Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-16-1998 Planning PacketORONO PLANNENG COMMISSION Monday, November 16,1998—6:30 p.m. 2780 Kelley Parkway—Council Chambers AGENDA Council Representative: J. Diann Goetten 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 November 23, 1998, City Council meeting unless otherwise noted by the Chair. RENEWAL: PUBLIC HEARING 1. #2442 Tony Eiden, 345 Leaf Street, Variance Renewal. (Staff; Liz Van Zomeren), OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Review of these items will commence prior to or behveen scheduled public hearings. 2.#2395 3.#2399 4.#2410 5.#2411 Brent Bentrott, 1453 Park Drive, Variances and Conditional Use Permit. (Staff: Liz Van Zomeren). Muriel Senn, 4448 North Shore Drive, Variances. (Staff: Liz Van Zomeren). Peter Boynton, 1973 Fagemess Point Road, Variances and Conditional Use Permit. (Staff: Liz Van Zomeren). Paul Hanssen, 3195 Casco Circle, Variances and Conditional Use Permit. (Staff; Paul Weinberger). SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING; 7:00 p.m. 6. #2430 Paul Phillips proposes a two-lot subdivision of a 4.5 acre parcel located at 2140 Sixth Avenue North. (Staff; Liz Van Zomeren). L NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS 7.#2435 8.#2437 9.#2438 10.#2439 11.#2416/2417 Lutz Construction, i-? Livingston, Variances. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). Jeff Martineau, 2565 North Shore Drive, Variances. (Staff: Paul Weinberger). Michael Sletten, 4680 Bayside Road, Lot Line Rearrangement. (Staff: Liz Van Zomeren). Service 800, Inc., 2190 West Wayzata Blvd., Conditional Use Permit and Commercial Site Plan. (Staff: Mike Gaffron). Code Amendment and Commercial Site Plan Review. (Staff: Mike Gaffron). SKETCH PLAN REVIEWS 12.#2436 13.#2441 Bob Erickson, 364/372 West Lake Street, Lot Line Rearrangement-Sketch Plan Review’. (Staff Paul Weinberger). Mike Hilbelink for John Vogt, 3020 Watertown Road, Subdivision-Sketch Plan Review. (StaffLiz Van Zomeren). PLANNING COMNnSSION COMMENTS 14. Report of Planning Commission representatives attending Council meetings on October 26, 1998 and November 9, 1998. 15. Other issues for discussion. 16. Planning Commission approval of minutes for October 19, 1998. 17. Selection of representatives for City Council meetings on November 23,1998 and December 14. 1998. ADJOURNMENT Public A ttendance • • 4 • Meeiino D ate //. - '/ \ □C ouncil Planning C ommission Park Commission Other 1- NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER ;. fafi f'ulMi /■'Iri-. ,T, I'JM tk^t / TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner'Zoning Administrator November 9,1998 #2442 Tony Eiden 345 Leaf Street Variance Renewal-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA Lot Area: One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acres) 77,039 sq. ft. (1.77 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting a renewal for a lot area variance for the property located at 345 Leaf Street. The previous resolution was adopted July 1997 and expired on July 28, 1998. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.23, LR-IA, One Family Lakeshore Residential District Section 10.03, Subd. 6, Lot of Record, A. 3. #2W2 Tonv Eiden 0 345 Leaf Street Variance Renewal PC-1 1/16/98 ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IA District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 2 acres 200 feet 50 feet 30 feet 50 feet Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width 77,039 sq. ft.11,555.85 sq. ft. The zoning lot does not meet the minimum 2 acre requirement. The existing structures are to be removed for new construction. A suitable building pad exists. No other variances are needed. Structural coverage and hardcover are not issues with this application. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP This is an existing lot. The lot size is 77,039 sq. ft. or 1.77 acres which is 88.42% of the minimum lot size requirement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To approve the lot area variance. Attachments A B C D E Application Resolution #3937 Plat map Topo Map Lot area calculations F Permit record G Minutes from July 21,1997 H Minutes from July 28, 1997 ^2442 Tony Eiden 345 Leaf Street Variance Renewal PC-11/1 6/98 k ^5- #24 A Application# cm' 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 INFORiMATION Site .Address 3*4^ Sl&b&T Date Received 10 - Z(gr^ V Amount Paid ____ Property Identification Number fP.I.D.) 05 ll~1 "2^ OOP'S. Ai:ach legal description to application if not included on required si^ey. Dr.te Property Acquired______^ /7 /_________________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjac9tlp^)arcels of land. Present use of property: )C residential ___pother (specify)_ Zoning District: IK (month/year) APPLICANT Name Ji eioe^i Address: HlOO feEgj:::SHieg Phone(home)_£ 0442. ____ Phone (work i ____ City: PL>lMQ(ATi4 ______Zip: OWNER (if different than a^.licant) Name Address: Phone (home ) C^// - _________ Pijone (work) 5^ 9 /")■">/(City: /Jyf'>'1^1 irn . Zip: G DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ Estimated C(mstruction Cost $ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED y Lot Area _ Setback: ___Lot Width Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: I3XKS~|~/10(^ LO~T____:---------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) • w B CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 9 3 7 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 FILE NO. 2261 WHEREAS, Thomas Meyers is the owner of the property located at 345 Leaf Street and Tony Eiden and Diane Eiden (hereinafter "the applicants") have an interest in the property located at 345 Leaf Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows; the East 310 feet of Lot 12 and the East 310.00 feet of the North 124.7 feet of Lot 13, Auditor's Subdivision Number 203, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance from Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 to remove an existing residence and construct a new' residence. A variance for lot area to reduce the required lot area from 2 acres to 1.77 acres is required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2261. The property is located in the LR-IA Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District where the minimum lot area requirement is two acres. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 21, 1997 and recommended unanimous approval of the proposed variance based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A. The zoning lot is 77,039 sq. ft. (1.77 acres) and does not meet the minimum lot area requirement of 2 acres. Page 1 of 4 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. R Q B.The applicants have obtained the owner’s consent to apply for a lot area variance. 4. 5. C. No other variances for construction of a new residence are anticipated. The City Council finds ihat 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 vari ance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, ^ 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 vdth the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the 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 a lot area variance to reduce the required lot size from 2 acres to 1.77 acres per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 to permit removal of an existing residence and construction of a new residence, subject to the following conditions: •* * Future buildings are to be located within the setbacks as shown in Exhibit D. No future variances will be approved. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 28, 1998). Violation’ of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automutically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be pumshable as a misdemeanor. 1. 2. J. Page 2 of 4 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 9 3 7 4.The undersigned owner and 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 recoi aing of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Mirmesota at a regular meeting held on the 28th day of July, 1997. ATTEST: l/.Ji______ PdfbAyiv^HQllin, City Clerk 5- ClericJu^'■600 Thomas Meyers, Property O GabriW Jabbour, May i Diane Eiden, Applicant STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. The foregoing instilment^i^^ackno O" this 28th day of July, and Dorothy M.' Ilaflin, Mayor and Clerk of the City of Orono,1997 by Gabriel Jabbour a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. JAMIELGEMAR NOMrnw UMOIICOWTY Uy CoMiaiai EgMsJR 91.2000 Page 3 of 4 10 t Permit No, 11^ 6ino •k-hb (c. 0 ^ 5</5' /J^aJ Sfr^r ■ PERMIT RECORD Date 'Ui J/-S' ^4 Tvpe of Permit kM//_ ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 21,1997 (#10-#2260 Benjamin Milbrath - Continued) Van Zomeren passed out photographs of the property. The application is a request for CUP and variance to replace a retaining wall, which has been removed, in the 0-75' setback with a keystone type wall. A variance is required to remove a walkw’ay on the north side of the tunbers. Grass will replace this area but the retaining wall will encroach into the side yard. Van Zomeren said staff recommends approval. The applicant said his goal is to have less hardcover. Milbrath said the plan would allow the drainage to flow into the front yard instead of the neighboring property and aids in presenting a natural setting. There were no public comments. Hawn noted that the propert>' needs relief as soon as possible. She noted that much of gravel under the deck has swept into the neighboring property and would like to see the gravel removed from the property. Milbrath said the gravel would be left there for now and removed once the walls are in place. He will replace the gravel with wood chips under the deck. Milbrath said the neighbor is pleased with his plan and the improved drainage situation. Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2260. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Van Zomeren said the application will go before the Council at their July 28 meeting. Milbrath noted that he w'ould not be in attendance. (#11) #2261 TONY EIDEN COMPANY 345 LEAF STREET VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:52-8:54 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren said the application is for a lot area variance for a 1.77 acre property located in the 2 acre minimum LR-1A Zoning District. The applicant is in the process of purchasing the property owned by Tom Meyer. Van Zomeren said Staff is concerned with the lack of a proposed plan but the building pad as outlined should not create any problems. Van Zomeren said she would recommend screening from the Luce Line. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 21,1997 (#11- #2261 Tony Eiden Company - Continued) Tony Eiden had no comments to add. There were no public comments. Hawn asked if the applicant was satisfied with the setback requirements. Eiden said he was and would be able to meet them. Smith moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2261. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (Item #12 follows item #16) (#13) #2264 JANET C. KIERNAN 1491 SHORELINE DRIVE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:54-9:20 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that an application had been previously reviewed and approved for reconstruction and additions to the residence in 1996. He reviewed that application and the new changes requested. The applicant had determined that it would be impossible to save the existing superstructure and is proposing a new residence. A one-stall addition to the garage would meet the setback. There would be an additional encroachment to the front setback and a new small encroachment to the side. The issue is with new construction being an opportunity where all the setbacks, especially the lakeshore setback, could be met. Lot area and width variances are also required. The one acre property-, 187' in width, is located in the tw-o acre zoning with a 200' width standard. Gaffron indicated that the property may be sewered in the future but continues at this time to require use of a septic system. Kieman noted the hardships on the property with the maple tree to the north side and the Indian mounds to the rear where a 50' setback is required. Kieman said to renovate the property would require an additional two to three courses of block to create more headroom and a better foundation. During public comments, John Ericson, 1620 Shadywood Road, clarified that the encroachment of the 75' setback would be allowed with a major remodeling but would be required to be met if MENXTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JULY 28,1997 (#8) #2258 GER.ALD E. WALSH, 180 BIG ISLAND - VARLANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 392 Mrs. Walsh was present. Gaf&on reported that the request is for the lot area variance similar to those granted to other Record Lots per the RS District ordinances which began in 1983. The property on Big Island was reviewed together, grouped by ownership, categorized by size, and granted a variance for building of Record Lots. The owners of lots that were allowed this variance were required to execute variance documents. This property was vacant at that time and has changed ownership several times. The documents were not signed for the subject property. The applicant would like to guarantee his right to build on the property and formally establish the automatic lot area variance. Gaf&on reviewed the .64 acre propert>', which is 100’ wide x 283* deep, a size common to other lots in the area. Gaffron said the applicant would be required to obtain a survey of the propert>' if he desires building permits. Gaffron said the property is located in the 5 acre zoning and would not be eligible for subdivision. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3935. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#9) #2260 BENJAMIN MILBRATH, 3265 CARM.AN ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 3936 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3936. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#10) #2261 TONT EIDEN COMPANT, 345 LEAF STREET - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3937 Diane Eiden was present. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JULY 28,1997 ( #10. - #2261 - Tony Eiden Company - Continued) Van Zomeren reviewed the plat for the propert>'. She indicated that the applicant is the developer of the property currently under purchase agreement from Thomas Meyer. The 1.77 acre property is located in the LR-1A Zoning District, which requires 2 acres. Van Zomeren said she believes there is enough space on the property for a building pad that would meet all required setbacks. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. Staff recommended approval or amendment of the resolution. Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3937. Peterson asked about the proposed structure and its relationship to the Luce Line and Staffs recommendation. Van Zomeren said she would preferred to have seen the building plan but the size of the lot is adequate. Jabbour amended his motion, Goetten seconded, to include no further variances will be allowed. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. f*#ll) #2262 NED BUTTERFIELD, 3745 WATERTOWN ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 3938 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3938. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#12) #2265 ROBERT LUND FOR GRA\DON K. AND MICHELLE M. NEWMAN, 1655 BOHNS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3939 Architect, Robert Lund, represented the applicants. Van Zomeren reported that the request is for average lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variances in the 0-75' and 75-250’, which would remain consistent with current percentages. The propert>' owners plan to remove an existing residence and construct a new residence. The property is on a pie-shaped lot which is the reason for 8 RUN DATE 07/00/97 BATCH S0<^ PROP AOOR OMCR NAHE TAXPAYER NAIIE/ACOR PROP ADDR ONtlER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP AOOR Qlt«R NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INTORMAUON 5Y:;TtM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI435A01 PACE 9 Z8 04-117-25 23 0008 00340 LEAF ST L H BEHRHAN i JANE E BEHRItAN LEIGH M S JANE E BEHrdl'JI 340 LEAF ST LONG LAKE 553G6 38 04-117-23 24 OOOS 00038 AOORESS UNA.SSICNEO STATE OF MINN STATE OF MINN (DHR) (LUCE LINE TRAIL) 38 05-117-23 14 O005 03200 BAYSIDE RO 0 J NYHAMMER A S C OLSEN OALE J I SUSAN O NYHAMIER 3280 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0050 00030 AOORESS UNASSICNED STATE OF MDW STATE OF MINN CONR) (LUCE LINE TRAIL) 38 04-117-23 23 0009 00360 LEAF ST H C FURCHNER JR ETAL HENRY FURCHNER 3oO LEAF ST LCiNa LAKE MN 55356 38 04-117-23 23 0024 03180 RIOGEMOOO CIR FRANK J A PATRICIA K ROUTSON FRANK. ROUTSON 1620 JOHNSON DR STILLWATER MN 55082 38 05-117-23 14 0001 00285 LEAF ST L P A P A CRANE LESLIE P CRANE JR PATRICIA A CRA)4E 285 LEAF ST LOt(G LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0003 00345 LEAF ST THOMAS H MEYERS THOMAS MEYERS 345 LEAF ST LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0006 03240 BAYSIDE RD DAB BOYLAN DONALD K DOYLAN 3240 BAYSIDE RD LOI« LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0007 03200 BAYSIDE RD RAT MINKEMA ROBERT L A TERESA M MINKEMA 3200 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 ‘•ir'.rj n • ii ^ 4> ,;. 38 05-117-23 14 0059 00375 LEAF ST ELIZABETH P VOGT ELIZABETH P VOGT 375 LEAF ST LONG LAKE MN 55356 * • ^ 3^ kJ'-:A TOTAL BATCH 504 00011 * ^ I. ^ j vj C J 4 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE SeSrSitoiioi of infobfutiom as it appears this date on ire becoros OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. ^ ' 0 DATE BY J L TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator November 9, 1998 SUBJECT: #2395 Brent and Kathym Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Conditional Use Permit-Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area: 17,150 square feet (.39 acres) Application: 0 The conditional use permit application is for grading and land alteration within 5' of the property line and to allow 500 cubic yards of fill. The applicant has submitted a plan that shows a different driveway approach than the plan reviewed at the October meeting. The grading and drainage plan submitted for the conditional use application moves the curb cut to Bluif Street to provide a less steep landing area. Background Information My The applicants appeared at the July 20, August 17, and October 19, 1998 Planning Commission meetings and requested hardcover variances, a 10' vacation of Bluff Street, and side yard adjacent to street seiback variances. The Planr"ng Commission recommended that the propiosed three season porch be located at least 3' from the side property line and that Bluff Street not be diminished by a 10' vacation. The applicant was also directed to redesign the location of the garage to include meeting the side yard setback from the east property line. 42395 Bentrctt 1453 Park Drive CUP Il/I6 ’9S page^I August The applicant submitted a new plan in August that showed access from Park Drive and located the garage closer to the house, approximately 130' from the street. The applicant also submitted building elevations for the proposed garage. The garage was proposed as a nvo story structure with the doors facing the street and a door on the lakeside for access to the storage area. October The applicant submitted two similar drawings for the October meeting where the only significant difference was the amount of fill. The October plan needed the following approvals; 1. 2. 3. A side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new deck and porch to be located r from the property line where 35' is required. A side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new garage to be located 8' from the property line where 35' is required. A hardcover variance in the 75'-250' setback to increase from 2,334 sq. ft. (23.43%) to 3,518 sq. ft. (35.32%). 4. A conditional use permit alter land and grade within 5' of the property line. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the above-referenced variances at the October 19, 1998, meeting subject to submittal and approval of a drainage and grading plan before commencement of construction. Staff noted that the conditional use permit application for grading and land alteration needed to be officially published and noticed to property owners within 350’, therefore, the Planning Commission did not take action on the conditional use permit. November The conditional use permit notice was published in the official newspaper and property owners within 350' received a notice with the survey. The applicant has submitted a plan that shows a new driveway curb cut from Park Drive via Bluff Street to provide a level driveway approach. ^2395 Benlrotl 1453 Park Drive CLP I h 16/98 page-2 Pertinent Ordinances . Section 10.25, Subd.5 (B) LR-IB Standards • Section 10.22 Subd. 1 and 2 Hardcover Regulations • Section 10.56, Subd. 16 Hardcover Regulations • Section 10.03, Subd. 19 Land Alteration Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street Lakeside 1 acre 140'35*10’35'75' Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street Lakeside 17,'l42 sq. ft. (.39 acres) 48' at OHWL 54' at 75' setback 5.3' to garage House is 9'; Proposed deck is at 1' & garage is 8' 72' to house The subject property does not meet minimum lot area or lot width requirements. The proposed deck/porch on the west side of the residence requires a side yard adjacent to street setback variance. The proposed garage also requires a variance from side yard adjacent to street. Because the deck/porch addition is proposed to be located less than 3' from a property line, there are additional Building Code requirements for fire and public safety that are required. The applicant will need to work with Building Inspections staff to meet building issue concerns. ^2395 Bentrott 1453 Park Drive CUP U/16/98 page-3 Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested O’-75’3,712 sq. ft.370 sq. ft. (9.97%) NONE 9 sq. ft..24 75 ’-250'9,960 sq. ft.2,303 sq. ft. (23.12%) 2,490 sq.ft. (25%) 3,404 sq. ft. (34.18%) 914 sq. ft. (9.18%) 250’-500 ’3,478 sq. ft.780 sq. ft. (22.43%) 1,043.4 sq. ft. (30%) 813 sq. ft. (23.38%). NONE TOTALS: 17,150 sq. ft. % of LOT AREA: 3,453 sq.ft. 20.13% 4,226 sq. ft. 24.6% The proposed plan represents an overall increase in hardcover of 971 sq. ft. Hardcover is proposed to be reduced in both the 0 ’-75 ’ and 250’ -500' setbacks. The consulting engineer questioned whether the area between the parallel sidewalks would be hardcover. According to the Building Inspector, applicants have proposed similar parallel paved areas in the past to reduce hardcover, however, the City has considered the entire area between the sidewalks to be regarded as hardcover because it becomes compacted as it is driven over. The Planning Commission should determine whether this area should be added into the hardcover calculations. The grading and drainage plan indicates slight changes in the amount of proposed hardcover. The above table reflects the newest survey submitted. The Planning Commission should again revisit proposed hardcover because the numbers are different than those reviewed in October. ISSUES The conditional use permit for land alteration and grading is subject to the following criteria: 1.That the proposed location of the conditional use is *n 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 Planning Commission shall consider if the drainage and grading plan meets the objective of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. U2395 Benirotl 1453 Park Drive CUP n/l6'9S page~~4 2. J 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. Driveway curb cuts are to be at least 5 ’ from the propeny line. This curb cut is not on the applicant's property and therefore does not meet Zoning Code requirements. The engineer has indicated his concern that the changes may have a negative impact on the adjacent property because of grading along the property line. The engineer also does not favor the curb cut on Bluff Street because if the City ever opens or uses the area for public purpose, the curb cut would need to be moved off of Bluff Street. The applicant would then not have the appropriate grade level for a landing area at the top of the driveway. The proposed driveway cannot be contained on the applicant ’s property because of the e.xisting topography and the need to provide a grade of 10% or less for the driveway. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The zoning issues are as follows: A. The location of the driveway does not conform to the Zoning Code. B. The subject lot does not meet lot area or lot width requirements. C. D. E. F. The west side of the property is subject to a 35' setback from platted, unopened Bluff Street. The applicant originally requested vacation of a 10’ portion of Bluff Street which was not favorably received by the Planning Commission. The existing deck encroaches into the required side yard adjacent to street. Both the proposed porcli/deck and new garage encroach into the required setback, the Planning Commission in October approved these variances, subject to the submittal and approval of the grading and drainage plan. The existing ga-age encroaches into the required street yard setback. The parking pad in front of the garage is partially in the street right-of-way. The existing hardcover exceeds the limits in the 0’-75 ’ setback. The applicant is proposing to remove hardcover in the 0'-75 ’ setback, however, overall hardcover would increase on the zoning lot. The hardcover numbers are slightly different than the numbers submitted with the previous plan, please reconsider the numbers. Please note that hardcover would be added for the driveway area near Park Drive which is outside of the property lines. U2393 Bentrott 1453 Park Drive CUP n/16/98 page- 5 “ STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission should evaluate the revised plan in view of the revised location of the driveway curb cut and the engineer's concerns regarding the culvert, retaining walls, the landing area and curb cut location and future use of Bluff Street. The variance approvals were contingent on the submittal and acceptance of a drainage and grading plan. The Public Services Director does not recommend approval of the driveway as proposed because it does not conform to the driveway regulations as set forth in Chapter 6 of the Municipal Ordinance regarding width of curb cut at the right-of-way and the angle of the driveway. Attachments AX Tom Kellogg's letter dated 1 l/lC/98 BX Tom Kellogg's letter dated 10/14/98 CX Driveway regulations A Application B Plat map C Surveyor's letter D New plan E Hardcover worksheets FI July minutes F2 August minutes F3 October minutes G Letter from neighbors--Palms H Acknowledgement form (dated June 1998; I Sewer plar. J Garage elevations K Plan Ul L Plan #2 NOTE TO COMMISSIONERS: In an effort to reduce the amount of staff reports that have previously been sent to you on this matter, the previous staff reports are not included as exhibits. If you need copies of previous reports before the meeting, please call Liz at 473-7357. H2393 Beni roll 1453 Park Drive CUP 11/16/98 page- b B0N&6TR00 ROScNE ANDERLIK t Ml m^tS Rosene Anderlik & \\\\ Associates Engineers & Architects November 10. I'998 tUzubeth VanZomeren Cay Planncr//.oning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Clascal Bay. M.N’ 55323 Re: Bentrott Site Plan File No. 139-2.395 ^ 6516361311 11/10/98 10:18 Cy :01/01 NO:A04 ^OJrn# Ann^ftk ^(1 Ayl-it flrCi (f'i •* ,V ^'/m v r 4r' in ^,7.. v Cp^ortuAtry CiPptw/n OfTC C ' An*ji«fiik |»f • M «'« f*> I Swr»f*«j PC • k fufner Pt • CiJPhn R Tnol •K-;ni*r|fi srnu^«cnc l*l • jewy.A Bowir<So«i Pf • P-5*': P2it'>* PC \4*<i»n M ». »*A itn-u C‘.'**kiai.<iir* A* ;n»'/Iff HoaP:3 a ' r»r.i.*i.-.n yh • P:orM f Pf«neM« PC • H 'nA'J W PC • O I Osii*'* • lr‘'*•r<'( <. ili-xAi. A» A • A ►»,tn>on. ff • T Pdiu!"ienn. rr • >el < F'Cifl • ic*vitfifi P Aruj«iun. ^ Piilfi. Pt • l.Ji-m/ P PF I s • irnrerf ► * • AjJ.h * \i f?.» g • Mu'Mt*! f* •f.ni Pp • A.ijf .1 tb dt P£ i*^'-rrf M **Bta t ,i»*1 5; VK* • M ^ v A" *iOi *r wwyvDC*'^tt!fO«.'.Cmi ftX Dear Liz: We have reviewed the revised site plan dated November 10. 199S for the proposed ganijjc rcliKation on the Brent Bentrott propeny. The site is hxeted at 1453 Park Drive ot> the s*)iiih side Forest Lake in the south half of Section 7. Wc have the following comments in regard.s to engineering matters 1. Grading: The revised grading plan appears to address some but not all ot our previous concerns. The proposed .swale and a^sodateJ grading cast of the driveway is shown right up to the property line. To construct die swalo and driveway as shown it will be necessary to obtain n temporary easement I'rom the property owner to the east. Drainage along the east side of the house i.s still a concern. The propo.setl grading plan shows u culvert under the driveway tJiat may direct some water westerly however it apj>ears that a considerable amount of storm w ater will be directed towards the existing home. Retaining wall details and design should he submitted lor review. 2. Driveway: The proposed grades on the driveway appear to be acceptable. Tlie 2 percent landings at Park Drive and at the proposed garage make sense. The City should consider if the future construction of Bluff Street is a possibility. The propoved plan shows the driveway to be constructed in the Park Drive and Bluff Street right-of-way. Future improvements to cither street wuiiM eliminate the 2 percent driveway landing making ingress and egress difficult if not dangerous. 3. Drainage: A detailed drainage area map of the contnbuting drainage area and drainage calculations should be submitted for review. 4. Easements: Utility easements should be shown 5-feet wide along the interior lot lines and 1 0-feei wide along Park Drive and Bluff Street. Drainage easements should be provided across all drainage ways. Please contact me at (604-4863) if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yi'urs very truly, BONESTROO. RO.SENE. A.NDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Cc: Greg Gappu, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612*636*4600 • Fax: 612*636*1311 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & \\\\ Associates Engineers & Architects Bone::rcO Ancc':>k jnj /nc is nvf Aciton €qu,* Cpporiurn:/ ErrfifOjt' **rmc’p^is Otto G Bortesr'oo. P£ • Joseph C Anperiiii. P£ • Marvin L Sofva.’a. PE • Richard E Turner P£ • G enn R Cook P£ • Rooert G Schuoicht. P£ • Jerry A Bourdon. PE • RoDert 'Ji/ Rorene PE arp Susan V Eoenm C pa Sen,or Consultants Aiioc^ar? Pr.'-c A Sarford. P£ • Ketrn a Gordon, PE • Pooe*-! R Pfefferie. PE • Richard ^ Fos:er P£ • David O Loskota. P£ • RoOert C Russek. A.I A • Mark A Hanson. P£ • Michael T Raur-'ann ?£ • Tea K F eid. P£ • \e'“neth P Anderson. PE • Mark R Rolfs. PE • Sidney P W i'ta —son. PE L S • RcCe't F Kotsmitn • Agnes M R.ng • Michael P Rau PE • Allan Pick S:r'"".dt PE Offices S: Paui. Rocneire' 'Aiiimar and St Cioud. MN • Milwaukee. \M we^SiZe WWW. scne'rroc com October 14, 1998 Elizabeth VanZomeren Cit>- Planner/Zoning Administrator Citv of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re: Bentrott Site Plan File No. 139-GEN DearLiz: We have reviewed the site plan dated October 7,1998 for the proposed garage relocation on the Brent Bentrott property. The site is located at 1453 Park Drive on the south side of Forest Lake in the south half of Section 7. We have the following comments in regards to engineering matters 1. Grading: The proposed grading plan appears to present some problems. The proposed slopes north of the driveway at the south end ol the iot scale to 2:1. We recommend the maximum slopes be 3:1 so they can be maintained. The proposed swale east of the driveway is within 6-feei of the lot line and as close as 7-feet to the neighbor’s garage. It may be necessary to obtain additional easements to construct the driveway and swale. The grading plan appears to make the existing drainage situation worse by directing water towards the existing home and proposed garage. We would recommend revising the grading plan so that drainage is directed away from sLoicniies. The proposed retaining walls exceed 6-feet in height in some locations. Retaining wall details and design should be submitted for review. 2. Drainage: A detailed drainage area map of the contributing drainage area and drainage calculation.s should be submittea for review. 3. Easements: Utility easements should be showTi 5-feet ^v•ide along the ’.nterior lot line. Drainage easements should be provided across all drainage ways. 4. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please contact me at (604-4863) if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul. MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 - Fax; 612-636-1311 § 6.05 Subd. 7. Submission of Plans to Public Works Director. All plans submitted to the Building Inspector for his or her approval/ which include or involve a sidewalk/ curb and gutter/ driveway/ driveway turnaround/ driveway approach/ curb cutS/ roadway surfacing or private improvement in any public road or other public property in the City/ shall be referred by the Building Inspector to the Public Works Director for his or her approval before a building permit shall be issued. Subd. 8. Construction Requirements Generally. In addition to the rules/ regulations and specifications as outlined by the Public Works Director with respect to the improvements listed above/ the following requirements shall be complied with when work is done under the provisions of this Ordinance. A. All driveway approaches shall intersect the public road pavement at an angle to be approved by the Public Works Direcror based upon the physical characteristics of the public road~/~'2riveway approach and the parce 1 of land being accessed. -Su^ angle shall be as close as is reasonably practical/ in the judge.-ent of the Public Works Director/ to a right angle to the pavement of the public road. B. No curb cuts shall be made in such a way that the curb return extends beyond any property line as projected/ except when consented tO/ in writing/ by the adjoining property owner involved. Said consent/ if necessary/ shall be submitted to the Public Works Director prior to the issuance of a permit. C. The top of the paving of the driveway approach slab at the curb line shall be 1 5/8 inches above the flowline of the gutter/ and shall not extend into the gutter beyond the face of the curb or beyond the gutter line/ and shall not be constructed in a manner that will in any way interfere with the use of the road for the purpose of travel or maintenance. The constructed public road shall not be excavated in the process of constructing the driveway unless previous approval/ in writing/ has been granted by the Public Works Director. D. Driveway culverts shall be provided and installed by the owner as required by the Public Works Director. E. Driveways shall not be constructed over curb stopS/ catch basins or other structures/ if at all possible. If there is no other feasible location for the driveway/ it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to set the curb stop/ catch basin cover/ or any other structures flush with the final driveway surface. cy. ORONO CC 141-1 (7-25-88) S 6..05 F. The owner and contractor shall protect the public from injury or damage during the construction of the sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any public street or other public property in the City and any permxt issued pursuant to this Ordinance shall contain the agreement of the applicant that the City shall not be liable for damage which may arise from the result of work, and that the applicant will hold the City harmless for any liability incurred by the City as a result of such activity. G. Trees or shrubs shall not be placed adjacent to a driveway so as to constitute a site distance problem. H. If a parcel of land has frontage on both a cul- de-sac portion and a "lead-in" portion of the public road, the driveway shall be constructed off the "lead-in" portion of the public road and not the cul-de-sac. Subd. 9. Resident Driveways, Approaches and Turnaround. A. One driveway approach shall be allowed from up to two single residential parcels of land to the same public road provided that appropriate easements exist between parties sharing the driveway and driveway approach. Parcels having frontage on more than one public road shall be allowed a driveway approach to one public road. B. Residential driveway approach shall not exceed 20 feet in width at the intersected right-of-way line. C. The total width of driveway approaches to up to two single parcels of land from a single public road shall not exceed 20 feet. D. A curb cut shall not exceed the width of the driveway approach at the property line by more than 10 feet. E. No portion of a driveway approach, except the curb return, shall be constructed within 100 feet of a corner. ORONO CC 141-2 (7-25-88) § 6.05 F. For residences hereafter constructed, the driveway approach and that part of the driveway and turnarounds which drain to the public road shall be paved with bituminous concrete blacktop or equivalent paving. 'where it has been determined by the City's Public Works Director that an existing driveway and/or driveway approach is causing a maintenance problem on the public road, including, but not limited to, the washing of dirt and gravel into the public road, the Public Works Director shall order that the property owner pave such portion of the driveway and/or driveway approach as is necessary zo remove the maintenance problem. Portland cement concrete will only be allowed from the driveway uo to the public right “of”way. This requirement shall not be construed to reduce paving otherwise required by performance standards in the Zoning Code or required as a condition to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit, lot division, subdivision or as designated in the approved site plan. G. Driveway turnarounds shall be required on all driveways or driveway approaches entering onto a State highway. County road or collector roadway as determined in the Comprehensive Plan, and on all entrances to public roads within the City where deemed necessary by the Public Works Director, based on traffic counts, sight distances, street grades and other relevant factors. If a driveway turnaround is required by the Public Works Director, such requirement shall be stated on any permit issued by him or her pursuant to this ordinance. S ubd. 10. Turnarounds. Business Driveways, Approaches and A. Only one business driveway shall be allowed per development unless a greater number of driveways are approved by the City, or approved as part of the site plan review. The business driveway approach shall not exceed the width of the access road or 32 feet at the property line, whichever is less a business or industrial district. The curb cut shala. not exceed the width of the driveway approach at the property line by more than 20 feet unless approved as oart of a site plan. In a residential district, the curb cut shall not exceed the width of the driveway approach at the property line by more than 10 feet unless approved as part of the site plan. B. All business driveways and driveway approaches shall be paved with asphaltic concrete or equivalent material. Portland cement concrete will only be allowed outside of the public road right-of-way. C. Loading docks, ramps and vehicular entrances shall be located in such a manner that backing onto and maneuvering within the public road right-of-way is eliminated and in such a manner that driveways greater in width than that specified by this chapter shall not be required. ORONO CC 141-3 (7-25-88) to Dkf 7-1) A Application # Date Received [0-23 Amount Paid CUT OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION ^ . Site Address \ Drvc Type of Application to be Filed ^ u, F- ________^_______________^^ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) L-<-^ IHU O’!-Ul-H2- <^023 ^ APPLICANT , o » +4- (home)_._H?J-j tij-------- Name ^tTv, (sevyVrc'^ Phone (work) Address iM -b 2^ Crvrk Or City <^rC\sc^Zip OWN JR (if different than applicant) ivNam_ Address Phone (home). Phone (work) City Zip. Date Progert^Acquired ___________________________________ I (do) (WcMio^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 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$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 (month/year) PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation $200.00 Easement Vacation $100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ______$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule REQUIRED SUBMITTALS \\V:^m \ 1. 2. 3.X 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 Fin^ce, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271), '• '< ' .J 5 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 pa>ment) 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 owmer 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 jny^eation and verification of this request. Owner's signature ^ Date u .Ok. Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the t^d 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. c COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. •unvrriNO. KNOiNKimNO and land plannino 4«a.A TAMAMACK AVINUK LONO LAKE. MINN. SSSB* 473-4141 November 3, 1998 Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Orono, MN 55364 Dear Brent: Because of the steep slopes from Park Drive down to your house, this is a difficult site to fit in a proposed driveway. The existing gravel driveway on Bluff Street right-of-way is at a 23% grade which is too steep to use for a driveway. Your previous October 7, 1998 plan by Larson Associates has the right idea but the elevation at the entrance to Park Drive is actually 2 feet higher which would cause problems with sideslopes, tree removal, visual appearance and amount of fill needed. The enclosed plan moves the entrance to Park Drive to the west and cuts along your property at an angle in order to stay off the steep sideslope. This eliminates grading and tree removal in this steep area, gives you a flat landing area at the entrance to Park Drive and gives you more length to get down the hill at a reasonable (10%) grade and give a flat area (2%) by the proposed garage. These proposed grades work well with this property and adjoining properties and require about 500 cubic yards of fill which is much less than would be needed under the October 7ih plan using actual grades. Sincerely, COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Mark S. Gronberg, P.E. & L.S. MSG/cr / ; ! // FO-R*-• I •*>-,0ULE\‘; k RO CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BRENT BENTROTT OF LOT 9, BLOCK 15, SAGA HILL REVISED HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA J* Soil :b-^ / <i-V*4? af-6o' 20" ^ . --■f! DECK .^,)\ '* Si® '•* i LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 9. Block 15. **Sago Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota**, also thot port of vacated Forest Doulevord os dedicated in the plot of "Sago Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesoto" which lies between the Northwesterly cx* i^nsions ocross it of the Northcost — erly line of Lot 9. Block 15, "Sogr Hill Revised. Hennepin County, Minnesota and the stroighl portion of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 9. .936; I This survey intends to show the boundaries of the obove described property, the location of on existing house, ^orag^. and other visible *'hardccver ” therebn, and the proposed location, of a proposed garage* It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. I o JifA I o y \ I W °oooW Patio V-wX- uy\) \ / STOrCS V o : Iron marker : Existing spot ejevotion Bearings shown are based upon dn assumed datum — — y • Zr000t0 0t C*0/044r (9J6.7) » I V •VI *M T “ - \ (94^0) u--., ‘ -TT ' * • 'T^r..........y-" « \ 'X, ■ \ ^ ot \ 'v \ J94«.0) ............... / (949.J) (9MW \ 1(951>)1 \ \ ^ V ' \ > \ 'S > ................PSA-V^'r^^' '5 50 (9‘54.4) \ J \. ' ^' \\ \ \' .........." V-958Y ------- .^960. '(96\9) ^ .f I '■ V 'X T\ V-K \ ,'\ (9J9.I) •‘i'"""’ j V// (066.4) .65.0i T' W.*Xi4 U \ HI VfJUH DAfC //-7- y.f OilAwti 1 1 . COFFIN k GRONBERG, INC. —Mj^cooLUi: odcDts^ uk> lunrroRS. ate flwmis 4H7 TAUARACX AVTMjr LOJC LAKE. Ul SS366 I ICPfOY CCRirY flUT IMS PtAII. SPtCflCATlOK OIT RtIHDHI WAS »»M€PARC0 DY UC W UJUtR UY 04itC\. SUWnSON AiO TIUI I AM A IXJLY UC'fNUO PMOfrSSOllAL iNCtAlH MO LMO oM%tTCM iicm nc uri w nt suic o i**cy|tA | HAilDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET //-y- SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE)75-250'250-500'500-1000’ EXISTING Hardcover in zone A. House Lenjth Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X \ D. Sidewalk X X E. Pauo/&eek- ^/tT/c_____9 X X /y /2€ F. Landscape //at(ff Underlain ________ By Plastic ________ X X X 2^ G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 370 -r B J7/Z 37 0 X 100 = 37 fZ PROPOSED HARDCOVFR IN ZONT A. House X Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape • ■■ Underlain Bv Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE ■ TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 9 ^ B 37/Z 37/Z X 100 = 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. 9. 9 7 7o 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. 0.2 9 % E A B A B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'^5-25^ EXISTING HARDCOVER I\ 7.0NT, A. House X Lengi!i Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway \ X D. Sidewalk jJiofKS //i /y X X 2.2 E. Patio/Deck J€ PfCK X X F. LaTidscape /7 Underlain S'? Hti'fie By Plastic ______________ A/c Pa O 2. S G. Other . /Pj n__________2 X X X O. <Z 3 tL TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 23^5 - B PROPOSED HARDCOVER Ps /0\F A. House Length Width X X X B. Garage ZQ 22 C.- Driveway X X D.’ Sidewalk Jrfp X X E. —Pe^'Deck rrtTAf ( (TCf-ijt;) F. Landscape /oach CT cu ) Underlain y>«rr. /■//// > By Plastic ______________ X X X X X A/c /a O G. Other /4d X X 100 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 3909 __ - B 9JCO X 100 250-500*500-1000* s //«P/S.F. S5 S.F. =S.F. =S.F. S5 S.F. S.F. =S.F. ss 29^S.F. =2S S.F. 278 S.F. 98/S.F. 7 S.F. =/T9 S.F. r:S.F. 8 =9 S.F. 2303 S.F.- -S.F. =23, /2 . //€6 S.F. S.F. =S.F. =S.F. ^72 S.F. /09€S.F. =S.F. /^o S.F. =9 0 S.F. __63 S.F. =/82 S.F. S^o =•? o S.F. =^7 S.F. =S.F.a =r a S.F.' 39o9 S.F. -77CO S.F. =39.T8 Vo A B A B fA-r/(o r7 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X 75-250* OSO-SOOQ 500-1000' Length Width B.. Garaj C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X X X X X X X X X X G. Other 05 O. 5 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE iPo ^ B X ICO = PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape ^ UJ/iLL Underlain ___________ By Plastic ___________ G. Oiher X X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 9i3 ^ B !?V7/X lOD 13 SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. /l7 S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 7PO S.F. ?V7^ S.F. 12. V? % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. IIP S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _____S.F. S.F. S.F. 3 S.F. 3HI <P S.F. 2?. 35 % A B A B ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 20.1998 (#14) #2395 BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES AND VACATION, 9:24 p.m. - 9:47 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Brent Bentrott were present. Van Zomeren stated this lot is located in the LR-1B zoning district, which has a minimum of one acre. Van Zomeren stated the applicants are requesting that a 10 foot portion of platted, but unopened. Bluff Street be vacated to allow an existing deck that is alc'.g the west property line to be remodeled into a three-season porch. The vacation is also requested in order to build a new garage that would be accessed from Bluff Street. Variances are needed for hardcover in the 0'-500' setbacks. Variances are also required for the side yard adjacent to street setback from Bluff Street to add the three-seas :n porch, and a variance to the side yard setback for the proposed garage because it is consid--' an oversized accessory structure. Van Zomeren stated this application is dependent on the vacation, which traditionally have not been granted, and recommended the Planning Commission consider that portion of the application first. Bentrott stated they are proposing to build a new garage which would be located closer to the residence which should help reduce hardcover. Bentrott stated he didn't know a fire lane was considered a road. Mrs. Bentrott stated they v/ould like a portion of the existing deck turned into a three-season porch. Chair Smith inquired what the practical use of the fire lane was. Van Zomeren stated any access off of the lake v/ould need to also be reviewed by the utility companies and the DNR, who would probably deny the request. McMillan staled the Planning Commission might be selling a precedent if the variance is granted, noting she was not in favor of the vacation. Lindquist remarked he does not think realistically this application would be approved as ,-roposed. Bentrott stated they suggested using the fire lane as one oolion. There were no public comments. Chair Smith inquired vrhat would happen if the vacaMon is denied. Van Zomeren staled if the vacation were not granted, the Planning Commission would be looking at a side yard adjacent to street setback to build right on the property line, no additional hardcover, and the conversion of the deck into a three season porch would be considered a structural change, and at least ten feet would be required between the accessory buildings. Bentrott stated he v;ould be in favor of constructing the garage under 750 square feel and ten feel from the neighbor ’s building. McMillan stated she would be in favor of the three season porch and a redesigned garage with proper setbacks from side yard with no additional hardcover in the 75’-250' and 250‘-500’ zones. Lindquist stated the garage cannot be constructed right on the property line. Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 20.1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) Benlrolt commented the existing deck is currently located right on the property line, which will be removed. Lindquist stated the Applicant probably will be denied the vacation and will have to comply with present hardcover restrictions. Chair Smith suggested the matter be tabled to allow the Applicant to submit revised plans. Bentrott stated he would be fine with tabling the application. Lindquist commented he would be in favor of a 60 day extension from August 22. Van Zomeren stated the City is required to act within 60 days of when the application is submitted, Bentrott stated he would be in favor of extending the time limit. Smith moved, McMillan seconded, to table Application 2395 for property located at 1453 Park Drive. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#15) #2396 CLINT AND JODI MORRISON, 3510 BAYSIDE ROAD - VARIANCES, 9:48 p.m. - 9:57 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Morrison were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting to replace their existing residence with a new house and attached garage. This property is located in the LR-1A zoning district, which requires a minimum of two acres. This lot consists of 1.36 acres. A variance from lot size requirements would be needed as well as a variance from average lakeshore setback requirements. A conditional use permit is also necessary to allow a boat house to remain on the property during the demolition and reconstruction. The boat house would need to remain as an accessory structure and not be occupied v/hile the residence is under reconstruction. No variance to hardcover is required. Staff recommends approval of the application based on the lot being a corner lot and the construction is completed in a timely manner. The Applicants had no comment. There were no public comments. McMillan inquired whether a conditional use permit is needed to allow the accessory structure to remain. Van Zomeren stated a variance is needed to allow the accessory to remain during the reconstruction. Mom'son remarked the boat house is really the original garage of the house. Lindquist commented boat house should be changed to read accessory structure. Page 14 r ORON ’O PLANNIiNG COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17, F 3 r [Him MIKE HILBELINK, Continued) Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission has to act on what is presented to them, but the Applicant could request that the application be tabled to allow time to submit revised plans. Van Zomeren stated if the barn is to be used to house animals, the Planning Commission needs to know the exact lot lines that are being proposed. Schroeder stated to house horses a minimum of three acres is needed. Van Zomeren stated since the barn has not housed animals for an extended period of time, the intent to house animals probably has been abandoned and a new conditional use permit would be required. Van Zomeren stated if a new house is constructed on the backlot. it must meet the required setbacks for that lot. noting the restriction for the barn falls on the lot that contains the barn. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2408 for property located at 900 Willow Drive North to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. VOTE- Aves 6 Nays 0. • / . OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS. CONTINUED (#3) #2395 BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES. 7:20 p.m. - 7:45 p.m. Van Zomeren stated this application was considered at the July 20 Planning Commission meeting Where the Applicants requested hardcover variances, a ten foot vacation of platted, unopened Bluff Street, and side yard adjacent to street setback variances. The Planning Commission had recommended denial of the vacation of Bluff Street and tabled the application to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. Van Zomeren reported the Applicant has submitted a new plan that shows access from the street and locates the garage closer to the house, approximately 130 feet from the street. The Applicant is proposing to construct a two-story 22' by 25' garage. Van Zomeren stated she has spoken with Tom Kellogg, an engineer with Bonestroo. who has reviewed this plan. Kellogg has expressed concerns over the slope of the driveway.' which would require a considerable amount of fill to obtain a grade of 8 percent. Van Zomeren stated the Planning Commission needs to consider whether this garage can be relocated to its proposed site, what grade the driveway should be at. how much fill will be allowed. ho\y close the garage should be to the adjoining properly line and existing house, and whether a variance to hardcover should be granted. Chair Smith stated this application involves issues that need to be addressed by an engineer, which the Planning Commission is not in a position to handle. Bentrolt stated at the last meeting the Planning Commission had staled they would not be in favor of using the unopened street for access to the garage, which necessitated the need to relocate the garage. Bentrott remarked a structural engineer has viewed the property. Bentrolt stated the adjacent property should not be impacted by the additional fill since the elevation is much higher. Van Zomeren slated the engineer has also raised concerns about the distance available in the lot Page 5 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2395 BRENT BENTROTT, Continued) width to maintain an adequate bench of three to one for safely and mowing. Stoddard commented the sleep embankment might require retaining walls, which would also increase hardcover. Lindquist staled this property will exceed the allowable hardcover in all three zones if the application is approved and will require variances in both the 75 ’-250 ’ and 250'-500 ’ setbacks. Lindquist stated he would probably vole against this application with the proposed hardcover. Van Zomeren staled that the new hardcover numbers were not provided with the revised plan. Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission probably cannot act on this application without the new hardcover numbers. Stoddard staled the surveyor or Applicant should be notified by City Staff that hardcover needs to be calculated before the meeting. Mrs. Benlrolt stated they would like to relocate the garage closer to the residence to allow elderly relation the ability to visit them year-round, noting they weren't aware they couldn't relocate the garage. Mr. Benlrolt stated Bruce Vang, building inspector, has been out to view the property and followed his suggestions to utilize the platted, unopened street and to construct a new garage because in his view the existing garage was a hazard since they had to back out onto the street. Stoddard stated it has not been the philosphy of the Planning Commission to vacate or allow use of platted, unopened street for private driveways. Stoddard stated the Applicant will need to review the possible need for retaining walls, amount of fill, and new hardcover numbers, noting the Planning Commission cannot act on this application until those issues are addressed. Berg expressed concerns over the driveway being close to the neighboring house and the impact the noise and headlights would have on the adjoining property. Schroeder suggested tabling the application to allow the Bentrolts time to address these issues. Chair Smith stated she would prefer a plan without retaining walls if possible, and suggested the Applicant continue to v/ork with City Staff on the hardcover and engineering issues. Mr. Bentrott stated they applied for the vacation to eliminate setback for the three-season porch. Hawn staled the vacation probably would not be approved. Mr. Bentrott stated in his opinion he has three options; 1) keep existing garage; 2) reconsider the application v/ithout the ten foot vacation of Bluff Street; and 3) proceed with the revised plan, which is the most costly. Hawn remarked in her view those options are not viable due to the increased hardcover. Schroeder suggested tabling the matter, noting he is not prepared to give guidance on this application due to the engineering issues that need to be addressed. Stoddard suggested the Applicant continue to work with City Staff in an effort to resolve some of Page 6 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2395 BRENT BENTROTT, Continued) these issues. There were no public comments. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2395 for property located at 1453 Park Drive. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#5) #2391 EVAN ANDERSON, 1260 SPRUCE PLACE - VARIANCE, 7:46 p.m. - 8:05 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Anderson were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are applying for an after-the-fact variance for hardcover to allow a patio to remain in the 0-75’ distance from the lake, and a variance from allowed hardcover in the 75’- 250' lakeshore setback for a patio and the reconstruction of an old garage, which would require a variance from the side yard adjacent to street setback. The Applicants are proposing to construct a 24 ’ x 20‘ garage to replace an existing 22.5’ x 20’ garage, which is 40.6 square feet larger. Weinberger stated a conditonal use permit is needed for retaining walls that have already been replaced on the property. An after-the-fact variance is needed to allow retaining walls and patio to remain in the 0-75’ zone which are not depicted on a 1996 survey. Mr. Anderson stated the retaining walls have existed since 1978 and have been replaced. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to maintain the total hardcover within the 0-75’ lakeshore setback at 18.5 percent. The allowed hardcover in this zone is none, which would require a variance. A hardcover variance is also required for the 75’-250’ distance from the lake. The Applicants are proposing to increase hardcover from 55.3 percent to 56 percent. The allowable hardcover for that zone is 25 percent. Anderson stated City Staff have been out to review his property in the past, noting they were not aware the retaining walls were not depicted on the survey. Mrs. Anderson stated they have obtained many permits over the years for the work that has been completed on their property. Mrs. Anderson noted their property is the principal watershed for that entire area and the retaining walls are necessary for the drainage. Chair Smith expressed concern that the retaining walls were not depicted on the survey. Stoddard stated he agrees with S'nfrs recommendations. There were no public comments. Stoddard remarked he v/ould b .; in favor of granting the after-the-fact variances, but would like to limit the size of the garage to what is currently existing. Stoddard commented he has viewed the Page 7 k ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19.1998 f; («4) #2395 BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 8:04 p.m. - 8:54 p.m. Mr. and Mrs. Brent Bentrotl were present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicants have appeared at the July 20th and August 17th Planning Com.Tission meeting requesting hardcover variances, a 10 foot vacation of Bluff Street and side yard adjacent to street setback variances. Van Zomeren commented the Applicants have submitted a new plan which requires a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new deck and porch to be located one fool from the property line, as well as a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a nev/ garage to be located eight feet property line where 35 feel is required. A variance to hardcover is also required in the 75*250 setback to allow 35.32 percent hardcover. Chair Smith inquired v/hen the Applicants were planning on commencing construction. Bentrott stated they had wanted a fall start date but have pushed it back to the spring. Chair Smith suggested putting this item on the November agenda to allow the Applicants time to submit a detailed drainage plan and less fill required. Bentrott inquired whether the Planning Commission could approve the application subject to the submittal of a drainage and grading plan. Schroeder stated an acceptable drainage plan needs to be submitted before approval can be given. Van Zomeren stated the steepness of the driveway also should be addressed. Stoddard suggested approving the side yard and hardcover variances subject to the submittal and approval by City Staff of a grading and drainage plan. Lindquist inquired whether the Planning Commission was in favor granting the variances. It was the concensus of the Planning Commission to approve the variances subject to an acceptable grading and drainage plan. Schroeder moved to approve Application #2395,1453 Park Drive, granting of variances to side yard adjacent to street to allow a new deck and porch to be located one foot from the property line, a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new garage to be located eight feet from the property line, a variance to the hardcover requirements in the 75-250' setback as outlined in the Planner's Report dated October 14,1998, subject to the submittal and approval of a drainage and grading plan before commencement of construction. Van Zomeren noted an extension will be required because the 60 days expires November 8lh. Schroeder suggested tabling the item since notification has not been given for the conditional use permit. Schroeder v«ithdrew his motion pending submittal of a grading and drainage plan. Van Zomeren stated the variances are part of the old application Schroeder suggested submitting a new application for the variances as well as inclusion of the request for a conditional use permit. Chair Smith stated it was the concensus of the Planning Commission that the variances will be approved subject to the submittal of an acceptable drainage and grading plan. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2395,1453 Park Drive, to allow the Applicants time to submit a drainage and grading plan. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Gt [-JI su\ ''\o JIjvuJ^cy i''Vve,Kjj> I\ CVctvc-^ er-r\ pAXJ|isvCu^ O-vAAtxCCt” '5k'Cbl<JLev-) • -4- 0 0 ^ /V\/ST Cxnr'-c)LA-a..<A>^ J W\. C\,^/^TCJtV^JixO O^L-i d divIlidflAA . ^A/Vv<JKWyl I D/n hd C\xJ\AX,ll^i^U> fD^Jkk'^. CTL.r i I vv Adjacent Propert}' Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) [print name(s)'[print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at HSo Pcw^\C [Sc- 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 Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Council approval. 2-ihd Property Owner Date V. .1 -W ♦-> - w ProperV Owner \ Date •4 »•* 'i I (we)Q [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located S jj at___________________also referred to as Land Use Application No._________. l (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbors project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If vou have any information that may assist the Cit\’ in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the .Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. • • ’ 69^ 5<S- F^- 1 1 ■" I ■ ir - " 1.1 —Hin . 1 11 II—11—Ij Pi|i«T>jr El©>, i‘Jio (^04fsr vtev>»> 1 1 1 (_-5(WervvsN) ii: llA iiKP^ X (^^v^Vla^^) \ \ \ \ \ \ \ VACATED boulevard - \ \ \ » j. ; *1 » \ V-\/ \\ BO'-J''-'- \ \tO be added to DESORPTION y ' V. Ol'OO' ^N IrtfsO BRENT BENTROTT 0 LOT 9, BLOCK 15, SAGA HILL REVISED ENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 9. Block 15. Sago Hill Revised This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above describ property, t^he location of on existing house, garoge, and "hardcover" thereon, and the proposed location of a 9; It does not purport to show any other Improvements or encroac. o : Iron marker (965.3) : Existing spot elevation Bearings shown are based upon an assun \ SETBAC^p \ AREA OF HARDCOVER TOTAL AREA 56 OF HARDCOVER ALLOWABLE 56 OF HARDCOVER 0-15 \4 50. FT 3704 50. FT .00156 056 15-250 \t^\^eO. FT q«!4l SO. FT 2556 250* 'so. FT 3514 SO. FT KtM'%3056 .. >,’/ .''• "'ir- - > .■';*••• Larson Associates, Inc. Architects And Engineers 23B1 Eaken Avenue, N.E. Buffalo, Minnesota &S313 Tel. (612) 682-9530 t (612)Fox 682-95S1 I terakf MTtify tkat IMa •Um, «r rapari wma pv« UA4«r wu ilTMA aa fTH I MB • dUlf Mi— Uva af/Sainale al « ma I Ual »*W« 10/7/Sa no. »•. 16847 Project Title BENTROTT RESIDENCE ORONO, MINNESOTA Sheet Title SITE PLAN Projeoi Number: Dete:_________ 98150 10/7/98 Drewn Bjr:TLM Checked By:JKL Copyright Lereon Aeeoo, Ino. 1998 Al I(Sf- ^ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BRENT BENTROTT OF LOT 9. BLOCK 15, SAGA HILL REVISED HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES Lot 9. Block 15. "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", also that part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plot of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies oetween the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Northeast­ erly line of Lot 9. Block 15, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County. Minnesota" and the straight portion of the Southwesterly line of sc'd Lot 9 This survey iruends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house, garage, ond other visible "hardcover" thereon, ond the proposed location of a proposed garage. It does not purport to show ony other improvements or encroachments. o : Iron marker : Existing spot elevation Bearings shown ore based upon an assumed datum —■ — t y C0 - f (966.4)if- LCSiG/CD OR amn C>CCK£0 RE v-CJON DATE DCSCft)PT»CN A - 7 - i COFFIN k GRONBERG, INC. C0N5U.Tf« EKKDS, LVO SURYTTORS, STTI RjVICRS 4d2 TAMARACK AVENUE, LONG LAKE. LH S5556 612-473-4141 I HtK£8r CERTFY That TfiS PLAN, SPEOFICATICH OR PiPORT •MAS PREPARED BY l€ OR LfOER UY CMRECT SlPERvtSXDN THAT I AM A OOLY ;.>CENSED PROfESSCRAL ENOCER AND LAAO SJNTYOR IMO T>€ L*«r5 Of T>C $Ta T£ of Wi#CSOTA DATE y-'-J-ftf Ui i.CENSE NIACCR y/■'■TT SC/\L£ DATE 7/3/98 X)0 NO. 98283 / / / fOPF-'> -r CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BRENT BENTROTT OF LOT 9. BLOCK 15. SAGA HILL REVISED HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 9, Block 15. "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County. Minnesota", also that port of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised. Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Northeast ­ erly line of Lot 9. Block 15. "Sc^a Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" and the straight portion of the Southwesterly line of soid Lot 9. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house, garage, and other visible "hardcover" thereon, and the proposed location of a proposed garage. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. o Iron marker : Existing spot devotion Bearings shown are based upon on assumed datum VAiZJA.NCe s I. 3\de \|OLfd a<lj[ace,rvf 4o S4fce+ dttk/xirch £N€tlN^EEElM(^ Issues* 1. (jLs« of e>ii^ St-. -fcr pad ' Ho -ejrHer fuWe uM. op 3. -K aaja<avt ®hruclvir«j . of lo* not 5hPV*r\ H. (bmnrtcY^j ^<-viowr Metvjo ioc|uAi<i SxHt^r a mxdcx>»i in ihe. • Sd 5e<bad:_ CoK)Dmg»JAL Use GrrAdir»5 S* oP lin«- 'll'hfl / lUnct al-kmhbn SOO cubic COJNCI l /vpP|Lov^^^ -k> Use. *BLUf=p sr. •Ibr drivcvoduyj Occe^ P (966 4) L€i;iG/4;0 DRAWN OCCXEO 98283 REVCilON DATE DC SCRIP TCN 0 \ ! ^ COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. OONSlLTie Dckoc, LAM) SURVEYORS. STTE flAMCRS 482 TAMARACK AVEHC. LONG LAKE. Ili S8350 612-473-4141 I f€R£BY CERirr that IMS PtAN, SPECFICATION. OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY UE OR OKiCR MY WECT. SUPERVISION AM) THAT I AM A DULY UCENSfO PROTESSiONAL ENCtCIR AND LAM) SURVEYOR UCCP 1M UVS Of T>£ STa TC Of ^MCS(|TA | DATE iJH LCENSc MACCR SCM.E r=^‘ DATE 7/3/98 JOB NO. 98203 3 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator November 10,1998 #2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive Variances—Continued Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:16,72? sq. ft. (.38 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting multiple variances to add to an existing residence. This application was postponed from the August, September and October agenda in order to obtain an accurate survey and develop a plan that meets the Zoning Code regulations to the extent possible given the topography, proximity to the channel, and existing conditions on the zoning lot. The applicant is requesting variances for lakeshore setback, side yard setback, street yard setback, and hardcover in the 0'-75 and 75'-250' setback and structural lot coverage. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.24, Subd. 5 (B) LR-IB Standards Section 10.22 Subd. 1 and 2 and 10.56, Subd. 16 Hardcover Requirements Section 10.03 Subd. 14, C Structural Lot Coverage U2399 Muriel Senn 444S North Shore Drive PC-^n/l6/98 page-1 ANALYSIS Lot Area and LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard 1 acre 140’35’10’75’ Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside 16,722 sq. ft. (.38 acres) 272’ at street setback 8’ existing 10’ proposed 8.6’ existing and proposed 32’ existing and proposed The zoning lot does not meet lot area requirements. The lot does not meet street, side or lakeshore setbacks. The proposed addition does not increase the lakeshore setback encroachment. The addition does add more structure into the required side yard along the existing north facade. The proposed plan improves the street yard setback distance by removing the portion of the existing house/garage that is 8' from the right-of-way at one point at the southwest comer to 10' along the street yard property line. Stmctural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Allowed Existing Structural Coverage Proposed Structural Coverage 16,722 sq. ft. .38 acres 2,508.3 sq. ft. (15%) House= 1,884 sq. ft. Shed=60 sq. ft. Total=1,944 sq. ft. (11.62%) House= 1,345 +712 Shed=60 sq. ft. Total=2,656 sq. ft. (15.88%) The current residence and shed comply with stmctural lot coverage requirements. The proposed addition exceeds the lot coverage requirements by 147.7 sq.ft, or .88%. U2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive PC-II/16/9S page-2 Hardcover Distance from Shoreline 0'-75' 75'-250’ Total Area in Setback 14.080 sq. ft. 2,642 sq. ft. Existing Hardcover 3,493 sq ft. (24.81%) l,129sq.ft. (42.73%) Allowed Hardcover None 660.5 sq. ft. (25%) Proposed Hardcover 3,371 sq.ft. (24.65%) 1,387 sq. ft (52.5%) Variance Requested 3,371 sq. ft, (24.65%) 726.5 sq. ft, (27.2%) The applicant is requesting hardcover variances in both setbacks. The applicant received approval for the driveway configuration from staff in 1984, (see Mike Gaffron’s letter dated 7/12/98, E.xhibit (G). Hardcover variances are required for the addition. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant has indicated that she desires to have additional living space to include a utility room. The existing lot does not have a suitable building pad because much of the lot area is located in an unbuildable area due to the topography, proximity to the channel and the bridge location. The existing structure encroaches into required street, lakeshore, and side yards, however, this plan is an improvement over the previous plan submitted. The applicant is proposing to remove 285 sq. ft. of paver drive area, 75 sq. ft. of patio blocks, and 32 sq. ft. of the patio. ISSUES 1. 2. 3. 4. The zoning lot does not meet minimum lot area requirements. The existing residence encroaches into the following setbacks: a. North side yard is 8.6' existing and proposed where 10 ’ is required b. Street yard is 8' existing where 10' is proposed and where 35' is required c. Lakeshore yard is 32' existing and proposed where 75' is required Structural coverage is currently 11.62% where 15% is allowed and 15.88% is proposed. The zoning lot exceeds hardcover limits in both the 0'-75' and 75'-250' setbacks. The applicant has proposed reducing hardcover in the 0 ’-75’ setback by removing stone walks. Muriel Setm 4448 North Shore Drive PC-I I/I 6/98 page-3 r a portion of the patio, and blocks. In the 75-250' setback, the applicant has proposed a 650 sq. ft, addition and removal of other hardcover for an increase in this setback of 258 sq. ft. 5. The proposed addition encroaches into the required north side yard and required street yard. The proposal improves the street yard setback by moving it back two feet. 6. There is a well near the southeast comer of the residence that limits the location of an addition. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recognizes that this is a very difficult site to work with given the location of the existing residence, the slope/grade from the road to the driveway and parking area, and the bridge. The proposed plan is an improvement over other plans that were submitted to date because a 10' setback would be maintained along the County Highway and some hardcover would be removed. The only other alternative would be to increase the bulk of the structure and make it more massive to increase living space. This option, however, would not provide more garage space or solve internal floor plan issues regarding mechanical systems. Staff recommends approval of the following variances: 1. 2. 3. 4. Lakeshore setback to remain at 32' where 75' is required Side yard setback to remain at 8.6' where 10' is required Street yard setback to be 10' where 8' is existing where 30' is required Hardcover in the 0'-75' and 75'-250' setback Attachments A B C D E F G H Application Plat map Topography Survey Hardcover August minutes Letter re: driveway County road plat U2399 Muriel Seim 4448 North Shore Drive PC-October 19. 1998 puge-~4 ft Application U Date Received Amount Paid - X\^ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 ($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 ____*1 ^ UK C I’ropeity Identification Number (P.1.D.1 A T jl~? ^3 .^1 TOS Attach legal description to application if not included on required sur\'ey. Date Property Acquired^/ _____________________________^(month'year) I (do^(do not) also ov^ the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential ___other (specify)______________________ Zoning District: ( | ______——____________________________— APPLICANT Name Mv>gig. /f tv f\J Address: Nc. City: Phone (home). Phone (work)_ -Vf ^_____Zip: c */ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name __________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:.05 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: j f-y ______ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:y Front Side ^Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage *J i>Average Lakeshore \ jr. ■ r 11.-y Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship o; practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: C~pQA<i>c. "tc ______ I iL______t2-__________________________________________________________________________— (attach additional sheets if necessary) LEGEND «•••• •21.1 »AtfO too cAAtri *00 ia*u PftfCO f*aii«o CUiL«0«AU tAlltOO SIOCWUI 1 ""1 Mi^4 OOCt •--------«CiAtCtt \___f •Alt • MlBv€ 'w--/ es_..^L &«c/F0«0 ttICMI OMAIBACI il«C •fire l«tc COICI CTD CEID fUl OwTUM ffaCl Call CZJ fuliOtaC r:::.i iullOlifi • M«OCi •CZD tttxtutft CD .COaCatU UU LlJ tvl»V«ia« root CZI ticti*noa«4 ruiiiit f ^tiCat O 1 Aal •rotc t tttcct iient -WlUlIt toi «•*liao«9 ti4««i 4 iAuao«o ttfitCM o CiOuaO COaltOL * fl*t> ▲caouaO COaiaOi hO*II*/«I*** -----------------•> iBOtf COatOwa * ^ |al|ti«8l**l COafOiX CZD oc^»mioa COaTOwa • oascuaio coato^ »tsit 4fQl |Ll**nOB So^‘l 00 04 00 04 HUHo:<-i O o O Is <flm 5 o % ^ 5.i • c S° S < « u (/)| «« « s • w. i so|l 4r X ' 7 . • . . k.' / HARDCOVER CALCULATION WOKKijHLL I 75-250-250-5yQ' rfi/. /o-jo'jg 500-1000’ fxt <;ting hardcover in zone A. House ______________ Lenjih Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway Cxyr^C^ "V a \j&rL X X BtJCk roA D. Sidewalks «-<=•<=>■s.g;X X ~7S yoCavct-pcjC Xt r/^ r / £/ ^ W DBC<. E. Paiio/Dcck tdb f^roop S€. Srdv'c X \ AJW ^ATIo F. Landscape 2.* z, tloc ^k^S x Underlain______adS bbg.L& x By Plastic _____/1, x <5 "ZooHO C. Other II TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ B J4oAc? X /34-S S.F. S.F. =S.F. S.S.F. S.F. C3 //S!S.F. s S.F. s >90 2£>2 S.F. =S.F. <»4» 4 t? 2.Z-Z S.F. a S.F. «*S.F. =. M S.F. s / o S.F. Zo S.F. 24J3 S.F. •/ 4. Of?o S.F. A B X 100 =% PROPOSFn HARDCOVFR TN ZONE (c/iA^Cfr) AA.fA /V CO. /A /? W 6ft0t^ 72 9. Y fd, A. House X ^ « S.F. Length Width X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage" C. Driveway €Z S.F. X X €S S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X ACf^o^C JTCffAf U/41H) , TTr>~>r y>)1^1. S.F. S.F. E. Pa:io/Dcck X /f/h^t/P fi4T*a X -7 S.F. S.F. F.Landscape Uuderlain By Plastic X A(A«Oiy( /C/U*-4 J'rjx.-r a X Xfj^ai/C tyP/t — S.F. S.F. S.F. - 2o -/4 G. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -f B X 100 = CA'AMg-f s - 22. ?<7/ S.F. /■O. o S.F. % A B 2-/. y 1.• • i ^ ^ ^ t J t 4 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKliilttT SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ fxi <;ting hardcover in zonk A. House ____ X 75-250'250-500' / 'Id ’ /r 500-1000' ^«v 10-^0-')^ 63 J Lcnjih Widih + ..i*. • • I , . • .*• * B. Garage X X X C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck . . 4 •• • !•' .• . 1* • Pat IQ ir>r .< F. Landscape Underlain By Plaslic G. Oihcr X X X X X X X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 370 33 Z£. 9 • mm9 *• - • • ' TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE //-2? ^ B //Z? X 100 =42.73 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % PfiOPOSED HARDCOVER IN 7QNT. A. House X *' juar /aj Ca.Afi. /? ________ = ___ S.F. Length Width B. Garage' X X X / / S.4 C. Driveway D. Sidewalk ii.oCkS E. Pacio/Dcck AjiT,a ' •■«vv ,.J. Landscape Underlain J7 , -By Plaslic G. Other X X X X X X X X X s fCSo - zfiS TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -i- B X 100 = S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _____________S.F. _____________S.F. _____________S.F. _____________S.F. _____________S.F. _____________ S.F. C//AiyC' S’ 4 2 S'e t3S7 S.F. ” S.F. ” % - IS -32 2<r-^z A B A B S2.SO ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17, 1998 I (#7) 2399 MURIEL SENN, 4448 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES. 8:18 p.m. - 8:1 The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mrs. Senn was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is requesting hardcover and street yard setback variances to construct an addition to an existing residence to include a 16‘ x 22 ’ garage and utility room. The Applicant has been asked to provide a current survey with updated, accurate hardcover information. Van Zomeren requested the Planning Commission provide direction on what amount of hardcover will be allowed, how close the encroachment to the front setback can be, and whether an addition to the house will be allowed. Senn stated she purchased the property 25 years ago, noting the stipulations regarding hardcover and setbacks were not present on the property when it was originally purchased. Senn commented the lot has a unique configuration as well as problems with continuing erosion. Senn requested she be allowed to construct a new garage on the property. Schroeder suggested the Applicant submit an application based on the ordinances, noting the property is a difficult piece of land to work with. Senn remarked she has contacted a surveyor but has had poor response. Lindquist inquired how much acreage this lot consists of. Senn stated the lot is one acre. Van Zomeren stated a rough estimate for the hardcover is 2.20C square feet. Van Zomeren requested the Planning Commission give guidance on what a reasonable setback from the county right-of-way would be. Berg commented the Applicant will need to submit a proposal before the Planning Commission can act on her application. Lindquist stated the Applicant will need to obtain an updated survey and plan for what Is acceptable to the City of Orono. _____________ Schroeder suggested the Applicant start with 1,500 square feet and attempt to minimize the setbacks There were no public comments. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2399, Muriel Senn, 4448 North Shore Drive, to allow the Applicant time to submit a proposal. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#8) #2401, THOMAS AND MARGARET RADKE, 3424 EAST LAKE STREET - VARIANCES, 8:25 p.m. -8:26 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was not present. Lindquist stated the Applicant was unable to stay until this matter was heard tonight and requested that the application be tabled. Page 10 WM'2or CITYof ORONO %JI Post Office Box 66 •Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 • Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka July 12, 1984 Mrs. Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 Re: Paving Driveway Dear Mrs. Senn: I have reviewed your proposal to pave your existing gravel driveway and turn-around apron. Aiter discussion with the City Engineer, we agree that in your specific situation, paving with asphalt or concrete over the existing gravel surface may actually have a beneficial effect on the quality of runoff entering the lake, since the silt from the gravel will be eliminated from the direct runoff. Even though bituminous or concrete paving is less permeable than gravel, it appears that with your unique topographic problems, paving appears to be a good idea. I also discussed with the City Engineer the idea of creating a "basin" around the perimeter of the turnaround area to catch the runoff and slow it down. He felt this would need to be quite extensive to have any major effect, and he suggested instead that you ensure that the paving be sloped to allow runoff to flow equally to all edges of the paving, and eliminate a swale which would channel the runoff to a single point and possibly cause some erosion. Based on the above, we have no objections to your proposal, with the condition that the paving cover only areas already gravelled, i.e. the 12' wide garage driveway apron leading to the turnaround, and the turnaround itself which is approximately 30' wide and 40' deep, and bounded by the existing hedge, and that the paving be sloped in all directions as described above. No permit is required for this work. Thank you for your concern with this project and your patience in awaiting this response. Sincerely, Michael P. Ga^ Assistant Zon'^ing Administrator BULUIM; a zoning - 473-7357 • administration a FINANCb - 473-7358 ASSESSING . ,pc: Thomas J. Jacobs, Building Official PL BUC VSORKS - 473-7359 City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 Phone: (612) 473-7357 Fax: (612) 473-0510 1 MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: November 12, 1998 Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator #2410 Peter Boynton 1973 Eagerness Point Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit-Public Hearing This item was scheduled for the November 16th meeting based on revised plans being submitted by the builder. Staff informed the builder that a revised survey with hardcover and structural coverage calculations was also required. This information was to be provided no later than November 9th. It was not received. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To table the application until the applicant provides the required information. Staff has sent a letter requesting that the applicant waive the 60/120 day review period. Nov 05 98 11;15a Joe Dzurik 612-479-1645 P • 1 Dzurik Construction Company 5280 Lake Sarah Heights Drive Loretta, MN 55357 612-479-1645 Fax: 612-479-1645 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET Date:November 5, 1998 To:CITY OF ORONO Attn:LIZ VAN ZOMEREN Fax:473-0510 Re:APPLICATION #2410 Sender:JOE DZURIK YOU SHOULD RECEIVE 1 PAGES, INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL 612-479-1645. Comments: L12, 1 DROPPED OFF THE LABELS NECESSARY FOR THE C U P. YESTERDAY (WEDNESDAY). 1 WILL HAVE THE REVISED SURVEY WTTH NEW HARDCOVER AND STRUC1 URAL 1 01ALS ON MONDAY. NOVEMBER 9TH. — PLEASE CALL ME IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL MATERIAL NECESSARY TO PROCEDE WITH THIS APPLICATION. THANKS. PID i»:c; iv. < “ixic I)2.0»U\^ COA)<r. CO OtAl - '7ZO-<b ‘\lM 3oy >0 > OKt l^EvOCg •Ai't i'-«" lo-Sli C>ll\ \V**v 0mmmm mmtmm •^io-^h 1 “• vr«. h 7/ .-S > ------------------ _ __ ___ ___ H yf* — rl ----- -----‘^Hl v<t ^943>C gA4T «MftC <N>4Wii M!*H V* 1**0"tmmmm mmmmm •-» i#/it MiSiM cU \ / M»5« •« suifi* PW fwr •0 *-• •/.•'•I'-o* lo/H^ t4-~' TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator November 13,1998 SUBJECT: #2411 Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Conditional Use Permit—Variances—Public Hearing The City Council tabled this application at their October 26, 1998 meeting to reconsider the application based on the finding that the ordinance should have considered the fair market value rather than the value of the structure at the time the zoning chapter was adopted. Tom Barrett, City Attorney, stated at the City Council meeting Section 10.03(J) applies only to the use and not the location of a non-conforming structure. The boathouse is not a "use". It should be noted the boathouse was not damaged by the wind storm. The deck located above the boathouse was damaged. The deck can not be rebuilt without necessary structural repairs to the boathouse to support the deck. The City Building Official has determined the boathouse will need to be reinforced structurally before a building permit can be issued for the deck. The City Attorney is preparing a letter that should explain when it is allowable to permit a non- conforming structure to be replaced after damage from a storm, fire, or other "act of god". This application will go before the City Council at their regular meeting on Monday, November 23, 1998. The 60 day time period for City action will expire on November 24, 1998. The City Council minutes are attached to the Planning Report for your review. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator November 13,1998 #2411 Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Conditional Use Permit--Variances--Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC Lot Area:24,750 One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) square feet (.56 acres)_______________ Application:The applicants are requesting a Land Alteration Permit to replace a boathouse 15 feet from the lakeshore. The existing boathouse has been determined by the City Building staff to be in disrepair. A wind storm in May heavily damaged a deck that was located on top of the existing boathouse. The deck could be replaced by receiving a building permit, as it had existed before the storm. However, the Building Official did not issue the building permit due to the existing condition of the boathouse it would be located above. The deteriorating condition of the boathouse was not a result of the wind storm. Structural Review: The applicant hired a structural engineer to review the existing condition of the structure and recommend corrective measures to provide a structurally sound foundation conforming to the Minnesota State Building Code. The structural engineer has determined the front and back walls would be replaced and portions of the side walls that will connect to the new front and back walls would have new concrete blocks added to fit the existing walls. The side walls would require some additional repairs. The structure has a minimal foundation that would need to be replaced. A portion of the hillside must be temporarily removed to build a foundation under the structure. The existing roof is deteriorated and must also be completely replaced. *^2411 Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Variances and Conditional Use Permit l0'l9/93 Page I Lot History:The Planning Commission recommended denial of variances to tear down the existing residence to allow a new residence on March 17, 1997. The applicant was a potential buyer of the property, not the current property owner. Following the Planning Conunission action the previous applicant withdrew, and did not appear before the City Council. This application w ill require the following variances: 1. Hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The existing hardcover is 310 s.f( 4.5%). The applicants are requesting to replace the 160 s.i. boathouse. To allow a boathouse to exist within 75' of the lakeshore. 3.A variance from the side yard adjacent to street setbacks to allow the structure to be located 10' from a platted public right-of-way, where 15' is required. A Conditional Use Permit is required for the following: 1. Land alteration in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. To allow a foundation to be constructed under the existing location of the structure. _________________ Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.22, Subd. 1(A): Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(1): Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.03, Subd. 19: Land Alteration Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B): Setback Regulations for the LR-IC Zoning District U2411 Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Variances and Conditional Use Permit I a'19.93 Page! ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IC (1/2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard adj./Street Street Yard Required 21,780 s.f.100'75'15'30' Proposed 24,750 s.f.90'16'10'NA The subject property does meet lot area requirements. The structure would be located 16' from Lake Minnetonka where 75' is required. The property is adjacent to a platted, undeveloped street. The code requires a 15' setback for structures adjacent to a street in the LR-IC Zoning District. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'6,750 s.f.310 s.f. (4.5%) none (0%) 310 s.f. (4.5%) To allow ’ replacement of a boathouse 75'-250'13,500 s.f.4,476 s.f. (33.1%) 3,375 s.f. (25%) 4,476 s.f. (33.1%) none 250’-500'4,500 s.f.1,340 s.f. (29.7%) 1,350 s.f. (30%) 1,340 s.f. (29.7%) none 500'-1000' 0 0 0 (35%) 0 none The proposal requires a hardcover variance for the 0-75' lakeshore setback to allow the lot to retain 310 s.f (4.5%) where 310 s.f (4.5%) e.xists. Should the City approve a Conditional Use Permit and variances, the applicants would be allowed to reconstruct a deck above the boathouse because it was damaged bv a storm. The deck is proposed to be 18' by 20'. Paul ami Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle I ariances and Conditional Use Permit 10/19/98 Page 5 Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 24,750 s.f 3,467 s.f 14.0% The lot does meet the 15% allowed lot coverage for structure. ANALYSIS A. 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. The boathouse is a legally non-conforming structure that has existed for many years. The structure has deteriorated to a point it requires major reconstruction or replacement. The Zoning Code would not allow this structure to be built new. 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 location of the structure w ould not be detrimental to public health. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The structure would not comply with allowed hardcover, lot coverage, and street yard setback requirements. Variance approval would be required to issue the Conditional Use Permit for Land Alteration. 1^2411 Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Idriances and Conditional Use Permit 10/19/93 Page A Issues 1. 3. 4. 5. The boathouse requires major renovation to include complete replacement of tvvo walls and partial replacement of the two remaining walls. Both remaining walls would also require tuckpoint and repairs to cracked block and other masonr>’ to provide a solid wall. The roof would consist of a full replacement. A conditional use permit is required for land alterations and grading within 75' of the lakeshore to remove a portion of the hillside to place a new foundation under the structure. The variances must be approved to issue a Conditional Use Permit. The applicants are requesting to replace a deck above the boathouse. The City Building Official has determined the boathouse is unsafe to construct a new deck above. 6. The deck could legally be repaired because it was damaged in a storm. The building which the deck was located above has been determined to be structurally unsafe not allowing the deck to be constructed. Therefore, the nroperty owners would loose their right to the deck which was involuntarilv removed. 7. Last year the Planning Commission recommended denial of variances to allow the existing house to be removed and a new residence constructed. It was recommended at that time the boathouse be removed to reduce hardcover on the lot. The applicants withdrew the application without a hearing with the Council. OPTIONS • The Planning Commission has the following alternatives to consider: A. Recommend approval of the request with the hardship being the boathouse existed as a legal non-conforming structure, and the deck which was located above the boathouse would be able to be reconstructed if the building was structurally sound. A condition of approval would be the applicants must return any material removed or graded during construction to its existing location and elevation. B. Recommend denial of the request stating the structural condition of the boathouse w ould require a complete rebuild of the foundation and most of the walls. The Zoning Code does not allow any structure within 75' of the lakeshore. ^2411 Paul nnd Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle yanancej and Conditional Use Permit 10/19^98 Page 5 Attachments A B C D E F G H I J K L Application Applicant Letter Plat Map Location Map Topographic Map Survey Hardcover Calculation Worksheets Site Photos Deck Plan Structural Engineer Report Property Owners List Permit Record ^24! I Paul and Leann Hanssen S195 Casco Circle Variances and Conditional Use Permit 10 19 98 Page 6 Application tt _____ f | Date Received 9*^ Amount Paid o^AT;. CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION x Site Address ^ ^ T>-pe of Application to be Filed ^ __vObfii Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)_____ ^ APPLICAN’ Address City M-7 Phone fhome ’l M-~7 \ ~ Phone (work") 4~*7i " ______________ZiD 5ZT3>^ ( OV*NER (if different than applicant) Name ____________ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address Date Prope**j^-^quired , City Zip. _ (month/year) I (doW^no^^so own the'adjacent parcels of land.L FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERi\nTS - _____S 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____S 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 VC_ $250.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain 3IZI 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 c $ v; 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 ^ Other - see Fee Schedule or no j ,settx:kjc August 13,1998 Request to replace deck at 3195 Casco Circle We submit this application to replace our deck that was damaged in the May storm. We purchased this property in the early spring of this year. After our purchase but before the actual closing and move in date, a severe wind storm took the deck and lifted it off it’s foundation, landing it nearby totally destroyed. The property consists of an older home of marginal value. The deck was one of the main ^Wcresrl^ 1 1®^'^ ;V>- jrv Siagsba^Fani B^'^/i ■-l.= ■^S3--* IS • •• ■ ------------------' 1 • \ LA- • f - \ . • # ^ :2 •‘^.- > ^ - - V. • ■ OHIIS Mwai g f .. -3U •# -• N - — » 0 CO Cl Ltini 7 oni VO«2 «o ^ *>/' I VZi (•;•-. «JUt »% • • # • c^GOOSE crr^*^ '* ""I'v^f to • V V^if^8CCAV'~ , *:^^ISLAND .:* ■ ‘4T‘ *•*. '• ^ ^ , f. > -T.*• ' • • *• . ••* •>• ;• r-v • *-• ^ •*. *. V* • ;• /^SPRAY - mrnn— * ^ V-*.' * Cx -^I. ;C.. :• \• • . - . ••' ;-r:' > Sv.\o^ecV Lo+D £ CASCO ----------------------------------------------------------- ..................... : 'frta - !=— -------'O*’’*!--' '-AKE mnnetonka % • % * M. t t . SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) /Si-iy HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 75-250’ 250-500’500-1000’ 6 I of 3 A.House X S S.F. Length width X za S.F. X S.F. X =S.F. B.Garage X r:S.F. C.Driveway X S.F. X s=S.F. D.Sidewalk X S.F. X ss S.F. E.Patio/Deck X S.F. X ca S.F. F.Landscape % X S3 S.F. Underlain X »S.F. By Plastic X S.F. G.Other \(L<^S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE S.F.A A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B CSl^X 100 - B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X S.F. Length Width X S.F. X s=S.F.c. X S.F. D.Garage X S.F. C.Driveway X z=S.F. X =S.F. D.Sidewalk X S.F. -•5; A X «=S.F. E.Patio/Dcck X • S.F. X «=S.F. F.Landscape Underlain X S.F. X «S.F.* VBy Plastic Other X B S.F. G.X S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE S.F.A TOTAT PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE S.F.B A + B X 100 ■=% HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN 70NF. A. House _______ X 75-250*250-500’500-1000’ <S s.F. Length X X X Width B. Garage C. Driveway __ _ D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other *7 X X X X X X X X X f 5 u ■2^ V M-2--T TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPER IT AREA IN ZONE . -5- B •' 100 PROPOSED HARDCO\TR IN 70NF. 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 A ^ ^ B L S.F S.F. ' S.F. -6 S.F. 11 '3 ^ S.F. 1C. 5^ y T s.F^ S.F./7 ) S.F.'--^^ S.F. S.F. _ S.F. _S.F. A B X 100 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. % B i •NiLi'il''"* i c a- .N : )\v^4 A B hardcover calculation worksheet SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN A. House • . X ■ 75-250’ 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 HARDCOV'ER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Length Width X X X 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 S.F. SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A S.F. B TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B S.F. S;F; ^ S.F. S.F.m X 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % •- - - r r M IQ A B • / 7c^wr-V'»^-■•*‘'v^-n-V".-‘ * -1 • .•- •■: -•'” — H «pS3| Igr:- -?-Tr-'\—j s ? V. itj~ s--^s-: If O A si.jp. ■D&nic^ HAiJ^j^Ea; 3>inrAA5<^<:i ■^e?LAC^' 5T&.^/A t>A^,'. \Ac:;^(?_ J.H, Dahlmeier Engineering Inc. t 3 September 24, 1998 Paul Hanson 3105 Casco Circle Orono, MN 55391 Re: Boathouse 3105 Casco Circle Orono, NfN Commission No. 98212 Dear Paul: The purpose of this letter is to report the findings of a structural engineering review and provide corrective measures f. >: your boathouse on your property. ASSIGNMENT J. H. Dahlmeier Engineering Inc. has been retained to provide a structural engineering review and report including necessary corrective measures for the boathouse on your property located at 3105 Casco Circle, Orono, MN, as directed by Paul Hanson, owner of the property. BACKGROUND The boathouse roof at lake side was severely damaged by the w indstonn on May 15,1998. In order to comply with the City of Orono ordinances, slonn damage repair can proceed only after a stmctural condition study followed by necessary repairs to provide a structurally sound structure. OBSERVATIONS AND COM.MENTS 1. A site visit was conducted by J. H. Dalilmeier Engineering Inc. on September 10,199S to review existing conditions. 2434 ComTf.trce Boulevard Mound, MN 55364 (612> 472-4746 FAX (612) 4724761 Paul Hanson September 24, 1998 Page 2 of 3 2. Uo 3. 4. c. The follovs ing observations u ere made with respect to the foundation of the boathouse: a. The foundation is an S" thick concrete masonry foundation system. b. The boathouse is built in tiie side of the hill with grade at the roof line at the rear and grade at the slab height at the front with grade sloping along the side walls Ihe stnicture is ten courses high (7'.4"). The slab on grade provides space approximately 10 teet deep with a transverse wood frame wall at this location with backfill approximate!} 3 *8 above the slab sloping up to the rear foundation approximately 6 feet away. No exploratory work was done to determine the depth of the footings. Horizontal cracks exist in the masomy side walls indicating frost heave with the wall out of level approximately 1/2" over its length. The rear foundation wall is severely damaged due to e.xcessive earth pressure and frost heave. f. fhe following corrective measures arc required in order to provide a structurally sound foundation conforming with the Minnesota State Building Code: a. Reconstruct the rear wall with 12" block on 16" x S" fooling a minimum of 5 feet below grade. Reinforce with #4 @ 32" vertical in center of wall with hook dowel into footing. b. Remove wood frame wall and construct new masonry wall 8" thick on 16" x 8" footing vvth top of footing 4" below bottom of floor slab. Reinforce with #4 @ 32" vertical in center of wall with hook dowel into footing. Tie this wall to e.xisting pilasters in side wall with #4 dowels @ 16" O.C. grouted in place. c. Underpin front foundation wall and side walls to provide a minimum of 5 feet to bottom of footing on e.xterior grade. Underpinning to be done in accordance with standard practice 4 feet wide strips. d. Tuckpoint and repair cracked block and other niasoiuy to provide a solid W’all. e. Tooth rear wall to side walls to provide a rigid wall system. f. Construct wood roof system using standard carj^enlry procedures with roof plate anchored to ma.sonry wall in accordance with the Code. g. Provide wood blocking @ 24" O.C. in first two joist spaces with nailing to rear wall top plate in accordance with the Code. Since the boathouse is a utility structure, protection against frost on the interior is not recommended or required in my opinion. 24761 Paul Hanson September 24,1998 Page 3 of3 5. "•"‘= »bserv«i by a registered professional 6. «qui -d design. Other items .nay be dated September 9,1598 to Paul Hanson). ®‘eted in City of Oiono letter If you have any questions, please contact me. i Sincerely, « ^ J. R DAHmElER ENGINEERING, INC. j/nn H. Dahlmeier, P.E. JHD:lm hereby certify that this plan, specification or repon was prepared by me or under niy direct supervision and that I am a duly registered professional engineer under the laws of tha State of lylinnesota. Minn egistration No. 9212 RUN DATE 07/27/98 BATCH SOS PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 20-117-23 3<> 0008 03129 CASCO CIR H J DOUCALL/NORWEST BK TRSTE NORWEST BANK N A PETER DOU6ALL/06916200-0046 6TH S HARQUETTE HPLS HN 55<>79 38 20-117-23 43 0022 03205 CASCO CIR CONISTON ESTATES INC CONISTON ESTATES INC 7 BROAD ST rURLESTON SC 29401 38 20-117-23 43 0025 03185 CASCO CIR J PRAUS C C K HAVILAND J PRAUS t C K HAVILAND 3185 CASCO CIR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0028 03145 'CASCO CIR B C DOWNEY ABA DOWNEY B C DOWNEY ABA DOWNEY 3145 CASCO CIR WAYZATA HN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 20-117-23 43 0020 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED D C PLAIN A P L PLAIN D CHARLES PLAIN 3227 CASCO CIR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0023 03195 CASCO CIR ROBERT H A JUDITH G ROBERT H DOYLAN 3195 CASCO CIRCLE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 002b 03165 CASCO CIR G K A 0 H CARLSON GERALD K A DIANE H CARLSON 3165 CASCO CIRCLE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0029 03135 CASCO CIR ROLAND C AHUNDSON ROLAND C AHUNDSON HINNESOTA JUDICIAL CTR 25 CONSTITUTIONAL AVE ST PAUL HN 55155 REPORT NO. PI435401 PACE 14 38 20-117-23 43 0021 03225 CASCO CIR DAIVO A DOTZENROTH DAVID A DOTZENROTH 3225 CASCO POINT CIR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0024 03185 CASCO CIR J PRAUS t C K HAVILAND J PRAUS t C K HAVILAND 3185 CASCO CIR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0027 03155 CASCO CIR BENJAHIN F ROBERTACCIO ET AL D F ( H K ROBERTACCIO 3155 CASCO CIR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0030 03133 CASCO CIR C C BECKER/T I HARCHESSAULT G C BECKER/T I HARCHESSAULT 3133 CASCO CIR ORONO HN 55391 H }i 0 • f. « % • I- X % ♦ *' t. ••• *. — N••..wuJ PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 20-117-23 « 0031 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED THE CASCO CO THE CASCO COMPANY ROBERT 0 HACNIE 3135 CASCO CIR WAYZATA HN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 503 00013 SIKIiLT riLi:. P/IWM PERMIT NO. _j530I //o5c> DATE PERMIT RECORD TYPE OF PERMIT 9-->-93 l .» 7 ii-9^/(m . Ki'l'iuxijS) ^0.' ^3-7 ;/ 5 * 3)--71 - C?l u (2Jj.6:A ^ L • >3.^ .T9 5 j1A^6 7 '¥^370*5 ^liA2:29 6’q^^ ^577 .S ’ 3 9-1^ « » •• .* t • •/• •V V .*%> •• *•• • ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 26, 1998 (Public Comments, Continued) Kellogg stated the plans have been submitted to the State, with the City preparing to advertise for bids in January, 1999, awarding the bids in February, 1999, with construction scheduled to bci^in in the spring of 1999. Kellogg remarked construction should be completed by October of 1999. Lyman inquired w'hether the posted speed limit could be reduced to 35 mph instead of 40 until the road is improved. Lyman stated the current posted speed limit signs are not readily visible and are not adequate. Lyman requested that hidden driveway signs be posted along the road, notir.g there are 14 hidden driveways on the Orono side along Femdale Road, which is a hazard. Lyman commented the width of the road does not conform to current City standards as well as not having shoulders. Lyman also requested the City consider relocating the sign concerning the Luce Line Trail to give the motorists more time to slow down. Mayor Jabbour commented Lyman's requests are reasonable but the City of Orono is diet.- id by law and is not able to lower the speed limit without the input of MnDot. Jabbour stated the Public Works Department can re\iew the locations of the speed limit signs to insure that they are visible to approaching vehicles. Kellogg stated the plans and specif.cations for North Ferndale Road will cut down the height of the hills as well as require 30 miles an hour for the new road. Mayor Jabbour remarked the Orono Police Department has purchased a speed monitor which could be posted along the road to inform the motorists of their traveled speed. Lyman requested that the speed monitor be posted along the road. Mayor Jabbour requested Gappa to relay Lyman's concerns to the police chief •^^zoNirZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#3) #2411 PAUL HANSSEN, 3195 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Paul Hanssen was present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit and variances to replace a boathouse and deck located 15 feet from the lakeshore The deck located above the boathouse was damaged in a windstorm; however, the building oflicial has determined the ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 26,1998 (#2411 Paul Hnnssen, Continued) boathouse to be in disrepair, which is not the result of the windstorm. Weinberger stated the Applicants have had a structural engineer inspect the boathouse who has determined that the front and back walls would need to be replaced as w’ell as portions of the side walls. A variance to hardcover in the 0-75' setback would be required as well as a variance to allow the boathouse to exist within 75* of the lakeshore, and a variance from the side yard adjacent to street setbacks. Weinberger stated the Planning Commission denied this application based on their understanding of the ordinance which limits improvements to 50 percent of the fair market value of the non-conforming structure. Hanssen commented he would like to improve the boathouse as it is a nice asset to the property, noting he was unsure as to why the Planning Commission denied his request. Hanssen stated the assessed value of the boathouse is listed at SI 5,000, with the fair market value usually being slightly higher than the assessed value. Mayor Jabbour stated the improvements cannot exceed 50 percent of the fair market value. Hawn Slated it was the Planning Commission's understanding that the value is what it was at the time the ordinance was put into effect. Hanssen stated the ordinance specifies the fair market value of the structure at the time of the loss. .Mayor Jabbour commented that perhaps this application should have been tabled until a determination w’as reached on the fair market value of the structure. Barrett stated this is the first time he has had an opportunity to review this application, noting the ordinance concerning non-conforming structures limits improvements to the existing structure to 50 percent of the present fair market value. Section 10.03(J) applies only to the use and not to the location of the structure, noting the boathouse is not a non-conforming use. Mayor Jabbour inquired w'hether this application should go before the Planning Commission to allow them to review the application based upon the correct information. Hanssen staled he would like to have a decision as soon as possible. Mayor Jabbour suggested tabling the application until the new information regarding the value of the structure is reviewed by the Planning Commission. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 26, 1998 (#2411 Paul Hanssen, Continued) Hanssen inquired whether City Staff could approve the application. Mayor Jabbour stated the City Council would need to approve the application, but would like to wait until the correct information is available. Weinberger stated the 60 day time period for this application ends November 24th. Goetten commented since all the correct facts were not before the Planning Commission when it reviewed this application, they should have the opportunity to review the information to give their recommendation to the City Council. Flint stated it is procedurally better to have this application go back to the Planning Commission for their consideration before the final decision is made by the City Council. Mayor Jabbour recommended placing this item on the agenda for the next Planning Commission meeting to allow them to reconsider their decision based on the correct information. V'an Zomeren stated this application will be on the November 16 Planning Commission agenda and will appear before the City Council on the 23rd. Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to send Application #2411,3195 Casco Circle, back to the Planning Commission for their review. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#20) ANN TRIES, LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMISSION - 1999 PROPOSED BUDGET Ann Thies, Administrator of the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission, addressed the City Council concerning the 1999 LMCC budget, noting that the LMCC has taken over the responsibility for funding local access programming. The new access fee is expected to generate S52.200 in revenues for 1999. Thies commented the expenses related to equipment repair and maintenance, office rent, studio fees, office equipment and access equipment have all increased. A subcommittee has been appointed to look into the access fees for the upcoming year. Thies requested the City Council pass a motion approving the 1999 LMCC budget. Mayor Jabbour thanked Ann Thies for her efforts in serving on the LMCC. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 CnstaIBay,MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2411 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; October 21, 1998 TO:Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 10/19/98 VOTE:1 FOR 4 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Denial for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: The structure is a non-conforming structure within 75' of the lakeshore. 2.The repairs to the structure would include adding a foundation and complete replacement of over 50% of the walls. 3.The damage, resulting from the storm, only destroyed the deck. The boat house was not damaged by the storm. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council October 19, 1998, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS»WPWIN60 \VP1X)CS CAROLE'PCACTIOV2411 10 vs O I Orono C't'-j P G • ^^SLs\^/'CiA^ b A C_| Qu—f T L jU. ^1 3D-3.’S' C<^i>c.o cica.t7 Xi'^SStA s.'s c)^1jl \^ ^Kvj^>6 .-\iOl ^ Vk>JI_ V->^ \v4lA-^ ^Xo \ 5 , V)0-«w N"^ ^^v^CsA''‘“0^VO\/^ rA^O.vA'l . N vs ^^^'wA a ^ '■W-^ , Wa/^ ^\Mii/<,l\AiL^ ;*^v^5<3 vAJJV^V ^VOY'sO J /y\/JL. ^nAy ^S4-2-T,/'^^aA-^ f 1 1 Douglas & Cheryl Hawkinson 3205 Casco Circle Orono, Mn 55391 (612) 4710-0121 October 19,1998 Dear Orono City Council, Planning Board, Inspections Dept; As the next door neighbors to 3195 Casco Point Circle, we are, without reservation, in favor of the re-building, fixup of the deck on top of the boathouse on the adjoining property. It was severely damaged during the May 15,1998 storm. The repair is certainly necessary to restore lost value to the property. Please feel free to call me with any questions you may have. Yours, Douglas J Hawkinson § 10.03 SEC. 10.03. GENERAL PROVISIONS. Subd. 1. Minimum Requirements. In their interpretation and application, the provisions of the Zoning Chapter shall be held to be the minimum requirements for the promotion of the public n6dlth, saf6ty^ morals, and welfare. More Restrictive Provisions To Apply. Where the conditions imposed by any provision of the Zoning Chapter are restrictive or less restrictive than comparable conditions imposed by any other law. City Code provision, statute, regulation of any kind, the regulations which are restrictive, or which impose higher standards or requirements shall prevail. ^ Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 ^ Subd. 3. All Permits Compatible With Agency Requirements. A building permit, conditional or special use permit, or other permit or necessary permission of the Council, wherever or whenever required by the City Code may be denied if the proposed action or permit is not compatible with the intent and provisions of the Surface Water Management Plan, the Storm Water Run-Off and Shoreland Guidelines Policy Statement promulgated by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, and any other valid governmental regulations, plans and policies adopted by the City. hree copies of the Policy Statement, other applicable governmental regulations, plans and policies adopted by the City shall be marked copies and filed for use and examination by the public in the City Hall. ^ Source: Ordinance No, 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 Subd. 4. Prohibitions, It is unlawful to convert, enlarge, reconstruct or alter any structure or use any structure or land for any purpose nor in any manner which is not in conformity with the Zoning Chapter. Non-Conforming Uses. Any land or buildings and leqaflv devoted* to a ‘Tvon-conforming use JQ-Puary 1| 1975, may be continued "in ~s a id non—contor minq pursuant to conditional use perm it dr anted specified. conforming use~ as hereinatreT' The non-conforming use may not be changed to another non-conforming use. , . Nothing in this Zoning Chapter shall prevent the placing of a structure in safe condition when said structure is eclared unsafe by the Building Inspector, providing the necessary C cc • s 0 ORONO CC 251 (4-1-84) § 10.03 recairs shall not constitute more than fifty percent (50%) of the fair market value of such structure. Structure shall include such accessory features attached to the structure or located anywhere on the land, such as signs, marquees, monuments. C. When any lawful non-conforming use of any structure or land in any district has been changed to a conforming use, it shall not thereafter be changed to any non-conforming use. D. Whenever a lawful non-conforming structure shall have been damaged by fire, flood, explosion, earthquake, war, riot, or act of God, it may be reconstructed and used as before if it be reconstructed within twelve (12) months after such calamity, unless :.he damage to the building or structure is seventy-five percent (75%) or more of its fair market value as shown on the assessment records at the time of damage, in which case the whole thereof shall be demolished, and any construction thereafter shall be for a use in accordance with the provisions of this Zoning Chapter. E. Whenever a lawful non-conforming use of a structure or land is discontinued and remains discontinued for a period of twelve (12) months, any future use of said structure or land shall be in conformity with the provisions of this Zoning Chapter. F. Any lawful non-conforming use of land not involving a structure, and any lawful non-conforming use involving a structure with an assessor's fair market value upon the effective date of this Zoning Chapter of $3,000.00 or less, may be continued for a period of thirty-six (36) months after the effective date of this Zoning Chapter, whereupon such non-conforming use shall cease, unless brought into conformity with the Zoning Chapter. G. Any proposed structure which will, under this Zoning Chapter, become non-conforming but for which a building permit has been lawfully granted not more than six (6) months prior to the effective date of this Zoning Chapter, may be completed in accordance with the approved plans; provided construction is started within six (6) months of the effective date of 'this Zoning Chapter, and continues to completion within two (2) years. Such structure and use shall thereafter be a legally existing non- conforming structure and use. H. Normal maintenance of a building or other structure containing or related to a lawful non-conforming use is permitted, including necessary non-structural repairs and incidental alterations which do not extend or intensify the non- conforming use. ORONO CC 252 (4-1-84) S 10.03 lawful non-conf«mfn\*'%^%“de"n%i"aYunlf^^^^^^ a buUdlng containing livability thereof, provided thii wTll no^®" Improve thi dwelling units or bulk of the buUding. ^ increase the number of Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 provisions of the ^toninq*^ChaDte?";,Sninon-conforming use land and buildinqs are out ^ ^hich location or height of structures ° lot situations whereinvolvinq the use nf hha size or other factors not the requirements of the Z^oning^ChaDter*^ conformance with situated existed leqallv un^Ar however, such a Council will not unrLsonably require ^s\r°ct^?oin^generally look with favor on^„^r?v* ® strict compliance and will 10.08. granting of a variance under Section which a de^ed^or ^registered^land^’su^v record is any lot for office of the ReqiVter of nAAffc recorded in the Hennepin County, Minnesota, prior°'to Janua^rv^l'^^igys approval by the Council if required. 1975, and after Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 January 1, ig'^5 in^ record existing upon requirements of the 7om*n which does not meet the utilized for a sinale fat,?i "i^th ...ay be that in the judqment of thA^rdwelling purpose provided affect public hpai^-vi ® Council such use does not adverselyarrect public health or safety and the following requirements are Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 With Public Sanitar^veffective date of n?!c record existing upon the City of up to anH Chapter in any "R” District of the public sanif-Ari/ e uding one acre, which lot is serviced by this Zoning Chapte^^aq ^^o does not meet the requirements of singl^familv ?etachA/, a be utilized forif the area purposes without Council approval pLcent (80%)Tf thA""?^^^ width of that lot are within eighty the lot of recLd shal\ norh*^^ Chapter. However,ecord shall not be more intensely developed unless •a .1 ORONO CC 253 (4-1-84) § 10.03 I. Alterations may be made to a building containing lawful non-conforming residential units when they will improve the livability thereof, provided they will not increase the number of dwelling units or bulk of the building. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 J. Apply to •’Uses" Only. The non-conforming use provisions of the ^-oning Chapter apply only to the use to which land and buildings are put, and do not apply to situations where location or height of structures, lot size or other factors not involving the use of the premises prevent strict conformance with the requirements of the Zoning Chapter. Where, however, such a situated existed legally under the prior applicable law, the Council will not unreasonably require strict compliance and will generally look with favor on granting of a variance under Section 10.08. Subd. 6. Lot of Record. A lot of record is any lot for which a deed or registered land survey has been recorded in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for Hennepin County, Minnesota, prior to January 1, 1975, and after approval by the Council if required. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 A. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon January 1, 1975 in an ”R” District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Chapter as to area or width i’.ay b.;; utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety and the following requirements are met: Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 1. In "R" Districts of One Acre or Less and With Public Sanitary Sev;er. A lot of record existing upon the effective date of this Zoning Chapter in any "R" District of the City of up to and including one acre, which lot is serviced by public sanitary sewer and which does not meet the requirements o this Zoning Chapter as to area or width only, may be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes without Council approvax if the area measurements and width of that lot are within eigh y percent (80%) of the requirements of this Zoning Chapter. Howeve , the lot of record shall not be more intensely developed unless ORONO CC 253 (4-1-84) TO: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commissioners FROM:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:November 12, 199S1 RE:#2430 Paul R. Phillips 2140 Sixth Avenue North (County Rd. 6) Preliminar>' Subdivision for a 2 lot subdivision-Public Hearing Zoning District: RRl-B One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) Lot Size:4.5 acres Application: The applicant is proposing a subdivision of his homestead propert}'. 'fhe existing parcel is 4.5 acres. The proposed division would be create a new lot along Sixth Avenue North. Each lot would be 2 '' acres served by an outlot. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.28, Subd. 5, (E) RRl-B, One Family Rural Residential District Standards Section 11.10, Subdivision Procedures Legal Description: The current legal description is Lot 1, Block 1, Phillips Woodland Terrace. Lot Sizes: The proposed lot meet the minimum 2 acre lot size requirement for the RR-IB district. The new parcel has a suitable building pad that will not require future variances. Sewer and Water The property is not currently served by city sewer or water. The proposed septic sites have been reviewed and approved by Steve Weckman, On-Sites Septic System Manager. See his memo in Exhibit F. ^2430 Paul Phillips Preliminary Plat iXovember 16. 199S page—I Drainage The City Engineer's letter in Exhibit C notes an existing wetland on the new lot. He suggests that area exists for a water quality pond. The MinnehiJia Creek Watershed District has indicated via a telephone call that they will not require stormwater ponding for this subdivision. Flowage and conservation easements will be required across the wetlands. Drainage and utility easements are required along the internal and external lot lines. Access and Driveways The current driveway serves two properties. An easement exists for the property owner at 2160 to use the driveway that serves 2140. The subdivision ordinance requires that a separate outlet be platted to serve three lots. The outlet as platted did not include a cul-de-sac. The City Engineer has recommended a cul-de-sac for emergency purposes. The proposal has been sent to the Police Chief and Long Lake Fire Department for review and comment. The location of a future possible cul-de-sac is limited by the shape of the lot, the wetland, and the proposed so; ■ s..es for the new lot. The subdivision ordinance requires a cul-de-sac of 100 feet in diameter, 50 feet radius. The private road outlot will require the subdivider to provide a homeowner's association agreement for the maintenance of the private road. Park Dedication Fee The Park Commission has recommended a park dedication fee in lieu of land. The new parcel is being created out of Lot 1, Block 1 Phillips Woodland Terrace Second Addition. The lot was platted in 1986 as part of a larger subdivision involving land in Orono and Medina. Records indicate that S400 was paid for the park dedication fee for the entire subdivision at the time. The propov d plat has been referred to the Hennepin County Assessor to determine the fair market value cf the undeveloped parcel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that the proposed preliminar>' plat meets the zoning and subdivision ordinance with the e.xception of the outlot not showing a cul-de-sac. The Planning Commission should discuss the need fo* il-de-sac and em.ergency access. Attachments. k2430 Paul Phillips Preliminary Plat So\ ember 16. 1993 page-2 A B c D Application Plat map Engineer's letter Woodland Terrace plat map E F Proposed Preliminar>’ Plat Septic Report 5u!bdlivisjcm "Doie. ^6C£n U 10/20? I qs A CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Siteaddress ^ I'i C CCuSjTj Rc>. ^ (UH! A/'»^_______ Propert>' Identification Number (PIP) ^ ! i f\ •'31 ~ CC 'X3 Please check one - Propert>' / abstract or Attach legal description to application. torrens? ' Tunfificu 5A ‘a*.*.^ A tnI nc^> I 6u:<.i< i APPLICANT ' ^ Name___77< A J> . T"hr • l~ L • _________________________ /\aarc55 ^ City 4c:,v6 a/ikc N iS Cc i\0 C*rnonc ZioSSIfC Phone (work) / j ^ Y OWTsXR (if different than applicant) Name Address Phone (home) City Zip Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) k ♦ EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels 1 it A* Development Size Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels ^ • Present use (check)Residential; no. of units Other (specify) Present Zoning District ••* PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) »/ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites / Existing Units r ti /New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density /Units per ^ Acres Minimum Lot Size Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use (check)/Residential Other (specify) I ✓ •• N MINIMUM ^UTERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMLNARY APPLICATION 1. P^yt^ent of fees (refer to "application fees" listed below. 2. Completed application form. 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. 4. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin Countv Department of Finance A-o03 Govt. Center 348-3271^ 5. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application Zoning Official’s Signamre _______________________________ MINI.MUM ^LATERL\L REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FIN.AL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Lener of Credit. Zoning Official’s Signature_______________________ I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check (X) those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) S250.00 _____ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement S350.00 X. Su’odivision Application (Class I &. II) S350.00 _____ Preliminary Subdivision Application S375.00 + S25.00/lot (Class III & all non-residentlal) _____ Final Plat Application (Class III) $200.00 _____ Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 _____Subdivision w'easements and covenants min. $200.00 _____ Pa.'k Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) _____ Legal and Engineering Review Fets (as incurred) _____ Renewal of Class 1 and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) _____Renewal of Class III. Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) _____ Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from origintl application) B. Special Improvement Fees: _____ Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + S.50/lineal ft.;_____|in. ft. x ,50 » $______ _____ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + S.50/lineal ft.;_____lin. ft. x .50 = $______ _____Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + S25/stub Totals 350^ SO — _____Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/stub _____ Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culveru) $200.00 On-Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/per lot x / new lots C. Flexible Application Fees.'Misc. Fees ' _____ Variance $220.00 ($50 00 per each additional variance) ______ _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100.00 ______ _____ PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit ______ The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zon'mg Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney. Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. ^ • / / Apclicant's Signature V/) '/Date VrJ-'i _____________ Owner's Signature Date ^7 Applicant must have all submitt.als Into the City Office 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 meet'uigs 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. RUN DATE 09/08/96 BATCH 503 PROP ADDR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NANE 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 COlfITY PROPERTY INFORHATION 5YSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 27-118-23 31 0002 02060 SIXTH AVE N TRINITY ENG EVAN LUTH CH INC TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH 2060 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE HH 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0017 02160 SIXTH AVE N PETER C WELLES PETER C WELLES 2160 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0022 01090 COX FARH RD L 0 EVERSON I K A EVERSON LANCE 0 t KRISTI A EVERSON 1090 COX FARH CD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 32 01180 PHILLIPS T H FOSTER t E L THIEL FOSTER 1180 PHILLIPS DR LONG LAKE HN 55356 0008 DR FOSTER 38 27-118-23 32 0016 01115 COX FARH RD C D I J K GARDNER CHRISTOPHER I JOLYNN GARDNER 1115 COX FARH RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 80 27-118-23 29 0001 00080 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 1200 WARNER RD ST PAUL HINN 55106 38 27-118-23 31 0005 02135 SIXTH AVE N RICHARD C VALITON ET AL RICHARD I SALLY VALITON 2135 COUNTY ROAD 6 LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0019 02085 SIXTH AVE N J R HARESH I D J HARESH JOHN R I DIANE J HARESH 2085 CO RD 6 ORONO HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0023 02190 SIXTH AVE N PAUL R PHILLIPS TRUSTEE PAUL R I HARY B PHILLIPS JOX 755 LONG LIKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 32 0009 01200 PHILLIPS DR J K I K L EVANSON JEFFREY I KRISTIN EVANSON 1200 PHILLIPS DR LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 32 0021 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED FULLERTON PROPERTIES INC FULLERTON PROPERTIES INC 608 2ND AVE S HPLS HN 55902 80 27-118-23 29 0r03 02160 SIXTH AVE N PETER C WELLES PETER C WELLES 2160 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 •I r- • iV REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 5 38 27-118-23 31 0019 02195 SIXTH AVE N DANIEL G t RUTH G HCPHERSON DANIEL G t RUTH G HCPHERSON 2195 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0021 01120 COX FARH RD JAHES F 8 JOANNE H HILLIER JAHES HILLIER 170 BROWN RDN LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0029 02100 SIXTH AVE N ORONO WOODLANDS INC ORONO WOODLANDS INC 2160 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 32 0010 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HARY B PHILLIPS HARY D PHILLIPS BOX 755 LONG LAKE HN 55356 80 27-118-23 23 0002 01200 PHILLIPS DR J K t K L EVANSON JEFFREY I KRISTIN EVANSON 1200 PHILLIPS DR LONG LAKE HN 55356 4 80 27-118-23 29 0005 01250 PHILLIPS DR HARY B PHILLIPS HARY B PHILLIPS ^X 755 LONG LAKE HN 55356 : .. • i-Ti . 1 . J RUN DATE 09/00/98 BATCH SOS PROP AODR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR B® 27-118-23 29 0006 01280 PHILLIPS OR B e t L H BIXBY BRADLEY 6 C LOUISE H BIXBY 1288 PHILLIPS DR LONG LAKE HN 55356 80 27-118-23 29 0009 00080 ADDRESS PENDING PAUL R PHILLIPS TRUSTEE PAUL R 8 HARY B PHILLIPS ,80X755 raNUTAWE* HN 55356 TOTAL BATCH REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 6 503 00020 ! I' . 4 -i- • •? ■/ 7 / .V^ei fiko^A)DATI b' Bonestroo rr-TTi Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects Octc>?’’ 14, 1998 Bcncstroo ftosene. AnJemk Associt*tes me »s Aff>fmjtt,vc Acnon Opportunity Bmptoyer Prmcip^lf Olio 0 Bonejtroo. PE • jOSfph C Ar»E • V,.v. nL P£ • R ch:-rd E PE • .7 Cze^ PE • Pec-rr G 5c*'uP'cnt P£ • Jerry A Bourdon. P£ • Rooert Jt ‘ Roiene. PE and Susan v EDeri.n CPA Sen>cr Consuftar'tj Associate Principals Meward A Sanford PE • Ke rn A Ci-jon p£ • Rcden R Pfsfferie PE • Rjcnard w Fester PE • David O Lcs^ota P£ • 7ere^: C Russet. - f A • Mar*< A Hanson PE • M'cnaet T Rautmann. P£ • Ted < F efd PE • Ken-et- ® A-ijerscn p£ • Varit R Rglf$ PE • S'Cney P Wiiiiarrson P£. LS • RdCC't F Kon.-nitn • Ac“es V Ring • .V.cnaei P Rau. ?£ • A laii RiCH Scnrrid:. P£. St Paul Rochester. Wii»ma' anj St C'cuct V\ • ViS.vauVee J. ePi te vv.% .voerescoc cons c n NO. PI435401 PAGE 6 00020 Elizabeth VanZomeren City Planner/Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Paul Phillips Subdivision File No. 139-2430 Dear Liz: We have reviewed the preliminary plat for the proposed two loi Phillips subdivision. The site is located north of County Road 6 between North Brown Road and Willow Drive in the southwest quarter of Section 27. We have the foiiowing comments in regards to engineering matters. 1. Access: An existing driveway along the west side of the property currently provides access to this site and to the property located north and west of the Phillips property. Access to the proposed Lot 2 would either be from the existing driveway or directly off of County Road 6. The private driveway should be reconstructed to a minimum paved width of 28 feet to meet current City standards for a private street serving 3 to 10 units if access to Lot 2 is from the shared driveway. The private street design should include a cul-de-sac to provide room for emergency vehicle iuining movements. An Outlot with adequate right-of-way should be platted for the proposed private driveway. Hennepin County should review and comment on the proposed access. Plans and specifications for any street improvements should be provided for review. 2. Grading: A grading and erosion control plan for the entire site should be submitted for review. Erosion control measures should be in place prior to any grading. Additional erosion control will be needed during construction of the house and septic system. 3. Drainage: The draft version of the City ’s’ Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shows that the site drains w'esterly to an existing wetland identified as LL-P4. Phosphorous loadings leaving the site should be limited to a maximum of 0.28 pounds/acre/year. A majority of the site currently drains to an existing low area west of the septic locations on Lot 2. This depression may provide an ideal location for a water quality pond that could provide rate control and nutrient removal of storm water leaving the site °lans should be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for their review. A drainage area map and ponding calculations should be provided with the final plan sef. *. Easements: Drainage and utility easements should be provided 5 feet wide along all interior lot lines and 10 feet wide along the roadway rignt-of -ways. Drainage easements should be provided across all wetland, drainage way and pond areas. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612-636*4600 • Fax: 612-636-1311 5. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please contact me at (604-4863) if you have any questions regarding this matter. rnii_L_iro wuuui_Ai\iu i LKt^AL-c. M • • • ,UL PHILLIPS 1. BLOCK 1, PHILLIPS :prace second addition OUNTY, MINNESOTAr\ S 89*54‘ 07" W 422.18 f TO: FROM: DATE: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager October 16, 1998 SUBJECT: Septic Review for Application #2430, Paul Phillips - Sketch Plan Review The proposed two lot subdivision requires the use of on-site sewage treatment systems. The site evaluation/design for the existing residence at 2140 Sixth Ave. N. was completed in 1990 and is still valid. The existing mound system meets City and State standards and the future drainfield site remains adequate for this lot. Site evaluation/design for the future lot has been submitted for a five bedroom residence. The sites meet the minimum City and State Standards, but a small amount of fill must be removed from the south end of the future site before a system is installed there. The fill is most likely from the construction of Sixth Ave. N.. Based on the above information, stafiF recommends approval of the application. The city requires the drainfield sites to be fenced off prior to any grading or land alteration. SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTOR Y Address: 2140Sixth Ave. N. PID: 27-118-23 31 0018 Building Type residence #BRs/GPD: 4 #Systems 1 Units Billed 1 Permit#: 3361 Date of Permit: 10/26/90 Installer: Quickway Exc. System Type mound Experimental: no Appliances lndry,dshw SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity: 1 Tank Condition: 5 DF condition; 11 Failure Pot: low SEPTIC TANKS Material: precast concrete Setback to Bldg: 15 Capacity: 1000,1000, 1000 Cesspool: no DRAINFIELD Length of Lines 160 # Lines: 3 Trench Width: 10 Treatment Area: 85*36 Type of Filter rock,clean sand Soil Boring: yes Tile Size: 1.5 Under Tile 9 Perc Rate: 41 Setback DF-Bldg: DF Ht above Wt: 3.2 Soil Type: loam, clay loam Limitations: water table WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: Pump Type: subm. INSPECTION RECORD Well-DF: Depth: 175 DATE 10/26/90 9/5/91 5/16/95 9/24/98 DESCRIPTION installation final inspection no surfacing compliant Report in File yes Diameter: 4 Method: drilled PUMPOUT RECORD COMPLIANCE DATE GALLONS 7/1/91 1000 1 3/12/94 2000 1 1 Sfxik A\)Q., Ai r% /I N S-P TESTING, INC.Steven B. Schirmers & Debra M, Schirmers 951 Katydid Lane NE • St. Michael, MN 55376 • (612) 497-3566 FAX(612)-497-5011 State License #394 June 23, 1998 Paul Phillips 2140 Co.Rd.6 South lot Orono, Henn. Co., MN C ■) •I • ^ ' / • > I - ■ ’i / This on-site sewage treatment system is designed for a Type 1, five bedroom home, in : n accordance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Chapter 7080 and local ^ • | ordinances. Approval will be needed from the city official for a 10' setback from the 50' S ■■ driveway easement. The soils on this site are SCS soils mapped - HcC2 - Hayden clay loam bordered by Gc - Glencoe silty clay loam. The seasonally saturated soils were located at 20" to 34" j (mottled soil). Due to the seasonally saturated soils, a Pressurized Mound System will need to be Installed to treat septic v '^ uent. The bottom of the treatment area must be located at least 3' above the saturated soils. The soils at a depth of 12" have a percolation rate averaging 4.6 mpi. A pumping chamber will need to be installed to lift the effluent to the treatment area. The power supply and switches must be located outside the manhole and pumping chamber in a weather proof enclosure. A warning device must be Installed with a light and sound device, this is in case of a pump failure. The manifold and supply line pipe must have back drainage to the pumping chamber. The distribution pipes shall have their ends capped. Be sure the rock and sand fill material are clean. The sod layer below the entire mounded area must be turned over, just break up the sod, be sure not to over work. 1 Keep all heavy equipment off of the proposed treatment area before and after construction. The treatment area should be marked off before construction. This Design is not valid & the system will need to be relocated if failure to protect the areas proposed for On-Site Sewage Treatment occurs. • 'V With proper installation and maintenance, this system should have no problem in treating septic effluent effectively. Nothing other than human waste, toilet tissue, laundry, showers, water softener etc. should be disposed of into the septic tanks. Iron filters must be diverted out of the system. Garbage disposals are not recommended, due to adding more solids & fine solids passing through to the system. Excessive amounts of soaps, cleaning agents & chlorine agents may kill the bacteria needed to treat septic effluent. Additives are not recommended. Recommend to pump & clean your tanks through the manhole by a certified pumper every 2 years. Check with your pumper to set up a schedule. .•v* - ■' • ^••1* •• • ». Steven B. Schirmers - [ .7 TO:Cha'T Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:November 6,1998 SUBJECT: #2435 Jeff Litzen-Lutz Construction 3433 Livingston Avenue Variances—Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area:10,113.75 square feet (.23 acre) Application: The applicant has proposed to construct a house with detached garage on a lot that does not meet lot area or lot width requirements. The lot is served by sanitary sewer and has been vacant since the original house was removed in 1992. This application requires the following variance: 1. 2. Lot Area. The lot is 10,113.75 s.f. where 21,780 s.f. is the minimum lot area for the LR-IC zoning district. Lots of one acre or less serviced with public sanitary sewer and platte d prior to the adoption of the zoning chapter are only required to meet 80% of the lot area requirement (17,424 s.f.). Lot Width. The lot is 75' wide where 100 ’ is the minimum lot area for the LR-IC zoning district. Lots of one acre or less serviced with public sanitary sewer and platted prior to the adoption of the zoning chapter are only required to meet 80% of the lot width requirement (80'). Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B): Minimum lot requirements. Section 10.03, Subd. 6(A)(1): Lot size. ^2435 Jeff Litzau — Lutz Construction 3433 Livingston Avenue lartances n/16/98 Page I ANALYSIS Loi Area and Yards LR-IC (1/2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Side Yard Street Yard Rear Yard Required 17,124 s.f 80’10'30’1 O' acc/bldg Existing 10,113.75 s.f 151.9'34'22*10' acc/bldg Variances are required for lot area and lot width. The proposed development would not require any setback variances. Hardcover The subject property is not located in the shoreland overlay district. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 10,113.75 s.f Existing: 0 s.f Proposed: 1,468 s.f 0% 14.5% The lot would not exceed the allowed lot coverage of 15%. Surrounding Properties The properties surrounding the applicant's lot are undersized lots that do not meet the required area in the zoning district. Most lots are 50' wide where the applicant's lot is 75' wide. The rear lot line is adjacent to a developed City of Orono park. Issues 1. The lot was previously developed as a residential site until the house was removed in 1992. 2. The locality is developed consistent with the applicants proposal. ^2435 Jeff Litzau - Lutz Conslniction 3433 Ltxingston Avenue lariances n/16/98 Pagel 3. 4. The proposed development would conform to all lot coverage and setback requirements. The lot is provided with sanitary sewer. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of variances from lot width and lot area resulting in a hardship on the property due to the lot being developed prior to the adoption of the zoning code, and the lot is provided with a sewer unit. Attachments A B C D E F G H I Application Plat Map Location Map Sur\'ey/Site Plan Site Topography Elevation View Sewer Map Propert>’ Owners List Permit Record U2455 Jiff Litzau - Lutz Construetton 3433 Ltungston Avenue Variances ////6/93 Page 3 A Application P • • Date Received (A- Amount Paid ;KA— CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE ^PLICATION ^Initial Application Fee $250.00~~^ (550.00 per each additional variance) •*-'__ Renewal Variance Fee $150.00-. 1*=^ (no change from original application) ", '• ■“-' iT’.- \ ^ Variance for non-conforming structures ’ $25^^ After-fr.e-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Ll\/INl^gTDM ______________;_____________ Property Identification Number fPJ.D.) i~7— IH-2.5-43>-QO(o3 — Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_________________________________________^(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ___residential ___pother (specify)______________________ Zoning District: Arvi TYirr^il^ D>ks^shcya ^sid-g»^a> T)<s^rc.-i-_________ APPLIC^J^ / y / / / r* Phone (home) Yf 7-'^32^ Name_)r^ - ^^1 l Phone (work) ^ ?<•? - c2ro ><il Addressf*/jLt>/ City'^^__^ / Zip: Slf S OWNER (if different than applicant) • • Name ______ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ . « Estimated Construction Cost $ (attach additional sheets , if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED 'K Lot Area ^ Lot V^dth Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) __ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:__________________________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) 2C0 1 iT \'v* • : >>>^ i! S Sko^sba-g Fan! S » v • ♦. ;.* - ii< \ •' -. - 5a-k • - . 3 • ^3 r:tV -'T ^ . . v#rT-— »K« ' F ^ ;IOHNS '.fOMT o \U £ ^r/7i > -T-___* ? ^ • • peering riJT OSRRINGiS^^n” iMflar... o.? ''------------ri • C..-. . , • , , * a A V \ •. .? : J , ^ j •*.••• A..^ ^•• .2*‘ J %*. . ^* •. . ^ ’—-rSiiiiisi •tt ^Jk •" 0«*»l ■/.'i:’ '> .l.\ '^ Spring oAsH0«La£ oLIE3r 24C ^IIN^ f ••-.Cv-T.v .\;5-fct; B as I Park A / Carman^fn f ••I VI \«- ' »?v 'rP^S^ Point S^; o R o hill!!''- ^ .V. : •. •- cv GOOSE • ■' ^'i^ISUVND r • • ‘* • -*r . -f . •, . ; r >!-. ••. '•♦■*' 1* •V* ~r* JO • ^ -a•a* /^SPRAY • * —*’1' •• it ^ I ■ ■■' • * ^^ ;. \ 'vj- * : . ' » . *. > ‘ 1v/> SUUVKY KOII: J & I. Uomc%. Inc. lU.srHirTinN; u*i a a U«-m tl.ill of l.ol 3, ninr.V 5, I NAVAHKK UK turns , llunncpln Coiiiiiy, t Hiiinnnoin. D(^\o & ^/h^ociaU^On^ 0«a» • *%Oi^ I i»«0 (612)421-9126 OAVTOM MNV»WfIXUM VINCWOOOtAMC <1 Dcnotrs Iron nomuncnrn m Uvnocot Splkus »ct lur niU|;. Control %%K,n Donocet Existlnf* Ground Elevations (xxx.x) Denotes Fropsoed final Grades PROPOSED TOP FOUHDATtON ELEV. PROPOSED CARACe PU»R EI.EV. 975~«/ PROPOSED* LOWER FLOOR ELEV. 9d‘7:t Lot Area ■ 10,113.73 Sq. Ft. House, Garage & Drive 2,428 ♦- Sq. ft- percent of coverage * 241a- HOTE: Verify all proponed grades and dimensions with ail actual final plans. I ' gjL. / .'<.4. w L t /y^OST'OA/o. " - - -^—»- - - -- - - - Tn-J Nv.« fiVVi ^ hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me cr under ray direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Land Surveyor under the/faUs.,yL of the Stotc of Minnesota. Dated 9/24/96he byt< vrwe. 0 Hinnetota License No. 12267 • Milt J.LYn‘^ Up tT"'\ • •• V d /'■ r.-. •• p'! i ;;-.Vv ^ ,1 / c LoV VOvdt^' t;' Lo4 A vca ' • 2.32.acv4ir \0a\^ - IJccj' 11cu Svl |Pc WC^ “* ^ VJCKS-Cit^ju — Z.cf* ^\lc VM»* A ^ o f- ( 0 VN iy»- 1 D 1 A1 } 1/S'=1-0 ‘ S Fascia Fascia .. SoHils ■^.p Trirtv^ ’..rapped . .'Od trim >rt and 50% 1.(2 Area Tabulation Sheet Index Lcwer Level S04 sq ^A1 Exterior Elevations & General Notes Matn Level Upper Level 804 sq It 820 sq ft A2 Foundation Plan vV/ Cabinet Elevation Sub Tctal 2.428 sq ft A3 1st & 2nd Floor Plans Porch 60 sq ft A4 Building Section Deck 138 sq ft 484 SQ ft A5 Electrical Plans I— ;• t • ...................... t * • .. * • • • ‘ I• ••6 1I ■ •• -• • • •••« •• • 1 MH 98 •. • •• • •.• #» ‘ • • 86 j IIIi•1•111 . 947.li RUN DATE 10/21/96BATCH 505rROr ADDR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER UHE/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR ONHER 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 LIST36 17-117-23 A3 OOOA02293 SttADYWOOD RDK W I S A RODEWALD KEVIN W I SHIRLEY A RODEWALD 2293 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 A3 0021 03A36 LIVINGSTON AVE ROXANN H DEISCH ROXANN H BEISCH 3A36 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 A3 0062 03A33 LIVINGSTON AVE JEFFREY A I LINDA H LITZAU JEFFREY A t LINDA H LITZAU 12A1 KADLER ST HICHAEL HN 55376 36 17-117-23 A3 0065 03AA5 LIVINGSTON AVE CAROLYN H TILLOTSON CAROLYN H TILLOTSON 3AA5 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 A3 0076 03A22 LYRIC AVE DANIEL E SWANSON DANIEL E SWANSON 3A22 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 A3 0061 03A06 LYRIC AVE HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 36 17-117-23 A3 001903AAA LlVn4GSTON AVE PATRICIA J GOAR PATRICIA J GOAR 3AAA LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 A3 0022 03A22 LIVINGSTON AVE D A SERNA SDL SHELDON D A SERNA SDL SHELDON 3A22 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 A3 0063 03A35 LIVINGSTON AVE D V t E N BRUCE DENNIS V S EVELYN N BRUCE 3A35 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 A3 0076 03AAA LYRIC AVE F L I S E MITTELSTAEDT HR/HRS FRANK L HITTELSTAEDT 3AAA LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 A3 0079 03A06 LYRIC AVE HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P O BOX 66 CRYSTAL DAY HN 55323 36 17-117-23 A3 0062 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED TOWN OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL DAY HN 55323 REPORT NO. PIA35A01 PAGE 1636 17-117-23 A3 §02003A36 LIVINGSTON AVE LANE W HOORE LANE W HOORE 3A36 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 \ 36 17-117-23 A3 0023 03A1A LIVINGSTON AVE ROSEHARY P BURHASTER ROSEHARY P BURHASTER 3A1A LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 A3 006A 03AA3 LIVINGSTON AVE DENNIS L HEGER DENNIS L HEGER 3AA3 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 I 36 17-117-23 A3 0077 03A36 LYRIC AVE LOIS H HUOLOW LOIS HARIE HUDLOW 3A36 LYRIC AV WAYZATA HN 55391 !; 4 u \ A J 36 17rll7-23 A3 0060 03A06 LYRIC AVE HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 QT 36 17-117-23 A3 015A 03A05 LIVINGSTON AVE SHERYL A PATTEN SHERYL A PATTEN 3A05 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 RUN DATE 16/21/9B BATCH 505 HENNEPIN COUNTT I topERTlT INFORHATION SVSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS tIST REPORT HO. Pl<iS5H0l PACE 17 PROP ADOR OWNER HAHC TAXPAYER NAHC/ADDR 38 17-117-23 0005•0038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED TOWN OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MM 55323 38 17-117-23 66 00080003' ADDRESS UNASSICNE1 HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 38 17-117-23 66 001500038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 ROX 66 CRYSTAL DAY HN 55323 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 17-117-23 66 0076 02361 SHADYWOOD RO LOUISE A CANCELHOFF LOUISE A CANCELHOFF 2361 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55361 38 17-117-23 66 0080 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED TOWN OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HM 55323 TOTAL BATCH 505 00023 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESEMTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE JePWSEHTATIOH of INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE OH THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTHCNT OF PROPERTY TAXATION# TO THE BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE 1 €H' No O 3W33 /Vijx* ^ I PERMIT RECORD Permit No. ?'753 Date g*?6g C- ^0 ‘4'^‘-hl It-Se-ll /?-l-^/ <3 /fc Type of Permit hx ' hiT^j TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator October 12,1998 SUBJECT: #2437 Jeff Martineau 2565 North Shore Drive Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acre) Lot Area:64,250 square feet (1.47 acre) Application: The applicant has proposed to construct a 3' by 13' addition to the residence located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback. A basement wall would be extended to allow the addition above the new foundation. The existing wall has been determined to be in poor condition. The property owner has stated that a portion of the lakeside deck would be removed to decrease hardcover. The house currently has a hipped roof line on the lake side. The applicant has proposed to change the roof line to a gabled style. The height of the new roof would not increase the height of the structure. The gabled roof line would be an extension of the existing gable. This application requires the following variance: 1.Average Lakeshore Setback. The roof line within the average lakeshore setback would be raised to allow' a gabled style rather than the existing hipped roof. 2.Allowed Hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The applicant has proposed to add a 3' by 13' addition to the existing residence for living space. However, a portion of the existing deck would be removed. Overall hardcover would be reduced from 2,775 s.f. (22.99%) to 2,439 s.f. (20.21%). n24}7 Jtjf Martineau 2"SS Sorth Short Drive Variances 11/16/98 Page I r Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.56, Subd. 16(C)(6): Average Lakeshore Setback Section 10.22, Subd. 2: Allowed Hardcover Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(1): Allowed Hardcover 4 W-Zi* Jeff Martineau 2"35 Sorth Shore Dr he Variances U/16^93 Page! ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IA (2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 87,120 s.f.200'75'30'50' Proposed 64,250 s.f.157'45'68'NA The residential addition would be located 45' from the lakeshore requiring a setback variance. A deck is located on the lakeside of the residence setback 15' from the lakeshore. 65 s.f. of deck will be removed as a result of the remodeling on the house. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0-75'12,070 s.f.2,775 s.f. (22.99%) none (0%) 2,439 s.f (20.21%) yes 75-250'30,120 s.f.4,327 s.f (14.37%) 7,530 s.f (25%) 4,327 s.f (14.37%) none 250-500'22,060 s.f.550 s.f (2.49%) 6,618 s.f (30%) 550 s.f (2.49%) none 500-1000'0 0 0 (35%) 0 none The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance to permit the construction of a 3' by 13' addition to the residence. The hardcover would decrease in the 0-75' setback h'llowing removal of 65 s.f. from the deck and 310 s.f. from a patio that would be completely removed. No alteration will occur beyond 75' from the lakeshore on the property. U243" Jejf Sfartmeau 2 "33 Sorth Shore Drive Variances Il'l6/9S Page 3 Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 64,250 s.f.Existing: 2,954 s.f. Proposed: 2,993 s.f. 4.6% 4.7% The lot does not exceed the allowed lot coverage of 15%. ANALYSIS Variance STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant's have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit B. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues 1. The residence was constructed prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. Most of the structure is located within 75' of the lakeshore. 2. Removal of the concrete patio and a portion of the lakeside deck would decrease the overall hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback by 336 s.f. 3. 4. 0. 6. An extension of the gabled roof would increase the height of the residence towards the hke. Although, the hipped roof is directing water directly to the lake. The gabled roof would divert water to the sides of the residence. The 39 s.f. addition to the residence would require moving the basement wall out 3'. The applicant has stated the replacement of the existing wall would be an improvement to the residence as the existing wall is in poor condition and of substandard construction. The proposal would not change any hardcover outside of the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The property contains a large wetland over most the north half of the lot. •24}" JeffMartmeau 2^55 Sorih Shore Dri\e Variances U/I6 9S Page A STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the variances to allow a 39 s.f. addition to the residence and alteration of the roof line. Upon approvals to remodel the residence the applicant will remove a 310 s.f. concrete patio and reducing the size of a lake side deck by 65 s.f. Attachments A B C D E F G H 1 J K Application Description of Request (and photos) Site Plan Plat Map Location Map Survey Site Topography Wetland Map Hardcover Calculations Property Owners List Permit Record U2417 JtffMarnmau 2^3S Sorth Short Drive Variances U/16^98 Page 5 J A Application#.2V37 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 (S30.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 ^ p (no change from ori^nal application) '• Variance for non-conforming structures -^^250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Date Received /c/iiln £> Amount Paid £ •n P. . 7 / PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address ____________________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)_____^ O00*-j Date Pro I (do) ( Attach legal description to a^lication if not in^ded on required survey. cquired own the adj Present use of property; \-^^sidential ipplication if not mcludec Xmontlv'year) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ___^other (specify). Zoning District: \ /I- APPLICANT PhoneOiome) ’2Ja'7JP> Name ^_______ Phone(work) ^zL(5l Address: AJn^cTl JnjiPCxtv: _____Zip: { OWNER (if different than applicant^ A L n ^Name Address: Phone (home). Phone (work). City;.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ Estimated Construction Cost S ATTfttkl. 2l^.ooo (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width %/^ardcover -V Setback:Front Side Rear Other (specify) Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual oroperty conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:_ (attach additional sheets if necessary) B November 2,1998 Jeff Martineau 2565 North Shore Oriv« Orono. MN 55J91 SUMMARY OF VARIANCE APPLICATION DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST 1 request three (3) changes to the structure located at 2565 North Shore Drive, Orono: #1. This change to extend three (3) feet to the existing dining room wall and change the dining room to a third bedroom as shown on the attached drawing. The exact size of this addition is 13 feet by 3 feet. A total hardcover addition of 39 sq.ft. The roof line would match good and eliminate one existing gable, gutter and downspout. #2. This change would be to eliminate the hip portion of the living room roof by extending the gable to the exterior wall. This change would also include relocating the fireplace along the exterior wall in the living room that is adjacent the existing deck. The fireplace would be within the foundation. These changes would add no additional hardcover and would eliminate existing gutters and downspouts presently running to the lake. #3. This change would be to remove app. oximately 65 sq.ft, of deck located closest tc the lake. This change would be made to compensate for the change described in changes number one and number two. I have researched and examined many different options with adding on to my home outside the 0- 75' setback. I had blueprints developed and also a model of the possible changes by adding a new garage with rooms above it. At further view this vould require raising the roof higher than the existing highest peak. These proposed changes solve additional existing hardships. Number one is the replacement of a wall in the basement in the area of the existing dining room that is in poor condition and substandard construction. The proposed changes will reduce a substantial amount of roof water run-off into the lake. All the proposed changes will in effect reduce the overall hardcover existing in the 0-75' setback. The overall hardcover for my property is under the 25% requirement. H : • 4 a. ' I I i ^7-*-*r» 7'T^: ■'~iS?s W, w; 4 \ £ ■i \ ffl! , MU' NS ( \ fx.sfin^ lo‘ippe<A foc^ \ V ILl I o CfeT(f F^/2p:p Cc£ X^tklJt P^Jl/OPC^ifjrs ^OM I \ t (b<5Q ^offiTri 6-0^1 VJ m tm A .' ‘''0^%-ft^'lliPi’' ■ ■'■ ■;". ••'■ -4i ^Hpl Jmm'I y^-re^‘,r k'l 1 I 3M Wma^ fc; •' AVI'7 ''- • WW •. r - ^*::- • • •: •• »• '^'y *.1, . J •*i , C Evaii Ir^t ^ .4^_- y ifi’ ^ 1^- • •- I y V •■ •< •■. ;*v*:;i ; . '*^ A .&l^OUl jO^S^OKJ I s f-r Z •• i.^ •-■?s:‘V .-« ■>•, •■ t ' ''*1 icrai li : S £?=*.’* "iri; '• ;F ':>••.r --^*-43.JMlj^? :■ ■y-"'^v;.: ''.\7.r.^<?;i^: :* -• - : ' ^ 7 - -<.70- -i. '\ ' ^r 'K V Si,.•^ X <T*•1 '•■'‘*V\ xTI>-^' - •*'* ^ ^ * i'5'j; •'<• • .\ V'V*';'*!:^ ''’’• V V fc /•ou<.<.-t^, ^-_/l^o^rejsi. •Ceil :^fC^'7C5. 'Si ill II ^•"v \-*- V •'. ' ;■ *^‘- 4‘.'1 •t.'i* I'r-.l < *» ’. ?2C.« ja M ;i ®i :• ■ -» t r> JB t:.’ 6 -Ul — r ■■m -I hi lUMim - IR^ ■m/ ^ *;... * C’ f' .'V V.r.-)? ■ #4 I c ^"TX/e^ ISocC^. of Vi^ne 2)<sc?/s^j? f 1 f f r 1 t y 'X V • II ' i f i f v'O .T r '• ‘'•iA- ' ’ jf*-' - #i-£ ;,.VA M ^ ^. ^ '' *. '• * - -^... % V V.^“3 . - • i-'- 4V-:1. \.'.'7^ \ %* . /iti /. * ' \'*^V'V ■ - ■“ ' ”.-••• f.>• V ■*• • .:-•- •. r'-: ' ■■ •'■ ^ r m , V cr^ ^oof ro JoTc ^ ‘iCe 1 ^B c<f AV./ /V V t,^ ^ co’’^ ^ t. 5.S' (ftf s •/ / ^ /t-5 fj* • • ■ ■ ■ \ iiiar • • __.• •• Y/.V yv- ^ V ri ve \ • \ ■. ..Aj t n 2/^ • # 7.tf fro^T 79'jV- •% \i kooki'*'’ f.w“‘""'': ll(Tf%^if>//_ . -\ - ,- - Tpoety- '//“> NC OR ■ATS I lATS ^ VAriRTOWV *• ___X? toiunn ^ ^1 — 1 ^ '^1- e/»,| *0 0 THOWOUgwMtO . I FOX -1^:1 Line wmri 4C0 vv-'rjr -■•- ;I0HRS •.•■ ;■ ‘.MMT V ^ \ U * • V > O .':•/ S u. couxOf \nx LA LOMSVIfW cn o vV\'V'.'. • * * A30I800N WAT ORONO \ ~^nio AO V- : Fwolcw me ra o TOU 'French } - .. - Lake CRURTlf R >-• • r /-• •• % • u. I 60e,4* 1 o»vN cA -J----------- Proposed a<3l^*' ^ Par 4- o? 4*0 V)«fc ro.ev\oN/e • • I I*= = ¥ is-'II . I J . I : : I 5 ! . ^ s ^ . I I n ! I i ! ; t nil f n 1 6' )) • \ ((( 88^o L,U ! ° • -• • ° - f ( d I I \ \ V “ r> FREf^CH LAKE IDBY) (l9QibSerial Photo) %.' V i ^ * , ^CnCH^? 'f;•X.'-' J* -'" GO'^.r ■/s':;'..?:-.- - . ' 5 ^ V •.>vl V ■ •'V , » . *. J.v 1 *V. •" -*_t • *ft. . r 1 tT /,-.'tt- "1 ,< t, 1 -.-\ •✓.i .’ ■' . • • . • •* A ''i, A ■ .Vsioo). ..,:^?.& .-•■'Si.. .‘‘i^rV ■•: r^;.-. ■'-’^nv--,:;:---5- .’ -V ?-.r^ " < • «•d7*\,.•*-/• * *- ■ -.<•• V.X * ••*: 7 .Xu i i. i •■■. ,»f:;. :'.(•'•t.^^'''iv?•;• *v"?r v . K -• -•: &2'.-X ife^ •'- •• -'V ■■■.t'Xt-^ - viT.r- M T -c u kfj? »•-- ^ i; -H.V ''-. r - - • • - 2- :- • ■ .7:. ‘•‘" .-Si;--:- •’to,-..,___ w *. •. •■*.. X HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET I of ^-/jr.7^ SETBACK zoNc: (circle ONE) (5^ 75-250 ' 250-500' 500-100^"T. Existing Hardcover in Zone • •* t A. ■ H ouse . X_________= 1739 s.p. LENGTH WIDTH 3 ^ ^oo/rj»^ r “i* j?9 .. -cs r. At WALL5 Cohc.. Patio S.F, - 2^5 I 10 I. ^20^S.F. CohlC WALK 3lO yfZL S,F,-^ ^p ef I ^ o S.F. B. G arage - X S.F. c. D riveway S.F. - X S.F. D. Sidewalk '- X S.F. X _ S.F. E. Patio / D eck S.F. - X S.F. F. Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN plastic ' sheeting X X S.F. S.F. . • i ‘STfP? COhiC ^b. L 4-, .• h,0 X ^3 B « 32 S.F, S.F. <^roop • = 1.^G. Other X •S.F. • Total H ardcover in Zone 2775 • * S.F. Total Property Area in Zone \'l.0 70t S.F. /// {v ZV3? • •mm • • 2 7 7J- .l[T| n.oyo X100 - ' \o.2i9. i;■■) :l 7 V. T ♦ / -n . -)^- ^ <? f HARDCOVER CALCULATIOH WORKSfjpEI^ a*'-' ^-/? -9^ 250-500' 500-1006"''rlp7 nnAywUYCA vnLwUL/i I iuri nuf\r\jn^Mr4 ^ aeinM.t'. zoMcj ^t.jM(.Lt umi) 0-75'( 75-250/ 9'in-'^nn» c;nn_innn* • • Ex 1ST IMG llAnOCOVER If| ZonE • • A. ’ H ouse * y - • 8^r> /0-2/. r*vx^r<f, . I* . LENGTH ^TOtiC PiLLAfZ^ ^ ?(P) 3 ■ WIDTH c c ‘ SfiHl^fr W^Ll"^ 37 — ■ —- X /.2 = 44 • • ^. p •• X • S. P . , X a S. P • B. Garage /7. S’ y 18.2 « S . P. B lacktop c. D riveway y • «« • Qsq-■ *S.F. • 0\l\\j£ V^/iMUjC. VJtOAf^ —- ------X . • = 2/ 70 • • • S. F. • D. Sidewalk • • v • • S.F. • Y • S.F. a S.F.E. ,ATI0/ D eck y _ • S.F. F,Landscape y • • • S.F.AREAS . . UNDERLAIN BY • . y • a S.F.PLASTIC SHEETING y • %# • f • • S.F. y • rn^m wit f S.F. G. Other y •a S.F. • Total H ardcover in Zone 4? 27 • S.F. A Total Property Area in. Zone lo.iZO ^ S. F • B • . • A i3Z7 4 B 30. ao A 100 - ^ 1.4,_3 7 •% . 1 i .;r;V ,«r^. ^‘iv-yry • * ^ ..*1 g { >‘— . 7 iff tf r-.7v* \ :V K r ^*7 4] r J^Ff /'iARTlNc/i 'j HARDCOVER CALCUUTIOH WORKSHEET • ^ • J SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE one ) 0-75' 75-250' Q50-5007 500-1000 'E xisting Hardcover in Zone * ' I 3 - •/t • V • •House % t B. Garage D. Sidewalk - E. Patio/ Deck * •<! ‘ IW . V ‘ ‘“n** I 5 •Ii A F.Landscape areas UNDERLAIN BY PLASTIC SHEETING fa % iK G. Other LENGTH X . WIDTH S.F. x _S.F. • • X _S.F. X _S.F. X _ * V no X _s S3 • • 5£<? s.P. X \ \ \S.F. _ X \ X X X X X i ic, 'f,' .1 Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 5 SC? r/z-i t Cti*^Cr •• • r-/x- /ja CAj.i. Cfr /# • I / • ? / zi o(> a . S.F, . S.F. , S.F. , S.F. S.F, S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.B B 2Z. j> g*^ X 100 = % «' f c -'1 .* i-#% •• V' -1) PROP AOOR OMHBR NAME TAXPAYER HAME/AODR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHB/AODR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAMB/AODR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEMPROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 09 117 23 41 0003 2S4S NORTH SHORE OR CAROL G CALLAHAN CAROL G CALLAHAN BOX. 72 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 CONDMl. I 38 09 117 23 41 0004 2565 NORTH SHORE UR JEFFREY L MARTINBAU JEFFREY L MARTINBAU 25C5 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 CONDMN I 38 09 117 23 41 0009 38 ADDRESS UNASSlUNED CHARLES k BIROITTA SCHOEN CHARLES k BIRGITTA SCHOEN 24 30 NORTH SH' RE UR WAYZATA MN 55391 CONDMN I 38 09 117 23 42 0003 2625 NORTH SHORE DR ANGELA E WOODHOUSE ANGELA E WOODHOUSE 2625 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 CONDMN 8 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPERARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF DATE lo-M-ms by Tr.ei Mlu) fJnt/\ ])! [ PERMIT RECORD « K Permit No. im al7^ (aO*i1 !ttlU / '■) /3 ^ G /cw<y^ Date 14- S'^ ^-S! n-^jJy ;;. /. S’s! V- / </ ■ y''/ :r -.p' o 3 -2,-LlI_ Type oC Permit ftuy*i4\0 ..^l<tsnhln^ S/9C S'CuJe/^tk ./-. \. . . -'t t>JjLiLu /;■ 1 Xtrr^I^::p J K<. . yi.. / f tlCA^ ' JP the/. ■rvj^<x (XCr 7..V«'; TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator November 13, 1998 SUBJECT: #2438 Michael Sletten 4680 Bayside Road Lot Line Rearrangement-Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-IA One Family Rural Residential District (5 acres) Existing Proposed 4680 Bayside Road (applicant) 6.51 acres 6.26 acres 4720 Bayside Road 180' X 242' (approximately 1 acre) 1.25 acres Application:The applicant is the property owner of the 6.51 acre parcel located at 4680 Bayside Road. He is requesting approval to sell a comer of his property that measures .25 acres to his adjacent neighbor at 4720 Bayside Road a septic area. The septic system inventory for both parcels is Exhibits. I he proposal will reduce the size of the existing 6.51 acre by a quarter acre and increase the size of the adjacent lot which is non-conforming as to lot size. The proposed lot line rearrangement will not interfere with the location of the primary or alternate site for the applicant's property. Pertinent Ordinances: . Section 10.27, Subd. 5, (B) RR-1A Zoning Standards ^2-/38 Michael Sletten 4680 Bayside Road 11/16/98 page-1 ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards RR-IA District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 5 acres 300'100 ’50 ’100' The applicant’s parcel will continue to meet lot area and setback requirements. The lot currently does not meet lot width requirements. The proposed lot line rearrangement will not further diminish the lot width at the required front yard setback. The proposed lot line rearrangement will increase the adjacent property ’s total lot area from 1 to 1.25 acres. The lot line rearrangement will not improve the lot width for the adjacent property, as the addition is to the rear. Issues 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The lot line rearrangement will provide a suitable septic site to an existing 1 acre parcel that has a non-compliant system. The existing 6.5 acre parcel will not be diminished in acreage so as to become non- conforming as to lot size. The 6.5 acre parcel is oddly configured. The proposal is to remove a comer and attach it to the rear of the adjacent property and would be connected by 20 ’ of common boundar>’. Existing drainage and utility easements e,\ist along the external lot lines. The easements should be revised to take 10 ’ drainage and utility easements along the new e.xterior lot lines of the parcel. The applicant will need to obtain a consent form from his montage company to sell a portion of the property to the adjacent property owner. U2438 Michael Sletten 4680 Bayside Road J 1/16/98 page-32^ STAFF RECOMMENDATION To discuss the configuration of the lot line rearrangement and the need for easements along the perimeter of the parcels. Attachments A B C D E F G Application Plat map Propertj' Owner’s list Proposed lot line rearrangement Proposed easements-drawn by staff Septic diagram for 6.5 acre parcel Septic Inventory §2438 Afichael Sletten 4680 Bayside Road 11/16/98 page~^ L Application ff Date Received 10-Z.i-^^ Amount Paid ^3^ • A CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Siie address 4^^ ^ u <7/^^ Property Identification Number (PIP) ?/-// ^ g ^ ^ ? r^{ 3 Please check one - Property ____abstract or_____torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name r, ^ /I Address City /T? ' ^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address City__ (attach list if more than one) _______Phone (home) Zip /^->*ry Phone (work) Zip Phone (home) _ Phone (work) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District 1 <5..T/ Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units J} Other (specify)_________ PROPOSAL D1V iaion for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) ____ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) :s per Acres Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)_________ * trsi! t'; A? * *' • ^ 1 •* V .J ^nNIMUM MATEWAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMLNARY APPLICATION 1 . Pa>inent of tees (refer to "application fees" listed below. 2. Completed application form. 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. of■»« oPPUcation. MLMMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Pavment of ftes (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning Official's Signature______ __________________________ APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) S250.00 X Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement S350.00 •* _____ Subdivision Application (Class I & II) S350.00 -------- Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 + $25.00/lot (Class III & all non-residential) _____ Final Plat Application (Class III) $200.00 _____ Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. $200.00 Totals _____ Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) _____ Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) -------- Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) -------- Renewa of Class 111, Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) Renewal of Final Class 111 Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from original application) B. Special Improvement Fees: -------- Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + $.50.'lineal ft.;_____lin. ft. x .50 - $ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50/lineal ft.;_____lin. ft. x .50 = $ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/snib Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 On-Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/per lot x _____new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees Variance S220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100.00 _____ PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit ^e apphe^t hereby agrees to provide all information required or requisted by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant’s Signature_______________________________ Owner’s Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are eld on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Plaiming Commission and Council. If m 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. f RUN DATE 10/21/98 BATCH 506 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR / PROP ADADDR I OWNER NAHE \ TAXPAYER \ NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 06-117-23 21 0005 0^565 DAYSIDE RD PIS RENNEBOHH PETER I SHARON RENNEBOHH ^565 BAYSIDE ROAD HAPLE PLAIN ►.:! 55359 38 06-117-23 22 0012 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ERVIN A WACHHAN JR CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 f 38 31-116-23 33 0006 / 0<«720 BAYSIDE RD I B PETER ACHEY ETAL I B PETER ACHEY \ <i720 BAYSIDE RD X^PLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 33 0009 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PAINTERS CREEK HOHEOWNERS PAINTERS CREEK HOHEOWNERS C/0 CRAIG PASSOW 100 LUCE LINE RIDGE HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 31 0013 09680 BAYSIDE RD H D SLETTEN I H K SNETSINGER H D SLETTEN I H K SNETSINGER 9680 BAYSIDE RD HAPLE PLAIN 38 31-118-25 39 0005 00085 LUCE LINE RIDGE H C JOHNSON I D J JOHNSON HERVIN C JOHNSON 85 LUCE LINE RIDGE HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 06-117-23 22 0009 09695 BAYSIDE RD KATHI J CHAPPELL KATHI J CHAPPELL 9695 BAYSIDE RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 06-117-23 22 0019 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ERVIN A WACHHAN JR CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 38 31-118-23 33 0007 09790 BAYSIDE RD L YOGERST I D DUNN D DUNN t L YOGERST 9790 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 33 0011 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED B R LANGE t J B BURRELL BRUCE R LANGE SUITE 615 53 W JACKSON BLVD CHICAGO IL 60609 38 31-118-23 39 0003 00025 LUCE LINE RIDGE C H HATTSTROH EVA HATTSTROH CURTIS H HATTSTROH 25 LUCE LINE RIDGE HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 39 0013 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PAINTERS CREEK HOHEOWNERS PAINTERS CREEK HOHEOWNERS C/0 CRAIG PASSOW 100 LUCE LINE RIDGE HAPLE PLAIN HN SSZS^ REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 18 38 06-117-23 22 0011 00038 AiiDRESS IRIASSIGNED I T E H L GEFFRE IRVIN T E MARJORIE L GEFFRE 9665 BAYSIDE RD HAPLE PIAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 33 0005 09660 DAYSIDE RD BEN CUFF BOBBIE E NEVA CUFF 9660 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 33 0008 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PAINTERS CREEK HOHEOWNERS PAINTERS CREEK HOHEOWNERS C/0 CRAIG PASSOW 100 LUCE LINE RIDGE HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 33 0012 00150 HCCULLEY RD HARCIA A BARNUH HARCIA A BARNUH 10569 PARKER DR EDEN PRAIRIE HN 55397 c . \ ' 7 36 31-118-23 3<> 000^ 000<iS LUCE LINE RIDCE J R HOLH t J K HOLN JANES R > JAYNE K HOLN 45 LUCE LINE RIDGE NAPLE PLAIN NN 5535«»nr TOTAL BATCH 506 00017 P PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 06 117 23 22 0017 PROP ADDR 4665 BAYSIDE RD OWNER NAME I T u M L GEFFRE TAXPAYER IRVIN i MARJORIE GEFFRE NAME/ADDR 4665 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 CONDMN # j8 06 117 23 22 0022 4725 BAYSIDE RD J W MORGAN JR £i D G J W MORGAN JR & D G 815 PINEVIEW LA N PLYMOUTH MN 55441 CONDMN 8 PULFORD PULFORD 38 06 117 23 22 0019 4775 BAYSIDE RD EVAN R MELINE EVAN R MELINE 16901 GRAYS BAY BLVD WAYZATA MN 55391 CONDMN 8 38 06 117 23 22 4755 BAYSIDE HILLOWAY CORP BT HILLOWAY CORP & GREENFIELD CORP 1551 HUNTER DR WAYZATA MN 55391 0021 RD AL CONDMN 8 38 06 117 23 22 0025 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HILLOWAY CORP ET AL HILLOWAY CORP £. GREENFIELD CORP 1551 HUNTER DR WAYZATA MN 5:> »91 CONDMN 8 1. n 1 ■' . n t eV. i) 'si I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPERARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF DATE BY 'ttcl • r LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SUKVETOBS INVOICE NO -lLLlIl F. B. Nn SCALE r faO _ 0-DENOTES IRON REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 7601 • 73rd Avcmit North 560^093 LOT LINE REARANGEMET FOR MICK SLETTEN MinneapoUf, Minnesota SS428 Bitnirgora (SrrtifUitr Lot 2. Bkick I. U\YS«I)H HIM . Itciinc|mi uninty. Minnesou. accoiding lo ihe revurded plat Ihcrcof excepting thcrerrom the rolinwing described prnpenv Hcginimiu at I lie most wesicrlv ctifner of said lol. iheiKe North 16 degrees 16 muiuies 05 sceotids liasl. assumed hearing, along tlie most northuesierly line of said lot 134 00 feet, tlience South 78 degrees 30 .ninuies U5 seconds Fast 75 08 feet. iheiKc South 05 degrees 32 minutes 43 seconds Wc«. 11 5 00 reel lo a boundary line orsaid lol. iheiKe North 8*1 degrees 32 tiiimiies 43 seconds V'esi along said lol line 100 00 leet to the poinl of beginning and tlierc icrniinating Parcel U (Containing 10.740 Si| Kl •ti25Acics) that part of Lot 2. Block I, IIAVS113I: llll.l.. Ilumetiiii Counts. Miiiin Mila, a* cording to ilic recorded plat ihcreol*beginning at itic most %%estef!> cornet of said lot. t letice 4onh 16 degrees 16 minutes 05 seconds East. asv«mrd hearing, along the most northwestw^ly h le ot‘ said lot 1.14 00 feet, thence SiMJlh 78 de^<ees 30 mtitules 05 seconds East 75 Oh fcvl. thence South 05 degrees 12 mimitcs 41 seconds West 11 5 00 feet to a biHiiidary liitc of said lot. thence North 80 degrees 32 minutes 43 sccihk Is West along said lot line 100 (Xi feet to the |Hiin( of licgimiing and there terminating The omy easements shown er# from plats of »ecoco or mlormation provided by client hereby certify that rhu i a true and correct repryseniation of a survey of ihe bouncanet of the above detenbed 'and and in# location of ait buitdingt ano vis- «b*e encroeenmenis. if any, from or on said land r. ^ > i ( A 7601 73rd Ave. No. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 Certificate 560-3093 For Excavation Only xOOO.O Denotes Exieting Elevotion MICK SLEHEM Denotes Proposed Elevafk ^ ■ Denotes Surface Oroinoge / Proposed Top of Block _______ Proposed Goroge Floor Proposed Lowest Floor Type of Building - fuK H/alfc.ai- & AY^ IV E (oOOHTf pOAU WOAP MS CITHl taUIL'DINO P6TA\L ^, I"'30' (jw^ friePECTOR ORONO ILANy WATE PERMiT NO.•» • *^150-'p' ~ 'tji, ^'IVO' o >p 'IDV .8'a flA'rft w-s ?) ^cr "i. •V • • — -O ^ i’SLSSsi rIsub™ ;f pporo^ec? Is pc$ itJewc/C. y 'V^ INUI MrrrwYi-*-' --------------- WL. .ommo...-' a,c .or your .n.crm.noM. A.. \&cf N?' W Vi Lot 2, Block 1. DAYSIDE HILL ..’P- I till Ii/ J Permit #*s: 1551 Dates: 7/17/67 (This is [i/f an existing system ( SYSTEM CQMPLT.^Cg fl-3) ; 3 Contractors: Widmer Bros. ) new construction). 0 Code System: Meets or exceeds current City standards in all respects relating to design, construction, and location. Appears to be operating properly. Compliant System: Does not meet all current City standards for new construction, but in most respects appears to be designed, located, and constructed in accordance with previous codes and is functioning properly. Non*Compliant System: System may or may not meet current City standards for design, construction, or location, but is failing to properly treat and dispose of the current input; and any system with less than three feet of vertical separation between the bottom of the drainfield and the saturated soil level. (The saturated soil level \ has or [ ] has not been Identified at this time. If saturated soil level has not been identified, this classification is subject to revision.) the TANK CO^roITIOM (5«9) : 9 5 Pumpout not needed at this time. Solids accumulation in tanks indicates they should be pumped out this year. System is discharging to the surface. Tanks must be pumped out within 48 hours. Inspection risers missing-tanks could not be inspected. If tanks have not been pumped out within three years, they should oe pumped out and risers installed now. Inspection pipe is located over tank baffle-can not measure solids accumulation. If tanks have not been pumped out within three years, they should be pumped out now.CP (During the last septic tank Maintenance Pumpout the taxiks [ ] were or [ were not confirmed to be water-light by the licensed pumping contractor. It the tanks were not confirmed to be watertight, this classification is subject to revision.) ngATNFIFt.D CO^roTTIOM 13 11 Drainfield is dry, no surfacing evident. 12 Some evidence of surfacing, not critical yet. Repair is not required at this time. ^3^ Drainfield is saturated and visibly discharging untreated effluent to the surface. the City Inspector immediately. Repair must be completed within 90 days. 14 Drainfield extent and condition unkno-wn. Contact POTENTIAL FOR SYSTEM FAILURE: (systen aae ar.d condit^ion. soils, etc.) : fslling ccmme:»TS! In order to confirm that your septic system meets Minnesota standards, soil borings were performed to verify a 3 foot separation between the drainfield and the seasonal water table. The separation is 0 feet and the system is non-compliant. Repair or replacement of the septic system is required by 11/14/97. /) / J_ _^ / y M /ICi Date of Inspection ^ ' S^lfic System Inspector Note: In the event that this inspection report is used to satisfy the requirements for a transfer of property, this report does not guarantee that an existing system will continue to function properly, but indicates the operation of the system under current conditions. Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 f,'0 ^ 'L. CITYof ORONO ij,'A .V<mma Municipal Offices '^mo3.street Address; 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 M Address: 4720 Bayside Rd. Permit #*s: 1551 Dates: 1/n/Sl (This is an existing system [ Contractors: Widmer Bros ] new construction). SYSTEM COMPLIAMCE (1-3): 3 1 Code System: Meets or exceeds current City standards in all respects relating to design, construction, and location. Appears to be operating properly. 2 Compliant System: Does not meet all current City standards for new construction, but in most respects appears to be designed, located, and constructed in accordance with previous codes and is functioning properly. Mon-Compliant System: System may or may not meet current City standards for design, construction, or location, but is failing to properly treat and dispose of the current input; and any system with less than three feet of vertical separation between the bottom of the drainfield and the saturated soil level. 0 (The saturated soil level ] has or ( ) has not been identified at this time. If the saturated soil level has not been identified, this classification is subject to revision.) TANK CONDITION (5-9); 6 tumpout not needed at this time. Solids accumulation in tanks indicates they should be pumped out this year. System is discharging to the surface. Tanks must be pumped out within 48 hours, o Inspection risers mi-sing-tanks could not be inspected. If tanks have not been pumped out within three years, they sh’uld be pumped out and risers installed now. 9 Inspection pipe is located over tank baffle-can not measure solids accumulation. If tanks have not been pumped out within three years, they should be pumped out now. (Bering the last septic tank Maintenance Pumpout the tanks [ ] were or were not confirmed to be watertight by the licensed pumping contractor. If the tanks were not confixnned to be watertight, this classification is subject to revision.) p^INFIELD CONDITION (11-14); 11 Drainfield is dry, no surfacing evident. Some evidence of surfacing, not critical yet. Repair is not required at this time. Drainfield is saturated and visibly discharging untreated effluent to the surface. Contact the City Inspector immediately. Repair must be completed within 50 days. Drainfield extent and condition unknown. li 14 POTENTIAL FOR SYSTEM FAILURE: (system age and condition, soils, etc.) : high COMMENTS: In order to confirm that your septic syste.m meets Minnesota standards, soil borings v.ere perform.ed to verify a 3 foot separation between the drainfield and the seasonal water table. The separation is 0 feet and the systemi is i ant. Penair or reolacement of the septic system is required by 12/31/2007. is-i±_Date of Inspection n for aNote: In the ^ that this inspection report is used to satisfy the requirements — transfer of property, this report does not guarantee that an existing system will continue to function properly, but indicates the operation of the system under current conditions. Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY Address: 4680BaysideRd. fci ------------■ ■ ■ ■* Building Type: residence Permit #: 7009 Date of Permit: System Type: mound PID: 31-118-23 33 0013 #BRs/GPD 4 Systems/unit 1/1 6/2/95 Installer: Patnode Bros. Appliances: Indry.dshw SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity: 1 Tank Condition: 5 DF condition: 11 Failure Pot: low SEPTIC TANKS Material: precast concrete Setback to Bldg: Capacity: 1000,1000,1000 DRAINFIELD Length of Lines 150 # Lines: 3 Trench Width: 10 Treatment Area: 80*45 T>'pe of Filter: rock,clean sand Tile Size: 1.5 Under Tile 9 Perc Rate: 44 Setback DF-Bldg: DF Hi above Wt: 3 Soil Type: loam, clay loam Limitations: water table WELL DATA Setbacks - WeU-Tanks: Pump Type: Well-DF: Report in File: Depth: Diameter: Method: INSPECTION RECORD DATE DESCRIPTION 6/30/95 insiallauon 7/29/97 no surfacing PUMPOUT RECORD COMPUANCE DATE GALLONS 1 1 X t 0/<A b^dwidcii OS<=>)fy 1 Building Type: residence Permit #: 1551 Date of Permit: System Type: standard trench SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity: 3 Tank Condition: 6 DF condition: 11 Failure Pot: high SEPTIC TANKS Material: concrete block Setback to Bldg: 20 DRAINFIEID Length of Lines 300 Treatment Area: 600 Tile Size: Under Tile Setback DF-Bldg: 30 Soil Type: loam, clay loam Capacity: 600,600 # Lines:3 Trench Width: 2 Type of Filter: rock Perc Rate: DF Ht above Wt: 0 Limitations: water table WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: 50 Pump Type: subm. INSPECTION RECORD Well-DF: 50 Report in File: Depth: 155 Diameter: 4 Method: drilled PUMPOUT RECORD DATE DESCRIPTION COMPLIANCE DATE GALLONS 10/29/79 no surfacing 2 5/23/80 1200 5/23/80 no surfacing, tanks will be pumped and ris 2 5/1/90 1500 8/4/86 no surfacing 2 3/1/91 2000 6/28/91 no surfacing 2 10/1/91 2000 8/13/93 DF saturated 2 12/2/94 2000 12/16/94 complaint-laundry waste w/sump discharg 2 8/5/97 2,000 7/30/97 non-compliant-repair by 11/14/97 3 12/1/97 non-compliant-tanks overfull,repair by 20 3 r HlZO G: / 1 ^ 0 5 1 A 8 ■ 77rn 7^2 g I D81 25? O 57'g S5D /• 3cyS)^e. Rd 10 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator , \J November 12, 1998 #2439 Service 800, Inc., 2190 W. Wayzata Boulevard - Request for Commercial Site Plan Approval - Variances/CUP - Public Hearing Zoning District: B-1, Retail Sales Business District Application: Request for approval of variances and commercial site plan approval for the construction of a 10,880 s.f oiTice building on Lot 1, Block 1, Sugar Woods 2nd Addition (final plat pending). Request for a conditional use permit for office use in B-1 District. List of Exhibits A - Application & Letter of Request B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Plan Submittal: 1. Site Plan 2. Floor Plan, Elevation Views 3. Landscape plan 4. Proof of Parking 5. Site Survey, Preliminaiy Grading & Utility Plan 6. Site plan sketch by staff identifying easements, setbacks, etc. E - City Engineer Comments 11-9-98 F - Consulting Planner Comments 10-28-98 G - Zoning Code Section 10.40: B-1 District Standards H - Preliminary Plat Approval Resol. #4182 & Peliminary Plat Drawing I - Council Resolution #4041 and Staff Memo re: Highway 12 Development Concept Plan #2439 Service 800, Inc. November 12.1998 Page 2 Site Characteristics, Conformity' (Note: Needed variances are shoun in bold type) Required/Allowed Existing/Proposed Site area:20,000 s.f 41,634 s.f Defined lot width:100'146'± Required front yard:20'10’-45’ Avg. 25’ Required rear yard:30'*See Parking Discussion Required rear yard (if "through" lot):20'M tf II Required side yard:(None)15’(VV); 3'(E) Building setbacks: Front lot line:35'68’ Rear lot line:35’54' Side lot line (West):15'15’ Side lot line (East):15’50’ • Building Height:30'15' max. Lot coverage by structures:15% (6,245 s.O 26.1% (10,880 s.f) Hardcover (Not in Shoreland):NA NA Parking Setbacks: Not allowed within in required 20' front yard (V^ariance) Allowed to within 3* of rear yard if this is noi treated as a through lot... Not allowed within 20' of rear lot line if this is treated as a through lot (Var?) Number of Parking Stalls: Required = 1 per 200 s.f. of "net usable floor area" (Net = 8,900+ / 200 = 45 stalls required) 45 stalls defined (36 proposed initially) Signage Allowance: Grading Within 5' of Lot Lines: 145 s.f (No CUP required since grading is not within 5' of residential lot lines) 50 s.f Loading Berth:1 required per section 10.61 Subd. 17 None proposed #2439 Service 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 3 Summar}’ of Issues for Discussion I. Variances Required 1. Lot coverage: 2. J. 15% allowed, 26.1 Vo proposed Number of parking stalls: 45 required, 36 proposed ("proof of parking" acceptance requested) Parking lot setbacks: a) Front yard: 20'required, 10’-45'proposed b) Rear yard (if this reviewed as a through lot): 20' required, 3'-16' proposed 4. Lack of loading berth. II. Engineering Issues (Also see Exhibit E) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Applicant must submit plans for access to Highway 12 to MnDOT for review and approval. Access is proposed to be through the triangular portion of MnDOT right-of-way just west of the property and directly across from Brimhall Avenue. Parking lot grades should be reduced to 4% from 5%+ proposed. Additional topography outside the site is needed to confirm that the grading plan will function in relation to adjacent properties. Retaining wall may be needed along east lot boundaiy, as well as a construction easement since the storm sewer and parking lot are so close to the side lot line. A detailed plan/cross section for how this boundaiy will be accomodated would be helpful. The City Engineer has a number of specific questions and design comments regarding sils drainage and storm sewer design (See E.xhibit E, item 3). Storm sewer calculations, and a drainage area map are needed. Stormwater plan needs to be submitted to MCWD for review and approval. Confirmation that the NURP pond on Outlot F, Sugar Woods, has the capacitv' to serv e this site and received MC\MD approval, has yet to be submitted. Plans and specs for proposed building sewer/water connections are required. An expanded utility easement will be needed over the existing City water line along the west M439 Service 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 4 property boundary, which appears to be offset 3-4 ’ eastward from the lot line. It is expected that this casement will be granted as part of the pending final plat approval for Sugar Woods 2nd Addition. Existing utility and drainage easements granted with the original plat of Sugar Woods are not clearly identified on the utility plan submitted, but appear to adequately cover the existing sanitary sewer and water facilities at the southwest comer of the site. 7. Financial guarantee required for specific site improvements. 111. Other Site Plan Issues Noted bv DSU and Staff (Also see Exhibit F) 1. 2. 3. Access to Highway 12: Driveways and curb cuts for business uses are regulated by Section 6.05 of the municipal code. The proposed access plan appears to meet the standards of that section, and with the general intent of the approval of Sugar Woods 2nd Addition (see Exhibit H). The applicant should be required to obtain formal MnDOTapproval of the access plan prior to issuance of building permits. Access Connection to Orono Shopping Center Site: Neither the City nor applicant have any intent at this time to create access between this site and the adjacent Orono Shopping Center site. The prelimir.aiy plat approval resolution allows the City to control access to that adjacent property. A future rear access driveway which would connect to the rear service road (if it is ever constructed) appears to be possible with this site plan. The code would normally allow a 3' parking setback from the rear lot line in the rear yard, assuming this is not considered as a 'through' lot. However, if this is treated as a 'through lot' at this time for review purposes, there should be a 20' setback from the north lot line to the parking lot. A setback ranging from 3' to 16’ is shown, with the greater setback show ing future parking. If the service road is ever constructed, 3 parking spaces at the northeast comer of the site will be lost, leaving a potential total of only 42 spaces where 45 are required. There does not appear to be adequate space to pick up 3 stalls in the front yard if the Highway 12 access is closed. In effect, the site plan is not entirely designed to deal with a future conversion to rear service road access only. 4.The rear line of the property does not technically abut the R-1A Residential District due to the platting of Outlot A. Sugar Woods 2nd Addition (the triangular road sliver abutting the future service road, Outlot D, which is zoned R-1 A). The significance is that a fence or hedge would be required along this lot line if the property did abut R-1 A. Given the nature and location of the site and the design and orientation of the building, it does not appear necessaiy' to require screening along the rear lot line. "2439 Ser^'lce 800, Inc November 12,1998 Page 5 D. 6. The landscaping plan includes 5 trees across the Highway 12 frontage, I tree at the right rear comer, and a row of shrubbery along the east side of the building. Applicants plans should more clearly specify which spaces along the building perimeter will be green spaces, and the types of ground cover specified (grass vs. landscape rock. etc.). The B-1 District standards do not set specific green space requirements. Green space constitutes approximately 25% or 34% of the site depending on the parking scheme, as follows: Full Parking Development (45) 25% green space 26% building footprint 49% parking and sidewalks Initial Proposed Parking (361 34% green space 26% building footprint 40% parking and sidewalks With the apparent proposed grade change between this site and the Wear shopping center next door, coupled with the parking being as near as 3' to the lot line, there is little opportunity for any significant landscaping between the two sites. The issue of parking lot setbacks is of some concern. Note that the existing sidewalk is completely within the right-of-way of Highway 12 (constmcted at the shoulder) and leaves 15'-30' of green r.o.w. between the front lot line and the sidewalk, enhancing the appearance of open space. This results in a visual green space between Highway 12 and the proposed parking lot of from 20' to 70’ in depth. It is unknown to staff whether future upgrades of Highway 12 will make use of this space. The 20' front yard requirement is met on average, although portions of the parking lot encroach into that 20'. This is due to the shape of the lot, and may constituie an adequate hardship for the variance. There is no side vard requirement for B-1, hence parking is allowed to within 3' of the side lot line under staffs interpretation of Sections 10.40 Subd. 6 and 10.61 Subd. 5B. It could be argued that the triangular MnDOT property at the southwest comer of the site is a side street, however, and it is possible that future access to the adjacent Otten site will be from this location. In this case, there should be a 10' setback from the west lot line to the first parking stall. This would also have an impact on building setback requirements; setback from a side street is required to be 35’, and the building is only 15’ from the lot line at this comer. However, it may be a stretch to say that this expanded MnDOT right-of-way is a street for setback purposes, and staff does not view this as a variance situation. Parking at the rear of the property is conforming in location, being 3' + from the rear lot line and 10’ + from the R-1A boundar\'. However, see the comments in item #1 above. Snow storage is likely to become an issue if the parking lot is fiilly used for parking. There is little area on the site that could be used for snow storage. ^i2439 Sen’ice 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 6 7.Loading berths: Section 10.61, Subd. 17 requires that one loading berth be provided for any office building in e.xcess of 6,000 s.f. area. No loading berth is proposed. Applicant should be asked to specify reasons why no loading berth is needed, and if those reasons are sufficient, then a variance may be appropriate. If not, then one should be provided. 8.Lighting: Code Section 10.60 Subd. 8 requires that lighting be diffused or directed away from "R” Districts and public streets. No lighting plan has been provided. 9.Signage appears to be in conformance with the limitation of 145 s.f. total and 50 s.f. per individual sign. The single linear building wall sign proposed is approximately 50 s.f. in area. IV. Building Design & Construction 1.Facade materials are not designated and would have to meet the standards of Section 10.40 Subd. 6G(1) to meet code requirements, i.e. a) face brick or b) natural stone, or c) decorative/textured precast concrete, or d) factory fabricated metal frame panels. (See comments below regarding the "office use CUP") 2. Height is well within 30 ’ limit. 3. Trash and recycle facilities are proposed within the building near the east entrance. V. Utilities 1.Sewer Availability Charge (SACk The 10,880 s.f. building would appear to net to approximately 9,000 s.f. for SAC and sewer/water unit determinations. At the Met Council Environmental Sei vices (MCES) rate of 1 SAC unit per 2,400 net s.f. for office, this building would be charged 4 SAC units, and would have a need for 4 sewer and water units. It is expected that applicant will acquire those 4 sewer and water units from Mr. Rebers whose Outlot F, Sugar Woods was allocated 44 units as part of the original utility project serving this area. Municipal sewer is available to the site. There is an existing stub located at the south end of the site. j.Municipal water is available to the site, with access feasible along the west lot line. f I 1 #2439 Sen-ice 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page? 4. D. 6. Other utilities apparently are available to the site. While the new serv ice connections are required to be below ground, the existing power lines are overhead in this area. The developer should be encouraged to have existing overhead wires buried as part of this project, although the City code does not make this a requirement (Section 12.40). Since a number of utility access facilities will be in the proposed driveway, applicant shall be responsible for bringing those facilities to grade and finishing them in a m inner acceptable to the Public Works Department. Although not a code requirement, there is benefit in keeping the perimeter utility and drainage easements in green space rather than under parking lots. This will allow future use by utility companies witli the least site disruption. VI. CUP for Office Use An "office" use in the B*1 Retail Sales Business District requires a conditional use permit. The B-1 code establishes no specific standards for this use. The CUP process allows the City to place specific conditions on conditional uses in order to ensure their compatibility within the zoning district. As an office building of a general nature, the proposed use has minimal impacts within the B-1 district, and does not appear to staff to be in conflict with the Council's "Concept Plan for Development Along Highway 12" adopted by resolution last Februarv-. The City is looking for high quality development along Highway 12, and one condition of approval could be to specify facade materials that would add to the quality of the building, i.e. require face brick rather than allow lesser materials. Perhaps a future critical issue related to the office use, is that this building will not have enough parking to satisfy a conversion to retail use, which requires 1 space per 150 net s.f. rather than the 1 per 200 net s.f. required for office use. This does in fact reduce the flexibility of this building for accommodating future uses. It should also be pointed out that constructing the 11,000 s.f. total area on two stories would halve the footprint area, could likely still meet the 30 ’ height limitation, would allow most of the variances to go away, and might even provide enough space for added parking to allow future conversion to partial retail use of the building. However, the single stor>- building as proposed would not have enough parking to ever accomodate a second story. #2439 Sevice 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 8 Analysis The need for most of the required variances is a function of the size of the building in relation to the lot size. The current site plan yields little flexibilit}' for accommodating future changes to access or for conversion to retail uses if that becomes appropriate or necessary. While a significant portion of the site remains in green space, the City code does limit this and any building site under 2 acres, to 15% coverage by structures. The lot coverage ordinance was adopted in 1989, in the context of regulating the proliferation and size of residential accessory buildings as well as to address the 'overbuilding' on small residential properties that is occurring as the lakeshore redevelops. A review of the files related to that ordinance suggests that the 15% limit was never intended to apply to commercial properties, and was never discussed in the commercial context, but as adopted in the ordinance, it does apply to commercial sites under 2 acres. The alternative to granting the requested variances is to recommend that the building be redesigned as a two-story office. This would solve a number of variance issues and would provide much greater flexibility for future uses of the building. Stan' Recommendation Planning Commission should address the following topics in making a recommendation to the Council: 1 . Lot coverage variance 2. Parking stall variance (accept 'proof of parking'?) 3. Parking encroachment into required front yard 4. Lack of loading berth 5. Review in context of future rear access road: Rear parking setback encroachment Loss of 3 stalls, how/where to make up 6. Applicant to address engineering issues 7 Landscape plan - need to enhance? Need to more clearly specify materials, ground covers, etc.? 8. Lighting plan needed 9. Any signage issues? 10. Building construction materials - specify? 11. Any utility issues? 12. MnDOT, MCWD approvals 13. Future uses, flexibility, alternatives 14. CUP conditions r,. #2439 Senice 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 9 60-Day Review Period For purposes of the 6Q-dav review period, this application was considered as complete on October 21,1998, the date on which it was submitted. The 60 day period will expire on December 21,1998; if this item is tabled by the Planning Commission on November 16, it will not be reviewed again until the January meeting, hence an extension of the 60 day review period will be required. Options for Action 1. 0 j. 4. Table for additional information or specific plan modifications. Recommend approval with conditions. Recommend denial, stating reasons. Other. -----------n-. /!'» Application # Date Received \ 0- >0 Amount Paid __b 5 CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LaND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 9inn u. Wavaata Blv T\-ue of Application to be Filed--------------------------- — Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 34-118-2 j-21-003 _ APPLICANT Nameservice 800. Inc. Phone fhome ’^ <;i9-47ei-'^747. Phone fwork^ r:i 9-A7S-3747_ VI.: s. ■ .uite 200_ --------Zip-55m OWNER (if different than applicant)____________ph°°e Date Property Acquired October 30. 192^— ---------------- I (tin) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FFFS - CONDITIONAL USE PERIVIITS - S 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application S175.00 Residential Accessory Use ^ ^ $250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg • % fX J a * _ (month/year) inn on 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/PED - see Fee Schedule r -------- $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from onginal application) --------After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee 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 g. ; Other - see Fee Schedule •' • ^ • 1 • /* { i 2. 3. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. X 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 Surv’ey (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 dravrings 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__--------------------------------- 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE ^ ^ u ^ • 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 incused in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correc^l^o ^ihe best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s signature '7 /1 ^ Date/ 7 OWNER'S SIGNATURE ^ ^ ^ ^ ' .a The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further aut onz reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members forpup^os^ of investigation and verification of this request. Date {oAv>/?X / •Owner's signature scheduled meeting, please ma.V:c an-angemcnls to have an authorized agent attend m >our place an a vn Building &. Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ■V ft • • • * . .. * M ♦* I V . • <•' •! .» ,* ^ c------3if L O c V- - N -4-2. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI50.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming*. :!ructures S250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 2190 W. Uavza______ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)_34-118-23-21,-QQ32 _—— Attach legal description to application if not included on required Date Property Acquired 10/30/98----------------— I 0fi>) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Application#_ Date Received Amount Paid survey. Present use of property: Zoning District: B-1 residential other (specify). (month/year) Phone (home)_fii2zA25r2241_ ____________ Phnnftrwork'i 612-475-3747 Address: 407 East Lake si-. Sln^p 200— City.—Wayzata---tin--------Zip. APPLICANT Name service 800. Inc. OWNER (if different than applicant) Name nreen valley Associates Address*. 4^7 9nn DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Phone fhome’l fit 2-475-3747 _ ____ Phone fwnrkS C12-475-3747 City: Mayyai-a. MM_____Zip:__5533i Estimated Construction Cost S 500,000 (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear X__Other (specify) Percentaop of bunding area nn Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore TlARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION of unusual PROPERTY' CONDITIONS ^^«ibe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:__pee Attached • • (attach additional sheets if necessary) •6 » ..r * % % 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date_in order for vour application to be considgred complete. 1. X Completed Application Form . . , / 2 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). , . , . . j 3. V Certificate of Sur\'ey (signed by a licensed surv'eyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 814 x 11 or reproduction. ... Y Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 814" x II" for reproduction. X Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (I) copy 814" x II ). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest m 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 y^ur variance annlication is not complete if the above information has not been includes H B SERVICE 800, INC. Creative Resources to Monitor Customer Satisfaction Every Day October 20. 1998 TO; CITY OF ORONO Planning Commission FROM: Jean Mork Bredeson, General Manager SERVICE 800. Inc. SUBJECT: Site Evaluation and Conditional Use Permit Thank you for reviewing our concepts and plans for a new building at 2190 West Wayzau Boulevard. Given the impending winter season, time is of the essence and we appreciate your prompt review. We also request to be included on the agenda of the November 23 Council meeting. The building will be owned by Green Valley Associates, a sister company of SERVICE 800. The occ'tpant of the building will be SERVICE 800. Inc,, a small computer-related services company. Our business is most like a consulting company and our main activity is regtilar clerical/office activity. Other th.m regular office equipment and supplies, no warehousing is to be done at the building. SERVICE 800 currently offices in Wayzata and has IS employees. The purpose of this project is to create an office situation for our growing company. Although we may elect to lease part of the building, our primary intent is to have space into which we can easily expand if we need to. The minimum space required for our current and future needs is 10,000 square feet. Although the City of Orono prefers a floor/acreage ratio of 15%. the 25% required on our plan is the minimum usable building size. Please consider the hardship associated with this small lot size in a commercial area as you consider a variance of the preferred ratio. If you have any questions, please contact me at any time. JcM Mork Bredeson fneral Manager & Owner 407 East Lake, Suite 200 no Box 900 Wayzata, MS 55391 in MS phone 6\2-ti7S-37ii7 toll-free 800-475-3747 /w6 i2-475-3773 V r T- .V .• • i? .« % 23?. 57 / t ■ k9^^-*55- / I’TV^ • / ^c.o' • I ^^TsT l.7ff ^ P (13) S (12 < 201.51 196 (16) 46. 23 <S'r \- TT V 554. U Ka?*3c'or*£S' 5L2L ioi. :7 l^JGAFy/COD inTas T'.^’ cc 8 I? 5 ' (19) R, • 'T (15) ^ OOC NO :C3iT32 --------------^ ^53.<J 337*41'* SI.S8 ^ n-94 ......•• 2>. 6 ix::gx-x:x-:-: zoo (2)2 /X. 12 . 2^4. t V*: OOC fi (57) ^ / ,.L...........U ! ■•07.-6 ^ I (sej j ^ (2J) I I ______ys !__________ ; 169 _ i35) C1_^(S5) ....../^vPN...... 2C4. 44 / occ rjo r~ 2734917 o ‘00 S37*4 I *E ^ (4£) (10) (36) 80 O' I'9.5? 55.6 225.0: ^ 35/ 728 I DANIELS ^ !0I.C6 :x.oi s 447. I 355 2 ’7. I€137.64 2C5 f 0 * Q (46) '^20S 1Uf-/ J (■>7! i7 : s.;.o f ••• =: =5 RUN DATE 09/25/08 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST DATCII 50^1 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR S8 34-118*25 21 0002 02160 WAYZATA DLVO W UlLLIAM W WEAR t WIFE WILLIAM W WEAR 2160 WAYZATA DLVO R306 LONG LAKE MN 55306 38 34-118-23 21 0023 02106 SUCARWOOO OR R M SCHOMMER OEM SCHOMMER R M SCHOMMER t E M SCHOMMER 2106 SUCARWOOO OR LONG LAKE MN . 55356 38 34-118-23 21 0631 00038 AOORESS UNASSICNED CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO p 0 nox 66 CRYSTAL DAY MM 55323 38 34-118-23 22 6017 02251 PINE RIDGE LA CAL OTTEN CLIFFORD A LOUISE OTTEN p 0 BOX 249 LONG LAKE MM 55356 38 34-118-23 24 0001 02120 WAYZATA DLVO W WILLIAM WEAR ETAL WILLIAM W WEAR 36 HACKDERRY HILL LONG LAKE MM 55356 72 34-118-23 23 0023 02225 WAYZATA BLVD W PERRY'S VENTURES INC PERRY'S VENTURES INC 2205 W WAYZATA BLVO LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 34-118-23 21 0021 02102 SUCARWOOO UR REDERS CONSTRUCTION CO REDERS CONSTRUCTION CO 3525 WEDSTER AVE MPLS MN 55416 38 34-118-23 21 0028 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED SUGAR MOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC SUGAR MOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC C/0 REDERS CONSTRUCTION CO 3525 WEDSTER AVE MPLS MN 55416 38 34-118-23 21 0032 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED SIDNEY D t DARDARA REDERS SIDNEY B t BARBARA REDERS 3525 WEBSTER AVE ST LOUIS PARK MM 55416 38 34-118-23 22 0019 00038 AOORESS UNASSICNED CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL DAY MN 55323 38 34-118-23 24 0058 00030 ADDRESS UNASSICNED SIDNEY D A DARDARA REBERS SIDNEY D B BARBARA REBERS 3525 WEDSTER AVE ST LOUIS PARK MN 55416 72 34-118-23 23 0053 02205 WAYZATA DLVO M PERRY'S VENTURES INC PERRY'S VENTURES INC 2205 WAYZATA DLVD W LONG LAKE HM 55356 RtrOKT flO. PI435401 PAGE U 38 34-118-23 21 0022 02104 SUCARWOOO OR REDERS CONSTRUCTION CO REDERS CONSTHUCTIUN CO 3525 WEDSTER AVE MPLS MN 55416 38 34-118-23 21 0030 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED SUGAR WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC SUGAR WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC C/0 REDERS CONSTRUCTION CO 3525 WEBSTER AVE MPLS MN 55416 38 34-118-23 22 0015 00038 ADDRESS PENDING CAL OTTEN CLIFFORD A LOUISE OTTEN BOX 249 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 34-118-23 22 0020 00030 ADDRESS UNASSICNED CAL OTTEN CLIFFORD A LOUISE OTTEN BOX 249 LONG LAKE MN 55356 72 34-118-23 23 0009 00520 BRIMHALL AVE JAW PROPERTIES INC JAW PROPERTIES INC P 0 BOX 703 DRAINERD MN 56401 72 34-118-23 24 0002 02073 WAYZATA DLVO M GREGORY M SHAUGHNESSV LONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR INC 2073 M WAYZATA DLVO P 0 BOX 697 LONG LAKE MM 55356 *4 b b •• 01 RUN DATE 09/25/98DATCH 50^HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIAS5A01 PACE 12 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 72 SA-118-2S 2A 00A8 0207S WAYZATA DLVD W CRECORY n SHAUCmESSY LONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR INC 2073 W WAYZATA BLVD P O BOX 897 LONC LAKE HN 55358 TOTAL BATCH 50^ 00019 CO.' n• •«•••••* • ' ' ; aV•• ? tfe I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF XNFORHATION 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 I ■ '4 ' tro>^iu-> d •*:- ;* « I :l I ^ H.I ■P078 .>,------ ii0‘i6 u0"i03 .0-.3^ ^ OH N«AIOH .o-.s 3 ..00. l.t^oZ8 S .et^es i ii0*i08 ii0"»6 ..o-.si- I o o 1 CO to o Cv 00 00 o .CD c iS - S CO o y^iDO S'lO 00 ^ LiJcno oz^o c i 5? ^ ZX3SVNG CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR EXISTNC SPOT aEV. PROPOSED SPOT aev. LEGAL DESCRPTIQN! Al ihot port of OUTLOT E. SUGAR WOODS, occordiog to tho plot thM'iof on fi)« and of record in the office of the Registrcr of Titles, Hennepin Comty, Minnesoto, lying northeiiy of the right of way of TRUNK'HC^AY NO. 12 09 shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PIAT NO. 27-70. DCSICHLD nevrjfjN UATC 0tSa?PT)0N : 1 • DRAWN OCCKiO CQFFIN k GRONBERG, INC. OCN^TIC ENCKIRS^ LAN) SUtVEYORS^ STTl HANCS 482 TAMARACK AVENUE, LONG LAKE, V«i 5MM 812-47>-4141 1 iCRLor court nur irts plah, sPCcncAiiori or report WAS f*HlPAHiU UY KC OR IHXR MY DlttlCT SU*€RVISJON AN) THAT I AM A OU.Y UCOISCO PHOf£SSiO»{AL CNCKXR AN) LAN) SIAVtYtM \HXH I>C U«S Of RC SIAIC GT IMSOIA UAii:MN LCCNSC NJUILR SCALE r-X DATE 10/20/08 JOB NO. 98-423 98-425 rf11 a»V y 1.Cl:-.;* * -'•'‘‘'''a -- .Hi)- 1 lOUv : E> —nofgi—PI (1016.0): E> 11616701 : PI I FHAI nFf^CRIPTIQN: All that part of OUTLOT E, SUGAR WOODS, accor on file and of record in the office of the Regist Iviirun nnrfhjfcriw r\f rmhf r\1 i/ * uO~iC ,o-,zz J^cmH 0„OT C§3 u,g£ Tf = O) -V -\- «o-.s ..0-.08 # # uO-,91. W V sc ^ LU n -----------^LU^ ^ A I I I I I I I 3 ..OO.l-KZe s .ZV291 0 -5 oTco.*^ c5^£§ • • .ujS O^UJ rr-”* >ZDC O ^ ^ooz^ ^ o>2 « s- H=<^S^CDo c 02g:i .m g(0- o y S “iz iro>^ ^>5 dZpf O c m® 2 OCO ojO Bones troo Rosene Anderlik & Associates SoreiTroo Ancerhs ;^nc / aoci^ta irc »s An Affirm.mve A^,t>on Opportunity Errploycr PrinciOA^s OttD G Bonesr'oo. PE • Joscpn C AncJeri * PE • %i*irvin L Sorv.ii»<. PE • P'cnjrd c Turner PE • Giern R Coov PE • RoDer: G Schunicht. PE • Jerry A Bourdcn PE Rotert 'Jt‘ Rosene pe and Susan V! EDerim. C PA Senior Consultants Asjocia:? PnrcipAii Howard A Sanford PE • Ke'tn A GorPor, P£ • Robert R Pfeffe'ie. PE • Ricnard W Foster PE •Oa.-dO LosJcota. PE • Robert C Posse's. A i A • Mar^c A Hanson. PE Michael T Rautmann PE • Ted K F e'd. «»E • Kenneth P Anderson. P£ • Mark R. Rolfs. PE • Sidney P WiHiamson PE . L 5 • Rooer» F Kotsmith • Agnes M Rmg • Michael ? Rau. PE • Allan Rick Schn*-dt PE Engineers & Architects November 9, 1998 Offices St Paul Roch Wtrbste w.vwoonesir. . r wtlirrar and S: Cloud. MN • M.i-.vauree, Wl :om Mr. Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono Post Office Bo.x 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re; Sid Rebers, Outlot E File No. 139-2439 Dear Mike, We have reviewed the site plan for the proposed commercial development on Outlot E, Sugar Woods in the northwest quarter of Section 34. The site is located on the north side of Wayzata Boulevard (T.H. 12) just east of the Otten Brothers Nursery' site. The site is proposed to be developed as a single story office building. There are several engineering issues that will need to be addressed as part of the plan review process. 1. Traffic: The access is proposed to be constructed west of Outlot E on MnDOT right-of-way. Plans should be submitted to MnDOT for their review and approval. Grading: The grading plan should show all e,xisting contours within 100 feet of the site. It appears that grading on the east side of the site along the e.xisting parking lot may require a short retaining wall. A construction easement may also be necessary to constmet the parking lot and storm sewer so close to the easterly lot line. Some grades on the parking lot scale to more than 5 percent. We would recommend that parking lot grades not exceed 4 percent. 3.Drainage: It is unclear how the proposed stonn sewer at the access to the site is supposed to work. The catch basin is shown off the roadway in between a culvert and a concrete pipe. We would recommend that catch basins be located in the access roadway and lied into the proposed culvert. The culvert should then be connected to the existing 24 ” RCP. The proposed catch b;; in in the southeast comer of the parking lot has a proposed build of 2 feet. We recommend a minimum build of 2 Vz feet on any stonn sewer structure to allow adequate room for the pipe. We also recommend that the storm sewer downstream from the parking lot catch basin be tied into the existing downstream storm sewer rather than allowing the storm water to run overland. Storm sewer design including pipe sizes and grades should be provided on the plan set. A drainage area map and storm sewer calculations should be provided for our review. Capacities and ultimate outlet locations should be provided for the existing 30” and IS” storm sewers. Plans should be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for their review. 4. Utilities: Plans and specifications should be prepared for the water and sanitary service line connections, with as-built plans provided to the City upon completion. 5.Easements: Utility easements \sill need to be provided for the existing water main, sanitary' sewer and any other existing utilities located on the property. Based on a recent site visit, it appears that the existing water main along the west edge of the property is located 3 to 4 feet east of the lot line. We recommend that a 10-foot utility easement be acquired along the west lot line. A triangular shaped utility easement 2335 West Highway 36 - St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636*4600 • Fax; 612-636-1311 will be necessary in the southwest comer to allow access to the existing water main and sanitary sewer Drainage and utility easements should be provided 5 feet wide along the other perimeter lot lines and 10 feet wide along the T.H. 12 right-of-way. Drainage easements should be provided across any existing or proposed drainage ways. €. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please contact me at 604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono DAHLXiREN SHARDmW ANDUBAN INCORfOlATIO CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 33401 612 339 3300 P*IONE 612-337 3601 FAX F DATE: October 28, 1998 TO: RE: Mike Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono FROM: Jon Scaizo Senior Designer Service 800 Inc. Application ^2439 As you requested, I have reviewed the site plan for the proposed office building located on Highway 12. I offer the following comments based on site planning and environmental perspectives. Issues: 1. Variances The developer is requesting 2 variances to accommodate the development of the project. A. The developer is requesting a variance to increase the floor area ratio from the required 15% to 26%. By ordinance, this site, which is .96 acres would allow a 6.242 square foot building. The applicant is proposing a 10,880 square foot building which the applicant states is their minimum space required for present and future needs. It is up to the developer to demonstrate that meeting the requirement represents an undue hardship and that there is no other reasonable recourse other than by variance and that they are requesting the minimum variance necessary. Although the applicant states this is the minimum space needed, this minimum represents an increase of over 174% of the square footage required as a maximum by ordinance. 11 o:! 9S i(>:os ©UlL* 337 5601 DSl. INC. B.The second variance request is for a reduction of parking spaces required from 54 spaces to 36 spaces with a proof of parking of 45 total spaces. The proposed building of 10,880 square feet with 36 parking spaces constitutes a square foot to parking space ratio of 3.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building The City ordinance requires 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building. With the proof ofparking of 9 additional spaces, the ratio becomes 4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of building. As mentioned earlier, the applicant states that the building, a.s proposed, is the minimum space required for their needs. It is evident that this building, as proposed, even with parking far below required numbers is loo large for tliis site The developer needs to look at ways of reducing building area and increasing parking proportionately to meet the requirements of the ordinance. 2. Additional Issues A. The landscape plan referred to a shrub labeled as “DAF” whose botanical name is Daphne and Burkwood i The common name should be Carol Mackie Daplme, not Njobe Weeping Willow which is a tree. O;\JOBS\I609 6\SERVSoO.MEM : I 1 r §10.40 (This is a cleaned up and partially updated version of 10.40; it is missing the added item from Ord. #161, 2nd Series, which was mislabeled and which perhaps was intended to go into the Permitted or Accessory uses section of 10.40 • this needs to be resolved) SEC. 10.40. B-1 RETAIL SALES BUSINESS DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "B-l" Retail Sales Business (District) is intended to provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood. The district may adjoin residential districts or other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The district shall have immediate access to adequate highways and public sanitary sewer. Subd. 2. Application. All applications for a building permit in any "B-l" Retail Sales Business District shall be reviewed by the Council and may be referred to the Planning Commission for review. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. Within any "B-l" Retail Sales Business District, no structure or land shall be used e.xcept for one of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the Council: A. Retail and Service Businesses. The following neighborhood retail sales and service businesses supplying commodities or performing a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood: 1. Arts and school supplies store. 2. Banks and insurance companies. 3. Barber and beauty shops. 4. Bicycle sales and repair. 5. Books, magazines, record shop. 6. Drugs, candy, ice cream, soft drinks, cosmetics and other usual drug store merchandise. repair. 7. Diy cleaning and laundiy’ pick-up stations including incidental pressing and 8. Garden supplies, florist shop. 9. Gift or antique shops. 10. Hardware store, paint store. 11. Hobby shops, camera and photographic supply stores. 12. Jewelry shops and repair. 13. Laundromats. 14. Locksmith. 15. Music, radio, TV, appliance sales and repair stores. 16. Newsstands. 17. Office supply store, office machine store. 18. Pet shop. 19. Pipe and tobacco shops. 20. Plumbing, electrical, heating, housewares, furniture, carpet store. 21. Postal substation. 22. Real estate sales. ORONO CC -n ^(4-1-84) § 10.40 23. Retail food of all varieties and home supplies. 24. Sewing center and yardgoods. 25. Sporting goods store. 26. Tailor shops. 27. Temporary sales such as Christmas tree lots. 28. Travel bureau. 29. Variety store. 30. Wearing apparel store, shoe store. 31 . Off-sale Liquor Store Source: Ordinance 29,2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 32. Home and garden equipment rental. Source: Ordinance 152,2nd Series Adopted: 10-28-96 B. Municipal Buildings. Municipal buildings where the use conducted is customarily considered to be an office use. Subd. 4. Conditional Uses. Within the "B-l" Retail Sales Business District no structure or land shall be used for one of the following uses e.xcept by conditional use permit: A. Garages. For the servicing and repair of automobiles provided repair functions are totally enclosed in a building. B. Motor Fuel Stations. Subject to the provisions set forth in Sectio ’. 10.61, Subdivision 18. C. Restaurants (Class I). Food is ser\-ed to customer while seated at counter or table. Cafeteria - Food is selected by a customer while going through a line and taken to a table for consumption. Neither live entertainment nor intoxicating liquor sales are permitted in Restaurants (Class I.) Source: Ordinance 67,2nd Series Adopted: 5-8-89 D. Restaurants (Class II). Fast Food, Convenience, Drive-in, and Liquor Store Restaurants. A restaurant where a majority of customers order and are serv ed their food at a counter in packages prepared to leave the premises to be consumed; or a drive-in where most customers consume their food in an automobile regardless of how it is served, or restaurants which serve intoxicating liquor or have live entertainment. E. Off-Street Parking. Off-street Parking when the principal site of the off-street parking abuts on a lot which is (in) another "B" or "I" District and is in the same ownership as the land in the "B" or "I" District and subject to those conditions as set forth in Section 10.61, Subdivision 4 and such other conditions as found necessarv bv the Council. ORONO CC 333 (4-1-84) L r §10.40 F. Public Services. Public service structures, including, but not limited to. electric transmission lines and buildings such as telephone e.xchange stations, booster or pressure stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electric power substations. Personal wireless service and commercial broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be considered public service structures. (Underlined language added per Ordinance No. 161,2nd Series, adopted 5-27-97). ORONO CC 333-1 (4-1-84) §10.40 G. Nurseries. Day nurseries provided not less than 50 square feet of outside play area per pupil is available and fenced. H. Offices. Professional office and offices of a general nature. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 I. Antenna Stfueture. One mdcpcndcnt antenna structure,■Nvithfmtonna or combination of antenna attached thereto, subordinate to and ser icing -thc- prinetpal-use-er structure on the same lot and customarily incidental thereto that ia-not attaehed-to another structure provided the height of the antenna stnieture does not e.\eeed 65 feet and the antenna structure is- aet-baek from any lot line a distance at-least equal to the total height of the antenna structure. Source: Ordinance No.-■H7 ' Effective Date: 6-5-75 (Subd. 41 deleted per Ordinance No. 161, 2nd Series, adopted 5-27-97) Subd. 5. Accessory' Uses. Within any "B-1" Retail Sales Business District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Garages, Etc. Private garages, off-street parking and loading spaces, as regulated in this Chapter. B. Signs. Signs, as regulated in this Chapter. C. Temporary Buildings. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of construction on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary’ to complete said construction. D. Landscaping. Decorative landscape features. E. Fences. Fences, as regulated in this Chapter. F. Incidentals. Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, provided that the incidental use shall not e.xceed 30% of the floor space of the principal building. G. Public Telephone Booths. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 334 (4-1-84) 1 r. § 10.40 H. Antenna. Any antenna or combination of antenna rigidly attached to the principal er accessory' structure provided that none of the foregoing exceeds the total height allowed in Secttf>n Source; Ordinance No. 177 EfTecttvfrBate; 6-5 -75 (Subd. 5H deleted per Ordinance No. 16U 2nd Series, adopted 5-27-97) Subd. 6. Area. Height, Lot Width, Setback Requirements and Design Requirements. A. Area. The minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet. B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be 100 feet. C. Front Yards. The minimum front yard shall be 20 feet. D. Rear Yards. The minimum rear yzird shall be 30 feet; side yard adjacent to "R" District shall be 15 feet; side yard adjacent to street shall be 10 feet. E. Setback Requirements. No building shall be nearer than 35 feet to any front lot line, 35 feet from any rear lot line, 15 feet from any side lot line, 35 feet to side lot line adjacent to street; except abutting or across the street from an "R" District, no building shall be less than 35 feet from such lot line. F. Fencing. WTierever a "B-l" Retail Sales Business District abuts an "R" District, along the side or rear lot line, a fence or compact evergreen hedge no less than 50% opaque nor less than six feet in height shall be erected along the abutting lines except within the required front yard. G. Building Design and Construction. In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter, the use, construction, alteration or enlargements to any building or structure within the district shall meet the following standards: 1, All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be: (a) Face brick, or, (b) Natural stone, or, (c) Specially designed precast concrete units if the surfaces have been integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture, or, (d) Factory' fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction, if the panel materials be of any of those noted in Items (a), (b) and (c) above. (e) Other materials as may be approved by the Council. Combinations of such materials shall be permitted. 2. All subsequent additions and outbuildings constructed after the erection of an original building or buildings shall be constructed of materials comparable to those used in the original construction and shall be designed in a manner conforming with the original architectural design and general appearance. ORONO CC ^ z (4-1-84) § 10.40 3. No building or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the propert>’ except as accessory to and during the construction of permanent buildings. H. drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. I. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. SEC. 10.41. B-2 LAKESHORE BUSINESS DISTRICT (To Be Entered) ORONO CC 336 (4-1-84) o '•f I H • f ii Vis >< CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4 1 f- •*’NO. ^ ^ " A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS II SUBDIVISION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2190 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - FILE NO. 2425 WHEREAS, Sidney and Barbara Rebers (hereinafter the "Applicants”) on February 19, 1997, filed a formal subdivision application with the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") for approval of a replat of property legally described as; Outlot E, Sugar Woods, except that part shown as Parcel 342A on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right-of-Way Plat No. 27-70, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the Property"); and WHERE.A.S, this replat is proposed for the purpose of converting said Outlot E to buildable lot status in order that the Property may be developed, as required by the City as a condition of the plat of Sugar Woods; and WHEREAS, after duly published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Stamtes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivisiori Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 17, 1997, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting held on April 14, 1997, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the Applicant and made the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the B-1 Retail Sales Business Zoning District requiring a minimum lot area of 20,000 s.f. and a minimum lot width of 100. The property contains a total area of 41,612 s.f. and has a defined width of approximately 146'. The proposed plat consists of one commercial lot meeting the minimum lot standard requirements of the B-1 Zoning District. Paae 1 of 10 ? CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.4 1S2 4. The property is served by municipal sewer and water. 0. 6. 7. 8. The property abuts I S. Highway 12 as well as Cutlot O, Sugar Woods, a segment of a proposed future frontage road corridor platted within Sugar Woods. In 1987 the City adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 which planned for the future development of a frontage road between Brow.t Road and Willow Drive, paralleling Highway 12. In 1987 it was anticipated that traffic on Highway 12 would continue to incease as a result of the upcoming completion of Interstate Highway 394. The piupose of this pi tned frontage road was to reduce and'or eliminate access directly to and from Highway 12. generally for safety and traffic flow reasons. Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 specifically addressed road improvements needed prior to development of the commercial corridor as follows: "Prior to the development of the commercial portion of this property, the existing intersection at Brown Road and Highway 12 shall be improved so that safety concerns associated with the current use and future increased use of this intersection are addressed. Configuration of the frontage road and North Brown Road would be determined at the time of development." Orono's 1994*95 reconstruction of Brown Road alleviated alignment concerns with the 12/Brown intersection, and Mn/DOT's 1995-96 safety improvements on Hichwav 12 similarlv alleviated a number of safety concerns. The plat of Sugar Woods, completed in July 1989, included two commercially zoned parcels (Outlots E and F) abutting Highway 12. These two parcels were platted as outlots. rather than as buildable lots, because the Applicant at that time wished to delay decisions regarding future access to the commercial property until such time that it was developed. The Sugar Woods plat confom’ed to the comprehensive plan by creating Outlot D. a short segment of the proposed future easi'west frontage road. Outlot D. however, only provides a corridor from the west boundary ot Sugar Woods to •i Paae 2 of 10 r CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 I "______ 9. 10. 11. the northwest comer of Outlot F. The City's intent in approving the plat of Sugar Woods was that at some future time when Outlot F is developed, the remaining frontage road segment eastward to Brown Road would be defined and platted. On December 12, 1988, the Orono City Council adopted Resolution No. 2554 granting preliminary plat approval, conditional use permit and variances for the plat of SUGAR WOODS. Page 8, paragraph 4.E stated that the subdivider's agreement should; "Clarify that Outlot D (portion of future east/west road) is to be fully- developed at the time of future development of the commercial corridor. The access road will be fully installed at the time of either the applicant's development of the commercial corridor or as a result of any other condition that may require the installation of the road prior to applicant’s development of the commercial corridor." The foregoing language was not put in the subdivider's agreement, but it was put in the resolution granting final plat approval. On July 10, 1989, the City Council adopted Resolution No.2653 approving the final plat of SUGAR WOODS. Page 4. paragraph 4 stated: "4. Outlot D, a portion of future east/west road located within the commercial zoned portion of the property, shall be installed at the time of the development of Outlots E or F or the development of the Wear property (unless the City has obtained an alternate legal access through Ow.'ot *E to the Wear propeny all subject to the approval of the City)." Pursuant to the terms of the preliminary- plat resolution and final plat resolution, on September 8, 1989, Rebers Construction Co. and Sidney and Barbara Rebers granted public roadway easements over Outlot D to the City of Orono. Said easements were filed with the Hennepin County- registrar of Titles as Document Nos. 2038791 and 2038792. Pase 3 of 10 !' O ^ 0\ L J CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.4 1 CJ 12. Thereafter, the Orono Building & Zoning Administrator and City .Attorney objected to certain terms of said easements; said easements were renegotiated between the City and the Applicants; and a replacement public road easement over Outlot D was granted to and accepted by the City subject to the following: "1. No road shall be installed by Grantee until a building pemtit has been issued for construction of a commercial building on Outlot E, SUG.AR WOODS (in wltich case the road may extend no flinher east than the Northerly e.xtension of the East boundary of Outlot E) or on Outlot F, SUGAR WOODS (in which case the road may extend the full length of Outlot D). "2. The south edge of any road built by grantee shall be no further North than the South boundary of Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS. "3. If and when a frontage road or service road is built connecting Outlots E and F, SUGA r "WOODS, across land South cf Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS, or an easement for such a road is dedicated, granted or condemned, this easement shall automatically expire." (Quit Claim Deed dated May 30, 1990, recorded June 25, 1990 as Rfvistrar of Titles Document No. 2105974.) 13. It appears that Interstate Highway 394 will not be extended along the current corridor of U.S. Highway 12; it appears that a bypass route will be e.xtended from the current freewav terminus near the easterly boundary of Orono to the intersection of Highway 12 and County Road 6. When this bypass is operational, traffic on Highway 12 adjacent to the Property will decline. However, the resultant traffic volumes on Highway 12 adjacent to the property at that time are anticipated by the City to be at a level that would generally indicate the need for a limited access hishway. Pase 4 of 10 r. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 1 B 14. 15. 17. 18. 19. The Council finds that aUhough the ultimate access for the Property should be via a frontage road, the form of future development of the adjoining and nearby properties should be taken into account at the time the frontage road is developed. Such future development has not been determined, but it will influence 'f. how, where and when the frontage road is constructed. Therefore, the Coup..I chooses not to install the Highway 12 frontage road through Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS, at this time, whether or not Outlot E is developed with a commercial building, without waiving its right to require or order such installation in the future. The Council finds that suitable interim access to Outlot E from Highway 12 may be possible using the Mn/DOT right-of way directly west of Outlot E. which would allow an access to be constructed opposite Brimhall .Avenue. Such an access location affords an opportunity for shared access to ser\e the adjacent property in the plat of East Willow W'oods. Outlot D, Sugar W oods, is intended to serve as a trail corridor as well as a frontage road corridor, and therefore requires a continuous width of 60 in order to accommodate both uses. Outlot D currently is 60 in width at the west end but tapers to a width of 40’ at its east end. Additional right-of-way is needed by the City via creation of an additional Outlot and granting of drainage, utilit>. road and trc'' easements in order that the 60' corridor be provided. The City Engineer has additionally recommended that a 5' drainage and utility easement be granted along the south side of the added right-of-way outlot, within proposed ^ot 1. 1 f.e easement granting the City rights to develop a frontage road in Outlot D does not grant an easement for drainage or utilities purposes, which is necessar> in order for the City to use it for the intended purpose. Proposed Lot 1 is subject to the Park Dedication requirements of Municipal Code Section 11.62. Pase 5 of 10 W i CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.A ^ 'A 20. .Any development proposed within proposed Lot 1 will be subject to a commercial site plan review process before the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 1997 the Orono City Council adopted Resolution No. 3972 granting preliminaiy plat approval for the proposed conversion of the Property into Lot 1, Block 1, SUG.AR WOODS 2ND .ADDITION, subject to a number of conditions; and WHERE.AS, the approval granted in Resolution No. 3972 expired on October 13, 1998 prior to the applicant completing the requirements for final plat approval; and WHERE.AS, the applicant applied for renewal of the Preliminar>* Plat Approval on September 22. 1998. and a public hearing was subsequently held by the Planning Commission on October 19, 1998 at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; whereupon the Planning Commission recommended that the preliminary plat approval be renewed per the conditions of Resolution No. 3972; and WHEREAS, the applicant’s suneyor has submitted a revised Preliminary Plat drawing which depicts the proposed Outlot A in addition to the proposed Lot 1, Block 1, SUGAR WOODS 2ND ADDITION as required in the conditions of Resolution No. 3972. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the request for renewal of the preliminary plat application of Sidney and Barbara F cbers per plat drawings by Wayne D. Cordes, a licensed surveyor employed by BRW, Inc. dated October 19. 1998, for the conversion of the Property into Lot 1. Block 1. and Outlot A, SUGAR WOODS 2ND .ADDITION, said survey attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions: 1.Lot 1 shall be allowed direct access to U.S. Highway 12 only if the applicants are successful in relocating their existing access to Highway 12. by obtaining an access permit from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Paee 6 of 10 r I,o.. A CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.1 '' 2 r 4. 6. permitting access over the triangular parcel of land owned by MnDOT across from the intersection of Brimhall Avenue and Highway 12. Any direct access to Highway 12 which is not directly opposite Brimhall Avenue will not be allowed. The right-in/Vight-out access of Lot 1 to Highway 12 at Brimhall Avenue is approved on a permanent basis. The left-in'left-out access of Lot 1 to Highway 12 at Brimhall Avenue is approved on an interim basis. At such time as a frontage road is installed to provide alternative access to Lot 1, the City shall have the right to terminate the right-in/right-out access at Brimhall A\enue upon payment of just compensation and the right to temtinate the left-in'left-out access at Brimhall Avenue without payment of any compensation; provided that Lot I's access to Highway 12 will not be terminated unless the Highway 12 accesses of the other parcels ser\’ed by the frontage road are similarly terminated. The City reserves the right to control access to Lot 1 from the W'ear property directly east of Lot 1 in the commercial site plan review process. Applicant shall, if found necessaiy by the City, place barriers to prohibit access from the Wear property. Lot 1 shall bear the total reasonable costs of constructing the portion of the frontage road directly adjacent to Lot 1. If the frontage road is built, the owner of Lot I reser\ es the right to contest the necessity and feasibility of the frontage road improvement. The Council will require at the time of final platting security in the form of a cash escrow, letter of credit or other fomi of security acceptable to the City. Applicant shall grant the City a drainage, utility and trail easement over Outlot D. •A. triangular segment of right-of-way shall be platted as Outlot A. SUG.AR WOODS 2ND ADDITION, per Exliibit A attached, and applicant shall grant to the City road, trail, drainage and utilities easements over said Outlot A. Page 7 of 10 /f3^ CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 1 Q 9 7.Applicants shall provide confirmation that the existing stormwater pond is viable to serve Lot 1. or shall provide a new comprehensive stormwater plan for Lot 1 and Outlot F, SUGAR WOODS, subject to approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City Engineer. Applicants shall in conjunction with City staff determine the exact location of the existing water main along the west boundary of the site and applicants shall grant to the Cit>' an easement for utility purposes within the property extending 10' from the centerline of the existing pipe. 9.Applicants are hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval will expire within one year of the date of Council approval, on October 26, 1999. Should Applicants fail to complete the filing of the final plat application witliin the one year deadline, it shall be necessary for applicant to file a new preliminar) subdivision application with the City. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Monda\s ot the month. These submittals are as follows: 1.Record plat drawings in the fomi of two (2) mylar copies (one cop> for the City's records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200’. Drawing to include: A. Lot lines platted per preliminary plat survey by Wayne D. Cordes dated October 19. 1998. B.Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10' wide along the exterior boundaries of the Property with additional water main easement as noted in Condition No. 8 above. C.Designation of Outlot .A per Exhibit A attached, to ser\ e as an expansion of the frontage road corridor. Pace 8 of 10 .) CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4 1 R 2NO. ' - j. 4. Legal documents required: A. Title opinion addressed to the City. B. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicuted therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. C. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the Property. Signed and executed road, trail, utility and drainage easement over Outlot A, SUGAR WOODS 2ND ADDITION. Signed and executed trail, drainage and utility easement over Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS. 5. Fees to be paid: Total due: S 200.00* A. Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents S200.00 B.*Park dedication fee, fee shall be based on 8% of the fair market value of land within Lot 1. per the provisions of City of Orono Ordinance No. 173, Second Series adopted April 13, 1998 and Resolution No. 4064 adopted April 13, 1998. The applicant shall be advised as soon as the amount of the park dedication fee has been determined. Page 9 of 10 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at its regular meeting held this 26th day of October, 1998. ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this /^^,/^day of . , 199^ , by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. A/’-// j CAROLE A. HASP.’/AM : i'[ f-vcr-.-T.«v:-• Notary Public Paee 10 of 10 4 / / SN / \ \ oo^z oo'bt / %••••* / < /I c:C ' » /r-% y ✓ ^ ................... •.•••••*•••••• ■•s / #<>',v ^ '—V3MV 3NI>ft(Vd SnONinruiB.., 0101 ^NN\\> \'\\ WNN.^ \.\\ \\\ \. \\N. \ \ \ / V3ifv oNixyvd snoNiwfuia-—^ M ..00.6 U30 S -C9*963- \; \ \ 4 \\N ?o|- h “So O -Opioz ^SS*I S / C_l OlOl 00 S2 r^r- M lot m . ............. SOOOM iivon? d3d IN3fGSV3 AlHlin QNV 30VNIVaQ-'-' •* 2101 \ I f-'I ■-•• V ^\(/) — 00109 — I ^ \ og65IHo <D o^S D.^* % VV*» DC *' D.J- II v 'a 9<L>'j> —^ UJ,o- q: 1%' < fe ’. '''. H j -■■OQ-Q9 /...... iNnd>3'ce -SV3h"B5'c w w w HiMON Pspoo '▼if Q 1 ei gK- o>. *-- w ^ *-•» <^->nvv -• *1 II I I /I MM V J t » >. ; ' X X ' * » • ,i I rA/^'^ • N»\ v\\ /<iM I - * -,i • * \\\ • /.ft |x I I'* tx*" ' r CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A f\ A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT ALONG fflGmVAY 12 ' • ^^'HEREAS; the update of the City’s Land Use Plan is an important element of the Comprehensive Plan update process; and WHEREAS, the construction of new Highway 12 will have a significant impact on land use along both new and old Highway 12; and WHEREAS, developers are currently pursuing sites for retail development throughout the Highway 12 area; and WHEREAS, it is important that the Council has a clear vision for land use along Highway 12 to guide its review of proposals for development along Highway 12; and WHEREAS, the Highway 12 area has, in recent years, been the subject of extensive study by the City; and WHEREAS, at its February 12 work session, the Council reviewed several pneral concept plans for development along Highway 12 as a way to clarify its vision for how the High\va> 12 area should develop; and WHEREAS, the consensus of the Council at the work session was that communiw scale retail development focused in a more compact area in or near downtown Long Lake (closer to Brown Road than to Willow Drive, at least in the short-term) most closely reflects the Council s vision for the Highway 12 area; and WHEREAS, this concept plan has the follo\ving benefits: 1. Focuses on downtown Long Lake remaining a strong retail area. Page 1 of 3 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. f> A. V 2. Focuses on maintaining a vital downtown and "sense of place" for both Long Lake and Orono. 3. 4. A compact retail area encourages pedestrian activity. It is easier to plan, coordinate and control the development of a more compact retail area than an extended retail strip. 5.Focusing development toward Brown Road could strengthen the ability to obtain desirable development on the north side of Highway 12 east of Otten Brothers Nursery. 6. 7. 8. Enables better control over the amount of retail development that occurs in this area, Provides the opportunity to generate stable jobs in office, high tech, medical, etc, A more compact community scale retail area matches the design of new Highway 12 with no interchanges through Long Lake. 9.Limits the number of north/south roadways that would be affected by retail development (increase traffic and activity levels). 10. 11. Maintains a lower activity level in the area west of Willow Drive. Would create less pressure for providing an access from new Highway 12 to the retail area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orono City Council, that a general concept p! or land use along Highway 12, calling for community scale retail development focused in a com; . area in and near downtown Long Lake (closer to Brown Road than to Willow Drive, at least in the short-term) most closely reflects the Council's vision for development along Highway 12. Page 2 of 3 1 r CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 71 fi / _ Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 23rd day of February, 1998. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE; February 19,1998 ITEM NO: Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: iWatne RonMoorse •City Administrator's Title City Administrator Report Item Description: Highway 12 Land Use Concept Plan - Resolution At its February 12 work session, the City Council reviewed three general concept plans for land use along Highw-ay 12 as a way to clarify the Council's vision for how the Highway 12 area should develop. The three concept plans were as follows: 1. 2. Community scale retail development along the majority of Highway 12. Community scale retail development focusv i m a compact area in and near dov.Titown Long Lake (closer to Brown Road than to Willow Drive, at least in the short-term) with office, office/service, and high tech industrial development west of Willow Drive. 3. Provide for regional or "big box" retail development in selected locations along current Highway 12. The Council selected concept plan #2 as the plan most closely reflecting the Council's vision for the Highway 12 area, and directed staff to draft a resolution reflecting the Council consensus for adoption at the February 23 Council meeting. General Elements of Concept Plan The general elements of this concept plan are as follows: 1.Restrict strip retail development along Highway 12, particularly west of Willow Drive. 2. Prohibit all regional "big box" retail development. j.The sub-area on the north side of Highway 12 west of Willow Drive would be planned for medium density residential development on the north side of an extended Kelley Parkway to take advantage of the wetlands as an amenify*. The area south of Kelley Parkway along Highway 12 would be planned for office development with minor "neighborhood" retail to serve the office development, the medium densit>‘ residential development and the Orono schools. r Request for Council Action continued Page 2 February 19,1998 Highu'ay 12 Land Use Concept Plan 4.The sub-area in the southwest quadrant of Old Ciystal Bay Road and Highway 12 would be planned for office/high tech/medical or similar development. A portion of this sub-area may also be considered for medium density residential development. 5.Orono's current industrial area on the south side of Highway 12 east of Old Crystal Bay Road would be maintained or redeveloped as office, high tech, medical, etc. Benefits of Concent Plan The key benefits of concentrating ietail development in a more compact area are as follows; 1 . Focuses on downtown Long Lake remaining a strong retail area. 2. Focuses on maintaining a vital downtoum and "sense of place” for both Long Lake and Orono. 3. 4. A compact retail area encourages pedestrian activity, It is easier to plan, coordinate and control the development of a more compact retail area than an extended retail strip. 5.Focusing development toward Btovnh Road could strengthen the ability to obtain desirable development on the north side of Highway 12 east of Otten Brothers Nursery. 6. 7. Enables better control over the amount of retail development that occurs in this area. Provides the opportunity to generate stable job.s in office, high tech, medical, etc. 8.A more compact community scale retail area matches the design of new Highw'ay 12 with no interchanges through Long Lake. 9.Limits the number of north/south roadways that would be affected by retail development (increase traffic and activity levels). 10. 11. Maintains a lower activity level in the area west of Willow Drive. Would create less pressure for providing an access from new Highway 12 to the retail area. r Request for Council Action continued Page 3 February 19,1998 Highway 12 Land Use Concept Plan A resolution reflecting the Council consensus regarding concept plan #2 is attached for Council consideration. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the adoption of a resolution to reflect the Council consensus regarding the Council's vision for development along Highway 12. KWY12USE IL TO;Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator November 10, 1998 SUBJECT: #2416 TOLD Development Co., 2380 Shadywood Road - Reqest for Commercial Site Plan Approval - Variances- Public Hearing Zoning District: B-5, Limited Neighborhood Business District Application: Request for approval of variances and commercial site plan approval for the construction of a Walgreen’s Drugstore on the former Grace Baptist Church site. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Letter of Introduction and Proposal Narrative E - Plan Submittal: 1. Cover sheet 2. Site plan 3. Landscape plan 4. Existing site conditions 5. Preliminary grading & drainage plan 6. Building Elevation Views & T>q5ical Signage 7. Typical Floor Plan 8. Typical Pylon Sign F “ City Engineer Comments 10-28-98 G - Consulting Planner Comments 10-28-98 H - Hennepin County Public Works Dept. Comments I - Hardcover Worksheet J - Zoning Code Section 10.44: B-5 District Standards K - March 1998 Site Plan Approval (Bank/OfTice/Retaii) Resol. #4043 (Reference Only) ■1 i ■-.--Hi ^2416 TOLD Development November 10,1998 Page 2 Site Characteristics, Conformity (Note: Needed variances are shown in bold t>pe) Required/Allowed Existing/Troposed Site area:20,000 s.f.84,312 s.f. (incl. 4 separate tax parcels and vacated Navarre Lane) Defined lot width:100'348'± Required front yard:20'5' - 15’ green space Required rear yard (through lot):20'r -30’ green space Required side yard adj. to "R" district:15'10’ green space Required side yard adj. to "B" district:Not defined 3' green space Building setbacks: Front lot line:35'67' Rear lot line (Olive Ave.):35'40' Side lot line adj. to "R" district:35'40' Side lot line adj. to "B" district:15'70' Building Height:30'29' max. Lot coverage by structures:15% (12,650 s.f)17.0% (14,373 s.f incl. 18x24 drivethru) Hardcover: N. 500-1000’ zone:35% (13,065 s.f.)69.1% (25,789 s.f.) S. 500-1000* zone:35% (3,550 s.f.)78.6% (7,980 s.f.) Parking Setbacks:Not allowed within in required 20' front yard (Variance) Not allowed within in required 20' front yard adjacent to R District adjacent to street (Variance) Not allowed within required 15' side yard adj. to R District (Variance) Yard not defined for 'side yard adj. to B District' No. of Parking Stalls: Required = 1 per 150 s.f of "net usable floor area" (Net = 12,500 s.f.± / 150 = 83 stalls required) 74 stalls proposed Signage Allowance 381 s.f.904 s.f. Grading Within 5* of Lot Lines (CUP required) #2416 TOLD Development November 10,1998 Page 3 Summar}' of Issues for Discussion Note: The proposed ’drugstore ’ use is not currently a permitted or conditional use in the B-5 District, hence the companion application (#2417) is applicant’s request for an amendment to allow ’drugstore ’ as a permitted or conditional use in the B-5 District. T. Variances Required 1.Hardcover 2. Lot coverage 3. Number of parking stalls 4. Parking lot setback in front yard (no stalls, but access lane in this area) and rear yard (access driveway within 1 foot of Olive Avenue right-of-way 5. Square footage of signage IT. Engineering Issues (Also see Exhibit F) 1. Confirm pvlon sign won’t cause visual restriction for egressing vehicles. 3. 4. D. 6. Parking lot grades should be reduced to 4% from 5%+ proposed. Retaining wall 16' + in height adjacent to pond; needs al design detail: b) safety fence plan. NIJRP pond is being reduced in size, will no longer have ability to serve Culver’s runoff needs, much less those of the new Walgreens... additional storage volume is required. Possible alternatives include; a) Enlarge existing pond; b) Underground stormwater storage vault; c) Excavate pond storage within adjacent DNR wetland; d) Divert relatively clean roof runoff out of stormwater treatment systems; Applicant needs to submit draina ;e calculations, pond calculations, drainage area map. Proposed storm sewer may need to be expanded Stormwater plan needs to be submitted to MCWD for review and approval. #2416 TOLD Development November 10,1998 Page 4 7. Plans and specs for proposed building sewer/water connections are required. 8. Need utility easements over portions of Navarre Lane to be vacated. Standard drainage and utility easements should be granted along perimeter of site, and drainage easements over final pond area. 9. Financial guarantee required for specific site improvements. III. Other Site Plan Issues Noted bv DSU and Staff (Also see E.xhibit G) 1. 2. 5. 6. 7. 8. Retaining wall along northwest boundary up to 8’ in height: impact on neighboring properties, safety fence, screening, etc. Proximity of rear access driveway to Olive Avenue: visual impacts, activity impacts on surrounding neighborhood. Ability to screen? Fence needed? Positive traffic barrier needed? Neighborhood pedestrian access across site - where? One of the tradeoffs of vacating Navarre Lane was/is to retain pedestrian access through the site for residents of the neighborhoods to the east. Landscaping plan is weak, in part due to the fact that hardcover is so excessive, leaving little space for plantings that are needed to screen the two major retaining walls and to buffer the site from adjacent residential uses. Lack of parking lot setbacks leaves inadequate room for landscaping and future w idening of County Road 19 and sidewalks. Note existing sidewalk is mostly in right-of-way but partly within property. Grading within 5' of lot lines (northwest residential boundary, east parking boundary) requires a CUP. Loading berths: The proposed loading berth is located and designed to meet minimum City standards. At least one loading berth is required by code. The location of the loading berth is intended to minimize impacts to site circulation while provifding adequate access for the one large semi trailer anticipated each week. The turning radius for that semi trailer is the primary factor in why there is so much driveway along the north and east sides of the building. Lighting: Code Section 10.60 Subd. 8 requires that lighting be diffused or directed away from "R" Districts and public streets. No lighting plan has been provided. t #2416 TOLD Development November 10,1998 Pages 9. a. b. 10. Signage allowance is 1 s.f. per front foot of site, i.e. 381 s.f. ± Prototypical signage: Pylon Sign: (16.7x5.3x2 sides) + (10.x4.25x2 sides) Building Wall Signs: Primary "Walgreens" (5x39x2 facades) Secondaiy "Walgreens" (4x25x2 facades) Logo (mortar/pestle/wording) (9xdx2 facades) "Pharmacy" (2xl3.\2 facades) "1 Hour Photo" (2x13x1 facade) "Drive-thru Pharmacy Entrance" (15x2) 262 s.f. 390 s.f. 200 s.f. 144 s.f. 52 s.f. 26 s.f. 30 s.f. c. Total Prototypical Signage 1 ,104 s.f. .Allowed Signage 381 s.f. Excess Signage (Variance) 723 s.f. Note: Applicant's narrative indicates signage is proposed on only the south and west facades. This presumably would eliminate the two secondaiy Walgreen signs, leaving a total anticipated signage request of 904 s.f. or an excess of 523 s.f. Limit on square footage of individual signs = 50 s.f.; most of the proposed individual signs exceed this limit. Parking location (Regulated under 10.61, Subds. 4-10; Subd. 5B shall apply to the B-5 District in the same manner as it applies to B-1, B-3 and B-4 districts for review purposes): Code Standards: Parking shall not be located in a required yard, except may be located in a rear yard to within 3' of the rear or side lot line, except when that rear or side lot line abuts an R district, then must maintain a 10 ’ setback. Note: The underlying premise is that required yards are intended to be green space, hence all pavement that is part of the site’s vehicle circulation system, whether or not it contains defined parking stalls, is considered as parking area. b. Conformity to Standard: Front Yard: (Along Shadywood Road) Front Yard: (Along Olive Avenue) Side Yard: (Adj. to LR-IC) Side yard: (Adj. to B-1) Proposed parking Required vard setback 20' 5’-15 ’ 20’ O’ - 30’+ 15 ’ 10 ’ Not defined 3’ #2416 TOLD Development November 10, 1998 Page 6 IV. Building Design & Construction 1 . Facade materials meet code requirements 2. Height is within 30' limit. 3. Integrated trash enclosure and drive-thru canopy are architecturally compatible. V. Utilities 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Sewer Availability Charge (SAC): The 13,905 s.f. building would net to approximately 12,500 s.f. for Si^C and sewer/water unit determinations. At the Met Council Environmental Services (MCES) rate of 1 SAC unit per 3,000 net s.f for retail, this building would pay 4 or 5 SAC units, and would have 4 or 5 sewer and water units attributed to it. Municipal sewer is available to the site. There are two existing stubs on Navarre Lane and two more on Olive Avenue. The properties that make up this site were assessed for 4 commercial sewer units aiid footage as part of the 1965 sewer project. The City may have to collect a 1-unit "sewer unit adjustment charge" depending on how mary units MCES determines are appropriate. Municipal water is available to the site, with the primary connection at Navarre Lane and alternate connection on Shadywood at the north end of the site. The properties making up this site were charged for full footage and a total of 5 commercial water units as part of the 1970 water project, hence no "water unit adjustments" nor connection charges would be required. However, this propert>' was assessed only one unit for the Navarre Water Treatment Plant Upgrade, and would be charged an additional 3 or 4 units at $350 per unit for that upgrade project. All other utilities are available to the site. While the new service connections are required to be below ground, the existing power lines are overhead in this area. The developer should be encouraged to have existing overhead wires buried as part of this project, although the City code does not make this a requirement (Section 12.40). The City has sewer and water in the portions of Navarre Lane which are proposed to be filled for site development. As part of the vacation, the City shall retain appropriate easements. The developer shall be responsible for bringing all manholes, shutoffs, etc. up to final grade and suitably finished at the surface to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. #2416 TOLD Development November 10, 1998 Page 7 VI. Additional Notes 1. City agreed to vacate west half of Navarre Lane in prior application, 2. Access to Countv Road 19 : The southerly access is the same as approved for the prior bank/office/retail proposal. The northerly entrance onto 19 is moved slightly nearer the north property boundary than the prior approval, but still meets the required 10' setback. Driveways and curb cuts for business uses arc regulated by Section 6.05 of the municipal code. The proposed access plan appears to meet the standards of that section, with the exception that only one driveway access is nomially allowed for a business site. The second access was discussed at length during the prior proposal, and ultimeatley was approved. The circulation pattern for the current plan is quite similar to the earlier plan, counterclockwise around the building to accomodate the drive-thru. The second access is expected to provide safer egress for seiA'ice trucks leaving the site than would be afforded by a single access point. Hennepin County Dept, of Public Works has been requested to comment on the plan, and has noted the required removal of existing unused driveway aprons and concerns regarding the sign location (See E.xhibit H). 3. Access Connection to Culver's Site: This proposed access conection is similar to that approved for the bank/office/retail plan a year ago. Although there is no formal agreement proposed, it is anticipated that the Culver’s occasional overflow parking needs will by default be met by the Walgreen's parking... 4. Legal combination of the four tax parcels should be a condition of approval. 5.For purposes of the 60-dav review period, this application was considered as complete on October 13, 1998, the date on which we received the narrative, layout, and pylon sign diagrams. The 60 day period will e.xpire on December 13, 1998, therefore if this item is tabled by the Planning Commission on November 16, It will not be reviewed again until the January meeting, haence an extension of the 60 day review period will be required. Analysis Planning Commission should review and make recommendations on the noted variances (k>i coverage, hardcover, parking encroachment into yard areas, number of parking stalls, and sienage square footage and individual sion size. Sufficient hardship must exist in order for these variances to be granted. W Other than the signage variances, the need for variances is a function of the size of the building in ^2416 TOLD Development November 10,1998 Pages relation to the site. The size of the building drives the parking needs, which in turn impact hardcover, lot coverage, and parking setbacks from property lines. The excess pavement needed to serve the drive-thru and accommodate large service vehicles is a function of the proposed use. None of these variances are strictly a result of the unique shape or topography of the site, although these two site factors must play a significant role in how the site is developed. Plannning Commission should briefly review the Engineering Issues. Stormwater is a major stumbling block with this site plan, and much more detail is required to document how stormwater is intended to be dealt with. In addition to the variances and engineering issues. Planning Commission should review these specific topics: Aesthetic impacts of proposed retaining walls; should they be screened? Impact of locating access drives adjacent to Olive Avenue Neighborhood pedestrian/bicycle access through site - Overall landscaping plan Lighting plan? Any concerns re: building design, materials, etc.? Staff Recommendation The plan is in many ways too ambitious for this site. It does not follow the 'linear' concept that the topography begs for. It does not yet deal adequately with stormwater. It proposes a number of extreme grade changes using high retaining walls, some of which should be screened, which is only feasible if they are terraced. The variances required are generally a function of the size of the building, and could be reduced in magnitude or even eliminated in some cases by reducing the size of the building. Expansion of the site has been suggested as a possibility, although this would require further rezonings. Ignoring the issue of whether the B-5 should be amended to allow a drugstore use, the current proposal needs significant work in order to be acceptable. Options for Action 1 . Table for additional information or specific plan modifications. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Recommend denial, stating reasons. 4. Other. A-i Application # Date Receiyed Amount Paid c ^ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Highway 19 at (partially vacated'^ X'avarrp T anp Typi of Application to be Filed Conmercial site Plan Review Pro{ erty Identification Number (P.I.D.)________________________ APPLICANT Name told Development: fn-ipany Phone (home).j^^ Phone (work) ?u?n-Qono Address 6900 Wedgwood Road, #100____Cit\’ Maple Grove_______ Zip 55311 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Adam Smith Company Phone (home) n 7a _____________________________________Phone (work) (320)763-3886 Address 700 Cedar Street. Suite 121 Cit\'A1 exandria Zip SfilOS Date Property Acquired Purchase Agreement executed 7/98 (doQ^^(5o riot))also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) I FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - ______S 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application ______SI75.00 Residential Accessory Use ______$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ______$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ______$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ______$300.00 Commercial.zindustrial Use ______$250.00 Land Alteration _____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain _____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more _____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee n % I i’ OTHER APPLICATIONS X* $250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (f consultant fees) ______$300.00 Vacation ______$200.00 Easement Vacation ______$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ______$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______ 5350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ______SI00.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Propei^ Ovvmers 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 sur\-eyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not incluued on required survey. Topograpliic 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 dccuments, 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 Il\Applicant ’s signature l/lti\k{\/\-------- Date \^ ^ T V ▼ V 9 O^^^S^E:R'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_____D’’te 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. 1. 2. 3. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS ____ Completed Application Form. ____ Describe request in detail. ____ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (>'ou must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). ____ Certificate of Smvey (signed by a licensed sur\-eyor) - 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_----------------------------------- 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 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 isi true Izd correct to-the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date ^1& 0\WER ’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entr>' onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, corrunission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature_____Date Applicant must have all submittals into the Cit>- offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetinas are held on the th.ird 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 anend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. Auci-19-98 08:51A Adam Smith Proper-t Ics , LLC >*iLE No. 08.-19 ’98 06:44 ID:T0LD DEVELlJPrtNT 6l2 420 7574 P.02 PhGE 2 REQUIRED SSUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. y. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Cenified Property Owners List of owners ^vithin 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this li?». ’.ribels and map from Hennepin Counry Depanmeni of Finance, A-603, Go*r:‘nn:fnt Center, 348-3271). Ceniticaic 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 owtier(s). Construction plan, if applicable (sec 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 OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (il" X 17'* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all document, 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 •ncluded. 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 unusu.».l expe.-.ses iacuned in review of this application, and certifies that the informaiior. supplied is true and correct to the best of his^er knowledge. Applica.nt'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 O- --------Date ——-------- Applicii.i mmi hive ill lubmiiuli into ihc CJiy offices 25 days before the Ptanninj Commission Meeting. Plann'uig Commisiion Meiicigs are held cn the thud Monday of each month. Applieanu must be present at all scheduled review rr.enins* of iha Planning Ccmmliilon and Council. If an applicant u unable to anend a iMM msslinil IBlfcl W auai^liaed ajent .send in jour plsce and advise the Building dt Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. -t r- -.-'7'. \ • • VL * . •#.’ ~J '^-;4 ■' « V-a ADDENDUM Property owners include; North Central Conservative Baptist Association (deed holder) Adam Smith Company (contract for deed holder) Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC (d/b/a TOLD Development Company) is the Purchaser under a Purchase Agreement by and between same and Adam Smith Company 3 ^...jc....—^ I •.J! t* »■. V 5 V RUN DATE OS/11/98BATCH 513 PROP ADOR OWNER NAHC TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 17-117-23 93 0002 02296 SHAOYWOOD RO SCOTT W GARDNER SCOTT W GARDNER 2296 SHAOYWOOD RD WAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0078 03922 LYRIC AVE DANIEL E SWANSON DANIEL E SWANSON 3922 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0081 03908 LYRIC AVE HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 38 17-117-23 93 0099 03900 SHORELINE DR DALE S JOHNSON C T JOHNSON 8 D A JOHNSON 16110 9TH AVE N PLYMOUTH MN 55997 38 17-117-23 99 0006 02380 SHADYWOOD RD GRACE BAPTIST CHURCH/NAVARRE ADAM SMITH COMPANY 1210 BROADWAY 8200 P 0 BOX 965 ALEXANDRIA MN 56308 38 17-117-23 99 0009 02377 SHADYWOOD RD lUKCEL S DITTRICH MARCn. DITTRICH 23/7 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0023 03919 LIVINGSTON AVE ROSEMARY P BURHASTER ROSEMARY P BURHASTER 3919 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0079 03908 LYRIC AVE HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 17-117-23 93 0082 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED TOWN OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN i5323 38 17-117-23 93 0159 03905 LIVINGSTON AVE SHERYL A PATTEN SHERYL A PATTEN 3905 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0007 02369 SHAOYWOOD RD GRACE BAPTIST CHURCH/NAVARRE ADAH SMITH COMPANY 1210 BROADWAY 8200 P O BOX 965 ALEXANDRIA MN 56308 38 17-117-23 99 0015 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 REPORT NO. PI9359I1 PAGE 19 38 17-117-23 93 0062 03933 ' LIVINGSTON AVE JEFFREY A KLEMAN JEFFREY ALLEN KLEMAN 299 BROADWAY AVE N WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0080 03908 LYRIC AVE HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 38 17-117-23 93 0083 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 17-117-23 99 0005 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED TOWN OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 17-117-23 99 0008 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 17-117-23 99 0025 02205 BAYVIEW PL CLEMENT F BIRCH JR ET AL CLEMENT F BIRCH JR ANO BARBARA J SIPPRELL-BIRCH 2205 BAYVIEW PL WAYZATA HN 55391 {• V.-J • 9 » *• • • • ' \ '‘mm •H';. i rr.rl::,6 RUN DATE 08/11/90BATCH PROP ADOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 36 17-117-23 0026 02215 BAYVIEW PL R t J HAZARD ROBERT RAYMOND HAZARD 2215 BAYVIEW PL HAYZATA MN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST38 17-117-23 0027 02225 BAYVIEW PL TERESA ANNE KOCH TERESA KOCH 2225 BAYVIEW PLACE HAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI955901 PACE 2038 17-117-23 99 002602295 BAYVIEW PL GINA I SUMNERS GINA I SUMMERS 2295 9AYVIEH PL HAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 17-117-23 99 0029 02253 BAYVIEW PL C H LEWIN ACM OLSON-KOSKA GREG LEWIN/CAROL OLSON-KOSKA 2253 BAYVIEW PL NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0030 02265 BAYVIEW PL DAVID W DEAN A DIANE M DEAN DAVID W A DIANE M DEAN 2265 BAYVIEW PLACE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0031 02275 BAYVIEW PL JAMES R ANDERSON JAMES R ANDERSON 2275 BAYVIEW PLACE HAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 17-117-23 99 0032 80038 ADDRESS UNASS16NED GENE AND SNERYLL BLOCK GENE AND SNERYLL BLOCK 2305 BAYVIEW PLACE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0060 03329. NAVARRE LA WILLIAM CHAD NILSSON WILLIAM CHAO NILSSON 3329 NAVARRE LA HAYZATA MH 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0065 02328 OLIVE AVE J T JACOBSON OLD JACOBSON J T JACOBSON t L D JACOBSON 2328 OLIVE AVE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0068 02306 OLIVE AVE W S MATUSKA t K H MATUSKA W S MATUSKA « K M MATUSKA 2306 OLIVE AVE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0033 02305 BAYVIEW PL R N STELLING ETAL GENE H BLOCK 2305 BAYVIEW PLACE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0063 02399 OLIVE AVE JAMES S HEITZ JAMES S HEITZ 2399 OLIVE AVE HAYZATA fW 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0066 02318 OLIVE AVE PATRICK W SULLIVAN PATRICK W SULLIVAN 2318 OLIVE AVE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0069 02300 OLIVE AVE MARGARET A WOOD MARGARET A WOOD 2300 OLIVE AVE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0059 03320 NAVARRE LA PAUL J PASCUZZI PAUL J PASCUZZI 3320 NAVARRE LA HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0069 02338 OLIVE AVE B A JAKUBIAK 6 L N JAKUDIAK BRIAN A JAKUBIAK 2338 OLIVE AVE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0067 02319 OLIVE AVE LOUISE B DAY LOUISE B DAY 2319 OLIVE AVE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 99 0073 02319 SHADYWOOO RD S R 6 K MORKRID STEVEN R 8 KAREN MORKRID 2319 SHADYHOOD RD HAYZATA MN 55391 9 V. i •r*.. » 2 V. : CM Hi ItUN DATE Ofl/11/98BATCH 513PROP AODR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 17-117-23 007<»0232A SHADYMOOO RD RICHARD JOSEPH HAEFHER RICHARD JOSEPH HAEFHER 2324 SHADYMOOO RD MAYZATA MN 55391 HENNEPIH COUHTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST38 17-117-23 44 007502334 SHADYWOOD RD JIB ERICSON JOHN C t BARBARA E ERICSON 1620 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 2158 17-117-23 44 007602336 SHADYWOOD RD JOHN C > BARBARA E ERICSON JOm t BARBARA ERICSON 1620 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 17-117-23 44 0077 03326 NAVARRE LA GRACE BAPTIST CHURCH/NAVARRE ADAH SMITH COMPANY 700 CEDAR ST R121 PO BOX 965 ALEXANDRIA MN 56308 38 17-117-23 44 0078 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO GRACE BAPTIST CHURCH/NAVARRE ADAH SMITH COMPANY 700 CEDAR ST R121 PO BOX 965 ALEXANDRIA HN 56308 38 17-117-23 44 0079 02341 SHADYWOOD RD LOUISE A GANGELHOFF LOUISE A GANGELHOFF 2341 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 17-117-23 44 0080 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED TOWN OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 17-117-23 44 0084 02350 OLIVE AVE GARY L WILL GARY L WILL 2350 OLIVE AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 44 0085 03340 SHORELINE OR VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS INC VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS INC P 0 BOX 65 NAVARRE MN 55392 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 17-117-23 44 0094 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOWNERS LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOWNERS P 0 BOX 41 MirmETONKA BEACH HN 55361 38 17-117-23 44 0099 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 38 17-117-23 44 0100 03382 SHORELINE DR GLASS II PARTNERS DONALD MCCARVILLE 3382 WARNER LA MOUND MN 55364 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 17-117-23 44 0101 03360 SHORELINE DR L 8 C KOEHNEN LEROY KOEHNEN 3360 SHORELINE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 44 0102 02385 SHADYWOOD RD S H SCHMIDT 8 S J SCHMIDT STEPHEN H SCHMIDT 2385 SHADYWOOD RD BOX 15 WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 44 0106 02308 SHADYWOOD RD PHYLLIS HENDERSON PHYLLIS HENDERSON 2308 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 17-117-23 44 0107 02304 SHADYWOOD RD CRAIG ALLEN BORCHARDT CRAIG ALLEN BORCHARDT 2304 SHAOYWODO RD MAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 11 0002 02420 SHADYWOOD RD . VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS CO RD 15 8 19 NAVARRE HN 55392 38 20-117-23 11 0024 03333 SHORELINE OR MGT COMPANY SUPER VALU STORES INC CORPORATE TAX DEPT PO BOX 990 MPLS MN 55440 4 A ir. - — I-•• if I ! •• // Z' P If r ■ ,/ A H if* u U ©TOLD D- / DEVELOPMENT COMPANY August 19, 1998 Cit>' of Orono 2750 Kelly Parkway Orono, NIN 55356 Dear Sir or Madam; TOLD Development Company is making application for Site Plan Revaew and an Amendment to current zoning code (or re-zone) for the property located along Count)' Road 19 (partially vacated) at Nevar Lane, We are proposing to; 1) demolish the existing, abandoned church, 2) re-grade the site, 3) construct a free standing Walgreens Drug Store. The Walgreens Drug Store will total approximately 13,905 square feet with approximately 67 paridng stalls and a dual drive through prescription lane. The building wilt be brick on all four elevations and will include a brick w all for screening the truck loading area and the trash storage area. The building meets all set back requirements and parking requirements found in the Cit>' of Orono code, but does not meet the hard surface requirements. We therefore seek a variance to the hard surface requirements. The overall impervious surface calculations are found elsewhere in this application. The elevations included in this application are Walgreens protot>pe. We can modif)' the elevations to address any design concerns of the Cit)'. The entire parcel is presently zoned B5. It is our understanding that B5, as presently written, does not allow drug store use. It does, however, allow some of the ancillary’ items found in a drug store. Therefore, we are making application for either; 1) a modification of what is permitted under B5 zoning allow "drugs, candy, ice-cream, soft drinks, cosmetics and other usual drug store merchandise*’, or 2) to tl i allow the parcel to be re-zoned to B1. ^ 1 Enclosed are applications that are complete for both the Site Plan Rev-iew and Zoning Amendment, except ’ j for the labels, w hich are ordered and will be shipped directly to you from Hennepin County to the Cit>'. '. j ..AWe will be available in the coming weeks to provide additional information as required or requested by the^* pj Cit)'. We also can provide any additional drawings, elevations or other clarifications required by the Cit)'. Verv, ttiflv vours. lam,obett n.’uunmng Vice President - Development RHC/kmm Enclosures .VUNNEAPOUIS • MILW.ACJKEE WEOG'AOOO COM.MERCE CENTRE • 6900 Wedgwood Road. Suite 100. Maple Grove. .MM 55311 • (612) 420-9000 Fa* (612) 420-7574 I TOLD ■D • Z. DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Octobers, 1998 .«i;D OCr I 3 1998 Mr. Mike Gaffiron Ms. Liz VanZomeren City of Orono 4750 Kelly Parkway Orono, MN 55356 CiTY Or CnCiVO Re: Application #4043 Dear Mike and Liz: 1 have enclosed for your review the following information: Protypical Walgreen’s store layout. Protypical Walgreen’s pylon sign. Narrative description of the proposed development./ Please do not hesitate to call on me if you have any questions or require any further information, Very ti ily yours. Robert H. Cunninghl Vice President - Development RHC:cst Enclosures MINNEAPOLIS • MILWAUKEE WEDGWOOD CO.M.MERCE CENTRE • 6900 Wedg*ood Road. Suite 100. .Maple Grove. M.N 55311 • (612) 420-9000 Fa* (612) 420-7574 J Project Description The applicant. Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC (d/b/a TOLD Development Company) is requesting i.) approval for the site plan, ii.) requisite text amendment to the B5 zoning to allow for the proposed use, and iii.) variance for the hard surface calculation in order to construct a Walgreen’s Drug Store at the northeast comer of Highway 19 and Navarre Lane (vacated). Submitted herewith are the following: Survey (Cl) Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan (C2) Title Sheet (T.O) Site Plan (ASl) Landscape Plan (LI) Elevation (A2) The proposed project, as noted above, is a Walgreen’s Drug Store. The building is 13,905 square feet and is approximately 105* wide by 135’ long. The proposed building is predominately brick on all four elevations with some glazing and drivit on the south and west elevations. The site plan calls for 74 parking stalls. Additionally, the building features a two-lane drive-through prescription pick-up and drop-off lane on the east elevation and a truck pad and a trash enclosure on the north side of the building. The site totals 84,312 square feet. The applicant, Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC will own the building and lease the building to Walgreen Company on a long term lease. Therefore, we are proposing, a building that meets the exact specifications and criteria of Walgreen Company. Walgreen Company has some 2,500 stores in 34 states. They are, therefore, by anybody’s definition, a national retailer. However, it is important to note that their focus is being a neighborhood retailer. In traditional areas, a preponderance of their customers come from a mile and a half radius of the store. Given this particular store location, we would still consider Walgreens to be a neighborhood retailer, but serving a slightly larger geographic neighborhood due to the proximity of Lake Minnetonka and shopping patterns. The store is 135' deep by 105' deep and fits the prototypical Walgreen Company “footprint ”. This design is being replicated nation wide and is the result of painstaking store development and market analysis, which is intended to serve the need of the Walgreen customer thoroughly and efficiently. The proposed drive-through prescription pick-up and drop-off, on a nation wide basis, serves a average of six cars per hour. Therefore, it is not comparable to either a bank or fast food drive- through facility in its intensity of use, as it is much less intense. The drive-through is intended as convenience to Walgreen’s customers Only prescription medications, and no other goods, will be sold through the drive-through. The north elevation features the trash enclosure and the delivery area. The trash enclosure shall be constructed of the same brick material as the building and will screen a trash compactor of moderate size. The delivery area is designed to accommodate a normal sized tractor-trailer delivery- vehicle, as Walgreen Company distributes to their stores from a central warehouse in this manner. A typical Walgreen’s store will have approximately one visit from a Walgreen’s delivery truck per week, with other deliveries being • »ade by other vendors throughout the week. The delivery area is a concrete pad that is on grade (and does not have either a recessed truck dock or a raised truck dock). Access to the building at this location is through double steel doors. The building entry is oriented towards the intersection of Highways 15 and 19. There is signage plamied on both the west elevation (Highway 19) and south elevation. There is an entry element on the proposed elevations that features the Walgreen’s logo of a mortar and pestle design, as well. Finally, we are proposing a pylon sign a south tip of the property. The parking field for the proposed project is predominately to the south and to lesser extent to the west of the building. This puts the parking away from the residential to the north and to the east of the site. The overall site plan shows a cross access agreement with the adjacent Texaco/Culvers property. The site plan also shows some face to face parking along the common property line of the site and the Texaco/Culvers. There is, however, no common ownership of the properties. There is circulation on all sides of the building. The circulation on the east and north sides of the building to allow for prescription drive-through traffic is appropriately sized to accommodate the turning radius of the aforementioned delivery truck. The storm water pond continues in its present location, but is reshaped to accommodate the site plan. Additional storm water detention may be required, and if so, will be accommodated underground. Due to the topography of the site and the surrounding area, there will be retaining walls both to the nor.h and to the east of the site. There is a combination of grass and tree landscaping along the Highway 19 frontage and to the rear (north) of the building. Additional trees are planned on the parking islands. The landscaped areas w ill be irrigated to insure the health and vitality of plants and the grass area. Ingress and egress to the site is accommodated through a driveway located at the very north end of the site and with a driveway located at the very south end of the site. As aforementioned, there is a cross easement with the adjacent Texaco/Culvers, as well. We plan to have no access (other than pedestrian access) to Olive Lane. We are pleased to be presenting this proposed development to the staff, planning commission, and city council of the City of Orono. We feel that the proposed Walgreen’s development will serve a need in the community and is well located as Highway 15 and Highway 19 can be considered the “Crossroads of the Lake Minnetonka Area”. As the area is already served by a supermarket, hardware store, bank, auto related businesses, and restaurants, we are convinced that a Walgreen’s Drug Store would be a positive addition to this location. Thank you for your consideration of this proposal. ^ CVMKB F-«DW ■ 0LC7>BdOia:4Oi^0e cBllllilllll ■ L Ji0lp < Io I a I f s I I I < I II I I ^ ii Ihlliiifli liiilitii! ii ii!llii!illHl I itiisiiii || ^ 1 ^ ^ i ^ llilliil iililiillf lill iiiiill ililililll Li Jill iiiilifi I { j lillliiiiilsi iliilli !lliiilii)iiJ!i fliili III III Lliiiiiiiiiiii! I ! i j i I I i ’ ’ Iiiliill!i!!lilii Iiiiiiiiiil'l liiHliiliiiiillliiiiiiiliiiliilil!! liilii llliiiiii ijiiiilliilliiill J«(«S»llla9l»litl< Ji<6lS9illliil JllilsiisIsSdSasaishillllllliSgItasB J.«tialiSI9lg9Bi8Bha ii V I k lii! i*f!i ii!lill!illiuiiiii f. , 2 i: 1 ■■M * *• -.■t r- i isiP^iihl I I It i Is £ J s I dl I I I I I I I I I I S IS {Hi '*iil H [ill s I i i t It i \ I >-2 < < I- -TC h-^ u ^ a ^ I SI I •• - liUi i ^ca ^ ^ / 111 I f3 = p«i||!Utm<5I ! i i-sd * E, jH -i ~ i >K ') I /W # •/(<, // r ‘ ■-..iM ... « N4 Q- \V 1 I 1 1 1 e D 1 o 0 1 1 B D zlo §u. UJ $o 0 ~1[ 1 I :k:1.;-'flil I-?;: ';'-V';j:-^'"’'>' ;.!4l '• m 0 ’•: 1 ‘ty*. ! • rj viT^#-v"r!r ifV-yv^sM WK- •' I ',*, »i;0 CSS; y;::*‘ T fL : ‘. *'.•1 • . ,|J. 1 1 M ■!.»•*’.» ■ ’ f *1 { ‘ ' *•■.*?»• > ' r . .* 0 |v(Tt‘” Wr ii;.'!: i! '*r"• . »* :. ,vl • • ■W‘';Mu '.■i:’!ri;''k. ‘ ■ rli‘ :•“• li®:i j ir'.Vi' '••fi' vwflt'l;'- ! ••' I I • • ■' S' i i:*.’ ... 'yi: .<\i -L:.'i t'-I *) Lu > cr Q zo $ L lj §0 1 I D 11i r 1. . I ^ F>I :<v •'•1 :v.;‘,i: '• ♦. .i‘i *i:: - ‘ ; f I, .. n . n'-« V’ • - .1 I" !' .. • r V '■ * • •• •. i ' • • I . , ;: -.-y ;•r!,V. ••*:; •: Ijfr ; 1 103 ‘-Q" r-2 \\ •v S" 11-0*•••.. .^•-10 .15 *-2**I --in. / // y ‘ v \\ V W $ % ■IIOT* ,11 1 V-€9. f ]•Oq>J^cutUl ••••a* »>«*C PHARMACY \J<J t030 iis*-S Ull . t».Q« i: I! i: I: I*? y 1*'* I I i Itc bb 'b d H ^ 1 M -K -j-......•.K ■ /homen; 1076 7 «i»^' sc»Mr 9 I ii*-5 iw«* ,r.*r;r. ."T.• • • •• • ' ........4-Arr -4-^ -Wf-JL i: ( :iR^7i 6 4- S’-O* X* /* '4 5*-0* :eiB« 66 - Cl Ifll'?*t 1«3T>* ?*-o' *..*y* ■•y \ ■\ JIUL ■•.« 1/1“ i’-o: \ y C<110 37l 6 • • T• • - JUC S--Q*«*.Q< •••.. • •-1*‘11/2 5*-0't‘-D JiP ^ :i f: IHORyj .•* / \. \ •y *-•..X i \ \ • . .X* X *v X \ .*•iUJ/ k Vr^ ••.z s \ 6if ••V \ / X* .^l \ C£N£Efii_SJlL£S GaS -T7T-1JiikJ \\ \ •v \*•. QFPICE C:i - Jit 5 u’Th. 1ri0«7 1 1 11 4 1 ID U) O IM IMr» Iiu7f]s , Cjin.1^6 Cl l03*JfG « -TT-lJulJ f : *38:••••••* .*• x' / >*I«C c*Ut_ AH \ s '- l_, .... m >■•••••I- I- cpArA^ tcs XJii. \ y y \XjJ^ ftObf I^mmm^ i . •• ^ 9 #0» •w^-'t l»- t0tlt r.s.'i [)r3Q<C 3T30«l 7T30«f ^cini9 raw V,-sorrir i r-t-Arf V>. X' '•>?/ I * — *.• i^WHEPl WHW? 8k ^ ic V I3i»<; ox*^ Uitrc fij I -2 II C* CN|«i|l«». III *^r.i !•••• 11^.. .... •*.. A 4>lt* « M* VN > wl»f% 1 1 •-4* • A.«K*0 • 46-0- • ,15-----------------------------------;-----------------------------1 i: U‘-r ©ELEVATION SIGN LIGHTING • r-O' see IS/AS.I roR PANCu Ttpe 10*-0‘ jl $• « 5* «H- >-rLCCtlMCAL CONTHOL SOI. r T/rOUMMtlON r\ ELEVATION©•t.iy scalci !/«• • I’-o- ----------------------ir-i 1------- OPEN 24 HOUHS DRIVIE-YHRU PHARMACY14 ll'-Y- UWli »• ■ ••-in. M nMIvC-IMIU A mMMACV*! #*M, k ir-im. rVD*.A ll KtntiCA c<yt. I Tr«-i% I—I lOUN.—1 1 K‘*4 pRIVE-THRU PMARMACV *(M|vf-IMIU » COMJIMSIU CUT KICNl AMO U ... i‘-r MMMCT* MflVfriCA *T| t* CAPlfM. IIHIA TVSV.B f 1oviNAcc COPT ulCiN. I Trc-» 1—J ll*-0* A. li-IRPL-' W.-1 14 OPEN 24 HOURS PHARMACY j f-i* •(MN »« lAm*l 0*M. B 0*-)*1l. MO *fMAiMICV*l I KlVtllCA WOllBt COPT.Tvre-c □ ------7^ I# CO. "PllMWWCT* »Ct«CTICA •COttai CflPTi t}* CAPMAi LtllfB »CIC m1 AIA 9‘0* OViHNil. COPT UNCIM. IS A primary panel typcs TYW-D □ 5^-J/Nofti setter FCH PROJECf RtogiREMeNr rocit111 >00 OOAO t«T-flO-tSOO occoricto. It. MOIf NOTE I nils ONAMINC IS fNt PROPCRtV OT TnC ItAiCRKN CONPANV. II IS MEAN! FOR RifCRfHCC ONLY. ANV OI»€A USC OR RCPPfXXiCIION IN PARI OR IN lOTAt IS PNOMIOIICO MIIM0U1 AUIHORI/AfION FROM IHI NAtCRCCN COMPANY. PROJECT TYPE iurnkcv project I MALCREENS* orahincs and specirICA!ions ARE INIENOCO TO S»CN ONtY NA c CREENS* criteria anq reouireicnis . all ARCHlIECTURAt. STRUCTURAL* MECHANICAL. ANU ELfCTRICAL ENCINECRINO SMALL FOLLON IHIS CRIICRIA. AND HE PROYIOEO BY LANULOHO’S ARCHlieCI AND EnCINEERS. ALL CONSIRUCnON MORK SMALL BE PROVIOEO BY LANOtORO'S CONTRACTOR UNLESS NOIEO OITCRHISE. PC ^7.i 1 1/I Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & I\J| Associates Enginec rs & Architects October 28. 1998 Mr. Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323 Re: Told Development File No. 139-2416 3ones:rrc AncJfrhk ana Auccu^tet me is an Afhrmattvc Action Eiiuai Oppor:un-ty impioyer Pnnc'pafs Otto G Bo.’^cstroo, PE • Joseph C AncJerlik PE • L S‘5rv.'*l^. PE • Richjrd E Turner. PE • Gicrn R Cook. PE • Rot:crt G Schunicht. PE • Jerry A Boufu'on, PE • Robert W Rosene PE Sus<<n M Eoenm. C PA Senior ConsuU<in(s Associate Principals HovVtirj a S»in.*.jrcJ. PE • Ke«th A Gordon. PE • Robert R Pfeffe'ie. PE • R.charc: W Foster. PE • O Loskct.». PE • Pob?ri C Putsck A I A • Mark A Hanson. PE • f/icnaei T Rautrrann P£ • Ted K.Field. P.E • Kennem p Anderson P£ • Vark R. Rolfs. PE • Sidney P Wii'-amson. PE . L S • Robert F Koismiin • Agnes V R.ng • W.cnaei P Rau, PE • • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE. Offices St Paul Rochester Wiiimar and Sf Cloud VN • ^/.lwaukee. Wi W/tfbSite vvwvy bonestroo com F - .. 'Jn I Dear Mike. We have reviewed the site plan for the proposed commercial aeveloprncnt located on the east side of Shadywood Road (CSAH 19). north of Navane Lane and Shoieliiie Drive (CSAH 15) in Navarre. The site is proposed to be developed as a Walgteen ’s letail store. Them are several engineering issues that v'ili need to be addressed as part of the plan review pfoce^s. 1. Traffic: The .site plan shows two accesses onto .Shadywood Road, one of which is located close to the signalized intersection. Plans should be »ubimtled to Hennepin County lor their review and comment. The proposed signing along CSAH 19 may creat.; sight restrictions for traffic leaving the site Details should be provided for pylon signs and entrance monuments. 2. Grading: Design grades within the parking lot near the northerly access and just south of the proposed building meet or exceed 5 percent and may create problems. We would recommend that access and parking lot grades not exceed 4 percent. The proposed retaining wall is over 16 feet tall in some locations. Retaining wall design and details should be provided tci review. Fencing will likely be required above the wall along the pond for safety purposes. 3. Drainage: The existing NURP pond is not large enough to treat runoff from both the Walgreen site and the existing Culvers site as stated in a November 29.1996 letter from the Minnebalia Creek V/atershed District (MCWD). Assuming a pond normal water levei (NWL.) of 941.0. tlie proposed grading plan for the Walgreen s site shows a reriuction in the existing pond’s wet volume from 0.6 acre feet to aoout 0.3 acre feet. In order to meet MCNVD requirements it will be necessary to provide additional de.'uJ storage in the pond. Options to provide the additional storage volume might include enlarging the existing pond, installation of an underground storm water storage vault, or excavating additional pond volume in the existing wetland located just west of the ponding area. It should be noted that the existing wetland does fall under MN DNR jurisdiction and mitigation would likely be required. A method of reducing the total volume of storm water that needs to be treated nvight be to divert rooftop drainage from one or both buildings away fixjm any on-s'te treatment facilities. Technica! data indicates that the qualify of looftop drainage is cIo:>e to that of runoft from cpci: land v ;th respect to tciai suspended solids (TSS) and total phosphorous (TP) and that additional treatment not cost effective. Drainage calculations, po.nd calculations atid a draine.ge area inap shv'xdd be submitted for review. Based on the dramagn calculations, it may be necessary to expand ti;c proposed storm sev'er system to include additional catch basins. Final plans should be submitted to the MCWD .for theii review and approval. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612-636-4600 ■ Fax: 612-636-1311 4. Utilities: The existing sanitary sewer and water main to serve this property are located within the right- of-way for Navarre Lane. Plans and specifications should be prepared for the service line connections, with as-built plans provided to the City upon completion. 5.Easements: Utility easements will need to be provided for the existing sanitary sewer, gas main and any other existing utilities located in the abandoned portion of Navarre Lai^e. Drainage and utility easements should be provided 5 feet wide along the perimeter lot lines and 10 feet wide along the County road right- of-way. Drainage easements should be provided across all ponding areas. 6. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please contact me at 604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very' truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono A 4 I3AIII .GREN SHARDI ,OW ANDUBAN IHCOaratATI.D CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 33401 612 339-3300 PHONE 612 337 3601 FAX DATE: October 28, 1998 TO;Mike GafTron Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono FROM: Jon Scaizo Senior Designer RE:Walgreen Drug Store Told Development Application #2416/2417 As you requested, I have reviewed the site plan for the proposed Walgreen . tore located at the intersection of County Roads 15 and 19. The proposal provides for a 13,905 sq. ft. Walgreen with a drive through. 1 offer the following comments based on site planning and environmental perspectives. Issues: 1. Variances The developer is requesting 4 variances to accommodate the development of the project. A.The developer is requesting a variance to allow 91% hardcover in Zone 1 and 63% hardcover in Zone 2, with an overall hardcover of 80%. The permitted hardcover is 35% in both zones. It is the developer’s responsibility to demonstrate that meeting the intent of the ordinance represents undue hardship and that there is no other reasonable recourse other than by variance and that they are requesting the minimum variance necessary. The large disparity between the maximum hardcover surface allowed (35%) and that proposed, (80%) demonstrates that the request isn’t minimal nor reasonable. B. The second variance request is for a reduction of parking spaces provided. The proposed 13,905 sq. ft. building requires 93 spaces The applicant has provided 74, a difference of 19 or 80% of what is required. C. The third variance request is for the reduction of the parking setback along County Road 19, from 20 feet to 5 feet. As most of the affected parking is located in Zone 1 and Zone 2, the requested reduction of green space increases hardcover where it is least needed. A five foot setback does not provide sufficient room to plant and grow trees to soften views to parking. In addition, the proposal does not provide room to accommodate any proposed changes to widening County Road 19, adding to traffic lanes or sidewalks. D. The fourth variance request is for floor area ratio or lot coverage. The City requirement states that the total footprint of all principal and accessory structures shall not exceed 15% of the lot area, the developer is proposing a F. A.R. of 16.5%. The development team needs to look at a more efficient site plan, reducing building, parking areas and surfacing to meet the requirements of the ordinance. These measures will increase the green space and bring the project into conformance. 2. Zoning Amendment The developer is also requesting an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow the proposed use within the B5 District. Although the Walgreens store may be a good neighborhood retailer, the size of the building and corresponding parking and hardcover surface make it unsuitable for this site. There is simply too much building and surface for this type of commercial development on a site with Zone 1 and Zone 2 hardcover standards. 3. Retaining Wall This project requires the construction of two retaining walls that vary in height with a maximum at 14 feet and that is exposed to views from the northeastern residential area. This wall needs to be terraced, if possible, and heavily landscaped to buffer the adjoining residents. This V. ’1 will require a suitable fence/guard rail along the top to meet building code. 4. Landscaping The developer of this property must provide significant landscaping along frontages abutting residential areas. The plan needs to provide additional deciduous and evergreen trees to accomplish this objective. The ordinance requires 50% opacity with a minimum 6 foot height along commercial/residential common boundaries. O:\JOBS\l 609.6\WALGREENMEM Hennepin County An £qujl Opporlunltr £mploTcr \/ November 6. 1998 Mike Gaffron City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Proposed Walgreen’s, CSAH 19 Mike: Thanks for the timely review opportunity regarding the above-noted proposal. As noted in prior correspondence, the site should be limited to the two driveways shown on the site plan: The one shared with O’Sullivan and the one at the north property line. Two other issues are of concern, however. First, upon development all other aprons must be removed and replaced with curb and sidewalk to preclude errant drivers try ing to enter and to minimize any potential hazard to pedestrians. Secondly, the proposed sign at the far south end of the site might present a sight-distance problem for the southerly driveway and/or drivers turning right from westbound CSAH 15 to northbound CSAH 19. If the city can help address these issues the proposal should function satisfactorily with minimal impact to the road. Again, thank you for the opportunity and please call w ith questions or discussion. David K. Zetterstrom Entrance Permit Coordinator DKZtjrh cc: Greg Gappa - City of Orono Transportation Department 1600 Pnirie Drive Medma,MN 55340-5421 (6l2):45-'500 FAX: (612) 478-4000 TDD: (6l2)852-6'60 RteytUd Papri B. Garage • • • C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Pa:io/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X X X X S5 8 total hardcover in zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN' ZONE ____ - B X 100 = 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. % PROPOSED HARDCOVER TN y.OVK A* hrotJTC* ^ • X _____ Length Width B. Garage . N . NX C. Driveway^ D. Sidewalk rrjjnj E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X X X X X X X X X X X ff^/O S F. €00 S.F. _______ S.F. S.F. S.F. • • G. OLher £i/4US /S. ^Oo S.F. S.F. ^30 S.F. 3 9 S.F. 2^S S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B X 100 = 2S. 769 S.F. 3 7. 730 S.F. 69. oS % A B A B , /}Ct/lc C T HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0*75'75-250'250-500 EXISTING HARDCOVER IN 70NF A. House Length Widih X X X B. Garage C. Driveway • m • mm X X '■‘D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B X 100 = PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN VONTF A. House _________ X Length .Width . V. ' X B. Garage C. Driveway^X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN'ZONE 7 -5- B /o. /sc SoctrjifdAT 2.) ' (Tsoo-ioQo:.) ^ 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. 77 So S.F. __ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 7?8o S.F. X 100 / S a S.F, S 2 % \ B A B ii J SEC. 10.44. B-5 LIMITED NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT. Subd. 1 . Purpose. The "B-5*' Limited Neighborhood Business District is intended to provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood, which businesses are not high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate amount of hardcover. The district may adjoin residential districts or other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The district shall have immediate access to adequate highways and public sanitary sewer. Because of the location of the "B-5" District as contemplated in the area known as Navarre in the Citv', the uses are limited in order to limit the hardcover in that area and to limit the future generation of traffic for that property in that use district since there is already a traffic problem in Navarre. ORONO CC 347 (4-1-84) 1 r § 10.44 Subd. 2. Application. All applications for a building permit in any "B-5'* Limited Neighborhood Business District shall be reviewed by the Council and referred to the Planning Commission for review. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. Within any "B-5" Business District, no structure or land shall be used except for one of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the Council: A. Municipal buildings. B. Offices. C. Clinics. D. Art and school supply store. E. Book and magazine store. F. Office supply store. G. Banks, loan company, insurance company, real estate office. H. Barbership, beauty shop. I. Camera and photograph supply store. J. Locksmith. K. Hobby shop. L. Gift store. M. Glassware and pottery. N. Antique store. O. JeweliA' store. P. Watch repair. Q. Library. R. Museum. S. Record shop. T. Music store. U. Tobacco shop. V. Galleries. W. Pet shop. Subd. 4. Conditional Use. A. Within any "B-5" Limited Business District, no structure or land shall be used for one of the following uses except by conditional use permit: store. 1 . Candy, ice cream, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, soft drink 2. Drycleaning store. 3. Tailor shop. 4. Pressing and shoe shine shop. ORONO CC 348 (4-1-84) § 10.44 5. 6r Laundry and cleaning pick-up stations. Home and garden equipment rental. Deleted via Ordinance No. 152, 2nd Series Effective Date 10-28-96) 7. Veterinary clinic. 8. Kennels. 9. Coffee or bagel retail stores, subject to the following conditions: a. No more than 50% of the gross floor area of any single building shall be devoted to coffee and/'or bagel retail stores. b. No individual coffee or bagel retail store use shall exceed 2,000 s.f. of gross floor area. A combined coffee and bagel retail store use shall not exceed 4,000 s.f. of gross floor area. c. The number of incremental parking spaces required for the coffee and/or bagel retail store use shall be calculated using the zoning code parking requirement standard for restaurant uses. Applicant shall demonstrate that the total parking needs for the site will be met. d. An individual coffee or bagel retail store use shall be limited to a maximum of 45 seats. A combined coffee and bagel retail store use shall be limited to a maximum of 60 seats. Source: Ordinance 170, 2nd Series Adopted: 3-23-98 B. Off-Street Parking. Off-street parking when the principal site of the off-street parking abuts on a lot which is in another "B" or "I" District and is in the same ownership as the land in the "B" or "I" District and subject to those conditions as set forth in Section 10.61, Subdivision 4 and other such conditions as found necessaiy by the Council. C. Public Service Structures. Including, but not limited to, electric transmission lines in buildings such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electric power substations. Personal wireless services and commercial broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be considered essential services. Source: Ordinance 161, 2nd Series Adopted: 5-27-97 ORONO CC 349 (4-1-84) § 10.44 Subd. 5. Accessory Uses. Within anv "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Garages, Etc. Private garages, off-street parking and loading spaces, as regulated in this Chapter. B. Signs. Signs, as regulated in this Chapter. C. Temporary' Buildings. Buildings temporarly located for purposes of construction on the premises for a period of not to exceed time necessary’ to complete said construction. D. Landscaping. Decorative landscaping features. E. Fences. Fences, as regulated in this Chapter. F. Incidentals. Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, provided that the incidental use shall not e.xceed 30% of the floor space of the principal building. G. Public Telephone Booths. Subd. 6. Area, Height, Lot Width, Setback Requirements and Design Requirements. A. Area. The minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet. B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be 100 feet. C. Front Yards. The minimum front yard shall be 20 feet. D. Rear Yards. The minimum rear yard shall be 30 feet; side yard adjacent to "R" District shall be 15 feet; side yard adjacent to street shall be 10 feet. E. Setback Requirements. No building shall be nearer than 35 feet to any front lot line, 35 feet from any rear lot line, 15 feet from any side lot line, 35 feet to side lot line adjacent to street; except abutting or across the street from an "R" District, no building shall be less than 35 feet from such lot line. F. Fencing. Wherever a "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District abuts an "R" District, along the side or rear lot line, a fence or compact evergreen hedge no less than 50% opaque- nor less than six feet in height shall be erected along the abutting lines except within the required front yard. G. Building Design and Construction. In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter, the use, construction, alteration or enlargements to any building or structure within the district shall meet the following standards: 1. All exterior wall finishes on anv building shall be: 0 W (a) Face brick, or, (b) Natural stone, or, (c) Specially designed precase concrete units if the surfaces have been integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture, or. ORONO CC 350 (4-1-84) f m § 10.44 (d) Factor}' fabricated and finished metal- framed panel construction, if the panel materials be of any of those noted in Items (a), (b) and (c) above, or glass. (e) Other materials as may be approved by the Council. Combinations of such materials shall be permitted. 2. All subsequent additions and outbuildings constructed after the erection an original building or buildings- shall be constructed of materials comparable to those used in the original construction and shall be designed in a manner conforming with the original architectural u?<;ign and general appearance. 3. No building or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the property e.xcept as accessoiy to and during the construction of permanent buildings. H. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council ftDr approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 I. Height. No stmcture or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. Source: Ordinance No. 188 Effective Date: 11-22-76 ORONO CC 351 (4-1-84) • • ft * *• • •K CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 43______ A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO ORONO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.56 SUBDIMSION 16(L) AND 10.61 SUBDIVISION 5(B) AND APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PEIUVOT TO ORONO DEVELOPMENT, LLC FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2380 SHADV'VVOOD ROAD PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.44, SUBDIVISION 2 FILE NO. 2326 WHEREAS, Thomas Dillon representing Orono Development, LLC (herein^er the ''applicant") has an interest in the property located at 2380 Shadyvvood Road located wthin the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Lots 19, 20, 21 and 22, Wiley's Navarre Addition, Lake Minnetonka; and that part of Lot 5, Block 3, Tow-nsite of Langdon Park, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeasterly comer of said Lot 5; thence Northwesterly along the Northerly line of said Lot 5 to the Northeasterly line of the public highway running across said Lot 5 and known as Muinetonka Lake Park and Maple Plain Road (now County Road No. 19); thence Southeasterly along the.Northeasterly line of said road to the Easterly line ^ of Lot 5; thence Northerly along the Easterly line of said Lot 5 to the point of beginning. All in Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City- for a building permit per Murucipal Zoning Code Section 10.44, Subd. 2 to permit the commercial development of the property' that includes the approval of the following variances: Page 1 of 11 • • CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A 0 4 3 1. Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L) - Hardcover variance: A. 500-1000' (North portion of property): Zone area = 36,150 s.f. ± Proposed Hardcover = 17,250 s.f. ± = 47.7% Allowed Hardcj.er = 35% = 12,650 s.f. ± Variance = 4,600 s.f. = 12.7% B. 500-1000' (South portion of property): Zone area = 10,100 s.f. ± Proposed Hardcover = 7,810 s.f. ± = 77.3% Allowed Hardcover = 35 % = 3,535 s.f. ± Variance = 4,275 s.f. = 42.3% 2.Section 10.61, Subd. 5 (B) - Setback variance for parking (not allowed within required front yard): Required front yard = 20' (10.44 Subd. 6C) Proposed front setback to parking = 5' Proposed encroachment by parking =15' Variance = 15' or 75% WHEREAS, the Orono Planning Commissioii reviewed this comprehensive application at a public hearing held on January 20, 1998, and again at a continued hearing held on February 17, 1998 and recommended unanimous approval of the development plans per the commercial site plan, building elevations, and land‘*cape plan prepared by AMCON Design, Construction, Construction Management, ^ dated 2/2/98, for Orono Development, LLC, subject to a recommendation that the v .'u-.d! require a 15' setback for parking, granting only a 5' variance. The City Council on February 23, 1998 reviewed the recommendations of the staff. Planning Commission, City Engineer, consultants and the applicant's comments ^d on a vote of 3-1 granted approval of the proposed variances and commercial site plan, directmg staff to prepare a formal resolution for approval incorporating unique fmdings and hardships in support of such approval; and Page 2 of 11 t CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 4ft______ ^^'HEREAS, the Orono City Council makes the following findings in regard to this application: 1. 2. 3. 4. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2326. The property is located in the B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District requiring 20,000 s.f. in area. The property consists of 80,995 s.f. or 1.86 acres. The development plans include an 11,246 s.f. one-stor>' commercial office/retail building, to include: - 3,150 s.f. bank with drive-thru window - 2,816 s.f. commercial/office space - 5,280 s.f. retail space The general uses proposed conform to the uses allowed in the B-5 Limited Neighborhood District. Applicant has concurrently requested (Application #2327) an amendment of the B-5 District list of allowable conditional uses to include bagel and coffee retail stores, which amendment is pending. 5. Per Section 10.61, Subd. 10, required off-street parking is approved as follows: A. Bank/commercial/office = 1 stall per each 200 s.f. of net floor area. 5,200 s.f. net floor area 200 = 26 spaces. B. Retail = 1 stall per each 150 s.f. of net floor area 4,500 s.f. net floor area 150 s.f. = 30 spaces Required = 56 spaces Proposed = 62 spaces (inch 3 handicap) C.If retail is restaurant uses = 1 stall per each 80 s.f. of public floor area Assuming public floor area = 50% of 5,280 s.f. = 2,640 s.f. 2,640 80 s.f. = 33 spaces (Required would be 26 + 33 = 59 spaces) (Requirement would still be met) Page 3 of 11 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A 0 4 3 6. 7. 8. 9. 12. The stormwater etention pond located at the rear of the property will be expanded to accommodate surface runoff from this site. All surface runoff will be directed via underground storm sewers to this stormwater retention 2uea before discharging to the designated wetland to the southeast of the propert>'. David Zctterstrom, Entrance Permit Coordinator for the Hennepin County Department of Public Works in a letter dated February 2, 1998 approved the two curb cuts as shown on the site plan referenced above. Tom Kellogg of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. in his letter of January 12, 1998 made a number of comments and recommendations regarding traffic, grading, drainage and utilities, easements and trail location. Kellogg's subsequent letter of February 13, 1998 regarding the revised plans noted a number of minor engineering matters in regards to drainage system design, which will be addressed in the construction plan review process prior to issuance of a building permit. Wallace Case, Landscape Architect/Planner with DSU, Inc. in his letter of January 23, 1998 made a number of comments regarding the proposed site plan and landscaping, which comments were t^en into account in the City's review of this application. 10. Applicants' development of the proposed site plan is dependent upon completion of the vacation of a portion of Navarre Lane as originally agreed to by Ae City via Resolution #3830 on January 13, 1997. 11. Surface drainage from this site will not have any impact on adjacent properties as all surface runoff will be directed to a retention pond to the rear of the site. The property abuts the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District to the north and east. Adjacent and nearby propert>* owners were legally notified of the public hearing for this project and were given opportunity to speak at that hearing. •Page 4 of 11 i CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 4.^ 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. The site is topographically difficult to develop and will require significant filling and grading to accommodate the proposed improvements. The proposed site grading plans have been reviewed by staff, the City Engineer, the Planning Commission and the City Council and have been found to be generally appropriate for development of this site, subject to adjustments to be made via a fmal grading plan which will have to be approved by the City prior to issuance of a building permit. Structural coverage on the site is proposed at 14%, meeting the 15% limitation on lot coverage by structures. The property has a unique shape and is a 'through' lot, abutting Olive Avenue to the rear and Shadywood Road (County Road 19) on the front. The orientation of the building is toward Shad>-wood Road, minimizing any commercial appearance or activity as viewed from Olive Avenue. The variance to allow a parking setback of 5' along the front lot line where a 20' setback is normally required, is justified by the umque shape and topography of the site and the need to provide certain amenities for the development. The combination of front parking and driving lane needs; minimum functional depth of building; drive-thru exit lane and rear building delivery access; retaining wall design and location as well as screening needs; and the location and design of the stormwater retention pond, result in the need to allow encroachment of the parking lot to within 5 feet of the front lot line in order to acconunodate the above noted features and concerns witWn the boundaries of the site, without creating the need for other variances. The proposed hardcover variance is mitigated to a great extent by the fact that all surface runoff from the site will be directed to a stormwater retention (NURP) pond designed to enhance the quality of runoff waters prior to Aeir discharge from the site. The magnitude of hardcover variance is further justified by the fact that less than 1 percent of the City's shoreland areas are devoted to commercial uses, hence the overall impact of the excess hardcover created by commercial uses is relatively minor, especially when such impacts are mitigated by stormwater treatment facilities. !, I’ Page 5 of 11 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A n 4 .9______ 18. The proposed site plan, landscape plan and building design incorporate features and elements which make this development appropriate for the B-5 District, especially in relation to its adjacency to an existing residential neighborhood. Such features and elements include orientation of the building toward Shadywood Road ^^•ith no vehicular access to the site from Olive Avenue or Navarre Lane, eliminating neighborhood traffic concerns; sufficient setback and vegetative buffering along the Olive Avenue boundar>' and the northerly boundary of the site; facade materials and design of a subdued character with design elements to break up the look of a long roofline, and consistent styling carried around all sides of the building; creation of a pedestrian pathway through the site to allow the neighborhood easy access to the Navarre business area; and other features. 19. The Council finds that the proposed cedar-shake-over-brick facade proposed is acceptable per Zoning Code Section 10.45 Subd. 6G(le). 20. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety’ and welfare of the community. 21. The 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 requested variances 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 applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property' right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLMED that the City Council of the City’ of Orono hereby approves the commercial site plan, building elevations and landscape plan Page 6 of 11 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 A a referenced above zind approves the variances as requested based on the unique findings and hardships noted above; and approves the City's issuing a building permit for the proposed commercial/retail/office/bank building to Orono Development, LLC subject to the following conditions: 1.Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide the following information for the review by the City Engineer: A. Plans and specifications for service line connections, proposed new' hydrants if any, etc. As-built plans shall be provided to the City upon completion. The Public Works Department shall review any potential problems associated \vith additional cover placed over existing water or sewer mains, especially in conjunction with the vacated portions of Navarre Lane, and applicant shall be responsible for making adjustments of City sew'er and water lines, manholes, etc. in a permanent manner acceptable to the Public Works Department. B. Final grading, drainage and erosion control plan showing existing and proposed contours, building locations, elevations, stormwater pond and erosion control measures to be used during construction. Plans must include additional detail on the pond outlet structure which currently is not acceptable as a permanent installation. Final stormwater retention pond plans shall be submitted, and must include information regarding the method of sealing the pond bottom. Storm sewer calculations must be provided, and revisions to the plans completed per the City Engineer's Februarj' 13 comments. Applicant shall provide confirmation as to whether gutter runoff from Shad\'wood Road will be entering the site and if so, that it will be adequately handled. A building permit cannot be issued until the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has approved the stormwater plans . C. Engineering details and design must be provided for the proposed retaining wall. Due to steep slopes along the north boundary of the site and north boundary of the pond, additional retaining walls may be required to result in slopes no greater than 3:1 to allow for landscaping viability. Page 7 of 11 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _4 0 43____ 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Upon commencement of building construction on the site, the City council will take formal action to vacate the portion of Navarre Lane as provided in City Council Resolution #3830. Applicant shall upon said vacation grant to the City utility and drainage easements over the entire width of right-of-way being vacated. Upon said vacation, applicant shall take all necessary action to legally combine the vacated roadw'ay with the propert}'. The sidew’alk connection to Olive Avenue as shown on the approved site plan shall be constructed and maintained permanently by applicant/property owner to provide pedestrian access through the site between Shadywood Road and Olive Avenue. Applicant shall grant to the City the following easements: a. b. A 10' wide trail easement over the portion of said sidewalk located betw'een the front facade of the building and Olive Avenue. A trail easement 10' in width along the easterly boundary of the propert}’ abutting Navarre Lane. It is the intent of the City that although the City is being granted such easements, the walkway within applicant's property shall be maintained by the property owner, not the City. All upkeep, maintenance and snow removal activity shall be the responsibility of the property owner. The parking lot shall be paved with concrete curb and gutter, driving lanes within parking lot shall have a 9-ton pavenwnt section for trucks. A geotechnical evaluation of the soil shall be done in conjunction with the pavement design. Applicants ’ architect shall submit final development plans to the Metro Council Environmental Services to determine the exact number of SAC umts to be charged at the time of the issuance of a building permit. The City will also determine if additional Sewer and Water Unit Adjustment Charges and/or system upgrade connection charges will be required for the new development, to be paid by applicant prior to issuance of the building permit. Appropriate traffic eind parking signage shall be installed subject to the Orono staff and City Engineer's review. Signage and cross hatching of crosswalk for the pedestrian walkway crossing of the drive-thru lane exit at the north end of the building will be required. Fire lanes shall be designated during the building plan review process and identified appropriately. Page 8 of 11 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 4 3 7. The landscape areas as shown on the above referenced site plan shall consist of grass wherever feasible and shall adhere to the above referenced Revised Landscape Plan dated 2/2/98 in regards to planting species, sizes and locations. Landscaping plan shall include placement of a minimum 6" depth of topsoil over all areas to be vegetated. Applicant shall permanently maintain all landscape areas as originally approved. 8. Site frontage for commercial signage calculation will be limited to the frontage along Shadywood Road, being 381 feet in length. Signage for this site shall be regulated by the provisions of Zoning Code Section 10.61, Subd. 1, Subd. 3(A) and Subd. 3(D). No commercial signage will be allowed along the facade of Ae building facing Olive Avenue e.xcept as minimally needed to identify service entrances to buildings, and as needed for the bank drive-thru. 9. Final lighting plan shall be subject to City staff approval and shall locate lighting so as to direct lights away from the adjacent residential neighborhood. 10. No business shall have its primar>' entrance through the rear (Olive Avenue side) of the building. 11. No formal approval for reciprocal parking agreements betw’een this property and adjacent commercial properties has been requested or approved for this site. 12. Erosion control shall adhere to "Best M&nagement Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas". All erosion controls as required by the City shall be in place prior to commencing e.xcavation on the site. The stormwater pond construction shall be substantially completed and functional prior to construction of building footings. 13. A Developer's Agreement shall be executed by the applicant to assure that all required site improvemc nts as shown on approved site plan will be completed to the City’s satisfaction. The City' Engineer has provided a preliminary estimate of the cost of site improvements at S169,100. This amount does not include the cost of landscaping and plantings, which shall be in addition to the preliminar>' Page 9 of 11 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 45^ estimated amount. Applicant shall provide an estimate of the cost of landscaping and plantings, which amount shall be added to the site improvement estimate. A Letter of Credit in an amount 150% of the final combined estimate shall accompany the Developers Agreement. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall provide suitable evidence of property ’ ownership. 15. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property ’’Ot w-ith die owners, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit within one year of the date of Council's approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (March 6, 1999). 16. 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. 17.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. .Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of March, 1998. ATTEST: Lirida S. Vee, City Clerk Property Owner(s) Page 10 of 11 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 4s STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of March, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. I JAMIE L6EMAR notary PUBUC-MINNESOTA HBiNEPIN COUNTY K<y Conunistion Enplia _______A U A LJ ^Icy>U yt \} Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of^^ 1998 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared .................................. . . - instalment,known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing acknowledged that he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. and JAMIE L GEMAR NOTARY PU6UC-MINNES0TA HENNEPIN COUNTY . Aly Commission Eipirts Jam 31,2000IF rARNOT^kY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day ofwn ini:>________/yi. ✓___________/ __-7*^ within and for said county, personally appeared I b^ore my a ^ 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. IWF/.OPPECAARO tMoyAMcMwMeto HoonephCMftfy tVC»inMi>MwAaal1.aro Page 11 of 11 TO; J Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM; Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator DATE;November 10, 1998 SUBJECT; #24 17 TOLu uevelopment Co., 2380 Shadywood Road - Request for Amendment to B-5 District Allowed Uses - Public Hearing Zoning District; B-5, Limited Neighborhood Business District Application; Request for an amendment to the B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District to add a drugstore use to the list of allowed permitted or conditional) uses. The B-5 District list of allowed uses currently does not include any ;es which could be broadly interpreted to include a full-service drugstore as that proposed. Such a use is allowed as a permitted use in ;he B-1 Retail Sales Business District and in the B-3 Shopping Center Business District. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map of Applicant's Proposed Development C - Navarre Area Maps Depicting All Properties Zoned B-5. D - Letter of Request E - Zoning Code Section 10.44: B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District (Updated to include recent amendments) F - Comprehensive Plan Excerpts Regarding Commercial Areas B-5 District Applicabilit>' Exhibit C depicts the 9 individual properties in Orono which are zoned B-5. While the applicant's 1.8 acre kite-shaped property abuts Shadywood Road, the remaining 8 properties all abut Shoreline Drive and are rectangular in shape and significantly smaller, ranging in size from 0.31 acre to 0.76 acre in area. The grouping of 3 parcels adjacent to the Hennepin County truck station totals 2.09 acres, with a depth of about 200’. The furniture store is located on the middle parcel of these three. The grouping of 4 developed parcels west of Navarre Avenue totals 1.54 acres, with a depth of 134.5 ’. The small office building east of Navarre Avenue is on a 0.31 acre parcel. There are no properties zoned B-5 outside of Navarre. The total area c'^ntained within the B-5 District is about 5.9 acres. By contrast, the total area of properties in Navarre zoned commercially (B-l, B-3, B-4, B-5) is about 33 acres. #2417 - Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 10, 1998 Page 2 B-5 District Purpose The B-5 District purpose as outlined in the zoning code is to "provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood, which businesses are not high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate amount of hardcover. The district may adjoin residential districts or other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The district shall have immediate aecess to adequate highways and public sanitary sewer. Because of the location of the B-5 District as contemplated in the area known as Navarre in the City, the uses are limited in order to limit the hardcover in that area and to limit the future generation of traffic for that property in that use district since there is already a trajjic problem in Navarre". Orono's Comprehensive Plan generally recognizes the Navarre area as one of only two commercial areas in the City, noting that Navarre will provide "sufTicient opportunity for neighborhood retail and service businesses, plus adequate professional offices, to serve the needs of most Orono residents." XivlP 4-26 "Urban Commercial Land Use") The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address the intent of the B-5 district, but does note in Urban Land Use Policies (CMP 4-18. Item 6) as follows; "COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. The location and scale of commercial and industrial development will be controlled so as not to encroach upon the primary residential land uses in Orono. Whereever possible, natural land forms or buffers will be required between different land uses." The allowed uses in the B-5 District include both ser\ ice and retail businesses, the majority of which are typically not major traffic generators. (See Exhibit E) Th : current list of conditional uses in B-5 was amended in October 1996 with the deletion of "home and garden equipment rental", which was concurrently made a permitted use in the B-1 District. The B-5 w as again amended in March 1998 by adding "coffee or bagel retail stores" to the list of allowed conditional uses, with a number of conditions related to maximum floor area, parking and seating. The list of B-5 conditional uses includes some which may involve higher traffic volumes, or somewhat more intensive use than the permitted uses. For instance, a "candy, ice cream, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, soft drinks store" such as the Dair>‘ Queen, has a more intense use of the parking lot and drive thru, and has perhaps more lighting than most of the other allowed retail uses. B-5 also lists "kennels" as a conditional use, which has the potential for disrupting a neighborhood due to noise levels and possibly odors. The "home and garden equipment rental" use was moved out of the B-5 District on the basis that such use could be noisy or create noxious odors, involving the operation of engines, as well as tending toward fenced storage areas which could be visually disruptive. #2417 - Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 10,1998 Page 3 The B-5 District was created in 1975 apparently to accommodate existing businesses adjacent to single family residential areas. The apparent intent was to limit the intensity of uses in the B-5 District to those which would not only be good neighbors, but provide a valuable service to the surrounding neighborhood. Consequently, the number of properties zoned B-5 is extremely limited. Proposed DrugstoreUse Thi drugstore' use as listed in the B-1 and B-3 districts is defined as "Drugs, candv. ice cream, soft drintcs. cosmetics and other other usual drug store merchandise ". This listing was apparently created as part of the 1975 zoning code revisions, since it doesn't appear in the 1967 code. The range of merchandise and services associated with a 'drugstore' use has probably changed somewhat since 1975, now commonly including on-site 1-hour photo processing service and coolers for a range of perishable as well as non-perishable take-away foods. The drive-thru pharmacy is also a relatively recent concept. The sit-down soda fountain is less common than it was in the past. Is ’Drugstore' Use Appropriate in the B-5 District Generally? Planning Commission should consider the following questions in determining whether a drugstore use might be acceptable within the B-5 District: 1. 2. 3. 4. Is the drugstore use consistent with the intent of the B-5 district: Does it supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood, or does it have a wider, more regional market base? Is it a low traffic generator or a high traffic generator? Does it necessitate a reasonable amount of hardcover or an inordinate amount of hardcover? How will the proposed drugstore use impact the neighborhood? 1 raffic? Lighting? Odors or noises? Hours of operation? On-site parking? Open space? Are these impacts a result of the drugstore use itself, or a result of the size, location, orientation and design of the building regardless of the specific use? Can the identified impacts be mitigated or avoided by adherence to existing performance standards? If not, would it be appropriate to establish additional performance standards? Would the drugstore use be appropriate generally on the other Orono properties zoned B-5, if a suitable B-5 site other than 2380 Shady'wood was available? Are any/all of the properties zoned B-5 in Orono, located where a drugstore use would have acceptable impacts on the surrounding neighborhood? #2417 - Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 10, 1998 Page 4 5.Is there sutTicient available land already appropriately zoned (B-1, B-3) in the Navarre area such that the drugstore use could/should be within one of those zones? 6.Will adding a drugstore use to the B-5 District change the character of the B-5 to such a degree that there is little to distinguish between the B-1 and B-5? How much real ditTerence is there between the B-1 and B-5 now? Given the small size of the Navarre business area, is there any real justification for it to be saddled with 4 different zoning districts now?!? Analysis It is difTicult to discuss the B-5 zone in terms of a distinct 'district', because it is made up of three widely separated groups of properties, in locations that inherently have perhaps only slightly more potential impact on adjacent residential uses than our existing B-1 or B-4 district locations. In this respect, there is no stark visual distinction between the existing B-1 and B-5, although our B-1 uses tend to be larger, multiple tenant retail/ser\ ice buildings. On the other hand, the B-4 has remained primarily office uses as intended, without the retail activity. The B-5 District was created in 1975 to provide limited business activity compatible with the adjacent and surrounding residential uses. The B-5 was also intended to provide for businesses that sen e "residents in the si rrounding neighborhood" as opposed to a place for City-wide or regional oriented uses. Those uses would be reserved for the B-1 or B-3 Districts. The nature of existing uses in the B-5 to a great extent matches the B-5 goals, i.e. a Dair>' Queen, an auto parts store, an animal hospital, low key retail, professional office, furniture store, and (albeit non-conforming) auto repair operation, all tend to ser\ e the surrounding neighborhood. Likewise, the nature of the proposed drugstore use would serve the same general neighborhood area. According to the applicant, the drugstore use would likely draw from a customer base that lives within 1-1/2 to 2 miles away typically, with perhaps a slightly greater distance for the Navarre area due to the linear nature of the road system created by the lake. The drugstore use will not be a regional draw as it is not a major destination and not part of a major shopping complex. In that respect, the drugstore use would seem to be in keeping with the neighborhood intent of the B-5 District. Certain facets of the 'drugstore' use could be inconsistent with the context of the B-5 District. The scale of the typical building constructed for a free-standing drugstore yields a 12,000-15,000 s.f footprint and the need for increased amounts of parking as compared to an office use, and in the case of the proposed Walgreen's, access for semi-trailer trucks and the drive-thru. This all tranf’^tes to ti gh degree of hardcover, significantly more than was previously proposed/approved for 2380 Shadywood Road site, and perhaps more than was contemplated when the B-5 zone was creu,cd. #2417 - Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 10,1998 Page 5 The two largest existing buildings on B-5 sites in Orono are in the 6,000-8,000 s.f. range, with the remainder being considerably smaller. One of the impacts of larger buildings is the inherently more difficult visual transition to residential. Topography also plays a role here as we see \\ith the Lowell's Auto Parts building with a massive retaining wall behind it. The 2380 Shady wood site is more than mice the area of any other individual B-5 parcel. As a comparison, note that the furniture store building covers about 23% of its site, and the Lowells Auto site has about 29% coverage by structures. The drugstore use proposed on the Shady wood Road site will have approximately 17% lot coverage. One option to consider is whether an upper limit should be established for the footprint size of any freestanding building in the B-5. Orono has not established such limits within the >ther 'B' districts, allowing the scale of buildings to be dictated by hardcover, lot coverage, parking, yard and setback requirements. However, a building size limit would be one way to maintain the 'neighborhood compatibility' intent of the B-5. Other factors which have a potential impact on the surrounding neighborhood, but which are perhaps less a function of the use and more related to the site planning, include; Change in the visual character of site - loss of trees, topography changes, new views of retaining walls, etc. Impact of lighting Drive-thru and ser\ ice truck traffic Hours of operation potentially extending past normal business hours. There are also social impacts to consider: Will the drugstore use become a 'hangout' for kids? Will the drugstore use promote a more user friendly and vital Navarre? Is the use needed in Navarre? Are other properties available that are already correctly zoned to accomodate the use? Are there any ramifications of letting the church site remain as-is until a development that is allowed in the B-5 district comes along? If the proposed drugstore use is recommended for approval. Planning Commission should consider whether additional conditional use standards are needed to limit the operation to a scope and level appropriate for the B-5 District. These might include a limit on building size, added screening requirements, limiting hours of operation, etc. Staff Recommendation Planning Commission should discuss whether an amendment to the B-5 district to allow a drugstore use is appropriate. If so, consider whether it should be a permitted use or a conditional use, and whether specific limitations should be established to keep the use within the intent of the B-5 district. V #2417 Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 10,1998 Page 6 As an alternative for this applicant, if Planning Commission concludes that the B-5 should not be amended, you may wish to provide some direction as to whether the 2380 Shadywood Road site is suitable for the drugstore via a rezoning to B-1, and the potential impacts of such a rezoning should the drugstore then not be constructed. The neighboring properties within 350’ of the Shadywood Road site, as well as the owners of all properties zoned B-5, have been notified for this public hearing. It is staffs understanding that the applicant also intends to send a letter to the neighborhood introducing this proposal. Options for Action 1. 2. 3. 4. Recomr'end approval of the proposed amendment, defining whether the 'drugstore' use should be a permitted use or a conditional use in the B-5 district, and whether additional standards should be attached. Table, direct staff to develop standards to limit the use to be consistent with B-5 intent. Recommend denial, stating reasons. Other. Application # V/ 7 Date Received C Amount Paid 3 CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Highway 19 at (partially vacated) Navarre Lane Tjpe of Appli^dtion to be Filed Zo ning Amendm Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) APPLICANT Name TOLD Development Company Phone (home ’) n /a Phone(workl (612)420-9000 Address ^onn Rr.a,<, ynnn CitV'Mipip r.mvp-----------Zip_i53jj — Attn: Robert Cunningham OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Adam Smith Company Phone (home) Phone (work) n2Q) 763-3886 Addres s 700 Cedar Street, Suite 121 City Alexandria ________Zip 56308 Date Property Acquired Purchase Agreement executed 7/98 I also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - ______S 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application ______$175.00 Residential Accessory Use ______S250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ______$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ______$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ______$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use ______$250.00 Land Alteration _____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS ______$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ______$300.00 Vacation ______$200.00 Easement Vacation ______$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ______$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule ' CiiLvi n S. -i } \ CQ r REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified ProperU ’ 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 Surv'ey (signed by a licensed surv'eyor) - 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 iti|4e^id correct to the best of hisAier know-ledge. 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. /nMto ■:____Owner’s signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the Cit> offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings arc 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. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Propert>' 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 sur\'eyor) - 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 Ariplication 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 origirial fee payment) and/or unusual expenses intyirred in review of this application, and certifies that the afiid correct to the best of hisi^er knowledge.information supplied is Applicant's signature (ilUtUf Date 'if- OWTSTR'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, r’*ase rake arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. Auq-l*g-98 08:51A Adam Smith Proper-t i es , LLC file No. 622 08.'19 *90 06:44 ID:T0LD DB/EL0Pr€NT 6l2 420 P.02 P hGE 2 /'3 K£QU1R£D SiUBMITTALS 1. _____ Completed Application Fonn. 2. _____Describe request in detail. 3. ____ Certified Property Owners List of owners \vithin 350\ labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Depanmeni of Finance, A'603, Government Center, 348-3271). 4. _____ 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 ruune(s) of applicant(s) if not current owncr(s). _____ Construction plan, if applicable (sec staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please anac't. a separate list of any other persorts you vvish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED lO 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------------------------------------ 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE ^ u • 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 infonnation supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Datew* •• • #• •%< 0>YNER'S SIGNATURE ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and lunher authonzea reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, conuntssion members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. 0*nrf5 signature O- eM^_____Date ------------ Applicant must have all fubmiBali into the City offices 23 days before the Platininj Commiiilon Meeting, piavinlns Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of «rh month. Applicants n.uit be present at 111 scheduled review mertins* of the Planning Commiiilon snd Council. If an applicant Is unable la anend a liDiiiilil mwnii »*» wttpmMi*»i*” ”■ •3"’ ■" J™ f'“‘ “■* Bcilding 4: Zoning Office of this change prior to the neeiing. IN® 1 a t: n * . 1* ^ I- a' ‘-9 4 ADDENDUM Property owners include; North Central Conservative Baptist Association (deed holder) Adam Smith Company (contract for deed holder) Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC (<i^/a TOLD Development Company) is the Purchaser under a Purchase Agreement by and between same and Adam Smith Company £> 1 \ ■: 0$ V*Viy - IX J'-’C-"" .... W 1^— j—■ 1?^. ■^r'1 m#% _•§:w?!t • u'tT"11*’ c WVAVN .•*- * : ’^ S “'o 5?^ ■■ ^5? ;fvi/g j4s J ‘ m T*v s i V'' 2 •s>\*J/r-^«fr r^r••Par-0»^<ir it 1 ■jv ~ '" 3t«-^* : • i*X ‘.V«* ., *>-1 ’^*iu **l ’mM ’ li^i P.. • . »i^i/ \ t • -•* i i T ’ • X ; iVPW * •• • •i>. t :«B^= « * y «« ittt.r^ f 11 :r: ^ R9* ■■■■rtiiM »HI«E] '.'•'I 1 •••••./,;••‘ /, * *\ ' •#• »^»ik^JLLli PTT .,\ '1 V i #-T ♦I b » r *:^s: '5T 0t»9 I .—A ^4Tv^ :; Siv;;?; 3 f «§' « ^ -=Ott- r • r f iM t’TO) •: .i^si • ♦ f \ . • • • 5* • •, I *• • t : !>-/ TOLD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY irr/rt. August 19, 1998 Cit>‘ ofOrono 2750 Kelly Parkway Orono, NIN 55356 Dear Sir or Madam: TOLD Development Company is making application for Site Plan Review and an Amendment to eurrent zoning code (or re-zone) for the propertv' located along County Road 19 (partially vacated) at Nevar Lane. We are proposing to; 1) demolish the existing, abandoned church. 2) re-grade the site, 3) construct a free standing Walgreens Drug Store. The Walgreens Drug Store will total approximately 13,905 square feet with appro.ximately 67 parking stalls and a dual drive throi-gh prescription lane. The building will be brick on all four elevations and will include a brick wall for screening the truck loading area and the trash storage area. The buildmg meets all set back requirements and parking requirements found in the City of Orono code, but does not meet the hard surface requirements We therefore seek a varianee to the hard surfaee requirements The overall impervious surface calculations are found elsewhere in this application. The elevations included in this application arc Walgreens protot>pe. We can modifr- the elevations to address any design concerns of the Citv The entire parcel is p'^esently zoned B5. It is our understanding that B5. as presently written, does not allow drug store u?’.. It does, however, allow some of the ancillaty items found in a drug store. Therefore, we are making application for either; 1) a modification of w hat is permitted under B5 zoning allow ‘’drugs, candy, ice-cream, soft drinks, cosmetics and other usual drug store merchandise”, or 2) to i allow the parcel to be re-zoned to B1. /. i V.-. • .Enclosed are applications that are complete for both the Site Plan Review and Zoning Amendment, except ; for the labels, which are ordered and will be shipped directly to vou from Hennepin County’ to the City. '..j We will be available in the coming weeks to provide additional information as required or requested by \he^ City. We also can provide any additional drawings, elevations or other clarifications required by the City. Verv ti>qy yours, < Vice President - Development RHC/kmm Enclosures MINNEAPOLIS • MILWAUKEE WEDGWOOD COMMERCE CENTRE • 6900 Wedgwood Road. Suite 100. Map e Grove. MN 5531 1 • (612) 420*9000 (612) 420 7574 TOLD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY D-a. ^MejM<7r45t_ Octobers, 1998 OpT! I 3 1593 Ci rv Or c.-,c;voMr. Mike Gaffron Ms. Liz VanZomeren City of Orono 4750 Kelly Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Re: Application #4043 Dear Mike and Liz: I have enclosed for your review the following information: - Protypical Walgreen ’s store layout. Protypical Walgreen ’s pylon sign. Narrative description of the proposed development. Please do not hesitate to call on me if you have any questions or requite any further information. Very jly yours, ^oben H. Cunningham Vice President - Development RHC:cst Enclosures MIM.'iEAPOUS • MILW.fUKEE WEDGWOOD COMMERCE CENTRE • 6900 Wedgwood Road. Suite 100. Maple Grove. MN 55311 • (612) 420-9000 Kax (612) 420-7574 Project Description The applicant. Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC (d^/a TOLD Development Company) is requesting i.) approval for the site plan, ii.) requisite text amendment to the B5 zoning to allow for the proposed use, and Hi.) variance for the hard surface calculation in order to const:, :t a Walgreen ’s Drug Store at the northeast comer of Highway 19 and Navarre Lane (vacated) Submitted herewith are the following; Survey (C1) Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan (C2) Title Sheet (T O) Site Plan (ASl) Landscape Plan (LI) Elevation (A2) The proposed project, as noted above, is a Walgreen ’s Drug Store. The building is 13,905 square feet and is approximately 105' wide by 135' long. The proposed building is predominately brick on all four elevations with some glazing and drivit on the south and west elevations. The site plan calls for 74 parking stalls. Additionally, the building features a two-lane drive-through prescription pick-up and drop-off lane on the east elevation and a truck pad and a trash enclosure on the north side of the building. The site totals 84,312 square feet. The applicant. Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC will own the building and lease the building to Walgreen Company on a long term lease. Therefore, we are proposing a building that meets the exact specifications and criteria of Walgreen Company. Walgreen Company has some 2,500 stores in 34 states. They are, therefore, by anybody’s definition, a national retailer. However, it is important to note that their focus is being a neighborhood retailer. In traditional areas, a preponderance of their customers come from a mile and a half radius of the store. Given this particular store location, we would still consider Walgreens to be a neighborhood retailer, but serving a slightly larger geographic neighborhood due to the proximity of Lake Minnetonka and shopping patterns. The store is 135' deep by 105' deep and fits the prototypical Walgreen Company “footprint ”. This design is being replicated nation wide and is the result of painstaking store development and marke» analysis, which is intended to serve the need of the Walgreen customer thoroughly and efficiently. The proposed drive-through prescription pick-up and drop-off, on a nation wide basis, serves a average of six cars per hour. Therefore, it is not comparable to either a bank or fast food drive- through facility in its intensity of use, as it is much less intense. The drive-through is intended as convenience to Walgreen ’s customers. Only prescription medications, and no other goods, will be sold through the drive-through. The north elevation features the trash enclosure and the delivery area. The trash enclosure shall be constructed of the same brick material as the building and will screen a trash compactor of moderate size. The delivery area is designed to accommodate a normal sized tractor-trailer delivery vehicle, as Walgreen Company distributes to their stores from a central warehouse in this manner. A typical Walgreen’s store will have approximately one visit from a Walgreen’s delivery truck per week, with other deliveries being made by other vendors throughout the week. The delivery area is a concrete pad that is on grade (and does not have either a recessed truck dock or a raised truck dock). Access to the building at this location is through double steel doors. The building entry is oriented towards the intersection of Highw ays 15 and 19. There is signage planned on both the west elevation (Highway 19) and south elevation. There is an entry element on the proposed elevations that features the Walgreen’s logo of a mortar and pestle design, as well. Finally, we are proposing a pylon sign a south tip of the property. The parking field for the proposed project is predominately to the south and to lesser extent to the west of the building. This puts the parking away from the residential to the north and to the east of the site. The overall site plan show's a cross access agreement with the adjacent Texaco/Culvers property. The site plan also shows some face to face parking along the common property line of the site and the Texaco/Culvers. There is, however, no common ownership of the properties. There is circulation on all sides of the building. The circulation on the east and north sides of the building to allow for prescription drive-through traffic is appropriately sized to accommodate the turning radius of the aforementioned delivery' truck. The storm water pond continues in its present location, but is reshaped to accommodate the site plan. Additional storm water detention may be required, and if so, will be accommodated underground. Due to the topography of the site and the surrounding area, there will be retaining walls both to the north and to the east of the site. There is a combination of grass and tree landscaping along the Highway 19 frontage and to the rear (north) of the building. Additional trees are planned on the parking islands. The landscaped areas w ill be irrigated to insure the health and vitality of plants and the grass area Ingress and egress to the site is accommodated through a driveway located at the very north end of the site and with a driveway located at the very south end of the site. As aforementioned, there is a cross easement with the adjacent Texaco/Culvers, as well. W'e plan to have no access (other than pedestrian access) to Olive Lane. We are pleased to be presenting this proposed development to the staff, planning commission, and city council of the City of Orono. We feel that the proposed Walgreen’s development will serve a need in the community and is well located as Highway 15 and Highway 19 can be considered the “Crossroads of the Lake Minnetonka Area”. As the area is already served by a supermarket, hardware store, bank, auto related businesses, and restaurants, we are convinced that a Walgreen’s Drug Store would be a positive addition to this location. Thank you for your consideration of this proposal. SEC. 10.44. B-5 LIMITED NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The Limited Neighborhood Business District is intended to provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood, which businesses are not high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate amount of hardcover. The district may adjoin residential districts or other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The district shall have immediate access to adequate highways and public sanitary sewer. Because of the location of the "B-5" District as contemplated in the area known as Navarre in the Cit>% the uses are limited in order to limit the hardcover in that area and to limit the future generation of traffic for that propert>- in that use district since there is already a traffic problem in Navarre. ORONO CC 347 (4-1-84) § 10.44 0 Subd. 2, Application. All applications for a building permit in any ”B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District shall be reviewed by the Council and referred to the Planning Commission for review'. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. Within any "B-5" Business District, no structure or land shall be used except for one of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the Council; A. Municipal buildings. B. Offices. C. Clinics. D. Art and school supply store. E. Book and magazine store. F. Office supply store. G. Banks, loan company, insurance company, real estate office. H. Barbership, beauty shop. I. Camera and photograph supply store. J. Locksmith. K. Hobby shop. L. Gift store. M. Glassware and pottery. N. Antique store. O. Jewelry store. P. Watch repair. Q. Library. R. Museum. S. Record shop. T. Music store. U. Tobacco shop. V. Galleries. W. Pet shop. Subd. 4. Conditional Use. A. Within any "B-5" Limited Business District, no structure or land shall be used for one of the following uses except by conditional use permit: store. I. Candy, ice cream, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, soft drink 3. 4. Drycleaning store. Tailor shop. Pressing and shoe shine shop. ORONO CC 348 (4-1-84) § 10.44 5.Laundry and cleaning pick-up stations. -Home-and garde n equipment renta lr Deleted via Ordinance No. 152, 2nd Series Effective Date 10-28-96 7. Veterinary clinic. 8. Kennels. 9. Coffee or bagel retail stores, subject to the following conditions: a. No more than 50% of the gross floor area of any single building shall be devoted to coffee and/or bagel retail stores. b. No individual coffee or bagel retail store use shall exceed 2,000 s.f. of gross floor area. A combined coffee and bagel retail store use shall not exceed 4,000 s.f. of gross floor area. c. The number of incremental parking spaces required for the coffee and/or bagel retail store use shall be calculated using the zoning code parking requirement standard for restaurant u.-es. Applicant shall demonstrate that the total parking needs for the site will be met. d. An individual coffee or bagel retail store use shall be limited to a maximum of 45 seats. A combined coffee and bagel retail store use shall be limited to a maximum of 60 seats. Source: Ordinance 170,2nd Series Adopted: 3-23-98 B. Off-Street Parking. Off-street parking when the principal site of the off-street parking abuts on a lot which is in another "B" or "I" District and is in the same ownership as the land in the "B” or "I" District and subject to those conditions as set forth in Section 10.61, Subdivision 4 and other such conditions as found necessary by the Council. C. Public Service Structures. Including, but not limited to, electric transmission lines in buildings such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electric power substations. Personal wireless services and commercial broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be considered essential services. Source: Ordinance 161,2nd Series Adopted: 5-27-97 ORONO CC 349 (4-1-84) § 10.44 Subd. 5. Accessory Uses. Within any "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Garages, Etc. Private garages, off-street parking and loading spaces, as regulated in this Chapter. B. Signs. Signs, as regulated in this Chapter. C. Temporarv' Buildings. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of construction on the premises for a period of not to e.xcced time necessary to complete sni! construction. D. Landscaping. Decorative landscaping features. E. Fences. Fences, as regulated in this Chapter F. Incidentals. Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, provided that the incidental use shall not exceed 30% of the floor space of the principal building. G. Public Telephone Booths. Subd. 6. Area, Height, Lot Width. Setback Requirements and Design Requirements. A. Area. The minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet. B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be 100 feec. C. Front Yards. The minimum front yard shall be 20 feet. D. Rear Yards. The minimum rear yard shall be 30 feet; side yard adjacent to "R" District shall be 15 feet; side yard adjacent to street shall be 10 feet. E. Setback Requirements. No building shall be nearer than 35 feet to any front lot line, 35 feet from any rear lot line, 15 feet from any side lot line, 35 feet to side lot line adjacent to street; except abutting or across the street from an "R" District, no building shall be less than 35 feet from such lot line. F. Fencing. WTierever a "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District abuts an "R" District, along the side or rear lot line, a fence or compact evergreen hedge no less than 50% opaque- nor less than six feet in height shall be erected along the abutting lines except within the required front yard. G. Building Design and Construction. In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter, the use, construction, alteration or enlargements to any building or structure wi:hin the district shall meet the following standards: 1. All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be: (a) Face brick, or, (b) Natural stone, or, (c) Specially designed precase concrete units if the surfaces have been integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture, or. ORONO CC 350 (4-1-84) § 10.44 (d) Factor)' fabricated and finished metal- framed panel construction, if the panel materials be of any of those noted in Items (a), (b) and (c) above, or glass. (e) Other materials as may be approved by the Council. Combinations of such materials shall be permitted. 2. All subsequent additions and outbuildings constructed at;.*r the erection of an original building or buildings- shall be constructed of materials comparable to those used in the original construction and shall be designed in a manner conforming with the original architectural design and general appearance. 3. No building or structure of;, temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the property except as accessoiy to and during the construction of permanent buildings. H. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Conunission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be i- compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 I. Height. No structure or building shall e.xceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. Source. Ordinance No. 188 Effective Date: 11-22-76 ORONO CC 351 (4-1-84) LAND USF JUNE, 1980 LAND USE GOALS AND POLICIES eSP^ClArt-uY Pf- ^ Orono's Land Use Plan is based upon the following goals and policies which in turn have been actively developed by Orono residents over the last 25 years. LAND USE GOALS 1. TO REINFORCE ORONO'S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMITMENT. 2. TO MAINTAIN THE HISTORIC IDENTITY AND CHARACTER OF THE SEPARATE URBAN AND RURAL NEIGHBORHOODS. 3. TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE PLACES FOR A VARIETY OF LOCAL RESIDENTIAL, EDUCATIONAL, RECREATIONAL, INDUSTRIAL AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES. 4. TO PROTECT NEIGHBORHOODS FROM ENCROACHMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES. 5. TO COORDINATE ORONO'S LAND USES WITH THAT OF NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES. 6. TO COORDINATE LAND USES AND DEVELOPED DENSITY WITH THE FINANCIAL AND PHYSICAL CAPABILITIES OF THE CITY AND ITS CITIZENS TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES. GENERAL LAND USE POLICIES 1. THE METROPOLITAN URBAN SERVICE AREA (MUSA) IS FIXED. Orono's Urban Service Area (MUSA) and Sewer Service Area (MSSR) are fixed by this and the other elements of the Community Management Plan and are legally described by Resolution of the City Council as shown on Map No. 6. 2. ORONO'S LAND USE PLANS WILL BE BASED UPON ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION POLICIES. Land use and development must assure the conservation, protection and preservation of sensitive environmental resources in accordance with the goals and policies of the Environmental Protection Plan. Land use policies will encourage the wise use and management of natural resources while prohibiting their misuse, abuse, overuse or exploitation. CMP 4-12 I i 3 i I i LANDUSE JUNE, 1980 i I 1 1 I I I I IL L 3. DEVELOPMENT DENSITY WILL BE LIMITED THROUGHOUT THE CITY TO A LEVEL WHICH WILL 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. These same factors act to draw development which can be destructive if not properly regulated. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reason­ able in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clear- cutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, material stone rip rap shoreline protection will be encouraged. CMP 4-13 T JUNE, 1980 lAND USE 7. a. OP alteration of floodplains will be restric development or fied floodplains are Most of the City-s designated located fbrpiotected by regulations marshlands and will P addition, where applicable "iherwise dry buildable floodplains do exi alteration willland, construction, filling^or^ be strictly control fioo^ level increases restrictions, avoid costly floodon other properties, and to a damage or pollution dangers 8. Itu 'ral h^source investigation ^ drainage plans, veg g^^e data :rirtfd -rracrproject. w^cher pu^uc or private 9. or private opf^ERVATION OF OPEN SPACE, ORONO-S use wi|;L promote the light and air . ^^''“'■^borhood and on each lot provided in each ensure adequate llVllZtlllo. .or aPX reaiaents. U,ht. air ana „^soURCES IS PREFERABLE TO INFLEXIBLE PRIVATE STEWARDSHIP OF LAND^^D^_^^ maintenance PUBLIC CONTROL. Priva including open space and stewardship f^^Ijtits, is favored over and many types of ^™P*^ . best and most public of the property owner and beneficial ^ore intimate, tttptnfltt’aSrtcononloal land management. rll land owners must ^ve equal i^d^use opportunities. land owner should be denx ^ .NO land owner shouio oe u= ^owth, land develop his land by ^ provided the banking or no-gro ^^oi«oiished within the development can be a ii^ies and require- performance standards, Plan, ments of the Community Managemen future development must en ^ce the comuNiTY. Land development • , existing developedneighboring propartres a character the land and the rnt^gHtyt sttbri^tt and beauty of the community. CMP 4-14 t jdL if 9 3 9 9 I i 9 1 ■ I i « 9 i 9 k 9 LAND USE JUNE, 1980 13. 14. 15. 16. 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 accommodate new subdivisions or development should be designed, financed and installed directly by the benefited developer as a precondition to increased lard 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 increased 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 I AND USE JUNE, 1980 If the individual development's density increase or impact is relatively small, or the layout is not conducive to public land dedication, then in lieu of lands the developer may be required to contribute funds f-r the municipal purchase of such lands or the improvement of such facilities pioportionat-2 to the cumulative = t LnLty increase from multiple small developments. wn Ta'*n WILL BE DEVELOPED UNLESS IT'S LOCATION AND PHYSICAL " cSa ^S?ewSicI ^sSitLle for the proposed use in accordance WITH this plan . Land to be developed must be of such size, character and location that it can be safely used for the intended purpose without danger to health, without peril from fire, flood or other occurrence and without undue impact upon neighboring properties. Ko land will be permitted to be subdivided or built upon which is held unsuitable by the City for the proposed use because of flood hazards, inadequate drainage, soil formations with severe fo- development, severe erosion potential, unfavorab topography, inadequate water supply or sewage disposal capabilities, or any other feature likely to be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision of the community. IIPRtM I AND IISF POLICIES 1. THE MAJORITY OF ORONO'S URBAN AREA WILL BE RESER^D FOR RESIDENTIAL LAND USE. Orono’s urban residential neighborhoods will provide the opportunity for a variety of housing types and price ranges. Many urban residences will be intimately associated with the lake shoreline and will be subject to density restrictions because of sensitive environmental conditions. Low-densi y multi-family residential uses will be limited to locations near existing shopping and transportation services, but will not be appropriate within 1,000 feet of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. CMP 4-16 i 4 i n 1 a n i I i i i i ii 1 f LAND USE JUNE, 1980 2. LIMITED COMMERCIAL AREAS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE BUSINESSES. The primary function of Orono's commercial areas will be to provide those retail, commercial and service businesses which are directly necessary to serve Orono's urban and rural residents. Commercial development will be limited to areas where full urban services, including municipal sanitary sewer and adequate transportation are available. Commercial development of a regional nature which would duplicate existing services in the neighboring town centers will be discouraged. 3. LAKESHORE COMMERCIAL AREAS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR PUBLIC ACCESS AND LIMITED LAKE-USER SERVICES. Orono's residents and other lake users require lake access, fishing supplies, boat service and boat repair facilities which are unique to our location on a recreational development lake. Orono's Land Use Plan will provide locations for such special-purpose businesses where appropriate from both the land use and the lakeside environmental standpoint. No use or location will be permitted to adversely affect the lake quality or the public's general usage of the lake. All lakeshore commercial is to be limited to areas where full urban services, including municipal sanitary sewer, and adequate transportation are available. 4. THE CITY WILL ENCOURAGE PRIVATE UNIFICATION AND COORDINATION OF THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL AREAS. Unplanned strip commercial developments will be discouraged. Coordinated projects designed to aesthetically enhance, unify and identify the business areas will be encouraged. 5. FUTURE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE LIMITED TO THE AREA OF THE EXISTING INDUSTRIAL PARK. No other location in Orono combines the availability of transportation and public utilities with remoteness from sensitive environmental features. In addition, this land use is entirely consistent with Long Lake's neighboring industrial development. CMP 4-17 r LAND USF JUNE, 1980 7. 8. 9. 6. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT V7ILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. The location and scale of commercial and industrial i development will be controlled so as not to encroach ^ upon the primary residential land uses in Orono. Wherever possible, natural land forms or buffers will be required between different land uses. PUBLIC URBAN SERVICES MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR ALL FUTURE COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND URBAN-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. Commercial, industrial and urban-density residential uses will be permitted only where municipal sanitary sewer, adequate transportation, police and fire pi^^tection services are available. In addition, commercial, industrial and multi-family residential development will be permitted only where a municipal water system is available for adequate water supply and fire protection. URBAN DEVELOPMENT WILL UTILIZE THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING PUBLIC FACILITIES. New land uses and development will be allowed to infill existing vacant properties within the urban service area consistent with environmental 1 tations and with the existing capacities of water, sewer, drainage transportation and recreational f^^alities. New development will not be permitted to overburden these services at the expense of the existing users. New urban development will not be permitted if it requires additional unplanned local or regional facilities capacity. THE EXISTING URBAN AREA WILL NOT BE EXPANDED. Orono*s Communl~y Management Plan is not a staged growth plan. The urban service area will not be expanded into the rural area and urban services and facilities will not be extended into the rural area for purposes of fosTering or allowing increased development in those areas. 10. THE DESIGN AND DENSITY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT WILL BE CONTROLLED TO ASSURE PROTECTION OF LIGHT, AIR AND SOLAR ACCESS FOR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. Requirements for minimum lot size, amounts of open space, minimum yard setbacks, and maximum building heights will be designed to assure protection of these values for all urban residents. CMP 4-18 i I I i i ■ i i i i i LAND USE JUNE, 1980 11. A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF NATURAL WOODLANDS AND OPEN SPACE WILL BE RETAINED ON EACH PROPERTY. Retention of the natural environment requires careful siting and preservation of trees and open space on each urban property. 12. LAND USE STANDARDS WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBAN ENCROACHMENT ON LAKE MINNETONKA. Minimum lot width will space out docks and structural encroachments while increasing areas of natural vegetation. Lake use regulations will limit the number of boats per property and the amount of public waters available for private docking and boat storage. 13. RETENTION OF NATURAL VEGETATION WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBANIZATION AS VISIBLE FROM THE LAKE. Building heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with pro­ hibitions against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes and retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. RURAL LAND USE POLICIES 1. ORONO’S RURAL SERVICE AREA WILL BE RESERVED FOR PERMANENT LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE. Orono's rolling rural area is not suitable for commercial agriculture. Likewise, the delicate balance of storm water nutrient loading vs marshland assimilative capacity preclude expansion of the urban service area without major environmental problems for Lake Minnetonka. Therefore, the ideal land use for that portion of Orono located outside of the Urban Service Area (MUSA) is the planned low-density rural residential land use. Commercial and industrial uses will not be permitted in the rural area. 3 CMP 4-19 • LAND USE JUNE, 1980 URBAN COMMERCIAL LAND USE Urban commercial development is limited to two areas which are provided with all the necessary urban services and facilities. The major commercial center of Orono will continue to be the crossroads center of Navarre. This area will provide sufficient opportunity for neighborhood retail and service businesses, plus adequate professional offices, to serve the needs of most Orono residents. Accessory functions such as offices and owner- occupied living units or limited multi-family developments will be considered appropriate in or near the Navarre commercial area. fn additional limited commercial area is designated on Highway 12 adjacent to similar land uses in the City of Long Lake. This area has utilities available from the City of Long Lake and will provide neighborhood services complimentary to those available in that City. LAKESHORE COMMERCIAL LAND USE Lake access and lake user service businesses are appropriate for a lakeside community and require a lakeshore location. Special performance standards are necessary to assure protection of the lake environment and protection of neighboring properties. The primary purpose is to permit those functions that are directly necessary to support normal lake-use activities such as boat launching, boat service, boat repairs and fishing supplies. Lakeshore commercial areas are not Intended for typical retail activities, including boat sales, which could be accomplished away from the lake. Accessory functions such as parking, winter storage and caretaker facilities will be appropriate in the lakeshore commercial areas. One lakeshore commercial area is indicated on the Land Use Plan along Maxwell Bay where resorts and marinas have historically existed. Sanitary sewer is available for boat sanitation purposes. Expansion of the existing facilities is limited however by surrounding residential neighborhoods, lack of public transportation, and environmental constraints including a crowded bay. Therefore, only the one contiguous area is considered appropriate for dedication to this use. Additional lakeshore commercial facilities do exist along County Road 15 north of Tanager Lake Bridge. This area has fewer transportation and environmental problems than Maxwell Bay, but it is not designated in this Plan for commercial use because municipal sewer and other urban services are not available. This area would be considered for future lakeshore commercial designation should sanitary sewer become available as projected in the CSPP Facilities Plan. CMP 4-26 lx TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:October 12,1998 SUBJECT: #2436 Robert D. Erickson 364/372 Westlake Street Sketch Plan Review Zoning District: LR-1A Lot Area: (Existing) One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acre) 364 Westlake St. 372 Westlake St. 0.65 acre 2.01 acres Application:The applicant has proposed a lot line rearrangement for properties located at 364 and 372 Westlake Street. The property owner has recently purchased the properties. The proposed lot line rearrangement would create two substandard lots. The 364 lot would be 1.6 acres, and the 372 lot would be 1.1 acres. The LR-1A zoning district requires 2 acres for each lot. Both lots have been assessed and provided a sanitary sewer unit. The 364 property has been connected, whereas, the 372 property has not. The 372 property contains two rental cabins and a principal residential structure. The lot was assessed for only one sewer unit although it does contain the three ________________separate "dwelling units'*. Pertinent Ordinances: . Section 10.03, Subd. 6: Existing lot of record; In "R" Districts ot greater than one acre and served by public sanitary ’ sewer. A lot of record in any "R" District in the City in excess of one acre, which does not meet the requirements of this zoning chapter as to area or width only, may be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes if the Council finds: (a) It is at least one acre in size, and the average width of the lot is at least 100 feet; (b) It is sers'ed by public sanitary sewer; (c) It otherwise meets the requirements of this chapter or other applicable City Code provisions. This portion of the zoning code does not apply in this case as it only applies to lots existing prior to January 1,1975. The lot line rearrangement would create two new lots. Robert D. Erickson ^64 'y2 Hesilake Street Lot Line Rearrangement 11/16/98 Page I Section 11.30, Subd. 5(C): Front - Back Lot Subdivisions: The proposal as designed in a would create a front and back lot subdivision. The definition of "back lot" per Section 10.02 and Section 11.03, Subd. 2 is a "a lot typically separated from a public or private road by another lot and which gains access to the public or private road via a narrow corridor. Such a separated lot is considered to be a 'back lot' when the corridor is platted as an outlot. A separated lot is considered to a be a "flag lot" when the corridor is platted as part of the lot. When the corridor is merely an easement over another lot, the separated lot is considered to be an 'easement back lot'." Section 11.30, Subd. 5(C) states that flag lots and easement back lots as defined in this chapter shall not be created. Therefore, the proposed lot line rearrangement must make use of an outlot or maintain the 50' width at the street to be considered a lot line rearrangement. Section 11.10, Subd. 14(A): Zoning Regulations. Every plat shall conform to existing zoning regulations and subdivision regulations applicable at the time of Final Plat approval. Variances shall not be approved to increase the overall subdivision density above the minimum lot area requirements of the applicable zoning district and this chapter. SectivT.i 11.03, Subd. 65(C): Lot line rearrangements require both resulting lots meet the requirements of the Zoning Chapter of the City Code. Pertinent Facts 1.The property at 372 Westlake Street originally consisted of three lots that have been combined for tax purposes. Lot 10 Lot 11 Lot 12 Total 0.62 acre 0.86 acre 0.53 acre 2.01 acres The property is zoned LR-1A requiring 2.0 acres. This is a conforming lot. 2. The property at 364 Westlake Street is 0.65 acres. It is non-conforming. J.The lot line rearrangement, as proposed by the applicant, w'ould create two non-conforming lots. 4.Upon replatting of the properties, the applicant will remove the two residences, both rental cabins, and any other structures on the property. i^2436 Robert D Erickson 364fy2 1^‘estlake Street Lot Line Rearrangement U/16 9S Page 2 5. 6. 7. Both properties have been assessed for one sewer unit each. The SAC fee has been collected on the 364 lot and it has been connected to sanitary sewer since 1994. The 372 lot was required to connect to sewer in 1995, but has not been. The property owner would be required to pay a SAC fee prior to connection. It was determined the lot would only be provided one unit despite the three dwelling units that exist on the property (one residence and two rental cabins). It could be argued the subdivision could be a true lot line rearrangement if the 50' lot width were maintained at the street side of the 364 lot. The lot would be widened closer to the lakeshore. If the lot line rearrangement would occur variances would be required for lot size to create buildable lots. This would be a Class 111 subdivision, because it would require flexible zoning to replat the properties. The Subdivision ordinance does not allow lot line rearrangements that create non-conforming lots. Lot Area and Yards ANALYSIS LR-IA (2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard Street Yard Requited 87,120 s.f.200 ’75 ’30’50 ’ 364 69,761 s.f 273'75 ’30’50 ’ 372 46,189 s.f 260 ’75 ’30’50 ’ Hardcover We'1 lake Street Lot Area Allowed Hardcover in 75-250' Setback Proposed Hardcover 364 69,761 s.f 10,939 s.f 10,769 s.f 372 46,189 s.f 6,177.25 s.f 5.328 s.f As proposed the applicant would not require hardcover variances. I»24}6 Robert D. Erickson 364/3^? Westlake Street Lot Line Rearrangement n/16 93 Page 3 Structural Coverage Property Total Lot Size - as proposed Total Structural Coverage Allowed 364 69,761 s.f.6,928.35 s.f. 372 46,189 s.f.10,464 s.f. Sewer Units Both properties have been assessed ana provided with sewer units. 364 Westlake Street - Has paid Sa C fee and connected to sanitary sewer in 1994. 372 Westlake Street - Has been assessed and provided one sewer unit. The lot has not been connected to sanitaiy sewer or paid a SAC fee. Access Both lots would gain access by private driveways, as they do today. The back lot would require creating a flag lot to gain access. The zoning code does not allow creation of flag lots. The proposed rearrangement provides a 30’ corridor to join the buildable portion of the lot to Westlake Street. The zoning code requires back lots to be accessed by creating a 30' outlot. The subdivision ordinance requires that any driveway be at least 1 O' from the side or rear property lines of adjacent lots. The driveway, as proposed, is not 10' from the side property line of the 372 property. Easements Utility and Drainage easements shali be shown as 10' along the exterior lot lines and 5' on the internal lot lines. Screening The front/back lot regulations require adequate screening be^veen the front and back lots and along access routes to mitigate vehicular noise and lights. The proposed plan did not show how much screening currently exists or show how the screening may be improved. •24i6 Robert D Erickson J6V i"’ Westlake Street Lot Line Rearrangement 1116 93 Page A Right-Of-Way Westlake Street is a dead end street that does not have room to turn around without utilizing a driveway. The City should consider creating a cul-de-sac at the end of Westlake Street. The City could request the property owner dedicate a portion of his property to allow the cul-de-sac to be built. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the applicant maintains the 50' front lot line for the 364 property. This would allow a movement of the lot line towards the lakeside of the property. The Council has designated each property’ with one sewer unit. Attachments A B C D E F G H I J K L M Application Description of Request Location Map Section Map Plat Map Sewer Map Existing Survey Proposed Survey Site Topography Hardcover Worksheets Legal Descriptions Permit Record — 364 Westlake Street Permit Record — 372 Westlake Street i^2436 Robert D. Erickson 364/3^2 Westlake Street Lot Line Rearrangement li 16/98 Page 5 Application # V36> Date Received Amount Paid c::^S7^ od< A CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Siteaddress ^ 4- Propert>' Identification Number (PIP). V^- rK'/(I A?^^3 OO/C^/ ~ Please check one - Property abstract or ’?‘72-4orrens? //7 Attach legal description to application. { APPLICANT Name ' ’TnyplcAri^AAddress City OflOA)C> ^ M7^Zip OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (worjej^^j ________ Address City__ (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Zip Phone (home) . Phone (work) a:2iJ2 Present Zoning District /A- Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ PROPOSAL Number of Building Sites Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites > 2=- Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) ^ Units perAcres l%i Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land __Residential __Other (specify) J^-TS" a.' ta ’v} / .* •L* -1 'J r) vv_if ATTACHMENT TO THE APPLICATION OF ROBERT D. ERICKSON TO COMBINE TWO PARCELS LOCATED AT 364 AND 372 WESTLAKE AND REARRANGE THE LOT LINES BETWEEN THEM Mr. E' ckson purchased the 2.01 acre property (lots 10. 11. & 12) at 372 Westlake In 1997, and has recently acquired the 0.65 acre property (lot 9) at 364 Westlake, creating a 2.7 acre parcel under his ownership. He now proposes to rearrange the lot line between lots 9 and 10 to create athe 46.189 sf. (1.1 ac.) lot A and the 69,761 st. (1.6 ac) lot B. The attached exhibit one “Site Plan" illustrates the homesites that would be created. Mr. Erickson will build a new home for his family on lot B. and will offer lot A for sale for a new single family home to be built by another. Each homesite meets all required yard setbacks for the R*2 zoning district and all hardcover and other coverage requirements of the City Code. The pattern for the present development of Westlake was set in October of 1912 when the “Hillside Park" plat was filed. The plat provided 50 ft. wide lots running from Westlake St. These lots extended approximately 500 ft. to the east and west of the Street, creating 2/3 acre building sites that are 10 times as long as they are wide. A pattern of one home per lot, with the home on the Lake on the east side, and near the center of the lot on the west, developed. Recently, on a home by home basis, this pattern has been flexed as lots have been combined to permit a more buildable site by modern standards for area and dimension. See the attached exhibit two, "Present Pattern of Ownership and Platting". Mr. Erickson proposes a lot line rearrangement between lots 9 and 10 that would move the line 20 ft. to the north and then bend it down to the Lake at about the midpoint of the lake frontage of the combined parcels. The former 364 Westlake (now lot B) would be increased in area 2.5 times to become a 1.6 ac. parcel. The former 372 Westlake would be modified to provide a balance between the area of the two lots. Approval of the rearrangement of the lot lines, and the replacement of the present two homes with the two new homes it will allow, will provide benefit to the community in four areas. The proposed plan, by better balancing the area of the lots brings them closer to conformance with the requirements of the zoning code and permits the development of two homes in compliance with all setback and yard requirements of the LR-1A district. The proposed plan will visually enhance the area by replacing the obsolete, unsightly and unoccupied buildings on the southern half of the site with new homes conforming to the required setbacks from the Lake. The new homes will also provide the environmental benefit of connection to the sanitary sewer now in place in Westlake, and by being accomplished with no change, and possibly a reduction, in the hardcover (see exhibit three, “Hardcover Calculations”) on the present site. All the structures and the septic system now located within the 0-75 ft. lakeshore setback area will be removed. And last, the rearrangement will permit the redevelopment to occur without any change to the present zoning designation. October 20.1998 t* .V . : « * 'V -----X ••• V'•A :>J 4C0 Ft cjiipj»r»* u BAnoc OFORIOR 0 o 'Sj ORONO : ■ STif La review* HI6H CHRST ikc or - / 400 - ••■•-■' •*. - > V • • W‘ i • •ATS ::'L'’■-'V.s* •-•WtST WJUtOf ao ; aco \>C. •V^* .K^y-yNort.ir-::: . • •b • oixOAHLRO s. Vi. /^ ■^Qvrnr'Javi .-V 5 kogsba^ ?dnt g ^\ ORONO/s) Arm • FOX FOX <“•: ' -N-Wr£ir'.L^V4^>^ • f % ^ l^> - Shed • • • —*.r'% ... •• •• .•: ..- • • »•.•.• • •- ISLAND AS O '.C‘* ''• ' ■ ■i‘,v ‘ Crystal • • / • - r V Fagenuss Point 9 • ■ • < ■ iuo^ ulj . '1N * *.:..v. :••■-* c.**^ 't ^ i eoo«\ \-',,l ":'. •■ V -^:l Exhibit Two Present Pattern of Ownership and Platting £■ / / i L T o H iCA w A 8. D T‘ 0) N It •* O > •r f pc? Ni C>. I ^ 7,1 I »» IT r-1----------□—rnr i| sSins ? r r C3 o / I ^ N K A / w • ' I: I ;« I I • I > • * I I I t f 14 — OJ Oi (27) 16 in 17 SEE SHEET 4 v*:i in I : o/ r-^ (28) HOUSE 20' -A I i i ... xi^^6o^;PVC ,1 ^ ^1 /A 7" 1 • ' v~vfi----------------------------------------■> A r+O- —crr-7 if j 'Y"A ' .'' ' ^ \ I 3b , . \ I,. \ ! r“» 'w' 6 I o i(i9) HOUSE 18 SERV, 20: \t,\4 St i»i, ,1 •toj ! 11ni I ! I at I li OJ in K3ou MJ i?El' » I ! II :)l (29) MH-575 ^EOCE CAP, ' Vrr^/' ; *' 7' ' I 47 ’ ? SE=?\':CES \EX TO LAC- CThLR (18)(17) > 19 t t • I* « I I I I Oi I '< ' if^. j » \L I • \% ! ^-3' ,ir sTuup (25) ^2o ; V • iv-“ 2 (24) LIFT NO. ^7• STATI 1 ON U- '5* ~'''~:~'|^''^%"ti'7'...........'-~41Er-Tp"P^- ' v' 'Is \ y 'f ^23 c-'ve'1 o / '. r b- (23)(22) V.2 S lPV iC TC lACr- (16)(15) S/ EX LVAGE & f:EINSTALL STING CMf‘ CULVERTS (14)(13)(12)(11) X. CD ')V: • D/ y 1 7k ”• ‘•V % • *. } & «nJ' - • • 9 *>. I.U a: C-J \ 7 1 \ ii i I 19537 \Jiilf / ) / 935.3 rr? I I i\\ 1 1 934.6 , 1 • • \ 1 / ^47 \ ^ 95C.7 i I It :./ U.., :77/7,M/. U7////A//; ///7//li'(l ON. hardcover calculation worksheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE)75-250*250-500* EXISTING hardcover TN 70Vr J /rf2500-1000’ A. House Length 3C> 32:X X X WidLh S.F. S.F. S.F.C 372-3 S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway S.F. X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Paiio/Deck X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOT^P^PERIT AREA IN ^ / ^SD S.F. PROPOSED H.ARDCQVTR rs' 70VF A. House Length S.F. 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 S.F. S.F. E. Patio/Deck X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA LN ZONE A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ B X 100 S.F. S.F. 3 % A B A B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET J SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75* EXTSTING HARDCOVER FN 70NT A. House ______________ X Leng^ii X 250-500’500-1000’ Width B Gzraae 2kL C. Driveway ~3^C2>/o P9D D. Sidewalk E. Pauo/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERIT AREA IN ZON’E . ^ ^/Yx^oc, * B ^y,V66>-Sirioo PROPOSED HARDCOVER TN 70VF A. House Length 20- WidLh X X X B. Garage C. Dnvcway D. Sidewalk E- Patio/Deck F, Landscape Uoderlaln ~W d By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X 9^/c 92^ S3 SS TOTAL HARDCOVER LN ZONE TOTAL ^OPERTY AREA LN ZONjE ^ > 242 S.F. _______S.F.^»i ~^hOi:> s.f.^37P:) S.F. C 35^0 s.F.(^3^i^3 : S.F. (3?;o S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. oJ S H . • ‘-Vil- i, r a .'^V| '■s^i S4, .-j! .. a r^i70 s.?Q(r^ 5Us2> s.FZb79') ___________S.F. s.f.C5’^^ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. __________S.F. 1^^3> S.F. X 100 A B Application of Robert Erickson Lot Line Rearrangement 364 and 372 Westlake Legal Descriptions 364 Westlake - Lot 9 Block 1, Hillside Park, Hf nnepin County PIN-05 117 23 23 0016 372 Westlake - Lots 10,11, and 12, Hillside Park, Hennepin County PIN - 05117 23 23 0041 •f r; ,1 1? •• fTf /V’' d * / f ‘ « K L Permit Wo. PERMIT RECORD Date 9- /O Type of Permit i3J2UL.Z^9jiA2L ^CL^OjC^ ccc^Ld .^.oAA.__ _________ __________/^JULdc£La2JLS _ '/^/(A.yys^Jrii />-^ Q 5 - /1 -^4___SBC-jCiccrJ l,cti .l'(:> n *?-=?- ______ 95L-}j_J I - / 5 • ^ t-____ %■ PERMIT RECORD m Permit No.Date Type of Permit; /3 TO: FROM: DATE; Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator November 12, 1998 SUBJECT: #2441 John Vogt and Mike Hilbelink, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road Sketch Plan Review for a Class III Subdivision Zoning District: RR-1B Lot Area: One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres, minimum) 12 acres total, 11 dr>‘ buildable (Approximate) Application:The applicants are proposing to subdivide an existing 12 acre parcel into 5 parcels. Two lots are to be ser\ed by the existing curb cut off of Watertown Road. Three lots are to be seiA ed by an extension of the cul-de-sac serving the Crystal Creek subdivision to the w est of this parcel. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 11.10, Subd. 7, Sketch Plan Process Section 10.28, Subd. 5, RR-IB Zoning District Standards LOCATION The subject parcel is located east of the Crystal Creek subdivision and west of the Rolling Meadow Addition north of Watertown Road. The area is zoned for 2 acre residential development. The • topography is rolling and there are several wetlands on the parcel. There is undeveloped land north of the property that may be developed in the future. The lot is 450' wide along Watertown Road. U2441 John Vogt and Mike Hilbelink 3020 Waterlown Road 11/16/98 page-1 ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards RR-IB District Standards Lot Area Minimum of 2 acres dr>' buildable Lot Width 200 ’ Front Yard 50' Side Yard 30' Rear Yard 50 ’ Subject Property Lot Area and Yards The applicant did not provide a survey that identifies the exact size and lot requirements for each lot. The width of the parcel along Watertown Road appears to be approximately 450 feet. The two lots abutting Watertown could meet the minimum lot w idth requirements. Staff is concerned about the size and shape of the three lots serv ed by the cul-de-sac. The lots may or may not meet the lot width requirements at the required 50' front yard setback. Roadways and Access The proposed cul-de-sac is an extension of the cul-de-sac that serv es the Crv stal Creek subdivision. The proposed cul-de-sac may exceed the allowed length of 1,500 feet for a block. The radius of the cul-de-sac is required to be 50’. The sketch plan did not indicatethe length or radius of the cul-de- sac. The extension is shown from the temporary ’ cul-de-sac in Crystal Creek. Note that lot 7 in Crystal Creek does not have frontage on a platted road or outlot. Roads that serve more than 7 units are required to be 28’ paved minimum width. The width of the road in the Crystal Creek subdivision needs to be reviewed because this proposal adds more units.. Also, a copy of the maintenance agreement/homeowner ’s association for the private road as extended into the proposed subdivision should be provided. No new curb cuts shall be provided from Watertown Road. A detailed road plan should be prepared for review by the City Engineer, Police and Fire Chiefs. The road system should be platted in such a manner that does not create a negative impact on existing lots. The size and location of the proposed cul-de-sac is not acceptable. The roadway ff2-t4i John Vogt and Mike Hitbelink 3020 Watertown Road 11/16/98 page~2 J system should not change the status of any existing lots into through lots. The road in Crystal Creek is a private road and Wear Lane is a public road. The plan should address connecting these two roads as well as providing possible future access to adjacent undeveloped areas. Septic Sites The applicant needs to provide a septic report indicating that there are primary and alternate sites for each proposed lot. The number of lots may be reduced if suitable acceptable sites are not located. Stormwater Management The proposed plan needs to address management of stormwater. A ponding area may be required by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). This may potentially reduce the amount of land available for development. The applicant shall provide a plan for review by the City Engineer and the MCWD. Drainage and Utility Easements A survey should be prepared that shows dedication of land along the internal and external lots lines for drainage and utilities. Flowage and conserv'ation casements vvill also be required. Park Dedication The applicant should provide a more detailed plan for review by the Park Commission and the Hennepin County Assessor to determine the fair market value. #2441 John Vogi and Mike Hilbelink 3020 IVateriown Road 11/16/98 page-3 5 i STAFF RECOMMENDATION The applicant shall provide a current, certified survey indicating lot area, lot sizes, lot widths, primary and alternate septic sites, and platted roads that meet the subdivision requirements. The applicant should work with City staff to develop a plan that meets the Zoning and Subdivision requirements. The applicant should also work with the developer of the Crystal Creek development and property owners in the Rolling Meadows addition to discuss the platting of the future road and connections through all three subdivisions . Attachments A B C D E F Application Proposed Sketch Plan Surrounding area map Topography Wetland map Letter from adjacent property owner f 1 U2441 John Vogt and Mike Hilbelink 3020 Watertown Road 11/! 6/98 page-4 CITY OF ORONO ® 612A730510 10/14/98 08:33 |5:10/17 NO:521 Application # ^ I A" Date Received fO- 20-<Ry Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LG cJa TIOII > ^ Siieaddress____3 0^0 UiMje/zTdcv'A/ , O/?U>10 Property Ideptification Number (PIP) Jl3 ^ ^ ooo'/ Please check one - Property X abstract or ____torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name I CJo^/A/ Voor /}/\/o Address. _________ /C ^ O 3)^3 ______Zipobii^ Phone (work) ^?b - S ■fj'f' Phone (home) </ 7 OWNER (if differdnt than applicant) -/^€t\JcK^ , Ji_urf/^ ^ S7^i'66S Address City —6^/f/ ec 7t-1______Phone (home) Lj.R — /yl>0 Zip y5~3j Phone (woric) 5^9 3>' "7 7/ .Jt Lucr^ (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size / kSi IL / Present use (check) I Present Zon^g District X Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Pesidential; no. of units Other (specify)______ / PROPOSAL _________ Division for Tax Purposes ----- ------ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites / Existing Units ^ Now Units - .A Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (cheek) 3~ Units per Acres /40 Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land X\ Residentid _______ Other (specify)________ u »: *w f. f ^ r} . .<.v i v . .1 sJ. CITY OF ORONO W 612^730510 10/14/98 08:33 S> :11/17 NO:521 NfINiMUM MATEMAL REQmRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINAIIY APPLICATION I Piytneo* of fee* (rv'fer to "•pplicttion fcci" luted below YAPPUCATION 2. Corapletcc' epplicetlon forni. 3. Prelimlntiy plit infonnecioii on Ceitificere of Survey. Govt Hennepin County Xkpeitineni of Finance A-603 LntoJ ^ “7 «PpUcttion. bnrOMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 3. Title oplrJon. 4. EtMmenu, covenants, etc. 5. Oevelopen Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning OfneUTs Signature ' ------------------------------------------ Date I ' 2*"“"* "> [Xl “»* »»ld> WW Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & ni) S250.00 -------- Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement S350.00 --------Subdivision Applicarion (Clus I St II) S3S0.00 zz; r'Sifp^nXS” _____Logtl Review and Filing; ____Subdivblon only S75.00 — Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. $200 00 --------Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) -------- Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) ------of c!^ Iir? 1200.00 (No chn|t 6on orit„.l oppliuUoo) --------R^I of fJ.^ cK' o'!!? APPliMOoo 1200.00 (No eh.o(. from !^ioal appikalion) F«a‘ ‘■“•“'(Noch^-l. (ron, ori,taa. .ppH„u") _____Proposed Privata Roads $600.00 + $.50/lineal ft.; ______Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50/Iineal ft. ' Xfitali lin.ft.x.50-S _ • . . _• • ♦ •'vaiulBiH _______lln. ft. X JO “ $ --------Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 -------- — Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $230.00 $23/stub _____Proposed Watermam Extension $250.00 $2$/stub -------- Proposed Storm Sawer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 --------°"'$ W OoT^’loi*x (•PPHcable to rural subdivision applications) C. FItxIbIt Application Fcet/Mitc. Fees -------- Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) -------- Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision SI00.00 -------- PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/DweirmgUoit Civ S««i»«r, Cily A-mey. ordinance. ^ 1 *PP*'““®** *9 P*y •!! widitional fees established by Applicanfs Signanir/:; j^ /q Owner's Signanjre /a^/\ .-.w ./o -> Daie_ Date /o/zo^/fy ^ridoTihe'ihbd Monda^ ***^ ** PlMnlnf Commission meeting. Planning Commission meerings and Council. If an applicant is unable to 9nend»^^u\tdmlctl!^^ll^ c^Keduled review meetings of the PUnn'mg Comrr-.siion place and to advise me Building St Zoning Office of mis change JriSr tr*"^!Jetoil’*"“^ jT .T yi' J r • - JL -~i--------- ( ^ \ • \ M'1 •k »La lL ^ J >, n \v- %.%•. A . \.5zoo\;w A, ••- .S'W.'r^s; M. - ^ ;* »' ^ A c* ':> •. "t -V ; .V i. -4 .? \ \ - -•-■ A. .•«.». 4800'■ , -. «.• *-•* •»... > A . ;. r '* ■? < s • > • ‘ *•• H '^'C^HQrk^ '■/ ■:' : • ’ V V ■■•;^, . V:’ *. S-* • -> •- ?* \ • '•... ft •?J. -' V-. .* • \ ' ,.. I •. ....-.-. I • t Peo^^c^ • «• A '.; \zz6j,^-- '•- ^•5. ^ ^ \k ^ •.,,• »Wto.a..; 1 i '. /■' ( HeHxw I • V • >*. ;v'5626 • 4«*• - •' .* .'. • • <•-. . ;,rj,-..,- .. \ %..v^ • • j •» 7^ •^«^»—»*■ -«^.. ^•. V —' •% ► — ■ ^^WAfc^Wff — f -3. A* .• 1 ■ • '-;*•/ "^•V5 -*. "-. V ■ J wCT-AtJh iN\)evrroe-N/ of 5u Eo®ct peof&^ .•< "«■• 2^U / ^**'-' . I I ^'rfoic J' • . ^r- »CMC __3 , fO-C 'l^ '~ " *>:. ......................, ^-.5 ••-.V »CMC ■ --------'. I ' 'o /^K it“Cdy V jiui**-* •'•*>■-(.■(,,» ^^'i'! ..... V WB6» • .,1 ’. *1.1,J/ ., (■.■^■■-■^- ^ «7‘"V uue.M • 1 rsPdn s,„M, _y ■^ ■ .noic 1 ____I ' . - f£MC ‘c l ’‘\ ' \ rv^ • 1 WINSTON LAW OFFICE V ^ ' November 3, 1998 \ .* ;:ov 'I ■■■ m t • - • Elizabeth Van Zomeren (473-0510) City Planner/Zoning Administrator Orono City Hall P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bav, MN 55323^ - RE: Sketch Plan Application No. 2441; Watertown Road Property Dear Ms. Van Zomeren: My wife and 1 own Lot 1, Block 1, Rolling Meadow^s Third Addition ("Lot 1"), which abuts the easterly property line of the property w’hich is the subject of the above-referenced file (the "Subject Property"). Our objections to the proposed Plan are as follow's: 1. 3 Our primar\' objection is the location of the road and of the turn-around circle immediately adjacent to our w'esterly property line. As proposed, there is no setback, buffer or other screening of the road from our westerly property line. What is now' private would become public, with little or no opportunity for us to control or supervise activities occurring at the rear of our lot. The location of the road as shown on the proposal makes our Lot 1 a through lot, and thus subject to the various restrictions imposed on a through lot. By reason of the length of the cul-de-sac (Crystal Creek Road) proposed to serve the Subject Property, fifteen (15) properties, and the invitees of each of those properties, would use the proposed cul-de-sac. All of the traffic attracted to these 15 lots has the potential of ending up in our back yard, as service vehicles, delivery vehicles, school buses and people out for a Sunday drive pass down the road and are forced to turn around at the cul-de-sac circle proposed to be located immediately adjacent to our property line. With the additional traffic comes additional noise, with the lights and other traffic disturbances. The turn-around circle becomes a gathering place for vehicles and pedestrians and the potential problems that come with such a rendezvous point. 4420 IDS Center, SO ^outK Slli street, ^linneapolis, MN 55402 Tel: 612/341-9S00 Fax: 6l2/3o^-6351 Novembers, 1998 Page 2 4.The length of the cul-de-sac is in violation of applicable city ordinances, and there is no hardship or other reason that the Subject Property should be given a variance to accommodate the extra length. There are a number of alternative designs that would eliminate the abov'e concerns. Some of those alternative designs are as follows: 1.The first alternative would be to have a road mnning along or in close proximity to the westerly boundaiy of the Subject Property. The lots to the West of the Subject Property have a topography that rises from East to West, and there is a tree line along the common property line. This topography and tree line provide the lots in Crv ’stal Creek a fair degree of priv'acy from a road built along or near the common boundary line. In addition, there is a drainage pond constructed along the border of the property on Lot 1. Block 2, Crv ’stal Creek, and there are various drainfield areas located at the rear of the Crv ’stal Creek lots, which areas are staked to prevent, future dev'elopment. All of this affords additional priv'acv' to the Crv'stal Creek lot owners, should a new road be located at or near the westerly boundarv' of the Subject Property. The only lot where the change in elevation is not as pronounced is on Lot 5, Block 2, Crv ’stal Creek, but, with respect to that lot, there is a wetland located at the Northwest corner of the Subject Property, and the road serving the proposed subdivision could terminate short of the wetland or bend slightly to the East, so that the privacy of Lot 5 could be assured as well. With the location of the tum-around circle moved to the interior of the proposed subdivision, the owners of the new lots can themselves police, control and supervise cul-de-sac activities. With the road along or near the vvesteily line of the Subject Property, the lots in the new subdivision could be stacked South to North, as they are in the subdivisions to the East and West of the Subject Property, so that approximately the same number of lots could be obtained, and so that the privacy of our westerly boundar)' could be maintained. In addition, this alternative and the next have the adv'antage of having only one curb cut on Watertovvm Road, which is rcughly equidistant between Crv ’stal Creek Road to the West and Wear Lane North to the East. Novembers, 1998 Page 3 2.A second alternative would be to have a road bisecting the property wth longer, narrower lots stacked on either side, with the most Northerly lot being at the end of the cul-de-sac central to the proposed subdivision. I'hank you for considering our concerns. .*^lease pro\ide us notice of any future Planning Commission or City Council meetings which consider a subdivision of the Subject Property. Sincerely, , Winston JBW/krm 1 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, October 19,1998 ROLL: The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date v/ith the following members present: Chair Sandra Smith. William Stoddard. Elizabeth Hawn. Dale Lindquist. Commissioner Charles Schroeder arrived at 6:45 p.m.. and Commissions Janice Berg and Lili McMillan were absent. The following represented City Staff: City Planner/Zoning Administrator Elizabeth Van Zomeren Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger. Senior Planning Coordinator Mike Gaffron. and Recorder Jackie Young. Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 6 31 p.m. RENEWALS AND AMENDMENTS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#1) #2421 JOANN JUNDT, 1400 BRACKETS POINT ROAD - VARIANCE RENEWAL, 6:32 p.m. 6:34 p.m. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Stoddard seconded, to approve Application #2421,1400 Bracketts Point Road, renewal of setback and hardcover variances per the findings and conditions of Resolutions #3786 and #3986. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#2) #2431 ROGER OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD - VARIANCE RENEWAL, 6:34 p.m. - 6:36 p.m. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2431, 815 Partenwood, renewal of variances for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0-75' setback per the findings and conditions of Resolution #4004. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#3) 2434 CAROL OLSON, KID’S ART SCHOOL, 2180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - CUP AMENDMENT, 6:36 p.m. - 6:40 p.m. Carol Olson was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is requesting an amendment to the conditional use permit to allow a tipi to be located on the property for educational purposes, which is considered to be an accessory use to the art school. Lindquist inquired whether the Applicant had any concerns with City Staffs recommendations. Olson stated she was fine with the recommended conditions. Page 1 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2434 Carol Olson, Kid's Art School, continued) Van Zomeren commented to the Planning Commission that a $250 fee was charged for this application, because there is not a reduced fee schedule for conditional use permit amendments Stoddard recommended adding the condition that the City is not liable for the construction or use of the tipi since it may not be covered under the City’s Building Codes Van Zomeren stated she will discuss the construction of the tipi with the building inspector. Hawn moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2434, 2180 North Shore Drive, amending the conditional use permit permitting the erection of a tipi in the area designated per Staffs drawing, with the recommendation that the $250 fee be waived. Olson indicated she was fine with the motion. Van Zomeren stated the building permit is based on the value of the structure, and will discuss the fee with the building inspector. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS (#5) #2399 MURIEL SENN, 4448 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES, 6:40 p.m. - 6:41 p.m. The Applicant was not present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant has indicated she will be revising her drawing plans and requested the matter be tabled. Staff will send out the appropriate letter to extend the 60 day time period. Hawn moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2399, 4448 North Shore Drive, per the Applicant's request. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#6) #2410 PETER BOYNTON, 1973 EAGERNESS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES, 6:42 p.m. • 7:15 p.m. Peter Boynton was present. Van Zomeren presented the Planning Commission with photographs of the existing structure. Van Zomeren stated this application was before the Planning Commission in August where it was tabled to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. The Applicant is now proposing to build a new house and garage in the same location as the existing house and garage. The building inspector has reviewed the property and has determined that the structure is not structurally suitable for repair and remodeling. Van Zomeren commented the property is located in the LR-1C district, which has a minimum lot size of one-half acre, and is comprised of .237 acres. The Applicant is requesting a variance to the lakeshore setback, a variance to the average lakeshore setback, a side yard variance to locate the garage five feet from the west property line, a variance to the street yard setback, variances to Page 2 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2410 Peter Boynton, continued) hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback and 75-250' setback, a variance to the structural lot coverage, and a height variance. A conditional use permit is also required to allow for any grading in the 0-75 ’ setback. Van Zomeren stated the proposed hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback is 1,054 square feet or 17.9 percent where 1,258 square feet is currently existing. The revised plan is also proposing hardcover of 29.64 percent where 32.9 percent is currently existing. This application should be treated as a complete tear down and should meet all required code provisions. Van Zomeren noted the Applicant was advised at the previous meeting to limit structural coverage to 1,500 square feet and to minimize the need for setback variances, which the proposed plan does not comply with. Chair Smitri inquired whether the new plan is proposing to go up with the new structure. Van Zomeren replied the proposed structure does exceed the standard height requirements. Boynton stated they are attempting to design something that will fit over the old building pad. Boynton commented the existing foundation is not suitable and the hruse is deteriorating. Boynton’s builder stated the street is lower than the existing residence. Schroeder inquired when the property was purchased. Boynton stated they purchased the property three years ago with the intention of remodeling the existing structure. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant has discussed the height of the proposed structure with Staff which requires a variance to the height requirement. Boynton stated the proposed structure is 30 feet higher than the roao without the ten feet credit for the elevation of the street. Lindquist stated he does not have a problem with the height of the structure, but noted the proposed structure should comply with the structural coverage limit. Boynton stated they are attempting to utilize the same building pad because a neighbor had expressed concerns about the house being located further back. Chair Smith inquired whether there were any public comments concerning this application. Boynton commented they are attempting to comply with the requirements as much as possible. Chair Smith stated some variances will be needed, noting the structure could be constructed to lessen some of the variances. Tom Mortenson, 1971 Fagerness Point Road, stated he has spoken with Mr. Bo >iton about the proposed structure. Mortenson commented he has a problem with the height of the structure, noting the Applicant is proposing to construct a 40 foot wall six feet from the lot line which will block his view considerably. Page 3 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2410 Peter Boynton, continued) Van Zomeren slated the elevation height at the peak of the house is 985 feet. Boynion remarked if the house is built further back, it will require more excavation. Chair Smith commented if the structure is moved back, it will eliminate some of the variances for the setbacks. Mortenson stated if the house is moved further back, he will not have a problem with the height of the structure. Kathy Lee. neighbor, stated sne is not opposed to moving the structure further back. Van Zomeren commented she was unsure whether the present garage foundation was adequate to build on. Boynton stated he is agreeable to moving the structure back. Hawn staled she would not be in favor of granting a variance to the structural coverage. Lindquist commented the height and structural coverage of the building need to be addressed further. Stoddard stated he was in agreement that the structural coverage and height of the building should be addressed. Chair Smith recommended tabling the application to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. Schroeder slated structural coverage should be limited to the allowable limit. Lindquist moved. Hawn seconded, to table Application #2410,1973 Fagerness Point Road, to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Hawn thanked the adjoining property owners for attending tonight's meeting and giving their input on this application. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS: SUBDIVISIONS (#8) #2425 REBERS CONSTRUCTION, 2190 WEST WAYZATA BOULEVARD - SUBDIVISION RENEWAL. 7:17 p.m. - 7:40 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Sidney Rebeis was present. Gaffron stated this application is for renewal of approval granted in 1997 for the conversion of Outlot E. Sugar Woods, be converted to buildable lot status to enable commercial development of the property. This property was originally platted and approved in 1989. which allowed the Rebers to postpone dedication of a specific service road corridor through Outlot F until Outlot F was further Page 4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1998 (#2425 Rebers Construction, continued) divided. That 1989 plat approval further required that future development of Outlots E and F be accessed by the service road rather than directly to Highway 12. The 1997 approval allowed the actual construction of the service road to be delayed, although Lot 1 will bear the costs of the frontage road adjacent to Lot 1, with the property owner retaining the right to contest the necessity and feasibility of such a road at the time it is proposed. Gaffron noted the preliminary approval is to expire October 13.1998, an. the Applicant is requesting a renewal of the preliminary subdivision with no proposed changes. Resolution No. 3972 contains a number of findings regarding this subdivision which support the final conditions of approval. Gaffron stated no park fee was paid for Outlots E and F *n the original platting of Sugar Woods, so a park fee is now due for the conversion of Outlot E to buiK'able lot status. Staff recommends renewal of the preliminary plat approval granted approximately one year ago, with no revisions or changes, subject to the resolution of a stormwater plan and an estimate of future road costs. Chair Smith inquired whether there were any public comments regarding this application. Lindquist noted this is basically a renewal of a previous application. Dick Schumer, 2106 Sugar Woods, inquired what is currently being proposed for an access road. Gaffron stated at this time neither the City nor property owners have any intent to construct a service road, but potentially a road could be constructed out to Brown Road. Schumer inquired what the purpose of the frontage road would be. Gaffron slated the creation of a service road north of Highway 12 connecting Willow Drive and Brown Road is outlined in Orono's 1987-88 Comprehensive Plan, which will limit access to controlled intersections. Gaffron stated the City would like to leave the option open to construct the road if it should become necessary. Carl Berg stated he is purchasing one of the homes in tiie subdivision and raised concerns about the fact that some homes are not currently occupied and that this is not a true representation of the people who will be affected in the future by the creation of the road. Berg commented he has reviewed a study which indicates that Brown Road and Highway 12 will experience less traffic volume after the Highway 12 improvement. Berg remarked that the creation cr this service road could also negatively impact the value of these homes. Chair Smith remarked that it is the City's philosophy to plan for the future as much as possible but it would be impossible to address this issue fully at tonight’s meeting. Schroeder commented it will probably be a long time before this road is constructed. Lindquist noted there is no intention at this time to construct the service road at this location. Gaffron noted there will be future public hearings if thr service road is ever proposed. Stoddard moved, Schroeder s .^nded, to approve Application #2425, 2190 West Wayzata Boulevard, Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Approval • Conversion from Outlot to Lot Status - Outlot E, Sugar Woods. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 5 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#9) #2426 GEORGE STICKNEY, VICINITY OF 450 WILLOW DRIVE SOUTH and 2340 FOX STREET - SUBDIVISION, 7:43 p.m. - 7:48 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. George Stickney was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is proposing to subdivide a 6 2/3 acre parcel into two zoning lots. Lot 1 would consist of 4.02 acres and Lot 2 would consist of 2.57 acres which meet ihe minimum lot width and lot area requirements. Van Zomeren stated this property lies within the RP.-1B zoning district which requires that all lots have a two acre minimum and have two suitable sites for septic. Van Zomeren commented Steve Weckman has reviewed the site and expressed concerns about the septic site on Lot 2, but other sites might be available. Two suitable septic sites are available on the north lot. Van Zomeren stated access to the sites needs to be reviewed as well as plans for drainage. This application has been sent to the Hennepin County Assessor to determine a park dedication fee. Staff recommends approval subject to final approval of the septic plan. Stickney stated it is his intention to live on the four acre parcel, noting there are three suitable septic sites available on that lot. There were no public comments. Lindquist indicated he was in favor of the application Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2426, Vicinity of 450 Willow Drive South and 2340 Fox Street - Subdivision, subject to the conditions outlined in the October IS, 1998 Planner’s Report. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#14) #2427 KENTON AND DIANE CARLSON, 3498 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE, 7:59 p.m. - 8:03 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Kenton and Diane Carlson were present. Van Zomeren stated this application is dealing with after-the-fact variances for a porch that was added to tt.e south side of the house that was not part of the original structure that was damaged by the early summer storms. An after-the-fact side yard variance is needed to allow the porch to be located 3.2 feet from the east property line. An after-the-fact variance to the structural lot coverage is also needed to allow an additional 159 square feet to be added as structural coverage. Currently w>th the porch there is 26.25 percent stiuctural lot coverage. Hardcover in the 75-250 setback h js increased from 36.16 percent to 37.43 percent, which requires an after-the-fact variance. Page 6 OROiNO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2427 Kenton and Diane Carlson, Continued) Van Zomeren commented the drawing shows 3/4' stone along Baldur Park Road and in the yard between the house and north property line. Currently a boat is stored on the rock. Staff is recommending that this area be regarded as hardcover but not included in the hardcover survey. Staff is recommending that this stone or rock be replaced with sod and landscaping. Staff is also recommending approval of the after-the-fact variances for structural lot coverage, side yard setback, and hardcover, with the condition that no further variances for hardcover and structural coverage be granted Carlson stated he intends to sell the boat or house the boat indoors. Chair Smith suggested the Applicant seriously consider adding sod to that area. Carlson commented he could put in a decorative garden in that area. There were no public comments. Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission will give the Applicant a reasonable amount of time in which to remove the boat. Lindquist suggested by June 1,1999, the Applicant have grass in the area and the rock removed. Chair Smith suggested the boat be removed within 60 days. Smith inquired whether hardcover for this lot should be reduced. Van Zomeren recommended no new hardcover or structural coverage be allowed on the property. Stoddard moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application #2427, 3498 North Shore Drive, granting of after-the-fact variances for side yard setback, hardcover, and structural coverage, subject to removal of the boat within 60 days of today's date, and further subject to the condition that the rock be removed and sod be placed in the area where the boat is currently stored, and further subject to the stipulation that no new hardcover or structural structure will be allowed on this property in the future. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS (#4) #2395 BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 8:04 p.m. - 8:54 p.m. Mr. and Mrs. Breni Bentrott were present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicants have appeared at the July 20th and August 17th Planning Commission meeting requesting hardcover variances, a 10 fooi vacation of Bluff Street, and side yard adjacent to street setback variances. Van Zomeren commented the Applicants have submitted a new plan which requires a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new deck and porch to be located one foot from the properly line, as well as a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new garage to be located eight feet from the property line where 35 feet is required. A variance to hardcover is also required in the 75-250' setback to allow 35.32 percent hardcover. Page 7 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) Van Zomeren stated a conditional use permit is also reqc’red to alter land and grade within five feet of the property line which will require proper notificatioi: J.r adjoining property owners. Bentrott commented his architect has reviewed Kellogg’s letter and responded to the concerns. Bentrott stated they are contemplating planting hostas and other green cover along the bank to avoid the necessity for mowing. Mrs. Bentrott commented they have planted hostas previously along an existing bank. Bentrott stated they could also consider constructing a retaining wall or move the fill somewhat. Chair Smith inquired whether the water drainage issues concerning the adjoining properties have been adequately addressed. Bentrott stated their adjoining neighbor is in the process of remodeling as well. Lindquist stated a joint drainage and grading plan should be developed between the property owners to resolve any water runoff issues. Bentrott remarked he was unsure what Item No. 4 in Tom Kellogg’s letter was referring to. Van Zomeren stated the language contained in Items 3 and 4 is standard language for a subdivision, and was not sure of Mr. Kellogg’s intent by including that language in his letter. Bentrott commented he is frustrated by the continual requests by the Planning Commission at each meeting to change a different aspect of the plan, noting he requested at the last meeting to have the Planning Commission give better direction on what they would like to see changed in the plan. Van Zomeren stated Staff has received a letter from the Palms at 1447 Park Drive expressing their support of this application. Bentrott commented according to the building inspector, his present driveway is a hazard due to the necessity to back out onto the street. Hawn stated she has concerns about the amount of fill that will be necessary. Chair Smith stated the drainage issues still need to be addressed before this application could be approved. Stoddard stated he was okay with the three foot setback on the side for the proposed three season porch. Hawn commented that she knows the Applicant has appeared before *he Planning Commission three times, noting there are substantial issues that need to be addressed with this application. Lindquist stated a definite plan for the grading and drainage needs to be submitted. Van Zomeren stated notification needs to be given to the adjoining properly owners of the request for a conditional use permit for any grading within five feet of the property line, noting there was not sufficient time to give notice to the neighbors before tonight’s meeting. Van Zomeren commented the Applicants have been working closely with City Staff to get an acceptable plan together. Page 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) Chair Smith inquired when the Applicants were planning on commencing construction. Bentrott stated they had wanted a fall start date but have pushed it back to the spring. Chair Smith suggested putting this item on the November agenda to allow the Applicants time to submit a detailed drainage plan and less fill required. Bentrott inquired whether the Planning Commission could approve the application subject to the submittal of a drainage and grading plan. Schroeder stated an acceptable drainage plan needs to be submitted before approval can be given. Van Zomeren stated the steepness of the driveway also should be addressed. Stoddard suggested approving the side yard and hardcover variances subject to the submittal and approval by City Staff of a grading and drainage plan. Lindquist inquired whether the Planning Commission was in favor granting the variances. It was the concensus of the Planning Commission to approve the variances subject to an acceptable grading and drainage plan. Schroeder moved to approve Application #2395,1453 Park Drive, granting of variances to side yard adjacent to street to allow a new deck and porch to be located one foot from the property line, a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new garage to be located eight feet from th»* ;;»’uperty line, a variance to the hardcover requirements in the 75-250* setback as outlin<-c in the Planner's Report dated October 14,1998, subject to the submittal and approval of a drainage and grading plan before commencement of construction. Van Zomeren noted an extension will be required because the 60 days expires November 8th. Schroeder suggested tabling the item since notification has not been given for the conditional use permit. Schroeder withdrew his motion pending submittal of a grading and drainage plan. Van Zomeren stated the variances are part of the old application. Schroeder suggested submitting a new application for the vaiiances as well as inclusion of the request for a conditional use permit. Chair Smith stated it was-Hil«-€Oi^nsus of the Planning Commission that the variances will be approved subject to the submittal of an acceptable drainage and grading plan. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2395,1453 Park Drive, to allow the Applicants time to submit a drainage and grading plan. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#7) #2413 PAUL AND MEGAN BENNETT, 500 HANLON AVENUE - VARIANCES, 8:55 p.m. 9:05 p.m. Paul and Megan Bennett were present. Page 9 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2413 Paul and Megan Bennett, continued) Weinberger stated this item was before the Planning Commission at the September meeting where it was tabled to allow the Applicant time to pursue possible purchase of an adjacent tax forfeited lot. The Applicants are proposing to construct a 20' by 24' garage with second floor living space to the existing residence which requires variances to the side yard adjacent to street setback requirements, side yard setback requirements, rear yard setback requirements, and a variance to the structural coverage. Weinberger noted in 1991, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2982 to permit the construction of a deck by the previous owner with the advisement that future proposals to increase lot coverage by structure on this property would not be looked upon favorably by the City Council. Weinberger stated without the adjoining lot the hardcover would be at 31 percent and with the adjacent lot it would be 14.4 percent. Bennett commented he is willing to purchase the tax forfeited lot but would like to negotiate on the special assessment for the sewer. Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission does not have the authority to waive special assessments and it would need to be brought before the City Council. Lindquist commented he would approve the application if the adjoining lot is purchased and would deny the application if the adjoining lot is not purchased. It was the concensus of the Planning Commission that the application be approved subject to the purchase of the adjoining lot. There were no public comments. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2413, 500 Hanlon Avenue, as outlined in the October 15,1998 Planner's Report, subject to the acquisition and legal combination with this property of the tax forfeited property. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONTINUED (#10) #2411 PAUL HANSSEN, 3195 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 9:08 p.m. - 9:27 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Paul Hanssen was present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting a land alteration permit to replace a boathouse 15 feet from the lakeshore as well as replacement of a deck located on top of the boathouse that was damaged in a wind storm. The building official has reviewed the boathouse and has determined the boathouse to be in a deteriorating condition which was not the result of the wind storm. Weinberger remarked the Applicant has hired a structural engineer to review the boathouse and was advised that the front and back wails would need to be replaced as well as portions of the side walls. The structure's foundation will also need to be replaced which will require a conditional use permit. Page 10 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2411 Paul Hanssen, continued) Staff is recommending the boathouse be treated as a new structure due to the major renovation work that needs to be completed. Staff is recommending denial of the request since the Zoning Code does not allow any structure within 75 feet of the lakeshore. Hanssen stated they have recently purchased the property with the intention of maintaining the boathouse, noting the boathouse is an attractive feature of the property. Hanssen presented the Planning Commission with three letters from the adjoining neighbors expressing their support of allowing the boathouse to remain. There were no public comments. Hawn commented she was not anxious to allow structures along the lakeshore, but stated the Applicant should have the right to rebuild since the structure was pre-existing. Chair Smith noted the structure was already in disrepair at the time of the purchase of the property. Weinberger noted the boathouse was not damaged by the storm but has deteriorated over the years. Stoddard stated he is in favor of the application. Schroeder inquired whether improvements to this structure could be made since the improvements may exceed the 50 percent limit allowed for under the ordinance, and recommended the application be denied. Lindquist stated if the improvement costs exceed 50 percent of the fair market value, then the application should be denied. Weinberger stated more information should be obtained on the fair market value. Schroeder commented it is his understanding the value of the structure is what it was in 1975 or 1976 when the ordinance was passed and the improvements cannot exceed 50 percent of that value. Hanssen stated when the property was purchased he knew the boathouse would need some work but thought the structure would last for another ten to fifteen years. Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission is not in a position to determine the value of the structure or the cost of the improvements. Weinberger commented a conditional use perm.t is needed to do the work around the foundation. Chair Smith suggested tabling the matter until further information can be gathered concerning the ordinance and the fair market value of the structure. Stoddard moved to approve Application #2411, 3195 Casco Circle, granting of a variance to the harcivover requirements in the 0-75* lakeshore setback, a variance to allow a boathouse to exist within 75' of the lakeshore, a variance from the side yard adjacent to street setbacks, and a conditional use permit to allow work on the foundation. MOTION DIED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND. Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to deny Application #2411, 3195 Casco Circle. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Stoddard opposed. Page 11 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2411 Paul Hanssen, continued) Chair Smith noted the value of the structure should be reviewed by the City Council. (#11) #2422 RICHARD GAY, 2735 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE. 9:28 p.m. - 9:48 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Richaid and Tanya Gay were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting to construct a six foot fence within the average lakeshore setback which exceeds the maximum three and a half foot height limit. The Applicant has stated the three and a half foot fence is not adequate to contain his two Russian Wolfhounds. City Staff is recommending denial of this application since fences are not allowed within 75 feet of the lakeshore. Richard Gay stated they have recently purchased the property and would like to erect a fence to house his dogs. Gay remarked he has spoken with the neighbors who are in favor of the fence, noting he is willing to plant additional landscape to provide more screening. Tanya Gay commented they currently have two Russian Wolfhounds, which are large dogs, and the fence is needed to prevent them from leaving the yard. Gay stated the dogs are capable of jumping over a three and a half foot fence which necessitated the need for the higher fence. Richard Gay stated he was not aware that he would need to obtain approval to construct a six foot fence at the time of the purchase and only became aware of that fact after the property was purchased. There were no public comments. Lindquist inquired whether invisible fencing could be utilized. Gay stated the invisible fencing would not deter the dogs. Lindquist stated he understands the desire for the fence, but he does not look favorably on fences within 75* of the lakeshore. Chair Smith agreed with Lindquist. Schroeder stated the hardship is not related to the topography of the land. Stoddard wondered whether all of the options have been pursued regarding this application. Chair Smith suggested that perhaps the fence could be removed when the property was sold. Gay indicated he would be in favor of removing the fence at the time of sale. Lindquist inquired whether the fence could be kept out of the front yard. Gay stated they are proposing to locate a portion of the fence in the front yard to permit access for the dogs into the house. Page 12 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1998 (#2422 Richard Gay, continued) Lindquist stated the Planning Commission needs to stay consistent with the ordinance. Chair Smith indicated the Planning Commission makes recommendations to the City Council and the Council has the option of approving or denying the application. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to deny Application #2422, 2735 Shadywood Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#12) #2423 GARA GEHRING AND TOM TERRY, 340 LEAF STREET - VARIANCE, 9:48 p.m. • 9:52 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Gara Gehring and Tom Terry were present Weinberger stated the Applicants are proposing to construct a 70.8 square foot roofed entrance to serve the existing residence which requires a variance to the front yard setback. Staff recommends approval of the application. The Applicant had no comment. There were no public comments. Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application #2423, 340 Leaf Street, granting of a variance to the front yard setback per the recommendations contained in the October 5,1998 Planner's Report. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (Recess taken from 9:53 p.m. • 10:01 p.m. (#13) #2424 GREG KLOHN, 4455 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE, 10:01 p.m. -10:17 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Greg Klohn was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting an after-the-fact variance to complete a deck currently under construction on the back portion of the house. The deck would require a variance to the average lakeshore setback as well as a variance to the hardcover in the 250-500' lakeshore setback. The deck would add 136 square feet of hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback, which would bring total hardcover to 35.1 percent where the allowable limit is 30 percent. Staff recommends approval of the application. Klohn stated the deck was damaged in the storm and he would like to replace what was damaged. Klohn inquired whether he would be allowed to replace the one stall garage located near the front lot line that was damaged during a storm Weinberger stated the Planning Commission is not acting on that at this time. Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2424 Greg Ktohn, continued) Hawn noted the Applicant needs to look at the overall structural coverage and determine what he wishes to construct on the property. Klohn stated he would like to construct a garage in the future. Chair Smith indicated the Planning Commission cannot act on the garage at this time Lindquist recommended the Applicant look at the other options and the structural coverage requirements that are imposed on the property before construction of the deck is commenced, Chair Smith commented the Applicant may want to construct a garage rather than a deck and the small addition. Smith suggested the Applicant explore his options before proceeding further. Klohn indicated he had the understanding you could replace what was existing, Lindquist advised the Applicant that the whole picture needs to be considered. Klohn inquired whether a variance to increase hardcover could be considered at tonight's meeting. Chair Smith stated the application could be tabled to allow the Applicant time to review his options. Klohn indicated he would like to commence construction before winter. Chair Smith remarked the Applicant has the option of having the item tabled or having the Planning Commission act on the application that is before them tonight. Klohn slated he would like the Planning Commission to act on the application tonight. There were no public comments. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2424,4455 North Shore Drive, granting of a variance to the average lakeshore setback and a variance to the hardcover in the 250-500* lakeshore setback. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#15) #2428 TERRY MAURER ON BEHALF OF DAVID HARDTEN, 2515 KELLY AVENUE, VARIANCE, 10:18 p.m. - 10:53 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted Terry Maurer and David Hardten were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are proposing to remove the existing house and detached garage on the property to construct a new residence with attached garage. The Applicants would like to keep the existing boat house with stairs along the lakeshore during the construction period. Weinberger stated the application requires a variance to allow the accessory structure to remain on the property without a principal structure, a variance to the hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback, a variance to hardcover in the 75-250* lakeshore setback, and a variance to hardcover in the 250-500* lakeshore setback. Overall this application is proposing to reduce hardcover on the lot from 10,110 square feel to 9,361 square feel. Page 14 __i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2428 Terry Maurer, continued) Weinberger commented this property lies within the LR-1B district, which has a minimum of one acre. This lot is pie shaped which creates a hardship for the lakeshore hardcover setbacks. Staff is recommending approval of this application. Maurer, Developer, stated they have explored several options in connection with construction of the new residence and have attempted to keep the proposed residence consistent with the other homes in the area. Lindquist inquired whether hardcover could be reduced to 25 percent in the 75-250' setback. Maurer pointed out that the residence shares a driveway. Hawn stated the Planning Commission likes to keep hardcover at 25 percent when a new residence is being built. Lindquist inquired whether the driveway could be reduced at all. Stoddard noted the garage is being removed and constructed in a different zone. Stoddard commented drainage is not a problem because the water drains into the wetland across the street. Stoddard suggested giving a credit for the shared driveway and the triangular lot. Schroeder indicated overall hardcover is being reduced by approximately 1,000 square feet. Chair Smith stated she would like to have the hardcover numbers for each zone. Weinberger stated the survey did not contain the hardcover numbers for the old proposal, noting this should be treated as a vacant lot. Hardten commented this proposal is the best plan they could devise for this lot. Chair Smith commented she would like to see hardcover reduced to 25 percent. Hardten stated they are proposing to reduce the overall harucover. Chair Smith noted the overall picture needs to be taken into account. Jeff Lambertson, Builder, stated no credit was being given for the shared driveway, which would amount to 800 square feet if the credit were given. Van Zomeren stated the neighbor needs access off of this driveway. Stoddard commented the unique shape of the property poses a hardship. Chair Smith inquired whether the size of the garage could be reduced at all. Maurer stated they are proposing to construct a 32 ’ by 22' garage, which could be reduced somewhat. Lindquist stated the application should be limited to 25 percent hardcover on a new rebuilt. Page 15 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (^2428 Terry Maurer, continued) Chair Smith inquired whether hardcover could be reduced to approximately 26.5 percent with the Applicants given credit for the shared driveway and triangular lot. Lindquist commented that the City Council may require the hardcover be limited to 25 percent regardless of what the Planning Commission recommends. Schroeder stated he recognizes this lot has a hardship due to the unique shape of the property, and would be willing to make a motion to approve this application. Hawn recommended the Applicant revise the plans to reduce hardcover to 26 percent before the City Council meeting. Lindquist moved to approve Application #2428, 2515 Kelly Avenue, as submitted. MOTION DIED DUE TO LACK OF SECOND. Chair Smith suggested the Applicant calculate how much the shared driveway accounts for. Van Zomeren stated two percent cannot be taken off by reducing the driveway alone, noting the garage could be reduced to help lower the hardcover numbers. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2428, 2515 Kelly Avenue, granting of a variance to hardcover in the 0-75' setback of 924 square feet, a variance to hardcover in the 75-250' setback of 27 percent, a variance to hardcover in the 250-500' setback to allow 33.2 percent hardcover due to the shared driveway and the triangular shape of the lot which creates a hardship and a variance to allow an accessory structure to remain on the lot without a principal structure. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. V\/einberger noted the exact hardcover numbers will be needed by Wednesday morning. (#16) #2429 JEFFREY BRAUCHLE AND ELISA SCHOONOVER, 650 NORTH ARM DRIVE • VARIANCES, 10:53 p.m. • 11:00 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Jeffrey Brauchle was present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting several variances that would allow for the replacement of a deteriorating lakeside deck on their home. They are requesting to replace only the existing deck and do not plan to increase the size of the deck or encroach closer to the lake. Weinberger remarked variances to hardcover are needed as well as a variance to permit the reconstruction of a deck 63 feet from the lakeshore. Weinberger noted very little of the residence lies within the 75-250' setback. Staff recommends approval of the variances subject to removal of some plastic underlayment located under a layer of rock to allow for better water seepage into the ground. Brauchle stated he is agreeable to removing the plastic extending beyond the deck. Lindquist stated he does not have a problem with this application as it is merely replacing what was Page 16 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2429 Jeffrey Brauchle, continued) damaged. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2429, 650 North Arm Drive, as outlined in the October 12,1998 Planner ’s Report, sutj^ct to the removal of the plastic underlayment. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#17) #2432 GREENFIELD CORPORATION, 4755/4775 BAYSIDE ROAD - EASEMENT/SUBDIVISION, 11:01 p.m. -11:12 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Laurie Lundeen, Greenfield Corporation, and Jim DeBerg were present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicants have sold Lot 1 and have granted a 20 foot private driveway easement over Lot 3 to provide access. Tha private driveway easement is not in compliance with the resolution that required access to Lot 1 be via Outlet A. Van Zomeren commented that driveway easements tend to cause confusion as to ownership and rights as well as issues surrounding location of garbage cans, mailboxes, landscaping, mowing, and maintenance, and Staff would prefer that driveway easements not be utilized if at all possible. In order for this easement tc be recognized by the City, the City Council would need to retract that portion of the resolution dealing with the location of the driveway. DeBerg stated the outlet is currently being used for access. Lundeen stated there was a private driveway easement granted. Van Zomeren remarked there was a resolution signed by the City Council which specified how access to these lots was to be provided, and this private easement represents a change to that resolution. DeBerg commented the outlet still provides the access. Hawn stated the parties need to follow the conditions outlined in the resolution. Van Zomeren stated before access was determined, there should have been a review done of the available building pads. Lindquist inquired whether they could do a lot line rearrangement. Chair Smith inquired whether the Applicants wanted the Planning Commission to act on this matter tonight. DeBerg requested the Planning Commission act on the application. There were no public comments. Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to deny Application #2432, 4755/4775 Bayside Road, based upon Resolution No. 3750. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 17 WWi] RrEinrTii^ nViTillM •lilCt •mti CTiii¥5PinM!i rniliH] [tlivZtlM •• 'fc. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2430 Paul Phillips, continued) proposal, access needs to be further addressed. Utility and drainage easements will need to be granted. Phillips stated the property was platted in 1986, with the intention of the 4.5 acre parcel being subdivided into two lots. Phillips stated he was required to provide access from Lot 4 to Lot 3, but until recently he was unaware of the back lot/front lot requirements. Phillips inquired whether it would be possible to grandfather the property. Schroeder stated since the land was never platted as two lots, it was doubtful whether it could be grandfathered. Weinberger suggested access could be gained off of County Road 6. Van Zomeren stated the County will probably not allow another access off of County Road 6. Lindquist recommended denying the application and putting it on the City Council agenda. Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to deny Application #2430, 2140 Sixth Avenue North, due to issues dealing with front lot/back lot requirements. NO VOTE TAKEN. Chair Smith remarked the Applicant will need to address the front lot/back lot requirements if he wants the City Council to approve this application. (#20) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS ON SEPTEMBER 28.1998 AND OCTOBER 12,1998 Janice Berg attended the September 28.1998 City Council meeting but was absent from tonight's meeting. There was no report on the October 12.1998 City Council meeting (#21) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION None m2) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 21,1998 Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve the minutes of the September 21,1998 Regular City Council meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#23) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON OCTOBER 26, 1998 AND NOVEMBER 9,1998 October 26. 1998 - Hawn November 9.1998 - Smith Page 19 1 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 {U24) ADJOURNMENT Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 11:24 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Sandra Smith, Chair Page 20