Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-24-1996 Council Packet
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 24, 1996, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL 1. CONSENT AGENDA C?APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Meeting of June 10, 1996 0 PARK COALMISSION COMMENTS iA COUNCLMEETINQ JUN 24 1996 CHY OF ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 3^7 PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 3. <{^2138 Joan & William Wroblewski, 630 Park Lane - Variances - Resolution ■4 4. #2140 Troy Anderson, 1490 Long Lake Boulevard - Variances - Resolution #5. #2141 Roberta J. Roth, 1251 Briar Street - Variances - Resolution •#6. #2143 Diane Perez, 3465 Eastlake Street - Variances - Resolution #2144 Arthur and Terry Jewett, 3546 Ivy Place - Variances - Resolution <<8. #2145 Donald & Robin Helgager, 3265 Sixth Avenue North - Variances - Resolution 9. #2107 John O’Sullivan Request for Drainage Easement Over Navarre Lane 10. Referral of Development Proposal to the Planning Commission for Sketch Plan Review for Property Located at 2380 Shady wood Road MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 11. Recodification Contract 12. Maxwell Bay Access - County Road 51/135 Improvements - Resolution 13. Handicapped Accessible Play Ground Equipment - Crystal Bay Park 14. Purchase of Speed Control Radar Trailer 15. Old Crystal Bay Road Trail Update 16. Saga Hill Park Land Acquisition 17. Local Performance Aid Certification 18. Housing Action Plan 19. Clarification of Wetland Filling and Mitigation Policy CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT (*20.) LICENSES (*21.) BILLS #t—. AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 24, 1996, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS •* If-* 06/21 - Council Work Session 8:00 a.m. 06/24 - Council meeting 7:00 p.m. 06/28 - Highway 12 Land Use Committee 8:00 a.m. 07/01 - Park Commission meeting 7:15 p.m. 07/04 - Holiday 07/05 - Holiday 07/08 - Council meeting 7:00 p.m. 07/15 - Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. 07/22 - Council meting 7:00 p.m. Public A ttendance Jl;Mg ^*4, \'Yi(aMeeting D ate ^ C ouncil Planning C ommission Park commission Please hll out the information REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. L_ V^inXMV NAME (please print)address PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1 1 ■n t t tA * A 1 /V90 C.vit, i^x/cA ^P/Vo 1. f IS C ii9 1 11 hr 1 C> ^ O P 4-A ^ Arr J>Zu\ 0, U _____zdC.— 4 -A/1/ P<4;LP ■ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------—---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- H ______________________________________________—--------—0.^_____________________- —------------------- 7. _________________________________________________________________ 8. ____________________________________________________________________________ V. ---------------—----------------------------------- lU. 11.___ ■ — IX* ------------------------------------------—-------—---------------------------------------------- lO. 14. _ 15. 0n39S.4 ]• ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FORTUNE 10, 1996 ROLL The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present Mayor Edward Callahan, Jr., Council Members J. Diann Goetten. Charles Kelley, and JoEllen Hurr, who arrived at 7 30 p m Gabriel Jabbour was absent Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Zoning and Planning Administrator Michael Gaflron, City Engineer Glenn Cook. Public Works Director John Gerhardson, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Mayor Callahan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m (*#l( CONSENT AGENDA Item #4 was added to the Consent Agenda. Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Aves 3, Navs 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES (*#2) REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 28, 1996 Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of May 28, 1996. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Jim White was present Callahan acknowledged the recent Park Tour. White noted the high level of maintenance seen at the parks as well as the new signs. White informed the Council that the Park Commission has been working e.xtensively on updating the Comprehensive Park Plan He said he was encouraged regarding the possible trail connection to Baker Park Goetten said she appreciated the number of residents who stopped during the Park Tour e.xpressing their concerns for their parks. White also said he appreciated the support of the Council regarding the work being accomplished by the Park Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Dale Lindquist was present and had no comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. I.Z-0 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR OROxNO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE tO, 1996 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#3) #2112 RICHARD AND JANET PUTNAM, 2765 CASCO POINT ROAD AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3730 Richard Putnam was present Gaffron reported that the application was for an after-the-fact hardcover variance for the reconstruction of a lakeside deck located out of the 0-75' zone. GatTron said the memo states the reasons why the applicant rebuilt the deck without obtaining a permit. The Planning Commission recommended approval, and the Staff concurs with that recommendation Putnam said the City Staff received the necessary information to issue a building permit well before he began replacement of the joists and boards of the deck When he stopped to pick up the building permit, Putnam said he found staff was unable to issue the permit. Putnam said the deck existed in 1989 when the replacement deck was approved with other remodeling When it became of a deteriorating itate, Putnam said he thought it was already approved. Because of an upcoming party, Putnam went ahead with the rebuilding, was then tagged, but finished the railing on the deck anyways Putnam said he spoke with Staff and told them it did not make any sense that the deck w as not to be rebuilt without obtaining a variance. He added that he did not have to go through this same process with his bedroom remodeling Putnam said it has cost him $900 for the review on a $1500 deck project. Putnam said the inspector was helpful in the bedroom remodeling, which made him upset that he was unable to obtain the same assistance with the deck reconstruction It is Putnam's opinion that the application process is a waste of time. He said many other people go ahead with projects without obtaining the required permits. He does not feel the people are being well served by the cumbersome process. Putnam feels the City would generate more revenue by eliminating the variance process and obtaining building permits only. He asks the Council to review the process as he did with the Planning Commission to make it easier for others in the future. Goetten responded to Putnam by informing him that she was involved in the 1988 review, noting it was a number of variances that were approved. Goetten reminded Putnam that there is a time limit to the variance approvals, and the costs generated by the deck reconstruction included costs which were brought on Putnam by rebuilding without the required permits. She also noted that in reviewing the minutes from when he received variances in 1988, she saw no mention of the deck. Goetten commented that the Putnam property was substandard and overused in relation to its size which is a concern to the City. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCII MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 (#3 - ^2112 Richard and Janet Putnam - Continued) Goetten informed Putnam that she has heard his comments, and the Council is looking into where the process may be speeded up, noting there are places where it cannot. While there may be possible areas for improvement, Goetten said the City tries to be fair and not single out any one property Goetten says she docs not care for after-the-fact variances, but reiterated that Putnam's comments will be considered in their review of the process for possible changes Kelley moved, Callahan seconded, to adopt Resolution #3730, granting an after-the-fact hardcover variance to Richard and Janet Putnam of 2765 Casco Point Road for replacement in-kind of the existing deck Vote Ayes 2, Nays 1, Goetten, noting she did not vote in favor of the variance in 1988 and is not changing her mind at this time (*#4) #2133 JOHN AND KARLA SPOONER, 1385 ORONO LANE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3731 Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution #3731. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. (•#5) #2134 ROBERT ALBRECHT, 1810 SHADYIVOOD ROAD - AFTER-THE- FACT VARIANCES - REQUEST FOR REFERRAL BACK TO JUNE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to refer the revised proposal of Zoning File #2134 to the Planning Commision for review on June 17th. Vote. Ayes 3, Nays 0. (#6) #2136 GREENFIELD CORPORATION, 180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WEST - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Mark Gronberg and Laurie Lundeen were present. Mabusth reported that the 17.2 acre site received preliminary approval for a 2-lot subdivision in 1986 for a single residential lot with a larger outlot for future development, but it was never finalized The applicant proposes a 6 lot residential division with 3 lots served from North Shore Drive and 3 lots at the north from a private road with a cul-de- sac. The northeast access at Bayside Road was selected ar, the best access in 1986 review. This access was to serve the subject property and property to east (Bayside Farms 2nd Addition) The extension road, Outlot B, will serve as access to future development within Outlot C, Bayside Farms 2nd Addition. The developer will be asked to grade and seed the roadbed, as current owner of property to east has no immediate plans to build residence or subdivide. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10, 1996 (#6 - #2136 Greenfield Corporation - Continued) Mabusth continued that there are designated wetlands along with type 1 and 2 wetlands, which are not part of the City's mapping but require protective covenants The applicant will be asked to provide detailed plans for access to lot 6. Access for lots 1, 3, and 4 will be served by road outlet A and lots 2, 5, and 6 from two separate curb cuts off of North Shore Drive The existing residential drive to lot 6 encroaches on the property to the south, is unsafe, and will be eliminated. A new shared access will be located on the shared lot line betw een lots 5 and 6 A detailed plan of this access will be required from the developer. The 26' setback must be maintained from the wetlands and 20' setback from the drainfield area. The key issue for this proposal is access The applicant wants to preserve the 3 obvious building sites and presented a similar plan outlining this arrangement in the sketch plan review Based on the location of septic sites (2, 3, and 4), location of wetlands, and topography, the developer has asked to create a new curb cut at North Shore Drive and create a private road that would serve only 3 of the 6 lots The code prov ides construction standards for typical section for road serving 3-6 units. The comprehensive plan is less detailed It notes the general desire of the City to have private, internal roads, instead of new curb cuts In this proposal, there would be 1 new curb cut at North Shore Drive. Lot width variances would also be needed for lots 1, 3, and 4. The 12 septic test sites reveal the need for mound systems Mark Gronberg reported that the property consists of 655' at property line adjacent to Bayside Road The County has asked for 1 7 additional feet for County Road 1 9 for a total dedication of 50' This would allow 200' for each lot. Gronberg said, if the cul-de- sac was extended westward, the lot widths could be achieved Gronberg did not care to do so It would result in the elimination of lot I's building site. Gronberg noted the steep slopes Gronberg remarked that the frontage along Outlot B would give lot 4 required frontage and argues whether a lot width variance is required. CoRds 19 and 84 also serve as frontage for lot 1 . Lot 3 is located at the end of the cul-de-sac and would need a lot width variance. Kelley asked if the proposal could meet the ordinance requirements if the cul-de-sac was extended. Gronberg said this is true. The variances are being asked for in order to pull back the cul-de-sac to put in the road for the adjoining property. Hurr questioned whether there was a need for a full cul-de-sac or for outlot A? If lots 1 and 3 shared a driveway and lot 4 came off of the outlot road, only a temporary cul-de- sac would be necessary. At this time, there is no idea when the lot to the east vould be developed. There are no building plans for the outlot. It would be just graded and seeded. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10. 1996 (#6 - #2136 Greenfield Corporation - Continued) Kelley noted that lot 4 access would be in the first 50' of outlot B Cook said outlot A could be eliminated. Callahan asked what the function of outlot B was? Gronberg said it was for the purpose of future dev elopment for site distance. Laurie Lundeen asked Mabusth to explain the plans Mabusth said, based on earlier directions of the City, the northeast comer was selected during the Olson subdivision as the best access for the subject property and property to immediate east. Goctten questioned why this developer has to provide the access for another development which has yet to be planned? Mabusth noted Staff is following directions of Council. Hurr asked why a shared road could not occur. Mabusth said it would eventually happen but would need a turnaround. Mabusth informed Callahan that the cul-de-sac in outlot B is necessary to provide a turnaround for emergency vehicles Lots 3 and 4 would be accessed from outlot B if the cut was made from the top. If there was to be a shared driveway for lots 1 and 3 and bring a platted driveway down for lot 4 and the property to the east, a permanent cul-de- sac would be installed at a later date It was discussed that outlot A could be eliminated, and leave outlot B as the main access road, and an easement taken from lot 4 for a temporary turnaround to eliminate any setback restrictions The easement would then go away when the future road was built. Hurr asked if the drainsites meet the setback? Mabusth said they did. They are located mainly downhill. One site is at for lot 6. Hurr was informed that the average distance from the house to the septic sites was 300-400' for lots 2. 3, and 4. Gaffron said this was unusual and pumping would occur but was not limiting these sites. Goetten said she was concerned that, when looking a*, the entire subdivision, gerrymandering was occurring to make 6 building lots. Goetten said she was not in favor of the subdiv ision as proposed. Gronberg likened it to a PUD with clustering of building sites. Lots 5 and 6 were noted to meet standards. Hurr noted that there was no standard in the code that requires lot width to be maintained for a specified distance. Mabusth concurred. Goetten said lots would still need to access a temporary cul-de-sac. Mabusth said lots 1, 3, and 4 would all come in at the northeast comer via the revised road outlot. 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 (#6 - #2136 Greenfield Corporation - Continued) Kelley commented that technically, the subdivision could meet standards but was now dealing v.ith aituie development and safety issues Mabusth responded that the Planning Commission was concerned with the internal road and saving the view. To maintain the best sites, the Planning Commission recommended approv al of the internal road and lot width variances. Goetten «3id she disagrees vith this assessment and sees it as an attempt to gain 6 lots. Mabusth said Planning Commission members were concerned for lot 4 w ith its limitations such as septic sites, type ! wetlands, and need for a retention pond to treat runoff from new road bed Mabusth said it was questioned w hether there was adequate room for a rural residential building site. Gronberg said there is adequate room for a building site and was conscious of protecting the wildlife area. Mabusth commented that the Planning Commission was also concerned with protecting the alternate sites with the long lots and specified need for protective covenants to protect alternate sites Kelley inquired why the primary sites are not located farther down the lots and the alternates up near the building sites. Gronberg said it was just a matter of a longer way to go. Kelley said if the primary fails, the water would seep down to the alternate sites. Gaffron said if the initial systems fail, they would be turned off and would have to wait to be built He continued that when the first sites are done, care would be taken not to ruin the second .ites Callahan noted that all septic sites seem to be near to the protective wetland areas He did not suggest changing the sites but questioned how protected the wetlands would be. Gronberg said the land rises 12' from the pond and does not anticipate the systems failing Council debated whether the proposal was the best use of the property, the highest use, or the most intensive use, and what could be done if all standards were met. Kelley requested that the application be tabled, reconfigured with the cul-de-sac moved downward and outlot A eliminated, and new sketches be brought back to the Council. It was noted that the Planning Commission approved the application in its current form. Hurr moved, Kelley seconded, to table Application #2136 to allow the applicant to consider the direction given by the Council and present these changes to the Council at their next meeting Callahan asked Goetten what suggestions she might have Goetten asked for fewer lots noting her concern over access and drainfields. Goetten did comment that the proposed change by Cook was an improvement but would deny the application at this point Callahan said he shared the same concerns to some point. Goetten said this w ould allow the opportunities for changes to be made depending on the majority opinion. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETLNG HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 (#6 - #2136 Greenfield Corporation - Continued) Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Hurr noted that the lot width variances, by not extending the cul-de-sac, would save good building sites. (#7) REQUEST FOR SEWER, JOHN MARESH, 2085 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH/1095 BROWN ROAD NORTH Mr. Maresh was not present during the discussion of this agenda item. GafFron said the applicant has requested consideration for sewering as part of the MUSA amendment or in addition to the Lakeview Terrace subdi ^sion. Kelley asked about the west side of North Brown, specifically, the Salem Court area, in reference to sewering. Gaffron said this area has mound type septic systems Gafifon informed Callahan that the property in question consists of a vacant 2-acre parcel abutting Brown Road and a 3 -acre homestead parcel abutting Co Rd 6. Goetten asked how the septic was approved for the site without an alternate site. Gaffron said the sites had been spr .oveu m 1988, but a new evaluator, who looked at the property in 1996, did not think there were sites actually available. Gaffron said this would need to be reviewed further. Kelley said he felt it was a question of management. Callahan noted for purposes of this particular request that the property be placed on a list for consideration for future sewering. W'hen the MUSA is then granted, the City can see what might be done for this property. Kelley said if the North Brown and Salem Court areas want sewering, it would help to defer costs. Callahan said this would not be decided at this time as there were no sewer units available. Callahan said with 5 acres, he found it hard to believe that there would only be one site for a septic system and asked Staff to check it out. Gaffron noted the existing system was not working. The applicant has asked for a building permit. Maresh has agreed to upgrade as necessaiy. Gaffron said the applicant may want to hold off if the Council wants to go ahead with sewering. Callahan said he was nr * willing to give a sewer unit if eptic sites are available and asked that Staff place Maresh on a list for possible sewering in the future. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 (#7 Request for Sewer, John Maresh - Continued) Kelley said he has spoken w ith Maresh and informed him of the possible outcome of this discussion, which is consistent w ith the above Callahan asked Staff to review and report back to the Council, noting if replacement was necessaiy, it cannot wait. Gaffron said if no alternate site is available, pumping was also an alternative Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to table the request for City sewer by John Maresh. Staff is requested to determine the facts and report back to Council. Vote: Ayes 3 Nays 0 (US) 1995-1996 MARINA LICENSES: LAKESIDE MARINA Gaflfon reported that he had reviewed the necessary applications with Lakeside and requested the completed applications be returned within 48 hours, which was done. Gaffron said the license application was complete but the CUP was lacking some information Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the issuance of a 1996 Commercial Marina License for the period January 1, 1996 to December 31. 1996 to Lakeside Marina, Inc., and to retroactively issue a 1995 Commercial License to Lakeside for the period January I, 1995 to December 31, 1995 Further staff is directed to monitor Lakeside's operation as necessary regarding adherence to the seven Minimum Operation Standards and the conditions of the CUP and report back to Council in August of 1996 Kelley clarified that if the CUP application is not submitted with all requirements. Lakeside will be tagged on June 21, 1996, as directed at the May 28 Council meeting, unless Staff is satisfied with progress shown. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Callahan asked Moorse questions regarding a State law involving local improvements. He asked for information on the additional costs related to the requirements. Moorse said he would discuss the issue with the Engineer. Moorse said the law did not require any additional meetings but one more finding. Callahan inquired about a Court of Appeals decision regarding a street financing plan and how it would affect parks and sewer systems Moorse said he discussed this with the City Attorney. Staff is aware of work necessary on the Park Dedication fee ordinance. Callahan asked Staff to obtain a legal opinion as to the legal status of the City's Park Dedication fee ordinance. In questioning where the City was in terms of sewer metering for the Highway 12 sewer trunk system, Moorse said additional problems had arisen with the operation of the meter. 8 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COIFNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 (Mayor/Council Report - Continued) Kelley asked who is paying for the additional metering. Cook said the cost is part of the original amount, and the contractor has agreed to do the additional metering. Moorse said Long Lake will not go ahead without the additional metering. (Hun- arrived at this time, 7 30 p m.) Hurr received permission to attend a leadership conference Callahan said he was pleased to receive a letter from the DNR congratulating Gaffron on his assistance in their pursuit of the Maxwell Bav boat ramp. It was noted that the public auction on property for sale in this vicinity will b* held June 17. Gaffron said he will attend the auction. ENGINEER REPORT (#9) BID AWARD 1996 SEAL COAT Cook said two bids were received for the 1996 seal coat. The low bid of $44,270.00 was from Allied Blacktop. Cook recommended t^^e City award the project to Allied, who has done the majority of the seal coating the past 3-4 years. Callahan moved, Goetten seconded, to award the 1996 Seal Coat bid to Allied Blacktop. Inc., for the amount of $44,270 00. Vote Ayes 4, Nays 0 CITY ADMINISTRATOR ’S REPORT (/flO) PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW' PROCESS Moorse leported that the Staff has provided a report relating to the planning review process and how to expedite the process as well as improve customer service. The report outlines the areas of customer service and policies in an attempt to gain a process whereby it responds to the needs of the citizens and still provide a complete job of analysis at the Staff and Planning Commission levels. Callahan noted the large number of recommendations and recommended a work session to review and discuss the subject in order to give it full consideration. Kelley remarked favorably in response to the potential solutions and its timeliness with upcoming staff changes in planning and zoning. Hurr asked for input from the Planning Commission also. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 (#10 - Planning Application Review Process - Continued) Mabusth asked Council if they would like to review the building and zoning customer surv'eys and responses gathered She noted that these responses have been positive and has received no complaints on the process Hurr said it is important that a thorough review of applications be done instead of stressing a shorter time period for reviews Callahan tabled the review of the planning process to an upcoming w ork session He asked that copies of the report be sent to the Planning and Park Commissioners (#11) OPPORI UNm TO PURCHASE HENNEPIN COUNTY (LIBRARY) PROPERTY Callahan reported that the City has the opportunity to purchase the Hennepin County Library land, which w as discussed in the past as a favorable purchase He asked if the purchase price of $250,000 was reasonable Moorse said the price appears to be reasonable and is requesting copies of the appraisal to review the comparisons Moorse said he has not conducted an in-depth study of the purchase price Callahan asked Moorse to satisfy himself on the value of the property It is the intent of the City to sell City-owned property near McCulley Road as a partial source of funding with the remainder funded from General Fund Reserves. Goetten and Hurr voiced their support of the purchase of the property. Kelley asked if the City can buy land. Callahan said this can be done if the City shows a public purpose Kelley noted the current zoning of the property as 2-acre residential or the possibility of B-6 He questioned whether the Council members felt there was not enough protection with that zoning Callahan said it was not necessarily the intent of the City t o sell the land to others for development He noted there were alot of possibilities for the land, noting the bike trail location in the area. Kelley asked that the City not store anything on the property if it is purchased. Hurr moved, Goetten seconded to approve moving forward with the acquisition of the 2- acre County parcel on the northeast corner of Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12 for the purpose of fiirthering the expansion of City facilities Callahan inquired if the financing methods seemed reasonable Hurr asked that the purchase not be contingent on the sale of the McCulley Road property. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO Cm' COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 (/# 11 - Purchase Opportunity of Hennepin County Property - Continued) Kelley asked whether the City HRA should be involved in the purchase Moorse noted that this is a general body for guiding housing and redevelopment in the City Kelley clarified that it would be the City itself purchasing the property and not through any other agency. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0 (#12) LOCAL PERFORi\UNCE AID Moorse reported that the State Legislature has recently made changes in the current HACA aid funding by placing a portion of it in a new program called the Local Performance Aid program Orono's share of $7,400 would then be tied to performance standards for city services If the City does not agree to this change, this amount of money would not be received. Callahan said he was not in favor of other agencies telling the City what standards they should be using. Moorse is in the process of establishing standards for city services, and Callahan suggested discussing the standards at the upcoming work session Hurr asked how the fee was established Moorse said it was probably tied to $1 per capita by reason of the amount established for the City. Both Hurr and Goetten were suspect of being tied to a program as described. Moorse said the deadline for application is June 30 Callahan said he was inclined to turn the program down. Kelley said, although he understood where the other Council members were coming from, the purpose is to gain money for use by the citizens He suggested trying the program for one year Callahan responded that he believed there would be a state standard agency at some point and best to stop the process now. Callahan moved action be continued to enable further discussion at a work session Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#13) PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE POSITION APPOINTMENT Moorse informed the Council that the final step in hiring the Public Works maintenance worker has been completed in the physical examination and drug testing by Donald DeBaere, DeBaere successfully completed the exam and tested negative in the drug test. The previous conditional offer of employment to DeBaere was based on these two procedures. Moorse said DeBaere would be at step 2 of the 4-step level. Hurr asked how many employees in the department w ere at step 1. Moorse said all employees were at step 4. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10, 1996 (#13 - Public Works Maintenance Position Appointment - Continued) Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the appointment of Donald DeBaere to the position of Public W'orks Maintenance Worker effective Monday, June 24, 1996 at a pay rate of $13.23 per hour. V'ote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#14) EMPLOYMENT OF PARK INTERN Moorse distributed a copy of an application for employinent of a park intern, which he recently interviewed Moorse said the applicant is a student at Mankato State University in the first year of a graduate program in urban and regional studies Moorse said the applicant's background was close to what he was looking for Huit asked if the position was advertised. Moorse said it was, and he had received 4 applications Three were from students in the under-graduate level, who did not possess the necessary skills The other applicant has accepted another position Hurr was informed that the pay for the park intern would be $7 50 per hour Hurr moved, Goetten seconded, to approve the hiring of Michael Schultz as a park intern, effective June 12, 1996, at the rate of $7.50 per hour. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#15) EQUIPMENT PURCttASE PARKS Moorse reported that the swimming buoys were found to be in need of replacement and asked for authorization to spend the additional money for the purchase of said buoys. Kelley moved, Hurr seconded, to approve the purchase of eight swim area buoys from Roylon Inc. for a total cost of $976 and to purchase the buoys through the Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund and to amend the budget by that amount. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#16) CSO APPOINTMENT Moorse reported that the current Community Service Officer has been offered a full-time officer position with another city. Moorse indicated he would like to fill this opening as soon as possible and recommended Anthony Wittke, who was the number two candidate in the previous selection process. Mr Wittke has been a reserve officer with our department since 1994, has gone through Reserve Officer Training, 1st Responder training, and is working toward his law enforcement degree. Kelley asked how many initial interviewees applied for the position. Moorse informed him there were 10. Hurr asked where the candidate was in the process of completing his law enforcement training Moorse said he believed he was about half-way through the program. MLNUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCII MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 (#16 - CSO Appointment - Continued) Hurr moved, Goetten seconded, to hire Anthony Wittke as a part-time Community Service Officer, beginning Tuesday (6/11/96) at a salarv' ofS7 30 per hour, with no benefits, whose compensation is not expected to exceed $5,100 annually ($2,975 for the remainder of 1996) Kelley inquired about the lack of benefits Moorse said no benefits were paid, but workers compensation would cover the CSO in the line of duty. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0 (#17) LMCD 1997 PROPOSED BUDGET Moorse presented the summary of the LMCD 1997 proposed budget. 1 he LMCD has asked for input from the participating cities Moorse commented that he had attended a meeting with other city administrators regarding the proposed budget The LMCD is planning to adopt the budget at their upcoming June meeting. (#18) COOPERATIVE POLICE SERVICES REPORT Moorse reported that the information provided is a copy of the final report concerning the study of cooperative police services It was coordinated through the efforts of a subcommittee made up of city administrators of Long Lake. Mound, and Orono. The report recommends two action steps 1) Enhanced cooperative efforts between police departments, and 2) potential mergers of smaller departments. Moorse said there will be a meeting to present the report for discussion on July 10 at the Shorewood City Council Meeting. Callahan suggested this topic be discussed at the upcoinifig work session. (#IS> USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS PURPOSES Moorse reported to the Council about a potential large issue regarding the use of cable and telephone lines to provide new technology in telecommunications. More providers are looking at using the public right-of-way for such infrastructure and would like to take control of the public right-of-way away from the cities Moorse said the League of Minnesota Cities are attempting to get involved in maintaining the local level control. An ordinance is recommended to ensure that the local level control be maintained. A sample ordinance was distributed to the Council for their review. Callahan acknowledged the importance of this issue, asked to be kept abreast of the situation, and noted the need for an ordinance i MINUTES OF THE REGl!L.\R ORONO CITY COIJNCH MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10. 1996 (#19 - Use of Public Right-of-Way - Continued) Hurr said a more restrictive ordinance than is represented by the sample was recently adopted by Minnetonka Beach She suggested the Council review that ordinance also Hurr said the use of water tow ers for antennas, definitions of public grounds, turnaround periods, and CUPs should be reviewed Hurr said she does not see the sample ordinance as being favorable to the cities Kelley inquired if the cables w ould be buried underground Hurr said both situations have been discussed Kelley said he would want to see all cable buried and saw satellites being used in the fijture. Callahan asked to look at what other cities are doing. Hurr noted that revenues can be considerable for leasing of space on the towers Moorse said alot of antenna sites will be used by PCS. Cook noted the impact of fiber optics from a public works standpoint (#20) HOUSING ACTION PLAN Moorse informed the Council that he reviewed the current Comprehensive Plan and found it to contain language pertaining to housing which is close to what the Met Council has suggested The Council had no additional comments or changes This plan will be presented at the June 24 meeting (#20A) GRANT PROGRAMS AVAILABLE FOR POLICE STAFFING Moorse asked the Council to consider an additional agenda item regarding a grant program av ailable for police staffing Moorse said there is no decision to add staff but would like to have the opportunity to discuss this option for the 1997 budget. Moorse would like to put an application in for a 3-year grant of $25,000 per year at the Federal level to hire a new officer with the focus being on community oriented policing. The other grant is a School Liaison Officer program, which would enable the city to increase the number of hours by assisting in funding an additional officer to replace the officer taken off the street to perform the school liaison duties This program is a one-year program providing matching funds. The deadline for making application for the Federal grant is June 14 Goetten said she has reservations in accepting money for a grant program that only runs 1-3 years She noted that even though a person hired understands it is only for a finite amount of time, when the time ends, it becomes a hardship for that person. Moorse said the experience would put them ahead of others in pursuing available positions. i r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCH MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 (#20A - Grant Programs for Police Staffing - Continued) Hurr said she was concerned with the City paying for a share of a School Liaison Officer when the schools arc currently paying that portion. Moorse said the matching grant fund would be in addition to the funding provided by the school. Moorse noted that the City owes the school a number of hours of service by the school liaison officer for this year but would be breaking even overall Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to authorize the submittal of an application for a grant under the Community Oriented Policing grant program. \ ote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. CITY' ATTORNEY’S REPORT Barrett had no report. (*#21) LICENSES Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the following license: Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. Special Event Permit; Long Lake Chamber of Commerce King Royal Brothers Circus Date & Time: July 26, 1996 - shows 4:30 p.m. & 7:00 p.m. Location; Northwest comer of Highway 12 and Old Crystal Bay Road (*#22) BILLS Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 ADJOURNMENT Hurr moved. Callahan seconded, to adjourn at 9;04 p m. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. I. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mavor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Halitn, City Clerk • • f ' • REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cffy DATE: June 19, s3ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2138 Joan & William Wroblewski, 630 Park Lane - Variances - Resolution Zoning Dutrict: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 acre, sewered. Application: Request for hardcover, front setback and lot coverage variances for enclosing existing concrete slab porch. Lut of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Planning Commission Action Notice 6/19/96 C - Memo and E.xhibits of 6/12/96 Discussion Please review the memo of June 12th. Briefly, applicants proposed to enclose a 4'x23’ concrete and block expansion of the 6'x23' porch area at the front of the house. This 4'x23' patio expansion was constructed in 1990 and at this time applicants wish to extend the existing roof 4', and create screen walls to yield a total porrh area of 10'x23'. The proposal requires a 1.8* front setback variance, constitutes no new hardcover and no increase in hardcover, but increases lot coverage by structures from 26.8% to 27.7%. Planning Commbsion Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval as proposed, noting that this approval is for enclosure with screen per the proposed plans, not to make this a room addition. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the attached resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt attached resolution approving hardcover, front setback and lot coverage variances for expanding the roof and enclosing the existing concrete slab porch with screen walls. Proposed Motion: Moved by___________, seconded by_________, to grant hardcover, front setback and lot coverage variances to Joan and William Wroblewski of 630 Park Lane for enclosure of the existing concrete slab porch to make it a screen porch. Vote: ______ayes,______nays. ch A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14(C), SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2, SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16(L) AND SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5(B) FILE #2138 WHEREAS, Joan and William Wroblewski (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 630 Park Lane the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.03, Subdivision 14(C); 10.22, Subdivision 2; 10.56, Subdivision 16(L) and 10.24, Subdivision 5(B) to permit the enclosure of an existing concrete block porch to make it a screen porch, requesting approval of a 33,2' front setback where a 35 ’ front setback is normally required, and requesting an intensification of hardcover in the 75-250' zone where existing hardcover is 44.4% where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, and requesting an increase in lot coverage by structures from 26.8% to 27.7% where only 15% lot coverage by struemres is normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2138. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. Page 1 of 6 ' »• ’ im 3. 4. 5. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1996 and recommended approval of the proposed variances on a vote of 7 to 0, based upon the following findings: A.The proposed fix>nt setback encroachment of 1.8' for a 23' wide portion of the existing house has no significant visual impact in the neighborhood, and is not inconsistent with street setbacks of other homes in the neighborhood. B.The proposal results in no increase in hardcover on the property, and all extraneous hardcover on the property was removed previously when the existing concrete and block porch area was expanded in 1990. C.The lot is only 10,001 s.f. in area and is comparable in area to other substandard lots in the neighborhood. The property would normally only be allotted 1,500 s.f. of lot coverage by structures including house and garage. The additional 92 s.f of structure is a 0.9% increase to 27.7%. The fact that neighboring houses on the east side of the street are quite distant, results in minimal visual density impact on the neighborhood caused by the proposed screen porch expansion. Further, there is no existing structure on the property that could easily be removed to offset the increased lot coverage caused by the addition. 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. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely ~.er\e as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 6 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.03, Subdivisions 14(C); 10.22, Subdivision 2; 10.56, Subdivision 16(L) and 10.24, Subdivision 5(B) to permit the construction of a screen porch by expanding roof and screen walls over the existing 4'x23' slab, granting variances to allow a front yard setback of 33.2' where 35' setback is normally required, and variances to allow lot coverage to increase to 27.7% where only 15% lot coverage by structures is normally allowed, and allowing an intensification in hardcover in 75-250 ’ zone where hardcover exists at 44.4%, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicants shall adhere to the plans submitted with Application #2138. 2. 3. 4. 5. Applicants are advised that hardcover in the 75-250' zone is limited to that amount which was approved previously in Resolution #2811 dated May 29, 1990. 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 (June 24, 1997). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 6 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of June, 1996, ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of June, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2138 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; June 20, 1996 TO:William & Joan Wroblewski 630 Park Lane Long Lake, MN 55356 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING:6/17/96 VOTE;7 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, June 24, 1996, 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. I TO: FROM: DATE: 5 Chair Peterson and Orono Park Commission Ron Moose, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator June 12, 1996 SUBJECT: #2138 Joan and William Wroblevi^ki, 630 Park Lane - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 acre, sewered. Application: Request for hardcover, front setback and lot coverage variances for enclosing existing concrete slab porch. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property' Owners List D - Survey E - Construction Plans F - Hardcover Calculations G - Resolution #2811 H - Selected Exhibits from 1990 Approval Pertinent Code Sections 1. Sections 10.22, Subd. 2/10.56, Subd. 16(L): Hardcover in 75-250' zone limited to 25%. 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C): Lot coverage limited to 15% of lot area. 3. Section 10.24, Subd. 5(B): 35 ’ front street setback required. Discussion In 1990 the Wroblewskis were granted a hardcover variance to construct a 4'x23' concrete and block expansion of the 6'x23' porch area at the front of the house. At that time, applicants did not plan to construct a roof, walls or railing for the expansion area and due to the lack of walls or roof it was considered as not encroaching the required front yard setback of 35', even though it is approximately 33' from the street lot line. Applicants are now proposing to enclose the porch and expansion area by extending the roof line and adding screen walls. This work does require a street setback variance, and constitutes a change in Zoning File #2138 June 12, 1996 Page 2 the nature of hardcover, requiring a variance. Further, the new enclosure adds to the percentage of lot covered by structures. The lot is only 0.23 acres, hence both lot coverage and hardcover percentages are in excess of the limits. Note that current hardcover is actually slightly less than that approved in 1990, because applicants have removed more plastic from rockbeds than was required in the prior approval. Pertinent Facts Lot area: FXISTING 10,001 s.f. (0.23 ac.) Front setback: 37.2* 75-250' 4,437 s.f. Hardcover: (44.4%) Lot coverage 2,679 s.f. by structures: (26.8%) PROPOSED Same REQUIRED STANDARD 43,560 s.f. (1.0 ac.) VARIANCE (Existing) 33.2‘35'1.8’ 4,437 s.f. (44.4%) 2,500 s.f. (25%) 1,937 s.f. (19.4%) 2,771 s.f. (27.7%) 1,500 s.f. (15%) 1,271 s.f. (12.7%) Issues for Consideration 1.Applicants have provided no hardship statement, perhaps because the CUP form submitted did not request one. Applicants should be asked what hardships exist to justify the variances. 2.Please review the staff memos of May 15 and May 22, 1990. The slab porch approved in 1990 required neither a street setback variance nor lot coverage variance because it did not extend above the main floor level of the house. The Planning Commission in 1990 neither approved nor closed the door on future enclosure of the slab porch, but noted that a future variance application would be necessary to do so. Applicants were advised of such a requirement as Condition 2 of Resolution #2811. Therefore, Plamiing Commission should feel no obligation to approve or disapprove the current request based on any past action. 3.The property owners have removed most of the extraneous hardcover on the property. The proposed plans show a doorway and apparent use of the rock and plastic area along the front of the house as a walkway, which would possibly preclude the removal of that hardcover surface. That 6'x32 ’ area is the one remaining landscape area which could feasibly be made nonhardcover. Will Planning Commission require any hardcover removals if Uie current request is approved? 1 ij Zoning File #2138 June 12, 1996 Page 3 4. 5. Given the nature of the neighborhood, with a narrow street and some houses set near the road, is the proposed front setback variance appropriate? Because the lot is extremely substandard in area, existing lot coverage is excessive. This lot would normally be allotted 1,500 s.f. of lot coverage by structures including house and garage. The additional 92 s.f of structure is a 0.9% increase to 27.7%. Is the fact that neighboring houses on the east side of the street are quite distant, a justification for allowing additional bulk of structure on applicants' property? Recall that the lot coverage by structures ordinance was adopted to address the visual density ot structures in a neighborhood. It does not appear there is any existing structure that could easily be removed to offset the addition. Staff Recommendation Planning Commission should determine whether there are specific hardships that support the variance requests. Planning Commission should also determine whether the proposed addition will have any negative visual impact on the neighborhood. If Planning Commission concludes the lot coverage, hardcover and street setback variances are justified, you should also determine whether any specific conditions of approval are necessary to minimize any negative impacts created. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval as proposed. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Table for further information (specify). 4. Recommend denial (state reasons). ,r/ > •': r • * r • I J 5.Other. 77 i /%•. .. . .V • ->t •-*- i T ’4p .:'■ ♦i^- Application M ^ / 3 9^ A Date ReceiTcd - 9 ~ 9(r> — Amount Paid # Z2-<^ ^ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address CpjO^Pa tZ HL Tv'pe of Application to be Filedlypc Ul r%ppiiv,u.viwii tv-r vv, 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------—........... Propert>’ Identification Number (P.I.D.) Oh t O ' ^34^^-------Q/AL. APPLICANT . (home)------3/f.^ Name ^ Phone (work). Address Cit>'OT cao Zip 5S356 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name_______________________ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address City Zip. Date Property Acquired /■ /S?_(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacenf parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - \|ARtAN6r 5 P-^<5U6-sraC^ # i^iL0 s 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application . 0 , ^ ______$175.00 Residential Accessory Use ^ $250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.)______ -7^^ Co^er \)ar\c\wc ; 5225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ^ / ' 5200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg 3, 6Tru6rM.re ■ S300.00 CommercialAndustrial Use °Z. 5250.00 Land Alteration r ' 7 i ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule 5150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS , r ^ 5250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ^ $300.00 Vacation 5200.00 Easement Vacation 5100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision 5350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) 5350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 5100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District______________ Present Use of Property V><2, Residential Other (specify). REQUIRED SUBMITTALS ^ A > • • 1. 2. -n. J. #“■ •V J c.—.••:n * • 4 .4 •ui • i •»* '♦ - - .,1 4. D. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. , , , , Certified Property Owners List of ov\ners within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin Count)- Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Surrey (signed by a licensed sur\eyor) - reter to hxndout for survey information. . Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) it land alterations in\ol\e changes in elevation (grades). List of the lecal names (include marital status) of all persons w 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 L.ARGE DOCUMENTS OR COP\ 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 Propertv- 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:___________________________----------------------- " “usual expenses incurred in review of this application and cemf.es that the information supplied is true and correct ‘o the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature ^Date ^^ ^ The owner herebv acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authonzed reasonable entry into the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and venfication of this request. . I-,,-, m„« havevrtklbmitlals into the Citv offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting, t’’’’ rc^mmissionMeelinas are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at a7 c lSTv"rm«^ the Planning Commission and Council, If an applicant is b"aW« schlduled meeting, please make arrangemenu to have an authorized agent attend m your place and adv.se the Building & Zoning Office of this change pnor to the meeting. q QV~—>»>■ 0^ <pt V —'• . * J A r TT■iw I ^•. I ’•» . f 1 >• V '• «• 0 * 4 I ' * -^ »m m ^ «^4jl ^ • /!..• •• -rt( oc 1 w • V- o r Ai • V '* *,.%• I*- 1/ /»J li“%» i t *» ^«‘ I '. •*- fO rr^ \ f // \ / y A*- * ' t . i t i ■■ *-■ r.\* > ■'ll. ft' - V '?l:r.r' X :• M - * i V . #■ v'»/ / / 0/• CH' f,% • • _/ ^ ^ • A A *LU ON OS —"•>■*■.' ; »,/ r *v;y. ,C;-r%V*^ . O'.':- RUN DATE OA/17/90BATCH 010RIIOR AOOR OMCR NAtC TAXPAYER NAtC/ADOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAfC TAXPAYER NAIC/AOOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAHE TAXPAYER »IAflE/AOOR PROP AOOR OIOCR NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR CMCR NAHE TAWAYER NAIC/AODR NCMKPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INrOOUTlCN SVSUH PROPERTY OtCRS LISTSB 0A>117>2S A1 0001ooosa ADDRESS UIASSIQKOSTANLEY M RUDO ETALSTANLEY H ROOD AOl PARK LANE LOIC LA»;E ft4 5SSSA SB 0A-117-2T A1 OO^Y 0040S PARR LA CHARLES A SCMALL A NIFE CHARLES A SCHALL MS PARK LANE LOMS lake ttl SSISA SO 06-117-71 <il 002'> 005*-« > ark la HERKAtl ItUI A Mirt LAUf NERilAN 5<« PA*»K LA»IE LCtC LAf.C LV4 S5I56 • ^ OA-117-75 «»A OCOA OOaSR m»AJETO‘».A HOLD LA RICNARO SPEETER RICHARD H SPEEILR OSY MlltICTOtR.A highland LONG LAKE K4 55SS6 total BATCH 010 00012 > REPORT NO. P1ASS*B1 rtCE SESB 06-117-:1 ^1 00«t700505 PAPK LA ,THOflAS C JEtZlR Lxf lA N iTHgUAG-C-^T2ER SOI PART. I Ate LONG LA».E rtl S5S5A SO 06-117-2S A1 00401 00601 PARK LA STAraeV H RUDO ETAL STANLEY H RUDO 601 PARR LAIC Lac LAKE It! 5SS5A SO 06-117-:i 61 0050 00607 PARK LA R RUOO A R RUDO RICHARD A KATHLEEN RUOO 607 PARK LA laC LAKE ttt 55156 SO 06-11 OOOSO AO KARIN tulle KAREN rULlE 1677 LttC LAKE NEN BRICH^I 1 BOOS UNASSIOWO SSllt 10 06-117-rs 61 0006 00506 PARK LA STATE LAtiO DIPT CITY OF OPO:» STREET A DRAINAGE 5/ZS/06 SO 16650S SO 0»-117-2S 66 0005 0066* ItltjnTaKA HCIO LA JAUCS-« l<CIC4IICER ETAL ,i . JAWS r HEiriircER 66* mi;4ETaPA HCLTCS Lar LAT.E tffi 55SS6 so 06-117-2S 66 0016 00610 PARK LA M C A J H NROBLEMSKl HILLIAH E A JOUl HROOIEMSKI 6S0 PARK LA Lac LAKE Ttl S5156 SO 06-117-2S 66 OOlS OOOSO ADDRESS WUSSiaCO C E FLEHITC JR I L P FLEHINC C E FLEHIIC JR A L P FIENIIC 600 HlMCTaOCA HIGHLAND LA Lac LAKE ttl 5SSS6 * /«>i /■ -4 r<v^if if r jir: « *-T V »*?^v:?-v?>>!.;-- t. '' \ ') v^. ^ r — w. ' . ■rW'" . •. *••• f . • ’. •U*’? -*>?• * > ' ^'9.V y’ . V'' <*V >r- ■ .• *“: . .. • •” i* r' '* ' r W/ji- *• •. • f j .• V . *' V’*-• * v^>" •i-!}; \-:•.:<•;// 5J. v:\ / il ■ ^ S- •'S. S. •■* ■}%j / '« «••• /SS.PS" A I • •I ’ r-r • w ^ r*]: * ••. •?. V I •.*•••.1*4 ; ■ * *'i4*^‘*} 'i I • i J •’••, '• • l^V*- I . ft ‘I w* i;i: •.»>.* *jI«1.f ^ » *4. ••^ r**'r .'T -^• -••(•r • i 1 -*< • *•** . # lUr.r..=Ir- CCU.-.-.V, Mlr.r.o==t^ ^ 6;3o p-ro' i-AiOfiL—' — — ^ -- — , / i-C/>J<ir tA<^^/T|J J .y--------- - V • '>r . ^♦• w —------ . uirj:,«toniCi2. ----» 01- Cover-Z^r.-. -=• J-, ■'“•L^rc-’Ml Harlcisz, de:zri'-ed yir.g« 27 -o»-. »■ “'“.’.f ■.""■"•r!., ■- --hi Uszozl;.- / “-;°of"?:r. .v:^:r;rpii^-..d ff-V —° . 4 4^1 'l®-d'3ar^: *nence -aswby a j\:clc-al .... Line o on a ^-^n- a'- -*/- r-«-icec br ''udicial Lana-sa-'c Lo^ 1 w a point t::-..Kea 3/^. !.!;>• thence South at rir.ht ar.pes U^.9 *<n*r -j»r<£d bv Judicial isr.awiriC, 72®‘32''"‘est a dlc-ance of 4-sS ther.ca -out. 7^ L-Ved by Judirial luncTark; feet to a point J^0^3. ^ the-ce deflectint^ to >-.-e --&>•' —^ ^ of said street, •-nich ?oi*.. ^ r/^ w iL^cial lancr^rk; ther.re ce- ^ fl.ectir.5 to the rtf.nt ,c .^«et to the X of said Par.: A^venue a c ^.nnc« o. x ;g3_ Undrark; ~VVof i«rtnr.lns, which ?clr.t li iyihg ?*.-- of '•■;r.'r!^..‘of Ccverniwht Uct 1, ^ _ 7 ,,.. Trithin the foUowihg aescrioea coczner.ci.-.g it i polhf =" " " Section 6. Towr-shio U. , -.[J feet South froa the -o the Siat- of laio ^''^•■=^"\;;e„;’ue;'t, it right melii to “f: f^’.iul^netonit. Suiuiit ^t-rSe o^7i'ri Ivenue, it Uld -enue '-^.for liid P-h -hue i tneacs £oviw..wewT:e.—- c ,,u-r- co'^'ni is cuurlobC by At*feet *-o the actual poln'w of capunr.*-.;/, • aic''r « line oecper.dictilar to t*.e re ,r-:rrc!:n: ;^t;" ^ .s‘CtTilToC l.r.-errccent Lot 1 . Korth it i right V.gle J^ioiil Ur.do,« eet line of iild ?irh Avenue,• thenc. 10 feet; thenc a ««aw at a_.-Knt a - beginning, . Southweiterlv .long 00;-^.““=“;;^'-^;,7°,--s e^reon. It doei not purport to si.o i-d the locaticr. of aJJ. existing bu--------aS other incrovertnts or g^rnres^.onents. C^aa 1 A w V.. —« Data o e •• = 1C S-lC-76 Iron ranker dictia* larX*:?^ Cercod A. t-oi:--. ^ , .'Plane Jut“/eyor ann r-ar-* iong,take. Hinr.esoca / ^ f ✓ - r\; . f » _______■ L- ' j» r • t • I » ■r. [ o i" \j \ -t>\r i r ■" 5 /> !C'\ •»« •« •• %»♦• I %••• • i « _j'r‘2r <f\'> (.. U' ••‘- t/'‘ ; A /-. . \ ( KJJ r'; \i ‘ \N r t wT *. r^^^' I r t * tl !? C' § '■ H:? ■ I' '• ' £ ’6^ ‘ ^ 4 ( I'. .K’ . U rC••I Vi ' > ^ ♦ < 4-\^^ « .-• * .. • : rf ■ . ^ ,\. >(„ ‘ I 1 I L ■0ooa oa o HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEETSETBACK ZONE:(CIRCLE O.NE)0-75’75-250’250-500’500-1000i» EXISTLNG HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House SB. S X n.z5 s \0{X S.F. Leofili V5'X Widtii 15-i^is S.F. /X 2.f5 «S.F. X a 1 ^S.F. B. Garage X 2-ic L?Q-H _ »• (« •s.F.ry ' C. Driveway 33 X 3i7 (155 S.F. ’t ' . X S.F. D. Sidewalk ^0 X V ai . (6?(5 y. '* » • S.F. i • X d =S.F. E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric G. Other X X -*\ S.F. ^2^ S.F. 1^*2- TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONF TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A \f{rn - PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE I'f to, OC> I S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. or y 1 p---.' ; f:3V«i.‘ "iL A B H V A. House g".^SiT S.F. Length ^^Kith B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X X X X X X X X X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. y S.F. ^/5"5 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. y .F. n G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTYAREA IN ZONE A iqfiHf + B S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. PROPERTYARE-Til-^X loo * /G .CCj / S F. A B I City of ORONO ^.1 OROItoJ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2811 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 PILE #1525 WHEREAS, William and Joan Wroblewski (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 630 Park Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of a grade level concrete porch which constitutes additional hardcover in the 75-250' hardcover zone where existing hardcover already exceeds the 25% allowable hardcover. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1525. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 21, 1990, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: a) Existing hardcover on the property is 49%, all of which is in the 75-250' zone. The applicant proposes to, in conjunction with the porch construction, remove an area of landscape rock and plastic within the property boundaries, resulting in a net reduction of hardcover from 49% to 45.6% on the property. Page 1 of 4 ■mm City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ___^11 b) The proposed grade level concrete patio is considered a non-encroachment in the front yard, and is not required to meet the normal 35' setback from the street. No structure above the concrete patio is proposed. c) Total lot area is 10,001 s.f., or 0.23 acres. The majority of the hard surface on the property including house, garage, driveway, and sidewalks, are all generally necessary for usage of the property, hence the opportunity for further hardcover reductions is limited. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision '* to permit the construction of a grade level concrete patio of dimension? 3.5' X 23' which constitutes additional structural hardcover in the 75-250 zone where existing hardcover already exceeds the 25% allowed hardcover, subject to the following conditions; 1. Hardcover on the property shall not exceed 4561 s.f. or 45.6% Allowed hardcover shall be as shown in the site plan and calculatioi attached as Exhibit B. Applicants are advised that any future proposal to increase hardcover on the property will not be approved but might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent removals oi existing hardcover, resulting in no net increase of hardcover on th( property. Page 2 of 4 r»LA'Jkl 2m-"'■»V >-v- g%>: U ■?»'i .1. '• i Sor-ie, City off OROIVO ORONa RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2811 2. Applicants are advised that any future proposal to roof or enclose the porch area in question will require a separate variance application because such an enclosure would be less than the required 35* from the front lot line. 3. Authorities granted by this variance run with not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 29, 1991). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation o zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 29th day of May, allin, Cit:^cierk ^ Property Owner(s) Jam^ R. Grabel^Mayor Page 3 of[/4 *. *.••«k •• • »f«r * • * •• .• • ^ 1 i C > Vv.<.'City of ORONO V V >Yrr=. :<>-L RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ 2811 .^=L- -t:’W STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. CODNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this /3______ day of ZrZ,o)-\.iP F 199^ before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared OJsd.Q yy^ £ ^ /7n. /<J^^ AT/' 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. THERESA L. NAAS NOrAHY PUMJO • IMMaOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY t$,mmmrnm ^S--p. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, 199_, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person (s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. N^OTARY PUBLit MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 4 of 4 I I ? *Tr 199^ tonally t to be egoing same as fore me jpeared je the rumentf IS his T<;\oV5^^Klrjwtonk* Hlc^.larc* Estates U mimsIa County, }*.trx.stotAC«rliflrtit« of Sunr«y:T howby eAFtlfy tbot this is • truo «nd corro<*t r«pr*s*nUtion of • survoy of U m bourcorios of:^ Tti»t port of Cutlot 3| Klnnetontci Ki(planes laUtos jy^nc 'ilthla tho followini>d«srrilMd tmet: That ?»iof Ceoomaant Lot 1, f>oetion 6, Township 117 North, Moac* 23 Wost of tlM Sth Priaelpol Htrldlon, dascriU .o< follows: CoeDkneiac ot o pclat in th« lastorl:*Uao of Nrk Avoaxto as plotto<i In •hirnwtonWa Surrit Park* distant 63 foot Southoastorly, oaasuroc alenr. said liao, fro* ths Seuthuost nornor of Lot IT, fcSo pa<LK L.MJC latte,*0-/B X ✓ a :^BIoek 9, sold Addition,which potat Is aarkod ^Thor a Judicial Isadioirks 'thoaco East 59.7 foot ,.^'on a lino at rldht ancias with tho East lino of 11^*1. said bat 1 to a pnint-aarkod'har Judicial lani> Bark) thoneo South at rirjht anclas 142.9 foot iS^;i i9e a point aarkad hr Judicial laadsark; h(5i^h-:thaaeo South 7J®32' 'Jast a diataaeo of 4.P8 -*S'"’‘: foot to a pniat aarkad hf Judicial la^urk; t- r * V TLor ^ V# #t V. thoneo dofloctlne to tho ri{ht Ad*43' i a distaneo of 9f foot to a point In tho Eaatorly lias of said stroot, which point is aarkad hf Judicial landaark; thonc« da- flaetla« to tho rirM 7C®30* alonff tho Ejtstarly * V” lino of sold Park Aoonua a dlatanco of ICl foot t* tho -^7*5 'j poiat of borlnnliw;, which point ia ■arJwd b/ Judicial Undmrk; u»-- P/ T>«t part of Outlet 3, Hinnatonka Highlands EaUtas, lyin« ulthia tha followlnf doscrlhad tract: That oart of Covareaont tat 1, • Soetlea 6, Township 117, Banco 23, caacriUd aa coeaxancln* "*• of sold Cooonua.nt Ut I, diaUnt 1312 foot South froo Uo Gooonwant Ut 1; thoneo Ust, at rlcht aneloa to Saat arlv of Park Avonuo, as aaid nv«nuc is shown on tha plat of Klnnotenra 5u*a«i Park*{ thoneo South.woata-l.v olone tha Saatorl/ llr.u of aaid Park ***"^ 63 foot to tho actual point of bocinnlsc, which coint la oar^ by a oot pursuont to Torrona faa# Ito. U97?j thane# Scat alenc a Una parpandlcular to tto last Una of sold Uwomaant Ut 1 • dittaneo of 59.2 foot, whlch^int ia , Jkdielal Undaork sat pursuant to Torrons Casa Nc. 11977 j 10 fkoti thoneo Uoat ot o licht anrlo to tho Eaatarl^ Uno of said Park Awanuai tha ea SoPthwosUrly aUnc nald lasUrly Una to th« point of And tho Ucatlon of aU axlstinc bulldlnn thoroon. It doaa not purport to show Sthon isproTOMats or oneroachaants. SenUi 1* ■ 40* Goto I HC»76 s t Iron Mrkor O t Judicial landnark MOOR ORIGINAL DOCUMENl UorQon Rn SfflR Und Supwsyor and Plannar Unc Uka, MinnaaoU Icjt^L jXsicid*rrTeA* L- —i'—r c#«<v«tt.»rTo/»i . «r^ ®?V eM.s ^TAir -i «' ♦Z f^A^coiftrtt. /£ipvi*»v^ - ^SO —.. -.• « «in^ 4«rr /i /^ Tr»*so* BAiirmu t - . . z %■ • 6 >• a 2t^rzS»i~ ifA2U ^ooe^*ftAsno A « r 1 » - /j/z. 2> j. -- 7»r s) . . ^s« . _ '*■ ,e:|3Ji: ^ . w—. . • /BO /^y 0 sac. J> VO C2i jfott ' •# * . ^ • • i' Sj^:h' • Y»<7 /<K^^2k ''•> ■».*: I .. . -. • • r .rL-^fc^ cx/sf . • tlPM4M# 33C» s^* AciU'.fVimc - Ai«r » Vsz,/» f. m j^s:c K i «' ' • • -• • « ...............'4' I .«• ' • , B - fi^SOL.^2&ll €y#/.3TV To; .M."^yor Grabf*k & Orono Counc 1 Members^ City AdminiStrato: lU'rnbardson Prom Date: Mi Chao 1 P. Gaffron. Asst Planninq & Zonina Administrate: May 22, 19'»0 Subject: *1525 William anti Joan Wroblewski - 630 Park Lane Variance - Resolution Zoning District - LR-lB, Single family lakeshore residential, 1 acre, sewered Application ~ Request for hardcover v’ariance to construct concrete slab porch 1* above qrade Notice of Planninq Commission Action 5/22/90 Proposed Resolution Memo and Exhibits of 5/15/90 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of 5/15/90. Briefly, the applicants propose to construct a qrade level concrete patio extension to their existinq open front porch. This concrete will be considered as a non-encroachment because it does not need railings nor extend above the main floor level of the house, hence it does not need to meet the normal setback. However, it does constitute a change in the nature of hardcover on the property, which required the variance. The Planning Commission at their May 21st meeting recommended approval on a vote of 5 to 1. ihe applicants propose to remove an area of rock and plastic near the garage, which will result in a total reduction of hardcover on the property from 49% down to 45.6%. Planning Commissioner Cohen did not give any specific reason for his denial vote. The other Planning Commissioners generally felt that the proposal was an improvement to the property, but noted that any future enclosure of this poren slab would require a separate varianc® application for encroachment into the required 35* street setback. Staff Recoasiendation - Staff recommends approve I as submitted with the proposed hardcover reduction, per the planninq recommendation. A resolution for approval is attached ror your review. Isv OKONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 21, 1990 ZONING FILE 11524-TRINITY PRE-SCHOOL CONTINUED II me procrarr were cifored at less than three *'ou'*s -J-l- t.y Hjnson, :o r«cori.-noncapprova. of poe co.-.dippona: cso porpit for T.-pniov :,pthcra.-. Ch-.-h^.. a o-schoop prpcro.-p ooS.-ep; to staff rcco.p.tencations X an- .lx,tion, ^kvcs-o, Nays-0. Motion passed. 11525 WILLIAM < JOAN WROBLEWSKI 630 PARK LANE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:06 P.M. TO 9:10 P.M. Joan Kroblevski was present for this -atter. • •and Certificate of Mailinc wereGuxv notec. Mav -••'fotxatton contained in his -,eno dated porch^'areli' ti-e additional Ms. WroOlewski replied able to sit on the oorch.tnat she would like enoug.h room to be the ptbiic recardihc this natter ^nc the public nearinc was closed. Hanson asked whether it would he possible for the joeiicants .o ptace a roo: over the oorrn without obtaihi approval.nine variance Gar iron stated that a future variance would be required s*nce the root would constitute an encroachment of the 35' street s o t o a c • xt^ was moved by Johnson, seconded bv Moos, to recommend approval ot the hardcover variance to construct a concrete adaition to the porch slab. Hardcover in the 75-250' cone shall be recuced to 45.6%. Motion, Ayes-5. Cohen, .Nay. Motion passed. #1527 LYNDON S. (BILL) STUBBS 2555 FOX STREET VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:11 P.M. TO 9:30 P.M. .Mr. Stubbs was present. .Mabusth reviewed the information included in her memo dated May 17, 1990. Hanson asked, takinc into oonsrdoration t.he draxna9eway that I Tor Pi^innirq Cofraissicn Choirninn Krilov Orono Plonr.ing Con-mi ssjcr. Moml orp City AdDi nipt rat oi Aerr.hnrcison H 9> Prom;Michael P. Gaffr"r, Asst Planning & Toning Administrator Date May 15, 1990 Subject: #1525 William and Joan Wroblewski - 630 Park Lane Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IB, Single family lakeshore residential, 1 acre, sewered Application ~ Request for hardcover variance to construct concrete slab porch 1' above grade List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Letter of Request Construction Plans Photographs Hardship/Unusual Property Conditions Applicants Hardcover Calculation Staff Hardcover Calculation and Sketch Pertinent Pacts - 1.Hardcover is as follov’s: (All 75-250’ Tone) Existing: 4897 s.f. (49%) Proposed: 4561 s.f. (45.6%) Allowed: 2500 s.f. (25%) 7. The proposed grade level concrete pati' i- .onsidered a non-encroachment in the front yard, and dots not need to meet the normal 35' setback for the LR-IB Zone. The app]icants indicate that there wi 1 1 be no structure above the concrete slab. No railing is proposed. 3, The proposed slab is above an area of existing rock «ind plastic hardcover and existing sidewalk, hence the porch slab will not increase hardcover on the property, although it is a change in nature of hardcover on the property. Note that the applicant proposes to remove 336 s.f. of hardcover west of the garage, resulting in a net decrease of hardcover on the property. /'' /’/'-a! ■ S’ - ( ' I '••oninq File §1525 y.^y 15, 1950 Faqe 2 of d. Discussion Plearo review the applicants photoc,raph3 and statement of hardship and unusual property conditions. This is an extremely small lot. The proposed porch slab in conjunction w*th removal of other hardcover on the property, would appear to yield a positive result and a decrease in hardcover on the property. It would seem possible that there are other areas of rock and plastic that could similarily be removed. Other than the rock and plastic areas, the only other areas of hardcover which could be removed fairly easily are the brick sidewalks. However, the sidewalks appear to be necessary and would not reduce hardcover significantly if they were narrowed from 4* to 3*. Staff Recomendation - If Planning Commission feels ehat the proposed hardcover reduction and the small size of the lot justify the hardcover variance to allow addition of a permanent concrete slab porch, then a recommendation for approval wruld be appropriate. Isv 1! i j </- V I JJi // • « / V • • # ♦ 23, r^<’^ \ /99« CO-6- ,6:50 liO Lcn.^ Uu(e, C6-//7.?3 <»C' Crc/Tc r^o»« ’Y 7ke C^irreA p^rck (XrecL rs L^neai^ I r J V "5 '/i ^ ^KtooX Cl^LO ^ •! ! y>cae TO. r’?^^ :2 'r T«^ -^uod ^•M/i i f s - *’ K!£S|Jx; ■ , , slef^ c^ilf rCflo6ed S#ytde im^m |i»e.Kt "t, •fVe Port A «t^-lewor ^ ^ 7^ mJc^ -tUi TK<. ctvttA o;i 11 r«l»*t! f ^ ••% . . -. . . 9*^■6 C<;(u^(ek toe «o-<t kcve re<L‘^i>-fut. l'iar<i 4occ ,r> y ".oninq File «1525 y.^Y jfi, 19 30 T^qe 2 of •iU Discussion Please review the applicants photoc.raphs and statement of hardship and unusual property conditions. This is an extremely small lot. The proposed porch slab in conjunction with removal of other hardcover on the property, would appear to yield a positive result and a decrease in hard >vcr on the property. It would seem possible that there are other areas of rock and plastic that could similarily be rem.oved. Other than the rock and plastic areas, the only other areas of hardcover which could be removed fairly easily are the brick sidewalks. However, the sidewalks appear to be necessary and would not reduce hardcover significantly if they were narrowed from 4* to 3*. Staff Recouendation ~ If Planning Commission feels that the proposed hardcover reduction and the small size of the lot justify the hardcover variance to allow addition of a permanent concrete slab porch, then a recommendation for approval would be appropriate. Isv REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION % ■% DATE: June 19. ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Jeanne Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2140 Troy Anderson, 1490 Long Lake Resolution Boulevard - Variance - Zoning Dbtrict:LR-IA Lot area = 32,400 s.f. Brief Reviw of Application (Refer to enclosed staff memo of June 10, 19^6 for more detail on this review) A|.plicant seeks approval of street setback variances for a single story family room addition at the west side of residence and a 6' x 6.8' entry addition to the south side. Structural coverage proposed at 6.6% is not an issue. Hardcover in the 75-250' setback area proposed at 18.1% and in the 250-500' setback area at 19.5% is also not an issue. Setback variances requested are as follows: Section 10.23, Subd. 6 (B) - Street/front setback. Required = 50' Proposed family room addition = 30' (existing porch == 35.1') Variance = 20' or 20% Proposed roofed entry = 42' Variance = 8 ’ or 16% Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the setback variances as proposed. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission recommenoation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution. Isv A RESOLUTION OR^^NTING VARLVNCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE NO. 2140 WHEREAS, Troy D. Anderson and Catherine A. Anderson (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the propert>' located at 1490 Long Lake Boulevard within th; City of Orono (hereinafter "the Cit\") and legally described as follows: Lots 3 and 4, Albee's Long Lake Addition, Hennepin County, and That part of Government Lot 1, Section 26, To\Mtship 118, Range 23, lying east of a line drawn parallel to and 675 feet East of, measured at right angles to, the West line of said Section 26 and west of the extension south of the most westerly line of Lot I, "Auditor's Subdivision Number 291, Hennepin County, Minnesota." (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants h.ave applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit construction of an 18’ x 23' famil: room addition to the west side of the existing residence to be located 30' from the street/ftont lot line instead of the required 50', applicant also proposes a 6' x 6.8' roofed entry addition to the south side of the residence to be located 42' from the front/street lot line instead of the required 50'. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2140. 2.The property is located in the LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. The property consists of 32,400 s.f. Page 1 of 4 3. 4. 5. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1996 and recommended unanimous approval of tlie proposed variances based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A.The existing structure placed on property prior to the current two acre zoning standards. B. t The shape of lot and location of residence on property. Applicant installed a new mound septic system in 1993. The proposed improvement will not have an impact on the e.xisting septic system. D.The City has received no negative comments from adjacent neighbors iioliried of the current proposed improvement. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property a*- • .ar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning d* .i; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings and hardships, the Orono City Council hereby grant variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a family room addition and entr^ addition granting a 20' or 40% variance for the family room addition and an 8' or 16% variance for the entr>' addition. Approval is subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 4 .. J. 1. 2, 3. 4. Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide an updated survey locatirig all existing additions and proposed family room and entry additions. Authorities granted by this variance run vsith 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 (June 24, 1997). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of June, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner (s) Page 3 of 4 i STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of June, 1996 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notar>’ Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of _, 199_before me a Notary' Public w'ithin and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of____, 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 4 t'K.'e,*,® “Tt f.e TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Memt>ers Ron Moorse, Citv Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:June 10,1996 SUBJECT; ^2140 Troy Anderson, 1490 Long Lake Blvd. - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA Lot area = 32,400 s.f. Application: Applicant seeks approv al of street setback variances for a single storv’ family room addition to the west side of residence and entry addition to south side The follow ing ordinances are pertinent for this review : 1.Section 10.23, Subd. 6(B) - Street/front setback. Required = 50' Proposed family room addition = 30’ (existing porch - 35.1') Variance = 20' or 20% Proposed roofed entry = 42' Variance = 8' or 16% 2.Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Review of structural coverage, Total area = 32,400 s.f Allowed = 4.860 s.f or 15% Existing = 1,753.3 s.f or 5.4% Proposed = 2,144.9 s.f or 6.6% 3.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. A. 75-250' setback area - 10,450 s.f Allowed = 2,612.5 s.f or 25% Existing = 1,670 s.f or 16% Proposed = 1,900.8 s.f or 18.1% B.250-500' setback area = 21,950 s.f Allowed = 6,585 s.f. or 30% Existing = 3,700 s.f or 16% Proposed = 4,290.8 s.f or 19.5% List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map Zoning File #2140 June 10, 1996 Page 2 D - Existing Surv ey E - Septic Map F - Proposed Site Plan Gl-2 - Hardcover Inventory ’ HI-3 - Elevations I - Floor Plan Reviei%' of Application Applicant seeks approval of street setback variances to permit construction of a 18'x23 ’ family room to the west side of the existing residence located 30' from the street lot line adjacent to Long Lake Blvd. Part of the family room addition includes a new rear entry to residence and family room. Note the rear roofed entry meets the required 50' setback from the rear lot line (review Exhibits F and HI). The second phase of the improvement project involves the installation of a 6’x6.8' roofed entry at the front or street side of the two story residence to be located 42' from the street lot line (review Exhibits F and H2). In 1993 applicant filed two variance applications. The first involved setback variances to permit a second story ’ addition to the existing 1 1/2 story residence and later in 1993 applicant filed for setback variances to permit construction of a 26'x26’ garage addition to the rear or north side of the residence. In 1993 applicant w'as also required to install a new conforming septic system in their northwest yard. Statement of Hardships Please review Exhibit A, applicant notes the following: A. Existing structure was placed on property prior to the current 2 acre zoning standards. B. C. The shape of lot and location of residence on property. Applicant installed a new mound septic system in 1993. The proposed improvement will not have an impact on the existing septic system. The City has received no negative coniments from adjacent neighbors notified of the current proposed improvement. i •j Zoning File #2140 June 10, 1996 Page 3 Issues for Consideration 1.Can the family room addition to the west side be designed so as to not encroach any closer to the street lot line than the existing 35' setback? 2. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Options of Action To either deny, approve or appro\*e as amended. Any recommendation of approval must include the condition that 2^)plicant shall be responsible tor providing an updated survey locating approved family room addition upon application for a building permit. Application # Date Received 9l Amount Paid .«»* «-v cm’ OF ORONO - v ariance application Initial Application Fee S220 00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI20.00 (no change from origbal application) ^ i Variance for non-conforming structures S220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Doub ’e application fee) A V ••i s «• t PROPERTY INFOR>LATION Site Address /-o /olv'cl Propertv' Identification NumberTP.I.D.) ~ }! T - 3-3> ~ ^ ^ . A ^ • • riupwltv iUWiitiXiVUVAN/ftl V* •**^*/_^___f f ■■ -—------------ Attach legal description to application if not included on required surv'ey. Date Property Acquired________! Q 2_________________________——^(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the cdjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: A t" residential ___^other (specify) ----------------------------- Zoning District: / iR — / ____________________________________ _________— - Phone (home) Phone(>^ork)— APPLICANT Address: Lo\c. OWNER (if different than applicar.t) Name ____________ City: O?. ^Zip: S?^S5Cp Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:_ Zip: description of request Describe request in detail: Estimated Construction Cost S f (^v>V\ V V t-V .-ISc<~c v*\ t I'V-s.vVr r-r,«r..v% W' 'rbi.vvc.v-v4 (attach additional sheets if necessary) .-P • VARIANCES required Lot Area ___Lot V/idth Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) hardship /description of UNUSUAL PROPERTV^ CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practice difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: r-jo<v>-g,_b-vi.bs—Blisin—ia. «Ce-f . a Lq __'*** (attac! additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application dgadling date m order for vour application to b< considered complete; 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Propert>- Owners List of owners within 150’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin Count>' Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Sur. (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘/i" x 11' for reproduction. Topographic sur\ey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, piovide one (1) copy 8‘/:" x 11" for reproduction. Sketcr.es or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/2" x H"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). .As in ad dendum 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. Plea.«e remember that yom variance application is not complete if the above information ha? ngt t>egh ipyluded. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all infoitnation required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this applicaion. and certifies that the information supplied is tree and corrtbt to the best of hisdier knowledge. DateApplicant’s Signature 7 OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes fif investiMtion and verification of this request. Owner's Signat-’'-e Date Applicant inust have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planmng Commis.<:’on 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 arrangemt . j to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 ■f A RUN DATE 01/20/93BATCH 00^PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR HEWEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST\S8 26-118-23 33 0001 01686 LONG LAKE BLVO J N GARDNER A A L GARDNER ANITA L GARDNER 1686 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0005 01520 LONG LAKE BLVO O-J SMITH.A3-S JONOALL D J SMITH IKS JONOALL 1520 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0020 00886 DAKOTA AVE J M BENHAY t K J GASNER JANET H BENNAY 886 DAKOTA AVE LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0029 01685 SIXTH AVE N NILLIAM R A BARBARA A PEARCE WILLIAM A BARBARA PEARCE PO BOX 9300 MPLS m 55660 38 35-118-23 22 0003 01509 LONG LAKE BLVO J*MBS.4^0PiJ»l^«^ jAMES-rrUpCTH— - - ^ 1509 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE MN 55356 »^Of«L BATCH 006 00015 38 26-118-23 33 000201690 LONG LAKE BLVD T D ANDERSON A C A ANDERSON TROY A CATHERINE ANDERSON 1690 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0006 01530 LONG LAKE BLVO CRANT D EGGEr^ERG GRANT D EGGENBERG 1530 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0021 00888 DAKOTA AVE D A C NOODNARD PAVIO A CYNTHIA WOOOHARO 1)88 DAKOTA AVE LOtre LAKE MN 55356 38 35-118-23 22 0001 01685 LONG LAKE BLVO KURTIS A GREENLEY A WIFE KimTIS A GREENLEY 1685 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 35-118-23 22 0006 01505 LONG LAKE BLVO JANES D WEYHE ETAL JAMES 0 WEYHE 1505 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE MN 55356 REPORT NO. PI635601 PAGE 738 26-118-23 33 000601516 LONG LAKE BLVO CINDY J FREDRICKSON CINOY FREDRICKSON C/O STATE DANK OF LONG LAKE BOX 636 LONG LAKE FW 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0016 01535 LONG LAKE BLVO BERNICE ZUMBUSCH BERNl'-E ZUMBUSCH 1535 LONG LAKE BLVO LOTK: lake MN 55356 - V- ♦ t ‘ 38 26-118-23 33 0027 01680 LONG LAKE BLVO ANITA S KEITH VANDER BRANDEN K R VANDEN BRANDEN 1680 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE MN 55356 %• 1 . ■ :» 38 35-118-23 22 0002 01525 LONG LAKE BLVO L W CAPRON ETAL W/L EST L W CAPRON 17505 OLD ROCKFORD RO PLYMOUTH MN 55666 $, « • ri ' • ; -it- 38 35-118-23 22 0005 01665 LONG LAKE BLVO DONALD W LUND ETA*. DONALD W LUND 1665 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE 55356 =14: c. c c 0 c /r.t. r: e © c* € o j & q, Ainee-s Long Lake Addition and in Gov't. Lot 1, Section 26-118-23 Hennepin County, Minnesota 9 /y^€ ^44^. fs4^ 2f/ MB5*4r£ SouHrt line of Scc^ioK ZC> TU?> y?!Ki*^tinq Leqa.T ne.script: i on Lots 3 and 4, Albee's Long Lake Addition, Hennepin County and That nart of Gou^rnmon*. I.ot 1, section 26, Township IIP, Range 23, lying Rast of^ Unrdraw"pa?aUortTand 675 fee. East of, measured at right angles to, the West line of said Section 26 "and West of the extension south of the most Westerly line of Lot 1, "Auditor's SubdiviQinn Number 291, Hennepin County, Minnesota." n ot uot i, Auditor s Subdivision This survey shows the location of an existing house and a driveway serving a parcel to the north of the above described property. It does not purport to show any other im_ _ provements or encroachments. ^ ^ o : Iron marker Bearings shown are based on an assumed datum. . CITY OF OnONO _j: SITE PLAN__GFi-'DiNG PLAN F^APPnOVED □ APPROVED V\'m-| r."\--.. ONS I, Ejection 26-118-23 Hennepin County, Minnesota N Z< w 0/M0y^ ^ /y fs4i. 2f^ M69*4r£ ^ooHt line of SeciioK 2(o T\ie> RZ^ Existing Leoa.l. Hoscription I.ot^■^ s"ction''2fi!%ownship'’ns/Ranqe^ "ivinS'?’'’?• Government 67S feet East of, measured at rinh? anqies t^ the m! ?^• parallel to and west of the extension south of y,e mos2 Weste^W ?inf ?' Section 26 and Number 291, Hennepin County, Minnesota." ^ ^ ^ Auditor's Subdivision provements or encroachments. ^ ^ V* - ooes not purport to show any other im- - o : Iron marker Bearings shown are based on an assumed datum. onsKM Ssiiiiiu . CITYOFORONO -J: SITE PLAN__ n APPROVED GFiADiNG PLAN □ APPROVED WiTM r.E\“;;oNS BY__ n ATT FTtj'. SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 250-500’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House oT*' . Lensih 500-1000* 2k is 7^ yj y o X X X Width /S B. Garage C. Driveway 7/ // " X X d2. go D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other PROPOSKD HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ^ Length V QO X Width y X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X 3C> 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 - B foV^O f ''0:). C 'vfV S.F. ISO /•7Q S.F. S.F. S.F. y 1 S.F. S.F. sso ___S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. •• S.F. S.F. S.F. 1 W *' S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE i^~7Q B \04^0 X 100 LiO. S.F. S.F. % A B S.F. fgo S.F. S.F. S.F. ' " S.F. 44^S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S3 S3 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. X 100 S.F. % A B ' j'- > y HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 5 SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'75-250* FXICTINC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. Hpu^c no/*-*-Lenflh y?'. ao ya K* X X X Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk X X 11 X X s-'/ E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X O. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA iN ZONE '^‘700 - ^ ppnpoCTn hardcover IN ZONE A. House Length t/^ ✓ ^g> X X X Width /?__ B. Garage C. Driveway SO D. Sidewalk S ■ ^ X X 21s. il U X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other 50-5001 500-1000' X 100 = TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ B ^ICKO X 100 i ^64 <;ao> /•70 l^~7Cn /fgs i^s: gtu</ 3^ 1/ ^ . /Vg5. Z3X f/ ^ y;> o ■ 9^. I * ^i; S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. •" 'I1 ..................... S.F.'--'im V 4 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. , . *.tf. 1 S.F. S.F. ,<r-v "N \ :) Vs ’4. S.F. S.F. S.F.c ■■K S.F. S.F. S.F. A B % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. tyU. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _ S.F. d0> ^ _ S.F. _ S.F. % A B _^ i J FrontEle^^ation 1 /0" = 1 ••0" * '1 Rear ElevatLon 1/0" = V-0" Jiiii! M ' s;’*l»HtUU8IW ii!I !!!i New Addition ifiII iii I' 'If! 1III! inmiMmHimHf 11 Ira Hffi r / 18*-(T b b cD Existing Foundation Underpin • verify y/ V77777/A ' I 3» fip-or gr.(r 2C •x8" Rg. / 2x10 <8 16* O.C. t /»10® 16"O.C /f b In Storage 30"x30"x8' Fig.U4 ft I - A cti I t bi e 1 - 30'x30‘x8' Ftg.' f 1 1 1 11 i:;; 1/I/ - — ! : ; I : t-; ■ ■ V / .. ^ Up A 7 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 19 ITEM NO.: ^0,■«<S b Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2141 Roberta J. Roth, 1251 Briar Street - Variance - Resolution Zoning District:RR-IB (property- is located within a shoreland area approximately 500+' from a natural environment lake. French Lake) Lot area = 10,500 s.f., property is served by municipal sewer_______ Brief Review of Application Applicant seeks approval of a side street setback variance to permit construction of a 16' x 20' detached single stall garage w'ithin the west rear yard of property. I'he detached garage will replace a 10' x 8.4' shed. The property does not contain a garage. Access to the garage will be via the unimproved extended right-of-way of Minnetonka Avenue. Minnetonka Avenue consists of grassed-over areas and gravel drive that serves both applicant's property and property to immediate north. The structural coverage is proposed at 13.2% (allowed = 15%) and hardcover within the 500- 1,000' setback area is proposed at 22.3% (allowed = 35%). The variance for side street setback is reviewed as follows: Allowed = 10' Existing = 1.8' Proposed = 2' Variance = 8' or 80% The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the setback variance as proposed. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution. , “V A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 6 (D) FILE NO. 2141 WHEREAS, Roberta Jean Roth (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1251 Briar Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1 and north half of Lot 2, Block 3, Cry stal Bay Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Muni< ,pal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (D) to permit construction of a 16' x 20' detached garage to be located 2’ from the side street line instead of the required 10'. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, 1. 2. 3. 4. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2141. The property is located in the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring two acres in area. The property consists of 10,500 s.f. The property is also located within 500 ’ of a natural environment lake, French Lake. The property is subject to hardcover and setback regulations for properties located within 500-1,000' of the shoreline of protected lake. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1996 and recommended unanimous approval of the proposed variance based upon the following unique findings and hardships: Page 1 of 5 5. 6. A. The garage will be located adjacent to an unimproved dead end right-of- way not maintained by City. B. C. D. The section of unimproved roadway currently serves as a shared drive for two adjacent properties and is, for the most part, grassed over. To place the structure and access drive further south in rear yard to meet required 10’ setback would result in the loss of mature trees. It is the ^applicant's desire to preser\e as much of their limited grassed yard as possible. E. The structure will have no visual impact upon the surrounding properties. F. The residence to the south is located 60+' from the proposed garage. G. The property is not served by a garage. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to pieserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the abo\ e unique findings and hardships, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03. Subdivision 6 (D) to permit the construction of a 16 ’ x 20' single stall detached garage within the rear yard of the property granting an 8’ or 80% side street setback variance, subject to the following conditions; 1 4. Prior to the City issuing a building permit for construction of garage, applicant shall have applied for the legal combination of Lot 1 and the north half of Lot 2, Block 3, Crystal Bay Minnetonka. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 24, 1997). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of June, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of June, 1996 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 r STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ti On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county , personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 Pv. To: From: Date: Chair Peterson and Orono Planning rommission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator June 7, 1996 7 Subject: #2141 Roberta Roth, 1251 Briar Street - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB - Refer to Exhibits H and I. The property is located within a shoreland area approximately 500+' from a natural environment lake, French Lake. Lot area = 10,500 s.f. The property is served by municipal sewer. Application: Applicant seeks approval of a side street setback variance to permit construction of a 16' X 20' detached garage within the west rear yard of property. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.- Allowed setbacks for garages with 2. Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (D) doors facing away from street. Allowed = 10' Existing = 1.8' Proposed = 2' Variance = 0' or 80% Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of structural coverage. Total area = 10,500 s.f. Allowed = 1,575 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,153.2 s.f. or 10.9% Proposed = 1,389.2 s.f. or 13.2% No variance required. 3.Review of hardcover (500-1,000'Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) - setback area). Allowed = 3,675 s.f. or 35% E.xisting = 1,778.2 s.f. or 16.9%* ' Proposed = 2,349.2 s.f. or 22.3%*'^ No variance required. *■' Existing hardcover: residence = 1,069,2 s.f., shed - 84 s.f., gravel parking area = 495 s.f, gravel drive to shed =130 s.f. *'^ Proposed hardcover: residence = 1,069.2 s.f, garage = 320 s.f, gravel parking/drive = 960 s.f Zoning File #2131 June 7, 1996 Page 2 Lbt of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners* List D - Existing Hardcover Improvements E - Proposed Hardcover Improvements F-1-2 Elevations G - Floor Plan H - Location of Ordinary High Water Level of French Lake (Application #2042) I - Lakeshore Setback Map Review of Application The applicant proposes the removal of the 10* x 8.4* shed to the rear yard of the property and replacing shed with a 16' x 20’ single stall detached garage. The existing shed is approximately 1.8* from the unimproved extension of Minnetonka Avenue. The proposed garage is to be located 2’ from the lot line. The right-of-way itself is unimproved and consists of grass and light gravel. The two abutting property owners use portions of the access for parking of vehicles and as a shared driveway. The applicant seeks approval of the variance because to move structure an additional 8' with an expanded driveway would result in the loss of mature trees within their limited rear yard. The only setback sought by applicant for the improvement is the setback to the unimproved street right-of-way. Hardcover is proposed at 22.3% where 35% would be allowed and structural coverage is at 13.2% where 15% would be allowed. Statement of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit A, applicant notes the road right-of-way is a dead end unimproved road not maintained by City and serves as a shared drive for the two adjacent properties and is, for the most part, grassed over. To place the structure and access drive further south in rear yard would result in the loss of mature trees and, as applicant notes, it is their desire to preserve as much of their limited grassed yard as possible. Stall' would add that the structure will have no visual impact upon the surrounding properties. Upon your inspection, note the existing vegetation and high berm to the west. Properties in French Creek will not receive any visual impact from the single story garage. The residence to the south is located 60'+ from proposed garage. It is staffs understanding that the neighbor to the immediate north will also be asking for setback variances to install a similar garage in their side street yard. The property is not currently served by a garage. 1 Zoning File #2131 June 7, 1996 Page 3 Issues for Consideration 1.The existing shed serves as additional much-needed storage area for the small lot. Where will the items stored in shed now be maintained on property? Is garage large enough to also maintain car and storage items? 2. 3. Is additional screening necessiuy or is existing vegetation adequate? Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Options of Action To approve as proposed or amended, a2sJ Application # ^ / / /Date ReceiTed~2ES Amount Paid & > CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) S jj / Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $2f0.y0 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) \II w- —a PROPERTY INFORiNLATION Site Address —t--------./ Property Identification Number fP.I.D.) /O'//^ ' —7 C^^/_ • •• • t J.J ^ » m » fAttach leeal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Propiny Acquired A/r- mUhETD - ----------------------(month/yeai) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: V residential ___other (specify)---------------------------------- Zoning District: *--------------------------------------------- APPLICANT . n .y Name I Address l^.2L O'' /j Phone fhomei Phone (work) ~^73 ~ ^L-6: ^ zip:j2Q^ /s^9 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name______________________ /j Phone (hcmieX Phone (work)_ Address:Citv:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: f^{ Estimated Construction Cost $ ^ t (attach additif^nal sheets if necessary) VARI.ANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width t Hardcover Lot Coverage /Setback:Front i/^ide Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNX'SUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventmg compliance with Zoning Code requirements: / /O N/iRR0l/> ^/i^ifiTpr/rr.k^ ^ ^ t)eHb eND ' dVcil f Uf4li/^(pm6X>i.— (attach additional sheets if necessary) i tc //7 fO — REQUIRED SUBNUTTALS / o c CO All of the following information must be submitted bv the applicarion deadline date in order for vour application to be considered com,)lete: 3.6 ompleted Application Form Certified Propert\’ Owners List of owners within 150’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy V/i" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in e.xisting grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8 'A" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/i" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as mav be requested by City staff, — The Applicant and Propert>' Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if ihe above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Applicant's Signature Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the propertv' by City staff consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. O.WS Signature (! Date 7-3 ' C’ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Plaiming Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 RUN DATE 04/23/96BATCH 511PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 38 10-117-23 23 0004 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED NILLIAH DONALD LARSON ET AL NILLIAM DONALD LARSON 1205 FRENCH CREEK OR NAYZATA NN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST38 10-117-23 31 003602160 CRYSTAL AVE H A J BLUEMARCUS .* A JUDY A BLUE BOX 62CRYSTAL BAY rW 55323 REPtMT NO. PI435401 PAGE 2738 10-117-23 31 003701290 BRIAR ST FAYE H HARTRANFT FAYE M HARTRANFT 1290 BRIAR ST NAYZATA MN 55391 PR«> ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADDR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NA»C/AODR 38 10-117-23 31 0038 01270 BRIAR ST JOHN C RANGE JOHN C RANGE 1270 BRIAR ST NAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0041 01251 BRIAR ST ROBERTA JEAN ROTH ROBERTA J ROTH 1251 BRIAR ST CRYSTAL BAY MN 55391 V 10-117-23 31 0073 01.:''5 ARBOR ST KARE.' E BJERKENG KAREN ' BJERKENG 1245 ARfOR ST NAYZATA FPI 55391 38 10-117-23 32 0005 02235 FRENCH CREEK CIR ROBERT C i NANCY N LUX ROBERT A NANCY LUX 2235 FRENCH CREEK CIR NAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0039 01250 BRIAR ST RAMONA M CESARE RAMONA M CESARE 1250 BRIAR ST NAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0042 01261 BRIAR ST GAL PRINTUP GARY M PRINTUP P 0 BOX 104 1261 BRIAR CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0093 02170 MirPIETONKA AVE M A J HC CLELLANO MICHAEL P MC CLELLANO 2170 MINNETOtilA AVE N P O BOX 45 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0040 01251 BRIAR ST ROBERTA JEAN ROTH ROBERTA JEAN ROTH 1251 BRIAR ST NAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0043 01291 BRIAR ST K CURLEY A N KELLETT KEVIN CURLEY 1291 BRIAR ST S PO BOX 41 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 32 0004 02220 FRENCH CREEK CIR A M AYERS A E AYERS A r«RRILL AYERS 2220 FRENCH CREEK CIR NAYZATA MN 55391 ‘ 'I '1^ I v. " f y ^ .A •. .J*-: V ^-> 6**1 TOTAL BATCH 511 0QQ13 NUN DATE OA/23/94 BATCH 511 HENNEPIN COUNTY PNOPEBTY XNFONHATION SYSTEM PROPENTY OM4ERS LIST REPORT NO. PIAS5401 PAGE 2B I CERTI*^ THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOMLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE MbMi ,» (■: v.,J t : :• >• f 5 ' S' A?.--* c> \ • • *«^a • .1 •• J • ’ *. • •« •• •• . • • • -V* • • • • • • I • - . ( • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA / #• - y /" / • 'fl V H o . i \J * • Tonka _i_s^z6'3Ce 'I-Avenue 8K K • % 2 «-«r fX/fr/4/C o.W , Existing , a Hoy^e W.4 •-JXS----------- Si 8 iC rs § Q> I N 89*26 30 'H/T90.0 .i:;• 0:1'' ••*; .. '*» • ■21 50' irrfli nrcrriinTTOM nr nnPMTcrc ■' ‘ 1 % • ‘I*v; I HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA r ! .1 • * . \iv Tonka >!•Avenue } Se9*26'30"E 14^.0 ,50' Q) I N89*26 30"ii/140.0 O!-' oV ■^.1k.1 or) 50’ IFCAI nFFPDTDTTnM Of DHTMTCrr. L 4*1 YPICAL RIdHT 5IPC ELEVATION \, -Ai % ________1 — AuQ TuLENGTH FOR LONGER . OPTIONS AT BREAK UNES GRADE SCALE: 1/4’ = r-0" ALL DEPTH OPTIONS 1/12 ROOP PITCH NTH OPTIONAL P DOOR TYPICAL LEFT SIDE ELEVATION SCALE; 1/4" = r-0' l6'-0' NDE ALL DEPTH OPTIONS 4/12 ROOP PITCH NTH OPTIONAL NNDON 2*8 RIDGE 2X6 RAFTERS ® 16" O.C. Ib ADD 2x4x3'-0 SPLICE BLOCK BETWEEN RAFTER TIES AND HANGER PRECUT STUDS 92.5/ar / ' r“ ^ REFER TO ' DETAIL 1x6 FASCIA 3/8' PLYWD SOFFIT r REFER TO DETAIL L ^ SECTION A-A X. / SCALE: 1/4" = 1-0" l6'-0‘ NDE ALL DEPTH OPTIONS 4/12 ROOF PITCH GRADE L 1 fr • ■ -i •<. • ! % t;.; r . 4 . ■ V LEFT SIDE FRAMINS IS’-O' NDE 4/12 ROOP PITCH ^ • Ki "•f A. 1 1 1 1 1 Q 1 ------------------------------—___L 1 (< • t: • % - !40 “!40 ak 1 1 1 « 1 i f— :! I4C ;'i£ -- 6 !40 •w/ 1 QJi O. s i:> ' '40 •' t C^'*1 » .1 ■-CIJ.' 1 10 '•' 140 ! _2i \ 6 140 1 c, V?: • s ‘I r? [S___..N(75) p.|£6 ‘ y^";v, '''■ ,, '7 lA' i \ 1;-)tx"Wirwir-^i (74) -’1 (71) H 50oC J ‘Z «:5;.r *74VL‘C.v’\'^ l4iTS>73; • s VO {'2) ’ g i40 MIYNETONKA 00 * * n ijiLk 55 LI -\• I A\ 140 (^«T3 1 —!------r-.1^' U ’\ 1 (32)' (38)/’%r/v''is !cr J<37)^..3. ^ .^(36) C7\' 7 I4C 140 j \- 5 ---_U.4.[__K v/^6 140 j 'v j5.; |4q‘^ » CRYSTAL '>1 12:^ • 2 90 1 • 50 3> rQ § ZX3 8 :6o.~s (■^\ ^ S'?■:•. I (3 !5i. 6o I Li^ «m?..6.> JS'’•Jl.' !3S. 35 £, V l' ' 3 ■ . !27„,.14 I la. 9 AVE !8)I6)fj '>e.s ■Id. (1 8. (ICO) 474. •} V'l^ST , '75 56); I (5^)^ '75 A g .V '75 :r Z3 175 3 co;o CD 100 lO o>o 175 I s/ >> L 155 I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION %■ DATE: June 19, 1996 ITEM NO.: % Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaf&on Title Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2143 Diane Perez, 3465 Eastlake Street - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 acres, sewered. Application: Hardcover/setback variances for reconstruction of roof over portion of existing house, Lbt of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of PC Action 6/19/96 C - Memo and Exhibits of 6/10/96 Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of June 10th. Briefly, applicant proposes to revise the roof pitch on an 8'x9' portion of the existing residence which is within 75' of the lake. No additional hardcover is being added. Planning Commbsion Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval with no conditions, on a vote of 7 to 0 at their June 17th meeting. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the attached resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt attached resolution granting variance approval. Proposed Motion: Moved by ,seconded by , to adopt Resolution No. , granting hardcover and setback variance for Diane Perez at 3465 EastlaKe Street for reconstruction of the roof on 8'x9 ’ portion of the existing residence. Vote:aye c navs. Lr„ ■s A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2, SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8, AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISIONS 16(C&L) FILE #2143 WHEREAS, Diane Perez (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 3465 Eastlake Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: That part of Lot 2, Block 8, Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying west of the east 200.00 feet (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2; 10.55, Subdivision 8; and 10.56, Subdivisions 16(L), and ftin..^' variances to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1; 10.55, Subdivision 8; and 10.56, Subd. 16(C) to permit the reconstruction of the existing roof over an 8 ’x9' portion of the existing residence, .. ch reconstruction revising the roof line outside the existing envelope of the house located less than 75' from the lakeshore where a 75' lakeshore setback is normally required, and constituting hardcover in the 0-75' zone where no hardcover is normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2143. 2. The property is located in the LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. Page 1 of 5 4F 3. 4. 5. he Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1996 and on a \ote of 7 to 0 recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: The proposal is to revise the existing shed type roof to a pitched roof more in keeping with the existing house. The revised roof line will enhance the integrity of the structure and will help it meet minimum energy code requirements. B The proposed roof revision constitutes no additional hardcover on the property. There is no extraneous hardcover on the property which can be removed. C.There is a hardship to the property ’ because the entire lot is within 75' of the lake, where no hardcover or structure would normally be allowed. D.The proposed roof revision has no impact on views of the lake enjoyed by neighboring properties, and technically due to the location of the adjacent street, there is no average lakeshore setback encroachment variance necessary. 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. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property nght of the applicant; and would be in keeping with .he spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 ■i CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2; Section 10.55, Subdivision 8; and Section 10.56, Subdivisions 16(C&L) to permit the reconstruction of the roof over an existing 8'.x9' portion of the house as proposed, subject to the following conditions: 1. 3. 4. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application . ^r a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 24, 1997). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of thi: resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of June, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Propert)’ Owner(s) Page 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acjcnow ledged before me on this 24th day of June, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono a >Iinnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Cnstal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2143 NOTICE OF PLANNING COM>nSSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 19,1996 I TO:Diane Perez 3465 Eastlake St. Long Lake, MN 55356 COPIES TO:J.M.N. Builders 6550 Woodedge Rd. Minnetrista, MN 55364 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING: 6/17/96 VOTE:7 FOR 0 AGAINST i Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, June 24,1996, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Plarming Commission minutes, they are available firom the Citv Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. ; ' TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, CiU Administrator FROM:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:June 10, 1996 SUBJECT: #2143 Diane Perez, 3465 Eastlake Street - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1 A, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 acres, sewered. Application: Hardcover/setback variances for reconstruction of roof over portion of existing house, List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Survey E - Hardcover Calculations F - Before/After Elevation View G - Neighbor Acknowledgments Pertinent Code Sections 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 2; Section 10.55, Subd. 8; and Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L) - No hardcover allowed in 0-75' zone. 2. Section 10.22, Subd. 1; Section 10.55, Subd. 8; and Section 10.56, Subd. 16(C) - 75' lakeshore setback required. Discussion Applicant proposes to rebuild and reorient the roof on an 8'x9' portion of the existing residence. This is a one stor>' room with a shed-type roof. The roof will change to a pitched roof more in keeping with the existing house. The entire lot is vrithin 75' of the lake. The existing 0-75' hardcover is approximately 1,952 s.f. or 17.7%. The proposed roof revision will not increase or decrease hardcover on the property. There is virtually no extraneous hardcover on the property which can be easily removed. The revised roof line will enhance the integrity of the structure and will help it meet minimum energy code requirements. Zoning File #2143 June 10, 1996 Page 2 Staff Recommendation If Planning Commission finds that hardship exists to the property based on the entire property being in the 0-75* zone, and finds no impact on neighboring properties, and finds that the proposed change neither increases hardcover nor has a significant impact in increasing the bulk of structure in the 0- 75’ zone, then a recommendation for approval would be appropriate. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval as submitted,. r 2. Recommend approval with conditions.f ^ A v/ 3. Table for further information (specify).9 ^ 4. Recommend denial (state reasons). 5.Other. c F - .w CL « y POOR ORIGINAL DOCUMENT Application # Date Received -■g' - v' -9C=> Amount Paid / -:: r • oo cm' OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 = r - (S50.0C per each additional variance) f': Renewal Variance Fee 5120.00 ' (no change from original application) / 4 / Variance for non-conforming structures S220.00 Afcer-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) y 1. - J .'>3 PROPERTY INFORNUTION Site Address $r/?-^r fiM Property Identification Number (P.l.D.) 2.S I 3 0O37 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired___________________________________________(month'year) I (do) ^o nop also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of propertv-: X. residential ___other (s^cify)__________ ___________ Zoning District: LH \A ^ >^C/l<rr Sffjcle L APPLICANT Name IXh N A'C- Phone (home) Address: c'cV. Kr» _____ Phone (work) ______ Citv ’: M,r>.-*srr.i^rA_______Zip: OWT^ER (if different than applicant) Name T*t-~.c<r2________ Phone (home) </7c> ^ ^3 VV Phone (work)____________ Address:Smcyi’______ City: OC:.-*..Zip:f Estimated Construction Cost 5DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Lost Describe request in detail: KOo (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) F ^ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoniug Code requirements: rt> (aftachich additional sheets if necessary) i 1. 2. 3. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information imist be submitted bv the aPDhC4tiQll-d£a4tiP? datS-lll order for vour application to be considered compktei Completed Application Form . Certified Property Owners List of owners within labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance. A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed .’irveyor) and include hardcover calculations as reqmred. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8 ‘/i 11 for reproduction. \\ojJil ... Topographic suivey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes m existing firade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/i" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/:" x 11"). List of the leeal names (include mantal status) of all persons \vith an interest in the property'. ^This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attJKly a s^arate 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 youi var;.>nce anplirntinn is not comniete if the above information has not be?p included, APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE , ^ u v The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that t e information supplied is^^^d^o^ctknowledge. Applicant's Signature ^ ^ p-2^3 ------- OWTVER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and fiirther authorizes reasonable entry onto the property- by City staffi consultants, agents. Commission members, and -mncil members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. /) /') 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Owner’s Signature Date S-y' y ______ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Pl^ g Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third month Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Plan g 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 Rui.. mg & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 RUN DATE 05/ES/9ABATCH 50«PROP AODR OitCR NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR QHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PK» AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 05-117-2S 13 0036 03A09 EASTLAKE ST A J SCHULTZ A M A SCHULTZ ANDREN SCHULTZ 3409 EASTLAKE ST LONG LAKE MN 55356 30 05-117-23 13 0039 03435 EASTLAKE ST CHARLES BAL6AAR0 CHARLES BAL6AAR0 341 l«STLAKE ST LONG LAKE MN SS356 38 05-117-23 13 0044 03424 EASTLAKE ST T E RAOKE A M A RAOKE THOMAS E A MARGARET A RAOKE 3424 EASTLAKE ST LONG LAKE MN 55356 HEfMEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OI«CRS LIST38 05-117-23 13 003703465 EASTLAKE ST DIANE M PEREZ DIANE M PEREZ 3465 EASTLAKE ST LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 IS 0040 03415 EASTLAKE ST TOGO N NUERTZ TODD M NUERTZ 5079 BARTLETT BLVD MOUNO MN 55364 38 05-117-23 41 0022 00405 OXFORD RO F OEFMISON SHAN JR ETAL F DENNISON JR A JANET SHAH 405 OXFORD ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 REPOtT NO. PI43540I PAGE 8 A. A fl , pi. I . >. / ' ».1 • . v f if''-. 38 05-117-23 IS 0030 03425 EASTLAKE ST MARILYN LARAE BARTZ OLSON CARL A JARNI6 2400 INTERLACHEN RO SPRING PARK FM 55304 38 05-117-23 IS 0043 03444 EASTLAKE ST 0 A MONGE ANA MONGE DEAN A A NANCY A MONGE 3444 EAST LAKE ST S LONG LAKE MN 55356 >1 TOTAL BATCH 506 00000 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF. , / DATE SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ^0-7^ rXlSTING HARDCOVFR IN ZONE -------- A. House Ir HARDCOVEBX^CULATION WORKSHEET * 75-250’250-500’500-1000’' Length 32^ B. Garage C. Driveway 33 D. Sidewalk ^ E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric G. Other HA-»'k *> %m 7.T S.F. ^ width X •3o /S.F. ^ %fO^-O I-7W S.F. X S.F. %ns.r / S.F. . • X '990 '^V^'^.F.■ 1 X »•S.F...V, •, .] X • 2 S.F.• • • X S.F.i !• • • • X -S.F. :e X -S.F. •• • ••• t \ % X -S.F. •' X m S.F. *'.•• ' A X -S.F. • * X I t. «ho S.F.*• TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A /-^ B I ■> r *’f I ^A B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House . ______________ X _-^ZI^^^S.F. //, C//0 t S.F. //, CIO t X 100 - /T. 7 % (/o-j> c-:rr j ,\v- S.F. Length Width X X X S.F. S.F. S.S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway S.F. • X X __S.F. . S.F..t ; • D. Sidewalk X X S.F. "S.F. ■ E. Patio/Deck X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric. X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE » B X100 - S.F. S.F: % A B • t . • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA .(931.2) EAST lai<:e street // 929.^ 'ij y LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : That part of Lot 2, Block 8. Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka, lying West of the East 200.00 feet. o : denotes iron marker (931.9) : denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, and the location of an existing house and yard barn thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. U L •■■'■‘'Vi,0 y. (f V // P '1?• V••« 1 > ‘S.* /Jeaj /iPT^K \U f .ir.--j* :• •! ■? r Jr I rr i::rt I £v! 'Cck I-2^ >^0 ^ \j /^(/J T C/r -<<1 t>t- - «« w k » r A I(w«)iAo^&e^ 344'i “sr(prim Biiiie(s)I [prim address]tmwm fwnc^ wm p». --.wcniem or proposed of the property located^ j^/CS' ^ JT^aiso referred lo at Land Use AppUcanoo No.________I (we) that in exccmific diis acknowledgeaienl, I (we) am (are) hoc asked to daelM appfff**il or disapproval of the property or vae bm OMrely to confirm for the City dmt 1 (we) mn (are) aware of the improvemern plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or oae requires Council approval. 0 QoM- Property Owner DateProperty Owner If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Applirminn. please submit your cominenis to the Building 9l Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to die scheduled meeting date. m. /• . f i# J / rm‘ O • } -/• '• 1 ; • - ; Jj . Adjaceot Property Owners' AcknowIcdgeiDeBt Fonsi 1(>M) I * [print hame(s)J of 3409 E [print address) ^ A- ***** 5? pj*"* pfoposrf improvenictit or proposed use of die property located “ C. Srtiia refetred w as Land Use Application No._________ I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to daelare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confinn for the City Council ihM I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. yvjl :ai I. Piopcfty Owner Date Property Owner Date I (we)'3ii ■[pnm aamc(s)l [piim address)tevf reviewed the pimis fim the proposal improvemcm or pieposcd use of foe property tocaiiit ai ^so refened to as Land Use Application No.________.I (we) wMferstand that in eKCCutiag this ackaourfadgemeot, 1 (we) iffl (lii) QOl asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property of uae but merely coefirai foe the City ihai I (we) am (arc) aware of the inprovemem plans and thai the pfOpOied nelghbof't protect Of use requires Council approval. 1\ . Property Owner Propetty Owner Dale If you have any infonnatioa that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application* please submit your conunenu to the Building dk Zoning Office at least 10 days poor to the scheduled meeting date. 4r*r* f Q 0, • [print nanie(s)| [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed impfovemeni or proposed use of the property located at LAkr l^so referred to as Land Use Application No.________. 1 (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgemeot, I (we) am (are) not liked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confinn for the City Council hat I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbOl'S project or use requires Council approval. LApu) Property (3wner Dale Property Owner Date If you have any infonnatioa *dtac may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office it least 10 diys prior to the scheduled meeting date. • • ..r- . _ — //• • • V N REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION -'f, X DATE: June 2020,^6 ITEM NO.: rj Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Revietied:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2144 Arthur and Terr>- Jewett. 3546 i\y Place - Variances - Resolution Zoning District:LR-IC Approximate lot area = 23.200 s.f. Brief Review of Application (For more detail on this review, please refer to enclosed stafl' me to t'ated June 12, 1996)I. The applicant seeks approval ot vaiiances that would permit the realignment and expansion of a section of roof located 22.6' in front of the average lakcshore setback line. This section of the stmcture is located 63’ from the shoreline instead of the required 75' a.nd provides 200 s.f. of the total 514 s.f that exists within the 0-75 ’ setback area. The realignment of the roof will result in improved drainage as drainage will run to the sides of the structure rather than hav ing drainage run directly to the lakeside. Other parts of the c...mprchcnsive improvement of the property involve a 7' x 10' entry addition to the street side of the residence and a 6 ’ x 24' expansion addition of the garage also at the street side. To suppt>rt the variances for the improvement in the lakeshore protected area, applicants have proposed reductions in hardco. within the 75-250' setback area existing at 4,000 s.f or 25.4% and proposed by applicant at 22.9%. Staff has recommended that a minimum backout apron of 20' x 10’ be installed as opposed to the 4’ x 16' pad proposed by applicants. We also recommend that applicant provide a small backout apron to the side to allow for turnaround because of the length of the drive. This can easily be 'ichieved and still maintain hardcover below the allowed 25% hardcover within 75-250 ’ setback area. There was some confusion as to a statement made in applicant’s hardship statement. Attachment II, Exhibit E-2, that stated "by diverting the rainwater to the street, we feel we can effectively maintain a dr>- basement." Applicant attempted to clarify by noting that dining room addition at the street side will fill in low area adjacent to basement windows and will alleviate water damage problems to their basement. Runoff from the street side of the residence flows to the west through grassed yards of neighbors and eventually drains to lagoon at cul-de-sac of Ivy Place. Runoff could not drain direct to street because of the topography. Runoff has always drained westward from the street yard. Request for Council Action continued Page 2 June 20, 1996 Zoning File #2144 Arthur and Terr>' Jewett, 3546 Ivy Place The following viiriances are required:i 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (A) - Structural improvements/building envelope expansion is proposed for a portion of the structure located within the 0-75' setback area. Required = 75' Existing setback = 63' No further expansion into lakeshore yard is proposed. 2.Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback variance required for proposed expansion of building envelope that encroaches average lakeshore setback line by 22.6'. 3. Section 10.22, Subd. (2) - Hardcover variance within the 0-75' setback area. A.0-75' setback area = 7,500 s.f Allowed = 0 s.f. Existing = 514 s.f. Proposed = 514 s.f. or ^ 8% B.Review of total hardcover on property. Total area = 23,200 s.f. Proposed = 4,198 s.f or 18% Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the application as proposed. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. Isv A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 (A), 1 (B) AND 2 FILE NO. 2144 WHEREAS, Arthur H. Jewett and Terr>’ Jewett (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 3546 hy Place within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lots 175 and 176, Taylors Subdivision of Spring Park Lots, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the proper^/"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 (A), 1 (B) and 2 to permit the reconstruction of a roof involving an expansion of the building envelope of a structure located 22.6' in front of the average lakeshore setback line where no such encroachment is allowed, a portion of the structure to be improved is at 200 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75' setback area where no hardcover is allowed, and this portion of structure is located 63' from the Ordinaiy' High Water Level of Lake Minnetonka where a 75' setback would be required. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2144. Z.. 3. The property located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 21,780 s.f. or one-half acre in area. The property consists of approximately 23,200 s.f. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1996 and recommended unanimous approval of the proposed variances based upon the following unique findings and hardships: Page 1 of 5 4. 5. A. The applicant proposes reduction in hardcover in the 75-250' setback area to support the improvement of the structure within the 0-75 ’ setback area. B. Ihe proposed improvement will not result in an increase in hardcover in the 0-75' setback area. C. The proposed realignment of the roof will allow ’ for improved drainage and treatment of runotT as runoff wilt be directed to the sides rather than directlv to the lake. D. Applicant is in the process of reducing a lakeside deck at approximately 10' X 12' to 4' X 12' completely located within the 0-75' setback area. E. The realignment and expansion of the roof will have no visual impact on the take views of the adjacent residences. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary' to alleviate a demonstrable hardship cr difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Plarming Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and tlic effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22. Subdivisions 1(A), 1 (B) and 2 to permit the reconstruction and expansion of the roof li.ne for a section of roof located 22.6* in front of the average lakeshore setback line, the roof expansion involves a 200 s.f. area of structure located within the 0-75’ setback area where no hardcover is allowed, and grants a 12' or 16% setback variance for the structural improvements to a portion of a structure located within the lakeshore setback area. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide an amended plan and hardcover inventoiy showing expanded backout pad and apron for drive located within street yard. In r.o case shall hardcover exceed allowed 25%. 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 (June 24. 1997). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the tenns of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of t’'1s resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of June, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this '*4th day of June, 1996 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COITNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed thTibiegoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 5 of 5 TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Park Commission Ron Moose, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:June 12, 1996 SUBJECT: #2144 Arthur and Terr>- Jewett, 3546 Ivy Place - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC Approximate lot area = 23,200 s.f. Application: The applicants seek approval of variances that would permit expansion and realignment of a section of roof located in front of the average lakeshore setback line, within the lakeshore protected area and where structure exists at 200 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75' setback. Other phases of the improvement involve 7’xlO' entry addition to the street side of the residence along with a 6'x24‘ expansion addition of the garage also at the street side. To support the variances for the improvement in the lakeshore protected area and to insure hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback area does not exceed 25%, applicants propose major reductions in hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: Section 10.22, Subd. 1(A) - Structure improvements proposed for structure located within 0-75 ’ setback area. Required = 75 ’ Existing structure = 63' No further expansion into lakeshore yard is pioposed. Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B) - Average lakeshore sett'ack variance required for proposed expansion of building envelope that encroaches average lakeshore setback line. The existing structure extends 22.6' in front of the average lakeshore setback line. 3.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardco ver. A. 0-75' setback area = 7,500 s.f Allowed = 0 Existing = 514 s.f* Proposed = 514 s.f Variance = 514 s.f or 6.8% ♦House = 200 s.f Deck = 314 s.f Zoning F-Me #2144 June 1-, i996 Page 2 B.75-250' setback area = 15,700 s.f. Allowed = 3,925 s.i'. or 25% Existing = 4,000 s.f. or 25.4% Proposed by applicants = 3,596 s.f or 22.9% Staff proposed = 3,684 s.f or 23.4% No variance required. C.Total hardcover on property Total area = 21,200 s.f ± Proposed = 4,198 s.f or 18% List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Neighbor's Acknowledgment Form El-2 - Hardcover Statement F - Hardcover Inventory G - Survey H - West/Street Elevation I - East/Lake Elevation Review of Application Applicants propose the realignment of a section of roof at the lake side of the residence. The reconstruction will also result in an expansion of the roof or building envelope of structure located within the 0-75' setback requiring approvals of setback and hardcover variances within the lakeshore protected area. All other additions proposed at the street side of the residence meet the required setback. Excessive hardcover exists within the 75-250' setback area at 25,4%. Applicants have proposed major reductions in hardcover specifically by reducing area of driveway. Staff would strongly recommend against reoucing area of driveway as proposed by applicants with a 4'xl6' apron extending from new garage addition with the remainder of drive at an 8' width. Staff recommends a minimum backout pad a 20 ’xl0' width and would strongly encourage a small apron to allow for turn around because of the lengtii of the drive. This can be achieved w ithout exceed dllo’ved 25%. Applicants do not propose additional hardcover in the 0-75' setback where 6.8% exists. The only improvement in the 0-75' involves the expanded roof for the living room addition. H __ Zoning File #2144 June 12, 1996 Page 3 Issues for Consideration 1.A 10'xl2' deck had existed at the northeast comer of residence. Applicants have trimmed the deck back to a 12'x4’. Will Planning Commission membciS require any other reductions in hardcover in the 0-75' setback area? 2. Do members concur with staffs recommendation concerning a need to expand on driveway proposal of the applicants? 3. Other issues raised by Planning Commission members. Statement of Hardship Please review Exhibit E1&2. Optic is of Action To approve as propose *. or amended if applicants' driveway is to be expanded from current proposal. Revised plans should be submitted to the City before the application can be scheduled before the Council for final action. In no case shall hardcover within the 75-250' setback exceed the allowed 25%. Application # X ! Date Received ^ ^ Amount Paid X'^ ^ 6 ^ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) ^9 %• i L'V. f.. ...k. w. .*i PROPERTY INFORMATION SiteAddress rj CjCC^ Propertv' Identification Number (P.I.D.)1^ % ^ m m ^ m — — — — — ^ r ----------------------------- Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Propfiity^cquired_____H 3_______________________________ —.....(tnonth/year) I (do) (do_^) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of propertv” residential Zoning District:_____SvdiirO h Ct 1 other (specify). APPLICANT ^ Name A- 14. Address:__ ^‘OWNtR (if different than applicant) Name - Phone (home) I- "iQ L- Q _____ Phone (work) ?> -^-22 Z <-l City: U )av/V< clri Zip: Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address: 'r :I .»Citv: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ M O6 ‘0 Describe request in detail: St.C^ ((.tf'Cul)»D(' () ^----ziZ----------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover ___Lot Coverage __Rear ^ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ^ fbtf.h r) V.»T j-----S----------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) 7 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All nf the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. J. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owmers within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Sur\ey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/i" x 11" for reproduction. Toposraphic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘/2" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/2" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). ,As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property' Owner must sign this application. Please remember that yfiuj; Viiriancc iipplipntinn is not complete if the above information has not been included^ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature _______________Date ,----------- OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and funher authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of im estigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature /7, A/________________^ 9.^--------- Applicant must have all subminals 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 p *esent at all scheduled rev iew meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, ple^e make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 RUN DATE 02/25/96 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LISTBATCH 506 REPORT NO. PI655401 PAGE 20PROP ADOR OmER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR 0:«IER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 58 20-117-25 62 001603550 IVY PL NM 6 J OAMPIER NILLIAM S DAMPIER 5550 IVY PLACE HAYZATA MN 55591 38 20-117-25 62 001703568 IVY PL CAS PYLE CHARLES D PYLE 5568 IVY PLACE HAYZATA MN 55391 58 20-117-23 62 001803566 IVY PL A H JEHETT ETAL ARTHUR M JEI«TT 3566 IVY PL NAYZATA MN 55391 58 20-117-25 62 0019 03536 IVY PL FRANK J BUYSSE FRANK J BUYSSE 3556 IVY PLACE HAYZATA MN 55591 38 20-117-23 62 0027 03560 IVY PL G A CHRISTENSEN ET AL GARY A A LYrt4 A CHRISTENSEN 3560 IVY PL HAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 62 0029 03525 IVY PL D L CUMMINGS A M M CUMMINGS DANIEL L A MARTHA M CUMMINGS 3525 IVY PL NAYZATA MN 55391 58 20-117-23 62 0053 03532 IVY PL 6 L HRIGHT A N L HRIGHT GILBERT L A NANCEE L HRIGHT 3532 IVY PL HAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 62 0056 03565 IVY PL JEFFREY A DEBRA DANBERRY JEFFREY A DEBRA DANBERRY 3565 IVY PL HAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 62 0035 03535 IVY PL OE MARQUIS HALLS DE MARQUIS HALLS 5535 IVY PL HAYZATA MN 55391 -1 JR JR ( < nVV I' "'■■■ iS u TOTAL BATCH 506 00009 t • 'I ^ . >«* J ii 1 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARniENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF. /] DATE s r. }• I A 1 - A * Adjacent Property Dinners’ Acknowledgement Form I (we) ^ V N/■>-1 “ ‘ In ; w [print name(s)] / iO!, C *0 [print address] _^c»-xy X- have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ♦'^l also referred to as Land Use Application No.------------- I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, 1 (we) am (^e) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to contirm for the City Council that 1 (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbors project or use requires Council approval. mu Property Ow*ne Date ^ /»c:.J/9 ^ /7Property Owner ************♦♦***♦*****♦**■*'*****’*'****** I (we) Date ^ ^ l^lacC [print riame(s)] nf ?3 ~Ll\! [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located rp Cj(^- ~^v «J (^\- fllso 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 C,ty- Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbors project or use requires Council approval. -n Date DateProperty Owner If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. ^ ri'•* ATTACHMENT I Tr ^ Jt* J ..•* 'J •-N C-1, We are requesting two variances. Variance number one is a request to allow additional hardcover to our property to accommodate portico and garage space. Variance number two deals with neighbor sightlines. It is a request to change the slope of the roof of our living room. » ATTACHMENT !l *>■ J Variance I Our remcxlellng project is primarily a reorganization of interior spaces. The dining room addition, which fills In a low area adjacent to basement windows, will alleviate the constant water damage problems to our basement. By diverting the rain water to the siref'*. we feel we can effectively maintain a dry basement. Because of this relocation of the dining room, the entry must be moved to a new location. Minnesota weather dictates that a covered entry be built, thus additional hardcover is requested for this area. The garage addition will cover, for the most part, existing hardcover and will only slightly Increase our hardcover count. Due to the long and narrow shape of our lot. a long driveway to reach the garage requires a great deal of our hardcover square footage. We have attempted to comply with Orono hardcover ordinances by removing a dog kennel and side door cement slab. The front sidewalk was removed, a lakeside deck and the driveway were reduced in size. We feel our property to be more In compliance with Crono building variances than other neighboring properties. Variance II We are requesting this variance to allow for the change of our roof line. The living room roof sheds water directly to the lake. By changing the pitch to the sides, rain water will be diverted to the ground to ^llow for absorption before running Into the lake. The room volume will Increase slightly, but the hardcover square footage will not increase. By changing the roofs pitch, we will also be able to increase the room’s Insulation value. The Pyle’s residence, on the north, will not be affected by this change, as their sight line is obstructed by mature trees. The Buysse residence, on the south, will not experience any sight line obstruction due to the roof change. 1 0T-23-l ‘?'?6 ll:03R! FPCifl THE [■HtlEEPPV •10 TO SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ON£) 0-75’ FMSTING Ha RDCO\TR IN ZONE A. House _ \)0 if_____ ^ 75-250’250-500* 4730310 P.Ol 500.1 rtwr t--'* LeneCi/'u \ \ X WMth tr. ? C? (g S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric f I H c j S.F. S.F. S.F. 12 / U r 3 I'l .4 \ X X X X X X X X I (s » 03 Sf. '-V S.F. S.F. r* »'• ■« t i Vc?7 CO > ly S.F. S F.r: '1^ C * S.F. “ S.F. •' V V 1 I -' •• ^ S.F. - S.F. : )fi^»nCC. Other I 0 / 0 / G 0 S.F. S.F. TOTAL H ARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B X 100 =» s F. S.F. V 7 V*'*» ^ M ^ A B ^ 7o C7Vo A. House X c-^c t-?- Length Width * i . .. . per-i* 1 (/X (it /6 X ■7 =n 0 X ~ B. Garage C. Driveway ip X ?■ V IH'^ H-X (> X =i. D. Sidewalk 3 X S c?f (5 X 9B E. Paiio/Deck H X Hf X f Z-XS F. Landscape Underlain X — X as By Plastic Or Fabric X asr ■. j (j. Uthcr X =s ik\^TOTAL H.ARDCOVER IN ZONE •7 > TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE * T A -./ }16 ^ B !Z. 10 0 •\ 100 =-Tt, . /' T“ SF s.fjT//./ V S.F. / S.F. A" S.F. S.F . s . .> S.F. . S.F. . . • . I % I '‘I S.F./ . S.F^ C -1-^ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B TOThL P.Ol a f I c i i c fa ( i 'St CD 0 1 n ^ : > 5 CDSo"z ■D 3Jm ? Dm O O •< r^’i \2 V'! jl. *' f f:^:K 1 -:r^ tf 3 3 5 S11 r/> c g Cl /> o i::., - *'} -1 > o o «; fT Ki ^ * 5 C c c. ) >• M A1 5 5 J i\ (7. !llr O (A. rn U I o rto •.: O x ‘ •*] :v oM H ^ S!io w 3 ^« ^ >^!i !§1^ 3 ;j 00 O* |«fi o ^ _,Ipj^s laj ^9n £ H S •4 f -c; I*'' v)^ 'A ? " V % & fh 8r-na•• ■ n £ Hi > O' H ni Im < > d O 7: (, *; .V < '• k% ■ i l. 'o. • i'*!* ‘ . .. f •. [.. -‘-.J r*. r 4 t %N % REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 19, 199§^q. ITEM NO.: ^ % Vf Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2145 Donald & Robin Helgager, 3265 6th Avenue North - Variances - Resolution Zoning District: RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential, 2 acre, unsewered. Application: Request for side, lakeshore and average lakeshore setback variances for additions to the east and south (or lake) side of the residence. The improvements will consist of a two stall garage, workshop and three season porch. The existing detached garage structure will be removed. List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 6/20/96 C - Memo and Exhibits of 6/11/96 Discussion Please review the memo of June 11th. Briefly, applicants propose to remove their existing detached garage which is located 6.8' from the side lot line, and construct an attached garage and additional living space for the existing house. The attached garage will be 5' from the side lot line where a 30' setback is normally required. The existing house is 15T from Lake Classen where a 150’ setback is normally required. The new additions will be 140’ from the shoreline, as compared to 123’ for the existing garage which will be removed. There currently is an average setback encroachment of 90' which will be reduced to 75'. This encroachment is based only on the comparative distances from the shoreline of applicants' house and the neighboring house directly east. Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission reviewed this application at their June 17th meeting and recommended approval on a vote of 7 to 0, making a number of findings including that the proposed side setback will have little or no impact on the neighboring property owner, that the neighboring property owner I /•%Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 2 June 20, 1996 Zoning File #2145 does not object to the variance, that the additions result in structure being further from Lake Classen and more in conformity vrith the required Natural Environment Lake setback, and that while an average lakeshore setback encroachment technically still exists, the resulting additions/removals will have no negative impact on views of the lake enjoyed by the neighboring property owner. Additional findings are incorporated in the resolution. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the attached resolution per the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt attached resolution granting lake setback, average setback and east side setback variances for construction of garage and additions to the existing house. , seconded by , to adopt ResolutionProposed Motion: Moved by _________ #_____, granting side setback, lakeshore setback and average lakeshore setback variances to Donald and Robin Uelgager of 3265 6th Avenue North to allow the construction of an attached garage and additions to the existing residence structure. Vote: ______ayes,______nays. 1 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1, 10.28; SUBDIVISION 5(D); AND 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16(C) FILE #2145 WHEREAS, Donald and Robin Helgager (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 3265 6th Avenue North \vithin the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: The west 327 feet of the east 542 feet of that part of Government Lot 1, lying south of the road. Section 29, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5(B) to allow a 5' side setback for construction of a new attached garage and room additions, where the required side setback is 30', and a variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 10.56, Subdivision 16(C-6) to allow said additions to encroach the average lakeshore setback where no encroachment is normally al.owed, and a variance to Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) to allow new structure to be located 140' from Lake Classen, a Natural Environment Lake, where a 1 50' structure setback is normally required. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2145. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. Page 1 of 6 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1996 and recommended approval of the proposed variances on a vote of 7 to 0 based upon the following findings: A. Since all proposed additions meet the 50’ street setback, no street setback B. variance is required. The location of the proposed additions to the east of the existing house and as near as 5' to the east side lot line is appropriate based on the following unique findings: I. Additions of the same magnitude as those proposed could not be located elsewhere on the property without encroaching the 50' required street setback or the 150' required lakeshore setback. While the property is approximately 1.5 acres in dry buildable area above of the OHWL of Lake Classen, the buildable envelope due to the required setbacks is only 1,800 s.f If additions were constructed to the southwest or south of the house, they would eliminate the existing flat back yard area, resulting in a steep slope directly behind the house. Given the proximity of County Road 6, it would be appropriate to retain a usable yard on the south side of the house. Topography is generally sloping towards the applicants' property, hence any additional drainage near the lot line caused by the proposed additions will only impact the applicants, not the neighboring property owner. The proposed proximity to the lot line may have a negative impact on existing screening between applicants' house and the neighboring house to the east, however the neighboring property owner has indicated this is not a concern. Page 2 of 6 .1 I r c. 4. 5. The average lakeshore setback for this application has been defined as the lake setback of the neighboring house to the east, since the neighboring property to the west is nearly one-quarter mile distant. The proposed removal of the existing garage and subsequent construction of a new attached garage and room additions will result in less encroachment of the average lakeshore setback than currently exists. The existing encroachment is approximately 90', and this will reduce to 75'. The neighboring property will have no additional views encroached by the proposed construction, and may have additional views of the lake opened up by the proposal. The existing garage encroaches within 123’ of the OHWL of Lake Classen. The proposal to remove that garage and construct new additions which will encroach only as near as 140' from Lake Classen, is a positive improvement to the conformity of the property in relation to setback from Lake Classen. 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 conununity. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely ser\’e as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 3 of 6 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5(B) to allow a 5' side setback where a 30' side setback is normally required, and grants variances to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C-6) to allow a 75' encroachment of the average lakeshore setback where no encroachment is normally allowed, and grants a variance to Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) to allow a 140' setback from the OlIWL of Lake Classen where a 150' setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicants shall adhere to the proposed plans submitted with Application #2145. 2.The existing detached garage structure shall be removed prior to final inspection of the new^ additions. 3.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 e.xpire on that date (June 24, 1997). 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 4 of 6 .\xjc7Wri — Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of June, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of June, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2145 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 20, 1996 TO: Donald & Robin Helgager 3265 6th Avenue North Long Lake, MN 55356 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING: 6/17/96 VOTE:7 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, June 24, 1996, 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. //. TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, Citv Administrator FROM:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:June 11,1996 SUBJECT: #2145 Donald and Robin Helgager, 3265 Sixth Avenue North - Variances Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential, 2 acre, unsewered. Application: Request for street, side, lakeshore and average lakeshore setback variances for additions to the east and south (or lake) side of the residence. The improvements will consist of a two stall garage, workshop and three season porch. The existing detached garage structure will be removed. Lbt of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Surv'ey E - Site Plans, Existing and Proposed F - Elevation Views G - Floor Plans H - Hardcover Calculations I - Topographic Map/Average Setback Review J - Bluff Analysis Pertinent Code Sections 1. Section 10.28, Subd. 5(B): RR-1B required street setback = 50’, required side setback = 30’. 2. Section 10.56, Subd. 16(C); 150’ setback required for structures on a Natural Environment Lake. 3. Section 10.22, Subd. 1; Section 10.56, Subd. 16(C-6): No encroachment of average lakeshore setback allowed. M Zoning File #2145 June 11,1996 Page 2 Pertinent Facts REQUIRED Summary of Request ITEM EXISTING PROPOSED STANDARD VARIANCE 1. Lake Setback: Existing House 151'151’150'- Existing Det. Gar.123’(Remove)150 ’- Proposed Addition -140’150'10’ 2. E. Side Setback: Existing House 27.3’-30 ’- Existing Det. Gar.6.8’(Remove)10 ’- Proposed Addition -5’30 ’25 ’ 3. Street Setback: • Existing House 45.3’45.3’50’- Proposed Addition -53 ’50’• 4. Average Setback Encroachment (per line B-B of Exh. I): Existing House 75' 75'0’ Existing Det. Gar.90’(Remove)0’- Proposed Addition -75'0’75 ’ Applicants propose to construct a garage and room addition to the east side of the existing house, which already encroaches approximately 3' into the required 30' side setback. The proposed addition will be 5' from the east side lot line, requiring a 25' variance. It appears from the information provided that all of the additions and revisions outside the envelope of the existing house will occur more than 50' from the street lot line, hence no Strggl setback variance appears necessary . The proposed addition will encroach 10' into the required 150' setback from Lake Classen. The existing house is 151’ from the lake. It might be argued that because the existing detached garage 123' from the lake will be removed, the proposed encroachment by the addition results in a better setback situation than currently exists. The average lakeshore setback encroachment has been defined in this application based only on the Zoning File #2145 June 11, 1996 Page 3 adjacent home to the east, which sits further back from the lake than applicants ’ residence. It is likely however, that the removal of the existing garage and construction of an addition further from the lake, will result in no loss of lake views by the neighboring property owner, and may result in some additional views being provided. Discussion Please review Exhibit 1, the topographic map. Note that this site is not a blutT (see Exhibit J). Although the site contains steep slopes, the proposed additions will be in a terraced area and should have little or no impact on the slope stability. Due to the severe slopes south and west of the house, the least difficulty for constructing additions is clearly to the east side near the lot line. An addition directly west of the house w ould start to encroach into the street setback. Additions to the southw est or south side of the house would eat up the limited flat yard area above the steep slopes. Given the close proximity to County Road 6, it may be appropriate to allow the property owners to maintain a useable flat yard on the lake side of the house. Also, additions to the southwest or south side of the house would likely result in a significantly greater encroachment of the 150' lake setback than the proposed addition. If the most appropriate location for the addition is to the east side of the house, how will the impact of a 5' setback be mitigated? Note that drainage is toward applicants' property rather than to the neighboring property, hence drainage is an issue to be dealt with by the applicants, not by the neighbor. A concern, however, is that the existing pine trees along the lot line (possibly on the neighbor's property) might be negatively impacted. If they disappear as a result of this project, is there a need for screening between the two homes to mitigate the impact of such a minimal setback? Issues for Discussion Given the limited buildable area of the property due to setbacks, topography and the location of existing structures, is the proposed location for the addition appropriate? If the location is appropriate, is the magnitude of the addition appropriate? Is a 5' setback from the east lot line acceptable? Is it possible to reduce the width of the addition to maximize the resulting setback from the side lot line? If the side setback variance is allowed, what measures, if any, are necessary to mitigate the impact of the side setback encroachment? Is the average lakeshore setback encroachment of concern to the Planning Commission? < I! Zoning File #2145 June 11, 1996 Page 4 5.Is the new encroachment of J 2 150' lakeshore setback by the addition sufficiently better than the existing situation to justify approval? Staff Recommendation If Planning Commission feels that the proposed variances are justified by adequate hardships, then a recommendation for approval would be appropriate, with any conditions Planning Commission feels are necessary to mitigate the impacts, especially of the side setback variance. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval as proposed. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Table for further information (specify). 4. 5. Recommend denial or partial denial (state reasons). Other. • 'I ...f /A.- .......'.I'*- i * / - !! 1 ' / uApplication # Date Received -“T -T.'-f' Amount Paid ■ cc r <• .iL/ =• / ’’ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI20.00 , (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION , , . , ^ SiteAddress t<r>M t Property Tdpntifir.itinn Number (P.I.I^.) ^ ^ ..•1 t'roperty laentiiicauon inuiuuci tr.i.1-/.1 l'^dv i—■ 1 ~ 8 ~.'^^3--------------- Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Daw Propeny Acquired H j ^-----------------------------------(moiuh/year) I (do) (^olio^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. _ “A ____iPresent use of property; jf residential Zoning District: Kfl — ^ A other (specify). applicant Name’^flAf^i.O ^ He.t-6 Address : ^Z(cfS Co. “KL—Lz-----------Citv: Phone (home) 4H 5- lojt Phonerwork^ 40^-085^ „ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name______ A — Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address:Citv:Zip: description of REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ go^g»oo_^-------- Describe request in detail: 'T5 dt»/o c-re^c;r —^rr^ctfCD twq —sda£—A.jC/ rr ^ ’ -__ ' ^ ' ---------- "rwy ns^uCoWattach additioral sheets if necessary) Tb ^cici -thtC 77^ . VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage y Setback: _X Rear X Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNTJSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements://s T^g g/T€ ,£u&r*tiT^ - y< AJJr 4»^e^€ ^ ^v/£.{, T^/hi- ^^(/.A.QtX3,ch additional sheets if necessary) jtttg 4^^ *< i REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the appU<;ation .d^qdlins order fcr vour application to be considered complete: 1. 2. j. 4. D. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surv'eyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/2 x 11 for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade .are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8 ‘/2 x 11 for reproduction. Sketches or plans of flo >r &. elevation view's (provide one (1) copy 8'/2" x li"). List of the legal names (include mantal status) of all persons with an intere^-t in the propert>'. This would include name(s) of applicmt(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 yflm; Viiriance application is not comnlete if the above information has not been inclyd^d- .APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all infomiation required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Date sjzAl* OVVTVER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and fiirther authonzes 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 CouncU. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 1 RUN DATI 05/23/9A MEtfCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORKATION SYSTEH PROPERTY ONNERS LISTBATCH 503 REPORT NO. PX43S401 PAGE 7PROP ADDR OKNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 36 29-118-23 91 000503290 SIXTH AVE NK A P ALLISONKENNETH A PHYLLIS ALLISON3290 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 29-118-23 92 000603960 SIXTH AVE N HEftCPIN CO PARK DIST HENN CO PARK RESERVE ATTN CHUCK BELLXNGHAH 3800 CO RO NO 29 HAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 29-118-23 99 000103225 SIXTH AVE N N C HEUPEL ADR HEUPEL NEIL C A DENISE R HEUPEL 3225 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 V > PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 38 29-118-23 99 0002 03265 SIXTH AVE N D R A R A HELGAGER DONALD R HALGAGER 3265 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 29-118-23 99 COOS 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED P R A M M CRADDOCK THOMAS A NANCY SAHYER 3905 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 503 00003 ♦9 li I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO,THE BEST P •‘ •• ••'•3 f. J OF MY KNONLEDGE AND BELIt F DATE PI CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR DONALD AND ROBIN HELGAGER IN GOVERNMENT LOT X SEC. 29-118-23 STD BY REVISION OAU OiSCIUnKIN NB\ Coffin & Gronberg, Inc. f.iMur.i'.k \\riun- • I i'n„ ! .iko \|\ I cci!il\ lh.»l ihiN sur\vv pri^pjri^J b)’ me or ur>Jcr m\ Jireii sujvr- viM(«n joJ th.il I am a ilulv ref^isIrreJ Civil Enj^incer arul Larnl Surveyor urvjer ihe lawy ol Ihi* Sl.ilr Mmrrcvta Mark S CfimK rg MinneM»lj 1 M*nve Numbri 12753 SCALE r«3o* DATE 8*0'?4^ Ml NO 9¥-30¥ ptniiel u>i*h the ■'''of 6^'t Let i. Sec Z9-UB tfie above described se. garage, shed, and purport to show any II i ii i! :i III f.~*-*^-*^ ^** iiti %1 4 »i}i ii zo TVH X nirn' i oz t 1■/^ Roeoi * y# '/• /.y ^ /?./;4- 4» '»* 4 II.* f fi- *♦ X rn\ § D 7. -n: ■•y -'^• >Ww : r I-. ' / . ■[r >- . > » » V'* r HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET:.-^'Jl. / * SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______________ X 75-250’250-500’500-1000’ p^cPA««to 5 ^ 5/5>f 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 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 4- B 'I - X 100 = PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______________ * Length X X X tjrj B. 4 Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other 2Z. (^1 lZ^ 6 4 X X X X X X X X X 1^. ' f i.aajn- 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. 4- B =*2 S.F. Width -r*«r S.F. —ri —SI I/O S.F. JB S.F. •?7 / ^ w- # ^jIS S.F. sz./0/u.S.F. a S.F. / //.S.F. s S.F. S.F. a S.F. n S.F. [&a 11 S.F. a lU S.F. $3> S.F. IE ZONE 5/ LouS S.F. lZr> *S.F. X 100 =% a A B A B •«* ^ * • .*- ' 9i^ :»>•«• -*.».•:,>■ .• r r. .-' - *. • A . •* •-? i •. • *•/ % rir EUM<it£C > • ft?;.-! .^j; -'5'. rivv » i v . -■i -.i.V .i? -i" -• »* HARDCOVER CALCUUTION HORKSH SETBACK ZONE! (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75 % Existing Hardcover in Zone .1 - i * •• •A. ' House I •m_ • -'H’- f-' ••• ♦ - • * « • V '.. 'ck?; #''<irev6aEC> Bnri^AHcS *yneo . ■ w’ •': •* ’I ’ ■i K' ■‘if- -■•r- -Ui: -V •.ii .V- ^ ' • • • ! <• • ■ B. Garage .i c. D riveway CoNcSc/iQ '•1 ^ • ' r* . % •»*- .• •«•*.» '> "O' •: ‘t- f *. I ‘ ♦ * ' • 0.. Sidewalk $nx/P «• • r^^• v; . - •. • r,.‘ B. Patio / Deck • i» • ;• ^ .■ T* - ■ * . I •• F.Landscape areas underlain BY , . PLASTIC SHEETING 6 OfJCe LENGTH 8 12,/ /4 flELO 5J0 h€ r^ALL 6. Other ^ •X X X X IM Lor 2^-UB :/j 250-500' 500-1000 WIDTH 9./ 1.5" . Total Hardcover in Zone . 4 Total Property Area in Zone \'2JS2. ^6 HO B(>S 2139 L9-/ 35- /S' 116 84- Z7(< 24- 65 ’ /> *• . S.F. S.P. V S.F. S.F.ii V S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S,F. ' fr'C'VI CfS.F. S.F. S.F.• • S.F. S.F. S.F, r f !• S.F. ♦ f O V I *J'1 46^ S.F. 8.P. ^uzot .... m B *IH X 100 . I5.S5 % VY* ^ .«* '• » .• :} r A • - 1 •I f ♦' f. '.I f‘ .; I ' - > ‘ . # ' . .* >„ I • i • -.' .*• •, i •■‘t* • •. • •..-Vi'i, . . . ^ . • • • I •• \t •• •' V i . -. -t T v T- • .» ‘.V ‘ . ^ • . i .1 • V* S' • • • • • % • ;* : -J :.*; %’• 5. s • • \ . ' » • ■ . « ; i > IH 6p^r Lot f, to. 2<?-//<5- HARDCOVER CALCULATION HORKSHEET oeitiM.K zunti UiMCLb cunt)^-75^ 7S-250* E xist I MG IlAnocovER im Zone 250-500* 500-1000* Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone . f.p, I A I B • # X 100 - ^ ‘ • • L • * V >1 • • A. ‘ House • ■------------------------------. X • »* rr •length • WIDTH 1 • 0 ----------—- X .• Bi • ^ CA Mi • • # -------------------------------- ------ .m ------- S.F, *• • •• ------------ X _ • iMi mm •• • -----------------X _m • AA mmk t B. Garage —-------------- X •% • A c» Driveway • . X • « •* U M k . « ---------------- X • • • AA mm • D. Sidewalk ;..X •• A _ X • c. Pat ?a /- X _ S • F • \ TAT10/Deck ^ t —V S • F • . . X F.Landscape * ADCA e • ™ X • 3f Ft A acAS UNOERUIN BY • . ,X « •— S•Ft , • PLASTIC SHEETING •• Si Ft • •• X m X • mm M S • Ft «• C E? G. Other .. X a «• S t F • . S.F. j.. - t i/■J.yc.I'vZ/A- < iff i‘‘ • .1\ClJflli I ftn t\'t: * V / / t'’:;• w •/ r/'-^» >' ^ I V A\oc\i / R ORiqjNAi JMEf^C c ttto % V ’ \ ///#. M \ <!-. O - i ■! '■'i • • /•» / r- < -i ' ^ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION \ DATE: June 21. 19^.H n ITEM NO.: C /. Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: ^2107 John O'Sullivan/Hrwin Smith 3340 Shoreline Drive - Request for a drainage easement over underground drainage tiles located within unimproved Navarre Lane right-of-way Exhibits A - Plan of Right-of-Way B - Detail on Drainage Facilities Discussion During the review of the comprehensive improvement for the property located at 3340 Shoreline Drive, Councilmcmbcrs conceptually agreed to proceeding with the total vacation of unimproved Na^•arrc Lane, that portion adjacent to the Church property and the Lafayette Ridge open space outlot. Review Exhibits A and B, one of the reasons for seeking the total vacation was that applicants ’ drainage plan was based on surface runoff being directed to the northeast or the Church property to a retention pond that would e\entually drain to wetlands in Lafayette Ridge. An underground drainage tile will convey runoff from the O'Sullivan/Smith property to the retention pond and a second will be installed from retention pond to wetland at southeast. Portions of the retention pond also encroach within unimproved right-of-way of Navarre Lane. Applicants ’ title company has asked that applicants gain an easement from the City to permit the drainage facilities within the public right-of-way. Applicants ’ attorney has drafted the enclosed easement. The City Attorney has reviewed the easement and found the easement acceptable. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To approve the granting of the Drainage Easement to Voyageur Service Centers, Inc. and to direct the Niayor and Clerk to execute the Drainage Easement. Isv i fiKAI^AGE EASFVfFNT I' A.SL'MCNT. made this davofJune Iw n Mimic-sota municipal coTH.ra,io„.,hcren:,tto refe md\o as “ ^crv,ce Ccnicrs. ,nc.. a M,„„eso.a ................. anclval,«b^comidcra,brgr«brCta^^^^^ ^<oc, here., gram, b.ug,,i„. L,, Jeorev , Oran^T ,rs ^e's " non-cxdiisiA c easement for drainage use over under and a « r«rpetual Mionesma. Couniy of I Icnucpin IcgalMo^hb^d a” MN»v..rre Addition. Lake its imer.scoli„n rvilh the nortimestetly li^e of Ou'tim m somimesterly along the nonhrvesterly lino of said Outiot C m t^nnin,** r ^ ■ With the northeasierlv line of Tract A R ti i c ' ^ ‘''^^'rsection ii-nl,weslerlv alone t'he nonLrnlv't ? r 'a a mosl nonheri, corner of said Tract A- ih"^ '' “ "f 33 08 feel to the northwesterly line of saL Tl?A asr^ southwesterly to a point on the of said Iruci A; thence North 3 l^deMcefsi'mim'tes^ a'u. loet more or less to n point on tlie southeact ^rl r ^ ^ »-*st a distance of 43.82 Lanedon l•.,rk••; thence norlhcastedv along me solersderlyltre of ^'.',’""’1**'= "f -he p,,i,,t ofkgin,,i„g;i.;.n„;prn C<:u„t:,;'hn:,:;rTC»^^^ i—n'r ll':^,,:;^ •>- -"-1- ,0 en.er n,«„ said land necessary for draining over, under and lluourh"il'''p'’''’ "•’pro'cincnis shall have the t ight to make use of 'atd la<""= '■""P~vemcn(s", 1 he Grantee oonstmetion. ,„.s,„i,,„h.n. ntaintenance. operation .nnd‘;";,ir'of above. " ““ >"N Ecsement as of the day and year wrilten C'lTV OF OROaMO By Its 4l69y/\V6BOll.DOC MM • .J K T iV ort i F : T T ‘In;.. I -7 t lflL :QI iiBlldHa .i iiOH * STATE OF NTs} ESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )ss. 1 his insfnjment was acknowledged before me on this-------da> of June. 1996 by corporation on behalf ""^'^rono, n Minnesota us municipal Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY; MOSS & DARNE ri' (RJE) A Professional Association 4800 Nonvest Center 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-4119 Telephone: (612) 347-0300 ZO ‘ d 610 ■ it?: T T *36. I c Ml lL :0I ii3tldH3 V si OH I nnr ITC=940.0 / INV=933.0>* ...........................GAS L'INE/TQ'' BE RELOCA'tED ' f % ^ - / *A NURP/RETENTION BASIN / ■if fj! 7 » 7 • ^0 / ' ^0 I * I INSTALL 40 L.F. OF 12" DIAM. PIPE ® S=S 7!Z AND 1 END SECTION INVERT OUT = 942.0 ^0 A^ _T0PftrmD. oiv.A.’94i.h U’d?sTV % •/nRE Hrawf F( \ % .948 \ CONSTRUCT CURB INLET \t \/ CATCH BASIN '' 7St \ ——K TC=950.0 \----/tXINV=944.3 X # j 1 % / . K fS • / Xr\ iV^ «/ Xi ’V \f / 0’ tttz:- OTji \ ^ ^ E)<1STING-SAN. . SEWER MH '•'JC=950.0 I'Nv=941 .0 “ “x ■5*“X< >;!•9S2 ./ / j^V;r » * # .♦ A y o X Church '/ms/x; • I 'j 7# ' i\ \ 0A I • /r * ' V—i /r^i* y * / ^ T ! ^ ^ / / / ; / m// ;/ °> / / // 4/' ^/t /' / / / r. \ \b* *xN / / y' / (^yf / •'' - /// / ^0 •i I 0 l s^tssr,7 JJ*'/1/U 9^)4 F.Fy954];0 4 **COUNCI. USTMQ REQLTST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUN 24 1996 mofonmDATE: June 20. 1996 ITEM NO.: /O Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Referral of Development Proposal to the Planning Commission for Sketch Plan Review For Property Located at 2380 Shadywood Road (former Grace Baptist Church Site) Involving a Rezoning of Residential Property to Commercial List of Exhibits A - Site Plan B - Comprehensive Plan C - Street Elevation John O’Sullivan and Erwin Smith propose the submittal of conceptual plans for the commercial development of residential property to the ’ '-mediate north of the former Martin Service Station property. The proposal consists of two structures, single story bank with roofed drive-in teller facilities and two story office building. Review Exhibit C, the applicants propose a mixed office use with limited retail outlets or store fronts at the lower level. T.iey have suggested retail uses such as a pharmacy, floral shop, card or specialty shops. The only district that lists office uses with retail is the B-5 but the purpose of the B-5 zoning district is to provide 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 code notes the district may adjoin residential districts or other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The code goes on to note that because of the location of the B-5 district only found in Navarre, the uses are limited in order to minimize hardcover and the generation of traffic because of historic traffic problems in Navarre. The proposed intensity of uses may pose a conflict with the B-5 zoning district. Also, the proposal involves two principal structures on one parcel. This requires a planned unit development (P.U.D.) The City code does not include the P.U.D. option for the Navarre area. Applicants have also been advised that the comprehensive vacation of Navarre Lane was not approved by the Council and they advised that they would once again seek to vacate the remainder of Navarre Lane as originally proposed and that they would be willing to grant a bike trail/pedestrian walkway easement through the property. In fact they noted that the walkw ’ay or bike trail could be located within the landscaped pond area and outlet at the north of the property rather than at the busy intersection. Request for Council Action continued ^e 20,1996 Referral of Development Proposal During the review of their previous application (Application #2107), the applicants were advised that any rezoning of areas within Na\ arTe would be done on a comprehensive scale or study. It is the intention of the applicants to move ahead with a rezoning application specific to the parcel at 2380 Shad>Avood Road. Fne applicants plan to proceed with infoimational meetings for surrounding neighbors within 600 ’ of the property. The meetings are scheduled the last week of June to be held on two nights specifically a Tuesday and Wednesday of that week. It was my understanding that Council members as well as Planning Commission members will receive invitntions to the informational meetings. Staff has also been advised that the applicants have the support of many of the residents of th* surrounding neighborhood. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the referral of the preliminary development proposal for property at 2380 Shadywood Road to the Planning Commission for a sketch plan review. friMi fTTVC HESS vta (FuWoniB/Wln96) C.l. ConctnicHon, Inc Alciindna MN Fcv »0-7e2<S968 Vole* 3^-7e3 39M To Jim Coon it JCJ Atoociotoo Pi«*1ori Tu*t««y.May 2V 1*M « 3T 11 AM // »•* y / i / \ '•a. / m / o /\ « / I / f / 0 / ,\ A A A I'r U \\ / BE /V .y / y //i n •*, /B£test ;3n bas 'n /, / 7,r o / fiSSS. * 7 / «/i 0 / / r / 'i / V*I 7 9 / / .^1 r / \ V g#r/'inSWi / » V \ / v\ \ V a*. ■N N / i\ \ **••• OflSTtNG^J SEWER XjC-9L_, r ' f \ /V"V?-' / 9 / 1*/. /•' •' /7/ '/ / //.' r7. / / *0^ / /5c-----p A f / 9 / J7'?///V// / />k// r.F^954ie X es3.j > N .V *953.9 'X ■/ ; '. s\ / V.\ (_____ 9 / ^^5 S9« wifm ••A inti>wi j \' ;dm < ui y>Lnm / / om <m 0»■ ll i' i/o. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 19, ITEM NO: ^ ^ %N Department Approval: Name Title Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Item Description: Recodification Contract The 1996 Budget includes $12,000 for the rccodification of the city’s ordinances. The purpose of the recodification is to update and reorganize the city’s ordinances and to provide an index and retrieval system to make the code easier to use. Although there are a number of providers of rccodification services, the number who provide the type and level of service to accomplish the purpose stated above is small. The city has obtained quotes from two providers. The base service price quotes for the two are as follows; Municipal Code Corporation $13,500.00 Sterling Codifiers $12,000.00 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Municipal Code Corporation for three reasons; 1.Municipal Code Corporation received vety high marks from area cities who have recently used their service. 2. 3 They appear to be the most customer-conscious. Municipal Code Corporation provides the code on computer with several options of information retrieval software available (at additional cost). Information Retrieval Software The cost of obtaining the code set up to be compatible with word processing and data base software is $1,400. The cost of information retrieval software that will work both with the code and for other city documents is $3,400. Staff will review these in more detail and will include a recommendation as part of the 1997 proposed budget. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the contract with Municipal Code Corporation for recodification of the city’s ordinances at a cost of $13,500 and to authorize the Mayor to sign the contract. J ADDITIONAL COPY TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED IF ACCEPTED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT ORONO MINNESOTA March 22, 1996 Table of Contents Page No CONTRACT: PART ON£ - RECODIFICATION OF CODE (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) Ordinances Included ..............................................................1 Legal Research and Review...................................................1 Pre-Conference Memorandum.................................................1 Conference with Attorney ......................................................1 Conference Memorandum......................................................2 Editorial Work ........................................................................2 Notice of Completion of Editorial Work .............................3 Typesetting and Proofs...........................................................3 Index ......................................................................................4 Printing and Binding .............................................................4 Code on Computer ................................................................4 Information Retrieval Software..............................................5 Internet Connection........................................................... . 5 Shipment, Adopting Ordinance................................ 5 PART TWO - LOOSELEAF SUPPLEMENT SERVICE (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) Schedule .................................................................................6 Ordinances to be Furnished by Municipality ........................6 Editorial Scrutiny...................................................................6 Editorial Notes ......................................................................6 Index and Tables ...................................................................6 Instruction Sheet......................................................................6 Checklist .................................................................................7 Tabular Matter .....................................................................7 Electronic Supplementation ...................................................7 Reprints...................................................................................7 Sample Ordinance Service.....................................................7 Shipment................................................................................7 Termination ...........................................................................7 QUOTATION SHEET ..............................................................................8 i PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT The MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION, a corporation duly authorized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as MCC. hereby offers to research, edit, and recodify the Code ot the CIT\ OF ORONO» MINNESOTA, a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under state law. hereinafter referred to as the Municipality, according to the following tenns and conditions: Part 0\e RECOOmCATION OF THE CODE (1) ORDINANCES INCLUDED. MCC will, under the supervision of the Municipality’s attorrey. recodify the existing Code as updated. The Municipality may forward ordinances subsequently passed for inclusion in the new Code until notice is received that the editorial work has been completed. (2) LEGAL research AND REVIEW. MCC will assign an attorney to work with the Municipality’s attorney. Before the conference with the Municipality’s attorney. MCC’s attorney will: a) State Imw. Research the Code and subsequent ordinances to be included in the new Code against state law. This process will discover inconsistencies and conflicts whh. and preemptions by. the state law. b) State law references. Update all state law references and append new references as necessary. c) Internal consistency. Research the provisions of the Code and subsequent ordinances to determine if there are inconsistencies or conflicts between existing laws and obsolete provisions. (3) PRE-CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM. Upon completion of the legal research and review of the Code. MCC’s attorney will prepare an editorial memorandum setting forth the major substantive changes and recommendations for the new Code, to be discussed at the editorial conference. This memorandum will delineate the provisions to be deleted and address the new language to be inserted. (4) CONFERENCE WITH ATTORNEY. MCC’s attorney will travel to the Municipality for a conference with the Municipality’s attorney and other interested officials. The following will occur at the conference: a) Issues. Issues discussed will include all inconsistencies and conflicts discovered during research, as well as obsolete provisions. 1 b) Solutions. Recommendations will be made regarding solutions to the issues discussed. c) Implementation. Agreed upon solutions will be implemenied with the help of MCC’s attorney. The Municipality’s attorney has ultimate decision making authority for solutions and implementation. d) Sample ordinances. MCC has an extensive collection of Sample Ordinances. Recommendations will be made regarding new legislation on specific subjects where there is an obvious need. To facilitate this, the Municipality should request recommendations on subjects of specific concern. e) Organization. Organization can be reviewed with the Municipality providing comments, criticisms or suggestions. (5) POST-CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM. Following the conference, MCCs attorney will draft and submit a memorandum outlining the substantive changes, solutions and implementations agreed upon. This memorandum is extremely useful upon receipt of the proofs; it is recommended the proofs be reviewed in conjunction with the conference memorandum. (6) EDITORIAL WORK. The manuscript will be prepared to include; a) Proper phraseology. Conci.se, modem and proper phraseology, without conflicts, ambiguities and repetitious provisions. b) Chap.er arrangement. Each chapter of the new Code shall embrace all ordinances of the same subject matter. Within the chapter itself, the ordinances shall be arranged in an orderly and logical fashion, to include articles and divisions as necessary. Chapters and sections will be re.served for tuture expansion. Title arrangement is also available and will be discussed at the conference. c) Table of contents. This tab. will list the chapters, articles and divisions of the Code, giving the page number upon which each begin:. d) Chapter analysis. Each chapter of the new Code will be preceded by a detailed analysis listing the articles, divisions, and sections contained therein. e) Catchlines. Each section will t e preceded by a catchline, which shall reflect the content of the section. 0 History notes. A history mue will be prepared for each section of the new Code unless tfie section was added during the project. The note w'ill indicate the source from whicn the section is derived. If the section is derived from an existing Code, the appropriate section of that Code, as supplemented, will be cited together with amendator>' ordinances. g) Cross references and footnotes. Cross references will be prepared to tie together related sections of the new Code. Proper explanation will also be made in the form of footnotes to relevant provisions of the Code. h) Comparative table. This table lists all ordinances included in the Code in chronological and/or numerical sequence, setting out the location of such ordinances in the Code. A table will also be prepared setting out all sections of the prior Code included in the new Code. i) State law reference table. This table will list by state law citation all sections canning a reference. (7) NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF EDITORIAL WORK. Upon completion of all editorial wr.rk, MCC will notify the Municipality in writing that the Code manuscript is ready for typesetting and printing. No additional ordinances will be included in the Code manuscript subsequent to such notice. (8) TYPESETTLNG AND PROOFS. After typesetting has been completed, MCC will submit one set of proofs to the Municipality for review'. The Municipality may make word changes on the proofs without charge. However, the Municipality will be charged for changes or deletions constituting more than one page of type. It shall be the duty of the Municipality lO return the proofs, with the changes indicated thereon within forty-five (45) days from the date of their receipt. If proofs are not returned within fony-five (45) days, and no notice to the contrary is received by MCC, it will be assumed that no changes are to be made. MCC will then proceed to print the Code and no changes shall thereafter be allowed. Should the Municipality request to review the p.oofs beyond forty-five (45) days but fails to return them within one year, the contract balance shall become due and payable. Upon mutual agreement regarding time and compensation, MCC shall update the proofs with subsequent enactments before delivery of the printed Code. MCC guarantees typographical correctness. Errors attributable to MCC will be corrected throughout the term of the contract, without charge to the Municipality. MCC’s liability for all services shall extend only to the correcting of errors in the Code or future supplements, not to any acts or occurrences as a result of such errors, and only so long as a contract is in effect. (9) INDEX. After return of the proofs, but before printing, a comprehensive, general Index for the Code will be prepared. All sections are indexed under major subjects with appropriate section citations. Columnar citations are used to enhance the ease of reference. (10) PRINTING AND BINDING. When the proofs are returned by the Municipality, MCC will proceed with printing and binding the Code in accordance with the following: a) Copies. The number of copies desired by the Municipality will be printed on 50 lb. white offset paper. b) Page format. The page size will be consistent with the format chosen by the Municipality: 8-1/2 x 11 inches, double column (samples attached). c) Type size. Various type sizes are available for text. Should the Municipality desire a type size larger, or smaller, than ten-point, notice should be given to MCC prior to notice of completion of the editorial work. d) Tabular matter. Tables, drawings, designs. Algebra formulae, or other material which require engraved cuts or special methods of reproduction, will be charged as set out herein. e) Binding. MCC will bind copies of the completed Code in expandable post type binders, each with slide lock fasteners and with black imitation leather covers stamped in gold leaf. Color choices are available for a slight charge. Any unbound copies of the Code will be punched and wrapped separately for storage and eventual binding by the Municipality. Additional binders can be ordered at any time by the Municipality at the then current prices. 0 Separator tabs. MCC will furnish separator tab sheets (mylar tabs, printed both sides) for the Codes. The tabs will reflect the major divisions or chapters of the Code volume. g)Reprints of chapters. This proposal provides for furnishing 50 Zoning reprints and 25 Subdivision reprints. Additional copies of other portions of the Code may be ordered for binding in paper covers for separate distribution or sale. Prices will be furnished upon request. (11) CODE ON COMPUTER. MCC can provide the Code in electronic media. The Code can be provided with WordPerfect 5.1 or WORD commands embedded so that the features of the software are available. Alternatively, the Code can also be provided in the generic form of ASCII. ASCII can generally be retrieved into any word processing software, but may require more than casual knowledge of computers and programming. The Code can be furnished on 3 1/2" disk, CD-ROM, or via the Internet or modem. (13) EVTERNFT CONNFXTION. Should the Municipality desire to place the Code on the Internet, it may be included on MCC’s home page (http://www.municode.com). This home page contains a growing collection of more than 100 Codes of Ordinances, and is available to anyone with Internet access. (14) SHIPMENT; ADOPTING ORDINANCE. Upon completion of the above, MCC will ship the Code as directed by the Municipality. At this time, MCC’s attorney will furnish tlie Mrnicipaliiy with a suggested adopting ordinance. Once the Cooe has been adopted, a copy of the ordinance should be sent to MCC, so that it can be included in the Code. (12) INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SOFTWARE. MCC offers the following information retrieval software programs, any of which are compatible with the Code in electronic media described above: a) Socrates. This is MCC’s information retrieval software which is integrated with the Code in WordPerfect WORD or ASCII. MCC performs the ipfegration and provides support to Socrates users. The software affords easy "e.xportation" of language to your word processing software for drafting and amendatory purposes. Utilizing your e.xisting word processing program eliminates learning new editing commands and allows new ordinances to follow existing procedures. Socrates is available for DOS and Windows. b) ISYS. ISYS is the program from which Socrates is derived. It is a commercially available information retrieval software which instantly locates any document(s) containing references to a word, phrase, or combination thereof. It can be used on any/all files you designate, not just the Code (including minutes, letters, invoices, etc). Additionally ISYS supports over 25 different word processing programs. ISYS is available for DOS and Windows. c) Folio VIEWS. Folio VIEWS offers a powerful, context-sensitive, on-line help system for immediate assistance to inquiries. The customized menus offer robust functionality and speedy start-up access to your information. Every word in an infobase is indexed. Type in a word, a phrase or. a query and watch the Query Map display the search results. With a click of the mouse, users can jump to the points of information they need. Information retrieval capabilities include standard boolean search operators, phrase searching, proximity searching and word stemming to include word variations and synonyms in searches. Folic VIEWS is avaUable for DOS, Window, and Macintosh. Part T wo LOOSELEAF SlTPLEMFNT SERVICE (1) SCHEDULE. After shipment of the new Code MCC will keep the Code up-to- d3te by the publiciition of Looselesf Supplements which will contain the new ordinances of 3 general and permanent nature enacted by the governing body. The Supplements can be published on a schedule to meet the requirements of the Municipality. There is no additional charge for frequent publication. A minimum of thirty (30) working days will be required for delivery of a Supplement. (2) ORDLNANCES TO BE FURNISHED BY MUNICIPALITY. The Municipality shall forward to MCC copies of the ordinances upon final enactment by the Municipality. The ordinances may be furnished on diskettes, if available. If diskettes are provided by the Municipality, it is also requested one copy of each ordinance be turnished for verification purposes. (3) EDITORIAL SCRUTINY. The new ordinances will be studied by a member of MCC’s editorial staff in conjunction with the existing provisions of the new Code. The pages of the Code containing provisions that are specifically repealed or amended by ordinance will be reprinted to remove such repealed or amended provisions and to insert the new ordinances. Should MCC detect conflicts, inconsistencies or duplications in the Code as the new ordinances are included, the Municipality will be notified so that remedial action may be taken. (4) EDITORIAL NOTES. Appropriate editorial notes will be prepared and appended to the new sections as deemed necessary by the editor. (5) LNDEX AND TABLES. When the inclusion of new . laterial necessitates changes in the index, appropriate entries will be prepared and the necessary pages of the index will be reprinted to include the new entries. The Comparative and State Law Reference Tables will be kept up-to-date to reflect the new ordinances and state law citations, if any, included in each Supplement. The Table of Contents will also be kept current to reflect changes in the Code. (6) INSTRUCTION SHEET. Each Supplement will contain a page of instructions for removal of the obsolete pages and insertion of the new pages. The latest ordinance included in the published Supplement will be noted in boldface type on the Instruction Sheet. (7) CHECKLIST. A checklist of up-to-date pages will be prepared and kept current for the benefit of the user. The checklist of up-to-date pages will allow instant determination of whether the user is relying on a page reflecting current ordinances. (8) TABULAR MATTER. Should the Supplement contain tables, drawings and the like for which special typesetting or other methods of reproduction are required, the costs will be charged as set out herein. (9) ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTATIOiN. If the Municipality has chosen to receive the Code in electronic media, as set out in Part One of this agreement, MCC can provide the Supplements electronically on a schedule desired to meet the Municipality’s needs, e.g. monthly or bimonthly. The Municipality may choose to have hard copy Supplements printed less frequently. The electronic media will reflect the entire Code as updated thiough the most recent Supplement. (10) REPRINTS. 1.1..-"deaf reprint pamphlets, which contain certain portions of the Code, including appropriate inde.x pages, can be kept up-to-date at the same time the Code volume is supplemented. (11) SAMPLE ORDINANCE SERVICE. Sample provisions of specific subjects will be furnished upon request. A sample index will be furnished for use in requesting the desired sample provisions. (12) SHIPMENT. Supplements will be shipped to the Municipality for distribution to the holders of the Codes. However, storage, distribution and billing services are available. Prices will be furnished upon request. The Municipality will have the exclusive right to sell the Codes and Supplements. (13) TERMINATION. The Looseleaf Supplement Service provided under this Part Two will be in full force and effect for a period of three (3) years from the date of shipment of the completed Code to the Municipality. Thereafter, the Looseleaf Supplement Service will be automatically renewed from year to year, provided that either party may alter or cancel the erms of this Part Two upon sixty (60) days’ written notice. f *• Q uotation Sheet PART ONE - RECODIFICATION: (1) Base Cost, includes $13,500 a)Legal Review b)Sample Ordinance Service c)Pre-Conference Memorandum d)Conference with MCC Attorney e)Post-Conference Memorandum 0 Editorial Work g)Typesetting and Proofs h)Indexing i)Printing and Binding i. Number of copies 75 ii. Number of binders 50 iii. Number of sets of special order tabs 75 iv. Estimated pages'400 8-1/2 X 11 inches, double column V. Number of Zoning reprints 50 vi. Number of Subdivision reprints 25 Base Cost does not include: a)Excess pages, additional per page $24 b)Tabular matter, additional per page no additional cost c)Freight charges (invoiced upon shipment)prepaid Additional services available: a) Code on computer 1. 11. Data integrated with Socrates or Folio VIEWS with WordPerfect 5.1 or WORD commands embedded, or in ASCII, one license (includes handling) Each additional license $515 $100 ISYS information retrieval software for all documents see attached price list ! . 'A page is defined as the area on one side of a sheet of paper. A sheet contains two (2) pages. 8 i PART TVVO - LOOSELEAF SUPPLEMENT SERVICE (1) Annual fee for Supplements (2) Number of copies none 75 (3) Cost per page a) b) c) 8-1/2 X 11 inches, double column Tabular matter, additional per page One set of disks, per Supplement (cost in addition to regular Supplement per page charge) If additional sets of updated disks required, per set $22 no additional cost $50 Sample Ordinance Service - during the first year following shipment of the Code PAYMENT. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Upon signing of the contract Upon submission of pre-conference memorandum (approximately September, 1996) Upon receipt of proofs (approximately January 1997) Balance upon delivery of Code. Payment for the Looseleaf Supplement Service will be due upon receipt of an invoice. Supplements will be invoiced when shipped. Freight charges will be prepaid and invoiced at time of final billing. $25 no charge $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 1 1 The terms of this agreement shall remain in force and effect for a period of ninety (90) days from the date appearing below, unless accepted by the Municipality. Submitted by: MUNICIPAl, CODE CORPORATION March 22, 1996 Accepted by: ORONO, MINNESOTA Witness Title Date 1ISYS PRICING INFORMATION Municipal Code Corporation ISYS is developed to provide equal access in single user and/or network environments. For multiple standalone users, a separate copy of the software is required for each workstation. For LAN installations, ISYS automatically monitors "concurrent usage" - i.e. the software will permit up to the licensed number of simultaneous users to be active at any time. This approach offers obvious and substantial savings over traditional "workstation licensing" systems. It also eliminates the need for continual auditing of license usage by network administrators, as the licensed limit can not be inadvertently exceeded. WINDOWS Complete Product DOS Complete Product Description Price Description Price Single User $ 435.00 Single User $ 395.00 3 User Lan Pack $ 1,109.00 3 User Lan Pack $ 1,007.00 5 User Lan Pack $ 1,784.00 5 User Lan Pack $ 1,620.00 10 User Lan Pack $ 3,437.00 10 User Lan Pack $3,121.00 20 User Lan Pack $ 6,612.00 20 Users Lan Pack $ 6,004.00 50 User Lan Pack $15,878.00 50 User Lan Pack $14,418.00 Quotes for larger configurations are available. Product is shipped by UPS 2nd-Day with respective fees added. LAN packs contain one set of documentation. Additional manuals can be purchased Prices include toll-free technical support. Discounts may apply if ordered through Municipal Code Corporation CALL US IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR WANT TO PLACE AN ORDER 800-262-2633 3/96 COUNCIL MiiETtNQ JUN 24 199$REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June ITEM NO.: I 7 Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Approval of Plans for Turn Lane Improvements - County Roads 51 and 135 Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Proposed Plan (Excerpts) C - DNR Letter to Adjacent Property Owners In conjunction with the construction of the Maxwell Bay access, Hennepin County Public Works Department has requested a resolution approving the turn lane/by-pass lane improvements at the intersection of North Shore Drive and Tonkawa Road. The proposed detailed plans for the intersection improvements are attached as Exhibit B. The detailed plans closely match the preliminary site plans previously submitted by DNR and approved by the City last December. The DNR has sent a letter and copy of the plans to the four property owners adjacent to the road upgrades (see Exhibit C). No significant comments have been received as of this writing. Because these road upgrades were reviewed as part of the public hearing process for the access, staff feels there is no need for further public hearings specifically for the road upgrades. Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution which w ill be forwarded to DNR and Hennepin County Public Works. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt attached resolution approving plans for by-pass lane/mrn lane improvements at the intersection of County Roads 51 and 135. , seconded by , to adopt ResolutionProposed Motion: Moved by_________ #____, approving plans for turn lane and by-pass lane improvements at the intersection of CS AH 51 and CSAH 135 in conjunction with construction of the Maxwell Bay access. Vote: ayes,nays. A r DVTr» APPROVING PLANS FOR TURN LANE AND BYPASS LANE IMPROVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CSAH 51 AND CSAH 135 IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE MAXWELL BAY ACCESS WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is cons^''ucting a public access at the intersection of CSAH 51 and CSAH 135; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono approved the site plan for the afores?ad public access via Resolution No. 3657 on December 11, 1995; and WHEREAS, Finding No. 8 of Resolution No. 3657 states that "The proposed site plan incorporates upgrades to County Roads 51 and 135 including right turn lanes and by-pass lanes to accomodate the anticipated traffic generated by the access"; and WHEREAS, the DNR has submirted construction plans for said turn lane and by-pass lane improvements; and W'HEREAS, a portion of said project will be constructed with State Aid funds;and WHEREAS, the City of Orono in conjunction with Hennepin County Public Works has established portions of County Roads 51 and 135 including the areas of the proposed right turn lane and by-pass lane improvements as 24-hour "No Parking Tow Away Zones" via City of Orono Resolution No. 3514 adopted January 9th, 1995. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, that the construction plans for improvements to CSAH 135 and CSAH 51 including turn lanes and by-pass lanes, are hereby approved. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono this 24th day of June, 1996. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor 1 1 = STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of June, 1996 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr., and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Bureau of Engineering 5()0 Lafayette Road St. Paul. Minnesota 55155-40_29 May 10. 1996 Bruce Polaczyk PE, Design Engineer Transportation Division Department of Public Works 320 Washington Ave South Hopkins, MN 55343-8468 Mike Gaffron, Assst. Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay Mn 55323 Subject: CSAH 51 and CSAH 135 Turn lanes - SAP 27-651-06 1996 State Park Fund Lake Minnetonka Water Access - Maxwell Bay Site WAS01400/A96-54 Dean Mr. Polac2yk and Mr. Gaffron, Enclosed please find the preliminary plans for the above project. These plans are also being reviewed by the MrvDOT State Aid Office. Please provide comments to me by May 22,1996. The estimated cost for the county portion of the work Is $18,000. The estimated cost for the State Aid portion of the project is $26,000. Notes: 1. The specifications are in progress. 2. The no parking zones existing on both sides of both CSAH’s throughout the project area will be maintained. 3. Pavement design is based upon Hennepin County ’s recommendation. Sincerely, Stan J. LiHfiell Landscape Architect Phone: 612-297-4901 Fax:612-297-5818 cc: Martha Reger Larry Killien Kim Waldof Ann Peterson DNR Information: 612-296-6157. 1-800-766-6000 • TTY: 612-296-5484. 1-800-657-3929 An EqudI Opportunity Employer Who Valuer Diversity 0% Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a 1 Minimum of l(Kf Po>t-Con\umer Waste 5 ^ z g >o<o F or?r|^T3^ ^ m X ^ :;o om >; • * 73 oP 5 f1o5>2 o ^ -j m >piilg rn 1—1 —4 __I —A TTC- O O ? H :2 z?o?^ in K(5>> (/) =d•^ (/) ds 3 ^ z §113875 ” °Qi;p ^C» PrnPm ^ WfflS 0\* -J ^5 O = ^ CD o ^^ rnct^HZ_m We anticipate the road improvements being constructed sometime this summer. We have not identified the exact dates of construction as of yet, but need to keep the design process moving along in order to complete the road improvements, as well as the public access construction, this year. Thank you for taking the time to review these plans. Sincerely, Area Trails and Waterways Supervisor enclosure cc; Mike GafFron, City of Orono Stan Linnel, DNR Bruce Polacyzk, Hennepin County w4 »- STATE OF DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Region 6A Trails & Waterways, 9925 Valley View Road, woNCNO. Eden Prairie. NIN 55344 (612)832-6170 p'leno. June 11.1996 •« ■ t Kenath and Donna Stein 3400 North Shore Drive Wa'-zata, MN 55391 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Stein: Over the last few years the Department of Natural Resources in cooperation with the City of Orono and Hennepin County have been working toward creation of a public access at the intersection of County Roads 5 1 and 135. As part of the plans for the access the City asked that portions of these two County Roads be upgraded to help accommodate the traffic that will be using this access Enclosed for your review is a copy of the preliminary design plans for the proposed road improvements. The work will consist of adding a right turn lane on westbound County Road 51 to northbound County Road 135. It will also add a through lane on eastbound County Road 51 All of this work will be done within the existing County Highway right-of-way, and will not encroach into your property. The pavement will be widened slightly within the right-of-way. The impact of new curbing and finish grading will be the greatest at the comer, where an additional 10 ’ of existing right-of-way wall be used. This road project is being built to conform with Minnesota State Aid standards and has the full review authority of Hennepin County. The Department of Natural Resources is responsible for the design work and overseeing the contract. Should you have any questions or comments regarding this project please feel free to contact me at 832-6170. If you have general questions about the public access, contact me or Mike GafFron, City of Orono at 473- 7357. I would appreciate it if you could get back to me prior to June 17, 1996 if you have concerns or comments. 1 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION \ DATE: June 19,f^ ITEM NO. ^ Department Approval: Ns me John R. Gerhardson Title Public Works Director / Admin^trator Reviewed:m ■% Agenda Section: Public Works Hem Description: Handicap Accessible Equipmen. Costal Bay Playground fo?$l 6?72T ‘‘ ‘“'-'P'ion <»=tcrial $3,500. That’nlmto is now lonltmedTswl!^^ 'Ou'Pnient may cost in the neighborhood of a concrete pad under one swingwrth a poured in place fall absorption material covering the «mcrc,roX Cr r, ® handieap access,ble super scoop in the area of Ute concr^ct’clZ"' wnnrivtpt^: a“ c“ "O' a'’w.io« =:r:o”^: rs" “f r™. cs.-- k'.t: ;rr,:“.S: re P'-^^hasc thc handicap accessible super scoop and swing installed Zm'coIZ” '•anLp iItems COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Motion to approve the purchase and installation of handicap accessible playrr;;"ss—!sr„s“ 2. request for council action N X DATE: June ^9$^ ITEM NO: /l/ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse City Adminisiraior Item Description: Purchase of Speed Control Radar Trailer Adminjs^ator Reviewed: / Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report The cost of the trailer is $13,980.00. The trailer was to be included in the pronosed 1997 police u get. However, the contract cities have requested that ii be purchased in 199fi The^v Accoum ^ funded from the General Fund Contingency COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the purchase of a radar trailer at a cost nf s:n osn oraet » .u • expenditure of $2 800 of Police Forfeiture Funds and $7,000 from the Contingency Account as e city s share of the trailer, and to adjust the 1996 budget to reflect these expenditures. ^o.N request for council action <?X Department Approval: Name Title X "DATE: June 19, 199^ ITEM NO: Tiption: Old Crystal Bay Road Trail Update system, Hennepin Parks would be willing ,o inerease its level of contribudon to Ae tea “p" COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED rn^^rievel rcomTto »P“™ °f o o ^ ' V . '^KSHoi^^ CITYofORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 June 14, 1996 JTOE n!’'?99r® Doug Bryant, Superintendent Suburban Hennepin Regional Parks District 12615 County Road 9 Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 Dear Doug: loward completion of the trail connection and providing .o the Ci.,- facilities in 199Tand m clll^ty r;S .rail on cLt. Si b^erS^r aT^whiC wdh nnancia, Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. Sincerely, '//- y ^ * Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator RJM/ch Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 % REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 4' ^ Of> DATE: June 19. 1996^'^Q ITEM NO: / X 'At> Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Item Description: Saga Hill Park Land Acquisition Admin^rator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Administrator's Report Backeround Approximately 21 acres of land in the Saga Hill area (east of County Road 19 and north of Tonkaview) have become available and affordable to the city due to various difficulties encountered by previous owners/potential developers of the property. The 21 acres include a nine plus acre parcel of tax forfeit property and 11 plus acres of property acquired by a bank through a foreclosure. The city is acquiring the nine acres of tax forfeit property at no cost. The city is working with the Saga Hill area residents and the Minnesota Land Trust to acquire the 11.25 acres of property through donations and a DNR grant. The application for a $50,(XX) Scenic and Natural Area grant through the DNR was prepared through a joint effort of the city, the Saga Hill residents, and the Minnesota Land Trust. The purchase agreement with the owners of the 11.25 acres, Midway Bank, was developed with assistance from the Minnesota Land Trust and is in the name of the Minnesota Land Trust. Update The Saga Hill group has been successful in obtaining a sufficient level of donations to fund the portion of the land purchase cost not covered by the DNR grant. The application for the Natural and Scenic Area grant in the amount of $50,CI00 was successful. Funding Because the DNR grant is not paid to the city until after the purchase is completed, the city will need to provide interim funding of $50,(XX) until the grant funds are received. This amount can be taken from the Park Dedication Fund and repaid upon receipt of the grant funds. Conservation Easement The purchase agreement for the 11.25 acres of property owned by Midway Bank is in the name of the Minnesota Land Trust. The Land Trust is requesting that, as part of the Trust assigning its interest in the property to the city, a conservation easement be placed on the property. Because the purpose of the Land Trust is to preserve natural and open space, the conservation easement would preserve the property from all development, except minor recreational uses such as trails. Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 3 June 19, 1996 Saga Hill Park Land Acquisition The advantage of the conservation easement is that the Land Trust, the Saga Neighborhood, and the city would be assured that this property would remain essentially in its current condition in perpetuity. The disadvantage is that it eliminates any potential for using the propertv’ to meet changing recreational needs, i.e. A skating rink, a play field or ball field, or play equipment. The issue for the Council to consider is whether it will accept permar mt restrictions on the type of recreational uses for which the property can be used. In reviewing the property in terms of topography and natural features, it appears that a significant portion would be difficult to develop for recreational uses and should be protected from development. This includes the easterly four parcels (lots 58, 60, 61, and 62), the northeast portion of lot 91, and the eastern 1/2 of lot 92. Without suggesting that a more active use should or would be developed in this area; one scenario for a more active use, such as a play field or ball field, would be to construct the ball field mainly on the 9 acre tax forfeit parcel, and potentially also including the westerly portions of lots 91 and 92. Also, if vehicular access was to be provided to the play field, a parking lot would be needed. Without any additional property acquisition, it appears that vehicular access would be provided on the Garden Lane right-of-way to the southerly portion of lot 91 on which a parking lot would be constructed. If this scenario has any possibility of happening at some point in the future, the city should preserve its rights to enable this to occur. Staff Recommendation Concerning the Conservation Easement It is staff’s recommendation that the opportunity to develop a more active recreational use on a portion of the 9 acre tax forfeit parcel should be preserved. Doing so does have a potential impact on lot 91 of the Bank property, in that a parking lot constructed on lot 91 would best serve vehicular access to a more active use using the Garden Lane right-of-way. Staff recommends that, at minimum, the city maintain the right to construct a parking lot and a portion of a ball field on lot 91. Environmental Review Staff recommends a phase 1 environmental review of the property to provide an indication of whether the site contains any hazardous materials. Miscellaneous Costs A. B. The Saga Hill group has requested the city pay the cost of the updated appraisal that was needed for the grant application. Cost: $1,500.00 The Minnesota Land Trust has requested the city make a contribution to the Land Trust in the amount of $2,500 to acknowledge the work of the Land Trust on this project, as well as its continuing work U preserve open space in Orono and throughout the state. Request for Council Action continued page 3 of 3 June 19, 1996 Saga Hill Park Land Acquisition COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED 1.Motion to set out the parameters within which the Council would accept a conservation easement on the property. 2.Motion to approve/deny the expenditure of $50,000 from the Park Dedication Fund as interim funding for the purchase. 3. Motion to authorize expendimres for an environmental review and closing costs. 4.Motion to approve/deny the expenditure of $1,500 from the Park Dedication Fund for the updated appraisal. 5. Motion to approve/deny the contribution of $2,500 to the Minnesota Land Trust. I y.\M fi (jlB^?, « - •. jKO- .V^v- (7). O^fvV C' (11) ^ I -^ICARxi^ • ' MkiiMnofiyain^ 136) 10 ' ? 3fl<-3t l»iar/Vffi lit iS ^rr < •Oi.3 rMiw I lOI a («) n ^ V ’l‘^„. ’ -7 ATHEReROFT n cr (A yy ^ V c J/ [n2< ^ •\-fcrwN^ vaan 2U _L. -■" TOMKAVIM i > f; 1/ <j :__I'OJ.fMV . «(39)(l^iV V.Q A C») >>r> ^ CO J.NiCIL MEETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION J U N 2 4 1996 CITYOFORONO DATE: June 20, 1996 ITEM NO: / / Department Approval: Name Title Item Description: Administiatpr Reviewed:Agenda Section: 7 Local Performance Aid Certification Attachments: A.Memorandum from the Minnesota Department of Revenue describing the new Local Performance Aid Program The City currently receives approximately $300,000 per year in HACA (Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid) revenue. The 1996 State legislature has taken a portion of the current HACA aid funding and placed it into a new program called the Local Performance Aid (LPA) program. For Orono this amounts to approximately $8,400. Under the new program Orono’s HACA aid will be reduced by $8,400. However, Orono ean recapture this aid amount through the LPA program. The LPA program, as its name implies, is a program to encourage cities to develop performance standards or measures related to the delivery of various city services. This involves first developing basic units of measurement for each service. The next step is to develop performance standards to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of each of these service areas. In order to be eligible for the LPA aid, the eity needs to begin a process to develop performance measures. Although the relatively small amount of the LPA aid is not a significant incentive to Orono, the concept of performance measures for the delivery of city services does have merit. The lake area city managers and administrators have included efforts to develop performance measures in their work plan for the next six months. The one caution is that it is important the time, effort and resources required to develop and carry out a performance measurement program do not exceed the benefits provided by the program. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends moving ahead with efforts to develop performanec measures. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to support efforts to develop performance measures for the delivery of city services, and to authorize the Mayor and one councilmcmber to sign the LPA certification to indicate the city is in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance measures. Mli'CNESOTA Department of Revenue Property Tax Division Mail Station 3340 Phone (612) 296-5141 St. Paul, MN 55146-3340 Fax (612) 297-2166 April 22, 1996 APR ? 3 1993 TO: ALL CITY CLERKS, ADMINISTRATORS, MANAGERS, AND FINANCE DIRECTORS • •• « » RE: CERTIFICATION OF LOCAL PERFORNLANCE MEASURES FOR LOCAL PERFORMANCE AID PAYABLE IN 1997 Laws 1996, Chapter 471, Article 3, Section 48 provides for a new state aid for all qualifying counties and cities beginning in calendar year 1997. This new aid is called Local Performance Aid (LPA). ?n order to qualify for this new aid. your city must have a system of performance measures for serv ices provided by the city, and must reguli-ly compile and present these measures to the city council at least once per year. If there is currently no system of performance measures in place, your city may still qualify for this aid if it is in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance measures. However, eligibility' based upon being in the process of development may not be used for more than two consecutive years. For the purpose of the enclosed certification form, “in the process” may include having the subject of performance measures on the agenda of the city council. The city should then use the time period between this year’s certification and next year’s certification to develop basic measures such as “workload,’’ unless it has already moved beyond this stage. The second year of “in the process” must be used to move to a higher level of performance measurement, such as measuring efficiency and effectiveness. AH cities should be able to qualify to receive LP.A in the first year of the aid program. This new aid will be determined as follows for calendar year 1997: The total amount of aid available for cities is $441,735 plus SI times the most recent population of each qualifying city. A per capita aid amount is then determined by dividing the total aid available by the total population of all cities that qualify for the aid. Each qualifying city would then receive an aid amount based on its population times the per capita aid amount. It should be noted that the $441,735 is appropriated from the general fund, and the additional amount ($1 times the most recent population of each city) is a permanent reduction in each city’s homestead and agricultural credit aid (H.ACA). The HACA reduction applies whether or not the city is eligible to receive LPA. Distribution of this new aid will be based on yearly certifications for each qualifying city. Cities will be required to submit an annual certification in order to receive LPA payable in calendar year 1997 and subsequent years. LPA will be paid in two equal installments on July 20 and December 26 of each year, beginninc in 1997. Qualifving cities will receive a certification of their 1997 LPA by Julv31,l996. (continued) An equal opportunity employer TDD (612)215-0069 Page 2 As mentioned above, your city may qualify for LPA by (1) having a system of performance measures in place, or (2) by being in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance measures. If your city qualifies for LPA by either criteria, and your city wishes to participate in the distribution of this aid for calendar year 1997, your city must fill out the enclosed certification and return it to our office by June 30, 1996. Please note: if our office does not receive a certification from your city' by June 30,1996, your city will not be eligible to receive this aid in calendar year 1997. If vou have any Questions regarding the completion of this form, please feel free to call me at (612) 296-5141. Sincerely, Larr>' L. Bewley ^ Research Analysis Specialist Property Tax Division Enclosure Form LPA - Ci Certification of Local Performance Measuresfor Local Performance Aid Payable in 1997 1. Does your city have a system of performa nce measures for services provided by the city, and are these measures regularly compiled and presented to the city council at least once each year? Name and mailing address of goveramental unit Name of person filling out form Telephone County of location YES NO 2. If the answer to question 1 above is no. is your city in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance measures?YES NO This form must be returned to the Minnesota Department of Revenue, Property Tax Division, by June 30,1996 In order for your city to be eligible to receive Local Performance Aid payable in 1997. Note: City certifications must be signed by the Mayor aad by a member of the City Council. We do hereby certify that, to the best of our knowlecge and belief, the facts presented m this certification are true and correct Signature of Mayor Signature of City Council Member Date REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval : Name Title [tem Description: Housing Action Plan inistrator Reviewed: DATE: June 20, 1996 ITEM NO: | ^ Agenda Section: Attachments: Proposed Housing Action Plan The Housing Action Plan needs to be adopted at the June 24 Coimrii * requirements of the Livable Communities Act. ^ nieet the COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the attached Housing Action Plan. i CITY OF ORONO HOUSING ACTION PLAN JUNE 24, 1996 Orono ’s Housing Action Plan is a set of implementation activities designed to achieve the city’s Housing Goals. The dominant land use in the City of Orono is primarily that of single-family residential homes. There is very limited industrial-commercial development or opportunities for employment and shopping within the City. Orono residents have always relied on the historic town centers in adjacent communities for shopping as well as employment. The general lack of commercial and industrial development and the limited availability of city services such as municipal sewer, water and mass transit will limit the opportunities for, and make it difficult, if possible at all, to provide opportunities for new life cycle and affordable housing in Orono. On the other hand, there are deteriorated and dilapidated housing units located throughout the City. Most of Orono ’s urban dwellings have been upgraded from seasonal cabins through either private or public rehabilitation programs. Others remain in need of attention. A top priority in Orono must be improving the housing conditions of persons who are presently inadequately housed and eliminating substandard housing. Thus, rather than pursuing construction of new life cycle and affordable housing units in the City, Orono ’s Housing Action Plan is aimed principally at improving the condition of Orono ’s older homes, both urban and rural, and improving the housing conditions of Orono ’s low, moderate and fixed income residents. 1. 2. 3. ORONO WILL PARTICIPATE IN HOUSING REHABILITATION SUBSIDY PROGRAMS. Many Orono residents, both urban and rural, are occupying older housing that has code-related structural, safety or health hazards, substandard living conditions or energy inefficiencies. They would like to improve their housing condition and their neighborhood’s appearance, but are unable to because of insufficient income. In many cases, older couples are forced to choose between heat or food or leaving their place of long residence. Orono will continue to actively participate in Community Development Block Grant and Minnesota Housing Finance Assistance programs designed to help these citizens meet their very immediate housing needs. ORONO WILL COOPERATE WITH NEIGHBORING CITIES TO FULFILL ARE- WIDE HOUSING NEEDS. Most apparent is the need for many senior Orono residents who desire to live in the immediate area, but w'ho cannot find available senior housing. Orono will actively participate with nearby municipalities toward jointly providing cost effective senior housing at locations that are near to home yet also convenient to necessary shopping, transportation and medical facilities. ORONO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPERS TO PROVIDE A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES AND COST RANGES. Whenever a multiple family or clustered housing development is proposed, Orono will actively encourage setting aside a HOUSING ACTION PLAN Continued page 2 of 2 4. 5. 6. reasonable number of units for large families and/or for low and moderate income families. Orono will participate and assist developers in applications for loan guarantees or other suitable forms of housing subsidy aids which may be available. HOUSING CONSTRUCTION WILL BE SUBJECT TO UNIFORM STATE BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS BUT WILL NOT BE BURDENED WITH UNNECESSARY ZONING REQUIREMENTS. Orono does not intend to require arbitrary minimum dwelling sizes or minimum amenity installations as these artificial standards only drive-up the cost of housing white limiting the buyer’s freedom of choice. Zoning standards for lot area and lot density will be based strictly upon environmental concerns and public facilities availability. Zoning performance standards will be based upon minimum availability. State Building Code performance standards will be enforced to ensure structurally sound, weather resistant buildings providing adequate health and safety protection for the future occupant and for the general public’s welfare. ORONO WILL ENCOURAGE COMMUNITY PRIDE. Private initiative has always been a characteristic of Orono residents. Programs will be pursued to encourage continuing maintenance and ufkeep of all properties and to promote the privately financed rehabilitation of older and under-uscd properties. ORONO WILL PROMOTE ENERGY CONSERVATION METHODS AND PROCEDURES. The building Inspection department will actively keep abreast of all new systems and products and will assist all homeowners in auditing and improving the energy efficiency of their homes. Orono will actively pursue and advertise all available programs for energy conservation funding. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION % DATE: June^hjjge ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Administrator ’s Report Item Descnption: Clarification of Wetland Filling and Mitigation Policy A potential developer of the property at the northwest comer of Willow Drive and Highway 12, has requested clarification of the city ’s policy regarding wetland filling and mitigation. His two specific questions are as follows: 1.The northern portion of the parcel includes a city-designated wetland. The developer has asked whether the city would allow approximately one acre of the wetland to be filled. 2.If the city would allow a portion of the wetland to be filled, the filling would have to be mitigated on a two-for-one basis. The developer has asked where the city would require the mitigation to occur. a.) On the same parcel b.) Somewhere on the north Highway 12 development area c.) In the same subwatershed d.) Outside of the subwatershed City Policy The general city policy has been in opposition to filling city-designated wetlands. The city policy regarding mitigation is that it should occur, at minimum, within the same subwatershed and in any case as close as possible to the filled wetland area. Please see the attached letter which outlines the city ’s general policies regarding wetland filling and mitigation. * 4 Reque^ for Council Action continued page 2 of 2 . June 20, 1996 Clarification of Wetland Filling and Mitigation Policy Staff Recommendation If the portion of the wetland to be filled is a city-designated wetland, staff recommends the established policy in opposition to filling be followed. If the portion to be filled is a newly delineated wetland, staff recommends consideration of a request to fill, subject to suitable plans for replacement of the wetland and providing for water quality ponding. COUNCIL ACTION REQLT:STED Motion to clarify the city’s policy in regard to the filling of wetlands CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices /y Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55355 Mailing Address: P.O Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 C056 January 31, 1994 Ellen B. Sones, Administrator Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard Minnetonka, MN 55345-1597 Dear Ellen: The Orono City Council on January 24 took action to designate the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as responsible Local Government Unit (LGU) for implementation and enforcement of the Wetland Conservation Act rules, reserving the option to designate the City as LGU at some future time. I understand that MCWD is, along with most other local regulatory bodies, in the process of developing policies and procedures for dealing with the WCA. I would offer the following information regarding Orono's historical position on wetland protection to assist the District in its wetland policy development process. 1.Orono ’s first wetland protection ordinance was adopted in 1964. That ordinance was strengthened in 1970, by prohibiting ftUing, grading, dredging, excavation or construction within wetlands. An "official mapping' of Orono s protected ("designated") wetlands was completed by the Hennepin Conservation District in 1974. That mapping identified approximately 300 wetland basins, of which approximately 50% were Type 3 wetlands, 20% Type 2, 10% Type 4, 10% Type 5, and the remaining 10% being Type 1 and Type 6 wetlands. 2.Since 1975, 39 variance/CUP applications for work in designated wetlands have been reviewed by the City, or an average of just over two applications per year. The majority of those applications involved excavating or dredging existing wetlands to create areas of open water. Other applications generaUy involved filling of portions of the wetland for creating driveways, or involved construction of structures (walkways, etc.) in wetlands. Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 r * = Ellen B. Sones January 31, 1994 Page 2 3.The City generally has supported the concept of improving existing wetlands where possible, and has long taken a strict stand against filling of wetlands except where absolutely necessary to protect a property owner's rights. 4.The City’s 1974 Surface Water Management Plan indicates that while wetlands are abundant in Orono, virtually ^ of Orono's wetlands are necessary to assimilate nutrients caused by the ongoing low-density development of the City as well as provide floodvvater storage. Since Orono can t afford to lose its wetlands, the City’s histoiy of wetland protection generally would support the no net loss" philosophy as well as the idea that any mitigation of City wetlands should occur within the City, preferably within the same sub-watershed and, within the proposed development in the case of subdivisions. 5.Orono ’s 1974 mapping of designated wetlands identified few Type 1 and Type 6 wetlands, and no Types 7 or 8. The new Federal delineation methods obviously will result in identification of many new "wetlands" which the City has . historically neither recognized nor protected. It is likely that the City will continue t ) oppose (and deny variance/CUP applications for) filling or destruction of its historically protected wetlands, but will not oppose filling or drauung of newly identified Type 1. 2, 6, 7, and 8 wetland basins as long as mitigation occurs. Please contact me at 473-7357 if you have any questions on any of the above, Sincerely, Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator RJM/lsv cc:Orono City Council Jeanne Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Admimstrator \ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION '^O DATE: June21,'%|J^ ITEM NO; \ Department Approral: Name Dorothy Hallin Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT: Long Lake Com Days 4 Mile Run Sunday, August 11, 1996 Noon - 1:00 p.m. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve listed license. i i a *■ I’ ij'J# / Date: June 18, 1996 To: From: Ron Moorse, City Administrator Gar>’ Cheswick, Chief of Police —' i Subject: Special Event Permit I have reviewed the application from Richard Recker on behalf of the Long Lake Com Days 4 mile run. 1 have no objection to the issuance of this permit. 'Arm—rw—m ry . t , »—w PARADES & SPECIAL EVENTS PERiVDT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA ,.v Permit #: Fee: $50.00 q Date Received: Phone Number: 3'^'^ C^CiCv4 Name: ____________ Address: S ^T. ^ City, State, Zip:_A\Nr* S Location of Parade or Event: ^ ^ N.Tq Lfv^. VO.l^ )\^vPtecPnUL___________________________ Date of Event: l\-SC___________ Hours of Event: lT.Oo9- ________ Typeof Event: Insurance Company:Amount: (Copy of insurance certificate must be submitted with this application) 1 am aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding parades and special events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the City of Orono harmless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectly from the parade of special event approved by the granting of this permit. I understand some events may require off-duty or reserve officers and a fee may be required for these services. \c ________________ Signature Date Approved: Q Deiied: D By: Remarks: 1 010396.3 ; tf •• IS Jun ISfSS Tue 12:21 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Dete Name Check Number S16IS SIS95 cm COUNTY CREDIT UNION 19-Jun-96 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Totals Check Number 51695 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Check Number S1696 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 51696 SI696 51696 19-Jun-96 19-Jun-96 19-Jun-96 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OP LAKES Totals Check Number 51696 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Check Number 51697 GREAT NEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. 51697 19-Jun-96 GREAT NEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. Totals Check Number 51697 GREAT NEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO Check Nuiiiber 5169» r^ENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT 4 COLL 51691 19-JUn-96 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT 4 COLL totals Check Number 5169S HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT 4 COLL ;^pitck NuTRber 51699 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT 4 COLL 51699 19-Jun-96 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT 4 COLL Totals Qieck Number 51699 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT 4 COLL Check Number 51700 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 51700 19-Jun-96 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Totals Check Humber 51700 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Check Humber 51701 LAN ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 51701 19-Jun-96 LAN ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Totals Check Humber 51701 LAN ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Check Number 51702 MH DEPT OF REVENUE 51702 19-Jun-96 m DEPT OF REVENUE Totals Check ..umber 51702 m DEPT OF REVENUE Check Number 51703 m MUTUAL LIFE 51703 19-Jun-96 m MUTUAL LIFE Totals Check Humber 51703 MN MUTUAL LIFE Transaction Amount 5.744.00 5.744.00 3.135.06 3. 135.46 7.304.61 13.575.13 1.190.00 1.190.00 0.00 m m m m O.CJ 0.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 3.103.72 3.103.72 55.00 55.00 Page 1 Comments SAVINGS N/H 4 TRANSFERRED PICA 4 MEDICARE N/H FICA.MBOCR CITY SHARE FEDERAL NITHHOLDING DEFERRED COMP W/B THOMTON IC0266780 SKREEN IC0262310 DEFERRED COMP M/H UNION DUES N/K STATE TAX N/H DEFERRED COMP W/H It Jun 1996 Tut 12:21 PM Check Re9ister City of Orono Check Itumber Date Name Check Number 51704 51704 W STATE RETIREMENT-DBF COMP 19-Jun-96 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DBF COMP Totals Check Number 51704 MN STATE RETIRKMENT-DEF COMP Check Number 51705 PEBSCO/OBRA 51705 19-Jun-96 PBBSCO/OBRA Totals Check Number 51705 PEBSCO/OBRA Check Number 51706 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 51706 19-JUn-96 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS Total i Check Ruabtr 51706 PEBSCO/US OF MAYORS Check Humber 51707 PERA 51707 51707 19-Jun-96 19-Jun-96 PQIA PERA Totals Check Humber 51707 PERA Check Number 5170i UNITED HAY 5170$19-Jun-96 UNITED WAY Totals Check Number 5170$ UNITED WAY Grand Total Transaction Amount 150.00 150.00 305.31 305.31 1.742.50 1.742.50 3.723.92 4.694.19 $.619.11 0.00 0.00 34.583.77 Page 2 Comments DEFERRED COMP W/H OBRA DEFERRED COMP W/H USCM DEFERRED COMP N/H PERA EMPLOYEE W/H PERA CITY SHARE aiARITY DONATIONS W/H 20 Jun 1996 Tbu 4: IS PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 51709 51709 51709 51709 ALL STAR ELEC1*RIC 19-J\jn-96 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 19-Jun-96 ALL STAR ELECTRIC 19-Jun-96 ALL STAR ELECTRIC Totals Check Number 51709 ALL STAR ELECTRIC Check Number 51710 ASCOM MAILING SYSTEMS 51710 lS-Jun-96 ASCOM MAILING SYSTEMS Totals chtck Number 51710 ASCOM MAILING SYSTEMS Oieck fruffiber 5i7ii atat 51711 51711 10-Jun-96 22-May-96 ATAT ATAT Totals Check Humber 51711 ATAT Check Number S1712 ATaT HIRELESS SERVICES Check Number 51713 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF 51713 51713 19-Jun-96 19-Jun-96 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF AUGIES MOBILE CHEF Totals Check Number 51713 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF Check Number 51714 BEACK, SCOTT 51714 19-Jun-96 BEACK, SCOTT Totals Check Number 51714 BEACK, SCOTT Check Number 51715 BLACKOWIAK & SON 51715 51715 51715 18-Jun-96 18-Jun-96 18-Jun-96 BLACKOWIAK A SON BLACKOWIAK A SON BLACKOWIAK A SON Totals Check Number 51715 BLACKOWIAK A SON Check Number 51716 BOBZIEN, SUE 51716 19-Jun-96 BOBZIEN, SUE Transaction Amount • 7.24 76.12 86.45 249.81 115.75 185.75 10.60 0.22 10.82 65.20 17.04 82.24 228.00 228.00 70.89 290.77 168.58 530.24 19.15 Page 1 Cofwsents REPLACE LIGHT REPLACE LIGHT REPLACE LIGHT METER RENTAL 3RD OTR LONG DISTANCE CHARGES LONG DISTANCE 51712 20-Jun-96 ATAT WIRELESS SERVICES 2.69 CELL PHONE USAGE 51712 20-Jun-96 ATAT WIRELESS SERVICES 2.68 CELL PHONE USAGE 51712 20-Jun-96 ATAT WIRELESS SERVICES 43.02 CELL PHONE USAGE 51712 20-Jun-96 ATAT WIRELESS SERVICES 75.64 CELL PHONE USAGE-PW Totals Check Number 51712 ATAT WIRELESS SERVICES 124.03 SANDWICHES FOR RESALE SANDWICHES FOR RESALE GOLF BALLS MAY SERVICE MAY SERVICE MAY SERVICE VCR TAPE REWINDER 1 20 Jun 199$ Thu 4:15 m Check Register City of Orono Check Ntunber Date Heme Check Humber 51716 BOB2IEH, SVE Total* Check Humber 51716 BOBZIEN, SUE Check Humber 51717 51717 BORIS, SCOTT li-Jun-96 BORIS, SCOTT Totals Check Humber 51717 BORIS, SCOTT Check Humber 5171$ BRACEWELL ENGIOTERIHG 51718 5171$ 51718 18-Jun-9$ 18-Jun-96 18-Jun-9$ BRACEHELL ENGINEERING BRACEWELL ENGINEERING BRACEWELL ENGINEERING Totals Check Number 51718 BRACEWELL ENGINEERING Check Humber S1719 BUDGET PRINTING 51719 18-Jun-9$ BUDGET PRIlfTlNG Totals Check Humber 51719 BUDGET PRINTING Qieck Humber 51720 COP IMAGING SYSTEMS 51720 51720 lS-Jun-96 18-Jun-96 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS Totals Check Humber 51720 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS Check Number 51721 CHAMPION AUTO STORES 51721 19-Jun-96 CHAMPION AUTO STORES Totals Check Number 51721 CHAMPION AUTO STORES Check Number 51722 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 51722 51722 19-Jun-96 19-Jun-96 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH Totals Check Number 51722 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH Check Number 51723 COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. Transaction Asount 19.15 100.00 100.00 $9.23 $9.22 $9.23 207.68 34.62 34.62 189.88 280.67 470.55 11.70 11.70 21.25 34.70 55.95 51723 18-Jun-96 COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO.871.23 Totals Check Number 51723 COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO.871.23 Check Number 51724 CROWN MARKING INC. 51724 18-Jun-96 CROWN MARKING INC.38.61 Totals Check Number 51724 CROWN MARKING INC.38.61 Page 2 Coements BIKE APPAREL MAIN? MGMT SOFTWARE MAINT MGMT SOFTWARE MAINT MGMT SOFTWARE REPORT COVERS, STOP WORK JULY LEASE COPIER MAINTENANCE MISC PARTS EASEL DOG LICENSE REFUND REIMB. JULY INSURANCE DESK SIGN 20 Jun 1996 Thu 4:15 PM Check Register City of oroao Check number Date Name Qieck Nuff^er 51725 51725 CULLIGAN 19-Jun-96 CULLIGAN Total* Check Number 51725 CULLIGAN Check Humber 51726 CTS UNIFOEJ^S 51726 18-Jun-96 CYS UNIFCSMS Total* Oieck Humber 51726 CYS UNIFORMS Check Number 51727 DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION 51727 51727 18-Jun-96 18-Jun-96 DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION Totals Check Number 51727 DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION Check Number 51728 ECKLOFF DOCKS 51728 51728 19-Jun-96 19-Jun-96 ECKLOFF DOCKS ECKLOFF DOCKS Totals Check Number 51728 ECKLOFF DOCKS Check Number 51729 ESS BROTHERS k SONS 51729 51729 51729 19-Jun-96 19-Jun-96 19-Jun-96 ESS BROTHERS k SONS ESS BROTHERS k SONS ESS BROTHERS k SONS Totals Check Number 51729 ESS BROTHERS k SONS Check Number 51730 EXPRESS MESSENGER 51730 18-Jun-96 EXPRESS MESSENGER Totals Check Number 51730 EXPRESS MESSENGER Check Number 51731 FACTORY DIRECT FURNITURE 51731 51731 51731 18-Jun-96 18- Jun-96 19- Jun-96 FACTORY DIRECT FURNITURE FACTORY DIRECT FURNITURE FACTORY DIRECT FURNITURE Totals Check Number 51731 FACTORY DIRECT FURNITURE Check Number 51732 FEED RITE CONTROLS 51732 19-Jun-96 FEED RITE CONTROLS Total* Check Number 51732 FEED RITE CONTROLS Check Number 51733 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY Transactton AifiOunt 29.90 29.90 541.40 541.40 784.55 645.16 1,429.71 3,538.07 42.65 3,580.72 233.24 90.53 625.16 948.93 34.05 34.05 227.50 225.75 279.99 733.24 30.00 30.00 Page 3 Consents JLm, JULY SERVICE MISC UNIFORMS MICROFICHE AS BUILTS MICROFICHE PERMITS HEWITT DOCKS SUPPORT BRACKET ADJUSTMENT RINGS ADJUSTMENT RINGS ADJUSTMENT RINGS PACKAGE TO FiNDOT TV CART PRINTER STAND ROUND TABLE CONTAINER CHARGE 20 Jun 1996 Ihu 4:15 m Check Register City of Orono Check Humber Dete Heme Check Humber 51733 51733 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY 18-Jun-96 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY Totals Check Number 51733 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY Check Humber 51735 GALL'S INC. 51735 51735 18-Jun-96 18-Jun-96 GALL'S INC, GALL'S INC. Totals Check Number 51735 GALL'S INC. Check Number 51736 GENUINE PARTS CO. 51736 18-Jun-96 GENUINE PARTS CO, Totals Check Number 51736 GENUINE PARTS CO, Check Number 51737 GOMAN. DAVID J. 51737 18-Jun-96 GOMAN. DAVID J. Totals Check Number 51737 GOMAN. DAVID J. Check Number 51738 GOPHER STATE ONE-CAIX INC. 51738 51738 18-Jun-96 18-Jun-96 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC Totals Chec'-'. Number 51738 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC Check Number 51739 HAMEL BUILDING CENTER Check Number 51740 HEALTHPARTNERS Transaction Amount 169.00 169.00 71.94 53.93 125.87 181.12 181.12 35.88 35.88 76.13 76.12 152.2b 51739 18-Jun-96 HAMEL BUILDING CENTER 80.24 51739 05-Jun-96 HAMEL BUILDING CENTER 1.43 51739 18-Jun-96 HAMEL BUILDING CENTER 457.65 Totals Check Number 51739 HAMEL BUILDING CENTER 539.32 Page 4 Comments FIRE ALARM MONITORING Check Number 51734 51734 G k 19-Jun-96 K SERVICES Q k K SERVICES 10.28 RATHBUN 51734 19-Jun-96 G k K SERVICES 67.17 STREET EMPLOYEES 51734 19-Jun-96 G k K SERVICES 4.73 STEFFENHAGEN 51734 19-Jun-96 G k K SERVICES 10 28 RATHBUN 51734 19-Jun-96 G k K SERVICES 54 32 STREET EMPLOYEES 51734 19-Jun-96 G k K SERVICES 4.73 STEFFENHAGEN 51734 18-Jun-96 0 k K SERVICES 47.09 FLOOR MATS 51734 18-Jun-96 0 k K SERVICES 58 34 FLOOR MATS 51734 18-Jun-96 Q k K SERVICES 47.09 FLOOR MATS Totals Check Humber 51734 0 k K SERVICES 304.03 BOOTS RAIN JACKET MISC PARTS SPECIAL DETAIL KAGES MAY SERVICES MAY SERVICES LUMBER FOR GATES REPAIR CASCO RINK BENCH SATELLITE ENCLOSURE ! ; 20 Jun 1996 Thu 4:IS PM Check Number Check Number 51740 51740 51740 Date Name 51740 HEALTHPARTNERS 18 - Jun - 96 u ' T.THPARTNERS 18-Jun-96 heal : IPaRTNERS 18 -Jun-96 HEALTHPARTNERS Totals Check Number 51740 HEALTHPARTNERS Check Register City of Orono Transaction Amount 313.50 2.671.06 1.706.09 4.690.65 Page 5 Comments JVir HEALTH IN5URAIICB JULY HEALTH INSURANCE JULY HEALTH INSURANCE Qieck Number 51741 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 51741 18-Jun-96 Totals Check Number HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 51741 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 634.45 634.45 SPECIAL BILLING Check Number 51742 I.C.I.E. ST. MARY'S UNIV. 51742 19-Jun-96 Totals Check Number I.C.I.E. ST. MARY'S UNIV, 51742 I.C.I.E. ST. MARY'S UNIV 400.00 400.00 SAFETY TRAINING Oieck Number 51743 IMAGINALITY 51743 20-Jun-96 Totals Check Number IMAGI.NALITY 51743 IMAGINALITY 2.500.00 2.500.00 TEE SIGNS - 1ST HALF Check Number 51744 51744 JIM HATCH SALES CO. 19-Jun-96 Totals Check Number JIM HATCH SALES CO 51744 JIM HATCH SALES CO Check Number 51745 51745 JOHN BECKMAN 19-Jun-96 Totals Check Number JOHN BECKMAN 51745 JOHN BECKMAN Check Number 51746 51746 LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY 20-Jun-96 Totals Check Number LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY 51746 LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY Check Number 51747 51747 LAKE MANAGEMNT INC. 19-Jun-96 Totals Check Number LAKE MANAGEMNT INC. 51747 LAKE MANAGEMNT INC. Qieck Number 51748 51748 LAKE MTKA CONSERVATION DIST. 18-Jun-96 Totals Check Number LAKE MTKA CONSERVATION DIST. 51740 LAKE MTKA CONSERVATION DIST, 132.15 132.15 355.73 355.73 49.68 49.68 653.50 653.50 6.181.88 6.181.88 PUSH BROOM, SHOVEL HANDLE GUARD RAIL FOR BACK ENTRC ROLL STORAGE TUBES POND MAINTENANCE 3RD QTR PAYMENT 20 Jun 1996 Thu 4:IS Pn Check Register City of Orono Check Hunber Date Name Qieck Number S1749 51749 LAWN DETAILERS INC. 18-Jun-96 LAWN DETAILERS INC Totals Check Number 51749 LAWN DETAILERS INC. Check Number 51750 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT 51750 18-Jun-96 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT Totals Check Number 51750 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT Check Number 51751 MAGIC CLEANERS 51751 18-Jun-96 MAGIC CLEANERS Totals Check Number 51751 MAGIC CLEANERS Check Number 51752 PffiTRO waste control C^WISSION 51752 19-Jun-96 METRO WASTE CONTROL CO^WISSION Totals Check Number 51752 METRO WASTE CONTROL CCI4MISSION Check Number 51753 MIDWEST ASPHALT Check Number 51754 51754 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO 19-Jun-96 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Totals Check Number 51754 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Check Number 51755 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 51755 19-Jun-96 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Totals Check Number 51755 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Check Number 51756 MN DEPT OF HEALTH Check Number 51757 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Transaction Amount 2.145.22 2.145.22 14.90 14.90 151.76 151.76 23.746.00 23.746.00 917.50 917.50 45.00 45.00 Comments MAY LAWN CARE 1 LB. LINE BLANKET CLEANINGS JULY SERVICE 51753 19-Jun-96 MIDWEST ASPHALT 877.40 HAND PATCH 51753 l8-Jun-96 MIDWEST ASPHALT 428.78 HAND PATCH 51753 05-Jun-96 MIDWEST ASPHALT 723.04 HAND PATCH 51753 04-Jun-96 MIDWEST ASPHALT 216.37 HAND PATCH 51753 04-Jun-96 MIDWEST ASPHALT 48.86 HAND PATCH Totals Check Number 51753 MIDWEST ASPHALT 2,294.45 POP FOR RESALE ACETYLENE Page 6 51756 19-Jun-96 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 23.00 O'BRIE-WTR SYSTEM OPERATE 51756 13-Feb-96 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 23.00 HANSEN-SEMINAR 51756 13-Feb-96 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 23.00 BRINKHAUS-SEMINAR Totals Check Number 51756 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 69.00 20 Jun 1996 Thu 4:IS PM Check Number Check Number 51757 Check Regiittr City cf Qroho Date Name 51757 MN DEPT OF REV1:NUE 18-Jun-96 MN DEPT OP REVENUE Totals Check 51757 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Qitck Number 51758 51758 51758 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY 20-Jun-96 20-Jun-96 Totals Check Niiinber MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGETJCY 51758 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Check Number 51759 51759 MN WOMEN IN CITY GOVERNMENT 18-Jun-96 Totals Check Number MN WOMEN IN CITY GOVERNMENT 51759 MN WOMEN IN CITY GOVERNMENT Check Number 51760 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL Transaction Asount 33.00 33.00 23.00 23.00 46.00 15.00 15.00 Page Comments MARCH SALES TAX DUE SKREEN-SWR TREAT. OPERATR GREGRY-SWR TREaT. OPERATR 1996 MEMBERSHIP-GOETTEN 51760 51760 18-Jun-96 18-Jun-96 Totals Check Number NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL 51760 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL 23.06 23.05 46.11 SAFETY/HEALTH MANUAL SAFETY/HEALTH MANUAL Check Number 51761 NAVARRE HARDWARE 51761 51761 51761 51761 18-Jun-96 18-Jun-96 18-Jun-96 18-Jun 96 Totals Check Number NAVARRE HARDWARE NAVARRE HARDWARE NAVARRE HARDWARE NAVARRE HARDWARE 51761 NAVARRE HARDWARE 104.68 162.63 10.51 165.25 443.07 MISC SUPPLIES MISC SUPPLIES MISC SUPPLIES MISC SUPPLIES Check Number 51762 NORTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER 51762 18-Jun-96 Totals Check Number NORTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER 51762 NORTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER Check Number 51763 51763 51763 NORTH STAR TURF 19-Jun-96 19-Jun-95 Totals Check Number NORTH STAR TURF NORTH STAR TURF 51763 NORTH STAR TURF Qieck Number 51764 51764 O'SULLIVANS AUTO REPAIR 19-Jun-96 O'SULLIVANS AUTO REPAIR Totals Check Number 51764 O'SULLIVANS AUTO REPAIR 1.260.00 1*260.00 2.04 3.935.18 3.937.22 17.30 17.30 FALL PTAC TRAINING MISC PARTS GREENS MOWER OIL CHANGE Check Number 51765 OFFICE DEPOT 20 Jun 1996 Thu 4:15 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 51765 51765 OFFICE DEPOT 19-Jun-96 OFFICE DEPOT Totals Check Number 51765 OFFICE DEPOT Check Number 51766 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. 51766 19-Jun-96 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC Totals Check Number 51766 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. Check Number 51767 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR 51767 51767 51767 18-Jun-96 18- Jun-96 19- Jun-96 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR Totals Check Number 51767 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR Check Number 51768 PERSONNEL DECISIONS 51768 18-Jun-96 PERSONNEL DECISIONS Totals ChecK Number 51768 PERSONNEL DECISIONS Check Number 51769 PIONEER 51769 51769 18-Jun-96 ie-Jun-96 PIONEER PIONEER Totals Check Number 51769 PIONEER Check Number 51770 PRO TIRE k EXHAUST 51770 51770 19-Jun-96 10-Jun-96 PRO TIRE k EXHAUST PRO TIRE k EXHAUST Totals Check Number 51770 PRO TIRE k EXHAUST Check Number 51771 REED VENDING 51771 51771 20-Jun-96 19-Jun-96 REED VENDING REED VENDING Totals Check Number 51771 REED VENDING Check Number 51772 RICKS SUPERVALUE 51772 18-Jun-96 RICK^ SUPERVALUE Totals Check Number 51772 RICKS SUPERVALUE Check Number 51773 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES 51773 18-Jun-96 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES Transaction Amount 306.73 306.73 17.93 17.93 26.63 26.63 15.98 69.24 205.00 2Q5.00 49.00 48.20 97.20 48.79 34.86 83.65 109.20 92.10 201.30 41.30 41.30 6,451.02 Page 8 Comments MISC SUPPLIES CHIPS FOR RESALE 8171 TON CHARGES 8174 TOW CHARGES SHIFT COVER POSITION REVIEWS ORDINANCE 8147 APPL. FOR VACATION-BETZ 8173 OIL CHANGE, TIRE SRV 8171 OIL CHANGE, BRAKES CANDY FOR RESALE CANDY FOR RESALE MISC SUPPLIES JULY ASSESSING FEE i I 1 20 Jun 1996 Check Register Thu «:X5 PH City of OronO' Check Transact ion Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Numbe^51773 P^LF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES Tciuuls Check Number 51773 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES 6.451.02 Check Number 51774 SERV A CLEAN 51774 19-Jun-96 SERV A CLEAN X.075.05 CARPET CLEANING Totals Check Number 51774 SERV A CLEAN 1.075.05 Check Number 51775 SNYDER DRUG STORES 51775 20-Jun-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 6.06 FILM DEVELOPING 51775 18-Jun-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 6.21 FILM DEVELOPING 51775 18-Jun-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 8.80 FILM DEVELOPING 51775 18-Jun-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 29.98 FILM DEVELOPING 51775 18-Jun-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 7.63 MISC SUPPLIES 51775 18-Jun-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 10.52 FILM DEVELOPING Totals Check Number 51775 SNYDER DRUu STORES 69.20 Check Number 51776 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC. 51776 18-Jun-96 SRF CC'^SULTING GROUP INC.155.40 T.H.12 STUDY Totals Check Number 51776 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC Check number 51777 STATE OF MINNESOTA 51777 lB-Jun-96 STATE OF MINNESOTA Totals Check Number 51777 state of Minnesota Check Number 51778 STREICHERS 51778 19-Jun-96 STREICHERS Totals Check Number 51778 STREICHERS Check Number 51779 TOMCHECK. LARRY 51779 l8-Jun-96 TOMCHECK. LARRY Totals Check Number 51779 TOMCHECK. LARRY Check Number 51780 TOP SQUADS 51780 51780 19-Jun-96 18-Jun-96 TOP SQUADS TOP SQUADS Totals Check Number 51780 TOP SQUADS Check Number 51781 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 51781 18-Jun-96 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 155.40 19.94 19.94 45.37 45.37 138.44 138.44 168.47 99.27 267.74 BLDG CODE SUPPLEMENT MAG HOLDER, HOLSTER REIMBURSE-MICROWAVE OVEN 8173 ELEC REPAIRS 8174 REPAIR ELEC. 251.13 UNIFORMS & EQUIPMENT 20 Jun 1996 Thu 4:15 PM Check Number Check Number Check Register City of Orono Date Name 517SI UNIF0KM3 0!3LlMi7ED Totala Check Number 51781 UNIFORMS CJILrMITED Transact ion Amount 251.13 Page 10 Comments Check Ru!!^er 51782 WARNING LITES OF MN 51782 19-Jun-96 Totals Check Number WARNING LITES OF MN 51782 WARNING LITES OF MN 99.05 99.05 BARRICADE RENTAL Check hunber 51783 WIDMER INC 51783 19-Jun-96 Totals Check Number WIDMER INC 51783 WIDMER INC Check Number 51784 ZARNOTK BRUSH WORKS 803.50 803.50 REPAIR WTPl LBAX 51784 19-Jun-96 Totals Check Number ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS 51794 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS 897.80 897.80 ELGIN BROOMS Grand Total 74,131.36 20 Jvm 1996 mx 4:1S PW User Initisls Buffer Name Finance CKM * rsday 20 June 1996 History Records Read Records Selected Number of Pages 3110 132 11 Selected by Check Number And Check Number 1 Check Register City of Orono Page 11 4 10 PM Start 4:15 PM Finish Greater Than 51708 Less Than S1785 Sorted by Check Numl^r Totals No Page Breaks INFORMATION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING COUNOLHECna JUN 2 4 1996 OF cnvoponoio The Brimeyer Group, Inc. EXiCLTM St.^RCH CONSULTANTS 904 Main Street, Suite 205 Hopkins, MM 55343 voice: (612) 945-0246 fax: (612) 945-0102 e-mail: brimgroup®aol.com o> Summer Issue June 1996 Vol. 4, Issue 3 Effective Governing Boards By Janies Brimeyer—President This is the first in a series of articles rd;;;arJin^ the effectiveness of ^overnin^ public and non-profit boards. Information and concepts contained in this series of articles are based on t^ie book, Boards That Make /I Difference, by John Carver. Watch for upcoming articles in future Brim Report newsletters From a governance perspective, the relevant factor that sets most non profit and public organizations apart from profit organizations is not in the essence of management but the lack of a process to evaluate a product, ser vice and cost Public and on-profit organizations all suffer from the lack of a rigorous market test by consumers to decide if the cost of a product is worth the cost of its production. This leads public and non-profit organiza tions to operate in a "muted market." Some of the flaws of governance for public boards are: Spending time on the trivial, short-term biases; taking a reactive stance; reviewing and rehash ing; leaky accountability; and the diffusion of authority. Carver creates a model for a new governance, encom passing the following concepts: 1. Cradle vision: Systematic encour agement to think the unthinkable and dream. 2 Address fundamental values: Ensure that the board focuses on values 3. External focus: More concern with the needs and markets than with internal issues. 4. Outcome-driven organizing systems: Establish a mission in out come terms. Enforce the mission as a central organizing focus. 5. Separate large issues from small: The ability to discern is a big item. 6. Force forward thinking: Strategic leadership demands the long-term view'point. 7. Enable proactivity: Press towards leading, not towards reacting. 8. Facilitate diversity and unity: Optimize the richness of diversity in board composition and opinion. 9. Relationships to relevant constitu encies: Define where the constituen cies fit into the scheme 10. A common basis for discipline: Provide a rational basis for the disci pline a board enforces upon itself. 11. Delineate the board's role in common topics: Enable the articula tion of roles without isolation. 12. Information: Introduce precise distinctions about the nature of the information needed to govern. 13 Over-control vs. under-contiol: Verify those aspects of management that need tight vs. loose control. 14. Use board time efficiently: Enable the board to use the precious gift of time more productively. Utilizing these concepts and prin ciples, governing boards should be asking themselves the question, "What are vve providing, for whom, at w'hat cost?" The results are an outcome- based approach to governance. Brimeyer Available for Consulting and Training The Brimey^er Group recently pro vided consulting work for Wright County and the cities of Becker, Chanhassen and Robbinsdale. James Brimeyer chaired the "Goal Setting and Strategic Planning for Small Cities" panel at the League of Minne sota Cities conference in June. Later in Juno he is scheduled to speak on the topic of "How ’ to be an Effective Board Member" for the Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association. The Brimeyer Group, Inc EXECimvt SCAJkCH CONSULTANTS 904 Main Street, Suite 205 Hopkins, MN 55343 (612) 945-0246 Effective Governing Boards Mayor and City Council City of Orono Box f>6 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Route: ___Colleagues ----File in notebook The Brimeyer Group Assignments Recent/Current: •City Manager— City of Benson, MN • Director of Economic Development—City of Elk River, MN •General Manager of Municipal Untilities— City of Elk River, MN • County Administrator— St Louis County, MN •City Planner—City of Minnetonka, MN • Electrica’ Engineer- Williams Electric Representative Searches: • City Administrator— City of Northfield, MN •Clerk Administrator— City of Centerville, MN •Community Develop ment Director—City of Northfield, MN •City Manager—City of Mankato, MN •City Engineer/Director of Public Works—City of Marshall, MN •CouiUy Coordinator— Benton County, MN •City Administrator—City of Emmetsburg, lA •Manager of Administra tive Services—BWBR Architects •City Manager—City of Sheldon, lA • Executive Director— Southwest Minnesota Initiative Fund •Executive Director— League of Minnesota Cities Labor Task Force Findings Outlined One of the most difficult problems facing businesses today is finding qualified employees. Chaired by James Brimeyer, the Labor Task Force of the TvvinVVest Chamber of Com merce was asked to prepare a report identifying employment challenges. Following is a summary of the Task Force's findings —which was recently submitted to the TwinV\ est Board of Directors: • Transportation is also an employ ment concern. A long commute, parking ramp fees, and other trans portation expenses are obstacles — especially for minimum-wage and lower-wage employees. • Inadequate training in certain skill areas is another concern. • Today's workers are seeking more job flexibility, job sharing, and •opporhanities to work at home. • For some, welfare and other social ..programs meet more of a family's Key Employmcnl Issues *•>'' • The TwinWest service area and th.S..i state of Minnesota as a whole have a income provided from low-w’age jobs. low unemployment rate—under 3%. • Due to social security restrictions and other issues, companies may not be taking full advantage of the pool of potential employees who are part of the aging population • Affordable housing, which is unavailable in many communities,« is a barrier to employment. • The high cost of child care is a primary barrier for many potential employees. • For recent immigrants and other non-English-speaking Minnesotans the language barrier and the unavailability of English as a Second Language (ESL) programs are obstacles to employment. • Finally, due to employer trends of downsizing and restructuring, today's employee has less trust and feels that employers have little or no loyalty to their employees. Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge Building 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville. Minnesota 55113 June 14. 1996 Mr. Gary Ringus 319 Harrington Drive Long Lake. Minnesota 553556 ^0 Dear Mr. Ringus: Thank you for your letter of May 9, 1996, summarizing our meeting of May 7 with the neighborhood groups that Mr. Murphy and yourself irpresent in Ix»ng Lake and Orono. I delayed responding until arrangements with Mr. Len Levine aiKl the implemcnters of successful reversible lane projects in Canada and elsewhere were taking shape. My understanding is that the Graffiti Bridge Association and the Concerned Citizens for Long Lake have agreed to have Mr. Levine facilitate our upcoming discussions involving the reversible lane proposal. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) is taking steps to enlist the ser/ices of National Engineering Technology (NET) Corporation for a feasibility study of a three-lane section with a reversible center lane in Long Lake and Orono on the current Trunk Highway 12 alignment. In the United States. Delean, the company that has implemented the reversible lanes in Winnipeg and Vancouver, operates under NET. Ken Curry, the engineer from Delean that Jonathon Tomhave has been communicating with, is the proposed study leader. I anticipate that we will involve representatives of the cities and neighborhood groups as part of the feasibility study by participating in a discussion with NET of design and access related issues. This meeting could happen in late June or early July, depending on the schedules and availability of those persons requested to attend. We will be in touch through Mr. Levine to set up these meetings as soon as possible. We look forward to working with you. Sincerely, Charles A. Siggerud, P.E. Division Engineer cc:Leonard Levine Wayzata City Council Long Lake City Council Orono City Council An Equal Opportunity Employer i May 9, 1996 Mr Chuck Siggerud IMinnesota Department of Transportation 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville. MN 55113 Dear Mr. Siggerud: Vi We want to thank you and your team for actively participating in a meeting with us on Tuesday evening, May 7, to consider alternative perspectives regarding Trunk Highway 12. It was a productive evening that left us with common goais as we adjourned that session. The format of our meeting allowed us to agree to the following conclusions: 1. With the cooperation of members of our group, MnDOT will visit with advisors and public engineers from Winnipeg, Vancouver, and potentially other cities where reversible lanes have proven t > be elective traffic systems. Thank you for agreeing to fund this activity. We would only add that it would be more beneficial for MnDOT to visit the Canadian sites as well as inviting them to visit here. 2. Between now and June 22, you will consider instating the reversible lane plan as a viable TSM alternative. This, of course, would occur as this concept continues to be proven as a legitimate solution to traffic movement. 3.We will continue to work closely with you while updating other agencies and political entities of our plan. Thanks again for your openness in considenng the reversible lane concept. We look forward to your developing this idea as a prototype for other cities and states in this area. Sincerely ciationrof LonaLThe Grafi|ti ^dge Associationrqf Longl^ake/Orono Concerned Citizens For Long Lake cc: Tom O’Keefe, Patti Loken - MnDOT City Councils of Wayzata, Long Lake, Orono Len Levine JUN j 4 15'hI FREDRIKSON & BYRON, P.A. Auurruf^s At Lau June 21, 1996 1100 lntcrnati(»nal Centre 900 Scomd Avenue South Minneapolis. \!N tMJl j 47-700(» ^\\ (hi:) U7-7077 Direct Dial No, (612) :47-7053 Orono LMCD Board Member City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Proposed Ordinance Regarding Storage Boats Dear Sir/Madam: I represent Bill Hawks. Mr. Hawks has asked me to contact you to discuss the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District’s ("District") proposed ordinance banning storage boats. As you may remember, I made a presentation when you first considered the proposed ordinance on Wednesday, June 12, 1996. At the June 12, 1996 meeting, I sensed that the District had some concerns about how the residents of Lake Minnetonka may feel about housdxKits such as Mr. Hawks’. Mr. Hawics and I appreciate the importance to the District of the neighbors’ opinions about the houseboat and about the proposed ordinance, and we believe that the District should give considerable deference to the wishes of the residents of Lake Minnetonka -- especially those on Halstead Bay, where Mr. Hawks lives -- when deciding whether to pass the proposed ordinance. After the June 12 meeting, we talked to Mr. Hawks’ neighbors to see how they felt about Mr. Hawks’ houseboat and about the proposed oidinanc.;. Though we expected that a substantial number of people would support Mr. Hawks, we were astonished by the overwhelming support the people around the area had for the houseboat. In light of the support we found for Mr. Hawks and the number of people opposing the proposed ordinance, we prepared a petition to the '-ake Minnetonka Conservation District. I enclose a copy of the most recent version of the petition for your review. As you can see, in the three days that we have been circulating this petition, about 110 residents signed the petition supporting Mr. Hawks and opposing the proposed ordinance. Though the sheer number of people willing to support Mr. Hawks is significant, what is equally impressive is the overwhelming support for Mr. Hawks in the people that we contacted. So far, every resident that we have spoken with has been willing to sign the petition. FREDRIKSON & BYRON. RA Attorneys At Law Orono LMCD Board Member June 21, 1996 Page 2 We feel there are several sound reasons for the peoples’ support of Mr. Hawks. First, the hous^x>at is a very attractive, unobtrusive solution to a problem ^at many residents of Lake Minnetonka have when trying to protect their boats. The houseboat surely is a more attractive and effective alternative tfjan the canopied "circus tents" that ?re common around the lake. Second, the houseboat is not substantially different in size and shape from other houseboats on the lake, and it is far more attractive. It does not make sense to ban Mr. Hawks’ houseboat from the lake, where there are other houseboats on the lake that are the same basic size and shape, but are far more conspicuous and far less attractive. Third, there is an element of fairness involved in the proposed ordinance. Mr. Hawks built the houseboat in reliance on the existing legality of the houseboat under the present Code of Ordinances. To change the law after Mr. Hawks has spent a considerable amount of money would deprive Mr. Hawks of the use of his houseboat without any compensation to him for the loss of its use. We hope this petition gives you helpful information when next considering the proposed ordinance. Please contact me if you have any questions or would like additional information. AEH/rg/550580 Enclosure Bill Hawkscc: N FROM : H h UKS ^€ST 6124727141 Phone no . :May. 20 1996 09:2lflM P2 PExmoN TO piSiS Bii^HAWKS- HOUSEBOAT „,. ss'ss Dijtrict U considerint whether to adopt i" ordlna^ dejtgneo p M?houseboat m the mtmn.r for which ,t w« oiKhded. we urce the Lahe Miene.onha Coos«v.do« houseboats in the future. Name "r f • -h fO ^ M (hL Sr^ ^vtKX^ ^ ~ ~"}ir bO^ 10473 24. mh -uefr^.. b.a —_s^.€^r-^ 4.L .. P^ ^Ocet^df kdf^, 1_¥s-5T g-7^ /^ 1^.----------^ W^Crf '1^4'a IAla *^ LLZ^Sjl <^0^ <3^7i>g^i^efe/*>/«^^@!!^^ ^ A ^ 7/^ 4/- C/>vf'W '^VhjmjL HY)/^ wMi Lmu.kjpin di mJ Mwi piro ^ 1Kaisir^ j^iv ■ ^ifimJi .KiA] GvrAQu'i^ 6M/-J cLciihf^^ L>j^ ___________^ —Th<y^C fi t^is y^yri ol^ - ^ y ^I^gililSilnlgM /^~?^ K»}A)^f^/)/' (H(°~f li^f ^^!ck'^^fg^<^r- ^ 1 /yy r nrCUf, l^in^ l^(=^ '(^rMPTC P 4i_ C^. I n~\ FROM : Th€ HRLKS NEST 6124727141 PHONE NO. :May. 2fi 1996 09:27(:^ pj Address C/c?re. Gou/d 0^ 22 ~7^ d / 'VhuL^, Qk, x4ff.C/:?5 si 4^ ^ J.(^'7s' )l^tsLlr^j l^uJ I^CUiul ^53t i^ • ■ ■? iamfi Address •JIIIMHI U 5" ^.S7.r I)[Z S^6f /^^^/-nry^nr^^t>ond __ S^lcA\<iHJ^ 6C/iUtXo y^U. 7 IW^ .^k; Ol^SrLA ^~a\,!^ kiujkkzt 1W._^f d Io6K'( ^ A :yKk^nf^hhu \ li a-^i ______ tbck^A liiAj rROi : THE HAJ-CS NEST 6124727U1 PHOre NO. :NAy. 20 1996 0S:5lOn Pi ams Address CflDiffifima ^ - u)latts 'HuiU^cisiaQ>^ n ^(^Oicr Ko__ ..^££iJ^----- ill!I (0<o‘<^ I] rjVjnfijajO.whi^ is if.^ch gbir^riTf "L.-Fv:^?o sli(S2 (LlLii-£^ Uj^ 'r\~ (nJ)D^ / /Wf/^ / J ' LaIPj^. R fjjL. _-Huxo ^iClLorQ- '\\^^c.K^ph\ pi___., STiio nP-_______w>ce VJcij J^ortett> r/v ’<(kpg/iyCig/U5g PktcJ-^ tfi-Lhe^—cu-difR. Om(h-^^^i]% ^ ^_________mJ^r// "A v C a ^U a IIS- 3JIIC (bAcMrJ C kj-^[Y\xTLMrvtA ' 5^1 (I omJ toM\ {^(tll lariO mponri fun^^3g>y Qp liiltiuj ^ LRKst\dx.-^ \ .A f f^iTJ ^ ^ \ I. / iams 1^/^y^ ll-.^ J Address .1 Comments t„ JM -MarnKL ^Wyo /7'7(fv/j}\ XdlL ^ykr^ 7 / p>j^ -A -^hLcr^ t^iomj A<y^ j/JcM/^jili M^i/pJ Comments * f C?cu/(^ /-^ aif?/Tg. I c - .^ /~aa/^S /^/'/UC, ^ ^OCJ '^7 Xiec* 1c^6^[ • *'•N cfy t/u >v ^ ' 2^: L^MfS^ pS'OpjTr Qj/i/i/^