Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-20-1998 Planning Packet
Public A ttendance Meeting D ate 7- .A ^ ^ a □C ouncil Planning C ommission Park C ommission Other La' ; Ml >* • -■ : 1::X-:-■ ■■•'-X': NAME (please print) 1._/h ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER //3 3o P(^c<. 2. a.(^?^' ,/p / rk^O d' O-MjJ ® / /*; a X /-n /3-2'4 dZe^ i fi£^ /Ia ..^ J e4l4t<a<>A. H'SOo >0(g0 ^V/firiuK’j- a3?/_ 9.^ggog rOwu '7LLa LMOifteo ivic 6/)?tv'6/oh M h& />n^,fA;^ch/?i.>^3*^1 A- 13v 15.„ 09U9S.4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, July 20,1998—6:30 p.m. 2780 Kelley Parkway-Council Chambers AGENDA Council Representative: Barbara Peterson AUDIENCE MEMBERS: Please sign in for the public record at the front podium if you wish to address the Planning Commission. Applicants will be asked to move to the front table to answer questions when the Chair announces the application. The Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council. If action is taken on any items on this agenda, they will be scheduled for the August 10,1998, City Council meeting unless otherwise noted by the Chair. OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Review of these items will commence prior to or between scheduled public hearings. 1. #2368 Kirk Otteson, 710 North Arm Drive, Variances. (Staff: LizVanZomeren). 2. #2370 Gary O'Keefe, 1392 Baldur Park Road. Variances and Conditional Use Permit (Staff: MikeGaffron). SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:00 p.m. 3. #2388 W. Wyatt Moe, 1220 Loma Linda Avenue and 1230 Spruce Place. Vacation. (Staff: Mike GafSron). NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. #2381 Busse Coiistniction on behalf of James Johnson and Charles Larson, 4300 Watertown Road and 4285 Sixth Avenue North. .Conditional Use Permit. (Staff: LizVanZomeren). 5. #2382 Busse Construction on behalf of Tim Otten, 425 Turnham Road. Conditional Use Permit (Staff: LizVanZomeren). 6. #2386 Busse Construction on behalf of Katherine Colgrove, 4260 Sixth Avenue North. Conditional Use Permit (Staff: LizVanZomeren). 7. #2387 Busse Construction on behalf of Bob Gehrman, 4300 Sixth Avenue. Conditional Use Permit. (Staff: LizVanZomeren). 8. #2385 Stephanie Kroeger, 3465 Crystal Place. Variances.- (Staff: Paul Weinberger). •• t 4 1 9.#2389 10. . •#2390 11.#2392 12.#2393 13.#2394 14.#2395 15.#2396 16.#2397 Daniel J. Kluth, 2801 Fox Street. Conditional Use Permit. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). David 1385 Rest Point Road. Variances. (Staff: Liz Van Zomeren). Thomas Berscheid, 1365 Rest Point Road. V^ances. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). Richard and Carol Kail, 2917 Casco Point Road. Variances. (Staff: Liz Van Zomeren). C. Peter Pearson Company having an interest in, 2695 Kelly Avenue. Variances. (Staff: Liz Van Zomeren). Brent Bentrott, 1453 Park Drive. Variances and Vacation. (Staff: Liz Van Zomeren). . Clint and Jodi Morrison, 3510 Bayside Road. Variances. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). Joe & Leslie Lucas, 1060 Brown Road North. Variances. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). ZONING AMENDMENT 17. #:City of Orono, to Amend Section 10.03 and 10.20 Re: Plumbing in Accessory Structures. (Staff: Mike Gaffron). PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 18.Report of Plaiming Commission representatives attending Council meetings on June 22. 1998 and July 13, 1998. 19. 20. 21. Other issues for discussion.• • « * , • • . * • * . • ♦ Planning Commission approval of minutes for June 15,1998. Selection of representatives for City Council meetings on July 27,1998 and August 10,1998, ADJOURNMENT I TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:July 10,1998 SUBJECT:#2368 KirkOtteson 710 North Arm Drive Variances—Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:19,945sq.ft. (.46acres) Application:The applicant appeared at the May and June Planning Commission meetings requesting average lakeshore setback, bluff setback and hardcover variances in the 75'-250' setback to allow an addition to an existing residence that is located forward of the average lakeshore setback within 30' of a bluff where the existing hardcover is at 24.15%. The applicant has submitted an alternate plan to add a second floor to the existing residence. The alternate plan to add a second story requires variances for average lakeshore setback, bluff setback, and hardcover in the 75'-250' setback. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.24, LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District o" Section 10.22, Subd. 1 and 2, Lakeshore Setback WMlHaiRlcover Regulations Section 10.56, Subd. 16, C. (2) Bluff Setback * 92368 KirkOtteson 7JO North Arm Drive July 20,1998 page-^I \ ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR'IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard Bluff 1 acre 140*35'10'75'and ALS* 30' from top of bluff ^Average Lakeshore Setback Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Rear Yard Side Yard Lakeside Bluff 19,945 sq. ft. (.46 acres) 100' at lakeshore 95' at 75' setback 29' to SW comer of garage • * W-22.5' E-30.4' existing and proposed 78'-83' from OHWL 12'-15' ahead of the ALS 5' from top of bluff The subject property does not meet the required lot area or lot width standards. The existing structure and proposed secoi^s^ic^ addition meet the side yard setback requirements. The addition would not further encroach int$%'e required bluff setback. > - > ' f htM dJj ■ j- vf a! ^ 1 fl2368 KIrkOtteson 710 North Arm Drive July 20.1998 page---2 Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Allowed Percentage 19,945 sq. ft. (.46 acres) 2,991.75 sq. ft. (15%) House=905 sq. ft. Addition=47 sq. ft. Garage=591 sq. ft. Total=l,543 sq. ft. (7.7%) The proposed amount of structural coverage is less than the 15% lot coverage requirement. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'7,069 sq. ft.None None None None 75’-250’12,876 sq. ft.3,100 sq. ft. (24.15%) 3,219 sq. ft. (25%) 3,566 sq. ft. (27.69%) 347 sq. ft. (2.7%) The existing amount of hardcover is slightly less than 1% of the total amount of hardcover allowed on the subject property. The applicant proposed removing 221 sq. ft. of hardcover by eliminating the sidewalk and 207 sq. ft. of the driveway turnaround to further reduce hardcover. However, staff recommends that the sidewalk remain to provide a reasonable walkway to the entrance. Staff further recommends that the driveway turnaround be allowed to remain because of the existing topography and the obstructed sight lines created by the adjacent garage to the^u^. This is not a driveway that staff can comfortably recommend that the resident and guests should back out of onto North Arm Drive. The new hardcover being added is to the street yard side of the existing residence to square off the master bedroom and the dining room and to allow an entrance deck. A hardcover variance to increase a deck by 48 sq. ft and the house by 47 sq. ft. is required. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship M236S KirkOtieson 110 North Arm Drive July 20. ms page—3 i 1. 2. 4. 5. 6. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property can continue to be used as a residence without the variances. However, the existing residence has a 905 sq. ft. footprint. Additions were made in 1956 and 1964. The applicants are asking for variances to increase the amount of space in their home and improve the flow of the floor plan, maximize lake views, add living space juid upgrade bathrooms. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The situation is caused by the existing residence being located forward of the average lakeshore setback and in the top of the bluff setback area. A hardco'^er variance could be eliminated if the sidewalk and driveway turnaround were removed, however, staff is not recommending that this non-structural hardcover be removed. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. If the variances are granted, the second story addition will not interfere with views from adjacent property nor have an impact on the ravine. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or inunediately adjoining property. The existing residence was constructed before the current zoning regulations. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The subject lot is unique due to its location near the ravine, the topography of the lot and the need to retain the sidewalk and driveway turnaround, and the proximity of the adjacent residences and the average lakeshore setback. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant should provide his testimony regarding the need to maintain his property rights by constructing a second story addition. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. t2368 KirkOtteson 710 North Arm Drive July 20,1998 page-^4 I 1 1 The existing residence is partially located in the required bluff setback area and the average lakeshore setback area. The existing amount of hardcover is slightly less than 1% of the maximum amount allowed. Very few, if any, changes can be made to this residence without requiring a variance. If the structure were removed, a lot area, lot width and bluff setback variance would most likely be required. (^See building pad exhibit). ISSU£S 1. The subject property does not meet the lot area, lot width or bluff setback requirements. 2. The existing residence is located ahead of the average lakeshore setback. 3. The residence was built before 1956 and has a 905 sq. ft. footprint. 4.The topography of the subject lot rises 25 ft. from the shoreline to the lakeside of the residence. A ravine is located along the east side of the property. The garage is located at a higher elevation than the house. 5.The adjacent residence to the west does not meet the side yard setback. It is located 2.5' from the property line. The applicant has indicated that he does not want to build into the side yard because it would further reduce the distance between the principal structures. 6. 7. The adjacent property also has a garage that is located 1.5 ft. from the property line. The proximity of this garage to the property line and its relationship to the street blocks sight lines for exiting from the subject property. Therefore, the driveway turnout should remain to allow the residents to have better visibility in backing out of the garage and entering onto the street. The proposed alternate design does not further encroach on the bluff setback and does not interfere with views. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To discuss the alternate plan and review the requested variances. Attachments A Application B Location Map K368 Kirk Outsort 710 North Arm DrNo July 20. 1998 pagers c D E F G H I J County Plat Map Topographic Map Original Request Alternate Plan & Building Pad Lakeside Elevation Cross Section Floor Plans Permit Record I H2368 KirkOtteson 710 North Arm Drive JufylO, 1998 page—6 APPLICATION EXHIBIT A Application U Date Received Amount Val^3oD • CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address *7/Q A/^n-fk D c . AA.hl Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Prope]^ Acquired Aptt\\ _________• ________________(month/year) I (do) ^onot) also own the adjacent parcels of land.' Present use of property: )( residential ZoningDistrict:__JLCLil|l other (specify). APPLICANT Name AYtU Phone fhome ^ _________________ Phonefwotk l 9va -/S'/5______ Address: “7to A/att4U Dft.____ City: /\/1ouAci ________^3^H. OWNER (if different tlian applicant) Name ___________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $, Describe request in detail: See. __________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width X Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear ^ Average Lakeshore X Other (specify) •. •« {■ ‘ t: K- •* ^ ( ‘ •c o \ I • / • / 9 • i HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: __________________—— (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the fQllQwjpg jpfprmatlQq must be submitted by the application dgadline dafp In order for vour application to be considered complete! 1. 2. 3. X 4. 5. 6. X X Completed Application Form Certified Pr nerty Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). ' Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/a" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing •gl^de are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy'S'/a" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 854" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital stahis) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicaht(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Properly Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour application js upt complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entiy onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature Date ~ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is imable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 MINNESOTA MUTUAL CITY OF ORONO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 CASE#0844047-564 M034001 DEFERRED ANNUITY PERIOD FROM: DATE PAID; TO EMPLOYEE NUMBER:NAME:AMOUNT: 476921819 BORIS, SCOTT W.150.00 474667812 GREGORY, JAMES D.45.00 477463877 HASEMAN, CAROLE A.292.30 469783642 PETTIT, SANDRA K.20.00 469629194 SKREEN, DALE S.68.00 480866181 VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH 50.00 471115918 WEINBERGER, PAUL E.120.00 TOTAL « «$745.30 i i Lakeside elevation . * \ • •••••• • • ------------ 1/ / -----------------/ «^K- / / ■n Cross Section for Second Story Addition ALL *10 ^6 C^flGP HOte.* ALL^&n?oafUJ?AL i«T8l?r Ffm «©#< PU)CR TZ> CXISTW<57 4=1^ 3b f^DMf>AnOKl^' / ^se*?n«Q?. A NfiNMesen?. ucebseo. -aiaacdui^^ -0l5>*' / / • • 24 ’-(i?'■^7 1 . • . WC^It^ •IS'Wii'^cISP l^fPRPgM,PlMIM6.k!hl2H.5IPgo7^ ia/y)g r "~JIC> A)or^ A-rrv\ ©r'. PERMIT RECORD PERMIT RECORD Permit No.Date Type of Permit 3GS ^^<dd. yo ’. ^q/cV. ■ A •. . c^9^/ yy;3 7y v5~ - i>~- ~7 xu-r //- /4^> s5~9/3 io)nd /A •••• • *•< To:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator July 15,1998 Subject:#2370 Gary O'Keefe, 1392 Baldur Park Road - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2-acre, Sewered Application:Request for hardcover variance, as well as a variance and conditional use permit for grading within 5' of a lot line and within the 0-75' lakeshore protected area to permit construction of a new residence to replace the existing residence. List of Exhibits A - 2nd Revised site plan, floor plan, elevation view B - 2nd Revised hardcover submittal C - Notice of Planning Commission Action 6-17-98 D - Memo and Exhibits of June 11,1998 Planning Commission June 15 Action On June 15 Planning Commission reviewed the revised proposal and on a vote of 6-0 tabled the request to allow applicant to further revise plans based on the following general direction: Limit hardcover to 25% of the combined 75-250* and South 0-75' zones, or approximately 5,731 s.f. (exact area of said zones to be confirmed by surveyor). Submit a revised grading plan for reviejy- 2nd Revised Plan Submitted Applicants' architect has submitted a 2nd revised plan that incorporates the following elements: 1. Proposed home and screen porch of footprint 2440 s.f. 2. Attached 3-stall garage of footprint 900 s.f. 3. Stoop, walks and driveways totaling 2,385 s.f. 4. Total hardcover of 5,725 s.f. (=25.0% of 75-250' and S. 0-75' areas) 5. Additional 300 s.f. patio requested (would yield final hardcover of 6,025 s.f. or 26.3%) 6. 1 -story home with daylight windows lower level; defined height approx. 23'. 7. No decks are proposed r k #2370 - O’Keefe July 15,1998 Page 2 8. 9. 10. 11. Driveway slope averages just under 8% which is steep but still very functional; grading plan for drivew'ay suggests either a 15% sideslope from house to backup apron or the need for a 2'-4' retaining wall along street side of driveway and backup apron; other option is to do greater filling in south yard area... Minor grading proposed in N. 0-75' to blend contours from old foundation to new house Grading plan does not show revisions along N. 0-75' lot line as previously discussed Optional retention pond in S. 0-75' zone for potential mitigation of additional hardcover This plan exhibits a reduction in overall hardcover on the site from the pre-existing 7,258 s.f. (tliis numter excludes area of Baldur Park Road in the property as well as existing 0-75' If . une beds underlaid by plastic) down to 5,725 s.f., or a net attributable reduction of 1,533 s.f. The proposal meets the letter and intent of the Planning Commission's direction at the Jm.^ meeting. Remaining grading plan details can likely can be worked out. Staff conceptually supports the idea of a ponding area on the site to enhance stormwater runoff quality; although the City has generally not considered such alternative mitigation efforts as justification to grant hardcover variances, the idea has merit. Issues for Discussion 1. 2. Will Planning Commission recommend approval of the requested 300 s.f. patio? Does Planning Commission have any added comments to pass on to Council regarding the recommendation for granting hardcover credit for the South 0-75' zone? 3. 4. Is the lack of decks a concern? Will a future owner be asking for variances for decks? Does the Planning Commission have any comments regarding development of ponding as a mitigation for individual site hardcover? 5. Any additional concerns not previously addressed? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the 2nd revised plan as proposed, subject to confirmation of details of the grading plan prior to Council action. Planning Commission should address the added 300 s.f. patio request and any other items of concern. Advise applicant to establish house location carefully to avoid encroachment of the average setback line. ■ I —-111—ji.kt #2370 - O'Keefe July 15,1998 Page 3 Options for Action 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Recommend approval of variance to allow 5,725 s.f of hardcover as shown in 2nd revised plan, using credit for the S. 0-75' zone area. Recommend approval for grading in 0-75 ’ zones as needed to blend in with pre-existing contours, with no walkout excavation allowed. Same as 1. but allowing additional 300 s.f. hardcover for patio. Table for further information. Recommend denial, stating reasons. Other. (This item will be scheduled for Council review on July 27) vV (f/^ /IRA-65# pboTP(^ .^1 rvAv .%!■ it 7. \».\ ^.l \ ii\ C^‘\ Hi K \ N 0^^ \ - vy K ____ ' ’ /*-f ■ < » \ V:■fc ,• V- I I r;!y r>V ^ 71 [/■ \ V t------- ^ /t II i^l/ \ \ V I /I/ |j Ci / ■ V^tMVE:. /• ■ r Ife K <;\/ li r - r ^ i') X X UAI2^& I^POMr m <5TS FM2<5?'15» /lAgA f=T3j2- tTiA<v4A<2iG. t=l2pM |2JC»6. *,'N:' \ V.^ W'-- ^ ■ ' ?l= AU\ I ,7^ Pnt^uv .^1T& N-TEKi,TI o’ :?Mfc?*- pi£>V^ ^PrfUN^or^ 1 1 \J I ^ \ Wl-IT^ATION \ -V— iv y j X\ Vi r' . • 5 \-- - *V.^ i /h; (55^- ^ I I S 0 r 2: ^ 'S-IL 2 & Wi T—I ------------- :i S.''i— >>-'I ^ SI q:o if —li a\ \ fii- t / '/Vrtoj -i-'S^, vi'l i' S « •/-f^riA r'Dnjsl nn ^-4 ^ I > \ .*. ^\ii :X r'Nw ^ I .»\ 'TT-ti r)‘ / \\ . •• <L , U cL B t ,0• ^ 1 • •* •/*Vi i 1II\^UJ vTt'J' )\ . oi » / —f wmm i ^') Ji-H -? / . .} Xi \\ n\ y / 1---------ur= / lji = ! N/S i 'i il IV 2 i-. ?r' tl vj ■t^: 7 §/ fj jr / /■7 .4*/I v> ’^i / / 4V li7: 41 / ' /" / 4^. ?/ SHARRATT DESIGN COMPANY MEETING MEMO ^^8 TELEPHONE MEMO Date:Attending Initials Company Project: e£^ Subject: Discussion Bv Information/Decision Action M__ /A ^ </g / lAyJilrf' /A»g^ ; /^yvsg«ig roM/dS^ SC^t^^AHe^ /^UyiL^ ^______________ ^AV/Ste> /yiJSfJl/H/^ri^ P'tyz^ 2pMyS •ftyjor^Are.^gr/^^ ■A y?^-77<g ■^'fPhU ^y-fXL v»f><VggK» SC^!^4S-'>^J>g •ggr ^jU-ir.U JC,^ ^■’P. /^ Y^cWPiL^nc. O'-'lS' >0 Pk-'rr 0)uNrP^u^ ^snAJC. opt 6590 Woodside Lane Shorewood. Minnesota 55331 470-9750 Fax 470-8407 E-mail: SDesignC @ AOL ir I c. ur iUKVtT MJK • , 0 GARY 0' KEEFE LOTS 17 AND 18, BLOCK 1, BALDUR PARK , HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA . LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lots 17 ond 18, Block 1, Boldur Pork This survey intends to show the boundaries of the obove described property, ond the locotion of on existing house, goroge, crtd oil ottn i visible **hordcover” thereon. It does not purport to show ony other improvements or encroochments. o ^ : Denotes iron nnorker ~ Beorings shown ore bosed upon on ossumed dotum Datum: Mean cen I ^i- \\to ' 'csl FROM t Psn«*.;.mc TAD^AX FHOt-lE HO. : Jul. 10 1998 12:08PM P2 I l_l\ t. ».. * I • • • • / iv.iv.JH 1 <.• tt >• ( o' /V » /-V I . ^SETUACK ZO.N'K: (CERCLE ONE) 75'2:.U* 250-500* .500-1000' 77 o . • .... AycnT// ^ > F.yiSTJNG Ha UDCO\T.R TN' 7r)\Tl •A. House ____. 5_______ .X /X 6______ « ^//l____S.F. ......... . .,..». . LtnjcS Wioci '•P'~Z^ ••• • • • • • •••. .X * ’ li* - - ... • C F •- I — ■ ■ • -......... _ X . »• _ S-F’* Ai" ____________________ X *= S F ^ B. Cansc • ' ________1 X « S.F. • • ^ • •» ^ - ■ - # ^ I ■ ■ !■ ■■ ■ ■ j *r*" * ■■■^« • . •• • C. - Driveway ____________ x ______________ *=_______________S.F. _____________:- ■ A___________________« • ‘S.F.“# • • -D. Si'd^wdJVc »•_^ .- .. * X * ^ S F _______________ X ^ S-F.'■ ■' ——I II »ii III II ■^»r»-»»..«.» - , - w - • •• • E. j^iUcHDctiQ-f-rrft^J X _ » /// S.F. ... ——. X . _JI_-Zr_r. “ ■ ______s!f! ■ . *• T. La.nd$c?.pc ______________ x « y/S’Jf S.F. Underlain _________ x ---------------------- ^----------s R By Plaiiic « S F . . Or rubric............................... ............................. .............................. * ______.- X ______________ M _______________S.F. ........ •• ■ ; TOTAL HARDCOVER-IN ZONE ' • ............ . ' ’S-F.** *"A ................ ; -. TO.T.AL-PROPERTY-AREA IN ZONE • ... 7^_? <? ' “S.F. D’ ... • •. . . A- . ------- .H- B . 7P?Z?_..... .X 100 - ________r> . . PROPOSED il.ARDCOVER Rs? 7<PN^ .. M.. A. •.. *H Oy se •. . ■. ** **x ^ ** *** SF"**** * Len|th WidUi • • ... - —----------------------- X m________S.F. . _______________ X = S.F. • ••••.••i*.# » . • .. -. i . , .• . *. ... ■ ■ IW II ............................................. - - , , | • • • • * V- * - * • X • « » SS SaF»* ... .Carafe _________________ x . c, . S.F... . ' C. Driveway ______________ x = ‘ S.F. . . ------------1______ X ~ « . "S.F. • —• • • !•»*•> • . .................................II .11 ■! IKm» ■ ■ ■ ■ ^ D. Sidewalk x & • c p . . .............. -- .................................. ......................., ■------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- » ^ * • * --------------------------- X = S.F. E. Pa«5o/Deck * 'x • « « p —____________ X ______________ *“ • S.F. - -Pr—Landscape—•• — -•.-• '--• • ......x .............. • .............. • S.F. ** *• * • — . Underlain ......... ................ X ” n . 77 “ ! ^ S.Fv • By Plastic “■_______:______ x _ - ' ' S.F. •- ' • Or Fabric .... — .. . ■ .. O. Other . X . . « ...„,. S.F. •• • • ^ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE • ' " S.F."' A ...........TOTAL PROPERT.Y AREA IN ZONE - _____________ S.F. B M* ««••• ■ • ^ * xl 00 ^ •-•».... • • - __5® - • • •• • , ^ • • * • . • •••• • • ••• • ^ . CoHlniGronberOilno. • ■":•*■....■-; '• •■*' •• ••••" ■•• ---- • ".•■■ • i'4 .............482TaiTUira(5kAvO. . ♦. .. ; • .'■ ' Long Lake, MN 55355 : i FRliM • Psn?Sonic TAE*/FAX PhOIE NO • ^^itlUAUv/OXE: (CmcXEONE) .• •'mgiiiig HARDCflvKR iw A. HO'Jltf ' ' Jul. 10 1990 l'2:07Pli P3 250-50y 500 ‘1000 '• I / • • S.F. •* • «•••••■ • • X X X B. Oarc|e •2.y. / - s.p. - S.F. _S.F. fc-*.-•***GV'*. Drivcsva)*-* »»>• 7 j <(H Aa^y) -i<7^ —• • ■ ■ fc#//J* * I • S,F. .X X •H • • . . • *f • . • D. Sidewalk 2*T.t V ? 7 g s.p /<^Sc? 5.F. ■ X X% • •» *« B. Paiio/Dcck ••• • • •X X .. F. Landscape • a — _____________ * . .<------OnaerVftin : ~ By PJsstic Or Faljrlc X X X • • . -i.. . 0. Oihcr /f. y/f r • • TOTAL Hardcover im zone total Property area in zo.4 ••••*••• • aMSa . • • fcRm!OmiiAEnc.OVEn fn zon't:* A. -House —....................... • • •• •,,•...,•1 , *Ltn|)/) • X • • • •— •••, ••*., ,, ,X X X • f _B. G.vpbc -.Oi....P.ri.Vcws7 ^.X X •*. « * D.-.Sidewalk. • •;■.................................................................................... •••#«•I X X E/^Paiid/bdck '/ * • *•• • • X X • t F. Liindi;.ape Underlain - By Plastic Of Fabricj ...... .. G. Other •* I X X X •• •• «•#«»«• hardcover iN ZONE ...^PXAU property area in zone •A - -------------•;: +; 13 v_ *« \ • • •• • t • * •• *.» ••« • • •• • ra LX ?c S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. cs , S.F.,. .. . —§•••:. • S F. /3S S.F. 2 3/f V S.F JV *7 Cy ,/v -------—S.F. '00 *= _______pjp r. A. B Wij’.a •S.J••V !• • * * i». ____S.F. ____-S-.F." ____S.F. S.F. - • • Ct S.F. . s;f .' S.F. S.F. ^S.F. S.F. S.F. S.Fi . S.F. .$.F. 9 . .X 100 « _ S.F. A S.F. B ____» • •Coffin A Gronboif, Ino; 482 Tamarack Avd. ...Lor^^l.vVp 55353 - . t; ‘I • • FRC3M : Panaeonic SLJ back 20.VE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75 PHOME MO. ‘ Jul. 10 1933 12;07PH 250*500' 500-1000'* .• • • • --“mm^G-HARnrovro ns’ 20NT. House . 2. g s ' •.. .* •X Lin^ih Wiilj:S.F.- • • • • » • • • .S X X S.F. S.F. . darjgc..:..___ 2 V, // V.Cl — r_* S.F. • • C. .Driveway... •»• # *•V?g .AF. /fv cj^A£.t. X X b. SiCc\valk ZJA*0 S.H. 2g/g> S.F. C<?l/C. Cc^jfcL <r. g> X .X XPaU^b ________ E3 S3 y^o S.F. 2 Pi S.F. 4’LntL X X rx u # • • • F. Landscape /'f'CJA^CC Underlain ^ /Vo^/7 • • Dy Plaiiic ’ , Or Fobric ~~ •. •. z7 S.F.' 93- S.F. .X X X Ts S.F. 2^0 fF.- _______S.F. • M«%. G. Oiher • •» • • *• • « . »**.... . .T.OXAL HARipCOVER 20WE total property ~area in zone ... ■. - . . S.F. yvzo S.F. • •»• . , ,^ROFO^pD WA^P gOVFR fN 7nNf A. House ® y^o X 100 /S/9 0 S.F. z r. /d -- fo A B • # • • • • • • • •. . Lcntth .WiOOi • «... , S.F. •• s X X X B. Carafe S.F.- . S.F. S.F. .. . • • •I -•• • • ' C.' '-D.-iveway- •* • •*S.Fi •••••••••• ••X X •••»•■ • D. Sidewall: S.F. S.F. •#•••• • X X ...E...P^iIo/R cc J? . . S.J-. S.F. X X • • • %.• •• •.• .•(. • •• , * , • F. Landscape -------UnderTin • • S.F. S.F. I3y Plastic *- ■»»—_i_»* ••••.. ». Of Fabric X X X to V3 s.r. >.Fi ..S.F. ---------- . ..... total HARDCOVER IN ^ONE TOTAL'PROPERTY/J^EA IN ZONE ‘ *. A • _________!1__ -j* B II. .g.j,.. .. • .« •«## % • «4 • • * • ^ • X 100 S.F.”’ A S.F. ■ B % • . • • • • • • « *. • • •• •M.r • ■ • •• •#•..* • • •• * • • •• » • • •*.. 0 0 . 0— 0 0,00 ,0 0 0 0 ■ • ••• • • 00 • •_ Coffin a Oronberg. tno. ■ " 482Tamara(*AV9,....; Long take. MN 55356" • . 4 i ■0tf c CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2370 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMVBSSION *• ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 17, 1998 TO:Gary O'Keefe 4075 Co. Rd. 44 Minnetrista MN 55364 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION; Variance DATE OF MEETING: 06/15/98 VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Tabled to allow applicant to revise plans to be more in conformity with the hardcover limitations. There appeared to be a general consensus that 40% in the 75-250' zone is too much; a figure that received apparent support was to allow 25% hardcover within the combined 75-250' and 0-75' south zones, i.e. 25% of (15,200 + 7,725) or approximately 5,731 s.f. (your surveyor, should confirm the actual areas within each zone). A revised grading plan should be submitted with your revised site plan/house plans. , Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Decline for the July 20 meeting is Friday, July 10. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Planning Commission Monday, July 20, 1998; meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. jig * To;Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From; Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator June 11,1998 Subject: #2370 Gary O'Keefe, 1392 Baldur; ark Road - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2-acre, Sewered Application:Request for hardcover variance, as w’ell as a variance and conditional use permit for grading within 5' of a lot line and within the 0-75' lakeshore protected area to permit construction of a new residence to replace the existing residence. List of Exhibits A - Revised site plan, floor plan, elevation view B - Revised hardcover submittal C - Notice of Planning Commission Action 5-19-98 D - Memo and exhibits of May 14,1998 Planning Commission May 18 Action This item was tabled on May 18 to allow applicant to provide revised plans addressing Planning Commission's concerns. Those concerns include: 75-250' Hardcover should be limited to 40% (6,080 sf) Excavation to create a walkout will not be approved Cutting down the top of the hill received a mixed reaction (3 in favor, 2 against) Revised Proposal Applicant has provided a revised site plan for a 1-story residence with a low’er level that the plan labels as "Walkout Floor", but appears to include daylight windows rather than walkout doors. The house concept has been completely flipped, with the garage now facing to the right rather than the left. The driveway similarly is flipped and would enter Baldur Park road further to the northwest. No second story is evident from the plans submitted. The bulk of the house from the street side appears visually somewhat lower than the first plan, although no elevation view from the lake side has been provided. •if #2370 - O’Keefe June 11,1998 Page 2 ^ .”iV> A revised grading plan has not been submitted, although applicant notes that while the walkout excavation has been abandoned, he would like to do some shaving in the 0-75' zone along the northwest side to match the neighboring elevations. Staff is concerned how this will impact a remaining 20" maple in this area. Hardcover The revised hardcover proposal includes some changes to the driveway and patio concepts. A backup or parking area near the garage is proposed, as well as a "percolating paver" patio at the northwest comer of the house, just off of the kitchen and screen porch. While no detail information has been submitted about the specific paver material proposed, in all past applications the City has considered such materials as hardcover, regardless of their permeability, much the same as weed-control fabrics in landscape beds. Including the patio and reconfigured driveway, proposed hardcover in the 75-250’ zone is 6,505 s.f. or 42.8%, as compared with 41.4% in the first prop)osal and 26.2% existing. Also, the revised proposal has significantly more driveway in the south 0-75’ zone than the first plan, approximately 1100 s.f. as compared to just 600 s.f. See the following comparison table: • .• •• . Hardcover: •>. f .--‘A .'c Existing 1 st Proposal Revised Proposal Allowed 0-75'N. 496sf(6.3%) Osf (0%) 0sf(0%) 0sf(0%) 75-250’ 3985 sf (26.2%) 6288 sf (41.4%) 6,505 sf (42.8%) 3800 sf (25%) 0-75’ S. 2284 sf (29.6%) 605 sf (7.8%) 1.100 sf (14.2%) 0 sff0%^ 6765 sf 6893 sf 7,605 sf 3800 sf A variance to allow 40% hardcover in the 75-250’ zone for a complete rebuild is not necessarily in keeping with the City’s normal practice of holding new construction to a higher hardcover standard than when an existing home is added onto. The primary factor that supports some degree of hardcover variance is that the 75-250' zone is reduced in size by having lake on both ends of the lot. While there is nothing 'magic' about the existing overall site hardcover number (6,765 s.f.), it would appear somewhat inconsistent to allow an increase in hardcover for a total site redevelopment when the total site is already significantly over the hardcover limits. Planning Commission’s suggested reduction of the 75-250’ zone to 40% could have resulted in a plan that was less than 6,765 s.f. overall if the driveway had not increased and the patio was not proposed. If there is a need to have added driveway with the current plan, that need should be documented so that Planning Commission can determine whether it constitues a hardship or is merely a factor in the total site hardcover balance. Planning Commission must weigh all these factors in reaching a recommendation. #2370 - O’Keefe June 11, 1998 Page 3 Lot Coverage Proposed Lot Coverage bv Structures: 1st Proposal: 3664/30,800=11.9% (Meets 15% limit) Revised Proposal: 3638 sf / 30,800 =11.8% (Meets 15% limit) Grading The initially proposed grading plan included lowering the crown of hill by 2-3', including grading within 5' of side lot lines and within 0-75' zone, requiring a variance and CUP. The plan set submitted does not include a revised grading plan, making it impossible to determine the extent of proposed grading under the revised plan. Filling for the proposed driveway may be significant in the area north of the existing garage. No revised detail is provided for the applicant's intended grade matching along the northwest lot line in the north 0-75' zone. A revised grading plan is necessai^' for this application to be adequately reviewed. Because of the potential loss of mature trees in the 0-75' zone, staff has difficulty recommending approval for lowering the hill if that is still intended, although we are advised that one of the two noted 0-75' mature trees in that area (the 20" basswood) has now been removed. It is unclear to staff whether this was related to storm damage. Conceptually, plan revisions that help limit the potentially imposing impact of this residence on the neighborhood are a positive step, but doing so by changing the natural character of the 0-75' zone would not necessarily be appropriate in staffs opinion. A proposal to match the 0-75' grade with the adjacent property may be appropriate but a grading plan is needed to show the extent of w’ork intended. Planning Commission should have this information in hand prior to making a recommendation. Summary of Requests The revised plan still requires three separate approvals: 1. Hardcover variances 2. CUP and variance for excavation of portions of the hill within 5' of lot line and within 75'of lake 3. CUP and variance for land alteration in 0-75' zones to fill in existing foundation and reconfigure driveway Review of Hardships Please review the staff memo of May 14 in regards to the hardship criteria. I i #2370 - O’Keefe June 11,1998 Page 4 Issues for Consideration i.Have adequate hardships b ien demonstrated to support the proposed hardcover variances, which under the revised proposal appear to have increased in overall magnitude rather than decreased? Does the movement of hardcover out of the 0-75' zones into the 75-250' zone, provide adequate justification for an overall site hardcover increase of more than 800 s.f. over the current approximately 6,765 s.f. ? 2. Will Planmng Conunission recommend approval for grading within 5' of the lot boundaries and within the 0-75' zone to lower the hill 2-3' if that is still proposed? A revised grading plan is needed to confirm that no new runoff flows are directed toward the neighboring properties; to confirm the extent of actual grading proposed in the 0-75' zones; and to confirm whether any importation or exportation of fill is needed. Staff Recommendation 1. A revised grading plan is needed in order to confirm the extent of grading required to accomplish the revised site plan. This should be provided for review prior to Planning Commission action. 2. 3. 4. Staff recommends approval of some hardcover variance for the southerly 0-75' zone to accomodate a driveway, but questions the extent of driveway necessary. St^ recommends that the overall site hardcover be limited to the existing 6765 s.f., blowing applicant to decide where to reduce hardcover. If Planning Commission recommends approval for some degree of grade changes in the 0-75' zones, approval should be subject to staff review of the grading and drainage plan to ensure no impacts to neighboring properties, subject to a confirmation that cuts and fills are balanced to limit the importation/exportation of fill, and subject to erosion controls. Staff recommends denial of any grading to create a walkout in the northerly 0-75' zone. Grading should be allowed, however, in the north 0-75' zone to fill in the basement of the existing residence and grade it to match existing contours; and grading should be allowed to accommodate the driveway in the south 0-75 zone. Options for Action 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Recommend approval. Recommend partial approval or conditional approval. Recommend denial. Table for additional information or revisions. Other. I / r yr> T ) I i____ ijji !> !K) '/ 'I*- 'O'- •‘ x't* ** v>^ I »•/)'' '• ..••«♦ r^Tu? *' /O (^-r*M*^riH*- ^ L/ ^<n ^ ----;;)—^-f ■' V.* ; 4 *. \ if Mh. /X'i ' ’ j, ' * lai.\i ? I I f y /fij.ill J-' -1 _ t-. 11 ft \ Vi 1*4 w N. t,fi<r^»>0^ ■ 1/S-^ X cf-x , i' .1 r - .ttfx.' .0 ir> 5 K> I\v. *■ ,t? i • V*' Vi:-V " I H < w ». / I > xJiJ iS?I ^ Ip§ o 1 Iid ^' « w i/ ) C’i *Q ^ t4 > P i‘ t-' li Ct'-i \ f.i VV* i J rC3w^w--''*^'‘'''\;:r.4 ’ yy ''' .*-» T.J. «r f«' .-%•* **f \ /f; mX ■ \ r \ ?,\ \ 0< V ^ C'M ' «r^'t?' V v/i-J... ^4\., @.&| •V 9 \ ♦. .•^r* < / • I/' . r h **f / '■'^w '•^oON v *' / j I i t\ft /| ^ •’ ' <•■ ■’-li •'*1i\ I \ «-I I 1?-------(5)I0UJ> 1 [pn< it*L<s~ " ;; iJlil pj ^ Wj'V V * f M i il M r*->inJi m ■ T- i T “■^x — ::r/i M Ji4 7A » 1 i-Mii "TT-‘crr Oiit «■ F«- sC.J ^'iliiftU -tdl'-.i 1 1 1 J 1i:« f i i/L^ / 1 ii ^ ^ io I • I ■ ^ 1 1 5\ " i i I I I B SIIARRATTDESIGN COMPANY MEETING MEMO TELEPNO Date: &)j Prelect: C} Attending Subject: Initials Company Dkcussion Bv Action Bv _ Date ot=t=-. Poor- Ucwi|s. ppor~ p^t4-r nc- AhnMA&.t,00 O ^ Sgi fiiioi- nm\afc- w/tu ?igj-Kiifie- . JSE; 4m2^SEl __ i .O #' . U •J 5590 Woodside Lane Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 470-9750 Fax 470-8407 E-mail: SDesIgnC @ AOL CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Cn stal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE \itm63-- NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 19, 1998 TO: Gary W. O'Keefe 4075 Co. Rd. 44 Minnetrista MN 55364 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance/Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 05/18/98 VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NO'^ES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Tabled to allow applicant to address issues noted by Planning Commission and provide revised plans. General direction provided by Planning Commission includes: 1. Limit hardcover in the 75-250' 7one to 40% (surveyor established 75-250' zone at 15,200 s.f.±; 40% =6,080 s.f.) 2. Consensus (5 of 5) is that excavation in 0-75' zone for a walkout will not be approved. 3.No consensus was reached on whether cutting down the top of the hill should be allowed (3 in favor of it, 2 against). Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information including revised plans. Deadline for the June 15, 1998 meeting is June 5, 1998. If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional information, please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder -'fter review and approval by the Planning Commission. State Law provides .i.dt Cities shall make decisions on zoning requests within 60 days from the date of application, and that this review period may be extended by notification to the applicant. Your application was received on April 22 and tlie 60-day review period would end on June 22. However, because your application was tabled by the Planning Commission to the June 15 meeting, the earliest potential date of final Council action falls after the 60-day period ends. Therefore, the 60-day review period is hereby extended an additional 60 days to August 22, 1998. G ‘ To;Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator May 14,1998 Subject;#2370 Robert Kuhn/Gary O’Keefe, 1392 Baldur Park Road - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: Application: LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2-acre, Sewered Request for hardcover variance, as well as a variance and conditional use permit for grading within 5' of a lot line and within the 0-75' lakeshore protected area to permit construction of a new residence v^rith walkout level. Note: The O'Keefe's purchase of this property is contingent on variance approval. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Survey (Existing) E - Proposed Site Plan F - Proposed Grading Plan G - Draft House Elevation Views H - Hardcover Calculations I - Neighborhood Topography / Residential Footprints Comparison J - Variance Resolution #2831 adopted July 9,1990 K - Documentation firom Prior Approvals L - Comprehensive Plan Review and Excerpts Pertinent Facts Lot area excl. traveled road = 30,800 sf = 0.71 ac (Exceeds 0.50 ac min. requirement) Lot width = 97.5’ at shoreline, 113' at 75' setback (Exceeds 80% of 100' min. requirement) irements:Required Proposed Lake setback 75'84’ Street setback 30’80' W. side setback 10’29’ E. side setback 10'13' Average setback No encr.No encr. #2370 - O’Keefe May 14, 1998 Page 2 Hardcover: 0-75' N. 75-250' 0-75' S. Existing 496 sf (6.3%) 3985 sf (26.2%) 22S4_sf(29.6%) 6765 sf Proposed Allowed 0sf(0%) 0sf(0%) 6288 sf (41.4%) 3800 sf (25%) 605 sf (7.8%) 0 sf (0%'> 6893 sf 3800 sf Variance 2488 sf (16.4%) 605 sf (7.8%) 3093 sf Proposed Lot Coverage by Structures = 3664/30,800=11.9% (Meets 15% limit) Proposed grading: 1. Intent is to lower crown of hill by 2-3*, including grading within 5* of side lot lines and within 0-75' zone, requiring a variance and CUP. 2.Intent is to excavate \vilhin the 0-75' ikeshore protected zone to create a walkout situation, requiring a variance and CUP. 3. Fill ranging from 1* to 5’ will occur in the 75-250' and southerly 0-75 ’ zones to create a larger flat area for house and driveway. Background The existing house was built in 1910 according to tax records. The detached garage was built in 1973. A variance was granted in 1975 for an addition to the house and basement replacement. In 1989 a variance was granted for 4,940 sf hardcover in the 75-250’ zone and 1,893 sf in the south 0- 75' zone (totalling 6833 sf) for replacement with a new residence. A CUP for grading in the 0-75' zones was also granted to allow for filling in the old house excavation and reworking the driveway. That application included a request to excavate for a walkout, which was denied. The variance approval was renewed in 1990 but was never used, so the current status of the site is as it was prior to the 1989 review. The applicant has provided a site plan showing removal of the existing detached garage near the road, reconstruction/relocation of the driveway, and replacement of the existing 1100 sf footprint house and 584 sf garage with a new residence and attached garage with a footprint totaling 3664 sf. The lot coverage by structures will still be conforming at just under 12%. Hardcover on the site is reduced in the 0-75* zones and increased in the 75-250' zone. There is a net increase r-. about 128 sf over the entire lot by staffs calculation (414 sf per applicants calculation). The proposed hardcover over the entire lot is essentially the same level as was approved in 1989-90. The net effect is to shift a greater portion of the hardcover to locations further from the lake. The house site is atop a hill on the otherwise very low and flat Baldur Park peninsula. Applicant notes that lowering the hill slightly will result in the new residence being somewhat less imposing in its surroundings. Both adjacent homes are lower in the topography than applicants site. Note that #2370 - O’Keefe May 14,1998 Page 3 this is one of the few double lots on the peninsula. However, a portion of that lowering will occur in the northerly 0-75' zone. It appears that 2 mature trees in the 0-75' zone would be removed as a result of this lowering. Applicant also proposes to grade for a walkout. This will require excavation of as much as 6 ’ deep in the 0-75' protected zone where such excavations are not normally allowed, and would likely rsult in a 3rd mature tree being lost. The City has denied a number of such requests in the past, citing Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies that intend to prevent changes to the shoreline landscape (see Exhibit L). In summary, the application essentially requests three separate approval: 1. Hardcover variances 2. CUP and variance for grading to lower the hill within 5' of lot line and within 75' of lake 3. CUP and variance for excavation within 0-75' zones to create a walkout, as well as to fill in existing foundation and reconfigure driveway Tleview of Hardships The applicant submitted a CUP applic'ition fomi rather than a variance form, hence no formal hardship statement was presente 1. Applicant did note the prior hardcover variance approval, and Planning Commission may wish to review the fmdings from the 1989-90 approvals (see Exhibit I). Applicant will be prepared to address the specific justifications for the granting of each of the requested approvals at the May 18 meeting. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship The following criteria must be considered in determining whether adequate hardship exists to grant variances: ... 1. 2. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property contains an existing residence. That residence could potentially be expanded without variances with some revisions to the site plan; however, access to the property is necessarily within the southerly 0-75* zone, so some variance would likely be needed to revise the driveway even if a house was built meeting hardcover requirements. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. #2370 - Gary O’Keefe May 14,1998 Page 4 4. 5. The magnitude ofthe hardcover variances is related to the size and location of the proposed house, factors under control of the applicant. A smaller house and garage could result in a reduction in the magnitude of the hardcover variance in the 75-250' zone. The southerly 0-75' hardcover variance as proposed is the minimum necessary to accomodate the driveway, and this is a factor unique to the property. The variances to do grading work in the 0-75' zone are related specifically to the use to which the applicant wishes to put the property, and are not inherent problems with the lot's buildability :r uniqueness in staff ’s opinion. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Applicant's lot is larger than most other lots in the neighborhood. It also is the highest lot in the neighborhood. The hardcover variance will allow the construction of a residence and attached garage completely within the 75-250'zone. The character ofthis neighborhood has been changing over the last 15 years as the small summer cabins have been enlarged into newer larger homes, typically on 50'lots. None of this upgrade has occurred by combining hvo properties, so the applicant's existing double lot is somewhat unique. The proposed house/garage combination will not be substantially greater in footprint area than other homes/garages in the neighborhood. The proposed 2-level view from the lake side, coupled with the greater width of the house than those on neighboring narrower lots, will potentially make this house dominant in the neighborhood Applicant is attempting to soften this somewhat by lowering the height of the hill so the house can be slightly lower, but at the expense of some mature trees and a slight change in the topography of the shoreline. • ••• Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors have not been suggested as a consideration with this application. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affectec person's land is located. Single j imily residences and attached garages are allowed uses in the LR-IC district. • t I I » ■'i #2370 - O’Keefe May 14,1998 Page 5 6. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. 7. 8. 9. 10. The same hardcover requirements and grading/excavating limitations apply to all residential lakeshore lots in the LR-IC district. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The conditions applying to this lot are the same as those applying to other lots in the LR-l C district. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant has a right to maintain the existing residence, or to construct a new residence on the property that meets City code standards. A new home could be constructed on the property without most of the variances being requested. The granting of the proposed variances will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort) morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Granting of the variances will not impair health, safety, comfort or morals. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. Certain facets of the hardcover variance request are related to the applicants wish for certain size house and garage; the southerly 0r75' hardcover variance is related to the factors inherent in the lot due to the lake being on both ends of the lot. The request for grading in the 0-75'zone is for the convenience of the applicant; the request for a CUP to lower the crown of the hill, while benefiting the applicant to some extent, may also lessen the impact of this home in the context of the neighborhood, but results in the lose of mature trees and changes the natural topography of the shoreline. Issues for Consideration 1.Have adequate hardships been demonstrated to support the proposed hardcover variances? Is the fact that the proposed hardcover variances are similar to those granted in 1989-90, but now with a greater share of the hardcover removed firom the 0-75* zone, a positive factor r #2370 - O’Keefe May 14,1998 Page 6 2. 3. in granting the magnitude of variances requested? Is there a basis to suggest that the hardcover overall should not be increased above the current square footage on the site (approximately 6,765 sf)? Is it appropriate to allow grading within 5' of the lot boundaries and within the 0-75' zone to lower the hill 2-3'? The grading appears to amount to taking 2-3' off an area 50x100' and filling from 2' to 5' deep on the road side of the house to make a larger level building pad; the total amount of earth movement would appear to be in the 500-1000 cubic yard range, a portion of which is required to protect the house foundation. It is a close call as to whether a CUP is needed merely based on excavating in excess of 500 cy; a key factor should be the potential impacts on drainage. The plan appears to not direct new flows toward the neighboring properties. It would also be helpfol to know whether the grading plan requires any importation or e.xportation of fill, or if it's balanced between cuts and fills. Any approval should require the standard erosion control require.ments. Is there sufficient justification to allow excavation in the 0-75' zone to create a walkout? Please review the minutes from the prior variance approval, and the included Comprehensive Plan review and excerpts. Staff Recommendation 1. 2. Staff recommends approval of a hardcover variance for the southerly 0-75' zone to accomodate a driveway. The variance to allow 40% hardcover in the 75-250' zone for a complete rebuild is not necessarily in keeping with the City's normal practice of holding new construction to a higher hardcover standard than when an existing home is added onto. The primary factor that supports some degree of hardcover variance is that the 75-250' zone is reduced in size by having lake on both ends of the lot. The fact that so much hardcover will be required to accomodate a side loading garage suggests that hardcover might be reduced by having an end-load garage, but due to topography it would have to be at a lower level to end up with a reasonably sloped driveway. Planning Commission must weigh all these factors in reaching a recommendation. Because of the loss of mature trees in the 0-75' zone, staff has difficulty recommending approval for lowering the hill. Conceptually, this proposal to help limit the potentially imposing impact of this residence on the neighborhood is a positive step, but the need to change the natural look of the 0-75' zone to accomplish that, is the problem. If Planning Commission recommends approval, it should be subject to City approval of the grading and drainage plan to ensure r ' impacts to neighboring properties, subject to a confirmation that cuts and fills are balanced to limit the importation/exportation of fill, and subject to erosion controls. 1 #2370 - 0"Keefe May 14,1998 Page 7 3. Based on City's history of denial of 0-75' excavation to create walkouts, and based on the goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan, and based on the potential loss of an additional tree, staff recommends denial of the grading to create a walkout in the northerly 0-75' zone. Grading should be allowed, however, in the north 0-75' zone to fill in the basement of the existing residence and grade it to match existing contours. Options for Action A Application it Date Received Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION V « PROPERTY LOCATION "' ’ Site Address 'L R oad • « Type of Application to be Filed C lAP S CL “eoon Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 33 0003 / 4 Phone (home ) /aP- ~ X __________________________Phone (work) ~~ / Address City /)l/AJAl£^/\yy^’2Jvo APPLICANT Name Li/, OWNER (if different than applicant) Name % Jus>Y Address ]3A'l- Phone (home). Phone (work)_ City Zip Date Property Acquired_____________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) LRi -cFEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use ’ $250.00 Land Alteration ^ PP6FfeT2T\/ ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore _ PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _ $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) _ After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee A OTHER APPLICATtjbNS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule 5 i*. '\s, d a REQinRED SUBI JTTALS 1. ^ Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail.2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. X Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govermnent Center, 348G27^ X Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. ___Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. X Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). ___List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). ___Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). ___As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. you ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11” X 17” OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: Date t L aPPLIC/^T'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees 'to provide alf information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date ^ OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. hPP-23-19?3 11:24 pROn IRCMPX OKEEFE ME'IHhNIChL. INC. TO ' 51Z 52« BIS® 612 941 1391 P.03 03 l9SO.ev»-23 XO.SSnM l»2S« KHQVmIvD SUBMHTA5.S 1 ^ Coinplcict! AppUcaUon Fojm. rnejueit Id cJclOjl. PhiKJicc. A-603, Oovw*nn«ni Ccnlci, 34^32^ handout for iurvcy 4. . .>L Ccitificatc uf Survey (siijnr.a by 6 licensed purveyor) ?nfonn«Uftn. .r-«i Snriudud OA required eoivcy. Attach Icff.al dcscripUOn 10 application if not in > dwiations involvo To)'OErnpliic lurvey (cxiBllnj. and proposed contourF) ‘ ’ chanji^^B in ctcvuilvu (erndca) * ^ ftn Interest in List of lUe ic^al namrs (include m«nle alatoa) Of ^ -------the ptopeny. l-his vsnuld Include nomc(g of ConstwcUon plan, if eppllcoble (sec tXtU for vcparalc list of any oUiOi ------AS M *dd«,<lo:.. to this opplicsllon, pl«»to »«"«> » ' ’ psraon* you vfieh notified of ihl# application. you ARE lUiQUmKD TO SUPPLY 30 ^ J'ym*'| for RETROUUCTJON ui“ X )7“ Ofl iWl-IAR ..c to Udrawings of all aubmlttod.) Tiu; AvplleBtil and Pfopftiiy Owner nitiat B\%n this appUCflUon. 5. 0. 7. g. 9,(f^ fiira ! J ’. ' -V I*0 C;> CcrtlfiVBth»n by Clerlcel Depattm«Al that I.etid Use complete._________ InUiRlSofCieilMlStBlT:.---------------------------------— —“ Appjicanl'a alghbtuiei^^>^g^a^ ^ ^hPWNER ‘S SJONATUKI. ^,.u In iWr Bt>p)ic»i ‘«n fmtlicr culhorlacd OwjtBt'B signatuto ^ ^----- A,«-u„ t.,v. .« ,uw«.t, w. d., f.„ .tr,«. JS '•>? w*" J!?; all tshsiwltd revun roc.-lmf. of Iho ‘‘'"'"'"f ,^7.w»“n "o'hwWd «?«"• •»«''> 7'"'' P'“" “"'**’'tclicaut«d meetpte«>^^e «rRt>aW»iCUW tt> hftV8 8R HU.hWlA Buil!ilr»i & J^onlna 01f'«c of llih clmnge prior in the wcclvn;. r^\}\D SC Tnio) P.M.S TOTAL P.03 ni S ®i»a ■' \ j north • • RUN DATE 0^/23/98 BATCH 503 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR .*' OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERPt’ INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OJiNERS LIST 38 08-117-23 31 0001 OlAOO BALDUR PARK RD CHARLES B REID CHARLES B REID lAOO BALDUR PARK RO WAY2ATA ^!N 55391 38 08-117-23 31 000^ 0138<f BALDUR PARK RO M D « J A VERSTEEG MARK D VERSTEEG 138^ BALDUR PARK RD WAY2ATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 31 0007 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED WILLIAM J M FRANKLIN WILLIAM J M FRANKLIN BROADWAY SALES 1000 W BROADWAY MPLS MN 55^11 38 08-117-23 31 0010 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO WILLIAM.J M FRANKLIN WILLIAM J M FRANKLIN BROADWAY SALES 1000 W BROADWAY MPLS MN 55^11 38 08-117-23 3^ 0016 01^12 BALDUR PARK RD C C HAGFORS « K E HAGFORS CURTIS C HAGFORS 1412 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0028 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED REGINALD A SPINOLER R A SPINDLER SPRING FARM 8402 BURROUGHS RD W DEER PARK WA 99006 38 08-117-23 31 0002 01396 BALDUR PARK RD R J « M A WETT TRUSTEES RICHARD S MARGE WETT 1396 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 31 0005 01376 BALDUR PARK RD J WANG « D L BOTHNELL-WANG J WANG SDL BOTHWELL-WANG 1376 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 31 0008 U0038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED WILLIAM J M FRANKLIN WILLIAM J M FRANKLIN BROADWAY SALES 1000 W BROADWAY MPLS m 55411 38 08-117-23 34 0014 01420 BALDUR PARK RD C M JOHNSON S K M F C M JOHNSON S K M F 1420 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 JOHNSON JOliNSON 38 08-117-23 34 0017 01408 BALDUR PARK RO JAMES P WERNER JAMES P WERNER 1408 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 0029 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED REGINALD A SPINOLER R A SPINDLER SPRING FARM 8402 BURROUGHS RD W . DEER PARK WA 99006 REPORT NO, PI435401 PAGE 6 38 08-117-23 31 0003 01392 BALDUR PARK RD R C S J E KUHN ROBERT C S JUDY E KUHN 1392 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 31 0006 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED WILLIAM J M FRANKLIN WILLIAM J M FRANKLIN BROADWAY SALES 1000 W BROADWAY MPLS MN 55411 38 08-117-23 31 0009 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED WILLIAM J M FRANKLIN WILLIAM J M FRANKLIN BROADWAY SALES 1000 W BROADWAY MPLS MN 55411 38 08-117-23 34 0015 01416 BALDUR PARK RD J C ULKU ET AL W/L EST RUBY E & JOHN C ULKU 1416 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 Oa-117-23 34 0018- 01404 BALDUR PARK RD CHARLES AFFIAS CHARLES AFFIAS 2634 JERSEY AVE S ST LOUIS PARK NN 55426 v ( i’ .Vr^ 38 08-117-23 34 0030 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED REGINALD A SPINDLER R A SPINDLER SPRING FARM 8402 BURROUGHS RD W DEER PARK WA 99006 0 * p . . ^ I ^ I RUN DATE OA/23/98 BATCH 503 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 38 08-117-23 34 0031 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED REGINALD A SPINDLER R A SPINDLER SPRING FARM 8402 BURROUGHS RD N DEER PARK WA 99006 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 08-117-23 0034 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN SS323 V r r n Vs d/ REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 7 38 08-117-23 34 0032 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED REGINALD A SPINDLER R A SPINDLER SPRING FARM 8402 DURR0U6HS RD W DEER PARK WA 99006 38 08-117-23 34 0033 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED HAROLD R KITCHEN HAROLD KITCHEN BOX 418 NISS^'IA MN 56468 38 08-117-23 34 0059 01428 BALOUR PARK RD THE HELI ROTH TRUST GUENTHER & HELI ROTH /TRSTES 1428 BALDUR PARK RD WAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 503 00023 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE ffi'iddrA U O ^l -I ■ I 1 \ I I CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR- GARY O'KEEFE OF LOTS 17 AND 18. BLOCK 1, BALDUR PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA ► *• .-Ji LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lots 17 and 18, Block 1, Bddur Pork This survey Intends to show the boundorles of the above described property, and the location of on existing house, garage, and all other visible "hardcover" thereon. It does not purport to show ony other Improvements “or encroachments. o : Denotes Iron morker Bearings shown are based upon on assumed datum Dotuiiu Muoii 360 lave' 0-75 FT. ZONE AREA: 16570+- S. F. > 75 FT. ZONE AREA: 15190+- S. F. A/rs / ■51 o I .J oesicreo DRAWN REVISION DATE OESCRPTON COFFIN St GRONBERG, INC. 482 TAMARACK AVENUE, LONG LAKE, MN. 55356 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _—AJL4J_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I HEREBY CERirV THAT THS PLAN, SPECflCATWN, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DRECT SUPERVI90N AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENCtCER UNDER THE LAWS or TfC STATE OF MV#CSOTA.DATE 4/27/98 JOBUMOJ V. *:^ ^ . .. .................... -»•• : • / .•V . ' ’ • / . *.• '•• ••• * , • .•• .* ----- $ i/i ti ej,--—............................................-----I*:*:-------------- _________ — oooo\ __________Ii:.::::in- "--------------------- ^-">--'L \ —....../ 'v 'v I r-j \ '----J y / V X \ J4 9» -------°Ck I $1^ ] rrrt? . ? %• H %•(^ .1 ' # •i%« V r'v'n"";; I ! ’'V--\. ;.,• i •;*•■ *. - r.t'. I. ' ^ . ■*«• K«»» •• • ^ rw-.rr—rTf / 4.^.T—1 ;.. \-V..--i 5 »jkiirlgfe ilV.*: 'J r i • ■••i'r" ’ ‘ • •• *. ■ *• --.-..V-••; ,• : •• . v. V . '•.** i\ . :•' T ' .u.’Oi* •A « y»;, .-, . - - ■ -♦ • • • . —• n • .* *^t .*• i I. . • •• • • • • • *. • . / ’ ‘•>;:!'> : r;v. "::;•• • :.*V • •* .. .;• ■. . • • • .••• • '■V- ■• •..’"■ '.- • ' :'A-* •• • * *.1 .. .*x \ • ^ Vv •:V/;-v' ■•■• • 'r ■ ■• < • HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) (o^5^ 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ____________ X ^oo~tW •3?)4 . S.F. Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X cs rs D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain X X By PIsistic G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE a + B X 100 «o O tH \^\Ce> e>'lS3 3i£. PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ._________X Length Width X X X D. Garage C. Driveway X X 9^^ D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. 44 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _____S.F. A _____S.F. B 1^,'Z % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. g>feO.S.F. • S.F. J S.F. S.F.a S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ . + B ^ X 100 11 S.F. 660 S.F. S.F. 10 > ^ A B HARDCO\TER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' f 75-250*: 250-500’ EXISTING HARDCOVER TN ZnXT; A, House X Length Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Length Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk ♦ E. Patio/Deck F, Landscape Underlain By Plastic G, Other X X X X X • X X X X X X X 500-1000 ’ n \ <2:? s.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S4 s.F. s.F. l<2?o ss4 176 Site? S.F. S.F. S.F. • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. = S.F. S.F. A S.F. B % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. m,t . V-N S.F. \ <^eT\C? S.F. ' S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. > ^ V V:5' 'Tn. ** -1- }": •S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE^ ___ <2?\ 4n B X100 » S.F. A I S1S"\ S.F. B % ir LOT AREA, LOT WIDTH, HARDCOVER - 1392 Baldur Park Road V Gross Lot Area 31,750 sf = 0.73 acre Portion in traveled road - 950 sf Net Lot Area 30,800 sf = 0.71 acre (Exceeds 0.5 acre min. of LR-IC zone) Lot Width: At shoreline: 97.5' (Exceeds 80% of 100' min. reqmt. for LR-IC Lot of Recor At 75' setback line: 113' (Exceeds 100' min reqmt.) Hardcover Zones: 0-75' North 75-250' 0-75' South Area=105'x75' = 7,875 sf± Area = 15,200 sf± (per Surveyor) Area = 30,800-7,875-15,200 = 7,725 sf ± EXISTING HARDCOVER: • i I I 0-75'North: House (26.5x14.5) Deck / steps (8x 12) + (4x4) 384 sf 112^ 496 sf / 7,875 = 6.3%’'(SO 75-250':House (26.5x41.6)-384 Det. Garage (24.1x24.2)-(4x24.1) Driveway (1250+975+240) Steps, patios (5x6)+(4x30)+(6x9)+(6xl0) Timber walls & borders (0.5x100) 718 sf 488 sf 2,465 sf 264 sf 50 sf 3,985 sf/15,200 = 26.2%ll.y 0-75' South: Part Garage (4x24.1) Gravel Driveway (112+660+220+1056) Timber walls & borders (280x0.5) 96 sf 2,048 sf 140 sf 2,284 sf / 7,725 = 29.6%\ iG>1 PROPOSED HARDCOVER:/.. • •' - • 0-75'North: NONE 0sf=0% 75-250':House and Garage (See sketch) Patios and walks (See sketch) Driveway (See sketch) 3,364 sf 896 sf 1.728 sf 6,288 sf/15,200 = 41.4% 0-75' South: Driveway (See sketch)605 sf / 7,725 = 7.8% Total Existing Hardcover = 496+3985+2284= 6,765 sf / 30,800 = 22%of total lot Total Proposed Hardcover = 6288+605 = 6,893 sf / 30,800 = 22.4% of total lot -'1 1 / 1 /^ . Vi f >\ 1 lA 1 «\ ^s j I A 1 *"1 LL^ 1 1 / <ffV1 \ ------- y ZQ 5/ V iP OicniL 5wvd mnvg • • 71- I .if^opo5e:«^j\A/e/!Sc^i/^e?e •^MlVMTvWMOM.Kfcefc • # — ________ ____ -------------------- pl^OfoSCb. bY Of We/6.K/5oe.|^Ofc^ |4£iu£<^^„AAA&-f F^Tfttl^TS 2AZk^ r-/&o iD acro Sr ^ r«- • l» OI •» 5694427 SSSSi, City of ORO1N0' X RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO___2831 Vi0f(kjf7!3 A RESOLUTION GRANTING RENEWAL VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 & 2 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8, AND GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE #1544 TftAHSFER C^..^?S)3>^.1YIiXlfUaS4€GeH^ AUG 21 1990 WHEREAS, Roger and Becky Berry (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1392 Baldur Park Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City”) and legally described as follows: Lots 17 and 18, Block 1, Baldur Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property”); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for renewal of variances previously granted to permit construction of a new residence to replace the existing residence on the property, requiring a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to permit a 2' encroachment past the average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed, and a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow hardcover in the southerly 0-75' and in the 75-250' zone in excess of the hardcover normally allowed in those zones, and for a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and variance to Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit the regrading of portions of the property located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no grading is normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1544 2. The property is located in the LR-lC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The property is approximately 0.71 acres in area. Page 1 of 6 Mi City of « •i WL 'R/ONO. \vJ.tVi RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2831 _________ 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed the original application #1363 on January 17, 1989 and February 21, 1989, and recommended approval of the applicants' revised request for variances and a conditional use permit based on the following findings: A) Hardcover is being totally removed from the northerly 0-75' zone and is not increasing in the southerly 0-75' zone. This is a substantial benefit to the property and to the neighborhood in regard to quality of runoff entering Lake Minnetonka. B) The hardcover increase in the 75-250' zone from 26.5% to 31.9% is justified by removals in the 0-75' zone, which yield a reduction from 8.8% to 0% hardcover in the northerly 0-75' zone. All of the proposed hardcover is necessary to preserve the substantial property rights of the owners in developing this property. C) The average lakeshore setback encroachment of 2' is appropriate given that the actual views of the lake enjoyed by neighboring property owners will substantially increase as a result of removal of the existing house. Furthermore, encroachment of the proposed house past the average setback line is necessary to preserve an existing mature oak tree on the property without redesigning the proposed residence. D) The variances requested are consistent with variances granted for upgrade of other residences in the Baldur Park neighborhood.in recent years. E) The unique elevated nature of the property in relation to the surrounding properties, suggests- that the residence must be located near the highest elevation and further from the road in order to benefit from the northerly view fo the lake, and therefore requires a longer driveway with its associated hardcover. Page 2 of 6 City of OltOlNO ‘ {hif: '• •'•RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUI^t'lL NO. ■ 2831 _______a^Si; 0r il, 'i>J} for grading in the 0-75' zone is necessary to allow applicant to fill in the excavation that will remain after the existing house is removed/ with a blending in of the grade to existing contours. The applicants have revised the house plans so that their walkout concept can be developed without the need to change grades from those naturally occuring in the northerly 0-75' zone. In the southerly 0-75' zone, minor grade changes to reconstruct the driveway are necessary to provide a safe and low-hardcover access to the property. 5. The Planning Commission reviewed application #1544 oh June 18/ 1990 and on a vote of 6-0 recommended approval/ finding no changes proposed from the approval granted in Resolution #2587 adopted March 13/ 1989. 6. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions/ light/ air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants/ but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. • 7. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit for the proposed grading in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone will not be detrimental to the health/ safaty or general welfare of the public/ would not adversely affect light/ air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties/ nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 3 of 6 i City of OFtONO Z'r •*■ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL . «r. ■‘f.v w\ .-I V, viV^-*n A ix*- ©NOg NO. 2831 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of "the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to allow an encroachment of 2' past the average lakeshore setback zone where no encroachment is normally allowed, and grants a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow hardcover of 25.1% in the southerly 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no hardcover is normally allowed, and allow 31.9% hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone where only 25% hardcover is iiormally allowed, and grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 and a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to allow regrading of the yard areas in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where filling and grading is normally not allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1. Construction shall adhere to the site plan attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. 2. All hardcover in the northerly 0-75' lakeshore setback zone shall be removed. In the southerly 0-75' lakeshore setback zone, the existing detached garage shall be removed and the driveway shall be reconstructed in a manner such that hardcover in that zone shall not exceed 1.-893 s.f. In the 75-250' zone, hardcover shall not exceed 31.9% or 4,940 s.f. The existing detached garage and hardcover surrounding it shall be removed, and a third garage stall shall be attached to the proposed residence per the site plan. Exhibit A. 3. Per applicants' revised proposal, the grading in the northerly 0-75' zone shall be limi.ted to that work necessary only to bring that excavation remaining from the removed residence back to pre-existing grades conforming with the shape and slope of the pre-existing topography. No cuts in the 0-75' setback zone have been approved for creation of a walkout. In the so,utherly 0—75' zone, grading is allowed as necessary to minimize the length and slope of the driveway as well as the hardcover associated with it. All areas in the 0-75' zone shall be immediately seeded or sodded after completion of grading, and all grading work on the property shall be subject to erosion control measures as may be required by the City. Page 4 of* 6 •f >» i‘ •• • "mi City of OROrVQ • ♦.•*l. •.' ' V*• ' J • ••. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCI VM; " NO. *“2831 applicant is advised that no additional hardcover wi^lr-l^be allowed on this property in excess of that granted with the current variance request, but any future proposal to add hardcover on the property might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent removals of existing hardcover, resulting in no net increase in hardcover on the property. 5. Applicants are further advised that the traveled portion of Baldur Park Road extends within the property boundaries and the City may at some future date request additional right-of-way to accommodate that roadway. (Granting of additional right-of-way is not a condition of the current variance approval.) 6. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (July 9, 1991). 7. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby a^ree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of txtle of the property. July, 199P Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of in. City ClgjiJc Property Owner( Page 5 of 6 < « City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2831__________ • • V / > > > i, STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. -(At. - • - ).t The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of July, 1990, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the Cit STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) 88. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this before n appeared 3rd day of before me a^ Uota:py Public wi^in and _ _ _ JC u CT rrc/| . . .. . ... . .^ ^ known to me to be the (^rsonTs) defsjbribed in and who executed the 4m>L<Af-________. i9?P I for^sa^ county, personally Qimg rV_ _ _ _ ___ foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOMW PUBUO ^MNN^A HENNEPIN COUim ^ Wy cormnJjsion cxpiras M-92 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of _____________________, 199__, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 6 of < A i . V V.PZA^J To:Planning Corrunission Chairman Kelly Oror.o Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Proa Michael P* Gaffron, Aest Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:January 11, 1989 Subject: #1363 Roger & Becky Derry, 1^92 Baldur Park Road - Variancs/CUP - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IC, single family, 1/2 acre, sewered Appldcatioa - Request for variances for hardcover, lakeshore setback, cn average lakeshore setback. CUP/variance for grade changes in 0-75 lakeshore setback zone. juiot of Exhibit A ~ Exhibit 3 ~ Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit 2 - Sxh.ibi t ? - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Exhibit K - Exhibit I. - Application Plat Map- Property Owners List Neighboring Property Owner Acknowledgements Survey With Existing Site Plan Swirvey With Proposed Site Plan Preliminary Elevation Views . . Prellaiinary Floor Plans Proposed Grading Plan Hardcover Calculations Submitted Hardcover Review by Staff Baldur Park Area Variance Listing Fexxinent Pacts - 1* m The property ip bordered on the north and south ends by Lak: Minnetonka, Per staff calculations, hardcover in the various zones is surrat^arizec. as follows: Existina 0-75’(S) ■>r?-2!50‘ 0-75’(N) 1,093 s.f. (25.U) 4,110 <26.'o%) 697 s.f. ( 8,8%) Proposed 1,893 s.f. (25.1%) 6,043 s.f. (39.0%) 362 -s.f. ( 4.6%) Zone Area 7,548 s.f. 15,500 s.r. 7,950 s.f. TOTAL 0-V5' in & S) 2,590 s.f. (16.7%)2,255 s.f. (14.6%) 15,498 s.f. In the 0-75* zones, there is a net hardcover decrease of 335 s.f. 75-250* zone, there is a net hardcover increase of 1,933 r /• Overall, there is a net hardcover i ncrea&e on the property of Ir'"-' s.f. Please review Exhibit K for a more detailed layout of hardc-^'"- on this property. • \In t!t? north 0-75’ rcr.e, the exinstino house encroaches l‘'•' in*<- average setback 2 o . The proposed residence w 5 ) 1 o r. ••• ^ c.pvroxir.?teiy r’’ in-lo the a<-erage setback zone, with decks f'-rt-r'-'' approxinatel}’ H' into that r.c-ne. *<. j •*> ;■•■»-’m > / • r-ft »♦ ft^-»vy. .v ’^ ‘>.V-'•‘ H .. I ' f r j > A ^L' . \V'r>'' -.r^rX---' r- ■ - ' . '.'V '‘..C'w .- 4i •-' r ' .' , •'!.” ^ • > "V»'<T;8** ‘%I • * . . . * *is--- S- *y..- <•'-,,S ^ V<;-.s, .-. ^.v^r'■'•■>•ii•» <v-J -\}‘ -A,i■ r::v •'■• . . S.‘ -‘^ r ^ * liivrif.' l^'^Pr r» : #«..v y<."<' !>•' '-^ ■jr - • 7c>ninft Pilft ilWJ Jnruary II. r*«|«* 2 of < ..;s.s :•,!> that avora^efi *5* Crco the fthrrollno. Tho l.rotoftt^ hoftro ^Mructlow rcftultt in a net decrraao of atrwcturo In i-ho north 0*“5 aono.- . J. Tha atilicanta are aware of the City eoden •■***«'•*f***^^***‘^^"*J55 nlructiirea .o ooet reflnirrd nethackn However, their Intoal In lequeatlne the tc ireaerve a 24- tfianeter rod oak ttoo at the a^thraat waor of the houae. Movine the |ro|o»ed houae 10 /i**,^r* required ai'tlsicka would likely reault In doHiructlon of that tree. 4.Cradire |.lar. Ptaff lequcftod a **^***’♦**}***!*')^jf !P?hr*houae.^to .lerty. alone>it:. elovatlcna of all Jif,!?thin ^»o^erty. aione w»ra noveTiom.^. «.. "‘"Ijr ' * 'J7,v ' *w verify how eradra will he chanqod. . The "*7*,|t "liJl larqor and avtead out than the exlallre aval I *'<*”^* rS'iJ*?!! «r«\rc|.<»llHl to oako aot«> ota.1.; ••►•'>•''' fitivcway area tc acroiw!ioaat.r tliHr hcuar laycut. The wi 11 he f 11 led with 1-5* of oatei lal In mdot to »''en oat ®f the driveway, la the aeuth 0-7f rone. flJllne above the exiarine driveway aa rueh ««» ^ • *^*l.*?*J*>y ^^— orieInal qrade al>out 50 ‘ fiw. the ahoreltne. *•• . in« •he a|.i2leanta are |.roioalne euta *11 **^K/^^ten? Is te45* fioo the shoreline and weikine inte tin* hill, .he InteM la e rreato a walkout level. 0 |.ertlen of tbla IiTfVlM te I aaener* area of the erlat Ire heuao. ao the «*•*»'**' Tlt Jeon'tIe eoved In the north 0-7^* tone la eatirated l-v aia.f .*» between .. and 100 eiiMr yntda. The <*i»\ Fi!uir»M*r haa »*eor rfquea*»d te j»*vitw tl*« } * i!* I :.ir, and Ma iieifonta ate fXiretrd to »•• ?«eei*.e.t |ii*« ‘ f* l«' ' hearinn. “•"”1?? « h,..- l^f....- .. .s ................... . 1M..« ..f -n -MtHj. ^'y' heuae and eonatrurt Ion ef a nurh lai«-t *‘‘»’'*^*'r**** *'"’ *'’’*•* 2 Thia re-develoint nt ».f th** li.il.'ut l*.u» | .m !t *«i. I.* ateady rate ef aniealaately t»nf irwli!**nee I**'' '•••■»**. .••• l€*«r*P.<»»t in fiiPitiAf If n»«tiitf# blit • ti«* In iif'ltiii*' la 11 !»lt- .•• i^'TcrVu.. 11 "t . OmM.- I.- il<> ..V.-....- ............ .............. ’•' •• •' tet»tl let .*t**a e! ala••^• •••.•*•-;'mH•! et ar • «•• “k*' rev •»’/1 ia • *•• si* t f. • i;niny*' »*5*• •! • ?•< • 4 » ! ^ . % • • * • •at* • ••* ^ I* r.''« e!*ane*-a te t!** c-l .•*• .le* • ••• t.• • »••.» •• ; ;aH**»teie p».*»-.ieV \ ercfe.ifh »l»* ♦*'•* |?e\* ••;sV f at vt •• • t« ••» *•*■ t *•'• t t' :•■•*• hill. ,, • • I* " •:•«*• • ^•ai|.ft.§ 1 ••*1 •••• 4t«****.l •••*•| I . • • • .* !• • • • T • • ,. • .•*•:• a . t a ft V* •;. «.,».•• ••- - ....................... •• a »•••. aaft.* •• •**• |.a I. %n%a. • ,1 • ....................... I ‘1 ! I > :‘r M I e a 1^*!>. •so *V • <•• *, - T*^TvT.' »v.. . W i» tiA q ,4 * 3; V v ‘V*- •. * 0.: • V.. •* •. •• * 1 •/i. . AfifiuuQ a 10'^ fliopo iRiiaodiiitoly garago accosa situation aeeaa i-atl.ar.,flW«*^^®®*^^*V?' ‘ ‘ ^ Ba.od o. tho location o2 th. '<^"9 ^ ____,...4.v.t^^v ranoi-o;»f?hEient !• Toduced unoer ^n® :'.^•VV/J’*»,:'.r ’" V\- *'.•• ■*. . */. _ 3. '. Saaed on the location o2 the exlating ana p^rop^ ,....... _ .. ■ average aetbuck oncroachnont is restricted by construction of. . “ismificuuu existing site linos aro further restricted by const the notf house. . -< *'■►«.•«» v_ WfVr-1 * ’ . . r- • »* • • • - V;>TirW -i Rogcroing hardcover, the by the relative siso of hardcover on the property are the hardcover increases the property, but the steep al«>P«» overall hardcover on the property laore significant than on flat \otB, Overaii n ^ structural incroasos from 6,700 s.f. to ^,300 e^f. The^J»o^^^^^^^ hardcover on the Property is ®o'« “wards the high end of what has 250' aone from 26.56 to 396 is -.v* total proponed hardcover, typically been approved on a i^ h^dcoSer! is proposed at Bhlun e« a percent of the total lot area Ij ^^laur Park (see -'3*, which is very typical of what has ocuatir- W4 4. T.l (•^ Exhibit L). ii ipli ‘"SS" ““:Sfl . lak^choro: safebacMa/ ? Shi8 rcQuiPoaont xottld be conei»tent.vita ^ ^ . City practice -in aiuiilar :ait^u^o»s. ' v,.\^ * • - • ■ - •'• • . *» ' • . C i garage Into 'porbnpe a‘three-car S«f«9«v of hardcover lr4crcaco on .^he property. ’ by chs City/ aXthough tho magnitude of this request le rexarrvoxy minor co7>par&d to those other cases. ... 2.._. •*;■*/*,**• ^ V' .'• jf-y* V- • • V. ; . 4. PM4erT.tlon of i.»tuto tr«.n on .. a ro«.on.bl. h.rd.hip, »>o=«Viv?”l!;.V«ocfloi".i ylUid troS potential vortical harshness of this construction as vie across the.lake. ; 5. The proposed fill generally occurxng thwob! apparently necessitated by tho f^inc in what could be ei?..ln«tlng a more aevore walk-out c«t, in a problem driveway V few foot‘to help tneaoao aroao. The garage could be loworea^a rw r f grading situation. Drainage must be directed down tne lot xxnes not on to neighboring properties. i.l.nnlng Co™i..ion 1. r.qu..«d « '“'lyto* the City Council or to give applicants direction to revise tne requeau bring back an alternative site plan. >!' t, \\ i k£ * * • r,^ : •• •• AV's--.r'=>,-':-c. •..•'••■ • •'* I I: • • • % 9 I* PeoPos€fi> c«<trr/**^ Q '-2,' ot^ /^ • s Qp i^o<Ase TO /IU.&CO UnAUliCiMT P(Z«<>ose^ fll^^ , .z; pge^ /IiZ0KMO S.5'®® e>p pje.oPose^ flUJNU j’-5' J>ef‘TH^ f/o x>itmMffi /K^A sc4i,<r *• / jzv^:Ye> • ! '.» \ 1. ♦. ^ :l^f. . ...• • ■'e: « ‘*.^.•5 d* •* • r<PM:-. * • •* • - • ^0A ‘ . V ';-»V5?;'5.. ■■ '• •« '■m-m Wi ;•• 'y^’‘.{ ■>•• ••*<. ■* ^ Jmi-m to VxA i -.'-jff> '; ■- .i> ? ^ ’-W'! * -vr-:- r* SCHT-'C ra« «1362-3»3SSa thia'-P^foP®®*^ with hio■fcha applicant i- ho jj® had and the noishbor tonoignborn? ' Mr. *®5« schoonwottor explained that thothe ecuth had no cojo—wicna. Mr. ._, _ n»i.nlv hecauso ha wan___ *4.>,« «oi*th had no.opinion*,„naxnAy .-.•loe.t.a on point. orjM^v poninsula»o,-:nfl i* this property. ^ - .. .• . ■,. s'. • ■ : )00^i ■ •aote vor. no eoooont. f«n tb. publlo r.,.rdln9 thi. ..ttor., ^ :.;f^0ii and tho public hearing waa cloiod. • • ':• > •; } . . 'i * ■ ' • * • : 4 ^ v-i:4•#r • #•••' :’0 'WM, It was-Boyed by cb.ltnM *«ii?;'.'*i*®"4\\cltiln conniSJlon'^'cbJcn- %aubiaet to . haracovor tyyuotlon ol 417 ^ .ntbaob,-... t • gource"' ■ - :• • ■ ' ubject to a hardcover V‘iaVoThoro^ vailabl«_»' *iication would bo tha propattyVv;;::, . , .^:Si^o "^^Krd^h^ t^h^a'fddiUorbo^r^ I V •; ' . •■ • • • TtOeSR 6 S3SKHY • • '. / v • axsxoa PhKX KCA2» ' . HJUJCiiS . '*■. '•'• ' • '■ jC HSAKZl^^ <iJs42 i*oMo ** 8l55 P#No a.i#i—»v4b .s'? Matlinc woroThe Affidavit ox Publication ead Cortificato o — "4 . * ■•iul/ noted. The applicants were present for this laatter. .*■. M oxpUlneO b'/ »'3.1.tant PUnnln^and'aonln^^ GaffroAp the Borry'a cS!rSntlV the hardcover onan existing renidonce and rebuUjS. ^ driveway :ra nov rosidenco with - i^crchp docK alig.-tly _ivevay would xtiielr. a’^^he Berry's to maintain thairoooor. It is the intentior of the Berry s^^ garage, it detached garage, in order to the yard by bringing inIn order to a-;cess the new, bo n>c..,«y to rnlsn . fill in tho south 0-75' *°*\V „ VT >T «®^h 0-75*out which will require ^ don^^^ locate tho - - one of tho .treasons the Berry p ‘ to preserve^a2one. One of tho reasons the Berry s -- preserve a W^’.m^r ■iyi > •_■*■’ . i -j/w- ‘^Vi Planning Commisaioner Bellows expressed her reservations .O-W- 'At ' lv •>'*.■ Ct ^^*^i**c_- -• C 5t "•Se/:- ?i. 8 S A • • • ••• .* .*•- . ;-.i .I-'.^/^'.'V«»'. i • • i^av< ■ r«*« ©orxy;.oxplainc^ —■— .-— Buch dif^aroACo.than che>xlBtin9 Daseaaav » ** vV ‘. ' ■ »■ " ■ • . ■ *' facaa, the Dov«io?er for . V irry*o,V proaontad ahovlca tho esiotin? raoidGacc , ^ ‘%rago ana tno oa^c a'aVbricf daacription of what ha #aa ^opoaing to Plaaaing Coanioaloaer HaaaoB ? not bolleva tbo fit veil vitb'tha site. .* • •- \ %fM»- SR believe there should be a need for varlancas. Tiiore- varerao cossaeats fron tha public ragarding this natter aad the public hearing waa closed. It vas moved by Planning Coanissionar Cohen# Planning Commlsslonor Moos, to table this item. sons direction for tho applicants. Tho not want to soa any hardcover or cutting and filling on tha nortn side in the 0-75*. Within tha 0-75* sons on attached garage must bo offset by removal of tha /Vsl Mr. Sorry oxpraased his desire to ri^o^lt detached garage had to be removed. Within the was tho concensus of the Planning adhere to than 30t hardcover. They also wanted tha -wieanta tho average lakashora setback. that coff.?liance with tha Planning «°*^^®®Kr?le? cause a oubstantlal reduction in tho sis# AA‘«/house suggested that a footprint be drawn prior to plan. The applicant questioned the Planning Jegarding the valk-oul: Kelley stated that they 7“ ^ cradlnl in a valk-out to be cut on the north side if It ^us?------- The natural contours of the property mustthe 0-75' sone.V.1IO V— #.s --------------remain. Motion, Ayes-7, Nays-0, Motion passed. /r! *r- . ■- • i ‘ - Wav*ata » KN 553^1 Tablad'^.for reaaonB noted bolov. ***^V*j? *^j^**>* ■** ■ * 0 ' • K0 ’J23 «BD SP2C1AL CCUO^OTCfiSSl . ' . : :^ ^ to .lio» dpjlleont. opport^ ptopo«l. .. direction ..given to applicants by Planning CoBmiasi 1. Northerly 0-75* aonot a) Slininato all hard^ve^ noceasary to rootore oldb) h*o cut//ill/grading except as noc aradaa.' baeonent excovation to blond with exlating graaea. General ^ a ■1 ! r • ■ A: ' .>’i )r' •.< wsi 2. Southerly 0-75* ^onoi asBoclated with detached *’ “Sw."cois?d«“.S‘«ln9 dotochod 9«.9. wi« 3-atall garage. 3. 75-250' Zone* . a) Meet average a f ) in 75-250' cone.b) Limit hardcover to 30% (4,650 e.r.J in Applicants' next ®®?^J"%e®ruary^2l”^ 19^8?i® Monday, KS^rSrrJ-iaf in all casec, the application must ®®"^^"c\\y^til^^*con^^ tho requested information within 90 days or the City wi application as foimally withdrawn. Xf to, .ppu-nt h„ trooM, .bt.lnl.9 .ddltlon.l iofcr..tlcn, plca« contact the Zoning Department (47 j'735V.. XX peu d„iro certiXiod cople. Of to, „XX^ minutes, they ore available from the City approval by the Planning Commission. W- p: m-' fr:< I * •■J * I ..• : • [ y • • 4-f Orono Comprehensive Plan: Review Re: Lakeshore Alterations The 1980 City of Orono Community Management Plan ("Comprehensive Plan") contains a number of general land use and environmental protection goals and policies with which the proposed land alteration would be inconsistent. Specifically, General Land Use Policy No. 6 on page 4-13 indicates that "lake shorelines will be protected from alteration. Shoreland areas, whether bluff, beach or flood plain, are sensitive environmental features with significant impact on lake water quality, aesthetic values and land use function. These same factors act to draw development which can be destructive if not properly regulated. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clear cutting will be prohibited ...". In General Land Use Policy No. 13, the Comprehensive Plan slates "future developments must enhance the environment. Land development should respect and enhance the unique natural features of the site and the general environmental assets of the community. Preservation of natural views, vegetation, drainage and general respect for unique site features always producing more aesthetic results and lasting value for the property owner and the community than does wholesale alteration of the landscape or mathematical division to the highest possible density." The Environmental Protection Goals on page 3-20 include the following: "Lake shorelines will be protected fi-om alteration. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clear cutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, natural stone rip rap shoreline protection will be encouraged." The City has on numerous past occasions relied on these and other principles contained within the Comprehensive Plan, to deny land alteration conditional use permits and specifically, variances for grading within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone, in cases where excavation and lowering of the natural lakeshore grades was proposed in order to, for instance, allow the creation of a walkout residence. The City has long taken the position that such excavations create an artificial and unnatural lakeshore appearance. t;: 1^ 4-2 \ AND USE JUNE, 1980 • 3. DEVELOPMENT DENSITY WILL BE LIMITED THROUGHOUT THE CITY TO A LEVEL WHICH V7ILL NOT OVERLOAD THE NATURAL SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE AND FILTRATION SYSTEM. Urbanization Increases the speed and quantity of surface runoff while decreasing the water quality. Developed land use densities will be determined by comparison between known levels of volume and pollution generation and known marshland capacity for ponding and nutrient assimilation. 4. THE WETLANDS AND MARSHLANDS OF THE CITY WILL BE PROTECTED AND . PRESERVED AS WILDLIFE HABITATS, AS UNIQUE OPEN SPACES, AND AS THE ONLY ECONOMICALLY PRACTICAL METHOD OF FLOOD PROTECTION AND STORM WATER RUNOFF FILTRATION. Wetlands, drainageways and floodplains will be protected from encroachment and from alteration or destruction by filling, grading, excavation or drainage. Wherever possible, the City will acquire open space and flowage ease ments for conservation of these lands. 5. PROTECTION OF LAKE RESOURCES WILL ALLOW REASONABLE ACCESS, USE AND ENJOYMENT WHILE PREVENTING OVERCROWDING AND EXCESSIVE ENCROACHMENT. In conformance with Mn. DNR Shoreline Management regulations for recreational development lakes, Orono will prohibit overly dense development within 1,000 feet of Lake Minnetonka. Lake use regulations will be promoted to limit excessive boat density and overuse of sensitive bays. Land use regulations will be developed to provide reasonable control over building density, land alteration and lakeshore encroachment. 6. LAKE SHORELINES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALTERATION. Shoreland areas, whether bluff, beach’or floodplain, are sensitive environmental features with significant impact on lake water quality, aesthetic values and land use function. Those same factors act to draw development which can be destructive if not properly regulated. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reason able in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clear- cutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, material stone rip rap shoreline protection will be encouraged. CMP 4-.13 13. 14. 15. 16. ^“3 LAND USE JUNE, 1980 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT MUST ENHANCE THE ENVIRONMENT. Land development should respect and enhance the unique natural features of the site and the general environmental assets of the community. Preservation of natural views, vegetation, drainage and general respect for unique site features always produces more aesthetic results and lasting value for the property owner and the community than does wholesale alteration of the landscape or mathematical division to the highest possible density. PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE NEW DEVELOPMENT MUST BE PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER. Whenever required, improvements must be provided by the developer. Because the City has limited staff and limited bonding potential, physical improvements such as roads, drainage and utilities required to accor..modate new subdivisions or development should be designed, financed and installed directly by the benefited developer as a precondition to increased land use density. In addition, this philosophy includes developer responsibility for special fire protection equipment or devices in the case of unusual land uses or building configura tions, and/or special security services in the case of unusual public safety situations. ALL PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS MUST CONFORM TO CITY STANDARDS. Physical improvements related to health, safety or community systems such as roads, pathways, drainage or utility systems will be designed, located and constructed to uniform. City- established standards to ensure proper functioning and compatibility with overall City plans. DEVELOPERS MUST DEDICATE LANDS REQUIRED FOR PUBLIC USE Land subdivision or any development that results in increased land use density, and hence increas\.»- demand for municipal services, will be expected to include public dedication of lands necessary for additional road rights of way, parks, playgrounds, open space, ponds or storm water holding areas whenever such facilities are directly used by the subdivided land or required by such density increase. CMP 4-15 4-^ ENVIRONMENT JUNE, 1980 6. THE WETLANDS AND MARSHLANDS OF THE CITY WILL BE PROTECTED AND PRESERVED AS WILDLIFE HABITATS, AS UNIQUE OPEN SPACES, AND AS THE ONI Y ECONOMICALLY PRACTICAL METHOD OF FLOOD PROTECTION AND STORM WATER RUNOFF FILTRATION. The Harza Study, the 208 Water Quality Management Study, and Orono's Surface Water Management Plan all recommend this approach to permanent water quality management for Lake Minnetonka. In addition, the Orono Plan goes on to identify individual wetlands and marshlands that require protection as part of the City's storm water management program. It is the nolicv of this plan to effectuate the policies and recommen dations of the 1974 Orono Surface Water Management Plan. 7. PROTECTION OF THE CITY'S MARSHLAND, WETLANDS AND DRAINAGEWAYS SHALL INCLUDE PROTECTION OF ADJOINING LANDS AND PREVENTION OF DRAINAGE, FILLING, DREDGING OR WETLAND'S VEGETATION REMOVAL. Ordinances will establish setbacks for all land alteration or construction. Wherever possible, the City will acquire open space and flowage easements for conservation of these lands. 8. PROTECTION OP LAKE RESOURCES WILL ALLOW REASONABLE ACCESS, USE AND ENJOYMENT WHILE PREVENTING OVERCROWDING AND EXCESSIVE ENCROACHMENT. In conformance with Mn. DNR Shoreline Management regulations for recreational development lakes, the City will prohibit overly dense development within 1,000 feet of Lake Minnetonka. Lake use regulations will be promoted to limit excessive boat density and overuse of sensitive bays. Land use regulations will be developed to provide reasonable control over building density, land alteration and lakeshore encroachment. 9. LAKE SHORELINES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALTERATION. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clearcutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, natural stone rip rap shoreline protection will be encouraged. 10. LAKE BED ALTERATIONS WILL BE DISCOURAGETD BECAUSE OF ADVERSE SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM EFFECTS ON V7ATER QUALITY. Dredging of lake beds releases large amounts of otherwise trapped nutrients and silt which adversely affects water quality for long periods of time. Dredging of new channels or inlets will not be approved to provide riparian access where none existed naturally. Dredging will- be permitted in limited circumstances only where absolutely necessary to maintain existing natural riparian access permanently lost by something beyond the control of the landowner. Periodic low water conditions or the owner’s desire for deeper draft watercraft are not sufficient reasons for disrupting sensitive lake beds. CMP 3-20 s TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator July 15,1998 SUBJECT: #2388 Wyatt Moe, 1230 Spruce Place - Vacation of Portland Place - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 acre, sewered. Application: Applicant requests that the City vacate a portion of Portland Place lying between Blocks 1 and 2 of Saga Hill Revised. List of Exhibits A - Application B > Plat Map C - Property Owner's List D - Public Hearing Notice E - Notice to Utilities F - Pertinent Sketches G - Excerpt from Title Examiner's Report H - 1998 Correspondence with Applicants Attorney I - Coimcil Minutes of October 23, 1961 J - Coimcil Minutes of August 14,1979 and Resolution No. 1062 "Confirming the Vacation of a Portion of Portland Place" K - Various Versions of County Plat Maps, 1976-Present L - Neighboring Surveys/Deeds Background Dr. and Mrs. Moe are registering the title to their properties on Loma Linda Avenue and Spruce Place. The title examiner requested that documentation of the vacation of Portland Place be provided. Portland Place was (is ?) a 33' platted alley conhecting Loma Linda Avenue and the road known today as Spruce Place, which is partially located within the dedicated portion of Portland Place adjacent to Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, Saga Hill Revised (see Exhibits D). County Plat Maps have variably shown Portland Place to be either not vacated, partially vacated, or totally vacated, as can be seen from Exhibits K. During the Moe's recent lot line rearrangement and variance application, staff, applicants surveyor, and attorneys for both the City and the applicant all believed that the entire length of Portland Place between Blocks 1 and 2 was previously vacated. This presumption apparently resulted from a reliance on the fact that the County Plat Maps continue to show a vacation filing date of 12/2/64. In researching this matter, we find the following documentation: 1., Council minutes from October 23, 1961 indicate the City Council approved vacation of Portland Place adjacent to Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Saga Hill Revised. (This would be the . i Zoning File #2388 July 15, 1998 Page 2 of3 easterly half of Portland Place to the immediate north of Moe's property). Dennis Hill at Hennepin County Property Descriptions indicates their records show that this vacation was recorded at Hennepin County as document #3514499 on 12/2/64. Subsequent County plat maps appear to show more area vacated than was actually vacated in 1961. 2. In 1970 the City installed sanitary sewer lines in Portland Place. The sewer as-built maps do not indicate whether Portland Place was considered as vacated at that time. In a letter on file from Mr. Moe dated November 15, 1971 he indicates he granted the City a sewer easement over "Parcel 260" i.e. a portion of the property west of Portland Place. City files appear to contain no easement documents that would confirm or deny whether an easement was granted for the sewer in Portland Place. 3. A 1975 survey on file for 1240 Spruce Place (Wallner) does not show Portland Place (or Spruce Place) as vacated. A 1978 survey on file for 1250 Spruce Place (Wolfe) does not show Portland Place (or Spruce Place) as vacated. A 1992 deed for 1250 Spruce Place does not include 'vacated Portland Place’ as part of its legal description. Apparently there is no obvious assumption via these documents that a vacation ever occurred. A 1979 survey for 1208-1210 Loma Linda (Udell) shows all of Portland Place vacated and references the 1961 and 1964 dates. 4. In August 1979 City Planner Alan Olson brought to the City Council a request to confum the vacation of Portland Place. He noted that the County Registrar had blocked filing of the Moe drainage easement (which the Moes had granted to the City over a culvert they had recently installed) because the torrens certificates did not show that Portland Place was vacated even though other County records showed the vacation. Olson noted he could not locate any City records to show an earlier vacation "except that we have a sanitary sewer easement over the vacated street apparently relying on the plat map information". Pursuant to discussion, the Council voted 4 to 0 to adopt Resolution #1062 confirming the vacation of a portion of Portland Place, specifically all otthat part of Portland Place lying between Block 1 and Block 2 of Saga Hill Revised, which would include the portions adjacent to 1240 and 1250 Spruce Place. The title examiner is now questioning the validity of the 1979 Council action because we cannot provide documentation that a public hearing and formal public process was held prior to such action. In fact, based on a review of the minutes, it is likely that no such hearing was held. Staffs current view (unless/until new information surfaces) is that Portland Place has not legally been vacated. In order for the Moes to complete their title registration, they are required by the title examiner to furnish proof that the pertinent portions of Portland Place have been legally vacated. The only apparent way to accomplish this is for the applicant to request the formal vacation of Portland Place, and that is the application in front of us. Zoning File #2388 July 15, 1998 Page 3 of 3 Criteria for Vacation Zoning Code Section 10.12 governs the vacation of streets, alleys, and public grounds. In past vacation requests, the City has determined that vacation may be appropriate when: 1. The vacation does not affect access to or use of any adjoining property. 2.The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve or use the dedicated right-of-way as road except for utilities and access purposes. 3. The unimproved dedicated right-of-way as its exists serves no public purpose. It is staffs opinion that these three conditions are applicable to the segment of Portland Place right- of-way adjacent to the Udell and Moe properties, but not to that portion adjacent to Wallner and Wolfe, where it is used for the actual Spruce Place roadway and shoulder. The only City utilities in place adjacent to Udell and Moe are City sewer lines. There may be other utilities using Portland Place, and the gas, electric, telephone and cable T.V. utilities have been notified of this request. There is a 30” storm sewer under Portland Place which likely is covered under the 1979 easement. No properties will have their legal access affected by the vacation of Portland Place adjacent to the Moe and Udell properties, and the portion of right-of-way to be vacated does not provide access to the lake. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the vacation of that portion of Portland Place located between Blocks 1 and 2, Saga Hill Revised, adjacent to the Moe and Udell properties only, subject to the condition that Moe and Udell grant necessary utility (sewer and storm sewer) easements to the City over the portions of Portland Place to be vacated. Similar general utility easements to be granted if any of the utility companies confirm the need for easements. Options for Action 1 . Recommend approval per staff recommendation. 2. Table for further information. 3. Recommend denial, stating reasons. 4. Other. Note; Applicant has requested that the City refund the $300 vacation fee. Although staff has spent considerable research time on this application, it can be argued that the need for the application is based on factors outside the applicant’s control. Planning Commission may wish to make a recommendation to council regarding a refund. jig A Application # Date Received Amount Paid -^500 .(/o CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION H Site Address 1X30 Spr'aoQ- \r\a.c&-_____~ Type of Application to be Filed \l ACTrVTo vv Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) (b 7 00^'X^ APPLICANT Name U)> »ylce^ Phone (home ) ^~7 i Phone (work) ~ £ <4 T Address 1*1—3 0 _^priAO'^ PCity Zip OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _______________ Phone (home)_ Phone (work)_ Address City Zip. 'r ••A/-. * 1 I '.(■Date Property Acquired I (do) (djk*^^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$300.00 CommercialAndustrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retedning walls within 75' of lakeshore _____PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _____$150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from origihal application) ____^ After-the-Fact Fee > Double Current Application Fee (month/year) OTHER APPLICATIONS $250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ^ $300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:_______ Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of hisi^er knowledge. Applicant's signature Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City stall, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants n.ust be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. (70)on (56) d ^ (,x) i.l . 01-111 V •(64):,_,3 \ 1,H (6?)} 3f vH —I 3C9.34 hW^*iyc .1T5J7J --T-^ 1 oc^ *77I7 j o I 7\ i ' i g <»> «i * -.;:\»s # V.33 I >*RT Of VAC«$T?«n)I r.o ______t 5 LCVA LiriCA A»/E \ /‘^ T > V30 - < 1 SC*. LOMA LINDA T'4(5) 150 S (6)?-o s ^ e (7) 215 8 *• < » . A.” e (9> »3 "/ « (10) f, ro.5 77i^ 9 y y |K V* ** JN^I2)*5/7 w I (66) ?5 jc^.n M Lcwu l>•^^J^^i i».c> its/ If ___________3^ CC< KC 38:2C«:. (2) / \j4 ':f67) I / S?5 mm ?\y\ %cwtrri I (7 '23-32 " 9 f;> (14 1 . J JS? 5 I- ® \a> (2 5) 4 V p 4 S c^?y.s <1 <] s ii ii nc.8 • (22)^1 214.5 447.9 (74J ?-si P. >yj 1 8 ,H 8V^ B « s •6J /•»'% w Li iU *15 i2;.fi 49.3 (23)'i o.ta O) O 2: 5SPRJJCE PlI^P »i(l2j ---------r<2 ---------■ ~ >- »».1> s 3 1^ ' ^ ^ 2 (20^ 43 _ji^— >: 3 Hi .RUN DATE 07/01/97 BATCH £02 PROP AODR OHNER NAME ■ TAXPAYER NAME/AODR . • prop AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER. ■NAME/AODR PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER • NAME/AODR PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER ' NAME/AODR PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY Ol-WERS LIST 38 07-117-23 1<» 0013 * 01155 LOHA LINDA AVB EUGENE GEYEN ETAL EUGENE A GEYEN 1155 LOHA LINDA AVE mound HN 55364 38 07-117-23 14 0068 01185 LOMA LINDA AVE D B t M J SAMS DOUG A MARY SAMS 1185 LOMA LINDA AVE, ' MOUND.MN- 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0008 01295 LOMA LINDA AVE ' C 0 ANDERSON SAM ANDERSON CHARLES A AtM ANDERSON 1295-LOMA LINDA AVE MOUND MN . £5364 38 07M17-23 01264 N0R1 M B MUELLEBfA JOSEPH 1264 NpRTH Al !mN 55- 0011 'ARM DR M K MUELLER MUELLER DR 64 38 07-117-23 41 0051 01305* SPRUCE PL CUYTON R FUCHS CLAYTON R FUCHS / 1305 SPRUCE PL MOUND MN 55364 ’38 07-117-23 41 0078 01295 SPRUCE PL HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO CONVEYED 2/8/82 ST DEED 161147 38 07-117-23 14 0062 „ 01160 NORTH ARM DR K A A L H KELSEY KENNETH A A LOURITA M KELSEY 1160 NORTH ARM OR MOUND MN £5364 •38 07-117-23 41 0006 01205 LOMA LINDA AVE K R HINRICHS ASM HINRICHS KEVIN R P SU2AFWF M HINRICHS 1205 LOHA LINDA ORONO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0009 / 01280 NORTH ARM OR P K HUNTSMAN A K L HUNTSMAN PAUL K A KRISTINE L HUNTSMAN 1280 NORTH ARM OR mound MN 55364 % 38 07-117-23 41 0012 01216 NORTH ARM OR R L DURKIN ETAL RICHARD.L DURKIN 1216 NORTH ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0076 / 01254 LOMA LINDA AVE K L HOFFMANN A L S HOFFMANN KEtA^E'ni L A LINDA S HOFFMANN 1254 LOMA LINDA AVE M0U40 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0087 , 01210 LOMA LINDA AVE ' DONALD R UDELL ET AL DONALD R A CAROLYN UDELL 1210 LOHA LINDA AVE MOUND MN 55364 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 7 38 07-117-23 14 0067 01180 NORTH ARM OR M H ERICKSON A N J ERICKSON MARK A NANCY ERICKSON 1180 NORTH ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 ;je ^7-117-23 HOOii. //•/S' iOPM, L/A«£kA I/Vs /maj ss3i.y 38- 07-117-23 ‘41 0007 01225 . LOMA LINDA AVE > JEFFREY D UDELL JEFFREY 0 UDELL 1225 LOMA LINDA AVE MOUND HN 55364 • • • * • 38 07-117-23 41 0010 01264 NORTH ARM DR /. J B MUELLER A M K MUELLER JOSEPH A MARY MUELLER 1264 NORTH ARM OR MOUND HN 55364 . \ 38 07-117-23 41 0050 / 01370 NORTH ARM OR C M BANICK A K L K BANICK KARl A CHRISTOPHER DANICK 1370 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07\l7-23 41? 0077 01254 \0HA LlfiDA AVE K L HOFFFIAFA ikI; L S tIOFFMANN KENNETH Ly^LINDA S HOFFMANN 1254 LOMA LINDA AVE MOUND >6^ 5^64 LINDA AVE H UDELL UDELL AVE 1 0089 Carjs, ' •EsU/'c. . (i‘?a Lxmi- MounJ, .. o RUM DATE 07/01>97 . BATCH S02 ♦ I PROP'AOOR OHNER NAME . TAXPAYER . NAHE/AOOR prop ADDR OhNER KAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER .NAHE/AODR ‘ PROP ADDR * OWNER NAME TAXPAYER . . .NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR • * OHNER NAME / >TAXPAYER ; .NAME/ADDR .*•.1 • *• .. • PROP ADDR OWNER NAME .•-TAXPAYER *• .. NAME/ADDR ^ • • ' • ^ ' tr • 38 08-117-23 23 0002 01180 LOMA LINDA AVE MATTIIEM M BURNS . MATTHEW M BURNS 1180 LOMA LINDA AVE MOUND MN 553C4 38 08-117-23 23 0027 01200 LOMA LINDA AVE EDMUND GRIFFIN ET AL DONALD R UDELL 1210 LOMA LINDA AVE MOUND HN S5364 38 08-117-23 32 0007 01240 SPRUCE PL D A NALLNER « L J HALLNER DAVID A NALLNER 1240 SPRUCE PL MOIMO HN 55364 . 38 08-117-23 32 0013.- 01270 SPRUCE PL K H.8 E E ERICKSON • KENNETH A ELAINE ERICKSON 2773 CASCO POINT RD NAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 32 0016 01300 SPRUCE PL NII,L1AM 6 AHERN WILLIAM 6 AHERN .' 130ff SPRUCE PL ^ MOUND 55364 . HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMAnON SYSTEM PROPERTY (»MERS LIST TOTAL BATCH 502 00033 38 08-117-23 23 0003 ^ 01190 IWK LINDA AVE M A a E C MITCHELL MARK A/ELI2ADETH C MITCHELL 1190 LOMA LINDA AVE MOUND m BSZG^ 38 08-117-23 32 0005 01220 . LOMA LINDA AVE W M\’ATT h»E ETAL W WATT MOE ^ C2S SO 8TH ST MPLS MN 55404 38 08-117-23 -32 0008 01250 SPRUCE PL W W WOLFE ETAL PHYLLIS J WOLF / 1250 SPRUCE PL MOUND MN 55364 38 08-117-23 32 0014 01280 SPRUCE PL ^ . P J 2 S J SCHUELLER PAUL J A SUSAN J SCHUELLER 1280 SPRUCE PL . MOUND MN 55364 38 08-117-23 32 0017 01310 SPRUCE PL . JOHN W WALKER JOHN W WALKER / 1310 SPRUCE PUCE MOUND MN 55364 * REPORT NO. P1435401 PAGE .8 38 08-117-23 23 0015 01170 LOMA LINDA AVE 6 & 6 HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP * G 2 G HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP 7019 TUPA DR EOirU m 55439 38 08-117-23 32 0006 01230 SPRUCE PL H WYATT MOE • W WYATT FOE 825 SO 8TH ST MPLS MN 55404 38 08-117-i3 32 0012 01260 SPRUCE PL E A ANDERSON ET AL TRUSTEES EVAN A AMOERSON ^ 1260 SPRUCE PL MOUND MN 55364 38 08-117-23 32 0015 01290 SPRUCE PL HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND 961A0 1/23/97 THURSDAY 9:00 CITY RES .2088 38 08-117-23 32 0018 • 01318 SPRUCE PL PATRICIA A GrtOETKEN • PATRICIA A GROETKEN 1318 SPRUCE PLACE MOUND MN 55364 I* 23 03-|i7r^3-V • CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kcllty Parkway, P.O. Box 6S Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phont (612)473-7357 Fax 473- 0510 NOTICE L The Planning Commiss on will hold a I public hearino in the Council Cnamoers a; 2780 Keile/ Pa.-Vway on Moncay. July 20. 1998 at 7:00 p.m. on the matter of appHcaiion I #2388. a recuesi by W. Wyan Moe. owner of f 1220 Loma Linda Avenue arc 1230 Spruce P>ace for vacaion of the foiiowu^g descrioeo « dedicated roadway: j That portion of oeoicated roaoway • knowns as "Portland Place* lying between ' Blocks 1 and 2 of Saga Hill Revised. Hennepin County. Minnesota. All persons wishing to be heard wid appear at this Ume. Written comments are solictied. A map of the proposed vacation is available jn the Cty offices for review. CityofOrono - • By: planning Convrussion Michael P. Gaffron. Senior Planning Coordinator (Published in The Laker u.nd Poneer July 4.1998) •A A*. •- • Affidavit of Publication state of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Bin Holm, being duly sworn on oath, says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mound, Minnesota, and has full knowledge of the facts V hiuh are stated below: A.) The newspaper has complied with all the requirements constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B.) The printed Appi 1 I r>n which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for___^ successive weeks: It was first published Saturday the----^day of July iq 98 and was thereafter printed and published every Saturday, to and Including Saturday, th&day of. //jrzfe: i^lzecAuthorized Agent .r Subscribed and sworn to me on this day of / July .,19 M By: nsraryr&biioKRISTI HOl.M >iOTA«lV PUX*C • MWN2SCTA COV.MISSION EXPIRES JANUARY 31. 2000 tat&4nformatten (1) Lowest dassified rate paid by commerdal users for comparable space: SI 2.90 per Inch. (2) Maximum rate allowed by law for above matten $12.90. (3) Rale actually charged for above matten S7.19 per Inch. Each additional successive week: S5.14. i-i ■ e GITYof ORONO •• • Municipal Offices July 8,1998 Street Address: . 2750 Kelley Partway ■ Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 GTE Telephone Operations Attn. Gail 2378 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 • Minnegasco Steve Von Bargen, Real Estate Specialist 700 West Linden Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55440-1165 Northern States Power Co. Attn. Lisa Rainbolt 5505 County Road 19 Shorewood, MN 55331 * . ; Triax Cable Co. Attn. Robert Craig, Plant Manager 2381 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 The City of Orono is currently reviewing a proposed vacation of dedicated public right-of-way known as Portland Place located between Blocks 1 and 2, Saga Hill Revised (Section 07-117-23, QQ 41) as shown on the attached map. • ••• Please advise me prior to the July 20 public hearing on this matter whether your utility has any interest or concerns'regarding this vacation. -Thank you! Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator end. Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 4734)510 " Po/ST/M/l^ PMC« . • A o D A / foRXiot^ 'To fee" l/AcAT^t> F'3> • I 5^e>2- UKJvno/^^ . I Land Lots 3 & 4, Block 9 Certificate of Title No. 829621 Lots 3 & 4. Block 3 Lot 5, Block 3 Owners and Encumbrancers TtTU^ 3 Kenneth L. Hoffmann and , Linda S. Hoffmann , joint tenants rf%^ Bank of America, FSB f Jeffrey D. Udell GMAC Mortgage Corporation Northeast State Bank •Charles O. Anderson and Ann M. Anderson , joint tenants North American Mortgage Company US Bank, NA First Bank of South Dakota (National Association) I also recommend as defendants the occupants of the above lots, the names of whom should determined by the applicants ’ attorney. (c) The abstract contains no city resolution vacating that part of Portland Place included m the registration. The applicants should provide me with a recordable copy of the resolution. Thereafter, I will comment further by Supplemental Report. (d) The vacation resolution as to Lake Street, Grove Strr -t and the park Is Resolution No. 3950 of the City Council of the City of Orono, County Recorder Document No.' 6792311. The Resolution made the vacation subject to certain conditions. There should be evidence at the hearing to support a finding of fact in the Decree of Registration Ihst tho conditions contained in Resolution No. 39S& of the City of Orono, Document No. 6792311, have been satisfied and the portions of Grove Street, Lake Street and the park Included In this proceeding are vacated. I recommend the City of Orono as a defendant (e) The property should be registered subject to the following: • • *• . • • To the conditions and restrictions contained In Resolution No. 3963 of the City Council of the City of Orono, Document No. 6792312. • . (f) Resolution No. 3948 of the City Council of the City of Orono has been recorded as Document No. 6792315. I assume there will be evidence at the hearing to support a SOO® 3 nTvnpv-spad &>i8i tunog 0t-28T0foT9 XVJ CT:C0 IHJ SS/iT/f) (i-l jlif May 3,1998 CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Partway Orono. MN 55356 Mallinj Address: • P.O. Box 66 • Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 John C. DeMoss, Attorney at Law 6950 France Avenue South, Suite 119 Edina, Minnesota 55435-2024 Re: Land Title Registration, W. Wyatt Moe and Nancy S. Moe Dear Mr. DeMoss: This letter is in response to the information requested by your above named clients regarding registration of the title to their properties in Orono, per the Report of Examiner dated April 14, 1998, specifically items 4(c) through 4(g) on pages 3 and 4. In regards to item 4(c), documentation of Portland Place vacation: The comment requests documentation of a City Resolution vacating Pt rtland Place. The Hennepin County plat map suggests that the entire segment of Portland Place 1> ing between Blocks 1 and 2, Saga Hill Revised, is vacated, with a note stating "Vac 12-2-64 Filed"; however, the shading of the map consistent with a vacation is not apparent on that map. Pursuant to your request, I researched City records, including Planning Commission minutes. City Council minutes, and Resolution Files for the years 1963-64-65 and fmd no record that the City took such a vacation action. Dr. Moe noted to me he thought this might have been dealt with arou^ 1976, and I also can find no sUch action during that time period. In discussing this with Dennis Hill at the Hennepin County Property Descriptions office, he noted that the portion of Portland Place north of Moe's property adjacent to Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Saga Hill Revised, was vacated on October 23, 1961 and recorded as Document #3514499. I have enclosed a copy of the City Coimcil minutes approving that vacation. Mr. Hill also noted he finds no specific documentation in County records of the vacation of the remainder of Portland Place, and that the County maps may in fact be drawn incorrectly. My subsequent review also found that the County maps have been inconsistent on this topic through the years (see attached County maps dating to 1976). The City installed sewer in Portland Place in 1970. Design plans for that sewer do not indicate Telephone (612) 473-7357 •' FAX 473-0510 John C. DeMoss May 3,1998 Page 2 «• whether Portland Place was considered as vacated at that time. In a letter on file from Mr. Moe dated November 15,1971 he indicates he granted the City a sewer easement over 'Parcel 260', i.e. a portion of theproperty w’est of Portland Place City files appear to contain no easement documents that would confirm or deny whether an easement was granted for the sewer in Portland Place; at this date I must assume there is no easement of record, and ask that such an easement be granted to the City, per the conditions of Resolution No. 3950. As of this writing the City Council has not been advised of the possible discrepancy regarding whether Portland Place has actually been vacated. The lot line rearrangement review by the Planning Commis.iion and Council last fall was, of course, based on the assumption that Portland Place had been vacated at some past date, and this was also apparently assumed by their surveyor. The City at this point has no intent to open Portland Place to vehicular travel, but certainly has an interest in it related to maintenance of the existing utility lines. A formal application for the vacation of Portland Place would likely be in order if your search similarly comes up empty-handed. In regards to Item 4(d), satisfaction of conditions of Resolution #3950: Resolution No. 3950 (vacation approval. Doc. #6792311) cc'^tains the following conditions: 1. Legal combination per the approved survey (confirmed with Hennepin County). 2. Quit-claim of "Parcel C" as shown on said survey (Doc. #6792313). 3. Granting of drainage easement over drainageways (Doc. *f6792314). 4. Granting of easement for sanitary sewer lines within parcels A, G, B, D and/or F (easement signed but not filed pending City creation of legal description). Granting of easements for any other subsequently identified existing utilities (pending).9*^ In regards to Item 4(e), satisfaction of conditions of Resolution #3963: Resolution No. 3963 (variance approval, Doc. # 6792312) contains the following conditions: 1. Hardcover not to exceed 37.5% (would require applicants surveyor to confirm when house is cor. pleted; building permit was issued for a plan that meets the condition) 2. Applicant to provide grading plan (OK; appro''ed at time building permit issued) 3. Building permit applied fur by 8/25/98 (done) 4. No action required 5. No action required John C. DeMoss May 3,1998 Pages In regards to Item 4(f), satisfaction of conditions of Resolution #3948: Resolution No. 3948 (Subdivision/lot line rearrangement approval, Doc, #6792315) contains the following conditions: 1. Legal combination per the approved survey (confirmed with Hennepin County) Granting of easement over drainageways (Doc. #6792314) Ditto Granting of easement for sanitary sewer lines within Parcels A, G, B, D or F (easement signed but not filed pending City creation of legal description) Granting of easements for any other subsequently identified existing utilities' (Pending) Provide Title Opinion (done) Division to be filed with County by 2/25/98 (done 10/6/97) No action required 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. In regards to Item 4(g), registration should be subject to drainage and utility easements over parts of Lots 3,4 and 5: (Agreed) To summarize, issues of import to the City include: 1.If no documentation is found to support the vacation of Portland Place, a formal application for its vacation should be filed with City. 2. City will be surveying existing sewer lines this spring to create easement description. 3.As a result of this review, City will also describe sewer lines in (vacated?) Portland Place for probable utility easement needs. Please feel free to contact me at 473-7357 if you have questions. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator end. cc:Wyatt & Nancy Moe Tom Barrett, City Attorney Ron Moorse, City Administrator Greg Gappa, Director of Public Services - CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: ■ 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Nalllns Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 John C. DeMoss, Attorney at Law 6950 France Avenue South, Suite 119 Edina, Miimesota 55435-2024 Re: Moe Title Registration - Confirmation of Portland Place Vacation Dear Mr. DeMoss: Purely by chance, while searching for information on an entirely unrelated subject, I just ran across a resolution of the City Council in 1979 confirming the vacation of Portland Place. A copy 'f this resolution is attached. This letter serves as an addendum to my letter of May 3. In regards to item 4(c) discussed in that letter, attached City Council Resolution No. 1062 dated August 14,1979 provides confinnation that Portland Place has in fact been vacated. If no easements are of record for existing utilities within vacated Portland Place, such easements must be granted. Please contact me at 473-7357 if you have questions. Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator end cc:Nancy & Wyatt Moe Tom Barrett, City Attorney Ron Moorse, City Administrator Greg Gappa, Director of Public Services Dennis Hill, Hennepin County I roperty descriptions Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 /4-^ GITYofORONO Mtmlcipal Offices Street Address: ' -2750 Kelley Parlcffay Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 • Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 John C. DeMoss, Attorney at Law 6950 France Avenue Soutti. Suite 119 Edina, Minnesota 55435-2024 Re: Moe Title Registration - Documentation of Process: Portland Place Vacation Dear Mr. DeMoss: You have indicated that ihe Title Examiner is requesting documentation of the public process that occurred in relatiw n to adoption of Resolution #1062 in 1979. City files contain minutes for the August 14, 1979 Council meeting which do not reflect that a hearing was held. Coimcil and Planning Commission minutes and agendas for the months directly prior to that date indicate no record of any hearing or discussion of the matter prior to the August 14 meeting. The background information provided to the Council for meetings ca. 1979 (except for matters related to zoning applications) was apparently not kept or microfilmed for future reference. Enclosed is a copy of the pertinent August 14,1979 Council minutes. From the City's point of view, Portland Place is vacated. Let me know if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator • * • end. cc:Wyatt & Nancy Moe Tom Barrett, City Attorney Ron Moorse, City Administrator Greg Gappa, Director of Public Services Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX473-0h0 ! •• -'f • r. 'V/I’.•f *S r '• Village.cf Orono Crystal Bay,Minnesota.•«V X Minutes of Council meeting held in the Village Hall On October 23,1961-7:30 pjj present: H.R. Ro8s,Mayor;R. C.Bagley,’/?. J. Schraitt,K.Turnham,E.O. Wood,Trustees. 0, A. Hanson, As sr., A.G. Stlnson,Foreman,0. E. John son. Clerk, S.B. Belt, Dep.Clk.' Minutes of meeting held on Oct.9,1961,were read and approved. Mrs.Emil Peterson,Secy.of the Casco Point Community League,was present inviting Council members to attend a meeting of their League at the Elizabeth Gardner School on November I7th,I96I,at 0:00 P.M. Geo.Oscha of Fox Inc.Navarre,was present requesting permission to move a house 20x22 ft. to a low lot on the grounds of the former Ferodowell nursery, the site to be fjLlled in for a split level home.Tne house and site will be viewed by Bagley and Hanson for furtner report at our next meeting. Ted v/olf requested approval of his plans for building permits on Lots 5,6,7,8, and 9,Block 6,Berqulst-Wickland Park Addn.Bagley reported favorably reoommendg Issuance of two permits wnicn was approved. Mr .v/olf also requested approval of permlt^for Lots 5,6,7,8,9 and 10,in Block 3,in same Addn. (Referred to Ian.Com. ^/^iearlbg on petition of Geo.Heathcock and lAaud Johnson,for vacation of Portland / Place,adjacent to Lots I. and 2,Block I,Saga Kill Revised Addn.was held with no one objecting end on motion of Bagley,seconded by Schmitt,petition was approved Geo.Tillson and his attorney V/m.Fox,presented plans for division of the Ferod- will property in Casco Point.Referred to the Plang.Com.for their recomendation. V/esley V/egen and Henry Meyer were present in reference to the possible purchase of Lot 13, Shadywood Addn.They were cref erred to our attorney now defending suit with reference thereto. John Hurley and a committee,representing the Shadywood Improvement Assn.were present with petitions for extension of the Mound water system to the Snady- wood Point area.Tney were advised that a public hearing would be necessary and subject should first be approved by the Village Council of Mound. Fred Olson was present requesting the hard-topping of the Baldur Psrk Road. Due to lateness of season blacktopping would be deferred but gravel would be applied to road and drainage problems checked to extent possible. Donald ’A'hlte presented plans for a 20 lot subdivision of his property at the intersection of Co.Hi-v/ays 19 3c 84. ( Submitted to Planng.Com.for review.) The hearing set for rezoning of property described in notice of published bearing referred to in minutes of of Oct.9th fro.m residential to commercial cx.' sslflcatlon involving petition of Melvin Olson was approved permitting use of this area bv the Henn.Co.Kighv/ay Dept. Changes in codes and ordinances submitted by Henson were reviewed end orderedi submitted to attorn^r Mev/hall for review prior to publication. Verified Accts.and bills No.1675 Through No.1709 were reviewed and approved Meeting adjourned. Approved: \V 0.Z.Johnson,Clerk. r REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL/ AUGUST 14, 1979 Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to accept the 201 Alternative Waste Management Study Report from the Metropolitan^7aste Control Commission and Michael Gaffron*s^eview of the study. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0 Mr. Alan Olson, City F^^nner, entered into the record the subdivision j^quest of Fred Herftfrth, 2^5 North Ferndale Road,^ated August 2, 1979, which states: / \ /The developer is proceed^ingwith design plans for installation of improvements^er the^ preliminary approval in March. I recommend adoption of the att\clied resolution formally requesting Wayzata's ap^oval of the necessary sewer and water extensions. An inventory of existing sewer and ^ter assessments on this property indicates tAat the property was originally assessed for three units (*2 on Parcel 205 and one on Parcel 3600), \ ^ \The Chevy Chase project was assessed wholely on a unit basis with $2,108.04 per unit being'a lateral sewer assessment zuid $^92.60 per unit bein*^ a lift station assessment. ^Because in this case,^t^e developer is constructing his own laterals, recommend charging only the lift station portion against the additional units in this division i.e. 4 units X $192.60 « $770.40. This amount \ would be payable^ith the fees and other charges ^at the time of final plat approval. \ / Council Meeting - August 14, 1979 Butler move^ Paurus seconded, to adopt Resolution #1061, A Resolution Requesting Approval From The City Of W^zata For Sewer And V7ater Extensions Into The North^te Subdivision. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays.(O)# —:- - - - - Page 15 3 Mr. Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record the following dated August 2, 1979, which states; The County Registrar has blocked filing of the Ncuicy Moe drainage easement because one lot is Torrens property and that certificate does not show that Portland Place was vacated even though other County records show the vacation. 201 ALTERNATE WASTE MANAGEMENT STUDY* UTILITY EXTENSION* ' •Northgate Subdivision 225 North Ferndale Rd h !: • i ♦ « RESOLUTION #1061* ^ ^ Northgate Subdivisiox Sewer & Water-Wayzat? rr«*PORTLAND PLAGE VACAi. (Continued) w REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, AUGUST 14, 1979 Page 16 I cannot locate any City records to show an earlier PORTLAND PLACE VACAT vacation except that we have a sanitary sewer (Continued) easement over the vacated street apparently relying on the plat map information. I ^recommend adoption of the attached resolution to confirm the vacation for the County record,, so that our drainage easement .can be filed. Council Meeting - August 14^ 1979 Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to adopt Resolution #1062, A Resolution Confirming The Vacation Of A , Portion Of Portland Place. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0) . _ _ _ RESOLUTION #1062* Portland Place Vacat Mr. Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record the following for the release of escrow funcls for the ^ielow*s Addition, dated August 8, 1979, which \tates: RELEASE ESCROW FUNDS* Stielow*s Addition Staff inspection as of that all requirements of have been completed. [ust i, 1979, reveal he Developer*s Agr-^ement I recommend release of the r^aining escrow funds in the amount of $2,356. ^ ^ Co\incil Meeting - August 14, 19\9 Butler moved, Paurus seconded, tcJVapprove the^ release of escrow funds for the Srdelow Addition in the amount of $2,356. Motion/ Ayes (4)- Nays (0). * /.f Mr. Alan Olson, City Planner> entered^nto the record the following .memo fron Michael^affron, Septic System Inspector, concerning the^status of sewer hookups as of August 1, 1979, aated August 3, 1979,which stales: \ SE^iER HOOKUP REPORT* . • / . \ ' Attached is a list of properties which have not been connected to sanitairy sewer within th4 specified time limit. Owners of these properties wer^sent notice that connection was required before tiie August 1, 1979 deadline. \ A number of these/homeowners are trying in goo< faith to complet^ the hookup and have run into ^ financial or technical problems. These situatiohs vill be handleyby staff. ‘ I recommend that the remaining 10 op 12 be sent a letter from the City Attorney stating that legal action is pending ^d will be commenced if steps are not taken immediately to complete connection.(Continued) RESOLUTION NO. 1062 A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF PORTLAND PLACE \-7HEREAS, on the original plat of Saga Hill Revised as recorded in the Hennepin County Recorder’s Office there was dedicated a public street by the name of ’’PORTLAND PLACE"; and WHEREAS, that portion of Portland Place lying between Block 1 and Block 2 of Saga Hill Revised is not and has never been developed or opened for use as a public street; and WHEREAS, the plat maps prepared by the Hennepin County Surveyor's Office show that a vacation was filed with the Hennepin County Recorder’s Office on December 2, 1964 for that portion of Portland Place described above; and • WHEREAS, the City and the owners of property abutting the above described portion of Portland Place consider the street to have been officially vacated and have in fact entered into separate easement agreements for sanitary sewer and drainage improvements which have been or will be constructed across and under portions of their property including portions of said Portland Place as originally platted; and \-7HEREAS, the Hennepin County Registrar of Title's Office has informed the City that there is no certificate of vacation recorded on the registered title of Lot 4', Block 1, Saga Hill Revised: that said Registrar will not record a newly, agreed upon easement until such vacation is properly recorded; and that the City has no knowledge as to why the Hennepin County Recorder's Office and the Hennepin County Surveyor’s Office have records differing from those of the Registrar’s Office; • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT< RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby confirms the vacation of that part of Portland Place lying between Block 1 and Block 2 of Saga Hill Revised as recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Clerk and Recorder except for preservation and continuation of all recorded drainage and/or utility easements on, across or under any portion of said street. I Resolution No. 1062 Page 2 ■f • i STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF ORONO . • • • • The undersigned duly qualified and acting City Clerk/Administrator of the City of Orono hereby certifies that attached hereto is a true and correct copy of the original Resolution No,iofi;> passed by the City Council of the City of Orono on August 14_ _ _ _ _, 19 7g , on file in the office of the City Clerk/Administrator, City of Orono, •, • •Walter R.^^nson, Clerk/Administrator Dated, this day of Angn.qf*, 19 79 » • ? • • {NJ VOo H 4M O # * • * • oo c •* • • ■: .:s-• • » 5o<rru Secjiov Y “ ESV^c.y^— —' '* 7~r->^—l7T+rr^ssra-. I 2^0 f§» & C.\\)ii )*^ Ji^i ^7o C-sJf ^ U.®^ f30I ) y<-' ^ 9mi V 7J, V 0 1 / *^ i C0 '►V's kn ^V H;\1 ^6^ (j) V -/..XJUS .1 X/v'*^ v3.^ 7>;/.% i 4 »//:- .(-V. 9'Z n •• vj-,>•<.» '3 < I f•s' J"0 \ ^ l»h 4?V(^c), X 's»C V lAN:V, ^Vze'r n7 yi '“•'E‘7^'-’' < 7 *- A -.»0^ 5*^- . *1 II I • ! !. I • *.l mwi 4m f m9^ a r^'i •?. **. I L' a 1 • ♦ « } • K') I I I \ I . • « MOUND CA, n71 M h-A----- ZCff '^i Jf-:} H- frL£f 5.1 (!« ^5^ mi 12 (jC^A:V 7, A f.^c'hic' i';•;/,'- > %n •. Kks^O ^O/PARK • v:l>r s \ <«-’•/= •—1 7^ •-U •• * {M.- Ji-ts > •'o / .;. __ r.:\y,^T.^,Z\ . ■*• .V • s •'W'r.Vc. ;'i. IS 6 (in') 1SJ‘ ISSJ} rJi1.s. 5 B 615 lijit CO V-’ i4^v ^ Ah^) MUUIVU 2 11982' Qityof 5(?c.7, • ■ osm ^ ^-3 200 * (i3) ^ 2;^<7 « 'V 13 ... a Ck------L, /»7, .. * .•» * .. • '•‘i I '1/^ . • •• }•. /^^9 - ••* • / .* • . / iac-0^ T.:;3^ (15) 7/3583. ! Ai?U v.-j •v l»^ /'22g) ^gZso.T ^.g2/tg. no / ^2/g) 0. f. Ohon OAl Ac. C^) I ^ MS • •• ro 4 • . .c\J 1, fn - '■■■ rJ nr\ issJf •Cl. .‘.rs" ,v ^47.5 ;.:MkSU«'(>n (1} 19 m. . - 92 0) .a \ •>>^ ^ vA ' c:>% ’. -V 5555^ • r' Jljnr • .. I ! •.■• .^3-.: vuj ••■•'; • g * ..;• ••: ‘ ^7 ::•. = yfJr^ *1 • • * iS'K: f^Mf^S Pi‘J'i. :v«.i/i vV^ • ^ A -'««>. ____ __ >:.'>r. .»i..^ f «-'- r *1 *i=«^x»»T??___I 3 • ^rrr , i^r^ •' !•» M-r 10 (30) 175 '4;-. 4i-., •;i '7 I (60): '=■1 155 A.-\......... i: (60) ?5 155^ L. : '5 tt P :(33)7 : 30 1 " .'5^ is jxr-' T-,r - T S 39 145 (54) fe Fl ki\i/r\r\^ 3C9. 3d ^i63-0-l* I5*£ icm (67) / ?94.3I S!9*04'I5 ’*107. 73 3^5.44 Hi B?: ► 2 *— ^ (68)to 4T • ““ 7N» SW04MVW _v19?. 9? K - -FIUO 10-I5-7I OOC NO 3312002 (2) 2; LO'M LINDA AVE A ( ?7.) :(87)? • 154.7 1 s'-' ' 130 S J 165 •-—VAC 12-2-64 (’al 150 “ (Scy filed I I \ V A*®. 7 eo 447.9 /•••■a (0 A 229 V * - c4L(24) 2» ^ A R a V ^ (73)7L 1 I35l65 BE L S 'n 8 = (I) (10 015 I IT5.II SPRUCE PL~ 2. 8 ." a 200 (71)P cx:: I1 hY-04-1993 09:13 HEMN CO PROPERTY Th:< Post-It* Fax Note 7671 Date 5,4.9^ Z)fyj/j/s JJM) CoyDepi.Co. Phor.G #Pnoneff 473-nS/t)34S-9n\i, 3439716 P. 01.^01 /Is Of MA-f Mr: 5. f^'7 w _ 3 r^i= 1 .■>< ~K» y —S1^’ b9_ SSSg®SS£SSSSS**SKS^^ .00. m •T— su mi ^ct^A'L • ijDa^of^ OF C\tV 0^ ^ s 8r37' 28" w 183^ j 7ota:f- V6S‘’.?<5'^o->- / Sf /0»fmrm^*t9s ^m*t0 0»/U*W'-'WProposed ^drama^ w*3 ..Lciip ^ \l i'.V-i •" -il • ^ ^ t* 9 ^ J jii hoiJse. S 88*30*2 ;T:^I-------— -7'i <r^q'»^l ; ;, » Iijop —__it£j,ll * I •f Proposed/house *. uC___It MM ^ ^ ^i3 eojfl ■?tt S 88*44* 33** E' ‘<><3 a! DescrioWon ode 1, Saga Hill Revised ock 1, ^a Hill.Revlsed id 5 and that part of Lot 3 lying southeriy of the northerly 15.00 feet of said Lot ■*cck 2, Saga Hill Revised. • % ROY J. HANSEN Land Surveyor AND Civil Engineer OF PROPERTY OF. PLAT OF SURVEY 13907 Spring Laka Road Hopkins, Minn. 55343 Tekphona 938-5678 V]. Wolfe LOCATION,Spruce Placxs . Or-o»\o ^ DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS,Lot (q ^ 0>\og.V:l \ 5 HllV ^gUlSgJL -3,0 u) 0 <£ J 0. u 0 Di 0. 3(> » J O V.'fHis hem HAS Bff8 f MCMnUKI \ \ Sc-ale • I 3 0 * . •. ’ . o ■ TPcnotes irow VY\onumc2»a*t CERTIFICATE OF LOCATION OF BUILDING 1 hereby certify that on. I made a survey of the location of the building(s) on the above described property and that the location of said building(s) is correctly shown on the above plat. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY I hereby certify that 1 sui /eyed the property described above and that the above plat is a correct representation of said survey. ROY J. HANSEN, REGISTERED SURVEYOR NO. 6274 4-7.^ \ 7^ *S> pru.cc.. ROY J. HANSEN Lsnd Surveyor ASO Civil Engineer PLAT OF SURVEY 13907 Spdng UlM Ro«d HcpVlns, Minn. 55344 Telephone 93S>567a OF PROPERTY OF ‘ Cleon Hilden LCCATIOM.12L0 Sprues rl2.ee, Orono, Kn NAU/oe/S^ Ifjs' gpgrpiayn AS Foi I nw< Lot 5» 3l0C.< 1 S2^2 hill Psvissi o liX_r\oHc5 irt>a morvuvn«n.\; Sca\a» I CERTIFICATE OF LOCATION OF BUILDING •CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY 1 hereby certify that on. I made a survey of the location of the building(s) on the above , • described property and that the location of said buildinj(s) is correctly shown on the above plat. . 1 hereby certify that oa ^ ^eoy cermy inai nn _______19.7 iS— I surveyed the propeny described above i(nd. that the above plat. is a correct representation of said survey. « : • \J• • ROY J, HANSEN. REGISTERED SURVEYOR. NO. 6274 TM 55^17 r*f ♦ ^ r k-i f#v: !• ■ ly ' C::-1/ 7270484. I ^,1 . , .. . ., .1 v-^ •,' '!;iI*:.; -VI ic.^u- ;•:i —.V.- I ;| j ; .;.Vk fir,. I'‘S - .'l-K . i '■^''1 'j'.* '•irVl-i»5!v:A !*•; %'. i .> " V*-' r>^•. q ^..fe -;, -.i; v^;^'v^'b jS-.: ^•> ;>1 ;I. i; ''Avlt-XM;,!•. ■. T / f>-v.f X4 q* 11 I. ; I MCiinv cMTirv that tmi A»ovt la a Taut a«0 ; •• • : . ■ • ■ • ' . • I /-.‘ ,f-‘.» •■■ ..■ ‘ • ; liotf 1 and 2 and the Narth ^ .and LaC 2, ••ock l^Sajt Hltli SUSsi»NS*»BCTTONj;NC; .^iephone (612) 873-W73 13001 Belle Plaine Trail belle plaine. MINNESOTA 56011 s ;V fax (612) 873:2070 •;^ ‘V-/ , 5 ' '!^'Ij^-. 2 l 3?3, June 29.1998 City ofOrono r=;s;"STSri?“-.^rssi: "• Planning Commission. This request is made to allow the ^ their properties as well as improve d^iag V j... * (he planning Commission, were not county ^ ^ *' woldd like to stockpUe this excess dirt at these locations. US to svockpile the dirt for these property owners. Patrick Brazil Busse Construction, Inc. An Equal Opportunity Employer - Contractor GEHRMW'I •nsT 31-1/8 -Z3-21 / w) t ■^CjOJZO/t 3(_|10'2^'" V X 7^ 5J- //8-2.3-2^ ••••irxrt 5/ -//8"2 3 -J/ 31-116-23-H IS si /tami %iTOTn*i «•« 5i-«' «^1 (13)i\ <»> * (♦ I»I ______1 1 » --------!.-■ « 1--. ■«..■ j 15:7.v~ ^‘ ^ •n^ ! (12) , a ...........r^ »f ■ * lu: •K i« sa«i Cof^54fUc4l OY) • • K 0 lr»- C.0 rvPor rv>'m^ ^53?^ IpH® ^ 4r300 bim MC.N. : V;v,:i r.^V'^'rr;''J?»c^^ r-.^^/ 4..ii } \vi.> ■t.^VvV^ ms • • V.* ^1 *^bmA m :v>^ . •\ \ -j: \^!s A'1‘ ''^V'<?/‘ mm. ^Oon' cci'fv-v^lNa'A'V bN) ^ooc^ u^t^son) 42^^ fslicnvMe-Kv i*% Wism ■ m^mmvt-v^2fe->Sc>. fv-.'?^>l ;>'>M^-^P i •• I, %✓.•—■»•“ * '"■'dS® •i.ifCriT>i I • iT^/si/^oon ^23*31 .ft: * -,2; W f/>-»r1v :;;|-If* a4>» •••*.5/M 41^ if-r>TV.V-.%.V-l.\ tzlbcihmr.r ^ > y ' fk ,% %<» V 4300 KC.N. mmgiM >/•mwz■0 ’ ' Vv \ v>\> v*^' -<• '* ' \ V'' V ./' gWifgngr K-y:j>jy I k^TU ^ i| ■^vfji; ifif? r'A ■"Siteiic:m i^»Sli m miB k •' - m^j :ii'Tr'-tf'' V '14ii^-^:.M:m^! p!i t<# mmm M<f^' i!»lai B vV'^<rfcmm /!«f--7',U'.' "ir--y;.'^ V v/,'vir>>/l^^^'V.;"'V P V •jiA'i-i n y^j^ri'ii m ;> *•' ^i. iin mm Wr^«V , , ®ij' '' • * u. 1 ^ 12.131/soon joiwat^ 4300 \Nftt£crowi^ •- ''••'■* :t?v %C* w,iMT .'•; Vi Wi%, m p '/^i- 3 : '^ri .'^•1 SS: fu'*- :p?;•.*\, ' ' V if £k Wi A;^''I>•» 'I orv- Cx)irvf I ian+ - r cpa» r * 23^ 2. li/31/ 3.00(o OTTEN 42-*^ Tumbav^ m k7^ U‘*i ■s. r :t‘ #S- ' ■!X i •sssssi r>- ‘V '*V<y-'^fMi lA. >nA>4r-'^^ >. »• •W: ;v v,'a:'fl.7 y *; > V- I i:oK ?; r^'*v*<r‘‘V'i^» ' Ml*r \»\ i ‘ = j.'T ;• ■• •• i’Si' J i 'jI '.S'/S. • r^'Ml ^ t t%^.> * * . . s"^ I ‘i J;jf'l-.:- J74.4 ■-■’kvij}- 'rj '""'■ ■Wi*‘‘'^^Wf- »'-<■/>^pp^XlHM^ U)C/\UOV4 oP <-y- >->•> v#,..L.-.; rr'A' *4.-r v> *i*' .V y,‘.v •frfv: '•. < nr •» • • .-•/ r^\,.-- “ w ‘ V-4 ‘ ■I ■ '’.’Vox?;^^ tA-LVl-i' u^v> ACtW<VlON y TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:July 16,1998 SUBJECT:#2381 Busse Construction, on behalf of James J. Johnson, 4300 Watertown Road Charles Larson, 4285 Sixth Avenue North Conditional Use--Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-1A One Family Rural Residential (5 acres) Application:Busse Construction is working on the County Road 6 project for Hennepin County. Due to the cut and fill process for the road work, Busse Construction needs to find locations near the project to naul excess dirt. Property owners in the area have requested fill. Land alteration of this magnitude requires a conditional use permit. The land alteration along Sixth Avenue North will be 625' by 65’ and 10 ft. high requiring 4,500 cubic yards of fill. The land alteration along Watertown Road will be 230' by 250' and 7 ft. deep requiring 10,650 cubic yards of fill. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.03, Subd. 19 and 20 Findings: 1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan; The proposed location of the fill along Watertown Road and Sixth Avenue North will not have a deleterious effect on the rural character or residential use of the surrounding properties. #2381 Johnson/Larson July 20,1998 page~l J 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it w'ould be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinit}’. The proposed location for the fill areas is away from the existing septic sites. Both the Johnson and Larson property have non-compliant septic systems that must conform by 2007 and 2006, respectively. Staff has visually inspected the area and has determined that there is space available for alternate sites. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The. applicant is required to grade the areas according to the topographic exhibit submitted. The areas shall be properly seeded and established to natural vegetation. Staff Recommendation To approve the conditional use permit to alter land on the Johnson and Larson property as submitted, subject to grading and seeding for natural vegetation. Attachments A B C D E F G H Application Topo for area along Sixth Avenue North Topo for area along Watertown Road Plat map Property Owner's list Survey Septic Info-4300 Watertown Road Septic Info-4285 Sixth Avenue North U238I Johnson/Larson July 20.1998 page~2 Application U ^ Date Received A Amount Paid 313^1 336 a ».^ TC» ^ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION DA. Site Address________\/Jar ^ "?)\xyy\/ Hk Cfi ________ Type of Application to be Filed_____Lq*t £4 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 3|«-118-^3 13 00/3 APPLICANT Name fAtSslio^ _____— />/ 'Address P CC^eu^ t€ City____ Phone (home ) ■^0*7 ^9(6^'- 0-Sd T3 IPhone (work ) CoQ Ca 2> A3 ' Zip ■3a7 OWNER (if different th^ap^icant). Phone (home ) 4/75'-3i5"/ Name_2T Address TT^Mfz^ id^Vihl90N ________ Phone (\wrk)______; ss H3>00 1U> City Mf)PL£ Rtf)/A/ ZifZip *>^3 ^ Dale-Property Acquired _ _______________________ I (So^do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - ______$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application ______$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ^ _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ______$300.00 CommercialAndustrial Use y* $250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain yi Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore __ (month/year) r A PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee •I OTHER APPLICATIONS ______$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation ______$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ______$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule \ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. X Completed Application Form. - Describe request in detail.2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. X Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). X Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. ____Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. y Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). ___List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in ' the property. This w’ould include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). __ Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). __As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign inis application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: Date_______________________ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date ^ OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signatu e Date 5-/S’"? S' Applicant must h« ve VdLsiibmittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commi sion Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this chang^rior to the meeting. 7 N 3bKn£>orN/L<XT'^on y / j '\y/ f / / /^ /^ // w / / / / ,--r-y/yw-v f I Culvert / ^/ '' /'%'- X \ .V 4 Droinfield ^ W/^l*2Joww (2oaD • • 7 I (0(0D fO•• § o > (/) (/) 8 > rj (/?I 3fo ot)mroro 6 % )• t i cd ] I \ 0-25-1993 2:47PM ■c • FROM OTTO ASSOCIATES. 682 3522 P.3 spooM jo s6p3 C vOVo I RUM DATE 05/10/98 BATCH 507 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER * NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 31-118-23 11 000<^ 09185 SIXTH AVE N STEVEN R JACOBSON STEVEN R JACOBSON 9185 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0009 09320 SIXTH AVE N F L DETERMAN ETAL FERDINAND L DETERHAN 9320 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0012 09225 SIXTH AVE N W A MUELLER 8 P 0 HUELLER WILLIAM A 8 PEGGY A MUELLER BOX 3 LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0018 09380 SIXTH AVE N JAMES E CARPENTER JAMES E CARPENTER 9380 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 13 0003 09395 WATERTOWN RD DONALD K PEARSON 8 WIFE DONALD K PEARSON 9395 WATERTOWN ROAD MAPLE PLAIN HN 55349 PROP ADD OWNER NAI E TAXPAYER ^ ^ NAHE/ADDI I) 31-118-23 13 0013 09300 WATERTOWN JAMES JAY JOHNSON JAMES JAY JOHNSON 9300 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 1. ** »• • i «. L 738 31-118-23 12 0005 09285 SIXTH AVE N CHARLES E LARSON CHARLES E LARSON 9285 6TH AVE NO LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0010 09390 SIXTH AVE N C S WILLIAMS 8 E R WILLIAMS CRAIG 8 ELIZABETH WILLIAMS 9390 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0013 09235 SIXTH AVE N W AND S WYATT WILLIAM D WYATT 9235 N 6TH AVE LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0022 09300 SIXTH AVE N ROBERT 8 MARILYN GEHRMAN ROBERT S GEHRMAN 9300 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 31-118-23 13 0009 09295 WATERTOWN RD H K 8 M W FILLMORE MILAN 8 MICHELLE FILLMORE 9295 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 13 0015 09225 WATERTOWN RD JAMES R PADDON JAMES R PADDON 9225 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 82 38 31-118-23 12 0007 09260 SIXTH AVE N KATHARINE S COLGROVE KATHARINE S COLGROVE 9260 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0011 09360 SIXTH AVE N D 8 N FLIES JR DONALD 8 NAWAL FLIES 9360 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0015 09220 SIXTH AVE N R 8 J HANNING JR ROBERT C 8 JULIE HANNING JR 9220 CTY RD NO 6 LONG LAKE fW 55356 38 31-118-23 13 0002 00920 TURNHAM RD L E BERG 8 K H BERG LEONARD 8 KATHLEEN M DERG 920 TURNHAM RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 13 0012 • 09220 WATERTOWN RD R AND J WYATT ROBERT J WYATT 9220 WATERTOWN ROAD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 19 0008 09100 WATERTOWN RD DEBORAH M SHOLL DEBORAH M SHOLL 9100 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 J I J • • . > RUN DATE 05/18/98 BATCH 507 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 31-118-23 2^ 0001 09980 WATERTOWN RD TAM SWEEZO TIMOTHY M SWEEZO 9980 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 31-118-23-21-0004 PENDING SUSAN K VAN MOORLEHEM ET AL SUSAN K VAN MOORLEHEM 4490 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 « TOTAL BATCH 507 00019 31-118-23-24-0010 PENDING KENNETH TURNHAM KENNETH TURNHAM 4490 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 REPORT NO. PI435901 PAGE 83 Jchns6b I 45oti \i^a-kvtcph .. V (cfHv M I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. 5//9/^ BY ^DATE • • • • s iron monumrni found iron monvmeni spf . sho^n crrP oJTumod • • i i ' • V -! •—• n^hf-Ot-H/cry . monument^ I Riohi‘Of' H '9y hne\ y I ei Coifniy RioJ ho 6 r ^ •<7f c/\^lini*ofrJm jV / ..*^* n/ }fh^ttwjv Ph!%, ra;»’ /.\ . </5 tifcordfJ in ^t*‘ y<\ cfftzr du'Ar aV**/7JT LMZSOtJ A f/np running Wpsf of rt^hf angfpT from i&j/ Une of West H of HE ^ of Src/ion J/-o * /•J:S (K O « J8f40 A/89*n 4TS.^O Sasf hnr of P/orf t/r | of NE Yo of Src/ion J/, , rnaN, r2j Wofstix A poini JS32.90 fopf Souik from Norlh UnT and 309.es JVpsf from’Easi lino of Wrsi l/Lof NES^ of Sod ton 3i,TU8N. RE3 Wof Sfh r.M, I •%7oy.<r I -H I f^A point Jisfpni J09.E5 fopi Wrft from East fine of of of NE of iSecfion 3/ I I rU t « • u A B C \b l/ukll —' m • • • 1 -• 70'0 97'6 ISU B7b Gr ! ■ t ■ I l| t'% I ■ / i • • • • • I\ \ :rt '-1 -.7/ • •••'V •‘/V; .-.t::.- - •f. :Mvr - y- • —V • • - ..y:v V ’ * «• « ti> t ■ne^ •: •* r % .• J.< w» *. * :-.vf . •• - -;tT;v•>s • • •V.'SBETIC system INVENTORY >■• • «M ... •V il?-"*. ‘ w- *.. • . . ..--"v.riJr., Address:- .4300 Watertown Rd. - •* V,—Building Type: residence ' Permit iri' - 5204 •*.•• v-*— • • -"'#BRs/GPD “"4 PID: 31-118-23 13 0013 ' x>:. i'.**' '• Systems/unit 6^MW*.. SystemT;^e: standard uench • :IV^. < • Confornuty: 3 SYSTEM CONDJTJOl^.^^ -Vvvyv Tank'Condition: DFcondition: 11 •ACSSv':FaiilurePot: m^'im ' SEPTICTANKS -i, ---------------•v-r»/---- w>. Material: > precast concrete Setback-to Bldg: 70 Capacity:1000,1000 A*/-** . * .. DRAINFIELD . ..;;•■••vT .-.•i, Treatment Area:1100 ^ *^v: .Under TileTileSize^. 4 Setback DF-Bldg: 90^"., Soil Type: ,sandy clay loam PercRate: 40• ’.DF Ht above ,Wt:-•>:vv .*# •. • VXiy..:. ^0. Limitations:.V • t WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks:. 120 x\ V « Pump Type: subm. Well-DF: Depth: 148 140 ‘-j:: Report in FUe: y Diameter: 4 Method: drilled : ^ INSPECTION RECORD DATE 8/8/78 *. .• . • •9/17/84: • * •9/5/86 • • .• •9/6/90 ■ ■ ■; .f V "5/20/91,•^V • •*!*•*6/25/93 V. - • • V - • 5/21/97,-. DESCRIPTION installation ’ no surfacing . • no surfacing - no surfacing-pump tanks no surfacing slight surfa^g / c # -/,• 1 1800 '".yir PUMPOUT RECORD COMPUANCE DATE GALL6NS S130IS5 9inm 10/1/90 10/28/94 5/18/95 1500 l^r •4 2000 - 1 non-complamt-rcpair by 12/311.2007 ... ^ •^3 2000 tfr 2000 - ^ ;4rV • afV/*.* • /;o - V '.. • •Ji-*• .••“l :. u..•W ■ •• • • -n*. - V.# ^ •• • • - • • ■w- liL'!.-:.. ■ -VV-r-.— r-•*.V \ . ' •• .V >>•. r.‘X-^ „ .'•V.-. •* ^i.V . ;*vy. 4 4* * • r^>.v - l«r j. ..... .'rvA?';-;- • vY.*;7 .■.vk^N'. 7Ac,'4': ;.-v_•r. ■' ^ -.'•St r •• »• V . ... xxMy. »■ •,C^w V. .. s .u • vir^‘ m . . .«.•' %• • • • ^ . -. *• -r- •• V-• >rr..■ # Lines: •4''^'Trench Width:3 -x.s’ni..• * •i'~T\me of Filter: -'Yock ..•-v-:%v--.1-*. . , 1 1 • %■.* 5(y-h^ r • «• » — r • .. SEPTIC SYSTEM INVEirrORY-^ Addr: 4285 Sixth Ave. N. PID: 31-118-23 12 0005 "Building Type: residence # BRs/GPD: 2 n-r # Systems/units: Permit No: none Date of Permit: -Installer: unknown .System Type: standard trench . . Appliances: 1/1 %.*• • SYSTEM CONDITION ~Conformity: 3 Tank ConditionG Failure Pot: medium - . 1 DF condition: SEPTIC TANKS Material: Setback to Bldg: Capacity: DRAINFIELD Length of Lines: Treatment Area: Tile Size: Setback DF-Bldg: No. Lines: Trench Width: Type of Filter: Under Tile: Perc Rate mn/in: DF Ht above WT: 0 Soil Type: slity clay loam Limitations: water table WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: Report in File?: Depth: Diameter: 60 Well-DF: Pump Type: Method: INSPECTION RECORD Date 12/2/82 no surfacing 8/15/86 no surfacing _ . 9/17/90 no surfacing-pump tanks 8/12/91 DF location unknown-pump tanks 10/28/93 owner located system-deep trenches^not 8/20/96 non-conforming-repair by 12/31/2^06 Compliance 2 2 2 2 2 3 PUMPOUT RECORD Date Gallons 4/11/83 1000 11/20/87 500 V . •• i .. r ■;' ■:7' .*■• •»* . -5 TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM; DATE: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator July 16,1998 SUBJECT:#2382 Busse Construction, on behalf of Tim Otten, 425 Tumham Road Conditional Use-Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-1A One Family Rural Residential (5 acres) Application:Busse Construction is working on the County Road 6 project for Hennepin County. Due to the cut and fill process for the road work, Busse Construction needs to find locations near the project to haul excess dirt. Property owners in the area have requested fill. Land alteration of this magnitude requires a conditional use permit. The proposed land alteration will be located in the rear yard behind the existing house and will be 220' x 180' in size and 3 ft. deep requiring 3,925 cubic yards of fill. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.03, Subd. 19 and 20 Findings: 1.That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the disitrict in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan; The proposed location in the rear yard mil level an existing *bo\vV in the property owner’s yard that he wants to use as yard. Several small trees and brush in the center of the fill area would be removed. U2382 Otten July 20. 1998 page~l J i i 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed location for the fill areas is OM'cy from the existing septic site. The existing system is noncompliant. Staff visually inspected the site and believes that there are alternate locations for septic sites,however, testing should be done to determine that the there is a viable alternate site before filling. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The proposed location complies with the Zoning Code, subject to septic testing before filling. The applicant is required to grade the areas according to the topographic exhibit submitted The areas shall be properly seeded and established to natural vegetation. $ Staff Recommendation To approve the conditional use permit to alter land on the Otten property as submitted, subject to septic testing before hauling any fill and establishment of ground cover. Attachments A B C D E F Application Topo for fill area Plat map Property Owner's list Survey Septic Info »2382 Otten July 20. 1998 page~2 A Application it Date Received ^1'?-^ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION Amount Paid PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address y^s-iKXUhl^CKA^ Ty'pe of Application to be Filed 'A'?~te*>e«:Vt *6>^.___C ^ 1 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 31>~ APPLICANT , Name mcLlof ________ Address /OS' ^ YC\£Lt^(e£^ OWNER (if different than^applicant) Name "^z HI Phone fhome'l •S‘cT)>‘f(£> ______ Phone (work ) Cfi/Q -^13'(o3'73 City A^U/^jJbn^_____Zip S'S<3 vy Phone (horne d V7<2?~y7S'0 Phone (work). Addres s ED City (0P6 A/O----------Zip^ Date Property Acquired V*" 2.Q ___________________ I^^^(do not) also owm the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application ______$175.00 Residential Accessory Use ______$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ______$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ______$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ______$300.00 Cormnercial/Industrial Use X $250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining w’alls within 75' of lakeshore ______PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule ______$150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) _____After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee (month/year) OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation ______$200.00 Easement Vacation ______$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ______$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule REQUIRED SUBi\nXTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owmers within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (sigried by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date -/T-9S Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. I • •• •; V; vV V. • «.••••• 3d i V- O yj S) • * . • • — •• *• . : . • • • . <;.• . . • • •• •• .• • ••• ..*•; I • .•••* • * • • • « 2l3o V. 100 V • • 3£V. desf • • • ••• • • •. • * * ^ ^ • *i ‘.ij 4- \ : • « :• .t . ; I.' • I r-T , 3350 389 S31VI00SSV 0110 HOdJ NV3SM I 8661-53-9 RUM DATE 05/18/98 BATCH 508 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER . NAHE/ADDR . t I HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYST’TH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 31-118-23 13 0002 00920 TURNHAH RD L E DERG S K H BERG LEONARD B KATHLEEN H BERG 920 TURNHAH RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 SI-118-23 29 0009 09595 WATERTOWN RD J L B H R DROLL JEFF DROLL 9595 WATERTOWN RD ORONO HN 55359 38 31-118-23 31 0006 00385 TURNHAH RD C E PHELPS B J C PHELPS CHARLES E/JENNIFER C PHELPS 385 TURNHAH RD ORONO HN 55359 38 31-118-23 92 0013 00320 TURNHAH RD J L B R P ZELINSKY JR J L B R P ZELINSKY JR 320 TURNHAH RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 89 % < 38 31-118-23 13 0003 09395 WATERTOWN RD DONALD K PEARSON B WIFE DONALD K PEARSON 9395 WATERTOWN ROAD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-ll«-23 29 0003 00925 TURNHAH RD WILLIAH W STEHPEL ETAL TIMOTHY W B ANNA H UITEN 925 TURNHAH RD MAPLE *>LAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 29 0007 00915 DEBORAH DR T A HALLQUIST/W A HALLQUIST TOH A HALLQUIST 915 DEBORAH DR HAPLE PLAIN HI4 55359 38 31-118-23 31 09550 WOLVERTON J L HARSTAD B J R JAMES L HARSTAD 9550 WOLVERTON PL ORONO HN 55359 * 0005 PL HARSTAD 38 31-118-23 92 0007 00390 TURNHAH RD C E TRUAX B J E C E TRUAX B J E 390 TURNHAH RD MAPLE PLAIN HN HENCE JR HENGE JR 55359 38 31-118-23 92 0008 00380 TURNHAH RD D E B D F HERZ DOUGLAS E B DIANE F HERZ 380 TURNHAH RD MAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 TOTAL BATCH 508 00010 31-118-23-24-0010 PENDING KENNETH TURNHAM KENNETH TURNHAM 4490 WATERTOWN RD Mj\PLE PLAIN MN 55359 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE 5^ (yMn 0 1 h 2 10X05 V#ff (mwT t Ji 5tc«iMl#-il 270.5? CERTIFICATE.OF SURVEY FOR TIMOTTEN IN THE NW1/4 OF SEC. 31-118-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA son sm li- 50?*2rE 822.4^ • ^ 23/59 0t tfif ,• #f£H --------------------------------- % K V\ o w J Cri*si:ia, t 17550 ••••••• M • •M* •••••« •\ iVi 0f S4€.Shtt$^iJ^ ^ • •• ••'3^.9? tU€0rHWVf / #r i#i. jf*/i5*2i w ? I I-C £ 12 ••• •••208.05 N09*27‘W 82X43 ^ tS.CtnN • Pc. #r • • LgGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREH/SES SURVEYED: * The South four acres of the East five eighths of the. East half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 31. Township 118 Worth. Range 23 West of the 5th Principle Meridian. A^0/£t fit /f0s if \ \ /^3S Jimhirn lii. / V TT‘ • ‘-jr — VJe-ll A > # * • .. .i-'- - - T7^ "qal c B . . ::r: jb. -1.-1 -. f \ .1 -• • ^ SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY — Addr; 425 Turnham Rd. ‘ " PID: 31-ii8-23 24 0003 Building Type; residence- # BRs/GPD: 4 #-Systems/units: l/l Permit Nc 3595 Date of Permit: 4/16/73 Installer; Widmer Bros. System Type; standard trench Appliances; Indry % w • SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity; 3 Tank‘"Condition; Failure Pot: medium DF condition; SEPTIC TANKS Material; concrete Setback to Bldg: 25 •*Capacity;■1000, 700 :. . DRAINFIELD Length of Lines; No. Lines:' ^ Trench Width; Treatment Area; 900 Type of Filter; rock ; Tile Size: 4 Under Tile: Perc Rate mh/in: Setback DF-Bldg: 20 DF Ht above WT: 0 Soil Type; silty clay loam Limitations: water table WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks; • 55 Well-DF: 75 Report in File?; y Pump Type: subm. Depth; 196 Diameter; 4 Method: drilled INSPECTION RECORD Date 11/2/81 no surfacing 9/9/86 no surfacing .1 . 8/13/90 no surfacing 7/11/91 no surfacing-pump tanks 5/13/93 no surfacing-risers added 10/7/96 non-compliant-repa: ’ by 12/31/2006 Compliance PUMPOUT RECORD Date Gallons . vr 1 1 1 1 1 3 • . * >i* . *: •• •V.* •jx, • • .• * t*•V.- it-m 1 (p TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator July 16,1998 KatUaiir ind #2387 Busse Construction, on behalf of larine Colgrove, 4260 Sixth Avenue North Bob Gehrman, 4300 Sixth Avenue North Conditional Use-Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IA One Family Rural Residential (5 acres) Application:Busse Construction is working on the County Road 6 project for Hennepin County. Due to the cut and fill process for the road work, Busse Construction needs to find locations near the project to haul excess dirt. Property owners in the area have requested fill. Land alteration of this magnitude requires a conditional use permit. The proposed land alteration will be located in the northeast section of the Gehrman property and a portion of the rear yard of Colgrove's property. The land alteration will require 17,310 cubic yards of fill. Pertinent Ordinances: • Section 10.03, Subd. 19 and 20 Findings: 1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan; The proposed location in the rear yard will level an area that slopes from 299.5 m to 295 m from southwest to northeast in the northeast section of the Gehrman's property. There is a wetland in the vicinity. The applicant will need to stake along the wetland and stay at least 26' away from the edge of the delineated wetland. The proposed land alteration will cross U2382 Otten July 20. 1998 page~l a portion of Colgrove's property. 2.That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially iniurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed location for the fill areas is away from existing septic sites. The existing systems are noncompliant. Staff visually inspected the site and believes that there are alternate locations for septic sites,however, testing should be done to determine that the there is a viable alternate site before filling. 3.That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The proposed location complies with the Zoning Code, subject to septic testing before filling. The applicant is required to grade the areas according to the topographic exhibit submitted. The areas shall be properly seeded and established with suitable ground cover or natural vegetation. Staff Recommendation To approve the conditional use permit to alter land on the Gehrman and Colgrove properties as submitted, subject to septic testing before hauling any fill and establishment of ground cover. Attachments A B C D E Application Plat Map Property Owner’s list Topo map Septic Info §2382 Otten My 20.1998 page-2 iLi------------- K CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION Application if O 3 ^Jo Date Received Gh Amount Paid o -fn/ 3ft«l PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Y^O^OSite Address ci w>________________^___ Type of Application to be Filed ^ dot^i L et-<i U Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 1 1 8_^3 1^ OOQfl APPLICANT * ^ ^ _ . N^me CObJgTg^CTlDKJ Phone (home) ¥hone (work) 4si:> lags _____ ___ _____________________ . SThiOllA Addre<;<; IftQQI aejU TlQm "T ta H Cit}; "^eWc MN SCoOI I OWNER (if different than applicant) Name |/oJ'kd.^ / ,h t'hone (home). Phone (work)_ Address Qjf>t//\Uj pJC^ City . 0f\.Q.Zip ^53>SU Date Property Acquired_________________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. / FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ______S300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore _____PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _____$150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) _____Afler-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee (month/year) OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation ______$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule 2. 3. 4. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1- ____ Completed Application Form. ____ Describe request in detail. ------^ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). ------- Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. . . ■ -------Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. -------Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). ------- List 'of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This w’ould include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). ..I—^ Construction plan, if applicable (see staff-for requirements). -------As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 5. 6. 7. 9. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (ll" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. ■Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: ______ Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true an^corr^t to th^best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date S A ’7-9^ OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entr>' onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 05/28/98 BATCH 505 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 30-118-23 3^ 0001 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED KIP A NELSON KIP NELSON ^580 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 12 0005 09285 SIXTH AVE N CHARLES E LARSON CHARLES E LARSON 4285 6TH AVE NO LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0010 04340 SIXTH AVE N C S WILLIAHS 8 E R WILLIAMS CRAIG I ELIZABETH WILLIAHS 4340 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0013 04235 SIXTH AVE N W AND S WYATT WILLIAH D WYATT 4235 N 6TH AVE LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0022 04300 SIXTH AVE N ROBERT 8 MARILYN GEHRHAN ROBERT S GEHRHAN 4300 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 TOTAL BATtH 503 00015 38 30-118-23 43 0003 00835 HUNT FARM RD ANTHONY W WALDERA ANTHONY W WALDERA 5313 HIGHPOINTE DR BLOOHINGTON HN 55437 38 31-118-23 12 0007 04260 SIXTH AVE N KATHARINE S COLGROVE KATHARINE S COLGROVE 4260 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 \ 38 31-118-23 12 0011 04360 SIXTH AVE N D 8 N FLIES JR DONALD 8 NAWAL FLIES 4360 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0015 04220 SIXTH AVE N R 8 J HANNING JR ROBERT C 8 JULIE HANNING JR 4220 CTY RD NO 6 LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 13 0013 04300 WATERTOWN RD JAMES JAY JOHNSON 8 WIFE JAMES JAY JOHNSON 4300 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 21 0001 4490 WATERTOWN RD KENNETH TURNHAM ET AL SUSAN K VAN MOORLEHEM 4490 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 5 38 30-118-23 44 0006 00885 HUNT FARM RD HUNTINGTON FARM HOME OWNERS LARRY MCCARTNEY 755 HUNT FARM RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0009 04320 SIXTH AVE N F L DETERMAN ETAL FERDINAND L DETERMAN 4320 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 31-118-23 12 0012 04225 SIXTH AVE N W A MUELLER 8 P 0 MUELLER WILLIAH A 8 PEGGY A MUELLER BOX 3 LONG LAKE HN 55356 A.gg 38 31-118-23 12 0018 04380 SIXTH AVE N JAMES E CARPENTER JAMES E CARPENTER 4380 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 ft* 38 31-118-23 24 0001 04480 WATERTOWN RD T 8 H SWEEZO TIMOTHY M SWEEZO 4480 WATERTOWN RD HAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 <1 0&\mzAn SikiU CoUbEOu^ c|20»o (o^o RUN DATE 05/28/98 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIASSAOl PAGE 6 BATCH 503 I ; !, • • 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF DATE*5l3?ilflnv Mui Oaa) • • • • . i J i •4 /COUrEooe . ^ \ * '■■■'' V •I . ♦ e *d ZZSE ZS3 ~S3iVI00SS'/ 0110 UOdJ \nzs-\l 9561-53-9 I r 1 # • T • SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY Addr: 4260 Sixth Ave. N. ” PID:’ 31-118-23_ 13 0007 Building Type: residence # BRs/GPD: 2~ # Systems/units: 1/1 Permit No: 1437-• Date of Permit: 3/30/64 Installer: McWilliams System Type: standard trench ..-^Appliances:' Indry .... e. - SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity: 3~ Tank Condition: Failure Pot: medium DF condition:' 11 SEPTIC TANKS Material: concrete block Setback to Bldg: 25 Capacity: 750/'750 DRAINFIELD V Length of Lines: 140 No. Lines: 2 Trench Width: 2 Treatment Area: 280 Type of Filter: Tile Size: Under Tile: Perc Rate mn/in: Setback DF-Bldg: 40 DF Ht above VJT: 0 Soil Type: clay loam Limitations: water table . ! WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: 65 Well-DF: Report in File?: Pump Type: Depth: Diameter: Method: INSPECTION RECORD Date 12/2/82 tanks not located 8/30/84 no surfacing 8/15/86 no surfacing 9/17/90 no surfacing-need risers,pump tanks 8/12/91 no surfacing-need risers,pump tanks 10/28/93 no surfacing-lst tank riser foundspump 8/20/96 non-conforming-repair by 12/31/2006 Comoliaiice 2 2 2 2 .2 f:2 -3 PUMPOUT RECORD Date Gallons -V . ...» • M - ..»y. * • *. • - Vmf. ■n TO:Chair Smith and Orono Plannin g Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:July 16,1998 SUBJECT: #2386 and #2387^ Busse Construction, on behalf of Katharine Colgrove, 4260 Sixth Avenue North Bob Gehrman, 4300 Sixth Avenue North Conditional Use-Public Hearing Zoning District:RR-IA One Family Rural Residential (5 acres) Application;Busse Construction is working on the County Road 6 project for Hennepin County. Due to the cut and fill process for the road work, Busse Construction needs to find locations near the project to haul excess dirt. Property owners in the area have requested fill. Land alteration of this magnitude requires a conditional use permit. The proposed land alteration will be located in the northeast section of the Gehrman property and a portion of the rear yard of Colgrove's property. The land alteration will require 17,310 cubic yards of fill. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.03, Subd. 19 and 20 Findings: 1.That the proposed location of the conditional ijse is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and ComnrAV 'sive Municipal Plan; The proposed location in the rear yard will level an area that slopes from 299.5 m to 295 m from southwest to northeast in the northeast section of the Gehrman's property. There is a wetland in the vicinity. The applicant will need to stake along the wetland and stay at least 26' awayfrom the edge of the delineated wetland. The proposed land alteration will cross H2382 Otten July 20, 1998 page-1 wr • •• I a portion of Colgrove'sproperty. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. • ^ The proposed location for the fill areas is away from existing septic sites. The existing systems are noncompl.ant. Staff visually inspected the site and believes that there are alternate locations for septic sites,however, testing should be done to determine that the there is a viable alternate site before filling. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply \vith each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The proposed location complies with the Zoning Code, subject to septic testing before filling The applicant is required to grade the areas according to the topographic exhibit submitted The areas shall be properly seeded and established with suitable ground cover or natural vegetation. Staff Recommendation To approve the conditional use permit to alter land on the Gehrman and Colgrove properties as submitted, subject to septic testing before hauling any fill and establishment of ground cover. Attachments A B C D E Application Plat Map Property Owner's list Topo map Septic Info U2382 Otten July 20,1998 page-2 • •k Application ^ Date Received 6d /! S Amount Paid ^ q _____ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION ... J Site Address M apphcoh^^ Type of Application to be Filed <^o^d;kcvtu( ^ U> Property Identification N'lmber (P.I.D.) 1^ QQi9. APPLICANT..-^ / iPhone (home ) vr.mp '"T^l'.rir Ryn>.! ft.ok^faone(%vork) ZlS-bU l 'si'-ic' iT" 't'-A 'v-1, CitV ”Iaj , J. (U^',4\]>, ZAv jfS'C'Address ,y3Ji^ B OWNER (ifidfferent tjiao applicant) . C Vn Ir ^ }^l\j k( Name Address l-j grr^ (o Date Property Acquired / ^ ^ ^ ^ T **~7_ City (»/;».■• 9 Zip S'S'c'?^ Phone (home ) Phon^work ) -fT — 9 / (^ X cn rTrro| Lc!h fTly^ zip_££L35^ (month/year) I (do) (do not) also o\vn the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERAUTS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use ______$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ______$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use V $250.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain y Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from ofiginal application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule m REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350 ’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Constmetion plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPL\ 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11 ” X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will requirf; to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: Date APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and..coiject to the be^t of his^er knowledge. Applicant's signature Date ^ ''iQ ’''IK OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry oato4he property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council me^h^ers f^purpos^^pri^estigation and verification of this request. ✓ Owner’s signature Date / g-Applicant must have all Submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meetin Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at ail scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. / Vsoo SfxfK Arv/e.. A). h 8 " 7T s/o 90 Xr\330 DE ^ID 3SO SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY Addr; 4300 Sixth'Ave. N. Buildihg Type: residence PID: 31-118-23 12 0008 # BRs/GPD: 3 # Systems/units:1/1 Permit No: none • Date of Permit: CyDtem Type: standard trench 1/1/66 Installer: Widmer Bros. , Appliances; Indry• SYSTEM CONDITION>r Conformity: *3f" Tank Condition: Failure Pot: medium -DF.-condition: SEPTIC TANKS Material: concrete block Setback to Bldg: - 15 Capacity: 750, 500 DRAINPIELD Length of Lines: 195 Treatment Area: - 390 No. Lines: 3 Trench Width: 2 Type of Filter: rock Tile Size: 6 Under Tile: 16 Perc Rate mn/in: Setback DF-Bldg: 20 DF Ht above WT: • 0 Soil Type: clay loam Limitations: water table WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: Report in File?: y Depth: 115 Diameter: Well-DF: Pump Type: subm. 4 Method: drilled INSFECTICN RECORD Date 12/2/82 no surfacing-pump tanks 8/15/86 no surfacing 9/17/90 no surfacing 8/12/91 no surfacing 10/18/93 no surfacing 8/20/96 non-conforming-repair by 12/3l/;2006 Compliance 2 2 2 2 2 3 PUMPOUT RECORD Date Gallons 6/19/79 2000 5/1/87 1500 ..1 • * •'JTT • • • • V• .••• — «.♦ * * >.^ . -- -_^I I ■4Amm • t • [t*F b*. b.' . w TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FllOIV-:Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:July 9,1998 SUBJECT://2385 Stephanie Kroeger 3465 Crystal Place Variance-Public Hearing Zoniug District: Lot Ai v‘a: LR-IC 6,646 One Family Lakcshorc Residential District (1/2 Acre) square feet (. 15 acre) _____________ Application: The applicant has proposed to tear down an existing one stall garage with attar lied storage to construct a new two stall garage in the same location. The new garage requires a variance from rear and side yard setbacks, and ? second variance from hardcover requirements within the 500 ’ to 1000' lakeshore distance. The existing garage is located di ectly on both the side and rear lot lines. The proposed garage would be located 3' from each lot line. Hardcover on the lot is 52.2%. This would be reduced to 48.6% if the application is approved and the garage constructed.________________________ Pertinent Ordinances: • Section 10.25: LR-1C One Fam. ly Lakeshore Residential District • Section 10.22, Subd. 2: Lakeshore Hardcover Regulations • Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(2): Lakeshore Hardcover Regulations .V P23S5 St:phan\c Kroeger $463 Oystal Place Variances mom Page 1 .1 r-I L*--Mr^ I' % ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards .y LR-IC Lot Area Lot Width Rear Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 21,780 s.f.100'30'10'30' Existing 6,648 s.f.50'O'O'32.3' (res.) Proposed 6,646 s.f.50'3'3'32.3' (res.) The existing garage is located on the rear and side yard lot lines. The proposed structure would be moved out slightly to 3 feet from the rear lot line a id 3 feet from the side lot line. The subject lot does not meet lot area or width requirements. Stnicturf.l Coverag e Tola! Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 6,646 s.f.Existing: 1,403 s.f. Proposed: 1,466 s.f. 21.1% 22.0% The lot exceeds the 15% structural coverage maximum requirement. Although, the Zoning Code; in Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C): Lot Coverage; states: Regardless of lot area, every developed lot shall be allowed at least 1,500 square feet of lot coverage by principal residence and garage structures. A variance from structural coverage requirements is not necessary to exceed the 15% lot coverage standard on this particular lot. ^23S5 Stephanie Kroeger 3465 Crystal J'lace Variances mom 2 I Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'0 0 none (0%) 0 none 1 75'-250' 1 1 0 0 0 (25%) 0 none ....... 250'-500'0 0 0 (30%) 0 none 500'-1000'6,646 s.f.3,466 s.f. (52.2%) 2,326 s.f. (35%) 3,232 s.f. (48.6%) from 35% standard to allow 48.6% hardcover All of Ihc subject lot is located in the 500' to 1000' lakeshore setback distance. The total amount of hardcover '.\ill be reduced, resulting in a net loss in hardcover of 3.6%. The new garage would consist of more square footage than the existing garage, but due to tlie garage's placement on the lot l)ortion of the driveway and a concrete slab the overall hardcover docs decrease from 52.2/oover a to 48.6%. A variance from hardcover requirements within the 500' to 1000' lakeshore setback is necessary to construct the garage. ANALYSIS Variance STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP Applicant ’s hardship is included with Exhibit A. 1 he applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. 1^2385 Stephanie Kroeger 3 -65 Cry stal Place larianccs 7l20m Page 3 i W 'TW ryiteria for nfitfirminim/ Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The properly can conlimic to be used in its current state. The new garage will not alter the use of the property. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Tlie property shares a driveway with the neighboring lot. Tlie only possible location for the garage to function with the shared drive is the same location as the existing garage. 3. Tlie variance, if granted, will not alter the essent ial character of the locality. Other properties located around the subject lot generally have a detached garage located behhid the residence. The new garage will not change the appcai ancc of tlie neighborhood or negatively impact neighboring residences. 4. 6. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors arc not a consideration with this application. 5. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. The Board of Appeals and Adjustmeiils or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. ’ .... The use of the property would remain residential with a garage as a permitted use. The applicant only intends to construct a new garage on the lot m' Stcfhani ? Kroegcr i465 Cry^^’ital Vlacc Variances 7/20/98 Page 4 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the tcmporar>' use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. 'i'he applicant will not be changing the dwelling status of the properly, The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question arc peculiar to such properly or immediately adjoining property. The property was platted well before the cunent zoning regulations, resulting in tlie property not conforming with standards. The size qf the lot has limited the applicant's options for placing the garage elsewhere on the lot. Also, the shared driveway cannot be moved to any other location without removing access to the neighbor's lot. The condit - “ss do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Many lots in the Navarre area are not served by shared driveways, but many do not meet setback requirements. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a :;r’>stantial property right of the applicant. 'fhe applicant has an existing garage located in the same location as the proposed garage will be located. 1 he applicant has indicated tire garage on the lot is nearing disrepair and should be replaced. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The granting of the variances will not constitute a public hazard. The granting of such variance will n(;t merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, hut is necessaiy to alleviate demonstrable hnrdsWp or difficulty. 'j'hc granting of variances will not create something new for the lot. fhe applicant has a legal, non-confonning structure on the lot serving the properly as tlie proposed garage would. The vaiiai.ecs are not a convenience due to the conditions already existing on lire properly. Tiie setbacks would become 3 feet, whereas, the cunent structure is on the property line, and overall liardcover would be reduced from 52.2% to 48.6%. H23S5 Stephnnie Kroc^er 34^5 Cry stal Place Variances 7/20/93 Page 5 ^i. _ -r.'MJ ^^i*^,tr»^'W'^*- r^> pv!l W] i- . ■■■ £' 1}: P; FV:1-. i:‘ . ‘.I Issues 1.The lot would increase in structural coverage from 21.1% to 22.0%. Although, a variance is not required if the total structural coverage is 1,500 square feet or less. The total lot coverage would be 1,466 square feet. 2.The existing garage is located directly on both the rear and side lot lines. The new garage would be setback 3 feet from the rear lot line and 3 feet from the side lot line. 3. The property is served by a shared drive with the neighboring property. 4.The lot is located within the 500' to 1000' lakeshore setback. The lot is allowed a total of 35% hardcover (2,326.1 square feet). The existing hardcover is 3,466 (52.2%) square feet, but the proposed changes would reduce the hardcover somewhat to 3,232 (48.6%) square feet. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the variances from rear yard setback and side yard setback n^quirements to allow a 3 foot setback for the construction of a garage to be replace the existing garage. Staff reconmiends denial of the variance from hardcover requirements within the 500' to 1000' lakeshore setback based on the excessive hardcover on the proi)eity. Attachments A B C D 1 F O H I. J. .Application and Statement of Hardship IMat Map Location Map 'I'opographic Map Survey Hardcover Calculations Photo of Existing Garage , New Garage Phm Property Owners List Permit Record f “5 H233^ Stephanie Kroeger 3465 C’o ’i/fl//Vflce Variances 7/20m Page 6 ■ ^ • ^ < - EXHIBIT A Application U Date Received (c ' 5- 9i^ Amount Paid ^Sd CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION . Initial Application Fee $250.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) \^ariance for non-conforming structures $250.00 Aftcr-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROI ERTY INFORMATION Site Ad Ircss CrMfsflXJl Pla.Cg. •|\ YJ A* VT T TX \ IProper./ Identification Number (P.I.D.) 3ft \T*~ltn -^3- 000 8 ______ Attach legal description to r eplication if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired S/ _____________________________^(month/year I (do) (^cTp^also own the acijacent parcels of land. Present use of property: (specify)____________________ ZoningDistrict: LE _____________________________________________ APPLICANT Name 6TgPHAiOH^ Phone (home) ^"1 \ 3 "7__ _______ Phone (work) /jgv . Address: aMfeS drv|OW>i Plft.c.g. City: ______Zip: | OW’NER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)______________ Name__________________________________ Phone (work)________________ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Constmetion Cost $ \ OQO ! - ' V Describe request in detail: 'Tert.v^ dm^r\ And v:&n (acg^ unify Cl oe.cc3 One. ._____________ \ O ^ ______ (attach additional shev's if necessary) VAIUEANCES REQUIRED Lot Area f-Setback: Lot Width Front A Side Hardcover Lot Coverage y Si Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1 )escribe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property con-litions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: fj&P Amall^ no plu/e. 4a puJ;'_____ QflLrr?y loW^jrg -\i\c c^d ^ya£^c rujrire.inUc^ iocahzcl----- (attach additional sheets if neeessary) A EXHIBIT C GRANDVIEW AVForest j ,^ Lake ^20cjA^^/2 Skogsberg Point Maxwell 0^ V‘ I 0BOMO ^ Arm \,1 60(i IMShadyf^ood Point \ I' ] DEHRING ISLAND >^S Crystal Bohns Point si)5b i*-*. Fagerness Point za5S7esK5?aa>is5«0BEUHt£t^ '.yrsT iRM »£S2t TORO ,:,--40(| SHORE! liSf y JV^E.V ME LA rT J’AniES s CtTY HALL yr.f , —-im [LM ros f/.iE ^:iL0\7 K/ / O Black Lake ^^®^i-ri!Af:;jNiA SPtUHGy<\ *DRJIirii-*^ THERH A'.Si U2 ti5 J£r=i: INTERLACHEN R 5 Spring I IRi 0 .;>rtR JVNO KO il:4 rd -4 Park ■X an Point 'f ^GOOSE ISLAND SHOREIINE CRYSTA tCv\D COUNTY;v^t\\o CO >.rr^H0 .’a NGSTON LYRIC ^ AVE AyEV^TT^ SDR 2400 DRICK ST LYOIARD Carman 2000 Bay ^ts2 ZVSPRAY BOMC lSCO \ .« 3 U. \ I U-AJi V/ V -^Ik / / /%. or:? Ti "T, /2LU /-\ 0 _e__* © V "i i\UM l«s. J 'O' T ! > © • s !=D.r: -niti:i! o Di i ‘SENT BY:MMIC7i!MIHC ; 7- 8-98 ; „2:361'MJ MMIC 612/922-7323-6124730510:# 2/ 3 I I I • CJH i .^m ft *1993 9:)3 kk f • 4\il. •• view of t ”o" is latlam •BOtd. EXHIBIT E •> r Ji IffiLtNGTON I?AlUiOAD 'W COOS OP BIT. SCAtei1*'-20' JOB NG. 980505 ' ;; llBfthllr SENT BY:MNflC/MMIHC ; 7- 8-98 ; 2:37PM : MMIC 612/922-7323- S r 6124730510i= 3/ 3 .............— ------------ .r. — I Mu^ci / rmk:^/v,i%4- HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 7/2/50 SETR^CK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’75-250’aso-soo ’500-1000’ JE2a.STINC; HAROCQVEtt IN ZONE A. B. C. D. E; House _ 9a&s.p. Llofii yiiCDi K X X S.F S.F., S.F- G«rp3o Drivewiy S.F. K X IP <a 1A33l 5.F. S.F. SidftH'AlH X t M S.F. 5.F. Patio/Dafk ^ Wa.1 k X X Ala ijar.dseap* Unddrlr.in 3y PlLitlc X X X Other feX. V’.frvW m TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL FROPBRTY AREA W 20NE ____ - 9 - ■X too - er OPOSED HA^PCOVER IN ZONE B. c. D. E. Hpusc LxofUi Width X X X Garage za PsY^o- HcM*d ondQT vsaw^aAX’ ssansiye « P.e»iSiia= - A6«. 9 Stdewelk X X fatio/Deck X «« F. L«uIlCi)|>e Underlain By fllUtic O. X X X Olhor TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN 20NE •»• B aCAJS^ X loa 32-2i2. EXHIBIT F & S.F. S.F. S.P. SF. S.F.. S.F. S.F. A S.F. B V« S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 8.P. S.F. S.F. S.P. S.F. S.P. • S.F. A ' S.F. a 7 t i li li u V I X 4 i ■( ■ EXHIBIT G Existing Garage mp v'V ■iC'.<s*l '?■ ^-'- >ihvP'v^-5- ^.5i«, 6v r fci m-:ii\mm :•• • ; •• . i |i t ' I 4 r WOnK ORDER 1952 C;OMO AVENUE ST. PAUL. r>»N 55108 Permit by, Legal Oescriptioa Lot___________ BIk___________ Add'n __ Value__ Type Const. SLAB: ^ □ By SUSSEL □ By Owner Approx. □ In / 2-STARTING POINTS ONLY * S.P.l____________________ S.S.P.L. R.P.L. _ Alley. _ House__ F. Street Other__ O Square With □ Sod Rem. • By □ A.B.U______ □ fl Grade Point n CQn(ill;i_________________ ti'I Blocks: CS:/ Owner l)iUy Sussel □ Wtr.proof: I )8y Own. DBy Sus. riBackfill: UBy Own. DBy Sussel CiiMaintain 0' Total Wall Height lii'duding Blocks OR □ Maintain 8' Y/all Height on Top of Blocks Block Site (Top course) ■; \ .HOME PHONg; JOB AnoRE.ss 3 /PZ-________*• BLDG CODE ARE •• SALESMAN CONTRACT DATE.sizEc3:2Zdil Wall Heighrolhcrlhan O" □ □□n Existing garage: No □ □ Octoched □ Attached Yes 0 Size of existing:__( ^ ^ Existing garage will be: U Left as is □ Converted to L.S.-By owner (jG Removed By: Owner □ Sussel ^ Junk Mj:: Ps Rsrr.ovedBy Owner Stakes visible • DYcs BNo Survey available.-□ Yes UNo □ Special instructions from Cement Hen •“T 1 T T"—i11 —1 1 1 1 —1 ———0• / •J 1 1 • •% 1 1 1 1 A /r #-C ■ 1 1 ———1 <1 1 1 r f rr 1 r 1 _ - ^______i____^______1 _____--V V ■ —1 ____1 ____n 1I ,• 1 1 1 ^ K1I 1•8 1 /! •• ——,=J=! ———■- } • ■1 /tu1_'!1 /:1 z( ——1 . L / —1 i 1 1 I 1rr — : ~ t f 1 — — ’• ■ —.1 O - ?- _pI'i/A! i *— — — A ‘ • ——! I 1 ——— i 1 1 •1 1 - L ——i ' !1 — —rX . r! 1 1 1 —1 U-• i_ 1 i 1 V — T-----* t-l--1-t T 144-.q:r: 1 \i 1 1 1 -nvjL _ "* 1 —— ———1 1 — \i.i . ! —1 1"1 —i m ————1 1 7 1 ~61l_1 : 1 • .r*r>*ttzQia ■rl-ii-— -----------H □ Good □ Fair .U Poor OIRPCTION a»***T*i^t , • • RUN DATE 0S/l^i/9S DATCH PROP AODR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NANS TAXPAYER NANE/AODR * % HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEN PROPERTY OWNERS LIST SO 17-117-23 3A 0052 00030 ADDRESS PENDING MCLEOD CNTY REG RR AUTl^CRITY DAKOTA RAIL INC 25 ADAMS ST N LJTCNINSON MH 55350 30 \7-117-23 43 0006 03449 CRYSTAL PL NARK L YOST HARK L YOST 3449 CRYSTAL PL WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 C?09 03473 CRYSTAL PL LORI A GOULET LORI A GOULET 3473 CRYSTAL PL WAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0012 03493 . CRYSTAL PL R J PAIGE A E A PAIGE ROBERT J PAIGE 3493 CRYSTAL PL WAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0018 03452 LIVINGSTON AVE WILLIAM R MAXWELL II A WILLIAN R MAXWELL II 3452 LIVINGSTON AVE NAVARRE NN 55391 WIFE 38 17-117-23 43 0127 02259 S:!ADYHOOD RD N D SCHAFER ACC SCHAFER MICHAEL A CHRISTINA SCHAFER 2259 SHADYWOGO RD WAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0004 02293 SMADYWCGD Iw K W A S A ROCB.'ALD KEVIN W A SHIRLEY A RODEWALD 2293 SHAOYWLOD RD WAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0007 03457 CRYSTAL PL L hat: 3NO A N HAMMOND LARA MANNONO 3457 CRYSTAL PL WAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0010 03477 CRYSTAL PL J R YULE ASM YULE JANES R A STEP!!AT4IE M YULE 3477 CRYSTAL PL WAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0016 03472 LIVINGSTON AVE C T VERSAILLES ET AL CHESTER A MELODY VERSAILLES 3472 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0019 03444 LIVINGSTON AVE PATRICIA J GOAR PATRICIA J GOAR 3444 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA 55391 38 17-117-23 0128 02245 SHADYWOOD RD KATHLEEN F SATlfER KATHLEEN F SATHER 2245 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA NN S5391 IP \ V REPORT NO. PI43M01 PACE I !»■ 30 17-117-23 A3 0C3S 03AA3 CRYSTAL PL A « L RCDEWALO AOELBERT N RODEUALO 3AA3 CRYSTAL PLACE WAYZATA HN 55391 3S 17-117-23 A3 0008 03A65 CRYSTAL PL STEPHANIE A KR0E6ER STEPHANIE A KR0E6ER 3AA5 CRYSTAL PL WAYZATA KN 55391 30 17-117-23 A3 0011 03AS5 CRYSTAL PL BUIR N REUTHER BLAIR N I^HER 3A0S crystal PL WAYZATA MN 55391 58 17-217-23 A3 0017 03A60 LIVINGSTON AVE KENRIC N LXNDLAN 6E0RCIANA CARTALUCCA KEVIN DOE 3A60 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA VM 55391 3B 17-117-23 A3 0020 03A38 LZVXN6ST0N AVE UNE W MOORE LANE W MOORE 3A38 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 A3 0139 03AC8 LIVINGSTON AVE D P DOSHAN ACC OOSKAN DAN P S C!<ERYL G DOSHAN 3A88 LIVIHGSTC:: AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 H pS • 1 V. i % J f-m -J EXfflBIT J PERMIT RECORD Permit No Date Type of Permit t. ■ A • wf .. K&: /A r/tf t TI ■/-/d' f / /g;? ,^3 • • • • • .-cms-r ft--,T ; i . » . ? f*' i •cL"n in IP •-U V • # <7 TO;Chair Smitii and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Mootse, City Administrator FROM: • • DATE: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator • * • * * * July 13,1998 { » • « SUBJECT: #2389 Daniel J. Kluth 2801 Fox Street Conditional Use Permit-Variance-Public Hearing i Zoning District: LR-1A le Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acre) Lot Area:118,268 square feet Q.71 acres) Application:The applicants are requesting a conditional use peimit for a guest house that will be used as a "game building”. The structure will be located on the same lot as their residence. A ccmditional use peimit is necessary for plumbing to serve die building. The iqiplicants have stated they only intend to have one toilet and one sirik installed. A lot size variance is required for die guest house. The Code requires lots with guest houses must meet density requirements. Lots in die LR-1A (2 acre) zoning district must be a minimum of 4 acres to support a guest house. The aoDlicant's lot is 2.71 acres. Backgronnd:A building pemiit was issued to the iqiplicant on June 10,1998 to construct die building as an accessory structure. This is a p ermitted use. Theneedfiir plumbing in die building requires a oondidonal use permit, as well as die variance fiom minimum lot size. In 1991 die City Council granted a*Variance fiom fiont yard setback to build a detached garage in front of the existing residence. The garage was constructed in 1992. »399DoHklJ. Khah 2901 Fax Sm«t VartoKt-CcHdUIOHalUMFvmlt 7M78 Pa$il I i. I N , a .• 1 Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.02, Subd. 1 Definition of Accessory Use or Sfructure Section 10.02, Subd. 28 Definition of Guest House Section 10.03, Subd. 7 One Building Per Lot Section 10.03, Subd. 9 Location Section 10.03, Subd. 11 Dwelling Use Prohibited Section 10.03, Subd. 12 Crowding Principal Structures ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-l A (2 acre)Lot Area Lot Width Rear Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 87,120 s.f. (2 aci^s) 200'50' 10' accessory structures 30'50' Proposed 118,268 s.f. (2.71 acres) 465.93'39.7'172'177' A lot with a guest house requires double the minimum lot size to maintain density. The subject lot is 2.71 acres. A variance must be approved from minimum lot size for this lot. All other setbacks for the new structure are met. «2389DanlelJ. Klulh 280J Fox Street Variance - Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Pcgel This application requires two parts. A will analyze the Conditional Use Permit. The structure will. . be considered a guest house requiring the lot to be a minimum of 4 acres. The lot is only 2.71 acres requiring a lot size variance to grant a Conditional Use Permit The variance is reviewed in B. A. Conditional Use Permit Findings: 1. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan; The pool house is considered a "guest house" for the purposes of zoning regulation. It is located on a lot that does exceed minimum lot size requirements for the residence, but will require a lot size variance for the guest house. It will be architecturally compatible with the principal structure. The proposed conditional use permit is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The game building will be required to meet all current building code requirements. The stmcture will have plumbing and heating. It will not have a detrimental effect on adjacent properties. 3.That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The footprint of the buildings is 1152 square feet. The height of the guest house is less than the principal residence. The game building is also more than 10' from the house. • • •• 02389 DcmieiJ. Kluth 2801 Fox Street Variance - Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Page 3 B. Variance STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant's statement of hardship is included as an attachment to this report. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Criteria for Determining Undue Hard<;}n‘p 1. 2. 4. 5. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The applicants had considered adding to their home, but due to drainage problems on the lot the only way to gain additional indoor recreation space the applicant felt it was necessary to construct a detached accessory structure. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The lot has some drainage problems that may have impacts on the lot if the addition would be attached to the principsd residence. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The structure will not change the appearance of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are not a consideration with this application. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. U2389DankU. Klulh 280! Fox Street Variance - Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Page 4 j I 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The use of the property will remain residential. The application is for plumbing in an accessory structure which the Code does not address. In the past plumbing in an accessory structure has been defmed as a guest house. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. The applicant will not be changing the dwelling status of the property. Mr. and Mrs. Kluth have agreed to place a restrictive covenant on the deed to run with the land which would prohibit the use of the building as any sort of living quarters. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The property contains a drainage pattern that would be impacted by extending the residence. The conditions do no apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The residence is built into a hill and water naturally flows from the higher southwest comer of the lot to the northeast comer. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The lot could support an addition to the home absent of a drainage problem. To maximize livable space without interrupting the natural water flow the applicant is constmcting an accessory structure separate from the principal. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The game building will be required to meet all furrent building code requirements. The stmcture will have plumbing and heating. It will not have a detrimental effect on adjacent properties. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difl&culty. «2389DmlelJ. Kluth 2801 Fox Street Variance • Condiilonat Use Permit 7/20/98 Pages i The variances for lot size are due to the inability to construct an addition to the home. Tlic second variance from rear lot setback requirements may be a convenience to the applicant resulting from an accessory structure converting to a guest house. Issues 1. 2. 3. 4. A building permit has been issued for the structure and construction has begun. This is permitted because it is an accessory structure and meets all lot requirements and setbacks. This is a two part application. A conditional use permit is required for a guest house, and a variance is required on lot size to preserve density within the zoning district. The game house does meet minimum setback requirements as an accessory structure. Although, in some cases a guest house has been positioned considering the possiblility for a two-lot subdivision. This would require the guest house to be positioned 60 feet from the principal structure, therefore meeting the 30 foot setback requirement should the lots be split in the future. Another consideration is setback distances for a guest house to meet those of a principal ' ■-ucture creating a conforming situation at the time a lot were to subdivide. The applicants have agreed to place a restrictive covenant on the deed to run widi die land which would prohibit the use of the building as any sort of living quarters. Staff Recommendation Planning Commission consider the issues and facts to determine a recommendation. Attachments A B C D E F G Applicant Letter and Attachments Location Map Plat Map Survey Topographic Map Property Owners List Permit Record M2389 DanleU. Kluth 2801 Fox Street Variance - Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Page 6 EXHIBIT A June 18,1998 2801 Fox Street Ixmg Lake (Orono), MN 55356 Orono Planning Commission City ofOrono P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 re: Application for a Conditional Use Permit and/or Variance To whom it may concern: Attached to this letter, please find our* application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow us to add a small bathroom to a Game Building we are constructing on our property. Also attached to this letter please find a descriptive index of the attachments. This letter will serve to describe our request in detail. The Need for the Additional Space We decided last year that we have a need for extra space for our home. Our home was built in 1985 and I purchased it in 1990. The house has no basement since the lower level is completely finished. The lower level includes our childrens* bedrooms, a bathroom and family room. There is also a small, partially finished laundry room and a very small, closet-sized storage area used as a work area. Our children (ages IV2 and 12) have lamented the fact that there is insufficient space in our house for larger games or projects. For example, I have a large collection of 1950's >dntage Lionell trains that we set up in the family room of our house a few years ago. The train board required to support the set of trains was eight feet square and took up half the family room. We have since dismantled the train set because we don’t have the space to use it. * Note: Althou^ “we” and “us” is used throughout tMs letter to describe my wife, Maggi G. Kluth, and me, my marriage to Maggj was subsequent to my ownership of the land. Therefore, title in the land at this time lies only with me. This Request for a Conditional Use Permit is therefore submitted in my name only but it is wth the foil support of Mag^ G. Kluth. ’■# o o# ^ o c Orono Planning Commission Kluth Application for a Conditional Use Permit and/or Variance June 17, 1998 ' i Page 2 of 5 Options for Exnandine Existing Home Area In viewing our options for more space, we came to the conclusion that adding on to the house was not a viable approach. The only available location for the addition would have to be on the east side of the house. TThis would destroy the architectural beauty of the house, and, more importantly, disrupt the natural water flow and drainage over the land. Since the house is built into a hill, it is essential that the water be allowed to flow around the buildings from the higher south-west comer to the lower north-east comer of the lot. Since there is a valley between the east side of the house and the rest of the east side of the lot, an addition to the east side of the house would fill in the drainage path from the rear of the house. In the past, we have installed multiple drun tile and drain lines from the house and the rear area though the valley to drain from the rear area to the lower north-east comer of the lot As a direct result of this, we decided instead to add a detached building and preserve the drmnage path (see Attachment A to this letter, a 1985 topographical survey of the land at issue showing the valley between the east side of the house and the east portion of the lot). We are building this Game Building for the specific purpose of housing hobbies, games, and school projects, in a single, large room. The building is detached from the house to maintain the drainage area between the house and the building (see Attachment B, recent survey). As you can see from the attached drawings, ^ve intend to pave a narrow drive throu^ the valley which is pitched to maintain the natural drainage from the rear of the lot (see Attachment C, landscape engineer's first color drawing showing elevation data along the valley), and under which will lie the drain lines from the house and rear areas. To make the Game Building as esthetically pleasing as possible, it was designed by the same professional architectural firm that designed our house: Cradit & Associates of Minneapolis. The interior and exterior will have the same design, trim and colors as the house interior and exterior (see Attachment D, complete set of final archite^ral design dra^ngs). It is designed to be used during all four of Minnesota's seasons with a forced rur gas furnace and a wood stove for the winter. The narrow driveway throu^ the valley will facilitate snow removal between the . house and the Game Building. The building itself has a low profile and its location was carefully chosen by the landscape architecture firm of Gardeneer, Inc. of Rogers, MN, to blend in with the natural surroundings (See Attachment E, final landscape engineer drawings). It is tmly a first class building which will complement the existing home and the land. (See Attachment F, panoranuc view of house, valley and building). Orono Planning Commission Kluth Application for a Conditional Use Permit and/or Variance June 17, 1998 Page 3 of 5 Requirement of a Bathroom • • To complete the functional design of the building and to fulffll the goal of the building becoming a detached extension of our home, it will need a simple bathroom. The normal use of the building will be during extended periods of play in which the need of a bathroom for the children is essential, especially in the winter months when a ti'.p to the hovse would be extremely inconvenient for the children. For safety and convenience, a quarter bath (toilet and sink) is all that is required. In working with the Orono City inspectors to get approval for the building, we were informed that the City of Orono is concerned about the possibility of detached buildings bemg rented out or used as apartments. We can assure the City tWs will not be the case and we are willing to accede to any of the City’s requirements and restrictions to obtain approval of the bathroom in the Game Building. There are no cooking facilities in the Game Building and there are no sleeping quarters. We would agree to place a restrictive covenant on the deed to tun with the land which would prohibit the use of Jie building as any sort of living quarters. Precedent for Granting Our Request The Orono City Council has granted requests in the past which are similar in all respects to our request. As such, our request is entirely in concert with past precedent. For example, in Orono City Counsel Resolution No. 3455 (Attachment G, August 8,1994), Mr. William Stoddard was granted a variance and conditiorial use permit for a guest house on an adjacent lot which was merged with his main lot. Mr. Stoddard did not have the required 2 acres for a guest building (LR-IB zoning district) or the required lot width. In a letter (not attached, but found in the original file) from a nei^bor of Mr. Stoddard in support of the variance, the neighbor referred to the detached structure as their “game house.” In Orono City Counsel Resolution No. 3493 (Attachment H, November 14,1994) Mssrs. Kipfer and Sargent were denied a conditional use permit for a detached building for which they requested the designation of “guest house.” However, in denying their request, the City Counsel approved the bulding plans which included a fiill bath and shower, and required that the owners place restrictive covenants on the land which prohibited the use of the detached structure for living quarters. In Orono City Counsel Resolution No. 2768 (Attaclment I, c.1990), Mr. John Rogers was granted a conditional use permit for a guest house as long as Mr. Rogers agreed never to rent out the detached building. A restrictive covenant was also required. iCf O O' Orono Planning Commission Kluth Application for a Conditional Use Permit and/or Variance June 17, 1998 Page 4 of 5 Finally, in Orono City Counsel Resolution No. 2444 (Attachment J, November, 1988), the applicant (Norwest Bank, as trustee) was granted a variance and a conditional use permit for a guest house above a detached garage. As you can see from the foregoing examples, the existence of a bathroom in a detached building, whether it be designated a “guest house” or not, has been granted in situations which required greater deviation from City Ordinances and City Counsel Resolutions than would be required in the present application. We therefore view our request as fitting within the four comers of past precedeent. The Present Application is a Direct Result of a Hardship By preserving the drainage valley, we have incurred a hardship: the need for a detached building rather than an attached building. Had we added on to our home, we could have potentially created drainage problems, or our addition may have been demed because of the potential drainage problems. By choosing to build a detached building, we now have a safety and convenience issue: the need for a small bathroom. To ameliorate this hardship, and to allow us full use and enjoyment of our land wWle preserving the overall quality of the land, we ask for this variance and conditional use permit. We do not believe that the granting of this variance and conditional use permit will run against prior City Counsel precedent or run against the zoning and planning ordinances of the City of Orono. We respectfully request the granting of our request. Please contact me if you require any further information. I can be reached at home at 449-0959 (voice), 449-8918 (dedicated fax), or at work at 373-6904 (voice), 339-3061 (fax). Very truly yours. • • Daniel J. Kluth Attachments ' 7 Orono Planning Commission Kluth Application for a Conditional Use Pennit and/or Variance June 17,1998 Page 5 of 5 Attachment B F G H I J Lt ■List of /attachments Description A copy of the 1985 topographical survey of the land at issue showing the valley between the east side of the house and the east portion of the lot. The valley is critical to the preservation of drdnage behind the house. Recent survey showing die location of the Game Building in relation to the eidsting bouse (drawn by Mark Gronberg, licensed surveyor, with CoflBn & Groriberg, Inc.). Landscape en^eer’s first color drawing shoi^g elevation data along the valley (drawn by A1 Hipps, licensed landscape en^eer with Gardeneer, Inc.). Complete set of final architectural design drai^gs (designed by Jerry Hufi^e, licensed architect with Cradit & Associates). Final landscape en^eer drawings showing approidmate location of the Game Building (drawn by A1 Hipps, licensed landscape engineer with Gardeneer, Inc.). Panoramic view of house, drainage valley and proposed Game Bufldin^. Orono City Counsel Resolution No. 3455 (August 8,1994). Orono City Counsel Resolution No. 3493 (November 14,1994). Orono City Counsel Resolution No. 2768 (1990). Orono City Counsel Resolution No. 2444 (November, 1988). • »'7 i, ■ / ........... C" • -V * 0 ;.i nt'tochmto> "ft I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representa tion of a survey of the bound aries of Lot i, Biock 3, FARVIEU, and the location of all buildlogs. If any, thereon, and the proposed location of a proposed building. It does not purport to show other laprovenents or encroachments, sN COFFIN t G30NBERG, INC. Gordon R. Coffin Reg. No. 6064 Engineers i Land Surveyors Long Lake. Minnesota CERTIFICATE OF SURVEV FOR NUTCRACKER HOMES LOT 1. BLOCK 3. FARVIEM HEHMEPifl COUNTY. MINNESOTA Oate : 4-9-8S Scale: 1* • 40’ 0 : Iror marker .TM- : Proi-osed elevation BD— : Existing elevation Datum: . ^ V -=lTT V•c X kI I _ h- to 6TH AVE N Classen Lake 800 ORONOHCH SCH onoNO EiiM SCH m I KELLEY ORONO MODLE SCH CtUKAL '^Ooo V-♦ CT Lake^ DICKEY SUGARWOODS RIDGE LA Taj ^yiew TER COU mItRY club R o/ s 400 OANtaS ST WOMU WEAR CIR WATERTOWN RD IRCHAW) u360 HARRMQ1 ELM COUNTRYSI^ GRAND AVE PARK I#. a Line WHITE DEVIN LA LONGVIEW CIR ABINGDON WAY "coum\ ^2 %n -iS- SUSSEX FOX EXhJffi®®// B'lKinS woSoTT*^ 800 FRaCHLAKE Av 5:v v‘r;i f''m Xi.'Lake pwip^• 200 MHNETONKA ^ CHYSTAL| PROSPECT AVE HERITAGE •• • • • EXHIBIT D Certificate of Sufviy.for!’ Daniel J. Kluth of Lot 1, Block 3, FARVIEW Hcnriopin County, Minnesota. • • LEGAL DESCRIPTION OP PREMISES SURVEYED: Lot 1, Block *3/ FARVIEW'.’ »« •• • * . . %% 5 This survey shows the boundaries of the above described property, the existing location of an existing house, and the proposed location of a :'roposed garage. It does not pur- port to show any other improvements.or encroachments^. . .. __ X hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly registered Civil Engineer and.Land. Surveyor .under the lavs of the State of Minnesota. COFFIN S GRONBERG, INC. * MArk S. Gronber^ MN. Lie. Mo. I27SS .Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners. Long.LAt(«> Minnesota . . .. Q •2 -V Scalet 1 inch ■ SO feet .Date s July 12, 1991 • o ! Iron marker found .—... . . Bearings ^A^^wn are based upon assumed datum. A*5*ta • SUfkaiMS • • • m • «••••• #2389 a • • i __/ CZ3 CTD CHID [_] •CD CD CZD I I o o t » ■ A o A »«4i • « i • CUltlAt lAXf/fOaO traCArt ClAlBACC ilkC f*CI MU COvCt IWAfT ^Ul ©vUMl fucc CAfC WAU tUllOMS •vuoiae • COallf. tt«uctu«ct cc«cicri UM iwtmiae foot OICICAriCa raClilTt ticas tA»K roif SMfCI ilCJif utiiiir 101 ■*ll«0O ticau lAllfOAO tVltCN C«0U«0 COatiOl • flit. •lOuaO COallOi »iO«ll./t|ll. laOCi COalOwl • tatfli^OlitC COatOuO MfiCtSlOa COalOwl OfSCVAfO COalOut tfOf lUfAtlOa S«al« la f«*| 0 IM |a|f*tal 2* SWl/4 SEC. 4 T1I7N.R23W HENNEPIN COUNTY rot Orono. hinntfolt 0«t« .r II•I0*•2 HORIZOf^St INC* AftlAt tuffMC fIdItlSICaHS • Ctl*. M VfM'I'M • a^vu iiiti • H0RI20MS* ru€ 3-7209 RUN DATE 06/01/98 BATCH 507 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 04-117-23 31 0006 00585 OLD CRYSTAL DAY PAUL W BER6GREN 8 WIFE REV PAUL W BER66REN 585 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 RD S 001138 04-117-23 31 02880 FOX ST LESTER E THOHPSON ET AL LESTER E THOHPSON 2880 FOX ST RT 1 BOX 325T LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 04-117-23 34 0006 02800 FARVIEW LA J F KEHP 8 L NOVOTNEY-KEHP JEROHE F KEHP 2800 FARVIEW LA LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 04-117-23 42 0005 02740 FOX ST 0 E DRESSEL ETAL ORVILLE E DRESSEL 2740 FOX ST WAYZATA HN 55391 . 38 04-117-23 43 0002 02765 FOX ST Y D ROUX 8 L E ROUX YVES D ROUX 2765 FOX ST WAYZATA HN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 507 00015 000838 04-117-23 31 02920 FOX ST CHERRY C STUBBS CHERRY C STUBBS 2920 FOX ST LONG LAKE tW 55356 30 04-117-23 34 02801 FOX ST DANIEL J KLUTH DANIEL J KLUTH 2801 FOX ST ORONO HN 55356 0004 000738 04-117-23 34 02905 FOX ST HARK F ENGEDRETSON ET AL HARK 8 CAROL ENGEBRETSON 2905 FOX ST LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 04-117-23 42 0006 02760 FOX ST HimETONKA ALANO GROUP INC HZNNETONKA ALANO GROUP 2760 FOX ST WAYZATA HN 55391 38 04-117-23 43 0011 02760 FOX ST HINNETONKA ALANO GROUP INC MINNETONKA ALANO SOCIETY 2760 FOX ST WAYZATA HN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 24 38 04-117-23 31 0010 00565 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD J D FARHER 8 P J FARMER JONATHAN D FORMER 565 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 04-117-23 34 0005 02820 FARVIEW LA T N HOWARD 8 C S HOWARD THOMAS N 8 CHERYL S HOWARD 2820 FARVIEW U LONG LAKE MN 55356 000438 04-117-23 42 02720 FOX Sr 6 L ROLLER 8 C J ROLLER GARY L RQLLER 2720 FOX ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 04-U7-23 42 0023 00540 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S G FUNK 8 J ROGOSHESKE GEORGE FUNK/JUDY ROGOSHESKE 540 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 04-117-23 43 0014 02770 RAINEY RD RICHARD K HYSOCKI ETAL RICHARD 8 APRIL HYSOCKI 2770 RAINEY RD WAYZATA MN 55391 4 tr TS I EXHIBIT G PERMIT RECORD Permit No.Date 2St>/ Type of Permit ■_ ' -7~/0-S'5 -__■ pjLu/— . /If JtJ 7-^^< '3co!7-r?3-i5 . 7?- 9-^(m t 1 1 9-^7- S-s"O.o\ 53_7^_ _„ ^d/sQho &[/:)/}-Sni’/Hiff y^A7 / i f32>l^/O- M(^ QjUL $*V^?o • __ !<>u-ql . _. >A , /1r.P.es5Lnr^/ ■R,.;U •• ••• •5. • •• «• • • • • • • •• •• •• • ^• •ft • TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator July 13, 1998 SUBJTECT:#2390 David Rahn 1385 Rest Point Road Variance-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:14,663 sq. ft. (.33 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance in the 75'-250' setback to construct a double garage, retaining wall, and driveway. The applicant requested previous variances last year to change a cabin into a residence. (See File # 2248). The following variances were granted in 1997: 1.Side yard variance to allow a second story addition 5.3' from the south property line where 5.3' was existing and 10' is required. 2.A hardcover variance in the 0'-75' setback of 19% where none is allowed. The amount of hardcover allowed in the 0'-75' setback is to be subtracted out from the total amount allowed in the 75'-250' setback. 3. A lakeshore setback variance to allow the cabin to be remodeled in place where the cabin encroached into the required 75' setback. A conditional use permit was granted to allow for land alteration in the 0'-75' setback. A portion of the lot is located below the flood plain elevation. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.24.5(B) LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District #2390 David Rahn 1385 Rest Point Road July 20,1998 page-1 h Section 10.22 Subd. 1 and 2 Section 10.56,16, (L) 1. and 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 9, D. ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard 1 acre 140'30'10'75' and ALS Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside 14,663 sq. ft. (.33 acres) 89.86'18' to new garage 5.3' on south 33' Variances were granted last year for side yard setback and lakeshore setback. The proposed garage has doors that face the side yard. On a lakeshore lot, a detached garage may be 10' from street property line. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Allowed • ••• Percentage 14,663 sq. ft.2,199.45 sq. ft. (15%) House & Decks=1,320.75 Garage=672 Total=l,992.75 sq. ft. (13.5%) The proposed garage complies with structural coverage limits. #2390 David Rahn 1385 Rest Point Road July 20,1998 page-2 Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'6,750 sq. ft 1,320.75 (19%) None 1,320.75 sq. ft.(19%) Granted in 1997 75'-250’7,913 sq. ft.792. sq. ft. (10%) 1,978.25 sq. ft. (25%) 2,104 sq. ft. (26.5)% 1,312 sq. ft. (1.5%) The above hardcover table is calculated for each setback, as staff normally does for hardcover variances. In the City Council resolution, however, approving the conditional use permit and variances, the Council directed the applicant that future hardcover would be limited to the amount of hardcover in The table below shows the allowed hardcover based on the direction provided in Resolution #3926. Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0’-75'6,750 sq. ft 1,320.75 (19%) None 1,320.75 sq. ft.(19%) Granted in 1997 75’-250’7,913 sq. ft.792. sq. ft.* (10%) 1,978.25(25%) -1.320.75 657.5 sq. ft. (8.3%) 3,797 sq. ft. (47.98%) 657.5 -3.797 3,139.5 sq. ft. (39.67%) * The applicant is indicating that th;jre is 792 sq. ft. of existing hardcover consisting of a shed, rock driveway, and play fort. When staff calculated the hardcover in 1997 for the other variances, only the shed was counted at approximately 100 sq. ft. The play fort and driveway were not identified on previous worksheets. The exismig hardcover at 10% exceeds the amount allowed by resolution. •f • #2390 David Rahn 1385 Rest Point Road July 20,1998 page-3 Tlie applicant is asking to add the following: 24' X 28' Garage 672 sq. ft. Driveway 1,152 sq. ft. 4' X 70' sidewalk 280 sq. ft. Total amount of new hardcover:2,104 sq. ft. (26.5%) The amount of hardcover proposed in the 75'-250' setback exceeds the 25% limit by 1.5% or 125.75 sq. ft. The City Council directed that the hardcover in the 0'-75' setback (1,320.75 sq. ft.) be subtracted from the allowed hardcover in the 75'-250' setback. Therefore, the applicant is asking for 3,797 sq. ft. total hardcover on the site which is measured against the 7,913 sq. ft. of lot area in the 75'-250' setback which represents 47.98%. This is contrary to the City Council's directive. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant has indicated that they currently do not have any storage for vehicles and no basement. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property can continue to be used without a garage. However, the previous seasonal cabin has been changed into a year round residence. It may be considered a hardship to not have a garage on the property, however, the applicant was instructed that future hardcover would be limited. 2.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The situation is created by the existing amount of hardcover that was built into the 0'-75' setback area which is credited against the 75'~250' setback. The applicant chose to not build the house and garage at the same time. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. #2390 David Rahn 1385 Rest Point Road July 20.1998 page--4 I- • j li The variance will increase the amount of hardcover on the lot. Most of the properties in the area have garages. 4.The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The zoning lots in this area do not meet lot width and lot area standards. All of the lots are subject to the same hardcover limits but most were constructed before the existing requirements. The subject lot also has a portion of the lot located in a floodplain, however, this does not impact the siting of the garage. 5.The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The other lots in the area are subject to the same conditions, however, the amount of hardcover on this lot is subject to the conditions of the previous resolution. 6.The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant will need to provide testimony that he has a substantial interest in having a garage. 7.The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The garage will provide enclosed vehicle storage and storage for household goods that would otherwise be stored in a basement. Issues 1. The lot does not meet lot width or lot area requirements. 2.Previous variances were granted for side yard setback, lakeshore setback, and hardcover in the 0'-75' setback. 3. 4. A conditional use permit was previously granted to construct a portion of the house in the floodplain. The amount of hardcover allowed in the 75-250' setback is to be reduced per resolution by the amount of hardcover allowed in the 0'-75'. The amount of hardcover requested for #2390 David Rahn 1385 Rest Point Road July 20,1998 page--5 I n the new sidewalk, 24' x 28' garage, and driveway exceeds the City Council's directive. 5.The proposed hardcover amount includes a play fort and a shed. This increase's the amount of hardcover by 132 sq. ft. 6.The Zoning Code allows that a detached garage may be located 10' from the property line on a lakeshore lot. The amount of hardcover could be reduced if thw garage was reduced in size and loca.ted closer to the street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To discuss the issues, review the previous resolution, and direct applicant regarding the size and location of the garage to meet the City Council's limit of 657 sq. ft. of new hardcover in the 75'-250' setback. A 20' x 20' garage would be 400 sq. ft. which would leave only 257 sq. ft. for driveway and sidewalk. Attachments A B C D E F G H I J K L Application Location Map Plat Map Applicant's Sketch Topographical Map Survey Hardcover worksheets Garage Sketch Minutes Resolution Permit Record Property Owner's list #2390 David Rahn 1385 Rest Point Road July 20,1998 page-6 ; Application # 5^6 Date Received ^ Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) 8 >s § §8 PROPERTY INFORMATION ^ k? / Site Address roihA iZoAc/ Property Identification Number fP.I.D.’l - flTl»- 3^^ (D& i / Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey, Date Property Acquired ^ ^ *7___________________________(month/year) I (do)<^ no^^so own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___pother (specify). Zoning District: ) R________________________ APPLICANT Name Address: Phone (home ) -c *• i: Phone (work ) /C. 3 « 't 'i' OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. c?oDESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ ^OOp: Describe request in detail: y^r^Z/g/ ‘i/C -/q_/V pv j^^_____________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: Aauz f^O (attach additional sheets if necessary) 7 X X ^ 4. 5. 6. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS ALLof the following information must be submitted bv the annlipatjon deadline riafg in order for vour application to he cftn<idered complete; Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8!4" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 854" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 814" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. . APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. 7. 8- nL Applicant's Signature — Date Z'? OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Coimcil members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Plaiuiing Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If ar. applicant is imable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authoiized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. LccPvnow Hni ’ «• ^■-i- :2::'-v3 ovji xui fel- TbiVvf ^cad c; lO' S^^toack;-fbr DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: -Tvey intends to show the boundaries of th« nhr.v/« 0d thereon. It does not purport to show om# 3menls or encroachments. other via anrpVifTor; er“i Inp'[Vt‘ Minnetonko/ond thereHg. *“ «' >-<** ? David Rahn _ots 15,22 &: 23, and vacatec Sub(division of “ ! Henneoin Lo A + D oin a ey ^ark County, Minnesota LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 23^, and all that part of Lots 15 and 22, and adjacent vacated alley, Subdivision of Lot 14, Rest Point Park, Lake Minnetonka, lying Southerly of the following-described line: Beginning at a point on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 15, distant 75 feet Northeasterly from the Southeast erly corner of said Lot 23; thence Northwesterly to the- Southeasterly corner of said Lot 22; thence Northwesterly on a line forming on angle of 74 degrees 55 minutes with the Easterly line of said Lot 22, to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and there ending. This “survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described^ the location of an existing house arid shed therebn, and the proposed location of a proposed garage. It does nptj)urport to show any other improvements or encroachments. * • hardcover calculation worksheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 75-250’ 250-500* 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN rOiMF A. House T S.F. X X X Width JA.< jLL=. J3^S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway S.F. X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. "Artio/Deck X X 3/5"S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic A X S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other .S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPER IT AREA IN ZONE -J3JZJ.___ - B X 100 S.F. _____^ - S.F. % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN A. House ____________ X Length Width S.F. X X X B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. . S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X ==t S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA T: ZONE __ _ _ _ _ _ _ B S.F. S.F. X 100 cr/O K B A B hardcover calculation woricsheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'75-250'250-500’500-1000* EXISTING HARDCOVER IN 7n!vp A. House A/»h/ 1^^(/ACjAUCe.^ Z.'Z-Vg Length Width B. Jjarftgc X X ri- C. Driveway-X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X* F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other Apft ^6 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPER IT AREA IN ZONE ____ ^ B “7^/^ PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN yoTsnr A. House Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway zv / ^ X X i a D. Sidewalk X X no E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Othar ’ X X /*2- TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B "7^/^ 7^/ 2*7'?7 /3Z./ X 100 X 100 !C?c? "C- ^6 2A S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ____S.F. - S.F. a._% S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % \ A B A B minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16,1997 (its - H2247 Wayne Holmes - Continued) Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application *f2247 vnth the tmderstandmg that fte buildmg cannot be closer than 10' to any property line or other structure, at a maximum of825 s.f, with retaining walls to be approved by the City Engineer, and plans . submitted to staff prior to constructioa The applicant asked if a separate permit was required for the retaining walls. Gaffron said it would be part of the buildmg permit approval Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#9) #2248 - DAVID AND JODI RAHN, 1385 REST POINT ROAD - VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:40-9:02 F.Ma The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present Van Zomeren reported that the application is a proposal for an existing cabm to square off the residence and restore an existing deck and screen ^rch. The .3 acfe property is located in the one acre zornng (fistnct. The structure «locat^ m the 0-75' setback. A hardcover variance is required to increase the hardcover o 19% Lot area and lakeshore setback variances arc required. A conAtional land alteration is required for any alteration or excavation in the flood plain and^S setback from the shoreline. Van Zomeren reviewed the topography of the prop^ noting that the shoreline contour is at the 924.9* elevation. The 93ff wnto^ W lakeshore: the 932' contour traverses the property, so the middle portion of the lot is considered to be in the flood plain. The concern is where the 931.5 elevation is located. The applicant said he has Uved on WUdhurst Trail since 1975. He noted that the five other homes west of this property is evenly setback as proposed for this residence. • • • There were no public comments. Stoddard inquired what the Watershed Distiict’s comments were Rahn said the Watershed did not require any mitigation for the entry, deci;, and screen porch as there are on post footings. Stoddard suggested relocating the 'f • required. Rahn said his histoiy as a contractor and budding official relatM to • restore the cabin with the addition to square h off and has not consider^ hood plain mitigation would be required, and its present locabon is the property. He would like to maintain the character of the property. He noted that morter to move the structure behind the 75' setback would - equireuse ot a holdmg area m that setback Stoddard noted that mitigation can occur elsewhere. o more • . I minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16, 1997 (i^9 - #2248 David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) l» . 3i' «,b,t B, »„ „ l„,.^ „ “ I” ““"“I', McMIm noted the ^mrnly driveway to be about one cat's lengtK Rahn said he would locate the garage and driveway limber uphiU and close to the 35'setb^ ^ “•'* “‘® sIn'Wufe would be located ^^e tLtXsrct “‘‘® . Simthw^infonned that the appUcant plans on residing in this residence. She asked if he had considered a two-stoiy design rather than expanding out. Rahn said his neighbor with a two-story design. The proposed design is one story with a steep Smith said she had a problem supporting a plan with doubling hardcover in the 0-75' and asked for less impact in tWs setback. Rahn said the current house is 600 s.f and the proposed is at a minimum at 1,300 gross floor area. He noted the residence next door is at a 29% coverage and was built in 1983 which has the same standards as currently exists. He noted a lot line rearrangement in 1961 deemed the property biuldable. There were no public comments at this time. Lindquist noted that buildable properties are allowed 15% structural coverage and the propos^ is at 1328 s.f. Concern was voiced with the structure location in the 0-75' but Lindquist noted there is no other location in which the structure can be located. Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve implication #2248 for a conditional use permit for l^d alteration for setback in the flood plain, hardcover at 19%, lakeshore setback as existing, and side setback if necessary. Schroeder inquired if a side yard setback is required even though no changes are made due to Ae original variance required for the property. If necessary, a side yard setback variance would be included in the above motion. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. . . • • • 15 • • MDroTES OP THE REGULAR OKONO CHY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON J UNE 23,1997 (^10) #2247 WAYNE HOLMES, 1390 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESpLUHON NO. 3919 Ga&on reported that the application is a request for side setback and side street yard setback variances for construction of a detached accessory storage building. The building as initially proposed would be located 2.5* from the .unimproved dedicated right-of-way known as Forest Avenue. The ri^t-of-way is wooded and low land. It is a potential access for HQghwood Park. Staff and Planning Commission agreed that the 2.5* setback was inadequate. Gaffiron said the applicant has agreed to maint^ a 10* setback by angling the building and removing 2’ from one side. This would allow the large oak tree to be saved but might result in the loss of lUac bushes. Gaffion said the iO' setback is typical of normal setbacks. There is a 15' setback requirement for buildings of this size, but he feels a 5' variance is appropriate in order not to impact the tree. Additional grading or retmmi^g wall would be required to eliminate any impact The applicant has proposed building a retaining wall. G^dBfron said the Planning Commission and Staff recommend approval of the amended plan. . Goetten asked how far the building would be from the oak tree. Mrs. Holmes said they have reduced the building by 2* to increase the separation. Gaffiron indicated that the tree would be 10-12' from the building. Jabbour asked if there was any reason to maintain the 60' right-of-way. Gafifron said ti ere are no plans to improve the road, but it could be a potential park access in the future. Goetten asked that the applicants be considerate of the tree. Mr. Holmes said they will work aroimd the root system. Mrs. Holmes noted that the building is a pole bam and would be constructed on a floating slab. This should eliminate any problem for the oak tree. The applicant voiced satisfaction with the resohitioq »s presented. Flint moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3919. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. ‘ • • * • * (#11) #2248 DAVID AND JODI RAHN, 1385 REST POINT ROAD - VARIANCE Mr. Rahn was present. .•r *• 12 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 23,1997 (#11 - ^^2248 David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) Van Zomeren reported that the .3 acre property is located in the LR-IB Zoning District. The proposal is to add structure to an existing cabin located within the 0-75’ setback. The second story would require a variance to the side yard setback which exists and is proposed at 5.3' and 10' is required. Lakeshore setback variance is required. Average lakeshore setback is not an issue as the structure is located behind that line. A conditional use permit is required for land alteration in the 0-75’ setback. Van Zomeren reviewed the topography of the property. The 932' elev'ation line "wanders" on the property. ’1 he existing structure is located at the high point of the property. T he flood plain is located behind the structure requiring a CUP foi any alteration. The proposal is to square off the structure which encroaches the 0-75' setback. Tne ha. Jcover in that setback would increase from 9% to 19%. Van Zomeren indicated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the side setback and hardcover variances noting that improvements are limited to an area behind the existing lakeside setback and an additional half-stoiy. They also recommended approval of the CUP for land alteration. Goetten asked the applicant if he had considered moving the addition to the rear of the structure in order to get out of the 0-75' setback. Rahn said he met with the Watershed District. He said his design was an attempt to gain a favorable response from the Council. He indicated that moving the structure back would result in building in the 931.5’ devation which is the flood plain. The plan as presented would not require mitigation of the flood plain as the additions would be built on posts. Rahn said the pl?»n is an attempt to restore the existing structure. He thought the Council would be less receptive to a plan involving alteration of the flood plain. • Goetten said her concern is with doubling the hardcover in the 0-75' setback vrith any new construction if there are other alternatives to consider. Rahn indicated that only one-third of the new hardcover is livable space; the remainder is decking. He said he tried to keep the structure compact and only squared the structure off. The screen" h and decldng is only 8'wide. Goetten asked if Rahn discussed adding to the rear of the structure with the Watershed. Rahn said he did. He met with Tim Hafiier of the Watershed District. He said this recommendation is possible but would occur in the lower area of the lot and require major alteration of the flood plain. Rahn said the home is located similarly on the lot with other homes in the neighborhood and is the only unimproved ate. minutes of the begular orono city council MEETING HELD ON JUNE 23,1997 (#11 - #2248 Da\ad and Jodi Rahn - Continued) Raiir .aid the only other option is to pUce the stnicture in the middle of the flood plain which would require mitigation. He reiterated that no mitigaUon would be required in squaring off the structure. Jabbour asked the Council for th«r opinion. Goetten said she would not approve additional hardcover in the 0-75 setback. Jabbour noted the applicant had suggested ehmin^'' on of the decks which would decease the hardcover from 1320 s.f. to 1018 s.f. Rahn tui.: he has sold his other home and his family plans on liwng here year around. He also indicated that he will be planning on adding a garage in the future. f J^bour and Goetten both informed Rahn that structure :n the flood plain is less of an issue than structure in the 0-75’ setback. Rahn said his dream is to restore the cabin and suggested diminat'mg the deck and maintaining the screen porch as planned. Goetten was informed that the 8'xl2 ’ is to be located on the north side of the structure. Jabbour said there is 60 s.f. of existing deck and 252 s.f. total of decking. Eliminafmg this decking and maintaining tlic screen porch would result iii 1068 s.f. of structure. The structure would be increased from 540 s.f. to 840 s.f. with a 132 s.f. porch. J^bour indicated that he is only considering this option because the stiucture is mimmal in size noting 1500 s.f. is normally allowed. ‘Ihe option would also maintain the structure out of the flood plain and would be serviced with sewer. Jabbour said this situation creates a true hardship. Jabbour moved to approve Application #2248 based on the hardships and rewoning as stated with the removal of decks as proposed by the applicant in order to facilitate the application. The motion failed due to lack of a second. Goetten said she could not vote in favor of the motion and noted that the application could be heard in front of a full Council. Rahn indicated that the guidelines have not changed since 1983 when the adjacent property was permitted 29% hardcover. Jabbour said be recognized the City made a mistake at that time. Rahn indicated that time is of the essence in providing a home for his family. Goetten said she would be wiling to table the application to the meeting of July 14. Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to t^le Application #2248. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 9 * MINUTES OF TEOE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JULY 14,1997 (#4 - #2246 Donald Currier, Jr. - Continued) Currier informed Flint that the antenna could not be nested or raised in the location required due to the trees. He noted fte survey shows the trees plotted that are affected by the antenna and the tree cover then drawn in. Jabbour noted that the ability to have a nested antenna is more visibly attractive than an antenna that must be fiiDy extended at all times. Currier said trees would still have to be removed to allow for the fully extended antenna. Jabbour was informed that the neighbor in whose yard the antenna would fall, if it would topple, gave his approval. Flint questioned why the antenna cannot be moved 15* further along the s^ne line noting the survey does not indicate trees in that area. Currier said the tree cover is located there and would result in the loss of a lotus tree. J^ur was informed that the horizontal width is a 34’ maximum with a 20' long boom. Flint was told that the antenna is directional motorized by a rotor. In answer l *he question of how dose the neighbors structures are to the north property line, Moorse said a letter indicates that the area is ungroomed without any structures. Kellqr questioned what would happen if that property owner wanted to build a garage in that location. Currier said the neij^bor told him he could put the antenna on the property line if he wanted to. Goetten reported that if the neighboring property was sol^ the antenna could create problems for the new owner. Kelley suggested a call option be placed on the antenna if that were to occur. Barrett indicated that tMs would be difficult to enforce. Peterson was informed that there were a couple other antermas in the City and no problems have been reported. The onfy other retractable antenna that was on a property in the City was removed when the resident moved. Jabbour said he feels the retractable antenna is a great idea. Currier indicated he would like to maintain the trees to lessen the visual impact. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3925 per the Planning Commission recommendation. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Flint. (US) #2243 DAVID AND JODI RAHN, 1385 REST POINT ROAD - VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. 3926 • • . • • • David Rahn was present. '» ••, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CTrY COUNCIL. MEETING HELD ON JULY 14,1997 (#5 - #2248 David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) Kell^ asked for clarification on the hardcover calculations of an incre^e fi’ora 9% to 19% in the 0-75* setback. He was informed that the calculations do not include a drivev.ay or potential garage. There is currently no hardcover in the 75-250’ setback and the hardcover noted is the house footprint only. KeUey said a driveway and garage inevitable and would need to know the calculations for them and what amount would be added in the 0-75’ where h leads to the home. Jabbour noted that the application is ^ cnfitled to 25% in the 75-250' setback. Kelley questioned what percentage would be m the flood plain. Rahn s^d the garage would not be below the 931.5' elevation and no variance would be required for a garage. Van Zomeren agreed that no vanance would be required. Kelley said he has never turned do^/n an application for a two-car garage no.ing the necessity for garages in this area but felt the calculations should be included. He questioned a sidewalk leading to the residence. Peterson questioned the need for the calculation since it is not included in the proposal. Rahn indicated that he is allowed 1500 s.f of structure outside the 0-75* and as much as 2200 s.f with the size of the lot. Jabbour asked the applicant how he plans on walking to the hou^. The applicant ^ questioned whether a walkway is required. Rahn said he has no intention of putting in a sidewalk. Jabbour indicated that one would eventually be needed. R^ said he uses the grass area now and the decldng and entry are included in the calculations. He current^ parks on the clearing on top of the hillside and there is no established driveway. ’Goetten questioned why the residence cannot be pulled back. Rahn said the residence ^ would then be located in the flood plain. He said he has space for 1900 s.f in the 75-250' - setback. Kelley asked Staff if 25% hardcover allowed for the 75-250* setbwk includes land in the flood plain. He was informed by Gaffiron and Vm Zomeren tiiat it did. Jabbour noted the structure could be a slab on grade without a foundation. Jabbour said he would make his approval contingent on no additional variances allowed in the future and ary further improvements adhering to standards in the zoning code. Gaffion questioned with hardcover shown in the 0-75', whether this amount should be subtracted fi’om that allowed elsewhere. He felt it should be. Jabbour cited an e^^ple where tins has been done in the past. Gaffiron indicated that with 2000 s.f total it would leave 1000 s.f for any future improvemems. Jabbour said that was a good idea. Rahn agreed to comply with this request L n TO;Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:July 6,1998 SUBJECT:#2392 Thomas Berscheid 1365 Rest Point Road Conditional Use Permit-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:21,318 square feet (.49 acres) Application: The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a detached garage on a through lot, and a Variance from lot setback requirements for an accessary structure. The Zoning Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for accessory buildings located on through lots in ”R” Zoning Districts. ___________________________________________________ Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.02(42): Definition of a Through Lot Section 10.03, Subd. 9: Accessory Structures Section 10.03, Subd. 10: Accessory Structure - Conditional Use Permit Section 10.24, Subd. 5(B): LR-IB Setback Requirements 9* ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 1 acre 140 ft.35 ft.10 ft.30 ft. Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Side Yard .49 acres 125.4 ft.82 ft- existing 70 ft.- existing 64 ft.22 ft. .49 acres 125.4 ft.49.7 ft-proposed 13.4 ft-proposed 22 ft. The lot does not meet zoning district standards for lot area and lot width. Although, the garage would meet all required setbacks. No variances are needed with this application. Structural Coverag e Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 21,318 s.f.Existing: 918 s.f 4.3% 21,318 s.f.Proposed: 1,494 s.f.7.0% The lot does meet the 15% structural coverage requirement. U2392 Thomas Berscheid 1365 Rest Point Road Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Pagc2 Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'none 0 0 0 none 75'-250'none 0 0 0 none 250'-500'21,318 s.f.3,490 s.f. (16%) 6,395 s.f. (30%) 3,718 s.f. (17%) none 500'-1000’none 0 0 0 none The applicant is only requesting a slight increase in hardcover on the property. The hardcover will remain well under the the allowed hardcover percentage in the 250' to 500' zone. Conditional Use Permit Findings: 1.That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan. P.ie use of the property, as a single family dwelling, is in accord with the Zoiung Chapter. The applicant is not proposing to change the use on the lot. The Zoning Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for accessory structures, to include garages, on any "through lot". The proposal is consistant with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant's survey places the garage conforming to required setback distances. 2.That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed location of the structure will not be detrimental to public health or safety. The garage will be consuncted to Building Code standards. Its' impact on neighboring properties will be minimal. A wooded area exists directly behind the proposed garage U2392 Thomas Berscheid 1365 Rest Point Road Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Page3 » I and between the garage and the neighboring property. Placing the structure further back on the property would require removing trees and increasing hardcover for a longer driveway. 3.That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. Garages are a permitted accessory use within ”R" districts. The Zoning Code requires accessory structures to be setback 35-feet from a street or no closer to the street than the principal structure on the lot. On a through lot two street yards exist creating a unique situation. The Code requires accessory structures to not be closer to the street than the principle building. For this reason the Zoning Code requires a conditional use permit. No variances are required with the application as all setbacks and building size requirements are would be met. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit to construct a garage, as an accessary structure on a through lot, based on the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. The applicant shall obtain a building permit from the City of Orono prior to constructing the garage. The applicant shall construct the garage in substancial conformance with the survey dated May 19,1998 on file with the Department of Building and Zoning. The applicant receives a building permit within one year of Coimcil granting the conditional use permit. Thomas Berscheid 1365 Rest Point Road Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Page4 Attachments A Application B Plat Map C Location Map D. Topography E. Survey F. Hardcover Calculations G. List of Adjacent Property Owners H. Permit Record #2392 Thomas Berscheid ^ S65 Rest Point Road onditional Use Permit mom Pages EXHIBIT A Application # ^^5*9 P- Date Received C" Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LA3SD USE APPLICATION I • • * f. PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address WV.S . r)<4rcss>^'^c^ *^^~V>vA T>'pe of Application to be Filed ^ 8 >% Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^-7^ 33. 3<£.crt ro APPLICANT Name___ Address x-^v^c^ \v OWTSTR (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) ^*Vv.~- Phone (work) Kfio City ____Zip Address Phone (home)_ Phone (work)_ City Zip. Date Propfiito^Acquired V^n>A . ^Vq____________ I (do) ^o irot) ^Iso own the adjacent parcels of land. ^ (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application UZ-f/3 Dlsj/liq- $175.00 Residential Accessory Use- on (\ ___$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ___$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ___$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ___$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use ___$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore ___PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule ___$150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from ori^al application) _Afler-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation __$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment . _____$100.00 Appeals _____Other - see Fee Schedule O. j ^ - (2e).- ifT OP e «7) / f^f'i ^.tJ: / :s-.. V'T oSkMI? - 71 (45) V f1 OF 49 290.2 r<>P »^.*35-» jg /^\ ' \ Jvw'^. _2&5 S ^'iCT n *(50) ■ • f r- M:/ I joy O/ Wl iS5^^ (K>'^ t«xT (!7) . k,'. / f a«..w i/l^i ,'j^»? »S^;WT tamgdi: 9 I 6 (7;*« (6)2 of lii^Jtu VAC DOC W 979200 ‘VACDOC NO 9909007 NOTE, lot a 7MiyXC9 6Am(S EXHIBIT f/OOD TR Classen Oh PL CHIPPP'VA lA OFOm CIR 0 BAYSIDE NORTH ^HICCVICW ^ 400 V; A * %.ELM •.c' *t I ■ :* v -i=- V!^V ?'■•?•.<■• ■«*''^V'WEST BRANCH RD •. 800 77^ EILEEN ST ORONO HIGH oo CNi CO WATERTOWN RO ICHRISTINE DR \ <- : ‘H ' -SAST -IAKE^ , V !?V^» ~ i \ A^ ir. Stubbs .) rfi^r” IDE RD > r. ''^-V V % ^ • -. I. vSSt ^200 .—h'<»' Lv ^A:i?ore5M SlA nS FOX 7^ iip •’/.i 'T/ !«»<vr« /Ot-.i-.V © EXHIBIT C w H W .* • • ‘ EXHIBIT F HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEEl TOT41L PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Length Width 100 X X X B. Garage C. Driveway . D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other \t> Vn X X > X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^.•QTAL PROPER ■ X 100 (CIRCLE ONE)0-75*75-250 ’^0-500^5 500-1000* EXISTING HARDroVER IN ZONE A. House ■X '^DO '\*\o S.F. • Length X Width S.F. X ..B SF. •X • •* « •SF. • • • B. Garage • • • * • • . •• • . ;X • * • m S.F. C. Driveway \r>X '-\D ^\ibC>S.F. X V\ rs B \\Vb fN S.F. D. Sidewalk*•.X SF. •X B SF. ■ E. Patio/Deck • X .•• ' • •S.F. •X .B S.F. F. Landscape •X • # S.F. Underlain X B S.F. By Plastic X »S.F. G. Odier X 'N&t)S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE • S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. lorn "S.F. S.F. S.F. s.f! S.F. S.F. SF. _\3c___ A B S.F. S.F. A S.F. B % 11- c J RUN DATE 06/12/98 BATCH 502 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR L I V.. PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER • NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER . NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER . NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 32 0037 0137S REST POINT RD H B S L K GERLICHER HICHAEL B S LYNNE GERLICHER 137S REST POINT RD HOUND HN 5536<» 38 07-117-23 32 0052 01315 REST POINT LA K J GROVER ASK GROVER KEVIN J GROVER AND SUSAN K GROVER 1315 REST POINT LA HINNETRISTA HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0056 04685 NORTH SHORE DR TYLER C CORBIN TYLER C CORBIN 4685 NORTH SHORE DR. HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0062 01354 REST POINT CIR B A SCHEBLER A S B SCHEBLER B A SCHEBLER A S B SCHEBLER 1354 REST POINT CIR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 33 0011 01385 REST POINT RD D W A J L RAHN DAVID W A JODI L RAHN 1385 REST POINT RD HOUND HN 55364 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 7 38 07-117-23 32 0038 01373 REST POINT RD K E ANDERSON A A K KRAHER KIRK ANDERSON 1373 REST POINT RD HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0039 01350 REST POINT RD LAS GRABILL LARRY A <SHARON GRABILL 1350 REST POINT RD HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0053 04675 NORTH SHORE DR TYLER C CORBIN TYLER C CORBIN 4685 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 52 0054 01345 REST POINT LA JOSHUA D URAN JOSHUA URAN 1345 RESTPOINT LA HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0060 01366 REST POINT RD LAWRENCE E A HELEN LANGHANS LAWRENCE E A HELEN LANGHANS 1366 REST POINT RD HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0061 01371 REST POINT LA KENNETH W A RENEE 6 EGCERT KENNETH A RENEE 0 EGGERT 1371 REST POINT LA HOUND HN 55364 t ^ t 38 07-117-23 33 0006 01386 REST POINT RD J T NY6ARD A K H NYGARD J T NYCARD A K H NYGARD 1386 REST POINT RD HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 33 0007 01380 REST POINT RD DAVID K BLODGETT DAVID K BLODGETT 1380 REST POINT RD HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 33 0012 01374 REST POINT RD G R BLOOH A T A BLOOH GEORGE R A THERESA A BLOOH 1374 REST POINT RD HOUND HN 55364 TOTAL BATCH 502 00032 • • • c L • • f RUN DATE 06/12/98 BATCH 502 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR . • PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER. N^HE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER. NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 31 0016 013<i7 REST POINT CIR W E PINEOAR 8 R A PINEGAR WILLIAH 8 REBECCA.PINEGAR 13^7 REST POINT CIR HOUND HN . SS36^ 38 07-117-23 31 0019 0^^545 NORTH SHORE DR C A 8 H L ALBRECHT TRUSTEES HAROLD L 8 CAROL A ALBRECHT 4545 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0022 01342 REST POINT CIR H J ALTENHOFEN ET AL HARK J ALTENHOFEN 1342 REST POINT CIR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0028 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ROBERT L BIRKELAND 8 WIFE ROBERT L BIRKELAND 1298 WILDHURST TRAIL HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0024 04615 TONKAVIEW LA KATHLEEN G ASH KATHLEEN 6 ASH 4615 TONKAVIEW LA HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0030 01310 REST POINT U E D 8 C L REINHART ERIC D REINHART 1310 REST POINT LA HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0017 01337 REST POINT CIR ROBERT H ZAUN ROBERT H ZAUN 1337 REST POINT CIR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0020 01336 REST POINT CIR JANICE K DE HATTEO JANICE K DE HATTEO . 1336 REST POINT CIRCLE HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0023 01348 REST POINT CIR K 8 D HANKINSON KEITH 0 8 DONNA H HANKINSON 1348 REST POINT CIR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0031 01299 V .LDHURST TR PATTI HAE SCHIHHEL PATTI HAE SCHIHHEL 1299 WILDHURST TR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0025 04625 TONKAVIEW LA R H SHELTON 8 H L SHELTON R H SHELTON 8 H L SHELTON 4625 TONKAVIEW LA HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0031 01360 REST POINT CIR D 8 J BOIES JR DAVID B 8 JENNIFER BOIES JR 1360 REST POINT CIRCLE HOUND HN 55364 REPORT NO. PI435401 PACE 6 38 07-117-23 31 0018 01320 REST POINT CIR SHAWN HEAKINS * • SHAWN HEAKINS 1320 REST POINT CIR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0021 01340 REST POINT CIR JACK EDWARDS KUTZ JACK EDWARDS KUTZ 1340 REST POINT CIR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 31 0C24 01350 REST POINT CIR RICHARD JL ANFINSON RICHARD L ANFIrlSON 1350 REST POINT CIR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0002 01340 REST POINT LA J H HOUTHAN 8 K J HOUTHAN J H HOUTHAN 8 K J HOUTHAN 1340 REST POINT LA HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0026 04629 TONKAVIEW LA J R ABRAHAHSON/D ABRAHAHSON JAMES R 8 DAWN ABRAHAHSON 4629 TONKAVIEW LA HOUND HN 55364-9631 38 07-117-23 32 0034 01365 REST POINT RO THOMAS NICHOLAS BERSCHEID THOMAS NICHOLAS BERSCHEID 1365 REST POINT RD HOUND HN 55364 EXHIBIT H Permit No PERMIT RECORD Date Type of Permit Isi. TO: FROM: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:July 13,1998 SUBJECT:#2393 Richard and Carol Kail 2917 Casco Point Road Variances—Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 acre) Lot Area:8,990 sq. ft. (.206 acres) Application:The applicants recently purchased the subject property and want to remove the existing carport and construct a 20 ’ x 20' detached garage. Variances are required for side yard setback to allow the garage to encroach into the 10’ required side yard. The proposed garage also requires a variance for hardcover in the 250' to 500' setback. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.25, Subd. 6, (A) and (B) Section 10.22, Subd. 1 and 2 Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) Section 10.56, Subd. 16, (C) 1 and 2 Section 10.03, Subd. 6, (A) 1 "...However, the lot record shall not be more intensely developed unless combined with one ore more abutting lots or portions thereof so as to create a lot meeting the requirements of this Zoning Chapter". U2393 Richard and Carol Kail 2917 Casco Point Road July 20. 199S page-1 ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IC District Standards Lot Area 1/2 acre Lot Width 100' Front Yard 30' Side Yard 10' Rear Yard 30' for principal structure, 10' for accessory Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Rear Yard w 8,990 sq. ft. (.206 acres) 59.9'60'8.5' on E side of house, 5' for new garage 10' proposed for new garage The subject property does not meet the minimum lot width or lot area requirements. The existing house does not meet the minimum side yard requirements along the east property line. The new garage requires a side yard variance to encroach into the required 10' side yard along the east property line. The driveway must be at least 5' from the west property line, the driveway turnout from a side loading garage should be at least 30' and the garage depth is proposed at 20*. These dimensions use 55' of the lot width which leaves only 5* for a setback on the east side. Structural Coverag e Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Allowed Percentage Proposed 8,990 sq. ft. (.206 acres) 1,348.5 sq. ft. (15%) or 1,500 sq. ft., whichever is greater House=l,036 sq.ft. Garage=400 sq. ft. Total=l,436 sq. ft. (15.9%) The subject lot is approximately 1/5 of an acre in a zoning district that requires 1/2 acre minimum lot size. The Zoning Code provides lots less than 2 acres in size to have a minimum of 15% lot !i . I TI coverage or a 1,500 sq. ft. footprint for the principal structure and accessory structures combined. This proposal is for 1,436 sq. ft. or 15.9% structural lot coverage which does not exceed the 1,500 sq. ft. allowance. The 15% limit does not apply to this application. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline 250’-500' Total Area in Setback 8,990 sq. ft. Existing Hardcover 3,522 sq. ft. (39.4%) Allowed Hardcover 2,697 sq. ft. (30%) Proposed Hardcover 3,638 sq. ft. (40.4%) Variance Requested 941 sq. ft. (10.46%) The subject property currently exceeds the hardcover limit for the 250' to 500' setback area. Part of the problem is that this lot provides access for the residence to the south which is also owned by the applicants. Staff provided an alternate plan that eliminates more driveway, provides a minimum driveway pad of 20' and a drive aisle of 10' for a total of 30'. The staff alternative requires a 5' side yard variance and also tries to protect the maple tree with a 10' rear yard setback. The amount of hardcover in the staff alternative is 3,606 sq. ft. or 40.11% instead of 40.4%. It would provide more green space between the house eind the new garage. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicants have stated that not having a garage for this property is a hardship. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The residence can continue to be used as a dwelling unit without a garage, however, the applicants have stated that they want to have a garage for this property. It is currently served by a carport. 2.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. This is a very small lot, less than 1/5 acre where a minimum of 1/2 acre is required. The applicants own the adjacent lakeshore parcel. The applicants purchased the property for use by their daughter. They want to provide a garage on the property. Siting a garage on the property is difficult because of the narrow width of the lot, the desire to preserve a maple tree and open space, and provide an adequate drive.vay/backout space for a sideloading garage. I 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance will add another building to a substandard lot. The adjacent lots are connected as one tax parcel. 4.The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. This is a substandard lot in a neighborhood of deep, narrow lots. Ideally, this lot should be combined with the applicant's property. Historically, however, it has fimctioned as a separate lot with a dwelling unit. 5.The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. All lots in this zoning district must comply with the standards. This lot is narrow and and substandard which impacts the ability to locate a garage on the property that complies with yard setbacks and hardcover. 6.The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicants shall provide testimony regarding their interest in providing a garage for this residence. 7. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The variances will provide a small 20'x 20'garage for this property. It is not possible to locate a garage on this property without needing a hardcover variance. Issues 1.This lot does not meet the lot area or lot width standards. The existing house does not meet the side yard setbacks from the east property line. 2.A minimum of 55' width is required to provide a 5' setback for driveway, 10' for drive aisle, 20' for driveway pad, 20' for garage depth. A 10' side yard requirement cannot be met unless the driveway is placed on the property line or the driveway pad is reduced. 3.This lot is penalized by hardcover that provides driveway access for the adjacent lakeshore residence which is also owned by the applicants. The Planning Commission should consider that this driveway serves two residences when reviewing the amount of hardcover on the lot. The applicants own the adjacent lot which also does not meet • I I 4. 5. the minimum lot size requirements. Allowing another structure on a substandard lot theoretically extends the future life of this lot. Financially, it makes it more difficult for this lot to be combined with the applicant's lot at a future point in time. Combining the lots would allow for one lot that more closely conforms to the minimum area requirements. The Zoning Code does not allow two principal structures on one zoning lot so the lots cannot be combined unless a dwelling unit is removed. The Zoning Code indicates that lots of records that are deficient in lot width and lot area shall not be more intensely developed. The issue is whether a garage is considered more intense development. Generally, properties without garages are reviewed favorably when variances are needed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To review the plan as submitted and as revised by staff and discuss the unique issues with this lot given that it does not meet lot area requirements and the applicant's own the adjacent lot. One possible solution is to ask the applicants to consider adding a stall to their existing garage on their property to be used by their daughter. This would provide enclosed parking for her vehicle and provide one larger garage servicing both properties rather than adding more structure and hardcover to a substandard lot that should eventually be combined with the applicant's lot. Attachments A B C D E F G H I J K L Application Plat Map Existing Survey Hardcover as submitted Staff Revised Survey Staff Hardcover Garage sketch Applicant's adjacent property Permit Record Picture of property Aerial photo Sketch of adjacent properties based on aerial photos (1994) « • A Application # 33^^ Date Received ^9 Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change frorn original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 9-^ O 0 T^Ol /0~r Property Identification Number fP.I.D.VAr>-ll~7^ i5i QG*o^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ]^te Property Acquired • _______________^(month/year) (^doM^o ^Iso own the adjacent parcels of land.’ Present use of property: X residential ___pother (specify)_____________________ Zoning District: Ll^-IL^ APPLIC^T . Name/l/c/i^/^/t/7 7^j4-tL Address:^ LL^clq yj'fKiO Phone (horne d __ Phone Cwork l ^/7J'~PooQ City: dAo/UH ________Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _____ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUES Describe request in detail ----------------------------- EST ^ Estimated Construction Cost $ A CX^ X (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED ^ Lot Area Lot "WidA X Hardcover ]___.Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshcre Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY COI^ITIONS Describe imdue hardship or practical difficulty m unusual property conditions preventing compliance wiA Zoning Code requirements: — (attach Additional sheets if necess^) ^ ^ 1. 2. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS iubmWed by the nnnli.,Hnn deadline Jat, in arder fpr y<f^r application to be cntKiHered complpte; ^^^^^"^pmpleted Application Form Certified Propei^ Owners List of ovvners wthin 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of ^^Jinance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). _ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'A" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing crade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy SYi" x 11" for reproduction. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. QK-* 1 • « _ ' ^---------------'V lui icpiuuuuuui] .^^^Ketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/a" x 11"). _ List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in e property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). _ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any oflier persons you wish notified of this application. _ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Properly Otvner must sign this application. Please remember that yonr ynrmnee pppl.calion is not complete if the ahnve information ha. not heen % APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) an^or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied i^^and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further autnorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes^^ investigation and verification of this request. Applicant’s Signaturi Owner’s Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each montli.^ Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make ^rangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 (Iff / 13/> m—^ B W'%//?' / ,N0-^ • A 6'S. 10 >\ .9 4,/ 8 a'; fl/s' <Ht:5; ^•4^. A B (40) « I yA V ^V <7( seji--". /?/vl' /<i>A'?>;'^^'k/^L\-^iy \K. A N (57)/V / Kfii <5!..n (56)(23) (22)^/^S;% (73) 2 (31) . E' l^i R*3IO'/r. (26) 53.02 no I /82. .(72) %y 109 \ 153) 99 4 / A »>y^^o (23) '/^Ar* (3' . ^rS ✓ / 152)^'107 / ^0 c? / \<r V \^0 ,%■ (5o; (35) / !«• ^0 ^0 .''95 OV»NO» fn wacnPT Ckyi)LS> \ ' (*in (46) •v;V-103 N^' C v<f) A v:A<®>’? i (36) —1 '■^1 ‘W .'\ (63) 15.* i^U'-'l ? "?i4-E . % 120 f> S' (60) 20-,- ...I ^0. (61) “•''.xb, b^38)'t' ■''• xo.6''. * vO ^ArL (27) 7''a.4’'-V'>. S 7^(25) .<b- T o'^^ ^'^JmTiiii(2d)>s\- \' (24) ‘S / »^ N ft. y^l\ to ^ f 00 ' O O I COro Oro CO A I is io ISi ^ oi3S “|O JO W 3- z _i 2 M O “ 5 S tn ® cj OO) s oro 0) 0) U. O O in 01 q: UJo oa. c •c Q. (O %00o • • C/) z UJ go «D •' £ S . ^ ^ o C c 5 ^ E 23D® C C ^ O O ®E E 2 c C c O O o •h .b u 0> 01 01€> f> or^0 o o c c c «} 0> 4) O O O 1 I I ^ CN lO 00 o> O) I £ Q Oto HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET As 50BMl'nHtS SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’75-250' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE 3g~8A. House 26.?- Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway /SO O^cl. Carparfl D. Sidewalk _____ X X y*s* 23 3-r 3. E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X 1. 9»r •I \f toTAL^HARDCOVER in ZONE TOTAL PROPER rV AREA IN ZONE A ._4CZ2:i PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House 38-8 26.? Length Width X X X B. Garage 20 zo C. Driveway /STZ)X X \/arfe3 D. Sidewalk X X ■ E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X : G. oldA conc- shdo y. r THTAT a/ V.2T TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE • -i- B g9jO 500-1000' X 100 = C3 X 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2. Z40 S.F. _____ S.F. ni-e>o S.F. S.F. S S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ^rz2- S.F.w o S.F. % Jo 56 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ^Ot>S.F. 2//^ • S.F. S.F. 30 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 566-0 3<»''^S.F. S.F. 7o A B A B in o O O I COto O K) CO 2 }8 ^ ^ S; is.|Mfi 2^2 o “ 1 “ ^ g §i N I • • O 5< Z S S*^ UJ § F ^ i S o§^ J8 ?s*□C S , o ^ O ® 5 *” ^ </7 « vr O CO as•ac otn 0) <D U_ 3 ^ 's s 4^ ^ Oc c o €> A> *t: E £ i3 3® S § J2 EEs S ^ CL _ • C S o • o o c c cP P o o Qu c9 a 01 o «> o O O CO 2o c:o (OIdo C7»c•co. CO (/) 2 I ^ 5 Id 2 Id O o o o c c c «> €> 0> O O O I I I o u » o o — •S *-w D 0 «S ^ coOQ U 1 ^ o> I OIo) ov;•? s £ o> tn ^ o lO a. I S3 3 XI ^w c*#-^ oo ^ $ E ^ •O-K 01 P I •5 •os v-lc c c V £ ^ “ £kS f! 5"? 2> S’! d < o fiC <o 08 .1 « *: ~ - o hS O -P ^ - 11 ^.1 •£ I Ji -JO..? ^45 ° t -, ■§ t iIS - I I v» o ■5.3 - ^ O-^J ^ .C ^ 7 ^ ^ ,A ^ C:^ h F o F ^ ^ _• qj JO ’ lo vS r V?c? >Sl L- 10 scale) \ oz o S c cE ct>« oz a S' • • CO o O 1.=? t '0 J -1^141-1 •», */) jsj 5 QfO ’2 -O . f — SL !• 1 ■4 REVISED a\j HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 5TAf^ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’75-250’500-1000’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House 8_____ X 26.7- Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway ISO Cmd. carport) X X D. Sidewalk 23 X X 3* S 3. E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other ^________ _ Cone. shcj> '* total; HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House 33. t 26.? Length Width X X X B, Garage 20 zo C. Driveway CPf^o) /SZ>X X y/ortes * • D. Sidewalk X X ■ 3.:T E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE . _ _ _______ B X 100 - /6 3 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2. Z40 S.F. S.F. /2?eo S.F. S.F. S S.F. S,F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. xs xX.3^rz2- S.F. q_ S.F. % /03t^S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. Aoe>S.F. IBCS S.F. S.F. So S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ^OL S.F. S.F. 3QdL 7o A B A 3 » i' -r— • • CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR RICHARD & CAROL KAIL IN LOT 97,. SPRING PARK AND ADJOINING LAND HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AKE VA/€raA/HA I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation \ of a aurvey of the following described ^operty: L^t 97, Spring Park, That part of vacated Lake Shore Avenue and that part of the tract of land lyin; between said Avenue and the shore of Lake Minnetonka, all lying between the Southwesterly extensions of the North westerly and Southeasterly lines of Lot 97, Spring Park, according to the rec orded plat thereof, and the location of .all existing buildings thereon. It does not purport to show other improvements or encroach ments . GORDON R.. COFFIN CO., INC. Date: July 26, 1984 Scale: 1 inch : 30 feet o : Iron marker Gordon R. Coffin Reg.^ oCoi Mark S, Gronborg Reg.jyi275l Engineers & Land Surveyors Long Lake, Minnesota \J r •V ^nV/iC;L lOCOXjjj^ li ■ ’liik#v^- - ^" . •.^- . ^AHrvN,oo<<i) \ hitvH) A p|>\icaa V x (60 oaJ (6^) SiiB^ecr ftoPoiCij I ' L i % 9 9 B TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:July 14,1998 SUBJECT: #2394 C. Peter Pearson Company, on behalf of Gary & Bonnie Bimbaum 2697 Kelly Avenue Variances —Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB,One Family Lakeshore Residential (1 acre) Lot Area:22,549 sq. ft. (non-contiguous) (Slacres) 16,749 sq. ft. (contiguous) (.38 acres) Application:The subject property was granted a lot area variance on November 10,1997, according to Resolution #3997. One of the conditions of the resolution was that no further variances would be granted for Lot 1 or Lot 2. The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance and side yard adjacent to street variance. The applicant is also asking to use Lydiard Avenue for access to reduce the amount of hardcover for the driveway. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.24, Subd. 5 (B) Section 10.22, Subd. 1 and 2 Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L), 1 and 2 page-^1 f ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside , Y-rd 1 Side Yard Adjacent to Street 1 acre 140'30’10'/5' and ALS 35' Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard \1 Lakeside Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street r 22,549 sq. ft. non contiguous (.51 acres) 98' at 75' setback, lll'at OHWL 30'10’75'17 ’ > f I 16,749 sq. ft. contiguous (.38 acres) The subject property was granted variances for lot area and lot width in November 1997. The applicant is asking for a side yard adjacent to street variance to reduce the required setback from Lydiard Avenue from 35' to 17' to reduce the amount of hardcover on the site and provide for a bigger footprint. The City Council's resolution indicated that no future variances would be allowed. page —2 I l‘ ijl I H:1 !• I ’I \ t f ’ r •• • • Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Allowed Percentage Proposed 16,749 sq.ft. (.38 acre.s) 2,512 sq. ft. (15%) House=1,222 sq. ft. Garage=440 sq. ft. Total=1,662 sq. ft. The structural coverage calculation was based on the contiguous amount of land. The total amount of lot coverage does not exceed the 15% requirement. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'8,714 sq. ft. (contiguous) None None None None 75'-250’8,035 sq.ft.6 sq. ft.2,008 sq. ft. (25%) 2,350 sq. ft. (29.2%) 341.25 sq. ft. (4.2%) The proposed residence, driveway and sidewalk exceed the 25% limit for hardcover in the 75* -250' setback. The resolution that the City Council approved indicated that no future variances would be granted. page-S i STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. 2. 4. 5. 6. The property in question has been granted lot area and lot width variances that expire on November 10, 1998. The property is vacant. A small house that does not require any variances could be built on the lot. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The situation is caused by the design of the proposed residence and the location of the lot next Lydiard Avenue which requires a greater setback of 35' instead of 10'. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances will change the character of the area by allowing a house that exceeds the hardcover limits to be built within 1 T of Lydiard Avenue. The access to Lydiard Beach would also be changed because it does not currently provide access to other residences. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. The applicant has a purchase agreement to buy the property contingent on receiving the requested variances. The lot was granted lot area and lot width variances, however, a condition was placed on the lot to limit future variances. The current price oflakeshore lots is driving the number of variances to maximize the size of the proposed residence. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. This lot is subject to the conditions under which the lot area and lot width variances were granted. Other lots, however, are also subject to the hardcover and setback limits. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. * « ^ « • t <1 7. 9. This lot does not meet the requirements of the zoning district for lot area or lot width. The lot area is also not contiguous. The lot is further restrictedfor residential development by the greater setback requirement from Lydiard Avenue. If access were providedfrom Kelly Avenue, the minimum amount of hardcover for a 35' x 20' driveway is 700sq.fr. This leaves approximately 1,300 sq. fr. for a building footprint. Because of the proximity to the lake, it may not be possible to construct a basement. Therefore, the maximum amount of total floor area may be less than 2,600 sq.ft, if it were 2 stories in height. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant has a purchase agreement for the property. As he is not the owner, he does not have a substantial property right in the subject property. The property owners are aware that the Council indicated that future variances would not be granted. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. As this b a vacant lot, there b not hardship to grant variances for setback and hardcover. Issues 1 . The lot was granted lot area and lot width variances in November 1997. 2. The property owners were informed that future variances would not be granted. 3. The Park Commission reviewed the proposed access from Lydiard Avenue at their July 6,1998 meeting and recommended that the City not allow a curb cut from the beach access. 4. The side yard adjacent to street setback for Lydiard Avenue is the same 35' setback as for Kelly Avenue. 5. Because of the 35' setback requirement for this property 700 sq. ft. of the allowed 2,008 sq. ft. of hardcover would be used by driveway. This represents 35% of the allowed hardcover being consumed by the driveway which reduces the size of the structure. 6. The Zoning Code provides that a lot may have a 1,500 sq. ft. footprint. The proposed plan is slightly larger at 1,222 sq. ft. for the house and 440 sq. ft. for the garage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To direct the applicant to redesign the house so that access is from Kelly Avenue and that the footprint of the house not exceed 1,500 sq. ft. and the amount of proposed hardcover not exceed 2,008 sq. ft. Attachments A B C D E F Application Applicant's letter Plat Map Hardcover & Calculations Survey Elevation G&H Floor Plan I J Resolution # 3997 Minutes: September 15,1997 October 20,1997 November 10,1997 Pictures i .1 t 3 Application H 4^ Date Received 2.4 V Amount Paid ___ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Addres s 7.0, 91 KEUX A^E-Nlfe ' Property Identification Number (P.I.D.][ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. DatePropftrt3(Acquired ^_____ I (do) ^o n^ also own the adjace ’nt parcels of lana Present use of property: X residential _ Zoning District:__________- IH other (specify) 0 (month/year APPLICANTt'l'jjiCe/uv 1 ^ Phone (home) Name C.» re4^r~ Phone (work ) Address T^Candu Coirt. '7^// '*^itv: _____Zip: ^5~S7<d, OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) H 7/ '~0^ Name f Bo^Aie: Phone (work i f Address: fl . City: £_______Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost OyO V ^ X Describe request in detail: LyJ i (attach additional sheets necessary/ Uniard 4^ • VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front X_Side X Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) *SlDP. YAED AbJftC€iVOT "To HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficultv or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: L\.n■uLSu/:^\ ^raper^-M t'4-iO-\S 5*1 T.d_ O ikA li.«w»'V vav &C ' k- Co . yVtAWc<.i.^ VoV STiXC, (\.KA \^rCZArri.>ff^ r7^>c-T\u/v (attach additional sheets if necessary) h REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must he submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete; ■i 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. y Completed Application Form y~ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of ^ Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). jx Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 814" x. 11" for reproduction. Topographic sur\’ey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 814" x 11" for reproduction. jX Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 814" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include- name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). __ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. __ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Properly Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in^r^iew of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true apdrcorKef^yihe best;>f^s/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature C ------ Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of myesTi^atipn^^S^erif^tion^f this request. / X ^ X^ Owner's S^nature ‘ ■'— Date /r ill submittals into the City offices 25 days before tr e PlaimingApplicant mukt ha^e all submittals into the’ City offices 25 days Commission Reeling, Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review' meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 B June 24,1998 RE: 2695 Kelly Ave City of Orono Planning Staff 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55336 Dear City of Orono Planning Staff, Attached is a variance application for 26XX(95) Kelly Ave, (Lot 1, Block 1, Carmen Cove), PID 20-117* 23-14-0007. Gary and ^nnie Bimbaum who reside in the adjacent house at 2695 Kelly currently own the property. I have a purchase agreement for their vacant lot. This application requests a side yard variance along Lydiard Avenue of 18 feet, and a hardcover variance of 4.2%. The unusual property conditions limit the potential building envelope. The lot of record is less then current minimum lot size, and hardcover restrictions limit the use of property for construaion of a dwelling. By side loading the garage from Lydiard Avenue, limiting the size of the driveway, a significant reduction in hardcover can be achieved while retaining the 75’ OHWL setback and the 35’ setback from Kelly Ave. As you can see the proposed house has a small double garage (20 ’x21^ and a modest foot print, we have included the side^ks, retaining wall, roof overhang and a patio/deck in the hardcover calculations. Please consider this request for variance. Sincere iris Pearson C. Peter Pearson Company Attachments 1. Application and Fee 2. Certified Property Owners List, labels and map 3. Certificate of survey, includes existing and proposed elevations, 8 Vi x 11 copy 4. Sketches of proposed floor plans and front elevation 5. Legal Name, Data Privacy form . - V V ’ .*• ■’ *.-,A '^v»rv**...' . i - . * • • • V, . . : • ^ . - ‘ V \ . ' V ? :\ ’ ' • ' * ’*■ ■• * 1* • ''•■••' * V * • \ . » •• . ..• ■ •- ••. V- '*. iV- •• ■ " j» ’ ^•s" S .i -• • .• '.- „ L •' . ■ . *. •.■■•' : v'^Vvs ■TiV--' ■ . •<■•'•'• ; ■-• ... •:.:/’’i ; ■>• •,■ ■■/ •' ■ •, • •' V- ■•. .■•1^ • ' •. r 2. Parcel Information . Parcel 102011723140007 House Number 02695 Street Name KELLY AVE ff~6OO* €sj» O • * - b. • • • \- . ♦ *« *• • yr; • * . '• / - • • • “ JV ‘‘ J '•..'•:■•'<•■■•►•'’■■■“.e .,.. 0 •■*.*.* * %i* ' *s ' C. • "*1 * . *•! .%.■■ *’.W. . . 'v.••••• ..*•. . •■ • • ."• ; ' PROPERTYSURVEYS SUBDIVISION DESIGN TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS C.R. WIMDEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. LAND SURVEYORS SUITE 110 • 7650 CURRELL BLVD. • WOODBURY. MINNESOTA 55125 PHONE: 612-731-7702 FAX: 812-731-7872 June 23,1998 C. Peter Pearson Co. 5360 Candy Cove Trail Prior Lake, MN 55372 Dear Mr. Pearson: According to our survey of Lot 1, Blod< 1, Carman Cove, Hennepin County, Minnesota the land and hardcover are as foilovYS. Lakeshore Setback Zone Lot Area In Zone Existing Hardcover In Zone Loti. Block 1 0-75 feet 8,714 sq. ft. 0-75 feet (non contiguous) 5,800 sq. ft. 75 - 250 feet 8,035 sq. ft. 0 sq. ft. 6sq.ft (0.1%) Total 22,549 sq. ft. The above areas are based on the enclosed survey and were measured from the lot boundaries and the 929.4 contour line. The worksheet for the proposed hard cover areas is attached. Thank you. Sincerely, Charles R. Winden i cy Lori; Carman Cove HARDCOVER C.ALCULATIOiN WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75* EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ X ;50-5Q0' LengUi 'JC'idth B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other WOUCg X X X X X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERl'Y AREA IN ZONE 6 ____ -i- B fto3? PROPOSED WARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House iRPg^UlA)^ Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway TO D. Sidewalk i a '» E. Patio/Deck r. Landscape Underlain By Plastic WALL G. Other ROOP X X X X X X X X X *1 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 13.EO + B e035 X 100 500-1000' ’^~rr 0035 o.\ H4-0 30L ■74 I n ITS •m- S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ’ S.F. ■ % A B _ S.F. _ S.F. _ S.F. _ S.F. S.F. __ S.F. S.F. _ S.F. ___ S.F. ___ S.F. _ S.F. __S.F. __S.F. __S.F. __________S.F. 7.350 S.F. A 035 S.F. A B X WO cr/e M I w . I : I j I i ■ i 1- I- ) > < Qrr < O (S ! / at &L6VAriC?UL > rv- '■ .i ? •/ 4*.» ff iwpi K!;».n:ise is u::::pS ::::!: is ■ raji ii i£0g^>4iik^i L cJ«>.cefflT-H=n^ iiiiii • • « _T.I I I I I I f±__ ' I R ,1j- u i5> f • \ Vv../ %J>> ^ 1. “Jl' 1226 -440 M V ^ ‘ « ,» I S i ! i z> e c:: o u u <2>u A. M 1 • ■ • « •C O m CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 99 7 A A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5, FILE NO. 2283 WHEREAS, Gary and Bonnie Bimbaum (hereinafter "the applicant ”) owners of the property located at 2695 Kelly Avenue within the City of Orono ‘(hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Carman Cove (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants haVe applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow the lot area to remaki at .52 acre (.38 acre contiguous) for Lot 1 and .62 acre for Lot 2 where 1 acre is required and lot width variances of 42' for Lot 1 to allow the lot widths of 98' at the 75' lakeshore setback and 111' at the 929.4' ordinary high water mark are required. A lot width variance of 75' for Lot 2 to allow lot widths of 106' at the 75' lakeshore setback and 65' at the 929.4 ordinary high water mark where 140' is required. A hardcover variance of 3.6% to allow the existing 28.6% hardcover to remain where 25% is allowed to allow Lot 1 to be considered a buildable lot is also required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2283. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zorung District requiring one acre in area. Lots 1 and 2 together consist of 49,504 s.f. or 1.14 acre (43,704 s.f. or 1 acre contiguous). Lot 1 is .52 acre (.38 acre contiguous) and Lot 2 is .62 acre. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 20, 1997 Page 1 of 5 . t CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL MO. 8 9 9 7 a and recommended approval of the proposed variance^ based upon the following findings: 1.The lots of record were platted prior to current zoning district requirements. 2. The lots are separate tax parcels. 3. 4. Both lots have been assessed separately for sewer and water. Variances for lot area for Lots 1 and 2 and a hardcover variance for Lot 2 was granted in 1987 to allow Lot 1 to be considered buildable. 4.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and reconunendat'ons of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the'proposed variance on the health;’ safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 to permit Lot 1 to be considered a buildable lot as shown on Exhibit A. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1. No farther variances shall be granted to either Lot 1 or Lot 2. 2. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the Page 2 of 5 I I ■i CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _3 9 9 7 A - applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (November 10, 1998). 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of November, 1997. ATTEST: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of November, 1997 by Gabriel Jabbour and Dc;c*hy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the Citv. / ( h >v>/; // CAROLE A. HASEMAN S NOTARY PUBlIMyllNNESOTA »HENNEPIN COUNTY t K My Commission ExplreJaa 31.2IXX) | 5'age3of5 Notary Public ■i r CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. R Q Q y f\ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On tins day of / ______, 1997_ before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared w:<^._________ known to me to be the person(s) descrioed in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. ri'-n CAROLE A. HASEMAN V- NOtWYMJBUC-WNNESOlA HBINEPIM COUNTY My Commission Expifei J». 31.2000 j-Ze^ NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 5 I 1 CITYof ORONO CSHO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 9 9 7 A II o* s_1 £ € ___ f ■ — O «-4- "»• N —' *• I' X. VIo fsi r4 <TN rv s. J) Vrv .c O -• VV RESOLUTION #3997 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) CITY OF ORONO I, Dorothy M. Hallin, City Oerk of the . City of Orono, Hennepin Coim^ Minnesota do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of a resoluQon of the Ofy of the City of Orono with the original record of such resolution m *e Mmu^ of te ^ “!ain« of s^d City Council a1 a meeting of said City Council held onproceedmgj City co ^ is . ttue and correct copy of said resolution duly adopted by said City Council at said meeting, day of In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this---Hth November__________________» * (SEAL) i ll i! ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 15,1997(#4 - #2298 Conley Brooks, Jr., anfl John Brooks - Continued) •^imith voiced concern with this land acquisition making Brooks' property more buildable. Hawii Led the peninsula was located in the 0-75' setback, Gaffion ^d it could be a concern in a dififerent arrangement but not in this case due to the setback and lakeshore. Schioeder asked if the motion should include a scenic easement which will benefit the property owner of 980 West Femdale and Robert Floyd. noted that the covenants do not address the maple trees located on the tip of the pomt. Brooks S dLtoLute scenic easement already and is willing to move the maple trees, Schroeder noted that no easement would be required if he owns the property. The special lot arrangement was explained. Votf Aves 4 Nays 3, Lindquist, Smith, and Berg, Berg said she is concerned wi* sett>“8 » precedent Lindqui^ said the proposal is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the property is not contiguous. . ACTION ITEMS GARY AND BONNIE BIRNBAUM, 2695 KELLY AVENUE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC hearing 10:21-10:31 P.M. Tlie Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. VanZomerenreportedthattheappU^tlonisa^^^^ Zomeren sail on page 5 of the memo, ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 15,1997 (#6 - 2283 Gary and Bonnie Bimbaum - Continued) Mr. Bimbaum asked for consideration regarding the stipulation of removing the fence. It is located on the edge of the property at the edge of the access road for the public beach. The area is uneven and receives heavy traJffic. The fence would provide for safety as there is no shoulder on the road. There is also alot of snowmobile traffic during the winter months. Without the fence, the snowmobilers would travel across the property onto Kelly Avenue instead of using the access road. There were no public comments. Smith asked the applicant if he has reviewed the Staff recommendations. Bimbaum said he supports the recommendation with the exception for hardcover being reduced on Lot 2 and request the fence remain. Lindquist asked whether there was any reason why the fence cannot be moved onto Bimbaum's property. Bimbaum said there was not much land left as the land has eroded. Berg noted that a person can no longer walk out to the point. McMillan S£ud it appears that what land is there is different from that shown on the survey. Stoddard inquired how old Ae survey was. Van Zomeren said the survey was inaccurate regarding hardcover and total acreage based on the applicant's phone call. Lindquist suggesied approval be subject to an updated survey. Schroeder moved to approve Application #2283 subject to Staff recommendations with the exception that the fence be allowed to remain on City property and an updated survey be provided prior to application review by Council. Stoddard responded that he felt the updated survey would show circumstances different than that shown on the submitted survey. Bimbaum acknowledged that erosion has occurred. Stoddard indicated that the water is hitting the fence area. Schroeder received confirmation that the application is to enable the property to be one buildable lot. Stoddard noted that the property is in the one acre zoning district and consists of .52 acre and .6 acres with the additional strip of land. This falls short of the requirement. Stoddard said he would like to see what land exists. I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 15,1997 (jfrS - 2283 Gary and Bonnie Bimbaum - Continued) Schroeder indicated he stands behind his motion due to the erosion occurring. McMillan indicated that the water is 2' higher. There was no second to the motion. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #2283 subject to an updated survey. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 1, Schroeder, who indicated he felt the results would be the same. (#7) #2284 JAMES SLECHTA, 3700 NORTHERN AVENUE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 10:31-10:45 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren distributed photographs of the property. The 127,968.3 s.f property, consisting of 3.97 acres total and .6 acres wetland, is located in the LR-IC, 1/2 acre Zoning District. The proposal is to construct a 42’x96' storage structure, which is in excess of the maximum for an oversized accessory struciure. The structure is proposed at a location 23' from the property line and 26.2’ from the wetland. The structure is proposed at a height of 23' with 16' side walls. The principal residence is approximately 16 in height. With the size of the lot, the property is limited to an accessory structure of 1,421.4 s.f. James Slechta said his intention is to move to his parents property to provide them assistance and requires the space to store his possessions. He has a building of similar size now 4t a different location. There were no public comments. Schroeder was ini.^.med by Slechta that the building would be used to store his 35' boat, requiring the height of the building, his vehicles and other equipment. Lindquist informed Slechta that the building size was too large. He noted there were already four outbuildings on the property now in addition to the residence. A variance from both the street and side setbacks are also required. He asked what structure Slechta could obtain with meeting the setbacks. Slechta said he could adjust the location but cannot reduce the size to 1400 s.f. Slechta informed Schroeder that he did not intend to work in the building. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 20, 1997 (#5 - #2310 Dick Bury - Continued) Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to deny Application #2310 based on non-conformance \Vt Ji code due to outside sales. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Schroeder informed Buiy that tl.? application could be taken to the Council for their review. (#6) #2283 GARY AND BONNIE BIRNBAUM, 2695 KELLY AVTiNUE - RENEWAL VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED 9:32-9:58 P.M. The Applicant was present. Bressler informed the Commission that the variance renewal application was tabled at their last meeting in order for a new survey to be submitted. He reported there were two lots of record with Lot 1 deemed a separate building lot. Variances are required for hardcover, lot area, and lot width. Bressler reported that the issue of concern is that the lot is no longer contiguous. The two lots together are one acre in the one acre zoning district. The two lots together meet the 100' width. Lot 1 by itself does not meet lot area or lot width requirement. The lot is .38 acres. The new lot calculation is .50 acres. Bressler noted that the Planning Commission in 1987 denied the application but the Council approved it. Staff recommends denial of the application at tfus time and directs the lots be legally combined. Gary Bimbaum said the recommended change was made after the survey was submitted and based on error. He indicated that the first 13 findings in the 1987 resolution have not changed. Regarding the erosion that has taken place, finding 3 notes the lot is undeveloped but was assessed for sewer and water. Finding 4 notes the lots are independent parcels and taxed separately. Finding 5 reports the individual access for Lbt 1. Finding 6 references the character of the neighborhood. He noted the majority of lots in the area were .2 to .4 acres. Bimbaum said the erosion of the point is irrelevant to the building lot affecting only 1/100 acre. Bimbaum said there are no drainage problems. He read the finding #13 of the 1987 resolution, noting the peculiarities of this property and their keeping with the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Bimbaum said nothing has changed from this resolution based on the erosion that has occurred. L. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 20, 1997 (#6 - #2283 Gary and Bonnie Bimbaum - Continued) Bimbaum responded to a statement regarding his economic purposes for the proposal. He indicated that the variances were in place when he purchased the property and alone do not constitute a hardship. He indicated that he no longer needs the large house on the one lot and is considering selling it and building on the other lot a smaller house in which to reside. Bimbaum said the lot could be built upon with an adequate footprint. He feels there are no substantial differences from the original application and is requesting approval. Dressier informed Bimbaum that a hardcover variance would be required to build within the footprint. Bimbaum noted that the original resolution allowed 30% hardcover and that amount has been reduced at the current level of 28.6%. During public comments, Jim Berg, 2655 Lydiard, said he supported denial of the application. Jamce Berg said she opposed the application in 1987. Bimbaum questioned whether there was a conflict of interest on her part. Berg said there was not. Van Zomeren said a conflict of interest would only exist if there was a monetary interest. Lindquist said he was unaware of any monetary interest by any member of the board. He noted that the Planning Commission is only an advisory body making recommendations to Council that are not binding. Van Zomeren informed Smith that she was unaware of the reasoning for Council approval in 1987 when the Planning Commission denied the application. Hawn questioned whether the sewer assessment could be refunded by the Council. Hawn said she did not support the application but understood the applicant has paid assessments and has a hardship. Berg said the applicant in 1987 had been told the lot was not buildable. M.'". Birabaiun said the perception is an unbuildable lot is incorrect noting the lot is in keeping with the other lots in the Carmen Cove area. McMillan noted the lot would be allowed 1500 s.f. of stmeture. Van Zomeren said hardcover has to be considered as well. Van Zomeren said the problem arises in that the variance was originally approved on October 26, 1987 and has since expired. It is further complicated since the land is not contiguous. • • — MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 20,1997 (#6 - #2283 Gary and Bonnie Bimbaum - Continued) Bimbaum said the connection of the lots was not a consideration at the time of the original variance application so would not be relevant to whether the lot was buildable. He indicated there is .52 acres at this time. The difference from the eroded portion of property is only 1/100th of an acre that is no longer included in the calculations, from .39 acres to .38 acres. McMillan questioned whether the elapsed variance would set some type of precedence. Bimbaum again noted no changes hr.ve occurred. He said he would like to bu'ld a smaller home on the property. Bre >sler said a hardcover variance would be required depending on the size of the driveway. Mrs. Bimbaum noted that the access road is adjacent to the lot. Bimbaum sa'd he intended to either sell all of the property or sell separately and keep one separate lot. Commission questioned the ability to approve a variance for a lot without any plans. Van Zomeren said it was to restore a prior variance. McMillan noted if the property is sold in the future, the new owner would have to make application and go through the same process. Commission discussed the ability to renew the variance without plans and whether it. could be denied when the lot has been deemed buildable in the past and assessed for sewer. The Bimbaum's said they had been unaware of the need to renew the variance each year. Lindquist said the intent of the application if for the City to deem the lot as buildable. Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application #2283 noting a buildable lot exists. It was noted that no other variances would be granted in the future other than lot area and lot width. Schroeder informed the applicants that it would be in the best interest of the City for the lots to be combined. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 1, Berg. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 10,1997 (#3 - #2279/#2280 Marc and Tracy Whitehead - Continued) Goetten asked what the time lime is to accomplish solving this issue. Barrett said since the applicant's attorney suggested litigation, it can be discussed during the executive session following the public meeting. Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to continue the application to the Executive Session. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Barrett asked that the record reflect that the applicant and attorney left the meeting before the Council was able to complete the discussion, and the discussion continued for several minutes after the applicant and attorney left the meeting. (#4) #2283 GARY AND BONNIE BIRNBAUM, 2695 KELLY AVENUE - RENEWAL VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 39997-A The applicants were present. • Van Zomeren reported that the application is a request for a renewal of a lapsed variance from 1987 regarding two lots. The applicants reside on Lot 2 and would like Lot 1 to be deemed buildable. Lot area and lot width variances are required for Lot 1. The approval would also include a hardcover variance of 3.6% to allow 28.6% hardcover to remain on Lot 2 where 25% is allowed. Van Zomeren displayed a topographical map and located the building pad for Lot 1. She reported that the issue at the Planning Commission was the sewer assessment that had been paid by the applicant for Lot 1. Lot 1 is .52 areas with .38 contiguous; 5,800 s.f. is not contiguous. The Planning Commission with a 5:1 vote approved variances for lot area and width. Mr. Bimbaum had no additional comments to make at this time. Jabbour asked Barrett if the decision can be reversed when a lot is assessed a sewer urut denoting it a buildable lot. Barrett said, as a general rule, this allows a non-conforming lot to be buildable, but the underlying decision making sewer available tends to confirm a decision that the lot is buildable; though it might be found that the lot is unbuildable and to: ;t the record straight, ft.- fee could be returned. Barrett said this was not very practical, however. Moorse cited an example with tax forfeit parcels that are non-conforming. If these parcels are returned to the County, the City has informed the County that the lot must be combined with adjoining lot and assessment is waived. Moorse said he did not know if this relates to this particular application. 8 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 10,1997 (Jr4 - #2283 Gary and Bonnie Bimbaum - Continued) Jabbour noted that future Council's cannot be bound and expects that this lot is buildable. He informed the Bimbaums that this decision was necessary to clarify the issue. • • Kelley, while not suggesting this occur in this application, said in taking a pro-active stance, he would like Gaffron to review if there are lots that have been assessed for sewer and are unbuildable. The City can then make an offer to reimburse the sewer assessment before any application comes forward on the property. Kelley noted that the photograph of the property depicts a fence and questioned it. Goetten said she was on the Council in 1987 and had voted against the variance as the zoning is one acre. She noted that while the lot is lovely, it should have been kept as one lot. Goetten said any residence built on the lot will have to be a very small house. She indicated that the lots on record are not adjoined with the property but this property has sewer to Lot 1 and makes the property substandard. Goetten reported that she will still vote against the application at this time as she did so previously in 1987. Bimbaum said he would take exception to Goetten's comments noting a 1500 s.f. footprint could be built on the lot. As far as setting a precedence for other homes, Bimbaum indicated that the size is the same as previously approved and 57% of the lots in the area are under one acre. Goetten inteijected that those are separate lots so they present a different situation. She said she would not allow a new subdivision to make a lot substandard. Bimbaum said the plat occurred before regulations were in effect. Gaf&on confirmed that the lot was platted in the 1940’s or 1950’s, and the application in 1987 was for a variance only. Bimbaum said the issue at that time was whether the lot was buildable. Flint said he would not support the application based on the logic shown by Goetten regardless of what took place in the past. Cook indicated the need for a 5’ easement on the west side of the property for the pipmg of drain tiles. Mrs. Bimbaum confirmed that there is a pipe running along that side. Kelley noted that this is not a part of this application. Jabbour confirmed that it would • have to be settled with the City Engineer at another time. Flint asked to be shown where homes are located along the lake that are less than 1/2 acre. Staff pointed out a variety of lots on the plat map. Peterson said she supported the application in 1987 because of the sewer assessment and will be consistent with that support at this time. L MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 10,1997 (#4 - #2283 Gary and Bonnie Bimbaum - Continued) Bimbaum reiterated that conditions have not changed since 1987 and findings are appropriate. Jabbour said he would support the application as the applicant had been informed the lot was buildable and sewer was assessed. He agreed that the property should have been viewed differently when sewer was installed. Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3997-A. Kelley asked for discussion regarding the fence. Jabbour asked the applicant if he would eliminate the fence. Bunbaum said the fence is on City property and was there when he purchased his property. He noted the fence runs along the access road to the beach and would be a safety concern with snowmobilers if the fence was eliminated. Jabbour said he would support the fence as it is located on City property. He informed Bimbaum that typically no fencing is allowed in the 0-75' lal^eshore setback. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 2, Goetten, Flint. (#5) #2310 DICK BURY, CLASSIC CAR SALES, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE - REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION/FINDINGS OF SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR USE The applicant was present. Kelley asked for definition of a classic car. Mr. Bury said the list is distinct and does not change and includes cars built between 1925 and 1918. •«* Van Zomeren distributed photographs. She reported that the applicant is requesting clarification of the intent and purpose of the B5 zoning district to find classic car sales as a substantially similar use to others in the zoning district, specifically, an antique store or a museum. The B-5 Zoning District is a limited neighborhood business district. Van Zomeren said in reviewing the list of permitted and conditional uses. Staff felt the use would be similar to that of an antique store. The Planning Commission, however, voted 6-0 in denial of the application as they did not find it consistent and were concerned with outside display and storage. Van Zomeren asked Council to direct Staff to draft a resolution to approve or deny the request. X'1%-y Ici^Lv/ -KVg:KJacb (cP^ ^ ^C^rOiiS" £)|!^B/M3IH bjdtsvci fercfi_av^ cClu H'. . ■ '\ oje^ A )t\ ^ (1 ni • .i, ; K)?:‘v' 4 % Uh£c:^:. , R •■■ -^•:v i» : r -f - . W;". ^ i>-1 : ".mxmm-. ‘5- •" - ' ’ ^■'^' ^' '•teiV \. ••■ ■•■ ^__________^y?h\p 'yy ■ ^ -\*V o'' ' • . V'. V f • 1 >? :> > ik: II:- ••-• V.1^ .iTE \ HLf . • % :• V/ ' r OV.,*-'>^ ' * Xs r i Hi)ave L'l A iXELL^ /ijGyuG I1Y3 M t.-W: ‘m > -j'-T. ?r'i6m., ^) 1?-N /*^ P51 V* . • ij^.Pi • -v-^ r^- •'! r.— •K* . ^ V-.. V- . ' f»^5 ‘rr* tx"»sV*rtj ^ei'dieAU. . 7:;a«;rr-;i.vrK-^p 1^' ■• ■ w- '«> . i'* by ^4. 6K 1-IO'q'S Re'. ^ <e|l^ /Ver\tuL. Monday, July 20, 1008 I.iz Van Zomcren Ciiy of Orono 2750 Kdly Avenue Orono, Minnesota 55323 Dear Id?, My husband and I will be unable to attend tlie council meeiing this evening and want to voice our concerns to you via this letter regarding the proposed building of a home on the property that is bordered by Lydiard Avenue and Kelly Avenue. We live ni 2648 Lydiard Avenue. Wc both are in agrosment that allowing access to this homo via the dirt road portion of Lydiard would demonstrate poor planning and generally be unwise. As wc understand, this property is addressed on Kelly. Therefore, its driveway access should rentain us stich and the developer/homeovvner should base tlieir plans accordingly. In Gummary. we are against any driveway access from l.ydiard. Respeciiiill)' yours, itlMl ^Uiui^d/^ Dan and Lori Drcisbacli. CRS. CiRT 2648 I.vdiard Avenue •• Orono, Minnesota /V TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Liz Van Zomcren, City Plai ncr/Zoning Admmistrator DATE:July 15, 1998 SUBJECT: #2395 Brent Pentrott 1453 Park Drive 10' Vacation of Bluff Street and Varianccs-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:14,768 sq. ft. (.339 acres) 20,218 sq. ft. (.464 acre.s) proposed with 10' vacation of Bluff Street Application:The applicant is requesting that a 10' portion of Bluff Street be vacated to allow an existing deck that is along tlic west property line to be remodeled into a three season p ch. The vacation is also requested in order to build a new garage that would be accessed from Bluff Street. Variance's arc needed for hardcover in the 0'-500' setbacks. A variances are also required for the side yard adjacent to street setback from Bluff Street to add the three season porch. A side yard setback is required for the new garage because it is considered an oversized accessory structure, Pertinent Ordinanees: Section 10.25, Subd. 5, (B) Section 10.22, Subd. 1 and 2 Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L) 1 and 2 Section 1C.03, Subd. 9, E. "Accessory siructures in excess of7 50 square feet footprint area but not exceeding 1,000 sq. ft. footprint area shall be located at least 15 feet from any lot line." {t2395 Brent Bentroli 1453 Park Drive July 20, 1998 pa^e-I ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-lIJ District Standards Lot Aren Lot Rear Yard Side Yard Side Yard Arlinrnnt fn - -. ^ . .... Street Lakeside Yard 1 acre 140'30'10’35’75' and ALS Subject Property Lc)t Area and Yards-AS EXISTING Lot Area Lot Width Rear Yard Side Yard Lakeside 14,768 sq. ft. (.339 acres) 48’ at OHWL 54’ at 75’ setback Garage is 5.3' from rear property line House is 9'; proposed garage is 5' I lou.se is app. IT Subject Property Lot Aica and Yards-AS PROPOSED WITH VACATION Lot Area Lot Width Rear Yard Side Yard Lakeside 20,218 sq. ft. (.464 acres) 58' at OHWL 64' at 75 ’ setback Garage is proposed to be 30' from street Garage is proposed at 5' from property line, 15' is required House is apjiroximately 72’ from OHWL 1 lie lot docs not meet minimum lot area or lot width requirements with or without the requested vacation. The e.xisting residence does not meet the side y^d requirement along the east property line nor does it meet the 35' requirement for side yard adjacent to street. The proposed garage is more than 750 sq. ft. in size which requires a 15' setback from the property line. 1 he proposed three season porch requires a side yard adjacent to street setback variance with o. without the vacation of Bluff Street. The garage requires a side yard setback from tiie cast properly line. Brent Bentrctt J453 Park Drive July 20. im page- Z Structural Coverage Structural coverage is not an issue with this application. Hardcover —Without Vacation Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'1,330 sq. ft.370 sq. ft. (27.32%) None 370 sq. ft. (27.82%) No change 75'-250'9,960 sq. ft.2,334 sq. ft. (23.43%) 2,490 sq. ft. (25%) 2,944 sq.ft. (29.56%) 454 sq. ft. (4.56%) 250'-500'3,478 sq. ft.780 sq. ft. (22.43%) 1,043.4 sq. ft. (30%) 1 , i98 sq. ft. (43.07%) 454.6 sq. ft. (13.07%) The proposed garage requires hardcover variances in both the 75-250’ and 250'-500' setbacks. Hardcover-With 10' Vacation of Dluff Street Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'4,450 sq. ft.370 sq. ft. (8.3%) None 370 sq. ft. (8.3%) No change 75'-250'11,710 sq. ft.2,334 sq. ft. (19.93%) 2,927.5 sq. ft. (25%) 2,984 sq. ft. (25.48%) 56.5 sq. ft. (.48%) 250'-500'4,048 sq. ft.780 sq. ft. (19.27%) 1,214.4 sq. ft.. (30%) 1,718 sq. ft. 42.44%) 503.6 sq. ft. (12.44%) • • The proposed garage with the 10' vacation of Bluff Street requires variances in botli the 75'-250' setback and the 250'-500' setback. t-2395 Brent Dentrott 1453 Park Drive July 20, 1998 page- ' 5 ' 5 1 1 vf f i . < I *' * STAl iiMENT OF HARDSHIP 1 he applicant has indicated that the garage is 165' from the house and the topography is sleep. The applicant has also stated that the deck needs replacement. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the oflicial conlrois. 2. 4. The house and garage can continue to be used as they are currently situated. The deck can continue to be maintained. Complete replacement of the deck would require hardcover and side yard adjacent to street setbacks. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The subject lot does not meet lot width or lot area requirements. The topography of the lot is steep from the area where the garage is located down to the house. The setback requirements are greater because of the side yard being adjacent to Bluff Street which is platted but is not open for vehicular traffic. The existing garage is located within the required rear yard. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance to allow the garage will move it from the street and would improve the setback situation from the street. Allowing Bluff Street to be used as access for the driveway is a policy issue. There are many of these platted streets that are "fire lane.s" down to the lake that are owned by the City but unusedfor vehicular traffic. If the City were to allow access from Bluff Street it would be a departure from past practices. The special conditioiv. applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property oi i.nimcdiately adjoining property. The lots in this area do not meet the minimum lot width or lot area requirements. This property is further restricted by the sideyi. rd adjacent to street setback. The topography of this lot creates a difficult situation for siting a garage. The narrow width of the lot also creates a problem for calculating hardcover. a239.‘> Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive July 20. 1998 page- V 5.The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicants will need to provide testimony regarding their need to preserve their property rights by changing the deck into a three season porch and removing the existing garage and building a larger garage with access off of Bluff Street. 9.The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difiiculty. The variances and vacation would be a convenience to the applicant because the extent of the hardcover variances would be reduced. The lot does have unusual topography from the street and is impacted by the required setback from Bluff Street. Issues 1. The lot does not meet minimum lot area or lot wdth requirements. 2. 3. The e.xisting garage is located within the required street yard setback. The existing deck encroaches into the required side yard adjacent to street setback. The applicant has indicated that the deck needs to be replaced. 4.The property is adjacent to Bluff Street which requires a 35' side yard adjacent to street setback. However, the City has not allowed these "fire lanes" to be used for access. The Planning Conunission should discuss the need for a greater setback when tliese platted streets that arc unopen do not function like a typical street. 5.The existing situation exceeds hardcover requirements. The applicant is requesting a 10' vacation of Bluff Street which would add more lot area to the property but it would not eliminate anv variances. 6. 7. The proposed garage exceeds 750 sq. ft. and requjrcs a 15' setback from the property line, The applicant is proposing to use Bluli'Street for access to tlie new garage. This is a change in how these fire lanes have historically functioned. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To review the issues and request vacation and variances with the applicant. if2395 Brent Dentrott 1453 Park Drive July 20. 1998 page-" ^ itt. ■ •5^ ■ -•'•< .14 Attachments A B C D G Application Plat Map Property Owner's list Acknowledgment form Topo Map Reduced copy of survey Building pad sliown on Survey H I J K L M N,0 Hardcover Calculations Floor Plan for Porch Elevations Garage Plans Garage Plans Permit Record Pictures VI -r' r»*» •f ' m Application if Date Received tn-'lA Amount Paid ■^SfSCi':___ CITY OF ORONO - VARIAKQ: APPLICATION Initial Application Fce^^^^O.OO ($50.00 per each additional Variance) Renewal Varianee Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address PAl^-K- Pioperty Identification Number (P.I.D.)2^ \Attach legal description to application if not included on required suivey. ' ^ (?Tv^ Date Property Acquired_____N} OV/ETW^^Erif^ M_______________(morith/year) I (do) <(dojio^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of prop, ily: presidential ___pother (specify)______________________[. Zi^ningDistrict: X LR- I 0_______________________________________________ APPLICANT Name Address: (MS^ City: Phone (home) Phone (work) Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (\\'ork)_ Address:City:.Zip: DESCIUPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Constmetion Cost $________________^ Qescribe request in detail: (/u^t(LQ jJblO (iZCcSt-n^ "ID - felled AOPiTVcNJ rvP (attach additional sheets ifjiecessary) (Abfe ^ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage 4 X Setback:Front X Side Rear Average Lakeshore HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS CpfhWO^' Deseribe undue hardship or practical difficulty^ or unusual property conditions preventirm PA.\U(-:}jr (pgp^^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) |_X Effc’ f ^ 1. >r y/ 2. 3. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS AILof thc_fo]lowing_jnforrr.ation must be submitted bv the application deadline date in ^ order for vour npplication to be considered comnlcte: Completed Application Form ^ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of. ^. Finance, A-603, Govt Center. 348-3270. U r Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surv'eyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/i" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing ^ grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (I) copy 814" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 814" x 11"). is/ List of tlic legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). __ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. __ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 4.'’ 7 5. 6. 7. 8. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your yarinnee application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/lier knowledge. Applicant’s Signature Date O^VNER'S SIGNATURE flic owner hereby aclnowlcdgcs and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature_____'______________________________Date ^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arr^geinents to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. nv VAC OtC KU VAC OOC NO 6074Z35 8 01- H7r<5i3- • ^U' By < •0 '-\ 9 f' A/ '• ' . \ '^ L / ¥ A ' ■__.7 p<<> / (4io «/2V^ ' / / V' r V ^v/<^ Xi? « '3 «/^‘i ’.71 :;<7) *0.44.- ^1 145.54 j« J ~l~ (8) g X.y.K \ .<(35)' «X® (40^ \ i3;V 50V 4#., V ^ ,..% »\ X ;N'X^ X:^-oeix '\ (17)\ <f> 15 /X .{00 75 /S>x '> X \ < 13) X 05)^ ?H)\|l?5 65 ..-V' • w :L (18) 51 * t -----r- 1 1 1 1 1 67 r. ..^ ; f > i- X J \/•• ct* ✓. (30) 65 «S.5 FA?.? OF SAGA Htl^ARX 77) U (£ 10 R UQ) (247^ ^( '6)/ s, /(is: .iv-oii:?XX %i;:K CCVi'ON (26) (6) / .,3^ / -y. ^ .-X.' / 7<5%/<a/ /%13 _ /,'^5\ S 54 » (46)/^}'^ r RUN DATE 06/22/90 BATCH 501 PROP ADOn OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR • < 38 07-117-23 42 0019 01423 PARK DR R 7 HOWELLS ROBERT T HOWELLS 1423 PARK DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0022 01453 PARK DR B A BENTROTT K S BEMTROTT BRENT A I KATHRYN S BEMTROTT 1453 PARK DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 43 0027 01448 PARK DR D B ERICKSON .1 L B ERICKSON DAVID B 8 LAUREL B ERICKSON 1448 PARK DR HOUND HN 55364 HENNEPIN COU\TY PROPERTY INrORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 37-117-23 42 0020 01435 PARK DR H J ^ELLEN 8 L C KELLEN MICHAEL J KELLEN 1435 PARK DRIVE HOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0023 04300 NORTH S)ORE DR THEODORE 0 HETZ S WIFE THEODORE 8 MARY J METZ 4300 NORTH SHORE DRIVE HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 43 0028 04315 NORTH SHORE DR R 8 H WILLIAMS RICHARD J WILLIAMS 4315 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 1 <2- 38 07-117-23 42 0021 01447 PARK DR P J SCHLEfJDER 8 H R PALH P J SCHLENDER 8 H R PALM 1447 PARK DR MOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0024 04330 NORTH SHORE DR D 8 H STRELOW DOUGLAS 8 MARLENE STRELOW 4330 NO SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 TOTAL BATCH 501 00008 • • I CtRTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. , /I /1 .^wJiKa) i .•o Adjacent Property Owners’ Acknowledgement Form I (we)4H7 [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at \C\S'\C . also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Cvyv...cil I (..w) an: (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. lO Prope^y Owner Date Propei\yOwner Date I (we) [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at____________________also referred to as Land Use Application No._________. 1 (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (wc) am (are) aware of the improvement-plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. 1^' Property Owner Date Property Owmer Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days pripr to the scheduled meeting date. i CERTIFICATE .OF SURVEY FOR : : ■ BRENt BENTROTT r ! OF LOT i9, BLOCK 15,'SAGA HILL REVISED HENNEPIN. COUNTY. MINNESOTA LEGAL DESCRIPTICN OF PREMISES: Lot 9, Block 15, Sago Hill Revised • • This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the locotion of- on existing l^use, garage, and other visible "hardcover" thereon, and the proposed location of a proposed garage. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachrnents. 0 . Iron marker WmV : Existing spot elcvotion Bearings shown ore based upon oi ossumed datum Vw3«- ‘ 4/ •* y mi'-' \ VACATED BOULEVARD- \ \ _ \ • ^**«V \ \ \ \ TO BE ADDED TO DESCRPTION \ BKLNl BLM 1 i-^U 1 I T 9, BLOCK 15, SAGA HILL REVISED HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 9. Block 15. Sago Hill Revised This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above dwcrH ?operty. the location of on existing house, garage, "nd othw vl "hardcover" thereon, end the proposed ocotion of a P’’aP°f®^9 It do “ not puVport to show ony other improvements or encroac 0 : Iron marker («=.5) : Existing spot elevotion Bearings shown are based upon an assur VOiGCl-licn of lo'op BluPP-Sf. Hardcover--•(f.Kis-hn0 and yopc^ed 3. 05 ^ Propefsed 'is ; 7600 _. . - 4'. "Side v/ard Advjc^l- 5. (oadii^y f^uSred 30* ^-femcxA-f 6. Access BluPf T of |of Ailovioi "Jx>UUOI rOCf i /w. / i ’r HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) (fnSy 75.250’ 250.500’500-1000’ • RXISTINH HARnCOVER IN ZONE ■ A. ■■’House ■■ • • • • •*• X ' S.F.- Lentth Width • • «»• «X X X S.F. - S.F. S.F. D. Garage C. Driveway S.F. X X S.F. S.F. • •• •• • D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. -E. . Paiio/Deeif X X /<4"S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. _G. Other ..... <f>^ /uuSf x S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 370 -i- B /S3o 370 J33£^ X 100 = S.F. S.F. % A B .—> <-iso - f.3o <7* PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN 7.n\’T- ^ ' * S.F.A. House Length Width X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. ««• ^ • B. Garage'S.F. C. Driveway X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X •f •S.F. S.F. E. Patio/Dcck S.F. X S.F. F; Landscape Underlain "By Plastic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. • •• «»• • • • • G. Other’S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A • B-X 100 = S.F. A S.F. B % -i .«•••• •••• ••13 t! I SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75* HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORJCSHEE'l 250-500'Cls^so* Hill A£ 7~S-9j> FXISTINC. HARDCOVr.R IN 7.0NF. A. House Lengih Width X X X < ^ r: • - ' r. « '.V 'Jj- • $ •• B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. - Sidewalk- 0LO£>t.^ • • E. l^Uo/Dcck y/2- /4 X X X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic ^/d/^AD • •n X X X 2. ^ 5* G. ^^ihcr /■6^f/jouj^ # ■m • • • TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A.. ... -r B X 100 = PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN 70NF. A. House X Length ....Width *. • — X X B. Garage ’Z2.14 tr Driveway.....X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck X X &s ts F-. Landscape Underlain By Plastic ■* />/^ PAO - *«• • * . ••••• X X X 2*5- G. O\hz\0PMP •pAP ' 2.■A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^^4^^ ^ B. 500-1000' X 100 = . ^ ............,............ 2^94.. : . f • <4: ■7'^, - . c^ita ^-(er of Z6 ^7B BBl 8 S 7334 tZ)t 30B> 3Z ZZo 37B 8 49 ^944 ' ^Uo •• (.• S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. s'.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.• • • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _ S.F. _ S.F. 23.43 % A B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F, S.F. S.F. A B ^ f . G£, % ..... -7S. 4^8.% T^i ' ^r Of //AA^ CO\JCA • « . • • • •• • • * • m% \ I •* ■ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET '^J/Teo 500-1000*SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75‘75-250’ <^^50-S0qD EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE "AV‘’ House* ***" Length \Vi(fth X X X D. Garage C. Driveway ^4- X X /Z7 D. Sidewalk X X Z04 E. Paiio/Deck • • •mm m9m • X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic • • X X X G. Other 0^o. fJ ^5 m mm •••««» • • • TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ?Sa -r B J4-7S 7gO X 100 =2-2.4^^ PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONT. A. House Length Width X X X ' B.* Garage'z-z 2 C ^7Z C. Driveway • • mm^m^ ’ • • X X • • • ... . D. Sidewalk- ---- •X X E. Paiio/Dcck X X • -•«••• • • • F. ..Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ B- ^<f-7S X 100 = ^7& s.r. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P. S.F. S.F. •m • S.F. S.F. S.F. % 4Z.44- A B A B /7/^ _ V4..TT-r- iZACATfa S.70 s4.^T..o/r. ax'!. ' ^7 zzo sa.,^r. of: A/^A^co Je^# . i 1 0- .* •. ' ! • • •# •* . • • • • • • •• %« %, r"-*.4 TJ 7 nxDcn Tt7|i|7 o-.9t I ' o*,o\ ____ <1 ->Vt V f - t T J • :•* 5 o V. ll 1 t—-——f '0 1 li2. • I in—1 . -^1 . A • - El. .1'•'•■■■1 r'Krn • - ■ - • ki- . ■; I' niLJ • ^ r . . i V \ •t ■r • -p S'? . !! i '• I5 3 • i‘‘ > i i • r- -N- -1: ' " ^ 1 1 ) rj t • • i4 111 111 i-a ■ ■ ji. *5^--------^ . I • - ^il: • •'•tr ^ • •*iV» . ‘ Vi-——V^- 'f 7- ^ .. o\-‘- ' '—' ! • , .fV •; . •. ; ■ *, .• • •!'l .M *.. A i‘» ’: • • . -1:. I . ••*.7. V ** 11*^-......... vi;^’rO . * W- !.^^7 ;s7.>i 7 7 v ’-t.i PV 1. ••« .• 1!>• 1'^ ^n- 77 I* I 0 P / . “r/ - V . •; ^ A‘ r|. |: .■. .■'. . ml n.. .r\^ . |! 1 i •:. ;. 1 •••. ’■ ••• 1r-: • , . •** * *• ?'• •.*•■ • 7 •- 1 •n , •• • . -4 • . • ft . r . •• • • • * r. :t , •>. . . * •; •• A.' *’ • •• .. ■ *■ • • • , • •...........................................................................• •#■ *. . • \ , ■ *.. • I ^ i ^ , . • - .x.s i. ------------ I**. ;.* •• • . ♦ ‘ • * < '^* • :.•:***• ,A y'j* ■ •. • • . •• •• i-- V' 5 J/*- 4 %. • •*... . . j;. - * •• • ,*••/. ...*4 > * •* , • * •%*:—• .• I** **•* ‘ * » * • , ' • •• " . •*• ;* • T, ?. •* ^ • • \ • . • - ; . •. t . j . • *• .• •’*. < * '•V ^ .> ' * ‘ . .* ‘ . : • . • ‘V • • ..; ^ V*. *•• • • • . ■• r • • • •• ‘ _______ * •____________t _____________________---------------------------------------- .............................•• ..** • % ' -y- •*.*• •• :•.; . >.••••■ :. ■• -. . : •• •.•• •• ■ N .••' :::• .• -. ....... •-. ., ;.v • Vr-Irr. • •■;.•.•"■ ■ r •• • ■■■•■..'.•.■ f- •• -. • V .■. .•• •.■•.■.■ ■ •■• • • ■. ^/v^;:.■v■^•'^V.^.••■.••■.;^■>0••....':'.• 'V . ••■• ■-J'.“ ---------------H •' ■ • •. "■ «:••'. ’■• .•" 1" .■■ .V* .:••■.■.■ ••■ •• ' '■ . ■■•■■' *' /■ ,••■'■"'■■ ■".“•.•..'■•.'i'. •■• *'f • 7 • ..7 »t* ‘«* * '• •'*"* V . . . **• i • •* ’*.'■* ** • * **.* **7 'V'* • •*. •*•*.*•.,*• * c» ■..***••*» •. •’ . .V .•••••;• ;• '. • • ‘ •■.••• ■. . • . • • •• =.-I. :■•;•.• , ' ■> •■■• >-r-v-.•• AV ■*• •••^ V- ; ,v; ... • . .. ■ . . .•... • .V.,. .•• *. Jj* •- . . .* , . . . •• *• • . .. . • .... , • . •••^ .* • . ^ »' • •' ■••••?!* *’v. . —T • ' .. •• • . , . •• I ^ . • ' <: • . •. * • • . * : • • ^ * V-.. \.C^ .. V.::'r ■ .7^ ... . ‘ -7 ^r- > 7 tr *'...• mim J . . i I :iV. \ % /•f )* l^ ft" ^ O 1 *> 0 0 VJ V) ^ii>x J 1 0 I iC .0 !i S ^5 at N> 1 M -« J-V / .-N» X .Jr i • • • •, •|.......... \^) I 1:V! j! I . I J ? 1 . •• . •0 T I-; J f/' : i I I 1^ p t • J * I : ! t i * : • vl • r I ly ■I" ' !•O • —I < J V-0 -7 Jt J tf r’" 1 r ^ IJ tV* V* ^ / i {t rtr 0 T - n X r:5 » h \ \ -t 4 JP- % i P 7 0 0 I* **—T • • • I V \ •7 1 x>0 4 1a / { 01 p* V i\ !• JX • / M *-4 / / ,, . ....... ♦ ( !i-,\ . ^ c PERMIT RECORD : Permit No.Date Type of Permit • ^-S'*5'5" •* * . • • ., • ‘ ht(s>- 79 -4- t^S'/Kotsei. '^^-7- ro L’liy €-is-9(a '?-'c?-f- Pgr"■ U.cJ^ O 8 ‘-l-i-y-'^c. • « * • • .. • • • • •• • • • • • • •••• • • •• • • . . \ t tv -41 •• • * iSffl a' SisMwM 1'tiisSi ^mM \ki r*;?- ■#».■; ^.- ,v; >' i \cr > f-^ -. •; '^mt« l&m^M fltil tV p-l'-fi •.-' Jjiri .^;t »: 5^“.* ;T- r:' ll: 1 'if ' i''^<il-i?’'i^‘^J ^c* ViT^:'^»2 ’Jv.> **.;>*-• *.r*. L"**' .». •'* *. —A.•t^, Tj mmm .y ^ m-miM'y. » - ^1?4* PSfe «.<i J.:' y VM0 CIMB^t; i79 tfc,^r- v*^:.....,,... 'f^ y% ■^;.?.v'- .‘;..W ''^i^..,- -. ; .'>4>. .t-' ■ iiiil*3^ mm^ J [jSSr: vfc-5n£2:i.L J:>J: . I i-„ J j] iah-y^ • % • • % *j • •* • Ited: ^ msY\f) W-^pitrpG,k, Fjve HS-'iu i w- • j ‘^lOZL* '•— !!@li| i F'v f-j; vs?.r.i 'M:,r- ^ -i ■ ;..:,v v- f>. . ri;^. im 7X^1:fc pm-A fellsl##-;®pm .‘Jj^F.-kN ' <» *^oa: .7^:.^!/v;?7 W/V:^ Li^CL /k TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 9,1998 SUBJECT:#2396 Clint and Jody Morrison 3510 Bayside Road Conditional Use Permit—Variances—Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acre) Lot Area:59,282 square feet (1.36 acres) Application:The applicants have proposed to remove their current residence to construct a new house and attached garage. The applicants are requesting a variance from lot size requirements to construct the structure. A second variance from average lakeshore setback requirements is necessary to build on the property. The property also contains a boat house that the applicants have requested to remain on the property during the demolition and reconstruction period. A conditional use permit is necessary for an accessory structure to remain on the property without a principal structure. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.22, Subd. 1(A): Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B): Average Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.56 (16)(C)(6): Average Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.23: One Family Lakeshore Residential District Section 10.03: Accessory Structures §2396 Clinion and Jody Morrison 3510 Bayside Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Page 1 1 ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IA (2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Street Yard Required 87,120 s.f 200' 75'30'50'50' Proposed 59,282 s.f.347'Existing: 95' Proposed: 125' Existing: 67' Proposed: 64' 77.5' 66' 67' The subject property does not meet lot area requirements. The lot and proposed residence meets required setback distances. However, the existing and proposed residence do not meet the Average Lakeshore Setback requirement. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'5,900 s.f.0 none (0%) 0 none 75'-250'50,220 s.f.8,349 s.f. 16.62% 12,555 s.f (25%) 10,888 s.f. 21.68% none 250'-500'3,162 s.f.0 0 (30%) 0 none 500'-1000'0 0 0 (35%)" 0 none The applicant would increase the total hardcover within the 75'- 250' from 16.62% to 21.68%. The lot would not require a variance for hardcover. §2396 Clinton and Jody Morrison 35 W Bayslde Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Page! Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 59,282 s.f.Existing: 2,966 Proposed: 4,395 5.0% 7.4% The lot does meet the 15% structural coverage requjrement. ANALYSIS This application requires two parts. A will analyze the Conditional Use Pennit. To grant a Conditional Use Permit a two variances are required, average lakeshore setback and lot size. The variances are reviewed in B. A. Conditional Use Permit The applicants have requested to keep the boat house on the property for use with a new residence. The ^ning Code does not permit an accessory use structure to exist without a principle structure on the same lot. During the demolition of the existing residence and the construction of the new home the applicants have requested a conditional use permit to allow their boat house to remain. Findings: 1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan The applicant's boathouse would remain on the property through the construction period of a new home. The use would remain as only accessory and would not be occupied while the residence is under reconstruction. 2.That the proposed location of the conditionahtise and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The location of the conditional use would not be detrimental to public health. The structure was constructed for use as a boathouse. U2396 Clinton and Jody Morrison 3310 Bayside Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Page 3 I . 'u: 3.That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. Under current conditions the boat house can exist. A variance from minimum lot size requirements must be approved to construct a new home on the lot. 6. Variance STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant's have included their statement of hardsb if m Exhibit A. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1.The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used imder conditions allowed by the official controls. The property can continue to be used in its current state with the existing structure. The use of the property would remain residential should the variances be approved. 2.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The property was platted before the 2 acre minimum lot size was required for the zoning district. It is not possible for the lot to meet average lakeshore setback standards, due to the lot being located on a comer. The entire buildable area of the lot is within the average lakeshore setback. The neighboring lots do have view access of the lake across the applicant's property. The applicant has indicated their lot is very wooded creating a visual shield between the homes. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Both variances would not change the locality, as the property currently functions as a single-family residence. §2396 Clinton and Jody Morrison 3510 Baysldi Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Page A 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are not a consideration with this application. 5. . Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. 10. Solar access is not a consideration. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The use of the property would remain residential, which is consistent with the zoning. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. The applicant will not be changing the dwelling status of the property. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or iimne^ately adjoining property. The property does contain a unique characteristic as it is located on a comer, resulting in the nearly all of the lot being located within the average lakeshore setback. The lot is almost entirely wooded creating a visual barrier between homes along Bayside Road. The lot was platted prior to current zoning regulations resulting in a non-conforming lot. The conditions do not apply generally to odier land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The applicant's lot is located on a comer making it impossible to use as a buildable lot without an average lakeshore setback variance. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant H2396 Clinton and Jody Morrison 3510 Bayside Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Pages .i I 1 The location of the lot has made it impossible for the applicant's to construct a new home. Nearly all lots in the zoning district would meet the average lakeshore setback. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The granting of variances would not be a public concern. The variance from lot size would be contrary to the Zoning Code. The applicant's have stated it is not possible to create a two acre lot by adding to their lot. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The variances wotUd alleviate a hardship for lakeshore setback and the lot size they have inherited. Issues 1.The applicant is seeking two variances (from average lakeshore setback requirements and lot size) and a conditional use permit for an accessory structure to remain on the lot without a principal structure. 2.The accessory structure would only remain on the lot without a principal structure during the demolition and reconstruction period. 3.The lot is located on a comer making it impossible to meet average lakeshore setback requirements. 4. 5. The lot size is 1.36 acres where 2 acres is required for the LR-1A zoning district The lot does meet all hardcover and structural coverage requirements. 92396 Clinton and Jody Morrison 3510 Baysidt Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 PagfiO \ 'i \ : -s- i \ - »- I- STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the variances for average lakeshore setback and lot size. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for an accessory structure to remain on the property without a principal structure based on the following conditions: 1.A demolition permit is granted by the City of Orono within one year of the Council approving the variances and conditional use permit. 2.A building permit is issued within two years for the construction of a new home as shown on the site plans on file with the City of Orono. 3.The accessory structure is not used as a residence dxuing the demolition and reconstruction period. 4.If the existing home is demolished and a biiilding permit is not issued by the City of Orono for new construction within the approved time period, the boat house shall be removed by the property owner. Attachments A B C D E F G H I J Application and Statement of Hardship Plat Map Location Map Topographic Map/New Site Plan Survey/Existing Site Plan Topographic Map/Existing Site Plan Permit Record Hardcover Calculations Property Owners List Permit Record §2396 ClirUan and Jody Morrison 3510 Bqyside Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit 7/20/98 Page! EXHIBIT A Application it 33^ ______.. Date Receiyed Amount Paid _____ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Tir-r PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Ovnrvo mbcir (P.I.D.'Property Identification Numbcir (P.I.D.). Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired v ________________________(month/year) reels'I (do) Cdoji5l3 also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___other (specify) _______________ Zoning District: LR.- 11^ CT\e T)| APPLICANT Phone (home ) An 3 - 3o Name Address: _____________ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _____ IVirA’r^'fx f Phonc(workl (6^ i: City: Orrirvo _________Zip: Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost S AoO % 'ooO Describe request in detail: ^ (attach additional sheets»if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ____Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage ! . 1 i ? Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing ; compliance with Zoning Code requirements: Ovjur gjcr>^-ce^ octoogjcViV ^ Wo, CLCX^ \oSiLft-^bcvCOg^ » (Oivx^ Vr)V—^3l- ^ g^Q->ce4b \r^L> qcx>p^^ —------------ ’ Q ^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) " ”*■— \J\J . . y EXHIBIT C : . •.' •.* • * •' • • . . :;• * .4 • • • 't » 1200 ^ • • (V • • •■■Mi:; • ^ >. f . .•; T/7 UJ S m 6 • • • • ^ *«• * • • SHARRATT DESIGN COMPANY MEMO Date: Pro/ecf, Mom-SoM I4»q& Sublect: EXHIBIT G Discussion Bv prJoPosfeO te»jt4it4:; Uall-Sl SF. i\ng,i4AY gf f4lS 14oJa£~?1S SP. Rf rag ykioS&226% g>». A.____462» %F’. Utoao o <SP -toi*us» A msa % HAU7oos/a»fc. 60,220 €»• lfe.C»2»9p |0O 6ofro %•*• 5%6~ 6P. n»%%p. Zi&W 2>6>62. 8F. 4gO SP. %60 SI*' 1.1 feft^Ye 5590 Woodside Lane Shoreviiood, Mnnesota 55331 470-9750 Fax470-B407 ’E-mail: SDesIgnC @ AOL ( RUN DATE 06/08/98 BATCH 507 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATXON SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 58 05-117-23 13 0015 03500 BAYSZDE RO K BAN6ERT t V BANGERT K BANCERT 8 V BANCERT 3500 BAYSZDE RO LONG LAKE NN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0047 00038 ADDRESS UNASSZCNEO KYLE FANILY LTD PTNRSHP R KYLE OKA KYLE 1140 TONKAWA RO I.0N6 LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0016 03510 BAYSZDE RO C H HORRISON 0 J P HORRZSON CLZNTON H 0 JODY P HORRZSON 3510 BAYSZDE RO LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0048 00038 ADDRESS UNASSZCNEO K R 8 L T OLSEN KEVIN R OLSEN 3580 BAYSZDE RO LONG LAKE HN 55356 REPORT NO. P:'«35401 PAGE 20 38 05-117-23 13 0017 03560 BAYSZDE RD KYLE FAHZLY LTD PTNRSHP RICHARD 8 KATHLEEN A KYLE 1140 TONKAWA RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 507 00005 »• 1. % I CERTIFY TfUT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATZON AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. ~ DATE • • • % / \ i •<35\0 EXfflBIT I tLd. PERMIT RECORD • •• i Permit No.Date •7yj?.!? Permit /jj li/m /o-Ah ^•4-^1 yyri A/n ay/7/m “f-RcD-?7-2 z^-8Z 'Sd/i j J f/rri ■ ■ L>id:^ « • ---------------------— ■ ■ .■ n ____________ •• • • « • • • « % • 4 • • • 4 •• • •• ^ • • • 4 • • • • • • • • • • . • •• • . • . •• • •• • •• • • • • •• • * * • • • • ' • • % • ' • • • • • • ^ . • ' • • • •. *V • • • • , • • ♦ • > e • • • ••• • • m • •^ • • . •• • . • •••• % * • • * ’ . .•* 1^ TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 16,1998 SUBJECT: #2397 Joe and Leslee Lucas Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acre) Lot Area: Application: 79,541.5 square feet (1.83 acres) The applicant is requesting a variance from side yard setback requirements to allow an addition to the residence. The existing residence is only 9.4' from the side lot line. The proposed addition would be 9' from the lot line were 30* is required. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.23: LR-IA One Family Lakeshore Residential District §2397 Joe and Leslee Lucas 1060 North Brovm Road Variance 7/20/98 Page 1 ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IA Lot Area Lot Width Rear Yard Side Yard Street Yard Requirements 2 acres 200'50’30’50' subject lot 1.83 acres 200.18'225’9.4'144 ’ The lot requires a variance from side yard setback requirements. The existing house is at the 9.4' setback. TTiis addition would be 9' from the lot line. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 79,541.5 s.f.Existing: 2,208.95 s.f Proposed: 4,598.65 s.f 2.8% 5.8% The lot does meet the 15% structural coverage requirement. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicants' statement of hardship is included as Attachment A. They should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1.The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. •• The property has a history of drainage problems. The garage foundation must be removed and replaced. Adding a full basement under the garage and new drain tile would function to keep the existing basement dry and would support the new addition currently being built on the south and west sides of the residence. §2397 Joe and Leslee Lucas 1060 North Bro\m Road Variance 7/20/9B ragtl n* < ( \ • • 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The home was constructed before current zoning standards. It also has a history of drainage problems that have eroded the garage foundation. 3. The variance, if granted, may alter the essential character of the locality. • • The size and style of the remodeled home would be consistent with other properties in the locality. 4. 5. 6. 7. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Single family residential use is permitted in the LR-1A (One Family Lakeshore Residential) zoning district. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The structure is currently located within the setback distance, and the current property owners, have inherited water erosion problems. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The existing residence was constructed only 9.4 feet from the side lot line. The applicant has stated the best way to control drainage is the addition of the drain tile under the garage. They also intend to add to the living space of the home within the setback. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjo3mient of a substantial property right of the applicant. The granting of the variance is not necessary to enhance the use of the structure. It is to create more living space within the residence, and help control water erosion. U2397 Joe and Uslee Lucas 1060 North Broyvn Road Variance 7/20/98 Page 3 Lf :rl ^ * , ;■ ' r 8.The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The applicant has proposed to increase the size and functionality of the residence both outside of and within the setback. Only a portion of the addition will be necessary to control drainage problems. The addition of first floor living space within the setback would not improve or alter the drainage on the property. To support the addition the applicant has stated drain tile is necessary under the garage. Issues 1.The applicant has proposed additions to the house that will encroach into the side yard setback. The existing structure is 9.4' from the lot line. The new addition would be 9' from the lot line. The zoning district requires a 30' side yard setback. 2.The garage foundation would be removed and replaced resulting from excessive ground water erosion. 3.The size and style of the residence, with the new addition, is similar to other homes in the area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the variance from side yard setbacks for replacement of the garage foundation to add a basement and drain tile to support the addition currently under construction, and for additional living space. The size and style of &e proposed home is consistent with other lots in the locality. Attachments A B C D E F G H I Applicants Statement of Hardship Variance Application Location Map PlatMap Topographic Map Survey Floor and Exterior Plans Property Owners List Permit Record • •• *• 92397Jo€ and Lulet Lucas 1060 North Brown Road Variance 7/20/98 PageA ■SI - EXfflBIT A i L.eslee and Joe Lucas 1060 North Brown Road Orbno, MN 55356 404-9542 • i* • • ; City of Orono Variance Application EXfflBIT B Application # ^3^ “7 Date Received ^ Amount Paid -<^30. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION i >7 D Site Address________| 0(f?0 »\k>r\vL gsT TO Property Identification Number (P.I.D.1 D7- ^7^ - POOS' Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. j Date Property Acquired________________________________________^(monthtyear) I (do) (oo n^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present uSrm property: ^ residential ___pother (specify), ZoningDistrict:___________/ A_____________________ APPLICANT I . Phone (home). Name -Jc>^ ^ ______ Phone (woik)_ Address: \0(oo AJ>. /Vrl Citv:~~ A Q Hitch’S Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST sli Estimated Construction Cost $ j6S~. OOO Describe request in detail: AJ iTVO WxTdUfitva j tOcom AJJiWini lo/tH /t/f=^0 VJi^LK.^dsLi’T A/Vr^gyngAyr ^’g / I muo > VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area \/seSetback: (attach additional sheets ff necessary) ___Lot Width ___ Hardcover Front l/"^ide t - .# Lot Coverage Rear Average Lakeshore si/jg\pyzl satbaJ:. HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY COi«)ITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ______ _______________________ ________________^ rth erl ^ ^ - I (attach additional sheets if necessary) . •• SEE MAP 48 EXHI DEER HILL RD • « "*»fer-T _______ 1 J A 6TH AVE N OHIOHSCM .OELEMSCH CITYMAU KELLEY MtOOUSCH EDmA 2600 gaTT^vTS? Iu>:.^ DEER HILL RO ^ ^Dicke^ ------f TER COUNjTRY CLUB RDj Lake. SU6ARW00DS A* — RIDGE LA 6 ll ^ ^ 1- i ♦. MOU TRIAL i. JA [ti&^WOOOHA! BtilR .1 CIR fERTOWN RO ^ >wu COUNTRYSIDE I DR WHITE 400 y OANtOSST TakeIview —/ TER «g!—5!!» ^ Long Lake ----- . - Wf^ ^**1 ^ ■■*^^*^0SCHARb u360 HARRMBl X 6RAN0AVE NUSOr '•' coun X DEVIN LA LONGVIEW CIR Biking ^®*«eo£n, ABINGDON WAY I E°^ B EXHIBIT B (2) VAC OCC NO 5455<83x ^ ~ ~~y~ ~r 4Tr?r /4*f •• iVimilElifl W49* I5*f !47 ;48*\9'‘3a*E I^SKE /a ^^=f'*Q7re~~ I 66.68: iCU:->r-' ■ii• \ritf? *»: s \o.t>5 U*' R.B52-t® 8 —----------------- lakeview I~~ ------1___A. 15* ^2.97 ^40.69 OOC NO 47!64ia ^Ai- 80 80 e I £ srj;• ^ ''Si' • • TT 0% X • O O • iH U4 EXHIBIT G Page 1 of 2 I M ■ I g X\ iri #W/SSSSliiS' r ♦[:]-T • ti — i®l • • ••• 2 I f«em ^ _____k___________I 4^ nI » Iv^-: I 4 • • • .• mm DATE 06/26/96 BATCH 506 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER HAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME T/\PAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR . .• HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI63S401 PAGE 12 38 27-118-23 31 0015 02020 SALEH CT IZABELLA STIPAKOV IZABELLA STIPAKOV 2020 SALEH CT LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 62 0005 01060 BROWN RO N J I L LUCAS JOSEPH R LUCAS 1060 BROWN RD N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 42 0015 01865 LAKEVIEW TER K R ASKE 8 $ K ASKE KARL R 8 SHERRILYN D ASKE 1865 LAKEVIEW TERRACE LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 42 0020 01965 COUNTRY CLUB RD PATRICIA A HONDALE PATRICIA A (HONDALE) CONNER 1965 COUNTRY CLUB RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 4.... 38 27-118-23 31 0016 02080 SALEH CT 0 L 8 B D PANZER DENNIS 8 BEVERLY PANZER 2080 SALEH CT LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0020 01095 BROWN RD N J R HARESH 8 D J HARESH JOHN HARESH 8 DIANE HARESH 2085 COUNTY RD 6 ORONO HN 55356 38 27-118-23 42 0013 01080 BROWN RO N HAROLD F BOWER ETAL HAROLD F BOWER 1080 N BROWN RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 42 0014 01925 LAKEVIEW TER HAROLD F BOWER 8 WIFE HAROLD F BOWER 1080 N BROWN RD LONG LAKE HN 56‘39«05 38 27-118-23 42 0018 01940 COUNTRY CLUB RD H J W SMITH SHF SMITH MARVIN J W SMITH 1940 COUNTRY CLUB RO LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 42 0019 01020 BROWN RO N H J ROSE 8 D A KIRBY MELANIE ROSE • DENNIS KIRBY 1020 BROWN RD N LONG LAKE HN 55356 J TOTAL BATCH 506 00010 tC 4b I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE OH TH® ^^^0 OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATHOH# TO THE_BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.' DATE i EXHIBIT I STREET FILE CSTN ^ ] 1 PERMIT RECORD PERMIT NO DATE TYPE OF PERMIT SUbb___ M~1V’=R ~V p ■ I (^O! (u. oQ /0'J.»- /n/5-a f / Mj^3 Cp-^U 9^ /o^ ^ C/^y>iJLc>^X.fiv^ \-n- r sl n To: From: Date: Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator July 16,1998 Subject: Proposed Zoning Code Amendment - Plumbing in Accessory Buildings Pertinent Code Sections Section 10.03, Subd. 9; Accessory Buildings Section 10.03, Subd. 11: Dwelling Use Prohibited Section 10.20, Subd. 3(G)(1) R-1A Conditional Uses: Guest Houses Attachments A - Proposed amendment language B - Staff Memo June 6,1997 C - Public Hearing Notice D - Pertinent Code Sections Background Staff is constantly in receipt of requests to allow plumbing in accessory buildings. There is no clear direction in the zoning code that allows or prohibits plumbing in accessory buildings. We are proposing a code amendment that would provide some direction. Staff has attempted to maintain some consistency in dealing with this issue. Water supply lines have generally been allowed in an accessory building (such as a faucet for a hose), but not fixtures which require waste piping. Residents proposing bathrooms or other plumbing in accessory buildings have generally been required to apply for a 'guest house* CUP. Many applicants claim no intent to use their accessory building as a guest house, yet certain levels or combinations of plumbing fixtures yield the potential to fully function as a secondary dwelling unit on the property. A problem that also often arises is that our guest house CUP standards require double the ironing district required lot area, which most properties don't meet. We need to reach a conclusion as to what degree plumbing in acessory structures should be regulated, and defirr; what fixtures or combinations of fixtures trigger the need for a higher degree of regulation. The ;,.ossible range in regulations might include: 1. Staff permit approval without restrictions. 2. Staff permit approval subject to specific restrictions or covenants. 3. Council action required for a CUP or variance. .4 ' I I Plumbing in Accessory Buildings July 16,1998 Page 2 Why Regulate Plumbing In Accessory Buildings? The ultimate goal is to preserve the integrity of single-family neighborhoods, avoiding the higher intensity of human activity associated with having more than one dwelling on a property. Most cities simply do not allow a second dwelling unit on a property. Orono Code has contained such a provision since 1962, but since 1968 (or possibly earlier) has also allowed a guest house as a CUP under virtually the same conditions as appear in the current code. We have experienced a (small) number of past situations where accessory buildings with plumbing have been converted to dwelling/rental use without City approval. The magnitude of the potential problem is not huge, although with our many 'estate' properties there are a lot of existing caretaker cottages, for instance. Our goal has been to avoid creating situations where conversion to a dwelling unit can readily be accomplished by merely plugging in a stove and a refrigerator. Defining what constitutes a 'dwelling unit' is key to resolving our concerns. What Is A Dwelling Unit? Please review the comments in the 6/6/97 staff memo. The only direction in the zoning code definition of dwelling is language stating "...designed or intended to be occupied exclusively for residence purposes...". The Uniform Building Code indicates that a dwelling is characterized by containing "...living facilities, including provisions for sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation..". Provisions for sleeping, eating and to some extent cooking are realized by providing 'plug-in' items: a bed, a table and chairs, a stove or microwave, a refrigerator. Provisions for sanitation, however, require plumbing: a sink, a toilet, and a shower or tub, and a water heater. These are items of 'infrastructure' which when present, make the conversion to a dwelling imminently possible. The building inspections staff have suggested that allowing a toilet and sink in an accessory building will not necessarily result in dwelling potential, but adding a tub or shower along with a toilet and sink can lead to separate dwelling potential. They note it is more common to get requests for a toilet and sink than for a tub or shower. Possible Options In order of least restrictive to most restrictive, Orono could follow one of these optional courses of action ("water supply" is simply water supply piping without wastewater piping, i.e. a hose connection; "partial plumbing" is wastewater plumbing that does not result in a sink-tub/shovver- toilet combination; "full plumbing" is when there is a sink-tub/shower-toilet combination): C i A •i I r Plumbing in Accessory Buildings July 16,1998 Page 3 1.Allow staff to issue permits for water supply, partial and full plumbing in accessory buildings, and regulate the yse of those buildings under current code standards; i.e. conclude that it is the use, not the physical structure, that is being regulated. 2.Allow staff to issue permits for water supply and partial plumbing, but for full plumbing staff can only issue permit subject to a covenant in which the owner agrees that the structure will not be used as a guest house unless a CUP is granted, and prohibiting its use under any circumstances as a rental dwelling (we do something similar to this for oversize accessory structures). 3.Allow staff to issue permits for water supply, partial plumbing and full plumbing, but require a covenant for partial or full plumbing. 4.Allow staff to issue permits for water supply and partial plumbing, but require a CUP for full plumbing. 5. 6. Staff issuance of water supply, but covenant for partial plumbing, CUP for lull plumbing. CUP for all plumbing. 7. Prohibit all plumbing in all accessory buildings except when a gi est house CUP has been granted (i.e. require a variance for anv plumbing in an accessory building when it is not intended as a guest house. 8. Some other combination of staff permit/covenant/CUP. These options are summarized in the following matrix. Obviously, there are additional options within the matrix other than the 7 highlighted. Options 8 thru 13 would impose higher regidation on partial plumbing than on full plumbing, which doesn't pecessarily make sense. Options 14-15-16 make full plumbing a variance with various levels of regulation for partial plumbing. FULL PLUMBING O5 pH I • Staff Staff/ cov CUP VAR Staff 1 2 4 14 Staf^COV 8 3 5 15 CUP 9 10 « 6 16 VAR 11 12 • 13 • 7 t f- Plumbing in Accessory Structures July 16,1998 Page 4 Staff Recommendation Staff would recommend a combined regulation as follows: A. B. Staff authorized to issue permits for water supp ly plumbing in accessory buildings. Any wastewater plumbing in an accessory building will require that a covenant be filed in the title including the following agreements: 1. Accessory building will not be used for a home occupation except if/when specifically approved by City. 2. Accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained. 3. Accessory building will not be rented out as a dwelling under any circumstances. C.Wastewater plumbing that includes a tuK^r shower will require a CUP. A conditional use to be termed "Plumbing in Accessory^Sji^^&e" will be added to the R-1A list of conditional uses, and will require that the owner execute a covenant as noted in B above. The value in adding this new conditional use is that it would allow full plumbing without having to meet the "double le t area" standard that is required for a guest house. The CUP and covenant would give the City clear enforcement authority if the conditions were violated. Also, the City could avoid being in the position of having to grant lot area variances or deny a guest house application when the lot is too small and there is no intent to use it as a guest house. To this end, proposed code revisions are attached as Exhibit A. Planning Commission Action Requested Provide staff with direction regarding the proposed amendment. { Plumbing in Accessory Buildings July 16,1998 Page 3 1.Allow staff to issue permits for water supply, partial and full plumbing in accessory buildings, and regulate the jigs of those buildings under current code standards; i.e. conclude that it is the use, not the physical structure, that is being regt dated. 2.Allow staff to issue permits for water supply and partial plumbing, but for full plumbing staff can only issue permit subject to a covenant in which the owner agrees that the structure will not be used as a guest house unless a CUP is granted, and prohibiting its use under any circumstances as a rental dwelling (we do something similar to this for oversize accessory structures). 3.Allow staff to issue permits for water supply, partial plumbing and full plumbing, but require a covenant for partial or full plumbing. 4.Allow staff to issue permits for water supply and partial plumbing, but require a CUP for full plumbing. 5. 6. Staff issuance of water supply, but covenant for partial plumbing, CUP for full plumbing. CUP for all plumbing. 7. Prohibit all plumbing in all accessory buildings except when a guest house CUP has been granted (i.e. require a variance for any plumbing in an accessory building when it is not intended as a guest house. 8. Some other combination of staff permit/covenant/CUP. These options are summarized in the following matrix. Obviously, there are additional options within the matrix other than the 7 highlighted. Options 8 thru 13 would impose higher regulation on partial plumbing than on full plumbing, which doesn’t pecessarily make sense. Options 14-15-16 make full plumbing a variance with various levels of regulation for partial plumbing. FULL PLUMBING O 3 Px < • Statf Staffs cov CUP VAR Staff 1 2 4 14 Staff/COV 8 3 5 15 CUP 9 10 6 16 VAR 11 12 13 • 7 1 PROPOSED CODE LANGUAGE ADDITIONS Section 10.03 Subd. 9. Accessory Buildings. F. Plumbing. The provision of outside sillcocks and indoor water supply shall be allowed in all accessory buildings. Because the provision of plumbing fixtures and wastewater plumbing in accessory buildings has the potential to allow such buildings to be used as dwelling units, plumbing in accessory buildings shall be regulated as follows: li Provision of anv combination of fixtures requiring wastewater plumbing that does not include a shower or bathtub shall be considered as an allowed accessory use in anv accessory building subject to provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from such fixtures, and subject to the property owner executing a covenant providing that: a* Accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by Citv. Accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained. Accessory building will not be rented out as a dwelling under anv circumstances. 2.Provision of any combinations of fixtures requiring wastewater plumbing that does include a shower or bathtub shall be allowed only via a "guest house ” or "plumbing in accessory building'* conditional use permit as regulated in the zoning code, and subject to provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming septic system designed to handle the anticipated flows from such fixtures. Section 10.20 Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. O. Plumbing in Accessory Building. The provision of a bathtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing, and subject to the property owner executing a covenant providing that: Accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved bv Citv. l2s. Accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained. £. Accessory building will not be rented out as a dwelling under anv circumstances. lO. B To:Ron Moorse, City Adminis trator Mayor Jabbour and Council Members From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron ^ June 6,1997 ^ Subject: Policy Discussion » Plumbing In Accessory Structures Should Accessory Buildings Be Allowed Plumbing? The 2X>ning code does not specifically prohibit plumbing in accessory buildings. Homeowners often wish to have plumbing in accessory buildings for typical single family residential uses such as potting sheds, yard maintenance equipment, workshops, art studios, home offices, washing cars, etc. as well as for other uses which require special permits (such as guest houses), or for uses which currently are not allowed in accessory buildings (such as home occupations). Because the incidence of plumbing in an accessory structure can lead to uses requiring special approval or which are not allowed, staff finds it difficult to respond to what seems like an ever- increasing number of requests for such plumbing, especially when it involves addition of a shower or toilet. In the past, the City has on a number of occasions forced the removal of plumbing from existing accessory buildings, allowing the homeowner to avoid paying a second sewer unit. This policy, when applied to new accessory buildings, suggests that such buildings should not have plumbing. Yet it may be perfectly reasonable to allow certain plumbing fixtures for certain residential uses, without such use constituting a second dwelling unit. Summary of Policy Issues 1. 2. What plumbing fixtures should be allowed in an accessory building without Council review? At what level of plumbing does an accessory structure have the potential for secondary dwelling use or non-residential use? 3.When is a restrictive covenant an appropriate alternative to a guest house CUP? Does Council wish to review/approve all restrictive covenant situations? 4.(Separate but related issue) Sewer unit assessment policy related to accessory buildings with plumbing. Plumbing in Accessory Structures June 6,1997 Page 2 Accessory Structure Not To Be Used As Dwelling Except By CUP Zoning Code Section 10.03 Subd. 11 states: "Dwelling Use Prohibited. No cellar, basement, tent, trailer or accessory building shall at any time be used as an occupied dwelling". An accessory building with the potential to be used as separate dwelling unit creates a potential violation situation. However, Code Section 10.20 Subd. 3 (G)(1) provides for one special circumstance under which an accessory building mav be used for dwelling purposes via a Conditional Use Pemit in residential zoning districts: "Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings, including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house." What Constitutes a 'Separate Dwelling'? A primary issue for Building & Zoning staff is to determine whether or when a guest house CUP is required for a given accessory structure project. This determination relies on a definition of what factors make an accessory structure a dwelling. The zoning code definition of'dwelling* is: "Dwelling - A building or one or more portions thereof designed or intended to be occupied exclusively for residence purposes, but not including rooms in motels, hotels, nursing homes, boardinghouses, nor trailers, tents, cabins, or trailer coaches. A dwelling shall not be interpreted to include lodging rooms." Tlie terms 'building', 'boardinghouse', 'motel' and 'hotel' are further defined in the zoning code. It is unfortunate, however, that the physical features that differentiate a building that is a dwelling from one that is not, are not defined. We then must turn to the Building Code, which indicates that a dwelling is characterized by containing facilities for "sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation ." The building code also indicates a number of other features of a habitable dwelling: a separate closet, a kitchen sink, refrigeration, a cooking appliance, and plumbing to include as a minimum a toilet, a tub or shower, and a lavatory. One could also argue that in Minnesota, a source of heat is also necessary duriirg a portion of the year. Permanent Fixtures vs. Personal Property The next difficulty is that many of the physical objects which would reasonably and normally be used for the activities of'sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation ’ are not fixtures, but can be i Plumbing in Accessory Structures June 6,1997 Page 3 relatively mobile items of personal property rather than real property, i.e. a bed, perhaps a space heater, tablc/chairs, a microwave oven or even an electric or gas stove and a refrigerator. These 'portable' items can be brought into and removed from a building 'at will' and, significantly, without Ae requirement of a building permit, hence using them to define w’hether a building is or isn't potentially functional as a dw’elling, is not practical. However, the function of sanitation generally requires permanent fixtures which are readily distinguishable from personal property, and w'hich technically require that a building permit be issued. Toilets, showers, tubs and lavatories fall into this category. And, most heating equipment falls into this category. Presence or Absence of a 'Kitchen* For some time staff has considered that the presence or absence of a 'kitchen' is a key determinant of dwelling status. Also, staff has generally considered that a secondary kitchen within a dwelling is one of the key factors that can create an apartment unit, and has usually noted to the builder/owner via the plan review that use of the second kitchen for a separate dwelling unit requires City approval (guest apartment CUP). The problem here is that the only permanent fixture in a kitchen may be a kitchen sink, and a lavatory in a bathroom might serve the same fimetion. Typical Accesssory Building Utility Amenities It is not uncommon for accessory buildings to be provided with electricity, not only for lighting but for many other purposes (lawn maintenance, workshop, etc.). A telephone jack might also be placed in an accessory building for convenience. Less common would be natural gas, except for heating purposes. Water piping might be common in an .accessory building for someone who is a gardener, with a wash tub or sink. A home workshop in an accessory building might include a toilet and lavatory for convenience. Less common in an accessory building are a shower or bathtub, both of which also would presumably be served by a water heater. Such a fixtures technically would require a permit from the City, and are perhaps the primary 'built-in' features most likely to make a building suitably functional as a stand-alone dwelling. In our society, where the majority of individuals tend to bathe on a regular basis, the absence of a shower or tub suggests a space that, even if provided wath most other amenities, is not intended for anything more than short term use . Without a tub or shower, it is not livable. By the same token, without a toilet, it is not livable. Yet the presence of a shower stall in an unheated garage for seasonal or occasional use by the homeowner to remove the grime from a hard day 'in the coal mines', hardly would constitute a separate dwelling unit in itself. This suggests Plumbing in Accessory Structures June 6,1997 Page 4 that perhaps a shower or tub in combination with a toilet is necessary to comprise a functional, if not necessarily legal, dwelling unit... It may therefore be reasonable to define whether a structure or space is a (potential) dwelling unit by the presence or absence of a bathtub or shower in combination with a toilet. Restrictive Covenant: Alternative to CUP? Staff would welcome a clear policy statement on what fixtures can be allowed in an accessory building without requiring a Guest House CUP. The policy becomes more difficult to define now that the Council has in at least one case allowed an accessory building ?o contain a shower and a toilet, with a covenant filed in the title stating that the building may not be used as "an alternative living space, guest house, secondary residential unit, mother-in-law apartment, rental structure, or •he like". It is staffs impression that Council has taken the position that even though an accessory structure has the amenities to be used as a second dwelling unit (i.e. it looks and smells and feels and tastes like a guest house), the determinant of whether it needs a CUP is the owner's intended use of the structure. And, if the owner does not intend to use it as a guest house even though it can easily function as one, a covenant filed in the title wherein the owner agrees to not use it as a dwelling presumably at least gives the City the right to sue for breach of covenant, if it is subsequently used as a dwelling unit. The covenant also notifies future owners of the property that dwelling use is not allowed. But such a covenant does not result in physical traits of the structure being created in a manner non- conducive to dwelling use. It effectively allows all the necessary physical features for a dwelling to be put into place, then assumes the homeowner and all future homeowners will abide by the restrictions (similar to allowing th' manufacture of cars that can go 120 miles an hour when the speed limit is 55). - 'Sewer Connection Charge' Policy Has Been Implemented Inconsistently This is a separate but related issue. Council action regarding sewer connection charges for properties with guest houses has been inconsistent when viewed over the past 10-15 years. In the past, where sewer was available, approval of a guest house CUP was accompanied by a requirement that a sewer unit connection charge be paid, regardless whether the property conformed to lot area requirements. However, in the recent (1994) Stoddard request for a Guest House CUP on sewered property in which the lot did not meet the 'double area' standard. Council chose to not require a connection charge, apparently on the theory that charging one would provide a future basis for the property owner to demand lot area and width variances for a future subdivision. A clear policy must be established to avoid future inconsistencies. Plumbing in Accessory Structures June 6,1997 Page 5 Policy Questions 1.What combination of fixtures or facilities is necessary to consider a structure as a potential guest house or accessory dwelling unit? 2.Given Council's recent action to allow, via covenant, all the physical improvements which make an accessory structure functional as a dwelling, is it Council's intent that staff take into consideration the intent of the owner (not just the physical improvements to the building) when reviewing accessory building plans? 3.Does Council wsh to review each individual case, or should staff determine whether a CUP or covenant is most appropriate for a given application, and let staff deal with the covenant situations? 4.Does Council wish to review the assessment policy for secondary dwelling units? Note that the current policy approved by Council in 1984 came into play in determining the number of units for the Bracketts Point sewer. Staff Recommendation Council is requested to review the policy issues and provide staff with direction. Optionally, this could be referred to Planning Commission, tabled for more information (specify) or discussed at a work session. •.; .: •. CITY OF ORONO 'rIt'HU-jJ .• . ,.•. 2750 K«ll«y Parkway, P.O; Boii 66 • 'iL i.' • Crystal Bay. MN 55323 ■ .. f ■..» I Phont (612)473-7357” Fai'473-^ '• •. /f.- : •'" 0510'rr'i.:. . The Planning Commission will hold s puh&c hearing in me Council Chambers at 2780 Kelley Parkway on Monday, Jtiy 20, - 1W8 on the matter of proposed revisions to * Orono Zoning Code Sections'10.03 and [ 10.20 relating to the regulation of plunibing in accessory siruaufe8..;.^^s*. a .. The meeting begins at '6:30 p.fn;* All wishing to be heard^wilt appear*ai this time. Written comrWhis a/e sbl^ted. A • copy of yte proposed revisions ts available In the City officeSjfjr review.' ’ ‘r' > ’ * / . City of Orono • uJ, V/fWllW . by; Planning Coorunissiort■ *•' **•-■*•■ V ■ ,. Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Plartning ' ' • Coordihaior, - . . f .• •• •• • •• •• *t* * (Published kvThe Laker W Pioneer July k •• —-- •6 (i;i 0 6’.-’5?> OVfV Or CriL’.vO Affidavit of Publication C state of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Bill Holm, being duly sworn on oath, says that he Is ’' an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mound, Minnesota, and has full knowledge of the facts v/hich are staled below: • A.) The newspaper has compiled with all the requirements constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B.) The printed Prop. Revisions To Oro no Zoning Code which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for __1_ successive weeks: It was first published Saturday tha 4 Hay of Julv 19-as., and was thereafter printed and published every Saturday, to and including Saturday, the.day of Authorized Agent Subscribed and sworn to me on this day of ; July ,199^ Notary Public KRISTI HOLkt notary Public • umncsota MY COMMISSION EXPinss ^XeMmdh^ (1) Lowest cla^(ie?rate p^d USSr^ for comparable space: $12.90 per Inch. (2) Maximum rale allowed by law for above matter: $12.90. (3) Rale aclually charged (or above mailer. $7.19 per Inch. Each addilional successive week: $5.14. § 10 .03 h Subd. 7. One Building Per Lot. Except in the case of Planned Residential Developments as provided for hereinafter, no more than one principal building shall be located on a lot except that staff may issue a permit to use a manufactured home that shall meet all required setback standards or an existing dwelling while a new principal structure is being constructed. Such permit shall be issued for a period of 3 months, any extensions must be approved by the City and shall expire upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new structure and such structure removed. Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 Subd. 8. Lots to Face Streets. Each lot shall face on a public street or appropriate private easement. Subd. 9. Accessory Buildings. A. Time of Construction. No accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory. B. Height Restrictions. No accessory building in the "R" District shall exceed the height of the principal building, nor shall an accessory building exceed 30 feet in height. Source: Ordinance 72, 2nd Series Adopted: 8-14-89 C. Area Restrictions. In all "R” Districts no accessory building shall exceed 1,000 square feet of footprint area except that accessory structures in excess of 1,000 square feet will be allowed under the following conditions: 1. Not more than one Oversized Accessory Structure (OAS) shall be permitted on any property. An "Oversized Accessory Structure" is defined as an accessory structure of foot print area in excess of 1,000 square feet, except that the following non-roofed accessory structures which exceed 1,000 s.f. footprint area are not considered as "Oversize Accessory Structures", but are subject to the specia4^ setback restrictions^of Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (D): - Tennis courts - Pools, when pool basin structure (excluding non encroachment-type patios) is greater than 1,000 s.f. - Paddocks or arenas ORONO CC 255 (4-1-84) L. ! § 10.03 * 2, Oversized Accessory Structures are regulated by the following table: Lot Area Maximum Individual Accessory Structure Footprint Area Maximum Allowed Total of All Accessory Structure Footprint Areas* on a Property 0-1.99 acre 1,000 s. f.2,000 s.f. 2.00-3.00 acre 1,200 s. f.2,400 s.f. 3.01-3.50 acre 1,400 s.f.2,800 s.f. 3.51-4.00 acre 1,600 s. f .3,200 s.f. 4.01-4.50 acre 1,800 s.f.3,600 s.f. 4.51-5.00 acre 2,000 s.f.4,000 s.f. 5.01-6.00 acre 2,200 s.f.4,400 s.f. 6.01-7.00 acre 2,400 s.f.4,800 s.f. 7.01-8.00 acre 2,600 s.f.5,200 s.f. 8.01-9.00 acre 2,8.00 s.f.5,600 s.f. 9.01 acre or more 3,000 s.f.6,000 s.f. * Excluding non-roofed tennis courts,pools, paddocks, a 3, Any Oversize Accessory Structure shall be subject to the following conditions: a) No such accessory structure shall be located within a required yard area (principal structure setbacks must be met). Further, no such structure shall be nearer the front lot line than the front line of the principal residence on the property, and no such accessory structure shall be located less than 30* from the side or rear lot line regardless whether less strict principal structure setbacks apply. b) The maximum neight for such accessory structure shall be 30' or the defined height of the principal residence structure on the property, whichever is less. • c) Such structure shall be allowed only when the property owner agrees and covenants in writing with the City as follows: i. Nq,.future subdivision will be approved that places the structure within a lot that has no principal structure, except that the City in its subdivision approval may grant a finite time period in which the oversized accessory structure may remain without a principal structure, in order that a principal structure may be constructed. At the end of this time period the oversized accessory structure must be removed if no principal structure has been constructed. ORONO CC 255-1 (8-14-89) I I I I I I I I 1 J I J I I I i ■ I ] j i 1 3 J J 1 I i I i § 10.03 ii. If the property^ is subdivided, the oversize accessory structure and principal structure will be located together within a lot that meets the minimum lot area requirement for the given size of accessory building. iii. In subdivision approval, the setback required for the oversize accessory structure as defined herein shall remain. Such covenant shall be binding on current and future property owners and shall be filed in the chain of title of the property. Source: Ordinance 72, 2nd Series Adopted: 8-14-89 D. Location. No detached garages or other accessory building shall be located nearer the front or street lot line than the principal building on that lot except on lots which have frontage on a lake and rear yard adjacent to a street, accessory buildings located within the street or rear yards of such lots are subject to the setback requirements of Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B), Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) and Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) except that detached garages may be located 10 feet from the street or rear lot line when doors face away from the street and a turn-around is provided on site. This section shall not apply to lakeshore lots divided by roadways or corner lots. Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 1. Location of Principal Building to No principal building shall be located closer than 75 •t 9 • m _____ Lakeshore. feet to the natural ordinary high water mark of a lake abutting the property. This lakeshore setback shall be determined as the mean horizontal distance between the natural ordinary high water mark on the lakeshore and the allowable building line. 2. Variance From Lakeshore Setback. Any application for a variance from the requirements of Item 1 above shall be referred to the Minnehaha Creek" Watershed District for its approval before final action by the Council. Source: Ordinance No. 155 Effective Date: 2-14-74 ORONO CC 255-2 (4-1-84) * i § 10.03 • E. Setbacks. Accessory structures in excess of 750 square feet footprint area but not exceeding 1,000 square feet footprint area shall be located at least 15 feet from any lot line. Soiree: Ordinance 72, 2nd Series Adopted: 8-14-89 Subd. 10. Conditional Use Permit Required. All acces sory buildings on through lots located in "R" Districts shall require a conditional use permit. Subd. 11. Dwelling Use Prohibited. No cellar, basement, tent# trailer, or accessory building shall at any time be used as an occupied dwelling. ^ ^ ■ ORONO CC 255-3 (4-1-84) N ti4 1 • i § 10.20 SEC. 10.20. R-IA ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Subd. 1. Purpose. The ”R-1A" One Family Residential District is intended to provide a district which will allow a combination of low density residential development and limited agricultural activity. Planned residential developments may be allowed by conditional use permit. The district shall have immediate access to highways and public sanitary sewer. Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within any "R-lA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses; A. One family detached dwellings. B. Public owned parks and playgrounds. C. Municipal buildings. Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any “R-lA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Schools. Public schools and parochial or private schools which teach a curriculum similar to a public school provided no building shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District and that a fence be erected fifteen feet or more from all street lot lines where the abutting use is for open play, and nursery schools providing fifty square feet of playground space per pupil. B. Churches. Churches including those related structures located on the same site which are an integral part of the church proper, convents or homes*for persons related to a religious function on the same site provided no building other than a residence shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an ”R” District. C. Clubs, Camps, etc. Golf courses, country clubs, tennis clubs, public swimming pools serving more than one family, scout camps, YMCA camps, YWCA camps, church camps, or private non profit parks, playgrounds and other similar uses. The principal structure for any of the above listed uses shall be 100 feet of more from any abutting lot in an ”R" District, and accessory structures shall be a minimum of fifty feet from any lot line. ORONO CC 279 (4-1-84) . 1 i; 1 i i § 10.20 D. Public Service Structures. Public service structures, including but not limited to electric transmission lines, buildings such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure regulating stations, wells, and plumbing stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electrical power substations, provided no building shall be located within 50' from any lot line of "an abutting lot in an "R" District. Prior to granting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design of service structures is compatible to the neighborhood in which it is to be located and thus will promote the general welfare. Public service structures as defined above that have been approved by the City at required public hearings for public improvement projects shall not require a conditional use permit but such structures shall be subject to all other appropriate standards set forth in this section; amendments to approved plans involving design and/or placement of these structures will require written notice by the City to all affected property ..owners 14 days prior to the adoption of the amended plans by the Council. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 E. Greenhouses. Commercial greenhouses provided all outside storage is fenced in such a manner so as to screen the stored material from view when observed from the public street or adjoining lot. Commercial greenhouse structures shall not be located in a required yard area, and are subject further to the general zoning code requirements pertaining to accessory structures. Source: Ordinance 72, 2nd Series Adopted: 8-14-89 F. Recreation Areas. Private gun clubs, archery ranges, ski slides, provided the area is fenced and no part of the principal use is less than 150 feet from any lot line. Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 G. Guest Houses & Non-rer^tal Guest Apartments. 1) Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings, including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 • « if ORONO CC 280 (4-1-84) I i k k k I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 irarwr.'trorT § 10.20 J ] 1 'I 1 I 2) Non-rental Guest Apartments. An apartment within the principal residence structure on a lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal residence, includxng ^hexr Structure, and such door shall be the primary access to the apartment. Application for such a guest apartment the concerns of parking, sewage treatment, entryway and xnterxor access method. Such apartments shall not have utilities metere separately from the principal residence utxlxtxes and shall not have a separate street address. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted; 2-23-87 H.■ Planned Residential Development.^ Limited to detached single family dwellings only and subject to the limitations of Section 10.32. I. Duplex Credit. One duplex may be located on a single lot as a conditional use upon application therefor provided that public sanitary sewer service is available, and the lot xs adjacent to a commercial or industrial district, and the duplex^ constructed within 200 feet of the commercial or xndustrxal district. A duplex is defined as a two-family unxt resxdential building. J. Apiaries. K. Antenna Structure. One independent antenna structure with antenna or combination of antenna attached thereto, subordinate to and servicing the principal use or same lot and customarily incidental thereto that xs not attached to another structure provided the height of the antenna structure Qoes not exceed 65 feet and the antenna structure xs set back from any lot line a distance at least equal to the total hexght of the antenna structure. L. Farms (Crop and stock). Provided that the area is ten or more acres. M. Animals. The keeping of domestic animals for for each animal unit, except as hereinafter set forth. A minxmum of two acres of open pasture must be available for ® ® and one additional acre must be avaxlable for each addxtxonai horse. When the horses are kept stabled and do not require pasture for feed purposes, the minimum pasture requirement may be adjusted at the discretion of the Council. Such minimum pasture acreage shall not include low lying lands unusable for pasture or grazing. Axiy person keeping such animals must comply with the provisions o the City Code. ORONO CC 280-1 (4-1-84) I § 10.20 N. Stables and Barns - Private, The use of an accessory building for keeping animals for non-commercial purposes provided it is for the non-commercial use of the property owner or resident and meets the available area standards outlined in Paragraph M of this subsection. Further, no such structure shall be located ler.s than 150 feet from the nearest adjacent residence and no closer than 75 feet from the nearest lot line. O. Stables and Barns - Public. The use of accessory buildings or land for the storage or rearing of animals not owned by the property owner or resident. Such must meet the requirements of Section 10.03, Subdivision 18, Further, ho such structure shall be located less than 150 feet from the nearest lot line. P. Riding Academy. Any such instruction maintained as an accessory use and conducted by the owner shall meet the requirements of Sections M, N and O of this subdivision and'no such instruction shall occur less than 100 feet from^ an adjacent re'sidence or less than 75 feet from the nearest lot line. Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 ORONO CC 280-2 (4-1-84) I I I I I I I I I I 1 . I mm w 'M ' ( 1 i xl y mu. § 10.20 M. Antenna Structure. One independent antenna structure with antenna or combination of antenna attached thereto, subordinate to and servicing the principal use or structure on the same lot and customarily incidental thereto that is not attached to another structure provided the height of the antenna structure does not exceed 65 feet and the antenna structure is set back from any lot line a distance at least equal to the total height of the antenna structure. Source: Ordinance No, 177 Effective Date: 6-5-75 Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. Within any ''R-IA'' One Family Residential District, no accessory structure or use_of land shall be permitted except for one or more of the following uses: A. Garages. Private garages and parking space. B. Pools, etc. Private swimming pool, tennis courts, and paddocks, C. Home Occupations. Any gainful occupation meeting all of the following requirer.^nts when engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling, when there xs no employed assistant, when that occupation is conducted within the principal Structure only, when evidence of the occupation is not^visible “O™ the street, no signs other than those permitted in R Districts are oresent, no excessive stock in trade is stored on the premises, over the counter retail sales are nOw. involved, the entrance to the home occupation is jained from within the structure, and the use does not adversely . ftect the character of the uses the district in whic i it is located. A professional his residence for consultation, emergency treatment or of religious rites but not for general practice of his profession when such general practice will involve the need for mote than • three off-street parking spaces for the occupant and visitors. D. Signs. Signs as regulated in the Zoning Chapter. Temporary Structures, Buildings temporarily located for purposes of constructing on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary for such constructing. F. Gardens, etc. Gardening and other horticultural uses including aviaries and decorative landscape features. G. Roadside Stands. One roadside stand for sale only farm products produced on the premises 5 such stand does not exceed 200 square feet in area and that it ^ located at least thirty feet back from the public right-of-way. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1—75 • ORONO CC 281 (4-1-84) .1 ^ • § 10.20 H, Antenna. Any antenna or combination of antenna rigidly attached to the principal or accessory structure provided that none of the foregoing exceeds the total height allowed in Section 10,75. Source: Ordinance No. 177 Effective Date: 6-5-77 Subd. 5. Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements, A. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10,75. be observed: B. Lots. The following minimum requirements shall Lot ' Area 1 acre Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 140 feet 35 feet 10 feet 30 feet Side Yard Adjacent to Street 35 feet SEC. 10.21. R-IB ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The ''R-IB'' One Family Residential District is intended to provide a district which will allow denser residential development. Planned Residential Developments may be allowed by conditional use permits. The district shall have immediate access to highways and public sanitary sewer. Subd. 2 Permitted Uses. Within the ”R-1B" One Family Residential District, no land or structures shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: District. A. Any permitted use as regulated in the "R-IA” Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-lB” One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used ‘ for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Any conditional use as regulated in the "R-lA" District except that a Planned Residential Development shall not be limited to detached single family dwellings only. Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. . Within any "R-lB” One Family Residential District, the following uses shall be a permitted accessory use: District. A. Any accessory use as regulated in the "R-IA" I \ \ t- sI i i i i i I I I I ORONO CC 282 (4-1-84) 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 205-207 . *. *• DISPENSING is the pouring or transferring of any material from a container, tank or similar vessel, whereby vapors, dusts, fumes, mists or gases may be liberated to the atmosphere. DISPERSAL AREA, SAFE. See Section 1021.2. DRAFT STOP is a material, device or construction installed to restrict the movement of air with in open spaces of concealed areas of building components such as crawl spaces, floor-ceiling as semblies, roof-ceiling assemblies and attics. DWELLING is any building or portion thereof which contains not more than two dwelling units. DUELLING UNIT is any building or portion thereof which contains living facilities, including provisions for sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation, as required by this code, for not more than one family, or a congregate residence for 10 or less persons. SECTION 206 —E EFFICIENCY DWELLING UNTT is a dwelling unit containing only one habitable room. ELECTRICAL CODE is the National Electrical Code promulgated by the National Fire Pro- A __fl_______Ilection Association, as adopted by this jurisdiction. ELEVATOR CODE is the safety code for elevators, dumbwaiters, escalators and moving walks as adopted by this jurisdiction (see Appendix Chapter 30). EMERGENCY CONTROL STATION is an approved location on the premises of a Group H, Division 6 Occupancy where signals from emergency equipment are received and which is continu ally staffed by trained personnel. EXISTING BUILDINGS. See “building, existing.” EXIT. See Section 1001.2. EXIT COURT. See Section 1001.2. EXIT PASSAGEWAY. See Section 1001.2. SECTION 207 —F FABRICATION AREA (fab area) is an area within a Group H, Division 6 Occupancy in which there are processes involving hazardous production materials and may include ancillary rooms or areas such as dressing rooms and oRices that are directly related to the fab area processes. FAMILY is an individual or two or more persons related by blood or marriage or a group of not more than five persons (excluding servants) who need not be related by blood or marriage living together in a dwelling unit. FIRE ASSEMBLY. See Section 71.3.2. FIRE CODE is the Uniform Fire Code promulgated by the International Fire Code Institute, as adopted by this jurisdiction. FIRE RESISTANCE or FIRE-RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION is construction to resist the spread of fire, details of which are specified In this code. FIRE-RETARDANT-TREATED WOOD is any wood product impregnated with chemicals by a pressure process or other means during manufacture, and which, when tested in accordance with U.B.C. Standard 8-1 for a period of 30 minutes, shall have a flame spreaa of not over 25 and show no evidence of progressive combustion. In addition, the flame front shall not progress more than 10V2 feet (3200 mm) beyond the centerline of the burner at any time during the test. Materials which may be exposed to the weather shall pass the accelerated weathering test and be identified as Exterior type, in accordance with U.B.C. Standard 23-5. Where material is not directly exposed to rainfall but exposed to high humidity conditions, it shall be subjected to the hygroscopic test and identified as Interior Type A in accordance with U.B.C. Standard 23-5. 1-t15 • • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15, 1998 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date w ith the follou ing members present: Chair Sandra Smith, William Stoddard, Elizabeth Hawn, Dale Lindquist: Janice Berg and Lili McMillan arrived at 6:36 p.m.; Charles Schroeder arrived at 8:40 p.m. The following represented the Cit>' Staff: Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, City Planncr/Zoning Administrator Elizabeth Van Zomcren, and Recorder Jackie Young. Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ol i BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS (#1) #2364 JOHN SERENA, 4607 WATERTOWN ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 6:31 p.m. - 6:39 p.m. Mr. Serena was present. Van Zomcren reported this application was previously tabled at the M.iy 18. 1998 meeting due to the applicant not being present. Van Zomcren stated the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to con\ert the former house at 4607 Watertown Road into a pool house. The property at 460.^. consisting of fwc acres, and the property at 4607, consisting of 2.0164 acres, will be combined. Staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit for a guest house to be used as a pool house provided the structure meets all current building code requirements and the pool house is maintained for the sole use of the occupants, including domestic cmplo\ ecs. or their non-paying guests, of the primary dwelling and not used as a rental or dwelling unit. • • There were no public comments. Hawn moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2364 for the property located at 4607 Watertown Road, including: 1) conditional use permit for a pool house; 2) the combining of Lot 4605 with Lot 4607 to be known as 4605 Watertown Rond; 3) the pool house is strictly maintained for the sole use of the occupants, including domestic employees, or their non paying guests, of the primary dwelling and not used as a rental or dwelling unit; and 4) follow City Staff recommendations as listed on Van Zomeren's report of May 13, 1998. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#2) #2368 KIRK OTTESON, 710 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANCES, 6:39 p.m. - 7:39 p.m. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15. 1998 (//2 - #2368 Kirk Otteson - Continued) Mr. and Mrs. Otteson were present. Van Zomeren stated this application was considered at the May IS. I99S meeting and was tabled due to concerns about the proposed addition to the e.xisting stmeture and its impact on the ravine. The building official has had an opportunity to visit the site and indicated that he docs not think the proposed addition will have a negativ e impact on the ravine because of the existing v egetation and that there would be little if any impact on the "top of the blufl” line Van Zomeren stated the applicant is requesting a hardcover variance to construct an addition and a deck on the lake side of the e.xisting residence. A bluff setback is required because the proposed addition is located between the top of the blutT and the 30 foot bluff setback, with an average lakeshorc setback also being required. Van Zomeren noted the existing hardcover is .^.100 square feet with the proposed hardcover being 3,310. The applicant has proposed to exchange non-structural hardcover in the driveway and sidewalk to add the decks and addition. Staff did not recommend remov al of the sidewalk and parking area because of safety concerns. There were no public comments. Hawn noted this structure was built before the bluff ordinance was in effect, but stated she is not in favor of setting a precedent by allowing further encroachment into the bluff line. Hawn stated in tlic past she has voted in favor of replacing or enclosing existing decks Otteson stated he was under the impression the Planning Commission w.as not opposed to the addition. Stoddard remarked the Planning Commission attempts to look at c.ach application on a case by case basis, noting that in order to make a recommendation, the Planning Commission needs to know whether this application falls within the bluff ordinance. Stoddard stated he did not hav e a problem with the application, noting the building inspector did not feel it would h.'ivc a negative impact on the ravine. Van Zomeren indicated it was her opinion that it docs fall within the bluff ordinance due to the rise of the land. McMillan noted the bluff would make the lot almost unbilildable if the residence was new construction. Chair Smith recommended that the possibility of erosion be taken into account. Chair Smith pointed out that it is the Planning Commission's responsibility to assess the implications of the ordinance as it relates to each particular property before a decision can be reached Roger Wiekman stated they were under the impression from the prev ions Planning Commission meeting that thev needed to show the drainage impact on this propertv rather than the impact to the bluff. Chair Smith inquired whether the new addition could somehow be constructed without encroaching upon the bluff. Smith also stated a need to reduce hardcover without removal of the sidewalk. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15, 1998 (i?2 - //2368 Kirk Otteson - Continued) Upon inquir}’ from McMillan, Van Zomcrcn noted that the City Engineer has not reviewed this property nor made any calculations on how the drainage would be impacted if this addition was built. Stoddard stated the City Engineer may need to review this propert) to ensure that the drainage concerns are adequately addressed. Otteson stated he would be willing to reduce the current hardco\ cr b\‘ possibly removing the deck on the lake side and would prefer living space to a deck. The applicant stated he would like to stay away from the bluff line as much as possible, noting that he has attempted to cornpK w ith the Planning Commission’s requests. He questioned the top of the bluff line since the area under discussion was very ’ flat. Van Zomcrcn confirmed that the top of bluff was detennined by a surveyor. McMillan stated she also is concerned about setting a precedent w ith the bluff ordinance if this application is approved as submitted. Chair Smith suggested tabling the matter until later in the meeting to allow the applicant more time to consider the various options open to them. Hawn stated she would like to see hardcover stay the same or be reduced, no encroachment into the bluff, and enclosure of the back deck. Hawn commented the new entrvway is fine, w ith the proposed addition not extending bey ond the red line. Lindquist stated he would be in favor of extension to the red line unless the bluff line changes. McMillan noted agreement with Lindquist. Ottesi n stated he would be willing to comply with the red line and would submit revised drawings. Van Zomcrcn noted the proposed hardcover is at 29%. and recommended tabling the matter to allow City Staff time to review the revised draw ings. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to table Application 2368 to the July 20th Planning Commission meeting based on City Staff recommendation. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (Agenda Item #3 follows Item U4.) SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS: SUBDIVISIONS (<I4) «2383 CHRISTINE AND GARY VALERIUS, 3750 BAYSIDE ROAD - PRELIMINARY CLASS II SUBDIVISION, 7 40 p.m. - 7:51 p.m. Christine and Gary Valerius were present. Van Zomcrcn stated the preliminary sketch plan has been reviewed by the Planning Commission at their May meeting and City Council at its May 26, 1998 meeting. The applicants arc proposing a two lot division that includes creating one new lot. A small portion of the parcel is located in the RR-1A zoning district, with the remainder lying within the LR-1A zoning district. Van Zonieren noted the total lot area for Lot 1 consists of 2.23 acres, with 1.38 acres being buildable. The newly created Lot 1 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MF.ETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15, 1998 (#A - #2383 Christine and Gary Valerius - Continued) will require a variance for wetland credit and lot width. Lot 2 consists of 2.28 acres, with 1 .93 acres being buildabic. Wetlands comprise a total of 1.2 acres for Lots I and 2. which w ill require standard drainage and wetland casements. Council had directed that the new lot could be sewered. An application has been made to the Watershed District for stormwater rc\ iew. Van Zomeren stated the existing access to the site is a private dri\ eway off of Baysido Road. The applieant needs to supply a well location map and a utility construction plan prior to final plat approval. Christine Valerius stated she will be requesting a wetland credit. Valerius stated Hennepin County has approved the drivcwa\’ access. Stoddard questioned the need for a lot width variance. Van Zomeren stated the combined lots fall five feet short of the required 400 feet for lot w idth. No additional land is available for acquisition to avoid the need for a variance. Van Zomeren noted onh Lot 2 would have lake access. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2383 for a two lot subdivision of the property located at 3750 Bayside Road that includes creating one new lot, a lot width variance and wetland credit per Staff recommendations. V'OTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS (#3) #2370 GARY O’KEEFE, 1392 BALDUR PARK ROAD - VARIANCE AND CONDITION AL USE PERMIT, 7:52 p.m. - 9:04 p.m. Mr. and Mrs. O'Keefe were present. Gaffron reported that the Planning Commission pre\ iously reviewed the application at its May 18, 1998 meeting. The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance as well as a \ ariance and conditional use permit for grading w ithin five feet of a lot line and w ithin the 0-7.5' lakcshorc protected area to permit construction of a new residence to replace the existing residence. Gaffron stated the 0-75' protected area exists on both sides of the lot which might constitute a hardship. At its last meeting the Planning Commission recommended that the Applicant limit the hardcover to 40% in the 75-250 setback, if possible, and to eliminate the walkout. The Applieant has submitted a revised site plan which reverses the layout of the house and eliminates the walkout, with some proposed changes to the drivewa>’ to reduce the hardco\er. Gaffron stated a hardcover variance, a conditional use permit and variance for exca\ ation are required Staff recommended limiting hardeover to 6765 square feet, with the allowable hardcover in the 75-250*zone limited to 25%. Gaffron noted the revised plan calls for 42.8% hardco\ cr. If the 75 foot setback on both ends of the parcel is taken into aecount, the proposed hardcover w ould be around 33%. In order to grant a variance, the Planning Commission must dctcmiine whether a hardship exist.*: with regard to the side setbacks. i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15, 1998 (//3 - #2370 Gary O'Keefe - Continued) City Staff is recommending submittal of a revised grading plan, limiting the hardcover to 6765 square feet overall, no walkout, and evaluating whether grading of the hill is appropriate in the 0-75' zones. O’Keefe stated he is willing to reduce hardcover by eliminating a portion of the driveway. Chair Smith commented she had hoped the hardcover discrepancy could have been resolved prior to tonight's meeting. O'Keefe stated that he calculated the hardco\ er at 8.66.5 square feet based on his own measurements. Gaffron noted that the staff did not calculate the current hardcover but relied upon an c.xisting survey. Gaffron commented he would prefer ha\ ing the O'Keefe’s sur\e>or calculate the amount of hardcover currently e.xisting rather than have City Staff re\iew the property. Gaffron indicated a bigger issue for the Planning Commission to decide upon is w hat is the appropriate hardcover for this properU’. O'Keefe inquired why there arc differences in hardcover requirements between Wa> zata and Orono when they share the same lake. McMillan indicated Orono's ordinances governing hardcover arc more restrictive. O'Keefe also indicated vciy little grading will be done in the area where the residence is presently situated. It was the concensu- of the Planning Commission that a rev ised grading plan needs to be submitted in order to allow them to make a determination on a variance and conditional use pennit. O'Keefe indicated he would be able to supply a revised grading plan b\ Tliursday. In response to a question by Chair Smith whether Mr. O’Keefe would be willing to reduce hardcover in the 75-250' zones, O'Keefe stated he would be in fa\ or of reducing hardcover, noting that the Planning Commission had recommended hardcoxcr be limited to 40% at its last meeting, which he has attempted to comply with. O'Keefe's architect has designed the residence with special pavers which would allow water to pass through. Commissioners agreed that grading to blend in with the neighbor's property was acceptable with an approved grading plan. Chair Smith inquired whether anyone from the public willed to comment on this application. Diann Goetten, City Council Representative, inquired why 40% hardco\cr was being recommended for this property. Gaffron reported that 40% in the 75-250' zone was suggested as a figure that could be obtainable for this parcel of land. Since the Applicant is now proposing to raze the e.xisting structure, the property would be considered as a new buildablc 'ot, and the standard hardcover requirements would be in effect. There was no further public comment. Hawn stated she would like hardcover to be reduced from 40%. noting that no vote was t,akcn on ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15, 1998 (//3 - #2370 Gary O'Keefe - Continued) the 40% hardcover limit. Berg felt that the hardcover was excessive, and suggested the size of the house be reduced, noting that the Applicant should stay within the height restrictions for that zoning district. O’Keefe noted that hardcover was excessive because of the drivcwa.v design based on elevations, not because of a large house. Lindquist suggested the desirable amount of hardcover in his view would be .573 1 square feet, or 25 percent of the area within the 75 - 250' zone and the south 0 - 75' zone. Chair Smith stated the Applicant has the option of having the Planning Commission vote on the application as currently proposed or tabling the matter to allow the Applicant mere time to consider the various options open to him. Smith felt the application as presently submitted would not be recommended for approval, and if denied, there is a mandaioiy six month waiting period before a new application can be submitted. O'Keefe stated he has attempted to comply with the requests of the Planning Commission Gaffron stated the current proposal for the hardcov er is at 33% if v ou take the 75 ’ setback areas into consideration. In order to reach the 25% hardcover limit, the Applicant must reduce hardcover by 1900 square feet. O'Keefe asked how remodeling the existing house would affect hardcov er percentages. Smith responded that requirements arc the same for both remodeling and new construction. O’Keefe requested the Planning Commission table the matter. Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2370. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#5) 2361 WILLIAM AND LA WAYNE YAEGER, 310 BIG ISLAND - VARIANCES, 9:05 - 9:27 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Yacgcr and their attorney. Win Curtis, were present. Gaffron stated the applicants arc requesting a lot arca/w idth variance and City designation of Lot 64 as an independent Record Lot in the RS District, and lakcshore setback, side setback and hardcover variances for construction of a new seasonal cabin to replace a pre-existing seasonal cabin, and a side setback variance for a gazebo. Gaffron noted the City rezoned Big Island from LR-IA-I Single Family Lakcshore Residential Subdistrict to RS, Seasonal Recreational, back in 1983. Lots 64-65 and Lots 8-9-10-11 were designated as Record Lot 15 by virtue of their common ow nership by Roy Ahern. Yaegers have subsequently purchased Lot 64 from Ahern, with Lots 8-9-10-11-65 being owned by Nancy Fames. ^1 /4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15, 1998 (tfS - #2361 William and LaWayne Yaeger - Continued) The Yaegers arc attempting to purchase Lot 65, and if successful, wisli to combine the two lots into Record Lot 15A. Gaffron stated a cabin was constructed on Lot 64, with the City issuing a stop work order for work occuring without a building permit in July, 1997. The new cabin replaces a pre-existing cabin but is in violation of lakcshore setback and hardcover regulations. Tlie new cabin as constructed requires variances for lakeshore setback, side setback, 0-75 ’ hardcover, and a full perimeter foundation. A gazebo located on the property was also built without a bulding permit and is in \ iolation of the side lot setback. Staff noted that the complete replacement of the pre-existing cabin eliminates any grandfathered status that the old cabin may have cnjo\ed. The Planning Commission was requested K consider whether Lot 64 should be designated as an individual Record Lot separate from Lots 65-8-9-10-11, and if so. what variances should be granted to allow the new cabin and gazebo to remain in their non-conforming locations City Staff is recommending that the Applicant acquire all six lots, and if not possible, to at least acquire Lot 65 and combine it with Lot 64, then mo\e the cabin and gazebo to confomiing locations 75' from the lake. Win Curtis, Attomey-at-Law, stated he had been asked to speak on behalf of the Yaegers in this matter. The Yaegers have attempted to purchase all six lots to no a\ ail. and would now like to pursue Option f=2, the purchase of Lot 65. combining it with Lot 64. and then mov e the eabin and gazebo to conforming locations 75' from the lake. Curtis reported the septic system has not been installed due to the stop work order which was issued, and the Yaegers arc currently looking at three different options; hav ing a shared system on the property to the south, install a septic system on Lot 65. or acquire an easement from the owner of Lots 8-9-10-11 for purposes of a septic svstem. Curtis noted the septic issue could be dealt with at a later time. Gaffron stated the acquisition of Lot 65. combining it w ith Lot 64. and then moving the cabin and gazebo to conforming locations 75' from the lake was a good solution to the problem, and would recommend the Planning Commission approve the application. Curtis remarked the gazebo would not need to be relocated if Lot 65 was acquircil. Curtis noted the property owner for Lot 65 is aware of tonight's meeting but is not in attendance. If the additional lot is purchased, the Yaegers arc asking for a 90 dav' time period in which to move the cabin. No plumbing would be installed until the septic sv stem was installed. Lindquist moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2361, contingent upon purchase of Lot 65, legal combination with Lot 64, with such combination to henceforth be designated as Record Lot #15. The Yaegers are required to move the cabin within six months from the date of acquisition of Lot 65 to a position that meets the lake and side setbacks, and to comply with all regulations regarding installation of a septic system. The lot area variance is also recommended for approval. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#6) 2376 RICHARD AND MARION BROWN, 2685 SHADYWOOD ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 9:28 p.m. - 9:34 p.m. Lr*... ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15, 1998 (#6 - #2376 Richard and Marion Brown - Continued) The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted Mr. Brown was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is requesting a conditional use pennit to work below the Ordinarv’ High Water Level for improvements to a boathouse that exists on the propcrt>. The Applicant is seeking to add four new wood posts to raise the lakeside boat entrance to lc\cl the stnicture. which is consistent with City ordinances. Staff recommends no additional work be completed w ithout approval by the Planning Commission. The Applicant stated he will be installing 12" wood posts. The roof w ill not be replaced at this time. There were no public comments. Stoddard recommended approving the conditional use pcmiit for boathouse improvements, subject to the removal of the old wooden fcncc/rctaining wall currently located on the west side of the property. Brown agreed to the added condition. Stoddard moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Applicant #2376, granting a conditional use permit for the property located at 2685 Shadywood Road to work below the Ordinary High Water Level per Staff recommendations, subject to the removal of an old wooden fence/retaining wall on the west side of the property. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#7) 2377 JOHN CHENOWETH, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE - FINDING OF SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR USE/COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW, 9:35 p.m. - 9:47 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Chenoweth was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is interested in purchasing the building at 3850 Shoreline Drive, which is currently being operated as Bay Furniture Store. The property is currently zoned B-5, Limited Neighborhood Business District. Van Zomeren noted the City Council in April. 1986, determined that the furniture store was compatible with the other uses in the zoning district and found that it was substantially similar to a gallery. The Applicant is proposing to continue to sell furniture and home accessories at this location, with improvements to the interior, exterior painting, removal of overgrowTi shrubs and bushes, and new signage. Van Zomeren stated the Applieant has requested the Cit\- to look at possibly expanding the permitted uses for the B-5 district to accommodate other businesses. He suggested some retail uses such as a computer store. Chenoweth was also concerned about resale of the property if the furniture business would not succeed. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15, 1998 (#7 - #2377 John Chenoweth - Continued) Chcnowcth stated he has concerns with the restrictiv e nature of the B-5 zone, and would like the City Staff to review this matter in the upcoming months. Chair Smith remarked that the B-5 zoning district currently allows businesses that arc compatible to the neighborhood, noting that the Planning Commission is open to review ing the zoning district. Schroeder cautioned the applicant that any changes to the permitted uses is a lengthy process, and it is unlikely one parcel would be rezoned. Van Zomeren stated City Staff is willing to discuss w ith the Applicant his concerns regarding the B-5 zoning district within the next six months. Shroeder moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application ff2377, finding that the intended use at 3850 Shoreline Drive is similar to the permitted uses for the B-S Zoning District, subject to Staffs three recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#S) 2378 WILLIAM MERNIK, 1840 LAKEVIEVV TERRACE - VARIANCE, 9:48 p.m. - 9:53 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication w ere noted Mr. Mcmik was present. Van Zomeren slated the Applicant is proposing to construct a 4 ’ fence to enclose the entire back yard of the propertv' which requires a variance from height restrictions as it is a through lot. Memik had no comment. There was no public comment. Hawn stated the safety of children should take precedence. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application U2il8, granting a Variance from height restrictions to construct a 4* fence around the property located at 1840 Lakeview Terrace. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#9) 2379 DEBORAH M. SHOLL, 4100 WATERTOWN ROAD - VARIANCE, 9:54 p.m. - 9:58 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Ms. Sholl was not present. Van Zomeren remarked she received a call from the Applicant earlier in the da,v who stated her father had taken ill and would be unable to attend tonight's meeting, and to please proceed without her. TTie Applicant is requesting a front setback variance to allow construction of a three season porch. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15, 1998 (/f9 /I2379 Deborah M. Sholl - Continued) A front yard setback variance was granted in 1997. This property is subject to RR-1A lot requirements. Staff recommends approval. Tlicrc were no public commfUs. Shroeder requested the minutes reflect the Planning Commission voted in the absence of the Applicant. McMillan moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2379, granting a front setback variance for the property located at 4100 Watertown Road to allow construction of a three season porch per Staffs recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#10) 2380 BRUCE SCHMIDTT ON BEHALF OF RICHARD AND KATHY KYLE, 1140 TONKAVVA ROAD - VARIANCE, 9:59 p.m. -10:17 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted Bruce Schmidtt, architect, represented the Applicants. Van Zomcren stated the Applicants arc requesting variances from axerage lakeshorc setback requirements and the 75 foot setback requirement for lakeshore property to add a second stor>’ to their home Tliis property :s located within the LR-1 B zoning district and consists of .62 acres. Staff recommends approx al of this application, noting no change to hardcover is being requested. Stoddard stated the proposal looks good, and inquired xxhether the shed located on the property could be relocated and the current hardcoxcr be reduced bx' minimizing some decks. Bruce Schmidtt stated he has talked to the propertx oxxncrs about hardcox cr. noting that the loxver deck could probably be minimized, but cited a need for the steps doxxn to the lakeshore. HaxxTi felt there xvas a lot of hardcover in the 0-75' zone xvhich could possibly be reduced. She noted the decks look rclativclx' nexv, yet the records indicate there xxcre no permits issued. McMillan remarked the shed xvas too close to the propertx ’ line, and suggested the deck off the house be reduced xvith the other deck being kept as is because it may be difficult to reduce since the deck is part of the stair structure. Stoddard commented he xvas in favor of the application subject to the removal of the shed and reduction to both decks. There xvas no public comment. Berg suggested both decks be reduced xvith the shed being moxed. Bruce Schmidtt suggested that perhaps the patio could be eliminated to reduce hardcoxcr. Van Zomcren stated the shed as presently situated is located txvo feet off the propertx- line. OROxNO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15,1998 (#10 - #2380 Richard and Kathy Kyle - Continued) McMillan recommended removal of the shed and patio, w ith the deck attached to the house being cut in half. Stoddard commented he was in favor of the application if the patio is removed, the shed is either relocated or removed, the deck on the north side is reduced approximatel.v 50 percent (310 square feet), and the ten feet side setback is maintained. Stoddard moved, McMillan seconded, to approve \t:f .'cation ^2380, granting of a variance for the property located at 1140 Tonkawa Road f verage lakeshore setback requirements and the 75 foot setback requirement to add a second story to their home per Staff recommendations, subject to the following conditions: 1) removal of shed located on south side of patio; 2) removal of patio and adjacent stairwell consisting of a total of 250 square feet; 3) reduce the size of porch on the north lakeshore side to 310 total square feet (about 50% of existing size) and to make it conform to the 10* side setback requirements; and 4) removal of all plastic landscaping underlayment. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. ZONING AMENDMENT (#11) CITY OF ORONC, CHAPTER 5, BUSINESS REGULATIONS AND CHAPTER 10, ZONING REGARDING HOME OCCUPATIONS. Chair Smith stated this ordinance deals with home occupations and firearms. Van Zomeren stated she has discussed this home occupation ordinance w ith City Attorney Tom Barrett, who stated the Cit\- docs ha\ c the right to regulate the sale of firearms. Barrett recommended the City not grant new licenses for the sale of fircamis in the future and allowing the current licensees to continue to operate until they fail to renew . Van Zomeren stated notice has been sent to all the licensees on the list and notice placed in the newspaper. There was no public comment. Lindquist stated he was comfortable with allowing the current businesses to operate until they fail io renew with no new' licenses being granted. Chair Smith commented that she was unsure about Tom Barrett s memo which docs not provide the Planning Commission with much insight regarding the statutes regulating the sale of fireanns. Hawn commented that 2E, Home Occupation Regulations, should read, the home occupation shall be conducted within rather than with. Van Zomeren stated the language regarding people gi\ ing riding lessons, tennis lessons or swimming lessons should be clarified further to prevent possible conflicts. Hawn remarked the language contained in 2B should also be clarified regarding what the nonresident is permitted to do. i( ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15,19'JH 011 - Zoning Amendment - Continued) Van Zomcrcn suggested languag*’ be included to reflect that the nonresident should only engage in the home occupation which is pennitted by the ordinance in the dwelling unit. Hawn suggested language to the cfTcct that only the residents of the dw elling unit and not more than one (1) nonresident be permitted to work on the premises in connection with the home occupation be incorporated into the document. The members of the Planning Commission concurred w ith Haw n's recommended change. Hawn also pointed out that 21 should read no equipment, machincr\ or materials other than those of a t>pe normally found in or compatible with a dwelling unit shall be allowed. Hawn commented that the language be as concise as possible to a\oid an> potential conflicts, and suggested that the language under 3., Prohibited Occupations in Residential Dwellings, be amended to read objectional commercial operational characteristics. (Discussion was held off the record from 10:30 p.iii. to 10:40 p,m.) (Continuation of Zoning Amendment Discussion) Stoddard moved, Smith seconded, to approve the Home Occupation Ordinance with the suggested changes, subject to the drafting of an enforcement policy which will be prepared by City Staff within 30 days for review by the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#14) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MAY 18,1998 McMillan moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 18,1998, as submitted. V'ote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#13) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Stoddard apologized to the Planning Commission for suggesting the O’Keefe's comply with 40% hardcover, noting that he docs not recall the comment but’wili acknowledge it if reflected in the* minutes. Berg commented that O’Keefe failed to comply w ith the recommended 40% hardcover in his revised proposal. (#12) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS ON MAY 26, 1998 AND JUNE 8, 1998. None (#15) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON JUNE 22, 1998 AND JULY 13,1998 June 22 - McMillan Julv 13 - Stoddard 1 W -i i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15. 1998 ADJOURNMENT Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to adjourn at 10:54 p.m. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Sandra Smith. Chair Person