Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-23-1996 Council PacketAGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 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 APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Meeting of September 9, 1996 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS X PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - William Stoddard Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADiMINISTRATOR’S REPORT * 3. #2101 Charles W. Hommeyer, Kenneth B. Rolland and Jeffrey A. Bowen, 4119, 4125 and 4127 Oak Street - Vacation/Final Subdivision a. ) Vacation - Resolution b. ) Final Plat - Resolution ^v3t>4!^Tf>^135 Paul Hedlund/Edna Albee Estate, 1575 Long Lake Boulevard - Variance - Resolution >^^.^*'#2159 James & Joann Jundt, 1400 Bracketts Point Road - Variance - Resolution 6. #2168 Todd & Donna Rooke, 4190 Highwood Road - Variance - Resolution ^'"1. #2169 Michael Renard, 1185 Tonkawa Road - Renewal Variance - Resolution #2170 Larry H. Nelson, 3335 Crystal Bay Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Resolution * 9. #2171 Minnegasco, Division of NorAm Energy Corp., 530 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Renewal Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 10. #2172 Gerald and Nancy Bloms, 4195 Forest Lake Drive - Variance - Resolution «yil. #2173 Chuck Downey/Gary Hegenes, 2675 Shadywood Road - Variance - Resolution \ 12. Request for Sewer - John Maresh, 2085 Sixth Avenue North MAYOR/COUNCn REPORT ENGINEER REPOH f 13. Bid Award - Old Crystal Bay Road Bike/Hike Trail .^14. Payment Request #3 - Willow Drive Reconstruction Project ^A'15. Payment Request #1 - Lift Station #28 Renovation Cliy ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 16. Appointment of Alternate to Cable Commission 17. Food-grade Hydraulic Fluid for Floor Hoists in Public Works Building 18. AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23,19%, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT (•19.) licenses •o' C2fl^LS . UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 09/23 10/02 10/02 10/07 10/14 10/21 10/28 11/04 11/05 11/11 11/12 11/18 11/25 11/28 11/29 - Council meeting 7:(X) p.m. - Council Work Session 8:00 a.m. - Public Information Meeting Regarding County Road 6-7:00 p.m. - Park Commission 7:15 p.m. - Council meeting 7:00 p.m. - Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. - Council meeting 7:00 p.m. - Park Commission meting 7:15 p.m. - Election Day - No Public Meetings Between 6 and 8 p.m. Polls Open 7:00 a.m. - 8:00 p.m. - HOLIDAY - Veterans’ Day - Tuesday - Council meeting 7:00 p.m. - Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. - Council meeting 7:00 p.m. - HOLIDAY - Thanksgiving Day - HOLIDAY Public A ttendance Meeting D ate ^(o eT C ouncil □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other Please fill out the information REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER £>r\ ^1>i> ^oc 4. (jAocff jtO 5.. 6.. 7.. 8.. 9.. 10.. 11. 12.. 13. 14. 15._ 091395.4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 9, 1996 XROLL "^3 The Council met on the above mentioned date Nvith the following members present: Mayor Edward J Callahan, Jr., Council Members Gabriel Jabbour, J Diann Goetten, ano^ Charles Kelley Council Member JoEllen Hurr was absent. Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, City Engineer Glenn Cook, Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gatfron, and Recorder Sherry Frost Mayor Callahan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p m (#1) PENNY STEELE, COUNTY COMMISSIONER Penny Steele, Orono's representative on the Hennepin County Board, was present. She stated she serves 29 cities in District 7 and wanted to meet those she represents. Callahan noted the quick response by Steele in dealing with one issue where Steele assisted the City. Jabbour also commented on the mediation performed by Steele regarding tax forfeiture parcel on Saga Hill and the legislative bill regarding lake access Kelley questioned the interaction between the Hennepin County Board and the Met Council and the vision between the respective elected and appointed boards. Steele said the boards view growth differently w ithin the broad range of forcing growth back to the central city or allowing the marketplace to dictate growth She was concerned with the Met Council's leaning toward central growth and dictating where people reside. Transportation, housing, and land affordability were mentioned. Kelley asked that the County Board assist the City in expressing opinions to the Met Council. He cited growth in commercial real estate values and the hope for a residual benefit to suburban residential real estate taxes Steele noted a misnomer of suburban wealth and commented on the need for more suburban representation on the board. (*H2) CONSENT AGENDA Items #5, 10, II, 13, 17, and 18 were added to the Consent Agenda. Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (*#3) REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 26, 1996 Jabbour moved. Goetten seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of August 26. 1996. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0 • ^ U' MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER % 1996 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Park Commissioner David Beal informed the Council of the recommendation by the Park ^ Commission to extend the trail to the teen center. He also noted the continuing work on the Park Master Plan for the Comprehensive Plan PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Commissioner Charles Schroeder had no report at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#4) #2151 JOHN AND JOANNE HURD, 2795 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - PitSOLUTlON #3756 The applicants were present along with their architect, Charles Coombs. Mabusth reported that the proposal is to raze the existing residence and rebuild. The property in question is located in the LR-IC, 1/2 acre residential zoning. This property exceeds the area standard and meets the 100' lot width at both the shoreline and the 75' setback. Mabusth noted the difficulty of the area with the majority of homes in the area being set 175' from the 924.4 elevation. The existing residence is 24' beyond the average lakeshore setback which includes the lower level principal structure and the two upper level decks. The amended application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their August meeting. Mabusth said the applicant worked with three other neighboring property owners to determine an agreed upon lakeshore setback for new construction. These property owners and the Hurds agreed upon a setback line which was determined by drawing a line from the location of the outer two homes owned by the Thielmanns and the Ericksons. There would still be an encroachment of the 3 level bay addition of 7' and a main level deck at 17'. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996 (#4 - #2151 John and Joanne Hurd - Continued) Mabusth noted that the City does not recognize the agreed upon line but shall adress variances to the average lakeshore setback line as defined in zoning code The property encroaches the code's a\erage lakeshore setback by 11' for the 3-story bay and the grade level screened porch by 17'. The southwest comer of the main level deck further encroaches this setback line by 20' The setback line pushes the new construction to the east creating an excess of hardcover in the 250-500' setback area The amended plan calls for 23.7% in this zone where 25% is allowed The 250-500' zone w ill consist of an excess of 671 s f or 8 9®o excess where 30% is allowed overall. Mabusth combined the hardcover totals for the two zones and presented it in that manner The Planning Commissioners did not seek any additional hardcover removals and supported the application as presented accepting the hardcover excess and the agreed upon setback line. Coombs pointed out that the setback line drawn was an attempt to maintain green space. The projection still encroaching the line was said to not be visible by either neighboring side. He also noted the desire to not disturb the site and maintain the hill and trees. Goetten said she was present at both Planning Commission review s and appreciated the work of the applicant in working out the situation w ith their neighbors She said she personally perfers any excess in hardcover to be located further back on the lot and away from lake Goetten sees no problem with the existing boathouse as it is attractive and in excellent condition She did note, however, that the Council would not look favorably on any future hardcover variance. Jabbour questioned why the 0-75' and 75-250* zones were noted together instead of separately Mabusth said it was done to show the impact of the project on the entire lot adding that this combination has been asked for in the past. Jabbour said he prefers to keep the zones separated to eliminate any clustering by the lake. There were no public comments Jabbour moved. Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution #3756. Vote: Ayes 4. Nays 0. (*#5) #2155 NANCY KRAUSE AND DON HANDLIN, 3860 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - RESOLUTION #3757 Jabbour mov ed, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution #3757, approving a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for Nancy Krause and Dan Handlin and the City of Orono at 3860 North Shore Drive Vote Ayes 4, Nays 0. (m . --- ^ -• "T minutes of the regular orono cm' council MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996 (#6) #2160 DAVID DOTZENROTH, 3225 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCES RESOLUTION #3758 The applicant was present. Gaffron reported that the property in question is ’ocated in the Casco Point area but presents no hardcover problems The issues involve setbacks The proposal calls for an addition to the detached garage of I6'x24', resulting in an accessory structure in excess of 1000 s.f Gaffron said an addition of 15-l/2'x24' would maintain it below 1000 s f The setbacks for side and street would then be 15' with the garage doors to the side. The doors currently face the stree» and are located .2’ from the street. Gaflfron reported the Planning Commission had no problem with the addition itself (noting the 13% hardcover in the 75-250’ zone) nor the change to the pitch of the roof The Commission did recommend that the garage doors be relocated to the east side and a redevelopment of the drivew ay also be to the side of the garage. The recommendation calls for the removal of the two doors facing the street and the concrete slab in the right- of-way. Gaffron said the applicant is concerned with loss of a large maple tree by harming the root system with the driveway relocation change recommended The driveway change would also likely require removal of some trees Gaffron also noted that the overhang as proposed would encroach into the right-of-way Staff'su^gc^ted a redesigning to eliminate this problem The application calls for variances to the side setback and street setback Jabbour inquired about the location of the black walnut trees on the property, which was noted Callahan asked if the trees w ere discussed by the Planning Commission. Dotzenroth said the trees were not discussed at length. He said the Commission noted a concern with the impact on traffic due to the location of the doors to the street side. Dotzenroth said his home is located at the end of Casco Point and the amount of traffic is low by the time it reaches his property He also noted the neighboring garages located with virtually no street setback Dotzenroth said he was concerned with adding hardcover on the property by the recommended change in driveway and garage door location. The cement slab located on the street side of the garage is now used for guest parking and eliminates the need to park cars in the adjacent park area. Dotzenroth personally parks on the east side of the garage now. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9,1996 (#6 - ^2160 David Dotzenroth - Continued) Kelley asked several questions regarding the number of garage doors, frost footings, and wall conditions of the garage. He said he was alluding to a possible rebuilding of the garage and questioned whether the garage should be moved to a better location on the lot if this w as the case Dotzenroth said he had no intention of taking the garage down and rebuilding it. It was his belief that the foundation was sound He did note that additional support might be needed if a bigger garage door was used Dotzenroth reported that the change to the roof pitch was to maintain the same architectural design of the Victorian- style house. There were no public comments. Jabbour said he agreed with the applicant's viewpoint in keeping vehicles away from the park area. He did believe the garage should be maintained below the 1000 s.f limit. Jabbour said he too was sensitive to the hardcover issue and did not want trees to be lost. Although the cement apron is on the right-of-way, Jabbour did not see the justification in adding the new driveway which would cause the increase in hardcover. Goetten said she was concerned with safety on Casco Point but with the amount of additional concrete required by the change in the driveway and the location of the property on Casco Point, the issue did not seem quite so relevant Goetten asked how the addition would be accessed. Dotzenroth noted that the garage would be used in a tandem manner. Goetten inquired about the time frame of the work being completed on the house and the new addition construction Dotzenroth said the home remodeling was close to being completed Jabbour was informed that the home had a full basement. Goetten noted receipt of a call from a neighbor, Mary Butler, who voiced her support of the proposal. Callahan asked why the Planning Commission tied the completion of the home remodeling to the garage addition Dotzenroth noted that the Commission did not want to see two projects going at one time and informed Callahan that the home would be completed by October 3 1 , 1996. Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to approve the garage addition as proposed by the applicant w ith the size of the garage remaining within the 1000 s f limitation The cantilevered roof is not to exceed the lot line and must remain out of the right-of-way. The doors will be allowed on the street side This approval was based on the hardships noted, the concern for additional hardcover, and the location of the trees MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9,1996 (#6 - #2160 David Dotzenroth - Continued) Kelley was concerned with what would occur if the garage was found needing total rebuilding. Jabbour said if walls have to be removed, the application would have to come back before the Council Gaffron said if the garage has to be rebuilt, the application would come back before the Council Kelley said he wanted the applicants to understand and the building inspector aware of possible problems Gaffron clarified that the garage must be within the 1000 s.f size limitation, conditions #3 and 4 were eliminated. Condition #5 requiring the completion of the house was to continue Also, Finding #6 was added noting the difference of opinion betw een the Council and Planning Commisrloa was due to the concern for the trees and need for additional concrete adding to hardcover, and the similarity between garages in the neighborhood. Callahan commented that the similarity issue would not be valid as impiovements have to begin somewhere. Jabbour asked why the push to finish the house was requested when no neighbors have complained Gaffron said the building permit allows for one year to finish the exterior work on project. Goetten said the concern was beginning another project when one was already begun. Dotzenroth noted a problem with a contractor setting the remodeling back in time. Vote: Aves 3, Navs 1, Callahan Motion carried. (#7) #2161 JAMES AND MELISSA EASLEY, 4105 HIGimOOD ROAD VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3759 The applicants were present Gaffron reported that the property consists of a 40' wide lot, 8500 s f in area, with an existing house located mainly in the 0-75' setback with a detached garage located near the street and side lot line in poor condition. The parking area is gravel. A sidewalk and retaining wall also e.xisl on the property. Gaffron informed the Council that it was the applicant's intention to tear down the garage and build a new detached garage within 3' of the side lot line and 25-30 ’ from the street. The doors would be located to the street side with parking in front. An enclosed stairway is proposed for the 2-story garage with a basement resulting in three levels. A future concept of the attachment of the garage to a new house located out of the 0-75' setback was also noted. •1 MINITES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996 (#7 - #2161 James and Melissa Easley - Continued) The issues relating to the new detached garage include a 3' side setback on the west side uhere a neighboring garage and residence is located 10' from the property line The proposal for the 3' side setback results from an eftbrt to save trees and to extend the west wall to channel drainage coming from the neighboring property away from the applicants house Gaftron reported that technically, a 30' street setback is required He also noted the need for a height variance based on the detached accessory structure being 4' higher than the existing 2-story house with basement The hardcover for the proposed garage increases from 38 1% to 40.8®o in the 75-250' setback The hardcover in the 0-75' setback remains at 23.3®/^o with the house and deck. The lot coverage by structure exceeds the 1500 s.f allowable by 146 s.f with a total of 1646 s.f This is caused by the replacement of the existing 1 8'x20' garage with a 20'x21' garage and 7' addition for an enclosed walkway. Gaftron reported that adequate parking would be provided off-street. The drainage is a problem in this area but the proposed channeling will help Gaftron said he and City Engineer Cook have discussed the drainage on Higinvood Road. Curb and gutter will eventually be needed, with discharge to a ponding area The drainage now ponds on private property. Goetten inquired about plans for improving the neighborhood drainage. Cook said the plans have not been finalized and are still in review. Goetten asked the height of the garage. Gaftron said the defined height of 23' is from the grade at the high side, to the average height of the highest gable If the concept plan for attaching the house was to proceed, the combined house and garage would be perceived as a total low-side-to-peak height of about 50 ’. The typical 3-level lakeshore home meeting a 30' defined height is 35-40 ’ in lovv-side-to-peak height If the home is tom down, Gaftron said there will also be variances needed for lot width and lot area. Goetten asked how the garage compares with others in the neighborhood. Gaftron said the garage is similar to that of the neighboring Applebaums. The neighboring homes and garages scale down with the topography. Kelley said he was concerned with the lot area coverage by staictures and inquired about the hardships due to the physical structure. Easley said the original staircase was located outside. The footprint was reduced and the stairwell enclosed at the suggestion of the architect Easley said he was aware of the need to stay within the code when building the new house but has to deal with the garage and current home at this time. Mrs. Easley said they and their architect are aware of the limitations and plan to piobably have a 3- stoiy structure for the new home Easley said the square footage of the current home is satisfactory One addiaonal bedroom would be required but could be accomplished in a basement area which is unusable in the current home. Mrs. Easley said they would work with what they have. She noted the garage is falling down, and its replacement is the first step in the improvement process. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO Cm’ COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996 (#7 - #2161 Janies and Melissa Easley - Continued) Callahan inquired about the "office" over the garage. Easley said it would presently be just a space, not an office per se When the new house is built, it would be used as a living space during construction He said it was his understanding that a temporary permit could be obtained It was not their intention to have any rental space but possibly for use for parents in the future for short-term stays He was asked if plumbing would be included Easley said it would eventually be added Jabbour noted that this could not be accomplished under the present ordinance Gaffron said a CUP could be applied for use as a guest apartment That would require a building plan with a home attached to it and plumbing installed first. Gaftron said such a plan could be worked with, but if the old house was retained and an apartment built over the garage, this would create a problem. Jabbour noted that the code is so laid out to eliminate substandard properties being subdivided and requires double the normal lot area for a guest house Goetten commented that there was such a mother-in-law apartment now in the Casco Point area. Callahan noted that since the space would presently be vacant, he advised the applicants to work carefully w ith the Staff w ith their future plans for modification. Kelley informed the applicant that with such a large structure, the applicants may ^ve up a larger new home Kelley asked that any overage on the new garage be offset on the new house in order for the ordinance be met. Easley said the original plan was for a smaller structure w ith an outside staircase Kelley said he wanted to make them aware of possible future problems Callahan noted that the Council will look at the entire project together when the new home is proposed Easley inquired if the jtair.>ell was moved to the outside reducing the structure, how this would affect the hardcover. Gaffron said it would be included in lot coverage if the top of the railing exceeds 6', which a portion probably would. Callahan advise ' the applicants to do their best to keep problems to a minimum Kelley asked the distance between the east side of the garage and the east lot line. Gaffron said it would be about 15*. Kelley cauf.oned the applicants regarding the need to get trucks in between the garage and the maple trees when building a new home Goetten moved, Jabbour seconded, to approve Resolution #3759 for lot coverage, hardcover, street, side, and height variances for a new garage to replace the existing garage with the conditions as noted in the resolution. Kelley noted that if the house is eventually proposed for replacement, he would expect that the structural coverage be brought into compliance with the ordinance requirement as part of the future variance approval Callahan asked the applicants to work with Staff regarding any minor differences found to be required in building the new garage. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. s ,1,1 i.ij MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9,1996 (#8) #2164 DOUGLAS J. OLSON, 2601 WEST LAFAYETTE ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3760 The applicant was present along \vith Jim Smith from Concept Landscape. Gaffiron reported that the 1-1/2 acre lot is located in the 1 acre zoning. There are homes on both sides and the total lot encroaches the average lakeshore setback due to its location on a point The proposed change is to the roof line from a 3; 12 pitch to a 12; 12 pitch around the entire house. addition is also proposed to the side of the home away from the lake. Part of the 2-stoi > a ddition is located in the 0-75 ’ zone with the roof pitch Most of the proposed work is ver existing hardcover. An entry is also being revised. • Gafffon reported that the hardcover exists at 9.1% in the 0-75 ’ setback. There is a proposal to remove a portion of the driveway to create a loop. The hardcover in the 75- 250' setback is proposed at 30.25% for a 217 s.f reduction from 31.0%. The variances required are for hardcover in the 0-75' and 75-250' setbacks, lakeshore setback, and average lakeshore setback The latter is net an issue as there are no views affected. The Planning Commission recommended approval with removal of hardcover in the 0-75' setback. The lot coverage is at 8 8%. Olson said he was satisfied with the resolution as presented in the package. Goetten noted the uniqueness of the property and had no problem with the proposal. Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution #3760. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. The motion includes the removal of hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback. (#9) #2166 JANET KIERNAN, 1491 SHORELINE DRIVE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3761 The applicant was present. Gaflron reported that the property is located on the sharp curve east of CoRd 15 by Bracketts Point. It was concluded during the review by the Planning Commission that the triangular piece of property w hose ownership was questioned is indeed owned by Kieman Gafffon noted that the possible change to the curve of the roadway by the County might not occur. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY ’ COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996 (#9 - #2166 Janet Kieman - Continued) Gaffron continued that there are a number of changes proposed to the house The majority of the work is to the north out of the 0-75' setback The change to the roof line is partially in the 0-75' setback and within the 30' side setback The change to the deck does not result in fiirther encroachment to the lake side or side setback There is a removal of hardcover proposed in the 0-75' setback with a replacement of a semi-circle patio originally planned as an equal tradeoff. As a result of the Planning Commission recommendation, the 0-75' hardcover will be reduced to 3.9*/o The driveway access will be moved south from its current unsafe location. This change is seen as positive as the new location is safer and creates better sight distance. There is a concern for drainage as it crosses the property. More detail of the drainage plans will be required vdth the building permit There will possibly be a need for retaining walls adjacent to the driveway A neighboring property has a serpentine wall which applicants property drains toward There is no e.xisting holding area for drainage Along with the driveway change, two stalls will be added to the garage Due to its size exceeding 1000 s f, a 15' setback is required To meet the requirement, the additional stalls will be off­ set. The existing hardcover of 27.5% will increase 34 s.f to 27.6%. Gaffron said there is also concern for trees located out of the 0-75' setback. The property is located in a "hot spot" for sewering The original projection was for the sewer line to go across the lake side property but was since found to be not feasible with the neighboring properties to the north being lower in elevation It may be better to build the sewer line along the right-of-way but Gaffron said there would then be a possible concern with Indian mounds Kelley suggested building the sewer line into the roadway. Gaffron said the sewer line would tie in with a lift station at Bracketts point It was noted that the houses to the south are not sewered Cook said the property may be served by an individual grinder pump Jabbour noted a neighbors concern with the hill shape and need for shaving off the roadway when road widening is considered. Callahan noted that these issues do not affect this application Callahan asked if the resolution speaks of the problems regarding drainage. Gaffron said it did. Ms. Kieman informed Callahan that she was satisfied with the resolution. Goetten commented on the beautiful plan being presented Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution #3761 per the Planning Commission's recommendation. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITV' COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996 (*#10) #2167 ALLEN AND JUDY SCHEFERS, 2540 CASCO POINT ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION #3762 Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution #3762 granting approval of a conditional use permit for fill importation of approximately 426 cubic yards for construction of a new residence at 2540 Casco Point Road for Allen and Judy Schefers and VV'ater Street Builders, Inc Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Callahan reported his dissatisfaction with the disregard of the motion made in May, 1996, for condemnation proceedings to begin on properties affecting the bike trail. The purpose was to enable the bike trail to be completed in 1996 Moorse said the Wills and Bruning properties require Council resolutions to authorize moving ahead on the condemnation proceedings. Callahan, Jabbour, and Goetten each said it was their understanding that the previous Council action included proceedings against all affected properties Callahan moved, Goetten seconded, to direct the City Administrator to have the City Attorney commence condemnation proceedings on September 10, 1996, towards any property in need of condemnation in order for the bike trail completion to be accomplished and to adopt the resolutions required to accomplish this. A report in writing is required from the City Administrator by Wednesday, September 18, 1996 stating that the condemnation proceedings have begun and a time table in writing by the City Attorney regarding accomplishment of the condemnation. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Goetten noted the receipt of a letter and petition by the Hassan Township requesting support for their incorporation as a city. Goetten asked the Council members of their opinion Goetten and Jabbour both noted their support. Moorse cautioned of impact on adjoining cities. Goetten moved, Jabbour seconded, to approve Resolution #3763 voicing no objection from the Council to the petition for incorporation as a city by Hassan Towr*ship. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Kelley made note of an upcoming Staff picnic. Kelley inquired about further review of the easements for internal trails on the Dickey property. It was noted that a letter of credit is on file for the developer in regards to the internal trails. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITV COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996 (Mayor/Council Report - Continued) Callahan suggested the Staff review the studies made regarding whether Countryside Drive East and West should be opened up as a through road It was noted that the road is dedicated and Staff recommended it as a throuuh road Callahan asked that the roadway and trails be reviewed at the same time Kelley asked to rev iew the pros and cons of havinti a through road Callahan asked Staff to consider the setbacks regarding the dedication of Kelley Parkway as a through road in relation to the moratorium on Hwy 12 Gafffon noted that the change in language to the B-5 and B>6 zoning will be on the agenda of the upcoming Planning Commission meeting Callahan asked that any changes and elimination of uses in the B-S include an indication of the ability to place those uses elsewhere within the Citv. Jabbour said Hennepin County was in the process of updating the public access on North Arm Kelley inquired about the seawall. Mabusth said the seawall had already been approved Jabbour noted his concern with an agreement being required between the MCWD and City for a holding pond concerning the ice arena Mark Engebretson had informed Jabbour of the request for the agreement and the resulting misunderstanding. Jabbour voiced concern over the City being in the middle He noted the MCWD was assuming the City would make twice-yearly inspections and maintain the holding pond Jabbour said the MCWD and City have mutual goals but differing attitudes The Council discussed the issue of stormwater control, w ho had the ability, and the legislative actions being taken. Council was concerned that rulings would dictate how the City spends its money without any say in the matter and rules changing without City input. Jabbour asked the Council to direct Staff to study how these matters should be handled. Callahan suggested the school be included on ponding for the ice arena Moorse said Gene Strommen of the watershed said the agreement causing the confusion will be changed within the next two weeks Callahan said he told Moorse to tell the MCWD to refer the matter to the committee and note the City would not agree to maintain the pond. ENGINEER REPORT (*#ll) ORDER FEASIBILITY STUDY - NORTH LONG LAKE AREA, COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION, BRACKETTS POINT, BAY RIDGE - SEWER HOT SPOTS - RESOLUTION #3764 Mayor Callahan asked that the Bracketts Point and Bay Ridge areas be included in the resolution. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CIT^' COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996 {H\ 1 - Feasibility Study of Sewer Hot Spots - Continued) Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution #3764 ordering preparation of a feasibility study for the installation of municipal sewer in the North Long Lake, Long Lake Country’ Club Addition, Bracketts Point, and Bay Ridge areas Vote Ayes 4, Nays CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#12) UPDATE ON PLANNING COMMISSION VACANCY Kelley moved, Jabbour seconded, to appoint Lili McMillan to the Planning Commission to fill the current vacancy. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Mayor Callahan noted the appointment creates a vacancy on the Park Commission which would be taken up at another time (*#I3) APPOINTMENT OF ADDITIONAL ELECTION JUDGES - RESOLUTION #3765 Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution #3765 appointing additional election judges for the September 10, 1996 primary election. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#14) SELECT DATES FOR TRUTH IN TAXATION MEETING Callahan moved, Goetten seconded, to set the initial Truth in Taxation public hearing tor 7:00 p.m., Wednesday, December 4, 1996, at the Orono Council Chambers, and to set the continuation hearing, if required, for 7:00 pm, Wednesday, December 11, 1996, at the Orono Council Chambers Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0 (#15) ADOPTION OF PRELIMINARY 1997 BUDGET AND TAX LEVY - RESOLUTIONS #3766 AND 3767 Jabbour confirmed the reduction in the tax levy from 14.743% to 14.246%. Callahan noted that this percentage looks favorable to that shown by surrounding cities. Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to adopt Resolution #3766 approving the 1997 Budget at $3,447,605, and Resolution #3767 establishing the proposed Tax Levy Collectible in 1997 at $2,161,630. Vote Ayes 4, Nays 0. l.t MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996 ' I (#16) CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM RESPONSE Moorse reported that there has been an increase in the number of calls regarding carbon monoxide alarms to the Hennepin County dispatcher The majority of the calls have been false but the ensuing discussions have resulted in the need for cities to determine vs hat response they request when such calls are received At the present time, the fire department and police respond to such calls Another suggestion is a response by a patrol officer who will determine if further action is required This response would be considered a Level III If there were any medical problems, the fire department would be called and an ambulance possibly dispatched Kelley questioned the issue of liability He asked once the police respond, the people are out of their house, what will happen Moorse said a furnace company is generally called. Kelley clarified that the home is kept vacant until such time as a qualified technician inspects the home He asked if there were brochures available giving out the information. Moorse said there were not but the newsletter could be a source for such information. Goetten suggested checking w ith Minnegasco to see if such a brochure was available through them Callahan asked what happens once agreement is made for a Level III response. Moorse said the direction would be given to the Hennepin County Sheriffs Department, who would show this information as the response level for the City of Orono when dispatching such calls Callahan voiced concern over a rivalry between the police and fire departments in regards to differing levels of response Mound and Wayzata were said to agree to Level III responding Long Lake has approved a Level I response Kelley asked if there w ould be ensuing problems due to these differing opinions Moorse said the decisions on response would be made at the dispatch level from the city approvals made. Kelley asked if the patrol officers carry detection equipment for carbon monoxide. Moorse said they do not The fire department does, however It was said the cost for such equipment is about $300. Jabbour said it would be a good idea for all squads to carr>' such equipment Kelley asked Staff to check on the number of calls received Callahan moved, Jabbour seconded, approve the selection of the Level III response for carbon monoxide alarms in the City of Orono Staff is also directed to review the demand and benefit of squads having detection dev ices \'ote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. Jabbour asked Moorse to inform him of the amount of money in the Police Forfeiture Fund. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO Cm^ COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9,1996 (•#17) RESIGNATION OF JOHN GERHARDSON, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR The Mayor and Council extended their appreciation to John Gerhardson for his many years of dedicated serv ice to the City of Orono Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to accept the resignation of John Gerhardson as Public Works Director effective January 31, 1997. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0 (•#1S) TAX FORFEIT DIVIDED PARCEL TO BE RELEASED TO ADJACENT PROPERTY' OW NER - RESOLUTION #3768 Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution #3768 authorizing the reconveyance of a portion of a tax forfeit parcel to the County for sale to adjacent property owners Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#19) SELECT DATE AND TIME FOR WORK SESSION TO REVIEW THE PERFORMANCE OF THE CITY' ADMINISTRATOR The date of Wednesday, October 2, 1996, 8:00 am, was selected for a Work Session to review the performance of the City Administrator Information including instructions received at the last review, primary objectives for 1995-1996, job description, salary range and history will be sent to the Council prior to the Work Session. The City Administrator is also to provide his perceived goals for 1996 and 1997 and his review of w hether he has met or exceeded expectations. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT The City Attorney was not present at the meeting (•#20) LICENSES Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to approve the following license with a vote of Ayes 4, Nays 0; Home Occupation License Annual Review Ben Meinhardt 3585 6th Avenue North (*#21) BILLS Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 15 1 i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9,1996 (#22) RESOLUTIONS AUTHORIZING THE TAKING OF LAND BY EMINENT DOMAIN FOR TRAIL EASEMENTS - RESOLUTIONS #3769, #3770, AND #3771 Callahan moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution #3769 authorizing taking of land by eminent domain for trail easement. Lot 1, Block 1, Van Dale. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Callahan moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution #3770 authorizing taking of land by eminent domain for trail easement - Lot 2, Block 1, Meyer Dairy Vote Ayes 4 Nays 0. Callahan moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution #3771 authorizing taking of land by eminent domain foi .rail easement - I.ot 1, Block 1, Peterman Addition. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Jabbour moved, Callahan seconded, to adjourn at 9:50 p.m Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Edward J Callahan, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SEP ^3 1996 C/7^ DATE: Septem^^^?(y3996 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2101 C. Hommeyer/J. Bowea^. Rolland - 4119, 4125 and 4127 Oak Street A. Vacation Resolution B. Final Plat of Lot Line Rearrangement Resolution The applicants have fulfilled all conditions of preliminary subdivision approval and provided all required submittals for final plat approval as set forth in Resolution No. 3676, the resolution granting preliminary approval of the lot line rearrangement (Exhibit A). Counci Imembers may remember that conceptual approval was granted for the proposed vacation and that the formal vacation would not be scheduled for Council's formal action until applicant had submitted the final plat rqi^lication. Council must first adopt the vacation resolution and then the resolution approving the final plat of Linden Woods. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either adopt or amend the vacation resolution vacating Ridge Place, Clyde Place and portions of Oak Street as dedicated in the plat of Minnetonka Summit Park. Council may then adopt or amend the resolution granting approval of the final plat of Linden Woods. A RESOLUTION VACATING PORTIONS OF UNIMPROVED STREETS AND ROADS WITHIN BLOCKS 3, 5 AND 7, MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK IN THE CITY OF ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA FILE NO. 2101 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on September 22, 1995, Charles W. Hommeyer, Kenneth B. Rolland and Jeffrey A. Bowen (hereinafter the "applicants") filed a petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of portions of unimproved dedicated right-of-way adjacent to their properties that were originally dedicated in the plat of Minnetonka Summit Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota and legally described as follows: That part of Ridge Place (now kno^^^l as Oak Street) as dedicated to the public in the plat of MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK which lies northerly of the easterly extension of the soudierly line of Lot 7, Block 5, MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK. ALSO All of Clyde Place as dedicated to the public in the plat of MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK. ALSO That part of Oak Street as dedicated to the public in the plat of MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK which lies between the southerly extensions across said Oak Street of the east line of Lot 4, Block 3, MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK and the easterly line of Lot 7, Block 5, MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK and which lies northerly of a line drawn parallel with and 30 feet northerly of, measured at right angles to, the northerly line of Block 7, MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK and its westerly extension to its intersection with said southerly extension of the easterly line of Lot 7, Block 5. WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held before iue City's Planning Commission on January 16, 1996, regarding said vacation and all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and Page 1 of 2 WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the proposed vacation; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation as proposed is in keeping with the public interest and in consideration of the following findings: 1.Major portions of the right-of-way to be vacated shall never serve for public road purposes as the original 15 residential lots have been replatted into 3 residential lots. Portions of the dedicated roadways would intersect the new residential lots. 2.The location of the right-of-way as it exists today could never serve for public road purposes because of steep topographies and location of drainageways. 3.The dedicated road right-of-way as it exists today serves no other public purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of the applicants is hereby granted by the Council of the City of Orono and that the portion of unimproved right-of-ways legally described above is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subject to the following condition: Concurrent with the vacation of the unimproved right-of-ways, applicants have also filed a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement whereby applicants have dedicated a 20' drainage easement over a drainageway located within portions of the right-of-way of Clyde Place and Oak Street and a 20’ access and utility easement over all private and public utilities within right-of-way to be vacated. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on____________________ ____, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Page 2 of 2 'Hi J A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PLAT OF A SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT, LINDEN WOODS FILE NO. 2101 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement by Charles W. Hommeyer, Kenneth B. Rolland and Jeffrey A. Bowen (hereinafter "the subdividers"); and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the vacation of certain unimproved road right-of-ways within the subdivision per Resolution No.______; and WHEREAS, the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement has created three lots, all meeting the required lot standards of the LR-IB zoning district, finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its continued use as a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdividers have completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including; 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 3676. 2.Dedication on the plat of additional right-of-way for a public road known as Linden Avenue. 3. Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements. Page 1 of 3 4. 5. 6. Dedication to the City of a drainage easement providing for limitations on the use of a drainageway described therein nnd shown on the plat as drainage easements. Dedication to the City of an access and utility easement over all public and private utilities described therein and shown on the plat as "utility easements". Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat, easements and covenants in the amount of $200.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Linden Woods, Hennepin County, Minnesota, subject to the following conditions; 1. 2. 3. Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Linden Woods shall access properties via a shared drive at Linden Avenue. Property owners shall obtain a land alteration permit from the City providing topographic information (existing and proposed contours). The new curb cut at Linden Avenue shall be approved by the Orono Public Works Director. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before April 9, 1^7 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of easements noted above. The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Page 2 of 3 nw u Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota this . 19%. day of ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 1996 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of OroiK), a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 3 - , VT IT’J >. t STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of September, 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 3 of 3 J /I GITYofORONO ^// RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Sfi7S A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELEMINARV approval of a plat of a lot line rearrangement INVOLMNG THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 4119,4125, AND 4127 OAK STREET - FILE NO. 2101 WHEREAS, Cnarles W. Hommeyer. Kenneth B. Rolland and Jeffrey A. Bowen (hereinafter ihe "applicants") on December 27. 1995 filed a fomial subdivision application with the City for approval of a plat of a lot line rearrangement of properties legally described as follows: Lots 1, 2, 3. and 4, Block 3. and Lots 1. 2. 3. and 4, Block 4, and Lots 1. 2, 3. 4. 5, 6 and 7. Block 5. Minnetonka Summit Park. Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 16. 1996. at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHERE.AS, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the lot line rearrangement of fifteen lots into three conforming lots in conjunction with the proposed \aeation of Park .A\enue. Clyde Place and portions of Oak Street at their regular meeting held on January 16. 1996; and WHERE.AS, at their regular meeting held on February 12, 1996, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the applicants noting the following findings of fact: I.The property is located within the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of one acre of land within each lot. The subdivision involves the lot line rearrangeme.nt of fifteen substandard parcels into three lots that will meet the area standard of the LR-IB zoning district. Pace 1 of 4 i P-1 'll CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 676 3. 4. 6. The property consists of three-plus acres. Lots 1 and 2 shall share a single driveway access onto Linden Avenue. Lot 3 shall continue to be served from unimproved extension of Oak Street. Tlie subdivision does not involve the creation of new building sites but merely the readjustment of the shared lot lines between the tliree property owners. The City concepmally approves the vacation of Park Avenue. Clyde Place and portions of unimproved Oak Place. The City shall fomially approve the proposed vacation upon applicants tiling the final plat. .NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Oiotio hereby approves the preliminaiy' plat application of Charles W. Hommeyer. Kenneth B. Rolland and Jeffrey A. Bowen per plat drawings by Mark S. Gronberg. a licensed surveyor ot Coffin and Gronberg, Inc., dated September 21, 1995, most revised date January 31. 1996. subject to the following conditions: 1. J. 4. 0. .Applicants to dedicate drainage and utility easements 5' along all interior lot lines and 10' along the perimeter boundaries to be excluded along the shoreline. Applicants to grant drainage easements at a minimum 20' width over drainageway that flows from north to south. The drainageway is located within portions of vacated Clyde Place and shall extend over portions of vacated Oak Street (taken over culverts under private drive). .Applicants to dedicate utility easements over all existing utilities located within vacated richt-of-wavs. Lots 1 and 2 shall access properties via a shared drive at Linden Avenue. .Applicants to seek approval of Public Works Director lor new curb cut at Linden Avenue. Applicants to dedicate additional 10' of right-of-way for Linden Avenue with a 30’ extension to the north as shoun on the preliminaiy plat drawings referenced above. Page 2 of 4 GlTYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO OF THE 8 6 7 3 The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of each month. These submittals will be as follows: 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy r.educed to 1" = 200'. Drawing to include; A. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg. Inc., dated September 21. 1995. most revised date Januaiy- 31. 1996. B. Dedication of "drainage and utility ea.sements" as noted in Item #1 above. Designation and dedication of a 20 ’ wide drainage easement over drainacewav located within portions of vacated Clyde Place, Oak Street and residential lots. Dedication of additional right-of-way for Linden Avenue as shown on preliminaiy plat drawings noted above, to be shown on plat as Linden Avenue. Designation and dedication of utility easements over all utilities located within either \acated right-of-way or portions of residential lots. F. Naming of plat. Legal documents required: A.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with propertv' interest indicated therein shall either sign off on the plat or e.xecute consents to subdivision. B.Signed and executed drainage easement to be taken over 20' drainageway within plat (see sample enclosed). Page 3 of 4 GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.8 67 o C. Signed and executed access and utility casements to be taken over all areas desienaied as utilitv easements on plat. Fees to be paid; Total due; S2Q0 OQ A. Legal re\ ieu and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents “ S200.00 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 12th day of Februaiy, 1996. ATTEST; / •ofothv MfTlhllin. City Clerk Edward J. Callahan. Jr.. Ma\or y i STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENTs'EPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of Februaiy. 1996. by Edward J. Callalian. Jr. &. Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalt of the Citv. LINDA S.VEE R notary PUBUC-MINNESOTA R HENNEHM COUNTY R Mv Commission Jin. 31.2000 y ■/ / //• Notar\’ Public Page 4 of 4 I om^ COUNCIL^ be taken over al RESOLUTION # S 6 7 6 iated documents - •sota at a regular STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) CITY OF ORONO ) ) ayor is 12th day of ty Clerk of the uted on behalf Minnesota, do hWeby ce^'thaU have'^om^^ c%°ora “ksoSof ± C^’ ^3i;r«r satd resolutL duly adopted by said a^-^o ’on “^ afs'aidme^'nJ' ^ ■SJ * HaV nf ^ Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 131h -----------------February ________________, 19 oc . ------------------------’ (SEAL) Sfp REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION J99« DATE: September 1^T^6 ITEM NO.; Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #^2135 Paul & Sue Hedlund / Edna Albee Estate, 1575 Long Lake Boulevard • Variances - Resolution Zoning District: LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 Acre, Unsewered Application: Request for lake setback, average lakeshore setback, street setback, 0-75' hardcover and bluff impact zone variances for construction of additions to existing residence. Lbt of Exhibits A B C D F Resolution Notice of Planning Commission Action 7/17/96 Planning Commission Minutes 7/15/96 Gradmg/Site Plan City Engineer Comments Memo and Exhibits of July 11, 1996 Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of July 11. Briefly, applicants are proposing to construct a second story addition above the existing house as well as a two story' addition on the street side of the house, including an attached garage. The existing house and a majority of the additions are within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone. The closest point of the existing house is 49' from the shoreline. The request involves replacing the existing detached garage (which is 0.2 ’ into the street right- of-way) with an attached garage setback 8 ’ from the street lot line. The initial proposal requested a variance for the new garage to also encroach into the required 30' east side setback, but that plan was revised so that no side setback variance is required. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone will decrease from 1,195 s.f. to 1,185 s.f. Hardcover in the 75- 250' zone will increase from 887 s.f. to 1,467 s.f. The net result is an increase in total hardcover on the property from 2,082 s.f. to 2,652 s.f. The original proposal reviewed by Planning Commission in May had been for 3,063 s.f. overall, however. Planning Commission had indicated that the overall hardcover on the property should be kept at a level equivalent to or less than the 75-250' zone 25% allowance for this property of 2,724 s.f. The current proposal meets that criteria. ■■■ ■■---------** ■- ' ■ ------------------------ —--------------— - .^,1- Request for Council Action continued Page 2 September 19, 1996 Zoning File #2135 Paul and Sue Hedlund/Edna Albee Estate, 1575 Long Lake Boulevard The w-est end of the existing house is technically defined as a blutf area, although the east end is not a bluff. Applicants have provided a grading plan indicating how the revised driveway grading and retaining walls at the northwest comer of the house will be constructed to eliminate erosion concerns. Septic/Sewer Proposal The property currently contains a septic system considered to be non-conforming. A site exists on the property, that would accomodate primary and alternate drainfields to serve a 2-bedroom house, but there is not quite enough area for an alternate site if the system is built to serve 3 bedrooms. Because this is in one of the sewer "hot spots", the applicants propose a multi ­ faceted approach to dealing with the septic system issue, including: that the additions and remodeling be allowed at this time but limited to two bedrooms. that the existing septic tanks be disconnected from the drainfield (if one exists) and be converted to a holding tank system. that the owner will supply the City with a fully executed pumping contract from a licensed contractor. that the owner will draft and record a restrictive covenant on the property that will not allow the property to become " ‘hree bedroom home until City sewer has been approved and been installed to the property. After much discussion, Planning Commission agreed to this, subject to design revisions to eliminate the closet in the den, and remove the south wall of the den if it is not a bearing wall. Planning Commission felt, and staff agrees, that these restrictions are reasonable and protect both the property owner and the City whether or not municipal sewer is provided to this neighborhood. Planning Commission Recommendation At their July 15 meeting. Planning Commission voted 5 to 1 to recommend approval of the revised proposal, subject to the septic system conversion to holding tank system with a pumping contract, subject to the two bedroom restriction via a covenant and subject to design changes, and subject to submittal of a detailed site grading plan for City approval, which has been reviewed and conditionally accepted by the City Engineer. Planning Commission based their approval on the following findii gs: I Request for Council Action continued Page 3 September 19, 1996 Zoning File #2135 Paul and Sue Hedlund/Edna Albee Estate, 1575 Long Lake Boulevard 1. 2. 3. 4. 8 Factors which make this a difficult lot in terms of development include steep topography, shallow lot depth between street and lake leaving virtually no conforming building envelope, and the location of the existing house almost entirely within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone. Replacement of the existing detached garage which encroaches 0.2' into the right-of-way, with an attached garage located 8' from the right-of-way, is a positive improvement to the neighborhood. The proposed location of the main portions of the house approximately 30' from the street lot line is not inconsistent with other houses in the neighborhood on the lake side of Long Lake Boulevard. The location of the existing house and the unuesirability of constructing additions on the south side of the house, justifies granting of the variance for additions on the north side of the house awav from the lake. The proposed second story additions and attached garage addition are modest in scope and do not yield a residence structure that is out of character for this lot in this neighborhood. Neither adjacent lakeshore lot will have existing lake views encroached upon by the proposed additions, hence the average lakeshore setback vziriance will have no impact on those properties. WTiile the second stor>’ addition and additions to the north side of the house are substantially within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone, those additions will not create any new rooms or walls closer to the lake than the footprint of the existing house, and the proposed plans yield a residence with a two story facade on the lake side and a one story facade on the street side, thus limiting the visual impact of the additions in the 0-75' zone. While a small portion of the property is defined as bluff and work is proposed in the bluff impact zone, the visual impact of such work will not be substantially different from the existing visual impact, and grading, drainage and erosion controls must be addressed suitably before the City will issue building permits. Because the property will potentially be provided with municipal sewer within one to two years, it is reasonable to allow conversion of the existing non- conforming septic system to a holding tank system subject to a pumping contract being provided to the City. Further, the fact that there is a suitable drainfield site that could accommodate primary and alternate drainfield systems for a two bedroom home, suggests that the residence should not increase above the level i A i 1 Reques for Council Action continued Page 4 September 19, 1996 Zoning File #2135 Paul and Sue Hedlund/Edna Albee Estate, 1575 Long Lake Boulevard _____ of two bedrooms until such time that municipal sewer is available to the propert>'. A covenant with such a restriction, and design revisions to eliminate a closet in the den and remove the south wall of the den if not a bearing wall, are reasonable conditions to protect the City and the future property owue ’^s should sewer not be provided to the property. 9. Existing hardcover in the 0-75' zone is 1,195 s.f. or 6.79%. The proposed 10 s.f. reduction to 1,185 s,f. in the 0-75' zone, coupled with an increase in 75-250' zone hardcover from 887 s.f. to 1,467 s.f. results in a total hardcover on the property of 2,652 s.f. This is less than the 25% hardcover allowance for the property in the 75-250' zone of 2,724 s.f., hence while a portion of the hardcover is in the 0-75' zone, overall hardcover on the property will remain at a justifiable level. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation. A resolution reflecting the findings and conditions of the Plaiming Commission is attached for Council consideration. Options for Action 1. Approve per attached resolution. 2. Approve w-ith revisions. 3.Table for further information. 4. Conceptual denial 5.Other. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to appiove attached resolution or taV.e other appropriate action. , seconded by , to adopt Resolution No.PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by__ granting variances for street setback, average lakcshorc setback, lake setback, hardcover and work in bluff impact zone for the Edna Albee Estate property at 1575 Long Lake Boulevard. Vote: ____ayes,_____nays. 14 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2; 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6(B); 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8; AND 10.56, SUBDIVISIONS 16(C), (J) AND (L) FILE #2135 WHEREAS, Paul and Sue Hedlund have an interest in, and Edna Albee Estate (hereinafter "the owner") is the c'’ner of the property located at 1575 Long Lake Blvd. within the City of Orono (hereinafter ‘'"iiy") and legally described as follows: Lots 13, 14, 15 and th,. west half of Lot 16, Albee’s Long Lake Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota C "the property"); and WHEREAS, the ' -ners have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6(B) to allow a street setback of 8' for a house and attached garage where a 50' street setback is normally required; and a variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2, 10.55, Subdivision 8, and 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) and 16(L) to allow additional structure and hardcover to be constructed in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no structure or hardcover is normally allowed; and a variance to Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) to allow additional construction as near as 49' to the shoreline of a Recreational Development lake where a 100' lake setback for structures is normally required; and a variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1(B) and 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) to allow encroachment of the average lakeshore setback where no such encroachment is normally allowed; and variances to Section 10.56, Subdivisions 16(C) and 16(J) to allow structures, filling and excavating within the bluff impact zone where no structures, filling or excavating is normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Page 1 of 9 • '*• \; 1 2 FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2135. The property is located in the LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. The Orono Planning Commission originally reviewed this application on May 20, 1996 and reviewed revisions to the application on July 15, 1996, and on a vote of 5 to 1 recommended approval of the proposal as revised based upon the following findings: Factors which make I'.iis a difficult lot in terms of development include steep topography, *:nallow lot depth between street and lake leaving virtually no conforming building envelope, and the location of the existing house almost entirely within the 0-75’ lakeshore setback zone. B Replacement of the existing detached garage which encroaches 0.2’ into the right-of-way, with an attached garage located 8 ’ from the right-of- way, is a positive improvement to the neighborhood. The proposed location of the main portions of the house approximately 30’ from the street lot line is not inconsistent with other houses in the neighborhood on the lake side of Long Lake Boulevard. The location of the existing house and the undesirability of constructing additions on the south side of the house, justifies granting of the variance for additions on the north side of the house away from the lake. D.The proposed second stoiy additions and attached garage addition are modest in scope and do not yield a residence structure that is out of character for this lot in this neighborhood. E.Neither adjacent lakeshore lot will have existing lake views encroached upon by the proposed additions, hence the average lakeshore setback variance will have no impact on those properties. Page 2 of 9 F. I. While the second story addition and additions to the north side of the house are substantially within the 0-75’ lakeshore setback zone, those additions will not create any new rooms or walls closer to the lake than the footprint of the existing house, and the proposed plans yield a residence with a two story facade on the lake side and a one story facade on the street side, thus limiting the visual impact of the addition in the 0-75' zone. While a small portion of the property is defined as blufT and work is proposed in the bluff impact zone, the visual impact of such work will not be substantially different from the existing visual impact, and grading, drainage and erosion controls must be addressed suitably before the City will issue building permits. Because the property will potentially be provided with municipal sewer within one to two years, it is reasonable to allow conversion of the existing non-conforming septic system to a holding tank system subject to a pumping contract being provided to the City. Further, the fact that there is a suitable drainfield site that could accommodate primary and alternate drainfield systems for a two bedroom home, suggests that the residence should not increase above the level of two bedrooms until such time that municipal sewer is available to the property. A covenant with such a restriction, and design revisions to eliminate a closet in the den and remove the south wall of the den if not a bearing wall, are reasonable conditions to protect the City and the future property owners should sewer not be provided to the property. Existing hardcover in the C-73 zone is 1,195 s.f. or 6.79%. The proposed 10 s.f. reduction to 1,185 s.f in the 0-75’ zone, coupled with an increase in 75-250' zone hardcover from 887 s.f to 1,467 s.f results in a total hardcover on the property of 2,652 s.f This is less than the 25% hardcover allowance for the property in the 75-250’ zone of 2,724 s.f, hence while a portion of the hardcover is in the 0-75’ zone, overall hardcover on the property will remain at a justifiable level. ! i Page 3 of 9 4.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 communitv. 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 serv'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 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 variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6(B) to allow a street setback of 8' for a house and attached garage where a 50' street setback is normally required; and a variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2, 10.55, Subdivision 8, and 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) and 16(L) to allow additional structure and hardcover to be constructed in the 0-75 ’ lakeshore setback zone where no structure or hardcover is normally allowed; and a variance to Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) to allow additional construction as near as 49' to the shoreline of a Recreational Development lake where a 100 ’ lake setback for structures is normally required; and a variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1(B) and 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) to allow encroachment of the average lakeshore setback where no such encroachment is normally allowed; and variances to Sections 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) and 16(J) to allow structures, filling and excavating within the bluff impact zone where no structures, filling or excavating is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1.Any future revisions to the approved site plan which increase the degree or magnitude of variances required or in the opinion of City staff constitute substantial changes from the intent of this approval, shall subject the application to further City review. Page 4 of 9 2. 5. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone shall not exceed 1,185 s.f. as shown on the site plan and hardcover calculations attached as Exhibit A. Hardcover in the 75-250 ’ zone shall not exceed 1,467 s.f. as indicated on Exhibit A. All hardcover remo\als necessar>’ to reach these approved hardcover levels shall be completed prior to footing inspection for the new construction. The owner is advised that any hiture additions of nardcover on the property which result in hardcover additions ih the 0-75’ zone will not be approved. Further, any hardcover additions proposed in the 75-250 ’ zone which yield a total hardcover on the property in excess of 2,724 s.f will likely not be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with the concurrent removal of pre-existing hardcover on the property, resulting in no net hardcover increase or net decrease in hardcover. Owners shall provide detailed retaining wall plans prior to issuance of a building permit, subject to the requirements set forth by the City Engineer in his letter dated September 19, 1996. Prior to the filing of this variance resolution, owners shall provide to the City a restrictive covenant drafted by the owmer or owner’s attorney and meeting the approval of the City Attorney, restricting the property from use as a three or more bedroom home until such time that City sew'er has been installed to the property. No building permit shall be issued for remodeling or additions to the property until the owners have completed the following: A.Converted the existing septic system to a holding tank system subject to approval of the City. B.Provided the City with a signed pumping contract for regular maintenance of the holding tank system. C.Provided detailed construction plans clearly showing only two bedrooms in the house, which may require revisions to the plans submitted for this application, including elimination of the closet in the den and removal of the south wall of the den if it is not a bearing wall. Page 5 of 9 6. 7. 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 (September 23. 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. 8.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. ATTEST: Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 23th day of September, 1996. Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 6 of 9 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23th day of September, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 7 of 9 J r 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 (Aey) 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. 4 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of___, 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 8 of 9 imMn r. - .^itr CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2135 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DAI E OF NOTICE: Julv 17, 1996 TO:Paul & Sue Hedlund 1202 W. 22nd St. Mpls.,MN 55405 COPIES TO:Nancy Gawron 920 Dakota Ave. Long Lake, MN 55356 Susan Albee 6871 Nez Perce Dr. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Jeff Martincau Burnet Realty 315 East Lake St. Wayzata,MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variances DATE OF MEETING: 7/15/96 VOTE:5 FOR 1 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Motion was to recommend approval of proposal as revised by owners, ir jluding: 8’ street setback for attached garage Side setback variance no longer required Hardcover per revised plan Average setback variance Lake setback variance Variance for work in bluff imoact zone A Conversion to holding tank system with pumping contract Covenant with 2-bedroom restriction (subject to design revisions to eliminate closet in den, and remove south wall of den if not a bearing wall) Submittal of detailed site grading plan for City approval prior to Council action. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the August 12th Council meeting is August 2nd. 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. 1 i \UNUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION . C MEETING HELD ON JULY 15, 1996 (#3) MI35 PAUL AND SUE HEDLUND/EDNA ALBEE ESTATE, 1575 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD - VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:18-7:54 P.M. Members of the Edna Albee family were present, along with Burnet Realtor, Jeff Martineau Gaffron recalled the application being before the Commission at their May meeting for a proposed addition to the structure to include removal of a detached garage, a new attached garage, an additioa a second story addition and driveway There are concerns over hardcover excess, the placement of the garage to the street and side of the property, and the septic/sew er situation. Gaifron said the proposed buyers of the property, the Hedlunds, ^ currently not pursuing the application, but the property owners would like to continue with the application in order to determine what can be done with the property. Gaffron continued in reporting on the hardcover, which will decrease from the existing 1195 s.f to 1185 s f, rather than the originally proposed increase to 1280 s.f Hardcover in the 75-250’ zone will increase from 887 s.f to 1467 s f, rather than to 1783 s.f. as originally proposed. The net hardcover results in an increase from 2082 s.f to 2652 s.f rather than to 3063 s.f as originally proposed This would be equivalent to the 25% allowed in the 75-250' setback. The garage, now proposed at 34' from the side lot line, will now meet the required 30' side setback This revised proposal moves the garage to a location 8' from the street property line and out of the public right-of-way, rather tVin 1' from the line as originally proposed. Gaffron said the applicants ask to rehab the house to no more than 2 bedrooms. The existing septic tanks will be disconnected from the drainfield and a fully executed pumping contract from a licensed contractor will be supplied to the City. The owner will also draft and record a restrictive covenant on the chain of title for the property stating a 3rd bedroom would not be allowed until City sewer has been obtained and installed The closet in the main floor den must be walled off, which will incur the need for a building permit if it is rebuilt to create a third bedroom Gaffron noted that the existing septic tank may only need a plug for the outlet, w hich would result in a minimal cost. If no sealed tank is found wh:n inspected, however, a new' tank would be required, and might cost the applicant about $2000. Gaffron reviewed other issues of concern. The second story addition would be located 49* from the lake, where 100' is required. A variance for an 8' street setback would be necessary, where 50' is required in the 2-acre zoning district. There would be an average lakeshore setback encroachment of 32'. It was noted that even though almost all of the house is within the lakeshore setback, it would not encroach on the views enjoyed by the adjacent neighboring properties The hardcover will stay within the guideline for the overall hardcover There is a bluff issue on the west side. Some filling w ould result from the project and erosion control measures will be necessary during construction. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 15, 1996 (#3 - #2135 Paul and Sue Hedlund/Edna Albee Estate - Continued) Peterson responded to the report noting the positive changes that were made. He reported that the number of lakeshore variances requested with this application is similar to that of other properties in the areas of Long Lake Boulev ard and Casco Point, which do not meet zoning regulations Peterson said the City does not know when sewer will come to the area, and he has no problem with a holding tank Peterson also reported that he spoke with a neigltboring property owner to the east, Mj Bingham, who originally voiced concern over the location of the ga*age near the side lot line but is in favor of the revision. Peterson noted that the street setback is consistent with that of the neighborhood. The bluff issue was said to be initiated by the state and does not seem to present a problem in the aplication. Peterson also commented that the average lakeshore setback is not a problem with this application due to the location of houses on nearby properties With these notations. Peterson said the plan was still quite aggressive with the confined building site. JefFMartineau responded that the applicant has addressed the size of the home, which Martineau says is consistent with the size of starter homes at 1092 s f with a 534 s.f. garage and 38 s f deck Schroeder commented that the house was small because it was bound by the size of the lot Peterson added if this was new construction, this home would not be allowed to be built Smith clarified that the second story does not extend over the master bedroom located on the main floor. A future powder room area was noted on the floor plans but will not be completed at this time There are two baths currently on the first floor. Smith suggested removing the wall to open up the den area so it could not be used as bedroom The applicant commented that the wall may be load bearing Smith asked that it be made clear that the second story' powder room and first floor bedroom not be used as such. Lindquist said that would realistically happen when sewer comes to the property. Lindquist noted there was only a partial alternate site for septic. Gaffron agreed but noted it would not be needed when sew er came in. The e.xisting system will be converted to a holding tank and the drainfield eliminated. Schroeder asked what would happen if it was found that sewer would not come for another five years Gaflron said the applicant may then wish to replace the current septic system. The applica.nt reported that it was their intent to notify potential buyers of a 3rd bedroom possibility in the fiiture Lindquist asked if it was the applicant's intent to follow thru with this proposal and rehabilitate the house and then sell it, or sell it now as-is. Martineau said the intent was (o have the capability of showing potential buyers what the property could be. Gattron noted that this could result in a buyer presenting a totally different plan to the Commission at a future time. There were no public comments. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 15, 1996(#3 - #2135 Paul and Sue Hedlund/Edna Albee Estate - Continued)Smith asked u hat w ould happen if sewering was put on hold, a new septic system was built using the alternate site, and it failed Gaffron said the property owners would then have to resort to pumping Peterson noted that there were many homes in Orono that pumped. Berg said the application was then based on what might be or what could be done Martineau informed Berg that their goal was to modify the previous plan in order to present a variation to the Hedlund's and bring closure to the purchase if possible. The Hedlund's w ere sent the current package being review ed Smith said if that failed, then a tangible plan would be possible for another buyer Martineau concurred noting it was a good use of the property. Schroeder asked what size holding tank w as used and whether it could hold up to a 3 bedroom home. Martineau said they were under the assumption that the e.xisting tank could be sealed and w ould work with Orono to determine if that was so It was noted that the actual size of the tank w as immaterial as whatever pumping schedule was required would have to be done Martineau said the pumping contractor would monitor the use of water to gain historic data and pump accordingly. It was determinevi ‘hat the holding tank was not relevant to the number of bedrooms in the house. Lindquist noted that the review was similar to that of a sketch plan review. Peterson said it verbally was a sketch plan review but in actuality an application Martineau responded he felt there was a high probability that the Hedlunds would move forward on the purchase. Smith asked GaiTron if there w ere any concerns with the bluff. Gaffron saiv. grading plan would be required to protect the site during const a:''*-'''' The driveway revisions could possibly require retaining walls Other similar sites e noted in the area. It was determined that a grading plan would be required prior, the application going before the Council. Lindquist noted that the hardcover w'as decreasing in the 0-75' setback and totals were similar to what now e.xists. The setbacks were also similar. He saw the plan as being viable. 3 ^fTNUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CONINUSSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 15. 1996 (#3 - #2135 Paul and Sue Hedlund/Edna .\lbee Estate - Continued) Lindquist moved, Stoddard seconded, to approve Application #2135 with the understanding that a grading plan for the bluff area be presented prior to the application going before the Council A minimum of a 1500-2000 gallon tank would be required for pumping and the drainfield would be disconnected Variances for a street setback of 8', hardcover, and average lakeshore setback were recommended Vote Ayes 5. Nays 1, Peterson (to be consistent with his policy to vote against average lakeshore setback variances). Peterson noted the improvements made to the plan and said the proposal is consistent with the other homes in the nr’^hborhood The application will be presented at the August 12 Council meeting. (#4) #2I4& VVAVNE M. HOLMES AND JACKIE DAHL, 1390 PARK DRIVT- VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 7;54-7;59 P.M. I he Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicants was present. Mabusth reported that their original proposal was to restore the majority of the house and add a new second story. The applicants found that the foundation would not support the new second story and now propose to raze the structure and install a new residence. The property is located in the 1 acre zoning district The lot width is met as well as all setbacks A lot area variance is required. No negative conuneiUs have been received from any neighboring property owners Peterson saw the application in the light of a formality due to code restrictions He did voice concern over a cistern on the property and asked that it’s removal or abandonment be attached as a condition of the application. The existing well is to be relocated, and tnc existing well will need to be abandoned. There were no public comments. Mabusth noted that the applicant’s have asked to have the application presented at the July 22 Council meeting. Peterson moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2148 with the addition of the removal of the cistern and existing w\.'' Vote: Ayes 6. Nays 0. B0N5STR00 AND ASSOCIATES ©612 6361311 09/19/96 07:50 g :01/03 NO:084 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects September 19. 1996 I . •• • I • • I h • . .» t* ••• \ t • •* *i • I > • . M •• ^ , . . , . . I, , . I , *•••»•• I #*,* .t , , 4 , ' . * • *r. *l« 4... , , *,.1 \ M r. , n. i I ^ *,i .1., . » .iH h ►( . ’ %•« *rr *' j •, »• - •it,. « • \ • f m %s ;• % !»••« ■.« • j • ir I |/ *•». I*, »«, #*| • • »i » ,tt J f I'’ • • • .1 » . t .•• I ♦ > f .• I V, fc ' I ». • M ..S A wi.,.. • • I ^ 4 t '4 • t I I • !••• it« ■ . • • • .4 I t 'r r I 4. P't h. i4 w I 4 • • I • Vi- I* *. I • EL ' *1 «•• r • V • • » Mr. Michael P. Gaftron, Asm. Building and Zoning Admini.strator City of' Orono Post Office Box 66 Cr\'stal Bay. Minnesota 55?2T Re; Albcc Estate Pile No. 139-gen Dear Mike. We have reviewed the grading plan picparcd by Coffin & Gronberg l\>r the AU kc residence. Tbc propeny is healed on Long Lake Boulevard oserlooking Long L.ike. We have several coinincnts in rcgard.s to cngincci ing nutters. The two 3-fooi tall retaining walls lu-c proposed to control up to 8-feel of fill to be pi .cd on the existing slope. The wall ,a.s shown i;ppears to be acceptable from an engineering standpoint. However, more information musi be provided to identify the specific wall material, type of fill and the whether any type of tie-back rcsitainis will be used If a hltK'k wall is proposed, each block manufacturer has specific design charts that may be used depending tin the type of fill and loading conditions. The iwt» walls musi bo placed at least as fur apart as they are tall (1:1 ) or a surcharge loading must bo used. If a boulder wall is proposed, the si/e of the bouldei*s, w’all batter and embedment dimensitms must be specified. The drainage plan shows directing the storm runoff directly over the two walls. Some type of draintile or storm sewer piping may be needed to prevent problems. Gutters and downspouts should be considered to reduce the amount of runoff at the top of the wall. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this mailer. Yours ‘ **ry truly. B().Ni:.STROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. .b>. Shawn D. Gusiafson. P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN 55TI3-3898 • 612-636-4600 o. To;Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Michael P. Gaffron. Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Bate:July 11, 1996 Subject:»^2135 Paul and Sue HedlundEdna Albee Estate, 1575 Long Lake Boulevard - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-I A, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 Acre, Unsewered Application: Re\ised proposal requesting lake setback, average lakeshore setback, street setback, 0-75' hardcover and bluff impact zone variances for construction of additions to existing residence. List of Exhibits A - Revised Site Plan Pioposal Revised Floor Plans Revised Elevation Vievv„ I.etter from Nancy Gawron. Estate of Edna Albee Revised Hardcover Worksheets Letter from Jeff Martineau RE. Septic/Sewer Considerations Notice of Planning Commission Action 5/28/96 Planning Commission Minutes 5/20/96 Memo and Exhibits of 5/7/96 B C D E F G H 1 Summarv This item was tabled at Planning Commission’s May 20 meeting to allow the applicant an opportunity to redesign, with the following general guidelines: Reduce hardcover. - Move garage further from street and out of side yard. Discuss sewer options, perhaps propose a covenant to be filed on title regarding sewer/septic expectations and limitations for the site. Since the May meeting, the representatives of the estate have taken over the application absent further input from the Hedlunds who were initially interested in purchasing the property. The estate representatives have been working with realtor Jeff Martineau and have submitted revised plans addressing the stated concerns of the Planning Commission: 1.0-75 ’ hardcover is now proposed to decrease from 1,195 s.f to 1,185 s.f, rather than the earlier proposal to increase to 1.280 s.f V Zoning File /)^2135 July 11, 1996 Page 2 75-250’ hardcover is proposed to increase from 887 s.f. to 1,467 s.f., rather than to 1,783 s.f. as originally proposed. 3.The net hardcover result is an increase from 2,082 s.f. total to 2,652 s.f, rather than the 3,063 s.f originally proposed. The revised propx)sal meets the criteria suggested by staff for allowing 2,724 s.f of hardcover based on that being 25% of the 75-250' zone area. 4.Revised proposal eliminates the need for a side setback for the garage. The garage is now proposed at appro.ximately 34’ from the side lot line. 5.The revised proposal moves the garage to a location 8 ’ from the street property' line rather than being only T as originally proposed. Septic/Sewer Proposal The property owners propose a multi-faceted approach to dealing with the septic system issue. The letter of July 9 from Jeff Martineau proposes: that the property be rehabed at this time with no more than two bedrooms, that the existing septic tanks be disconnected from the drainiield if one exists, that the owner will supply the City' with a fully executed pumping contract from a licensed contractor. that the owner will draft and record a restrictive covenant on the property that will not allow the property to become a three bedroom home until City sewer has been approved and been installed to the property. The applicants discussed with staff the fact that the proposed first floor bedroom adjacent to the garage foundation could be designated as a 'den' rather than a bedroom. Staff would consider this acceptable if the closet was omitted from that room (this closet would be the area under the stairway), which would force a remodeling and trigger the need for a permit at some future time that it is converted to a bedroom. Of course, there is no guarantee that a future owner would apply for a permit for this future minor remodeling to create a closet and convert the den to a bedroom; but the covenants would presumably be adhered to under the risk of violating them; therefore the covenants must be drafted in such a manner that they are enforceable by the City. The proposal to eliminate the use of any existing drainfield and convert the existing septic tanks to holding tanks with regular contracted pump out until sewer arrives, would eliminate the need to install a new septic system if deemed acceptable by the City. The property owners are, of course, aware of the risk that sewer is likely at least one year and perhaps a number Zoning File #2135 July 11, 1996 Page 3 of years in the future, hence they are balancing the cost of pump out vs. the cost of replacing the system. Staff finds this part of the proposal reasonable from the standpoint that we are concerned that the existing system likely would be contributing to the degradation of Long Lake should it again be subjected to full family usage. Conversion of the existing septic tanks to a suitable holding tank system may be as simple as plugging the outlet, or in fact may require replacement with a sealed tank in order to ensure its viability. The cost of the former action is probably less than $100; tank replacement would likely be a $2,000 project. Items for Discussion 1. f Is construction of a second story' above the e.xisting one story residence, located 49* from the shoreline where a 100 ’ setback is normally required, acceptable to the Planning Commission? Is the proposed 8 ’ street setback for the attached garage acceptable as compared to the 0.5 ’ street encroachment of the existing detached garage? Is there justification for granting an intensification of the 32 ’ existing/proposed average lakeshore setback encroachment by adding a second story? Does the applicant’s hardcover proposal for 1,185 s.f. (6.73%) in the 0-75 ’ zone, and 1,467 s.f (13.46%) in the 75-250' zone, meet Planning Commission’s hardcover goals for this property? Does Planning Commission have specific concerns regarding the additional structure or fill that will be needed within the bluff impact zone in order to accommodate the proposed construction? 6.Does Plaruiing Commission accept applicant’s proposal for conversion to a holding tank and placement of covenants regarding the number of bedrooms, as sufficient to keep this property from becoming a potential burden to the City and to this neighborhood via future septic system concerns? Staff Recommendation A recommendation for approval, partial approval or conditional approval should clearly define the hardships and justification for each of the variances (see Nancy Gawron’s letter. Exhibit D). Zoning FUe #2135 July 11, 1996 Page 4 Options for Action 1. 3. 4. 5. Recommend approval per the revised proposal, defining the hardships that support the request. Recommend approval per revised proposal wth additional specific revisions or conditions. Table for further revisions. Recommend denial. Other. s, ! 1 F ?:p>' 1 yv’‘.1 B 1 *•2?*.'^ */. IIIII■I-.L V I. V. “+ Cx [^7^ U>N6tl-AK^ 0LVtP N BsmzY 27PT u5>M^* E(?£>f^ U^tATV>N Pi5crn4;(i3l E- 1 SiTfe 121 <? E_ (F^«=>TnaiKiT^ Cf>rTr^Y &AUd^M Y i;. ' ^54 iS-f== ^9> 'm c^ t='£.A^f? i ^PAM IA^« ^ i‘_ ^1'• fftiaiNTiAu DiftiOM AN9 ittusTa«fiO-<v \ 88a - EJJ?0 ••• • ’ • __________ -M I FORTH CHTTECTS r' ? S. L_^Md t-AKfe. B?WD N<^(^'Thf A—ri hJ ^TUtPY •j «‘ V ■7' e ■ i*<ofNTiAu ikkwftTaATiOM LAKe ‘^Tv/py' ■7 'g- ■‘i ^1 '• AU O I ftl UAHSB ^ u-^N/A nr' H *^T u o-y !^'» ^ 1 ^ 7' e> 1 ■ I ••3I««Tial Of ftitf N ^^Afii9 ibbWftTfATlOM I‘57 ‘£> U£?Wiii UAI<i.e. ^ue-VAn"!‘^N 'Z^'- 7- #' ^>*ruc>Y i • •••OiNt AU Of ftiaN **^ANO ILkUfttaATiON em- ^ Orono Planning Commission 2780 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN. 55356 July 8,1996 Dear Commissioners; On May 20, 1996 Orono Planning Commission chose to table a request for 5 variances concerning the Edna Albce Estate at 1575 Long Lake Blvd. This letter intends to show hardship for those 5 variances. The purpose of a variance is a means for improving older properties so people can continue to live there. When rules change variances are meant to allow improvement and modernization to property rather than force people from the property. At 820 square feet of living area and constructed in 1938, my mother’s house does not meet many of today’s criteria for modem-da\ living. We are proposing a modest addition to this house in order to bring it closer to today’s standards. All of this proposed addition would be done between the house and garage minimizing excavation and any impact on the lake or nearby wetlands. We believe aesthetically it is the best approach to expansion on this house and also is consistent with other homes on the lake m this area. Side lot setback - 30 '. The original house needs to be preserved as much as possible due to the fine hand-~^ cut limestone work on both ends of the house and a fireplace of the same material. The garage needs to be offset from the front of the house more to provide an aestheticallv pleasing front entry from the road. Leaving the garage where it is blocks the whole front of the proposed entry rendering it unsightly and perhaps unfunctional. Moving the garage to the west and detaching it would involve monumental dirt work on such a slope, require a 12-15 ft. retaining wall (unsightly from the lake) and totally block the view of the lake from the neighbors and road. Also, many mature trees would need to be removed further causing erosion problems and more unsightliness. In order to attach a garage we will need a few feet in the 30 ’ side lot setback. We have moved the garage as much possible to the west and awa> from the road. Mr. Bigham to the east has taken exception to this variance but we propose his view would not be altered much as he is looking at the back of the existing garage and we have a line of mature arborv itae planted near the east lot line to ease his view. Road setback - 50’. As my mother’s house sits 32 ’ from the road on a 30% slope there is no way we can comply with ordinance on this. The existing garage is 2 inches into the road now We feel we have adjusted the garage as best we can to get it further from the road. Septic System. We have permission for a state approved gravel-less trench system for this site for a 3+ bedroom house already worked out with Orono. This site was approved before state regulations of March 31,1996 requiring an alternate site for a septic system went into effect. We do not wish to install a septic system nor do we wish to incur costs for landscaping restoration as city sewer has been proposed for this area within a year. Rather could a covenant be added promising to hook up to city sewer and a pumping agreement be reached to fill the gap before the city sewer arrives? Lakeshore - 75 ’ and Bluff Zone. Most of the existing house sits w ithin the lakeshore setback and the bluff zone. Adding a second story and building toward the road encroaches the least on this lake setback and bluff zone. Hardcover. Our plans has reduced hardcover to within acceptable parameters for this property^. In closing, our mother passed away in April of 1995. She lived here for 57 years and developed this landscaping for her property over many of those years. It is aesthetically pleasing and drainage for this slope is well considered. Her heart and soul went into her home on Long Lake. This property has been on the market for one year. It has been sold twice and each time the City of Orono ’s demands have caused our |V’ ' ''\ <■ buyers to back out. It has caused our family an unbelievable amount of trauma in selling the place where we were raised. Not being able to do so in an expedient fashion has furthered our anguish. We can’t fully get beyond the death of our mother when we still have to maintain and worry over her vacant home. This property caimot be improved without variances. We feel this is a modest plan with the least amount of impact on the environment. This plan also brings this property up-to-date and is consistent with the better upgrades in the neighborhood. We’ve had verbal approval from Charles Truman at the May Planning Commission meeting. He is the neighbor immediately across the street and whose site line is affected most It appears to us that the neighbors have been given greater leeway on variances in the recent past and been allowed to do so on less acreage. We encourage you to view our property on Long Lake. We feel a look is worth a thousand words. Feel free to call me at 473-2474 if you would like to view the inside of the house or to answer any questions. 1 am usually home by 4:00 p.m. Along with my sisters I am. _________1^9*^ Q- Nancy A. Gawron as personal representative to the Estate of Edna H. Albee • • • ✓r ; • • #I • i . .1 I L r 4- . ii 5; 4; tf- f • i fiuiite tsr/rre HARDCOVE^X^^^LATlOiN VVOKK^nKfc. J ■ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) (O-^ 1 A' - 75-250’25-500’500-1000’ ^ EXISTING hardcover PJ ZONE A. House _____^ —I So2.^ S.F. Length Width X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage S.F.• • « » C. Driveway *9 « « <«• 1 X X- S.F. S.F. Srtt^* D. Sidewalk /.5 X X 6 73 fSZ.^___S.F. S.F.5^,0 E. Paiio/Beek X .•X *\ % /OS’! S.F. \ S.F. F. V^dscape . uNerlain By Ptotic. Or Faohc • 7-e> X X X /2:a Sr4 za y \.ir Jl± S.F. S.F. IS •• SiF. HZ rif*t&i9s G. Other Z\'Z3^Z S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE Total property area.in zone A //<f6 3 + B n€OC_ S.F. /7^aa S.F. A B X 100 79 - % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE (’7^/0“96) A. House ______________ ^---------------S.F. Length Width A if if X X X S.F. s s -»22J • * ••• •••* S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway X X iS.F.- --> +25(7 S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk (Sroop) /tfnffi/f rcAB* Tfaa^ALk stfif UAAlK E. Patio/Dcck ____________ fiATfO /iLOCk-S X Afi TiMOfAS F. Landscape ____________________^ Underlain ______________ ^ By Plastic • * Or Fabric + 25 ! S.F. ^ giT*\ S.F. Vs.F.^gfg - T S.F. I t 1 i • s S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other ■W total hardcover in zone total PROPEgY area-in ZONE ^ ^ \m -" y/^s-.. s.F>VV. #?rg ■r~~, S.F. •7^2_ _ A B * 14 \ • •• . .! • • » / • ■ SETBACK ZONE; duBee hardcover CALCULATK^VORKStlEEj ; (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ 25-500’ ft •* 500-1000’ •«» #« 0 pvTCTTsir: hardoo VER IN Z^NE ft •• S.F. ft *A X 1 • • t• • A« ttOUSC Length X Width 1 ft* ' ' • ft ft S.F. • / t r% ■ft • • X % 8S r S.F. 1 !. f• • , t « X =*S.F. Pi rTjiraoc /2 X 1 ft * ft • S.F. i t- O. WU au ^v • - ’ (T* Drivewav X • 0 ••• esc? ;■■s.i;. 0 :• *4 X .■ •...•,S.F. u • ft # • • D Sidewalk ft /£> «ft • X S.F. ): •• ft I• 0 ^ X * *4-1 •tg.3 S.F. E ratio/Deelt ■z • X .X ”ft ft S CMS.F. a*• St-oua X ‘ ; ‘S.F. u l!V- f B ft F 1 and^rnng X •a S.F. f frtd^rl^in 1 X •. -X S.F. i f Rv Plastic 2Z X 4-a &8.0 S.F. r « Or Fabric • / B0^ fZ P /4^ Imfi X 7.0 O.A, -7.9 - /t^.Z ft S.F. ft ftUP ft 4 r •ft ,• ftftft« « •« ft'ft ft*«k ••ft • * ftft^ •«« • ft . ••ftft ft W . • • • • • TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE . . TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A aer + B 88 7 x’lOO _S.F. __S.F. 8, /4____% A B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE C A. House _____________ ^ L—S.F. Length Width X X X • •• •re 59^ IS.F. ^S.P. S.F. B. Garage C. ‘ Driveway « • -- X X jrc^oP D. Sidewalk S.F. X X X X/!^n/fuy* i S'/ ^ ^ F. Landscape Underlain /^T*0 eC8€Uf By Plastic_____________• ^ Or Fabric • k % G. Other I X • ft • « total HARDCOVER IN ZONE ■■ - ' total B jj>95 « 100 «. • . •• • 14 • ^ sya S.F. S.F. .0 7a i S.-f: •^.F. ” 1 S.F. - 2?^T S-.F. - -\ -Z7J S.F. IS.F. .■ J' S.F. ft • • ft S.F. ^ ft /vsz yoj ^9^ fj vC . • S.F. " S.F. 90 A B I V JEFl- MARTINEAU realtor. G.R.I..CRS IS Mil I ION DOLLAR PRODUCER Bui (».12)473-3000 Dir; ((>12) 476-3659 Fax (<.2)476-5421 vvjyiata OHicr ■ 1 I *!•»! I.ak^ Sifrrt VV.^v/4ti MN 5S3^1 012^4730000 012/473-30J2 t f- • 1/ 9 C. July 9.1996 CITY OF ORONO Mr MikeGaffron Sox 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mike, The proposal cnslosecJ on the property located at 1575 Long Lake Blvd. is for a two Oedroom home It Is proposed that the property be "rehabed" ot this time with no more than two bedrooms The existing tanks will be blocked off from any dramfield The owner will supply the City with a fully executed pumping contract from a licensed contractor and the owner will draft and record a restrictive covenan* on the property that will net allow the property to be a three bedroom home until the City sewer has been approved and been installed to this property. Any further questions, please feel free to contact me at 476-3659. Sincerely. Jeff Martineau, for the Estate of Edna Albee (Nancy Gauron. Personal Representative) i <T. O - <d O 2 riHx s«<5.-iT—nrix" oaa. 6 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2135 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 28, 1996 TO:Paul & Sue Hedlund 1202 W. 22nd St. Mpls.. MN 55405 COPIES TO:Nancy A. GawTon 920 Dakota Ave. Long Lake, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variances DATE OF MEETING: 5/20/96 VOTE:5 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Comqiission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIE CONDITIONS: Tabled to allow applicant an opportunity to redesign, with the following general guidelines: Reduce hardcover. Move garage further from street and out of side yard. Discuss sewer options, perhaps propose a cohvenant to be filed in title regarding sewer/septic expectations and limitations for the site ... Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the June 17th meeting is June 10th (or July 8th for the July 15th meeting). If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional information, please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSIO'' MEt 1 FN(j HELD ON MAY 20, 1996 i (f^ - /^2i34 RubcinC^iiijJeb Aibi echi - Coniiiiucd) Smith moved. Lindquist secondeJiNto deny approv^P^he after-the-fact deck. The stair landmu vva^ approved with the condifh5^uhafjh€appIicanr work with Staff to meet the 90-100 .s f compliance for <;tair landinc Vote Aves 5 Nav<; 0 Th» appli'^ant wEi informed tfjErTlie application w^ttld 20 to the second Council mee^in*^ in June. It was noted foj>^ record that the Plarjtins Coi lOiOii v\uS not conccmcd with the stairway to^tte lake but would like to see the City woriTwth the applicant in •eeting size requirements (ffZ) #2135 PAUL AND SUE HEDLL^D, 1575 LONG LAKE BLVD. - VARLANGES - PUBLIC HEARLNG 8:28-9:12 P.AI. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicants was present. Gaffron reported that the property in question was a 3.4 acre lot. the bulk of which is located in the 0-7.S' setback, with 17,600 s f in the 0-7.S' .setback and 11,000 s f in the 75- 250’ setback Tbe bouse on the property is small and mostly located within the 0-75’ setback. The single car garage encroaches into the right-of-way. Gaftron said the pi’oposal to purchase the property is contingent on approval of the additions. .An addition is proposed to the rear, non-lakeside of the house, but still partially in the 0-75’ setback. A second story is also planned The garage will be removed and replaced by a 2-car attached earaee. Gaffron informed the Planning Commission that the variances required for this proposal are for hardcover, side setback to the east, proposed at 18' where 30' is required, and street setback. The attached garage requires a 50’ street setback and is proposed at T. Gaffron said Staff recommends a 10’ setback to the street lot line. The normal setback for a detached garage, when doors are to the side, is 10', which Gaffron said should be strived for. Gaffron reported th.at the average depth of the lot is such that there is no buildable envelope The existing house does not meet .setbacks Any upward changes results in visual impacts Gaffron said it should be noted that the height of the stnicture be limited to 2 stories. If thus limit \vas not placed in the resolution, the structure could be built to 2- I.-'2 stories. .Any m.ore than 2 stories would not fit the neighoorhood and would be disproportionate from the street view. A letter from the neighbor to the east stated his ODDOsition to allowina a side setback less than the 30' reauirement. Gaffron said there• 4 • could be ramifications to changing the saraoe to the other end of the house. MINXFTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMI^n^sION MEETING HELD ON MAY 20, 1996 The hardcover in the 0-75' setback exists at 1200 s.f. and 900 s f in the 75-250' zone. The proposal would increase these calculations by 85 s f in the 0-75' and to 1785 s f in the 75-250' zone The overall allowed hardcover of 25% is 2724 s f and is proposed at 306j s.f!, an increase ot appro.ximately 300 s.f. over the allowable. Gaffron continued that this is also a bluff situation The addition to the bulk of the stpjcture would have an impact. Grading would also be required within the bluff impact zone for the driveway Gaffron said the bluff impact is minor, how ever, w hen compared to other issues involved. A main concern is with the septic system for the property. The current septic system is non-conforming and requires replacement, for wliich a site exists Tliere is, however, no available alternate site on the property for the proposed 3-bedroom house. The neighborhood is proposed for sewering but thJs is an unresolved issue Gaffron questioned whether the house should be expanded to 3 bedrooms without an alternate site or Withhold final approval until the sewer issue is determined. Applicant, Paul Hedlund, said the property was very unusual. It is their intent to keep the home intact and build onto it as opposed to tearing it down and starting over with new construction. Peterson commented on the large number of variances fo. he application. He noted that, although the property deser\-es to have a home on it, the applicant needs to w'ork with Staff to make it a viable proposal. Hedlund said he sees the plan as the best for the property and reiterated the purchase was contingent on City approval. Stoddard acknowledged the good design and elevations, but asked the applicant if he would consider moving the garage to the west. Sue Hedlund said the west side of the lot w-as steep and questioned the encroachment of the bluff area Paul Hedlund also noted that the well was located on the west side of the property. During public comments, Charles Truman, who lives across the street from this property, voiced bus approval of the proposal. He said it would cause no hardshup to the neighborhood. MEsUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION NEETING HELD ON MAY 20, 1996 (#5 - #2135 Paul and Sue Hedlund - Continued) Peterson noted the concern from a neighbor regarding the side setback. He aareed that the concept was good in general but was concerned with the major issue of sewering Peterson sasd the application should be tabled until a solution is determined Peterson saw the need to provide a septic system tor a 3 bedroom, house or wait until the sewer issue is resolved Hedlund said he would prefer sewering and would not want to invest in a new- septic system sf sewering was in the near future Lindquist said with the need for MUSA amendment approval, planning, and review', it could be at least another vear until any decisions would be made Hedlund said he could w-ait a year but would need to receive approval of the improvements for a future timiC Lindquist informed Hedlund that he saw the propeny as it now is, a 2 bedroom, 800 s.f. home. Lindquist said it was liis opinion that tliis was all the land could handle. Lindquist said he would not want the applicant to wait for septic approval and then find that the Lm.provem.ents could not be made. Jeff Martineau, a Realtor with Burnet Realty, said he was representing the Albee family estate He acknowledged the problem.s with septic but noted that thus was not the only site in the area with no alternate site. He asked the Planning Commission to consider alternate solutions Martineau noted the uniqueness of the property and said a 800 s.f. home w as not consistent w ith homes of the '90’s He felt the design, location, and size of the property was consistent vvith the neighborhood Peterson informed Martineau that the Commission was in the planning process of what would be allowed for the property. He agreed with Lindquist on wha could be done with the property as a fact of reality, rather than one of marketability. Peterson said the main issue w'3s the sewer. He said the application could not m.ove forward without an alternate site, which is a recent regulation, and a system which meets zoning requirements. Peterson noted that other agencies are involved Martineau said he w'as in attendance not as an agent but to represent what was good for the homeowner He .said he sees the propo.sal as a reasonable use of the property. Hawn said she saw the proposal and issues as very troubling. Hawn noted that the property was in the 2 acre zoning and was only 1/4 size of the requirement She noted the fragility of the area with the bluff'and the one septic site Hawn felt it would be irresponsible to take this substandard lot and Lnerease the building size. She noted this property w as an example of why there were building codes. NflNX^TES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION NEETING HELD ON MAY 20. 1996 (#5 - #2135 Paul and Sue Hedlund - Continued) Susan AJbee said she saw the Hedlund's plan as being quite conservative She noted that there were no honies on the north side of the lake with alternate sites Alhee said the proposed septic system for the property has a 25 year guarantee She did not believe the applicant was asking for anjthang upj'easonable with the addition of one more bedroom and an attached 2-car garage Albee said there was only a 10"c) building envelope on the property, and her parents have lived there for 60 years Smith said she had no problem with the house increasing in height but with covering more of the lot with structure. The main issue with Smith was the sewerina. Stoddard noted the sewer issue along with the height of the addition and encroachment into the 0-75' setback. He said there w as still the issue of being 300 s f over the hardcover limit. He asked if there could be design changes to include movement of the garage to decrease the footprint especially in light of a com.plaint from a neighbor. It was also noted that there was no guarantee when sewering would come to the neighborhood. GafFron was asked about the status of the MLiS.A. application. Gaffron said the City is working with l ong Lake to determine capacity availability and make changes dow’nstrcam as necessary Once that is worked out, the Met Council will probably approve the application. Gaffron said sew ering was a matter of timing and cited exam.ples of w'hat might occur. He said he was concerned w ith the proposed improvements if the septic ICiltO Stoddard said he saw the footprint as a problem Peterson said he had a problem with the garage He did not wish to set any precedent by allowing a garage that near to the lot line. Sue Hedlund asked the Commission if the blufl' was a major concern. Peterson said it was the least concern of all the issues involved. Peterson moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2135 for redesign of location of garage and architectural redesign for fit on the property, along with a solution on how to handle possible future failure of the septic system. Peterson noted the possibility of holding tanks if necessary'. He brought the applicant ’s attention to the clean up being conducted of Lena Lake. Callahan said he was in favor of the tabling He said the issue was similar to that of the ice arena proposal with aw aiting resolution of the sew'ering issue. Callahan said he saw' the issue as political and was not clear whether it would be resolved favorably or in the near future. Callahan also noted the need for an agreement to be reached with both Long Lake and Medina on sewering issues. MINXfTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 20, 1996 (^5 - #21 Paul and Sue Hedlund - Continued) Vote: Aves 5. Navs 0. (#6) #2137 \\ ILLIAM AND SCSAN DirNKLEY, 2709 WALTERS PORT LANE - VARIANCES - PIFBLIC HEARING 9:!3-9;38 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted The Applicant was represented by Carl Smith Gaffron reviewed the proposals and improvements to the DurJdey property An addition to the house, revamping of a garage w all, replacement of retaining walls, and a new entry way w as approved in 1995 with revision to hardcover with removal of retaining walls that were replaced with plantings The current proposal is to change a deck on the south side of the residence and replace it with a room with a pool spa. This addition would meet the 10' side setback hut is located within the 0-75' setback Changing the deck to the proposed enclosed structure would decrease the hardcover by 24 s f but would increase the lot coverage by structure from 15.6% to 16.7°a. The additional structure also encroaches the average setback line Gaffron noted that the homes to the north and southeast are set far back on the properties The visual impact of the Dunkley property, with its bulk in the 0-75' setback, would not affect the views of the other properties. Gaffron said there may be opportunities for hardcover reduction but the intensive review of the hardcover was done with the earlier application Gaffron added that the driveway is ver>' large and could be an option for hardcover reduction Peterson commented that the applicants have done a fantastic job on replacing the retaining w-ails and redoing the landscaping. He noted their compliance w'ith the requests of the City. Letters have also been received from the neighbors approving what has already been done on the propeity Peterson noted the limitations to the property but agreed that the deck needs to be removed or replaced He asked if the deck could he moved forw ard'’ Gaffron agreed that this could be an option and asked how it would affect the side setback variance? Carl Smith responded that the location of the spa room was best suited to the location with the patio door on the left side. Hawn was informed that the spa was a therapeutic need for the applicant Hawn asked why the hot tub room located beneath the area in question could not be used for the spa. Carl Smith said that hot tub was not in good condition, and the spa was probably too large for that particular room Gaffron questioned whether there was any logic to placing the spa at the other end of the home? This would be a location near the master bedroom. mi- T To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator May 7. 1996 Subject:#2135 Paul and Sue Hedlund/Edna Albee Estate, 1575 Long Lake Boulevard - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 Acre, Unsewered Application: Request for lake setback, average lakeshore setback, street .setback, side setback, 0-75' hardcover and bluff impact zone variances for construction of additions to existing residence. B C List of Exhibits A - Application/Letter of Request/Photos Plat Map Property Owners List D - Neighbor Comments (Bigham) E - Survey-Existing F - Survey-Proposed Site Plan G - Topography H - Hardcover Calculations Existing/Proposed Elevation Views Exisling/Proposed Floor Plans K - Septic Report Excerpts L - Bluff Analysis by Staff Pertinent Code Sections A.Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C) - Required lake setback = 100' (Recreational Development Lake, unsewered); existing and proposed = 49’. B Section 10.23, Subd. 6 (B) - Required street setback = 50’; existing house = 32’, existing detached garage = O' (10' minimum allowed on lakeshore lots); proposed house including attached garage = 1' approximately. C.Section 10.23, Subd. 6 (B) - Required side setback = 30', proposed = 18' for attached garage. D.Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B)/10.56, Subd. 16 (C) - No encroachment of average setback allowed; 32’ encroachment existing/proposed. 1 Zoning File #2135 May 7, 1996 Page 2 F.Section 10.22, Subd. 2/10.55, Subd. 8/10.52, Subd. 16 (L) - No hardcover allowed in 0-75' zone; proposal is to increase 0-75’ hardcover from 6.79% to 7.27%; area of structural hardcover increases. G.Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C) - No structures allowed in bluff impact zone (bluff and 20' from top of bluff); proposal includes additional structure within bluff. H.Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (J) (5) (h) - No fill or e.xcavated material may be placed in bluff impact zone. Summary of Issues This 0.65 acre lot currently contains a one-story, 820 s.f. residence and 240 s.f. detached garage. The entire house is less than the required 100' setback from Lx)ng Lake, the clo.sest point being 49' from the lake. The applicant proposes to purchase the property and construct major additions, including: increase the footprint of the house by 4(X) s.f. add a second story above the entire house, including a third bedroom. remove the existing detached garage and add an attached 475 s.f. garage. The propeity is extremely substandard in a number of respects; and the proposal requires many variances: Average depth of the lot from the street to the lake is 110', making it impossible to meet the required 100' lake setback and 50’ street setback. This lot has no buildable envelope. The existing house does not meet the required lakeshore or street setbacks, but does meet the required side setback. The proposed house will be even nearer to the road. The existing detached garage is a few inches into the Long Lake Boulevard right-of-way, and less than 20' from the pavement. The proposed attached garage will be only 1' from the street lot line. The existing septic system is non-conforming, and the property contains only one possible drainfield site that can support a system for a three-bedroom home (this is an area that is proposed for municipal sewer v/ithin the next year or two). Zoning File #2135 May 7, 1996 Page 3 The west end of the existing/proposed construction is in a defined bluff area, where no construction, filling or excavating would normally be allowed. Setbacks The setback to the lake is not proposed to change. However, a second story will be constructed above the existing house, adding to the visual bulk of structure near the lake. Based on the elevation views submitted with the application, only two stories will be visible from the lake. This is not a basement walkout situation. No height variance is required, and the strucn ’.re as proposed is not as towering as the Code might allow. Given the nearness to the Itdce, does Planning Commission wish to consider limiting the height to two stories as proposed, not the IVi stories the Code would allow? The new house additions will be approximately 30' from the street right-of-way, which is not out of character with other homes in the neighborhood. However, the proposed attached garage will be only 1’ from the street lot line, and the attached nature of that structure may have a visual impact of the entire structure being "right up against the road". While the proposed garage is not large by today ’s standards, its location does not even meet the 10' minimum setback that would be required on a lakeshore lot for a detached garage. Further, the proposed garage location encroaches the required 30' side setback, and the neighbor to that side has indicated an objection to such a setback. Can the proposed attached garage be relocated further west on the property to meet a minimum 10' street setback and avoid encroaching the 30’ side setback? Is there any justification to allow the variances as proposed? Assuming the garage can be relocated, is there a hardship? Hardcover Hardcover is proposed to increase slightly in the 0-75' zone. Certain areas will be converted from non-structural to structural hardcover, including the entire addition on the north side of the house, as well as a deck over the existing 4' x 10’ sidewalk at the south side of the house. Existing and proposed hardcover is as follows; Area 0-75' = 17,600 s.f. Area 75-250 ’ = 10,895 s.f. Allowed hardcover = .25 x 10,895 s.f. = 2,724 s.f. Existing:0-75 ’ = 1,195 s.f. 75-250 ’ = 887 s.f. 2,082 s.f. Proposed:0-75 ’ = 1,280 s.f. 75-250 ’ = 1.783 s.f. 3,063 s.f. Zoning File #2135 May 7,1996 Page 4 Is there any hardship or justification to allow the proposed hardcover increase in the 0-75' zone? Is there any hardship or justification to allow hardcover on the property to exceed the 2,724 s.f. that this property would normally be allotted? Would it be appropriate to limit 0-75' hardcover to the exiting 1,195 s.f., and limit total hardcover on the property to 2,724 s.f.? Average Setback Both the existing house and proposed additions encroach the average lakeshore setback by approximately 32'. The average setback line is drawn frrm the adjacent residence at 1545 Long Lake Boulevard to the residence to the west which accesses from North Farm Road. Neither of the adjacent residences will have significant lake views impacted by the proposed construction. Bluff Impacts Per Exhibit L, just the westerly end of the existing/proposed house is situated on a bluff by definition. The midpoint of the property meets the 30% slope/25' rise criteria for a bluff, but the east and west ends of the property have an average slope less than 30%. The impacts of the new construction are mainly visual impacts as viewed from the lake, and there is little existing vegetation on the lakeside of the house to soften the vi.sual impacts. Further, becau.se the yard quickly drops away from the house on the lakeside, it may be difficult to establish the degree of vegetative screening which could help reduce the impact of the additional facade created by the .second story. The project as proposed will involve additional fill within the bluff impact zone in order to accommodate the new driveway. A detailed grading plan would be required prior to issuance of any building permits for this property, and erosion controls would be needed during construction. Septic System Requirements Applicants have provided a .septic .system design sufficient for one .system for a three-bedroom home. However, no alternate drainfield site exists on the property. This property is within the "North Long Lake" area proposed for construction of municipal sewer in the near future, perhaps as early as 1997. If sewer was not on the horizon, staff could not support the expansion of this house from two bedrooms to three bedrooms absent an alternate site. An option for Planning Commission to consider is that such expansion not be allowed unless/until municipal sewer becomes available. 1 Zoning File #2135 May 7, 1996 Page 5 Foundation The Inspections Department has inspected the existing basement and finds that it is 8" block. This will require an engineered design to support the additional story, but will not require replacement of the existing foundation. Summary of Issues for Consideration 1.Addition of structure less than 100’ from lake. 2. Attached garage only 1' from street lot line, 18 ’ from side lot line; house only 30’ from street lot line. 3. Proposed hardcover increases in 0-75’ and 75-250’ zones. 4. Average setback encroachment. 5. Structure and land alterations in bluff impact zone. 6. Septic system limitations/future municipal sewer. Staff Recommendation Any recommendation for approval, partial approval or conditional approval should clearly define the hardships and justification for each of the variances. Planning Commission should consider whether the proposal can be revised to eliminate the side setback variance, increase the street setback to a minimum of 10’, eliminate any hardcover increases in the 0-75' zone, and limit total hardcover to a level equivalent to 25% of the 75-250' zone (2,724 s.f.). Finally, Planning Commission may wish to delay approval of the expansion from two to three bedrooms, until a final decision to construct city .sewer is reached. Options for Action 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Recommend approval as proposed. Recommend approval with specific revisions/conditions. Table for revisions/further information. Recommend denial. Other. Application # /j:' Date ReceiTcd V- Jt - l Amount Paid * i J-c - * CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 ^ / (no change from original application) V i r-. Variance for non-conforming structures S22(X00 tel ,9 • * After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORi\LATION Site Address 1 S~^ LOO ^ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 2C> - ll V- ~2-3>■i 3 OOI I Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Pmoem Acauired '-Peoqyjn -SAcg---------------------^(monlh/ysar) I (do) (do not) also own the^jacent parcels of land. residentialPresent use of propert>’: Zoning District: other (specify). applicant ^ Name Phone (home) ) H " ^ Address: I 7JD?^ La J 2^2. oQ_^ j . rnone inomc; o / i • H&C^uuoa /So(5 HeOuj^^Phone(work) ID H - £r3-"t jT- - Citv: PlA Zip: jft-OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) - J? / 7 — ^ r-. ----- Phone (work) Address: c/^ ^i^* ------- P"----—Lie DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: _____ Estimated Construction Cost S ICO.coo -iro.OQO -----------------------------------------MIIa (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _ Setback: ___Lot Width y' Front y Side Hardcover Lot Coverage ear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual properU' conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements. ------------------— " (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information mu»» be submitted bv the application deadUng datfi.in order for vour application to be considered complete; 1. 2. J.y 4. 5. 7. 8. y/y Completed Application Form y Certified Property 0\vners List of owTiers within 150’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘/i" x 11 for reproduction. Topographic sur\ey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8V2 x 11 for reproduction. , Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy SVi" x 11"). ■ Q ^'jtxLisi of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in V the propertv'. 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 }[asiE varinnce application is not complete if the above information has, not APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zomng 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 i h-<^ h OWNER’S SIGNATURE . ui 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 purp^s of investigation and verification of this request. a. ^ r,i Owner's Sinnnnire AW ^ ~' Y> . Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, 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 ♦ r/\:r. • v #•. Descripf ion of Requesf From fhe CH\j of Orono % We are requesfing permission from fhe (^fij of OrorK> fo approve fhe required variances allowing proposed improvemenfs fo be made on fhe affaohed properf\j. We make fhis requesf and need fhe variance approval in order fo creafe a dwelling more represenfafive of foday's housing markef and fo provide appropriafe living space for our currenf and fufure family needs. Proposed sHvcHire: • 3 - Bedrooms • 2 - Fuji Bafh • 1 - Half Bafh Hard^ip/Descripf ion of Unusual Property Conditions One needs fo look af fhe survey fo see a a number of unusual property condifions af 1575 Long Lake Blvd. The unusual condifions are as follows: Lof Size - 28.495 square feef (.62 acres) 0'-75' Hard Cover Zone - 6.79% Rear 8ef Back - Oarage Ofrucfure looafed on lot line Lake Shore Set Back - Majority of house sfruofure inside fhe 75' setback House Qize - 750 square feet. 2 bedrooms, 1 Full Bafh The question is. what improvemenfs can be made fo this property given these preexisting conditions and what would be considered reasonable when considering the variances required to make those improvements? Given fhis scenario, we feel our •>''>posed plan provides a balance between fhe need for sfruofure improvemenfs and viable living space while incurring nominal changes in fhe existing property conditions. We thank you for your consideration, 9ue and Paul Hedlund . J RUN DATE 0A/2S/96 BATCH 50APROP AOOR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/AOORPROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAfC/AOOR PROP AOOR OIMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 26-11B-23 5S 0007 015A0 LONG LAKE BLVO ROBIN E CRANFORD ROBIN E CRANFORD 15A0 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE 55SSASO 26-11B-2S S5 0012 015A5 LONG LAKE BLVO J E BIGHAM < C A BXCHAM JAMES A CYNTHIA BIGHAM 15A5 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE MN 5535A 3B 27-11B-23 44 OOOB 01469 NORTH FARM RO JOSEPH H OFFERMAN JOSEPH H OFFERMAN 1669 N FARM RD LONG LAKE ftl 55356 HEFWEPIN COWTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 06MERS LIST3B 26-118-23 33 0008 01570 LONG LAKE BLVO C E TRUMAN ETAL CHARLES E TRUMAN 1570 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE rt4 5535638 26-118-23 33 0030 01586 LONG LAKE BLVO AROIS J SEVERTSON ARDIS J SEVERTSON 1586 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE MN 55356 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 1358 26-118-23 35 001101575 LONG LAKE BLVOEDNA H ALBEEESTATE OF EONA H ALBEENANCY A GANRQN P R920 DAKOTA AVELONG LAKE M4 5535638 26-118-23 33 0031 01580 LONG LAKE BLVO JOEL S BOVEE JOEL S BOVEE 1580 LONG LAKE BLVO long lake MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 506 00007 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE OAIE‘<MmV,y Ik'f kidllu? M ' I (we) Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgeincnt Form % litas'6)Li/S have reviewed* the plan/for the proposed improvem^t or proposed^^ of the property Ideated at UvutuieP- ^li/D also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. •Aved ’the olansTor the proposed improvem^t / I (w^ understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to^ declare approval or disapproval of the propert>’ or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans ^d that the ^posed ^ighboi^ y cUfr' ^SL to. Date . ♦♦ii^crrT^*****^]^^*^^*^*'^'*^^*************’^************************* ******** I (we) print name(s)]print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at____________________ also referred to as Land Use Application No.________.. 1 (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the C;t>' Council that 1 (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building^^Zoning Off^at least 10 da^ nrior to the scheduled meeting date. 04/.£-l C*^tiruitf«r Swr*«f lor »• « « » •]. »« IS I 1%. «ltif‘S i.vftC «00llii>* \ 1/ 1* s >• *- i « •»•- • *,.»• f i»4— r *» I • •< «••!•>' J* • ■ I »».| . >«i*v ••• •Ijtw*. «»• a>^49$ . ^ m^^rn.COFFIN & CKONBFRC, INC.1 VJIW/i \UI l\Vl, I . • ■ • 1. J • «■» I : X»i«k I i \^. •..« • I I *. M . »-.» 4 -1: I » O II %w>mm I jifc 4 Ai*» »4 > i w •#$«« •« Mlv «4 M«*k ^ vu-^«41.,«»« i;*^% >>• ••«i« ^3f-M POOR ORIGINAL OOCUMENl siiT/n S'HARDC0VER_C^CL)LAnOiN NVUlOvi^^iLi ‘ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONT)75-250’25-500’ FVTyrrsG HAPnrovER IN ZONT A. Home______________* Len|(h WidJi • • I '• X X X B. Garsgc 4-^ C. Driveway ' « • • X*X-• •• • •• M t , • ^ 0 sre^s D. sidewalk 4 /•5 X X 6 73 E. Patio/©eek . .Slocii* X . X jt 3 •*- . f • ‘ ’fc', ..'i - ■ “ ^ « -r -a-':\v F, V^dscape 56Ae^ UMerlain By Plmtic. Or FaoHc • 2 o X X X z c * hr Tif^eefis G. Other <?.S ?■ 3 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A -i- B n^O^_X 100 fROPOSED HARDCO\TR IN ZONT A. House ______________ * LengO WidJ) B. Garage C. Driveway X X -^r2-(^ 4I , D. Sidewalk MM X X ^C- E. Patio/Deck X X l§ F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric Ti-rz . G. Other X X X -'-S'!A usl l-‘3 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA-lN ZONE A -___:--------- ® •»,» »» ^ •«••• •• • • • • ••• x.lOO - • • 14 • I • .... 500-1000 ’ • M 802.9 SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. tgz.^ S.F. if. c? S.F. S.F. /OSl S.F. /2.0 (3O S.F. S.F. S.F. Z3-Z S.F. )!9^.3 S.F. A /7^g(2 S.F. B 79 0O ioo^M S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. iuy,o _S.F. S.F. o S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P. y- A B i ^ ;• • 9 *. ••% • t ! .1 I: f- {' . ♦ * m . »• ii 1 \ I • • • "'f A ■ /"■ fiLsae e^r^raHAiU)COVER CALCULATiO^V UlOvi^t j SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ 25-500’ EVTjrTTNC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______________ X LenfCh Wid'Ji X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk 3'i X X 41 ‘ Z E. Patio^Oeek 2^ X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic. Or Fabric • H8(X X X X G. Other A A x 7.f TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE .... TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A g>8 7 -i- B x'lOO PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______________ X Length Width • • •X X X • ••• •* • • • • • B. Garage 2.7jns- C.' Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X 6t'Sl E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X Or Fabric G. Other f Hj i-t=-.6 total hardcover in -zone total PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE » -t- B X 100 - lO-£/ 'tB SOO-IOOO’ 2^ 2SO 4^.0 i$‘3 AS.o ■7'9 4^'3> H4.Z Bay e.i4 l£k S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 27. g>‘ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 9 0 9 • •2V2..^ SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S F. S.F • S.F. 5«y.oI s.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. s.p. ir«KJ A B A B ••• • • »14 -7i-OT(^10,. : at .............. FORTH * ARCHITECTS 'fVeraceP ^rrW iU-eyvrPo<J -•.• i . ■ i . . • i ■j HEDLUND RESIDENCE, I • I futrrihlA ioimas^Tiotl ctiTi-cp■^3 FORTHARCHITECTS i *1 ■ <*>» fcAvr el€>/#wtio4 ■■Bi oa BB BB SB • r ■ \ •/ I H • H FORTHARCHTTECTS 1 i ' 1 F -1 F • f iU Ihj m TU«ro'4fc&k\««rrU «XtVWTi HEDLUND RESIDENCE n PI CXKfTiKlai NlOfCTH ^L^VATiOkI • • 1 r ■1 Jrh 40 MLPiMw ••• *••* 's !.•/>HEDLUND RESiIDENCE nCL i cn ••n (.a <E TFbtl^D FORTHARCHITECTS IQ' ' • • Jv..i> y A *y . . . # ^ • I • t \..v' •'J • W fi 'iV-T, I1 4 I L. fN> HEDLUND RESIDENCE a ir MiCLPIMw FORTH AROmECTS1. cli . vo i. Q.a u I l/J HEDLUND RESIDENCE 4i 1 P'XU :}C • crry of orono SEPTIC SYSTEM APPROVAL CITY of ORONO Mmildp«l Odkcs Post Office Box 66 Coitil MIfiowU 5S32XXM LOCATION: OWNER: 1575 Long Lake Blvd. Edna Albee GENERAL CONTRACTOR:SEPTIC CONTRACTOR: SITE EVALUATOR: Soil Testing report DATE: ^^96 The City of Orono has Approved your on-site system design as of January 5, 1996 (approved-disapproved) (date) The site is limited due to steep slopes, mottled soils at 39-48", and fill witli the following comments: soils at approx. 40". Jim Anderson (U of MN) . Bob Koch (Koch’s Soil Testing), and Duanne Ritter (Ritter Exc.) believe that a gravelless system will function adequately under these conditions. The City approves this design based on their recommendation and a variance is granted to allow the septic tanks 5Q ' from thg lakf> as no npi-inng exist. No alternate site is available, but sewer may be available in the THIS IS NOT A PERMIT. This is a design approval form which must accompany the site plan. A permit musf uturc be issued to a licensed septic contractor prior to installation. A list of currently licensed septic contractors is enclosed. NOTICE TO INSTALLERS: Any changes to the approved plans and specs must have prior approval of the Inspector (473-7357). Call for inspections 24 hours in advance. ALL DRAINFIELD AREAS MUST BE FENCED OFF prior to building site excavation and fencing must remain in place until final site grading. Approval to pour footings will not be granted until the Inspections Department has verified that primary and alternate sites are adequately protected. NO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC OF ANY KIND (cars, trucks, earth moving equipment, etc.) is allowed within 20' of tested drainfield sites either before or after system construction. Compaction of these areas could render them unusable prohibiting the timely completion and or limiting the long term use of the property. A site copy will be available at the City Offices for the septic contractor. CITY OF ORONO , On-site Systems Manager •m- ••• TELEPHONE-473-7357 • FAX-4734510 KOCH’S SOIL TESTING P.O.BOX 81 LORETTO.MN 55357 TEL: (612) 479-2637 Edna Albcc Estate 1/2/96 Job Site: 1575 Long Lake Blvd., Orono, Mn. Percolation tests and soil borr.gs were done on the above lot on 11/7/95 what type of drainfield could be installed to replace the current system which m :*eJ^lion rate was 19.9 min./in. and the depth to mottled soil was at 39-48 the enclosed soil borings and percolation tests for the details. Note: the perc. test “many a preTurized sy^t^wlTs^igned for this properly due to the mottled soil level I tiTS'inv^^^^ on 12/27/95 with Mr. Jim Anderson (University of M^e^oTMike Gaffmn and Steve Weekman (City of Orono). Duane ^ner (Duane w “r ExcLting, Rockford. Mn.) and Robert Koch (Koch Soil Testing. Lorettm 1^.) mesenl ^was the general consensus that a 10 inch gravelless trench system could be instafed Three soil borings were taken that day (12/27/95) and mottled «* 42 inches to 48 inches. It was agreed that the gravelless trench system would be ^?delTf r ^avdle'ss on the downhill side should be at least 6 inches into existing soil The soil located in between the trenches should be scarified up with e ° ‘ backlS similar topsoil (black loam) be added into this area to ensure » cova-TepTof 6 inches over entire drainfield area. The decision on when the placemen of topsoU will be done will be up to the contractor/installcr as proper drainage areas wil ~ t-. srS- gal /day water usage with a perc. rate of 19.9 minimch would be of the following Overall size* 750 sq. ft. Total amount of pipe needed: 250 “• xhpp^fnre However, it was felt that only 80% of the pipe would >>e filled with effluent. T the system should be increased by 20% or to a size of 900 sq. ft. Overall drainfield size: 900 sq. ft. r... .-■> «> ■>-. every 2-3 years. This practice will enhance the life of the system. MPCA Certified Roben Koch w* • •r-it fs \ ^9P«CTz 5^* CSYV &SS e»Ri£»?i* PERMIT NO. Sr .‘31 ?r APPROVcO AS SUBMITTED i approved with corrections as noted ^ NOT APPROVED — CORRECT & RESUBMIT n«M comii»«nts «« for your informrtk^Mi / toN co«M«nc« ;wlth ■« BWUttWo buJ0«l« 4 .^■SnHliHiKlipg Itoms not apoclhcoily notwJ irt vm •'52.*'^ ' <f EP THIS |*LAN SET ON SIFE AT ALL TIM?*»-; J O I - Jj^K \ SSL ■)u5^ t •» •? \ vJ r{\, . vJS^ lo” f. Q. A"'n - >■vO 'tlv^\>t t 1 * 1 I I .! i ! 'Ii •i I I'TT2a *^S i?:! t• t i| t! **i^j' /. ! i,06£icTfc^ 7/^ ! I , ' . ' ’ .1 i ‘ i •• I ' :? I ; ‘ ‘» » I J i' t (‘ ! ! :• tt I 1 ii 1 I! !I !I • • t iIf'-- t f * * I i; •I I i !t •• I! i ! 1< I i •i I , f i .! ! : *I iI!i !'ll**i i i t ! : ! i • i I I t I • II! I• ill ' I ; I• •: .1* L ,\F»! V !•“ / is A ticu.rfr ‘ ! ' , ■ ' I ; 1 ■ i . ' - ' I I I I I I 1! M "I I I ! • I t ’ ! 5 / ;i, ^Lper \ zs'+\ • ; 1 M ; It 1 i * • I • i ^ i * ! ■ I ! ■ ' i ■ i ! : ; M ITOwAfeii WKVIS- BoU'y I • ♦ • 1 1 \ I I -roc TO, A eo!t*T r-e>c4- • ' • : ' ‘ 1 ! ' I I .* : II» I t I i « • OA\Y^y ^07. op . ! (<9dcu'<ejr A*r-poiMT I I* I , i ' i j * I ! ' I I ' A,P,0€C.IfjoT rAen I>ef —I fb/M-|r‘;a! IMrtVs.!pc*r. f=o/£_ Vf>p £?p ! : i I I • I I I i I I » .1 I I I I t/7" I fiV ;6er. Ill I I 1 I t I ' I :i ; .1I I i t ‘ I > I l-W I -W I I i ; <?»/»/ ip i i I ! • i 1i ; f ’ i • .i ♦ I .I I • ? * I ! • I I •! 1 I I t • • i . . I , J i i I ‘ ’ ! I ! ♦ • I I I i i ■ r * ' ' ;. • ♦ I i K"I!I I t t I I I . I I » Ll i I !I 1 t I ' I v!/.! t^CArt^/ I •• I \ %* ♦ •! J • <« I I I ! *f •T1 !I I I ’> t I : ! : ■ ' I i » i I I I , ! iI1 I * 'I ' ( ! !- I < s I I ! ( f t • II ‘ ^ I ■ ^ : 1 12.: sLs"*** oA/^y-72.1 i^ I r>V. !J 4nlu>i.pl\>! wwivt tii'Cii ^ ' /jfeye 2^ O^ r^c-e I I I i I ! I ; i 1 ' ' I » « 1 « * 'MlI . . i i I- i i » ; ! I I i .1. i 1 i. i 1 ) • Mi ,M i 1 I i I ! 1 i 1 r ■’ i ! 1 ill ’ ! I M I I i 'at'r^ fv*^ y* ^ i . .— , ■ i :! ; I 1 I I ' i I . ' I ! 1.1 ill' ' ^L- j - I ' I 1 . : I » . 1 I I • : :^! IHi ! '»• I i * I i ’ * i i • i I I : I ! I I I » /ipf'^-: • \ I I i ! !I • ♦ i I « i ! ! * ///y j, // -i;2-, 2J>' A<f>^€' d?cH^L^3 • 'C>€-fe?N- ’Tou)f,u> ^v>y )S'l^ L.L, - •r70<^erc-r / /5 J-.*4'*'r i,-y. 6i^<? ’-rO€' -TO A ^5T*«>f2^ >-s>c>A^ovj^ ^)Ht-'->L- /vyecV-?t*c. of2-. (^cc-ua: a—Po/njt s'5?oimt /\ pot- /Jot rAetrT loef, e><ceki-- /4^ .... _„. .— fb/r^T 8. lVire-T"S. ‘tc'P <2>F £i-uf?^ _^8«/ -..,.* 4 ' ST*"**** <?*/•/ (^ViMufvy', • S'/ ^ j > lA -1 'lA K t. (\ V • O' *. . jv ■;>;: . V ■' ^ •’■*•. . . WmW ■/ Uh y \ • V* ., ‘ v; r ^ V ;/V w 4fWk* • i.l''t Km '.’.rvdij ll||M|i| ^ mmi ■:< 'K / i 'V ’i^ps^ •■••’■•%»v• r-.'/ •'V*! .',i-!cas\l \M vM /.'V^r4 ■'M\ . \ . ■ J<T( y »••. ♦ ’ v,f •:r. S .Vl •.» /v r (/n^ o >■ rV \y 'n r', 1 thkk» . T t I i 11/^ • I ‘ ) -1 Iv. •■■«.:’'l-^.'mVy k^! Emmm - ■ .'■'Vs V A 1 mMm ' ;^iyW«>AiV r ,.T ?i ■* *•«' •• - / M dWW-' > ■■ C I ,>'••■■«.'■>'. • „,.^ if WmL}'!<s- v..\f 'if' ' S:! .. •*-■• j ^Vir-V-.ijJr iVY'Vfn r •_,jv S >*- adi X v»A^i V ^' > '^ »>i ,;v mk'''' V. ' ®^5^ 5 ! ■V' iiii ^'."„ </ ' 'I ',^1 f/ ^ - r'r^fer-'v: ■■■ v«--^25ag Rffll''. ^ . . . ' A. \ mm *'\’S\- 'V\U ' ‘'V ''k <*.i • ;S:> .•^•* • ' 1'' ■ :■• ’• -V' : •; k'V', :^f.--';^v/' - 4 '.,/• ' ' --i" -' k' ; . ■ 4. ' * ■'* A'*’ ' ' ^ t -a* ,1^ » ^^<li >>;• . rr.". ' ■i - • '’'i- /'■. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: September 19, 1996 23 1995 ITEM NO.: Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Assistant Planning &. Zoning Administrator___________ Item Description: #2159 James and Joann Jundt, 1400 Bracketts Point Road - Variances - _____________Resolution____________________________________ Zoning District: LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 Acres, Unsewcred Application: Request for lakeshore setback variance and 0-75' hardcover variances for restoration of existing grotto, retaining wall and lakeshore stairway system (applicant also proposes cosmetic repair to existing boathouse). List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 9/19/96 C - Memo and Exhibits of August 14, 1996 Applicants propose to restore two existing limestone rock stairway: ding down the lakeshore bank east of the e.xisting house. These stairways have been in . .ce for many years, and restoration will include repair or replacement of d“tf-inrated stonework and handrails. Additionally, applicants propose to restore the > lerground grotto and its associated retaining wall. This is an underground cellar-type room, located within the lakeshore bank behind a stone retaining wall. Restoration will include mainly cosmetic work including adding stucco interior wall and ceiling panels, adding a decorative light fixture, restoration of the existing wood doors, and restoration of the existing stone retaining wall. Applicants had originally proposed significant restoration of the existing boathouse, which is in failing condition. That work was to include roof replacement, window and door replacement and modification, straightening of the frame, residing, a new concrete floor, and a new concrete step. The August 14 staff memo indicated that the apparent total restoration proposed suggests that the structural work intended likely exceeds 50% of the value of the structure at the time it became non-conforming. The zoning code limits the structural restoration of such structures with the goal that they eventually disappear. Prior to the Planning Commission review, applicajits withdrew the boathouse work from this application. However, at the Planning Commission meetin applicant indicated that rather than remove the structure they intend to repair the roof. Please review the di-^cussion on Page 2 of the .August 14 memo regarding the confermity of this structure. Request for Council Action continued Page 2 September 19, 1996 #2159 James and Joann Jundt, 1400 Bracketts Point Road Hardcover Existing 0-75' hardcover on the property excluding the public roadways is less than 1% of the 0-75' zone. While applicant's submitted hardcover calculations indicate a 250 s.f. increase in hardcover, applicant indicates that is incorrect and retlects a prior application, and in fact there is no expectation that additional hardcover will be added as part of the restoration work proposed. Planning Commission indicated that they have no problem with the hardcover aspect of this application. Planning Commission Recommendation At their September 16 meeting. Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 to recommend approval of the restoration/repair/cosmetic upgrading of the stairways, retaining wall and grotto. Plaiming Commission directed applicant to work with staff regarding the boathouse repairs, but specifically did not approve any variances for the boathouse structure, and indicated that depending on the work ultimately proposed, that may have to come back for a iurther separate review. Planning Commission noted the following hardships which support the restoration work for the grotto, retaining wall and stairways: 1.The prop>erty is unique for a number of reasons, including its age, its history and the fact that applicants have been diligently restoring the property to its former splendor. 2.The proposed work involves restoration of amenities or structures which already exist, and does not propose any new buildings or amenities. 3.The 650' length of the eastern shoreline justifies the existence of as many as four lakeshore stairways to provide access to the lake from the higher portions of the property which are as much as 25' above lake level, and the steep slopes east of the house suggest the need for stairway access. Planning Commission noted that the boathouse would not be permitted if it were proposed to be constructed today, but members indicated that the boathouse appears to be an amenity which, in the context of the entire property, should be allowed to be restored. Factors which -r Request for Council Action continued Page 3 September 19, 1996 #2159 James and Joann Jundt, 1400 Bracketts Point Road may justify structural repair to the boathouse include its age. its connection with the history of the property, and its unique former function as a "changing room" with a divider for a boys’ side and a girls' side. Planning Commission suggested that applicant work with staff to determine the cosmetic versus structural nature of contemplated repairs, if structural restoration variances are necessary to bring that back as a separate application. Staff Recommendation Staff concurs with Planning Commission that the stairways, retaining wall and grotto should be restored. Additionally, Council should give applicant direction regarding the restoration of the boathouse. A resolution for approval of the restoration of the stairways, grotto and retaining wall is attached for Council adoption. Options for Action 1. Approve per attached resolution. 2. Approve per attached resolution with revisions. 3.Table for further information. 4. Conceptual denial 5.Other. _, seconded by , to adopt Resolution No.PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by__ granting lakeshore setback and 0-75 ’ hardcover variance approval for restoration of lakeshore stairways, retaining wall and grotto for James and Joann Jundt at MOO Bracketts Point Road. Vote:ayes.navs. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2, 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8, AND 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (C & L) FILE NO. 2159 WHEREAS, James and Joann Jundt (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1400 Bracketts Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: (Exhibit A attached); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2, 10.55. Subdivision 8 and 10 ‘•6, Subdivision 16 (C & L) to permit the restoration of an existing retaining wall, undergiound grotto and lakeshore stairway system located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no hardcover or structure is normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2159. •The property is located in the LR-IA Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 16, 1996 and recommended approval of the proposed variances to restore the lakeshore stairway system, retaining wall and underground grotto, based upon the following findings: Page 1 of 5 4. 5 A.The property is unique for a number of reasons, including its age, its history and the fact that applicants have been diligently restoring the property to its former splendor. B.The proposed work, involves restoration of amenities or structures which already exist, and does not propose any new buildings or amenities. C.The 650' length cf the eastern shoreline justifies the existence of as many as four lakeshore stairwa\s to provide access to the lake from the higher portions of the property which are as much as 25' above lake level, and the steep slopes east of the house suggest the need for stairway access. 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. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessuy to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difTiculty; is necessar>' 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. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2, 10.55, Subdivision 8, and 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C & L) to permit the restoration of the existing lakeshore stairway Page 2 of 5 h system, retaining wall and underground grotto, subject to the following conditions: 1.The restoration work shall not exceed that contemplated or proposed in the submitted plans. Hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone shall not exceed the pre-existing level of 0.7% as indicated on the site restoration plan attached as E.xhibit B. Applicant is advised that any future proposal to add hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone might be approved only in conjunction with the concurrent removal of existing hardcover, resulting in no net increase in hardcover in the 0-75' zone. 2. 3. 4. Structural restoration of the existing boathouse is specifically not a part of this approval, and structural repairs to that building shall be reviewed by the Inspections Department :uid if determined to require variances, shall be brought forth to the Planning Commission and City Council as a separate application. 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 pemiit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 23, 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, znd shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the temis of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of September, 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 23rd day of September, 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 wid County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in aiKl 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 HENNI PIN ) 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 J Page 5 of 5 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Costal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2159 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: September 19, 1996 TO:James and Joarm Jimdt 1400 Bracketts Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: Kraus Anderson Construction Midwest Division P.O. Box 158 Circle Pines, MN 55014 Attn; Scott Crawford Tom Crosby Faegre & Benson 2200 Norwest Center 90 South 7th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances DATE OF MEETING: 09/16/96 VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. 2. Approval of restoration of stairways, grotto and retaining wall. Boathouse variances noi approved, applicant to work with staff to determine extent of repairs possible without variances; bring back as a separate application later if variances still required. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council, Monday, September 23, 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 w 6 TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:August 14,1996 SUBJECT: #2159 James and Joann Jundt, 1400 Bracketts Point Road - Variances Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1 A, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 acres, unsewered. Application: Request for lakeshore setback' ariance and 0-75' hardcover variances for restoration of existing boat house, grotto and lakeshore stairw ay system. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Surv'cy/Site Plan E - Site Plan Enlargement F - Construction Plans G - Hardcover Calculations H - Photos 1 - Floodplain and Wetlands Management codes re: nonconformities Summary of Request Directly east of the residence and at the shoreline of this property exist the following amenities: Limestone rock stairway leading down the lakeshore bank; a second, narrower stairway also exists approximately 100' north. Circa 1930 "boat house", approximately 12'xl2' used for storage only Retaining wall and underground "grotto" room, approximately 12'xl6' plus 5'x6' entry. Applicants propose to do re.'toration work on the two stairways, interior cosmetic remodeling of the grotto, repair of the adjacent retaining wall and major renovation of the boat house. Discussion Hie stairway directly east of the house is one of four stairway systems that provide access to the east shoreline of the property, which is approximately 650' in length. The other stairw ay systems include a stairway to the dock at the southeast comer of the property; a short segment of stairs centrally 1 i L.___ . #2159 - Jundt August 14, 1996 Page 2 located just above the shoieline and about 150* south of the boat house; and a narrow stairway traversing the slope approximately 100’ north of the boat house, and which is virtually hidden and unused at this time but also proposed for renovation. The work proposed on the stairways is relatively minor in nature, and includes leveling and resetting the existing stair slabs, plus replacing the existing metal handrails with a new decorative cast aluminum handrail. The hidden stairway further north is also proposed to be leveled and reset. It appears that with some minor work near the shoreline the northerly stair system would connect to the Hat terrace area on which the boat house is located (sec Exhibit E). Secondly, applicants propose to make major repairs to the existing "boat house". This structure is in poor condition, likely due to a failing (or lacking) foundation. The proposed work includes; replacement of existing shingle roof with new cedar shakes and new e>ebrow window replace and modify virtually all existing windows and doors replumb existing structural frame and reclad with new clapboard siding pour a new concrete floor add a new concrete step After discussion with the Building Inspections Department, it would appe'’r to staff that this structure is being virtually rebuilt from the ground up, absent saving the interior framing. This building is actually not a "boat house" in the sense that it would shelter a boat, but is merely a small storage building. It has no apparent architectural significance. City codes regarding such non-conforming structures limit the degree of allow able repairs to 50% of the building's value at the time it became non-conforming (1975 o.* earlier). In this case the needed structural work would appear to substantially exceed its current and former value (old City assessor's records do not even list this building, much less establish a value for it).IJ The grotto structure *s of a somewhat different character, however. It is essentially an underground room, built into the hillside and faced with a rock retaining well. Its function has not been discussed by the applies its but the work proposed for it is mainly cosmetic, including: adding stucco interior wall and ceiling panels - adding a decorative light fixture - restoration of existing wood doors - restoration of the existing stone retaining wall #2159 - Jundt August 14, 1996 Page 3 Hardcover Applicants’ hardcover calculation worksheet indicates that the vast majority of hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone (including the east shoreline and west shoreline of the property) is in the public roads and driveway entrances. The existing stairways, boat house, etc. account for less than 1% of the 0-75' zone. The hardcover calculations also include some entries which are confusing, such as showing an additional 250 s.f. of driveway, as well as varying numbers for patio deck, pathways and additional retaining wall. It is not clear from the plans where these hardcover increases are intended to take place. Applicants or their representative should clarify the hardcover calculations. Staff has left a message with the project manager requesting clarification of the hardcover calculations. Issues for Discussion 1.Given that the Shorcland Ordinance does not specifically limit the number of 4’ wide stairways that can be placed on a property, but realizing that more than one such stairway per property may coi.stitute excess hardcover, does Planning Commission have a concern about the number of stairway systems serv ing this property? 2.Since the existing stairways traverse the slope at an angle rather than running directly to the lake, does Planning Commission feel there is any justification to have applicant reroute the staiivvays more directly to the lake? Or, is the potential visual impact of direct stairways 1 cssened by allowing them to angle through the wooded shoreline? 3.Is there sufficient hardship demonstrated to justify the nearly total reconstruction of the \ 12'.xl2’ boat house, given its deteriorated condition raid lack of architectural significance? ) 4.Are the mainly cosmetic changes to the grotto area and restoration of the adjacent rock retaining wall of any significant visual impact? 5.While applicants have not proposed removal of any vegetation related to this project, what vegetative screening might be approj’r'ate to add, if any, to mitigate the impacts of the retaining w all (or the boat house if proved)? 6.What specific hardcover increases are proposed? Are they justified by hardship? Is there any hardcover in the 0-75' zone that can be removed to result in no hardcover increase? \ #2159-Jundt August 14, 1996 Page 4 Staff Recommendation If Planning Commission finds that the restoration of the stairway above the boat house/grotto and restoration of the stairway to the north are justified by hardship, perhaps for both safety and to provide reasonable access to the lakeshore, then a recommendation for approval of the stairway restoration would be appropriate. It is staffs opinion that it would be difficult to make the necessary findings of hardship to justify allowing the existing 12'xl2' "boat house" to be restored. Please review the nonconformities section of the Floodplain and Wetlands Management ordinance (Exhibit 1) which applies to those areas less than 75' from the lake. Section 10.55, Subd. 26(B) states that "no structural alteration or addition to any nonconforming structure over the life die structure shall exceed 50% of its value at the time of its becoming a nonconforming use ..." T he existing structure has been nonconforming since at least 1975 or before, and the proposed construction will certainly exceed 50% of its former value. Finally, if Planning Commission finds that the cosmetic changes to the grotto and the restoration of the adjacent retaining wall are supported by adequate hardships, then a recommendation for approval may be appropriate. Planning Commission should address whether hardcover removals are necessar>'. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval as proposed. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Recommend partial approval. 4.Table for further information. 5. rnmend denial, stating reasons. 6.Other. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2159 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: August 20, 1996 TO:James and Joann Jundt 1400 Bracketts point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: Kraus-Anderson Construction Midwest Division P.O. Bo.\ 158 Circle Pines, MN 55014 Attn: Scott Crawford Tom Crosby Faegre & Benson 2200 Norwest Center 90 South 7th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances DATE OF MEETING:08/19/96 VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Tabled at applicants' request. Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Planning Commission, Monday, September 16, 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. ii i i rr*T Application tt ^ ^ Date Received ^ Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal "'Variance Fee S120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-confonning structures $220.0(^\iA^‘1 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee)■ V e -e- *.x PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 1400 Bracketts Point Road. Qrono. Property Identifrcation Number (T.I.D.) 11-117-23-33-0001 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired. March 1992 _____________________(month/>ear) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ^ residential ___other (specify) Zoning District:_______________________________________ applicant Kraus-Anderson Construction ^'ame Conpaany, Midwest Division Phone (home). Address: P.O. Box 158 _____ Phone fworicl (612) 786-7711 Citv: Circle Pines_____Zip:_55QiA OWNER (if different than applicant) ^ame James and JocUTn Jundt Phone Hiome ’) (6121 473-9524 Phone (work)___________ Address: 1400 Bracketts Point Road Citv: Qrono Zip:__553ai DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost S Describe request in detail: Restoration work to existing Boathouse and pvigt-ing— (trotto and Stone Rp>^a^n^ny Wall (Bo a<~hnnsp Rmlt 1930) (Groto Built Prg~1912) (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARLANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage X Setback:tr n f A * W 4*.Side Rear Averase Lakeshore _ Other (specify) hardship /description OF UNUSU-AL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: The existing Boathouse, Grotto and-------- Stone Retaining Wal"* are in damaged, broken amd unsaife conditio n and need----- to be restored and repaired. (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUB>nTTALS •/ .v7 All of the following information must be submitted bv the appircatiotT'deadliDe date in order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. o J. X_ Completed Application Form * _ Certified Properr>- OwT*ers List of owT.ers within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin Countv' Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 34S-3271). * Certir'icate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/:" x 11" for reproduction. _ Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade.are proposed. In addition, provide one (I) copy 81V x U" for reproduction. X 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. Tnis would include naine(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). .As an addendum to this appucation, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. X Additional items as may be requested by Cit>' staff. (Photos) *TFESE ITEMS HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF ORC^'O. Tne Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vQur variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included, .APPLIC.ANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff lime not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true ^d correct to the best of his'lier knowledge. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Applicant's Signamre Date OWER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further auLhorizes reasonable entrv onto the prooerty by Citv' statt. consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, ple^e make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zonins Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 iOJII OAlt QO/2(/9SBATCH OOAPROP ADOR OHNER HAIC TAXPAYER NAKE/AODR PROP ADOR OHIIER DAHE TAXPAYER IIAtlE/ADOR PROP AOOR Ora«R NAME TAXPAYER IIMIE/AObR nciiiiLfiii cou. . .noPROPERTY 0»««ns LISTiitlUUMAI 11*11 SV iiLPORT no. PIAS5A01 PAGE 123B 11-117-2S 52 OOOT OlAOO BRACKET IS POINT RO J R JUNOT I lURY J JUNOT JAMES R JUNOT BOX ICRYSTAL BAY 111 555255B 11-117-25 52 0017 01500 BRACKETTS POINT RO GEORGE S PILlSmmV ET AL GEORGE S PILLSnURY AOOO FIRST OAIK PLACE WLS III 55<i02 SB 11-117-25 55 0001 01A20 ORACKETTS POINT RO J R JUNOT A M J lUNOT JAMES R JUNOT BOX I CRYSTAL BAY It! 55525 PROP AOOR OHMER NAME TAXPAYER tlAME/ADOR 50 11-117-25 55 OOOA 01500 BRACKETTS POINT RO MARTHA S A A LACHLAN REEO ’ MARTHA S A A LACHLAN REEO 1500 BRACKETTS POINT RO HAYZATA m 55591 • • * 50 11-117-25 52 001001265 BRACKETTS POINT RO MICHAEL E LYNN III A HITE MICHAEL A JORJA LTTtI 111 1265 ORACKETTS POINT MAYZATA It! 55591 30 11-117-25 52 001101620 BRACKETTS POINT RO J R JTAIOT A M J JUNOT JAMES R JUNOT BOX 1CRYSTAL BAY W 55525 .30 11-117-25 52 001001220 BRACKETTS POINT RO ELLA P CnOSOY ELLA P CROSBY 1220 BRACKETTS POINT RO HAYZATA 111 55591 50 11-117-25 52 001901200 . BRACKETTS POINT RO JOHN S PILLSBURY JR ET AL JOHN S PILLSBURY JR 6000 FIRST BANK PLACE MPLS III 55602 •^Li 30 11-117-23 55 0006 01650 ORACKETTS POINT RO MARTHA S A A LACHLAN REEO MARTHA S A A LACHLAJT REEO 1500 ORACKETTS POINT RD HAYZATA m 55591 30 11-117-25 55 0005 01600 ORACKETTS POINT RD R A L HEAORICK ROGER L A LYtll C HEADRICK 1600 ORACKETTS POINT RO TUYZATA III 55591 TOTAL DATCH 006 00010 1 ctnnrY that the tacts represehteo are am accurate amd true REPRESEMTATION Of IMTORtlATlOtl AS IT APPEARS IHIS DATE OH THE RECORDS OF THE HE^P^EPIM COUtUY DEPARIMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATlOflt TO THE BEST OF MY KWMLEOGE AMO BELIEF. DATE • • k a. »_4 // / At'^'Z /',' ' / *V W7./// //// H y.'' ' >y' &''*i r t ''' T'^i) ' ij>r ::>;<4 N r & • • - '-f* !'•* •■? ' *i ,l-'-i ! ^ ■-''" •■H'[ 7^5<’r^...i\ I ,>N^.''. •••'/'> • . Jr.......' *? \ (» I ifT I- * ✓ ' <* ' 'i'' H' .'I • w hi '*i^ ' - *•• ' ; K,' / .' 't'J'4- ' .•■• .' - ' ' i' ;•■ U ■ i\ . U' / .- <}^ .' ,' .;• \ e M ' .■ ■ / . .* • V- ^ ‘i.' ■• *i *i : ■" ■X ^ 1- •' -1 /-’’• • rU ■lx ' ' . , • / ' ' l/ 'l*J^X m. ^ t » t \ V • o»,o;o'S Jim \ *> A • i;i- 7*'5 J -x.l I f i t ( ' ** / " / ’ f • I * , !t #•• "*•* — ■i^ ;'i'Tlh-' /.u n? /• .' W*. r ?{ I • . 4i4- * 1 •* ' V y« ;i ^ • i. •\ •* y • w> /1 IJ# ,.i<:.yr;-.yA; I F* • •« /• , ? y f# f///l i-kX|v V V-//'W r ^/-iS 'AC;r.//K ■■•■>.li- A. y.✓ ' */! :p IB B B ’ll I f z P! ? w yrn 8 . ... < II N.^ i • iUfOT. jiii ,• .■• .' / / ; li; / ■' / /.' / ',^i iii / / ' ' ' • 11 ' / » » / / I I ' 11 , , ! ' f > I I } I < I I -)ii I I LO II I d Ooo ~D > 2^ --------------\f \ \ XX X _ X ... -v-. . X 1 \ X Om ooz 0 X)3m 1 m >< i/)—H 2 O 2 mo CO-H CO moom 5 2 c:o NJ cn Og hsimo oo 2 0::d qm 1 o Xo:;o m m O ^ c: CO 55 ^m 2 o o m CO ni m $ o 2: i<^q X oo PO CD ZJO CD 3] o CD-<^rn CD 05^?0 oco oo z m >. m -H m "D X3 O c o1^:o m 5 X o C/) m m < > oz: / ........... -^x X . .-S X X \X / y 11 ''\ \ ■ ■ ■— • T 1 4. cn I O m CO 2 O ooo ooo::d CO o > oxm8 m X *^S ^ Z3 >o^<5 czooo % m XJ CD O o COs:oo CO 2ooo Z3 2 CO X □□o > ocz: COm o o 2 2 CO m m 2 H O tn o m >tn p- m $ o 7^^D-z^;no2:: 0:o-n0 zm o Ooxo >;z}^>;coo g2s|go mrn o m CD CO 8^ O o ^5= X ^ I o:=^ 5-n m o QSW v»^ o z Z 0;0 O 0COOO O 70 CD to Oc o :d m m m g o o I X m > =2tOZo m oX ::d z O m "8| c“ ^O ^> "O 00m ^ > 5:^?CD ?- m zom o :x> m m CO "nu 70 55 mo ss %5 “D 70 70 o >• 2: >omo :d ;^<oC i°i r- z zi< tooz C^O z? ^XC CO Z Om CO o5X;d > o p ;o5m :*3 tomo o 7JJ o ooo z^o / f / '^3 k / —-h ? ^ Ns Nv Z 2 Oo zo X)tnm X3 2: ziS'2 o^e ^05mo5 ^ nl> X Go X TO'JOTO rij rn cr o -o CO ‘ (T 2'^c CD if ------1m "U O ■Dmz So iom C3 I 0°^ to ^ 00 "^' z^s; . - ^ CO CD ^ ZH 5 O ^ 2 m =®Sto 0^0 a 3g—< CD ^ mto o CDr-m I ^ >i V.-s HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 250-500 ’SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 75-250 ’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Boat x Lensih Width X X X B Garage C. - riveway (Public)X X D. Sidewalk (Stone Steps)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 21.557.5 4. B 130,834 X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Boat____________ ^ Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway (Public)X X D. Sidewalk (Stone Steps)X X E. Patio/Deck Pathways X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other Retaining Wall TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY' ARE-A IN ZONE 21,939 - B 130,834 X 100 = 500-1000’ 196 S.F.'' S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 20.591 S.F;A‘ S.F. 525 S.F.! S.F. 245.5 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 21,557.5 SF. S. % 130,834 S.F. 16.47 A B r / 196 S.F;/ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 20,591 S.F.V 250 S.F. ./•/ 525 S.F.- S.F. 187 160 S.F. S.F.. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 21,939 S.F. 130,834 S.F. 16.76 % A B $ / m ' -'-V •A 0 ' jJt • f. '-T jZ-'-.x'-^' -I [A.*\ • y y’V' V ■ «?^ A> A. i J/. .'■/ '^zr^1^ S9E b' -r*^ .<• i' ■ > >^ -rrgk.-. ' • V'-r'-l Ik • . *. ^ r v 5» r- '-> I’4'i^'Iv ; ■'*'• ■' '■ •X J?*''. ■» » H ». ; . h?;~ ■»-' •> 'v • . V • r -^ .^.r ' 'i> ■ * ♦ '',' .-i^i5i!i 'i-• .. V* &J^W*' .> '- ’^./'l \' •• ■ * ™SW*. tAr' * •f r >i^f* ■'■■••.■'• ’’t •-' ^-#V« T>7. ^^lil -•• .ft", :'r^ r‘ " • ' -r*. * t« ! • *• . f . * ^:i M '<v iT^*. - •.;v/-'--:-:i,ii-:, •' ■C ' \ ^ A •:: * M •■ ■ - '^•* v’’:v-'^-->"'i, i'-’,'" f '-y'■ ','■ ' K‘] ■ ' * .*^ '/'L ' A'I mt^S S ry g V ',..'/// “ __ '• . ‘* 4 E:':istinq Stone Stops - East Elevation (Jundt Residence - 1996) 114^^ foisting Stone Stops - East Elevation ? (dui'idt Residence - 1996) " ■■ -nr r i—"iitfTW~ co> • o O o a <> o □ ® o5 s 4 ^ -iiir..*. •.!*.. . > . ^ ■7'- . 4 V, ^ ■ ^ : 2r V* i* ’*. ^ / V -A-'J ^1;.. ' '^:c ~T * • ''v'^ '*• • * • ^ ^ •—■. •»'’ (Jundt Residence POCSflOBS . .. ■I mm : ■‘’.V . ' . A _ _rf«'%j^r-sr**^ * * ^ /I «C» •4. 4- V ^, . (Jundt Residence - 1996) A* J ■ ^-<^r- i'./&. vS•%T:. i Existing Groto Ei (JuidL I^sidoncG : ^:-1 w- 't ' • ^ w »-t I , * ,\* I ?.' ^ • / ^. f u M-iw '^_.w”w*». >o>- ‘ *•••‘Ife ‘ : •' 'T'-",. ',r^^«cgsgs g ±X':-' 4'^ /-. ■- '- v^ .\".2 ■ ' —* Existing Boathouse/Grotto - East Elev. (Jiuidt Itosidciice - 1996) Wr ‘ S'-‘v ^ * * -' -r ‘ •f5-,A\ i- r « » • / Of * v!^ '■- ^ ' •■• ''■^•r • - ;• . A-^^1 , / . S r*, <«: .. -V ■''^J*--'--,_>‘'r^r’^ - fr V;.i d»9f •■0 ^ “ ^ .- ^ . .fe / ^ .- '?r5 '. v;;'4,• ; r-M^S , >: ^ \> • . %«.* iiJv^'f ^ - <. .- .’» ' \ tT V^' • - '^>’*;' ■ .'i ^ »- ( -r? 5 ' '% lj-:istMin (Ju:v:lt_ H fr A*f. fm ' > '»■ i > X Is C..5S r- 3r ' ‘r>:-A-s^«5-3•» •V-V'' t: • ’•• ^ •.•'■. \ ' \^ \. ^ ■ ‘ : • w > .'- ■ .•A, ■' 1 • i 34 . tj •-V, ,.vV'-''-A'4fflE®| -,.s • ;:., t; ■« ‘r.-ai^l (' ' - v-^-.^’ vSteigi ! J ;■•■ ■ri V' “v^4r , j|„ ,'/v hxi-.^iiLr. \« *' -I ^Iv' A |a •• vr ^ . ■ V' . - ^V ^ Vr% ■ «»>» Existing Boathouse - Soutli Elevation (Jundt Residence - 1996) rx’k»i/'5?«cRti-UT<r?.'^:g^£C75^^>• kL,* /,- ,v f • Jl:V>v i-,^' V . '^LJ^’ '* &.isting BoatJiouse/Liast "^iior--.! ■ (Jundt nosKlo,.c.. - “■’ “ ' • V •ir* • #«s S 10.55 Subd. 26. Non-conforming Uses. A structure or the use of a structure or premises which was lawful before the passage or amendment of this Section but which is not in conformity with the provisions of this Section may be continued subject to the following conditions: A. No such use shall be expanded, changed, enlarged or altered in a way which increases its non-conformity. B. No structural alteration or addition to any non- conforming structure over the life of the structure shall exceed 50 percent of its value at the time of its becoming a non-conforming use, unless the structure is permanently changed t'l a conforming use or unless the alteration or addition would substantially reduce potential.flood damages for the entire structure. C. Any alteration or addition to any non-conforming use which would result in substantially increasing its flood damage potential shall be protected in accordance with Subdivision 14, Subparagraph E of this Section. D. If such use is discontinued for twelve consecutive months, any future use of the building premises shall conform to this Section. The assessor shall notify the Zoning Administrator in writing of instances of non-conforming uses which have been discontinued for a period of twelve months. E. If any non-conforming use is destroyed by any means, including floods, to an extent of 50 percent or more of its assessed value, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this Section. However, the City may issue a conditional use permit for reconstruction if the use is located outside the floodway and, upon the reconstruction, is adequately flood proofed, elevated or otherwise protected in conformity with this Section. F. Uses or adjuncts thereof which are or become nuisances shall not be entitled to continue as non-conforming uses. G. Except as provided in Subparagraph E above, any use which has been permitted as a conditional use shall not be considered as a non-conforming use. H. Non-conforming uses located in the Floodway District shall be eliminated or brought into conformity with the standards contained in this Section within a reasonable period of time as determined by the City, after a hearing for each such non- conforming use. The Council shall make its determination upon the basis of the normal useful life of any improvement upon the premises. In addition, the monetary value of any competitive advantage derived by the operation of such non-conforming use, by reason of the limitation on establishment of competing businesses ORONO CC 375 (4-1-84) S 10,5*5as a result of this Section, shall be considered as a reduction of losses resulting from the requirement of termination of the use under this Section. Subd. 27. Amendments. The flood plain designation on the official maps shall not be removed from flood plain areas unless it can be shown that the designation is in error and that the area is at or above the elevation of the regional flood and is contiguous to lands outside the flood plain. Special exceptions to this rule may be permitted by the Commissioner of Natural Resources if he determines that, through other measures, lands are adequately protected for the intended use. All amendments to this Section including amendments to the official maps must be submitted to and approved by the Commissioner of Natural Resources prior to adoption. Changes in the official maps also require prior approval by the Federal Insurance Administration. Subd. 28. Interpretation. In their interpretation and application, the provisions of this Section shall be held to be minimum requirements and shall be liberally construed in favor of the City and shall not be deemed a limitation or repeal of any other powers granted by State Statutes. The boundaries of the Flood Plain Districts shall be determined by scaling distances on the official maps. Where interpretation is needed as to the exact location of the boundaries of the district as shown on the official maps, as for example where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field conditions, the City Engineer shall make the necessary interpretation based on elevations on the regional (100-year) flood profile. The person contesting the location of the district boundary shall be given a reasonable opportunity to present his case to the City and to submit technical evidence if he so desires. Subd. 29. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. It is not intended by this Section to repeal, abrogate or impair any existing ordinance, regulation, easement, covenants or deed restrictions. However, where this Section imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this Section shall prevail. Subd. 30. Warning and Disclaimer of Liability. This Section does not imply that areas outside the flood plain districts or land uses permitted within such districts will be free from flooding or flood damages. This Section shall not create liability on the part of the City or any officer or employee thereof for any flood damages that result from reliance on this Section or any administrative decision lawfully made thereunder. Source: Ordinance No. 213 Effective Date: 1-11-79 ORONO CC 376 (4-1-84) To: From: Date: Subject: ^4Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Moorse Michael P. Gaf&on, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator September 11, 1996 #2159 James & Joann Jundt, 1400 Bracketts Point Road - Variance - Continuation of Public Hearing - Revised Propxjsal This item was tabled without discussion at the August 19 meeting at the applicant’s request. The applicants have revised the application by proposing to remove the boat house rather than reconstruct it. The review sjiould focus on the proposed stairway, retaining wall and grotto restoration. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Sep DATE: SeptenAtt 18, 199^ ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2168 Todd and Donna Rooke, 4190 Highwood Road - Variances - Resolution Zoning District: LR-IB Lot area = i 1,994 s.f. or .27 acres. Brief Review of Application Applicants seek approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area that would allow construction of a 12'xl6' main level deck at the northwest comer of the residence. The structure will be placed over existing hardcover and will replace an unsafe deck that has been removed. Applicants also advised that the proposed deck is smaller in size than the previous deck. The deck will meet all required setbacks and stmctural coverage is proposed at 13.07%. Hardcover at 55% (30% excess) will not be increased or reduced. Planning Commission noted need to retain nonstrucmral walkways and aggregate cover as these improvements helped to reduce potential for erosion of steeply sloped west side yard. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Hardcover variance within 75-250' setback area. A. 75-250' setback area = 4,775 s.f. Allowed = 1, 194 s.f. or 25% Existing = 2,626 s.f, or 55% Proposed = 2,626 s.f. or 55%* Variance = 1,432 s.f. or 30% *192 s.f. of deck built over aggregate patio 2.Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Review of structural coverage. Allowed = 1,799.6 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,370 s.f. or 11.4% Proposed = *1,562 s.f. or 13 07% No variance required *Shed = 105 s.f., house = 1,265 s.f., proposed deck = 192 s.f. EFr Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 2 September 18, 1996 Zoning File #2168 Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission's recommendation. Please refer to the enclosed staff memo dated September 9, 1996 for more detail and background on this review. Applicants' addendum. Exhibit B, sought direction from the Planning Commission regarding a future location for a garage to serve the property. Mr. Rooke advised that he has been in contact with the remaining property owners along the north side of Highwood Road. He advised that they may present a proposal to the City in the future regarding the creation of an access drive to the rear of the properties via a 20' alley to the east that connects North Shore Drive with Highwood Road, refer to Exhibit C. Applicants were advised to work with staff on this proposal. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; To adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution. \ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 FILE #2168 WHEREAS, Todd A. Rooke and Donna M. Rooke (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 4190 Highwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; Lot 30, Highwood Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit construction of 12’xl6' main level deck at the northwest comer of the residence located within the 75-250' setback area of the property where 2,626 s.f. or 55% is proposed and where 25% is allowed. Hardcover in the 75-250' setback area exists at 2,626 s.f or 55%. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2168. The property is located in the LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1 acre in area. The property consists of 11,994 s.f or .275 s.f 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 16, 1996, and recommended unanimous approval of the variance as proposed based upon the following unique findings and hardships; Page 1 of 4 1 nts") rono "the )no. A. 40% of the area of the property Is located within the 75-250' setback area at 4,775 s.f. The total area of the property consists of 11,994 s.f. B. 1,364 s.f. of hardcover improvements within the 75-250' setback area consists of retaining walls, exposed aggregate and rock over plastic The majority of improvements are located within the west yard where the topography is at its steepest. Landscape plastic and aggregate rock help to reduce erosion. C. The proposed structure will meet all required setbacks. D. Structural coverage on the property will not e.xceed the allowed 15% proposed at 13.07%. E. The proposed deck is smaller than the deck that existed on the west side of the property. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to It and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the vanance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but Is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the Citv. 0 The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Mumcipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit construction 5. Page 2 of 4 of a 12'xl6' deck at the northwest comer of the residence and grants a 1,432 s.f. or 30% hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area, subject to the following conditions: 1.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 (September 23. 1997). 2.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the temis and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 3.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 23th day of September, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23th day of September, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. On this day of , 199 ___, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )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 / TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator September 9, 1996 SUBJECT: #2168 Todd and Donna Rooke, 4190 Highwood Road - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Lot area = 11,994 s.f. or .275 acres. Application: Applicants seek approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250’ setback area to permit construction of a 12'xl6’ main level deck at the west side of the residence. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1. 2. 3. Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Review of structural coverage. Total lot area = 11,994 s.f. Allowed = 1,799.6 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,370 s.f. or 11.4% Proposed = * 1,562 s.f. or 13.07% •Shed = 105 s.f., house = 1,265 s.f., proposed deck = 192 s.f. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. A. 75-250' setback area = 4,775 s.f. Allowed =1,194 s.f. or 25% Existing = 2,626 s.f. or 55% Proposed = 2,626 s.f. or 55% No change is proposed. B. 250-500' setback area = 7,220 s.f. Allowed = 2,166 s.f or 30% Existing = 574 s.f. or 8% No change is proposed. C. Total hardcover Proposed = 3,200 s.f. or 26.6% Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B) - Review of side setback. Required = 10' Proposed = 10.5' No variance required. Zoning File <^2168 September 9,1996 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicants' Addendum C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List E - Floor Plan F - Survey G - Staff Skctch/Tossible Alternative for Garage H - Topographic Map Review of Application Review Exhibits E and F, applicants propose a 12’xl6' main level deck to be installed over an existing aggregate patio area at the northwest comer of residence. The addition of 192 s.f. of deck area still falls within the allowed total area of structural cov erage for the property, proposed at 13.07. Existing hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback area is at 55%. 192 s.f. of hardcover improvement becomes more permanent. No additions or reductions in hardcover are proposed within the 75-250 ’ setback area. The structure meets all required setbacks of the LR-1B Zoning District. Refer to E.xhibit B, applicants note the proposed deck is really a replacement deck. The former deck was unsafe and has been removed. Applicants further note the proposed deck is smaller than the previous deck. The applicants ’ addendum also seeks direction from the City regarding the placement of a future garage on the property. On your inspection review development along the north side of Highwood Road. You will note one single stall attached garage and another single stall detached garage. None of the substandard properties along the north side can support a double stall garage. Applicants' property is even more restricted by the severely sloping topography to the west (review Exhibit H). The only portion of the prop>erty that could support a garage with access from Highwood Road is the eastern portion. Applicants may be able to construct a single stall attached garage at the southeast comer of the residence. Refer to Exhibit G, a 10 ’x20 ’ single stall garage could be placed over portions of the existing residence, 8’ wide stoop and 18’ of existing drive. Such an addition would require side, street and hardcover variances. Refer to Exhibit H, applicants ’ residence lot is the most western of the properties served by the cul- de-sac road. Any future variance application for a single stall garage must provide detailed information on existing improvements within Highwood Road. Applicants may need to provide additional guardrails at end of public road. The City Engineer and Public Works Department will have to w'ork vvitli applicants to ensure safe use of both applicants ’ revised drive and public right-of- way for back out maneuvering. Applicants should be advised that there is no guarantee that the required variances would be approved by a future Council. Zoning File #2168 September 9, 1996 Page 3 Statement of Hardship - Refer to Exhibit B I.Applicants note the limited size of property and inabilit>' to acquire additional land in 75-250' setback area. 2.1,364 s.f. of hardcover improvements within the 75-250' setback area consists of retaining walls, exposed aggregate and rock over plastic. The majority of the improvements are located within the west yard where the topography is at its steepest. Landscape plastic and aggregate rock help to reduce erosion. 3. 4. 5. The structure meets all required setbacks. Structural coverage on the property will not exceed the allowed 15%. The proposed deck is smaller than deck that existed on the west side of residence. Issues for Consideration 1. Should e.xisting or proposed hardcover improvements within the 75-250' setback be removed or reduced in area? 2. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Options of Action To approve as proposed or amended. Applicants to provide an amended survey locating main level deck with building permit application. As for the applicants' request for conceptual direction concerning a proposed future garage, a single stall attached garage may be feasible and that portions of the garage would have to be located within the existing residence structure. Structural coverage would not be of issue as applicants have 238 s.f. of structural improvements available. The single stall garage must encroach any closer to the east side lot line at 3.5’. The City would have to consider side, street and hardcover (75-250') variances but there is no guarantee of future approval. i Application ^ 6 ^ Date Received 7 - 3 / ~ Amount Paid ^ Q ‘ ^ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renevval Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) ' Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) n C ‘ 4-v» PROPERTY INTORMATION Site Address Hilrtl P-cAD Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)_ rl<»crrintirm tfl anoHcation i Property Identification iNumoer (r.i.uj -----------------------^-------------- Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Pr^ertv Acquired______________________ I (do) ^o no^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property" ^ residential -----^other I (month/year) other (specify). Zoning District: APPLICANT Name ^ ^ Dc^./.\./A IZc-dr-C Address: Uil>rtv;cCs Phone (home) V 7 *2 - S' S' ^ 3 _____ Phone (work") ^7 s'- Citv: fh Pl S__________Zlp:_££2M- OW'NER (if different than applicant) Name_______^ ^ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $, Describe request in detail: (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _Lot Width yC Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) hardship /description of unusual property conditions Describe undue hardship or practical difficult)’ or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:---------------------------------------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) 7 J REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete; 1. 2. J. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Propert>' Ovv-ners List of ovsTiers within 150’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin Count>’ Department of Finance, A-603, Go\i Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed sur\eyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8 ‘/:" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade, 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 S'/z” 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 Cit>* staff The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses in^^ed in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true am correct to the best of his/her knowledge. X Applicant's Signature Date OW'NER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by Citv'^aff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of hy/estigation and verification of this request. _Owner’s Signature Date r Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days/^ejpre the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on theLlhird 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 . n ! i " I ■ / Attachement 1 for 4190 Highwood Road Variance Request V ,V. We have a m o part request. It would be acceptable if they require separate variances to be executed independently. Both parts relate to hard cover. Part I. The replacement of the deck on the West side of our house. The replacement deck is plaimed to be considerably smaller, however it would not affect the hard cover from the perspective that underneath the deck is exposed aggregate. The replacement costs are approximately $700.00. The deck was not safe for anyone to walk on since the day we purchased the house. See attachment 2 Part II. We are looking for a recommendation from the city as to the location and size of a garage which could be placed on our lot, whether it be attached or detachted would not matter. RUN DATE 07/24/96BATCH 501PROP ADDR O^tlER NAME TAXPAYER NAHC/AODR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 56 07-117-25 45 000704201 NORTH SHORE OR B M HEITZEL-HARTTIETT BETTY M MEITZEL-JURTNETT 4201 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55564 ^flORE DR 38 07-117-23 45 0010 04199 NORTH S UNITED CH HOSP ASSN FAIRVIEM HOSP ASSN 2512 6TH ST S MPLS MN 55454 58 07-117-25 44 0021 04175 HIGHICOO RO MERLIN L HALVERSON MERLIN L HALVERS0f4 4175 HIGHMCOO RO MOUND MN 55364 58 07-117-25 44 0024 04190 HIGHI'IOOO RO T A A D M ROOKE TODD A CONTU ROOKE 4190 HIGHNOOO RO MOUND MN 55564 58 07-117-23 44 0027 04166 HIG!IHOOO RO HAL DEVAAN HERBERT A LORETTA DEVAAN 17605 SUSAN OR MIItlETOTKA MN 55545 58 07-117-23 44 0044 04175 NORTH SHORE OR ANN MARIE MAXFIELD ANN M MAXFIELD 4175 NORTH SHORE OR HOUM MN 55564 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST56 07-117-25 45 000604205 NORTH SUCRE OR F 6 HAHTERA ACL HAHTERA FREDERICK HAHTERA 203 N SHORE DR riOUMD m 55564 56 07-117-23 45 0011 04199 NORTH SHORE DR UNITED CH »!OSP ASSN FAIRVIEM COMMUNITY HOSPITAL 2312 SO 6TH ST MPLS MN 55454 58 07-117-23 44 0022 04195 HIGHHOOO RO M A FirtlEY A S J FIfJNEY MARK A SARA FINNEY 4195 HIGHHOOO RO raUND m 55564 38 07-117-23 44 0025 04182 HIGHHOOO RO AfW-LOUISE RESSLER Af*N-LCUI5E RESSLER 544 GRAY ST LAKENCCD CO 80226 58 07-117-23 44 0028 04150 HIG:ilt:X)0 RO TOta B GRANOSTRAMD TONI B GRAr40STRAND 4150 HIGHHOOO RD 0R0I40 hH 53364 38 07-117-23 44 0045 00U38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ANN MARIE MAXFIELD ANN H MAXFIELD 4175 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 REPORT NO. PX455401 PAGE 138 07-117-25 45 000900058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED UNITED CH HOSP ASSN FAIRVIEN HOSP ASSN 2512 6TH ST S MPLS MN 55454 38 07-117-23 43 0012 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENT4EPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PAPT OF ROAD Sr 158925 9/5/80 I ¥ I58 07-117-23 44 0023 00058 ADDRESS UTIASSIGNED JULIUS C IIALLUM FAIRVIEN HOSPITAL ASSN 2512 S 6TH ST WLS MN 55454 *.i 5. V 38 07-117-23 44 04174 HIGHHOOO H B DEVAAN ALE 6 D DEVAAfl A J T 4174 HIGHHOOO RO MOUND fU 55564 0026 RO DEVAAN THACKER r n-r 'ft’v'V: 38 07-117-23 44 0043 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO AffI MARIE MAXFIELD ANN M MAXFIELD 4175 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND m 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0046 04191 rWRTH SHORE DR LILIAN ANDERS0t4 LILIAN ANDERSON 4191 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 / RUN OATS 07m/94 HENNEPIN CCUNTY PRCPERTY INTORKATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI4S54Q1 PAGE tBATCH SOIPROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 16 07-117-25 A4 0075 00056 ADDRESS UNASSIGf^D HEM^PIN FORFEITED LAt40 CITY OF ORONO STREET6/9/'^0 ST DEED 156855 58 07-117-25 AA 008501555 HIGHMOOO LA ERICK G A LAURIE S CELMS ERICK G A LAURIE S CELMS 1535 HIGHHOOO LA MOUND MT4 5536A TOTAL BATCH 501 00020 V > *A r- ' ') ■ % *• ;f ^ I CEmiFY THAT THE FACTS REPnESEtITEO ARt AH ACCURATE AHD TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTHEHT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF DATE ']o SKiSTtfjf' ^ecK / F ■......... REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION % 19,DATC^^SMteml CO- 7 1996 ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2169 Michael Renard, 1185 Tonkawa Road - Renewal Variance - Resolution Zoning District: LR-IB Total lot area = 32,648 s.f. Application: Applicant seeks approval of a third renewal variance to permit construction of a two story addition to the east side of the existing residence. This is the current owner’s second request for a variance. Two were granted to the former owner by the City in 1989 and 1990. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B) - Average lakeshore setback encroachment. Allowed = 0 Existing = 1 1/2' Proposed = 4' (current survey (Exhibit I) fmds original survey (Exhibit G) showing a 1 1/2’ encroachment incorrect) 2.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Hardcover variance Applicant has advised City that original hardcover inventory submitted for earlier applications was incorrect. New hardcover inventory reflects increases. A.0-75' setback area = 9,675 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 391 s.f. or 4.04% (earlier reviews no hardcover was recorded) Proposed = 213 s.f. or 2.2% Hardcover reduction = 178 s.f. or 1.8% (130 s.f. landscape area, 48 s.f. concrete pad) B.75-250’ setback area = 22,973 s.f. Allowed = 5,743.3 s.f. or 25% Existing = 6,142 s.f. or 26.7% (existing per original hardcover facts 5,516 s.f. or 24%) (Removal of 420 s.f. existing hardcover) Proposed = 6,147 s.f. or 26.7% (proposed = 6,567 s.f. - 420 s.f.) Variance = 403.7 s.f. or 1.7% Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 4 September 19, 1996 Zoning File #2169 3.Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Rev iew of structural coverage Total area = 32,648 s.f. Allowed = 4,897 s.f. or 15% Proposed = 2,747 s.f. or 8.4% No variance required. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Neighbor ’s Acknowledgment Forms E - Resolution No. 3053, Approving 1991 Renewal Application F - Original Survey/Site Plan G - Original Sketch of Average Lakeshore Setback Line H - Original Floor Plans I - New Survey/Site Plan J - Side Elevation K - Street Elevation L - Lake Elevation M - Second Floor Plan N - Lower Floor Plan O - Hardcover Inventory Used by Staff for Planning Commission Review P - Hardcover Inventory Submitted at Public Hearing Q - Hardcover Removal Plan Review of Application Average Lakeshore Setback Variance Review Exhibit G, in the 1989, 1990 and 1991 reviews a survey/sketch was usr ' to de.ermine the encroachment of the average lakeshore setback line. Encroachment appeared u * .-oximately 1 1/2’. New and more detailed information provided with the current appiicr'I j.. shows the encroachment would be 4’. Note the building addition has not been placed any closer to the lakeshore than the previous application. Intensification of variance sought by applicant is now confirmed with more detailed survey information. The two story addition is slightly smaller than the previous additions. The improvement plan will still provide a master bedroom suite at the upper level and the lower level expanded 'iving, dining and entrance areas. Members may wish to compare Exhibit H, the original floor pla« . with new floor plans. Exhibits M and N. In the earlier floor plans the 2’ extension at lake side was a lower level porch with upper level balcony. The current plan shows a complete two story bay addition. Request for Council Action continued page 3 of 4 September 19, 1996 Zoning File #2169 Hardcover Variance 75*250' Setback Area During the Planning Commission review, both staff and Planning Commission members realized that there was a conflict between the hardcover facts presented by staff and those discussed by applicant. Mr. Renard then submitted his hardcover survey to the staff for use at the meeting. Applicant had already advised that the new survey work revealed higher percentages for existing hardcover. In the earlier review hardcover (75-250') was recorded at 24%. The updated hardcover shows existing at 6,142 s.f. or 26.7%. Unfortunately at the meeting, staff read 6,142 s.f. as proposed. When applicant agreed to remove 420 s.f. or 1.8% of landscape with underliner area this would have brought hardcover down to 24.9% no longer requiring a variance. If you review Exhibit P, the last sentence reveals proposed hardcover at 28.6% noting an addition of 425 s.f. new hardcover. Review amended hardcover facts listed on page 2 of memo. With the removal of 420 s.f. of landscape area, hardcover is proposed at 6,147 s.f. or 26.7%. Hardcover would remain at existing percentage. Staff has contacted all six members of the Planning Commission in attendance. The need to poll Planning Commission members was unfortunate but the misunderstanding and errors were not designed by applicant or staff. It is the time of year when applicants and contractors are anxious to begin construction. Planning Commission members felt they could address the hardcover variance of 1.7% rather than delay applicant another month. Five of the six members approved the proposed hardcover at 26.7% holding hardcover to the existing level. One of the six members contends hardcover should be kept at 25.5%, the level approved in 1989, 1990 and 1991. The majority opinion noted that applicant has agreed to remove 178 s.f. or 1.8% existing hardcover improvements within the 0-75' setback area. During discussions at the meeting, they were reminded that in the 1991 review the City determined a need to retain the existing turn around at house because of the safety issue. It is still necessary to maintain a back out area for cars before entering County Road. During the discussion at the Planning Commission review when members were determining what could be removed in the 75-250' setback area, they noted in previous reviews that the shed was to be removed. Applicant advised members that the shed is needed for storage of boating, yard and children's play equipment. He advised if he was to rebuild such a structure today it would cost $12,000 and asked that it remain to serve their family needs. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the majority recommendation of the Planning Commission Request for Council Action continued page 4 of 4 September 19, 1996 Zoning File #2169 ______________ COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Council may amend or adopt the enclosed approval resolution. Members may wish to consider additional hardcover improvements, refer to Exhibit P. 107 s.f. of patio area will be removed as a result of the new construction, the existing walls surrounding the turn around area are needed to sustain steep banks. The walk at 87 s.f. or 0.3% may be removed but it would be minimal. The shed and walk at 255 s.f. or 1.1% would reduce proposed hardcover to 25.6%. Applicant has specifically.asked to retain the structure for the family use. The minority opinion of the Planning Commission felt that if applicant cannot remove existing improvements that the addition should be scaled down to meet the 25.5% limit. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 (B) AND 2 FILE ^2169 WHEREAS, Michael Renard (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1185 Tonkawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Tract B, Registered Land Sur\ey No. 853, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to illow construction of an addition to the existing residence to be located 4' in front of the average lakeshore setback line where the existing residence is located 1 1/2’ in front of the setback line and where the code would allow no such encroachment and a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 seeking approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area of 403.7 s.f. or 1.7% for a total of 6,147 s.f. or 26.7% where only 25% is allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2169. 2.The property is located in the LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1 acre in area. The property consists 32,648 s.f or .75 acres. Page 1 of 6 1 3. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on September 16, 1996, and recommended approval of the average lakeshore setback variance of 4' and hardcover variance of 1.7% within the 75-250' setback area based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A.The encroachment to the average lakeshore setback is minimal at 4’ and will have no negative impact upon the lake views of the adjacent residences. B.The existing residence is located 1 1/2’ in front of the average lakeshore setback line. C.The City has received written acknowledgment by both adjacent neighbors that they have been made aware of the plans for improvement and the City has received no comments from either neighbor. D.Hardcover in the 0-75' setback shall be reduced by 178 s.f. existing at 391 s.f or 4.04% and proposed at 213 s.f or 2.2%. E.Proposed total area or size of the residence structure is consistent with the size and areas of surrounding residences on adjacent properties at similar areas. F. The existing bituminous drive and backout apron is required to maintain safe access to the adjacent County Road. G. Structural coverage is proposed at 8.4% where the code would allow 15%. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property 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. Page 2 of 6 i 5.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) approving an average lakeshore setback variance of 4 ’ and a hardcover variance 403.7 s.f or 1.7% with total hardcover at 6,147 s.f. or 26.7%. This approval is subject to the following conditions; 1.Applicant shall complete all hardcover removals as shown on site plan attached to this resolution as page 6. Hardcover removals consist of 48 s f of concrete pad and 550 s.f of landscape area with underliner. All hardcover removals to be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction by the Orono Building Department. 2.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 23, 1997). 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The 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. Page 3 of 6 - ■ Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 23th day of September, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Fd .'.'ard J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23th day of September, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy fvl 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of___, 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as bis (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day '>f____, 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 6 ri I I To:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:September 11,1996 Subject: #2169 - Michael Renard, 1185 Tonkawa Road - Renewal Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Total lot area = 28,405 s.f. Application: Applicant seeks approval of a third renewal variance to permit construction of a two storv' addition to the east side of the existing residence. TTiis is the current owner's second request for a variance, the original two were granted to the original owner by the City in 1989 and 1990. The following ordinance's are pertinent for this review; 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback encroachment. Allowed = O' Proposed = 4' (compare Exhibit G and I. new survey confirmed addition will encroach another 2Vi beyond average lakeshore setback line) Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Hardcover variance. 75-250' setback area = 22.827 s.f Allowed = 5,707 s.f or 25% Existing = 5,516 s.f or 24.1% Proposed = 5,995 s.f or 26.2% Approved by Council in 1991 = 5,829 s.f or 25.5% (based on removal of 168 s.f of detached shed area) Amended proposed = 5,827 s.f or 25.5% (5,995 s.f - 168 s.f) Variance = 120 s.f or .5% List of Exhibits A - Application B C - Plat Map - Property Owners List D - Neighbors Acknowledgement Forms E - Resolution No. 3053, Approving 1991 Renewal Application - Original Survey/Site PlanF G - Original Sketch of Average Lakeshore Setback H - I J Original Floor Plans New Sur^ey/Site Plan Side Elevation K - Street Elevation 1 Zoning File #2169 September 11, 1996 Page 2 L > Lake Elevation M - Second Floor Plan N - Lower Level Floor Plan Review of Application This is the first renewal variance application filed by the current owner. The original variance was granted to the applicant in 1991. The former owner had presented two variance applications proposing the same size two stor>‘ addition to the east side of the residence. The current application involves minor changes. A new sur\ey places the addition 4’ in front of the average lakeshore setback where the original lakeshore setback survey for the earlier reviews was determined to be approximately Wi. '' he current survey has more accurately defined the encroachment that results in a I'A' frirther expansion beyond the lakeshore setback line. Members are asked to stand at the approximate location of the addition and note the view windows of the adjacent residences. When standing at the lakeshore setback of the proposed addition, it is difficult to note any encroachment of the average lakeshore setback line. The encroachment is minor and will have no visual impact upon ’’ w adjacent residences. Applicant's hardcover facts, proposed at 5,995 s.f, do not reflect the removal of the 168 s.f. of detached structure. There is nothing to suggest that the Council will change from its original approval in 1991. Staff has adjusted hardcover at 5,827 s.f or 25.5%. There are slight changes in the floor plans of the current proposal from the original proposals presented to the City. Compare Exhibits F and H with 1 through N, the 2' extension into the lakeshore yard in the original proposal involved a lower level enclosed porch with an upper level balcony where the current proposal involves a 2' two storv' bay addition. ITie lower level plan still provides new living roorri/Mining area with an expanded formal entry. The upper level consists of a master bedroom suite. In the 1991 application, the City considered reduetions in the generous paved area adjacent to residence but soon realized the need for a backout area for safe acces. to County road and also noted the location of the retaining wall surrounding paved area. Members may review the resolution of 1991, Exhibit E. Staff would reeommend the adoption of the findings and conditions set forth in that resolution, although members may wish to amend or add additional conditions. Options of Action To either amend or adopt the findings and conditions of Resolution No. 3053. I--., rwJWt................ Application #; o- Date Received t.-- Amount Paid -c r CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIOIJ , Initial Application Fee S220.00 Tfj (S50.00 per each additional variance) ’T^ 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 Site Address /! KJ. i-f Propert>' Identification Number (P.I.D.) OS’" ~ !Z __ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property ’ Acquired_______Ock" /?/•*_______ I (do) ^o n^ also o\vn the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) Present use of property: X residential Zoning District;____ other (specify) applicant Name Address: l/SS T^aJ/CalCa X c L____ Citv ’: Phone (home) V 7^" ^ 5'«S V Phone (work) }U^______ £)^c>7fC>_________Zio: OWTS’ER (if different than applicant) Name ______________________ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address:Citv':Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST /if Estimated Constmetion Cost S Describe request in detail; _ o^" /tc/cA—^X/ilAtisL / (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width y Ht Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore X' Other (specify) ^?UicuJa! HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property condirions rhlchihiD (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of thg following information must be submitted bv the annUcation deadline date in order for voUr application to be considered compkte: 1. 1 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Cenified Propert>- Owners List of ovMiers within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govi Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/s" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grado are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/s x 11 for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/j" 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 thic application. Additiona' items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that variance application is not complete if the above information has not been in<?lud£iL APPLIC.ANT’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 further authorizes reasonable entrv 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 'yP/iAi/?//il' /, Date ^ ------ 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 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 Oa/05/96 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERYf INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY DJtCRS LISTBATCH 502PROP AODR OmER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 0004RDHIFE5B 08-1X7-23 13 01105 TOFKAHA JOHN D MILLER t JOHN D HILLER 5009 UNIVERSITY AVE N E MPLS MN 55421PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 58 08-117-23 13 000801140 TONKAMA RO R A K KYLERICHARD A KATHLEEN KYLE 1140 TONKAMA ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55354 PROP AODR OmER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 58 08-117-23 13 0017 01185 TOriCANA RD M T RENARO ADS RENARO H T RENARO ADS RENARO 1185 TONKAMA RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 438 08-117-23 13 000401180 TONKAMA RO R E ENGEBRETSON ET AL RICHARD E ENGEBRETSON 1180 TOraCAHA RO LONG LAKE m 55354 58 08-117-23 13 000701140 TONKAMA RD R K HOLLAND A E SULLIVAN RANDY HOLLAND/ERIC SULLIVAN 1140 TOTKANA RD LONG LAKE MN 5535438 08-117-23 13 000901120 TONKAMA RD j A A Kmr JOHN G A ANNE L BENOT 1120 T0I2CAHA RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 38 04-117-25 13 001401145 TONKAMA RO 0 0 ADAMS ARK ADAMS DANIEL OSCAR ADAMS ROXANN K ADAMS 1145 TONKAMA RD LONG LAKE ffi 55354 38 03-117-23 13 0018 01205 TOr^U RO THOMAS H SMITH A HIFE THOMAS H SMITH 1205 TONKAMA RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 TOTAL BATCH 502 00008 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE HEPRESE^rrATION OF INFORMATION AS i** APP ARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNTPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPEJ^TY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE p ^ MV. n 1 n » 4. C.V 1 V .. r 1 ^ f v;- TJ| ■ri '* T ’’ ‘ ul * 'V ’ - Adjacent Propei^ Owners^AcknowIcdgemcnt Form 'V J ’i V .*• I (we)~7^7>yyf5 of ^ [print name(s)] [print address; have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at //BS also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the propern’ or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date 0/hn AS/hnS_________of _//6'S ~7nrik^L4Aj0. P-A _1 (we) [print name(s)]print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at //g,T '7^ka^jj0< also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement. I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Council approval. Property ’ Owner Date Property Owner Date Tf vou 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. o Sx C^\ CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3053_______ A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2, FILE #1699 WHEREAS, Michael Renard (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1185 Tonkawa Road within the City of Orono-(hereinafter "City") and legal ly described as Tract B, Registered Land Survey #853, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to allow construction of an addition to the existing residence located 1-1/2' in front of the average lakeshore setback line and a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 seeking approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area of 122 s.f. or .5% over the allowed hardcover of 5,707 s.f. or 25%. NOW, THEREPOnE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1699. The property is located in the LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1 acre in area. The property consists of 28,405 s.f. or .65 acres. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on November 18, 1991, and recommended approval of the average lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variance of .5% within the 75-250' setback area based upon the following findings: A.The encroachment of the average lakeshore setback is minimal at 1-1/2' and will have no negative impact on the lake views of the adjacent residences . B.There is no hardcover in the 0-75' setback area on the property. Page 1 of 4 //o o// //\\. J*.- 1 ■ i'>r >« N CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3053 C.The proposed total area or size of the residence structure is consistent with the size and area of surrounding residences on adjacent lots of similar size. D.The existing bituminous drive and backout apron are required to maintain safe access to the adjacent County road. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, bit is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the aoplicant; and woulJ be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or mr.ra of the findings noted above, the Orono City Counci] hereby grant.', a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) that would approve the average lakeshore setback variance of 1-1/2' for the proposed addition and approves a hardcover variance to allow 5,829 s.f. or 25.5% hardcover within the 75-250' setback area, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall remove wi shed consisting of 168 s.f. within the 75-250' setback area. Such removal to be confirmed by the Building Inspector at the time of the footing inspect.!on for the new addition. Page 2 of 4 o o ,\ % ‘ ^ ^^*cbsho-^^ * V ^. * V GITYof ORONO RECOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3053 _____ 2.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant# but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval# or this variance will expire on that date (December 9# 1992). 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code# shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein# and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicant has read# understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself# his heirs# successors and assigns# hereoy agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono# Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of December# 19 9. Clerk Barbara A, Peterson, Mayor 7^7 Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of December# 1991# by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallln# Mayor 6 City Clerk of the City of Orono# a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. , LINDA S. VEE NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My cofTimissJoo expires 9-12-96m Notary Public Page 3 of 4 I ^04, o o\ V o^- CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^053 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. 1 i On this day of 199 / before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared_ _ _ _ _“T'. 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. S3.MVOOMMI a y NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) JO ^On this day of /)1 ^1992r before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared ^ n/i rd ---------DC b C-)h < . /C^Ti’ /?/( rA______________ 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 hi-^ (their) free act and deed. VV.r>; V \. «,TA.Wu%« • Sg!"*° HENNEPIN COUN^ My COrnr"l»»l?'i explrw B-12-W Page 4 of 4 RESOLUTION #3053 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF ORONO I Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Orono with the original record of such resolution in the Minutes of the proceedings of said City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on December 9 , 19 91 . and that the same is a true and correct copy of said resolution was duly adopted by said City Council at said meeting. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set lOth , day of _ _ _ _December hbnd and seal this , 19 91_ _. /borothy MPWaTliiu City Cleallin. City Clerk (SEAL) ♦ • • • • "B 23131 Mm. * 1 t --------------TTl—J1—__________ . J fOl'V c <L ?. ur ii • *\< \W • • < • • •.; ••• •.••;•*. t^..• ^ •• ‘ • L)'\ • V --■ iOLTO Mmi. — ' • p*. ■•* • *•*,• • •:t'‘..1.< • ..•;. .-. ; •* . w ****••. • ■'■ * . . • *•• * '^SN. . ■. ■/: ,r:-~ :.: ' * K5: .w/>u,- :~<:r -.. .. .v • .«.. t..^* ’ • •» • .* • 11!?^ •: ' ^ •.! ••• r*«** POOR ORIGINAL DOCUMEN ;• j'SIjJ.' * • • •Sv \kt•iVi: 'iy • •*'<i * r;jVi ■f *.,* *.•« V.* . :tl . ‘I! >4 *. •v‘ •i *•J !>1 X* L .. it •• ’ •• ..ii • * •»I • .1 ■ • i- ..• N»-: # • !•• • • I •*> •I • V • # ... • ■ii'». V.*- .l|l;V • • \y- . I! ..j ' •• ' U-. '! • • •; •’ • I I*. .1 * ■: *1 i • I it.* ' | v> \'V. : 'd ? • *. ••• : *1 ;« , V. ^ i ‘I? I..*. V .j } . *> J M ■a'-o’ *.« ■ — »• .. « ^ ^ mm':-■ — y-m-- txT.r*t •* “ • •r' I i *1 •».-j.i , lilffiT J----0 / •' k / ■>I \ \ / \ \ :i../ jS&fejlit -.*' ;.'.r .I lEMviii v’! ;. ’ •»■ ■• 'll ■ \ [YrMMO ■ I j*##.'" m < P?i'P V- •'; ............ 1 LI • ♦!..«•'1 * ..-.1 U.KC. ^rriiiE _J-: - :.:Il.....H “■" Q 1-t • r • .41"m TT.POIC-- ^f\ht~[W0 iilM-NSy '■'■ \ *• 1 V . T\oo"' ;:\i -j iiiiiII ■flv ii?'- i r. Sf#:-:•1' V ,: ,, .1 II* UIVIH^ U’o\^ I/.' \ Li i;w—I -‘•1 I I > ' ri!f * ^ ' — .Q--~ .—• « . »w 4 t' "-•V k: t,HK^ar’ \ I I&HQCC3birj3-6 3-6 ITIS-6 tico /e - r r ’ H • 3 'Asc, VInyl JirM • S IDE k I ■ *. ! •* I I LTD i ■ 55301 RENARD ADDITION I ATE 7-?4 -.;-4 OF 2 . / w •- a>»**>««• «i. I r* • n ) r .onl'i Sc«(. V=l' r» t ‘ Vihyl ^ iclf^^ - \ - . , , * • •,f.?P.NT r \ ^ • LJ DES I6N ft CUSTOM :,ceo I tage s ltd P. 0. BOX ti^^ATZATA, MN 55301 R h i 'JAf L .. ... 0 - •..1..>-RXTSTING HARP- SU«FACE;i -•» Slip ; House jf) Drivewdy • : Deck - Walk • - Steed----------- •. Pa;tib: •fH • •• • • •• 2050 sq. ft. : 2880:%sq. ft. K- • 123 sq. ft.. . 220 sq.* ft. — ^ _,.tSS sq. -ft. . - - . 75 sq. ft. .: '.vf % *JH - w : ^ ^ L^-.r 1.-^ ‘.*- t i* t ; jq:. Total Hat’d Suiifacf = ' ■ 551 ^3 sq. ft.r ^ . « e;.'» *• ' I • . i ^ . .. . i - V ^tal Pereen .of coverage within 75 to 250 ]^t se: sack . 24.1 percent 1.—- ------------- —r-7r.........""‘.T"....................................* •• • ;; ... -. I - -* r • . I . - J . - * -:r : ?■£ • ; '.^5. ' ‘ > • —• --•------* ; . .: ; . J . » . .S • , . . • . • • • « •• •• •9 ^ ^---------- ( -. ;fO - " ‘ s . ■■"rt Pl^*POSED HARD SURFACE; • I ^ .... . ■ i .I :e ^ I . - • I •I . a* • 4' • .1 —proposed'fiodse‘“7’.7”.“'rrT~^***^® ~ ~ " .. • •-> '■ Drive •*]•!. •- - | 2880 sq. ft. 1 " • m sq. ft. I ... .* • ...» •••a t - ............... * -* . w. * A . • r. *** * * •* • » I ••*—.• •• •• -• % t • . % .t I • !D.- SHed f2 166-sq. ft. (K * • :• * : ::: r :;,£- ■ '. I;■I V . I . : i; T’otai, perceiit of coverage within '75 ''tO 250 -f'oof .setback 26. i percent ., , . "i ^ ' H.t - • ’ -V •..*?. *1 % • . I • ^ ^ ^ .'.... . • • # • i- •« * «I • • • • \ - ! • f f f m ■ • • » .. - . - r • r ....,-. . ... ' ^ . a-s ■ L^r •irv - ‘ n • ? - • »4 , : * 'fo * ; ! ’ ;.■:^.^::Note; No Shar'd surface ^exists within the'o ;to:75 -f6ot setback. . . • . r * • J • ... • . . - ^ t a . r • . . . • . " * I ' e . V. a. . -a. t • a •• , • a- V a . a 1 • * a* 4 •* a* • i . * " - r ) • .' V • •i 1. ,:.•! .a. a . t.. , . ERTIFICATE OF SURVEY /" = BOOK PAGE . /n FILE NO. 86026-0 SHEET OF - * * * a ^ ' * * *1^ • ^ %**^ **^^'* ■OOB OHieiNAU OOCUM6N1 1^ Tract B, Registered Land Survey Number 853, Hennepin County, Minnesota EXISTING HARD SURFACE AREAS; 0 - 75 FOOT SETBACK AREA = 42^ SQUARE FEET Concrete pad Wood decking Concrete walk Landscaping 48 — io. e c. 173 40 ^ ^ *t‘o130 fTotal 391 square feet = coverage iJ, / 75 - 250 FOOT SETBACK AREA = 22,973 SQUARE FEET Existing house Brick walk and walls Patio Retaining walls north Deck Landscaping Bituminous drive Shed and walk 2024 326 107 120 130 420 2760 255 . & i.ii f'.Z, Tf ^ 'J T?{ ■ Total 6142 square feet “ 26.7 % coverage • • 250 - 1000 FOOT SETBACK AREA - 616 SQUARE FEET Bituminous drive Total 37 square feet" 5.9% coverage NOTE:The proposed new addition adds 425 total square feet to the 75«250 foot setback area for a coverage of 28.6% . 'i 1 c- ys* 7/--aso W//A 'invi LAKE MINNETONKA T'iaWnOOO IVNJOIdO dOOcs # / > COUi^Q ^5 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^TJIVq 1996 DATE: September 18, ITEM NO.; )< 1996 Department Approval: Name Jeanne A Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2170 Larry H. Nelson, 3335 Cr>stal Bay Road - Subdivision of a Lot ____________Line Rearrangement. Class 1 - Resolution_______________________ Zoning District: LR-IC Brief Review of Application The current owner and applicant has filed a subdivision application of a lot line rearrangement involving applicant's homestead parcel and adjacent railroad property to the south. The current owner purchased the property in 1992 The former owner purchased the property from the railroad in July of 1980. The deeds reflecting the exchange of property contains the new legal descriptions. The County plat maps nor tax records acknowledge the lot line rearrangement. The applicant had no knowledge of this problem at the time of the sale in 1992. The title company has been working with the applicant and the City to complete the filing of the subdivision application. Both staff and the lawyer for the title company have been in contact with a representative of Rail America. The company was advised to contact the City before the Planning Commission public hearing. The City has yet to hear from the company. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for Larry H. Nelson involving the property located at 3335 Crystal Bay Road and the property originally owned by Burlington Northern, now Rail America, subject to the condition that applicant apply for the legal combination of Parcels A and B at the City offices prior to the City filing the subdivision at the County. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution. Isv A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT OF A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3335 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD FILE NO. 2170 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement by Larry H. Nelson (hereinafter "the subdivider") of properties legally described on the survey attached to this resolution as Parcels A and B (hereinafter "the property ); and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the City for a Class I subdivision of properties to be legally combined for tax purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the Class I subdivision and combination of the above referenced properties by the subdivider as shown on the Certificate of Survey by Mark S. Gronberg, a licensed surveyor of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc., dated November 30, 1992, most revised date July 25, 1996, and attached to this resolution, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. Upon approval of this division by the City Council, Larry H. Nelson shall apply to the City for the legal combination of Parcels A and B as described in the above referenced survey. The aforesaid division as shown on the attached Certificate of Survey shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder’s Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before March 23, 1997 together with a certified original copy of this resolution. Page 1 of 2 3. The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the division has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota this 23rd day September, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Mallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of September, 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. 1 i Notary Public Page 2 of 2 O JL • • * « r * *' •t n f • 4 Application ff Date Received dno S'' ^/h * • ' • ■ r* y Amount Paid t'-d i-• % 4: d CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIV ISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Siteaddress 333^ ^ ^ Property Identification Number (PID)______________ Please check one - Property I—abstract or Attach legal description to application. torrens? APPLICANT . / / / Nam e Z./4X^/Ct/ Address ^^3r^^</Sr><g^ /gxty /^'d C\\su)^:z/t-r/^ /^// Phone (home) V' 7/- Z^93 TX'o^^59f Phone (work) OWNER (if different than applicant) Name __________ Address City__Zip Phone (home) Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units_[ Other (specify)_________ L-ie-IC PROPOSAL ______ Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites j_____Existing Units --____New Units Total Units Number of Building Sites \ Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per ____Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)_________ \ MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to "application fees” listed below. 2. Completed application form. 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. 4. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt. Center 348*3271). 5. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Zoning Official’s Signature _______________________________________ Date---------------------------------- ' — ■ MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning Official's Signature________________________________________Date Totals I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply)^ A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class 1,11 & 111) $250.00 ---------- _____ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $350.00 ) ---------- Subdivision Application (Class 1 & II) $350.00 ---------- _____ Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 + $25.00/lot (Class III & all non-residential) ---------- _____ Final Plat Application (Class III) $200.00 ---------- _____ Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 ----------- Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. $200.00 —■ Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) ---------- Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) ---------- Renewal ofClass I and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) ---------- Renewal of Class 111, Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) ----------- Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from original application) ----------- B. Special Improvement Fees: Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + $.50/|ineal ft.;_____lin. ft. x .50 = $______ _______ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50/Iineal ft.;_____lin. ft. x .50 = $______ _______ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 ---------- _____ Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub ---------- Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/stub ---------- Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 ---------- On-Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/per lot X_____new lou ---------- C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) ---------- Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100.00 ---------- PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwclling Unit ---------- •nic applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by Ap^Ss 4 ---------------- Dai. /?- -------------- ' ' ' 4 y __________ Da,. _______Owner’s Signature \Dplicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings re held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Comrnission and Council If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your nlace and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN OATS 08/12/96BATCH 506PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 58 17-117-25 61 000602160 KENNOOO NAY S P DINMICK I B OIMMICK STAR I TRIBUNE EMP CREDIT UN 625 PORTLAND AVE MPLS MN 55688 HEfi«PIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY (M4ERS LIST58 17-117-25 61 000500058 ADDRESS UT4ASSIGNEDCAL ROODCLAIR ROOD2215 KErtXXX) HAYHAYZATA MN 55591 REPORT NO. PI655601 PAGE 1758 17-117-25 61 000600058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEDCAL ROODCLAIR ROOD2215 REftOOO HAYHAYZATA MN 55591 PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP ADDR (MIER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOCm 58 17-117-25 61 0007 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGT4ED CAL ROOD CLAIR ROOD 2215 KE^A^D HAY HAYZATA tfi 55591 58 17-117-25 61 0017 05515 CRYSTAL BAY RO PATRICIA A GUTTORMSON PATRICIA A GUTTORMSON 5515 CRYSTAL BAY RD HAYZATA MN 55591 58 17-117-25 61 0015 05295 CRYSTAL BAY RO HARK C ZAGARIA MARK C ZAGARIA 1526 21ST AVE N E ROCHESTER MN 55906 58 17-117-25 61 0018 05525 CRYSTAL BAY RO 0 M STANTON t B L STANTON DENNIS M t BECKY L STANTON 5525 CRYSTAL BAY RO HAYZATA MN 55591 58 17-117-25 61 0016 05509 CRYSTAL BAY RD V N MELIN I K P MELIN V HILLIAH A KATHLEEN P MELIN 5509 CRYSTAL BAY RO ORONQ MN 55591 58 17-117-25 61 0019 05529 CRYSTAL BAY RO MICHAEL J FINLEY MICHAEL J/PATRICK M FINLEY 5529 CRYSTAL BAY RO HAYZATA MN 55591 . .M I I PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 5B 17-117-25 61 0020 05555 CRYSTAL BAY RO URR^ H NELSON LARRY H NELSON 3555 CRYSTAL BAY RD HAYZATA MN 55591 58 17-117-25 61 0021 05559 CRYSTAL BAY RD DONALD J STOYKE DCRIALD J STOYKE 5559 CRYSTAL BAY RD HAYZATA MN 55591 58 17-117-25 61 0022 05565 CRYSTAL BAY RD JAMES H OGLAND JAMES H OGLAND 5565 CRYSTAL BAY RD HAYZATA MN 55591 rrr*^«V* *• I ■ PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 17-117-25 61 0025 05569 CRYSTAL BAY RO W L A L D PASCHKE HARREN L A LUCILLE 0 PASCHKE 16661 VILLAGE HOODS DR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55567 58 17-117-25 61 0026 05555 CRYSTAL BAY RD JOHN E KUST JOHN KUST 5555 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD HAYZATA MN 55591 58 17-117-25 61 0025 05559 CRYSTAL BAY RO JOHN A ROBIN JR JOHN A RODIN JR 5559 CRYSTAL BAY RO HAYZATA MN 55591 PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 58 17-117-25 61 0026 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIG(4ED HELEN M THOMPSON CLAIR ROOD 2215 KENNOOO NAY HAYZATA MN 55591 58 17-117-25 66 0016 05565 CRYSTAL BAY RO J R LOFRANO ETAL J R LO FRANO 5565 CRYSTAL DAY RO HAYZATA MN 55591 58 17-117-25 66 0017 05569 CRYSTAL BAY RD PAUL C HAGEN PAUL C HAGEN 5569 CRYSTAL BAY RO HAYZATA MN 55591 RUN DATE 08/12/96 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY Olf^ERS LIST REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PAGE 16BATCH 506PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 56 17-117-25 64 005702215 RENNOOO NAY M X KIEFFER ASA KIEFFER MITCHELL 1 KIEFER 2215 KENNOOD HAY HAYZATA MN 55591 56 17-117-25 44 010405240 NAVARRE LA CLAIR T A LYNN 0 ROOD CLAIR A LYNN ROOD 2215 KENHOOO HAY HAYZATA MN 55591 56 17-117-25 44 010905266 NAVARRE U GRACE MARIE DAHL GRACE MARIE DAHL P O BOX 222 NACONIA MN 55567PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 56 17-117-25 44 011005290 NAVARRE LA CHARALAMPOS MARINOS CHARALAMPOS MARINOS 17600 SUSAN LA MINNETONKA MT4 55545 TOTAL BATCH 506 00022 • / I I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENFJEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. . Cj DATE r lil ■ MV.r.%'-<-'~ • •' '..r •' >.^?I''; j.^T*>i./,'I'i ^** ?•''V ' / V. •-'• \T'-, ■^ •‘^- I ■'ti^.'vV I S-" ~'■J5i ■1 I ,t ►5i ir':i II.:i? •• f, X*a•‘ilS f 1 ‘".-■.4 if . - 4-' >•. • e 4578758 ,^. V'Qlill SnllCnturt, jr«4« »u__.. JKOW. Slrd . . 4at •/. Xm«..i7y2r. 79 Jf*). tttttm» .lutlimtOB JlocthuB.Jac._ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ____ _ __ _. a i: t f'j; *v N V ’ ^0' • *'•*• • • mrporMiem under tks laww of tke State nf„ Dtlivtre ^CtOXlt.A* J<gfi .>n4.A;iCf^Urrti0f Motta •• Joint Itnanf , party of the /tret pari, and ef ika County «/. ..fitoncpla. pari. >««%••••• *4 • and stale ................... pariioe of the OilncMflll^ TPiot tJie eaitl vurty nf ihe /Iretpart, in eonetderatien of the fu»>k of__Pn* _____ ..DoUat..X$1.00)..•ad.pthfr v«Xu»blt coniKcratipn - - - t * * DOlLdltS, to ii In hand paid by the raid p»erlUs of the eeccnd pari, the receipt whereof ie kert'y acknowledged, dote horehy Orani, Bargain, Quih-eiain^ and Convey unio the eaid partiee of the eetond pari ae joint tenants and not ae tenanie In eommen, their aeeigne, iPte ourviter of eaid parties, and the heirs and aseigne of ihe eurtdvor, formter, all the traei . or pareel of land -ying and being in the County of _____________ --------------------- anj State of Minnesota, deeerihed ae folUnre, to-urii: That part of CovemMnt Lot 6, Section 17, Townahip 117 North, Range 23 Veat of tha 5th Principal Kerldlan, daacrlbad aa follova: Beginning at the noat Southerly corner of Lot 7, **Vallacc'a Addltlo to tha Village of Hlnnttonka Beach"; thtnca on an aaauned bearing of North 5A^ Laat along the Southeaatcrly l^nc^of aald Lot 7 to the ouat Eaaterly corner of aaj^d Lot 7; thence South 29 Eaat a dlatancc of 16.67 ^ feet; thence South 56 Weat to an lnterapctl'>n with a line bearing South 29 Eaat through the point of beginning; thence North 29 beginning. West to the point of State Deed Tax: $4.40 i!i7.iao m * “Mi; ^ IK Vli "ifj : • t t •t ^« 1 i dau -I :av‘ 1 -o’ .iL !»?_ , ,'i pH Spi lim I- .. ■•; iiv» : :l!' '• ' i* * ' 7 ' •• I •• } r ' i* ••M l 1| ( • -1 , • ■ „ e* : *• . L*t\ ^ - - i. * ;V'll. ) • .‘•I . ■■ . ■ '^v‘ V“j •' f •>, f •* *9 ■ «• .'■y ^. 1 ■. • ■ V* :■ If *T». *'• .•* "I*'. * EXHIBIT PAGE OF PAGES i Zoning File #2170 September 8, 1996 Page 2 Staff has talked with Robin Ripley of Rail America and asked her to contact the City prior to the Planning Commission meeting if the company has any questions or concerns. The deed of 1980 has been recorded (refer to Exhibit D) and the legal description on the Warranty Deed transferring property to Mr. Nelson also reflects the new legal (Exhibit E, Page 2). Review Exhibit F, portions of the existing residence and detached garage are located within the railroad right-of-way. The subdivision will bring all structures within the homestead parcel, although an accessory shed and additional retaining walls not shown on survey are still located within railroad right-of-way. The subdivision will add 901 s.f. to the severely substandard parcel at 5,500 s.f. or .13 acre. Staff Recommendation To approve the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for Larry' H. Nelson involving the property located at 3335 Crystal Bay Road and the property originally owned by Burlington Northern and now Rail America, subject to the condition that applicant ’s surveyor provide an amended survey designating Lot 7, "Wallace's Addition to the Village of Minnetonka Beach as Parcel A and Parcel B providing the description of the portion to be divided from the railroad property as described on the survey. Exhibit F. /. To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:September 8, 1996 Subject:#2170 Larry H. Nelson, 3335 Ciystal Bay Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement, Class I - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC Application: Applicant seeks approval of a lot line rearrangement involving applicant's homestead parcel and adjacent railroad property to south. The deeds between the former property owner and railroad were executed in July of 1980. The fcilowing ordinances are pertinent foi this review: 1. Section 11.03, Definiiion 66 (A) (1-3) - Subdivision may be completed as a Class 1 division. 2. Section 11.10, Subdivision 10 (A) - Class I subdivision requirements. List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Transfer Deed from Burlington Northern, Inc.-July 23, 1980 Warranty Deed to Larry H. Nelson Survey/Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Review of Application The applicant and new owner of property has filed a subdivision application with the City in order to complete the process begun back in July of 1980. The owner in 1980 failed to file the required subdivision application with the City and as a result, the real estate taxes have never been adjusted nor does the Hennepin County Plat Map reflect the division, refer to Exhibit B. A title company has been working with the applicant and City to complete the filing of the subdivision application. Burlington Northern no longer owns the railroa.'. line. The current owner. Rail America (formerly Dakota Rail), has received copies of the legal notice and staff memo. It is not clear whether the title company has been in contact with Rail America. lad<««du«l (U m tnUividujl (s)finno488 w V. No drliiuiiirnl taxrs on^ t^isfcr ontrnnl; Ortifirate of Krai Kxtatr Value ( ( I required Certificate of Real EstaldValue No.___^ o I nS «a :!MOV 2 3 1992 County Auditor rv)tn (T» Ou. '^v X’ CXD ^Deputy • sjs«wsr»u / y 92U07/2/ F:II2--»«7 ,,,„,/ 6000488 .MCCM'.a lir ^ATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: $ Novbgr 2 ^ 19 92 O tCJ"--!- *»7 *.t':»X'4?::: -CD 22 '>2 [r .Rn’'22l2 -JT CtiXt.M?? COH 25 W * 2^0'^212 4“ i;t.tXi04:?:3 t'OC 216 'X Date (reserved for recording data) FOR VALUAHLE CONSIDERA TIUN. Alice Lorraine Moss (mantai tiaiui) hereliy convey (s) and warrant (s) to Larry H. Nelaon ^ real property in f> •*■ \ Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows . Grantor (s), ^ ^ , Grantee (s), // X s S’ SEE ATTAaiED EXHIBIT Kj 9^. I 'V 7HE SELLER CUUmEG T!!AT grHE SELLER DOES f40T KNOW 'OF ANY WELLS ON THE VoESemDED PROPERTY rt Ilf moff ipact t% co««l*nut on b«cli) together with all hcretli I aments and appurtenances belonging thereto, subject to the following exceptions: ej %• ■ Building and zoning laws, ordinances, state and federal regulations; Restrictions relating to use or improveaent of the property without effective forfeiture provisions; Reservation of any raineral rights by the State of Minnesota; Utility and drainage eastaents which do not interfere with existing improvements. Alice Lorraine Moss .•ii II. .Ill II* *1 ____________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF Hennepin n. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of___November , Alice Lorraine Moss ____________ . 19_12 7 woTAR^j.^ST^p^o^y^^ij^gpyp-i^»xy oa sank ) HtNNEPW COUNTY ^ My Coftim. Up. 01/14/03 ' * , Grantor (s). ilONATUSt Of fiatON TAKINO ACKNOWLtOOMSNT Ta« Siattmtnu for the m»1 proparty daacribad la Ihla lirairMmt >1 rba aant to (taciuda aama and addiaaa of OiaAtat)! CASH Loan No. (this instrument was ORAfTtOBY (NAME AND ADDRESS} First Security Title 319 BARRY AVENUE SO. II01 WAYZATA, m 5S391 MF92-6066 FST 02626 79323 Grantees: Larry H. Nelson 3335 Crystal Bay Road Wayzata, MN 55391 1 EXHIBIT Lot If "Wallace's Addition to the Village of Minnetonka Beach." A1£0: lhat part of Government Lot 6, Section 17, Tcwnship 117 North, Range 23, West of the 5th Principal Meridiem, described as follows: Beginning at the most Southerly comer of Lot 7, "Wallace's Addition to the Village of Minnetonka Beach"; thence on an assumed bearing of North 54 degrees East along the Southeasterly line of sedd Lot 7 to the roost Easterly comer of said Lot 7; thence South 29 degrees East a distance of 16.67 feet; thence South 58 degrees West to em intersection with a line bearing South 29 degrees East through the point of beginning; thence North 29 degrees West to the point of beginning. 4 II. • I ' ~l T I II III I I I I I I 1 > I and in Gov't, i-ot' Hennepin 'Couhtyv Minnesota ■*• . • « . 4 • I “• NOTE: PART OF GOV'tI LOT 6 TO BE ADDED TO LOT 7,"WALL­ ACES. ADDITION TO .THE. .VILLAGE OF MINNETONKA BEACH" Existing Legal Description (A)hot 1, "Wallace's Addition to the Village .of Minnetonka Beac^i." ALSO^Mat ^ Government Lot ^5, Section 17, Township 117 North, Range 2.1 West of the Sth Pr.^nc- iple Meridian, described a.s follows: Beginning at the most Southerly corner 7? "Wallace's Addition to the Village of Minnetonka Beach"; '’•'^ence on hearing of North 54 degrees East along the SoutheasterIv l.ine of ]!’ 'e' most Easterly corner of said Lot 7; thence South 29 degrees East a 16 67 foot; thence South 5« degrees West to an intersection with a line bearing South 29 degrees East through the point of beginning; thence North 29 degrees We... to the point of beginning. This survev shows th.e location of all .existing .buildings and. visible .."hardcover" in relation to the boundaries of the above described property. It does not pur­ port to show any other improvements or encroachments. •: Iron marker found _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ o: Iron marker set _- _ _ . ^ ^ ^ M ,hown are based ■ ^^ 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Sep,,^Ni ^996 DATE: Septem^h/^ 1996 ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2171 Minnegasco, a division of NorAm Energy, 530 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Renewal Conditional Use Permit - Resolution Zoning District: Light Industrial Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.50, Subd. 3 (A-7) - Conditional use permit required for public service structure within Industrial zone. Brief Review of Application In 1990 the City granted a five year conditional use permit to Minnegasco to use a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer to inject gas into the distribution system during periods of high demand within winter months. In January of 1995, the City granted a conditional use permit to allow the continued use of the portable vaporizer through the winter of 1995-96 to expire on October 1, 1996. During the 1995 review, the City advised applicant that they were to seek a more permanent solution to address the gas supply needs of the northwest Lake Minnetonka community. Council also wanted to forewarn applicant that there would be no assurance that the City would approve continued use of the vaporizer at the site. Review Exhibits B and C, Mr. Pilon reviews the status of several projects listed in the 1995 review that have either been completed or commenced. He also reminds us that with the upcoming County Road 6 impro\ements that Minnegasco plans to reinforce the gas distribution mains along the roadway. Refer to Exhibit J, applicant also has submitted information on the merging of NorAm with Houston Industries to be completed at the end of the first quarter of 1997. The applicant has advised that it is their plan to remove the gas vaporizer and restore the site during the spring of 1998 and noted that if the vaporizer is still required after the 1997-98 heating season, they will work with the City and surrounding communities to find a new location. i Request for Council Action continued Page 2 September 17,1996 #2171 Minnegasco, a division of NorAm Energy, 530 Old Ciystal Bay Road North Planning Commusion Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the conditional use permit for Minnegasco to continue the use of the portable gas vaporizer at the industrial property located at 530 Old Crystal Bay Road North with the understanding that the entire operation will cease as of the 1997/1998 heating season and that the site will be restored by May 31, 1998. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.50, SUBDIVISION 3 (A-7) FILE NO. 2171 Whereas, Minnegasco, a division of NorAm Energy Corporation (hereinafter the "applicant") has an interest in the property located at 530 Old Cr>stal Bay Road North located within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as: Lot 1, Block 1, Van Dale Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a renewal application for a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.50, Subdivision 3 (A-7) to permit the continued use of a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer through the spring of 1998. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. 3. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2171, The property is located in the Industrial Zoning District of the City. On September 16, 1996, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval based upon the following <m mfindings; a.The proposed use is a permitted conditional use within the Industrial Zoning District. Page 1 of 5 4 b. tc. The existing use has been found to not present immediate hazards to the public health, safety or general welfare or to have been materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity and has not had a negative impact on the surrounding residential properties because of its limited schedule of use within the winter months for the last five winters. Use of the gas vaporizer from the 1992/93 season through 1995/96 season is as follows: 4. e. 1992/93 season 1993/94 season 1994/95 season 1995/96 season 3 times 4 times 3 times with 3 standbys 19 times d. Police Chief Gar>- Cheswick has observed an early morning filling operation and noted that it was conducted under adequate supervision and noted no problem with the operation. The Long Lake Fire Department has visited the site and familiarized itself with the operation. f. Staff obser\ed and received no report of mishaps or traffic problems during the past 1995/96 heating season. g. Since the 1992 heating season, the City has received no reports of any detriment to the health, safety or general welfare of the public nor has the City staff found any evidence of depreciation of the surrounding property values and that the use of the facility during the past four winters has been conducted in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Management Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City stafl, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed use 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 a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.50, Subdivision 3 (A 1-7) to Minnegasco, a division of NorAm Energy Corporation to allow the continued use of a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer at the property located at 530 Old Crjstal Bay Road North through’the winter months of 1997/98. This approval is subject to the following conditions; 1. 2. 5. 6. The applicant shall be responsible for the complete restoration of the site by May 31, 1998. Under this current conditional use permit, the City shall ask that applicant make no changes in the hours of operation or extend the period of operation outside of the cold winter months. It shall be the responsibility of the owner, VCI Capital, Inc., to advise the City if there is a discontinuance of the lease agreement with Minnegasco. All use of this facility shall cease and this conditional use pormit shall be null and void. This conditional use pormit is approved for a specified time. Applicant must resolve permanent service needs for this area of Orono and the greater western Lake Minnetonka community within the time limits of this conditional use pormit as the City of Orono will not grant another conditional use permit for an extension of the use at this location. 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 representative of Minnegasco, a division of NorAm Energy Corporation and the owner of VCI Capital, Inc. have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of Minnegasco and VCI Capital, Inc., its successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 3 of 5 { Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 23rd day of September, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Authorized Representative of VCI Capital, Inc. Authorized Representative of Minnegasco, a division of NorAm Energy Corporation STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of September, 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 m STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of , 199 ___, before me a Notary Public within and for skid County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. On this day of , 199 ___, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 5 of 5 To: From: Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject: September 10, 1996 #2171 Minnegasco, a division of NorAm Energy, 530 Old Ciystal Bay Road North - Renewal Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Application: In 1995, the City granted a one year conditional use permit to allow Minnegasco to continue the temporaiy use of a portable vaporizer providing an additional gas resource to the northwest Lake Minnetonka area. Minnegasco had originally asked for a five year extension (original five year CUP issued in 1990). Applicant has filed for an additional one year extension with the hopes of permanent withdrawal from the facility in the spring of 1998. The following ordinances are pertinent for the current review: 1.Section 10.50, Subdivision 3 (A-7) - Conditional use permit required for public ser\’ice structure within Industrial zone. Minnegasco proposes the continued use of portable liquid natural gas vaporizer to inject gas into the distribution . 'stem during periods of high demand within winter months. 2. Required setbacks: A. Street setback adjacent to residential zone Required = 75' Proposed = 75'+ B. Rear setback Required = 50' Setback from rcar/east property line = 100' C. Required side yard setback (VA times the height of the tank at approximately 15') Required = 22.5' Side setback adjacent to residential used portion of industrial property = 40' from tank to truck location Residential used structure on subject property is over 260’ from proposed operation. Section 10.61, Subdivision 5 (C) - Vehicle parking areas must meet 5' side and rear setbacks and 20 ’ street setback. Zoning File #2171 September 10, 1996 Page 2 3.Section 10.50, Subdivision 5 (1) - Outdoor storage fencing is required for proposed use. A. Minimum fence height Required = 5' Existing = 8' B. Type of fence Required = 50% opaque Proposed = 50-100% opaque (fencing consists of cyclone fence with wind screen defined as open type) List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant's Addendum C - List of Projects D - Plat Map E - Property Owners List F - Cook Letter 12/26/95 G - Description of Portable Vaporizer H - Resolution No. 3663, Approved 1/8/96 I - Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/95 J - Merger Information on NorAm with Houston Industries K - Location Map L - Site Plan M - Elevation Review of Current Application Minnegasco has filed for an extension of one year to permit continued use of the portable vaporizer at the temporary facility in Orono’s light industrial park for 1996/97. During the 1995/96 review, the City advised applicant that they were to seek a more permanent solution to address the gas supply needs of the northwest Lake Minnetonka area. Review Exhibits B and C, Mr. Pilon's letter notes that several of the projects listed in the 1995 review have either been completed or commenced, specifically plans to reinforce gas distribution mains along County Road 6 w'ith the upcoming County road improvements. Pilon advises that additional gas supplies from Northern Natural Gas Company have been requested at an increased delivery pressure at their Minnetrista delivery point. He notes also that Northern Natural Gas expects to have additional gas supplies at higher pressures available in the 1997/1998 heating season. Zoning File #2171 September 10, 1996 Page 3 It is their plan to remove the gas vaporizer and restore the site during the spring of 1998, noting that if the vaporizer is still required after the 1997/98 heating season, they will work with the City and surrounding communities to find a new location for the vaporizer unit. Refer to Exhibit J, applicant has submitted additional information on the merging of NorAm with Houston Industries to be completed at the end of the first quarter of 1997. Usage levels of the vaporizer are reviewed as follows: ’92-93 season 3 times '93/94 season 4 times '94/95 season 3 times with 3 standbys '95/96 season 19 times During the last rev iew, the Police Chief and a representative of Fire Department advised staff of their concern with their lack of knowledge of the operation and potential danger should a mishap occur. The Fire Department lacking any knowledge of the operation would not be able to provide adequate coverage should a mishap occur. The Police Chief has been present at one of the early morning hour fillings and advised iff that it was conducted under adequate supervision and noted no problem with the 'v .. ..-i !n the past year as with the previous five years, we can report no mishaps or traffic problems. Although applicant seeks to extend the temporary use of the vaporizer until the winter of 1997/98, Council may only wish to grant a one year conditional use permit during the phase out period of this operation. Options of Action Planning Commission may adopt the findings and conditions of the previous resolution, refer to Exhibit H. Members may also wish to make a recommendation as to the duration of the permit whether it should be granted for one year or until the spring of 1998. If the pennit is extended to the spring of 1998, applicant must be placed on notice that the City will approve no further extensions. MGC #1126 (RJP) y *»v;T .../ * r‘ . 1 1;. V Application #Xt 1 f n.a k Date Received fc ...... ^Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION 1ai PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 530 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD Type of Application to be Filed CONDITIONAL u se PERMIT - renewal Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 33~Il8-23 13 OOll >JPLICANT (home)— Name Minnegasco, a division of NorAm Energy^ (work)- Address 700 Linden Av w. Box I165 City__Minneapolis, m Zip—??A40-11^5 612-321-5A26 OWNER (if different than applicant) Xame VC I CAPITAL, INC Phone (home) AHHress 2765 ’VAYZATA BLVD City Phone(work) 612-476-2637____ ORONO_________Zip Date Property' Acquired I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PER.MITS - S 75.00 For each variance requ^*st with CUP application $175.00 Residential Accessory Use $250.00 Instimtional (church, school, etc.) $225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $250.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS , r ^ $250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ~ $300.00 Vacation $200.00 Easement Vacation ^ $100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ' ^ $350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) $350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ~ $100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE Or PROPERTY Present Zoning District INDUSTRIA^----- Present Use of Property______Residential XX Other fspecifVl INDUSTRIAL REQUIRED SUBMITTALS ^ I • 1. 2. J. 4. D. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. CertiEed Property Owners List of owners within 350 ’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map Eom Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). . . - Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for surtny Attach lecal description to application if not tncluded on requrred survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations mvolve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in die Dtooertv 'This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). ConsSn plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an. addendum to this application, please attach a separate hst of any o e persons you wish notified ot this application. SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings ot all documents, plans, etc. to e submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above intormation has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:-------------------------------------------------------------— applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or f ® Admimstrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered ongmd fee p^ment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that information supplied is true and corr^ «uthe-hesi of hisAier knowledge. Applicant's signatur Date The owner herebv acknowledges and agrees to this application and further i^asonable entrv onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request ___-z/o/ Date ----- all sdbmittals into the City oniccs 25 days betore. d/tbmirtals into the City offices 25 davs before the Planning Commission Meeting. Applicant mus are held on the third Monday o( each month. Applicanu must be ^ TT^f.rrev“rm«^e?of Ptouis Coernmiioa and Council. If an applicant is unable «> attend a Building & Zoning Office of this change poor to the meeting. 4 mneg 4 MORAIM Emirqy CQMPJUIY August 22, 1996 w t re.. Ms. Jeanne A. ilabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Orono, Minnesota 553232-0066 Re: Conditional Use Permit Renewal Parcel 33 - 118 - 23 - 13 0011 530 Old Crystal Bay Road Orono, Minnesota Dear Ms. Mabusth: • In my letter of October 25, 1995, requesting a five year extension of our conditional use permit for the operation of a portable liquified natural gas vaporizer at the site along Old Crystal Bay Road, I stated that our plan was to use the vaporizer for two to five years as a backup until we completed a project along Hennepin County Road 6. At that time the application was amended to require an annual renewal with an update on projects. Since writing that letter several critical details have emerged. The list of projects that I included have been completed or are under construction. In October, 1995, Minnegasco purchased a sophisticated computer program for modeling portions of our natural gas distribution system. In January, 1996 a system expansion and modeling team composed of senior engineers, supervisors and gas supply managers was formed to study areas using the new modeling program. The system that supplies natural gas to the Orono area was among the first to be modeled. The modeling showed that we not only have pressure problems but also supply problems as well. Minnegasco plans to reinforce the Orono area from the west with additional gas distribution mains along County Road 6. Other projects are also being developed. (See attached list.) These projects are expected to be completed over the next three years. Minnegasco has requested additional natural gas supplies from Northern Natural Gas Company at an increased delivery pressure at our Minnetrista delivery point. Northern Natural Gas expects to have additional gas supplies at a higher pressure available to us for the 1997-1998 heating season. Projects currently being developed in other areas of our system will also have an impact on the Orono area. A reinforcement and operating pressure increase along County Road 10 in New Hope and Plymouth will indirectly provide additional pressure to one of the main system supply points at County Roads 6 and 101. TOO West l.inden Awiuit* 1*0. Bo.\ 1105 Minneapolis. M.N 55-M0-llti5 At this time we are requesting an additional year of operation at the existing site on Old Crystal Bay Road. We also request an additional year beyond this request (1997 - 1998) to assure that all systems have been installed are functioning as designed. Our current plans are to remove the LNG vaporizer and restore the site during spring, 19^8. If the vaporizer is still rec^ired after the 1997 - 1990 heating season we will work with the City of Orono and the surrounding communities to establish a plan of action for the vaporizer. Should you have any questions please contact me. Sincerely, ’. r y'- > • .U’ Richard ^^^^<^ilon, P.E. Senior Administration Engineer Engineering Services 612-321-5426 ■/ pc: Wayne Fransdal Tom Olinger Jerry Kallstrom Dave Henningsgaard 4 i A. WEST MINNETONKA AREA REINFORCEMENT PROJECTS Increase operating pressure in pipeline from delivery point in Minnetrista along County Road 6 to Tovmline Road. Install new 8" pipeline from Townline Road to old Crystal Bay Road. Install 6" pipeline along County Road 110 to parallel an existing 4" pipeline. Install new 8" pipeline from Old Crystal Bay Road and County Road 6 to County Road 6 and County Road 101. The expecte’d cost of these projects is $2,500,000. i ftUK DATE Od/21/^6 BATCH 508PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP AOOR O^R NAf€ TAXPAYER KAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR a#CR NAME TAXPAYER KAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR HE^tJEPIN C0U4TY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHTCRS LISTS8 33-118-23 12 0002 02765 KELLEY PKWY COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ATTN MARCIA HILDA 016 TRANSIT A REAL ESTATE S H STREET LEVEL HC GOVERiflENT CENTER 38 33-116-23 13 0011 02765 HAYZATA BLVO N VEDA INC ETAL VEDA INC PO BOX 375 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 13 0014 02725 HAYZATA BLVD H VEDA INC VEDA INC PO BOX 375 LONG LAKE MT4 55356 38 33-118-23 24 0001 00595 OLD CRYSTAL DAY RD N ROBERT N HA04ER ETAL ROBERT HAGNER 595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO N LONG LAKE MN 55356 REPORT NO. PI43540I PAGE 2138 33-118-23 12 000802745 KELLEY PKHY HILLON PROPERTIES HILLOH PROPERTIES C/0 ALBERT B YNGVE 1021 IDAHO AVE N GOLDEN VALLEY MT4 38 33-118-23 13 000202687 HAYZATA BLVO H DUAJtm R JACOBS DUANE R JACOBS 2685 HAYZATA BLVO LONG LAKE MN 5535655427 38 33-118-23 13 0012 00450 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO N VEDA INC VCI CAPITAL INC PO BOX 375 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 13 0013 02605 HAYZATA BLVO H VEOA INC VEDA INC PO BOX 375 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 13 0015 02605 HAYZATA BLVO N KASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC IND HASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INO P 0 BOX 340 LOt>IG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 21 0002 00685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N SCHOOL OIST NQ 11 Ar40KA-HENNEPIN I S 0 NO 11 11299 HANSON BLVO N H COON RAPIDS MN 55433 . .tv r- % 38 33-118-23 24 0002 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIC^D JOANN R FROST TRUSTEE JOANN R FROST TRUSTEE 521 N HILLOH DR LOrJG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 508 00011 C I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPREStNFATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEFWEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNONLEOGE AND BELIEF. 8-W4.v ’ ' 'DATE * wir inr L/ \- rpTf^ ^ I Bonestroo Rosene Andcrlik & Associates Engineers & Architects Bonestroo. Rosene. Anderlik and Associates. Inc is an Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer Otto G Bonestroo. RE Robert Mf Roser>e. P E • Joseph C Anderlik. R E Marvin L Sorvala. P E Richard E Turner PE Gierm R. Cook. PE Thomas E Noyes. P E Robert G Schunicht. P E Susan M Eberlin. CPA* • Senior Consultant December 26, 1995 Howard A Sanford. P E Keith A Gordon. P E Robert R Pfefferie P E. Richard a' Foster, P E David O Loskota. PE Robert C Russek. A t A. Jerry A Bourdon. P E, Mark A Hanson. P E. Michael T Rautmann. P E Tec? K Field. PE Thomas R Anderson. A IA James R Rosenmerkel. P E Donald C Burgardt PE Thomas A Syfko P E Frederic J Stcnborg. PE Ismael Martinez. P E Michael P Rau P E Thomas W Peterson P E Michael C Lynch. PE James R Maiand. P E Jerry D Pertzsch. PE Scott J Arganek. P_E Kenneth P Anderson. PE Mark R Rolfs. P E Mark A Seip. P C Gary w Morien. P E Paul J Gannon. A.IA Darnel J Eogerton. PE A. Rick Schmidt. P E Dale A Grove P E Philip J Cas we'i. P E Mark D Wallis. PE Miles B Jensen. P E L. Phillip Gravel. PE Karen L Wiemen. P E Cary D Krisiw.'PE Brian K Gage. PE F Todd Fester PE Keith R Y90P PE Douglas j Benoii. PE Shawn O Gustafson PE Ceciiio Oi .ler. P E Kent J W agner. P £ Paul G He.e'. <»E John p Gc'der PE Dan D Bo/urn P E Je'f'ey J Ehie' •'ger PE Jni»ch R R»'e h 9 E tee M v.»''n P£ Charges A E' ckson Leo M Pavieisiiy Mar’an M Ci;en Agnes M F ng Jarres F Engeiha/dt Ms. Jeanne Mabusth City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Re: Liquified Natural Gas Site Old Cry stal Bay Road & TH 12 File 139-gen n ,7 J< * .* dec 'd i Dear Jeanne: The liquified natural gas collection site on Old Crystal Bay Road south of TH 12 should be reviewed for any potential hazard to me surrounding neighborhood as discussed. The Police and Fire Departments need to be aw are of this location and protection procedures if an emergency condition occurs. The Gas Company should be requested to provide location, history and accident information on other sites. The continued operation of the site should be based on a review of all factors by the Cities Emergency Service group. If you have any questions please contact this office. Sincerely. BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:rb 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55II3 ■ 612-636*4600 DESCRIPTION OF THE PORTABLE LNG EQUIPMENT & PROCESS Minne9asco desires to provide a stand-by supply of natural gas that will preclude supply problems in the Orono area during extreme cold periods. This stand-by supply involves using a portable liquid natural gas (LNG) vaporizer to inject gas into the distribution system duping periods of high demands under extreme cold conditions. The need for the equipment is temporary, however, it will be necessary for three to five years. Minnegasco’s portable LNG vaporizer facility is composed of two semi-trai lers; one with the LNG vaporizer, the other an LNG tanker. The vaporizer delivers natural gas from the LNG tanker into a roadside t aP which is connected to Minnegasco’s distribution system. Before cold weather strikes, the LNG tanker will be brought to the site. Minnegasco personnel will make all the piping connections. The vaporizing process will begin before 5:00 a.m. and be complete about 9:00 a.m. When the process is complete, the disconnections are made, and the LNG tanker is driven off the site. The vaporizer remains on site to be utilized in the next cold weather. During operations Hinnegasco employees will be on site at all times The site will not be attended when the equipment is not in use. Security patrols will visit the site at irregular intervals. There will be very little noise generated by this equipment on the Orono site. Any noise will be much less than the noise caused by passing traffic on Old Crystal Bay Road. The portable vaporizer was used in Spring Park during the 1989-90 heating season. The equipment is currently parked at Minnegasco s Dakota Station. Dakota Station is Minnegasco’s large LNG facility located on 11500 12th Ave. S. in Burnsville. t CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 6 6 3 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.50, SUBDIVISION 3 (A-/) file no. 2087 WHEREAS. NUnnegasco, a "f c'^^TaTB^^ lo«t.7Slhe C “ “ Lot 1, Block 1, Van Dale Add.tion, Hennepin County. Minnesota (hereinafter the "propert>"); and WHEREAS the appH-has » "Sli^f “ vT >o ^ e^er^roT^^ffh; ”4 u^a portable liqu.d natural gas vaponzer for five years ______:i now. therefore, be it RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. Minnesota' flndings 1.This application was resnewed as Zoning File ..2087, The property is located in the Industrial Zoning District. J. f.ndincs; The proposed use is a permitted conditional use within the Industrial Zoning District The existing use has been fo'*"'* >° or to"have'been materially etr^prc^s. or oft teStc'hetrorusfwSThe months for the las. four winter seasons. Page 1 of ^ 4 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. S 6 6 3 c In 1990 ihe Citv eranted a conditional use permit for five years for the croposed level of ’use and found there were no repons of any detnrnent to the health, safety or general welfare of the public nor was there evidence of depreciation of the surrounding propeny values and that the use of the facilitv since 1992 has been conducted in keeping with the • intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Management Plan of the City. 4 The Citv Cvncil has .onsidered this application including the findings and ' LcorSiendauons of the Planning Commission, repons by City staff, co^ems by the applicant and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safet> an welfare of the community CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one r ore of the above findings, the Orono City CounctI hereby ..nrirs a condiuon. use perm,, pc 'ih “fnfiLldrporlr^"^ i.;...,« »«0“ North until Octc-'cn I, 1996, subject to the following conditions 1 Under this conditional use permit, the City shall ask that changes in the hours of operation or extend penod of operation outside of th cold winter months. 2 I. shaU be the responsibility of the o-vner. VCl Capital. Ir.c to an«se the C^ ,f there ,s a discLinuance of the lease agreement tenth of this facility shall cease and this conditional use permit shall be null and void. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for the complete restoration of the site . the time the proposed use is to be discontinued 4 This temporarv conditional use permit is approved for a sp^ified tirne^ Iool.can7™s.' resolve permanent service needs for this area oi Orono w, hn fha' period or,tae as there is no guarantee that the City wnll gran, ano he conditional use permit for an extension of the use a, this location. Applicant Pase 2 of 4 1 /oT o'CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 8 6 6 3NO. shall be responsible for advising the City prior to the deadline of this conditional use permit as to the status of the improvement project along County Road If it is found that the supply needs of the area are not met and that the use o a portable liquid cas vaporizer is still needed to ser\e the community that the City v^-ill ask applicant to seek a more suitable location for tins potentially h^ardous facility’. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and condition^ 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 undersicned representative of Minnegasco. a division of Noram Energy Corporation'and the owner of VCI Capital. Inc have read, understooo and hereby acree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of Minnegasco and VCI Capita!, Inc., its successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording o. this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property Adopted by the Orono City’ Council on this 8th day of January, 1996. ATTEST: 'Dorothy M. M^n. City Clerk Edward J. Ca^han, Jr., Mayor Authorized Representative of VCI Capital, Inc.Authorized B^y:*^entative of Minnegasco. a division of )<oram Energy' Corporation I ase 3 of 4 fO. o^' %l®#' CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 663 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HEN*NTPIN ) u- o u ^ r The foresoine instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day ot Januao', 1996 by Edward J Caliahan, Jr and Dorothy M Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, »i N^.tnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City JAMIE L BOSMA KOTAflYPL'BLIC-MlNNESCTA ffi HENNEPIN COUNTY » My CCffiOission Eci>c Jan 31. ?000 S; 1 STATE OF MINTsESOTA ) Notary'-Public COLNTY OF HEN^TPIN ) ) ss On this ^ dav of _£din^ _____. 1^9^ ^ within and for saidyjn nuo------- , -------—:—tt .. r> . , ^ r un-r r> ^ t n ^un tnis 0" oay oi I'i^nrc* -------» ------ f :,n— *7“ county, personally appeared Pz-h^rf l«.'. ^—rkJ (,(ipif,\l J^n<!-----------■_ known’to me to be the personis) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, anci acknow'ledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. CAROLE A. HASEMAN NOTARY PU8UC-MINNES0TA H81NEPIN COUNTY 0. ILj. My Commission &® -es Jan 31. riV »NOT.ARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINTNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENTnEPIN ) On this /(/‘day nf . I99^_before roe a Notary Public ttit^n and for said county. personaUv appeared llteftaiYaf -'"i. i t.pn.; ^ ^ , ____tirKo As^oriiT#»H the forcBoina instrument, andta^'to me to be the person(s) descrtbedjin and who e.a'ecuted the foregoibg ins.mm acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. A LI 1(5 JAMIE L BOSMA NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY ^•v ConfTi»ss;cn Ejrcires Jan. 31.2CC0 Jp NOTAF.V FL^BLIC ' I’ace 4 of 4 i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOV'EMBER 20, 1995 (#11- #2086 Robert and Janice Callan - Continued) Peterson moved. Smith seconded, to deny approval for application #2086 as it was his opinion to deny all wetland applications Smith said she saw no compelmg benefit to taking this step and saw the true advantage in keeping the wetland as it now exists. Berg a<Teed. Vote: Aves 3, Peterson, Smith, Berg, Nays 2, Hawn, Lindquist. Motion passed for denial. Smith said she saw the drainage benefits as comparing apples to oranges. Berg said she saw the application as being for aesthetical rather than environmental reasons Geor«e Stickney commented that the Planning Commission has approved a skating pond elsewhere and here. Peterson responded that this area is a designated wetland Mabusth said the pond Stickney was referring to was a type 1 wetland. (#12) #2087 MINNEGASCO, 530 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - RENEWAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING - 11:00-11:07 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and * Tidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants .vere present. Reoresenting Minnegasco were Rick Pilon and Jerry Kallstrom. Peterson asked the applicants why a permanent fix could not occur. Pilon said Hennepin County postponed the CoRd 6 project and asked the gas company to do the same. It is possible that a permanent solution couid be scheduled for next year but has asked for renewal of 5 year permit instead of asking for a 2-year extension. Pilon said the existing feeder is west of Tow nline Road, and the low pressure system is east of Townline. The purpose to to bring gas from the high to the low area to stabilize and present an independent leg. Lindquist asked if this would eliminate the need for the facility. Pilon said it would and needed one year to verily that. Pilon said the CoRd 84 project was postponed. It fed Painters Creek with a high pressure feed toward Rockford. Pilon said gas cannot be taken out of this feeder to enforce the area He said the project is an insurance plan to ensure gas outages do not occur. Smith asked how often this vaporizer is used. Pilon said it was used j times in 1992- 1993, 4 t^mes in 1993-1994, and 3 times in 1994-1995 with 3 standbys. Smith asked if there has been any complaints or concerns. Mabusth said there has been none. 25 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PL.ANNING CO\L\flSSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20. 1993 (#12 - #2087 Minnegasco - Continued) There were no public comments Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2087 as submitted with the condition that if the lease if not renewed, the vaporizer could not remain Pilon noted that the lease with the landowner is being renewed on a year-by-year basis. Vote Ayes 5, Navs 0. (#13) #2089 RICH.\RD MILLER, 4520 WATERTOWN ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 11:07-11:15 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reponed that the application is for lot area and width variances for the existing lot located in the 5 acre zone. The property consists of 3 6 acre dry and 2.9 acre wetland for a total of 6.5 acres. A 28% lot area variances would be required. The width parallel to the front lot width is 4% short at 287' where 300' is required. Gaffron noted the 5 acre zoning was created in 1975 when a majority of the residents indicated they preferred 5 acre zoning to maintain the large lot sizes. Gaffron said there are very few small vacant lots in this zone. The property in question of 3-1/2 acres is unique according to Gaffron It has not been built on. Miller has owned the property since 1972. The buildable envelope requires a 100’ front setback, a 50' side setback, and 26’ setback from any wetlands. The driveway would come from CoRd 6. Septic testing has been done, and a site is available for a 5 bedroom home. Gaffron pointed out the likely building site. Gaflfron questioned if the City does not grant the variances, does the owner have any reasonable use of the property. He noted that the assessor has given the property a lower value compared to buildable lots. Miller has paid S5.000 in taxes over 20 years. Gaffron asked if constructmg a residence on this 3-1/2 acres dry buildable (6.5 acre total) lot would change the character of the neighborhood. Gaffron commented that when the owner bought the property, the property conformed to the code of 1 acre zoning. Miller noted he is considering building on or selling the lot, and when the variance is approved, it may cause the taxes to increase. Peterson commented that the codes do change but noted the uniqueness of this property. Miller said the homes and lots going towards CoRd 6 and Hwy 12 from his property are smaller. I lyoii^iivi E nergy CORP. Jk•** • r* \- T. Mifton Honea Chairman of the Board. President and Chief Executive Officer V. ? August 12,1996 P 3 ■' ■ ■P-= i.r : A e Dear Public Official, Permit me to apologize for this informal communique, but I felt, in this case, immediacy was more important than style. I wanted to advise you that Nor Am Energy Corp., which serves your area through one of our subsidiaiy companies, hcis received a proposal from Houston Industries Incorporated to acquire the stock of Nor Am and merge our companies. Our Board of Directors has evaluated this proposal and unanimously voted to accept the offer and submit it to Nor Am stockholders for approval. This was announced on Monday, August 12. Although I don't anticipate this consolidation of companies will affect, in any way, the service we are privileged to provide your community, I Wcmted you to have the details of this proposed merger. I have taken the liberty to enclose with this letter a copy of the press release aimouncing this event. I have also included fact sheets and other data for your information. The local gas distribution companies, which are NorAm subsidiaries, will retain their separate identities and orgcinizations. This combination offers excellent potential for enhancing customer service and for providing a wide range of new vcilue-added serv'ice. The information I have included provides significant details on all aspects of this proposed consolidation. If you would like additional information, please contact our local representative. VVe will keep you informed of significant events as we proceed. Cordially, 1600 SMITH STREET • P.O. BOX 2628 • HOUSTON. TEXAS 77252-2628 • PHONE 713/654-5931 \i 1 •' i News Release Contacts: Houston Industries Inc. Dan Bulla (investors), 713-207-3120 Sandy Fruhman (media), 713-207-3123 For release: August 12,1996 NorAm Energy Randy Burkhalter (investors), 713-654-7502 Ellen Orsbum (media), 713-654-5930 Houston Industries Incorporated Announces Agreement to Acquire NorAm Energy Corp. Houston, August 12-Houston Industries Incorporated (NYSE: HOU) and NorAm Energy' Corp. (NYSE: NAE) today anriounced that they have signed a definitive agreement for Houston Industries to acquire NorAm Energy in a transaction valued at $3.8 billion (consisting of $1.4 billion of debt and pieferred stock assumed by Houston Industries and $2.4 billion for common stock). The combined enterprise will have a total market capitalization of approximately $14.3 billion. Under the terms of the agreement, which has been approved by the boards of directors of both Houston Industrie and NorAm Energy, Houston Industries will pay $16.00 for each NorAm common share outstanding, 50% of which will be paid in cash a “>d 50% in Houston Industries common stock. After closing, four NorAm Board members will join the Houston Industries Board of Directors. The acquisition is subject to shareholder approval of both companies and various regulatory approvals. The proposed transaction combines NorAm Energy, the nation's third largest natural gas utility serving 2.7 million customers in six states, with Houston Industries, a holding company involved in the electric utility and unregulated energy businesses in the United States and in foreign markets. The corporate offices will remain in Houston, where both companies are currently headquartered, and Don Jordan will continue as Chairman and CEO of Houston Industries. Houston Industries’ regulated subsidiary, Houston Lighting & Power Company, is the nation's ninth-largest electric utility in terms of kilowatt-hour sales. Its service territory includes the City of Houston and surrounding communities with a total of 1.5 million customers. HI Energy, Houston Industries’ principal unregulated subsidiary, pursues foreign utility privatizations and the development of unregulated power generation projects, primarily in foreign markets. It has projects and interests in Argentina, Brazil, and India. \ 1 NorAm brings a growing, well-respected wholesale gas and electricity tradine business, significant mid-stream gas assets in the form of interstate pipelines ^ the nation s third largest gas distribution operation. One of Its distribution divisions, Entex, serves metropolitan Hous’.on, in addition to Communities in Louisiana and Mississippi, and has approximate!. 600,000 customers in common witn HL&P. NorAm also has a leading position in retail energy services and an emerging presence in Mexico and Latin America. The acquisition of NorAm Energ>' positions Houston Indus’ries lo oe a national wholesa.e and retail energy services leader with extensive gas and electric capabilities The combined entity will be well-equipped to meet the evolving needs of customers country products and efficient service throughout a broad region of the ' "Market and regulator)' forces are changing the industr)' landscape to a more competitive environment. In addition, the electricity and natural gas markets are converging, and customers are demanding additional products and services. This acquisition will substantially strengthen Houston Industries' strategic position given these rapid changes in the industry," said Don Jordan. V\e see several strategic benefits to this acquisition," continued Jordan. "First, it combines Houston Industries’ electric market knowledge with NorAm Energy’s wholesale gas and electricity trading operations and skills, which will help propel the combined company forward in the converging wholesale energy markets. Second it positions the combined company to provide the bundled gas and electric products and services customers are increasingly demanding. Third, it helps establish Houston industries broad national energy presence and offers the opportunity for improved eLiciency across all of our operations. Fourth, it gives us access to 3.6 million customers, 2.1 million more than we had previously." Jordan added, "This combination nrese’^ts exciting new opportunities for our employees as we enter the natural gas distribution and transmission businesses for the tirst time, expand into wholesale gas and electric marketing, and extend our international position." Milt Honea Clhairman President, and CEO of NorAm Energy said, "This transaction is a natural f't that will benefit our shareholders, customers, and employees. Our companies have a shared vision, common geographical areas, and complementary skills and assets. Our shareholders benefit from the value created by the combinaticn- the increased access to Houston Industries’ experience and skills in the electric power industry, Houston Industries’ financial strength, and our complementary international development interests. Our customers benefit from the combined company’s ermanced abihty to offer a broad array of products and services,, particularly in electricity. Finally, the combination will provde greater opportunities for our employees as the combined c ompany continues to expand its wholesale, retail and international presence." " "The combination of HL&P and Entex under one owner offers excellent potential for enhancing local customer service and for providing a wide range of new value-added services," Jordan said. "At the same time, we intend to continue the efforts already underway to increase the opportunity to move gas from west to east across the Mid- Continent region where NorAm Gas Transmission and Mississippi River Transmission are strategically located." "Houston Industries plans to expand many of the retail services offered by NorAm Energy throughout its gas and electric distribution operations. NorAm has been a leader in developing new value-added services for residential and small business customers such as appliance repair and preventive maintenance contracts and home security system sales and monitoring, as well as services for other utilities and retail marketers." In addition to serving more than 2.7 million households in six states through its Entex, Arkla, and Minnegasco gas distribution divisions, NorAm Energy is a major natural gas pipeline and energy marketer, providing supply, gathering, storage, and transportation of natural gas and wholesale electric services through its NorAm Trading and Transportation Group (NTTG). NTTG includes NorAm Energy Services group (NES), a leading natural gas and electric wholesale trader. In the first six months of 1996, NES traded over 2.5 Bcf per day of natural gas and almost 450 thousand MVVh of electricity. NTTG’s interstate pipeline system consists of NorAm Gas Transmission and Mississippi River Transmission. In addition, NTTG operates gathering assets in Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Texas through NorAm Field Services. NorAm Energy Management provides unregulated retail energy sendees to industrial and large commercial customers. Through NorAm Energy's wide-ranging gas activities, it handles over 5 Bcf per day of natural gas. In addition to its corporate office in Houston, NorAm Energy has offices in Shreveport, Louisiana; Little Rock, Arkansas; Boulder, Colorado; Tulsa, Oklahoma; Minneapolis, Minnesota; St. Louis, Missouri; Williamsburg, Virginia; Midland, Michigan; and Miami, Florida. Subject to the approval process, the transaction is expected to be completed by the end of the first quarter of 1997. Selected Financial Data Year-end 1995 Houston Industries Nor An Revenues ($ Millions) 3,730 2,965 Net income from continuing operations ($ Millions) 397 66 • Total assets ($ Millions) 11,820 3,666 Earnings per share from continuing operations (Dollars) 1.60 0.47 Dividends per share (Dollars) 1.50 0.28 Average shares outstanding (Millions) 248.3 123.9 ### I — ' -------------------- - Nor Am Energ>' Corp. Factsheet 1995 Nor Am Energy Corp. (>T\'SE: NAE), is the nation’s third largest natural gas utility serving over 2.7 million customers through its Entex, Arkla and Minnegasco distribution divisions. It is also the largest in the United States in number of communities served with a total of 1,300. NorAm ’s two interstate pipelines, NorAm Gas Transmission G^’GT) and Mississippi River Tran^.iiission (MRT), together form one of the nation’s largest pipeline networks with approximately 8,600 miles of pipeline moving natural gas from the vast mid-continent supply regions to on-system markets and to pipelines serving the densely populated Northeast and midwest markets. NorAm Field Services (NFS) operates approximately 3,500 miles of gathering pipelines moving in excess of 200 billion cubic feet (BcO of natural gas per year. These lines are connected to over 3,900 wells and reserves of 36 trillion cubic feet of gas in major producing fields in Arkansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Texas. NorAm Energy Services (NES) provides wholesale energy marketing services including the non-regulated rebundling of gas supply, storage, transportation and other services, as well as electric power marketing. NorAm Energy Management (NEM) is the company’s retail energy supplier, providing total energy portfolios to industrial and large commercial consumers. This retail marketing effort generated 169.7 Bcf of gas sales in 1995. This group also provides other energy services such as performance contracting, risk and energy management as well as services targeted to the residential consumers. Selected Financial Data (millions of dollars)1995 1994 Annual Revenues $2,964.7 $2,857.9 Operating Income 287.3 264.9 Earnings-Continuing Operations 65.5 51.3 Total Assets 3,666.0 3,561.5 (per ^hare data) Earnings $ 0.47 $ 0.33 Divide, ds 0.28 0.28 Stock Price: High 9 9 Low 5 1/8 5 1/4 Close 8 7/8 5 3/8 Ave. Common Shares Outstanding i.9 million 122.4 million Employees 0,600 HOUSTON INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED FACT SHEET (Y>ar-end 1995) Houston Industries Incoq)orated (HI) is a holding company with $11.8 billion in assets and annual revenues of $3 7 billion HI is involved in the electric utility and unregulated power businesses m the U S. and in foreign markets Houston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P), a regulated electric utility, is Hi’s oldest and laigest subsidiary Hi’s business strategy is to remain in the energy' and energy services industries and to pursue opportunities with the potential for greater growth and risk-adjusted returns than could be achieved in the regulated utility industry alone Houston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P) is the nation’s ninth-largest electric utility in terms of sales w hich, in 1995, exceeded 61 billion kilowatt-hours HL&P serves more than 1.5 million customers in a 5,000 square-mile area along the Texas Gulf Coast that has a population exceeding 3.7 million. Firm peak demand in 1995 was 11,419 megawatts. Houston Industries Energy, Inc. (HI Energy) pursues foreign utility privatizations and the development of unregulated power generation projects HI Energy has operations in the U.S., Argentina and Brazil, and projects under construction in Argentina and India. Selected Financial Data ($ Millions) Revenues:1995 1994 HI Consolidated S 3,730.2 S 3,754.1 HL&P 3,680.3 3,746.1 Income from Continuing Operations HI Consolidated 397.4 424.0 HL&P 451.0 453.2 Total Assets:11,819.6 11,403.1 I\ 4 Geographic locations of combined businesses . of NorAm Energy Corp. and Houston Industries Incorporated (Not shown are additional operations in South America.) NorAm Divisions □Minnegasco A Arkla •Entex NGT MRT rl ■ I ■■4 Vl:J • •- , * v» I ' r / •« • » ;f V' ,*v f « Houston Lighting & Power Subsidiary ^ of Houston Industries Incorporated Area of Service. ’ ’• * •<vy- ^ \ «t *1 H/miwgasco 1 A Ncmsim inmY compmy i Minnesota Contacts For NorAm Energy Corp. A1 Swintek 800 LaSalle Avenue, FI. 11 Minneapolis, MN 55402 612/321-4799 Ame Hendrickson 800 LaSalle Avenue, FI. 11 Minneapolis, MN 55402 612/321-5375 Roger Schoeb 2400 North Riverfront Drive Mankato, MN 56001 1-800-245-2377 800 LaSalle Avenue, Fi 11 PO Box 59038 Minneapolis, MN 55459-00:)S rni O >r 0 m 01 o •i5z•• mo o 0^ 9 mo : r Vo <m 9 o Is 0 5 ^ (A \] jrv ! I I S.l >: V > y y V'J >( l« -vV rv _Ik i™J^ >VV'' F »• >L TC* & :i ------V,------:^ ' r I i^y.— -sfej^w^vA,^ K S. \ V Hd O $eorw r o O N M 2 2 > C/5n O MeETlNQ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Sfp 23 DATBv 18, 1996 ITEM NO.: / 0 Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2172 Gerald and Nancy Bloms, 4195 Forest Lake Drive - Variance - Resolution Zoning District:LR-IB Lot area = 15,832 s.f. Additional Exhibits J - Applicant's Letter of 9/5/96 K - Adjacent Property Owners Acknowledgement Form L - Applicant's Letter of 9/17/96 Brief Review of Application Applicant seeks approval of a structural coverage variance to permit construction of a main level deck addition at 12' x 14.6' at the southwest comer of residence. The 168 s.f. of new deck area results in an increase of 1.1% structural coverage. Structural coverage is at 15.7% and is proposed at 16.8%. The structure v\ill meet all required setbacks of the LR-IB zoning district. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the application as proposed but conditioned approval on final resolution to be filed on the Chain of Title of the property to include a disclaimer that states the property has been approved at 16.8% of structural coverage and that the City will not approve any future request to increase structural coverage on this property. The applicant voiced major concern with such a disclaimer being added to the resolution, noting that it would have a negative impact on the value of the property should the property be offered for sale in the future. Mrs. Bloms asks for special consideration of the Council in her letter of September 17th, Exhibit L, in which she notes that the majority of homes surrounding her property are far more in excess of the allowed 15% structural coverage. She notes her home was built in 1983 prior to the passage of the stmctural coverage ordinance and that she nor her surrounding neighbors have any knowledge of the ordinance. Request for Council Action continued Page 2 September 18, 1996 #2172 Gerald and Nancy Bloms, 4195 Forest Lake Drive In a phone call to staff after the meeting, she alluded to a comment made by a Commission member that future Councils cannot be bound by the actions or directives of a previous Council. If this is the case, she questions why such a condition would be noted in the resolution, especially since she feels it would only have a detrimental effect on the value of her property when attempting to sell it at some time in the future. Staff would ask Council to consider a different and more consistent wording with previous actions of the Council as follows: The property has been approved at 2,668 s.f or 16.8% of structural coverage per Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) of the Municipal Code that would allow 2,375 s.f. or 15%. Applicant and future owners arc hereby advised that should structural improvements be proposed at some time in the future, the City may ask for reductions in the areas of existing or proposed improvements in order to maintain structural coverage at the approved level of 16.8%. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the unanimous recommendation of the Planning Commission omitting the disclaimer dealing with future structural improvement. The following options are available to the Council: 1. To adopt condition set forth by the Planning Commission; 2. To adopt condition suggested by staff; 3. At applicant's request, omit any reference to the structural coverage excess. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C) FILE NO. 2172 WHEREAS, Gerald L. Bloms and Nancy C. Bloms (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 4195 Forest Lake Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 6, Block 3, Forest Arms Country Club Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to permit construction of a 12’ x 14.6' main level deck at the southwest comer of the existing residence that will result in an increase of 168 s.f. of 1.1% structural coverage where 15.7% exists and a total of 16.8% is proposed where only 15% is allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. 2. 3. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2172. The property is located in the LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consists of 15,832 s.f. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 16, 1996 and recommended approval of the variance as proposed based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A. Stmctural coverage on this property is consistent with structural coverage found on developed properties within the Forest Arms Country Club Addition. Page 1 of 4 4. 5. B. The deck will result in 168 s.f. or 1.1% increase in structural coverage. C.15.7% structural coverage exists on the property. The proposed improvement at 168 s.f. will result in total structural coverage of 16.8%. D. E. The deck will meet all required setbacks of the LR-IB zoning district. Hardcover is proposed at 3,928 s.f. or 24.8% within the 250-500' setback area. The Code would allow 30%. F.The City has received no negative comments from the adjacent residents nor from the othe: residents notified of the pending zoning application. 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 propert>'; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessaiy' to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessaiy' 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. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) approving a structural coverage increase of 168 s.f. or 1.1% where excess structural coverage exists to permit construction a 12 ’ x 14.6' deck at the southwest comer of the residence located at 4195 Forest Lake Drive, subject to the following conditions: 1. To be amended by the Council. Page 2 of 4 I 2.Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide an amended survey locating deck addition with access stair and detached shed in rear yard. 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 expire on that date (September 23, 1997). 4.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. 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. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of September, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner (s) Page 3 of 4 1 r STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of September, 1996 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Miimesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of____, 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 Notar>' 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 ackiowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 4 7 To:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator September 9, 1996 Subject:#2172 Gerald and Nancy Bloms, 4195 Forest Lake Drive - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Lot area = 15,832 s.f. Application: Applicants seek approval of a structural coverage variance that v^ronld permit construction of a main level deck addition at the southwest comer of residence. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Stmctural coverage variance. Total lot area = 15,832 s.f. Allowed = 2,375 s.f. or 15% Existing = 2,500 s.f. or 15.7%* Proposed = 2,668 s.f. or 16.8% Variance = 293 s.f. or 1.8% Increase of stmctural coverage = 168 s.f. or 1.1% *Includes 60 s.f. of shed area. 2.Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Review of hardcover. Allowed = 4,749.6 s.f. or 30% Existing = 3,760 s.f. or 23.7% Proposed = 3,928 s.f. or 24.8% No variance required. List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - 1 - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Surv'ey/Site Plan Hardcover Inventory Elevation Floor Plan Stair/Foundation Plan Deck/Foundation Plan 1 .-4 Zoning File #2172 September 9, 1996 Page 2 Review of Application The Bloms received approval of an area variance that allowed the residential development of the last remaining undeveloped lot within the Forest Arms Country Club Addition in 1983. The applicants have now filed for a structural coverage variance to permit construction of an approximate 12' x 14.6' deck at the southwest comer of the existing residence. The deck will be an addition to the existing deck to the rear of the residence and will meet the required 30' rear setback for the principal stmcture in the one acre zoning district. The 6' x 10' shed (not shown on surv.ey or included in hardcover facts) has been included in the hardcover and structural coverage facts. Statement of Hardship The applicants ask the Commission members to review the surrounding properties developed in the 1970's. They note far more coverage on the older developed properties than on their property. The only variance sought by applicants is for stmctural coverage involving an increase of 168 s.f. or 1.1%. Issues for Consideration 1. Should either existing or proposed structural improvements be reduced in area? 2. Other issues raised by Planning Commission members. Options of Action To approve as proposed or amended. Any recommendation of approval must include a condition that applicant provide an amended suTN ’ey locating deck addition and detached shed in rear yard upon application for a building permit. i Application M / nj-. Date Received 3/ tl - Amount Paid ^ cU CITY OF ORONO - VARLANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 r a (S50.00 per each additional variance) t;' il Renewal Variance Fee SI20.00 (no change from original application) ^ » Variance for non-conforming structures S220.00 After-thc-Fact Fees (Double application fee) \ # # .1 * • ** A • /> I ‘ ■J t. ■ V . PROPERTY INFORMATION___, a . Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Propert>’ Acquired ----------------------(month/year) I (do) (do ndt) also own the ^acent parcels of land. Present use of property: L^'^*''f ^idential ___^other (specify) Zoning District:_____________________________________ applicant Phone fliome ) V'/03^ ■Address: L OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _____________________ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address:City:Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTKjr Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: Cldci On 'tO_^-r ^ OC(d.Sairtjic6L dOAr Id (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear X^Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:. (attach additional sheets if necessary) 1 1. 7 5. 6. 7. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS A., .f .h, fnirnwiPf inf^r^nrion muH hf tY <b-? appUjaKap d«.4'iot datt iu «rrf>r fnr your .nnlicati o n *" I'* consirtfrtd tPBiple»t I Compleied Application Form , , Certified Property Otvners List of otvners wthin 150, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 3aS-a271). j ■ i j t. a Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/=” x II" for TOTornDWrsurvey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8K" 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 m the property This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list ot any other persons you wish notified ot this applic .tion. g, ___ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vflur ...rinncp annlirntinn is not complete if the above infprmariQn hns npt beep included. applicsignature u -7 • The applicant hereby agrees to p.ovide all information required or requested by *= Zor^g Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered ^ and/or consultant e.xpenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of hisfiier knowledge. CL Date % members for purposes of investigation and verification ot this request. /hrMA Date Aoolicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Pl^imng CoLission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings ^e held on ^ month ADDlicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Plann « Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meetmg pl^ make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the BuUdmg & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 RUN DATE 08/22/96'BATCH 509PROR AOOR OHCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOORPROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR PROP AOOR OWER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR HENNEPIN C0t*4TY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OMCRS LIST REPORT NO. PX9S5401 PAGE 5458 07-117-2X H 0005 041*0 FOREST LAKE DR L L GOLDEN A T 0 GOLDEN LYTM L 8 nnOTNY 0 GOLDEN 4180 FOREST LAKE OR HOUND HN 555*4 58 07-117-25 11 0004 00970 FOREST ARHS LA C JAHES LANGE ETAL C JAHES A RUTH A LANGE 970 FOREST ARHS LANE HOUND HN 555*4 58 07-117-25 11 0005 04195 FOREST LAKE OR G L 8L0HS A N C BLOHS GERALD A NANCY BLOHS 4195 FOREST LAKE OR HOUND m 555*4 158 07-117-25 11 000* 04175 FOREST LAKE DR T A S THEXSEN THOHAS J THEXSEN 4175 FOREST LK OR mound HN 55564 58 07-117-25 11 0007 04155 FOREST LAKE OR FREDERICK J YOUNG FREDERICK J YOUr«4155 FOREST LAKE OR ORONO HN 555*4 58 07-117-25 12 0020 009*5 FOREST ARHS U HERBERT 6 OLSON ETAL HERBERT A JUOY OLSON 9*5 FOREST ARH LANE HOUND HN 555*4 i58 07-117-25 12 0021 04210 FOREST LAKE OR ROBERT E HENZEL ETAL ROBERT E («NZEL 4210 FOREST LAKE OR mound 555*4 38 07-117-25 12 0026 04215 FOREST LAKE DR JOHN 0 LOUCHLIN ETAL JOHN LOUGHLXN 4215 FOREST LAKE OR MOUND HN 555*4 58 07-117-25 12 0027 04205 FOREST LAKE OR JEROHE 0 LEHIRE JERRY LEHIRE 4205 FOREST LAKE OR HOUND HN 555*4 58 07-117-25 15 0092 01005 LINDEN LA ROBERT P KING ROBERT P KING 1005 LINDEN LA mound MN 55364 58 07-117-25 15 0095 01015 LINDEN LA T J ERXKSHOEN A H H SAPA THORA J ERIKSHOEN HARY H SAPA 1015 LINDEN LA mound HN 55364 58 07-117-23 15 0094 01027 LINDEN LA L R A C L HITHAH LAHRENCE R A CHERYL L HITHAH 1027 LINDEN LA HOUND HN 55364 58 07-117-23 14 0019 01045 NORTH ARH OR SALLY A RHYLICK SALLY A RHYLICK 1045 NORTH ARH OR MOUNO 55364 38 07-117-25 14 0020 01015 NORTH ARH OR R A L CONRAD RONALD C CONRAD 1015 NORTH ARH OR mound FN 55364 TOTAL BATCH 509 00014 RUN DATE 0a/22/9A HE»tCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OMNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIAI5A01 PACE 55BATCH SOf I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENIEPIN COUtHY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNONLEOGE AND BELIEF. - ^ ^ DATE ^ ^ ’ \ ya c to ^; CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: CeRALD ^ UANC Y BLOMS f' M £^£5 T_i.A!<s: .DRiVe.«>J=^=^ LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 6, BLOCK 3, FOREST ARMS COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA o Otnotes iron monument □ Denotes offset stake X 000.0 Denotes existing elev. (000.0) Denotes Proposed elev. » Denotes surface drainage Proposed garage floor elev." ^77-/7 Proposed lowest floor elev. “ 970-0 Proposed top of foundat'iof .'lev. ■ BENCH MARK: 7o^ «/*/^«/» /C.Of C«rrter m 973.35 DEMARS • GABRIEL LAND SURVEYORS. INC. 3030 Harbor Lane No. Plymouth MN 55441 Phono: (612) 550-0006 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any. from or on said land. File No. 3770 -A Book - Page //3 ■ Z4 Scalar / % 40 -U n tt w . • » • Bloms Property Lot Size 106 X165=17490/2 135 X105=14175/2 25% 8745 7087 15832 sq ft. 3958 sq ft ■3c> 4^ y ^C' House & garage Driveway Existing .deck l^xisting patio addition to deck 2100 1120 340 140 3700 168 3868 •' W • • ^ 'f A This should meet the hard cover rules for with a 1000 ft. of the lake. ^ -LiX 5 'f to ^ Ls. /tCtCX ( ' *1 Justus Lumber Co., 330 11th Ave So., Hopkins Mn. 55343, Phone # 938-2741 Thu Aug 08 17:55:04 1996 The Bsterlals in this deck will cost $2513.61 3D View Fax # f "y Ll^ \JJ .c«I » 938-2741 Deck Layout Pax « (r 't'o fte. CoN>s7Attfc7!€0 • < ? • t Justus Lumber Co., 330 11th Xve So.# Hopkins Hn. 55343, Phone i 938-2741 Thu Au^ 08 17:55:04 1996 Deck Dimensions for Deck 3 Fex i t ^ . -i V. * . • ii- A luatus Lumber Co., 330 11th Ave So., Hopklne Mn. 55343, Phone # 938-2741 rhu Aug 08 17:55s04 1996 3ee]c Dimeneions for Dech 1 Fax 9 Deck 1 41 ft « •;I f VI 4 • f ♦ *■ 1 fi * : . I. L Septembers, 1996 Jeanne A. Mabusth City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 RE; Variance Application Dear Ms. Mabusth, 1 would like to request that the variance, I applied for on August 23, 1996, be sent to the September 23, 1996 Council Meeting. I was not aware of the Zoning Code limiting properties to 15% lot coverage. The addition that I proposed for my deck is very reasonable. I am far from being over built on my property. All my neighbors have more coverage on their lots. I'm was amazed to find out about this code. Having to apply for a variance has added a large expense and a great deal of inconvience to this project. 1 was hoping to complete this project before the weather turned cold. Moving this variance request to the September 23 Council Meeting would at least make it possible to complete it this fall. Sincerely, Nancy Bloms SEP 9 '4 Adjacent Property Owners’ Acknowledgement Form I (we) ^hi no < 4 ^ 'T/ici sefJ of 4^*75 (/- [print name(s)] [print address have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at H/^j^f'CCc^fLU £kr. also referred to as Land Use Application No. 2/7^.> 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 Ci^ Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans ana that the proposed neighbor’s prmect or use reqjAircs Council approval. O Pkoperty Owner Date ^-5-U Property Owner Date ****************** *****l*****‘>>*******************^'***** *****"*********** I (we)c'thL'1 of jirint riame(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the prope^ located at he also referred to as Land Use Application No. <^/ / A • I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the propern- or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. / j^perty ^Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. 1 September 17,1996 City of Orono Council Members P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 RE; Variance Application for Gerald and Nancy Bloms Dear Council Members, I would like to request that a resolution, added to the approval of my variance, be taken off the record. The resolution was suggested that no further variances for structural coverage be granted on this property. 1 feel that it is unfair to limit us in this manner We purchased this property in 1983. At the time we needed to apply for a variance to build, as the property is under an acre. The variance was granted, because it was consistent with the lot sizes around it. At this time, I don’t for see any further need for a structural coverage variance 1 still object to this resolution being attached to my property. Should 1 want to sell my house, this might make a difference to a buyer. All of the lots, that were plotted with my lot, have more lot coverage then mine. I feel it is unfair to single us out in this manner. Sincerely, Nancy Bloms . <-meetinq 2 3 1996 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATEPlF[Qa0||Ol^. 19% ITEM NO.: y j Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2173 Bennett C. (Chuck) Downey / Gary Hegenes, 2675 Shady wood Road - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 acre, sewered. Application: After-the-fact structure-to-structure setback variance for construction of gazebo by previous owner (proposed hardcover removals result in no need for a hardcover variance). List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 9/19/96 C - Sketch of Proposed New Decks D - Memo and Exhibits of 9/12/96 Please review the memo and exhibits of September 12th. Briefly, Mr. Downey is selling this property to Gary Hegenes. This variance application was required in order to resolve a hardcover/setback issue created by the previous owner, Rolla Martin. When Mr. Downey bought the property in 1993 he was unaware that Mr. Martin had constructed the gazebo without a permit, placing it less than the required 10’ setback from the residence, and yielding hardcover in excess of the allowable 25%. This was brought to Mr. Hegenes' attention when he inquired about the property at the City offices prior to his purchase. Existing hardcover in 1996 is 8,205 s.f. or 29.5%. Mr. Hegenes has agreed to remove 1,488 s.f. of existing hardcover including rock and plastic adjacent to the garage, gravel parking area adjacent to the driveway, and rock and plastic near the driveway and fence area. He also proposes a slight reconfiguration of decks on the property, which results in an additional approximately 35 s.f. of hardcover. The decks do not need any setback or other variances, and the net hardcover result is a reduction to 24.3%, meeting the 25% limit in the 75-250’ zone. With the hardcover brought into compliance, the only outstanding issue is the 5’ setback between the garage and gazebo, where a 10’ setback is normally required. The gazebo is a screened-in structure, and is functionally tied into the surrounding house by a series of decks and retaining walls. The placement of the gazebo has no impact on the visual density of the neighborhood, and is an attractive amenity for this residence. It probably cannot be easily moved to meet the 10' setback, but any fire walls within the garage deemed necessary by the building inspector can certainly be accommodated. J- . Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 3 September 18, 1996 Zoning File #2173 Planning Commission Recommendation At their September 16th meeting. Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of a structure to structure setback variance subject to hardcover removals as proposed yielding 75-250' hardcover below the 25% limit. Staff' Recommendation Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Applicant to remove 248 s.f. of rock and plastic adjacent to garage. Applicant to remove 320 s.f. of gravel parking area adjacent to driveway. Applicant to remove 920 s.f. of rock and plastic near driveway and fence. Applicant to remove any fabric or plastic from landscape area at southerly comer of house (this shows up in 1990 staff review as hardcover; is not shown on the 1996 survey but still has edging and may still be hardcover). City to grant after-the-fact approval for existing gazebo and associated decks; Applicant to obtain a building permit for said gazebo and decks and inspection department to review their construction. No penalty fees should be due since this work was completed by a previous owner. Approval of deck additions as shown in Exhibit C, which will add approximately 35 s.f. of hardcover. Applicant to obtain a permit for this deck prior to construction. 75-250' hardcover as calculated under current methods = 8,205 - 1,488 -I- 35 = 6,752 s.f. or 24.3%. This bring the property into conformity under our current method of calculating hardcover although it is approximately 662 s.f. more than what was approved in 1986. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached resolution granting after-the-fact variance for structure-to-stnicture setback and requiring hardcover removals to bring property into hardcover compliance. Proposed Motion Moved by____, seconded by to adopt Resolution #, granting a structure-to-structure setback variance and requiring hardcover removals for Bennett C. Downey and Gary Hegenes at 2675 Shady wood Road. Vote; ____ayes,_____nays. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 12 FILE #2173 WHEREAS, Gary Hegenes (hereinafter "the owner") is the owner and Bennett C. Downey (hereinafter "the applicant") is the former owner of property located at 2675 Shadywood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1453, Files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant on behalf of the owner has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 for an after-the-fact variance to permit the construction of a gazebo which is located less than the required 10' setback from the principal structure on the property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2173. The property is located in the LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 16, 1996, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: Page 1 of 6 '^1 A. B. The gazebo was constructed by a prior owner of the property, Rolla Martin, some time prior to 1990, without a permit and in violation of the hardcover and structure-to-structure setback ordinances. In 1990 Mr. Martin submitted an application for a hardcover variance to construct an addition to the existing residence. During the preliminary staff review of that application, it was determined that the gazebo construction had occurred and hardcover on the property was in excess of that allowed by previous variance in 1986. Mr. Martin withdrew the 1990 application prior to its review by the Planning Commission because he was intending to sell the house, and therefore the issue of the gazebo and excess hardcover was never resolved. Mr. Dowmey was unaware of the unresolved hardcover/setback issues when he purchased the property and did not become aware of that issue until Mr. Hegenes inquired of City staff whether there were any irregularities on the property. Staff had previously flagged the file and indicated that no permits should be issued until the unresolved issues were taken care of. The owner, Mr. Hegenes, has agreed to the removal of 1,488 s.f. of hardco\ er including areas of rock and plastic and a gravel parking area. The removal of said hardcover will bring the property from its current 75-250' hardcover level of 29.5%, down to below the 25% 75-250' hardcover allowance. Mr. Hegenes also proposes to reconfigure existing decks on the property which will result in a 35 s.f hardcover increase, resulting in a fmal 75- 250' hardcover of 6,752 s.f or 24.3%, therefore requiring no hardcover variance. Page 2 of 6 i F.The gazebo is located approximately 5' from the existing residence and is considered as a separate accessor>' structure. The location of the gazebo is complimentary to the residence and is connected to the residence by a deck and landscape system. The gazebo does not add to the visual density in the neighborhood. Any fu^ code issues resulting from the 5' separation can be resolved by the construction of fire walls within the adjacent attached garage. G.Since neither Mr. Hegenes nor Mr. Downey were directly responsible for construction of the gazebo, no penalty fees should be assessed but the property owner should be required to obtain an after-the-fact permit for the gazebo and the inspections department should inspect its construction. 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. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the 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 an after- the-fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 to permit the construction of a gazebo located less than the required 10' from the principal structure on the property, subject to the following conditions: Page 3 of 6 i ~ '.J ' . 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Owner shall remove 1.488 s.f. of hardcover from the 75-250 ’ zone as indicated on Exhibit A attached. Final 75-250 ’ hardcover is approved at a level of 6,752 s.f. or 24.3%, including approximately 35 s.f of new decks to be constructed as shown on Exhibit A. The owner is advised that any future hardcover additions on the property which result in 75-250 ’ hardcover of more than 25.0%. will be considered a violation of the zoning code unless a variance for such excesses is gVanted. Owner shall obtain an after-the-fact building permit for the gazebo (no penalty fees will be assessed) and the inspection department shall review the construction of the gazebo and may require any modifications necessary to bring that structure into compliance with the building and fire codes. Owner shall obtain a permit for the proposed deck additions as shown on Exhibit A, prior to their construction. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant or current owner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 23, 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 owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 4 of 6 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 23rd day of September, 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 23rd day of September, 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of____, 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of____, 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instniment,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. i NOTARY PUBLIC .j 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 6 of 6 6 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 TO: Chuck Downey 2675 Shadywood Rd. Excelsior, MN 55331 ZONING FILE #2173 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: Septembc 20,1996 COPIES TO:Gar>' Hegenes (Fax 885-9159) TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING: 9/16/96 VOTE:6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1.Removals of Hardcover per Staff recommendation, resulting 75-250' hardcover to be less than 25%. 2. Obtain after-the-fact gazebo permit, subject to approval of Building Inspection Department. 3. Proposed new decks approved, permit required. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, September 23, 1996, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available firom the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:September 12,1996 SUBJECT: #2173 Bennett C. (Chuck) Do\sTiey / Gary Hegenes, 2675 Shadywood Road Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 acre, sewered. Application: Request for after-the-fact 75-250' hardcover variance for construction of gazebo by pre\ ious owner, and a 75-250’ hardcover variance for construction of a proposed second story deck. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - 1996 Survey E - SubmittedHardcover Calculations F - Proposed Deck G - 8/22/96 Letter to Applicant H - Staff Hardcover Analysis 1985-86/1990/1996 I- 1985-86 Survey w/Hardcover J - 1990 Staff Hardcover Sketch K - 1985-86 Application Excerpts L - 1990 Application Excerpts Discussion Mr. Downey this week completed the sale of this property to Gary Hegenes. Unbeknownst to Mr. Downey when he bought the property from Rolla Martin in 1993, was a hardcover issue left unresolved due to Martin's withdrawal of a 1990 variance request for an addition. Consequently, Mr. Downey is requesting an after-the-fact hardcover variance to resolve this issue, accompanied by a request from Mr. Hegenes for approval of a 3'xlO' second story deck addition. Hardcover History In 1985 Mr. Martin proposed a tennis court on the property, but after discussions with staff, he concluded that he could not show adequate hardship, and he with ’rew that application. Note that in 1985, the City did not require a hardcover worksheet, and accepted the surveyor's hardcover numbers of 7,800 s.f hardcover in the 75-250' zone which the surveyor indicated contained an area of 29,100 s.f., yielding 26.8% hardcover including a driveway serving the neighboring property. Zoning File #2173 September 12. 1996 Page 2 »I p • V •f'' <- o'’" In 1986 Martin applied for and received approval for an additional 90 s.f. of hardcover to construct a room addition at the south end of the house. Total approved hardcover was 7,890 s.f./29,100 s.f. = 27.1%. In 1990 Martin requested a further hardcover variance for an addition to the north side of the house. In reviewing that application, staff found that a 120 s.f gazebo had been built near the garage since 1986 without a permit, and 240 s.f of new rock and plastic and 2,750 s.f of rock w ith permeable fabric had been placed in the 75-250’ zone. During 1990, staff and Council w ere debating whether or not fabric-lined landscape beds should be considered hardcover. • Before the 1990 hardcover variance application was brought before the Planning Commission, Mr. Martin withdrew it because he was planning to sell his house. This left unresolved the issue of hardcover increases apparently done without approvals, and staff flagged the file to allow no future building permits to be issued until the hardcover issue was resolved. In 1991 the City Council concluded that landscape areas lined with fabric would be considered hardcover, and they have been since that le. Mr. Downey purchased the property from uiaiun in 1993. but never requested any building permits and remained unaware of the hardcover issue until this summer, when Mr. Hegenes asked staff if there were any irregularities on the property and he w as at that time told of the unresolved hardcover problem. Staff met with Mr. Hegenes and Mr. Downey and concluded that to resolve the issue, Mr. Downey would file an application for hardcover variance, and Mr. Hegenes was advised that he should include his deck proposal w ith this application. Applicant's surveyor (the same surveyor used by Mr. Martin in his previous applications) has currently calculated the 75-250' hardcover at 8,205 s.f, e.xcluding the enti»c 10'xl80' shared driveway. Additionally, he calculates the 75-250' area as 29,600 s.f, i.e. 500 s.f larger than was reported in 1985. Undercurrent methods of calculation (excluding the 1,800 s.f shared/neighboring driveway from both sides of the hardcover calculation): Approved hardcover in 1986 was 6.090 s.f or 21.9% Existing hardcover in 1990 was 7,239 s.f or 26.0% Existing hardcover in 1996 is 8,205 s.f or 29.5%. The proposed deck is shown in Exhibit F, intended to connect the existing square second-story deck (drawn in by staff since it was omitted from the 1996 surv'ey) with the other decks on the west side of the house. To match and connect the two existing decks, the new deck will be approximately 10' long by 3.5 feet wide. r"—■ Zoning File #2173 September 12, 1996 Page 3 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends as follows: 1. Applicant to remove 248 s.f. rock and plastic adjacent to garage. 2. 3. 4. Applicant to remove 320 s.f. of gravel parking area adjacent to driveway. Applicant to remove 920 s.f of rock and plastic near driveway and fence. Applicant to remove any fabric or plastic from landscape area at southerly comer of house (this shows up in 1990 staff review as hardcover; is not shown on the 1996 survey but still has edging and may still be hardcovered) 5.City to grant after the fact approval for existing gazebo and associated decks: Applicant to obtain a building permit for said gazebo and decks and Inspection Department to review their constmction No penalty fees should be due since this work was completed by previous owner 6.City to approve proposed 3.5'xlO* second stor>' deck addition which will add approximately 35 s.f of hardcover. Applicant to obtain a permit for this deck prior to constmction. 7.Final 75-250 ’ hardcover as calculated under current methods equals 8,205-1,488+35 = 6,752 s.f or 24.3%. This brings the property into conformity under our current method of calculating hardcover although it is approximately 662 s.f more than was approved in 1986. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval per staff recommendation. 2. Recommend approval with additional or revised conditions.V.tA 3.Table for further information.n •• f . 1 4.Recommend denial (state reasons).• '/v /. - •> ^ t.V . r. • .•A 5.Other. 1 ‘ i ' ' % 4 o Application 0 Date Received S- - %1 - 9 6 Amount Paid (i 1 l.o ' ^^ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Varizince Fee SI20.00 d,i S '7(no change from original application) ^ Variance for non-conforming structures S220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) .Oft A-::#-' PROPERTY INFORAIATION S if e Address 3 (/ ~7 !> Oh ^/^c;AO Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) /»7J33.^y o*^5 3 ______________________ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property' Acquired ^ < V ^ 3 ---------------------__(month/year) I (do) Go no^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property’: fO residential ___^other (specify) Zoning District: dv - t ____________________________ APPLICANT Phone (home). jsTjjfne _____ Phone(work)_ Address: Citv: *l ■'i_—Zip: 3^) OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ____________________ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address:Citv:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $________ Describe request in detail: flAeou^>;<tr Otxej,-zp^<.C ^ <^7 .>er<^A e < v __________________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARLANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore v/ Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: co c«^fc: u: -------- to -------- —------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) il V 1 ' / ■ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must he submitted bv order for vour application to be considered complete; 1. 0 j. 4. D. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Propert\' Ouners List of ovmers wit must obtain this list, labels and map from Finance. A-603, Govi Center, 548-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed calculations as required. In addition, prov reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed eU grade are proposed. In addition, provide one ( Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views List of the legal names (include marital statui the propertv'. This would include name(s) of: .As an addendum to this application, please persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by Citv City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, m 55323 (612)473-7357 Oa/27/% 10:35:48 UM) USE AfRICATlGN 1 i 220.00 220.00 SUBTOTALTAX TOTAL SALE AECEhe 220.000.00220.00 220.00 CHANEE CLERK! 01 TRANS! 2269 0.00 oulii. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Date (f (*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 of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zonine Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 0S/2&/M BATCH 506PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OmER MAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR a#IER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 16 21-117-25 25 001902690 PHEASAirr RO M J A 6 R PUOIL MICHAEL J A GAIL R PUOIL 2690 PHEASANT RO EXCELSIOR MN 5S551 58 21-117-25 25 0022 02660 PHEASANT RD L R JERPBAK A L H JERPBAK LLOYO JERPBAK/LINOA JERPBAK 2660 PHEASANT RO EXCELSIOR MN 55551 58 21-117-25 26 0066 02680 SHAOYHOOO RD VEmXJN E lUKUA ETAL VERNON E TUKUA 2680 SHAOYHOOO RO EXCELSIOR MN 55551 58 21-117-25 26 0055 02695 SHAOYHOOO RO TOOO A ROOIDEAU TOOO ROeiOEAU 2695 SHAOYHOOO RO EXCELSIOR HN 55551 HENf€PlN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHXRS LIST58 21-117-25 25 002002680 PHEASANT RO R P OOLLIFF JR ETAL ROGER P OOLLIFF JR 2680 PHEASANT RO EXCELSIOR MN 55351 38 21-117-25 25 0023 02655 SHAOYHOOO RO T J HADDEN A J N JOHriSON T J HAOOEN A J M J0IR60N 2655 SHAOYHOOO RO EXCELSIOR MN 55351 38 21-117-23 26 0052 02670 MAPLERIDGE LA P A A LITTLE IV PHILIP IV A AMANDA S LITTLE 2670 MAPLERIDGE LA EXCELSIOR MN 55551 58 21-117-25 26 0056 02695 SHAOYHOOO RD S 0 A B A PAULSON STEPHEN A BOTHAINA PAULSON 2695 SHAOYNOOO RO EXCELSIOR MN 55351 REPORT NO. PI65S601 PACE 1538 21-117-23 25 002102670 PHEASANT RD RAYMOND E JOHNSON RAY E JOHNSON 666 FERNOALE RD H NAYZATA MN 55391 38 21-117-23 25 0050 02685 SHAOYHOOO RD R H 8RCPM A M H 8R0I84 RICHARD N A MARION H 8R06M 2685 SHAOYHOOO RO S EXCELSIOR HN 55331 38 21-117-23 26 0053 02675 SHAOYNOOO RD 8 C DOHNEY ABA DOHNEY BENNETT C A BETTY A D(»ffCY 2675 SHAOYHOOO RO EXCELSIOR MN 55531 % i\5 3 i j TOTAL BATCH 506 OOOll r?A I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEttlEPIN COLWTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAX4II0N, TO THE BEST OF MY JWHLEDGE ANO BELIEF. DATE JkX .• J* f V \ T HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA mmm LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Tract A. Reoistered Land Survey No. M53 nies of Registrar Titles, toonty of Hennepin.’ intends to show the boundaries of the above o : Iron <aaiker Bearings shown art based upon an assumed datum. Rr VISION'nsn iJfVRjnioN - COFFIN & GRONBFRr. iNf I. r';^ni'ni)v Lvi,t S,-ii,vk,"v Si/.' [.mui.vk \viiHii- • l.iki \1\ Ol2-47^-4l-n I hiribv u riily lh.il this 5iiru*v va.is prrp.in‘J h\ rm- ur imdir nu dirtvl vupiT* vision, and lhal I am a du!v n gislcri-d Civil tiigintYr and Und Sun cvt»r under the laws of (he Stale of Mmncsi<ta. Mark S CrunKfj; Minnesa.ia Luomm* Numtift i:rS5 urn VO 96352 - HANGOVER CAJLCULATlUi\.VVUi<lv5HEt. i SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) <^3^ rDow/^^Y SO^JOOO* .I < EXISTING hardco ver IN ZONE S.F.I 31 I m I Length WidA -S X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage S.F. C. Driveway \ X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk.X C.'k frtCr'y /^^ J r;>.'. X S.F. S.F. * • % % E. Paiio/Deck X X S.F. S.F. ». F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic. Or Fabric • G. Other X X X 2 tot 55 S3 S.F. S.F. S.F. . ¥ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE • A O ^ B /^90^> • J2f^ S.F. S4-0 ■ ^ S.F. A B X 100 S.F. PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A.- House • -_________ ^ S.F. Length Widdt X X X S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway / X t I “IS A •• _5 —tr- ii« S.F. X X r S.F. S,F.'.y D. Sidevyidk P«- * ..*4 X X S.F. ........S.F. /E. Patio/Deck V. X X S.F. S.F. I 3t A V F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A __ _ _ _ _ _ __B X 100 - • S.F. " S.F. % A B • • 14 V HARDCOVTR CALCULATlO^VVOKlvitth;!:.j SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’CTs-ISQQ 25-500’500-1000 EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length Width riu>NT 7^SArL Tto B. Garage X X X • C. Driveway t X X D. Sidewalk "Zef.z. E. Patio/Deck r r^tf* c S'rafJfS CtA'3!p/«(/>.ATh. ■ X t •■ ( > — F. Landscape Underlain 'By Plastic. Or Fabric • X X X I G. Other 5*3^-^ ^AT<es/£ie ^OAVSASS Ji,7 LP X 1. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A BZOS ^ B Z % €OO X 100 ZS30 S.F. zrz S.F. 4/5 S.F. 43 S.F. ». • •• t S.F. K /P03 1 • S.F. 3ZO S.F. :: ito^*’S.F. * S.F. SSO S,F.- 4• S.F. 92P>^.F. S.F. * • • • S.F. BZOS S.F. 2%€OOt S.F. 77. T2 % I Jk * A B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A/OT( ; SfACKra^ u»^f ” na 0/i/7 A. F .use . _______________ . X /^Or//^CLua (p /S /8O0 JA./rr._______'O. Lcngih Widuh X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway S.F. X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Paiio/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 S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _______• ® . S.F. S.F. X 100 - A B . • • • • / t < / \ CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Ofono. MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. M.N 55323 0065 Chuck Downey 2675 Shadywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Gazebo/hardcover issue, 2675 Shadywood Road Dear Mr. Downey: As we discussed briefly this week, an unresolved issue regarding hardcover and the gazebo on your •.'roperty at 2675 Shadywood Road resulted in the City's position that no permits will be issued until the gazebo/hardcover issue is resolved. A summary of the histor>’ of this is as follows: 1. Former owner Rolla Martin was approved for an addition to the house in 1986. That approval granted a hardcover variance to allow 27.1% (7,890 s.f.) hardcover in the 75-250' zone. 2. ^In May 1990 Martin applied for a hardcover variance to construct another addition (kitchen expansion)......... .. ’ 3. Staffs 1990 hardcover review for that application found a total of 9,019 s.f. of existing hardcover, of which approximately 750 s.f. was landscape fabric which may have been considered non-hardcover when installed prior to 1990, but certainly was considered as hardcover in 1990. Discounting this 750 s.f, in 1990 the property still was at a 75-250' hardcover level of 8,269 s.f or 28.4%, i.e. more than allowed in the 1986 approval. 4. Pan of this increase was also due to the gazebo built above the retaining wall planter area between the wings of the house. This was built without a permit (which it likely did not require because it was slightly under the 120 s.f permit threshold in effect at that time). However, it was located less than the required 10’ setback from the house and constituted excess hardcover, hence it was called out as an issue during the 1990 variance application review. Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 Chuck Dovs-ney August 22, 1996 Page 2 5.Martin then asked for the application to be tabled before it was reviewed by the Planning Commission, because he decided to sell the house. He never re-opened the application and the issues of the excess hardcover and gazebo setback were never resolved. At this point I suggest the following course of action: a. Have the sur\'eyor (presumably Gronberg, who has all the basic work done in prior surveys) do a hardcover worksheet for the site to confirm the level of hardcover in 1996. b If 75-250' hardcover is over 7,890 s.f, your options are: 1. Remove the excess hardcover, QK 2. Apply for a hardcover variance, i.e. re-activate Martin's application. c. If 75-250' hardcover is 7,890 s.f or less, then the only issue is whether the gazebo is at least 10’ from the house. It would be appropriate for the Building Inspector to review whethe- ’-e gazebo might be considered as part of the house structure, which would negate this iss f, however, he considers it as a separate accesso*^' building, it must meet the 10’ setback, fit doesn't, your options are: 1. Move it to a legal location that meets 10'. OR 2. Apply for a structure-to-structure setback variance I'm enclosing the documentation on this issue, and will be pleased to answer any further questions you may have. This issue must be resolved before we will issue any further building permits for the property. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Enel. cc: Lyle Oman, Building Official i^b7S~ d 7^ PERMIT RECORD ____________ -1 1^ \o f^' • • Permit No.Date Type of Permit —im .......__ S-ib-e.6 CJ HQOl/u^ 35^-7 5?'M- 77 /l/fibJ (^o3ci_____i-s>.s9c, • . f/ 1996 HARDCOVER REVIEW - 2675 SHAD\ WOOD ROAD lism 75-250’ Area Approved 1986 Start'Calculation Sur\eyor Update 1990 1996 Used 29,100 sf Used 29,100 sf 29,600 sf (All include area of neighbor's drivew-ay) House 2824 sf 2830 sf Decks S60 sf 810 sf Gazebo (& etc.)120 sf 550 sf Walkwavs 828 sf 835 sf Retaining walls 50 sf 67 sf Driveway (excL.all of 1800 sf shared and neighbor-only portions)See #2 below 1557 sf 1605 sf Graveled driveway -320 sf Stepping Stones 10 sf 20 sf Landscape areas w/fabric or plastic 990 sf 1168 sf Total 75-250’ Hardcover 7890 sf 7239 sf 8205 sf Analysis: 1. Per current practice, exclude 1800 sf shared/neighbor driveway portion from zone area: 75-250’ zone = 29,600 sf - 1800 sf = 27,800 sf 2. 1986 Hardcover Approval included 1800 sfof driveway in easement 3. Equate 198t dardcover approval per current exclusion method: 7890 sf approved - 1800 sf exclusion = 6090 sf / 27,800 sf = 21.9% 4. 1990 Existing Hardcover = 7239 sf / 27,800 sf = 26.0% 5. 1996 Existing hardcover = 8205 sf / 27,800 sf = 29.5% Staff Recommended Removals: A. Remove 248 sf rock & plastic adjacent to garage B. Remove 320 sf gravel parkinc area adjacent to driveway C. Remove 920 sf rock & plastic near driveway and fence D. Add approx. 35 sf associated with proposed 3.5 ’xlO’ deck 75-250’ removals = 1488 sf additions =35 sf net= 8205-1488+35 = 6752 sf / 27,800 = 24.3% The recommended removals will result in this property’ again becoming conforming under the curreti. methods of hardcover calculation. / • 7ofl.C ZortA AAr&a o*-' ‘0**O'lS l6,2COt:S.//, 2l7o .ieoois^/7 15-25e> 9 z%!oots:fy/ 0 small i\ioaderf •^ic/e\,Jo(k Ly. rhc. 0‘75/ooi kofie,, liulh <joln^ la be rcniovcJ mL, P>^/’oLr t' A^\r70Ai t I hereLy certify that this is a true and correct Tract^A^^Rpi^^t^*" boundaries of of '-'53, files ^°>,/oo = 27. / ^of Registrar of Titles, Count/orHenne^in"and of 3* the location of all buildings' If annheJeoT an S if ri^es’’not‘^o,,^S “I°? Pi'ORosed tennis court.kJI tV ; ‘u>-ai.ion or a proposed tennis cou It does not purport to show any other imorove- _l ments or encroachments. improve- ^ COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Scale Date 0 1 inch = 30 feet September 7, 1985 Iron marker o*- Hurdcovdr 21% . (2f,i2>V7^ IGOOi^/f 15-250 reS%1»nti?f„'‘'’^-'’“ ‘"'= '= '■ correct •O Tract ^ survey of the boundaries of -O of Regtstra? ’''“• ^‘'os 7^ the location hf In Hennepin, and of the proposed location ora'^?opoUrL nirco"urr ™en?nr"°eJc?o“aTh;eUs/'°“ -Prove/^' COFFIN & GR0N8ERG, INC. Scale:^ 1 inch = 30 feet Date : September 7, 1985 0 - Ir^ijnLjmAJcJcjej^ ' K CITY . * .OF : ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITvIij^ NAS BEEN —MROFIIMEDNO. 2006 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 PILE #1023 WHEREAS, Rolla and Nancy Martin (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 2675 Shadywood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1453, files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "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 room addition which will increase hard ­ cover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone from 26.8% to 27.1% where a maximum of 25% hardcover is normally allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1023. 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 19, 1986, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A) Applicant has 0% hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone. B) No existing hardcover on the property is readily available for concurrent removal as a tradeoff. 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 thn proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 1 of 3 ‘ # CITY ORONO i ^ j City of ORO]^PTP,ji m BEEH RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COu{^SH0p|[^£Q NO. 2006_ _ _ _ _ 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 2 to permit the construction of a room addition which will increase hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone from 26.8% to 27.1% where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions; 1. The maximum allowable hardcover on this property is 7,890 square feet or 27.1%. The applicant is advised that any future improvements of the property which would result in additional hardcover will not be approved, and might be approved only with concurrent removals of existing hardcover. 2. 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 9, 1987). 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned 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 9th day of June, yui^othy iallin,/City Clerk fProhext^Owners "/Tim/- Paqe 2 of 3 ^ V k Tot Plannin9 Cotrenisiiion Mtc.b^rf- Assistant*punning i 3oning Administrator Dates May 14, 1986 •i Subjects §1023 Bella fc Nancy Martin, 2675 Shadwcod Road - Variance Sofiin9 District ~ I.R-IB Itppllcation - Hardcover variance to construct a b«lroo» addition XJ.st of Bsihi^its Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Application Plat Map Property Owners List Plans, Elevations of Proposed Addition Existing u-7S' Hardcover - 0* proposed 0-75’ hardcover - Existing 75-250’ Hardcover * 26.8% proposed 75-250* Hardcover - 27.1% The aoplicants am rcqMeuting to construct ^ which wi 1 I increase the 7a-250' o%\ * Th“ h«d: 27.1% proposed. The the form of house, driveway cover on the property is _ __ r«auested increai'ccover on the property is main o'^er. The requested increai'c and concrete patio areas wjth doexs Although no trade- i« fairly minor, only _square tec. or 0.3%.^^^^is fairly minor, only the most likely off is proposed, tf a trace oft - .action of the asphalt area would be to iomovo a 6.5 x 14 sectionarea backup apron staff r..'Comr.anrti. approval of the variance a. prjpoacd MINUTBS or TUB REGULAR OROMO CT^IiClL K&ETZIfC HBLC JUNE 9, 19t€ 11022 SCHAIX continued Counci Ifnember Frahn stated that ho felt they snoul<l table the matter in consideration of Attorney McKinnon ’s request to avoid the potentiality of a leqal case* It was moved by Counc iImembcr Frohm* seconded by Counci 1 member Katnmorcl* to table this matter until the June 23rd Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. Staff war. instructed to inform the neighbors that action will be taken on June 23rd with or without their representation . HOLLA a NAMCY HARTXN 26'y^l^SHADYIIOOO ROAD VARIAkiCB RESOLUTION §2006 ' Rolla & Nancy Martin were present for this matter. Mr. Mar-in reviewed the proposed plan to construct a bedroom addition which would increase the hardcover in the 75- 25U* area by 0.34. He noted the the existing decking, which included in the hardcover does not have plastic unJf?r it. It was moved by Cour.ci Imomber Kammcrel, seconded by Counci Imcmber Grabok, to adopt Resolution 92006 approving the hardcover variance. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. ii02V MRS. PHILLIP PILl^SBURY 1700 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD VARIAWCK Present representing the appli%.'^t wore Attorney Stevn Pflaum, Architect William Scott, an<i I.andBcapo Designer Damon Farbor. City AflminiStrator nornhard.son explained tho i equ'^st for n 2-1/2' height '»arianrc for a 6* high section of bricK wall that is adjacent to Bracketts Point Road and Cty Rd. 15. Damon Farber stated that tin? reauen for tlm 6' wall i'* mainly for aesthetic purposes as well .in health an' safuev. !lo stated that the corner is busy, dangerous, anvl noisy. He noted that th#»ir preference In to^ 1' conn I Rtant i .e. ent i re wa I 1 3 - 1 / 2 * or »*n t 1 r *' wa 1 1 6' » » 1*01 ght. f •r t e V e r f 1 a u m po i n f e : out ♦ r •• e variance wer. needed not i nw tti.it in ?;o:'** .1/'*.^ • er»y '•I'nr.t ruct the 6* w.i 1 1 without .i v.ir i .T'; I’*- *.'♦^••'1 tl>-*’ t I .1 f f 1C C.1 n l*e he.l r <i if' t h< * fi eu se wit .i w : fi* I r • ; • • on erl well I*.' seen. In .ulil l t l «>n, velijti-- ;';l* '» nh)» iirertlv in the 'ion;..- .1» »:e r *1 . 1 POOR ORIGINAL DOCUMENT Toi Planning Cotrcnxssion Kecberf- TTomi Assistant Planning 4 Soning Administrator Dates May 14, 1996 subjects #1023 Rolla 6 Nancy Martin, 2675 Shadwcod Road - Variance Sonisi^ District ~ l.R-lo Upplication - Hardcover variance to construct a b«droo» addition himt of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Application Plat Map Property Owners List Planr^f Elevations of Proposed Addition Existino C»-7S* Hardcover - 0« proposed 0-75’ Hardcover Existing 75-250* Hardcover » 26.0% proposed 75-250* Hardcover - 27.1% The aoplic.nts are roquenting to construct “ to which Vi 11 ^ncrense the iVo». 27.1% propo^sed. the form of house, driveway cover on the property is requested increaf»c and concrete patio wath d • Although no trade- is inlrly nlnor, only 50 "eaui^edV tK^^ Ukcly off i. proposed, if n ^,®‘’.“V,Von of th. ..ph.ltarea would be to remove a 6.5 x i« backup apron. Stnff r..cos.r.enrt» npprov.l of the variance a. proposed To: rroa: Date: Flanninq Coir»rr.issicn Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Ccmmission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Kay ]6, 1990 Subject: #1523 Poila Martin - 2675 Shadywood Road - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-*lBr Single family lakeshore residential^ 1 acre, sewcied. Application - Request for hardcover variance to allow construction of a kitchen room expansion in the area of an existing open deck. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F “ Pertinent Facts - Application Plat KtTp Property Owners T.ist Survey Room Layout Resolution #2006, Previous Variance Approval. 1, Applicants propose to construct a 6' x 16' expansion of their kitchen area. This will be located in an area already rardcovered with a deck. 2. The propcsed addition is approximately 96' from the shoreline. There is no hardcover in the 0-75' zone, except for a s'^ries of 1' x 1' stepping stones. Hardcover in the 70-250' zone was approved at 27.1% in 1986. The proposed addition does not increase the hardcover percentage on the property. However, some additions of hardcover since 1986 appear tc result in a slight increase above the approved percentage (see below). ' Discussion - Ihff proposed addition has no impact on the percentage of harcjcover on the pioperty, but is brouglit as a variance beoa-ise it t echn i c’01 1 y is a change in the nature of existing ha I (Irovoi . '"he addition does not require an average lakeshore '-ft tack variance, and will not have any effect or t!)e r r 1 n h i n<i picpertir«« nor on the quantity or quality of to lake MiruK ika. The addition n-cet s all ieqi:iied scr ecK V r . Zoning File 11523 May 16, 1990 Page 2 of 3 A room addition was approved in 1986, increasing hardcover from 26.8% to 27.1%. Staff’s site inspection of 5/17/90 indicated that since the 1986 variance approval, a few improvements to the property have occurred which have increased hardcover. Th0S0 includos • 240 s«f* 3T03 of rock dnd plds^ic for boat trailer parking next to the garage (It is unclear whether this was included in the original 1986 calculation, and a hardcover breakdown was apparently not done with that application). - Approximately 750 s.f. of landscape areas with permeable fabric, which likely were approved by staff in 1986 (if they were ever discussed). Permeable fabric has since been deemed as hardcover by the City Council, although staff is on record as disagreeing with this determination. - A screened gazebo of approximately 120 s.f. (size not verified) located next to the garage, closer than the required 10' setbac)* to the structure. This gazebo, if actually less than 120 s.f. in area, would not require a building permit but would bt required to meet hardcover regulations and the 10' structure-to- structure setback requirements. Because the hardcover was not reviewed in detail in 1986, it is difficult to account for each square foot previously indicted by applicants surveyor. However, a current review of the survey and a detailed survey of existing vs. previous hardcover calculated using the same basis, indicates that hardcover has incieascd from 27.1% to^ 28.4%, if the pormeabl.* fabric landscape areas are ignored. Staff Recommendation Civ'en that the proposed addition does not increase hardcover, has no impact on neighboring properties, and al 1 required setbacks, there would appear to be sul'santial iustificatic-n for granting the necessary ^,c»..Ang file #1523 May 16, 1990 Page 3 of 3 j^3f^cover with the gazebo, and the concern about reguired setbacks for that gazebo. Planning Ccmmission may wish to ask for more review of that gazebo structure, i.e., is it large enough to have required a permit, can it be moved to meet the required 10' setback, and is there justification to allow the apparent 1.3% hardcover increase since 1986 that is partially attributable to that gazebo? Isv /A 'n ft ' f- >/ - . \ : /^ / «.'.5rr- ^ ' ‘ 12 ’ • \r /z. I ^ ^ 12 -X lO^ Z‘2. Ir-* US" {//‘^LlA^^Z )2Z y/o' tic!Cr^\f-T^rZ. ^/vc K o’/rr-i' y/0‘'^» <2) © Dv''*:. /S.s yS-S’ /ft.*7 >^ ?0D z^. L- ^ 30r } ?; ^^/z. 7 j ^/r W. z,^fL,z y.z y S’ ■■'' ~,r '■/'/ ■V //J.C. '^v •<• / > 7 “ ^e> i • >y'n. ! .>' (^" /&/\g^ • W " - ? rt.( /T)/ ?;, > ^ /.\(si^IIf*T^. 1 \ ••= 70.POOR ORIGINAL DOCUMENT jJy *■! z'TZ • SSf > :>(/$> / •••■*• f f Jr•^^>• . V'vr *»t. - /^o V \ > /j]) ‘^/•f/»T /o) •* V V C I ?) : *' i . - ..- » t - .. V 0 -.4 • ^ V "• I v> ,• V ^ .5/JC . Of~> , A - r ^ ^ X 20 *-iyZO ^ /»f-. . (^4 x?.o^ 82B ilc>C'<. •• * . f 0 ^ "2 H ' f 't ,:^.'f*Cm - ^'VO !>ei j(.^> ir-v / y V 2 <-/- 32>C> 2 2. X 2 r ~ C'ys' 1-7 xl,a ” (^ 23>yiCr - 51i,0 > Ci r AJ OyM^r S“0 / VC;^-r/v2^.«AC C*//^^ t.rE/C ^; 2//"7 \ 2'T7'^r'‘7 )'-» S.'^^* A^0i-^; /O ^ // (' .4 t_»v'i^r’ ' ft '2-2.0 3 '^<9/9 '•^• ?<5/9 /oo •- EO/''"; / ,....• . 'S.vv:. POOR OR.G.NAL OOCOM.A" ' r j a y V > X .* V»/. *' - 2' - «rx/;j r 2 y i.'-" .'>.0 V 07^ Of c <<3'Z^'€>C> /-' 1^0 -T (,'/^vT- p^ri. p-pou/' fj(^ / ,»O0B original OOCUMENi ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 21, 1990 ZONING FILE #1522-NORDLIE CONTINUED Gaffron escinated that 600 s.f. be renoved. of hardcover would have to There were no conriients from the public regardin9 this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Hanson, to reconunend aooroval of the hardcover variance provided that hardcover in the 0-75' and 250-500’ zones remains the same and that hardcover in the 75-250' zone not exceed a maximum of 35%. iMotion, Ayes- 5* Navs-0, Cohen abstained. Motion passed. 11523 ROLLA MARTIN 2675 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE • « en r.PUBLIC HEARING 8:56 P.M. TO 8:57 P.M. Gaffron stated that the applicant is has requested that this matter be tabled. selling his home and It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Kelley, to table application U523. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1524 TRINITY PRE-SCHOOL 2060 SI.XTH AVENUE NORTH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 8:57 P.M. TO 9:00 P.M. Ms. Wesley Ann Hallquist, Pre-School present. Program Director, was The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were dulv noted. Mabusth briefly reviewed the information pertaining to this appiicacicn. Kelley asked whether the building has fire sprinklers and smoke detectors. Mabusth replied that the City required the Church a fire suppression system at the time of their recen 9 addition. * She suegested that should the pre-school into an afternoon' program that there be no need for aadi-ional Planning Commission review. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the utdoor play area be fenced. MS. Hallquist stated that the State did not require a fence - 12 - CITY OP ORONO p. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay# MN 473-7357 ZONING PILB #1523 55323 NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: June 15, 1990 TO:Rolla Martin 2675 Shadywood Hoad Excelsior, MN 55331 COPIES TO: type of APPLICATION: Variance DATE OP MEETING: May 21, 1990 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Tabled at applicant's request due to potential sale of residence. . i Please contact staff to discuss the outstanding issues of the screen Dorch and excessive hardcover over and above that which was approved in 1986. Lsv _ fjor^ /N COUNCIL MEETING SEP 2 3 1996 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cmroFORONO DATE; September 17, 1996 ITEM NO.: /, Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: City Sewer Request, John Maresh, 2085 Sixth Avenue North Attachments:A. B. C. D. Letter from Mr. Maresh Received September 6, 1996 Air Photo of Site Council Minutes 6/10/96 Memo and Exhibits of June 5, 1996 On June 10, Council directed staff to investigate the concerns presented by Mr. Maresh regarding the inability to find suitable drainfield sites on his homestead property and his vacant lot. Staff has met twice on the property with Mr. Maresh and his consultants. We have reached the following conclusions: 1.Vacant lot abutting BrowTi Road (Created in 19871. It appears there are at least two or three suitable undisturbed sites for a mound system on this vacant two acre lot. This summer S-P Testing completed borings confirming that these sites are available. Therefore, staff finds no reason for Mr. Maresh to further pursue the provision of sewer service to the vacant lot. 2.Residence parcel. The 2.5 acre residence parcel was originally tested for an alternate site in 1987 by SMI Testing, who reported suitable slopes and percolation rates, and mottled soil at a depth of 3* at a location directly south of the existing house. This was accepted as a suitable alternate site that would require a mound system. In 1996 S-P Testing found mottling at a depth shallower than 12" at the same site tested in 1987, and concluded that the original site was not useable. S-P Testing then identified a site slightly higher in the topography and to the southwest of the house, which met the 12" minimum depth to mottling but would require the removal of a large number of trees. The City accepted this site based on the infomiation submitted by S-P Testing. Not wanting to lose so man>' trees, Mr. Maresh hired another site evaluator. Bob Koch, who pointed out that a portion of the S-P Testing site could be considered as disturbed soils due to past use as a tree farm, noting the numerous depressions where trees had been spaded out. Koch was able to find no suitable sites on the property meeting the criteria for a standard mound system. 1 Request for Council Action continued Page 2 September 17, 1996 City Sewer Request, John Maresh, 2085 Sixth Avenue North While a mound system could be constructed on the site identified by S-P Testing, that system would by State code definition be considered "experimental" based on some portions of the site having disturbed soils and not meeting the 12" to mottling criteria. Unfortunately for the homeowner, an experimental system would be installed entirely at the risk of the homeowner and if it was later found to be failing or causing a pollution problem, neither the site evaluator nor the system installer would be held responsible. This leaves the propert>’ owner with no recourse at that point. Options for Consideration 1. 2. 3. Maresh could legally combine the vacant lot with the residence parcel. This gives him the alternate site he needs, but eliminates future use of the vacant lot as a building site. Maresh could proceed with a lot line rearrangement, with the goal of giving his residence an alternate site while maintaining 2 acres and 2 septic sites in the vacant lot. This might be feasible but likely would yield a gerrymandered lot line. The City might allow Maresh to create an easement within the vacant lot, in which to install a system serving the residence lot. This technically w'ould require subdivision approval to create the easement, and is not a practice which the City has allowed previously except when pre-existing systems were later found to be over a lot line. *1. The City could provide municipal sewer to the residence parcel as part of the Long Lake Country Club Addition project proposed for 1997. This would presumably use one of the 50 units Met Council is expected to approve for use by existing problem residences. The difficulty here is that there is no justification for providing sewer to the vacant lot abutting Brown Road, and Mr. Maresh is proposing that an easement be created for sewer purposes across the vacant lot, but not serv ing the vacant lot. This will appear as a 'leap-frog' provision of sewer, perhaps not a good precedent to set. 5. The City could refuse sewer to the property, forcing Mr. Maresh to either accept an 'experimental' system or pursue options 1,2 or 3. Recommendation Staff acknowledges there is a potential risk placed on the homeowner in allowing an experimental system on the S-P Testing proposed site. It appears that other potentially suitable »T.'f *-x;. .>■ • Request for Council Action continued Page 3 September 17, 1996 City Sewer Request, John Maresh, 2085 Sixth Avenue North locations on the residence lot have similarly been disturbed due to the former use as a tree farm. Staffs initial reaction is that legal combination of the vacant lot with the residence lot is the best solution. It can be argued that the property aparently cannot sustain two rural lots by virtue of the septic limitations, and this would suggest a combination is appropriate. The problem for Mr. Maresh is that this leaves him without a second building site within his A'A acres. w The option of providing sewer to the residence parcel is attractive to the property owner, in that it solves his existing problem without compromising his second lot. Such a solution may be feasible on this property but not on many other properties, because Maresh owns the property on which an easement would be needed. Providing sewer to his residence would appear to meet the general criteria discussed for the 50 undefined units to be made available by Met Council for existing developed properties in distress. The vacant lot could still be developed with a septic system, and in any case should not be served with sewer since it is a two acre conforming lot with suitable septic sites, and has no inherent need for municipal sewer. Approval of sewer would require an extension westward from the proposed sewer line in Lakeview Terrace. This would add slightly to the cost of that neighborhood sewer system which would be offset by one additional unit being brought into the assessment formula. Council Action Requested Indicate to Mr. Maresh which, if any, of the above options are acceptable to Council City of Orono 2750 Kelly Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Mn 55323 SEP 6 r* " i.e. Request for sewer connection to the North Brown Rd. sewer project for 2085 county Rd. Six. Dear City Officials. Because of the location of a septic system designed by S&P Testing on my property, I had a second opinion as to the suitability of the site that was tested and approved by the city when this property was subdivided. Mike , Steve, Bob Koch (Septic testing and Design), and myself walked the site and found some areas that met the 12 inch standard and most that did not. I was told that This could definitely not be used as a site because it did not meet the standard. I then requested that since we were all here that we should retest the borings on the site that was supposed to meet code. We found a few borings to be ok but 3/4 ’s of the site was below standard just as the first site was. In addition, the soil is to be undisturbed and non compacted by heavy equipment. The site S&P selected has 20 to 30 tree boring sites where trees were spaded out by heavy trucks and a plug of soil plopped into the site. This soil does not meet the criteria set by the state. Now, instead of saying that this site could not be used as quickly as Steve dismissed the First site, 1 was told that we could get special permission to build an experimental system but if it fails, nobody would be at fault. I asked what would be done if it does fail because I have no place to build a septic system. Steve told me that they would require me to build on the same site!! In discussion with Bob Koch and Elmer J. Peterson co., They had never heard of such a ridiculous idea. If it fails the first time with a special design, what makes anyone believe that it will last when built the second time. Mike Gaffron was shaking his head when we were investigating the borings on the "approved site". He could not believe they designed it over all the tree borings and obviously heavy equipment had to have driven over this area extensively. Bob Koch told me that there is no question that I should get onto the city sewer system because to build on any site would require a huge addition of sand and that would drive the cost of the system very high and no guarantee that it could last. He would not trust it. Plus, to be on sewer would save all the trees that would have to be destroyed for the experiment. I am requesting that my property be included in the North Brown Rd. sewer project and that an easement be allowed to cross 1090 N. Brown Rd. property. 1090 North Brown Rd does have two to three viable sites for septic systems and does not require the city sewer as my property does. If you have any questions my phone at home is 475-3197 and work 475-0989. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Dr. John Maresh 3% .J '§'•, ^1nt^r^f -sS [4-JV m' U.J 4r'^Vl y." ' / i '/■ \ >/' .*r s=-4^:- 0‘N rr. .> ivT’' ■• * '■v'ia<;*:tf^ SP' >r J5^> .••irk .T^- * ^c ■ ■t-'/fs- ' J/ '-•r • f ^ j * tr '■ .< « *^* ^ • i ’ ' y . * ' ‘O' / ' /■f C. 'i^ ^ ''-i ’v‘5. o (?: 7 /-it>^'o(f <■ %r 1 O' rO ^ ^. ‘ /<c- Ij o-/Q w \ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO Cm' COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10,1996 (#6 - "21 36 Greehiidd Corporation - Continued) Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. Hurr noted that the Ip; 'rtidth variances, by riot-exiending the cul-de-sac, would good buildin^^tes:** save (#7) REQUEST FOR SEWER, JOHN MARESH, 2085 SIXTH AVTNUE NORTH/1095 BROWTS' RO.AD NORTH Mr. Maresh was not present during the difcussion of this agenda item. Gaffron said the applicant has requested consideration for sewering as part of the MUSA amendment or in addition to the Lakevievv Terrace subdivision. t Kelley asked about the west side of North Brown, specifically, the Salem Court area, in reference to sewering. Gaf&on said tliis area has mound type septic systems. Gaflfron 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 approved in 19bS, 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 review ed fiinher. 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. When 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 sew ering, 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 w'ould only be one site for a septic system and asked Staff to check it out. Gaf&on noted the existing system was not working. The applicant has asked for a building permit. Maresh has agreed to upgrade as necessary. Gaf&on said the applicant may want to hold off if the Council wants to go ahead with sewering. Callahan said he was not willing to give a sewer unit if septic sites are available and asked that Staff place Maresh on a list for possible sewering in the future. I « I X i t K MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CIT\' COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 10, 1996 (#7 Request for Sewer, John Maresh - Continued) Kelley Mid he has spoken with Maresh and informed him of the possible outcome of this discussion, w hich is consistent w ith the above Callahan asked Staff to rev iew and report back to the Council, noting if replacement was necessary, it cannot w ait. 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 (#8) 1995-1996 >URL\A LICENSES: LAKESIDE MARINA Gaffron reported that he had reviewed the necessary applications with Lakeside and requested the completed applications be returned within 48 hours, which was done. Gaffron Mid 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 Januaiy 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996 to Lakeside Marina, Inc., and to retroactively issue a 1995 Commercial License to Lakeside for the period j'anuajy 1, 1995 to December 31, 1995. Further staff is directed to monitor Lakeside's operation as necessar>' 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 submined 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. IVLWOR/COUNCIL REPORl Callahan asked Moorse questions regarding a State law' involving local improvements. He asked tor information on the additional costs related to the requirements. Moorse said he would discuss the issue with the Engneer. 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. \ 1 8 Coiy/vc INq REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION X Cfry, 0 1996 DATE: June 5. 199f OROM o ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Asst. Plannins & Zoning Admin AdministratoL Re v ie w ed:ki .Agenda Section: Zonine Item Description: Request for City Sewer. John Maresh. 1095 N. Brown Rd./2085 Si.xth Ave. N. Attachments: A - Letter from Mr. Maresh B - Plat Map/Survey C - Municipal Sewer Preliminary Layout Mr. Maresh has a non-conforming failing septic system which is scheduled to be replaced as soon as ground conditions permit. As a possible alternative, he is requesting that the City include his properties in any sewer project that goes forward to serve the Long Lake Country Club area. The properties consist of a vacant 2-acre lot at 1090 North Brown Road and the Maresh's 2.5-acre homestead parcel at 2085 Sixth. Both parcels are outside the area proposed for inclusion in the MUSA, out could conceivably use two of the 50 undefined sewer units we have requested of Met Council. A potential obstacle, however, is that those 50 extra units were intended to solve existing problems, not to serve new development. A few' other developed properties along Brown Road North are also likely to make this request for sewer. While it might seem incongruous to bring sewer to th ^ iwo 2-acre lots which were subdivided (and septic testing performed and accepted) as recently as 1988, Maresh indicates his site evaluator is skeptical that more than one suitable drainfield site exists on each lot. It would be appropriate for staff to meet with the site evaluator for confirmation of this if the Council wishes to consider the properties for possible future sewer. Note that only minor revisions to the preliminary design of the sewer in Lakeview Terrace would be necessary in order to provide service to Maresh's properties. The vacant lot would need to be encumbered with an easement to serve the homestead lot. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: If Council wishes to consider whether these properties should be provided with sewer, direct staff to meet w’ith the property owner and his consultants to document the need for an alternative to the use of septic systems. city of Orono 2750 Kelly Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. Minn. 55323 I.e consideration of sewer connection for properties of 1090 Brown Rd. North and 2085 County Road Six , Orono. Minn. Dear City Officials. My septic system requires replacement. I have signed a contract to have a new system built and would have already done so except that the area is to water saturated to enter into construction. I have recently heard that a plan to extend the city sewer system north on brown road and into the Country Club area and Dakota Ave I am requesting to have both of the above named properties to be included In this project for the reasons listed : 1. When S & P Testing walked my properties to search for a septic site, they found one site only on my 2.8 acres that would barely meet code Some portions of this site do not meet the requirement of 12 Inches of good soil below the septic. I was told that all the rest of my land has water right near the surface or that because of heavy truck traffic when my property was a tree farm, that the soil is 'much to compacted ’ to place a septic over it. With this as a starting point, it is a given that this mound system is doomed to fail I was told a range of 8 to 15 years. When this new system fails, another site for a new system does not exist. 2. The site found to be acceptable exists in the middle of very dense, beautiful tree growth. Because this was an old tree farm, many old. tall arborvitae. pme. and birch trees exist here. There areik 100 or more trees that would need to be cleared and hauled off leaving a large void amongst the other trees. Besides the anguish of loosing so many old trees, there is the great additional cost of cutting and removing these trees. They would need to be cut and chain dragged out of the site because the area cannot be driven on or the soil would be compacted making the site worthless. I cannot have any of the tress moved to a new site for the same reason. The only option Is to destroy natures beautiful growth Because of the size of these trees and the dense nature of there growth, There removal adds thousands to the cost of the new system. 3. The lot next to brown road had only one site found to meet the criteria for a mound system also. The problem with this site is that it is directly over the only suitable building site for a house This makes the new lot essentially worthless unless It had access to city sewer. 4. The cost of this septic system has grown to be between $13,000 to $16000 depending on the final tree removal bill. To spend this amount of money on a project that adds zero value to my house is unfortunate, especially with the knowledge that at some pojnt while I am living here that I will be required to spend even more to hook up to city sewer. Because of the circumstances, it seems prudent and wise to become part of the city sewer now and not have to pay double jeopardy. The timing is perfect if not one year to late. I hope this adequately describes my dilemma My properties are available for a 1 tour of the sites which would present a better incite to what I have described. My Intention Is to live in our present home another 12-15 years. I do not intend to sell the lot until dose to the time that I sell my own home. If you have any questions or comments concerning this matter, please call me at either my home 475-3197, or office 475-0989. Thank you for your prompt corisideration of this matter, Sincerely. 2085 County Road Si)C Orono, Mn. 55356 ■■ ^Ni REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SEP ^ 3 1996 DATE: ITEM NO : ;3 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report Item Description: ' Bid Award - Old Crystal Bay Road Trail The City has now received and reviewed the bids for the Old Crystal Bay Road trail. 1. 2. 3. Extent of Trail Construction. A. The bid includes two parts or trail segments. (1) The trail segment south of the Burlington Northern Railroad bridge. (2) The trail segment north of the Railroad bridge to Kelley Parkway, B The bid specs were written to enable the city to choose to do all or a portion of the trail work in 1996 or to do all or a portion of the work in 1997. C.The Park Commission has also suggested that the trail be completed north of Kelley Parkway through the City facilities to the school property in 1996. Cost of Trail Construction. The Council has authorized $100,000 of expenditures toward the Old Crystal Bay Road trail co.-'struction in 1996. The cost of each of the segments of the trail as listed above is shown below. The total cost of the two trail segments bid, and the individual cost of the segment south of the railroad tracks, each exceed the $100,000 expenditure limits set by the Council for 1996. Easement Trail Segment South of RR North of RR to Kelley Pkwy Kelley Pkwy to School Property Construction Cost Engineering Cost Landscape Cost Total Cos^ $85,662 $8,500 $33,000 $127,162 $78,473 $7,800 $ 1,000 $87,273 $49,000 $4,900 ...$53,900 Easement Acquisition. Quick take ;ondemnation proceedings have been initiated for all easements needed for the trail. The quick take will not enable the city to acquire the easements in time for this construction season. However, staff is continuing to work with the property owners to i * Request for Council Action Conrinued page 2 of 2 September 19, 1996 Bid Award - Old Crystal Bay Road Trail 4. 5. either reach a settlement or to obtain a right-of-entry to do the work while negotiations and the condemnation process proceed. Mn/DOT Limited Use Permit. Because the trail project involves the operation of a trail within Mn/DOT right-of-way (crossing Highway 12) Mn/DOT requires the city to obtain a limited use permit for the trail. The permit is attached. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends the bid for both trail segments be awarded to the low bidder, Buffalo Bituminous, Inc., in the amount of $164,136, with Alternate 0\, which is a reduction of up to $1,(XX) for work done in 1997; and that the Council set a limit on the maximum amount to be expended in 1996. Staff will then construct as much of the trail as possible within the maximum expenditure limit, with the priority being to complete the segment south of the railroad tracks. If it is not possible to construct the segment south of the railroad tracks in ’96 due to the lack of easements, staff will begin on the north side of the railroad track and construct a trail as far north as possible within the maximum expenditure amount authorized. Staff recommends that if the segment south of the railroad track is to be constructed it should be constructed all at the same time. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED A. Motion to award the bid for the Old Crystal Bay Road Trail Improvements to the low bidder, Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. in the base bid amount of $164,136 and to accept Alternate #1, a reduction of up $1,(XX) for delaying a portion of the work until 1997. B. Motion to indicate the maximum amount to be expended in 1996 for the Old Crystal Bay Road Trail construction. C. Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to sign the Mn/DOT Limited Use Permit to enable the trail crossing of Highway 12. BONESTROO ASSOCIATES ^6126361311 09/17/96 1 1:37 g :02 NO:293 1/1 Bonestroo Rosene m « Andcriik & Associates Engineers & Architects September 17. 1996 fMV Vv^n. 4r»,#er*.. in ^^ Vfon w v.V^^•.' ^rrr^p.H% uif.»r. *‘.'1 ►'k • 0.r-»*’C L Pt • e fumer rfc • uienn i# r* . rnu^.M C »^«vi • •oo.m C SV-ut-.mi rc • le»r, 4 Bu4i*Oo*‘ • 1-*n/*'* W »o.l U»tv> V t«c»^tin C^A SeOiO^ C‘>«U*i»AfMl PE . ^ Qm -r.n ^ • i?ot>e»t f? rt^f^eMP *6 • 7»i;pir3 W f.^nr PE • D.iviJ O cjthOCJ C '*uS5C4 Ai A . A H*rtiuA P| • V.ct.^e* T ff>i.:-r >nn P, • Tr-I ■ f v'd *t • Kpnn-m > AnUv» .Cil^ • Mart > 7qi»» ^E • r Mi*lu.^fHor •»£ I > • N''t>r-r J A» tln».:h ,}(•■ . • P »ui «finp*.r*» .^na »» (*»oufJ VN • Mequ.*>n >»• City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 35323 Attn: Ron Moorse Rc: Old Ciystal Bay Road Trail Our File No. 139 Dear Ron: Enclosed please find three copies of the limited use permit for the crossing of T.H. 12. ^e p^tt should be approved by the city council prior to award of this project. The city attorney should have an opportunity to review the permit because of Section 15. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R • Jc GRCrgs 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113*3878 • 612*636*4600 BONESTROO ASSOCIATES ^6126361311 09/17/96 11:37 0:03 N0:293 Minn^ftota Department of Transportation MatropolHin Division Waters Edge Building tSOO West County Road B2 Roseville. Minnesota 5^113 582-1286 August 29, 1996 Mr. Glenn Cook Bonestroo A Associates 2335 West Highway 36 St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 Subject:S. P. 2713(12-10-55) City of Orono T. H. 12 at Old CrysUl Bay Road Old Crystal Bay Road Recreational Trail Mr. Cook: Enclosed are three originals of a Limited Use Permit at the above referenced location. Please have the City of Orono's authorized persons sign each one and return all three to this office for further processing. When the permit is fully executed, one copy will be returned to you for your records. If you have any questions, please call me at the telephone number listed above. Sincerely, Keith Crocker Right of Way Operations > Enclosure: (3) copies of permit An Equal Opportunity Employer BONESTROO ASSOCIATES ^ 6126361311 09/17/96 11:37 |3:0A N0:293 ("ity ftf Omnn rryttal Rjai Road Tnil T H. 12 m niii rry«tal Hay Wnwil STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION I tMITrn I’SF. PERMIT In Koonkna with Minnesou Sututn See. 161 4M. 11.1-niied Uie Permii i> iwted to the CiUUll QMMLhereiiafler referred to as the * Applicant", for the purpo*e of conitructlag. mainiaimng, and operating a non-motoriied recreational trail t^Uhin the Sute of Minnesota Department of T^aporutioo i. hereinafter referred to as the 'State* or the 'MinnesoU Depariment of Transportation", right of 'aay as shown in red on Pahihit "A* which is attached and incorporated at a part of this permit In addition, the tollowtng special provisions shall apply: 4 5 6. 7. It 9. SPECIAL PROVISIONS 1. The construction, maintenance, and operation of the trail will be at no espente to the ^MinncsuU Drjmrlmcnl uf Tisiiu^wLaticHi. 2. Bcfoct conslnjction of the plans and specifications for such construclion Shall be Approved by the Minne«u Deporrmem of Transportation, through the Division Engineer of the Metro Division. No idvcrtising devices in gny fornt or siie shall be constructed, placed or permitted to be conitnjctcd or placed upon the Stated right of way. No cofrmrrcial activities shall he allowed on Stale's right of way. AU mainienancc of the trail shall be provided by the Applicant: this includes the insullaiion and removal of regulatory signs Tltii permit is nonexclusive and is granted itibjei l to the rights of others, including, but not limited to public utilities which may occupy the State's right of way. The Applicant will preserve and protect all utilities located on the lands covered by thi.s permit at no expense k» the Minncsoia Department of Transportation The Applit^t shall construct the bike trail at the location shown on the attached Exhibit "A* subject to verincalion by the Minnesota Department of Tiansportaiion’s Division Engineer of the Metro Division that the con.siruction geometries and procedures are compatible with the sale and efficient opcraliim of the highway facility. The Applicant shall rtotify the Roadway Regulations Supervisor. Rill Warden, ai (012) 582' 144.V seven (7) days pnor to starting of Its operations. I he Applicant upon completion of (he construction shall restore nil diviuiiied ski* ditches in such manner that drainage, erosion control and aesthetics are perpeiuated. The Applicant shall not do any excavating or filling which would alter or impede drainage at the subject site. Page 1 of 3 ■•t S'. t' •' 1 m T-:it r-^i1 1. i7 hL t \ M !i . A Ir BONESTROO ASSOCIATES ^ 6126361311 09/17/96 11:37 0:05 N0:293\ p 27iin2»»m>55>fiity fff old Cryatal lUv Trmil T-H. 12 It Old rrviBl BiY Road 12. 13 I.V 16. Thi. permit does not release the Applicant farm any liability or obligation imposed by Federal Law. Minni-.iotA Statutes, local ordinances, or ocher agencies relating thereto and any necessary permits rebrlrg thereto siwll be iJiumcd bv the AppIiCAiil. Any use permitted by this permit shall remain subordinate to the right of the Mmnewia Depanment of Ti-a^l^^v•Utlo^' to use ih< propeny tor highway ami IranspOfUtlCB P'irp*.'‘«<*s This penwt not grant any ir-erest whatsoever in land, nor does it establish a permanent park, recreation area or wildlife or waterfowl refuge facilily that would become subjc?ct 10 Section 4 <f) of the Federal Aid Highway Act of l9f)8 This permit shall be subject to cancellation and termination by tne Minnesota Ltepanment of Transporatinn for aiw exher highway or transportation purposes, by giving the Applicant W days written nou« of such action. Upsxi canccllMion. any relocation of the bike trail will be performed by the Applicant at the sole csttcn.sc of the Applicant The Applicant will hold harmless and indemnify the State. i!S Commissioner of Transportation and employees from liability claims for damages tWMise of btVily injury, death, oroperty damage, sickness, disease, or loss and expense arising from the App'icant s operations or its successors and assigns from the Applicant's use of the portion of highway riEhl of way over which this permit is granted. The Applicant will hold harmless and rr.demnify llie Stale, ih Commissioner of Transporution and employees from claims for damages because of bodily Injury, death, pniperty damage. Sickness, disease, or loss and exiiense arising from any and all public use of live bike Irafl. The Applicant will hold harmless and indemnify the State. Its Commiisionrr of Transportation and employees from claims resulting from temporary or permanent changes in drainage patterns resulting in nood damage. The Applicant shall not dispose of any maienaU regul.iieO by any goccinmcnial ur rc-ulalory agency onto the giound. or into any body of water, or into any container on the State’s oght of way. In the event of spillage of regulated materials, the Applicant shall provide for cleami? of the spilled material and of materials cunt.tminaicd by the spillage in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, at me !W)ic exfiense of the Applicant. The Applicant (for itself, its contractors, subcontractors, its ir.Dterialmen. and all other persons acting for, through or under it or any oi them), covenants lhat wt laborers . mechanics', or materialmen' liens or other liens or claims of any kind whatsoever shall he filed or maintained by it nr by any siibcontMcior. matcri.almen or other person or persons acting for, t>ifough or under it or any of them against tfie work and/or against said lands, for or on account of any w'ork dorn? or mate'’ials Ititnishcd by it or any o*’ ihcni under any agreement or any amendment or Mipplemenl lliereio. ajirees to indemnily Hnn hold harmless the State from all such hens and claims. THE TERMS OF THIS PERMII SHALL Bh TEN YEARS FROM THE [JATE OF THE EXECUTION OF THl.S PERMIT. Page 2 of ^ % •% 4 * I • * BONESTROO ASSOCIATESS«£4^22Lki2-LLU-51l CUyjitXkDQO ® 6126361311 09/17/96 11:37(5:06 NO: 293 t .» T H 13 M f»4 r>v«tol Bay Road RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL CITY OF ORONO By:By: Metro Division Fjtfineer D«te Date APPROVED BY'.By: COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTA VION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BU)0 ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 3.1133 Date Director, OfRcc of Right of Wiy ind Survcyi Date The Commissioner of Transportation by the execution of this permit certiflct that this pern'll is necessary in the pultlic interest and that the use intended is fur public purposes. Page 3 of 3 I BONESTROO ASSOCIATES ^6126361311 09/17/96 11:37 0:07 >.#»•* i NO:293mmm «ie match ”\ ♦ Kr- g mh________! -/*•“ A e'-----------------/ TXlt P.OT. 0I»_____ iAV B/L POT. 10400 00 I EXHIBIT A ^ m Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & |\ I Associates Engineers & Architects r,»ier>« ir*w.'< #.“r \ fft' . »r .4^. 4< fc/o r V *Vf/vi/s Ott*» G Bon*rstf<i , Kt • lo\> C 4n»teftil» PE • M.vvn I Sorv.»lj PE • P'Ch^r * F Tiifn. • Pf • I • <>•->11 r* • Tnom^t £ r*f • Pr&e*i r, Schuf^»Cht PE • Bour Ju ' Pt • Rober; A »ntl '.u•».«*» V Ehe^'m T PA S-’n or COr^sultf^nt 4 ,io<: v«ff P'’'’tHuwv *»ti A PE • A it raor' PF • Pobo't P Pfeffe'le P£ • Pich<*fd )Mf Ftjiter Pf • D «vicl O t v>v«ot<( PF • C Possek Al A • «rli A M.«nson PE • A*«<h^l T R*iu!'n.fnr* PE • il K Frcid P£ • Kprv'eth P AnrVr’Or^ PE • V.irk P Poifs PE • S»i!nn*y P W*lii irryon P£ L > • Pri»i*: F c>r» fM St P.«ul Rothi •.tf' ,»rd St CJoud \1S • Veqtion ^ Septembers, 1996 ^ % A g( Ni' -/a, Mr. John Gerhardson City of Orono POB0X66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 ♦ % Re:1996 Old Cry stal Bay Road Trail Improvements BRA File No. 13985 Honorable Mayor & City Council Members: Bids were opened for the afore mentioned project on Friday. August 23, 1996. Transmitted herewith are ten (10) copies of the bid tabulation for your information and file. The following summarizes the results of the four bids received: Contractor Base Bid Alt. No. 1 Alt. No. 2 Base + Alt. No. 2 Low Buffalo Bituminous. Inc.$164,136.00 -$1,000.00 $9,900.00 $174,036.00 #2 Hardrives, Inc.$167,451.70 $0.00 $11,000.00 $178,451.70 #3 Expert Asphalt, Inc.$173,027.00 -$1,800.00 $11,070.00 $184,097.00 #4 Lan Dar, Inc.$204,680.50 -$5,500.00 $12,875.00 $217,555.50 The low bidder on the project was Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. with a Base Bid of $164,136.00. This is slightly higher than the engineer ’s estimate of $150,000. Delaying the project until next summer by accepting Alternate Bid No. 1 would result in a cost savings of only $1,000.00. Bid amounts for Alternate Bid No. 2 for berm construction along the proposed trail alignment were competitive with the amounts varying by only about $2,000. These bids have been reviewed and found to be in order. We are therefore recommending that the City proceed to award this project to Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. for the Base Bid amount of $164,136.00. Alternate No. 2 could be added by change order at a later time if required through easement negotiations. Should you have any questions, plea.se feel free to contact me at 636-4600. Sincerely. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. LNC. Glenn R. Cook, P.E. GRC:pah:enc 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113-3898 > 612-636-4600 1/1 Bonestroo Rosene ■ Anderlik 6i |\ I Associates Engineers & Architects September 5, 1996 ir<;•f 4'r»fT» Atfrrt (.lTi£»>Kru^vr^ **» •' • Ot* . G n • jr>, j>*' C *'* • M»fvn L So*^v.«tdi ^E • Tiifi* " Pf •C’tn*'*r r ■'M ^ • Tho,n.»» E \.*vet rt • PoheM G Schu*'»fCht P£ • « BoufC??^” PE • 9iA'fi 4r Wovmf »-< •rti \u* V Eoc*’*'' CPA Con>uit.^nt\ «r!* Pr* Hov. »rrr ^ PE •n -r** a i-rr-cn **E • f?ohc'T P Pfef^e'V PE • Pir^»4r(j \n' fovt**' PC • r j o i .fco* • rr • 'vop'f c Pu .:*?ii a i a • m a Hw-^son pe • Vt,—nr) T P *•.! • **\v • T ! H ,"•« uT 't • . <•• th ” Ar. ?t • Vam f! Poifs P£ • ^ijrtv ** Vl'M» --icp •*€ t S • ^•. : • •''5:srti-rn O * ■ St P »al P*’!*^* 'tf^ \1 ‘ U ’«» .n*d St VN • Vr iuO'^ S.^•m ♦ # Mr. John Gerhardson City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Re: Old Crystal Bay Road Trail Our File No. 13985 Dear John: The bids received on the Old Cry’stal Bay Road Trail project include several options for contract award. The options provide flexibility in determining what construction w'ork should be completed in 1996. Part one includes trail construction south of the railroad bridge ($85,662.50). Part two includes trail construction from Kelley Parkway to the railroad bridge ($78,473.50). Alternate 1 changes the completion date from this fall to next spring (-$1,000.00). Alternate 2 provides for a berm on the Brunning property ($9,900.00) The following is a summary of the contract award options. Part 1 Part 1 + Part 2 Part 1 + Part 2 + Alternate 1 Part 1 + Part 2 + Alternate 1 + Alternate 2 Part 1 + Part 2 + Alternate 2 Part 1 + Alternate 2 Part 2 $85,662.50 164.136.00 163.136.00 173.036.00 174.036.00 95.562.50 78.473.50 We have also reviewed the cost to extend the trail from Kelley Parkway north through the school day care center. The estimated cost to complete this w’ork is $49,000 based on the bids received. This trail segment would be constructed away from the street so no street costs are anticipated. The street construction cost for Part 1 is $24,000. The street construction cost for Part 2 is $25,500. 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113-3898 ■ 612-636-4600 r The extension of the trail porth of Kelley Parkway could best be completed by obtaining a separate contract to grade the pathway. The surfacing could then be done as a change order to this project. If the City were to complete part of the work, the cost could be reduced by up to $ 10,000 or more. Please call this office if you have any questions. Very truly yours. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:la =: i J V/Bonestra Roscnevji Anderfk& |\|| AssodatalEflgfltfn 4 A#CflM«Ctd Project Name 19% Old Crystal Bay Road Trail Improvements / hereby certify that this is an exactProject No.File No. 13985 reproduction of bids received.Bid Opening 10:00 a.m., C.D.S.T., Friday. August 23. 19%Owner City of Orono Glenn R. Cook, P.E. Registration No. 9451 BID TABULATION Tabulation of Four Low Bids of Four Received No.Item Unit Qty. Part 1 - Old CrystaJ Bay Road • Trail 1 Clear and gnib Cites 2 Remove CMP or RCP culvert 3 Remove bituminous pavement 4 Saw bitumiiioas paveineiu 5 Relocate mailboxes, sign. etc. 6 Common excavabofi 7 Common borrow (CV) 8 Topsoil bonow (CV) 9 Subgiade preparation 10 Agpegate base. Cl. 5.100% crushed 11 Afg lMoe. a. 5.100% crushed (walk) 12 Agg.base. Cl. 5.100% crushcd(dwy) 13 Type 41 wearing course mixture 14 Type 31 base course mUture 15 Type 41 bit. mixture for walk 16 Type 41 bit material for driveway 17 Bitununous material for tack coat 18 12" PVC pipe culvert. SDR 26 19 15" CM pipe culvert 20 15” CM pipe apron 21 15" RC pipe culvert {O. 5) 22 15-RCPF.E.S. 23 18" PVC pipe culvert Bid No. 1 Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. LS LF SY LF LS CY CY CY SY TN TN TN TN TN TN TN CL LF LF EA LF EA LF 1 90 200 750 1 400 1,000 180 660 55 360 35 45 90 170 16 50 20 30 2 30 1 150 1.00 10.00 250 2.00 200.00 5.00 1000 15.00 I 50 12.00 1200 1200 4500 4500 45.00 4500 2.00 20.00 30.00 125 00 35.00 500.00 3500 1.00 900.00 500 00 1.500 00 200.00 2,000 00 10,000 00 2.700.00 990.00 660 00 4.320.00 420.00 2.025.00 4.050.00 7.650.00 720.00 100 00 400.00 900.00 250 00 1.050.00 500.00 5.250 00 Bid No. 2 Hardrives, Inc. 1.500 00 6.00 2.00 2.00 750.00 1000 950 10.00 0.75 12.00 10.00 12.00 4500 40 00 34.00 45.00 1.00 35.00 30.00 125 00 31.00 500.00 2500 1.500 00 540.00 400.00 1.500 00 750.00 4.000 00 9.500 00 1.800.00 49500 660 00 3.600 00 420.00 2.025 00 3.600.00 5.780.00 720.00 50 00 700.00 900.00 250.00 930.00 500.00 3.750 00 Bid No. 3 Expert Asphalt, Inc. 2.500 00 5.00 2.00 2.00 750.00 9.50 12.00 12.00 1.00 10.00 1000 10.00 45.00 4500 45.00 45.00 2.00 24.00 15.00 250.00 30.00 350.00 2800 2,500 00 450.00 400.00 1.500.00 750.00 3.800.00 12.000 00 2,160.00 660.00 550.00 3,600.00 350.00 2.025.0a 4.050.00 7.650.00 720.00 100.00 480.00 450.00 500.00 900.00 350.00 4.200.00 BidNo.4 Lan Dar, Inc. Unit Price ToUl 2.500 00 10.00 2.50 3.00 600.00 6.50 1050 900 0.75 15.00 1000 15.00 42.00 42.00 36.00 80.00 500 3200 32.00 300 00 40 00 400.00 42.00 2.500 00 900.00 500.00 2.250.00 600.00 2.600.00 10.500.00 1.620 00 495.00 825.00 3.600.00 525.00 1.890.00 3.780.00 6.120.00 1,280.00 250.00 640 00 960.00 600.00 1,200.00 400.00 UX).00 I3985T.WB2 24 CofMiractCBMH. Design SP-325 Coficreieaifb4tguiier. D^gnB6l826 Fnrnisli St install ”No Pufuiif" sign27 4* wide solid line • while paiM28 Spnice Colorado Blue • 4* Hl B B29 Spnioe Colorado Blue • 6* ht B A B 30 MapleSogar-3*CALB&B 31 AihSyiniiiitOCALBAB Sik fence, pieassembled Seed. MUhiie 500 Sodding, type lawn I 32 33 34 35 36 37 Disc anchoring 38 Commeicial fen. Analysts 20-10-10 39 4* PE cocr. peif. pipe ikaan 40 Modultf block letaiiiing wall 41 Install wood board fence - 6* high 42 36” wide solid while line - paint 43 Class 3 rip Total PM 1 -CXdCry^ Bay Road - TraU I PiH 2 • Old Crystal Bay Rand • TraU dear and gnib trees Remove CMP or RCP culvert Remove bituminous pavement Saw concreie cuib Saw bituminous pavement Relocate mailboxes, sign. etc. Relocate guard post Common excavation Common borrow (CV) TopsoU borrow (CV) Subgrade pceparatioo Aggregate base. O. 5. 100% crushed Agg.base. Q. 5.100% crushed (walk) Agg.base. a. 5.100% crushed(dwy) Type 41 wearing course mixnire Type 31 base coune imxture 60 Type 41 bit. mixture for walk 61 Type 41 bit. material for driveway 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 (3985T.WB2 EALFEALFEAEA EA EA LF AC LB SY TN AC TN LF SF LF LF CY LS LF SY LF LF LS EA CY CY CY SY TN TN TN TN TN TN TN I70041.31066 6 6 250 0.3 30 1.400 0.6 03 0.06 1.000 500 300 32 4 I 100 275 3 950 1 10 400 1.500 400 850 40 375 135 60 120 170 20 1.300.00 12 00100.00 0.65 160 00 175 00 250.00 25000 3J0 1.000.00 1000 3.00 1.000.00 1.000 00 1.000.00 4.30 13 00 1500 5.00 80.00 1.00 10.00 2.50 10.00 2.00 100.00 23.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 130 12.00 12.00 12.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 1.300008.400 00400 00851.50 960 001.050 00 1300.00 130000 873.00 300.00 300.00 4.200.00 600.00 30000 60.00 4300.00 6.500 00 4300 00 160.00 32000 85.662.50 1.00 1.000.00 687.50 30 00 1.900.00 100.00 250.00 2.000.00 15.000. 00 6.000. 00 1.275.00 480 00 4.500.00 1.620.00 2,700.00 5.400 00 7.650.00 900.00 1.200.008.80125.00 0.72165 00192.00 250.00 250 00 3.00 1.100.00 530 6.00 1.100.00 550 00 1.100.00 650 1550 1630 5.50 50 00 1300 00 6.00 2.00 1000 2.00 450.00 100 00 10.00 950 10.00 0.75 12.00 10.00 12.00 4500 38.00 34.00 45.00 1.200.006.160 0050000943.20 990 001.152.00 1.500.00 1.50000 750.00 330.00 165 00 8.400.00 66000 165 00 66.00 6.500.00 7.750 00 4.950.00 moo 200.00 88.427 20 1300.00 600.00 550.00 30.00 1.900.00 450.00 1.000.00 4.000.00 14.230.00 4.000.00 637.50 480.00 3.750.00 1.620.00 2.700.00 4.560.00 5.780.00 900.00 2«400.00 7.25 7500 1 00 350 00 40000 300.00 300.00 2.00 2.200.00 23.00 4.00 750.00 730.00 1.800.00 4.50 13.00 12.00 1.00 75.00 230000 5.00 2.00 30 00 2.00 750.00 50.00 10.00 12.00 12.00 1.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 4500 4500 45.00 45.00 2.400.005.075.00300 001310.00 2.100 00 2.400 00 1.800.00 1.800 00 500.00 660.00 730.00 5.600.00 450.00 223 00 108.00 4300.00 6.500.00 3.600 00 32.00 300.00 90.55500 2300.00 500.00 550.00 90.00 L900.00 750.00 500.0a 4.000.00 18.000.00 4.800.00 850.00 400.00 3.750.00 1350.00 2.700.00 5.400.00 7.650.00 900.00 1300.0014.00 85 000.751650019500 250.00 25000 3.50 1.100.00 3.50 6.05 1.100.00 550.00 1.100 00 1200 16 00 22.00 5.50 100.00 7.500.00 10.00 2.50 50.00 3.00 600.00 45.00 6.50 1030 9.00 0.73 15.00 10.00 15.00 42.00 42.00 36.00 80.00 1300.009.800 00340 0098230990.001.170.00 1300.00 1.500.00 875.00 330.00 165.00 8.470.00 660.00 165.00 66 00 12.000.00 8.00000 6.600.00 176.00 400.00 105.724.30 7300.00 1.000.00 687.50 150.00 2.850.00 600.00 450.00 2.600.00 15,730.00 3.600.00 63730 600.00 3.750.00 2.023.00 2.520.00 5.040.00 6.120.00 1.600.00 62636465666768697071 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 BityimiKMis mnerui for uck coat 15* CM pipe culven 15* CM pipe apron 22* span RC pipe arch culvert (Cl. 3) ImtaU 22* span RCP arch bend (Q. 3) Reinstall ea. 22* span RC pipe arch apron 18* RC pipe culvert Reinstall ex. 18* RC pipe apron 12* PVC pipe culvert SDR 26 Adjust frame dt ring casting Adjust traffic control handhole Concrete curb Sl gutter. Design B618 Fwvuk it install *No Parking* sign 4* wide solid line • white paiM Spruce Cokxado Blue > 4* Hl B & B Spruce Colorado Blue • 6* hi. B A: B Maple Sugar-3* CALBAB Ash Sominit - 3* CAL BAB 80 Sik firace. preassembled 81 Roadside seeding 82 Seed. MUntre 500 Sodt&ng. type lawn Mulch material. Type 1 Disc anchoring Comincfcial fcrL. Analysis 20-10-10 4 ” P.E. corr. perf. pipe drain Total Part 2 - Old Crystal Bay Road - Trail 83 84 85 86 87 GLLFEALFLFEALFEALFEA EA LF EA LF EA EA EA EA LF AC LB SY TN AC TN LF Total Pwt 1 • Old Crystal Bay Road - Trail Total Pvt 2 • Old Crystal Bay Road - Trail Tam Base Bid I3985T.WB2 509041682251202 I 900 4 900 200 07 70 500 1.4 0.7 0.14 600 2.00 30 00125.00 60 00 100 00300.00 3500250 00 20.00 250 00 15000 10.00 100 00 065 160 00 175.00 250 00 250 00 3.50 1.00000 1000 3.00 500.00 500 00 1.000 00 4.50 100 00 2,700 00500.00 960 00 800 00600.00875.00250.00400.00500.00 150 00 9.000.00 40000 585 00 320 00 350.00 500 00 500 00 700.00 700.00 700 00 1.50000 700.00 350 00 140 00 2.700.00 78.473 50 85.662.50 78.473.50 164.136 00 1 00 30 00 125 00 5500 250 00150.00 31 00150 00 35.00 17000 400 00 S.») 125.00 0.72 165 00 195.00 250 00 250 00 3.00 1.100.00 5.50 6.00 1.100.00 550 00 1.100 00 6.50 50 002,700 00 500.00 880 00 2.000 00300.00775.00 15000700.0034000 400 00 7.920.00 500.00 M8 00 33000 390.00 500 00 500 00 600.00 770.00 385 00 3.000.00 1.540.00 385.00 154 00 3.900.00 79.024.50 88.427.20 79.024.50 167.451.70 2.001500250.00 3500 3500150.00 28 00100 00 20.00150.00 150 00 7.25 75.00 1 00 350.00 400.00 300 00 300 00 2.00 2.200.00 25.00 4.00 750.00 750 00 1.800.00 450 100 00 1550 001.000.00 560 00 280.00 300.00 70000100.004(X).00300.00 15000 6525.00 300.00 90000 700.00 800.00 600 00 600 00 400.00 1540.00 1.750.00 2.000.00 1.050.00 525.00 252.00 2.700.00 82.472.00 90555.00 82.472.0a 173,027.00 5.0032.00300.0072.00275.00600.0042.00 250 0030 00250.00 250 00 1450 85.00 0.75 165.00 195.00 250 00 250 00 350 1.100.00 5.50 6.05 1.100.00 550.00 1.100.00 12.00 250.00 2.88000 ijoaoo1.15100 2J0000 1.200.00 1.05000 250 006oaoo500.00 250.00 13.050.00 34000 67500 330.00 390.00 500.00 500.00 7oaoo 770.00 385.00 3.025.00 1540.00 385 00 154.00 7.200.00 98.956.00 105.72450 98.956.00 204.680.50 AlteraMc IM N«^ 1. CMupIctiMi Date Bmc Bid with alieniaic complctioii dait of i<ne 30.1997 iaiiea of October 30. J996 *”"Pfc0uii dMe (Add or Oedoct)Bcrai oooMvction froro Sia. SOMX) 10 Su. 5I-»S0 (3a kft to 80-kft) aioiig die proposed ^iil 89 CoMKn borrow (CV) 90 Topsoil bonow (CV) 91 CY CY AC 950 100 0.2 Total Base Bid Alternate Bid No. I (ADD or DEDUCT) Bid No. 2 (ADO or DEDUCT) Deduct 8.00 15.00 4.000.00 Add (1.000.00 7.600.00 IJ00.00 800.00 9.900.00 164.136.00 (1.000.00) 9.900.00 173.036.00 No Bid 1000 10.00 2.500.00 Add SO.OO 9JOO.OO 1.000.00 500.00 11.000.00 167.451 70 000 11.000.00 178.451.70 Deduct 10.00 12.00 1.850.00 Add (1.800.00) 9.500.00 1000.00 370.00 11.070.00 173.027.00 (1.800.00) 11.070.00 182.297.00 Deduct lOJO 9.00 10.000.00 (5.500.00) 9.975.00 900 00 2.000.00 12.875.00 204.680.50 (5.500.00) 12.875.00 212.055 50 13985T.WB2 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse TItl'' City Administrator REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 2 3 DATE: S^ifiK9fl|j|yt}996 ITEM NO: / ^ Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Administrator ’s Report Item Descnptiuii: Pay Request #3 for the Willow Drive Reconstruction Project Attached are a letter and supporting materials from the City Engineer related to Pay Request #3 for the Willow Drive reconstruction project. The request is for payment of $40,550.86. The City Engineer is recommending payment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve Pay Request ^3 for the Willow Drive project in the amount of $40,550.86 ^ J Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects •-**' •*'1 ’» t . H* A'^ 'n* Ar tu^t L^ t^'^rtijntr, I nr cytfT % -.vw. Oft- G . 't • ' Ar»d^rlik TE • M.*rv;n L Son.«^l< Pf • Iurr*'» P! • * 'I ;o* ' • t PF • PcOv't G Str>u»'K^^! P£ • |••rr, • • P«if'*fr V. Post*'* P* «'’* 1 Si4* •'* \1 CPA S»*nior C«nt•, Asspt How • .« A PT • K. •t-' A Gnijo** Pe • Roh».»t R Pfeiferle PF • Tifhiid W Pr • O »w.‘ ? t j>ot • '£ • C R ussia AI A • V«rh A H «nson PF • H fr! T Potif PC • T : A F t Id • r •***♦'•:»> AntWsori Pf • MArk R Roffv PF » iulrf*v P •’-ion PF I S • "‘.l i't ' t »'• ••• *r P ujI Ro<*^^'fO' vU'. i « •' «i P *!.? ^to'icl M\ • Vequon Wl -7/(9,/. *■ /I /.; I » r ♦ • t % September 10, 1996 Mr. John Gerhardson Director of Public Works City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 Re: Municipal State Aid Improvements, Willow Drive Our File No. 13962 Dear Mr. Gerhardson: Enclosed please find three copies of Pay Request No. 3 for the above mentioned project. This portion of the work has been satisfactorily completed and we recommend payment. Sincerely, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC /-LllaiL , Harlan M. Olson / -<-f V HMO:gs 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113-3898 ■ 612-636-4600 Owner: City of Orono. P.O. Box 66. Crystal Bay. MN 55323 For Period: October 30. 1995 to September 10. 1996 py|!^*^|[^2!SContractnr: Buffalo Bituminous. Inc., P.O. Box 337, Buffalo. MN 55313 Date September 10,1996 Request No. 3 F> REQUEST FOR PAYMENT MUNICIPAL STATE AID LMPROVEMENTS WILLOW DRIVE (SAP 152-101*11) File No. 13962 SUMMARY 1 Original Contract Amount 2 Change Order - Addition 3 Change Order • Deduction 4 Pevised Contract Amount 5 Value Completed to Date 6 >4«ienal on Hand 7 Aiaouni Earned I * US «cttainage 5% 9 ;‘>-Total 10 . jss Amount Paid Previously II AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. $ $ 28.232.80 S $ s $ s 131.982.50 135.266.13 163.498.93 163.498.93 8,174.95 155,323.98 114,773.12 40,550.86 Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Approved by Contractor: BUFFALO BITUMINOUS, INC. Approved by Owner: CITY OF ORONO, MN Specified Contract Completion Date:Date: 13962\r8quesLwb2 No.Iton Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Quantity to Date Anunint to Date 2101.502 Base Bid Clearing (tree)TR ii 65.00 11 715.00 2101.507 Grubbing (tree)TR 11 65.00 11 715.00 2104.501 Remove concrete curb &. gutter LF 70 3.00 70 210.00 2104.501 Remove pifje culvert LF 70 10.00 70 700.00 2104.505 Remove bituminous pavement SY 1,700 1.50 1,711 2.566.50 2104.503 Sawing bituminous pavement LF 160 1.50 160 240.00 0104.601 Relocate mailboxes, signs, etc.LS 1 100.00 1 100.00 2105.501 Common excavation (P)CY ' 2.300 5.00 3,522 17,610.00 2105.507 Subgrade excavation CY 500 5.50 325 1,787.50 0105.604 Select granular borrow TN 6,200 1.00 4,528 4,528.00 2105.535 Salvaged topsoil (CV)CY 240 7.00 240 1,680.00 0105.609 Gec«extile fabric. Type V SY 4,000 1.00 4,000 4,000.00 2211.501 Aggregate base, C1.5,100% crushed quarry rock TN 1,300 15.00 1,708.21 25,623.15 2221.501 Aggregate shouldering. Class 5,100% crushed quarry rock TN 100 20.00 136.5 2,730.00 2331.508 Type 41 wearing course mix.TN 260 35.00 260 9,100.00 2331.510 Type 31 binder course mixture TN 370 29.00 361.06 10,470.74 2331.514 Type 31 base course mixture TN 555 29.00 549.08 15.923.32 2357.502 Bituminous material for tack coat GL 500 1.00 500 500.00 2502.541 4" perforated PE pipe drain LF 500 7.00 500 3.500.00 2501.511 12" CM pipe culvert LF 54 30.00 54 1,620.00 2501.515 12 ” CM pipe apron EA 2 200.00 2 400.00 0504.602 Adjust valve box - water EA 2 150.00 2 300.00 2531.501 Concrete curb & gutter-Design B618 LF 750 15.00 777 11,655.00 2531.503 Concrete median SY 250 40.00 221 8.840.00 2563.601 Traffic control LS 1 5,000.00 1 5.000.00 2564.531 Furnish & install sign panels. Type C SF 26.5 35.00 44 1,540.00 0564.602 Pavement message (left arrow) epoxy EA 1 130.00 1 130.00 0564.602 Pavement message (right arrow) epoxy EA 1 130.00 1 130.00 0564.603 4" wide solio line, yellow epoxy LF 2,000 0.88 342 300.96 0564.603 4" wide solid line, white epoxy LF 1,000 0.88 967 850.96 2573.503 Silt fence, prcassembled LF 400 5.00 360 1.800.00 2575.501 Roadside seeding AC 0.2 2,000.00 I 13962\requesLwb2 2575.502 2575.505 2575.511 2575.519 2575.531 2105.535 2331.508 2357.502 564.603 564.603 564.603 2575.501 2575.502 2575.511 2575.519 2575.531 Seed, mixture 500 Sodding. Type lawn Mulch material. Type I Disk anchoring Commercial fertilizer, non-phosphate Total Work Completed to Date Change Order No. 1 Salvaged topsoil (CV) Type 41 wearing course mixture Bituminous material for tack coat 4* wide soHd line, yellow paint 4" wide broken line, yellow paint 4” wide solid line, white paint Roadside seeding Seed, mixture 500 Mulch material. Type 1 Disc anchoring Commercial fertilizer, non-phosphate Total Change Order No. 1 • ADD Total Completed to Date Total Change Order No. 1 LB 20 20.00 SY 1,200 3.00 TN 0.4 500.00 AC 0.2 500.00 TN 0.2 500.00 $135466.13 CY 100 7.00 10.5 73.50 TN 890 30.00 884.46 26,533.80 GAL 550 0.01 550 540 LF 700 0.30 700 210.00 LF 450 0.30 0 LF 4700 0.30 4700 1.410.00 AC 0.05 2,000.00 0 LB 50 20.00 0 TN 1.00 500.00 0 AC 0.50 500.00 0 TN 0.50 500.00 0 1 28.232.80 135.266.13 $28,232.80 163.498.93 13962\request.wb2 PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS Owner City of Orono Project No. FUeNo. 13962 Contractor Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. CHANGE ORDERS Description Amount 1 10/17/95 Resurfacinc of Willow Drive 28.232.80 2 3 9 Total Chance Orders $28,232.80 PAYMENT SUMMARY nio. I Start 10-2-95 56.948.23 2.997.28 59.945.50 2 10-2-95 10-30-95 57.824.89 6.040.69 120.813.81 3 10-30-95 9-10-96 40,550.86 8.174.95 163.498.93 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Material on Hand Total Payment to Date $155,323.98 Original Contract $131,982.50 Retainage, Payment No. 3 8.174.95 Change Orders 28.232.80 Total Amount Earned ________$163,498.93 Revised Contract $160,215.30 13962\request.wt>2 1meeting SEP 2 3 1996 ‘i. .,. U ' REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: ^flfifiWMpl996 ITEM NO: /5" Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Administrator ’s Report 1 Item Description: Payment Request for Lift Station #28 Renovation Attached is a letter and background materials from the City Engineer regarding Pay Request #1 for the lift station #28 renovation project. The amount of the pay request is $5,061.89. The City Engineer is recommending approval of the pay request. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve Pay Request #1 for the lift station #28 renovation project in the amount of $5,061.89. 1/i Bones troo Rosene mnijl Anderlik & 1 vJl Associates Engineers & Architects September 10, 1996 City of Orono 2750 Kelly Parkway Orono. MN 55232 Attn: Mr. John Olson Re: Orono. MN Lift Station No. 28 Renovation Our File No. 13968 .tfh If*.;; 4 f» « I • » fir f, .»t ^ •• ■*f \|» ( • ill ‘ P} • •,!.« .1 • P'tiM? tf lu»f’» r Pi • » .*ofc t • rr»#»m.*s t •^*\i , I t m P .iK 'i Slhu• P^ • 9 ihrr \* Povrn« .’I *»'il *u V PA S*»”Of ‘ ^i<€h.i^v Pf A S*«n' >fc1 PE • K »?•' A ' Pf • ? >h *r Pf • X f «./,»** P. •ft. J'*■ •-j .•.i( ' i*i • ' 'C‘'ft ‘ AiA • V'fir A H 'f • V*|. *1 »r* r P H.t '' »f r Pi • T. *1 ft f .• ij •*'t • • .•• • P Am ’ Pf • M.«rk P Po»». P? • S* ?n^*, P Mf'i' * —tun Pf I !, • **«*iIh ' » « .•»t#TH*n •ul R« vM -tn f Wi will Sf Ol^od VN • V^ iKor * • A A S -/Ut/l ^ ♦ ^ SEP i ® ‘ Dear John: The following are copies of the Pay Request No. 1 for the above-mentioned project in the amount of $5,061.89 for Council approval. Please put the request for payment approval on the September 23, 1996 council agenda. This payment is for payment of bonding, mobilization and submittal procedures. We feel that this amount is a fair payment for these items of work and recommend approval of such Pay Request. As mentioned at the preconstruction meeting, we have signed the pay requests and the Contractor will sign them when he collects his payment. If you should have any questions or comments concerning this or any future pay requests, please give me a call at 604-4881. Sincerely, BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Timothy L. Grinstead / 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113-3898 • 612-636-4600 ^BoMStnoi Owner City of Orono, 2750 Kelly Parkway, Orono. MN 55232 Date: September 10. 199< For Period:Start to September 10. 1996 Request No: I ■iIbV V w 1 Tl Contractor:Ford Construction Co. Inc., P.O. Box 667, Excelsior, MN 55331 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT LIFT STATION NO. 28 RENOVATION File No. 13968 SUMMARY I Original Contract Amount Change Order • Addition Change Order • Deduction Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Material on Hand Amount Earned 8 Less Retainage 5% 9 Subtotal 10 Less Amount Paid Previously II AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. 2 3 4 5 6 7 $ $ $ $ $ S $ $ $ $ Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Approved by Contractor Ford Construction Co. Inc. Approved by Owner: City of Orono Specified Contract Completion Date:Date: 69.872.00 69.872.00 5.328.30 0.00 5.328.30 266.42 5,061.89 0.00 5.061.89 l;V139M 3968\nEQUEST.WB2 Ho. Contract Unit Quantity Amount Item Unit "c Date 1 Install sod SY 50 5.00 2 Install 6" sidewalk SF 75 4.00 3 Install 3/4* rock drive CY 4 25.00 4 I .stall 6' Colorado Blue Spruce EA 3 400.00 S Provide temporary controls, pumps and piping for interior conveyance LS 1 4.000.00 6 Provide lift station demolition LS 1 2.500.00 7 Install new pumps, piping, valves, top hatch and slab per Section 11306 LS 1 35.522.00 0.15 5.328.30 8 Install new control panel, base slab per Section 16903. including base bid dialer Total Work Completed to Date LS 1 26.000.00 $5328^0 Alternate No. 1 9 Provide improved telephone dialer specified in Section 16903 LS I 700.00 Total Alternate No. 1 Alternate Equipment Bids to Item Manufacturer Deduct II Item Manufacturer Deduct l:\139M3968\REQUEST.WB2 Pumps/Controls ABS/Professional (S2.000.00) Pumps/Conirols Myers/Healy Ruff ($4,000.00) J » ■ 1 f- ■ • —■ rr’^fwa > ♦ PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS Owner City of Orono Project No. 13968 Fik No. 13968 Contractor Ford Construction Co. Inc. CHANGE ORDERS Description Amount i 1 2 3 • Total Chance Orders PAYMENT SUMMARY r^o. 1 Start 09/10/96 5.061.89 266.42 5.328.30 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Material on Hand Total Payment to Date S5.06I.89 OriKinal Contract S69.872.00 Retainace. Payment No. 1 266.42 Change Orders Total Amount Earned S5.328.30 Revised Contract S69.872.00 1 4 I.A139M 3968\flEQUEST.WB2 .v'lura. '.'VL.vT - •• •-. ♦» , COUNCIL MEETINQ SEP 2 3 1996 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITYOFORONO DATE; September 18, 1996 ITEM NO: j Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed;Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report Item Description: Citizen Volunteer to Assist With Cable TV Franchise Renewal Process The Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission is beginning negotiations with the cable provider regarding the renewal of the cable franchise. An Orono resident, Fred Blanch, has indicated an interest in volunteering his time and efforts toward promoting the city’s interests in the franchise renewal process. A letter from Mr. Blanch is attached. Mr Blanch has had a discussion with Councilmember Jabbour regarding serving as Councilmember Jabbour’s alternate as the city’s representative on the Communications Commission. The Cable Administrator has indicated that although one of the city’s representatives on the Communications Commission needs to be a Councilmember, the city can appoint a non-elected resident as an alternate representative on the Commission. The Council may, at this time want to appoint Mr. Blanch to a one-year term on the Communications Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to appoint Mr. Fred Blanch to a one-year term as an alternate member to the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission, effective September 23, 1996. Frederick Blanch 3965 Bayskje Rd. Long Lake, MN 55356 612/475-1775 r -*) April 2.1996 Mr. Ronald Morris C'ty Administrator City of Orono P.O BoxG6 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Mr. Morris: I am directing this letter to you at the suggestion of Mr. Gabriel Jabbour. » Because of the upcoming negotiations with Triax Cablevision, I would like to offer my services to become a member of the Lake Minnetonka (Cable) Communications Commission. Related experience: Originated, developed and simultaneously directed successful businesses for twenty years: Screencratt Inc., printing (l00-»- employees); 3D Studios. Inc., sales promotion; Promotional Planning, Inc., advertising and Heritage Land Corporation, land development. Member of the Stale of Minnesota Pesticide Task Force, 1975-76. Have served on ten Boards of Directors - includes two nonprofit - 501(C)(3)s. Have been a composer of chamber music for twenty years; have been ASCAP awarded the pas» ^'ve years. Since 1991 have produced Music da camera, a chamber music program for distribution to Public Access cable television. It is currently carried by seventy-two cable systems in twenty-eight states, telecast to over 4.000,000 cable subscribing homes. In 1995, Music da camera was awarded a first place (Performing Arts category) by the Hometown Video Festival - Alliance for Community Media, Public Access cable television ’s equivalent of an Oscar for Best Picture. In setting up this distribution network, I have had experience dealing with cable companies, cable boards, etc. Currently the Executive Director of Chamber Music Minnesota (a volunteer position). 1 will be happy to provide details and may be contacted at the above number. Until then, I am Sincerely yours. cc: Mr. Gabriel Jabbour. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION meeting 2 3 i996 DATE: ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name: Jack Brinkhaus Title: Public Works Supervisor Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Food-grade Hydraulic Fluid for Floor Hoists in Public Works Building Attachments:A. Memo dated September 12, 1996 B. Quote for Removal & Draining of Floor Hoist System Floor hoists located in the Public Works garage currently use petroleum-based hydraulic fluid. Petroleum-based products are hazardous and there is a potential for pollution of the ground and groundwater at the Public Woiks facility. Food-grade hydraulic fluids (vegetable oils), only recently available for applications like floor hoists, are not considered hazardous If leaks using food-grade products occur, there is no pollution of the ground and groundwater. If the soil or groundwater were contaminated with petroleum-based products, the city may be required to eliminate the pollution by digging out any contaminated soils This would reo”'re removing the floor of the garage, and, depending on the severity of the contamination, the ilation of wells. Hydraulic floor hoists eventually leak during the course of normal use. And, there is always the danger of broken 4ir; and mal^nctioning equipment that would result in a major spill. The current system ds between 120 and 130 gallons of hydraulic fluid. Although mere expensive, food-grade products eliminate the potential for an extremely expensive project of removing contaminated soil. The cost of replacing petroleum-based fluid with food-grade fluid will be approximately $2,785. This amount can be funded through the Building Capital Outlay Fund. Currently, the budget includes $5,300 for Buildings & Structures, of which $3,870 was spent for sealcoatin^^ and striping the parking lots. This leaves $1,430 available. The remaining $1,355 could be either adjusted from this fund, or be taken from the repairs & maintenance budget in the operating fund. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council authorize the project of removing pctrolcum-based hydraulic fluid from the ‘'ity's floor hoists and replace it with food-grade hydraulic fluid. ,seconded by .that in PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by_______________ order to prevent potential soil and groundwater contamination, the Public Works department is authorized to remove petroleum-based hydraulic fluids from the floor hoists and replace it with food-grade hydraulic fluid at a cost not to exceed $2,785. And that the budget of the Building Capital Outlay Fund be adjusted to reflect these expenditures. Ayes ___, Nays ___, September 12,1996 To: From: Subject; Ron Moorse, City Administrator John Olson, Mgmt. Analyst Food Grade Hydraulic Fluid for Floor Hoists From time to time, particularly in the spring, groundwater has seeped into the floor hoists in the Public Works garage Because of the current petroleum-based hydraulic fluid used in the floor hoists, a possibility for contamination exists. If the ground or groundwater became contaminated with petroleum-based hydraulic fluid, we would have to remove the floor and dig out the contamination as soon as possible to limit pollution This would be a costly project. A solution for this problem exists, a food-grade hydraulic fluid made from vegetable oil. The fluid would operate the hoists just like petroleum-based fluid does, but it is not considered a hazardous material If there were a leak of fluid into the ground or groundwater, we would simply have to fix the leak. We would not be required to '■emove the floor or the dirt below the floor. In order to free our current floor hoist system from any petroleu n-based product, we would need to remove and drain the hydraulic cylinders, pump out the hydraulic fluid reservoir, and blow out the lines. After these were completed, then the food-grade fluid would be introduced into the system We have received quotations for this project which are as follows: Remove and drain cylinders. Pump out the reservoir and Blow out the lines;$ 600 165 (3 @ 55 gal.) gallons food-grade hydraulic fluid, at $11.00 per gallon, including tax; Miscellaneous repairs to floor hoists $1935 $ 250 Total project costs;$2,785 In order to prevent the possibility of pollution and to avoid the removal of the shop floor and rebuilding of that part of the city garage, we feel it is an inexpensive alternative to add food- grade hydraulic fluid to the floor hoists. Food-grade hydraulic fluid, which is not considered hazardous waste, will not cause contamination if it does leak into the ground or groundwater. If we leave the petroleum-based hydraulic fluid in the floor hoists, we can almost be assured of future contamination to the ground and groundwater as the hoists age and begin to leak due to normal wear. T a T MAINTENANCE. INC. P. O. Box 606 St. Bonifacius, MN 55375 (612) 446-1755 Sen/ice Station Equipment Ssiet & ServiO' ^pdJ o V tNvoice NO. OAT£ Accouisn K40 VOun P O NUM8CP T£ QMS SMtP VIA PQB salesman QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE a.mou.nt 1 r y 11% ^-y'y'y^C.I y^^y>f*yfiy y^»^ysy~^ a<y?~’ i 1 1 1 j/i^Sy^y^-^ y ^ Syy y^^^yy^.. ^yS' yy^Zyy^ yyW^ y^ 4fyy. y y ^^.ZiyATy^y^Cy y>sy2>yj^ yy<y ’ ^ y <y^s>yy>iS^ y^^^ yy^^,s.yzr ^gicy'yyy^' y:>y<y y^-yyyp cT^<r«i>cr y^y^y^, yp^^p yyssy^ y<yy=y~ y^ySy~?X>-^ S>4y y y <D C)0 ^ -- - - y ’yyyy ^yD y^y y> PLEASE PAY FROM THIS INVOICE gUB TOTAL TAX TOTAL OO i OOWc***EEt! SEP REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 1996 DATE: September 19, 1996 ITEM NO: } Department Approval: Name Dorothy Hallin Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed: m Agenda Section; Licenses Item D^ription: List of Licenses for Council Approval r There are no licenses. sp-p ^3 cn ^996 10 Sep 1996 Tue 1:41 AH Check Number Check Number 52107 Check register City of Orono Date Name 52107 CITY COUNT/ CREDIT UNION 11-Sep-96 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Totals Check Number 521C7 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Check Number 52108 52106 52108 52108 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES ll-Sep-96 ll-Sep-96 ll-Sep-96 Totals Check Number FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 52108 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Check Number 52109 52109 GREAT NEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. ll-Sep-96 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO Totals Check Number 52109 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO Chtck N’jmber 52110 52110 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT 6 COLL ll-Sep-96 Totals Check Number HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT 6 COLL 52110 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT 6 COLL Check Number 52111 52111 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT k COLL ll-Sep-96 Totals Check Number HENNEPIN COUrrY SUPPORT k COLL 52111 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT k COLL Check Number 52112 52112 ICMA RETIREMENT TTUST - 457 ll-Sep-96 Totals Check Number ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 52112 ICMA RETIRE^ffiNT TRUST - 457 Check Number 52113 52113 UM ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE ll-Sep-96 To* als Check Number LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 52113 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Check Number 52114 52114 yH DEPT OF REVENUE ll-Sep-96 Totals Check Number MN DEPT OF REVENUE 52114 DEPT OF RE'/EI^UE Check Number 52115 52115 MN MUTUAL LIFE ll-Sep-96 Totals Check Number MN MUTUAL LIFE sms MN MUTUAL LIFE Transaction Amount 5.769.00 5.769.00 3,122.31 3.122 31 7,340.39 13,585,01 1.190.00 1.190.00 164.82 164.82 184.50 184.50 100.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 3.065.98 3.065.98 55.00 55.00 Page 1 Comments SAVINGS W/H k TRANSFERRED FICA k MEDICARE W/H FICA.MEDCR CITY SHARE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING DEFERRED COMP W/H THOKTON 8C0266780 8KREEK 8C0262310 DEFERRED COMP W/K UNION DUES W/H STATE TAX W/H DEFERRED COMP W/H 10 Sep 1996 Tue 6:41 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Nuoiber Date Name Oieck !lumber 52116 52116 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP 11-Sep-96 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Totals Check Number 52116 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Check Number 52117 PEBSCO/OBRA 52117 ll-Sep-96 PEBSCO/OBRA Totals Check Number 52117 PEBSCO/OBRA Check Number 52118 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAJORS 52118 ll-Sep-96 PEBSCO/US CCNF OF MAYORS Totals Check Number 52118 PEBSCO/US CuNf OF MAYORS Check Number 52119 PERA 52119 52119 ll-Sep-96 ll-Sep-96 PERA PERA Totals Check Nufnber 52119 PERA Check Nu’^ber 52120 52120 ST. CROIX COUNTY ll-Sep-96 ST. CROIX COUNTY Totals Check Number 52120 ST. CROIX COUNTY Check Number 52121 UNITED KAY 52121 ll-Sep-96 UNITED KAY Totals Check Number 52121 UNITED KAY Grand Total Transaction Amount 150.00 150.00 268.57 268.57 1.992.50 1.992.50 3.662.26 5.080.49 8.942.75 32.75 32.75 29.00 29.00 35.529.68 Page 2 Comments DEFER.RED COMP N/H OBRA DEFERRED COMP K/H USCM DEFERRED COMP K/H PERA EMPLOYEE K/H PERA CITY SHARE CHILD SUPPORT-SCHULTZ CHARITY DONATIONS W/H 19 Sep 1996 Thu l:S9 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number S2287 52287 AL'S MASTER PLUMBING 19-Sep-96 AL'S MASTER PLUMBING Totals Check Number 52287 AL'S MASTER PLUMBING Check Number 52288 ASCOM MAILING SYSTEMS 52288 12-Sep-96 ASCOM MAILING SYSTEMS Totals Check Number 522«8 ASCOM MAILING SYSTEMS Check Number 52289 ASPLUNDH COFFEE 52289 19-Sep-96 ASPLUNDH COFFEE Totals Check Number 52289 ASPLUNDH COFFEE Check Nuirt^er 52290 AT&T 52290 12-Sep-96 AT&T Totals Check Number 52290 AT&T Check Nunfcer 52291 AtXIIES MOBILE OT f 52291 52291 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF AUGIES MOBILE CHEF Totals Check Number 52291 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF ChecK Number 52292 BLACKONIAK & SON 52292 52292 52292 12-Sep-96 12-Sep-S6 12-Sep-96 BLACKOWIAK & SON BLACKONIAK & SON BLACKOWIAK & SON Totals Check Number 52292 BLACKOWIAK & SON Check Number 52293 BORIS, SCOTT 52293 19-Sep-96 BORIS, SCOTT Totals Check Number 52292 BORIS. SCOTT Check Number 52294 BRINKHAUS, JACK 52294 19-Sep-96 BRINKHAUS, JACK Totals Check Number 52294 BRINKHAUS. JACK Check Number 52295 BUDGET PRINTING 52295 12-Sep-96 BUDGET PRINTING Transaction Amount 48 92 48.92 180.75 180.75 202.00 202.00 0.17 0.17 39.50 60.94 100.44 70.89 290.77 168.58 530.24 15.00 15.00 15.90 15.90 31.92 Page 1 Comments REFUND 3340 SHORELINE DR 4TH OTR METER RENTAL COFFEE LONG DISTANCE-CELL PHONE COFFEE SANDWiaiES FOR RESALE AUG SERVICE AUQ SERVICE AUG SERVICE EXPENSE REIMD. MILEAGE REIMD. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY i 19 Sep 1996 Thu 8:59 AM Check I^Umber Check UuftJber 52295 52295 Check Regieter City of Orono Date nsm^ 52295 BUDGET PRINTING 12-Sep-96 BUDGET PRINTING 12-Sep-96 BUDGET PRINTING Transaction Amount 44.05 194.59 Totals Check Number 52295 BUDGET PRINTING 270.56 Page 2 Oomcent* SCORE CARDS ENVELOPES Check Humber 52296 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS INC. 52296 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Number BUFFALO BITt^ilNOUS INC 52296 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS INC 40.550.86 to.550.86 HILLOH DRIVE PAY 83 Check Number 52297 CAR-TEL MOBILE COWUNICATIONS 52297 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Number CAR-TEL MOBILE COf^^UNICATIONS 52297 CAR-TEL MOBILE COWUNICATIONS 99.25 99.25 CELLULAR PHONE RENTAL Check Number 52290 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS 52298 19 Sep-96 Totals Check Number CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS 52290 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS 189.00 189.88 SEPT LEASE Check Number 52299 CHASPRO 52299 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Number CHASPRO 52299 CHASPRO 100.00 100.00 MACHINE END OF FIRE HYDR Check Number 52300 52300 52300 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 12-Sep-96 12-Sep-96 Totals Check Number CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 52300 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO Check Number 52301 52301 CITY CP LONG LAKE 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Number CITY OP LONG LAKE 52301 CITY OF LONG LAKE Check Number 52302 52302 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Number CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 52302 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH Cneck Number 52303 52303 COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Number COLONIAL LIFE INSURATJCE CO, 52303 COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO 135.70 539.36 675.06 126.00 126.00 118.50 118.50 871.23 871.23 8171 BATTERY. ELEC WORK 8169 SUSPENSION WORK JET RODDING SEWER LINE POSTAGE DUE SEPT INSURANCE 19 Sep 1996 Thu 8:S9 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 52304 52304 CCNNELL, MARY 19-Sep-9^ CONNELL. MARY Totals Check Number 52304 CONNELL, MARY Check Number 52305 CYS UNIFORMS 523CS 12-Sep-96 CYS UNIFORMS TotlXf Check NUn^r 52305 CYS trNIFOKMS Check Number 52306 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 52306 12>Sep-96 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Totals Check Number 52306 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Check Number 52307 DYNAMED 52307 52307 19-Sep>96 12-Sep-96 DYNAMED DYNAMED Totals Check Number 52307 DYNAMED Check Number 52308 EAST SIDE BiIVERAGE 52308 12 Sep-96 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE Totals Check Number 52309 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE Check Number 52309 52309 FEED RITE CONTROLS 19-Sep-96 FEED RITE CONTROLS Totals Check Number 52309 FEED RITE CONTROLS Check Number 52310 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY 52310 19-Sep-96 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY Totals Check Number 52310 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY Check Number 52311 FORD CONSTRUCTION 52311 19-Sep-96 FORD CONSTRUCTION Totals Check Number 52311 FORD CONSTRUCTION Check Number 52312 FRESHWATER FOUNDATION 52312 19-S-P-96 FRESHWATER FOUNDATION Totals Check Number 52312 FRESHWATER FOUNDATION Transaction Amount 7.50 7.50 283 66 283.66 60.00 60.00 60.00 149.35 209.35 227.00 227.00 5.00 5.00 169.00 169 00 5,061.89 5,061.89 317.50 317.50 Page 3 Comments REFUND DOG LICENSE UNIFORJC SPRING RATER FOR RESALE MEDICAL SUPPLIES MEDICAL SUPPLIES BEER FOR RESALE CONTAINER CHARGE FIRE SPRINKLER MONITORING L.S. 828 PAY 81 RENTAL-I\ .uING LOCATION 4 i \ 19 Sep 1996 Thu S:59 Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 52313 52313 52313 52313 52313 52313 52313 52313 52313 52313 5^‘'13 52313 G & 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 19>Sep-96 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 12-Sep 96 K SERVICES G St K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G i K SERVICES G i K SERVICES G i K SERVICES G i K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G fc K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G 4 K SERVICES G & K services Totals Check Number 52313 G & K SERVICES Check Number 52314 GENUINE PARTS CO. 52314 52314 12-Sep-9€ 12-Sep-96 GENUINE PARTS CO GENUINE PARTS CO Totals Check Number 52314 GENUINE PARTS CO, Check Number 52315 GOLF CAR MIDWEST 52315 52315 12-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 GOLF CAR MIDWEST GOLF CAR MIDWEST Totals Check Number 52315 GOLF CAR MIDWEST Check Number 52316 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. 52316 52316 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 GOPHER STATE ONE-C\LL INC GOPHER STATE ONE-CALI. INC S Totals Check Number 52316 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC I I Check Numoer 52317 HALLIN, DOROTHY 52317 19-Sep-96 HALLIN, DOROTHi Totals Check Number 52317 HALLIN, DOROTHY Check Number 52310 HEALIHPARTNERS 52318 52318 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 HEALTHPARTNERS HEALTHr'ARTT’ERS Totals Check Number 52318 healthpartt:eks Check Number 52319 HENNEPIN COUf.TV SHERIFF 52319 12-Sep-96 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Totals Check NunODer 52319 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Transaction Amount 10.28 79.11 02.57 4.73 10.28 74.48 4.73 47.09 58.34 47.C9 53.11 471.81 16.53 24.11 40.64 1.200.00 554.84 1,754.04 37.63 37.62 75.25 26.10 26.10 313.50 2,671.06 2,984.56 108.91 108.91 Comment s RATHBUN STREET F.MPLOYEES FLOOR MATS STEFF’iNHAGEN RATHBUN STREET EMPLOYEES STEFFENHAGEN FLOOR MATS FLOOR MATS FLOOR MATS STREET EMPLOYEES MISC PARTS MISC PARTS S .rT LEASE REPAIR GOLF CARTS AUGUST SERVICE AUGUST SERVICE MILEAGE REIMS. OCT INSURANCE OCT INSURANCE BOOKING FEES-JULY Page 4 19 Sep 1996 Thu S:59 AM Check Regltter City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 52320 52320 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASL-PER 12-Sep-96 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASUREP Totals Check Number 52320 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURSl Chtch Number 52321 HIN2B BUSINESS MACHINES 52321 19-Sep-96 HINZB BUSINESS MACHINES Totals Check Nuinber 52321 HINZB BUSINESS MACHINES Check Humber 52322 IMA2INALITY 52322 12-Sep-96 IMAGINALITY Totals Check Humber 52322 IMAGINALITY Check Number 52323 KO£KN£N*S AMOCO 52323 19-Sep-96 KOEKNEN'S AMOCO Totals Check Number 52323 KOEKNEN'S AMOCO Check Number 52324 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC 52324 12-^cp-96 KUSTCM SIGNALS INC Totals Check Number 52324 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Check Number 52325 LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY 5232r 12-Sep-96 LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY Totals Check Number 52325 LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY Check Number 52326 LAWN DETAILERS INC. 52326 19-Sep-96 LAWN DETAILERS INC Totals Check Number 52326 LAWN DETAILERS INC, Check Number 52327 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT 52327 52327 19-Sep-96 12-Sep-96 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT LONG LmKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT Totals Check Number 52377 LONG LAKE TRACTOR EQUIPMENT Check Number 52329 KACQUEEN EQUIPMENT 52328 19-Sep-96 MACQJEEN EQUIPMENT Totals Check Number 52328 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT Transaction Amount 577.00 577.00 75.00 75.00 2.480.00 2.480.00 38.64 38.64 17.51 17.51 38.13 38.13 2.145.22 2.145.22 16.10 3.83 19.93 557.45 557.45 • JPage 5 Comments ROOM k BOARD - JULY REPAIR PAX MACHINE TEE SIGNS GASOLINE PURCHASE FART FOR 'SMART' TRAILER REGISTER ROLLS AUGUST SERVICE D-RINGS SPRING EXTENSION REPAIR STEERING CYLINDER _ _ 19 Sep 1996 Thu 0:59 AM Check Register City of Orono Check fTumber Date Name Check Number 52329 52329 MCNICHCLS, DAVID 19-Sep-96 MCNICHOLS, DAVID Totals Check Number 52329 MCNICHOLS, DAVID Oieck Number 52330 MEDTOX LABORATORIES 52330 12-Sep-96 MEDTOX LABORATORIES Totals Check Number 52330 MEDTOX LABORATORIES Check Number 52331 52331 METRO WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION 12-Sep-96 METRO WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION Totals Check Number 52331 METRO WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION Check Number 52332 MIDWEST ASPHALT 52332 12-Sep-96 MIDWEST ASPHALT Totals Check Number 52332 MIDWEST ASPHALT Check Number 52333 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO 52333 12-Sep-96 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Totals Check Number 52333 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Check Number 52334 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 52334 12-Sep-96 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Totals Check Number 52334 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Check Number 52335 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION 52335 19-Sep-96 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION Totals Check Number 52335 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION Check Number 52336 MN STATE TREASURER 52336 12-9^1 96 MN STATE TREASURER Totals Check Nunib^t^S2336 MN STATE TREASURER Check Number 52337 MOORSE, RON 52337 19-Sep-96 MOORSE. RON Totals Check Number 52337 MOORSE. RON Check Number 52330 NAVARRE HARDWARE Transaction Amount 5.27 5.27 50.00 50.00 23,746.00 23.74<5.00 335.53 335.58 58.60 58.60 13.50 13.50 74.22 74.22 20.00 20.00 137.60 137.60 Page 6 Comments EXPENSE REIMB. SCREENING TESTS OCl'OBER HAND PATCH POP FOR RESALE MEDICAL OXYGEN OCTOBER INSURANCE OMAN-CONT. EDUCATION REPO REIMB. EXPENSES i 19 Sep 1996 Check Register Thu 8:59 AM City of Orono Check Transaction Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 52330 NAVARRE HARDWARE 52330 19-Sep-96 NAVARRE HARDWARE 33.34 MISC PARTS 52330 19-Sep-96 NAVARRE HARDWARE 136.96 MISC PARTS 52338 19-Sep-96 NAVARRE HARDWARE 17.36 MISC PARTS 52330 19-Sep-96 NAVARRE .-iARDWA.RE 157.12 MISC PARTS Total* Check Number 52330 NAVARRE HARDWARE Check Number 52339 NORTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER 52339 19-Sep-96 NORTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER Total* Check Number 52339 NORTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER * ChtCk N*jmber 5234 0 NORTHERN STATES POWER 52340 19-Sep-96 NORTHERN STATES POWER Total* Check Number 52340 NORTHERN STATES POWER Check Humber 52341 N5P 52341 52341 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-9€ NSP NSP Total* Check Number 52341 NSP Check Number 52342 OFFICE DEPOT 52342 52342 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE DEPOT Totals Check Number 52342 OFFICE DEPOT Check Number 52343 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. 52343 12-Sep-96 OLD DUTCH FOODS I.NC Total* Check Number 52343 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC Check Number 52344 OLSON. JOHN C 52344 19-Sep-96 OLSON, JOHN C Totals Check Number 52344 OLSON. JOHN C Check Number 52345 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR 52345 52345 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR Totals Check Number 52345 PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR Check Number 52346 PRO TIP*: L EXHAUST 344.78 8.00 8.00 1.092.70 1.092.70 506.72 125.98 632.70 172.58 124.74 297.32 20.24 20.24 266.13 266.13 58.58 20.00 70.58 LAB TEST STREET LIGHT BILL NSP CHARGES NSP CHARGES MISC SUPPLIES MISC SUPPLIES CHIPS FOR RESALE Page 7 TUITION, BOOKS REIMB. TOW CAR OFF OCB ROAD DOCK REPAIR 19 Sep 1996 Thu 8:59 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 52346 52346 52346 52346 52346 52346 PRO TIRE k EXHAUST 19-Sep-96 PRO TIRE k EXHAUST 19-Sep-96 PRO TIRE k EXHAUST 19-Sep-96 PRO TIRE Si EXHAUST 19-Sep-96 PRO TIRE i EXHAUST 12-Sep-96 PRO TIRE k EXHAUST Totals Check Number 52346 PRO TIRE k EXHAUST Check Number 52347 REED VENDING 52347 12-Sep-96 REED V'ENDING Totals Check Number 52347 REED VENDING t Check Number 52348 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES 52340 19-Sep-96 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES Totals Check Number 52348 ROLF 1.KICKSON ENTERPRISES Check Number 52349 SCHARBER k SONS 52349 19-Sep-96 SCHARBER & SONS Totals Check Number 52349 SCHARBER k SONS Check Number 52350 SCHOENING EXCAVATING 52350 19-Sep-96 SCHOENING EXCAVATING Totals Check Number 52350 SCHOENING EXCAVATING Check Number 52351 SCHULTZ, MICHAEL 52351 12-Sep-96 SCHULTZ, MICHAEL Totals Check Number 52351 SCHULTZ, MICHAEL Check Number 52352 SNYDER DRUG STORES Check Number 52353 STATE OF MINNESOTA 52353 52353 12-Sep-96 12-Sep-96 STATE OF MINNESOTA STATE OF MINNESOTA Transaction Amount 21.00 86.31 24.86 38.55 32.26 202.98 47.00 47.00 6.705.37 6.705.37 234.27 234.27 180.00 180.00 24.00 24.00 10.00 10.00 Page 8 Comments #171 TIRE SERVICE PK3. #171 OIL CHANGE, ALIGN. #173 OIL CHANGE #175 OIL CHANGE, FLUIDS #169 OIL CHANGE CANDY FOR RESALE OCTOBER SERVICES REPAIR JOHN DEERE CLEAN OUT k PEGRADB DIT04 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 52352 19-SCP-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 13.09 FILM DEVELOPING 52352 19-Sep-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 0.52 FILM 52352 12-Sep-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 2.44 FILM DEVELOPING 52352 12-Sep-96 S.NYDER DRUG STORES 3.62 FILM DEVELOPING Totals Check Number 52352 SNYDER DRUG STORES 19.67 EXEMPTION CERTIFICATE EXEMPTION CERTIFICATE Totals Check Number 52353 STATE OF MINNESOTA 20.00 19 Sep 1996 Thu 8:59 AM Chec)c Nurriber Check Number 52354 52354 Date Name 52354 STREICHERS 19 -Sep-9 6 STREICHERS 12-Sep-96 STREICHERS Check Register City of Orono Transaction Amount 84.14 81.31 Totals Check Number 52354 STREICHERS 165.45 Comment s MISC EQUIPMENT BATTERY PACK Page 9 Check Number 52355 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. 52355 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Nutf^er SUBURBAN TIRE INC 52355 SUBURBAN TIRE INC, 590.95 590.95 SQUAD CAR TIRES Check Number 52356 TEKPORARIES-TO-GO 52356 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Number iraPORAR I £ S - TO - GO 52356 TeiPORARIES-TO-00 38.50 38.50 TD® STAFF FOR PICNIC Check Number 52357 THORPE DIST CO. 52357 12-Sep-96 Totals Check Number THORPE DIST CO, 52357 THORPE DIST CO, 113.50 113.50 BEER FOR RESALE Check Number 52358 TOWN k COUNTRY 52358 12-Sep-96 Totals Check Number TOWN k COUNTRY 52358 TOWi; k COUNTRY 963.63 963.83 SEPTEMBER SERVICE Qieck Number 52359 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 5235i 12-Sep-96 Totals Check Number UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 52359 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 463.22 463.22 UNIFORMS Check Number 52360 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 52360 52360 52360 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Number US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 52360 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 13.31 110.22 66.56 190.09 US WEST CHARGES US WEST CHARGES US WEST CHARGES Check Number 52361 WARNING LITES OF MN 52361 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Number WARNING LITES OF MN 52361 WAP.NING LITES OF MN 99.05 99.05 BARRICADE RE.NTAL Check Number 52362 WATERPRO 52362 19-Sep-96 Totals Check Number WATERPRO 52362 WATERPRO 936.82 936.82 METERS 19 Sep 1996 Thu 8:59 AM Check Register City of Orono Page 10 Check Number Date Name Transaction Amount Comment s Check Number 52363 52363 YOCUM OIL CO INC. 19-Sep-96 YOCUM OIL CO INC Totals Check Number 52363 YOCUM OIL CO INC. 1,362.58 1,362.58 DIESEL FJEL Grand Total 101,465.15 1 information ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING OOUNCLMEEnNa SEP 2 3 1996 cnYOFonoNO OF Lafayette Ridge Homeowners Association P.O. Box 41 Minnetonka Beach, MN 55361 Orono City Council P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 RE: Outlot C, Lo^-'yenc Ridge (17-117-23 44 0094) The purpose of this letter is to request that the Orono City Council pass a resolution directing Hennepin County delinquent Tax Forfeit and Land Department, to release Outlot C to Lafayette Homeowners Association Prior to 1994, tlie City of Orono assessed Outlot C for street lighting improvements. On August 26, 1994, this property was forfeited to Hennepin County for lack of payment on the special assessment On August 26, 1995, Lafayette Ridge Homeowners lost its rights to redeem. Lafayette Ridge Homeowners Association w as ne\ er notified of the assessment of the forfeiture, or of Its rights to redeem in that the notices were sent to the w rong address There are se\ eral outlots associated with Lafayette Ridge in which we have received tax statements for several years. The tax statements recei\ed for these outlots indicate no tax due. in that, the outlots do not pay real estate taxes. In discussions w ith the tax assessor, the Office of Delinquent Tax and Forfeited Land Department in Hennepin County and with City personnel, we have been told tliat assessing the outlot was done incorrectly, in that, given the outlots do not pay taxes that apply ing a special assessment was inappropriate. In discussions with Hennepin County , they have indicated to us that it will take a resolution from the City of Orono to reverse the previous actions and to release the property back to Lafayette Ridge Homeowners Association 1 have also discussed this issue w ith your City Attorney . and asked him to talk to the individual at the County to get specifically what they need from the City to release the property. We presume the conversation between the County and the City Attorney has occurred and that your attorney can provide you with the specific requirements of the County. In summary . v.c are requesting that the City provide the County the necessary information to release Outlot C. and that the City waive the special assessment. As you are aware, we must retain ownership of Outlot C in order to be in compliance w ith the PUD agreement w ith the City of Orono. We will pl.m to be present at your City Council meeting on September 23, 1996. In order to answer any questions y ou may have at that time. Meanw hile, if there are any questions regarding our request, feel fiee to call me at 893-8821 during the day or 471-0347 in the evenings. Sinccrelv. Bruce W. Palmer President Lafavette Homeowners Association REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 09/03/96PERMIT TYPEBuilding SGL FAMILY-NEW SF-ADD/REMODEL SF-ACC STRUCTURE DEMO/PRINCIPAL COM-ADD/REMODEL INST-ADD/REMODEL DEMO-ACCESSORY ACC/GARAGES Sub-total Mechanical HEATING SYSTEMS AIR CONDITIONING FIREPLACE VENTILATION REMOVE OIL TANK Sub-total Plumbin< FIXTUREl WATER METER UNDEFINED Sub-total Sewer & Water SEWER CONNECTION NEW SEPTIC SYSTE DRNFLD &/OR TANK SAC ONLY SEWER k WATER Sub-total Sign PERMANENT/POSTED PER./free STANDG TEMPORARY Sub-total User Defined LAND ALTERATION LAWN SPRINKLER Sub-total Grand-total PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED AUGUST 1996PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO PAGE! 1REQUESTER: CAROLE•. . . . . . .CURRENT08/01/96 -RANGE . . . . .08/31/96 . . . . . . . PREVIOUS08/01/95 -RANGE . . . . .08/31/95QTYBASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW QTY BASE FES VALUATION PLAN REVIEW612,567.25 2,075,724.00 8,168.70 3 5,816.75 931,000.00 3,780.88 23 2,728.00 146,913.00 729.80 31 6,526.25 520,111.00 3,456.38 2 133.25 6,499.00 72.96 3 341.25 19,300.00 221.81 1 50.00 0.00 0.00 1 50.00 0.00 0.00 1 74.75 3,000.00 0.00 1 162.25 10,000.00 105.46 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 274.50 16,000.00 121.71 1 30.00 0.00 0.00 1 30.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 137.25 7,450.00 89.21 34*15,583.25*2,232,136.00*8,971.46*43*13,338.25* 1 ,503,861.00*7,775.45* 7 653.85 52,307.50 0.00 7 691.11 54,088.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 105.00 5,635.00 0.00 6 315.63 19,950.00 0.00 6 231.25 13,050.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 2,075.00 0.00 2 72.50 4,475.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 15*1,041.90*76,732.50*0.00*17*1,062.36*74,848.00*0.00* 16 1,017.66 60,446.33 0.00 14 750.94 40,643.67 0.00 1 35.00 2,500.00 0.00 1 133.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 1,000.00 0.00 17*1,052.66*62,946.33*0.00*16*918.94*41,643.67*0.00* 5 175.00 0.00 0.00 4 140.00 0.00 0.00 13 1,300.00 0.00 0.00 4 400.00 0.00 0.00 2 100.00 0.00 0.00 1 •50.00 0.00 0.00 2 1,050.00 0.00 0.00 6 5,100.00 0.00 0.00 1 70.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 23*2,695.00*0.00*0.00*15*5,690.00*0.00*0.00* 1 35.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 35 00 0.00 0.00 1 30.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 2*65.00*0.00*0.00*1*35.00*0.00*0.00* 3 150.00 0.00 0.00 1 50.00 0.00 0.00 3 105.00 0.00 0.00 2 70.00 0.00 0.00 6*255.00*0.00*0.00*3*120.00*0.00*0.00* 97**20,692.89* *2,371,014.03**0,971.46**95**21,164.55**1,620,352.67**7,775.45* PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED AUGUST 1996REPORT NBR. BrEERPTl-1 DATE OF RUN 09/03/96 CITY OF FROM 08/01/96 REPORT t•* * t ORONOTO 08/31/96 REQUESTER: CAROLEBUILDINGMECHANICALPLUMBINGSEWER fit WATER USER SIGN FIREBASE FEE 15,583.25 1,041.98 1,052.66 2,695.00 255.00 65-00 0.00PLAN REVIEW 8,971 .46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00SURCHARGE1,117.50 38.38 33.96 10.50 1.50 0.00 0.00 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SAC 0.00 0.00 0 ^>0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 212.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MAIL IN ENGINEERING PEES 16.50 13.00 4.50 50.00 ESCROW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 25,004 .29 1,096.86 1,099.62 2,710.00 306.50 65.00 0.00 REPORT NBR. BFEERPTl-1 DATE OF RUN 09/03/96 4 • * • t PERMIT FEE REPORT •• CITY OF ORONO FROM 08/01/96 TO 08/31/96 REPORT TOTAL BASE FEE 20,692.89 PLAN REVIEW 8,971.46 SURCHARGE 1,201.92 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 SAC 0.00 INVESTIGATION 212.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 MAIL IN ENGINEERING FEES 34.00 50.00 ESCROW 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 31,162.27 >•^4 PAGE: 35 REQUESTER: CAROLE i TUE, SEP 3, x996, 4:18 PMPERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST 1996 PAGE 1PERMIT WORK ADDR NBR STREET ISSUED PERMIT NBR ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM valuationWHITEIS236.300.00 382,000.00344.540.00EDMUNDS695,000.00TURKBAS246,532.00 SAPA 3,000.00 SPENCER 15,000.00 KIRBY 2,400.00 WASBERG 5,100.00 PERKINS 10,500.00 GUTTORMSON 2,000.00 ALBRECHT 1,700.00 PUTNAM 1,400.00 REZABECK 6,000.00 ANDERSON 5,105.00 BECKMAN 7,000.00 MARIER 6,250.00 GREIMANN 2,500.00 GAWRON 2,978.00 BECKMAN 2,600.00 FLIES 1,600.00 SPINNER 24,000.00 HERMANSON 2,100.00 SANDLER 500.00 ENGLUND 499.00 KEZAR .00 WINSLOW .00 JOHNSON 171,352.00 LESUEUR 3,000.00 FLYNN 5,000.00 RUSCH 7,000.00 MAHAFFY 10,600.00 BECKMAN 25,000.00 MOSIMAN 3,500.00 0,750.00 SANFORD 11,000.00 VARS 1,475.00 8,000.00 TROUP 5,050.00 GRANDE 4,846.50 1,165.00 WAADE 9,000.00 SAPA 1.500.00 9.711.00 SMIEJA 2,200.00 O'SULLIVAN 3,000.00 HENDERSON 3,100.00 MILLER 6,900.00 BECKMAN 1,035.00 SANFORD 11,913.00 34C ME 15C 0101010101 06 06 06 06 06 06 06 06 09 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 15 16 17 18 19 24 29 29 29 29 34C 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 02 19 24 24 29 15C 1000 850 575 1030 2685 1015 503 1020 3135 1699 3315 1810 2765 4185 1295 405 2775 3779 920 405 4360 94 r 3 78b 3533 2455 3050 1625 4520 2180 3473 1920 290 4 05 3505 2600 945 575 2755 890 2450 945 1487 1015 1920 3085 3340 2464 4423 405 945 COX FARM RD OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S SUSSEX CIR TONKAWA RD COPPER VIEW DR LINDEN LA FERNDALE RD N BROWN RD N NORTH SHORE DR NORTH FARM RD CRYSTAL BAY RD SH7UDYWOOD RD CASCO POINT RD DAYSIDE RD LOMA LINDA AVE OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S WHITE OAK CIR CASCO AVE DAKOTA AVE OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S CTH A>7E N »;ORTH ARM DR TOGO RD LIVINGSTON AVE SHADYWOOD RD 6TH AVE N BOHNS PT RD WATERTOWN RD NORTH SHORE DR LYRIC AVE SHORELINE DR HOLLANDER RD OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S LIVINGSTON AVE THOROUGHBRED LA COX FARM RD FERNDALE RD N COPPER VIEW DR OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S COUNTRYSIDE DR COX FARM RD SHORELINE DR LINDEN LA 6TH AVE N WATERTOWN RD SHORELINE DR DUNWOODY AVE NORTH SHORE DR OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S 96/08/0996/08/1296/08/1396/08/2296/08/26 96/00/02 96/08/13 96/08/13 96/08/19 96/08/16 96/08/16 96/08/29 96/08/30 96/08/27 96/08/01 96/08/26 96/08/07 96/08/09 96/08/12 96/08/12 96/08/14 96/00/16 96/08/23 96/08/30 96/08/05 96/00/26 96/00/30 96/00/15 96/00/13 96/00/26 96/08/16 96/08/16 96/00/21 96/00/23 96/00/06 96/08/13 96/08/14 96/00/15 96/00/20 96/00/26 96/00/27 96/00/27 96/08/27 96/08/27 96/00/22 96/08/14 96/00/06 96/00/13 96/08/26 OR-007750OR-008239OR-008260OR-008209OR-008294 OR-000223 OR-000235 OR-008249 OR-008270 OR-000275 OR-000270 OR-008314 OR-008319 OR-008066 OR-008210 OR-008304 OR-008230 OR-008241 OR-008243 OR-008244 OR-008267 OR-000277 OR-008297 OR-008324 OR-008224 OR-008290 OR-008321 OR-008266 OR-000257 OR-000300 OR-000250 OR-008273 OR-000205 OR-OO029G OR-008227 OR-008254 OR-000263 OR-008271 OR-000204 OR-000299 OR-000306 OR-008307 OR-000308 OR-008309 OR-000207 OR-000071 OR-008226 OR-008253 OR-000301 0000000014732588147595151942106012745471 19551210 14499448 14768403 00000000 14732221 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 18882242 00000000 10017274 00000000 18694201 16584485 00000000 14733397 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 14710413 10716682 17533060 19299342 00000000 15120110 38940005 32902940 35350194 39414211 14732508 30711491 35712525 39414211 35453797 37575040 00000000 17632998 34450585 34791600 35301432 LAKEWOOD DEVELOPMENTA U T DEVELOPMENTKEITH WATERS & ASSOCSTUHR BRUCE GORMLEY DENNY STREETER & ASSOCIATES INC LUCAS DESIGN WORKS STONEHOUSE DESIGNS KELLER HOME IMPROVEMENT HENDRICKS ROOFING REMODELI R K MEIERS HACKBARTH ENTERPRISES CORP PLYMOUTH ROOFING SCHMIDT ALLEN MOE-OSUM CONST CO MARTINSON CONSTRUCTION STILLWELL TED ROELOFS REMODELING U RENOV BURNSVILLE HEATING CO ROMARK INC DEAN'S TANK OIL KLEVE HTG & AC LAKEWOOD DEVELOPMENT A-ABC APPLIANCE U HEATING AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR CO KLEVE HTG ft AC M H SEIFERT CONST DEPENDABLE HTG ft AC C I CONSTRUCTION RON'S MECH INC COUNTRYSIDE HTG A/C MISSION MECHANICAL COX FARM RD 96/08/09 OR-000236 27389354 BRUCE NELSON PLUMBING ft HT TUR, SEP 3, 199C, 4:18 PMPERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST 1996ADDR NHR STREET ISSUED PERMIT NBR ID NUMBER COMPANY PAGE 2OWNER LAST NM VALUATIONPL01119001900011920014423012755 01 1390 01 340 24 2205 24 2760 24 2765 24 915 24 915 24 1900 29 320 29 1407 29 405 17C 17C SI 13 3502 13 2060 2C 2C SW 01 2490 01 2643 01 2943 01 40 01 3470 01 3470 01 250 01 405 01 503 01 640 01 900 01 330 01 4640 01 330 01 850 01 945 01 1570 01 65 01 3605 01 1390 24 2550 24 2325 29 4000 23C 23C UD 01 1010 01 60 01 2655 01 340 22 2000 22 2250 22 255 7C 98C LOMA LINDA AVE NORTH SHORE DR W f.TH AVE N NORTH SHORE DR COPPER VIEW DR PARK DR NORTH ARM LA FRENCH LAKE RD WHITE OAK CIR SHADYWOOD RD FOREST ARMS LA FOREST ARMS *^A FOX RIDGE WOODHILL RD SHORELINE DR OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD 96/08/1396/08/1996/08/2096/08/2296/08/27 96/08/28 96/08/29 96/08/08 96/08/09 96/08/13 96/08/1 96/08/19 96/08/30 96/08/01 96/08/02 S 96/08/12 OR-008256OR-0082aiOR-008283OR-008288OR-008305 OR-008312 OR-008317 OR-008234 OR-008242 OR-008255 OR-008272 OR-008280 OR-008322 OR-008219 OR-008222 OR-008246 293372002933720027554268242435142479194224775505 29331780 24490147 24733680 24490147 25334357 25334357 25334357 27844792 25334357 24738793 CULLIGANCULLIGANJERRY'S PLBG 6 HTG FRITZE PLUMBING DOLDER PLBG k HTG K fc K HTG k PLBG, INC SYMINGTON PLBG CUSTOM PLUMBING, INC. SCHMIT STEVE PLBG CUSTOM PLUMBING, INC. PLYMOUTH PLUMBING PLYMOUTH PLUMBING PLYMOUTH PLUMBING HOKANSON PLUMBING INC PLYMOUTH PLUMBING CITYVIEW PLBG k HTG MITCHELLYOUNGQUISTVOGTHOLMES NIELSON LANDIS SHANNON WILHELM ADAMS ADAMS POLANSKY CONNOR WAADE RETTINGER SHORELINE DR “tiTK AVE N 96/08/09 OR-008217 96/08/30 OR-008323 00000000 00000000 FISCHER CASCO POINT RD THOROUGHBRED LA FARVIEW LA WEAR LA N BAYSIDE RD BAYSIDE RD CYGNET PL TONKAWA RD FERNDALE RD N ORCHARD PK RD TONKAWA RD TONKA AVE NORTH ARM DR TONKA AVE OLD CKYSTAI. BAY RD COX FARM RD FOX ST STUBBS BAY RD N WATERTOWN RD PARK DR WOODHAVEN DR WATERTOWN RD BAYSIDE RD 96/08/07 96/08/02 96/08/09 96/08/08 96/08/08 96/08/08 96/08/12 96/08/12 96/08/13 96/08/14 96/08/14 96/08/19 96/08/20 96/08/22 96/0H/.72 96/08/22 96/08/29 96/08/27 96/08/27 96/08/29 96/08/07 96/08/29 96/08/12 OR-008132 OR-008221 OR-008225 OR-008231 OR-008232 OR-008233 OR-008245 OR-008248 OR-008252 OR-008262 OR-008268 OR-008279 OR-008282 OR-008206 OR-000290 OR-008291 OR-008292 OR-008310 OR-008311 OR-008315 OR-008229 OR-008313 OR-008247 26901400 57237155 54791762 57536468 00000000 24461495 54734300 24722316 54734300 54786926 24672924 00000000 54718151 24461495 56572548 54718151 54287393 54425855 54425055 24775505 54718151 54461495 24722316 LENNON EXCAVATING CLOVER HILL COMPANY INC HAYES EXCAVATING JB DIGGERS KIDEN REBSTOCK WIDMER INC SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE COPPIN PLBG SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE GLEASON BUD ALL METRO PLBG PETERSON ELMER J CO WIDMER INC MARTY EXCAVATING PETERSON ELMER J CO PATNODE BROTHERS SWEDLUND SEPTIC SERVICES SWEDLUND SEPTIC SERVICES K t. K HTG k PLBG, INC PETERSON ELMER J CO WIDMER BROS INC COPPIN PLBG WALSTEDT WALSTEDT LUTZ BENNETT SPENCER KMETZ POTTER CHRISTENSEN IVERSON CHRISTENSEN HALE REYNOLDS KROEGER MERIDETH HOLMES HUTCHINS HARRINGTON SHADYWOOD RD MYRTLEWOOD RD COUNTRYSIDE DR NORTH ARM LA COUNTRYSIDE DR FRENCH LAKE RD LANDMARK DR 96/08/01 96/08/09 96/08/22 96/08/29 96/08/07 96/08/16 96/08/16 OR-008220 OR-008240 OR-008295 OR-008316 OR-008228 OR-000238 OR-008259 84775296 84721306 84792585 29331780 15590251 14739128 00000000 FIC lilC ENVIRONMENTAL LANDFORMS GENERAL SERVICE SY’ ’NG;0N PLBG EILEN CONSTRUCTION INC B BUTTERFIELD LANDSCAPING ALBRECT PROFT BARES NIELSON VITAS HASSELQUIST CASEY 152.44133.9610,200.002.500.009.500.007.000. 00 200.00 625.00 4.600.00 600.OC 216.93 105.00 1.000. 00 3,000.00 10,000.00 1,200.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 . 00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 200.00 .00 .00 .00 2,372,014.83 01 Residence 24 Replacing Existing02Addition25Lifting Principal Residence03Garage/Attached 26 Well Abandonment04Garage/Detached 27 Foundation Only05Porch28Temporary Trailer06Deck29Renovate/Remodel07Fence30Accessory Structure08Gazebo31Stairway to Lake09Pool32Retaining Wall10Re-side 33 Entrance Monuments 11 Re-roof 34 Tree Removal 12 Tennis Court 13 Sign 14 Dock 15 Shed 16 Demo-Principal Structure 17 Demo-Accessory Structure 18 Move 19 Commercial 20 Institutional 21 Storm Damage Repair 22 1-100 Cubic Yaras 23 101 Cubic Yards or More 99 Undefined LOCAL USB CODES 9399 Undefined TUE, SEP 3, 1996, 4:17 PMNUMERICAL LISTING AUGUST 1996PERMIT NBR ISSUED CANCEL ADDR NBR STREET PAGE 1WORK ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATIONOR-007750OR-008066OR-008071OR-008132OR-008217OR-008218 OR-008219 OR-008220 OR-008221 OR-008222 OR-008223 OR-008224 OR-008225 OR-008226 OR-008227 OR-008228 OR-008229 OR-008230 OR-008231 OR-008232 OR-008233 OR-008234 OR-008235 OR-008236 OR-008238 OR-008239 OR-008240 OR-008241 OR-008242 OR-008243 OR-008244 OR-008245 OR-008246 OR-008247 OR-008248 OR-008249 OR-008252 OR-008253 OR-008254 OR-008255 OR-008256 OR-008257 OR-008258 OR-008259 OR-008260 OR-008262 OR-008263 OR-008266 OR-008267 OR-008268 OR-008270 OR-008271 OR-008272 OR-008273 96/08/09 N 96/08/27 N 96/08/14 N 96/08/07 N 96/08/09 N 96/08/01 N 96/08/01 N 96/08/01 N 96/08/02 N 96/08/02 N 96/08/02 N 96/08/05 N 96/08/09 N 96/08/06 N 96/08/06 N 96/08/07 N 96/08/07 N 96/08/07 N 96/08/08 N 96/08/08 N 96/08/08 N 96/08/08 N 96/08/13 N 96/08/09 N 96/08/16 N 96/08/12 N 96/08/09 N 96/08/09 N 96/08/09 N 96/08/12 N 96/08/12 N 96/08/12 N 96/08/12 N 96/08/12 N 96/08/12 N 96/08/13 N 96/08/13 N 96/08/13 N 96/08/13 N 96/08/13 N 96/08/13 N 96/08/13 N 96/08/16 N 96/08/16 N 96/08/13 N 96/08/14 N 96/08/14 N 96/08/15 N 96/08/14 N 96/08/14 N 96/08/19 N 96/08/15 N 96/08/15 N 96/08/16 N 100041853340249035021295 320 1810 2643 1487 1015 2455 2943 2464 2600 2800 2550 2775 40 3470 3470 2285 503 945 2250 850 60 3779 2760 920 405 258 405 4080 405 1020 503 4423 945 2765 1190 2180 1920 255 575 640 575 4520 4360 900 3135 2755 915 290 COX FARM RD BAYSIDE RD SHORELINE DR CASCO POINT RD SHORELINE DR LOMA LINDA AVE WOODHILL RD SHADYWOOD RD THOROUGHBRED LA SHORELINE DR LINDEN LA SHADYWOOD RD FARVIEW LA DUNWOODY AVE THOROUGHBRED LA COUNTRYSIDE DR W WOODHAVEN DR WHITE OAK CIR WEAR LA N BAYSIDE RD BAYSIDE RD FRENCH LAKE RD FERNDALE RD N COX FARM RD FRENCH LAKE RD OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S MYRTLEWOOD RD CASCO AVE WHITE OAK CIR DAKOTA AVE OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S CYGNET PL OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S BAYSIDE RD TONKAWA RD BROWN RD N FERNDALE RD N NORTH SHORE DR COX FARM RD SHADYWOOD RD LOMA LINDA AVE NORTH SHORE DR SHORELINE DR LANDMARK DR SUSSEX CIR ORCHARD .PK RD FERNDALE RD N WATERTOWN RD 6TH AVE N TONKAWA RD NORTH SHORE DR COPPER VIEW DR FOREST ARMS LA HOLLANDER RD 01 0000000009 00000000 19 17632998 01 26901400 13 0000000010 18882242 29 27844792 01 84775296 01 57237155 29 25334357 06 19551218 15 00000000 01 54791762 24 34450585 01 38940005 22 15590251 24 54718151 11 18817274 01 57536468 01 00000000 01 24461495 24 24490147 06 14499448 01 27389354 22 14739120 01 14732588 01 84721306 11 00000000 24 24733680 11 18694201 11 16584485 01 54734300 29 24738793 29 24722316 01 24722316 06 14768403 01 54734300 24 34791600 01 32902940 24 24490147 01 29337200 19 14710413 29 17533060 22 00000000 01 14759515 01 54786926 01 35350194 18 00000000 11 00000000 01 24672924 06 00900000 01 39414211 24 25334357 29 19299342 C I CONSTRUCTION LENNON EXCAVATING KELLER HOME IMPROVEMENT HOKANSON PLUMBING INC FIC INC CLOVER HILL COMPANY INC PLYMOUTH PLUMBING GORMLEY DENNY HAYES EXCAVATING RON'S MECH INC BURNSVILLE HEATING CO EIDEN CONSTRUCTION INC PETERSON ELMER J CO HENDRICKS ROOFING REMODELI JB DIGGERS WIDMER INC CUSTOM PLUMBING, INC. STREETER & ASSOCIATES INC BRUCE NELSON PLUMBING k HT B BUTTERFIELD LANDSCAPING LAKEWOOD DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL LANDFORMS SCHMIT STEVE PLBG R K MEIERS HACKBARTH ENTERPRISES CORP SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE CITYVIEW PLBG k HTG COPPIN PLBG COPPIN PLBG LUCAS DESIGN WORKS SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE COUNTRYSIDE HTG A/C ROMARK INC CUSTOM PLUMBING, INC. CULLIGAN SCHMIDT ALLEN MARTINSON CONSTRUCTION A fit T DEVELOPMENT GLEASON BUD DEAN'S TANK OIL ALL METRO PLBG KLEVE HTG fit AC PLYMOUTH PLUMBING STILLWELL TED WHITEISREZABECKO'SULLIVANFISCHER ANDERSON CONNOR ALBRECT EIDEN WAADE SAPA ENGLUND REBSTOCK HENDERSON VITAS HUTCHINS MARIER WALSTEDT WALSTEDT LANDIS SPENCER SANFORD HASSELQUIST PROFT GREIMANN SHANNON GAWRON BECKMAN LUTZ RETTINGER HARRINGTON BENNETT KIRBY SPENCER MILLER SANFORD WILHELM MITCHELL LESUEUR RUSCM CASEY KMETZ VARS JOHNSON FLIES POTTER WASBERG ADAMS MAHAFFY 6,250 236,300.006,000.00000.00.00.00 5.105.00 3,000.00 .00 .00 10,000.00 3,000.00 499.00 .00 3.100.00 0,750.00 .00 00 00 .00 .00 .00 625.00 15,000.00 11,913.00 .00 382,000.00 .00 2.500.00 4.600.00 2.970.00 2.600.00 .00 1,200.00 .00 .00 00 00 00 00 00 2,400 6,900 11,000 600 152.44 3.000. 00 7.000. 00 .00 344,540 00 00 00 00 00 .00 5,100.00 0,000.00 216.93 10,600.00 1,475 171,352 1,600 TUE, SEP 3, 1996, 4:17 PM PAGE 2NUMERICAL LISTING PERMIT NBR ISSUED AUGUST 1996CANCEL ADDR NBR STREET WORK ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATIONOR-00827BOR-008277OR-008278OR-008279OR-008280OR-008281OR-008282OR-008283OR-008284OR-008285OR-008286 OR-008287 OR-008288 OR-008289 OR-008290 OR-008291 OR-008292 OR-008294 OR-008295 OR-008296 OR-008297 OR-008298 OR-008299 OR-008300 OR-008301 OR-008304 OR-008305 OR-008306 OR-008307 OR-008308 OR-008309 OR-008310 OR-008311 OR-008312 OR-008313 OR-008314 OR-008315 OR-008316 OR-008317 OR-008319 OR-008321 OR-008322 OR-008323 OR-008324 98C 96/08/16 N 96/08/16 N 96/08/16 N 96/08/19 N 96/08/19 N 96/08/19 N 96/08/20 N 96/08/20 N 96/08/28 N 96/08/21 N 96/08/22 N 96/08/22 N 96/08/22 N 96/08/22 N 96/08/22 N 96/08/22 N 96/08/29 N 9b/08/26 N 96/08/22 N 96/08/23 N 96/08/23 N 96/08/26 N 96/08/26 N 96/08/26 N 96/08/26 N 96/08/26 N 96/08/27 N 96/08/27 N 96/08/27 N 96/08/27 N 96/08/27 N 96/08/27 N 96/08/27 N 96/08/28 N 96/08/29 N 96/08/29 N 96/08/29 N 96/08/29 Y 96/08/29 N 96/08/30 N 96/08/30 N 96/08/30 N 96/08/30 N 96/08/30 N 1699940331533091590046401920890405330 3035 4423 1030 850 945 1570 2685 2655 3505 3785 3050 2450 3473 405 405 2755 945 1487 1015 1920 65 3685 1390 2325 1810 1390 340 340 2765 1625 1900 2060 3533 NORTH FARM RD NORTH ARM DR CRYSTAL BAY RD TONKA AVE FOREST ARMS LA NORTH SHORE DR W NORTH ARM DR GTH AVE NOLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S TONKA AVE WATERTOWN RD NORTH SHORE DR TONKAWA RD OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S COX FARM RD FOX ST COPPER VIEW DR COUNTRYSIDE DR W LIVINGSTON AVE TOGO RD GTH AVE N COUNTRYSIDE DR LYRIC AVE OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S COPPER VIEW DR COX FARM RD SHORELINE DR LINDEN LA GTH AVE N STUBBS BAY RD N WATERTOWN RD PARK DR WATERTOWN RD SHADYWOOD RD PARK DR NORTH ARM LA NORTH ARM LA CASCO POINT RD BOHNS PT RD FOX RIDGE RD GTH AVE N LIVINGSTON AVE 06 1473222111 1473339706 00000000 01 00000000 24 2533435701 2933720001 5471815101 2755426801 1473258829 0000000001 24461495 02 00000000 01 24243514 01 19421060 01 56572548 01 54718151 01 54287393 01 12745471 01 84792585 29 15120110 11 00000000 16 00000000 01 38711491 24 18716682 29 35301432 10 00000000 01 24791942 01 35712525 01 39414211 01 35453797 01 37575040 01 54425855 01 54425855 01 24775505 24 54461495 06 00000000 01 24775505 01 29331780 01 29331780 06 00000000 17 00000000 24 25334357 13 00000000 11 00000000 STONEHOUSE DESIGNS PLYMOUTH ROOFINGPLYMOUTH PLUMBING CULLIGANPETERSON ELMER J CO JERRY'S PLBG & HTG LAKEWOOD DEVELOPMENTWIDMER INC FRITZE PLUMBING KEITH WATERS U ASSOC MARTY EXCAVATING PETERSON ELMER J CO PATNODE BROTHERS STUHR BRUCE GENERAL SERVICE ROELOFS REMODELING & RENOV A-ABC APPLIANCE fit HEATING MOE-OSUM CONST CO MISSION MECHANICAL DOLDER PLBG fit HTG AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR CJ KLEVE HTG fit AC M H SEIFERT CONST DEPENDABLE HTG fit AC SWEDLUND SEPTIC SERVICES SWEDLUND SEPTIC SERVICES K fit K HTG fit PLBG, INC WIDMER BROS INC K fit K HTG fit PLBG, INC SYMING'- “ PLBG SYMING-jN PLBG PLYMOUTH PLUMBING PERKINSSPINNERGUTTORMSONCHRISTENSENADAMSYOUNGQUISTIVERSONTROUPBECKMANCHRISTENSEN SMIEJA EDMUNDS HALE REYNOLDS TURKBAS BARES MOSIMAN HERMANSON KEZAR GRANDE FLYNN BECKMAN BECKMAN VOGT WAADE SAPA KROEGER MERIDETH HOLMES ALBRECHT HOLMES NIELSON NIELSON PUTNAM WINSLOW POLANSKY SANDLER 10,24,2,10,5,25, 2, 2, 695, 500.00 000.00 000.00.00105.00 133.96.00200.00050.00 000.00.00 200.00 500.00 000 00 00 .00 .00 246,532.00 .00 3.500.00 2.100.00 .00 4,846.50 5.000. 00 1.035.00 7.000. 00 9.500.00 1.165.00 9.000. 00 1.500.00 9.711 7, 1, 1, 1, 00 00 00 00 .00 700.00 .00 000 200 200 400 000 500 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 09/03/96 ZONING PERMITS ISSUED/FEES CX)LLBCIEDPERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO-- CURRENT RANGE - 08/01/96 - 08/31/96 * * t * *PAGE; 1REQUESTER: CAROLE-- PREVIOUS RANGE - 00/01/95 - 08/31/95PERMIT TYPE QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEWUser Defined SUBDIVISION 1 350.00 0.00 0.00 2 500.00 0.00 0.00VARIANCE4780.00 0.00 0.00 9 1,550.00 0.00 0 • 0 0CUP1150.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0 • 00 SKETCH PLAN 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 200.00 0.00 0.00 VARIANCE/CUP VACATION 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 1 300.00 550.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-total 6*1,280.00*0.00*0.00*14*3,100.00*0.00*0.00* Grand-total 6**1,280.00**0.00**0.00**14**3,100.00*^0.00*t 0.00** REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 09/03/96 ***** PERMIT FEE REPORT ***** CITY OF ORONO FROM 08/01/96 TO 00/31/96 PAGE: 1 REQUESTER: CAROLE USER REPORT TOTAL BASE FEB 1,280.00 1,280.00 PLAN REVIEW 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 0.00 0.00 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 L . 00 SAC 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 ESCROW 0.00 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 1,280.00 1,280.00 ■ N ' PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED YEAR-TO-DATEREPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OP RUN 09/03/96 ***** permit issued reportCITY OF ORONO PAGE: 1REQUESTER: CAROLE-- CURRENT RANGE - 01/01/96 - 00/31/96 -- PREVIOUS RANGE - 01/01/95 - 08/31/95PERMIT TYPE QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEWBuildingSGL FAMILY-NEW 25 49,950.75 8.090,297.00 32,473.13 23 39,953.10 7,392,270.00 25,968.16 SP-ADD/RBMODBL 186 40,276.75 3,234,224.00 19,234.52 162 38,347.50 4,180,817.00 20,669.73 SP-ACC STRUCTURE 23 2,748.00 161,902.00 1,585.86 22 • 3,710.25 398,700.00 2,357.06 DEMO/PRINCIPAL 6 440.00 0.00 0.00 10 620.00 0.00 0.00 COMMERCIAL-NEW 1 4,940.bu 905,000.00 3,216.53 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 COM-ADD/REMODEL 6 1,688.75 167,026.00 374.89 8 2,582.75 392,542.00 216.61 DEMO 1 80.00 0.00 0.00 1 30.00 0.00 0.00 INST-ADD/REMODEL 2 1,749.50 199,500.00 0.00 3 331.25 17,000.00 158.60 SP-LAND ALT 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 72.00 5,000.00 46.80 PLAN REVIEW ONLY 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 550,000.00 1,423.18 DEMO-ACCESSORY 1 30.00 0.00 0.00 6 200.00 0.00 0.00 ACC/GARAGBS 15 1,995.25 112,292.00 1,110.53 8 1,331.75 82,675.00 851.99 Sub-total 266*103,915.50*12,950,241.00*57,995.46*245*87,178.60*13,019,012.00*51,692.13* Mechanical HEATING SYSTEMS 72 6,685.26 519,783.28 0.00 44 3,731.56 284,379.00 0.00 AIR CONDITIONING 16 772.40 53,051.00 0.00 12 630.00 40,485.00 0.00 WOOD STOVE/FLUE 2 97.01 6,060.43 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIREPLACE 46 1,986.46 116,366.44 0.00 37 1,635.00 09,974.00 0.00 VENTILATION 5 175.CO 5,375*00 0.00 3 140.63 8,925.00 0.00 GAS LINE INSPECT 2 70.00 1,000.00 0.00 3 105.00 1,100.00 0.00 DUCT WORK ONLY 9 357.94 15,125.00 0.00 8 280.00 7,065.00 0.00 REMOVE OIL TANK 9 335.00 14,325.00 0.00 5 175.00 5,450.00 0.00 UNDEFINED 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 247.50 19,000.00 0.00 Sub-total 161*10,479.07»731,006.15*0.00*113*6,944.69*457,178.00*0.00* Plumbing FIXTURES 109 7,513.04 475,464.21 0.00 84 6,153.72 412,495.62 0.00 WATER METER 6 706.00 2,750.00 0.00 4 482.00 1,200.00 0.00 UNDEFINED 2 70.00 800.00 0.00 3 105.00 1,700.00 0.00 Sub-total 117*0,369.84*479,014.21*0.00*91*6,740.72*415,395.62*0.00* Sewer k Water SEWER CONNECTION 12 420.00 0*00 0.00 6 210.00 0.00 0.00 WATER CONNECTION 1 35.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 NEW SEPTIC SYSTE 33 3,300.00 0.00 0.00 27 2,700.00 0.00 0.00 DRNFLD k/OR TANK 3 150.00 0.00 0.00 3 150.00 0.00 0.00 SAC ONLY 9 5,650.00 0.00 0.00 7 5,950.00 0.00 0.00 SEWER DISCONNECT 1 35.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 SEWER k WATER 3 210.00 0.00 0.00 1 70.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-total 62*9,800.00*•0.00*0.00*44*9,080.00*0.00*0.00* Sign PERMANENT/POSTED 1 35.00 0.00 0.00 2 70.00 1,500.00 0.00 PER./FREE STANDG 1 29.25 800.00 0.00 2 70.00 400.00 0.00 TEMPORARY 3 90.00 0.00 0.00 2 60.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-total 5*154.25*800.00*0.00*6*200.00*1,900.00*0.00* Fire FIREWORKS 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 IBO.OO 0.00 0.00 PE3^ITS ISSUED/FEES CX)LI£CTED YEAR-TO-DATOREPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 09/03/96 PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO PAGE: 2REQUESTER: CAROLE01/01/96 -RANGE . . . . .00/31/96 01/01/95 -RANGE . . . . .00/31/95PERMIT TYPE Sub-total QTY0*BAIJE FEE 0.00*VALUATION0.00*PLAN REVIEW0.00*QTY3*BASE FEE 150.00*VALUATION0.00*PLAN REVIEWO.OQ*User Defined LAND ALTERATION TREE REMOVAL RETAINING WALLS DOCKS LAWN SPRINKLER Sub-total 14 4 3 2 11 34* 000.00 120.00 306.00 60.00 305.00 1,671.00* 0.00 0.00 23,290.00 0.00 0.00 23,290.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 12 4 1 0 6 23* 630.00 120.00 100.00 0.00 210.00 1,060.00* 3.000. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.000. 00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* Grand-total 645**134,309.66** 14 ,192,431.36**57 ,995.46**525**111,354.01** 13 ,097,285,62**51,692.13** i * 1 REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OP RUN 09/03/96BASE PEE PLAN REVIEW SURCHARGE Lie. SEARCH PEE SAC INVESTIGATION DEPOSIT MAIL IN SEWER CONNECTION ADDL SAC MAIL IN PEE MQIL IN ENGINEERING PEES ESCROW PERMIT TOTAL PERMITS JSSUED/imS (X^LUSCTEDBUILDING103,915.5057,995.466,486.81 0.00 24,250.00 1,035.25 0.00 1.50 1,355.00 0.00 195,039.52 t « • * *PERMIT FEE REPORTMECHANICAL10,479.070.00368.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 120.87 3.00 0.00 10,971.52 YEAR-TO-DATE PAGE:CITY OF 01/01/96 ORONOTO 08/31/96 REQUESTER;CAROLEPLUMBINGSEWER 6 WATER USER SIGN PIRE8,369.84 9,800.00 1,671.00 154.25 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00253.63 26.50 14.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 67.78 6.00 1.50 50.00 50.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,692.75 9,082.50 1,770.63 154.25 0.00 REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 09/03/96 REPORT TOTAL BASE FEE 134,389.66 PLAN REVIEW 57,995.46 SURCHARGE 7,150.15 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 SAC 24,250.00 INVESTIGATION 1,070.25 DEPOSIT 0.00 MAIL IN SEWER CONNECTION ADDL SAC MAIL IN FEE MQIL IN ENGINEERING FEES 196.15 1,355.00 50.00 1.50 3.00 50.00 ESCROW 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 226,511.17 PERMIT FEE REPORT ***** CITY OF ORONO FROM 01/01/96 TO 08/31/96 PAGE: 2 REQUESTER: CAROLE . r ZONING PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED YEAR-TO-DATEREPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUN 09/03/96PERMIT TYPEUser Defined SUBDIVISION VARIANCE CUP SKETCH PLAN VARIANCE/CUP VACATION REZONING APPEAL Sub-total Grand-total • PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO • * • • •PAGE: 1REQUESTER: CAROLE. . . .. CURRENT01/01/96 -RANGE . . . . .08/31/96 . . . . . . PREVIOUS01/01/95 -RANGE . . . . .00/31/95QTYBASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW106,195.00 0.00 0.00 11 5,215.00 0.00 0.00429,540.00 0.00 0.00 42 8,450.00 0.00 0.0092,350.00 0.00 0.00 13 2,025.00 0.00 0.003750.00 0.00 0.00 8 1,600.00 0.00 0.00175.00 0.00 0.00 6 2, 175.00 0.00 0.003600.00 0.00 0.00 1 550.00 0.00 0.001350.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.0000.00 0.00 0.00 1 100.00 0.00 0.0069*19,860.00*0.00*0.00*02*20,915.00*0.00*0.00* 69**19,860.00**0.00**0.00**82**20,915.00**0.00**0.00** REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 09/03/96 ***** PERMTT FEE REPORT •»•»» CITY OF ORONO FROM 01/01/96 TO 08/31/96 USER REPORT TOTAL BASE FEB 19,060.00 19,860.00 PLAN REVIEW 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 0.00 0.00 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 SAC 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 ESCROW 0.00 • 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 19,860.00 19,060.00 PAGE: 1 REQUESTER: CAROLS 1996 RECAP OF CONTRACT CITIESJanuary February Harch April June July August Septewtoer October Movewber Decewber YTD TotalsSpring Par Plan Review Inspections Retainer TOTALNo. Plan Reviews No. Inspections 82.87390.0025.00497.870 26 438.59 120.0025.00583.59 1 8 200.36 195.0025.00420.36 2 13 0.00285.00 25.00310.00 0 19 576.71 135.0025.00736.71 1 9 105.30 150.CO25.00280.30 210 3.243.33 195.0025.003.463.33 613 723.94 180.0025.00928.94 512 5.371.10 1,525.00200.007.221.10 17no Minnetonka Beach Plan Review Inspections Retainer TOTAL No. Plan Reviews No. Inspections 0.00 135.00 25.00 160.00 0 9 772.37 30.00 25.00 827.37 2 2 511.55 30.00 25.00 566.55 2 2 744.57 75.00 25.00 844.57 3 5 308.43 135.00 25.00 468.43 2 9 1.480.04 60.00 25.00 1.565.04 4 4 146.09 210.00 25.00 381.09 1 14 194.68 135.00 25.00 354.68 2 9 4.157.73 810.00 200.00 5.167.73 16 54 657.8> 1,410.96 986.91 1,154.57 1,205.14 1,845.34 3,844.42 1,283.62 12,388.83 ■'X 4' i TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator DATE:September 20, 1996 SUBJECT: MUSA Amendment Update The Met Council staff has indicated there are no issues standing in the way of their recommendation to the Met Council for approval of the city ’s MUSA amendment. The MUSA amendment will now go to a committee of the Met Council on October 21 and to the full Council for final consideration on October 24. The Met Council’s housing staff person pointed out that the city ’s resolution of participation in the Livable Communities Act, which included the city ’s housing goals expires at the end of 1996. He indicated a new resolution renewing the city participation in the Livable Communities Act for 1997 should be provided to the Met Council by November 15, 1996. The housing staff person also suggested that, since the housing issue is generally foremost in the minds of the Met Council members when reviewing MUSA amendments; it would be help'\il to have a letter from Orono indicating the city plans to renew its participation in the Livable Communities Act, and indicating a willingness to meet with the Met Council housing staff to review and discuss the city ’s housing goals. A draft letter addressing those two housing issues is attached for Council review and comment. i o \ GITYorORONO Municipal Offices Street Mdress: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 MaMef Mdrets: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 September 20, 1996 lJU a I? Carl Schenk Metropolitan Council Mears Park Centre 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Dear Carl: This letter is to indicate the city’s intent to renew its participation in the Livable Communities Act for 1997, and the city’s willingness to meet with Met Council housing staff to review and discuss the city’s housing goals. Sincerely, Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator Tdephonc (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 TO:Mayor and City Council FROM: DATE: Ron Moorse, City Administrator September 20, 1996 SUBJECT: Summary of September 17, 1996 Highway 12 Corridor Mediation Meeting I have attached three versions of the summary of the September 17 Highway 12 Corridor mediation meeting. Version A is the original version drafted by the city of Orono. Version B reflects revisions suggested by Mn/DOT. Version C reflects revisions made by the city of Long Lake. The revisions by Mn/DOT and Long Lake are indicated by underlining. i SUMMARY OF SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 fflGHVVAY 12 CORRIDOR MEDIATION MEETING I. II. Mn/DOT indicated it is proposing that the "new" Alternate 6 corridor plan, which move •. the railroad R-O-W to the south to enable the 2 lane freeway to be located on the nort’i side of the railroad, become the "preferred alternative"; and that the only ciner alternative to be carried forward in the study process be the No Build alternative. The south bypass and reversible lane alternatives are proposed to be eliminated from further study or consideration. The cities of Long Lake and Orono indicated the Councils could not make formal agreements regarding the corridor at the meeting, however, each city indicated they were supportive of the Mn/DOT proposal. The city of Long Lake indicated its support of the Mn/DOT proposal was subject to a number of conditions. These were as follows: A. Mn/DOT to replace/upsize the sewer trunk line currently located in the railroad right-of-way. B. Mn/DOT to construct a "regional" stormwater ponding facility that serves the expected ponding needs of the proposed Highway 12 roadway, and that also serves the commercial/industrial area of Long Lake; and that Mn/DOT construct the storm sewer lines necessary to carry the stormwater from the commercial/ industrial area to the regional pond facility. C. Mn/DOT to replace the Long Lake Fire Station at a new site. D. Mn/DOT to provide a way to mitigate/address the impacts on properties that are not "taken" for roadway right-of-way but are left "next to" the new roadway. The solution suggested by Long Lake was to define a corridor of approximately 400 feet on each side of the new roadway. If property owners in this corridor felt the roadway had reduced the value of their properties, Mn/DOT would purchase the properties and would absorb any loss in property value. E. Mn/DOT to replace any trails lost to the project right-of-way and construct trails along the new corridor. F. Mn/DOT to mitigate the loss of any park land. G. Mn/DOT to relocate those whose homes are lost to the project right-of-way, and to accommodate those who wish to relocate within or adjacent to Long Lake. 1.) Mn/DOT to relocate all property owners on Virginia Avenue, rather than only those property owners on the east side of Virginia Avenue whose homes would be taken for the project R-O-W. SUMMARY OF SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 HIGHWAY 12 CORRI] MEDIATION MEETING ConHnued page 2 of 2 rv. The city of Orono indicated the concerns and issues underl^ mg each of the conditions set out by the city of Long Lake are certainly valid and worthy of efforts to address them. V. A summary of Mn/DOT ’s response to the Long Lake conditions is as follows: A. Mn/DOT indicated it would replace any disturbed sewer lines but may ask for some level of cost participation b> the bcnefitted cities regarding the "upsizing" portion of the costs. B. Mn/DOT indicated it makes sense to plan for and construct a "regional" stormwater ponding facility to serve a broad set of stormwater ponding needs versus constructing individual ponds for individual properties. Mn/DOT indicated it would be constructing a pond to serve the needs of the roadway project and would size the pond to meet as much of the city ’s needs as possible. Mn'DOT indicated it may ask for some level of funding of this pond by the city(s) benefitting. C. Mn/DOT indicated it would replace the Long Lake Fire Station at a new location. D. Mn/DOT indicated it would work to find a solution to the issue of those properties left "next to" the new roadway, but could not commit to the specific proposal made by the city of Long Lake. E. Mn/DOT indicated it would replace trails taken for the project right-of-way and would provide for trails along the new corridor. F. Mn/DOT indicated it would mitigate the loss of park land taken for the project right-of-way. G. Mn/DOT indicated it would relocate those whose homes would be taken for the project right-of-way, and would make its best efforts to accommodate the relocation desires of thoce whose homes are taken-particularly those who want to relocate within or adjacent to Long Lake. VI. The meeting concluded with the cities of Long Lake and Orono and Mn/DOT indicating that if Alternative 6 became the selected corridor alternative, each would make its best efforts to address the conditions set forth by the city of Long Lake. I. n. B SUMMARY OF SEPTEMBER 17, 19% HIGHWAY 12 CORRll MEDIATION MEETING Mn/DOT indicated it is proposing that the "new" Alternate 6 corridor plan, which moves the railroad R-O-W to the south to enable the 2 lane freeway to be located on the north side of the railroad, become the "preferred alternative"; and that the only other alternative to be canied forward in the study process be the No Build alternative. The south bypass and reversible lane alternatives are proposed to be eliminated from further study or consideration. The cities of Long Lake and Orono indicated the Councils could not make formal agreements regarding the corridor at the meeting, however, each city indicated they were supportive of the Mn/DOT proposal. The city of Long Lake indicated its support of the Mn/DOT proposal was subject to a number of conditions. These were as follows: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. Mn/DOT to replace/upsize the sewer trunk line currently located in the railroad right-of-way. Mn/DOT to construct a "regional" stormwater ponding facility that ser\'es the expected ponding needs of the proposed Highway 12 roadway, and that also serv es the commercial/industrial area of Long Lake; and that Mn/DOT construct the storm sewer lines necessary to carry the stormwater from the commercial/ industrial area to the regional pond facility. Mn/DOT to replace the Long Lake Fire Station at a new site. Mn/DOT to provide a way to mediate/address the impacts on properties that are not "taken" for roadway right-of-way but are left "next to" the new roadway. The solution suggested by Long Lake was to define a corridor of approximately 400 feet on each side of the new roadway. If property owners in this corridor felt the roadway had reduced the value of their properties, Mn/DOT would purchase the properties and would absorb any loss in property value. Mn/DOT to replace any trails lost to the project right-of-way and construct trails along the new corridor. Mn/DOT to mitigate the loss of any park land. Mn/DOT to relocate those whose homes are lost to the project right-of-way, and to accommodate those who wish to relocate within or adjacent to Long Lake, 1.) Mn/DOT to relocate all property owners on Virginia Avenue, rather than only those property owners on the east side of Virginia Avenue whose homes would be taken for the project R-O-W. SUMMARY OF SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR MEDIATION MEETING Continued page 2 of 2 IV. The city of Orono indicated it shares many of the concerns and issues underlying each of the conditions set out by the city of Long Lake, and is c^’^mitted to working with the city of Lone Lake and Mn/DOT to address them. V. A summary of Mn/DOT’s response to the Long Lake conditions is as follows: VI. A.Mny'DOT indicated it would replace any dismrbed sewer lines but may ask for some level of cost participation by the benefitted cities regarding the "upsizing" portion of the costs. B.Mn/DOT indicated it makes sense to plan for and construct a "regional" stormwater ponding facility to serve a broad set of stormwater ponding needs versus constructing individual ponds for individual properties. Mn/DOT indicated it would be constructing a pond to serve the needs of the roadway project and would size the pond to meet as much of the city’s needs as possible. Mn/DOT indicated it may ask for some level of funding of this pond by the city(s) benefitting. C. Mn/DOT indicated it would replace the Long Lake Fire Station at a new location. D.Mn/DOT indicated it would work to find a solution to the issue of those properties left ' next to" the new roadway, but could not commit to the specific proposal made by the city of Long Lake. E.Mn/DOT indicated it would replace trails taken for the project right-of-wiy and would provide for trails along the new corridor. F.Mn/DOT indicated it would mitigate the loss of park land taken for the project right-of-way. G.Mn/DOT indicated it would relocate those whose homes would be taken for the project right-of-way, and would make its best efforts to accommodate the relocation desires of those whose homes are taken-particularly those who want to relocate within or adjacent to Long Lake. The meeting concluded with the cities of Long Lake and Orono and Mn/DOT indicating that if Alternative 6 became the selected corridor alternative, each would commit jo working together to address the concerns and issues underlying the conditions set forth by the city of Long Lake. c SUMMARY OF SEPTEMBER 17,1996 HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR MEDIATION MEETING I.Mn/DOT indicated it is proposing that the “new" Alternate 6 corridor plan, which moves the railroad R-O-W to the south to enable the 2 lane freeway to be located on the north side of the railroad, become the “preferred alternative"; and that the only other alternative to be carried forward in the study process be the No Build alternative. The south bypass and reversible lane alternatives are proposed to be eliminated from further study or consideration. II, The cities of Long Lake and Orono indicated the Councils could not make formal agreements regarding the corridor at the meeting, however, each city indicated they were supportive of the Mn/DOT proposal. III. The City of Long Lake indicated its support of the Mn/DOT proposal was subject to a number of conditions. These were as follows; A. Mn/DOT to replace and upsize the sewer trunk line currently located In the railroad right-of-way to meet projected needs of Long Lake and Orono. B.Mn/DOT to purchase the Fleming Addition from the City of Long Lgkejgr the purpose of providing a source of fill for sound barriers, a lo cation foc_a storm water pond and such other land use as ma y be required wth control returning to the City of Long Lake after the project. C. Mn/DOT to construct a “regional ” stormwater ponding facility.This facility would be sized to serve the ponding needs of the proposed Highway 12 roadway, the projected needs of the commercial, industrial, end residential areas of Long Lake and handle the current a nd proiected stormwater flow from Orono into and through Long Lake. Further, that Mn/DOT construct the storm sewer lines necessary to carry the stormwater from the commercial, industrial and affec ted residential areas to the regional pond facility. D. Mn/DOT to replace the Long Lake Fire Station and City Hall at a location South of the Railroad at Brown Road. E.Mn/DOT to address concerns of property owners whose properties are not taken for roadway right-of-way but are near the new roadway. The solution suggested by Long Lake was to define a corridor of approximately 400 feet on each side of the new roadway. If property owners in this corridor felt the roadway had reduced the value of their properties. MnDOT would purchase the properties and would absorb any Highway 12 New Alternatives September 19.1996 Page 2. 3:43 PM loss in property value. It was further suggested that property owners be permitted to do this from the time of design approval until one (1) year after project completion. F. Mn/DOT to replace any trails lost to the project right-of-way and construct sidewalks and trails along the new corridor. G. Mn/DOT to mitigate the loss of any park land including relocation an d replacement of current Holbrook Park facilities. H. Mn/DOT to relocate those persons whose homes are lost to the project right-of-way and to accommodate those who wish to relocate within or adjacent to Long Lake, including moving existing homes to new locations. I. Mn/DOT to provide relocation assistance to all renters affected by this project. J. As part of their R-O-W acguisition for the connection of Brown Road from South of Railroad to North of Highway 12 Mn/DOt to take all properties abutting Virginia Avenue. K. Mn/DOT to construct sound barriers and visual barriers such that noise levels as measured in the City of Long Lake sound level study (1995) and wrrent levels on the North sidejjf Long Lake (in Orono)^e not increased by the presence of the new road. IV. The City of Orono indicated the concerns and issues underlying each of the conditions set out by the City of Long Lake are certainly valid and worthy of efforts to address them. V. A summary of Mn/DOT’s response to the Long Lake conditions is as follows: A. Mn/DOT indicated it would replace any disturbed sewer lines, but may ask for some level of cost participation by the benefited cities regarding the “upsizing” portion of the costs. B&C. Mn/DOT indicated it makes sense to plan for and construct a “regional" stormwater ponding facility to serve a broad set of stormwater ponding needs versus constructing individual ponds for individual properties. Mn/DOT indicated it would be constructing a pond to serve the needs of the roadway project and would size the pond to meet as much of the City ’s needs as possible. Mn/DOT indicated it may ask for some level of funding of this pond by the City(s) benefiting. i • • m Highway 12 N«w Alternatives September 19,1996 Pages, 3:43PM D. Mn/DOT indicated it would replace the Long Lake Fire Station and City Hall at the new location suggested . E. Mn/DOT indicated it would work to find a solution to the issue of those properties "near" the new roadway, but could not commit to the specific proposal made by the City of Long Lake. F. Mn/DOT indicated it would replace trails and sidewalks taken for the project right-of-way and would provide for trails along the new corridor. G. Mn/DOT indicated it would mitigate the loss of park land including ^replacement of current Holbrook P^k faciIit]es_. H.Mn/DOT indicated it would relocate those whose homes would be taken for the project right-of-way. It would make its best effort to accommodate the relocation desires of those whose homes are taken, particularly those who want to relocate within or adjacent to Long Lake, including moving existing homes. I. Mn/DOT indicated it will provide relocation assista nce to all renters affected by this project. j. Mn/DOT indicated it would be willing to take all properties abutting Virginia Avenue. K. Mn/DOT indicated it would constru ct sound & visual barriers to_meet the objectives identified by Long Lake. VI. The meeting concluded with Mn/DOT and the cities of Long Lake and Orono indicating that if the “new" Alternate 6 became the selected corridor alternative, each would work together to achieve the conditions set forth by the City of Long Lake.