY OF o;^ f \ # ■ 525 Leaf Si • Long Lake, MN 55356•Office 612 / 473-0350 • Thought for the Day 473-0418 Admi n that clear In th admi n submi have Inspe Since Sonia Glenn Russ SB/jr C.C. A1 an Jeanc Thome Doro1 Milt Bruci 525 L CT24I9(B OF 1983 19/83 le are ition le ktion »y of a e a pointed I treet, e Permit Orono, m. uses vided this of 1982 to ken be id 1982 exempt use ous the )ious le Day 473-0418 r *T./••/...■••It •*•••<i.'.' ^ Church of Religious Science It is not our intention to in any way obstruct the Administrative process of the City of Orono. We believe that it is in everyone's interest to cooperate fully in clearing up any misunderstandings which may have developed. In the spirit of cooperation and in order to facilitate administratively the completion of the City s records, we submit this Conditional Use Permit application and wi 11 have an inspection of the church structure by the Building Inspector so that a Certificate of Occupancy may be issued. Sincerely, yjXc'9t rr f Sonia Burton Glenn Chaffi Russ Lund SB/jrr C.C. Alan P. Olson, City Planner Jeane Mabusth, Zoning Administrator Dorothy'^McClure!'^Director^o^ Research, State of Minnesota Milt Hilt, Hennepin County Assessor Bruce D. Malkerson, City Attorney ' b: j r.v; . CiCT ? r I9K' CITY OF ORO ' 525 Leaf St. • Long Lake. MN 55356•Office 612 / 473-0350 • Thought for the Day 473-0418 baysid sT I A'S9*/2 37~^y [\0) 58 ^ y*--■— 3/0 23 I/) 7bl^s 1/4 f/ i M ^^se*os'/s TST (10) i m4*kWiikt SI January Sonia N 500 Sex 529 Sou Minneap< Ch^ 52! Dear Ms. Your let legal qi zoning c referrec response As for you car carefu] through includi in your those c any tim The ques Religion previous permit. we have therefor* upon whi< At our m< previous connccte< had, in : Religiouj moved to is pertir conditior six month A /OMN(; m A«• fi'r Ji^' * ,.vVtt; ^'1 EXHIBIT D mi CITY of ORONO l'c»st l)lfice Box 66*(Vyslal Bay. Minnesota '>532:J»Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka January 3, 1983 Sonia Nieves-Burton, Attorney at Law 500 Sexton Building 529 South 7th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 Re: Church of Religious Science 525 Leaf Street, Orono Dear Ms. Nieves-Burton: Your letter of December 31, 1982 regarding this property raises legal questions about interpretation and enforcement of Orono's zoning code, particularly Section 32.410. Consequently, I have referred your letter to City Attorney Bruce D. MalkersoA for response, As for your comments regarding Mr. Scheller and the City records you can be assured that the records are complete and have been Sad°1hS^rc^;i^r^f ^Ay^So^uie°n°^f including, i believe, the permits and memos which you reference in your letter, if you hav’o not had the opportunity to review those copies, you may, of course, arrange to review our files at any time during normal office hours. we have little or no information on file since 1975 and have, requested Mr. Lund to provide the necessary information upon which we can base an opinion. inrormation At our meeting held on November 10, 1982, Mr. Lund stated that the - ^^!4?ouVlc°L moved to another location for a year or more in ^977 0^1978? ?his because Orono Zoning Code Section 32.475 states that six^mo^^h^^ permits expire if the conditional use lapses for SIX months or more. ^ BL’II.IJINi; A /.0M\(i . 473-7357 ADMIM.SIKATION A I I.SA.NCK - 473-7358 l*L BLIC\^ORK.S - 473-7359 D OROXO :V)323» Municipal Offices y raises Orono's , I have n for y records, ve been Lund looked documents eference review files at Church of as the nal use in ownership, have, information Bd that the as not Be, and iirch of / th^ had 1978. This bates that apses for V%OKKS - 473-7359 • t*-- Sonia Nieves-Burton January 3, 1982 Page 2 Secondly, the building code concern is one for the safety and security of the present users of the property. The lack of a certificate of occupancy indicates that construction completion has never been verified by the Building Inspector. Indeed, contractor John Larobin promised by a March 24, 1970 letter"to date (renew) the building permit which was inactive mu- time. The renewal permit was never applied for or issued. This fact, and the lack of a certificate of occupancy, was brought to light by the current ta.x-exempt application, and resulted in my October 1982 letter suggesting an inspection be made to verify the current status of construction and code compliance. You may call me to discuss this matter at any time. It is not our intention to be an adversary of the Church; instead, i believe It IS in everyone's interest to clearly establish a record of past and current use of this property so that we can proceed from this point foreward in the most efficient manner possible. Sincere Ivf, . / ^an P. Olson City Planner cc:Walter R. Benson, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator Russell Lund & Glenn Chaffin New Thought Center, Inc.-Church of Religious Science 525 Leaf Street Dorothy McClung State of Minnesota Department of Revenue Centennial Office Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55145 Bruce D. Malkerson, City Attorney CITY of Building AND APPLICAT P.O. BOX 66, CR ZONING DISTF FIRE ZONE VAR. DATE COND. USE DATI LOT AREA WIDTH 1 PROPOSED SETS FRONT R.J REAR L; LAKE WE ACCESS NEW E> AGENCY-APPRO CITY COUNTY STATE PR. EASEMENT REMARKS: INSPECTION F FOO' FRAr INSU WALI FINA WORK YOND ( QUIRED INSPECl JECT TO PENALT INSPECTION HC CALL 8 ■ 12 A M CALL 1 • 4 P.V COPY WHITE FI CANARY PINK ASS ty and k of a mpletion eed, ter to inactive or issued, was and resulted ade to liance. t is not , I believe ord of oceed ossible. Lence I/../.f I r--. ............ .iMiiiil Z-S. CITYof OUOXOBuilding Permit EXHIBIT PERMIT N'? 1. 4983! AND APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY P.O. BOX 66, CRYSTAL BAY, Ml^ 55323 473-7357 DATE ISSUED__^ EXPIRES___________________ ZONING DISTRICT FIRE ZONE VAR. DATE COND. USE DATE LOT AREA WIDTH DEPTH S mMmm PROPOSED SETBACKS FRONT R.SIDE REAR L.SIDE LAKE WETLANDS ACCESS NEW EXISTING AGENCY APPROV. DATE CITY COUNTY STATE PR. EASEMENT SITE AnnRF*;*; /.cAp -------- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PROP. ID. » f / 7 • 2 j lot___________ BLOCK_______________SUBDIVISION___ DWNER ARCHITECT/ENGINEER - Must Certify Multi-Family. Commercial & Industrial Construction Plans ICERT.NO. )^Nt (Name) (Address)(Phone) (Firm)(Address)(Phone) BUILDER (Firm) TYPE OF WORK (Address) (Phone) ^'7cO. PovP.vm f Addition*.) Remodel Renovate CONST. TYPE RESIDENTIAL DWELL. UNITS GAR STALLS ATT DET. NONRESID. OCC. CLASS. STORIES BLDG. SIZE L.W.Ht. STORIES B BDRMS/FLR SEPTIC APP. DATE DOCK PROPOSED USE COUNCIL APP. DATE EST. CONST. VALUATION 8oc, PERMIT FEES BLDG. PERMIT STATE FEE PLAN REVIEW PENALTY PARK FEE SAC CHARGE 2-0.c2J TOTAL DUE REMARKS INSPECTION REQUIRED WORK REQUIRING I FOOTING before oour SEPARATE PERMITS FRAMING rouuh i»i INSULATION PI UMBING _ WALLBOARD Before Taoinn MFrHANirAl FINAL before riccuoancy WELL SEPTIC WORr. BEYOND OR WITHOUT A RESEWER QUIRED INSPECTION WILL BE SUBlA/ATFR JECT TO PENALTY. INSPECTION HOURS 473-7357 GRADING & FILLING CALL 8 -12 A.M. INSP. 1 - 4 P.M. CALL 1 - 4 P.M. INSP. NEXT DAY ELECTRICAL Ifom Stale ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY REQUESTS PERMISSION TO MAKE THE REAL IMPROVEMENTS SPECIFIED. AND DECLARES UNDER PENALTY OF LAW ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND ACCEPT ANCE OP ALL INFORMATION. CONDITIONS AND REOUIRE- MENTS REPRESENTED ON THIS DOCUMENT. THE UNDER SIGNED FURTHER AGREES TO DO ALL WORKS IN STRICT COM PLIANCE WITH ALL CITY OF ORONO ORDINANCES AND STATE OF MINNESOTA BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS. Signature f-yc-S'-:. COPY WHITE FILE CANARY INSPLCrOM PINK ASSESSOR GREEN FINANCE GOLD RECEIPT Approved \City of OfOn< CIT^ INSF PERI K Uju. § £ -J 5a: OWf TEL X^FC □ FF □ IN □ W> C Fll □ PR □ DE □ Fll co^ •nI Ig q: §o RK □ CORRE ^ □ CORRE □CORRE □ STOP C □ INSPEC call for I Owner/I In specie While C(>pi WIT NV 49831 RES___________________ 3C>7-0 ;ioN ____ (Phone) al & Industrial Construction Plans (Phone) (Phone) ■>; (?,l f3r-/<;o Renovate CONST. VALUATION 8oc. PERMIT FEES DG. PERMIT ATE FEE zo.C2) AN REVIEW NALTY ^RK FEE CHARGE DIAL DUE JO.>0 CKNOWLEDGEMENT EREBY REQUESTS PERMISSION TO MAKE 'EMENTS SPECIFIED. AND DECLARES LAW ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND ACCEPT- RMATION, CONDITIONS AND REQUIRE- D ON THIS DOCUMENT. THE UNDER- iREES TO DO ALL WORKS IN STRICT COM ITY OF ORONO ORDINANCES AND STATE DING CODE REQUIREMENTS. '' die __City of OfOfK r.F I, \U • . •:> EXHIBIT CITY OF ORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PERMIT NO. CALLED-IN SCHEDULED DATE COMPLETED /> ADDRESS OWNER y^l-irk -av?r K Uiu. 5 § TELEPHONE NO. footing □ framing INSULATION WALL BD FINAL PROGRESS DEMOL FIRE PREV CONTR. □□ c□□□ □□□□□□□ PLUMBING Rl MECHANICAL WATER HOOKUP METER SET.'TURN ON SEWER HOOKUP SEPTIC INSTALL SEPTIC MAINT. WELL TEST PUMP □ SITE INSFECTION □ EXCAV./GRADING/FILLING □ lakeshore/wetlands LICENSING COMPLAINT FOLLOW UP SEPTIC FINAL □□□□□ COMMENTS: §o § 5 u tt O U. Ujcc 5 ::do I^^RK SATISFACTORY PROCEED „ S CORRECT WORK i, PROCEED ° '’"°TO TAKEN g roSSI" oSe“onS°7o"n COVERING g ?WoMfR“Eo“c^lir?KNGE ACCEr' call for the next inspection 2 Owner/rnntr \ / / ^ Inspector KXll.yJ While Cony/lnsppcio»*S File 473-7357 Gold Copy/Site Notice ' € : £ c• u c C • U u. Cc tr 5 $ kict Uj QC Ui Q OO •X . V- exh’3;t CITY OF ORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PERMIT NO. CALLED-IN SCHEDULED COMPLETED DATE TIME ADDRESS •^'7 JL OWNER TELEPHONE NO. CONTR. □ FOOTING □ framing □ INSULATION P^WALL BD JiiTFlNAL □ PROGRESS □ DEMOL □ fire PREV PLUMBING Rl MECHANICAL WATER HOOKUP METER SET/TURN ON SEWER HOOKUP SEPTIC INSTALL SEPTIC MAINT WELL TEST PUM»’ SITE INSPECTION excav./grading/filling LAKESHORE/WFTLANDS LICENSING COMPLAINT FOLLOWUP SEPTIC FINAL COMMENTS : ; *jUfc£5cT) □ photo TAKEN Uj Q pVyORK satisfactory . PROCEED □ /BftORRECT WORK & PROCEED ^ORREPT BEFORE COVERING D CAZ;‘iI3s ”rcTOT 'NSAECTOR WILL RETURN, □ INSPECTION REQUIRED. CALL TO ARRANGE ACCESS. '■ • •• call for the next inspection 24 hours in advance. Dwner/Contr. on site r /// While Copy/Inspector*s File 473-7357 Gold Copy/Site Nonce ■iii' \ % i .-H u *1 i ■■ - m A'-. % % * ( it i G IME ILLING NDS , -1.• '« ■w ; t. \ TA fl •f I A ■ W /I •j-M M »-r : 'h ■ V.J 3 V;: ' Vl'*.. fV i-?-' \f ^' S -5^ « • i-.*4 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CENTENNIAL OFFICE BUILDING SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA SS14S PHONE: (512) 296-1022 July 29, 1983 1©SDW1F AU6- I 1963 f ;i ■‘I CITY OF nROMh Mr. Walter Benson City Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Mr. Benson: Would you please bring me up to date on the abatement for property owned by the Church of Religious Science. My file shows no activity since January. Does the city of Orono continue to object to this abatement? Sincerely, (Jryolu^ ( DOROTHY A.) HcCLUNG Director of Legal Research DAMidlw AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER . V. ’ "1 •-K f V- 4«A- ♦ • ♦ * 4 L Aug Mr. New 525 Lon Dea The you at abs rec Unt Cit for In you obt use Chu cod A b con but the bee The wit for res Sin Cit cc: l@[SDW[i AUG-1 1963 1 !iy OF OROfMQ property f Orono EXHIBIT r IVIcphone ‘7:17357 CITY of ORONO Piisl Office Box G(5» Crystal Hay, Minnesota 5»')323 • Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka CERTIFIED # August 2, 1983 Mr. Russell Lund, Jr. New Thought Center, Inc. - Church of Religious Science 525 Leaf Street Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Dear Mr. Lund: The State Department of- Revenue has contacted us again regarding your tax abatement and exempt status application for this property at 525 Leaf Street. We have had to advise them that we have had absolutely no response from you since last January. We have not received any zoning application or other information from you.- - —- ^ ^ w w W • -..I* » ^ w A A. t 9 J Wft • Until the proper City conditional use permit should be issued, the City will continue to oppose any abatement or tax-exempt status for the property. In November and December of 1982, we had several discussions with you regarding zoning requirements for use of this property. You obtained application forms to apply for the required conditional use permit, but you have never filed that application with the City. Church use of property without a conditional use permit is a zoning code violation. A building permit was issued to your contractor in April, 1983 to construct some long-needed exterior exit stairs on the church building, but no one has yet contacted the City Building Official to conduct the required interior inspection. Consequently, there still has never been an occupancy certificate issued for the building. The above matters cannot continue indefinitely. Please contact me within the next 30 days to file the zoning application and to arrange for the building code inspection. Let's work together to have this resolved in the very near future. Sincerely, Ian P. Olson City Planner cc:Dorothy A. McClung, Director of Legal Research Bruce D. Malkerson, City Attorney V.’alter R. Benson, City Administrator TO: PROP DATE SUBJ On A Lund use ] me t< Mr. ] cert: I wi] and/c IVlcplione ^73*7337 RONO * Municip.’tl Offices r " Bgarding 5 property hiave had tiave not i\ you. ssued, the status ions with ty. You ditional th the City, is a zoning , 1983 to hurch buildinc, to conduct ill has never contact me nd to arrange o have this -I ii If i- % TO: FROM; DATE: SUBJECT: Walter R. Benson Alan P. Olson September 9, 1983 EXh ’lBn'J 525 Leaf Street - Church of the Open Door LSnd^jr^.^eaaJding to Russell use Per^.it"or1in\^"occupaL'^%^"°?r"L^a1L “d?h^me to resolve the matter. ^ ^ ^ asked that he contact .'■1•A"-- l' ^ -J 'iv. r 'Tv. ■* CITY OF ORONO Septemb( Church c 525 Leaf Long Lak Re: Tax To Whom We have pursue t attached office u It is im' 4 use perm, without We hav( last Ji the zoi this pj It is not in everyc and curre misunders The above someone h before Oc Attorney and Build J Bussell tional contact ^hy. The Ir. Lund m. "mm EXHIBIT 'V- '* .J 'a; I %-W L- Tflfphune *173-7357xS . -t CITY OF ORONO CITY of ORONO ?’osl Office Box ()()• Crystal Bay. Minnesota 5532.1 • Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka September 19, 1983 Church of Religious Science 525 Leaf Street Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Re: Tax Parcel PID 05-117-23 41 0020 To Whom It May Concern: ^L'per:uy^anraufa"Bui?5infcodrc^tilica?e'‘'lV°"^without further delay. ““ Certificate of Occupancy las^®jLuary‘'despiS°prlmiseI br^?''lusseu\und thL"roplrt^"'''="^'°"^ tte'cur^en"? ItlTf It is not our intention to be an adversary of the Church Tt and%^:^^°rt u%f If «g;^.r<T;4;i sr?L"“ ^ and Building Coda Cartificate of Oconpa3^ Pa™it, 1 M V. 7i-;. it. limn Churc Septe Page Pleas the n Since Waite City cc: Enclo Toli phtmc -I73-7357 ORONO 5.')323* Municipal Offices y to r. The to our nditional upancy h since to pursue nt use of h. It is the past any nation. Ly. If \dministrator the City L use permit. Church of Religious Science September 15, 1983 Page 2 Please contact Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth or myself within the next 10-15 days. Sincerely, Wa 1 te^^^tf^*1SS?son City/Administfator cc; Russell Lund, Jr., 905 Tonkawa Road Dorothy McClung - State Dept, of Revenue Bruce Malkerson, City Attorney Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator Tom J. Jacobs, Building Official Enclosure CITY OF ORONO ms EXHIBIT L . ^ ‘j ) CITY of ORONO I'osl Office Hux f)G* Crystal Uny. Minnesota 5532.1 • Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka September 29, 1983 Mr. Russell Lund 905 Tonkawa Road Long Lake, MN 55356 L Dear Mr. Lund: I have met with Glenn Chaffin of the Church of Religious Science to discuss the filing procedure and review process for 34'^022 permit application per Ordinances 32.400 and D asked that I write you to confirm that the Church of Religious Science is being asked by the City to file a con ditional use permit because there has never been formal application in 1969. In addition, the City has never issued a certificate occupancy for the church structure. above for your review®" sections of the ordinance referenced use ne^nitf ^^e process of reviewing the conditional wi n^K inspection of the church structure 1 be made by the Building Inspector so that a certificate of ocveUpancy may be issued. Please contact my office if you have additional questions or any questions relating to the statements made above. Sincerely, Cx, • /ITN UtsAJCT' Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator cc:Glenn Chaffin Walter R. Benson, City Administrator Thomas J. Jacobs, Building Inspector File IK ii.DiNi; X/.Omni; J73-7357 • ASSI .SSINC AI)MINI.STK,\TIO.N & I lNANCi: - 473-7358 rUKLIC WORKS - 473 7359 .1 li - » « CITY OF ORONO Octobe; New Th< Church 525 Le. Long Li Dear M: I trie< you. J use pe: 1. Ce: of of 2. St. of In our plan o; for a i area ai Please Sinceri W Jeanne Zoning JA!-l/am; mmmL ORONO I 5f)32;<* Municipal Offices -•-'-V'o-v. ligious cess for .400 and Church e a con- 1 application ince the ded sometime tificate mit review nent ordinances e referenced e conditional ch structure ficate of uestions tc WORKS - 473 7359 ir" IHWitfiililii Lian* EXHIBIT M 'rdi*ph(mf I7.‘{*7«jf)7 CITY of ORONO CITY OF ORONO INisl Office Hox fib®Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323*Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka October 26, 1983 I- :!1. t>r r / i . J New Thought Center, Inc. Church of Religious Science 525 Leaf Street Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Dear Mr. Chaffin; I tried to contact you by phone but never was able to reach you. My letter is written to advise you that the conditional use permit application is incomplete without the following: 1. Certified property owners list of owners within 350 feet of the subject property - from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603 Government Center 2. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) preaddressed to each of the names on the above list In our discussion at my office, I did ask you to submit a site plan of the property showing all improvements. I am not asking for a survey, merely a sketch that will update enlarged parking area and any other recent improvements, on the site. Please call my office if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator ■JAM/ams '■fix mB 'A ' . * ■- M I' : . a •mi ■’4*- r •V- , mm CITY OF ^RONO December ! New Thougl Church of 525 Leaf : Long Lake Dear Mr. < The State again reg. tion for vise them property', ments. As my let (not a su; the Condi- A final ii assure thi be obtaini structure office to final ins] convenien« In order meeting o property Please co matter. Sincerely Jeanne A. Zoning Ad: cc W. R. I -‘.^;- 'ivU'piutiu* i7a-7:jr)7 ORONO 5r>32^)* Municipn) Offices D reach nditional lowing: 350 feet spartment d to each mit a site not asking ged parking A . ^ W :W-\ 'll ■m ^ . i ■T ■ % \ u \y b CITY OF ORONO> 'IVlophone 473*7357 eXHlBn CITY of ORONO Post Office Box (i(i«Crystal Bay. Minnesota .')5323 • Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka December 15# 1983 New Thought Center# Inc. Church of Religious Science 525 Leaf Street Long Lake# MN 55356 Dear Mr. Chaffin: The State Department of Revenue has contacted the City once again regarding your tax abatement and exempt status applica tion for the property located at 525 Leaf Street. We will ad vise them of the current status on the property concerning the property's compliance with all zoning and building code require ments. As my letter of October 26, 1983 asks# I must have a site plan (not a survey) of all improvements on the property to complete the Conditional Use Permit Application on file with the City. A final inspection must still be made of the church structure to assure there are no code violations. A certificate of occupancy must be obtained from the City to assure the safe use of the church structure. I would recommend that you contact Tom Jacobs at the office to arrange for an inspection of the church building and a final inspection of the exterior access stairs at your earliest convenience. In order to meet the deadline of the upcoming Planning Commission meeting on January 16th# I must have the site plan of the church property by Tuesday# January 3# 1983. Please contact my office if you have any questions concerning this matter. Sincerely# Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator cc W. R. Benson, City Administrator Trlophonc ‘173-7357 RONO :J» Municipal Offices a- ad- the uire- lan ete y re to pancy must rch t the and a iest ussion rhurch ^ng this ■ ... . '■ f'7*-V, TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Jeanne A. Mabusth* Zoning Administrator March 13# 1984 SUBJECT: #806 Willow Properties, 2600 Wayzata Boulevard Subdivision At the Council meeting of March 12, 1984, the Council advised Hennepin County that they were unable to approve their request for an area variance of .42 acres. The application was tabled until the Council meeting of March 26, 1984, at which Hennepin County was to advise the City if they will proceed with the conditional use permit meeting the two acre minimum area standard. Willow Properties' subdivision application will be tabled until Hennepin County makes a determination regarding their current proposal. WiHBriirapi . .. . ' TO: PROM: DATE: SUBJECT At your the rey legally review^ subdivj not val in the 1 of reco lots of Council divisioi involvec procedu] The app Council him to p his proi Ericson Commissi Council denial o 1984 mee :d ed Hennepin Eor an area the Council > advise the meeting the ibled until lir current m ■■ f t ■ - -• ■ " tkk'" Is >'r*i X,.■auib fi r^' TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Jeanne A, Mabusth, Zoning Administrator March 13, 1984 SUBJECT: #811 John Ericson, 1620 Shad^A/ood Road Variance At your February meeting, you asked Council for specific direction in the review of an application seeking the division of substandard legally combined lots. What standards are to be employed in this ....100 percent of lot standards because this is primarily a subdivision application... .or now that ownership considerations are (legal combination is a legal instrument defining ownership) in the review of lot width variance applications for substandard lots of record, can we use the same performance standards for substandard lots of common ownership. Council advised staff that in the review of applications seeking the division of legally combined lots, the Planning Commission was indeed The applicant was present and advised Council of his position. Council reviewed their position for the applicant and further advised him to prepare a written statement listing all pertinent facts about IS property to assist in the review of his current application. Ericson asked that his application be tabled at the Planning Commission meeting of March 19, 1984, because he would be out of town! staff to prepare the necessary findings for iQoi^^ of the Ericson application for presentation at the April 16, 1984 meeting. ' HA I' .ri r r a •y m A •Vv rm til "H'm I ■m TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJE* Zonin Appli Zonin LIST Exhifc Exhik Exhit Exhik Exhik Exhik Exhik Exhik Exhik Mr. i appld setbc foll< 1. 2. 3. irection in substandard ^ed in this primarily a rations are ownership) andard lots substandard seeking the i was indeed Bual review position, her advised 6acts about >plication. e Planning lut of town. .ndings for 5 April 16, ■ r ■■ •iii I*. Li 1 ■ >■ ,\4 % km t» p,\ ^ v , .'r #■</r.i ».vj V..M'ifjm .V."At rnmmm K. . k TO: PROM: Planning Commission Members Tom Jacobs, Building Official DATE:March 15, 1984 SUBJECT: #814 John Ericson, 3482 Lyric Avenue - Variance Zoning District - LR-IC Application - Lot area, lot width. Zoning Code Sections - 34.552 side setback A) Lot Area Required - 21,780 sf Existing - 6,700 sf (approximately) Variance - 15,080 sf or 69% B) Lot Width Required - 100* Existing - 50* Variance - 50* or 50% LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Application Property Owners List Plat Map Site Plan Revised Site Plan Letter from realtor - sale of neighboring lot Sewer location Water location Neighborhood Pattern Mr. Ericson is returning to the Planning Commission with a revised application to construct a hous and garage which will meet all required setbacks. Staff has reviewed the application which revealed the following: 1. Maximum hardcover allowed on the lot (500-1,000 35%) is 2,345 sf. Hardcover proposed is as follows: House/garage Driveway Total - 1,560 sf 630 sf = 2,190 sf 2.Proposed structure meets all setback requirements for the LR—1C 'zoning district. 3. The property has been assessed for sewer and water as follows; a) interceptor sewer .15 acres 8 $110.00 ~ $ 16.50 b) lateral sewer 50* 8 $8.15 per liraal ft = 407.50 c) watermain 50* 8 $5.80 - 290.00 d) one water unit paid 580.00 H 4. Prc 5. Thi 6. Th< prc Plannii Denial 1. Ad 2. He* avi 3. Coi of WO' 4. Ap; wit Approv. 1. Th 2. Th re 3. Pr ha 4. Pr Such a 1. Ma 2. No 3. Ap St 4. Ap is xance g lot rith a revised tall required revealed the i) is 2,345 s£. for the LR-IC er as follows: ^.50 7.50 D.OO D.OO U 4 R-. ■— Sj'». «• -■ i _ 4. 5. 6. Property is provided with a sewer and water stub. The proposal fits the neighborhood patter (see Exhibit I) There is vacant land available and for sale adjacent to the subject property. Planning Commission Options of Action Denial based on the following findings: 1. Adjacent land available and for sale. 2. Negative precendent established when undeveloped land is available and for sale adjacent to subject property. 3.Combination of Lot 16 and 17 would meet the lot width requirements of the LR-IC zoning district, thus only one variance (lot area) would be required rather than the two applied for. 4.Approval would not be consistent with other recent lot area and lot width variances approved in the neighborhood. Approval based on the following findings: 1. 2. The proposal meets the neighborhood pattern The proposed house and garage meet all setbacks and hardcover requirements in the LR~1C zoning district. 3.Pjfoperty has been assessed for sewer and water and one water unit has been charged against the property. 4, Property has been provided with sewer and water stubs. Such approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Maximum hardcover not to exceed 2,345 square feet 2. No other variance approved for this structure 3. Applicant submit certificate of survey showing all proposed structures meeting required setbacks and all hardcover. 4. Applicant pay $225.00 sewer unit charge with the building permit mm bit I) the subject d land is f squirements I (lot area) area and lot d hardcover e water unit ubs. 11 proposed rover. ding permit. ■A', ■'ii > ^ II •ifA-Mm ,'^>piLAND USE PLANNING ^ ZONING VARIANCE APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay, Hlnnesoca 55323 473-7357 EXHIBIT 1 #314 -r ■ i ■ TRUCTIOHS, Please first read the attached Information Sheet. Complete Items 1-13 A Print). If needed, attach letter or other information to better describe your request. Incomplete spplicatiA will not be accepted. 1. EXHIBIT ^ PROPERTY ADDRESS FID #17-117-23-^0-0073 Legal description shall be shown on attached Survey, Exhibit 3 2. APPLICANT Name John C. Erlcson Phone ^01-9560 Mailing Address 1<^20 Shadywood Rd. Vayzata. Mn. 55391 If Applicant Is not owner, explain Buyer - Subject to Variance by city of Orono. ~ 3. OWNER Name Nielson Phone 72^-2339 Hailing Address 4159 Snellln^ Ave. So. Mpls. Mn. 55^106 Date Property Acquired (Month/Year) I (do) (do not) also own other adjacent parcels of land 4. AGENT >*•"« Firm Phone LIST OF EXHIBITS Pescriptien Initial Applieat^^i^ must include: 1 2 3 X Application Form y Property (Xmera List Certificate of Survey JH^ Fee Receipt Date Received o3 (Pi^ By Staff Information ^ _ Plat Map 5 Inventory 6 ___ Staff Cooments Other Information ^ I Mailing Address : 5. 6. NOTICES Should be sent to:Applicant Owner Agent PRESENT ZONING USE DISTRICT Residential 7. PRESENT USE Residential (Other)Vacant Lot .’I £gr - I I0B4 Vacant Land v Vacant Bulldlng(s)Occupied Buildlng(a) CITY Or'v/.id !J 8.DESCRIBE REQUEST ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ ^ catebllah new uae __ continue or expand exlatlng uae Si.iu . —i * — ““‘I** »_ •dd on _ remodel _ replace .Describe reaiiesf: in co v tj/i r* t >M - ir: * r*'. § lb i t L t C- C r lU iU CO > 14. < M §_ «s m H^ cn z r C) ui ai fn z .j .j CJ M mJ ..I I > < < N M ^ «J U. IL. t *4 in M M rw ^ m o ino IUu g IU IUw > ^ < fO uCVJ M I tt IU N V U IU > uM I K O -I O _ in ••CO nro o in IU ft IU> o : IU e I H in I in m I lU IUM IU m > «a ^ < Ki u- ft e ^ in LU u U) o c tn z -J - cy M o c • > o cM ^ -J lu u in M •-o .J . in ^ . CO m M H tn o IUft r O Z IU < > Q. Ul Q. O Z X ft ^ < ft o »- 1 1ST OF EXHIBITS PgiertptlBn ttal ApalteatlBw t Ineluda: X Applleaclon Form Y Property (Xmere List ___ Certificate of Survey Fee Receipt )ate Received e3 fC Information _ Plat Hap _ Inventory _ Staff Cooments r Information 1111 -‘ll YOF V/.;0 __ remodel ___ replace r* • a Q 10 -H>• m tt ui n 5 > in 2 < *0 N ^ u o ^ aJ «i M ^ 5 q: 2r* u.a>£ ^ O ^ UJ O >02 lii O H in 10 m >o H q: a^ CO lU ILI w M O O ^ -J U. lA. in M M in -J .j «p Kl M M fo o 2 a III oc 8§«g ^ a < ui & U1 CL 2 NO Ui Kl >•a* < K» U eg M I Q: K* >- < iM H 0» UI ro ^ in>- >- UI inlU UJ > < X “> "> a -i K CD ^ Kl O O O tt q: < ^ N O^ >-o o ^ < lAj lu m 2 III >N < Kl H CO •O 2 eg M mJ • > UJ N M Kl ^ -J H^ UI • UJ N H ^ < ^ ceCO K) UJ lO o > > < Kl 5» -I inUJ ID^!5gUJ > UJ M < H -I H < in Na ch >. UJ ^ <> ro a UI ^ > o < 10 Kl Kl § eg M A2: cr o« m in m IN^ N N CO Kl Kl O §§§ to 10 h- q: ft (O lu UI o > < < < H H mJ mJ ^ < < tn ft C oO < ft o Q Z UJ < < >- N^ ft < UJ jiL !rrrz=r:,> , |i-------- Vi(5^ tir]. t mm 4 (i;:!sr':i' • rXO M < r^ M M masSSSm UJ5 > n^ < o o in ^ < < lAj in^ u ^ ^ >M M o CD < ISSSog■< -J M M M E D»SS«^^ o a c|^«n ^ ^ o ^ Xg-<O H v| f, Jfy . -. .; Jm- ^•v.^ *-!i ■<a jyn • ■ .-ii !5 h ^ V-t •■.l rjn-—•! ■-•?. 3^A V / O' O \<Svd \ Y2\ .^”l‘ \d \ lV' ^ |Jfr"‘" i r-r«“ ffl •^1 *0 I ’ V i'j- - ^ 14%.. x .'S^.y j • im • * •• yf^ yiCt : \ 4^^ ; ■ 9O 9 /fnr :^t\S"1 t4 v — 7/f” * — — -----------— - ^ • I .1 ^ " V ^ ''!i' ^ 4 “'jr M 1 • “TT5T7 St 20. (iit/*1? 21 .a 9hti 1 r fli’ la vjfy — irrt/.u • 7%>tl /•16. . ^2 ■ • %■2,2 ■ Q & vnmitij: f9$9 os os tOV/U'^ / *0 'S*'* **2 « * i *s^* \2f 1 . \S 2 S' ^ 3d«VAVN • « N wg:- 4 • m 2<r . —^ S ^___"*1• e»* m fc 2'S-- £ W * ^ 7ti/ * ^ 1^ 31r»c. •» • 2^' J-Ht- ^ TTIT i mr •/^ .csi 2<^> •»\« < 'Vat;- .* I r-: -‘;:: ?;. -V '■ Frank Ki^ise MARY -PAI realtor. (RES) 473-85 12500 WAYZATABOULEV March Mr Joh 1620 S Wayzati Dear M: Thank 3 (known underst 5 Naval to bui] you pur lot. F It is anyone to pur to it would warran Their is $15,900 for $18 they ar< combinei the arei In our lot at been c was to bought were b' taxes < If she money. Market paying EDINA OFFICE. 50 ington. MN 5543V OFFICE. 3540 East MN 55343, 544-953 5036 France Aveni WN 55343. 544-95' HOMES DEF.4f-’V! •>»nww ■mmm: (;i ^Xlo'(?/f I- Frank Kreiser Real EsUte. Inc (RES) 473-0580 (BUS) 544-9533 12500 WAY2ATA BOUIEVARO • MINNETONKA. MN 553A3 1C. fJ/>^ March 1, 1984 Mr John Erickson 1620 Shadywood Road Wayzata,MN. 55391 Dear Mr. Erickson; Thank you for your inquiry into the property at 35XX Lyric Ave It IS my opinion that this would not be economically feasible for anyone to conbine these two lots. You have apparen^roffe«d to purchase one parcel for $ 12,500.00 . The iLntJcal l” next would b^S 25®nnn®nr^''®‘* ® 12,500.00 and combined the two warrLt an character of the neighborhood does notwarrant an expenditure of that kind. sis'goo* Another*^h available on Northern Avenue priced atLrn^sor Th parcel is available at 3601 Togo Road they are bo;h comparable parcels, except that co™L a ^ ! already over a half acre. If lots 16 and 17 were combined xnto over half an acre the cost would be excessive lor lot°ll <=»at neither lot is a buildable been enT 1 4. • * ^^® Orono and Hennepin County have ‘®*®® "y ®“®"t *01^ almost forty yLrl I bought for^d*^?® Zoning Administrator that both lots were ught for delinquent taxes and therefore the price of thp Trn-c were oth inflated. My client bought lot 16 in 1947 for back If she^soiS^h faithfully paying on this lot all this time mLey ' 12,500.00, she would be losing MarkI; vl? i incredible to me since she has the Estimated Hennepin County of $ 8,200.00. My clien*- is . aying taxes on her "unbui/dable lot" equal to the hLf acre lot inglon. MN 55431. 88H-'^C9^'^^^bu R n SlE*^OFF^^ r 7929 Soulhtown Center. Bloom- OFFICE. 3540 East Lake Street. Minnei^ol.s MN 55S 724-5446 f '''' ® >^'NNEAPOUS MN 55343. 544-9533 • TRAININGCENTER 12500 Wavzata Boulpuarri ^^500 Wayzala Boulevard. Minnetonka 5036 Fiance Av„nui. S,.„.n M.nneaMlis Mli 554,r9S“o9° * "ELOCATION DIVISION: MN 55343. 544.9513 . IMS.UHANCi: DEPAFIIMENT 503C Fianr, ’2500 W.lyTala BoulcvaiO. Minnolonka. HOMESDEP.FR1VEN..5|i:it.F.anceAvenueSEaSN554'o 9»f^^ ' P'STINr.UISHEEi fc;i: Page 2. on 3601 I would and wate and sewe: some whe: houses W( We will ■ and we m. will adv Sincerel V Mary P. i Realtor® Frank Kn 12500 Wa’ Minneton] 'h-1v i~ ,.r-<V ric Ave ,, As I 17, Block variance 0 you that B buildable BCt . asible for offered lot next he two d does not priced at rogo Road (ccept that 17 were sive for duildable r have sars. I 5 were ihe lots r back • s time, losing la ted ent is icre lot wn Center. Bioom- • MINNEAPOLIS ivard Minnetonka. ::ation division. vard. Minnetonka. DISTINGUISHED i . V m p ' V. ■ A V Sv- I'. ■ • .* J Page 2. on 3601 Togo Road. I would further note that when The City of Orono put in sewer and water on Lyric Avenue the engineers stubbed in both water and sewer to both properties. It would appear that some one, some where thought they were both buildable lots and that two houses would be there one day. We will certainly watch with interest your request for a variance and we may have to seek counsel depending on the outcome. I will advise my client accordingly. Sincerely, Mary P. Goodfellow Realtor© Frank Kreiser Real Estate, 12500 Wayzata Boulevard Minnetonka, MN. 55343 In c. cc: B.J. Wasson Frank Kreiser Real Estate, Inc. -/ .mui. H !• ■IN- TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Zoning Dist Applicatior List of Exh Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Pertinent Z 31.700 - Pr us 31.831 - Pr we The applica acres each of 4.9 acre wetland. T designates occurring w This wetlan extensive d asked to re reservoir o submitted b; District ani and Water C The applica; yet, but in he indicatei hUL -mSm■f.i a sewer h water me one, hat two a variance me. I r • .-/Av] m VL;.'; V i m Ih a. jr - - TO:Planning Commission Members FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator March 12, 1984 #817 - Steven Raster - 2675 Fox Street - Variance Conditional Use Permit Zoning District - RR-IB Application - Request to dredge a wildlife pond in a designated wetland List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map v/ith property owners list Exhibit C - Survey. Site location, dredging/spoils disposal plans Exhibit D - Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit Exhibit E - Hennepin Soil & Water Conservation District review Exhibit F - DNR permit application Exhibit G - Copy of airphoto with designated wetland map overlay Exhibit H - Copy of 31.801 •• Purpose and intent of wetlands ordinance Pertinent Zoning Code Section.; 31.700 - Prohibits filling, dredging, storing, etc. without conditional use permit 31.831 - Prohibits filling, grading, dredging, etc. within flood plain and wetlands conservation area The applicant wishes to dredge two wildlife ponds of approximately 0.3 acres each within a designated wetland. Applicant's property consists of 4.9 acres, of which roughly 2.9 acres are part of this designated wetland. The total area of the wetland is.5.7 acres. The DNR also designates this wetland as #863-W. This would appear to be a naturally occurring wetland. This wetland appears to act as a storage and retention pond for the fairly extensive drainage area to the north and west. The City Engineer has been asked to review the proposal and the effects it may have on this important reservoir or retention area for the drainage system. The plan was submitted by the applicant for leview by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and has received approval from this body. The Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District has no adverse comments to the proposal. The applicant has applied to the DNR for a permit. The DNR has not acted yet, but in my conversation with Roy Schultz of the DNR regional office, he indicated they are generally in favor of projects of this nature. 4 41 ,1 -If MillitiMtriM IrmVi( Tiln •filil'i' r 4n i"' '-if'- ii' li ir m 'w-Tii n'lTiiiH k I H 4 :■ i #817 - St March 12, Page 2 Notwithsti project wl wetlands v Policies 1 Comprehens 7. PROTEC INCLUDE PI dredging C setbacks 1 City will these land Staff wou. intents o; Exhibit h; applicati< Ordinance' 31.834, 3] strator nance - nated wetland 1 plans view verlay s ordinance t conditional flood plain and ximately 0.3 rty consists designated DNR also e a naturally d for the fairly ngineer has been n this important plan was ek Watershed nnepin Soil the proposal. R has not acted gional office, is nature. 1 •'T ; •* tv , L If r. ^■v I. i #817 - Steven Raster March 12, 1984 Page 2 project^which"Lcludes°filUnq"’'dredain°''^^®" Project and any wetlands would appear to be in'direct coAflic^wi^h Coi^reL^f?ve"p^:^r^^!|rst:tL^r""'"""" the" INCLUDe'^PROTECTIOn™? ADJ0INING**LANDR°aNn^OD*'^ DRAINAGEWAVS SHALL dredging or WETLAND'S VEGETATION REMOVAL DRAINAGE, FILLING, setbacks for all land alteration or Ordinances will establish City will acquire open space anA fWherever possible, the these lands. ^ ^ ^ flowage easements for conservation of intents of the'^Flood^Plains"and"wetla^d^^M" the purposes and applications i^ lesigL^ed'^etianSs wndlife habitat pond Ordinance? i would Ilso speoificffl'v^!^ ® the Wetlands 31.834, 31.835, and 31.88o!^ cally refer you to Zoning Code Sections <f.f? -V'-.V^' J;^'*‘;'* /? ‘ L £*it *12915 V l«f 2» 33^5 V 59i if LDI.JA. 11 11*^ 4 »*' I4f.l> HII*S4*C 57MT fffj) /f# 41 <n stsUiJc't V. \i A^990S S'*. •1 ! / i 33 •n •*>••V-,'A 1 Wn V« ^«.5j \ :32 5^292.97 1 1 1 c> te% ><4 ^5 9>3 0,K rs ^ 2 jn 5 :3 V) *n •r\ » )sr 1 •% :7 232 3^292 97 1«9 —------. _{_. anE~lAsf ~"5 • y'233 25 227 29 ( •”■ / LOT 12 **• m 'A•#» 141~'.1K» _ %r ‘ 5; ^L lot zi ^ ur IW ^IT; TOWN ' ■> Nirsi w J?I4I — kirun jrrrr FOX STREET ii$4)M. 115 r: •f /) f w .V ^ V Vf' 'O' \LOT 2T''n' [f©(10W[l FEB I 6'1984. rv CITY OF OhQ. !M SEC.9,T.II7,R23 #^17 tot 19 jCjC «*k*«W***^» »«■ «««• \h i •'* *’:. ' . ■^>.- *f\ >• V EXHIBIT 1. Orville Dressel * 2760 Fox Street Wayzata, Mn. 2. Lyle Olson 2720 Fox Street 3. Darel D. Schipper 2690 Fox Street 4. Roger V. Dane 2660 Fox Street 5.Dennis Kumlin 2665 Fox Street 6. E. E. Strickland 780 South Old Cyrstal Bay Road ” 7. Minneto.'ka Alano * 8. Mr. § Mrs. Funk 2760 Old Crystal Bay Road 540 Old Crystal Bay Road 9. 10. Mr. a Mrs. Rassmussen 2700 White Oak Circle 11. Gordon Buhrer 2620 Fox Street FEB I 61984 u L_CITY OF np^Mn #817 V.- ad B- £ a, Mn. S5391 i:;v. n 1 i i 1^:m:^m ■r- ■ir^^4 • *•-}.• n^#-'1 ^ j^. _, y.iMiH p“ -.'*- - MilDV-.v #81 / EXHIBITJTi • • * • • . • - :':^tTY Oi • • • • V • (••••VJ-• • • • A**oV^ .. I./' ’........;/2*^-':[:^ . !i i , , . , . u.% • . O • / 4^. - . «--• rf» * M ?' • »/•• • • • . • S i \\S •/*'' -< . . C* '■ . ! j \ • '•hP^i • I. ^V, • * // V • i • • . • . vM i f- * —-^ —’ i> 03** ' • V'1' ,4'^.' vVT;: ■ y'i •' ‘A J j,s> • * f i-' •'y'\-tV.;-i" •' 5 ;r"<-----"O'- .' 1 /•<#. ‘l ' #1 A... ©'^f'!.) .XA .(:'%/..tfM^o^ :;:• -'•'‘'Co:, ^... •ai V^'.eTj 0(f?^ V;-^c"^H' 1 "‘ C/5C r* o 3ero r<a. % • 7 .* »-? • • \ pw^-y;V'1a :'V i rv,' f. -w* .? 1 ‘A M *1 • ’ •ii, ^ '.'' ;A-^ f;. ,••••••• • • .• 0 E'-fe ■'7^.*'^ ,....t^ 01-n ; ypfA%.\ ^iw •'V;// • r U - w :M • *511 * Aw r*"'n ' •( 2. AM 4 4 t/'is C^^ChiV •* • » • . ••-•.' t ' i '•'.« <:\’^>..v V »:• iA*’, - , , . 1 . •■ ^ ••«.] -TW-‘iYV t ' -A** • . V\*r ^ v\ •. ,.^ - •" \ ,ite *y •. 9..‘* *. '■ >: 1 •] j p 9 • a'::i; 'V., -: r-: jJiJi.. - !'V /V»t.vA '1..:mftk :;J W r s,\. A‘4 f A^}-- .' <* »• - I- .•»« # XHIBITjr I.«A \l 1 ’ V'/ ■-^ ,of ■,/ » • - • ''®COw i:' J.X u) •; • O CO ,_____,' % r.....L ii ■ r3 f'-LxZ ' » " .‘ I > ••#. . * A ■ t-'-' / .••:■■■ •' ' 1' '^1 ■ / .1 l\ 7|. • i-yll-i;. _' ft ••;•.'jv I . / ' * »^V.•V/f.. ; 'b • . I \ V ' ...i• • • 4 MN b'o:}'.)! 't R i r 4t •,!( PiF *v-. ►f-.v M. 473 0^11 ■C; LW- V*> C 1 - 'i !? ;-«i ^ *o Cft i» • ro •-«> tn M rt*M «> ;r 0^<♦ r* *1 ffi (T^ »r ^ O. W V*, |V. M. O •>.j o '.fl i: • f*-r^ <T»►j vh o :ro n » (T>f). C* noM »* m ^ v.>» r> o <♦. a^o CO • c. «?:r vr» H» i»o C -O M *i :? vf» M*o «io•P O D in o CL o <♦ <t^ f^. '•• 1*1 Orr *1 • • zz:.oi ti ^ n M n. o ri. f>> •.n f* »•o 7^ O:r o M •1 ' •! O 'O :r r. ^ o •• ro <♦ rii :r ill ms? ^ [t ^ Ct> t/> p O €♦ O it <«t:nro rrr^i VO C A'L'< l'»(. 42 30i.fi I. «ffl!iaMI«HQSSE3BO ViX: I •] J ^01 1 owiii’v lUi.icI W.iy/iit*!. MN *l/*{b/11 f T., * • •"WIWlllllUii.1, • • • • » * * • |v M .M MN 4/:i i)/n \ ; 4jt' A^:: M t > i ItI r 'i'. iffiTViiiwiilu ;V’ i V-* » ./ ^ , -•'•ii .r r: ri‘ €♦ > 'O :r f- <T» ^ ^ O M r4> • O jn * 'O c® Ct O 'O p» M| ^ M -i ^ €-► ^ D*2 »i (^o 'f> O# 01 ^ M- o ^ -‘J o ^/i r: c? »i » :r r:<;i« L«S LyuMi Ik I ® ] i*( ^' '101 I KWiirs KimiI W.iy/.il.i. MN !»!i.‘{0 1 i/:< !»/n 2^m :A ’ ^ J’ « 1 ' ::::r'^Ph. P' ‘ V- ’'-■"T’l #Q: 8 tn M o Li o G •r) rr ►-•• (!> p' cn cn O €♦ cd q -a C/iU t* ^ ^ €♦^ r> o o ar • K- fA O o n M* § Ia -j I M VaI “.<lr ••r> '^.Tw/.* »• > /.:• /.V.4 ?r L‘.tli -*. •1'-> « J ^±1 J *^1M S!i.*;m 1 /\ /’{ «| / I ] rk? ■V L; .vy; 4D *v i* •: 5r!BiJBE5BlEG I •] J ^ 'lOl 1 ownrs Mo.iil W.iy/.il.i, MN !j!>!i!n ‘1 /U *j/ll 1 W % '.V*^ t ;!It I • f \ I I > i !i I I ii Ei<V I t \m i I • I i I i * C1V (f 'iPi \'it I 1 1 i!0 f In 1 ! I f! \ t » 1 11 :i i t ■ wr > V § > .,1' t ^ : ?•-i, t. MN i>'.>:{'.n •1/3 b/n I i i : • ii I ! i Wtqv/TJP’’? •fwuvjjji I^.-J /^C/i. 9.^ ^.i y • « C1H? /fA \^ Pf 'HiP ^ • I I • . •; i i' im* <5f PRjOMto *^v. l,fc«> PK?p*9mcM VP\AiW» (\x1^p w\vu f^\W/ hi \^‘W n? y TO’.; f { •i I • ‘: • I # ’ . I f » 'i ‘ Wi^ leftvc^ V\vMp5i • ^ 60.^\PC?. fF^ WltU #ov)^ fe?,^ • fr• (,/V p ^ ipT. vr i f « « i; V?nA^t> (Jvjco fiuro a4 /*«>J- :» W'»» % 1 V ^ f '.>r ■ Decemb RE S Be?-fore 063-W V Hopefu] will be We are of prov consist create The pn to fac the we‘ di sturl the wel not ini The exi about h alterat four pei approjs ii The frir be appr< from thi The disj wetland We woLilc December appreci£ 473-571J m-Jitter. Michael IFI a n hot. »> IK 7 ^U'Tk^' 0‘x\!D’ > a4/*«^j- 'pU V . ■• ;.^ •* ■ >**:■ ■W' I J'i ^ » >lv ^ i- i' V'"mm f. December 16, 1983 RE Wetlands Alteration for Waterfowl Habitat Improvement Steven Raster Property, Section 4, T.U7N. , R.23W., Orono, Hennepin County, .Minnesota. Before making a formal application for alterations to Wetland Monl^.nf your comments on a preliminary concept opefully, with this preliminary review, the application process ill be able to proceed ftester and more efficiently. We are proposing an alteration of Wetland 063-W for the purposes of providing a better habitat for waterfowl. The alteration ^ the wetlanHo would be located near the edge of the wetland majority of the spoils deposition outside of -he wetlands limits. A location near the edge would also minimise x° wetland during construction. Drainage into ^ot rnto^p::;:;: wet^ranS\°nd abQut^'h«?i^“4:^'"K‘^ wetlands is approximately 5.7 acres, alter-»tin ° Raster property. The proposed four percPnt"?a S 5®arrL^'"'T^r''n' «e.tland by about »ppro^ioately cl; acre Je%pproKLa;ity“o '"th 5"•fr-nm -n-i^ ^ ^ The total amount of dredged material The H^«n would total between 1,600 and 1,000 cubic yards these spoils would be on low areas at the wetland edge near each of the ponds. Michael Sc \M. r ri\W, .m i (tmh ... , , mfyl/iu^ 0 ■•'’AVWto*' ^ 01 •] j ^±}: i 31 Towni's Roiid Wnyzjitn. MN 55391 473 5711 # t \rt. ■ V: # i % fS.’< ^ ;■ •- ;•/■• A. '^fD O'! P»0. Box 387, Way •0A»0 OF MANAGERS: Oivid H. Cochran, Pf*i, . December Mr. Miche Landplan 401 Towne Wayzata, Re I Stev Dear Mr. The Minnel on Decembt These prel wetland ba The deposi rules for 1.The di wetlai 2.The d( emerge assi> i Prior to Indicate fr^t fro wetland Should you I Very truly i El/GENf Engine CliffQrd Ree cc: 0. ^^abL• Ml 1 and concept. process urposes i on d to wetland de of minimize into and and res, sed about Led would aterial f^ards. the t week of greatly I IN 51)301 473-5711 ‘ 4 • * *1 • |l ^ . - - — w .. -" ^ k.' .. un MiNNCrONRk ----- «■ P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 ■OARO OF MANACCRS; December 21, 1983 Mr. Michael Schroeder Landplan 401 Townes Road Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Re: Steven Kaster, Wetland Alteration Dear Mr. Schropder: ot!VcS?\Sri9Wll;cavaUon’^^ WetlanSlla^i.'’'' PUns wetland'’bK™n?®'’^ P’^cement of dredging spoils within the rules for th^followingVeasons^* wetland OHW is not allowed by District weUan^trstSrrsto^Iilter’rliJf^^ of the emergenrwetland*^vegetaUon^and*^tL reduce the surface area of assiMlate nutrientllr^^s^orlawi^^^^^^^ ability! Indicate the d!on/ord?edgiJg%pon^wn ’/b® ”1®" revised to wetlanSTas?®."""*"'' Prevent®t?e*re!;„" o*f" sedi!rto th°e » Should you have any questions or problems. pl,-,se advise. Very truly yours, EUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES Engineers for the District A ^ A Cliffpi-d Reep cc: d. Kabusth, City of Crono y • • * ^. . . T " ■* . ■ VV o €♦ C» a it •• •• ?ti" • H*» Q W O ?B'S’ a oq 3 K’g*’ 5* *1 pet (I VI t 1. ^ c OHM* <t a 9 COo w o C o ^3: ^ M O 9n o 9 • 2da>li tyy gT ajin W *4 ^ <UaaMt«r dw^ut, witktu'l n. ialamd is va^ :dai:;**«i tii>* tUia-t vill f,«u»r*tlX %sat«r?»;fl, A lo7j[«r d«u^aiut—ujbA>>»d t/ltk -ij# islaad 1« ta* jxr*lter»d ia a R*fj od'M T-i»* ^Ua^.nd rA4#*.'Xd «l^';fji wi't^ "ty^^ i>3f or 2iixt\tr» 0/ ^Ix ajitx -----------jmijr ala>dji a#«d l5o A-i a 5il rail*. ti»<? lalAJid# ia#r*A4ii* -fcia patawtdUl o/' Xir«Tld«« ‘.Mun* **odjp*** oop dlv»raitjr i#r <»>mi aroA^ altfiVi wl^ 3lt*a, 1 aaHjv < D^Hwitjr rjTAdA-tipani, u\m)i a* faa. <L#A*atia aata.a«d additianal "bm^m or g > n ^ •‘■"^ oorma 'tA# a^ugo i^anMi«ioixM curf Inaiaa-Ud ab^nrAp, i^a^gout ««uld V* 79Adorsd o-nm agr* iat^ir^gtla^ t« <ara9vX aAA^iia^ ^2hp iaX^md flix iXjy im tA« ouWr P#2dLflk»-Uap tko I »*3** o}iA>gd loT»l dit«k SS :s“4&'sr^jr?:\rs;sw sr * sia*..tr4^d3^ w^ti*n ’3oTf^ ^ 150 witi ai.-a«« - addltlo^ .aMiwtl*,, t». liMlatW o«, W or,*t«d. t* »« y^ii, aii,, t. j«dat«r r \ A ^^*®*'^^** 51#®d iwfc bo OAnstrxMl'tod at da’»*S« +V;»*. *a' 4 , .^p.. »i.uld ,t a 5,1 rau, to All lar^ dxj^uta ohoxad hays islands 09m U 'cr^a^m ts •n-«. eral:., .attl. ha>, «o.„ ta tia^/t-Cd.^^ut^LSS^ b- r^f' .. 4“s,=r.s:.T, -»5; A r»_ I ^ </* f /• » ♦ •> /? ■ • '• >■ Otv> MINIMEI- WATER! P.O. Box 387, Wayj eOAnu OF MANACCRS: Otvid H. Cochran, frci. • AIbci Permit ) Applicai Locatioi Purpose At the the sub 1. Pe 2. Si 3. Le After 1 allowir that th stormwa The Boc 1. A1 sc This dc constri requesi to com EUGENE Enginei MTchaeMTchae Jan Date 0 bt * * ■II d^ut, witk#xrt ft, kft wliiftt will [VO* U«u5auiut-«^>«id I t'jm j«lter»»4 tyy la *i*»';»a wl'ta ty>» ■» «/ 1/ tMT, Mtl/ tk« itflaad iA (jLs r«ay L Wa ox* ««nr»ft add «• m««ift •/ tM da^ui f«**3r»vl aZTi <Kia««r3tti»d» nr9« thm MUM ran^tlMiM !.»»>«. ^ ia^ut «9uld r»n Mur* iait«a>#ftt: ^idA4 l4(laad > •uxacr tta3>ak«« or nhtir* a • l*ftlat«d f tt€vm]c aad hooeoiftat« a ''b«nd** OOP t. Wli^ adniiKUM ^ d o«a 'bo oroatod^ to ditoIu»« HAoUld Im LjNMWora^ Jap»dait4ir 3j>-4 !iiu« oidft at tba odgo, ► :i«atla^'o«>«)cr, t># I’otMad^ ox“»t*tia<5 ‘Iinco'bj', pi^-rlUla^db''. o uiiould '•*■• GoK.iioAi cJrOSnr / ^ .' y ,0 II! Illllll IIIJ.,l«.'fH $y&3w 1 U<‘ FEB 1 61984 EXHlBiT \> ....... IS ■■J7rr.,.»>l*WaHtO lOUNOUT CITY OF QROMC MINIMEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT im MIHNnONKt P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 iHl'OTA mvt* BOAIlD OF MANWtBSr Oivid H. Cochut*. P.«*. . AlUrt 1. lfhm.« . John E. Tamil . Mitbiel W. Cit.rtI » Cim.lU P. Andrt Permit Application No: 84-08 Applicant;Steven Kaster 2675 Fox Street Orono, MN 55323 ^ry 20, 1984 Location: City of Orono, Sec. ADC, Fox Street at Old Crystal Day Road Purpose: Dredging in protected wetland 863-W to create a wildlife habitat. At the regularly scheduled January 19, 1983 meeting of the Board of Managers, the subject permit application was reviewed along with the following exhibits. 1. Permit application received January 5, 1984. 2. Site Plan prepared by Landplan, Inc., dated ^tober 11, 1983 3. Letter from the District dated December 21, 1983. After lengthy discussion, the Board granted a variance to district rules allowing the disposal of spoils material within the wetland area on the basis that the project would have an insignificant impact on water quality and stormwater storage. The Board approved the permit application with the followng condition: 1. All disturbed areas, as a result of the dredging operation, will be seeded and mulched upon completion of the project. This document is your permit from the MCWD. It is valid for one (J) ^ construction is not complete within one (1) year, an extension must be requested. Please contact the District at 473-4224 when the project is about to coirmence so an inspector may view the work in progress. EUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES Engineers for the : Board G. Macomber DNR, Metro Region Waters z^-I)r''Hess, Landplan City of Orono January 19. 1984 Date of Issue 4:. •r V .•^1 I k!fI Vi # V-j ts 2501 Dec Mr. Lar 40] Wa^ Dec th: tic stc due sic Sii ( / ( Pa* Dii PN] En« Road fe habitat. f Managers, ng exhibits: : rules m the basis Ity and ition: rfill be (1) year. If St be ect is about lion Wat2rs nan i: a Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District 250 North Central Avenue. Suite 109 - Wayzata. Minnesota 55391 - Telephone (612) 473-0249 December 28, 1983 Mr. Michael Schroeder Land Plan 401 Townes Road Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Dear Mr. Schroeder: RE: Steven Raster Wetland Pre-application We would not have any adverse comment to make on this proposal. I know DNR does not like to see any reduc tion in the size the wetland, any reduction of flood storage, or placement of spoil in the wetland so as to re duce aquatic vegetation, but in this case it seems so in significant that it may not be a problem. Sincerely, / /. /c-' /. ^7 Patrick N. Kennedy District Administrator PNK:iw Enclosure ’ll FEB 1813S4 £!iroFORr'?n cofjst HVAiio'; t>r.v[ i m stir (>ovi MNvrM Rev. 12/81 Ihpr department I?s3l?sa(ES<S)TrA Ik natural re ► ► Please read instr Applicant's Name (L We Srwt. RR II. PROPOSED I □ fill 7^□ drain, □ i □ remove □ t □ abandon □ install iv. ESTIMATED PROJI~aJ5 BRIEF EXPLANATION OF JUSTIFICATION (ExplaN ENVIRONMENTM. IMPUl tr), 5 ££ ^ ALTERNATIVES (Other a AfO /U I hereby make applicat waler(s) in accordance concerning this applic. ni.£. ».J l. ST ATE OF _V \ *-> io ^ IX)UNTY0F Su^ribed and sydrn Jo beif/< day of My commission expires Signature of Notary ion 2 on reduc Dod to re D in- / ■ r.: .. r*- ' f -V r! I l,i • TO?622-02 Rev. 12/81 f|||r department / otf TiN)[?!flOEs<S)TrA k natural resources 0^iJO MmFERMIT APPLICAnm TO worn IX PROTECTEO WXTE] (INCIUOING DAM w^of 7 6fFICE USE ONLYT NO.y. 1 ► ►Please read instruclions before attimpllng to complete this applicali5ir^^QlO£0| AppijMnfs Name (Las!, First. M.l.)I Authorized ^nt (if applicable) □swco ac/c DW.D.| pUSCOc AOdre^ljfSrwi^J^, Box Number. City, State . Zip Code)nm. Telephone Number&areacode ^/^)»75-S 71/m Sections(s) YJi :T Fire NO m Bw or.Inject Address.Coui y II. PROPOSED PROJECT □ fill ^^i^excavate □ drain, □ remove □ abandon □ install □ construct □ other (specify) IV. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST V. VII. BRIEF EXPLANATION OF PROJECT III. PROJECT AREA □ dam Range(s) tg-2-5 ■ Projecl-will anecl Lake. Wetland or Watercourse (nsrnPA niimhAP ^ A I Lot, Block, Sub-Division □ lake □ wharf □ bridge □ harbor □ riprap □ channel □ culvert /tl^etland □ shoreline □ obstruction □ watercourse □ sand blanket r~l norm^nAn# □ shore-protection □ other (specify) JUSTIFICATION (Explain why this project is needed) ----------------------------------------------------- /ioc/76fis^ m mmfj/jQ vmm^g^ lufiimpiL iimitff • \ « EXVtltOXXtEXTAL .mrw, t.^nticpated changes to the water and related land resources, tncludin, una^ibiTM detrimental eXects) ALTERNATIVES (Other alternatives to the action proposed) fOO ^c/^/e>/^ a * 'a f ,» 0 -• • • a»< •• • • • •• •• • •. concerning this application are true and correct to th* imki m Tjk^formjtl^ubinttt^ and statements made • * conri.fninn .hie ,„-i7 ®’"*' 'mofmation^ ^ concerning this application are true and correct to the uest of jgyirnowled ^ ^ t Tc. A/: . CTATC nc r____state of COUNTY OF tN\VwKJX»AL.OX AXr VK Mr WM.t, SiOMure of Owni thqUzed Dale J 2 j^ribed and swdrn Jo beti/ie me this - StonalOre of Leasee , . .. • • « w Date . • ♦ • • • • • • . ‘ A Distribution: ’ White: DNR Blue: SWCD Green: Watershed District Goldenrod: City or County Pink: Army Corps of Engineers i Canary; Applicant ! mi sH? •* vfA<', m Uii r ■• -'ife %• L* fj *. •■» Ji^-* • ,»• • f-P ■:t& f». **« i:-4 f f V-m TT «* .VI •/ •v ^ n'i'* #?Vr /. V '-3w Tr f'j 'Uffh fr/’S w r..i: K&'f !\" 1:1 h h.t*‘ v*fS i i ';:2i c<»Sⅈ&ir iTfl I ** \ > '• RS- - ‘wlC:_£ ^ -..H‘ '-V ■■ ■•fll,jK ti m j r. •»To ^ E'J r ‘iiA* '^m \ -m 'si?!: ^ ISlr^ — ^ r^ >1 ►•»;-. • /• iP'r /T Sift .^r - “10 rJr - “v*.' f *• - ’-■■^ >:vr'->v/ • A,.*. « •v ’ 0£f r^v.'JT"» ».♦••• .*•• •, *. f 3W® ' ' !<' *1. !vV ► V vrT?-»-T rt . |7. Yrc.ggfT Mgs? ?r.^.JS&L;;;c;::-i • •»3? • ‘ . — • •• w.’: • • • ' ■ , ,s ■ . i kk * > sj •-J .4 i *«•« *■“ - -'k •» '.. ftbk-. >■ * X « cm V • I ‘^.r\Vi .Wl V • L'l'' 7 ^ O':'i Vf'r*- ‘‘wAi I ^.1 > • j»-3?r“ 1 ■> ,i--.. iu«.'»** ^ - *tiTy ‘-4 V -^ •'*»'■ T • • aV.fA A • • *<*1 ^ \N %, ■ D^ “ • • £ - >•./A* ihf I .* *• p «I r— ■J?‘ '’• f-*^- 4 r Ui **^v* v.»mj % !^.' •■ ^kv:4-iidaki^Aj f •- ^;- -'^",m' - 'K:-‘-:"":;:wp;;:r ?^5fe-;.- n )> KJ -*»-.» c --p.tF:*-. I-S l' «!m ■h- i‘/ .M >. • ''• . 5*' K" i- :*•' ‘ 0-^ li.-' '■: •'.'' ’: I} f r ’ / f ***7 f QjCy^ttif^iCG. i/'JcnTS:i/n(x , VILLAGE OF ORONO ORDINANCE NO. 2,\2 F.XH!B*T H#«# .♦• 1/ '/> i^r,.X,7T r 7.P / - «■/ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SECTIONS OF THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: * Section 1. The Municipal Code of the City of Orono is amended by amending Sections 31.800 et. seq. to read as follows: ‘ . * • *• 31.800 Flood Plain and Wetlands Management 31.801 Statement of Purpose It is the purpose of this Ordinance to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare and to protect the public interest against uncoordinated and unplanned land development which affects marshes, swamps, wetlands, drainage ways, lakes and watercourses within the City of Orono, which development, if allowed to continue, will result in loss and damage to public and private improvements through inundation by flood waters and subsequent expensive construction of storm sewers and other public projects, in the irreparable destruction 'f these valuable natural resources, loss of water retention facilities, open space and wildlife habitats, and impairment of public and private water management program and the retention of open land uses which will locate permanent structures and artificial obstructions so as not to obstruct the passage of waters nor destroy the natural public water areas marshes and wetlands within the City, In addition to these general purposes, the specific intent of this ordiii«ii«oe is to: (a) Reduce danger to health by protecting surface and ground water supplies from the impairment which results from incompatible land uses by providing safe and sanitary drainage. (b) Reduce the financial burdens imposed both on this community and on communities within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the individuals therein by frequent floods and overflow of water on lands. \ ‘^1 SECTIONS FOLLOWS: f Orono is ead as ose of this nd general t uncoordinated hes, swamps, fithin the City ue, will result lents through .ve construction ► irreparable loss of water dtats, and : program and \ permanent to obstruct >lic water areas specific intent surface and lich results le and sanitary 3th on this lehaha Creek ein by frequent (c) Permit and encourage planned development land uses ihlchTui not impede the flow of floodwater or cause . danger to life or property (d) Permit and encourage land uses compatible ^seLation of the natural vegetation and marshes which ^ i -Snai fantnr in the maintenance of constant rates of^watL flow through the year and which sustain many species of wildlife and plant growth. (e^ Avoid fast runoff of surface waters from developed areas to prevent pollutional materials such as feces, motor oils, paper, sand salt and °ther debris, garbage and foreign materials from being directly into the nearest natural stream, lake or public waters. ffl Encourage a suitable system of ponding areas to ieLif the tLporary withholding of rapid wh<ch oresently contributes to downstream flooding anf general water pollution giving preference to wh^=h Contribute to groundwater infiltration and recharge. tSj reduciCg the need for public projects to contain. Store and control such runoff. (e) Provide sufficient land area to carry abnormal flows of^torm water in period of heay nrevent needless expenditures of public funds for storm Lwers and flood protection devices which proper plann g could have avoided. unsanitary conditions or other hazards. fi') Prevent the placement of artificial obstructions which restrict the right of public passage and use of the bed. bank and water of any creeks, marshes or watercourses within the City. cZerce’and governmental services, f traordina^ public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the tax base, all of which adversely affect the public health, safety and general welfare. TO: FROM DATE: SUBJ] Zonir Appli Zonir List ( Exhibj Exhibj Exhibi Exhibj Exhibi Exhibi Exhibi Exhibi Staff 1 1. Th allowe* is 2,4 2. Thi creates 3. No 4. Th€ lineali 5. The by the 6. The besides and 485 t land uses or cause % le with the arshes which constant ch sustain us animal ler debris, cried ike or other ireas to ter runoff coding and areas which echarge , s to contain. r'fv ■v.n abnormal flows ition, and to ids for storm jroper planning in areas unfit Looding, bstructions and use of shes or :e, loss of iption of >rdinary public Lef, and idversely ral welfare. fO: - FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission ^ Thomas J. Jacobs, Building Official March 16, i984 #820 Lonie Fisk, 493 Park Avenue - Variance Zoning District - LR-lB lot width variancezoning Sections 34.452 A) Lot Area Required - 1 acre 43,560 sf Existing - 10,761.92 sf Variance - 32,798.08 sf or 75% B) Lot Width Required - 140 Existing - 125' Variance - 15* or 10% List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit P Exhibit G Exhibit H Application Property Owners List Plat Map Certificate of Survey Sketches of proposed house Petition - opposing variance Neighborhood pattern Sewer location staff has reviewed this application which has revealed the following ailo^el hardc:virf%\nhe\o*;%“3°’7r6is 2,441 sf. 3,766.67 sf. The proposed hardcover creates two front°yarf se?blcks"o°f “iT- °nd°?wo“ide Ve\bS“tf''5’o?!“ 3. No other land is available. lineTly ^oTchLge! """" ^ -«er unit and no by the neiVhborhooV'to^ dump‘^deb?is°." P*^°Perty which has been used besides this one^fSee Exhi'biVEr^’^^OneVs vac^ neighborhood and 485 Park Avenue which a LsrixVsts ^and 4, Block 2) f.-i L * >• % ;4 i *1'. V . : V ■ .-t :.n 7. 1 (See 8 C• ^ Optic Denis 1. r 2. c and r 3. E 4. ^ Apprc 1. N 2. R exist 3. F limit 4. C debri fire 5. P 6. S 7. T are 1 Appro 1. 2. 3. E const ! following: a - maximum d hardcover /enue which cks of 10*. jnit and no »s been used ighborhood 4, Block 2) mmm 7. The neighbors in the area are against the proposed constructi^on (See Exhibit F). 8. Sewer stub has been provided for the property. Options of Planning Commission Denial based on the following findings: 1. Does not follow the neighborhood pattern of four or more lots. 2. Only one-half sewer unit has been assessed against the property and no lineal footage has been assessed. 3. Existing house/cabin has never been hooked to sewer. 4. Neighbors in opposion of construction. Approval based on the following findings: 1. No other land is available. 2. An existing foundation exists on the lot which shows that a house existed on the property at one time. 3. Proposed structure meets all required setbacks and hardcover limitations. 4. Construction of the proposed house will stop the build-up of debris in the foundation from the neighborhood, thus getting rid of a fire hazard. 5. Property has been assessed for one-half sewer unit. 6. Sewer stub is provided to the property. 7. There are only two other double lots in the immediate area. These are located adjacent to the subject lot and on the same street. Approval is based on the following conditions: 1. Payment of sewer charges as follows': 1/2 sewer unit Lineal footage 0 18.30/ft Total « $1,929.52 = 1,830.00 = 3,759.52 2. No other variances will be granted to this property. 3. Existing foundation and debris must be removed prior to construction. m Ui < . UJ K E < .j CK M •K O lii T --JgS .j ^ 10 o o M M Ni Z iO ^ X X o 3 to o C E -I % I; ^TES THIRD^ TRACT LJWL ••^ •• I t<^J j?,S30 r^^3' :!v4_______pr:A1 ■ •* ^ I* Ut) tract HL_t Z1 A^U •^y I5(t0 jF- *>Jv il(n) i5(ie> rrfi [l@[iD\ FEB 2 8 198/! ^ CITY OF QRONfi ^*1^ 11 TTl * ■■III ,»^-. * \ X-rl ifc'* u'. t; y. c^) '4'* -IN I yjc '.V, k.:^ iiwr: f i 'lA .1'-* . .-V v;^' ■i ^'•1 V. li^' •St; ^*OVCt0iONAk iANO tU«VCVO«t AND 4.ANO OlVClOPMCNt CONSULTANTS (6121 S44IS67 3397 WI6CON9IN AVC No MiNNKA^OUt. MINN 99421 PROPOSED SITE PLAN: for Lonnie FisH r ^ €^r - :)0 f / ' : '/ / / L. • - • •«»« * ‘ / \ V5^: XX / r/' / / / / SCALEi I" .?0* DESCRIPTION: Lots 7 and 8, Block il, Minnatcnka Summit Fnik Denotes Pound T rcn Monuirent 1 @ g mm rFEB 2 8 1984 __________________________ CITY OF OROl'ib NOTE: Lot dtfncosions shown ore boscd on a survey done by others. 101 - 36 ^ csrtify ihcjf .hii survey rrci>ofr*d by ms or under my fupfvltion ondthotiqmoduly PegisTertfd Pr:>t if onal fuirv^. /cr under the lo^ ^ the Slot# of Minnesota . ^ by L ' 4^ 4^ DoW - -Reg.Na/£if ? •• ';v^ • •. ;• v‘ '■: ;.m Yi- 1 V,- ' c A.^' '^9\i r. *rc ^v< \ ^ 4. I— . / — V ^ • !■ ^ M I * C ‘ v*- L I> L • £ *' ’* F F F:i.Ry «uv.c~ LC\'G lake T'^N. PAGE 1 Or 2 JEANNE « NABUSTH ZONING CITY OF ADMINISTRATOR# CROMO F.0.SOX 6-£ f; u c • • *::t A t c v 55323 l-E ■:=^‘ SL »11’~ ■ ^ ■- ^ ~ - * - -■" • • ^ “• '^'AD J01NING RAOU'NDING THE r'RCr E=:TV DEECRIEED AE: M 7 f. .SJ Z . ;-f. , .-. j y i_:CK 2 LOT t^7 and ^ Z O'-v-' £ -FPOEE THE COr-iSTPUC'^I ON OF A DWELLING ON •'1 E;-;T I OfME D L 0 ; S , “ C =: R EA Son = aS poll Okl£ : < t 1 > CCN£TRLic ■ I ON O.N TH! £ SITE W ILL SERVE TO FURTHER D E b I R 0Y THE NAT U RA L S ETTIN G Ari D AN RLE L QT ST Z E £ ^/WhiCH ATTRACTED US TO THIS AREA ORIGINALLY •• ^ f- ••/* *-• w«^NSIDERING THE SIZE 0= THE f=*RORERTY, IT IS DIFFICULT 0 IMAGINE A DWELLING THAT WOULD BE IN HARMONY WITH THE existing STRUCTUFES IN THE SURR0U?1DING PROPERTIES 3; AS^THE AE0VE MENT I QNE" PR0PEP7Y I S CE; -.TRALL'/ L0GATED WITHIN I HE NE!6HBCRHC0D,IT IS FELT THAT CCNSTRUCTiON ON THIS SITE WOULD DEETROY THE FEELING 0“ OVERALL ■' SF-C10L ENESS•'THAT I E A -AFT 0- SUBf iR ='AN • i <=■ in OPDNO. ■■ ” m ■ --i fi ' li III 0^ ydS'^ ■o7f 'Tc'^ ADMINISTRA~GR^ CRCf'iO 66 I C^V »— —. I -1 • ,1 /TmL ' ■%i£^ 'i’SO ’^u's^SL(^ tM«. MN S6366 yd^5 <0^ /■ \^liUj y. !>^ 4-07f 0fi^ ^' ^ ^CT'zlt^^k , mmm r;v ;%;^r; ; :.•.■• ; ..r . r^;■ **. ♦ ^ f JW* Jb>^ * ‘ 'ka ■' i If; li:.: / 'ry i , ' \ y,: '- WkiMmmk \ f$ . LJ7F ~ ^ ^5ijr-----i i J 5 >f‘v“ ••■■ '■>/ biH ' r • ’ 'a: <ij. *.«»-< . ' .V I r **A *•A I- ul o •• la iJl f i «? 34 ». y ^ *> •h «>,*<>/ \ \ {'if ;; ti) a.K!» 3;4^^ I- - n 4^ =.. I 1 h\ yykW w }1 4 \ v> ’>-» M ^ V • • I iK I f rr mi wSj^^PIa,fe?»S I I'iu J Vi ^ .‘4 *•//I 4 f • ^ h rm i I ’> ' l^'t »v t^ .. -?r x-vv * . V , • •% m /. I r-L* fi r •; 3*/^. 4* k! w.t f,' mmm^.•&)! I IKAT -7wo«y»y;iTiiw ** * .jii' A . 7W> < - " 'li V«.*4*w ? • * ' • y'*'. • Y !'^' /‘v I' 'V .c J 4 A \ h 4 r f. '9»f Id •7V‘I >> ^ I « tMb K" .. V ^ 'K:?Av4 j 'fe 4^« •*. ;' m ■ ; ■'■ /; 0 r 9 J-t !^Tf-vgs^Jsl - A' ' r % 4 4 «■' '’^SCT.. . a X ” Htt ‘ f k > *^1^’ Mm /j-1- :v->') / «.I'V.^ Li : m :r' Wr ©::"im ■> <“ > i;l 4\' 11 ' -V • » '•V r'foi:v^:S; 5"l-V,l.. 16^^ 4 ^r\ ^_^«4 A i . * "• u.'* * W f ► V »•!? • < 9. s1 ,ta “* .JECMt ;5^' ri r ‘ i a ?N .« >' M S’- v« * ■ r o i .t COMMISSIONwayza^^mn?'-AS SHOU 55391 ^.D.GOETTEN writing to you as a concerned property ru/NPP MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK P. nr. '^'^OFERTY OWNER in THE KNOW pwno ’ ®L0CK 2 AREA. AS YOU KNOW NOW. OR WILL ORTLY,there has been a request rncocn«r- request for variance on THF property described as. MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK BLOCK 2 LOT #7 AND #8 RND I WISH TO OFFER MY PERSONAL REBUTTAL TO THE re mill be OIUEm .o . ^ ™ THATWILL BE GIVEN AS TO wwv « REASONS THAT TO WHY A VARIANCE SHOULD BE GRANTED FOR THIS SITE. 1)"THERE WAS ONCE A HOME ON THE SITE" IT IS TRUE THAT THERE WAS ntvjrc /v ^ ®WlLCiING ON THIS SITE ^ SUMMER I Afc'c- _ ^ oITE,A SUMMER LAKE COTTAGE TYPICAL OF THRn.r.. EPICAL OF THE AREA PRJCR TO THF -- :r:,-— 2)"THERE ARE OTHER HOMES ON LOTS Twrc ™ SMALL IN the AREA" THIS IS FALSE IN THE CASE nc Tur the parcel s.,r neighborhood, the parcel size in question is only I A- rn . and there are no homes in the NEIOHB ^ LOTS, those that ARE ON 2 LOTS ARE OF3°" ^ N-H THE EXCEPTION OF THOSE HE J those.THE TYPICAL PARCEL SIZE IS 4-6 LOTS. ■■ J -v' .:Vv;v- ; OF THIS VAR feeling of ' preserve.AS URGE YOU TO PERHAPS YOU WITH WHAT THI please F£ arise CONCER^ SINCERELY DONALD L.MEYEI (HOME) 473 —72? (WORK) 944-57C s COMMISSION 9AY road SITE. OF tht= . «tSAINST THE GRANTINTHIS VARIANCE ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT ut, , feeling hf ...._ _ _ _ _ thefeeling of ■■SPACIOUFNESS..THAT I ah FRESERVE.AS a MEMBER ACTIVELY SEEKING TO °'^°NO PLANNING COMMITTIE IURGE YOU TO qpp tuet M I parcel of land for yourself and ----here AND «ITH MHAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE AGREED TO ON THE PETITION. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME SHOULD ANY OUESTIONS arise CONCERNING THIS MATTER. SINCERELY DONALD L.MEYER <HOME) 473-7258 (WORK) 944-5700 EXT.21 long Li 55356 ‘.JL ^S'— -•' 'T K' *. ♦ • * —.. i-ONG LAKE • . * • <c * *^ ‘ crn .- I_ T .* '. r--. . -—. • '-’ • *■* L 5 ; “f O ^^^. : • - * * i # -T •• • 'Z L^•' * zK THE this LETTr, nE ^y;j?os--•■^' 15 If- T-. r. I ■«J.C » -• . •• w t ^f .• , ’^•'" • K i T l/.i Ir -• . ’ ''? ^ “ z-•■ - *> ^ _V^- ' r*'-• * ^ I t».Aj£ UlOULO i " L-^c —•£liru -x^. .„ L..KE C V T .-X-.- 'M— ' ~ — . I 41 j f_.i -r‘‘“'■•‘T.vje uio.'i' r, . ,j_, , SADLY,this’".; •>| T;T Z'> »—• < • '0M£, pi_ f- V f ease ■-•S’^ Qoerc QJ.J IT Ifs!*'‘ ? site^."Sss't>i«s?Evrir? ^ .... A'T.- IN TRaiS.^ENT A -v-,r.r> IN WHICH TO p"tcc a *'*’ ■"^'^’^"^NENTS,HO='^N'r~’rr 'I*^ YEARS LILT^'r WORK WE WERE '^ETER MANY ^AVE A HC**- the SURRO^onT^^SPn^?^! ^'-'^'CHASE -hc'^hm! ""Y' HARc' ‘ three SiDES.LARRC'SJ*, TO SAY tk'c fp"'~ •' ’^'-'E- ^ ' ■■ COULD ASK I5rWELL.AS niip urn..- ___ nuhc>. SHAU-. SPACE ' ' ■ - - ■• - H;-vfw E=N I ,\'3 WE WOULD LIKE TO SNcn-'=••••.-- x.- <--w wUNCERNlNG ~Hlo r ^.-.■'■*2'~'Z ^-- ^EEL ~3cr=- -r.-, ,-om^ that we are NOT a = r 1JUS' p^oC'p '■■ •-»=> WE -ISAT SOUND ^ -' <H0ME> d73_7-,B-o • ,-j, , _E "^ \ . ,r . 1 — fi 1*1 C'^***^w, vj i '-'M ?:nse^^-/ ■ A..'-Y^V .'.' i i i '. '_ "Y ••Y-:. "^-::^ ^:V'."=YA C-O.'vAuD L.'-’c- -5^ =ARK aC: long lake nn t er . “ Wl OR SI M f * • i O! heree »~w’ ••/' ^ 1> CONS 0ES7 WHIG 2)CONS ■^0 I! THE 3) AS TJ- WITH I ON Th ■' SPAC ORONO 4>AS THi OF LA^ ■>''ar:.4n OONTIn ^LSC IT =■00 THE , ■ 0 THE C( ?I C-NED LSI 09 ''>N IT IK- DIp~e? ^L>E>.C'V hborhooi:) . years LIUIS'S A HrvT •'CH hard i PARK AUE. ODS ON EN SPACER that attend “5*:C-0:vAl_o-‘^PwK hi. s7 'lake ^n!J E-'■■:• js r- ,- _ LC\'I.\'G Arr-lTr.jT CTPii- '-• ■ •'»=' OPCNCQ WZ 35:3D3 V ^ 0 P •-■ n -. c ~ p- c- r r-. -p . •=^U‘.;RuuNDiNjG T’^p =POPE:^~v — -’‘--p.-r.- :e=c-k^sed'^c. •• # ^U\NETCiNKA Si’T'iMT^ d--i^ ?i-0CK 2 > or r, i,-..^«"'-‘< HERcE',' ripen -ru’- AECVE ^1ENTl5NEr7'rn~f’|I"-*'~'^ C'=- A -VE‘ -j.b.FuR REASONS AC e^r;r :!~ OCONSTRurTTnK, .... ; - - • » • wr-! o U OCONSTRUCT!ON n-- Tu-., considfotm^ __ _ '--^.N^ruLr -H. e!<!st!no sTRc-cfuL=r^;: thT;;!-,^:^::^ -S_THc ASOUE MPMr...,.- P.-^OPERTIES3-s the ASOUE ment-m- --^'-'^n'dino PROPERTIE 'Hsa^-HcL.:r f frr-; I l.-,c.-=. 'SPAClSuSNEt,'''?^^!:^ PfJTPOY THe'pi^ r.^^'.., = -':^STRUC-!'N pP CANo"lN''Trt*^Apcr%uT''-“ -OMPiPAEL''-'!- — THIS— HE •'•■‘rT,.: •--ci.-E.-N -:,L' 9<jTMr■*- •*--br^s'jRirj'i ^pe.v ----- I On r T r ^ *S UNDERcy r, -o'-'I^K-eouE rha:I;Y:’ -Hli p '^= CURRENT Ol.iNiR ',-; ■C,:--''- ■ • -• AS.*’.-r ' ’Y ■/• ■Xi l% < L. 4 ^ .. ^OoSi liD a'-k. ^ //// (^/tf U ytC. 'To, ■•e-k Vp^' •• ^! 'J I f' 1 2 S"TR6TC’ c:' CR C*-.':'; 6i ‘3-^V Ji r i. rr I I ■“li N’^. If •; -v-i^ •■'i a\:t •••;: ^ ;>: V'-' P •t- ;.7 >■ '_i:. 9mm V-A%.. - ; -v' •^rj>'^:^ C ^ .3 'Ccolii U>OAH. \Y \"\j ^ i^fyU 4-T8 ^^c&- >fv <f 72>7^cic4Jr\^ /? . ‘ - ... /\Jf ^ vnOd^ ^ XnU^S^Z ^hji/M^ fd^ Ofi WJK .^^UNOOISloSsasffL"'^ ^o7r 0Ai. It. I'^^.Hl n Ik'o (-^< -» H^^Tc^aAcca '«»'-■ p ‘ 4 . . • ^ ^ I’ 'CL "m.^ mm p?- : ' .'vV ' i:V' t.i4 W: 3 :■ ;j5 kM vVd,bT r ■ : .■■;.* 4i ^- ■:- "V £i::”^:iz'§m EPiM? r.. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECI ZONING AREA - APPLIC;^ The ap] homest< certif: be exci merits Water c adequat not ad\ sell th tions - would c area is ship wi and not review numbers Please i nine att single f natural the effe aestheti cohesive tion opp welfare this typ If this the hard' is not e; tennis a survey - the open TO: FROM: Planning Commission Jeanne A. Mabusth Zoning Administrator DATE:March 15, 1984 SUBJECT: #822 Howard Johnson, 1635 Concordia Street Sketch Plan Review ZONING DISTRICT - LR-lC AREA “ 196,000 or 4.5 Acres APPLICATION - Conditional Use Permit for PRD of Nine Units per Ordinance 34.530 and 38.600 ments [the PRD road area can be included in area credit!. sewer are available to the property and there is serve all nine units. The applicant has sell the^nL^h ‘ he plans tosell the pad the unit sits on he must create the legal descrio- tions - note that only five units could be sold on a pad i ^ condominium format and all-round owners. The deed transferring owner- condo unit. The units are attached nd not limited to quads as in the LR-lC-1 district - please numbers of"un?tra?t;ch^“‘^ Please review Section 38.600. Purpose of PRD. Does this PRD of nine attached units enhance the surrounding neighborhood of dwellings by setting aside areas that preserve thre?L^K"of^^''r*- -proposed use counteracturban congestion?- -what about the visual/ aesthetic effects from the lakeshore? - - - Does it provide cohesive structures to neighborhood design? - - - Offer recrea tion opportunities close to home - - - and in improving the welfare in general of City residents? - - - what effects would this type of project have on the surrounding proplrt^vllues? proceed, a surveyor must certify that is norfxceeLd between 75' - 250* setback area . . hardcover variances can be approved. A survev and open parking area are shown on the improvements must be shown on a site plan so that the open space ratio can be determined. Plan Marc page Staf I am but hardi Ques JAM: j Units 5 acre not been t must 5 ease- ait] . sre is Leant has Lans to al descrip- pad. I L ground ring owner- attached ■ please lo limit on this PRD of lood of >reserve interact ! visual/ irovide er recrea- ng the cts would values? rtify that back area ved. A on the n so that \W: i i ^ 7 I.: ‘ .’=V I i ■ *4# .. / • . . ,, M •• •• Planning Commission March 15, 1984 page 2 Staff review of hardcover data 0 - 250* Setback Area Hardcover Allowed O’- 75' = 16,200 sf 75'-250* = 37,800 sf 9,450 sf or 25% Proposed 0 22,000 sf or 58% I am not certain that I have interpreted the 250' setback data but it would appear from the enclosed staff sketch that 58% hardcover appears faj.rly accurate. Questions for consideration: a) Would you approve a nine unit PRD if all hardcover standards are satisfied? b) Would you prefer a PRD of two quads and one unit, three duplex and one triplex, three triplex units? c) Would you prefer a nine lot plat? JAM;j1 sf or 58% ack data t 58% - 9 Ca— ( ^ C-( I <—'V^' 'v. ■"r* O O V cx. c/ isd A' r .tfLCA. ~1 . _ . . X-f CD I ^ s ’. -- \9 ^,o -Z.C) 'Xli©[luwL^lrvi!•:--------- -- |i-i Mi'iR - I I9BA i:!J, CITYQFQMi« t ■' ' V. 'J 4— )lo ^ -- jif j6>o-0 g^.(pc>0 tj.-f *2.^ 0^00 *=- ^ 0 “i" 3. c<rc$>o “ t : ; -V77 O O i^_Y i-> .?.p - \ H°-/o 'aM.-.- ll Ml CD CD CO CNi O C- CD CD J ! oz o l/% QC z z to Oz < o u o UJ z z OC z to o LU QC CK' « r* k» ♦-o « » • •• ••<• t t ■ LhLL^ i' .1 Y OF OROllU J % in* fj H bb^ tr f I <D CD CO CN j O r-. Cj Oi ■ V J-.ri ■f; V I oz > QC to Qz < O DC to o DC o i/t IW Z Z o u Ui z z *M .i Miii pu, -l.Lt.iH ■ 1 wtr* rs K* ? %0 o -i « * • •! «• L. I• • CITY OF OROl PLEASE FILL :; CITY OF ORONO NAME (please print) PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE fhjuxMiy * r i PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. ADDRESS APPLICATION NUMBER/NAME PRESENT FOR 1. id <£ f 1 J ll "//t a/I /n h / ^ ■ ■ ------------------------------- 2. fifCh/frsCaAjrV 5 n >yS'r.riD /w* 3 • it ^3r % $ 1 1 i ^ J ./ 3 /: Oft-✓ c 1 9-> 4."3 e<'?" '^Cn(//4-ocO-L 3*7^5^ (o'^^oi'’AAuJ i io^ <‘if 1-1- \Sl^ "2^^^iTn 6. ScfLOt^ tSu alpo r»i' S-r ?/7 1. Ain k:n-, AdsMA /76 <S ^7^cov ^ £bf >0/t//\ % 8. ^?. _C^ /f /^Ql 9. v!^\]tv 3T KtcJKl^ftlL,^ioC U^f' w 79 7 iJ-79/___________ '■/Bc> /Xek /c^i' Cy^A^4 14.y^'\dt:a<icA 1 0 V '• N 15. K c?\\ g3 v'T^ , V) r a-.:A\< ^'■\<L -'.A Am_____ 16. AoX _______.7 17.</o5^5 0<X. 5-^ 18. t(2 ^<=> fd d»-*d Ji-5 _ I IlMk ’ 1- y- ( j: CITY OF ORO; PLEASE FILL NAME (pleaj 2.LV. VOtf: /f/ 5. £-.d 6.C* crry 10. 11 . ■<?g.yy«f^ / i2.rnibo ^ 13 . ^ A , X ^AA 14. Wtc J*U 15. .S 16. y ii^utkiy\ t ^ Q /-l/ •> > ,i> / h 19. (d C 20. r: ^ f-kiJiJSiy lECORDS. NUMBER/NAME FOR 6^(.-i- Oa/^ ?-v ■ V ‘3 /»• >■ f [?• n: ■ #'•• I PUBLIC ATTENDANCR CITY OF ORONO MEETING DAT eAM^CU IS^ / ^ ^ please fill out the information requested below for our city records. * NAME (please priat)ADDRESS APPLICATION NUMBER/NAME PRESENT FOR ylO&ES^r jrr£M 44= I . --Jo / •', - v, ^ (t > • / 6« ! Qt cr C> ^ r/ I'' ^ / KJ 4 -9 / 7 'f y t 8 • PftwUM 9./f\-yy\ e 1 U N* 10. /i' Jh. /?3i U 11» 13.^/t.a ).^ lA^WlfLPU s/£/e. R.iP. y<f7 /Me iAnn ^rl I / ~ 72J_MfJt€ 16. Wfl^c/Af^ __________I ^AP ^ ^ to C' V / ^ 6 * Uit:j? i jl'Mii:} /n VJ 19. ^ ? -■< ^’M) L/ '.^ _J ’~iL C /*> .1 / s*/,>> f / 20./I^f /r r ''' ^ f > ’^ (• /' ^ (7 •: / A / / j '• rv? t 1"t- Hi*- • -a'. 3.' I CITY OF ORONO PLEASE FILL OUl NAME (please p l.(^QVJa^VKC "2 3-1 'X\ ■ > ?\\ V/» Q.n VrJ. 0 V—~*<r 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. DATE^MfeCiU PY RECORDS. PION NUMBER/NAME SNT FOR RECORDS. N NUMBER/NAME FOR IIm -'V - •• ^•r#-^ tl''. ^ M iHt » t J I t- I f i /kt>e^^aQfihT^<>Aj:!t.if ■BooS^A/iy ti \t^ Sk ^H s •# ✓/ "iS^vT So C4t<^ V49clh r - ■*$%: il nin nMSCotCdn^/A ^^o^;yAe^o 4oH<*»icM) •il -«•*»•• ‘ ■» Q<li^i\ ^t7d PUM<k¥jf^CXlC^ I^U)dLfi.(/fO*! : f • ;i i ■• f 'm^ ■ ■•••■•■ .^- -•■• \ -; V I.;.--?^ •■..■ •. :-,i TO K1 •■.n.v-'vy...V:^ n ; . •n.:f.n.v- ^-n:: :}y ilsi ■ ■■=:• ^ i n .•* m. ^ V-: ' WESt:- • ' • •• .-.■ :-4 ■■. . .■ ; V ^:..v nv y iLl. . / r- ’^. ' ' ,-n m a..n oru-ij ,-wJ ^iLaia zi.^ili;^j, u n OTT^ iHr n irn : nii urn ii 1^ ’ U ; .i _Ai‘ 4---- ; n ilTTOtn t.,v«; I. i «\'A^xi o»: V. .. .- —rni r -1-LJL nilJIjim . I^-^I I Aw< (i>-....^., . -.JLal )4 I I .fcMt I I '_;___•'"j I' n—rinn^r^i \ ■ n —ni “^nrT—n^-nrr ~ "T^ vvasT j5.uo,v/.Ti o»: * 1% ----- -- t T r: ! _.J___ □ a t4C3» Tn HbUStVATTVO; . ik-*» •* - n J- J «o-”ru uv_a,v/v,"rio>i * ,, n n fl ‘ 1 ■ - j. ^ L.....V {1. 1__i ^U.r.TXmi '& V T' 1. *.--_4------4k ttm«.ruku '^>4k' ^ i lt-»» l..*» •- •'». C»- SA fV*n*li>- ’ ] t - » ^ __ .. . . . .<***^**^i. 'mi -■m ■- \ '■-'x ■ . ouTL \ X . , •. X . X \ ' *•»’* ' \ \ '\'' V•• ■: 1 \ \v nf H . . \ ' . . ■ ■ V W <‘ - ....... t! ij / / ........••• -. ■ *•. ^X A ^ 3***' ♦ * • \ \ *. " /X MX.-- I »•• M nr«M r : MM ittte tivi. to»« • . m m«m« [RSI: m .m #«« ^ i.m4 f ^ -j-"”; • r t,' ' iM »»-CfX>,TWTS4.f Ai^ PRELIMINARY PLAT #016 tREP<*E0 POR LAiB MINNETONKA HOMES Itniyi ft ^wrMn. 9» ||PBEUMIM/:^EV Pl_r^-r ^->t^EP£kaEiD PO« — ■ M II t«*. i rw.«>. ‘ -—^ MK NTE^Cl^EEkl Cee.£VL DevEi-OPMEKiT coep \tm—‘-r-------- . I M-17 fi ! 1^ f ' ^ - ■ . j I- ^IO<\ 1 •,.1 i d * i ^ fc. * ^ r-f'- '* -' r ”« .•' *»• :. ■ I ’•• (") i N « \i> .-. f. *ig f '* > J'^1 / • ? \ 'i . d 's; r-lv ... /y.^" ) ^ hi j f tfn . \ 7. •■>.'" 8' ■ •■' j>»t J/'Sg 4 fMf:/ / IS ■f /// ! 1 |i|i |P fll51 Ills *5 21 ce '4'-. IN t/y V^' .7'1 / i.. 1 ' / ^vr/ ’^•- i .'-1” '•'i^ •^4 “*-4 4fl \ Ip-I'j K T''-' ■f. , , ‘--’• ///''¥■ ^"> -.-v 4.i5 i;;;L^'<--dt ^ i '' ' r ■ !■ l i K.rUiH IPUi fWlO iiii1* 'I i ,.1. y ' J/'' ■' • ^S/'II!!!^’^ .! t •xXfD -/ ! 11/A. [t\ ( -i>^-. l\^'\ f ,,,, ifi l!*=.;-Ssiisl;iy,* ' ' ii" ui '■■ ■im^«*)V I 1' .-fi //////// 1 aifl ! i!il 1 »i!! ,• - .*■ r UiPI ^ iipj ij'! 1 i i '! lot 7 Hf )fi?»rr«t(o« wljfi t>« liw of the torth IW.h of Mid fioefraaent tel 2; tteact Last iltfflj thi last otr.tlonad South Itoe to tlw point of b«5lnrin5. IKat thf Sor»«y thowi htroon It a eorrect dtllriMtlon of tald turtoy. Oatfd thI. tC"* dny of__lArvC—i.C. 19M Surveyor - I'lnof'ct? Rfa(«trition he. 617? 22 24 ,' 4 : 3 IS II ‘^~i •3:5^! i%* » n.v •0 0 11 1 b ^ 4 rr® • 1 [ ■W 1: i“« : ■ r*'*) 1 •...( WATE^ 0 LYRIC AVE. -fyf II a fl.v-.:?• II 'aV .■.;.P’ -|,1— T/ir^ 21 22 10 nl ~r I & 2)24 * ji^ieeiPii 34 n IE ■ ■ • -■■m-'^m 2S HI ; -A^i» 1 <-'■ " ! >I r ' ^ - w/ d fcyi /^y rs I I'' • ^ I r J------r\>t‘ 1,{1 li ■1^ *.• I x<!''V -1*^ !‘Q --J'l I I Vi» i ^5i 'XS>rii^ » Ar*' j>^ 2: ?!i I ly. \ '- X o 'vb '•< ?' > V - i-i'———If- C^O'4/i!( ^0/i^ #v , v> 1 i \ Ifc..','- f #804 .XHflIT fc"d by ^ CITY or owjwoCITY OF Ol SUBDIVISION KP p LiCATI^ APPLICANT Mam« Pmtntt __ <r«<0 *0« £-jj.n>itx /oo P*^ a^5b. Telephone (1171 Mellinq Addreae Name -TohnPROPERTY OWNERS Mailing Address B. — taa^ 100 north (AtUch li.t of more than o.TiT Telephone .Salle St. suite HU. 010*9°. 1^ PROPERTY LOCATION Street Address IteCulley Itaad and C8AH No. M Legal Description jee attach^ (PID) -------------— existing land USE Nuiaber of Tax Parcels Development Site Present Use (check) Present Boning Diet. 6S.6 Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential! no. of units Ot.»er (specify) _2E21- -- PROPOSAL I - - - -Kt line rearrangement only (no new building sites) - subdivision for new building sites number of building sites. . Q__ existing units 30 new units ■m total units ____ 1 units par 1.341 acres awsrage proposed gross density __ .^„„,‘^,..r^ry buildabl. land einimum lot si.e. - -- „.id.ntial *' ■' 1.'' '' > ' f ■■■'. Mmc." ^ mH