Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-21-1997 Planning Packet
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, JULY 21,1997,7:00 P.M. 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY - COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE - J. Diann Goetten ATTENDANCE Applicants presenting proposals before the Commission are asked to move to the table at the front of the Chambers when their application is announced by the Chairman. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PUBLIC INFORMATION REVIEWS 1.#2187 Donald and Robin Helgager 3265 Sixth Avenue North Variances - Public Hearing 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. #2238 Chic Dwight and Fred Guttormson 1220 Tonkawa Road Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing #2253 David Reinhold 3551 Livingston Avenue Veiriances - Public Hearing - Continue to August 18 #2254 Curtis and Barbara Palmer 2710 Casco Point Road Variances - Public Hearing #2255 Rick Rice 2700 Kelly Avenue Variances - Public Hearing #2256 James and Mary Rivers 1442 Shoreline Drive Variance - Public Hearing #2257 Dennis A. Meyer 4685 Tonkaview Lane Variance - Public Hearing #2258 Gerald A Walsh 180 Big Island Variance - Public Hearing PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA - MONDAY, JULY 21,1997, 7:00 P.M. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 15. 17. #2259 Mark and Laurie Headrick 1850 Fox Ridge Road Variance - Public Hearing #2260 Benjamin Milbrath 3265 Carman Road Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing #2261 Tony Eiden Company 345 Leaf Street Variance - Public Hearing #2262 Ned Butterfield 3745 Watertown Road Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing #2264 Janet C. Kieman 1491 Shoreline Drive Variances - Public Hearing 14. #2265 16. #2267 Robert Lund for Graydon K. and Michelle M. Newman 1655 Bohns Point Road Variances - Public Hearing #2266 Ronald and Robin Hohrman 190 Cygnet Place Variances - Public Hearing John O’Sullivan for Adam Smith Company 2380 Shady wood Road Commercial Site Plan Review - Public Hearing #2268 Robert T. Cal Ian 2995 Deer Run Trail Variance - Public Hearing 18. #2269 Conley Brooks and Gerald McCourtney 1045 Femdale Road West Subdivision of Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hearing PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - MONDAY, JUNE 16,1997 - 7:00 P.M. 19. #2270 Marcia and Kenneth Hickey 4640 Tonkaview Lane Variances and Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing 20. #2271 Chad Nilsson 3210 Navarre Lane Variances - Public Hearing 21. #2272 Wyatt Moe 1230 Spruce Place Variance and Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hearing 22. #2273 Morgan Nelson 3145 Jamestown Road Variance - Public Hearing SKETCH PLANS 23. #2263 Brook Park Realty 3560-3700 Shoreline Drive Sketch Plan Review PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 24. Report by Planning Commission representatives attending Council meetings of June 23, 1997 and July 14, 1997. 25. Other issues for discussion. 26. Planning Commission approval of minutes of the June 16,1997 meeting. 27. Plaiming Commission to select representatives to attend the Council meetings of July 28, 1997 and August 11, 1997. ADJOURNMENT .. -x-TT i t Public A ttendance Meeting Date ‘7 ' j / - 9 '7 □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 (fkvm agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 2. 3. V (sjOCt- ^£ 4.'^Unfr i ^>£ft<Atc M-7 ^/ .1 )orYfe/p/e P^' L\^j *711 6.^^obiA U 2ill sn Z7-<^^ 9.t^2jL ^€'yiyiyT/J 3::vr /- M *■2 / ^7 / 7 Uc i^tryn/tte^i f*/<~ y 11. ‘^^Cton /tf/»;'y,/*r^ jT'4 ^ 12. (iL.yi:! //?^? ^ / 7 :Z 13. f)/^AlLl/ 4-LA0ri£ M^Jll^^c^ I^SO fcnc£j ^2li 14. ///1\ 4^ A]^’r^ta L/LijL- 'p.^lC^i i ... ^ . I'i/'t..,,. —/i ("i'V., , . X.X10 ijj. Uj. Fi=finj)fic£?2j:^ 0*t3»S4 / Itk X^edr^lcAjU y Pi. v.aa»yAfltLg^ V .1, O 6NiL\J 5TA^ Orono planners to meet July 21 The Orono Planning Com mission will meet in the council chambers at 2780 Kelley Parkway on Monday, July 21, at 6:30 p.nri. on “Application #,2263 Brook Park Realty ” to consider, a sketch,; plan for residential development vof the property located at 356Q b3700 Shoreline, Dnve. • •' ^1** • * * The regular- meeting of the ; planning commission will begin at 7 p.m. on the ,21sti ' PM To;Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:July 16, 1997 Subject:#2187 Donald and Robin Helgager, 3265 Sixth Avenue Nortli - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing - Plan Rev isions Zoning District: RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential, 2 Acre, Unsevvered Application: Applicants have withdrawn their proposal for constructing a guest apartment, and have revised their current qjplication. The new proposal is for construction on the footprint that was approved in June 1996 (Resolution No. 3737) but with the addition of a second story over the attached garage addition. This places additional bulk of structure encroaching the 30’ side setback, hence the need for this additional variance review. List of Exhibits A - Architect's Letter of Request B - Survey/Site Plan/Revised Building Plans C - Building Plan Approved in June 1996 D - Resolution No. 3737 E " Planning Commission Minutes 11/18/96, 1/21/97, 2/18/97 F - Council Minutes 3/10/97 G - 60-day review Period Waiver 3/11/97 H - Notice of Council Action 3/14/97 Discussion The 1996 approval included a side setback variance to allow the construction of a new attached garage and room additions S' from the east side lot line where the required side setback is 30'. The existing house is 27.3' from that side lot line, and the existing garage (to be removed) is 6.8' from the lot line. The 1996 approval also granted a variance to the 150’ Natural Environment Lake setback to allow the additions to be located 140' from Lake Classen. The justification for this variance was removal of the existing detached garage which encroaches within 123' of the OHWL. The 1996 approval also granted an average lakeshore setback variance, justified on the basis that the removal of the existing garage and subsequent construction of the new attached garage and room additions would result in less encroachment of the average lakeshore setback than currently exists, with the likelihood of additional views of the lake opened up to the easterly Zoning File #2187 July 16,1997 Page 2 neighboring property owner as a result, The proposed plans include no apparent revisions to the envelope of the existing portions of house within the 50' street setback, hence no street setback variance is required. HardshipsA^ariance Justification Planning Commission should review the findings and conditions of Resolution No. 3737. Perhaps the primary justification for granting the side setback variance originally, was the inability to coustruct additions to the north, west, or south sides of the house without significant variances to the street setback or lakeshore setback requirements. >V’hile this property is somewhat substandard in acreage (1.5 acres dry buildable) in the 2 acre zone, the required setbacks leave a buildable envelope of only 1,800 sq. ft. Planning Commission concluded that it w'ould be more appropriate to expand the residence to the east near the side lot line, than to encroach any further into the street setback or lakeshore setback. Since the existing house covers nearly the entire buildable envelope, applicants had no alternative but to expand into a required setback. The difference between the variances approved in 1996 and the current application is simply the additional story above the proposed attached garage/storage addition. Some minor room size and use revisions have occurred, and now the addition will include a bedroom/exercise room above the garage wing. The new second story incorporates a steeper roof system, hence the bulk of the structure may appear significantly greater than that which was originally approved. Planning Commission should consider the standard criteria for determining undue hardship in reviewing this request: - Can the property in question be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls? Yes: The existing residence may be continued as is for its current residential use. - Is tlie plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to the property and not created by the landowner? The existing house and detached garage were constructed prior to current codes, and the 150' lakeshore setback is a recent code change which has had significant impact on the buildable envelope of this property. While the existing house nearly meets the current setback requirements, any additions outside the existing envelope would encroach on a required setback. - Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? The RR-IB zone 30' side setback is intended to maintain the rural character of the 2 acre zone and to provide open space. The only adjacent home is approximately 80' from Zoning File #2187 July 16,1997 Page 3 applicant ’s residence and 65’ from the detached garage. The separation between the neighboring residence and applicant's proposed residence would be approximately 58’. Do the conditions apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the property is located? All lots in the RR-IB zoning district are required to meet the 30 ’ side setback, and all lakeshore lots are required to meet the average lakeshore setback as well as defined lake setback. Is the granting of the variance request necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property right of the applicants? The applicants have indicated the need for additional living space, which cannot reasonably be obtained without a variance to one or more setback requirements. Will the granting of the variance merely serve as a convenience to the applicants or is it necessaiy to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty? While the variance will be a convenience for the applicants by allowing expansion of their residence as proposed, no functional additions would be possible without a variance. "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the zoning code". The need for variances is based on the property layout and not based on financial considerations. Issues for Consideration 1.Is it appropriate based on the facts and hardships presented to allow a 2-story structure with 5' side setback in the 2 acre zone? Since the City granted a variance in 1996 for a one story addition encroaching the side yard, is the proposed two story addition appropriate in light of the justifications previously used for the one story encroachment? 2.Does Planning Commission have any other concerns regarding the average lakeshore setback or lakeshore setback variance request? Staff Recommendation If Planning Commission concludes that the two story addition located 5' from the lot line is justified, then a recommendation for variance approval would be appropriate. Planning Commission may wish to incorporate the findings and conditions of Resolution No. 3737 into any approval recommendation, including removal of the existing detached garage structure prior to final inspection of the new additions. r Zoning File #2187 July 16,1997 Page 4 Options for Action 1. Recommend approval as proposed. 2. Recommend approval with additional specific conditions. 3. Table for further information (specify). 4. Recommend denial (state reasons). 5.Other. Isv #—• i A • • • • • • • • • • June 26,1997 Gluts Obrien 6trotlier ADCHlTEa6 Orono Planning Commission CITY OF ORONO PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: Helgager Residential Remodeling Dear Commissioners, We are requesting that you approve the latest revisions for the remodeling of the Helgager residence. These revisions add rooms over the existing kitchen area and the proposed garage. The footprint of the addition is the same as it was under the earlier approved remodeling. All setback encroachments remain the same. Since the addition of the guest apartment addition could not be resolved to the satisfaction of all parties, it is our desire to gain some of this square footage by putting it over the addition approved earlier. If you have any questions, please contact my office. Respectfully, CLUTS, O’BRIEN, STROTHER ARCHITECTS 7520 Market Place Drive Eden Prairie Minnesota 55344 Phone: 612/941-4822 • -• • ___A U=24^22 ew. t-'i- ■ T-‘\ —’ fitif Utt. »f A»i ‘1 L»t !,S*c 29-//0 -2j L«>c parallel with ike f«9 * r <s^«f Uc Z9-UB part of ion 29, incipa I -he above described i. garage, shed, and jurport to show dny Is I 5 r r • •sr % F i\acQc!olwg\9643helg\5-l4ulb.dwg cn H- 3 U OJin • •ro I 3 I i-------1 — / / I \U I J I I I I • i / / i... A-^|V- i'- I • I I % .J^ I :r - t: I . 4i -4X\ I I I I I I ! I / \\y ’ -5»' '■»^)r • : r-^: . ’ .^4 - t, t /*■ iy^U^^^JlMlur/Tsac^ •-4 • . ;iv..../ - *•</''»» -* -^mr; •./• « . .:. '. ^ -1> > 4 *-J '!i*»< 1-r-vr I M , I r •. tA > * »♦ mm\ • ^ Jt ^ § ® % # 4 k X 'Sm Q.oQ St'CTi cr* 1 2 I— u*i lD CO I- D -J c•« n b« • • to <ri In 01 ri\acQddwg\9643helg\5-Melev •i ? OL I CO CL H OH cr< o: o 10 H D X ■; fc • b fO U‘i • • fo r-l •H I 01 agr EpfflOH ’ SML': 1/4'- V-Cf F»\acaddw9\9643helg\5-14elev IIK s li z 79 -H mr § oz ;< } C:N/-' Vi ^ V ^ > I* {* ;i» 7^ ^3 <2, '/» »/• »/f fii >• il i) - . .!.£• > * ,A-*' ■■ ■ y>A ^^0 A‘' .ryf, 1VI ;M, * I? v^l/I •. /:i V3 ( C-^.CO fA .•- r" X » p>. *■ f 6643303 Ifim GITYofORONO CSHO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 8787NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1, 10.28; SUBDIVISION 5(B); AND 10.56. SUBDIVISION 16(C) FILE #2145 WHEREAS, Donald Helgager and Robin Helgager, husband and \vife, (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 3265 6th Avenue North within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: The west 327 feet of the east 542 feet of that part of Government Lot 1, lying south of the road, Section 29, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5(B) to ^low a 5' side setback for construction of a new attached garage and room additions, where the required side setback is 30', and a variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 10.56, Subdivision 16(C-6) to allow said additions to encroach the average lakeshore setback where no encroachment is normally allowed, and a variance to Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) to allow new structure to be located 140' from Lake Classen, a Natural Environment Lake, where a 150' structure setback is normally required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2145. 2.The property is located in the RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. TRANSFER ENTERED Ha:N£PIN COUNTY TAXf AYEfl SERVlCeS OCT 2 W96 Page 1 of 6 t GITYof ORONO ETHECIT 8737RESOLUTION OtTHEJIlTY COUNCIL NO. _ 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1996 and recommended approval of the proposed variances on a \ ote of 7 to 0 based upon the following findings: A. B. Since all proposed additions meet the 50’ street setback, no steet setback vari: nee is required. The location of the proposed additions to the east of the existing house and as near as 5' to the east side lot line is appropriate based on the following unique findings: 1. Additions of the same magnitude as those proposed could not be located elsewhere on the property without encroaching the 50' required street setback or the 150' required lakeshore setback. 2.WOtile the property is approximately 1.5 acres in dry buildable area above of the OHWl of Lake Classen, the buildable envelope due to the required setbacks is only 1.800 s.f. 3.If additions were constmeted to the southwest or south of the house, they would eliminate the existing flat back yard area, resulting in a steep slope directly behind the house. Given the proximity of County E.oad 6, it would be appropriate to retain a usable yard on the south side of the house. 4.Topography is generally sloping towards the applicants' property, hence any additional drainage near the lot line caused by the proposed additions wiil only impact the applicants, not the neighboring property owner. 5.The proposed proximity to the lot line may have a negative impact on existing screening between applicants' house and the neighboring house to the east, however the neighboring property owner has indicated this is not a concern. Page 2 of 6 •i 1 CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 7 3 7 4. 5. C.The average lakeshore setback for this application has been defined as the lake setback of the neighboring house to the east, since the neighboring property to the west is nearly one-quarter mile distant. The proposed removal of the existing garage and si bsequent construction of a new attached garage and room additions \vill result in less encroachment of the average lakeshore setback than currently exists. The existing encroachment is approximately 90', and this will reduce to 75 . The neighboring property will have no additional views encroached by the proposed construction, and may have additional views of the lake opened up by the proposal. D.The existing garage encroaches within 123' of the OHWL of Lake Classen. The proposal to remove that garage and construct new additions which will encroach onlv as near as 14C’ from Lake Classen, is a positive improvement to the conformity of the property in relation to setback from Lake Classen. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Comn)ission. reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply genetally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not au\cisely affect iraftic coudilious, 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 o: difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping %vith the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. A Page 3 of 6 ,/^o^ 4s CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 7 a y CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.13, Subdivision 5(B) to allow a 5' side setback where a 30' side setback is normally required, and grants variances to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C-6) to allow a 75’ encroachment of the average lakeshore setback where no encroachment is normally allowed, and grants a variance to Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) to allow a 140’ setback from the OHWL of Lake Classen where a 150' setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicants shall adhere to the proposed plans submitted with Application #2145. 2. The existing detached garage structure shall be removed prior to final inspection of the new additions. 3.Authorities granted by this variance run with the properly not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 24, 1997). 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the tenns of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 4 of 6 i It, a*e8»b:s GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^737 vi'. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of June, 1996. ... •. .'V' •.V ^othy .V, ' • i'J**! . V . 1- alli^' City Clerk • 7 Mim- Property Own©r(^ Edv\*ard J. Cajlihan, Jr., Mayor / ) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of June, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. I JAMIE L. BOSMA notary PUBIIC-MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY „ ^Coffimi^t^ExpIrBJ^ W Notary Public UlJ^ /Ob'-; Page 5 of 6 I til >11 GlTYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 3 787 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this 1 da} of and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the personfs) desci acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. ________, 199^ before me a Notary Public witWm . , j.ljllycfn. :sc! ibed in and who executed the f^r^^oing instrument,and t;rr-;?v^;-y4:c£ifsa8 g:a a a;sai igj^,28a !a JAMIE L.BOSMA '* NOIARY PUBLIC4ynNNES0TA HENNEPM COUNTY MirOoRmi C\l i I; ijQ 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. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )S£. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of____ NOTARY PUBLIC , 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 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 18, 1996 (#2 - #2180 Peggy and Frank Pichelman - Continued) Lindquist suggested an outer limit be established for hardcover. He said he is not comfortable setting a precedent of allowing 41% hardcover. Stoddard agreed asking that hardcover be maintained in the 30% range. The Planning Commission set a upper limit of 35-36% hardcover. Pichelman noted that the structural coverage was reduced by the amended plan from 18% to 17.1%. Mabusth noted the different hardcover calculations that exist and that were proposed The Pichelmans indicated with a hardcover range, they could work with their plan to decrease the size while still meeting the setbacks. Berg suggested 38-39%. Mabusth asked that the applicant prepare an amended plan with reduction in hardcover in the 75-25<^’ setback. Stoddard moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2180 contingent on receipt of an amended plan received by Staff prior to the Council review with hardcover maintained at 38-39% in the 75-250'setback zone. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (Planning Commissioner Stoddard left the meeting after agenda items 1 and 2.) (#3) #2187 DONALD AND ROBIN HELGAGER, 3265 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING 8:32-8:54 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present along with Achitect, Neil Heupel. Gaffron reported that the applicant received approval in June, 1996, for removal of a garage and construction of an attached garage to the residence within 5' of the side lot line. The addition was not constructed, and the applicant is now requesting approval of another application. Gaffron noted that the property in question is located on Lake Classen, a Natural Environment Lake, requiring a 150' setback. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 18, 1996 (#3 - #2187 Donald and Robin Helgager - Continued) The current proposal calls for the removal of the garage, one small addition, and another large addition to the west side of the residence. The proposal would result in a 32' encroachment in the right-of-way, a 24’ encroachment of the lakeshore setback, a 5’ side setback variance, and encroachment of the average lakeshore setback. The neighboring residence to the east would define the average lakeshore setback. The encroachment of the right-of-way is considered extreme in comparison to any other properties on CoRd 6. The lakeshore setback is similar to what was proposed with the original application but with added bulk. Gafiron noted that the east side setback variance was approved in June vnth the finding that it would be difficult to build to the west. Yet this proposal calls for the addition to be to the west of the residence. Also included in the improvement is a proposed'guest apartment to accommodate a mother-in-law living at the residence, which requires a CUP. The proposed constructions appears to have addressed the specific issues of being within the principal residence structure, use for a relative, and a single common entryway serving the entire structure with the exception of additional accesses to the dec^ and garage spaces. Parking will be provided by a two-stall garage on the east end of the house replacing the existing garage and a third separate stall at the northwest end of the house to serve the apartment use. The plumbing will share the existing septic system installed in 1988 to serve a 4-bedroom home. The residence will still have 4 bedrooms but will be larger in size. The septic inspector has reported that there is apparently no alternate drainfield site on the property. Borings were taken but no alternate site was found. Helgager reported that their plans were changed after receiving approval for the initial proposal in June due to his mother-in-law’s plans to move into their residence. This '• proposal is an attempt to accommodate her and her needs. Helgager noted that a single level home is desirable as she is getting older. He understands that the home is close to the road and would like to accommodate the concerns for screening. He noted the building envelope to be about 1800 s.f Helgager indicated that the current home would not meet the setback standards. He said he attempted to balance the distance between the lake and the roadway after hearing the discussions from the previous proposal. Heupel addressed the issue of building to the west of the addition. He noted that the problem was not being able to build to the west but the approach to the garage would have required changing, and it had been their desire to maintain the approach from CoRd 6. Hawn said she felt with sophisticated landscaping and removal of fence and dead trees, evergreens and other screening could be done. She did feel the residence was too close to the well noting a 2' separation where 3' is required. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 18,1996 (#3 - #2187 Donald and Robin Helgager - Continued) Lindquist asked the applicant if the garage on the front side of the house was necessary. Helgager said the intent was to provide a garage for his mother-in-law so she does not have to walk through the entire house to gain access to her accommodations. Heupel also added that this garage addition would be at the same level as the slab and would not require stairs as would be the case with the other garage. Lindquist said he understood the need but noted the elimination of the garage would ud the problem of setback. There were no public comments. McMillan asked if the conditional use permit for guest house would be reviewed periodically. It was noted that the CUP requires no annual review and stays with the house with restrictions as required. Gaifron reported that if the Commission recommended periodical reviews, it could be written to only apply to this ov.-ner, if desired. Lindquist inquired about the lack of tdtemate septic site. Gafiron reported that the property is not close to sewer and the problem would remain the same with the number of bedrooms if there is no alternate site. Lindquist agreed but noted that the house size was doubling with the improvements as proposed. Helgager responded that he understood the septic issue but saw it as a distance in the future with the ability to go to a mound system if necessary. Helgager added that he was informed the life expectancy of a mound system is 15 years and could be replaced to an alternate site postponing replacement for 30 years. Lindquist was concerned that the ' potential problem would only be prolonged. Gaffron said it was not the City's experience that a mound system would only last IS years, but probably twice that time. He noted the pump or rock bed of the system may have to be replaced at some point. Gaffron reported that the vast majority of new systems were of the mound type due to the soils and seasonal water tables. A maximum slope of 6% is required for a mound system which is a problem with the many steep lots in Orono. Lindquist asked if the applicant could make the home smaller in size. Helgager asked for some guideline. Berg asked and received confirmation that there would be a full basement under the residence. Noting the 2200 s.f. on the main level, Berg said it is an extensive size considering having the main level and basement. Hawn suggested that the home not be extended forward of what currently exists. Lindquist suggested removal of the single garage addition and a reduction in the house size. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 18,1996 (#3 > #2187 Donald and Robin Helgager - Continued) Berg suggested moving the garage back to the line of the house. She said she would be in support of the garage if it was moved and saw the garage location as the most logical site. This suggestion would result in a reduction in the footprint and attachment of the garage at the same side as proposed. Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to table Application #2187 for further review. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#4) #2188 MARY K RICE, 1570 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:54-8:59 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth indicated that the property is located along the "S" curve of North Arm Drive and consists of6,883 s.f Tlie application presents two options involving an attached single stall garage with upper level deck (Option 1) or a detached garage located in the south side yard (Option 2). Both options involve street setback variances of 2' or 3'. Structural coverage would not be exceeded by either option. Hardcover within the 250- 500 ’ setback area would increase from 23.9% to either 25.6% for Option 1 or 30% for Option 2. A 10’xl6' deck also exists along the south side of the residence. Mabusth noted that Staff prefers Option 1 as the topography slopes to the east and wofild have the minimal impact on areas of existing plantings. The applicant said Option 1 was also her preference. There were no public comments. Hawn inquired as to how the residence was entered. Rice said the residence can be entered from either the deck or the basement. Mabusth noted that the access to the front of the residence was removed. Berg moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2188, Option 1, for a 2' street setback variance. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#5) #2189 STONEGATE FARM, INC, 2940 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING - APPLICANT WITHDRAWN The applicant withdrew this application prior to the meeting. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 21, 1997 {U\ - #2201 Vacation of tliumproved Right-of-Way - Big Island ^^ontinued) The subdivision includes Lots ^nd 5 as lot line rearrangenlent and the division of Lot 3 into three new lotsMabusth noteoiljat the existing lot j>frecord includes lots4 and 5. Lots 1 and 2 would be new lots. There were no public comments. Lindquist asked the applicant if he had cwd Stjufrecommendations 1-8 for the subdivision and 1-4 for the guest house CUP amHs in concurrence with those findings. The applicant said he was noting tl 2 need to work out the details reWding #7 (road improvements). Lindquist moved, McMillan/ieconded, to approve Applicatibn #2204 with Staff recommendations #1-8, Wnereby #7 pertaining to width woulokie reviewed with Staff and Engineer, and with Sjan recommendations 1-4 for the guest housbsCUP. Mabusth repoi 27 meeting. that the application would be presented tc ih“ Counclkat their January Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. ACTION ITEMS (#3) #2187 DONALD AND ROBIN HELGAGER, 3265 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - VARIANCES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 8:02-8:25 P.M. The Applicant was present along with Architect, Neil Heupel. Gaffron reported that the application for a guest apartment was reviewed by the Commission at their November meeting. The applicant was asked to revise the plans to address the concerns brought forw’ard. The street setback was reduced to be consistent with the existing house. The setback was originally proposed at 17' although 50' is required. The setback currently proposed is 24'. The single stall attached garage remains adjacent to the entry to the guest house in the proposed plan. Changes were made to the floor plan to straighten a line where the garage extended. The required setback from Lake Classen is 150' and the proposed is 126'. The east side setback is proposed at 5' and 30' is required. The east side setback had been discussed in an earlier review which did not include the guest house. The average lakeshore setback was reduced from 90' to 80' to provide easterly views for the house. A ■'2 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 21, 1997 (#3 - #2187 Donald and Robin Helgager - Continued) Gaffron reported the issues for discussion include whether or not the single stall garage is necessary considering the proximity of the large structure to CoRd 6. He suggested the location of the garage may possibly be reconfigured by pivoting the garage and eliminating the staircase. Gaffron stated that the DNR felt the hardship noted for the setback to the lake was self-created. He asked the Commission to consider whether there are suitable hardships for granting the east side setback variance given the magnitude of the additions to the west. He asked the Commission to consider whether the guest house design will function as a separate entity or part of the principal residence. Gaffron noted that the guest house does clearly share the main entrance to the house. He did question whether the separate garage stall gives the appearance of two separate dwellings rather than that of a single, family residence. He also asked if the Commission had specific concerns regarding the lack of an alternate drainfield site. Heupel reported that the design of the house was pulled back on the lot in response to the suggestion by the Commission. McMillan asked if the site was too steep for a mound system as an alternate for the septic. Gaffron said the concern was over disturbed soils as well as the steep topography. McMillan also inquired if the great room e.xists as shown on the plan. She was informed that the family room, hall, great room, and kitchen will remain the same. She inquired about landscaping plans. Heupel said the landscaping would be the same as that shown in the original plans. Lindquist asked if the single stall garage could be eliminated. Heupel said moving the garage would affect the well. McMillan inquired about the well. Gaffron noted that the new plans solve the well location problem. McMillan said she would be in favor of the plan with a detailed landscaping plan included. Smith was not in favor of the garage as located. She asked if the garage is of importance that it be pulled back from the roadway. Hawn asked if the well could be relocated. The applicant said he does not wish to make any further changes to the well. . .-.r. MDSTUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 21, 1997 (#3 - #2187 Donald and Robin Helgager - Continued) Helgager said he understands why guest house requirements prohibit more than one main entrance. He noted that prior to remodeling, it had been difficult to know where the primary entrance to the home was located. Helgager said the location of the single stall garage is to enable the user of the guest house entry to the interior without having to walk through the entire house. Smith suggested moving the garage location from the front of the house so h would not protrude. Heupel brought the Commission's attention to the steep topography of the property. Hawn inquired if the access from CoRd 6 could be moved further west. Gaffiron did not believe this would solve the problem. Helgager also said it would increase hardcover. Lindquist reported his problem with the plan had to do with the garage and not location to the lake side. There were no public comments. The applicant was informed that the Planning Commission’s objection to the plan was the garage. Helgager asked if it was the additional garage or the garage location to the road. Hawn said she had a problem with both noting that she would prefer less garage area farther from the road. Smith said she was concerned about the design of two distinct living areas. She felt it would encourage the establishment of two residences in the future. Lindquist indicated his concern about the proximity of the garage to the road. Schroeder was concerned about the future creation of two units and the proximity of the garage to the road. McMillan noted there is limited area to resolve the issues and questioned whether some square footage of living space should be eliminated to accommodate the third garage. She does not wish to see any further encroachment to the lake side and sees the lake as a bigger concern than that of CoRd 6. At the applicant's request. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2187 to allow the applicant to review the plans. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#4) #2195 GENMAR INDUSTRIES, INC., 1449 SHORELINE DRIVE - COMMERCIAL SITE PLANA^ARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 8:25-9:29 P.M. The Applicant was represented hj'.Vary McConnell and JefFMelby. The site operator was also present. 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 18,1997 ^^3 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members preser.t; Chair Dale Lindquist, Charles Schroeder, Sandra Smith, Elizabeth Hawn, William Stoddard, and Lili McMDlan. Janice Berg was absent. The following represented the City Staff: Assistant Zoning and Planning Administrator Michael Gaffron, City , lanner Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Mayor Jabbour and Council Member Goetten were present. Chair Lindquist called the meeting to order at 7;00 p.m. ACTION ITEMS (#3) #2187 DONALD AND ROBIN HELGAGER, 3265 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - va RIANCES/CONDITIONAL use PERMIT - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:02-7:14 P.M. The Applicant was represented by Neil Heupel. Gafffon reported that the application had been tabled at the January meeting at the request of the applicant. The applicant has made no changes and is asking for action by the Planning Commission in order to move the application on to the Council. Gaffron reviewed the original and revised application plans previously presented. The structure was originally 1 T from CoRd 6 and increased to 24'. The variances required include street setback, 150' lakeshore setback, and an average lakeshore setback, though the encroachment has been reduced. A conditional use permit is required for the guesthouse use. Smith asked the representative why the applicant has asked to move forward with the application knowing the opinions of the Planning Commissioners. Heupel said the applicant feels the best plan has been presented and does not care to spend any additional money to revise the plans given the conditions and setbacks. Heupel stated the plan created the single entry required under the CUP for guesthouse use. He said they would be willing to screen the house from the roadway v\dth landscape plantings as suggested previously by McMillan. Heupel noted the plan also meets the requirements for the CUP regarding a separate kitchen and use of same well and septic for the entire residence. He reiterated the desfre for the applicant and guest to have separate garage spaces. Smith noted while the entry into the residence is the same, it does not directly enter the family roorh as stated but is separated by doorways. HawTi said she would prefer a design with the three garage stalls together. There were no public comments. minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 18. 1997 (#3 - #2187 Donald and Robin Helgager - Continued) Schroeder inquired what the relevance was of including a Ust of other guesthouse uses in the City. Gaflfron said the applicant requested the list to see what has been constructed in this area. Schroeder asked if there were different situations involved. Gaffron said the setback variance is unusual as well as the separation of the garages. Gaffron said a residence with guesthouse use wth both attached garage and detached garage is requested one or two times a year. Smith moved. Hawn seconded, to deny Application #2187. Smith listed the setback variances as the reasoning behind her motion. Lindquist noted the garage so near the roadway as being a problem. McMillan fek while the current residence is a reasonable use of the property, doubling the size of the residence was a sdf-created hardship and not unique to the property. McMillan also said the variann would not be in keeping with the* essential character of the locality. Vote; Ayes 6, Na>'s 0. (The meeting was recessed for one minute.) SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS/PUBLIC INFORMATION RE\TE\VS (#1) 7:15 P.M. - #2211 ZONING AMENDMENT, CHAPTER 10, LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING), MUNICIPAL CODE OF ORDINANCES, TO DELETE ^ANTENNA STRUCTURE” AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE BI, B3, AND I DISTRICTS - PUBLIC HEARING 7:15-7:33 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailii^g were noted. Van Zomeren reported that the application is for a zoning amendment to the ordinance under wiuch a moratorium was adopted in August, 1996, r^arding telecommunication towers. The moratorium was extended in December, 1996, and is due to expire on March 24, 1997. Staff e.xpects to present the amendment change to the Council at their March 10 meeting. The change involves deleting the terminology allowing antenna structures in the B-1, B-3, and 1 Zoning Districts. If the telecommunications policy is approved, no antenna structures can be requested in those zoning districts. Denial of the amendment would allow such requests to be made. Smith asked the reasoning behind the amendment. Van Zomeren said the concerns involved aesthetics, setback requirements, and the rapid change in technology. Staff is recommending co-locating antennas on water towers if needed. NDNUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MARCH 10,1997 F (#7 - #2202 County Road 15 Reconstruction - Con^mued) Jabbour said he did not see the need to require the mitigation in Orono as the sites in Excelsior and Independence would benefit Orono. In regards to the potential concerns with grant'ng conditional approval prior to EAW completion. Radio informed Jabbour that there might be no benefit in distinguishing between public and private projects as a private resident would say there is no difference. It was recognized that the County will have 3-30 days, or between March 15 and April IS, to make their determination firom the comment reporting end of March 12. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to continue the agenda item to a Special Council Meeting to be held on April 1,1997 at 8:00 a.m. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. Settles asked Gaffron to check for the information required by the Council. Kelley asked if an EAW would be required on CoRd 6 reconstruction project. The County representatives will verify and report to Gaffron. Radio said the County is put on notice that the EAW approval would be required to obtain the puimit. (#8) #2206 ELAINE AND STEVE SILUS, 3235 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. 3851 Silus asked for clarification of #1 in the conclusions of the elution. He questioned the timing of the hardcover removals Silus asked that the teniporary storage facility and unattached garage be allowed to remain during construction. He said he would remove those structures when the project is completed. The Council agreed with the request. Jabbour informed Silus that he would not obtain the occupancy permit until the structures were removed. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3851. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#9) #2210 KENT E. AND SUSAN SWANSON, 3229B CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3852 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3852. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#10) #2187 DONALD AND ROBIN HELGAGER, 3625 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - VARIANCES/CUF - RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL Neil Heupel represented the applicants. MESUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MARCH 10,1997 (#10 - #2187 Donald and Robin Helgager - Continued) ---------- Gaf&on repmed th^ the Planning Commission reviewed the revised application and ^ommended demaL The vanances are a result of the shape and size the lot and setbacks for an addition to the west end of the residence, a new attached garage and an attached ^est hoi«e with additional garage. The detached garage is to be removed The residence is located on I^e Classen requiring a 150’ setback, which is met by the existing residence with the existing garage at 123’. The revbed plan proposes the ^d 7 for the garage which will be removed. There is a 5 ’ separation proposed from the house to the c^t lot hne. The proposed street setback is 24’ where 50’ is required The average setback as d .6ned by the house to the east is encroached to a lesser degree at 80’ but no encroachment IS allowed. The CUP is for a guest house. An approval was grantw last year for a lesser variance that did not include the guest apartment. Gaffron indicated that the Planning Commission’s recommendation for denial was based on the following specific reasons: The need for setback variances to support the proposed guest apartment use suggests that use is not appropriate for the site. The sep^ted garages u proposed yield the appearance of a two-unit dwelling in this single family zoning district. The hardships are self-created, i.e., the need for the magnitude of variances request^ is a direa result of a proposed additional use on the site rather than a substantial hardship to the property. If approved, the resulting structure would be out of character with the majority of other homes on CoRd 6 in regard to proximity to the road. Gaffron cited other factors which may have entered into the recommendation: The DNR recommended denial of the lake setback variance as it is a self-created hardship. The limited building envelope would be si^ficantly encroached upon. The 5' east side setback previously approved was justified by a finding that no additions to the west were feasible due to the limited building envelope. There is a lack of an alternate drainfield site, though no additional bedrooms over the design capacity are requested. Heupel responded to Gaffron’s comments. He said the applicant does not agree with the hardships being self-imposed. The required setback at the time the property was purchased by the Helgager’s was 75’ but now has 1300 s.f of buildable land. When the Shoreland Ordinance was adopted, the building envelope was reduced rendering the property' basically unbuildable. The plans for any addition w'ould require variances, and the proposed revisions are closer to CoRd 6 due to the lake setback. Heupel said the plans have gone through several design changes, and neither he or the applicant view any further changes without a significant cost. Jabbour, while commenting that he a^eed with the comments regarding the lot, reported that the Planning Commission w'as w’illing to W'ork with the applicant regarding the issue of the separated additional garage and were not asking that the 1300 s.f. be adhered to. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MARCH 10,1997 (#10 - #2187 Donald and Robin Helgager - Continued) Goetten said she would support the setback variances but was concerned with tlie second garage in the rural residential area. She asked that the garage be changed. Heupel noted the change to the garage proposed by Commissioner Hawn for a possible tuck-under garage. This idea had not been propos^ as it would require two accesses off* of CoRd 6. Peterson said she concurred with the comments made by Goetten regarding the second garage. Heupel was informed that the Council agreed with the conclusions made by the Planning Commission and a denial would eliminate any further review of an application for a six- month period. Jabbour suggested the applicant may want to table for further review. Heupel was asked if he would waive the 60 day requirement for a decision for action. Heupel agreed. Heupel asked for clarification that the applicant would be allowed to encroach the 150’ setback from the lake in order to pull the garage back from the street. Goetten indicated that two driveway accesses would not be allowed. Hawn suggested the garages be combined into a triple garage and pulled back behind the residence on the east side which would more easily accommodate the guest house. Heupel said this suggestion was a good possibility. Kelley inquired if the representative had the legal authority to extend the application through a waiver. Radio said he would have to have power of attorney, which Heupel does not. A letter was to be obtained by Tuesday, March 11, from Mr. Helgager. The Council reiterated that all three garages must be combined. Goetten moved, Peterson seconded to continue the application conditioned on the waiver being provided by March 11. If thp waiver was not obtained by that date, the application would be denied. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT (#11) INTERIM LIBRARY SERVICE DURING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RIDGEDALE LIBRARY Jabbour reported that the Ridgedale Library will be closed for rehabilitation for a two- year period. There have been no special provisions made for the Long Lake and Maple Plain Libraries. He asked the Counc'il to support a letter requesting that the library' staff would be reallocated to those libraries. ! •MPR-11-1997 09:53 CLU'S .O’BRIEN. STROT>€R 941 4951 P.22/02 DATE: TO: March 11.1997 Orono Planning CommissioR CITYOFORONO POB0X66 Crystal Bav, MN 55523 ^>6 FROM: Neil Heupel PROJECT: Helgager Residence Remodel COMM NO: 9643 SUBJECT: Variance Application COPY Ta NeU Heupel ^4/1 / j *6 '0-Vo We, Donald and Robin Helgager, agree to waive impt^iti^n of the 60 day statutory i^>pfDval period regarding our aonirg application. File #2187. A—"— -4 Donald Helgager , • • I« •« !• r . • ••1,1 I * •. . % TOTfi. P.02 ) j t’’ CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO. #2187 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: March 14,1997 TO:Donald and Robin Helgager 3265 Sixth Avenue North Long Lake, MN 55356 COPIES: NeilHeupel Gluts, O'Brien, Strother Architects 7520 Market Place Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance/Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 03/10/97 VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: To table in order that applicant be allowed to revise proposal for further review. Revised plans shall be referred to Planning Commission for review. Applicant has waived 60-day review period. Please contact City staff if you have any questions. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. To:Chair Lindquist & Planning Commission Members From:Michael P. Gaffion, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:July 15, 1997 Subject:#2238 Chic Dwight & Fred Guttonnson, 1220 Tonkav.-a Road - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing The ^plicant was unable to attend the June meeting but has indicated he will be at the July 21 meeting. , CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 TO: Chic Dwight & Fred Guttormson 1220 Tonkawa Road Long Lake, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances ZONING FILE #2238 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 17, 1997 COPIES: DATE OF MEETING: 06/16/97 VOTE: 4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commusion recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Tabled because applicant was not present. This item will be rescheduled for the July Planning Commission meeting. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Planning Commission on Monday, July 21, 1997; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. To: From: Date: Chair Lindquist & Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator June 12,1997 Subject:#2238 Chic Dwight & Fred Guttormson, 1220 Tonkawa Road - Variances Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1B Single Family Lakeshore Residential Application:A. Request for after-the-fact lakeshore setback, 0-75' hardcover variances for enclosure of room below pre-existing deck. B. Request for 75-250' hardcover variance for construction of detached 30' X 32' garage. List of Exhibits: A - Planning Commission Minutes of May 19 B - Memo & Exhibits of May 14 Staff and applicants met on the property June 3 to discuss fiirther options. A number of concepts were discussed including: Re-orienting the proposed garage to allow a revised driveway loop with less encroachment into the 0-75' zone. Relocating the driveway loop nearer Tonkawa Road for the same purpose Eliminate the loop in the yard, develop a second access to Tonkawa further south. Parking and access are the applicants' greatest concerns, as is property security given the proximity of the new Maxwell Bay access. Staff and applicants reached no specific conclusions. Planning Commission and applicant should discuss whether any of the new concepts have the ability to solve applicants concerns and meet Planning Commission's goals for this property. The staff memo and exhibits of May 14 are attached for reference. #2238 June 12. 1997 Page 2 Summary of Items Needing Approval and Potential Tradeoffs Need Approval:- Reconstruction of deck (0-75* hardcover, setback) - Enclosure of room under deck (Setback) - Addition of detached garage (75-250' hardcover) Potential Tradeoffs:- Remove 8’ gravel driveway to lake in 0-75' - Remove 4'x9' shed in 0-75' - Remove 8' x 12' shed in 75-250' - Remove 120 sf deck at shoreline - Remove loop portion of driveway in 0-75' zone - Remove portions of parking area in 75-250' - Re-work driveway to decrease hardcover in 0-75' Options for Action 1. Recommend approval per staff recommendation or with additional or revised conditions. 2. Recommend partial approval. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Table for further information. 5. Other. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19.1997 (#13 - W22il Jim and Roxanne Sta^ - Continued) The q)plicant requested the application be presented to Council at their May 27 meeting. •(#14) #2238 CHIC DWIGHT AND FRED GUTTORMSON, 1220 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCE - PUBUC HEARING - 9:56-10:27 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Fred Guttormson was present. Gaffron reported that the application was a two-part request. The first request was for an after-the-fact lakeshore setback and 0-75* hardcover variances for an enclosure of a room below the pre-eTusting deck. The applicant reedved approval for thb enclosure last year with the condition that particular hm’dcover be removed; the condition was not met. The second request is for a 75-250' hardcover variance for construction of a detached 3(ftc32* garage. The garage will be located to meet the 15 ’ side setback. The garage meets the 10' street setback with side feeing doors. Hardcover exists at 36.4% in the 75-250' setback where 25% is allowed. The proposal would result in 35.9% hardcover with removal of a shed and portion of the driveway. A portion of the garage is over gravel. The 0-75' hardcover exists at 10.9% which includes an 8' gravel driveway which exhibits new gravel, and a 4*x9' shed. Another shed appears to have been removed. Gafifron noted there is a loop driveway located in the 0-75' setback. The deck exists at 34' from the shoreline. The enclosure did not meet building code standards and was completed without a permit. If it is approved, the enclosure would require rd^uil^ng. A hardship statement was pro\dded for the garage. No hardship statement was presented Tor the deck enclosure, but the enclosure had been approved previously but expired because the resolution was not rigned and no permit was issued. Gaf^n pointed out that the lakeshore dedc and gravel driveway are still present on the property. Their removal was required in the previous resolution. Gafi&’on asked the Commission to consider whether hardship is demonstrated and if other removals should be required to reduce the hardcover. He questioned whether the loop driveway should be in the 0-75* setback. He asked the Commission to verify that conditions of Resolution 3611 should be applied. He suggested the possibility of allowing the applicant five years in which to remove the lakeside deck. Gaffron said Staff does not necessarily recommend approval of such an amortization period but recommended conditions 1-4 as outlined in the packet. Guttormson said he had added unndows placed on the existing railroad ties to enclose the deck. He believed this would not be considered permanent as the windows are removed in the summer months. He then found he need m approval and the work performed to building standards. Guttormson said he wouiu like to maintmn the lakeshore deck. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19,1997 (#14 - #2238 Chic Dwight and Fred Guttormson - Continued) Schroeder was informed that Guttormson has owned the pr<^)erty for three years. Smith questioned why the oii^al resolution was not tigned and the gravel was not removed. Guttormson said he parks his motor home on the gravel driveway but would have removed it if the enclosure was made permanent Undquist asked if the applicant intends to finish the enclosure and remove the gravel driveway noting the ne^ for a building permit Guttormson said he would if allowed. He would also remove the driveway and reseed to the lakeshore. Lindquist inquired if the lakeshore deck would be removed. Smith noted it was a condhidn of the prior resolution. The applicant stated he did not complete the proposed improvements and would like to maintain the deck. Hawn suggested removal and sodding of the loop portion of the driveway with a back-out areabdiind the garage. The parking location of the RV was discussed. The applicant said the garage doors would have to be heightened. He would prefer to park the RV in the loop of the driveway. Lindqiust informed Guttormson that the intention is to eliminate hardcover in the 0-7S* setback. Guttormson said he would store the RV elsewhere during the winter months but park it on the property the two weeks each month that it was not bdng used. Smith inquired of the time fiame if the applicant were to remove the driveway to the lake. The applicant said he would request 60 d^s. There were no ptiblic comments. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2238 subject to Staflf recommendation #1, elimination of the loop driveway in the 0-75* setback noting sufficient spacing for a turnaround dsewhere, conditions #2 and #3. Guttormson said he would like to remove the proposal for the garage and maintain the loop drivewr^. Guttormson was informed that he could present that request to the Council. Gaffion indicated the garage request could be removed fi'om the application. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to eliminate the loop, with conditions 1,2, 3, and 4. If the applicant chooses to eliminate condition #4, a permit would be required to reconstruct the garage. The applicant smd he wanted to maintain the loop driveway. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19.1997 (#14 - #2238 Chic Dwi^ and Fred Guttormson • Continued) Lindquist informed him that it is the intention of the Planning Commission to reduce hardcover in the 0-75' setback and any changes would indude the loop driveway. Stoddard said he would support the drivews^ in the 0-75' setback due to the configuration of the lot. He would recommend clutter be removed, gravel driveway to lake eliminated, and sheds removed. He noted the loop driveway cannot be seen. Hawn said she fdt the applicant wants the loop driveway to park the RV. The applicant said he would park it els^here. Sdiroeder suggested the garage door be heightened to house the RV. The applicant said this could be done. Hawn said she felt it was inappropriate to house the RV on the driveway. Lindquist informed the applicant that the loop driveway would have to be eliminated before any further improvements are allowed. The applicant suggested tabling the application. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #2238 to allow applicant to consider the loop driveway, garage, and deck enclosure, and woridng with Staff on options. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#15) #2241 KYLE HUNT AND PARTNERS, INC., 1185 FERNDALE ROAD WEST - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 10:28-11:00 P.M. The AfGdavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicants, Cheryl and Gary Costley, were represented by Kyle Hunt. Van Zomeren reported that the .887 acre property is located in the LR-IA, one family lakeshore. Zoning District requiring two acres. The proposal requires variances to ade yard, hardcover, and lakeshore setback for construction of an addition to the residence under the existing deck for an exercise room, a third stall addition to the garage reducing the side yard setback to 19.1', and increasing the 75-250' hardcover 137.5 s.£ to 25.5%. Lindquist read a letter from the neighbors, Bradley and Mary Bowman, expressing objection to the garage location. It was noted that the adjacent properties are located closer to the side property lines than that proposed by the applicant. Van Zomeren reported that the lot width measures 200' at the setback, 245’ fi’om Femdale Road, 45' fiom the west, i4 fi-om east, and 71' fix)m the lakeshore. The building pad is limited by the 26' separation requirement from the pond reducing the pad to approximately 92' in width. The property is further limited by the location of a well in the yard. I i —■ To: From: Date: Chair Lindquist & Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Mav 14,1997 Subject:#2238 Chic Dwight & Fred Guttormson, 1220 Tonkavva Road - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1B Single Family Lakeshore Residential Application;A. Reediest for after-the-fact lakeshore setback, 0-75 ’ hardcovei variances for enclosure of room below pre-existing deck. B. Request for 75-250' hardcover variance for construction of detached 30' X 32' garage. List of Exhibits: A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List, Adjacent Owner Acknowledgements D - Survey E - Garage Construction Plans & Elevations F - Resolution #3611: 1995 Conditional Approval for Below-Deck Enclosure (Expired) G - Building Inspector's Letter/Notice of March. 1997 and Memo of 8/8/95 H - Staff Sketches, Selected Exhibits from Prior Application #2049 Pertinent Code Sections: 1. 10.22 Subd. 1; 10.55 Subd. 8; 10.56 Subd 16(L): Hardcover limited to 0% in 0-75 ’ zone, 25% in 75-250' zone. Existing Proposed 0-75' 3609 sf (10.9%) 2691 sf (8.1%) 75-250’ 4879 sf (36.4%) 4815 sf (35.9%) 2.10.22 Subd.l; 10.55 Subd. 8; 10.56 Subd. 16(C): No temporary' or permanent structures allowed within 75' of shoreline. Pre-existing upper level deck setback: 34' Proposed setback of room below deck : 34' 3.10.22 Subd. 1; 10.56 Subd. 16(C)6: No average lakeshore setback encroachment allowed. Existing and proposed encroachment: (Deck is 34' from shore; adjacent home to the north is approx. 50' from shore; there is no adjacent house to the south for defining the average setback line). #2238 May 14,1997 Page 2 Summary of request: In 1995 applicant requested variance approval to enclose the area under his existing 8'x24 ‘ deck on the east side of the house. The Building Inspector noted this would require continuous 42" frost footings, and that the existing deck could not be used as a roof. Variance approval was granted by Council on October 9, 1995, subject to a requirement for specific hardcover removals including an 800 sf gravel driveway and the 120 sf detached deck located at the shoreline. Applicant never signed the approval resolutions and the variance approval expired on October 9, 1996 In March 1997 the Building Inspector, during an inspection of other remodeling work on the house, found that applicant had in fact enclosed the area under the deck without permits, without the appropriate variance being in effect, and without having completed any hardcover rem^^vals. In fact, the gravel driveway to the lake now has new gravel added to it. Applicant now requests after Jie fact approval to allow the enclosure under the deck to remain; and is concurrently proposing a 30'x32' (960 sf) detached garage (which will be located to meet setback requirements). This building will provide additional inside storage for a number of items currently stored outside. It is not known whether the large RV stored at the site will fit inside, but storage of this vehicle might be more appropriate outside the 0-75' zone. The removal of the two remaining sheds on the property will be an improvement. Structural coverage on the overall property will be 2887 sfor6.2%. Enclosure As Constructed Does Not Meet Building Code The construction of the enclosure under the deck does not meet building code standards, and there is no building code definition of a "temporary structure" as suggested to staff by the applicant. Even if the enclosure is ultimately granted variance approval, it will have to be dismantled in order to be rebuilt to meet the building code. Applicant has not provided construction plans for the enclosure. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a hardship statement regarding the need for inside storage for vehicles and other equipment, and he notes a security concern due to the new' Maxwell Bay public landing. Applicant has not provided any hardships in regards to the deck room enclosure. Hardships and justifications for this enclosure were enumerated in Resolution #3611 (Exhibit F). Hardcover Applicants surveyor has provided a revised hardcover worksheet which does not reflect a shed that has been removed in the 0-75' zone. The 800 sf gravel driveway in the 0-75' zone has been re graveled rather than revegetaied. This driveway appears to have been in place in the past, but its #2238 May 14, 1997 Page 3 hardcover status was always questionable. Proposed hardcover removals include the small shed near the lake, the shed near the house, the 80C sf gravel driveway, and additional portions of the loop driveway. The current hardcover appears to be as follows; ®-75' Zone (Area =33,050 sf) Existing Proposed Structural:House 770 sf 770 sf Dec^ R"*-'n/Stair 240 sf 240 sf Deck ai Shore 120 sf 120 sf 4x9 Shed 36 sf (Remove) • Non-Strucrural:Loop Driveway 1530 sf 1480 sf oldewalks, etc.113 sf 81 sf Driveway to Lake 800 sf f Remo vet 3609 sf 2691 sf (10.9%)(8.1%) 75-250' Zone (Area = 13,400 St) Existing Proposed Structural:House 797 sf 797 sf Shed 12.6x8.2 103 sf (Remove) New Garage 960 sf Non-Structural:Driveway 3680 sf 2830 sf Sidewalk 126 sf 126 sf Other Concrete 89 sf 56 sf Misc Decks, etc 84 sf 46 sf 4879 sf 4815 sf (36.4%) (35.9%) Issues for Discussion 1 . Has adequate hardship been demonstrated to support approval of the additional structural hardcover associated with the new ga «ge? Does Planning Commission accept the proposed gravel hardcover removals as well as the shed removals as adequate mitigation? As an alternative to the applicants plan, can the loop driveway be eliminated in the 0-75' zone, leaving a larger parking pad in the 75-250 ’ zone? 2. Do the findings and conditions of the prior approval (Resolution #3611) still apply as regards the deck enclosure? If so, is there any reason to allow the 120 sf lakeshore deck to remain? Applicant's attorney has suggested a 5-year amortization regarding removal of the lakeshore deck. If applicant was not asking for variances to add structure in the 0-75' zone, absent other issues an #2238 May 14,1997 Page 4 amortization might be attractive. However, this is a variance request to add to the bulk of structure in a non-conforming location and the lakeslK>re deck is an obvious and relevant immediate trade-off in the opinion of staff. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the following: Approve hardcover variance in 75-250' zone subject to the proposed removals, with exploration of the possibility of removing the loop driveway in 0-75' zone, or at least defining its maximum allowed width in the 0-75* so it doesn't expand... b. Approve deck enclosure only per conditions similar to those under which it was approved in 1995: a. The deck and screen porch shall not extend past the southerly wall of the house. The stairway may be in addition to the 8* x 24' deck and shall be located at the north end of the deck, and shall not exceed 4' in width, and shall be only of the length necessary to accommodate the stairway and landing. This approval allows excavation in the 0-75' zone only in the amounts to accommodate construction of the deck and screen porch. The proposed low boulder walls between house and lake are specifically not approved, and shall not be constructed. Prior to footing inspection, applicant shall remove the grade-level wood patio 3' x 8' portion that extends outside the existing deck footprint. Applicant shall further remove the small accessory building located at the southeast side of the property, and shall remove the 120 s.f. detached deck structure located at the lakeshore. prior to footing inspection. c. d. 3.Applicant shall remove gravel from the driveway areas to be made non-hardcover, and shall topdress and revegetate these areas by seeding or sodding, such work to be substantially completed prior to final inspection of the additions. 4.Applicant to obtain a building permit prior to construction of the garage and an after-the-fact building permit prior to reconstructing the deck enclosure. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval per staff recommendation or with additional or revised conditions 2. Recommend partial approval. 3. R?:commend denial. 4. Table for further information. 5. Other. .3^ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee SIOOwO ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) ro i r Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)----—U-----------^ 8 Kj i n 8 A^egal description to application if not mcluded on required survey. ^ Date Pmpcriy Acquired_________If ^ "I -------------------------------- I (do)rtdo noh also own the adjacent parcels of land. Preserit^^property: residemial -----other (specify). Zoning District: APPLIC Address: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name____________________ Phone (home ’l “^1^ f' /1_----- c- Phonefwork) ^ ~ 3(» City: 0.' oA.cj ______ Zip: ^ Phone(home) Phone (work)_ Address:City:Zip:, description of request Describe request in detail:C ---- (attach additional sheets if necessary) Estimated Construction Cost S ^ ol /0<^Q-----^ vA-r<4^<p.o VARIANCES required Lot Area _ Setback: ___Lot Width Front Side y Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage ^ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) PwP'ny conditions, pce«nttog compliance with Zoning Code requirements:—^ Ik compliance witn zoning v^oac rc4uucm^uu,.------ \ r. ^ \ ~ c g- e- &------C-CJu!i. Ik > s 't \ ^ Q (attach additional sheets if necessary) 1.i’ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bvthe application deadline date in or<|gE for vour application to be considered complete: (h 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150 ’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). Cenificate of Sur%'ey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. ~ In addition, provide one (1) copy 8V4" x 11" for reproduction. ... Topoeraphic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes m existmg grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8V^" x 11" for reproduction.^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8>/^" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance apnlication is not complete if the above information has not been incluued. 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 tni^xa^ correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signature^^^^^Date 0^ ^-SLs^-~9y 0\^’NER*S SIGNA’i uivjs A . . . ui The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees ro this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purpo^s-o^^v^tig^nOh^and^^lsm^^^Q^ request. Owner’s Signature v/a 5 /*? 7 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 moiith. 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 m your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. V*: '--------- f t O') , / 11 % (10) NSZ'OT -----------k‘ (9) m • n \ \ 'Vw;s-¥;‘-ffT- I • . . • /.. . • •• ■ • • ■: • ...........................................................• . • • • i •* ' / » • •I **•• •.•• * ..*r- 03 % 1 • , i ^ ••• • ^ 1 •• •• t». •« 1 • r- . ;/ • f ® M';'e s -- t % • f • • • • •• • 10 . • flAl ^ RUN DATE 07/1D/9S HA'T.I 5M PROP AOOR aMCR NAHE TAXPAYER NUC/AOOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR 0»tCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR • * , • * •; • •. so 00-117*23 13 0005 01200 TONKANA RO HILFRED PERPER S HXFE NILFRED PERPER 1200 TQMCANA RO LONS LAKE m S535A SO 00-117-23 13 0010 01205 TONCANA RO THOMAS H SMITH A NXFE THOMAS H SMITH 1205 TONKANA RO LONG LAKE MN 55350 30 00-117-23 42 0004 01305 TONKANA RO 6 0 J PUTNAM GALE L PUTNAM 1305 TONKANA ROAD NAYZATA MN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY (MCRS LIST REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PAGE 10 30 00-117-23 13 0000 01100 TONKANA RO R E ENGEBRETSON ET AL RICHARD E ENGEBRETSON 1100 TOMCANA RO LONG LAKE MN 55350 30 00-117-23 13 0007 01100 TONCANA RO R K :iOLLAND t E SULLIVAN RANDY HOLLANO/ERIC SULLIVAN 1100 TONCANA RO LONG LAKE Nl 55350 30 00-117-23 42 0001 01220 TONKANA RO F E GUTTORMSON/C J 0 0NI6HT F E GUTTORMSON/C J 0 WIGHT 1220 TONCANA RO LONG LAKE MN 55350 30 00-117-23 42 0003 OSSOO NORTH SHORE DR STATE OF MINCSOTA STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPT NAT'L RESOURCES 500 LAFAYETTE RO ST PAUL MN 55155 TOTAL BATCH 504 00007 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENIEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. tO THE BEST OF MY KN0NLED6E AND BELIEF. ^ ^ CJ DATE ^ I -"A 1 - ? ? >S '. -- - Vj ». I , f. \<* '^S'SQtbcKck'C,^ 'Ji v) '' fl■’a ’i V . 5 (■V:; ' *'i* ^► / ' *1 l^r.AL PESCUFTfOfi CF «>pr|yi|5f5; If*dt. por t of Lot. 9. AuiJi';or's buf'cl i v i s l on flumpri** ; fhnnesuLd, lyin<j bouthf^rly of d lirie pdr^llel witf e.ister|y at rigfu angles from a lir.e ibed as at a point on the Easterly line ol Cjunty Koud Tio. fe«i Southeaslerl y along said CduLtr.y lni.» i mm i thp North line Lot ^0. said auilil.r ’s SjjJl.ii* **asterly 1^3.2 feet to a point disiant tool.29 f«* .ingles ^rtjm the North line of said Lot 10; thence easterly on the extension of the I a s t-desr »* i l»o»i li Maxwell's Da/, and there terminating. • denotes iron marker fuund doarmgs %h{j^n are based upon an .i'.s>in<*d dii.um. Tins survoy intends to Show the houv'iarles of ilii* property, the loration of an exisii*.'; hou . anr * tion of .ill existing "hijrcJf.uver ** f’ie»»*on. *i doe' show any at ’ier Improvements nr em rt; j. limei. 1 s. . - > i • •/ V.i II m1^1iia iisa >s’C » ’.i'J liefest wmfesfi mm m IIA« d 4iI • I ■ ;i‘' W f ■ ? tHi iffi I \. r 1 V / I 1 ir P 1 fT if £• I 1 \ r /?*[__ fjxHlJqi 4- Z. Itz I { \t^ / B 4T 1 5 7 0 1 I r- • I*; V >r < tI •vf ii •• : • ► .1 I i j* e .5 I •• / V« •' pR^D t^U'jTOj^MSOt^ HAJU)COVfc:R CALCULAi^e^VUKKCJtU:.!- ■ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75 ’ 25-SOi; • • EXISTTNG HARDCOVER !N ZONE A. House ________* ----- Length Width B. Garage 6RA\jfL C. Driveway D. Sidewalk crrHEiZ cotiCi^BTC E. Patio/Deck X X X *7.6 7. r J .■ . F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic. Or Fabric .X X X X X X V X X X 6’ 7. ^ G. Other /I. 6 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A B .X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House. ^ ____________ Length Width X X X B. Garage J ^ C. Driveway ____________ D. Sidewalk c?r7iv E. Paiio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric 7. C G. Other X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________B X 100 - • • 14 SOO-IOOO* \ I 7 97 s.F. _________^S.F. __________S.PSsJt h 3 5*-=^ S.E. 3630 s i: ) s.i^* ‘ '' r N 1 2 6 S S97 10 i'U s.v. S.i>. ___ • /J !i .........• /03 s.F. -^3'/'I .s.F. I'J 4CO S-.F. y6. 'f/ A li ir/ tO 77/ 960 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2830 S.F. S.F. /7g S.F. ___S.F. 46 S.F. *S F. S.F. S.F. S.F. • I S.F. 4 8/S ^ s.F.A n . .1 1l 1•J? f: I ll tf llIi !> i .t e •5 «• 9 i HARDCOVEil-GM-CULATlOiN WUKK5^ ■ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ^-75V 75-250’ 25-50 EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _________ Letifih Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway r& 'Ak'f D. Sidewalk __ 0THf*2. coficanE_ y — ^ X X X X X E. Paiio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X y /• t / G. Other V X •*’ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _________ B . PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _______ ... Lcn^tii X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk C<5"- c<f< /■( X X E. Paiio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other ■ ■ * TOTAL HAR.iCOVER IN ZONE total property area in zone A______________B • • • • - 'P. • • X 100 = Width X 100 - • ' 14 •f - 7-^7 500-1000 ’• • yVO s.r. j_S.F. ^S.F. S.F. S.F. / > >■ O •' ^oo 70 Z-1 O' LZO 770 _.ii F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. t ^ 3 O S.F. ”S.F. 7c? // S.F. S.F. 2>10 /Z o S.F. S.F. s • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2.^ J I S.F. dh ^ - S.F. • % A n F GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 6ir 41 ESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS I AND 2, SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8, AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISIONS 16 (C, J, & L) FILE NO. 2049 WHEREAS, Fred Guttormson and Chic Dwight (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 1229 Tonkawa Road witliin the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows; That part of Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision No. 217, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying southerly of a line parallel with and 125 feet southeasterly at right angles from a line described as follows: Beginning at a point on the easterly line of County Road No. 135 distant 1141.25 feet southeasterly along said easterly line from its intersection witli the noi th line of Lot 10, said Auditor ’s Subdivision; thence northeasterly 143.2 feet to a point distant 1004.29 feet south at right angles from the north line of said Lot 10; thence continuing northeasterly on tlie extension of the last-described line to the shore of Maxwell's Bay, and there terminating (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1, Section 10.55, Subdivision 8, and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) to allow construction of a screen porch and replacement of an existing deck within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no structures are normally allowed; and a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2, Section 10.55, Subdivision 8, and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L), to allow hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone where no hardcover is normally allowed; and a variance to Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (J) to allow excavation and retaining wall construction within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where grading, filling and excavating is normally not allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Page 1 of 7 mi.GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 611 1. 2. 3. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2049. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakcshorc Residential Zoning District. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 21, 1995 and recommended partial approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A.The existing 8 ’ x 24’ deck and 4' x 6' stairway (216 s.f. total) arc in poor condition and need to be replaced. Since there are existing doors opening to this second level deck, it would be appropriate to replace the deck in kind to preserve a substantial right of the property owner. Construction of a new 8' x 24’ deck plus a stairway at the north end of the new deck will result in no new encroachment of the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone. B.Construction of an 8' x 24’ screen porch directly below' the proposed deck will have minimal visual impact as viewed from the lake, due to partially being below grade and due to existing screening along the shoreline. Further, the existing and proposed deck constitutes hardcover under the City’s hardcover policies and therefore no new hardcover results from the screen porch addition. C.Neither the deck nor screen porch will have an impact on neighboring properties ’ views of the lake. D.Excavation along the south wall of the existing residence to allow installation of walkout doors to replace existing windows is minor in nature, involving the removal of only 4 cubic yards of material ranging in depth from 0-3’ along a small portion of the foundation wall. The excavation is necessary in order to allow access via the proposed patio doors. The visual impact of the additional facade opened up to lakeview is very minor. Page 2 of 7 1 r ii GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 6 11 ^ 4. 5. E.Replacement of the existing 8' x 24’ deck and relocation of the stairway to the north end of the deck will result in an overall structural hardcover increase of less than 10 s.f. in the 0-75' zone. Further, structural hardcover on the property can be reduced significantly by removing the 120 s.f. non- conforming deck structure at the lakeshore. Further, 0-75* hardcover has been reduced by removal of two sheds and a remaining small shed approximately 10-15 s.f. should also be removed from that zone. F.Other hardcover in the 0-75' zone includes a circular gravel driveway, an addition to sidewalk and walls adjacent to the house. Applicants have recently removed an 8’ gravel driveway leading to the lake which constituted approximately 800 s.f. of hard surface. That is a positive improvement to the property, although that area has not been revegetated and should be. Further, the portion of grade-level wood patio extending outside the footprint of the existing deck, i.e. 24 s.f. of wood patio, is unnecessary and should be removed. G.The removal of the detached 120 s.f. deck structure near the lakeshore and concurrent removals of other structural and non-structural hardcover, are an improvement to the property. H.No adequate justification has been presented to support granting a variance for construction of low boulder walls between the house and the shoreline. 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 tlie community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculinr to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a Page 3 of 7 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 A 1 - 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 Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1, Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) to allow construction of an 8 ’ x 24' screen porch and reconstruction of the existing 8' x 24' deck plus stairway structure; and grants variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2, Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) to allow construction of said structures which constitute hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback zone where no hardcover is normally allowed; and grants a variance to Sections 10.55, Subdivision 8 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (J) to allow excavation in the 0-75 ’ zone where c.xcavation is normally not allowed, to accommodate said screen porch and additionally to allow alteration of grades to accommodate a walkout door on the southeast facade of the residence, subject to the following conditions. 1. 2. 3. The deck and screen porch shall not extend past the southerly w all of the house. The said stairway may be in addition to the 8' x 24' deck and shall be located at the north end of said deck, and shall not exceed 4’ in widtli, and shall be only of the length necessary' to accommodate said stairway and landing. This approval allows excavation of fill in the 0-75 ’ zone only in the amounts to accommodate construction of the deck and screen porch, in addition to approximately 4 cubic yards of removal at the southeast wall of the house to allow access to the proposed walkout doors, including the necessary retaining wall adjacent to the front stoop. The proposed low boulder walls between house and lake are specifically not approved, and shall not be constructed. Page 4 of 7 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 6 11____ 4. 6. 7. Prior to footing inspection, property ow-ncr shall remove the grade-level wood patio 3' X 8' portion that extends outside the existing deck footprint Applicants shall further remove the small accessory building located at the southeast side of the property, and shall remove the 120 s.f detached deck structure located at the lakeshore, prior to footing inspection. Further, applica.its shall topdress and revegetate the area of the previously removed 8’ x 100 ’ gravel driveway by topdressing and seeding or sodding, such work to be substantially completed prior to final inspection of the additions. 5. Final hardcover in the 0-75' zone shall not exceed 2,645 s.f. as follows: House - 770 s.f. Attached deck and screen porch including stainvay - 232 s.f. Loop driveway - 1,530 s.f. Sidewalks, etc. - 113 s.f. Total - 2,645 s.f In the 75-250' zone, hardcover shall not exceed the existing 900 s.f of structural hardcover including house and shed, plus 3,979 s.f of non-structural hardcover including driveways, sidewalks, etc. for a total of 4,879 s.f or 36.4% hardcover in the 75-250' zone. Property owTiers are advised that any future proposals to add hardcover on the property will likely not be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent removals of existing hardcover to result in no net hardcover increase. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not witli 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 (October 9,1996). 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. Page 5 of 7 GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. R ft 1 1 8.The undersigned applicants Imve 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 9lh day of October, 1995. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Property Owner (s) STA I E OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of October, 1995 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 6 of 7 .•5J CITYof ORONO Municipal ORica Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Fred Guttormson 1220 Tonkawa Orono, Minnesota 55356 Re: Work Without Building Pennit Dear Mr. Guttormson: It has come to the attention of this department that you have recently enclosed the area under the deck on the lakeside of your home. On October 9, 1995 the City Council conditionally approved variances to allow this addition; however, the resolutions were not signed and the variance expired. A building permit was not issued and the conditions of the variance were not followed. The structure also does not meet the requirements of the building code in respect to foundation construction. Therefore the City must require you to remove the structure as soon as possible. Your failure to contact the City with a removal schedule before March 17,1997 will result in legal action. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, Lyle Oman Building Official LO/ch cc:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Bruce L. Vang, Field Inspector Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Planner/Zoning Administrator Tdephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 < I ifiiiR Umb I I II I nil I ii -1-:.£aAiAnw^:;*:3ria C'l- CITY OF ORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PERMIT NO_______ \ N DATE TIME called in SCHEDULED completed '2'30 ADDRESS y^^C> Xo.-^VA cu A- OWNER CONTR. TELEPHONE NO. ________ I g DESCRIPTION li: i •j ii § 5 Ui «: I rri 0 Ui Uj 1 01FOOTMQ nnWMINQ 03MSULATION 04 WALL BO. 05 FINAL 070EMO-8ITE 07OEMO-PV4AL OOPLUMBlNOm 10 PLUMBINQ FMAL OWNEfl/CONTIUeTOil TO MEET YOU COMMENTS: ______ 11 MECHANICAL n 13 MECHANICAL Fir ;AL 24/25 WOOD BURNER/RREPLACE 12 WATER HOOK-UP 14 SEWER HOOK-UO 27 SEPTIC MAWT. 15 SEPTIC mSTAU. 23 SEPTIC RNAL IS EXCAV/QRAOINQ/FIUJNQ 19 LAKESHORE/WETLANDS 34 TREE REMOVAL USnENSPECnON 05 PROGRESS 21 COMPLAINT 22 FOLLOW-UP 35 HARO COVER REMOVAL 36 FOUNDATION REMOVAL Ct^OOe' or /afn lor Oaf(cu^. CUA (L pp.r-.AA.~f In,.t fc WORK SATISFACTORY PROCEED C CORRECT WORK S PROCEED O CORRECT WORK. CALL FOR HEINSPECTION BEFORE COVERING O CORRECT UNSAFE CONDITION WITHIN INSPECTOR VflLL RETURN HOURS. Z PROJECT COMPLETE C ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ________TEMPORARY ________PERMANENT □ STOP ORDER POSTED. CALL INSPECTOR U INSPECTION REOUIRED. CALL TO ARRANGE ACCESS. C PHOTO TAKEN □ CITATION ISSUED Call for the next inspection 24 hours in advance. 473“7357 OwnerfContractor on sHeQ Inspector ___________ Whitt Ctpy/lnsptclor*t Flit Canary Copy/SIta Notict TO:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning AdministratorFROM: Bruce L. Vang, Building InspectorDATE:August 8, 1995SUBJECT: Variance Request - 1220 Tonkawa The existing deck at 1220 Tonkawa is quite old, rotting, and poorly built in the first place. The building department could not allow this deck to be used as a roof for the proposed screen porch. Is a new roof to be built under existing deck or perhaps to replace existing deck? New footings and foundation for proposed porch must be continuous 42" deep footings to replace present post footings under deck. The existing house foundation adjoining the proposed porch must be replaced at 42" deep when earth cover is removed along wall. MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 9,199 PLANNING COMMISSION C0>D1ENTS Xhcre was no Planning Coinniission rcporr. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT (*=3) #2044 GEORGE OLSON» 2775 SHADWOOD ROAD - VARLANCE resolution #3610 to the existing residence. Ayes 5, Nays 0. «4) «049 CHIC DWGHT/FRO GUTTORMSON. 1220 TONKWA ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3611 The applicants were present.inC Jir---------- variances for a numoe. .A? screened porch below the deck area.variances for a number of projects. e a ch below the deck area, on the lakeshore s.oe ^ a walkout door, and construct low boulder residence and 34* from the deck.I w ------------ . «. • rr,mm;.sion review of Aueust 21. 1995. the appUcant received a partial Dunns Pla^ng Cor^ssio under the deck and deck replacement recommend^on ^jgck not e.xtending past the south wall of the and stairs. The app___ retaining wails to allow a window to "~Zr ^,.,c based on the deck not e.xtencmg past uic &uuui .. and stairs, pte app south side wall and reiainine wails to allow a window to ES: 4.:^™ :s;eeS2See pauo below the decide waa recommended to be top dreaaed section of the ^ applicant was also asked to remove the deck by the St^Xn no“ Se DNi^Xmmended denial of the deck and screened ptreh?^ on the to to the property ts non^omotmmg. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 9,1995 (#4 - i^2049 Chic Dwght/Fred Gunormson - Continued) that the approval of the excavation to create a waUcout would possioly be precedent setting. Callahan asked the applicant if he had reviewed and approv ed the the driveway, which was sodded. He is willing to proceed with the recornme^a^ns if the lakeshore deck can remain. The applicant said it WM their mtentton upkeep on the property. The rip rap has been found to be eroding and needs to be reconstructed in order to save trees. Chic Dwight commented that neighbors present at the Planning Commission meetmg meeting and felt their inabUity to speak was unintentional, an ov rsight, and apologized for the applicant's feeling of mistreatment. ssiSspE St He noted that the area was more than likely Hied in when the house was built and is notin its natural state but was probably flat and built up to accommodate the spht-entty Style home. The anoUcant said the area where they ate asking for excavation for the walkout is on the east end and receives very little Ught. Their purpose is to gain more Ught into the lower level of the home with the walkout door. KeUey asked and received confirmation that there is an entrance to the inside of the residence from the screened porch. «Wed if there were anv hardships for the requested variances. The appUcant said S^rn » improve on the aesflietics of the home, to gain the e.xtta light into the lower level, and to repair the deck. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CTTY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 9,1995 (#4 - #2049 Chic Dwight/Fred Guttorrason - Continued) Jabbour inquired what the applicant would be allowed to repair on the deck if the of replacement a variance is needed. If a deck is totally removed, it wou requ^ a variance to rebuUd it. The City would likely approve a variance required to maintain the safety of an e.xisting deck. excavation. Hurr said she was concerned with the deck's encroachment on the toshore. TTie excavation. not the deck at the lakeside. Jabbour said he takes a more realistic approach to the applicatton. He deck is already there and would be rebuilt. The screened porch would be over and above a patio which^is hardcover a.-.j'ways. Jabbour saw the tradeoCfs as substanttal to the goals of the City as the property has been emensively cleaned up. He uw the remov^ of fhe rock areas, driveway to the lake, and two sheds as major contnbuuons to hardcover removal and 99?4 of what the City would like removed. Jabbour said support the boulder walls unless they were to stabiUze the ground. He did support the walkout. te^l975. He was not aware if the deck was there at that time nor wh«her its value had ivoon Actahlished The applicant said the house was built in 1970. Kelley asked if a grading plan had been presented at that time. Gamon said probably not. The applicant said he has the original plans. ME'fUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO MEETING TTFT.D ON OCTOBER 9,1995 ^rr-T - ---------------------- KeUey said he would support the walkout, and supported the and the Plaoning Comndssion with the lakeshore deck remauung if the drweway was removed. The applicant noted that 1000 s.f, ofhardcover has already been removed on the propeny. Hurt said she was not in fevor of approval of ke^itig the lalaside Jabbour moved. KeUey the Callahan moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Apphcation #2049, R«olution #3611. ^r^ZiS Commission reconnnendation. Vote: Ayes 4. Nays 1. KeUey. A (.#5) #2051 MIKE HILBELINK. 2760 WATERTOIVN ROAD - RO.AD NAME approval Vr • r**t M0*8 RON RANTZ/AUTOGRAFS. INC, 2525 SHADYWOOD ROAD - COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW - RESOLUTION #3612 The applicant was not present, will be made aware of this minor change. Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution #3612. Vote: Ayes 4. Nays 0, Abstain 1. Callahan, who was unaware of the proposal. mi) #2060 TIM FEYO/KAREN FULLER, 4055 EI.M STREET - VARIANCE renewal - RESOLUTION #3613 seconded, to adopt Resolution #3613 granting a lot area Zr^remr^ ?o„ lo<;ated at 4055 Elm Sneet. Ayes 5, Nays 0. 4 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21,1995 (#9 - #204SJames & Joann Jundt - Continued) Mabusth said\e septic is non-conforming, and h is being questioned what affect the apartment would4iave on the septic. Mabusth said it is a good i^w to wk for septic inspecuons. Petei^n agreed that the goal is not to aUow the s^uc to M. noted that this property was considered a hot spot for sewering at one time, an e applicant has been de^^ng %vith this issue throughout all the appUcations. \ # _ Schroeder added that tlicity cannot aUow more people to reside on the septic can handle He is ii,favor of inspections; and if the system fads, Schroder said that would affect the condition^^se permit. The property has two separat\eptic units, one for the main residence and one for the acceaoty structures. The sepnXnits do not meet the separation requirements. Peterson commented that normal ii^n^ons «cur every two years. This property, according to Peterson, should he ins[wed more often. accessory structure, subject to conditions ornne ^ur wiu. ^ system eVery two months to show its cip^ility m handling the increased usage. A g will be incurred by the applicant for ^ra inspecu^n time. U SI ^e“e fnoTS pumped out on a regular basil There were no public comments. Ayes 6, Nays 0. Mahusth commented on an issue with ttee removal in the 0-75' We for waterproofing of ^^innel that was notCproved hy Staff. All of the earth arounda tunnel that was no;appru^-^ ^ Crawford S‘nmd”th^ «e elrr^ Le deteriorated, and Uee ™ots s«re r”**' Part of the tunnel enaoaches the 0-75' setback. An amended appheauon coming .....brfbre the Planning-Comnusaonon this issue and is not part.pilte.applicauon, ratot #2049 FRED GDTTORMSON AND CHIC DWIGHT, 1220 TONKAWA ROAD^- variances - PTJBUC HEARING - 9:25-9:48 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit ofPubUcatioa were noted. 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21,1995 (#10 - #2049 Fred Gxittomason & Chic Dwight - Continued) The applicants were present. Gaffron reported the application was to replace an existing deck, along with the consmiai^of a screened porch under the deck. A walkout area would from what is now a split entry area. The existing deck is in poor ^ would be done of the total foundation as footings have been found to . frost line. This would all occur within the 0-75' setback ar« and requn-e hardco c average lakeshore setback variances. The residence is 42' from the lake, and the^4 deck would be located 34' from the lake. Drainage on the property mature trees toward the proposed, screen porch area. It ,s que^oned whe^^ tins could be flattened out, retaining walls about 1’ in height be constructed, or ground cover established to aid the drainage. A letter from the DNR was read into the minutes recommending denial of the appl^o" based on the existing house being whMn 75' of the lake and proposed porch increasing the nonconformity of the house The porch and deck would also be withm the 37.5' shore impact zone. Gaffion noted that the hardcover would be at 8.48%. resulting in a minimum increase in the hardcover from existing. It would, however, lend more permanency. Two buildings have been removed as well rs an 8' gravel driveway locat^ in ‘Ite zone, which has not been revegetated. New gravel has been placed for the loop driveway. The appUcant said the property was overgrown and buildings were found to be d«eriorated There is a tank on the property but the reason for.ns unknown. Du.^ cto "p Sre driveway to the Idte was discover,^. Two “ remove debris from the yard and house. An outhouse sized buddmg sbll exists by the lakeside. Peterson said the appHcation has several issues. He felt the fiUing on the keep the property natural. Peterson felt the sliding doors wodd meet his approval but found the deck and screened porch were issues needing discussion. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21,1995 / (#10 • #2049 Fred Guttonmoa &. Chic Dwight - Continued) Lindquist asked why the deck and porch would be beyond the house. The applicant said there was surface hardcover there already. Lindquist said the desire if the Planning Commission is to remove as much hardcover in the 0-75' zone as possible. It was noted that there is a 1x6’ patio extention leading from the patio doors. Lindquist said the deck could be replaced but the extension removed. The deck should not extend beyond the house. Ga£fron asked the Commission if approval were given for the walkout, would this be setting a precedent by allowing a change to the grade. The applicant said her purpose was to gain light into the lower level of the home and modernize it. The applicant said it appears the grade was put m when the home was built and not originally there. Peterson said he saw a problem with the bench by the dock and asked applicant if th^ would be willing to eliminate the accessory structure to gain the deck. The applicant said about 1000 s.f. of hardcover has been removed and felt they were being sensitive to that issue. The applicant said the property was purchased in part because of the deck structure by the lake. Peterson said it would not be allowed today. The applicant said she would be willing to remove the shed by the lake. Lindquist asked if the deck could be 8' instead of 8'6". Schroeder said the structural coverage should not exceed the amount on the property as it exists now. He suggested the driveway extension and outhouse-size shed be removed as mediation for the deck. Any additional hardcover in the loop driveway that is unnecessary was also asked to be removed. The applicant said this was required to turnaround noting the inability to park on Tonkawa. Berg said she used the loop area in which to turn around. Peterson said the applicant should be concerned with the problems being created by beavers gnawing on the trees. Major erosion problems could occur in the future due to the loss of these trees. Peterson asked if the issue is altering the lakeshore if the grading is changed. Gaffron said it would be a conditional use but Staff saw no need for this to be done and would not recommend approval for this or boulder walls. Smith asked what could be done to maintain the shoreline. Gaffron said the boulder wall would help erosion from coming to the house and rip-rap could be done to prevent shore erosion. A Watershed District permit could be obtamed to rip rap. \ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21,1995 (#10 - #2049 Fred Guttormson & Chic Dwight - Continued) There were no public comments. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve replacement of the deck and screened porch in the existing footprint, not to exceed the footprint. Approval was recommerided for the grade cut to allow a window or walkout door as proposed on the southe^t side. No boulder walls would be allowed. Removal of the concrete slab on the east side, removal of the existing accessory structure to the south, removal of the old access boat ramp and resodding of same, and removal of the dock at the shoreline to include the bench-deck area were recommended. \yes 6, Nays 0. (#11) #2050 WILLIAM TOLES, 3165 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 9:48-10:12 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The applicant was present. Gaffi-on reported the application is for hardcover and average lakeshore setback variances to construct a pool on the lake side of the propert>', which was purchased by the applicant in July of 1995. The pool would create a 15' average lakeshore encroachment but would have no visual impact. A net decrease in the hardcover would result in the 75-250' zone from 33.1% to 32.6%. • Gaffron compared the application to a 1988 variance approval, the hardcover square footage of which was aUowed at that time, today, is now exceeded. There continues to be no hardcover in the 0-75' zone. The 75-250' zone was approved in 1988 for 29.5%, but exists at 33.1%. and is proposed at 32.6%. The 250-500' zone was approved m 1988 for 24.1%, exists iii 1995 at 20.4% and proposes no change. The two sur/eys from 1988 and 1995 each use a slightly different base lot area for each zone. What Gaffron thinks happened is the driveway portion was eliminated but rock beds that are in place were not looked at and the overhangs were listed separately. The 1988 circular driveway has been changed with not as much loop and the garage addition built. The applicant wiU take out the rock and plastic to be replaced with hard surface. The 1390 s.f. of land in base area calculation change and 400 s.f. of concrete patio would be in exchange for the pool. When the pool is built, there would be no hardcover within 11 5' of the lake. In looking at the hardcover as a percentage of the entire lot, there was 21 7% before, and as approved, in 1988, now existing at 22.1%, and proposed at 21.8%. M PHONE NO. STATE OF ^DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES METRO WATERS, 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN SSIO^leno 772-7910 August 21.1995 NViG • Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 RE: Fred Guttormson and Chic Dwight Variance Application, Lake Minnetonka (27-133) City of Orono, Hennepin County Dear Ms. Mabusth: We have reviewed the above-referenced lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variance proposal (received August 8,1995) 1220 Tonkawa Road (City #2049) and we recommend denial of the proposal for the following reasons: 1.The existing house is within ttie 75* setback from the Ordinary High Water level (OHW) of Lake Minnetonka and does not conform with the shoreland standards adopted by the City of Orono. The proposed screened porch and deck are unacceptable because they will increase the nonconformity of the house. 2.The proposed screened porch and deck are within the 37.5' shore impact zone of Lake Minnetonka. According to State Shoreland Standards, only water oriented accessory structures should be placed within the shore impact zone. 3.There are reasonable alternatives available to placing the screened porch and deck within the shore impact zone of Lake Minnetonka. An examination of the plat indicates that sites for screen porches and decks exist which are outside on the 75' setback to Lake Minnetonka. 4.Hardship must be demonstrated to justify receiving a variance. The approval of a variance due to hardship should be based on the following prerequisites: The proposed use is reasonable. B.It would be unreasonable to require conformance with the ordinance. Practical difficulties may arise due to "functional and aesthetic concerns" and economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulty. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth August 21,1995 Page 2 C. The difficulty of confomning to the ordinance is due to circumstances unique to the property, such as peculiar topography. If the problem is common to a number of homes in the area, it is not considered unique. D. The problem must not be created by the landowner. E. The variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality. In accordance with the city ordinance, the Department should be advised of the action taken on this request within 10 days of final action. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these variances. Should you have any questions please contact me at 772* 7910. Sincerely, I Joe Richter Hydrologist c:City of Orono shoreland file Ed Pick, Shoreland Hydrologist Dale Homuth, Regional Hydrologist o <£ C.VO- i’M V ./■ •■ < n V; T *'*.j .-.J4--. v**. ^ *1 VW-' 2940-1 Qu t.9 3o-l •!- Jrrr .• ^. •. • t| •• Vl^iTE.^ . M r*o- :kc..I*:l eouc. ri-c* #c i i‘tk ■ •o’-a'•t0•cfi____!--------------ia==9F'-------T-------- B • *•»/#• i . >4 . hJ* VUUYV > ••- irs ' 'er- * •• UV ’ • . • ■• % flU • - J t : ^>ysr/AJ(^UjiT?<oM-r i5//jr7/JG. O <2 (-1 (A I t/o Q I (i LOi'IU0 o4 0<?c '2fic}<?kf5^ Qoo(\'Cs OmI^\cJ3c5'"V^><pio:jB Pd • o^?crc> t I • I . •« • s.-j •. ■.! .* •• V.-.V ••• ^ v-^:: I • ».* I • • ..V .' • •“.•• » \ v:: ■nrv r- .u>- I t • • • m 1 •//, • t • •• • ^ .V *./ ^ •* r 4 • i1 1 1 i # i . ! * •* ,' » //^ •# / y */. r * I 2f r 1 <^////m / V 7/ "/;/ ///: « jlW- .—* • •.- •.. 'T • 0 .**• •• ♦•> .pVtoN^* V/*«VA.^ f • " •: f'Xi^V^Cm CM^, ^ ...1. .. . I . ..g"6".- . ___: Mo^ia. uu* 1^0 7 0 ;\.'.='tv- mm ‘.rw ;v \ 7^* *^- :» •«« IV* • rrt***^Tf •. •* V. 5? .1 r".3 ’ P\ J l\ *S #'^y\^ y. /iv '<f'>/..* •!7> 1 1 " 1 - </y' '/ 1 / ! .' > i'J^V 1 • • i f # #xc-*-C"'------kf1/''/# ^ Ac*f- o hl t a ‘ci a •J*** ^^ U)»V\ O? c t*< y .■f rh ^ H’ i. • i'^.J-\ 4 \9ao“Tcr\vi=xjcf^ 9o OGcjOO C'-Th't. 77^'^<7 Tpli. ITi'yv^ 2-^ i/irj-!/L ~nu' f/tr MAC Ei' //“J c^'^cA'<^ TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator 7V^-f7 FROM: DATE: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator 5 July 14,1997 SUBJECT: #2253 David Reinhold, 3551 Livingston Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning Dbtrict: LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2 acre sewered. Application: Request for lot area/lot width variances to construct a new residence to replace the existing residence. Lbt of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owner's List D - Survey E - Hardcover Zone Review Summary of Request This propert)' currently contains an existing 720 s.f. house and 40 s.f. shed. The lot is 50'xl 34.5' or 0.15 acre. The LR-IC stindards are 100' width and 0.5 acre. Applicant requests area and width variances to allow replacement of the existing house with a new residence, and he indicates he may sell the lot rather than build on it himself Pertinent Code Sections 1.Section 10.25, Subd. 6 (B): - Lot area required = 21,780 s.f; existing = 6,725 s.f - Required lot width = 100'; existing = 50' Required setbacks: 30' front and rear, 1 O' side. 2. 3. Sections 10.22/10.56: Hardcover in 500-1,000 ’ zone is allowed at 35%. Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C): Allowance for lot coverage by structures is 15% of total lot area or 1,500 s.f, whichever is greater. Zoning File #2253 July 14, 1997 Page 2 Discussion The existing house on the propert>' is small and in poor condition, and has not been lived in for a few years. Applicant proposes to remove the existing house and either rebuild himself or sell the lot as a building site. A third option he is considering is sale to neighboring property owners for additional yard area. Applicant has not provided plans for a proposed house for the site. It may be rea.,onable to grant the variances requested to replace the existing house without knowing the parameters of a new house, only if all setback, hardcover and lot coverage requirements are intended to be adhered to. Given the 35% hardcover limit, the 1,500 s.f. lot coverage allowance, and the required front, rear, side yard setback requirements, a modest residence with two car attached garage could be developed on this property without variances other than the requested lot area/width variances. A conforming residence might include the following; A. 28'x36’ house + 24'x20* attached garage = 1,488 s.f. B. 16'x30' driveway = 480 s.f C. 3'x32' sidewalk = 96 s.f D. 10'x28' deck = 180 s.f E. lO’xlO’shed = 100 s.f Total hardcover = 2,344 s.f or 34.9% Total lot coverage = 1,488 s.f This home could be two stories in height to gain square footage, but would have to be set at the 30 ’ street setback line in order to meet hardcover requirements. Further, the attached garage would have to face the street, 'fhis combination of limitations leaves little flexibility in design, but may also yield an opportunity for creativity. Hardship Both adjacent properties contain existing homes, hence no additional land is available to make the lot larger. Further, of 73 homes in the neighborhood bounded by Shady wood Road on the east and Blaine Avenue on the west, including Livingston Avenue, Lyric Avenue and Crystal Place, 41 are on single 50' lots, 23 are on double 100' lots, and 9 are on triple 150' or larger lots. Construction of a new residence on this property would not be out of character with the neighborhood, even though it would be significantly smaller than the zoning district standards. Also, it can be argued that a property containing a residence which meets the lot coverage, setback and hardcover standards should not be considered as "over built". Additionally, allowing the replacement of the existing deteriorated structure with a modest residence will help the City meet its goal of maintaining affordable housing in the City. Zoning FUe #2253 July 14,1997 Page 3 Staff Recommendation If Planning Commission determines that this lot should be considered buildable, staff would recommend the following conditions of approval; 1. 2. 3. Granting only the requested lot area and lot width variances. Development of the property shall not exceed the 35% hardcover limit. Development of the property shall not exceed the 1,500 s.f. "lot coverage by structures" allowance. 4. 5. At the time the existing house is removed, the existing shed shall also be removed. Existing house to be removed within 90 days of variance approval (to avoid City proceeding with hazardous building action). 6.Applicant is advised as part of this approval that it is City's intent to grant no other variances for this property. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval per staffs recommendation. 2. Recommend approval with other conditions. 3. Table for further information (specify). 4. Recommend denial (state reasons). 5.Other. ___^ Application if Date Received Amount Paid c* CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renev\-al Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.D?T ^ Afler-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) i> V.‘ i'- '1^ ml. y t! 8 PROPERTY INFORMATION K! Site Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)^ Attach legal description to application if not included rn required survey. Date Property Acquired \\f\‘\nn I (do) (qoj^^*^so own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X._^residential ___pother (specify) Zoning District: (month/year) C-)i\r Loi\'r!y'iC (^'/lOCtc) APPLICANT Name h^.uci) He.,j,i,AtC Address: si'z r-w/if Phone (home)_5^o_iSiiiJ _______ _____ Phone(woik ) i-soo ■ cvc. City: aiu Zip: — : r___ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City;Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in'detail: ^ y '^r fJB^^ n~o C^r'f-rT7/ .< .________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED V Lot Area ^ Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSfflP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ExivL.y, ^AC^^<^4c \)i,------- Wi /at*kv.a /tl-ViVtNO . I 0»w ft -L-ai' i’lnufti I'* iM.i\luJt J lit (attach additional sheets if necessary) I I REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete: Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of o\Miers 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 SVi" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy SVi” 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 this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. © 4. 5. (D (3 8. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signature Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of 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 ail scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 RUN DATE IZ/ZO/UBATCH 006 .L PROP AOOR ONNER NANE TAM’AYER NAHE/AOOR I . c • pf90P AODR OtIER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR L PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR V ,PROP AODR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR : *. * * J. PROP AODR ( • ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AODR 0»tCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEH PROPERTY ONNERS LIST SB 17-117-2S 43 0040 * 03556 LIVINGSTON AVE COIN LONG CHRISTIAN 0 A NANCY LONG 3556 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0045 03533 LIVINGSTON AVE S B SANDLER I K A SANOLER STEVEN B A KATHRYN A SANOLER 3533 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA Hi 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0048 03559 UVIN6STQN AVE 0 LEFEBVRE A L S CARNES DONINIC LEFEBVRE 3559 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0055 03564 LYRIC AVE R 0 BARTELL A K K DARTELL ROLAND D/KIMBERLY K BARTELL 3554 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0058 03508 LYRIC AVE RONALD THOHAS HILL RONALD THOHAS HILL 3508 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0153 03596 LYRIC AVE HICHAEL E A LAURA J SNANSON MICHAEL E A LAURA J SNANSON 3596 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA m 55391 it : ‘ " 38 17-117-23 43 0041 03520 LIVINGSTON AVE ROBERT EUGENE EBERT ROBERT EBERT 3520 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 38^ 17-117-23 43 0046 03541 LIVINGSTON AVE JOANN H HOLSBECK JOANN H HOLSBECK 3541 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0049 03577 LIVINGSTON AVE ELIZABETH J BALTER ELIZABETH J BALTER 3577 LIVINGSTON NAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0056 03536 LYRIC AVE RICHARD R GILMORE CHARLES LENIS HENKE 3536 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA NN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0148 03554 LIVINGSTON AVE R E A J M THOMPSON RICHAR0 E/JEANNE H THOMPSON 3554 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA HTm 5F391 TOTAL BATCH 006 00016 REPORT N0« PI435401 PAGE 16 JS8 17-117-2S 0044 03525 LIVXN6ST0N AVEissr^ «««. 3525 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 » * I v. *• V A* V \ ^ ■■ ■ ■ • -I J-i' i «■ 38 17-117-23 43 0047 03551 LIVINGSTON AVE DAVID N REINHOLD DAVID N REINHOLD 3551 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA m 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0050 03585 LIVINGSTON AVE MICHAEL 6 MOSIMAN HICHAEL 0 HOSIMAN 3585 LIVINGSTONE AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0057 03520 LYRIC AVE J A V NEGLEY JANES A VICKY NEGLEY 3520 LYRIC AVE N NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0150 03572 LIVINGSTON AVE MARK N A KAREN L CUFF MARK N A KAREN L CUFF 3572 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 GO .. .. ' ■ r ^ • • • i'. ^ ■** « • ,; • . V GVl » V *' y \ V J" .. •» % • • I fc' • ' ■ . »- • . . I. (M • V:J •I • ■ • ■ •,V •; »■',•*? » * ^ n V’,‘ r»' V • I • '• :>■ y ,r\* Mv J - \y 4 .* ‘V• ^ 7 . ' ( ft •» - . m w . •• K)LIVINGSTON AVLNUt tr>lO S 89*59' E 50.00 - o in •7 / # ooO 9.2 •> EXISTING HOUSE 4^ -- 19.9 -----•: />o EXISTING SHED**'-*., 3.8..^'. «in 0)o V E 1^ro •A o>ooo T ^ 49.92 meas 50.0* S 89*5 V 44" W 1 O \ NM. N RR TE ^RETAfMC WAU LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES.: LOT 6. BLOCK 4, NAVARRE HEIGHTS denotes iron marker denotes distance as shown on the plat of NAVARRE HEIGHTS Bearings shown are based upon on assumed datum. o ♦ This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described and the location of an existing house and shed thereon. It does not to show any other improvements or encroachments. property, purport #; J ■ ComN & Gronberg, Inc. L I'UMii.L'tK ’ / 'Ji;. 1 ii>hl *>(1 n/, »' 17.1'WU ' 1 hereby cerlifv Ih.il this survey vv.is preptired by me or under my direct super vision, and that I am a duly registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of the Stale of Minnesota. DATI: 1-3-97 SC’AI.K I"s20' TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:July 14,1997 SUBJECT: #2254 Curtis and Barbara Palmer 2710 Casco Point Road Variance(s)—Public Hearing Zoning Dbtrict: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area:16,032.21 square feet (.37 acres) Application:The applicants are proposing to add more storage space above an existing garage. The garage is located in front of the principal residence and is located in a required side yard which makes it non-conforming as to its location on the zoning lot. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.25 LR-IC One family Lakeshore Residential District, Subd. 6, A and B Section 10.03 General Provisions, Subd. 9, Accessorv' Buildings, (D) Location "No detached garage or other accessory building shall be located nearer the front or street lot line than the principal building on that lot except on lots which have frontage on a lake and rear yard adjacent to a street. Accessory buildings located within the street or rear yards of such lots are subject to the setback requirements, except that detached garages may be located 10 feet from the street or rear lot line when doors face away from the street." U2254 Curtis and Barbara Palmer 2710 Casco Point Road Page I I f in» -r-w-r I L ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IC District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 1/2 acre 100 ft.30 ft.10 ft.30 ft. Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard 16,032.21 sq. ft.100.34 ft.4.6 ft.10.7 ft. The subject property does not meet the lot area requirements for the LR-IC zoning district. The existing garage is 4.6' from the property line. Structural Coverage Structural coverage is not an issue with this application. Hardcover Hardcover is not an issue with this application. U2254 Curtis and Barbara Palmer 2710 Casco Point Road 6/21/97 Page 2 AfrucMJfs srniw-teMT « ' May 25, 1997 City of Orono Request for Variance on Existing Garage I have a existing garage that has been classified as a non conforming use due to location. It is a two car unit that was built into the side of a hill in front of my house. It has a storage space above it with a roof over it. This area is used for some storage. However, with the amount of items around, I have a need for more storage and have been using the second stall of the garage forcing me to park one car out side. This has not been a good situation. I would like to add a dormer to the front of the roof facing the street (see drawings) which would give me more usable floor space on the upper level and allow me to place both our cars in the garage. Therefore, I request I be allowed a variance to complete this addition. Iam'ir ''Ft tiTMt STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. 2. 4. 5. 6. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The existing residence can continue to be used for residential purposes. The applicant has indicated that the existing two car garage is used for storage and one vehicle. The existing garage is located outside of the building pad for the zoning lot. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The zoning lot has steep topography in the street yard. The plight of the landowner is created by topography, the location of the existing garage and the desire for more storage. 3, The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance to add more storage to a non-conforming garage will add more structure in the street yard. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are not a consideration with this application. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Accessory structures arc allowed in the LR-IC zoning district. The existing garage is non- conforming. The zoning code allows non-conforming structures to be maintained. The applicant is requesting to increase the second story of the garage by increasing the floor area from 15 ’ 6" x 19' 4" (299.15 sq. ft.) to approximately 20' x 22' (389.71 sq. ft.) by adding 5' 9" X 16'(90.56 sq. ft.). U2254 Curtis and Barbara Palmer 2710 Casco Point Road 6/21/97 Page 4 ■I 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The need for a variance is created by the location of the existing garage on the zoning lot and the applicant's desire for more storage within the garage. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. There are garages on Casco Point that are located in the street yard. The location ol the existing garage is due to the steep topography. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjo>Tnent of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant has indicate that he needs more storage and he wants to be able to park two vehicles inside the garage. The applicant could provide storage elsewhere on the zoning lot. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The variance will not impair health, safety, comfort or morals. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The variance is a convenience to the applicant. The applicant could add more storage space in another location ori the zoning lot. Issues 1. The lot does not conform to lot area requirements or street yard requirements. 2. There is steep topography in the street yard. (See Exhibit F) The grade at the driveway is 10' below the residence. The back yard slopes approximately 6'-8* from the side lot lines. U2254 Curtis and Barbara Palmer 2710 Casco Point Road 6/21/97 Pages 3. 4. The existing garage is considered non-conforming as to its location. The residence was constructed in 1964. An addition was construction in 1988. Work on a fireplace occurred in 1990 and a 5' x IT porch was added in 1996. No other variances have been granted for this zoning lot. 5.If more space is added to the garage, it increases the possibility of future use as a dwelling unit or home occupation in an accessory structure. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The existing garage is non-conforming due to its location on the zoning lot and tnere is steep topography in the street yard. Neither the location of the garage or the topography limits the use of the garage to store two vehicles. Storage for the applicant could be provided elsewhere on the property or stored off-site. Staff finds that there is no hardship to increase the bulk of a non- conforming structure. Attachments A B C D E F G Application Plat Map Floor Plans Elevations Survey Topo Maps Permit History U2254 Curtis and Barbara Palmer 2710 Casco Point Road 6/21/97 Page 6 ii i •; 4 4 . » • • I * . • • ! ‘ J ! • i'i I . i 1 ! I I»( I . . • I l! Oi^TlOiv/ aA a P SEE MAP 61 Ct/z'i’iV (A'^tA inio .. mam 9mrn*f I mw^^K r • t Application # Date Received V/ -*? 7 Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-lhe-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 2DlO Ct^^O Po iUT S Propertv' Identification Number (P.I.D.I oo zl / Attach legal description to application if net included on required survey. Date Property Acquired________________________ I (do) (^ngn also own the adjacent parcels of land. .(month/year) Present use of property: X residential ___pother (specify). Zoning District:____________Z- ______________ PPLICANT X ?Ai Name eur5,TI^ i-4 e Address: 2.7/0 PT. (2lO. Phone (home >4;]^/-8S^ _____ Phone(woric)^ I S"IQ OO____ City: o\2DMO________Zip: FiR f OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:,.. Zip- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ \ PCO C30 Describe request in detail: (attach additional sjieets if necessarj ’) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width L)N #2254 Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore X Other (specify) F^V7D(T|0L) XQ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: —1*^ lUTO t4\LL iSs ouly ~T\L/0 r U^ISD TO ci^gCoUD LfVIeL to WAtST VU S>?slkTlU(%> ^ m *«*•(attach additional sheets if necessary) 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. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Go\l Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Sur\ey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy SYz” x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (e.xisting and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/j" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy SYi’ x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signature Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Plaiming 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 .\0i. V > l“i7 17 ^ *Vv-r 40 40 40 ><• V' V ' ■"’• (1) ic^V 'O . . ro, ( ?) ^/r ; ,-i, ^ - i 4 ' DOC NO 2t i I ~-i.-0 (3) 20-in-23-2‘\\ \ \ il§)•?.14) '<£5: N \ 25i. 5 -'S.a<,i-.'7- ^o. 1/ ^ /0 Ir^J /■___^/' 0^ • 0$,..7 ; \ 51 ___J1 : /^"'^•^f|i|;::= /$) (46) SfiJ .x*' 17 40 r- p&l 0' ■--0-'¥>;> ... - '77^ ' ,(^).<oA%.^X. i* 19)'r.:5 /5^U0) Vv' ^ / i ;'v AfS4. ., (20)'^ .*> (19) !0n iQ ,■> 1 ^ -\ 14 i 5) '*> c<>-^ oy! A9 '■A ¥/ /-^\ ,'" \- /^/ -^/N /4vV A/> //4^^V .' ■%^'' 7>c /'^ 5 ' o/ / \ * ^\ i .A HA HHAHi'1/ ■■-■/;' ‘®/^® / -¥ t'--7iH^i% r /I‘7 ’A'-\/> >>ri7V,7 / /: o.-/ ^7'- ' 7 ,' 2« / : ,s.; \ \ I; 1| ......................\ o t^-WriT^k zy/o «:i pc -iso . ^m/^zrKri\. rn-i '■;y-r>\ «/*♦•'• . • I? r. i • • j> . •':> f ' • •• TWO CA'^^ ^ \ Certificate of Survey for rom Martin of Lots /2 and »3, Block 3, CASCO HEIGHTS Hennepin County, Minnesota' ?ftD j hereby certify that this is a true and'correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of Lots 12 and 13, Block 3, CASCO HEIGHTS, and of Che location of all buildings, if any, thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments, COFFIN a GRONBERC, INC. Hark S. Gronberg Reg. No. 12755 Gordon R. Coffin Reg. No. 6064 Engineers and Land Surveyors Long Lake, Minnesota Phone 473-4141 Sc.-le Dace o 1 inch = 30 feet August 13, 1985 iron marker • ->0 t I • t I 958.3 TO: 6 ^ Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Mocrse, City Administrator FROM:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:July 14,1997 SUBJECT: #2255 Rick and Deborah Rice 2700 Kelly Avenue Variance(s)--Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Lot Area:22,324 One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) square feet (.512 acres) Application: The applicants propose building a wrap-around deck on an existing residence. The proposed deck extends into a required rear and side yard setback from Lydiard Avenue. The existing residence encroaches 5 ’ into the required 35' side yard adjacent to Lydiard Avenue. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.24, Subd. 5 (B) - LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District U2255 Rick and Deborah Rice 2700 Keliy Avenue 7/21/97 Page 1 L ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area 1 acre Lot Width 140 ft. Front Yard 35 ft. Side Yard Adjacent to Another Lot Rear Yard 10 ft.30 ft. Side Yard Adjacent to Street 35 ft. Subject Property Lot Area and Yard: Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard 22,324 sq. ft.150 ft.150+ ft.30' on west side The subject propeny does not m^et the lot area or side yard adjacent to a street requirements. The proposed deck would encroach into required rear and side yards. The deck would encroach into the side yard an additional 6' from the kitchen w'hich would reduce the required side yard to 21' at the point closest to the property line. The proposed deck would reduce the required rear yard to 23' where 30' is required. Structural Coverage Structural coverage is not an issue with this application. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75' 75'-250 ’ 250-500'22,324 sq. ft.3,766 sq. ft. (16.9%) 6,697.2 sq. ft. (30%) 4,415.7 sq. ft. (19.8%) None 500'-1,000' Hardcover is below the allowed amount for the 250-500' setback. U2255 Rick and Deborah Rice 2700 Keliy Avenue 7/21/97 Page! Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The variance is for a deck. The residence can continue to be used as a residence without a deck. However, the proposed location is off of the kitchen area and would possibly have a view of Lake Minnetonka. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The existing kitchen was constructed at 30' from Lydiard Avenue instead of the required 35'. A deck that met the rear and side yard setbacks could only be constructed behind the residence or in the side yard next to the garage. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The purpose of a 35' side yard adjacent to a street is to maintain the same setback as the front yards along Lydiard Avenue. (See survey of adjacent property.) 4. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are not a consideration with this application. 5. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Decks are permitted in residential districts. 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary uie of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. U2255 Rick and Deborah Rice 2700 Kelly Avenue 7/21/97 Page 3 4 -------- 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. This is a comer zoning lot that essentially has two 35' setbacks from Kelly and Lydi^d Avenues. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or stmcturcs in the district in which said land is located. Other comer lots in the LR-IB zoning district are required to meet a 35’ setback from the front property line and side yard adjacent to streets to maintain the same setback for properties that front on the adjacent street. The granting of the application is necessaiy for the preserv-ation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant has indicated the reasons for the proposed deck. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The variance will not impair health, safety, comfort or morals. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The variance will be a convenience for the applicants to have a deck as proposed. How'ever, the proposed deck is located oft of the family room and kitchen. If the deck was located elsewhere on the lot, it would be next to bedrooms, the garage or in the front yard which is less desirable. Issues 1.The lot does not meet the minimum lot area requirements. The existing residence is 30* from the west (Lydiard Ave.) side of the property line. 2.The topography of the zoning lot slopes approximately 8-10' from the front yard to the rear yard. The property immediately to the north has an elevation 6-8 ’; above the subject property. 1^2255 Rick and Deborah Rice 2700 Kelly Avenue 7/21/97 Page 4 1 3.The adjacent street, Lydiard Avenue, is platted at 50', however, the paved area is less than 50' in width, so that the yard area between the paved area and the existing residence is greater than 35'. 4. The permit history indicates that an addition was constructed in 1988. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To consider the size of the proposed deck, the desired view to the lake, the existing house layout and setback from Lydiard Avenue, the topography of the lot, and the tree cover and shrubbery between the subject property and the adjacent property. Attachments A B C D E F G H I Application Plat Map Hardcover Calculations Deck Calculations Adjacent Property Survey Subject Property Survey Permit History Topo Map Hardship Statement H2255 Rick and Deborah Rice 2700 Kelly Avenue 7/21/97 Pages LocA^lo^) MAf ^ Z-lOO ;<VtHUt 44-00 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220,00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-confonning structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY FORMATION ly y/ ^ Site Address ^3^ 'I 7> D jK/ / Application ^ Date Received (a- J3~ 9 7 Amount Paid % f)i trr/k^ ■ Property Identification Number (F.I.D.T ^ ^ l/^dn Attach legal description to application if not included oi required survey. Date Property Acquired _______/ ^^7_________________________(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: Presidential ___ptherv^specify) Zoning District: iJ^_______(_/ ______ APPLIC Name Address /.-CjL Phone (home) / O Q _____ Phone (work ) i O ^ City : fjccd/r/d/^ ' ivo\^S33/ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $1 £>0 Describe request in detail: ^^///./ ‘ LJA.A-P OA LJ£J7 5~/n^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback:Front L^d.y^Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSinP(DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue'hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:_________________ y ._____ (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete: 1. 2. X X 3. 4. Wo 5. 6.y 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/i" x 11 ” for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8Vi" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'A” x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance appiivation 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 expei«sS-incup»d-Tn^revie\v of this application, and cert'Iies that the information supplied i^lrufij^t^TCT^preqt (0 the beet r>f his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signatu Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property_W City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purp0^esoflln)i^«fjgatipn and verification of this request. A©, f oner's Signature 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 91.7 I / !50 LYDIARD CIR - <b • 64 I •-. V' 1 91.7 ! \ Yr 4 (2) \ ^ \ ?^\A 5 (3) t 202 (12) : ' * ♦ D -7 .'” UO '_n \ CX) iSO ^ '3 ...^(38) P 22^214.15 ::> ID CJl :^'2‘St5 IS' <\ 'X/ 201 ^150 V \\ • •*•••■ ;$■ ■.•.* • • • « •<• *•••«• 4 ',(M ^'io' ^ 6 ^ Uj 1^ ) _ (34) \i-* /.A*.•.•.*.!v**‘ 5;ipi^ V :9>i: ^■;09. 6 - ■^S'l'i Ml.« 175.5 NS9'48'E 175. W (41) O)(40) (51 5(39) :Z3 c:> o'!(4' ^ y' D Q OL 3 (48) /<Cto N \ \ § 2 oI lya (43) Lr^ 235. 5 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'75-250’ c 500-1000* EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ________ Length Width X X X ^ ®* Garage C. Drivewaycp- D. Sidewalk X X CQ- X X Patio/Deck X X r-r-3 F- Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERIT AREA IN ZONE ^ ,. -f-) 44 ^ B AX,.X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Length Width X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck ’TrClAAi^X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ ^ , LwtT.l * B 77.3AV X 100 = HHiS, 7 S.F. S.F. UU-^ A B A B 1j » «i. (S *'• • V ^'^.*_ ^ f I 4 . • ------JIV -• ■' rW * f ^y_. •" ’V' 35' :3T » W " 'or •> t» \ '••■?■■'■ vT'-Vj. mj, •• j^' ?• ' ■ \'iJV A f •» ■ Jii:-i:Scf i< ^ <i Vi/"-' ■■^• .;• >;*v /pr •i ^ V' ;« ■ jl^ ** 4 <*t^> ■ ' % V#, « N. v> J'*- 'i. ■&f. f’ .7 Jr ?«*• > . J i- • > '* ¥ ' • A--'<'f •■'*>'^'^ •• > h i: ♦i' J- v,-*< •»- >A-’ ■ .• •• ■ »v •. .>. ".' •♦" •4 *y • ‘ • • 1’ / .V ’.V“ *:c. «» •. A -.» v>. .'■ 5' •''4>r -V • , ^ ^0 • • • • -* - . • • if^r: ■r V ■ r r“ - .■ - ■" tw:.?.. v> ■ ■ '.'■';v<':.‘*r.. ;^ :'■ , ■• 'i 'S' .'V -•■■'%V.‘'.'^- ^ . ^' .V A,'.'•r;' “' '■•' • ■ m- '- ■ ’•'• '.■.‘.Xi ■ ;r. ■ V'• ■■■# A'' -o- >?* < • > I n YDIARD AVENU s 1 - —nL. s a. ii I * CERTIRCATE OF SURVEY for KEN WUERT2 •/«' lEod U1 3 Z 111 > < 0 Of < 0 > J '•Aue t I" « »o* SSNOTCS xeori MON. (svt ) t>EKmeSi XReM MON. (put)") O COV6C AReF. 331ft S.F. <'| a .9 */o) 0^1<.T AB.«A = 22.3ZA «,.P. 5! uo-r uocA-reo BETiNeew Z%o' 90.0 Fte-T peoKA lake M>MMeTowe.A 0^'^ ExiiT. + "^6p*SBto - a : 9^ LEGAI, DESCRIPTION Lot V, VERN - MAR MANOR Hennepin County, Minnesota MERILA & ASSOCIATES. INC. ENGINEERS. SURVEYORS. SITE PLANNERS wfl-7Jrd A»t. M. • C63 • 8rMkl|« P«fl, MlantMlt 8S420 (612) 933-7595 Buiub/ioc, fiftP 'Ji Wi htnbv ctrtify that thk b • Wvt md comet rtprtitnuUoii of • wnrty ol tfia boundariM of d»a abovt dtitrlbodland Mdof dta locaUsn of ai buMnf^ if any, tfiarton md dl fbibic oncroacfvnfnu If tnr, from or on mW land Attuntr^lNn- ^ j laPdr lanOAarvMTSmyftf* Jab Ma^-8fl MWi. Raf. Ho./£££y _ o? iii Hdif PERMIT RECORD Permit No Date 177 S4S Type of Permit 3//S 7-^-73 mi <--/r-7F /U(PZ27L. '07^" C4nit,yKe^c^ f*rv T HARD SHIP REASONS TO GRANT DECK VARIANCE • THE BUILDING PAD HAS LIMITED SPACE FOR RECREATIONAL DECK ON WEST SIDE OF HOUSE. EAST SIDE OF HOUSE IS DAUGHTER ’S BED ROOM. • THE EXISTING HOUSE FLOOR PLAN MAKES THE LOCATION OF THE REQUESTED DECK THE LOGICAL PLACE. I.E. FROM THE KITCHEN TO THE FAMILY ROOM. ALSO, THIS GROUND AREA CURRENTLY USED FOR ENTERTAINING IS SLANTED. DIFFICULT TO GET AROUND ON AND CONDUCIVE TO TURNING ANKLES. • SET BACK IS ALREADY ENCROACHED ON BY THE EXISTING BUILDING. ORIGINAL IDEA / PLAN ALWAYS CALLED FOR A DECK OFF OF THE FAMILY ROOM AND KITCHEN. • THE SIDE STREET SET BACK (35*) IS GREATER THAN A REGULAR SIDE YARD SET BACK (10*). • LYDIARD AVE. WHEN BUILT, WAS OFF SET TO PRESERVE LARGE MAPLE TREES ON EAST SIDE OF STREET. THUS GIVING THE APPEARANCE OF VERY LARGE SIDE YARD. WITH THIS DECK THERE WILL STILL BE PLENTY OF SPACE / LAWN WEST OF THE HOUSE. THESE ARE THE VERY SAME MAPLE TREES THAT PROVIDE SHADE FOR PROPOSED DECK. • OTHER EXISTING HOUSES ALONG LYDIARD AVE. ARE MUCH CLOSER TO THE STREET THAN PROPOSED DECK. • PROPERTY OWNER HAS HANDICAP THAT MAKES GETTING AROUND ON THE GROUND VERY DIFFICULT AND THUS UNABLE TO ENJOY THE GREAT OUTDOORS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE . • PROPOSED DECK WOULD ALLOW ENJOYABLE VIEW OF LAKE MINNETONKA. SET BACK VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR 2700 KELLY AVE. LOT 8. VERN MAR MANOR TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City AdministratorFROM: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning AdministratorDATE: SUBJECT: July 10,1997#2256 James P. and Mary H. Rivers 1442 Shoreline Drive Variance(s)"Public Hearing Lot Area: Zoning District: LR-IA One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acres) 9,250 square feet (.212 acres) Application:The applicants are proposing to change the roofline of an existing residence. Replacement is necessary because there was damage from snow which accumulated in the valley of the roof. The applicants have informed staff that the insurance company is requiring the roof slope be changed. Because the existing residence is located in the 0-75' setback, a variance to increase or intensify a non-conforming structure is required. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.23 LR-IA One Family Lakeshore Residential District, Subd. 6, A and B Section 10.22, Subd. 1, Lakeshore Setback Regulations, And B, Subd. 2 Section 10.03 General Provisions, Subd. 4, Subd. 5, B, D, H, I U2256 James P, and Mary H. Rivers 1442 Shoreline Drive Variance 6/21/97 Page 1 1 ANALYSIS I*• h It le >r Lot Area and Yards LR-1A District Standards Subject Property Lot Area and Yards The lot does not meet the minimum lot area, lot width or shoreline setback requirements. Variances have previously been granted for side yards and lakeshore setbacks. Structural Coverage Structural coverage will not change with the alteration of the roofline. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75’1,757.01 sq. ft. (38.3%) None 1,757.01 sq. ft. (38.3%) None The proposed alteration to the roofline does not affect hardcover. Variances have previously been granted for hardcover to exist at 38.3% in the 0-75' setback. #225(5 James P. and Sfary H. Rivers 1442 Shoreline Drive Variance 6/21/97 Page 2 STATEMENT OF HARDSHIPquiring the roofline to be alteredThe applicant has informed staff that the insurance company is re or face cancellation of their policy.A residence has been at this location for more than 37 years. 2. rriteria for Detfrnining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The aonlican' has indicated to staff that the temporary solution to the leaking roof is in • S d« ^ reavy rains. The damage will continue if the roofline ts not altered. Eventually, the u sidence would become uninhabitable. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The landowner ’s situation is due to the roofline and the effect of melting snow and rain pooling in the roof valley and causing damage. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the loeality. The variance for altering a non-conforming stntcmre will not change the character of the area. Economic considerations alone she!' not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are a consideration with this appiication to the extent that the applicant's insurer is requiring a change to keep the policy in effect. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. 3. 4. 5. #2256 James P. and Mary H. Rivers 1442 Shoreline Drive Variance 6/21/97 Page 3 6. 7. 8. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the prop>erty in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The residence is non-conforming as to location. Residential uses are allowed in the zoning district. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The residence has been modified numerous times during the last 37 years. Ihe roofline is unusual and cannot handle precipitation. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The variance is needed because the residence is within the 0-75' setOack. Roof repair would intensify the bulk of the building. The condition of the roof is unique to this property. 10. I he granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant must obtain the variance to keep the property insured and repair damage to the structure. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The variance will not impair health, safety, comfort or morals. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessar>' to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The variance would alleviate die hardship created by the non-conforming status of die residence. U2256 James P. and Mary H Rivers 1442 She re I me Drive Variance 6/21/97 Page 4 Issues 1.The zoning lot does not meet the minimum requirements for the LR-IA district. The existing structure is located within the 0-75’ setback area and is considered non-conforming. 2. 3. The topography of the lot is not unusual. The street file indicates the following variances were applied for: #39 1975 #185 1976 Addition and remodeling #1698 1991 Roof and screened porch (after-the-fact) 4.The structure was remodeled in 1959. In 1976 an addition was added and remodeling was done.' STAFF RECOMMENDATION To approve the alteration of the roofline as shown in Exhibit D. Attachments A B C D E F G H I J Application Plat Map Existing Side View Proposed Side View* Plan View Permit History Resolution #3122 Staff Report dated September 29,1976 Old Survey Topo Map U2256 James P. and Mary H. Rivers !442 Shoreline Drive Variance 6/21/97 Pages I .lockTim /lAP >) Mat— £Nt(^^^>^^ OcUt. #225 Application # Lo Date Received ^ 7 Amount Paid .cjo rAi CITY OF ORpNO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Ap:4[c^tion Fee $220^* ($50.00 per eacR additidnaTvariance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) . Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) 8 O. I Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 3*$ — 11 - UH - __________ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. >pcrty Acquired.__________________________________________^(month/year) (49M<fo ®lso own th^adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: v residential ___pother (specify)_________________ Zoning District:____Ll2.-\K FAmi Itj I/iVv.’sinctfe Ctsidgir>hQ.I DtstriLF CA OCfti) APPLICANT'ri-u-Aiv 1 ^ Name NcLojU M ^ Address: 14^1^' U^y Phone (home). Phone ('Nork).____ ♦f?3-yz’fv City: \ A . Zip: I OWNER (if different th^ applicpit) i [) Phone (home; Name ^ \p- Phone (work) Addressii^tl-T. P City: (Xb-M^rtfcc Phone (home).WISE3M1 Zip: ^ j DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ Estimated Construction Cost $ (attach additional sheets if necessar>') VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore :eshry^ setback. HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: )T€ G U \ V"g yrt^ ^JT”"C^<XTT>C l ^Pr>t g,0»r>PCf ~f~_____ ^ygooP VvOVA <0O (attach additional sheets if necessary) 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.X 2. ^ 3. Con.pleted Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). 4. No 5. 6. / Z 7. 8. »sj-a Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy SVz' 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 S'A" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 814" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that jiflUT 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 corr^t to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature M/x.Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date &//3/97 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 & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 .J ‘4ij of^ 'EJxiS'T''^6-1+4^ \JlAi fxT>ft>sgj7 Ssfiiz. '\zi'e\A 1 442, & _ AP-E A /■ / / -^(1- 'FI..a^.\ / / ■hr / / ' -rU / /' / / / / /' / // / I'' "2|f Nl- -) PERMIT RECORD • • Permit No Date G'lO -5^ jm Type of Permit •» r^er»\oogLiA/j-t 5£PT‘(i, 3VJV n-^j>7h /ia^ ^ (Pa) h'^3 ^S'Ufc^jt coAi^cno/^ SAC. J V—rifaint W\UtXt GITYof ORONO CV.6’ SBO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3122 A KBSOLOnON GRANTING AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES TO MDNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 (^, SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AOT SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1698 WHEREAS, James P. Rivers (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 1442 Shoreline Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows : . (P.I.N. 11-117-23 22 0005) SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 117, RANGE 23 COMMENCING AT A POINT ON LAKE SHORE OP LAKE MINNETONKA WHICH POINT IS DISTANT 70 FEET NORTHWESTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM A LINE BEARING NORTH 67 DEGREES 48 MINUTES EAST FROM A POINT WHICH IS SOUTH 10 DEGREES EAST DISTANT 836.5 FEET PROM NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 THENCE SOUTH 67 DEGREES 48 MINUTES WEST TO SHORE OF MUD LAKE THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SHORE OF MUD LAKE TO A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 50 FEET NORTHWESTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES PROM THE LAST PRECEEDING DESCRIBED LINE THENCE NORTH 67 DEGREES 48 MINUTES EAST TO SHORE OF LAKE MINNETONKA THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY TO BEGINNING EXCEPT ROAD, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for after-the-fact variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10..^ , Subdivision 1 (B), Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit a roofed/screened porcn measured by staff at 21 15' 6" located 9' from the shoreline instead of the required 75', resulting in 318 s.f. of additional hardcover where 1,439.01 s.f. or 38.3% exists and where none is allowed and side setback variances for struc located 14' from the right side yard and 20' from the left side yard where a 30' setback is required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1698 m GITYofOROXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3122 2. 3. 4. 5. The property Is located in the LR**lAr Single Family I.akeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres In area. The property consists of approximately 9,250 8 . f • The Orono City Council reviewed this application on May 11, 1992, and conceptually recommended approval of the after-the-fact variances based upon the following findings: A.The unauthorized addition has existed property for approximately 15 years. on the B.Applicant has agreed to remove 240 s.f. of existing paved/gravel hardcover to be replaced with grassed area located within the 75-250' setback area. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed after-the-fact variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 ^ MM • • m CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.3122 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B), Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) allowing a roofed/screened deck installed at the lakeside of the existing residence and granting a 53' or 70.6% lakeshore setback variance, a 318 s.f. or 8.48% hardcover increase in the 0-75' setback area and a right side set setback variance of 16’ or 15.3% and a left side setback variance of 10* or 33%, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant is being advised that major structural repair of the roofed/screened deck in the future will require City approval. 2. Applicant shall install 240 s.f. of grassed area adjacent to County Road 15 located within the 75—250' setback area. The grassed area shall be installed by July 1, 1992. 3. Viclation 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. Page 3 of 5 \V<A GlTYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3122_________ Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of May, 1992. ATI ST: /6-dAMuJO llin, Cit^Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s} STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of May 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson & 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^P iSuC • V HENNEPIN COUNTY My commission •xpirss 8-i2-¥0 J. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 • ••• GlTYof ORONO 'Mi RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3122_________ STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this /y6i-day of before me a appeared /hr, /199 3 Notary Public within and'^for said county, personally l^tnn^S P, ' I'Tt d r 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. LINDA S. VEE notary PUBUC - MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My comiT.iMion axplrn S-12-90 /lA NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 f 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 saune as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 • . *«*• ■n T- : - ' f V-. V * ‘ • • • '*?tf-;.^SUBjfECT: 4*:’-V ^ -Ci^ ^istrator * - Administrator ..;' >^:V d WE: : ’ V • September ' Rivers - 1442 Shoreline Drive Var^ce - Lakeshore Setback ^ Expand Existing Non-Conforming Dtfolling in B-2 Zone %. •%•*«. «..• •• jm'm ai •* '• *..' tr* ■•••V .* • »i.v .‘.-•A -a'V;..• •Jf- •>., V^AW :* •>- ^.v* ■*••..,•. > /•H-Mr. vRivers (Wiridward Marine) is considering reaching ah agreement with •. - i>:?^Mr.iMcJ^an idiei^^ he would lease or purdiase Mr. McMahan’s proper^ to the * 'va L*- *. > • ■5^ •••••f: ;■" ‘">x ■ t t^'4noiyrof include tte/residence Uhind Mac’s ■-:4i^tza'Building,v':,• '•:-4:' , - ^ is now only 38’ frora the shoreline (Mr. River’s measure-.|^^>i *'• water level is extremely low this year. ' -.-x V -- y V •' ■< •.-•H; ... ival for an addition to‘the house (non-confoiTidng^questing s>pro 7’^iesidence in B*2 Zcne). Tne proposed addition would be 414 sq. ft* in area 9’ closer to the shoreline. This would result in a 29’ Idceshore .‘i/‘;'aetbadc from the present shoreline. I don’t have the data as to.>diere the ^"?^-]^fiioreline would be if Ae water level were at a 929.4 elevation. ’ ■ ■ v'f • i . •- fV-*» i-.• iA •• :i ^ __ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ agreed to' ' xiemove the easting hardc^r surface extending to the shoreline between the ' Wndwrd MariM huilding and Mac’s Pizta building. This concrete asphalt slab • ;. /;!$'approximately 2,000 sq. ft. in area. Approximately 1,200 sq. ft. of this :/.; slab is located within the 75’ shoreline setback line. If approved, he would • Vv/?'^50 remove the building that previously was used as Mac’s Pizza and more Wcently as a bait shc^. T •_ **in review of..this proposal, we might consider several conditions, boat ^splay. ' '• . * along the Coiiaty road and the present sewage disposal system for all buildings. 9.^ ' • y i ’ '• *.,4* . . ■ , ' . * *' '^^"Noljait of this^ W lies within the 75’ lakeshore setback, but if this ’ '' 'ii/,'sl»'is also .^removed, seepage and filtration would he ^inproved. '•''PLATWING OOM4iSSIQN ^EETING.- October 18, 1976 • V;;. ' ^ • ^ •• / >.The'Planning Coninission recomnended approval of lot area/widtli/side setback v. : ^ 4 cot*KfirV vaTnanrAC ’for* an arlilitAon "to the 6XistinC^ n0n*C0Ilf01Tllin2 h"?:;‘.i' *:-‘ /'•lakeshore setbadc variances for an addition to the existing non-confoiming ..._ ...1____________________________________ - ;■•• ■ ••>.•..'.felling subject to the following: sco^rcial ii^.of subject^lot*^o^ side^^except for auto^ilo patkiT^ *•- rs*.. u**-.#i* *♦ r - .i.*W r">.V /••^■'‘ “V '*• : • .'>'*.1 1 I'.*: .*o*r^rvs^ ■■ . . •‘"v.^. • ■•■:-'-^ ^- ■•. V •■' •'■^ •••*.■. .** >■ .'•-■• •■ :.;i., • *> t .V * «. • •: i . - \ t •. ■ -1 >; j »■ • *' '.' > ■', V *;•; ••'•' ■•' -V. •• ■ liV *-.■ ■■ • •• • !i’‘• ;• ■■■■ •• • i, •• - • #18M V. • J’ ; •>. •= ^:V'v-:^; j -*'• ■-.•■ ; ■•• *.'. • i' ' ■> V.-u .V • <: -.vV^ •: •.. * ’‘S ' * ■ ? . '. “ -k.»•*... . ■t /vVj? ■ ■■■f4 • '•I ■'■M ■■ S'rtni »Vl; ' if??' ..;•; •• -V^i^ **.‘!^* i • * - V ** i4o' X. n . i. .• •< -V* ^ • y^W'-- ••: . . • • • . i • * ! 't ••. *. '/ -V: * .^• '* •• * V* ' ' •:• ? i ■ •( •r * •. • • 4i r ..* <■ > 5*> if* -'?• %>- •.. •• ••-.Hv v ‘ .* V • *i.<» . , -. - •. k .■'•I-:' > Vivi*"V.- • '"VA^ ■ W ••. . .* I > r>fV • ‘••- 4' V F* ... vv-V/ ' A - Shsyd Jyiie, W -1 To:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Michael P. GafTron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:July 14, 1997 Subject: #2257 Dennis Meyer, 4685 Tonkaview Lane - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, Sewered, 1 Acre Minimum Application: Request for lot area and width variances to construct a new residence on this 0.69 acre vacant lot. List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Property Owner Acknowledgements Survey Site Plan Hardcover Calculations Topographic Overlay Proposed House Plans and Elevation Views Pertinent Code Sections Section 10.24, Subd. 5(B): Required lot area = 43,560 s.f. = 1 acre (existing = 29,900 sq. ft. or 0.69 acre) Required lot width = 140' (existing = 114.3* = 82% of 140' standard) Pertinent Facts 1.This lot was assessed one sewer unit and front footage in the 1970 Saga Hill Sewer Project. 2.Technically, the lot width is more than 80% of the 140' standard and no width v^ance is required per Section 10.03 Subd. 6(A)(1). 3.The LR-IB distriet lot area standard is 1.0 acre. On Tonkaview Lane, the average lot size is 0.83 acre. Range in existing developed lot size is 0.39 acre to 1.61 acre. Eleven lots on Tonkaview are larger than applicant's lot, seven are equal in size or smaller. J Zoning FUe #2257 July 14, 1997 Page 2 of 3 4.Applicant proposes to construct a residence meeting the required 35' front, 30’ rear and 10' side setbacks. 5. Proposed lot coverage by structure is 2,792 s. f. or 9.3% where 15% is allowed. 6.The southerly one-third of the property is in the 250-500' zone, and no hardcover is proposed in that zone. The northerly two-thirds of the lot is in the 500-1,000 ’ zone, where hardcover is proposed at 34.2%, meeting the 35% limit. 7.The proposed structure includes three stories above the basement. The plans submitted scale out at a defined height of 31’, where a maximum structure height of 30' is allowed. Applicant has not requested a height variance, and no hardship exists to grant one. Therefore, applicant should be advised that the current building plans must be revised to limit the house to 30' In height or applicant must otherwise confirm that the house as designed meets the 30' limit. (Note that the code indicates a height limit of IVz stories or 30'. Since stories are not defined in the zoning code, the Cit>- has concluded that the 30' limit will take precedence over the 2'/j stor>’ limit.) Discussion This is one of the few remaining vacant lots on Tonkaview Lane. The hardship is that no additional land is available. Factors which support the use of this property as a building site include its general conformity with other developed lots in the neighborhood and the fact that it has been assessed for sewer. It is staffs opinion that the lot is buildable. It appears that most of the construction will occur in the north half of the property which is relatively flat. The lot drops off to the rear, and at the south lot line drops off dramatically to the property below, which has been created by excavating into the hill. A potential concern is additional runoff to that southerly property, hence staff is recommending that, prior to Council approval of this application, the applicant must submit a site grading and drainage plan subject to approval of the City engineer. That plan must show the existing and proposed site contours, and define the extent of grading needed to accommodate the proposed walkout. The proposal should also address the possibility of directing roof and driveway drainage to the north, although the street elevations might make this unfeasible. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the required lot area variance, acknowledging that the lot width meets 80% of the standard and therefore no variance is required for lot width, subject to City engineer approval of a grading and drainage plan to be submitted by the applicant prior to final Council action, and subject to the proposed structure meeting the 30' height limitation. Zoning File #2257 July 14, 1997 Page 3 of 3 Options for Action 1. Recommend approval per staff recommendation. 2. Recommend approval wth additional conditions. 3. Recommend denial (state reasons). 4. Table for further information (specify). 5.Other. #22 Application if H Date Received 7 Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 {S5Q.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFO Site Address RIVUTI4^noN "Ton L^/UUL^oiic/\aarc55_____________________/ urj ry/ mu c uy ^----------- Property Identification Number (P.I.D.l TO- ( 1 7OO^ I Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acqime d *7~C~ /^ 7^_________________(month/year)’roperty Acq im< /do ndt^^soTown the adjacent parcels^f land, it uSe"bf properlPresentlBem property Zoning District:_____ residential Is of land. - ]/ other rspecifyl O?CK applicant _ ^ _ Name f) A _________ Address: f Q a - City:W Phone (home ) L|-7 ^'“5^ ^3 ^ V ^ Phone (work ) 7 Zip: Vl OWNER (if different than applicant) ■ Name ______________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Constnic^n Cost $ Describe request in detail: A/G^ ^^ ^ V k fA_______________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARI^CES REQUIRED / V Lot Area v Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions prevent!^ /'nmnlian/'^ with 7r»nino PriHe reauirements: ^ — (fHe, ^ u tCu ^ 7r,± yPr r*- . /«ner < A 8 I* r5 8 (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline dntejn order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150 ’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Go\l 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'/2" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘/j" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy SVi" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that ypiic yariance apnlication is not complete if the above information has not been includctL APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signature Cf. Date Tit 19^7 OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby ickfiOwledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reason-cible entry onto the prr* j«t) 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 & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 ) d Rtfl DATE 06/05/97DATCH 504PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR i . PROP ADDR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP ADDR OILIER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR ' .i : • ♦ . #•• • HENNEPIN COUNIY PROP’KrV INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LISTSd 07-117-2S ZZ 0026 0^'20 TONKAVIEH LA SIEVEN F VALEK STEVEN F VALEK BOX 586 SPRING PARK MN 55584 07-117-25 32 0014 04759 TONKAVIEN LA LARRY ARNOLD GREENHAGEN ET AL L GREENHAGEN i V 6REENHA6EN 4759 TONKAVIEN LANE MOUND MN 55564 58 07-117-25 32 0027 04655 TONKAVIEN LA A M NASSET I N L NASSET ALISON NASSET/NANCY NASSET 4655 TONKAVIEH LA MOUND MN 55564 38 07-117-23 32 0047 04690 TONKAVIEN LA NAS BULL NILLIAM A BULL 4690 TONKAVIEN LA MOUND MN 55564 REPORT NO. PI455401 PAGE 1458 07-117-25 52 000504725 TONKAVIEN LA EAT CHRISTIANSON EARL A TERRY CHRISTIANSON 4641 TONKA VIEH LANE HOUND MN 55564 58 07-117-25 52 0004 04755 TONKAVIEN U STUART V NHITMAN STUART V NHITMAN 4755 TONKAVIEN U MOUND MN 55564 I • • ‘‘ 58 07-117-25 52 0025 04625 TOTACAVIEN LA R M SHELTON AML R M SHELTON AML 4625 TONKAVIEN LA MOUND MN 55564 SHELTON SHELTON 58 07-117-25 52 0026 04629 TONKAVIEH U J R ABRAHAMSON/0 ABRAHAHSON JAWS R A uANN ABRAHAMSON 4629 TONKAVIEN LA MOUND MN 55564-9651 . < li ) 58 07-117-25 52 0028 04655 TOTfCAVIEN U DEM4IS A MEYER DENNIS A MEYER 4680 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND MN 55564 58 07-117-25 52 0029 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO DENNIS A MEYER DENNIS A MEYER 4680 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND m 55564 i* ', -) 58 07-117-25 52 0050 04680 NORTH SHORE OR DENNIS A MEYER DENNIS A MEYER 4680 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55564 . ! ) i TOTAL BATCH 504 00011 » i 01 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE \h Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form [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,________. I (\vc) understand that in c.xccuting this acknowledgement, I (we) am (arc) 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 ncigh.bor's project or use requires Council approval. fJj^rty^wner Date !'1 hih^l Owner ^,0..t.t^,tti,iH,iit^****************^************* ****************'**************** 4 (we) A [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located juj _____________________also referred to as Land Use Application No._________. I (wc) understand that in c.xecuting this acknowledgement, I (we) am (arc) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that 1 (we) am (arc) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbors project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner U DateDate Property Owner Date If you have any information that may «MSt the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at leas y prior to the scheduled meeting date. i f! f • V** \ \ ■ *1 - rr 4' iT<^ o'"— * T *. » / Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form TtfG^ X. I (we)^AQL L CHRtSTl _____of ToK}\^tKUK<.^ UAA i [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plsuis for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at____________________also referred to as Land Use Application No._________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (wc) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (w'e) am (are) aware of the ir^provement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner to -1 2 -'‘i Date / Us -(2- Property 'Owner Date I (we) ti n y/. /^1 ^(p^O [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._________. 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 tlie improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ofnIV 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. I #OF TRACT F. R.L.S. NO. TD3H HENNERN COUNTY, MINNESOTA X V*. : • •• i ».///“b N % \ \ \i/N \ \ ^ \ \ (1013,3)—••• IS \ ' t r-io' nC-INlNCniN L^WVJIN I I, iviiiNiML-ow I r-v \ \ \ -9 \ jd Q. \ \ \ ' ^rf !- t|0 /j!p • • .'I f } -O .'r-- LEGAL OESCRiPTiON OF PREMISES \ \ N \Uj \« fx ^<p ’V 00 J cO 1 \to 1 \ o 1 \^ 1 (1013.3) ( HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'75-250' 250-500'500-1000* FXISTINC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ________ i Length Width ■^3 X X X IQ;Garage Driveway i - t>. X X Sidewalk X X ■ V Patio/Dcclc X X IJiW • •• Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A -5- B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House 37-X Length Width X X X B. Garage TLC-50 C. Driveway X X 4-4 D. Sidewalk A\/frnrA:, t A X X C'\i 4^ 7.4 E. Patio/Deck In**.*- I»t -iJ o«^^v£ x F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G, Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZOf^ ^ . S3 ss X 100 = 6 4' ^ Cr* 15 2. ro 162 O ■7,'=) 7. '^7. X 100 = S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _ S.F. ___________S.F. 7 •'■■-T % A B A B I C|At^ ^90t\ 6#IWI«*^ J 4iC4n’'Co*»^ 3u«*^ . ^ %V l^l t 91* Fvm« i.iJ«•*. [ ^ -X If L4 S - > V ^ ••. • , • . • *•• • • • • • - r S-c ’ A *. —i , li •*~r^ 1 « ♦ 1 • •• . • |t •Li________’i ____11 *{ 11 UU% ^ llT ^»ici«*V| L*itJi 1r • J ■•i I (“ IV F-M« l-nlo • ? .j._._.- _ - I tT"rr3~=rff« -‘^.^^4-r“ . • V KM /f—?1 l‘*P«Av/4'By I ■ ji.»iA>5«r IA>ii^ '^^iPCf^ce m»»2. V #2257m nil I i,9f^c U re.-«ry £,9 st%. ^ 1 ' 1 * •'■ ’■MM. m.-^1Prr-1 • • • * • ffl V LII 1 • • * . • * '» — ------------- • JJ fl i O Q] crn *7, y^,*»\*• «.* • • • s r. If 1 ✓ * a 1 < • . • ■• ■■■•. ■■■ r 5 \^=—' m ;]Q# ^ •i ^ •• # • ••• * • ► -1 • 1• .. u j # « _ ^ • • • * • . -• •• * •# • • *•••*• • • • • A \ yA*«i*.«** ”TI • i,uT* -^i-avAT** «*\ Kjr^ ^c<wv.% «V-«" €' 1^ w C0^^ nrCm^i,] *P|L, T,-»S Im>|w l^a« v<^F»tt- |m »V»o»>%”7oanoJ- j 2i«^«. fW =t=; (i ! n C IL' Llr.---J -e-us^.-u J*c iv»^> »«- - I »«r ^•'*- Aa# 4 6#v«^fc •4 V**.k . |-j 1^ • 4 ««.»*»%/*. vl. <«»r —1. -1 C-4-»«*•« ' * •^•»*«» \>«»f«. ’ I 'I / ' K -\1 i': i-|iia£ \^ ---------------------------_ M •»«'- ^•»«.^t», I ^?-4 - «.'• - — ““ TV vl/ 4 ^^ vl/ 4 ^ ftvsM l.**.u* H^T^v ^ ^ V y « f \'v: f-i ArtQ II 4aN»e^«. U**^^*«4U -VJ^. ••I Vl/L^4tt<i4Aa 5-i»<- 6r-^« • , nl- 4-I* w/r »4 av4i^C GfcjiW* 4 I'l V in-V, uo^ ^ w/3 *4 1fi*^AQ. 6kc%WW I* / / / ' ___ ^•.o•H’ r -|/^J4 4^—1* tt* ^•J».'Pi*n. Ul'PiwO. 3 *4 -ev^***- vJ«^ \*« ri«| r^»*» 4’'“* PiuiVA ^****^-^ I I--._ J »,i.*-u- ir I ^artoV^C.^* d#w JX«aC A**0 | .1 ^m\**%.y^ !•* ^••40*^V*| • ^ U ll**^®.lu • ^ TTr^v vi)t •^Cf-p.Aru o-x" 1 Z1 LS'-: $4. •’V.'t < •/ •/* t. *y‘‘ \ • V . * • ’> • r .. •• i 4 • , •*• • • . * , ' • -.v. ’• f •. ' y: .* -i:: W-\Uo':.. i •r 01 <1 '; ire TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:July 14,1997 SUBJECT: #2258 Gerald E. Walsh, 180 Big Island - Lot Area Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: RS, Seasonal Recreational. Application: Request for lot area variance similar to those granted per the RS District ordinances in 1983. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Topographic Map E - Excerpts from 1983 Information Packet F - Excerpts from RS District Ordinances Summary of Application Mr. Walsh recently purchased 180 Big Island, also known as Record Lot 37, a 100'x280' (0.64 acre) lot comprised of two tax parcels. This record lot is listed as a substandard buildable record lot in the RS ordinance, which means the City would allow construction of a seasonal cabin and related amenities. When the RS ordinance was adopted in 1983, all owners of substandard buildable record lots were given the opportunity to apply for an "automatic lot area variance" at no charge, by signing and returning specific documents to formalize the buildable lot status. Approximately two-thirds of the eligible owners took advantage of this, and a few others have dribbled in over the last fourteen years, typicall as a result of a request for building permit or transfer of ownership. Records indicate 38 of 53 "substandard buildable record lots" have completed the area variance requirement. Applicant at this time has no specific plans to build on the property, which is currently vacant, but is requesting the formal lot area variance be granted as was granted to similar properties. Staff has not required that a survey be submitted at this time because no survey was requested of the other properties granted such variances. The City would certainly require a survey prior to issuing building permits for the property. Also, the two tax parcels must be legally combined per Section 10.31 Subd. 6(B). i Zoning File #2258 July 14,1997 Page 2 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the requested lot area variance per the provisions of the RS Zoning District standards, including legal combination. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval as proposed. 2. Recommend conditional approval. 3. Table for further information (specify). 4. Recommend denial (state reasons). 5.Other. ft ^4 Application # Date Received -^3-^7 Amount Paid .o*> CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) 8 If PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address / ^0 ! S>LA^r^__________________/ ___________2_ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Zh-117-2^ 00/57 23-/71 -2S 2S0Q/fe • % •• •a* a ___Attach legal description to application if not ? icluded on required survey.*P Date Property Acquired 6/^7 (month/year) I ^fc^^o^n^also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ___presidential X o ther (specify) Zoning District:___________________________________ _______________ APPLICAI^ . Name Address: K^^Sl}/\/ AU^hc Phone (hom e) I'^X. Ofik Phone(wprk ) L-l'L City: ?>/j" Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ___________________ Phone (home)_ Phone (work)_ Address:Cit>:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: e-C- ** lef* v^vN^^vgv Jin ff Cjrt.AA - O^oi/VAycE ATTACMiD-------------- %attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED V Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or uni^ual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: loT /J- -Hw) 4mt. (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete: 3^ 4: s: 6^) 7?) 8" Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Go\l Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/a" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic suivey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘/a" x 1 1" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8‘/a" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that 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 truepnd^correct to the best of his/her knowledge. /pW/44 -Applicant's Signature Date e. 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 jpvestigation and verification of this request. L/J Date l-h'^h 7Owner's Signature 7 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 & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 r GITYoT ORONO Municipal Offices Slratt MdffS£ 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono MN 55356 Mallifli Addnss: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 May 23,1997 Gerald Walsh 16950 North Manor Road Eden Prairie, MN 55346 Re: Record Lot 37 (Address: 180 Big Island) Dear Mr. Walsh: Enclosed per your request is a copy of the zoning ordinances for the RS Seasonal Recreation District Also enclosed is additional information from our files regarding the status of buildability of the property. Record Lot 37 is listed as a Substandard Buildable Record Lot. Owners of all such lots were given the opportumty to apply for a no-cost Automatic Lot Area Variance in 1983. The prior owners of your property did not take that opportunity, hence before the City could issue building permits, you would have to make a lot area variance application. 1 believe this is more a technicality than a problem, since per the zoning ordinances, the lot is intended to be buildable. You would have to provide a survey of the property and other items as part of the variance application process. Please contact me at 473-7357 if you wish to proceed with such an application. Smcerely, / Michael P. Gaffi6n Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator end. Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 320. 76 e (3) \ in / /.v.-.v. *............... M;MM tiihfii \ ^ y\,/20) -V s\ V '5\9 iZ ' V N ' ^ X V I/'• V •RON DATE 04/04/97I .*r ♦•V .. ^ BATpi S04 .»4'.»^f“>»•* ■,•.•’’*■.' • .‘-.I- •S8 ES-117-ES Zl 0015 PROP AOOR . • 00180 BIO ISLAND ' (»MER NAME CAROL J MCCARTY TAXPAYER CAROL J MCCARTY .. NAME/AOOR 1904 NRAN6LERS MAY COTTQNNOOO AZ BAS2A • / . ’ \ PROP ADOR 30 E3-117-23 23 0020 00140 SIC ISLAND ONNER NAHP JOHN D URAN 4 HIFE TAXPAYER JOHN D URAN ‘ *r • • ; • PO OCX 290 BIO ISLAND EXCELSIOR MN S»31 30 23-117-23 23 0032 PROP AOOR * 00200 BIO ISLAND OWNER NAME JAMES N OGLANO TAXPAYER JAMES N OOLANO NAME/AODR 3345 CRYSTAL BAY RO NAYZATA m 55391 . ■ V * 4 -V*;. * V»\r - .* / % •' vV. -I ‘ * *V • -1:I •. I ' - • • • V • • • • .J * * . * *: ■ ' • • . • ■ Ip • K * . • • ' I. I • . ‘.V • , * Vi . . * ,• > • ; ‘t• •.: ■ • I»• • * . • ‘ ‘ ^ .. . 4 . » t •HE»MEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PR»>ERTY OMNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI4SS401 PA8E 738 E3-117-E3 23 001600180 BIG ISLAND CAROL J MCCARTY CAROL J MCCARTY 1984 HRAN6LERS MAY COTTONHOOO AZ 86326 38 23-117-23 23 0019 00160 810 ISLAND JOHN D URAN JOHN D URAN PO BOX 290 BIG ISLAND EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 23-117-23 23 0028 00220 BIG ISLAND GEORGIA RUUD ET AL I MARGARET SCHEFTEL P 0 BOX 176 EXCELSIOR IW 55331 38 23-117-23 23 0029 00170 BIG ISLAND JOSEPH M A MARIE J JOSEPH N i MARIE J LOT 31 BIO ISLAM) BOX 183 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 BACKES BACKES 58 23-117-23 23 0035 00190 BIG ISLAND STEPHEN R O'GARA STEPHEN R O'GARA 2914 H 44TH ST MPLS MN 55410 TOTAL BATCH 504 00008 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEMCPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. >(x W Jl t Jt'/l ' DATE' •»^ I. ^ij,• . . v’; >. •••.! I • *1 .••••- .• ! i»- .. i • V;-' ' ) ■ . • .{5'SV.^. r..- ; • ■ ‘ ' 1 K) CJl •; ■ ««•« . . o OFFICIAL RECORD LOT HAP OAOINANce HO, 246 - DCCENfiER 30. 1982 RS SEASONAL RECREATIONAL ZONING DISTRICT NOT TO SCALE MINNETONKA DCACH HUNTINGTON rOINT recreation point MAHPZYATA ISLAND • ^ }NKA 9AY I ! . S />big isuiHb Mcnn«ptN r«U ttMUwiiviM ' P». hMM. MU m \UlMiU •■1 fi-'\ "ntifibr* r Uimittcitka \PtlNfA SNII4U(%CIIX-/' POINT CnOMINC *•» i’** ■ ijl:,;: l-ju Ml ... 5-i*!vv .. If r- M (yl *( I .* r ■ • Jl! ‘U s« Uv jr • I - : : NORTH POINT COMFORT CROWN POINT *» - ■ Stott ei Mm. Big UCaitd VUtMiu Coop < POUT aiAIMlNC s • :• !‘» -I i : ^. f. 1 f i‘ !*, I V'. -• NORTH ©CITYofORONaPost Office Box 66•Crystal Bay. MinnesoU ^23•Municipal Offices473-7357On the North Shore of Lake MinnetonkaORDINANCE NO. 246 RS SEASONAL RECREATIONAL ZONING OFFICIAL RECORD LOT NOTICE FEBRUARY 15, 1983 This notice is provided to the owner/taxpayer of .ecord according to Ordinance #246, Section 34.336. The following Record Lot classification will be considered accurate and final unless you have some reason to dispute the facts used to make the classificat on. Record Lot identification forms the basis for the granting of automatic lot area variances that "Grandfather" existing properties of less than 5 acres in area. RECORD LOT means all the contiguous or abutting land owned in common by the same person or pe7s^ as of November 9. 1981, (the effective date of the island moratorium) or at any time such common-ownership may occur thereafter, including one or more platted lots or unplatted parcels of land, and/or one or more separately Identified tax parcels. Because of the unique circumstances and actual use patterns existing on the islands, also included within the definition of a "Record Lot” is commonly-owned land that is contiguous except for being separated only by platted unopened public^lght-ofj|^ This RECORD LOT consists of _ _ tax parcel (s) as follows: Record Lot #37 Mark C. Kaiser 6621 Watervan Ave. Edina, MN 55343 ^3- //7 - APPROXIMATE SIZE ACRES & CLASSIFICATION: (size is exclusive of any votlands) OVER 10 ACRES# (nvay be SCSDIVI0A3LE) "over 5 ACRES# but LESS THAN 10 ACRES (conforming but not SU3DIVIDABLE)p icontoriaing oux; SOBSTANDARD/BUILDABLE (less than 5 acres* new seasonal cabin may be built# or an permits# etc.# but without requiring further City Council review) UNBUILDABLE (means a vacant lot of less than *1/2 acre* may be used for recreational purposes without a cabin# but requires a Council approved variance to be built on) EXISTING USE CLASSIFICATION ^^RECREATIONAL USE ONLY (without a cabin) ^ SEASONAL CABIN# used 180 days or (if your cabin is used more than 180 days/ year# please complete the YELLOW application) Seasonal Cabin plus a PRIVATE GUEST CABIN Other CONDITIONAL USE PLEASE VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF THE ABOVE INEOEMATIOH If there 1, an .rr« please the correction and return this page to the City In the enclos p paid envelope. We want this permanent record Co be correct. IF YOU WISH TO CHALLENGE THE RECORD LOT BBTERMINATION AND/OR THE FROPERTY. you must file a formal written Before Jyly l.Wd o will remain classified as above. Sign below i„,„rmatlon may be Stating the problem and facts supporting any g * bills copies of recorded requested to verify any challenge such as surveys, utility bills, copies o deeds, etc. Owner/Taxpayer Dace Phont / JT • • fc i,v* V'-i'i** ii Of CITYofORONO Post Office Box 66«Cry«Ul Bay. MinnesoU 55323* Municipal Offices On tht North Shore of Lake Minnetonka February 15, 1983 Csecord Lot #37 Mark L. Uiser 6621 Uatervan Ave. Edina. MN 55343 Dear Island Landowner: The purpose of this letter is to provide you with information regarding the recent zoning changes on Big Island, and how these changes may affect your property. The new RS Seasonal Recreational zoning regulations were established by City Council adoption of Ordinance i-2A6 on December 30, 1982. This action also ended the development moratorium that had been in effect since November 9, 1981. A summary of the ordinance is attached. If you are interested, a complete text of the ordinance is also available for a nominal charge of $3.00 to defer printing and nailing costs. Your property is identified in the ordinance by the Record Lot Number shown above and on the attached blue page. This Identification is part of a special section that inventories lot by let the ownership patterns and existing uses of island property. Based on this record, the ordinanci then "grandfathers" building rights for these Record Lots by making them eligible for lot area variances. This means that for the first tine even if your lot is less than five acres (or two acres under the previous ordinance) that you may now build a new seasonal cabin, or if you already have a cabin,that it may continue to be used. Improved, added-onto or replaced with a new cabin, subject to building permits and setback reguxations, etc., but without questioning its use for building purposes, and without requiring any special City Council review. In order for you to automatically receive the benefits of the lot area variance, you should review and complete the following before July 1, 1983; 1. Please verify the Record Lot information on the attached blue page and itify the City if there is a problem or a ..hange. (over) BUILDING a ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION 4 FINANCE - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS- 473-7359 t ! Island Landowners February 15, 1983 Page 2 3. 4 . 2. If the Record Lot Infornation is complete, please sign, have notarized and return the white Variance Resolution. State law requires that all zoning variances be recorded with the County Recorder in resolution form. Returning this resolution is optional, but if you choose not to do so, you may be required to pay a fee and file a forra'l variance application in the future if you ever plan to do any building on the property. There is no fee for having this automatic variance recorded at this time. If your Record Lot consists of two or more separate tax parcels, a green form for requesting a combined assessment is enclosed. Please sign and return this to the City to allow your tax records to be changed into one parcel consistent with the zoning and to assure the most favorable tax rate possible. • A conditional use permit issued by the City Council is required for certain land uses in the RS District, Including the following residential uses: a) If you use or have used your cabin FOR MORE THAN 180 DAYS/YEAR. b) If you have MORE THAN ONE CABIN on your property. Refer to the enclosed yellow sheet for a definition of these uses Including a description of when a special permit is or is not require If you wish to apply for a permit, mark the yellow page and return it to the City. We will send you the appropriate application form by return mail. A postage-paid envelope is enclosed for your use in returning the above forms to the City. If you have.any questions about this, please call Alan Olson or Jeanne Mabusth at 473-7357. On behalf of the City Council and Planning Commission, I want to take this opportunity to thank each and everyone of you whose Interest and P^^^®this past year has helped so much in the completion of this planning process. I have certainly enjoyed meeting all of you and learning so much about your island. I hope this last step can be kept as simple as possible so that your property rights can be correctly recorded for your future benefit. Sincerely, Enc1osures -n 1 I I a I 1 1 j 1 S 10.31 Permit Limitations. A permit issued under this Subdivision shall not grant or vest any property rights to use of the public right-of-way or other public property, or in any improvements made thereto. Permits issued under this Subdivision shall be valid for one year, shall be subject to change, alteration or revocation for cause by the Council at any time, and shall be automatically renewable on the anniversary of the date of issuance except upon written notice from the City to the permittee at least thirty days prior to the anniversary date. H. Hold Harmless. As a condition of issuance of any periit, the applicant shall in writing release, indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all claims or causes of action arising out of the use or alteration of the platted right-of-way by applicant or his invitees. 1* Permit Hearing and Notice. The Planning Commission or the Council shall hold a public hearing or hearings on each application for a permit. Notice of the public hearing shall be given not less than ten days or more than thirty days prior to the date of the hearing by publication in the legal newspaper for the City. Such notice shall contain the description of the land and the proposed use. At least ten days before the hearing, the City Clerk shall mail an identical notice to the applicant and to each of the property owners within 350 feet of the outside boundaries of the land in question. Failure of the property owners to receive notice shall not invalidate the proceedings. At the public hearing, the Planning Commission or the Council shall review the application and the statements and drawings submitted therewith and shall receive pertinent evidence concerning the proposed use and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained. Subd. 6. Lot Area Requirements. Within any "RS" Seasonal Recreational District, no new lot or parcel shall be created less than 5.0 acres in dry buildable lot area exclusive of any designated wetlands. Within any "RS" Seasonal Recreational District, the following provisions shall govern the buildability, use and/or subdivision of each existing record lot as defined and identified therein: A. Record Lot Definition. For purposes of the "RS" Seasonal Recreational District, a "record lot" shall mean all the contiguous or abutting land owned in common by the same person or persons as of November 9, 1981, or at any time such common ownership may occur thereafter, including one or more separately platted lots or unplatted parcels of land, and/or one or more separately identified tax parcels. Because of the unique circumstances and actual use patterns existing on the islands, also included within the definition of a "record lof'.is commonly-owned land that is contiguous except for being separated only by platted if ORONO CC 313 (4-1-84) S 10.31 unopened public right-of-way. Each record lot as defined and identified herein shall be considered in its entirety to be one lot for zoning purposes. 1. The effective date for determination of common ownership is November 9» 1981, the date of adoption of Ordinance No. 238 establishing a moratorium on development, including land subdivision, on the Lake Minnetonka Islands. Common ownership as of that date has been and shall be determined by the deeds of record at the Hennepin County Recorder's Office. This definition shall not preclude the City from recognizing or enforcing the common ownership/lot of record provisions of Ordinance No. 172, or any other similar prior ordinance. 2. The Council has identified and hereby establishes 69 record lots on Big Island, Mahpiyata Island and Deering Island as listed by Record Lot Number in the left-hand column of Subparagraphs D, E, F and G of this Subdivision. Each such record lot shall include all land identified by all tax parcel property identification numbers (PID's) grouped together following the Record Lot Number. 3. Within sixty days after adoption of .thisjU Section, the owner of each record lot shall be notified in writing**-* at his last recorded address of the classification of each record lot, including all tax parcels determined to be included in such record lot. All existing uses in the "RS" District are identified in the Record Lot Inventory, Subparagraphs D, E, F and G of this Subdivision, and all such uses have been deemed to be seasonal in nature. The notice shall provide that in order to receive the benefits of the automatic lot area variances granted by Subparagraphs F and H of this Subdivision, the owner shall form provided by the City acknowledge the record lot and shall apply for combination of all separate tax parcels pursuant to Subparagraph B of this Subdivision. Any record lot owner may appeal the record lot classification or use determination to the Council with no application fee required within six months of effective date of this Section. The Record Lot Inventory shall be considered accurate and final for all properties except those found__ on appeal to have a demonstrable cause for change or adjustment. 4. Notice of record lot establishment determined herein shall be filed by the City in the chain of titlej^J of each property. 5. Future changes in tax parcel property]W identification numbers caused by combination of parcels for tax^| purposes or for any other reason shall not alter the establishment of record lots listed hereinafter. New record lots shall created only by Council approved subd i v i s ions pu r s uan t to^ Subparagraph C of this Subdivision, or by combination of two orir — more complete record lots listed hereinafter. ORONO CC 314 (4-1-84)P P 1 1 I 1 1 I i I 1 i I i 1 A S 10.31 B* Tax Parcel Combination Required. No new building permit, variance or conditional use permit shall be issued for any purpose on any record lot composed of two or more tax parcels unless or until the owner of such record lot shall apply for a formal combination of all commonly-owned property into one parcel. If contiguous, all property shall be combined into one tax parcel. If separated by public right-of-way, a special lot combination form shall be executed and filed in the chain of title of each separate parcel. C. Subdivision of Record Lots. Al’ record lots established in this Subdivision shall be continued in common ownership and shall not be subdivided, sold in parts, reduced in area, leased or otherwise separated without application for and Council approval of a "subdivision" in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations Chapter. Such subdivisions will normally be approved and additional new record lots created only if all resulting lots are each 5.0 acres of dry-buildable lot area or more. No existing record lot shall be divided or reduced in area to less than 5.0 acres of dry-buildable lot area, except as follows: 1. Lot line rearrangements between abutting properties that do not create an additional building site will normally be approved. 2. Separation • of platted lots divided by public rights-of-way may be approved provided the separated lot is combined with other abutting property to enlarge said property without necessarily creating an additional substandard building site. D. Subdividable Record Lot Inventory. The following record lots are hereby established, each of which is determined to have a dry-buildable lot area in excess of 10.0 acres per owner. Therefore, each of the following record lots may be subdivided into two or more lots in conformance with the minimum lot area requirements of this Subdivision subject to subdivision application and approval pursuant to Subparagraph C of this Subdivision and to the Subdivision Regulations Chapter. Record lots are identified by Record Lot Number, and each includes all property identified thereafter by the listed tax parcel property identification numbers: ORONO CC 315 (4-1-84) TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Michael P. Gaflron, Asst, Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:July 15,1997 SUBJECT: #2259 Mark and Laurie Headrick, 1850 Fox Ridge Road - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential, 2 acre, unsevvered. Application: Request for side setback and front setback variances to convert existing garage to a family room and add a new two car garage. Pertinent Code Section: Section 10.28, Subd. 5 (B): Required side yard = 30' (existing = 24.5', proposed = 5') Required front yard = 50' (existing = 38.6', proposed = 36.6') List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Letter of Request E - Survey F - Proposed Site Plan G - Topography Overlay H - Conceptual Construction Plans I - Septic System Layout J - Septic System Inventory Information K - Neighborhood Layout Pertinent Facts 1.The existing house with attached two car garage is located 24.5' from the north side lot line and 22.3' from the south side lot line. The current zoning code side setback requirement is 30', although this house likely met the zoning standards in effect when it was built in 1963. 2.Applicants propose to remodel the existing two car garage into a family room, and add a new two car garage, mudroom, kitchen expansion, and rear deck reconfiguration. The new garage is proposed to be located 5' from the north side lot line where a 30' setback is required. The proposed garage addition would meet the required 50' front setback. The existing garage is m Zoning File #2259 July 15, 1997 Page 2 3. 4. 38.6' from the front lot line; a 10’ wide window seat 'bumpout' proposed in the submitted plans would bring that structure 2* closer to the road. The property is approximately 1.7 acres in total area, of which approximately 0.4 acre is wetland and 1.3 acres is dr> buildable land. The rear two-thirds of the property is low, and the existing house sits near the front of the lot, on a ridge approximately 25' above the rear of the lot. The property has a failing (discharging) septic system which was initially noted in July ly96. The possibilities for repairing or replacing the drainfield are limited due to site topography and the wetland. The property is in the Fox Ridge sew er 'hot spot', for which the engineer's 1994 estimated cost of providing sewer was $29,800 per unit. The neighborhood indicated to the City that the cost of sewer is prohibitive, and as a result the City has not yet scheduled this area for a sewer project. Discussion Please review the applicants' letter of request and hardship statement. Applicants note that recent additions to the family have left them with enough bedrooms but generally not enough living space. The primary issue is the side setback variance; the front setback variance is relatively minor in the context of this request. Applicants suggest that the following factors limit the opportunities for additions which would meet the side setback requirement; shape of lot - location of house on lot - topography - layout of rooms in house - expense of building on top of fill. Planning Commission should consider the standard criteria for determining undue hardship in reviewing this request: - Can the property in question be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls? Yes; the existing residence may be continued as is for its current residential use. Is the plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to the property and not created by the landowner? The existing house and attached garage were constructed prior to current codes, and therefore the front and both side setbacks do not conform to current standards. Upward expansion of the existing footprint would require variances to the front and side setbacks, and perhaps for height given that it is already a two-story home. Zoning File #2259 July 15, 1997 Page 3 Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? The RR-IB zone 30' side setback is intended to maintain the rural character of the 2 acre zone, and to provide open space. Other homes in the neighborhood are separated by distances ranging from 90-200'. Only applicants' residence and the residence to its north are separated by a lesser distance, approximately 70', which would be reduced to approximately 50' if the additions are constructed as proposed. Do the conditions apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the property is located? All lots, including cul-de-sac lots, in the RR-IB zoning district are required to meet the 30' side setback Is the granting of the variance request necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicants? The applicants have defined reasons for the proposed additions. Will the granting of the variance merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, or is it necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty? The variance will be a convenience for the applicants by allowing expansion of their residence as proposed. The proposed room additions relate to the existing layout of the house: additions which meet all setback requirements could be developed at the rear of the house, but might not relate to the existing room layout. "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter." While applicant has indicated that the costs of construction in the rear yard at a conforming location would be higher due to building on fill, the layout of the house and room relationships is also a factor in requesting the variance. Issues for Consideration 1. 2. 3. Under what circumstances is it appropriate to allow a 5' principal structure side setback in the 2 acre zone? Does this application meet those circumstances? Will the proposed additions change the character of the neighborhood? How’ will the 5' setback impact access to the rear of the propert>', drainage, or existing utilities? Zoning File #2259 July 15,1997 Page 4 Staff Recommendation In staffs opinion there are few circumstances in which it is appropriate to reduce the side yard to 5' for a principal structure in any zoning district, much less the 2-acre zone. Even in Orono's 1/2 acre zones, the minimum side setback requirement is 10'. This is a neighborhood of substandard 1 acre lots in the middle of a 2 acre zone, and the proposed addition will in staffs opinion tend to have a negative impact on the visual density of the neighborhood. Planning Commission must determine whether sufficient hardship exists to support the requested variances. Planning Commission may wish to consider whether some setback relief is warranted, and if so, suggest that the applicants consider providing a revised proposal. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval as requested. 2. Recommend conditional approval/partial approval. 3.Table for revisions or further information. 4. Recommend denial (state reasons). 5.Other. Given that the septic system is failing, it would be appropriate to condition any recommendation for approval on concurrent upgrade of the septic system. • # . I • CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Imtial Application Fee , $220.00 . _ ($50.00 per each additional variance) ~ Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 . After-the-Fact Fees (Double appUcation fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION ^ . Site Address /SS~0 f~QK Application # Date Received ^ 4^-V 7 Amount Paid n . i.; .. . ■ r Property Identification Number (PJJP.) >5’^ I]"? — 23 /OOOS________ Attach legal descripdon to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired __________________■ ______ (month/year) I (d>s6(^o noj) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: )( residential . Zoning District: ^ R I S other (specify). APPLICANT Phone Oiome) Name Phone (workl Address: IS SO /^)c /8J. City: Oir&y\o _________Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:,Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ /;?^.0OO'/7S.^ Describe request in detail: sjU. ^________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary)^ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width X Setback:Front XSid( Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: S*jl ________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) k' r.v-l*r c‘ . «• ^ V4 _^ ^ ^ r, - REQUmED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered completet ' OOO:..? . : , : 1. 2. ' . « , .i * ^ • 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form___ Certified Property Owners Li^'of owners witHin 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map' from'Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover - calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'^" x 11" for reproduction. — - . , — . ‘ Topographic sinvey (existing and jpropbsed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'A" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8!4" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance apnlicntion 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 cprrec^^ tl)6 jjest of^his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature 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 & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 •V, RUN DATE 05/30/97 BATCH 504 HE^tCPIN COWTY PROPERTY XNFOmATXON SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER ,V,-.y;,NAME/AD0R !\i 38 03-117-23 12 0002 00038 AOORESS UNASSIONED CARGILL MAC MXLLAN JR ETAL L0N6RI0GE ASSOCIATES P 0 BOX 9300 DEPT 28 MPLS m 55440 PROP AOOR 0»MER NAME ‘^'-^^TAXPAYER ...NAME/ADOR 38 03-117-23 13 0007 01895 FOX RIDGE RD T J DAYTON A M DAYTON TOBIN J A MAE DAYTON 1895 FOX RIDGE RD LONG LAKE 55356 PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 03-117-23 13 0010 01950 FOX RI06E RD 0 S PHELPS A E 0 PHELPS DAVID S A ELLEN 0 PHELPS 1950 FOX RIDGE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 V'* ■ ‘ . • • .#g?». 8 V* . I- . . . . ,• V'' I ' .' ' • ' ■ ■ . • * : • ' ■ “* ' r' «» I I / \ * '’*1 ••• * v’ ‘.V: i S ?;J* \\ V , REPORT NO. PIAISMI PAGE ZS ' • » 38 03-117-23 13 0001 00350 BRONN RD S H F FARLEY A K G FARLEY NILLXAM A KATHLEEN FARLEY 350 BRONN RD S LONG LAKE m 55356 ) 38 03-117-25 15 0006 01945 FOX RIDGE RD D E KIRKMAN DAVID E 1945 FOX LONG LAKE FOX RIDGE RD man A J M KIRKMAN . - •' A JOAIME M KIRKMAN . • a -.; ♦, i ’ * ' - ' I RIDGE RD • v- ^ i;. 38 03-1’. 7-23 13 0008 01850 ►T' ridge RD M C HEAT- CK A L S HEADRICK M C HEADRICK A L S HEADRICK 1850 FOX RlbGE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117-23 13 0009 01900 FOX RIOGE RD S M A E H POLANSKY STEVEN M A ELLEN N POLANSKY. ' 1900 FOX RIOGE RD * ’ LONG LAKE rtl 55356 ■ ' ■ ■ ... . J .r . • • .I r. ' • > I- • T| ’* <#■ - ' • .1 : . . .* V. •.* 'ii ,*v t • » .. /V A .-NO% TOTAL BATCH 504 00007 O *«s J . y • • • I CERTIFY THAT THE FACre REPRESENTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF wAn^EDGE AN0*^LIEF***™^^ PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST •. r *• V; . i*' A * • *• ■Ji i-:..-; ...\ .. • i DATE • ‘ * • •* nV- • ,*' A' ;t . • ' . •^-^FV *) ,V*A' '.•i ; i V .. . • • fV.- O b City of Orono - Variance Application Description of Request: •mni I ll‘ Vi.; / .)it ^ ti n C- -r. iT^^SOi/ v.-cxi^ ! V // We recently became the parents of quadruplets (two boys, two girls, 7 months old), in addition to our three year old son. Our house has enough bedrooms but does not have a family room/kitchen, a space now much more imperative. We would like to add a family room adjacent to the kitchen. Our proposal entails converting the present garage into the family room and adding a new garage at the end of the driveway. We would also like to replace a current deck on the back of the house. We want to minimize the addition of building and deck because our actual yard space is small in comparison to the lot size (the unusual hardship is described below). Hardship/Description of Unusual Property Conditions: We live at the end of a cul-de-sac. Our house is set on a pie shaped lot. The house is at the tip of the lot (front facing west), close to the street. As the lot begins to spread out past the house, the terrain drops dovMi. The house is situated such that the front entry is level with the front yard and the back of the house basement is level with the backyard, so that between the front and the back of the house, the land drops down 10 to 12 feet. The back yard is level for between 25 to 40 feet from the house and then drops sharply down about 30 feet. Our backyard is a strip of yard about 100 feet by 15 to 40 feet. The backyard appears to be fill from the building of the house. Several contractors have told us that it can be very expensive to build on fill and the building process entails the use of pilings to support any structure built in the backyard. The north side of the lot appears to have the most gradual decline and therefore, the most attractive building site. As for the remaining portion of the lot, it is unusable for building because a large percentage of the land is located at the bottom of the sharp drop-off. The kitchen is located at the back of the house (the north east comer). The current garage is located adjacent to the kitchen (north side of lot) and within 25 feet of the north side lot line. The driveway runs parallel to the property line. Converting the current garage into the family room and adding the new garage requires the new garage to approach the side lot line within 5 feet. W-1J !V. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR MARK & LAURIE HEADRICK OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1. FOX RIDGE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA legal OESCPPTION or PRCIylSES; Lot 4. Bk>cli 1. rox RDCC This ■tf’vty intoods to show Iho bocndortos of tho obovt dotcfibod proporty. and tho location of an oxtoting houst and dock tho^’oon. It doos nat purport to show any ather improvomonti Of tncroochmont %# o ; Iron morkor BoorinQs shown or# bosod upon on etsunod doti^ l••n ConiN & GRONBLRG, INC.I fPut 1^ • j* «« ywAi *u(W^ «MoA t4 JwK KTP**w«^Ci»Xh«|tmwt4wJl4»hl^wnofWMiidr» Or b«r« (X Or <i»«r t4 • \l, Mli* ♦ I • . t \'\ »’i: i'• SIii Mm* S Ciw4rt| Urmr \wit*hr» ir^ •« *1 > |••5d* iwkri 4J*fT H«l Ml mol mcrf •/ tr LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 4. Block 1, FOX RIDGE This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, and the location of an existing house and deck thereon. It does not purport to show any other imorovernftnts or Anrronrhm^nf • •V 1•1 hb^ukic ^ nrs/orNcc •I )7’^tO I I fc» miUT'l fAU tl/TN\ ,(J I V, X— \ ,WFg ■ LOZ! n(A'j9}Ct ' C^ONO Gi nhi •< CONCCi'J Ol?.A>AJ/i\iO ' t'tor TO Jsv uJfo ro9 A!£(Hi'rcr^i'^IL r t: /K‘7 TO /SC USCO roi /\rf(/T/^FCT(ti/Ai /'k//^FUS'y‘j. }• • • • .V >•<*« '______, ** **• i"»Vrvr'l' * * - V r'rrs '-'A'■V ^ .. « f •ft » . f , - »• I (TfA^ACrf X.-Vv* £>f^^ CCk>Ait /*i2 6foAt ^kini coAUP N I rrm It -O- z=J. UuO ^con \ '■fOilMrnrt -ii.nt FAcrr/i /\no u^ Coi7A:r> ro c.f^,nN^ y / / 6- A^Afi ' io\n JKAu^tk 1 oToHO 'HiSI'n ■krcoHtfyr o'^f'O/if^ic, y/ic/ •1*^1 Cfotv u,;.2x2 CCbATc. iVi •-/'6;»l Cf.mBV ; 7 b) A/6/ /D /;r A'6//i' A?cHtrr(^<fy''c *!’*•• o ^^ ■7. t-'f" //z* V- ^ \ /Mrk /CO.ti nr*uyitck i fvTX;^ ■ ■' ■ ^— ZITZ.//Z"«^ I <L /4C7 TV Sr uiro/^i^ .g., „#- i/Fi2/;y /!// sitFi’ oii^£AJii3ii%: /vJi- ^2 H / vt//i V7. o/r/t) OOi/V 's '‘orer Tsoiy _tlJ-^c'. ,. ^ W/3SO lJc$3C. /f/orjF^ . . . _ H/WO /'CT »» fTT 1 mnt>\/jtuc 2"»/I* f V'_ A,pi> OArf*^>T- iV ty a'IZO /i/fFL> i**Ptr t^rj> Crt'frl U r Z-'-t n Ik A r f* iLff J6, 27, S' 7kA'/ Fiv. 1 '1 ‘ >11- Vj- 1 ...• • •A e <| 1 ‘ . K I I' ■:la7 . > y , t / / .* / #« #/# */ . / • • / / « Ci^-TTf^p- SJAI VorAc spttr -ncK. CPtiTZAU(NEJ r.V''^^ M.-. r-«.. mtoatN iur»z/ncr * . I ' Arifr /jr v<* y<ANTi7'/ Y noi .y I(*r,(,it\rr ^/*yAJ'?»V CH‘ff to liorrptrt 2>f ftf F'y fA 'SIHPl • ^0 ------b-n ______________-' .. - ; •; # « •a ■^T^tU- 4 Coit>( ^ fuG't t/y K /y" i \ •j : • ^ ■lij N^LOU^/J Itutitt A^/u Arzoxjr rr fL vr*tr '^ic^^Cfri ^ loooif i^ri T M VI \ \..J) ?& c5 t7 / N \ \ / \ :■ O w 257f w! » .• T SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY Addr: 1850 Fox Ridge Rd. PID: 03-117-23 13 0008 Building Type: residence # BRs/GPD: 5 # Systems/units; Permit No: 6124 Date of Permit: 9/29/80 Installer: Sullivan System Type: trench and bed Appliances: lndry,dshw,dspl 1/1 SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity: 3 Tank Condition: Failure Pot: failing DF condition; 13 SEPTIC TANKS Material: concrete block Setback to Bldg: 10 Capacity: unknovm DRAINFIELD Length of Lines; Treatment Area: Tile Size; 4 Setback DF-Bldg: Soil Type; 80 No. Lines; 2 Trench Width; 10 400 Type of Filter; rock Under Tile: Perc Rate mn/in: 15 DF Ht above WT: Limitations: slopes WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: Report in File?: Depth: Diameter: 40 Well-DF: 50 Pump Type: subm. Method: drilled INSPECTION RECORD Date 7/19/78 no surfacing 9/29/80 new DF installed 6/16/82 no surfacing 6/23/87 system surfacing 9/23/87 insp w/Sullivan-suggest fill over 8/16/90 DF moist, but not surfacing-pump tanks 7/23/92 DF moist-eroc'ed areas should be filled 4/18/94 slight surfacing 7/8/96 DF surfacing-repair by 10/31/96 Compliance s c 2 4 3 2 2 3 PUMPOUT RECORD Date Gallons 7/27/78 1000 9/27/79 2000 11/20/80 1500 3/11/80 1500 3/19/80 1500 8/28/85 1400 12/21/88 1500 4/13/92 1500 3/15/94 1800 8/10/95 1500 . 7/18/96 2000 is i I «V7ism mmm fflBS^rVAV ^ r CfJ .•li Mr*' «ak» PI r\^>imi .}i.> "W-S m jrui.—20—9T 03 t 1 ^ F-M 4.i2 <e.2T R. O I Tobin J DAYTo^4 »©^5 foy R idoe R oad Long Lakl MlN^it:soTA s‘>j’r»c July 20. 1997 Orono PLinaii^g Comn\ission 2750 Kelley Porkwny. P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear PLiar ing Commi!>5>ion, I am writing to express my opinions regardmg the land use application #2259 submitted by Mark and Laurie Headrick. As the neighbor most dir» clly impacted by the application, I hope that niy input is given considcratioru For a variety of reasons described below, I «un opposed to the Headrick's request to extend their house to within five feel of the property line between our lots Most importantly, I feci that extending their house diamatically closer to my house would have %i lren\endously negative impact not only on my property, but on the neighborhood as a whole. Tlie distance between our houses is already the smallest in the neighborhood by quite a significimt dist.\nce, and the requested choi^ge would obviously further reduce that distance. From an aesthetic standpoint, moving the Headrick's garage oven closer to the property line would detract from the overall appeal of the Fox Ridge Road neighborhood. From in economic standpoint, I am concerned that the proposed change would reduce the c»vorall value of my property which may, in turn, reduce the value of each proper!) on the street. A number of additional concerns have also lead to my opinion regarding the proposed land use application. Tl'io Headricks have experienced a number of problems relatmg to their septic system which sits towMrds the back of their lot. Given the uncertainly surrounding what will happen with the installation of municipal sewer in our neighborhood, in terms of both the time*fr*ime aiul the financial implic«^tions, I feel it is premature to allow an addition as significant as the one proposed to proceed. Secondly, I am concerned that the proposed addition to the Headrick's house is, at best, a temporary solution to their needs and that they will eventually be forced to move even if the addition is approved. The result is that each homeowner suffers from an irreversible and highly undesirable change in the nature, feel, and value of the neighborhood. After having rev'icwcd tl\e application, talked with Mike Caffron, and only recently seen and discussed the plans with the Headricks, 1 am unconvmccd that the Headricks liave met any of the conditions necessary in proving hardship. Wliile 1 CiUi certainly understand the reasons behind their request, 1 do not feel that specific family needs nor particular economic factors should play any role in arriving at a decision regarding the request. Specific circumstances relating to a particular family are temporary, while changes to a house, a lot, and a neighborhood are entirely permanent. For these reasons, I am opposed to the requested application submitted by the Headricks. As I explained to Mike Gaffron over the phone last week, my family and I moved from Kenwood to I ong Lake for a variety of reasons, one important one being the spacious, aesthetic appeal of owning a lot with more thi\n two acres (. land. Tlu» proposed addition to the Headrick's house dramatically reduces the overall appeal of both my lot and the neighborhood as a whole. I appreciate having the opportunity to express my concern^ and I thank the City of Orono and the Plcmning Commission for taking the time to review my input. I v% ill be attending the meeting on Monday night to answer any questions or concerns that anyone might have regarding my feelings on the land use application. Sincerely, Tobin J. Dav/on RECEIVED JUL 2 1 1997 CITY OF ORONO lO TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Plarming Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:July 16, 1997 SUBJECT:#2260 Benjamin Milbrath 3265 Carman Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit—Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:19,985 square feet (.46 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting variances and a conditional use permit to replace a 4' wood retaining wall that has rotted in the 0'-75' setback. The applicant is also requesting a variance to remove a walkway constructed of timbers in the sideyard to replace it with a retaining wall. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.03, Subd. 19, Prohibition. Section 10.09, Subd. 6, Conditional Use Permit Section 10.22, Subd. 2, Lakeshore Hardcover Land Alteration Regulations Section 10.24, LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District, Subd. 5. U2260 Benjamin Milbrath 3265 Carmen Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit PC: 7/19/97 page-1 ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 1 acre 140 feet 35 feet 10 feet 30 feet Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside • 19,985 sq. ft. (.46 acres) 105’ ft. (app.)35’ (app.)9.8 ’ and 10’85’ from house deck encroaches into 75’ setback The subject property does not meet the required lot area and lot width minimums. The house encroaches several inches into the required north side yard. The deck encroaches into the required 75' lakeshore setback. A side yard variance is needed to replace the walkway along the north side of the property with a retaining wall. Structural Coverag e Structural coverage is not impacted by the proposed retaining wall replacement, Hardcovw Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0’-75 ’7,125 sq. ft.1,252 sq.ft. (17.57%) None 673 sq. ft. (9.4%) 673 sq. ft. (9.4%) i^2260 Benjamin Milbrath 3265 Carmen Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit PC: 7/19/97 page-2 75'-250'12,860 sq. ft.3,614 sq. ft.3,215 sq. ft.3,456 sq. ft.241 sq. ft. (28.1%)(25%)(26.87%)(1.87%) The proposed replacement of the retaining wall and sidewalk reduces hardcover in both the 0'-75' and 75 ’-250' setbacks. A variance for 9.4% in the 0 ’-75' setback and 1.87% in the 75'-250' setback is required. Previous variances to allow 28% hardcover in the 75'-250 ’ setback were granted. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant has provided an explanation of his request, please see Exhibit AA. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property can continue to be used as a residence, however, the rotted wall has been removed and the applicant's deck needs to secure his deck. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The landowner's situation is created by the condition of the retaining walls that were on the property, his desire to replace them, the location of the retaining wall in the required lakeshore setback, and the topography of the zoning lot. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance for a side yard setback, hardcover, and lakeshore setback will not change the character of the area. 4. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are not a consideration with this application. 5. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. U2260 Benjamin Milbrath 3265 Carmen Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit PC: 7/19/97 page~3 Solar access is not a consideration. 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person ’s land is located. Retaining walls are allowed on residential property if the applicable requirements are met. 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. This special conditions applying to this zoning lot is the topography and the deteriorated condition of the retaining wall that was removed. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. There have been other applications before the Planning Commission and City Council to replace retaining w'alls in lakeshore yards that are deteriorated. 10. The granting of the application is necessaiy for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The variances are needed to secure the deck and yard from eroding into the yard and lake since the rotted wall has been removed. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The variance w'ill not impair health, safety, comfort or morals. If the wall is not replaced, the safety of the applicant's household is threatened. 12. The granting of such variance w ill not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. U2260 Benjamin Milbrath 3265 Carmen Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit PC: 7/19/97 page-4 The variance will alleviate hardships created by topography and location of the wall in the required lakeshore yard. Issues 1.The zoning lot does not meet minimum lot area or lot width requirements. The north side of the house encroaches several inches into the required 10’ side yard. 2.The topography of the zoning lot drops 22 feet from the front yard to the lakeshore. The side yard on the north property line where the applicant wants to replace the timber walkway >\ith a retaining wall has significant grade changes. 3. The retaining wall has been removed along the deck and it needs to be secured. 4. Previous variances were granted for hardcover. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To approve a conditional use permit to replace a retaining wall along the deck and construct a new retaining wall to replace a walkway in the side yard and to grant variances for lakeshore setback, side yard, and hardcover to allow the retaining walls as shown in Exhibit C. Attachments A B C D E F G H 1 Application Plat Map Proposed Survey Old Survey Retaining Wall information from contractor Hardcover Calculations Bu 'iUn .'. Pad sketch T< > >v’’;phy Map Permit History H2260 Benjamin Milbrath 3265 Carmen Road Variances and Conditional Use Permit PC: 7/19/97 page~5 ioc^rioio yu/f 1 ^wmsf t ^(^ZZ60 CaftMJi^ l?oat( cr. Application # <^3LC^o Date Received /<?0 Amount Paid > '^SD'~ A CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address *\2paJL €yr .£,Utoir S3 I Type of Application to be Filed _____________________________________ Propert>' Identification Number (P.I.D.) 2-0~lt^'“Z3 OO 11 APPLICANT Phone (home ) Name i(VO.\\o/^-V\/a ___________ Phone (work) QlL - 3"i6 I Address d A^ “Qc^juJ City Cyc«,VsicZip £6 3Z \ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _____ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address *City Zip, Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Crcdit/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, seawrall, retaining walls within 75' of lakcshore _____PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _____$150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) _____After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District 0 _____ Present Use of Property Residential 06/24/97 Pay 250.00 Other (specify). h REQUI^D SUBMITTALS 1 , / Completed Application Form. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. -^^^cscnbe request in detail. Certified Property 0^^•ners List of owners wathin 350’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Suney (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for surv’ey information. __ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ___Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve - changes in elevation (grades). / List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This w'ould include namefs) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). lonstruction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other 'persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11” X 17’’ OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUB.MITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be iibmitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must this application. Please remember tliat your application is not complete if the above ::}<or relation has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that 1 Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:________________________Date____________________________ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred- in- review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true ^l^correct to theTx^st of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date f 2^*^ { y 9 ~ OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry' onto the property bv Citystaff. consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purpoy^^f invesfig^on and verification of this request. Ow'ner ’s signature Date C 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 atier.d a scheduled meeting, please make arran<>ements to have an authorized agent attend in your piace and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 3x~. _ ' ill: .-^v :) i] / \ \% c V ‘ VARIANCE REQUEST Applicant seeks a variance from the side setback requirements in the 0-75 ’ zone and the 75-250 ’ zone and a hardcover variance in the 0-75 ’ zone to replace existing (previous variance granted in 1986) wood retaining walls that are rotting and to decrease the hardcover amount in the 0-75 ’ zone by replacing current landscaping fabric & chips with grass. HARDSHIP STATEMENT A hardship exists in that the current retaining wall supports the base of the existing deck, pool and house. With its current condition there no longer exists proper structural support for the dirt wall which the structures rest upon and the hill will wash away over time. A second hardship exists on the side of the house where the existing walkway to the lake is constructed and the timbers are deteriorating, if such timbers are left as is there will be no safe access to the back of the property and their will be nothing to prevent the erosion of the hill suppporting the side and back foundation of the house. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Applicant Wishes to remove existing, previously approved 4 ’ high wood rotted retaining wall in the 0-75 ’ zone that runs parallel to and supports the hill that the existing deck, pool and house are located on. Applicant also wishes to remove landscaping fabric hardcover and woodchips in front of the old retaining wall and replace it with grass. Applicant would like to replace the wooden wall with a more durable 5’ higii 'vaU constructed oi"keystone retaining block. Engineering diagrams and approvals / cerification of design are included. Applicant would also like to remove the existing walkway along the side of the house that leads down to the lake consisting of rotting landscape timbers, landscape fabric and rock and replace it with a outer retaining wall of keystone block and remove the landscaping timbers and fabric and rock and replace it with a grass walkway. By replacing the current retaining walls and steps the applicant will remove 579 square feet of hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone and replace it with grass. In* addition the replacement of the timber and rock walkway will allow for water drainage to flow through our own lot into our backyard instead of overflowing onto the next door neighbors lot and eroding their hill. ENGINEERING DIAGRAMS AND STATEMENT OF ENGINEERING APPROVAL/ CERTIFICATION ON FOLLOWING PAGES ( I ' I * • jtfWft|r /R. 7^%f4 t»*J AVfNU* ^rn»*««ni.aOMi«ofo«<. M<l >0*4 /'/i”(p>‘ hereby certify that this Is a true am! correct reprcKontatioii of a snrvoy i,f iIm. boundaries of the land nixjvo described and of the lucntlon of all bul!diii|'.s, if any, . and nil visible encroacitments. If any, from or on said Lind. Oalod this da- iii'J'_________. ‘3 .'"L- f\ ^ ------’ ■ I TNi. U* •• • «.* ‘i’.N;..:';-.i .;■ •:• V • ...- •. . * -. . » • V- A ■: r •.. • ••;. * . • • • f *' V.:*’ c pi^pObec/ 4 I VWrv 111*1 4 w * *N r Atffr S. (^Mifu^e, ^%f4. t»*J AVfNiff ^nn»M • tOOMINOf ON, MINN • 7M« \'r --e hereby certify that this is a true am! correct reproKenlalion of a .survny ».f iiii. boundaries of the land alx)vo described and of the location ui* all ljnlldln{ts, if any, !l;fMN,|. and nil visible encroachments, if any, from or on said IaikI. Dated Ihls #l;»“ ----------------------MJJ ___________ 19 nr^. /) .. . . .. . .* ■ . * • '• . ■ •• • •'. •;•:•, • , •.1 • • , • •V *.*‘••^7 •' :mm^ ... . ..!• • • • •• * • ;•* TEL:Jun 18*97 16:43 No.003 P.02 June 18. 1997 /wMr. Jeremy Banken Meadowood 18435 Highway 5*^ Plymouth, MN 55446 Re: Milbrath Residence Orono, Minnesota Dear Sir. Attached is a copy of the Keystone gravity wall design chart for various site conditions. Per your description and field sketches, the walls will not exceed 5* in height, e.xperience no additional surchiu’ges. and be constructed in predominately clay soils. Keystone Standard units constructed with the 1 ” minimum .setback orientation will meet the requirements of these site conditions and the minimum design requirement of the Uniform Building Code. Construction shall be in accordance with the Keystone construction manual. I hereby certify that this plan ®9'5temd Professional Engineer under the la Date_^og. No. 20689 4141 Wc‘4 7Mlh Sircoi Rloimiingiiui. 6i:/S9MU4U 55UOn47-><*f/l l•4•xM >/K'l7 IxSk TEL:Jun IS’97 16:43 Ho.003 P.03 imeecHKfiT •n- *>:•?•. .^4 A_,J®£S;_ ' ____ T»- •. ■- .• .v» ~, •• ••• ' •* - ’_i^» Ty»^ %>>»; •%«, -r ' I • TTv, t'^'i--'.:v . * V J* .»' ^ .!w?^''7*’^ v**-r B it> 0199$ KEYSTONE* Rctainmi Vill Sirsieau • 4444 Veti 78ih St. • MlnaeapolU, MN $543$ * (612)897-1040 • (100)747-8971 • Pm(6 12)897-3858 Total Height >(^5TB:5T Retained Soil Type •y.v/.V ’-.V'S NEAR VERTICAL WALL (Minimum setback per unit) STANDARD UNITS MAX. HGT. Soil Type Sand/Gravel Silty Sand Silt/Laan Clay Backaiope Level 4.5 ’ 4.2 ‘ 4H-.1V 4.8’ 4.4’ 4.0 3M:1V 4.T 3.8' 2H;1V 4.3’ 3.ff 3.3* COMPAQ UNITS MAX. HGT. Soil Type Sand/Qravei Silty Sand Silt/Lean Clay Bactcsiope Level 2.r 2.5 ’ 4H:1V 2.8' 2.4' 2.2' 3H:1V 2.5* 2.3' 2.V 2H;1V 2.4* 2.r 1.8* Total Height > f WSt ^ Slope # ■M Retained Soil Type M .■yfof-y-s'-. ONE INCH SETBACK WALL (1 'setback per unit) STANDARD UNITS MAX. HOT. Soil Type Sand/Gravel Silty Sand SlttA.ean Clay Backaiope Level 6.5* 5.8* 6.2* 4H:1V 8.3- 3H:1V e.v 5.4' 2H:1V s.r 4.8’ 4.0* COMPAC UNITS MAX. HGT. Son Type Sand/Qravel Silty Send SiltA.aan Clay Backaiope Level 3.6' 3.? 2.V 4H:1V 3.V 2.8* 3H:1V 3.4' 2.7 2H:1V 3.2- 2.7 2.2' NOteo: Calculatlona assuma a unit weight ol 120 Iba/cf for aR aoll types. Aaaumad 4 angiea tor aanh prasaura calculatlona ara; Sand/QravalOA*. SlUy SandaSO*, arvf Sartdy SOVLaan Clay>26*. No.', ciitlcal atructuras with 5R>t.S. No surcharge loadings are indudad. Surchargas or special loadtog oonditloru wA raduca maxhnum wall helghta. Sliding calcutations aaeume • 6* crushed alone lesreHIng ped as compacted loundatlon matsflal. The Information provided Is tor preHmkMry design use or^. A quallfled pcoleeeional should be ooneuhed. KayStone accepts r>o labiWy tor the Improper use of these tables. 3/13.-05 D ‘S? # \ n ul tr • •'** k'i;*/^iN<--‘ S.rt \^k i*«♦ Vi Sii J' UJ«U ►J. SOroo CO £•> WAll ♦j.rHIrr- —.J UjAll i'setVxif*- CC :D hCC uvo ife" =1 6taniardD Ci:^ a rO - OO barcrxn*^ - <^o iS tsoU:! C.l2^ -•V • • CO ^is» HARDCO SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) V 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk lo ' E. Patio/Deck JJL X X m. z X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric io2A X X X G. Other M tr <^OTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 4 {' ' V;. PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length tl V, X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk 6VcpS X X E. Patio/Deck L( 9.7 \ X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G.) Other no *i2^cAA> /\' /vlC->>aA\ ^ WTAL HAPvDCOVER IN ZONE lULATION WORKSHEET 75-250* Width ^ ' I a io TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A n ___ -r B n Il6 Width 5 ' 12. lo X 100 250-500’500-1000 1- 8 S.F. " S.F s:S.F. =S.F. S.F. as S.F. as S.F. os 8o S.F. mo S.F. » S.F. SB S.F. SB S.F. =S.F. lolS.F. nnc. n I ZS S.F. S.F. A B 10./O S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. Z6 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE , ^ ^ A _ ^ -i- B / I X 100 =Z .3M I LI S.F. _ _ _S.F. % A B lAoV ’•^6<£c^ Ca\c4/V^"*^, ^ 1 HARDCOVER CALCXJLA^QJ>WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ / 250-500’500-1000’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Ccd Leagih i Width B. Garage C. Driveway X X X D. Sidewalk / r S E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric G. Ocher X X X X X X X X X 2Z L^A-WC(—o.'>‘oi(X<l. o*f -rr\'T\i LTADn/^m/iTD r^TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY .AREA IN ZONE - A ^ L- IW - B I (Lb'CO X 100 = ‘1 PROPOSED Ha RDCQATR IN ZONE A. House C cv. ^ Length W'idth • % *'* w B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk/ 4 A A v r S tl >• * • •* %*; E. Pacio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic. Or Fabric X X X X X X X X X X X X X XG. Other ^______ ^ TOTAL HART '•'ER ZO^fE TOTAL PROPERTY A.w. .w IN ZONE A -jHSL H H- B 1 L.BCO X 100 S.F. 2n- C../31 Cl3: \S ^CcovousW Coog/" S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 1 D ?, S' S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F ,'4C/M S.F I 7-1 3 S.F, / ^. lO /O S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. \07,S S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S-.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. \ 7 . S.F. 7 or/O F A B A B Pl '.t or iur'/ey for HorLert i>. 'HNkinson Gc cf _,ot Moc< 1, Canain Cove nennepin Co\uiV> Wnnesota MtOIKXi PAb in 2 trve '■•'.ci <*<'*'*rr"*'*t •i of t’*io toijid'irles of ✓ I ri.i.| ■...-.r'livn Ccv*^, tr.cJ loc'ition ill exir-i.**.i . Jt, rocs r.ot ctr'.jort to show othrT ir-'jro-'*r:f;*i'>5 or •T.irrouor-'iOnts. C“ TO !?//» Senlo : o !•' - /.r.« Iron Cor.ion h. ''offin 6vX ‘4 L'.iri Swv2/or hnc Pl‘iij»or Lon^ La.'.e, >; ir.no sola THIS ITEM HAS BEEN MICROniMED 326.«3 CAPNA.M PERMIT NO . - /7» Jco 77</o SI KELT KILE 3 Si L? .S fiA PERMIT RECORD X DATE TYPE OF PERMIT // 6 ^ 0 3 Ala PJA \ -is A Uji. i/- 1 ^3 :i 4 SL>Ul IQS' /j y6 7/,( SL y.j':TiiL<W. / TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Liz Van Zorneren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator July 14, 1997 SUBJECT: #2261 Tony Eiden Company 345 Leaf Street Lot Area Variance-Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IA 75,212 One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acres) square feet (1.72 acres) Application:The applicant has a purchase agreement to buy the propert>' at 345 Leaf Street and remove the existing residence to construct a new residence. The lot is less than two acres in size and a lot area variance is required. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.23. LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District. Subd. 6, Area, Height. Lot Width and Yard Requirements ANALYSIS Lot Area and Y^ds LR-1 A District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Ya'^d 2 acres 200 feet 50 feet 30 feet 50 feet Subject Property Lot Area and Yards The subject property meets the lot width requirements. The building pad drawn by staff on the existing survey indicates that a new residence could most likely meet the setback requirements. H226I S'ame: Tony Eiden Co. Address: 345 Leaf St. date of PC: July 21. 1997 page—I The lot area is 1.73 acres, so a variance is needed Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Allowed Allowed Percentage j ' 5,212 sq. ft.11,281.8 sq. ft.15% A building plan for the new residence has not been provided, however, structural lot coverage should not be an issue. Hardcover Hardcover is not an issue for this application. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The lot is an existing lot that is less than the minimum lot size requirement for the LR-1A zoning district. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1.The propert> in question caimot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property can continue to be used as a residence. 2.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. 3. The applicant desires to purchase the lot to construct a new' residence. The variance, if granted, w ill not alter the essential character of the locality. Without building plans for the new residence, staff cannot determine what impact a new residence w ill have on th. character of the area. 4. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable »226! Same Tony Eiden Co. Address 345 Leaf St. date of PC July 21 199’ page —2 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. The applicant is a developer who has a purchase agreement on the property. Without a variance, a new residence cannot be constructed on the subject property. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to. inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for an\ use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. ■ Anew residence would be a permitted use in this zoning district. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. This lot is larger than several of the neighboring properties. Many of the lots in the area do not meet the minimum lot size requirements for the zoning district. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The minimum lot area requirements apply for adjacent lots in the area. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The variance is needed in order for the property owner to sell the zoning lot to the applicant to construct a new^ residence. U226I Same: Tony Eiden Co. yddress: 345 Leaf St. date of PC: July 21. 1997 pages 1 r 11. The granting of the proposed variance wll not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The variance \%ill not impair health, safety, comfort or morals. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The lot size is existing and cannot be increased to meet the minimum lot size requirement unless more land was acquired from the adjacent owner. Issues 1. 2. 3. 4. The lot can meet all of the setback requirements for the zoning district. How ever, it does not meet the minimum lot size requirements. Staff prefers to have the building plans for the new residence to determine the impact on the character of the surrounding property. The zoning lot is adjacent to the Luce Line Trail. Existing vegetation on the property that screens the residential lot from the trail should be preserved. The topography of the zoning lot slopes from Leaf St. to the existing residence approximately 10'. The applicant will have to provide drainage plans for the Building staff. 5.The applicant needs to provide a signature from the owner of the property that they have permission to apply for the variance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To request that the applicant provide more information regarding the type of residence to be constructed and its proposed location on the lot relative to the Luce Line Trail. Attachments A Application B Plat Map C Topographical Map D Existing Survey E Lot Area Calculation F Permit History U2261 Same Tony’ Etden Co. Address: 345 La Si dateofPC:July2L. 1997 page —4 OLkTlOtO yWAf lu 34 5 9 SX @ WttTMtiailt t o © MINNETRISTA ;s iwirTviaj to I §SEE MAP 75 “n" S3JWW CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional ■•. oriance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.0 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application U ^^0/ Date Received 0>/9.(pl0^ Amount Paid XXC • ^ ^ S P- PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 3 ^^f Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) r>5 J!1 /V 0(0<D 3 _ _ AA _ ^ — . __ WAttach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired ____________________________________(month/year) I (do) (go nqi^ /iSO own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: AT residential Zoning District: ) (2-f/[ other (specify). APPLICA^ Name /Olll A Phone (home) 7(n •' /) f______ Phone (work) Address: ^!y)d hi rr .City: p /yu^fA u Zip: ^f OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_________________ Name__________________________________ Phone (work)_________________ Address:City:.Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: o a yifU) Estimated Construction Cost $ ^ t re.tn^\jc. ex'/Si-MA /\du5c (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage 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: ^ 7^ ■gx' /I/A /j2/U^ _______1________________________ ^ - ............................................................................................................................................................................. 06/26/97 Pay 220.00 (attach additional sheets if necessary) ie5^’ 1. 2. 3. _2^ 4. Mo REQUIRED SUBMITTALS Ali of tht follgwine infomution must be mibmitttrl hv ii'> ,pniiMtin. a....... order for vour application to be considered comp|y^y| ^ Completed Application Form _ Certified Property Ow-ners List of owners within 150 ’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/j" 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'A” x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy ZYi" 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 owTier(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. 5. 6. 7. 8. X The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour ^pplicatipn npt egmoUte if the above information not been 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) Md/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. / dApplicant’s Signature Date /p ~ 9~7 OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authori* es 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 ;^11 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 r z' EAST / mSI - CH-U7-Z3-Z3 56) a?i;sPi 115 \ iViO®®i \4?4 'A-EST 198 ( (6) R (5) 200 T ( !CT)c .73 ....J.242 317 {;0 'RB" Nf\J c,A\- 633.25 193 R 200 7 M89N2' 15'A 67 372.7 57. 29 240 \ 97?.r I >• ?.s 974.9 973.7 967.? 968 100e m * jaropoMd Top of Blocli .Propoood CoroQO Floor .Propoood Lowost Floor Type of BuUbig I- Area 77,039 sq. ft 1.77 acres excluding road.The East 310.00 feet of Lot 12 and the East 310.00 feet of the North 124.7 feet of Lot 13, Auditor s Subdivision Nuiriber 203, Hennepin County, Minnesota Subject to road and easements of record if any. I _ _I_ JUN-12-87 THU 16!36 -i r» ••9 TEL No.Jun 12,97 16:17 No.017 P.Ol zl % «1/ ^ I > s Ul) ii ‘i »T#1 0,5 1 ■• A #<* IP l»» > ‘m j .# <* t• 1 • Po«t*lt* Fax Note 7671 0«»» ||Miga»^ / T* coyo6pf PtKm«#«>««•* - 7 fT.i F«*^•*5' ' 7-?Z^ >• J/ •I «l iV) T Sr—rW-- -r.fo J mu*"iSTTiT <n5 ^ Iff!?)'.*' - ** **1 * r:uniJt > (At* ^ P 4 ! «aKCSBBK ___ 3f!i: I' - I 1?'*’ E t ca> ikYsm Ji / (li) GOVT LOT 3 fo) ~fit!'»o T^—j- GOVT LOT 2 ...•••—i MfV. oeCEMBER 1 SfrjLtJ- PERMIT RECORD Permit Mo Date Type of Permit Il3<f 'tj! 9ik&i0'¥-7/ eno 6 -PV -7/g ‘h‘ht> J/'S' ^4 L>t'\ TO;Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator I A. FROM; PATE: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator July 16,1997 SUBJECT: #2262 Ned Butterfield 3745 Watertown Road Conditional Use Permit-Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 Acres) 103,380.57 square feet(app.) (2.37 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to haul clean fill (approximately 2,000 cubic yards) onto the lot to create a level building pad for a new house. Greenhouses that were on the site have been removed. Pertinent Ordinances: • Section 10.03 Subd. 21,2. ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards RR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 2 acres 200 feet 50 feet 30 feet 50 feet #22(52 Ned Butterfield 3745 Watertown Road Conditional Use Permit PC: 7/19/97 Page-1 Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard 2. 37 acres 214.54'90' fix)m center of Watertown Rd. 10.88' The zoning lot meets the minimum lot area and lot width requirements. The existing house meets the front and side lot lines. The applicant may be removing the existing residence. A new residence should be able to meet all of the setback requirements. Structural Coverage Structural coverage is not an issue with this application. Hardcover Hardcover is not an issue with this application. Issues 1. The zoning lot meets the required minimum lot size and setbacks. 2.Greenhouses that were on the zoning lot have been removed. A depression has been left and the applicant wishes to fill in the area to have a level building pad at generally the same height as Watertown Road. 3.The applicant's engineer estimates that approximately 2,000 cubic yards are needed to fill in the depression. 4.The permit history indicates that the greenhouses were removed in November 1996 and 100 cubic yards of fill were hauled onto the site in June 1997. A conditional use permit is needed to haul in more clean fill. FINDINGS: 1. The proposed location of the conditional use permit is in accord with the objectives of the #2262 Ned Butterfield 3745 Watertown Road Conditional Use Permit PC: 7/19/97 Page-2 kI i Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan. 2. The proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To approve a conditional use permit to allow 2,000 cubic yards of clean ful to be hauled onto the property to grade the zoning lot as shown on the survey prepared by Westwood Engineering. (Exhibit E). ' Attachments A B C D E F G Application Plat Map Topo Map Survey Grading Plan Letter of Support Permit History U2262 Ned Butterfield 3745 Watertown Road Conditional Use Permit PC: 7/19/97 page-3 c% fy c'’i.Application • i Date Received 0/jl 1 Amount Paid <> AS‘0 11 c 'Ty^AAKX ■«• 8*4 CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION ^ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^cthy/ry^ a T^na J Type of Application to be Filed __________________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 39— jjg— ;33 OOl3< applicant Name Address OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ________________ Phone (home) Phone (work) ^'7^ -> ^ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address'City Zip. Date Property Acquired_____________________________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERhUTS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$300.00 Commercial/lndustria! Use V $250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain y* Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore (month/year) PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 "Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District _________ . Present Use of Property Residential 06/26/97 Pay 250.00 Other (specify). r 2. ^4. 5. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form. /n Describe request in ietail. ^ Certified Property Ownets T.ist of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to.handout for survey information. C 4 -fo propcueJ Co A-K o , |u V!>) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). 8. j\ Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 9. As an addendum to tliis application, please attach a separate list of any other ■ persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:___________Date APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his^er knowledge. Date 9 OVVNCR’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. \ r II 5* (b I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 4-^ (f ^ 7 F 2'] So \<lc ^k\.iz4AJB^ ^ P,0, t 55'325 '^n G, % ^ \ /^ '• JIam^ ^jMt ^^^iLtidtx^ 22 (p2 UOs.©<Arv\ '"V^ £aM. VM^ CV /aAJL. ^llM^AJdt“, /Viu^A C^ ^h^S \J^^Ltixiji^j^y-^\ Qf-I^ Qpj(r^ Vlu^ 55 35*^ Permit No. 3 i4 um __________ J s 3 a,__ SlA^l — PERMIT RECORD Date <?./-S -bu Q±2:.?A Ijiiij-Ln. 37^5 Type of Permit QdJL±J^jC^^pcXfi, ^pSiAJsL ICUIO^ ..2L^lUjU:^MdAHaJL^ J ^ t* O.C»f^9^ To:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator /3 From:Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:July 17, 1997 Subject: #2264 Janet Kieraan, 1491 Shoreline Drive - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 Acre, Sewered Application: Revised side setback, lake setback, average lakeshore setback, and hardcover variances to construct a new residence to replace the existing residence. Application also involves the need for lot area and width variances due to the change in scope of die project. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Survey E - Site Plan Proposed with Building Permit Application F - Site Plan Approved with Variance Application #2166 G - Resolution No. 3761 Adopted September 9, 1996 Pertinent Code Sections 1. 10.22, 10.55, 10.56:- 75' lakeshore setback required - no average setback encroachment allowed 2. 10.23 Subd. 6B: LR-IA lot standards: - 2 acre lot area, 200' lot width - 30' side yard setback Discussion Applicant was granted variances in September 1996 to permit the construction of additions to the existing residence and revise the roof of the existing residence, portions of which were located in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone, constituting hardcover and structure in that zone, and such additions and revisions encroaching past the average lakeshore setback as well as encroaching into the 30' required side yard setback. The original application was intended as a remodeling and addition project, which was based on the existing residence structure remaining substantially in place. At the time the building permit application was made, it became clear that applicant proposes Zoning File #2264 July 17,1997 Page 2 to remove the entire superstructure of the residence, and likely wll be able to reuse only parts of the foundation. Additionally, it was determined that the plan submitted for the building permit had been revised from those used to gain variance approval in 1996. Specifically, while the bulk of structure has been slightly reduced, there is a new encroachment into the 0-75 ’ setback, as well as an additional encroachment within the 30' side setback. The proposed complete removal of the existing residence not only triggers the need for a lot area and lot width variance, but also provides the City with an opportunity to have the new construction substantially meet the City's setback requirements if that is deemed feasible and appropriate. Applicant's new site plan includes some minor revisions to hardcover layout on the site, as well as reducing the proposed detached garage addition to only one additional stall, in order to meet the hardcover limitations as imposed by the prior approval, as well as meet the required street setback. Issues for Consideration 1. 2. 3. Is the new minor encroachment into the 0-75' setback zone justified by any hardship, or should the house be further redesigned to eliminate that encroachment? (Compare Exhibits E & F) Is the proposed additional side setback encroachment appropriate and justified, or should that encroachment be eliminated? Given the nature of the property, including orientation and relationship to neighboring houses, the steep hill to the north, the septic system location in the hillside, tree locations, etc., is there justification to grant variances to allow reconstruction of the residence substantially within its existing non-conforming footprint, or should the City take this opportunity to require that the new home be constructed at a location meeting setback requirements? Staff Recommendation Planning Commission must take into account the site factors noted above in determining whether it would be appropriate to require redesign and/or a relocation of the residence. The existing house is currently sitting empty, and applicant had every intention of commencing construction in late June when the new variance concerns were discovered. Zoning File #2264 July 17,1997 Page 3 Options for Action 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Recommend approval of the revised plans with the two new setback encroachments, recommend approval of the technically required lot area and width variances (area = approximately 1.0 acre, width = approximately 187), and allow reconstraction within the existing footprint. Recommend approval of lot area and width variances and new residence be moved or redesigned to meet side and lakeshore setback requirements. Table for further information. Recommend denial, stating reasons. Other. JUM-2 T--9T FRI rtli DREILING mND "SSOC. PC S 1 4 2 7 1 2e?T •p . 02’ V Application U Date Received 4?-2-7^^7_ Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION ■Si,>,Address m<it hR.. _____ Property Identification Number (P.l.D.)__________________________________________ Attach legal description to application if not included on required siu^cy. Date Property Acquired___________^fS'______________________________,(montli/year) I (do) also ouu die adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential Zoning District:. other (specify). APPLICANT . ' , Phone (home) ----- Name I C. K ____ Phone (work)_____________.. ^ Address: ThTVT^r^ TfZ^ City: fYiTA/^________Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ______________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:,Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST , Es^ialed Con^clion Cost (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ____Lot Widtli Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:/ Front j/_ Side Rear Average Lakeshorc y/ Other (specify) 7^ t!(Ch HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS compliance with Zoning Loac requireratms.—c/ -------—-——— m //. '-to it^e. A- f. FPl OS»:a8 AH I>F<EIL.IfiG AMD ASSOC. PC 314 231 2S9T P. 03 *• •• ' <r \ ‘ *5-1t J - A^->' .w required SUBMITTAIS All of frtllmvinp information inu5t bf submined bv tbg-applicii .tiflii_dia_(Hine d^t^Lu 0 nTrr f»r apnUration to be considered comoUty: 1. 3. Completed Application Form Certified Property 0%vners List of o\%-ners within 150’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department ot Finance, A-603, Gox-t Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover * calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'.'i" .\ IT tor reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing • grade"rue proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/;" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/^' x 11). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in ---- the propcit>'. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not currcni ownci(s) As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you w'ish notified of tliis application. Additional items as may be requested by City- staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your vsiriance ai)pU.-aHnn is not complete if the ahovy infoymatiOP bai-llilUl£gll-intluikd. TlK^tpplkant hereby' agrees to provide all intbnnaiion required or requested by the Zoning Admii^^^trator. aerees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by ongmal fee and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this applicaiion. and cerntie> mat . infonnation supplied is true and correct to the best ot his/her knowledge 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Date >7/ V 7 imd agries W this application atid furtlwr ^t^omo Utc propeny by City st.aff, consultants, agents Comnusston members, and Councl members for purpioses of investigation and venfication of this request. Owmefs Signatiue Cl:—Date Applicant must hav: all subminals into the City- o«^es J5Ja^ '.JndV'd Commission Meeting. Planning Commission , review meetings of the Planning month. Applicants must ^ ^ is'^unlble to attend a scheduled meeting, please Sr';!^:;:^m7.:s m ;a«^n aue^ m yo. place attd to advise the Building Zoning Office of thi.s change prior to the meetmg. (13) 353.72 wi 117 \T5.3< . MW >ur’iUV p fff /o7),4. ^ iJt/' ^' ;.v-|y pjp//w (2) 7 / - 71 o>7 r?/’ 7^^5 V ^ ^’O'■H-g- 79. 22 S67*?8'36"E 99. 19 j;oj ui » [ O (9) ^ \ r^l ^i;;ik -i ^ 3 ^ V I J 7. • •••••• mm . ...... 106. 94 / '■'77T7 3^ V*.v;•/ .VI N.*% •’* RUN DATE 07/2^96• f BATCH 503 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LISTPROP AbDR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 56 11-117-E3 23 0002 01A75 SHORELINE DR D H I E A SCHMITT DOUDLAS R A ELLEN A SCHMUT 1475 SHORELINE DR NAYZATA MN 55391 PROP AODR OMNER NAME Taxpayer NAME/AODR 36 11-117-23 23 0010 01467 SHORELINE DR R L NAAOE A Z L NAAOE ROBERT L A IRIS L NAADE 1467 SHORELINE DR NAYZATA MN 55391 » f • - •. PROP ADDR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 36 ll*il7-23 23 0016 01460 GREEN TREES RO CAS PUTOU CARL A SUSAN PUTOU 1460 GREEN TREES RD NAYZATA MN 55391 •** > •.. • •. • * 'PROP AODR 0»t«ft NAME TAXPAYER " NAME/AOOR •• •• • • f** ' ••**• • • • r. ^ • it . . . /* 38 11-117-2^ 32 OOdi ' 0X200 BRACKETTS POINT RD C0R1»ME GRIFFITH PILLSBURY CORINNE 0 PILLSBURY 4800 FIRST BANK PLACE MPLS MN 55402 I PROP AODR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR » • • • • . • * i • ' 36 11-117-23 32 OOld 01220 BRACKETTS POINT RD ELU P CROSBY ELU P CROSBY 1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD NAYZATA W 55391 r 36 11-117-23 23 0006 01491 SHORELINE DR JANET C KIERNAN JANET C KIERNAN 1491 SHORELINE DR NAYZATA MN 55391 36 11-117-23 23 0011 01465 GREEN TREES RO D L A N H VERGEYLE DAVID A MARGARET VERGEYLE 1465 GREEN TREES .RD NAYZATA MN 55391 36 11-117-23 23 0017 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED CAS PLATOU CARL N A SUSAN PUTOU 1460 GREEN TREES RD NAYZATA MN 55391 36 11-117-23 32 0010 01265 BRACKETTS POINT RO MICHAEL E LYNN III A HIFE MICHAEL A JORJA LYNN III 1265 BRACKETTS POINT NAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 503 00013 REPORT NO, PI435401PA^36 11-117-23 23 00()^ 01469 SHORELINE Dit ERIC H BERIN6AUSE ERIC H BERIN6AUSE 1469 SHORELINE DR NAYZATA MN 55391 36 11-117-23 23 0015 01510 GREEN TREES RD R H LENNY ASM LENNY RICHARD N LENNY 1510 GREEN TREES RO NAYZATA m 55391 36 11-117-23 23 0016 00036 AuORESS UNASSIGNEO GREEN TREES HOMEQMNERS ASSOC GREEN TREES HOMEONNERS ASSOC C/0 JACK 0 YOST 1515 GREEN TREES RO NAYZATA MN 55391 3A 11-117-23 32 0013 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED CORINNE GRIFFITH PILLSBURY CORINNE 0 PILLSBURY 4600 FIRST BAMC PLACE MPLS MN 55402 C0:;■:) • •T r' ** \ ...1 , i I. . C ' RUN DATE 07/2A/9A BATCH SOS tIENNEPIN COUMTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OltlERS LIST I; i PROP ADDR OMNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 11-117-23 23 0002 01A75 SHORELINE DR D M C E A SCHMITT DOUGLAS R a ELLEN A SCHMITT 1A7S SHORELINE DR HAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADOR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR SB 11-117-23 23 0010 01A87 SHORELINE DR R L HAADE S I L NAADE ROBERT L A IRIS L NAADE 14B7 SHORELINE DR NAY2ATA MN 55391 f' • PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 36 11-117-23 23 OOlS 01460 GREEN TREES RD CAS PUTOU CARL A SUSAN PUTOU 1460 GREEN TREES RD NAYZATA MN 55391 • • • « ' • . ,vv-i . PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER • NAHE/ADOR 38 11-117-23 32 0001 ' 01200 BRACKETTS POINT RD CORZrME GRIFFITH P1LLS8URY CORXNNE 6 PILLSBURY 4800 FIRST BAMC PLACE MPLS m 55402 J’ • • .. .. • PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR •*. • *•* * . ' ■ *. .1 *. .n .. I. . * •) I.; ■. • ■ 38 11-117-23 32 OOls 01220 • BRACKETTS POINT RD ELLA P CROSBY ELLA P CROSBY 1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD HAYZATA MN 55391 * i.. * • • • r .. ; '** :.r . V ;L c 36 11-117-23 23 0006 01491 SHORELINE DR JANET C KIERNAN JANET C KIERNAN 1491 SHORELINE OR HAYZATA MN 55391 36 11-117-23 23 0011 01465 GREEN TREES RD D L S M H VERGEYLE DAVID A MARGARET VERGEYLE 1465 GREEN TREES RO NAYZATA m 55391 36 11-117-23 23 0017 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO CSS PLATOU CARL N S SUSAN PUTOU 1460 GREEN TREES RD NAYZATA MN 55391 36 11-117-23 32 0010 01265 BRACKETTS POINT RD MICHAEL E LYNN III S NIFE MICHAEL S JORJA LYNN III 1265 BRACKETTS POINT HAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 503 00013 REPORT HO. PI435401 PAK 6 r) 38 11-117-23 23 00d4 01469 SHORELINE Drt ERIC H BERINGAUSE ERIC H BERINGAUSE 1469 SHORELINE DR NAYZATA m 55391 » •. *) 36 11-117-23 23 0015 01510 GREEN TREES RD R H LENNY S S N LENNY RICHARD H LENNY 1510 GREEN TREES RO NAYZATA MN 55391 36 11-117-23 23 0016 00036 AuORESS UNASSIGNED GREEN TREES HQMEOHNERS ASSOC GREEN TREES HOHECmERS ASSOC C/O JACK 0 YOST 1515 GREEN TREES RO NAYZATA MN 55391 4 36 11-117-23 32 0013 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED CORINNE GRIFFITH PILLSBURY CORINNE 0 PILLSBURY 4600 FIRST BANK PLACE MPLS m 55402 I • t.iN] / ■ •- • • / \y, •/ <• . ;.‘ •. . .‘ /.-iS /''. / »>. » •. / ..f ■■ ■■ ■ ■ {// j, • • I V ••./*-. ;. •• i * J - ^ • 'o > rr.* ^OL]. ■ / *w •V V; < *•• .V \v\-^ v-*r •■•'• . '* ! iV>V •'•V'-'* ■* / / ’ > li^yX^.v'^NvVvV •fn Y- ' 1 * V.« : <•• '<s-. '\ ; • ' •. \ »SK\v'V ‘. :• .. \Lh >< V N Y'. •. » .\ \nV v \'' vv y ^ '••V y '. v'' * Y* ‘X**. **. • •: •. \ * •v\\\ . • • ‘ % ..X • \ ^ ^ \ •»>.■•• ,\ Vv . • •:vV'‘ V -7a>— • r , Y' '-Y:V.;^,: •: m - ■ •• *V^ ,’ — « • • ■■/'■■-•■•■. .*•/ •7.V.V- .'■■:•■. *r 'r 3oZi-3iZ •" •..• * * *i •< .\.'^; •' ; i / .:i -,1 t '•*,#• t*. • ••<. I •.,7 •y-t-w ,. ^■^^^/ < ‘ '!'^* 1^" V " . W » .♦ " '*>• V.r"'? It **rV * ' » < jg'. ., . ^*.'1 •“ .4 *•'•'* .s ’■l • S » •. ^ . f • * V">* .• *. % . ■ I I \ ^‘ »••. 7.^ •*. «•«.••*•', y XXV X XX • V .:' ■' ‘:■ V.]:' : ■■ ■'' v. . . •■•—J •• • • '.: • '* I • - . •• ' -'r• ■ •;■■■ . ' ■;:\t’:-?r- v:' ;f5?,v. ./;:• t '• • s • ■ . • .* ■ . • •’ ■•. ‘ . . • - ■ ".•. •;• •. •■>.:: •:: < > r -‘; • • ■ r . '.. ’ ■• '. • .• i/yv/vV.vi^VvAfr-r-- V ., ■ r»Tn-.V- "! .'■ i.- ■. ‘ ■ . . • - ■ , .'. ■:• ■ '■ -:' ■ '• > :■ -‘.•' • • ■ r . •■• -V' ••.j.JV:, . •• . • •..■<■•'• -‘i- ' *!v‘ . .■■••' '.'\ .'..i. i •"■ 7*. ^j;<'r,>‘;'*•.'■ ■■ . .. ► t • I. • ►!ilm I * ••X •• % i.- * • •* . ' t ;!. . • . •. .■-• ■!.r A;'.- „n- : ■• - • ■ .fTri-i ■ \v ■■•■ ? - -“rr^ vVj* l^y .V-* '.J:^V- X :^’ . >• • . ( y 0 2 0' n.- ;«a 1^ W Z M • 4" - ‘ • ^:.i ■■•'i , • i -|tea, Vi'. •‘^^ •» I •• ^ f * .................. ■• .4^, • .V-. f • rl - * ■- • •>'■ t S‘*-’ * • I < fc-* •• '••vV A > : • \ 8»S •*- * ./.i* • ^ : •• -L .• .’•'•sVjJ' .V '.J > kN .'v'-W;.Xt X'‘..~x'v>S:v'o;'. r. '< .‘ Xt- ' • • •• , . T-; >rvTfT;:y;>X;^^ •• <... ;..v/-v.. •• X' im '•r ' .I-.;.' y' b > .•• I .^.\^Nrrfrvy»: ♦ \ :1 • 1. * . *' ^fvVr . W \“ *! ' i*i * .’. \. . .. * \ •- ; •. • • •:.. i V *.*. .• • • f - J * '/ :.-i.V. i / ’. \hsUt^ CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 7 61_____ A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2; J0.55, SUBDIVISION 8; 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6(B); AND 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16(C) & (L) FILE #2166 WHEREAS, Janet Kieman (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 1491 Shoreline Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2; 10.55, Subdivision 8; and 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) and (L) to permit the construction of additions to the existing residence and revision of the roof of the existing residence, such additions and revisions constituting hardcover and structure in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no hardcover or structure is normally allowed, and constituting additional hardcover in the 75-250' zone in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed in that zone, and such additions and revisions encroaching past the average lakeshore setback where no encroachments are normally allowed, and such revisions encroaching into the 30' required side yard setback where no encroachments are normally allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2166. 2. The property is located in the LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. Page 1 of 8 I ! GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 7 61 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 19, 1996, and on a vote of 5-1 recommended approval of the proposed variances subject to the following conditions and based upon the following findings: A. The major proposed room addition to the existing house will be located behind the 75' lakeshore setback line. Some proposed revisions to existing roof lines will encroach both the 75' lakeshore setback and the 30' required side setback, however none of these additions will increase the footprint of the encroaching portions of the house, nor will walls be moved closer to the respective lot lines. Therefore, the additional impact of the additions and roof line revisions on neighboring properties is minimal. B C. D. The existing house encroaches approximately 26' past the average lakeshore setback line, and the room additions to the north of the existing house will cause an additional average setback encroachment of a lesser magnitude. No neighboring property views of the lake are encroached upon by either the existing house or the proposed additions, hence there is no impact on neighboring properties by granting the average lakeshore setback variance. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone is proposed to be reduced from 6.0% to 3.9% by removing certain existing hardcover items and replacing them with a terrace area at a reduced level of hardcover. Hardcover in the 75- 250' zone is proposed to increase from 27.5% to 27.6%, and the impact of this minor increase is minimal. The location of the existing house with its existing encroachments into the lakeshore setback, average lakeshore setback and side setback is a hardship to the property. The driveway relocation is a positive improvement to the property, and the 75-250' hardcover variance is justified by the need to provide adequate off street parking for the residence since no parking is available in the County Road 15 right-of-way at this location. Page 2 of 8 Wm GITYofORONO m CSHO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 7 61 - 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. F.The proposed garage addition should be offset to meet the required 15' street setback and the footprint kept at no more than 1,000 s.f. to keep it from becoming an oversize accessory structure subject to much stricter setback standards. The s^plicant has revised the proposal to eliminate the need for a street setback variance for construction of two additional garage stalls, and has provided plans showing the footprint of that garage to be less than 1,000 s.f. in order that the garage be a conforming structure. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed driveway relocation and finds the driveway configuration feasible but indicates additional design w'ork and/or agreements with the neighboring property owner are necessary and must be completed prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed improvements to the property. The City Engineer has reviewed the future potential routes for municipal sewer on the property and has indicated that the proposed improvements will not hinder sewer development, but has indicated that certain sewer easements may be required. 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 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 3 of 8 m CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^761 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; ^d 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) and (L) to permit the construction of rJditions to the existing residence and revision of the roof of the existing residence, such additions and revisions constituting hardcover and structure in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no hardcover or structure is normally allowed, and constituting additional hardcover in the 75-250' zone in excess of the 25% hardcover normally in that zone, and such additions and revisions encroaching past the average lakeshore setback where no encroachments are normally allowed, and such revisions encroaching into the 30' required side yard setback where no encroachments are normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1.Hardcover in the 0-75' zone shall not exceed 3.9% per the revised site plan and hardcover worksheet attached to this resolution as Exhibit B. Hardcover in the 75-250' zone shall not exceed 27.6% as shown on Exhibit B. The hardcover removals necessary to achieve these hardcover levels shall be completed prior to the footing inspection for the proposed new construction, except that removals associated with driveway reconstruction may be delayed with the approval of the building inspector in order that construction traffic not be impeded. Applicant is advised that hardcover on the property exceeds the normal limits, and any future proposal to increase hardcover on the property will likely not be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with the concurrent removal of pre existing hardcover, resulting in no increase or a net decrease in hardcover on the property. 2.Applicant shall provide adequate grading and drainage plans for the proposed driveway relocation which must be approved by the City Engineer, prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposed additions and site improvements. 3.Property owner is advised that the existing and proposed house at a 4-bedroom design shall not be increased to a 5-or-more bedroom design until such time that municipal sewer has been provided to the property. 4. The applicant and future City Councils are advised that the current City Council Page 4 of 8 S.i I = 1 ■ I' f CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 7 fi 1______ intends that no future additional structure in the 0-75’ zone should be approved for this property. 5.The property ovmer is advised that the City will likely require a municipal sewer easement along the \.est boundary of the property, such easement location to be defined at some future time. 6.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but arc 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 9, 1997). 7.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically temiinate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of September, 1996, ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 5 of 8 GlTYof ORONO RESOLUTION NO. . THE CITY COUNCILOF THE Cl o76l STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th 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 6 of 8 • • % i CITY<^ ORONO NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 76) 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 (±ey) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. I NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 7 of 8 TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:July 16,1997 SUBJECT: #2265 Robert Lund for Graydon K. and Michelle M. Newman 1655 Bohns Point Road Variance(s)-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:Irregular Application:The applicant requests a variance on behalf of his clients to remove an existing residence and construct a new residence that would be located partially forward of the average lakeshore setback. Hardcover amounts would be change slightly within the 0’-75' and 75'-250’ setbacks but the percentage of hardcover in each setback w ould remain constant. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.22, Subd. 1. Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.22, Subd. 2. Lakeshore Hardcover and Land Alteration Regulations Section 10.24, Subd. 5., LR-IB Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements t. U2265 Robert Lundfor Newmans 1655 Bohns Point Road Variances PC:7/19/97 page~I ANALYSIS i Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 1 acre 140 feet 35 feet 10 feet 30 feet Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Irregular > 1 acre 240 feet (app.) 270+ feet 30' & 65'+85'+ The subject lot meets the minimum lot area and setback requirements. The proposed residence is located on a penisula where the shoreline curves. The proposed residence would be located behind the 75' lakeshore setback and ahead of the adjacent residences. The average lakeshore setback is approximately 130 feet from the lakeshore. Structural Coverage Structural coverage is not an issue with this application. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'25,360 sq.ft.3,132 sq. ft. (12.3%) None 3,120 sq. ft. (12.3%) None 75'-250*43,300 sq. ft.11,606 sq. ft. (26.8%) 10,825 sq. ft. (25%) 11,603.5 sq.ft. (26.8%) None U2265 Robert Lundfor Newmans 1655 Bohns Point Road Variances PC:7/!9/97 page-2 d Previous variances were granted in 1995 for hardcover in the 0'-75' setback. Stc Exhibit J , Resolution #2072. The applicant is not requesting variances to install additional hardcover. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant has provided a statement in Exhibit C. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1.The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. There is an existing residence on the property and a guest house. The applicant will need fo provide testimony as to the reasonable use of the existing structure. 2.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The plight of the landowner is created by the shape of the lot, the zoning lot's location on a peninsula, the topography and mature trees and the desire to construct a new residence at the proposed residence. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The zoning lot will remain residential, however, this structure is larger than the existing structuie when viewed from the lakeshore. 4.Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are not a consideration with this application. 5.\ ’r.due hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for soiai energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. 6.The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where U2265 Robert Lundfor Newmam 1655 Bohns Point Road Variances PC: 7/19/97 page-3 J i the affected person's land is located. Residential uses are allowed in this zoning district. 7.The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. 8.The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such propert>’ or immediately adjoining propert}'. The special conditions that apply to this lot are its irregular shape and its location on a peninsula. 9.The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. There are other zoning lots in the city of Orono that are located on peninsula's and have residences located forward of the average lakeshore setbacks. 10. The granting of the application is necessar>' for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant or property owner will need to provide testimony regarding the preservation and enjoyment of property rights. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The variance will not impair health, safety, comfort or morals. 12. . The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessarj' to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The proposed design of the new residence would need to be modified to locate behind the average lakeshore setback. The circular drive would need to be relocated. Issues 1. The zoning lot meets the minimum lot area and setback requirements. U2265 Robert Lundfor Newmans 1655 Bohns Point Road Variances PC:?/19/97 page—4 A V 2.The property owners intend to remove an existing residence. Theguest house and circular driveway would remain unchanged. 3.Variances w ere previously granted for hardcover to redo the shoreline where there is steep topography. 4. There are mature trees on the lot that the property owner wants to preserve. 5. The zoning lot is irregular in shape and is located on a peninsula. { STAFF RECOMMENDATION To amend or approve the proposed location of the new residence to be located approximately 85' from the shoreline at its closest point instead of behind the average lakeshore setback which is approximately 130'. Attachments A B C D E F Application Plat Map Applicant's statement Hardcover statements Existing Survey Proposed Survey G1-G3 Building Plans H Proposed Elevations Permit History Resolution #2072 Topography Map 1 J K ^2265 Robert Lund for Sewmans 1655 Bohns Point Road Variances PC: 7/1 9/97 page-5 LOC^riofJ /AAP ^ . P K. /Arcl^elUUS5 (3oUs P*N*V^ 3I ftfrctr /orr/i 1200- I - I »» f »«y Sict**t$P€iu I y^L^''^ I Cs>4* Maxwell Way ORONO SAm/ «otW ^atiir PEERING Fagenteu Pouu 1 Crystal > ^ iSrfiMi Bluck Lake V ' • •« Carman Bay ^ ^ORONO KCMirawiT V u .* ♦UMMM j J ^ ~ ^ph«IP*fl^. T^V---------Xr~^7 fl 1^ WAWATQSiJ •^islandV i]= 7ci SHADY ISLAND .SPRAY hsLANU Mi""'’"' mk" / >ENai ANTED 61.-25 ISLAND Hawmris frWn tMlWOOf SHOREWOOD ^ i ^TiSiniHtJiaaiiw 3 ^ jfgram ^ •• nfiUr^ Wf f—lU IM Application # Date Received U Amount Paid *■“______ A CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address nrtVing Pr^in<- Pr>ar^ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 38 17-117-23 11 0002________________ Attach legal discriptipn to application if not included on required survey. See Survey Date Propert>’ Acquired__________________________________________(month/year) I (do) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ^ residential ___^other (specify) Zoning District:___________________________________ APPLICANT Phone fhome ) 927-0379 Name Rnhpr'h Lund. Architect__________ Phone(\W)rk ) 927-0680____ Address: 4829 East Lake Harriet Pky:itv: Minneapolis Zip: 55409 OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home ) 471-8791 Name Gravdon K. & Michelle M. Newman Phone (work) 349-6985 AddressJfiSS Bohns Point Road City:Wayzata __________Zip: 55391 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 800,000.______ Describe request in detail: Variance requested for the average Lakesh ore Setback requirements (attach additional sheets if necessar>’) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear X Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSfflP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:____________________________________ Please see attached sheet (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete; 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Chwiers List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed sur\eyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/a" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic surv'ey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy SYt" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/a" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current ow'ner(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 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. Applicant's Signature Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges anj^agre^to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by Citjrst^, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of inv^itigatioimnd verification of this request. Owner's Signature uMAAy Date //n/97 ^ •'Y' 7 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 & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 s t t • • 17- 117-23-11 Uj«TM 161. ?5 BOHNS POINT 2^5 100 ,• • /•./••• • •* *• • • «• Oi C7» N»>» • /6-H7-23-2Z d ROBERT LUND & ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECTS 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARKWAY, MINNEAPOUS, MN 554C9 P. O. BOX 1134. WAINSCOTT. NY 11975 (612) 9274)680 FAX (612) 927-0382 (516) 537-5500 FAX (516) 725-4478 June 24.1997 Proposed Newman Residence 1655 Bohns Point Road The Average Lakeshore Setback lines for this pie-shaped property (located on a point on Lafayette Bay) would site the proposed dwelling in a valley. Such a location would require a large amount of fill and the removal of a significant number of mature trees and landscaping on the property. The proposed dwelling shown on the accompanying drawings is located further landward from the lake than the existing dwelling, is sited to minimize the removal of trees, and is also sited to minimize the re-contouring of the land. HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE)L 0-75’75-250'250-500* EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. »»•. .2_3--------------- Wellhouse Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X rh c-i 11, 65 Cone, stair ^ 192 walk from hSuse 1580 Cone; by sftore E. Patio/Deck •)o Pat-ir. 110 n^rk- X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other intn gi-nnp> conc5 walls. 96 stone stair TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERIT AREA IN ZONE ■?Ti2 _____ ^ B 25360 X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A< ______________ X Wellhouse Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 31 20________ -5- B 25360 X 100 500-1000* 1837 122 1126 3,1.3? 25360 12.3 1837 1126 3120 % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. __________S.F. 253fi0 S.F. 12.3 % \ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.H . S.F.t f S.F.•• • »• S.F. S.F. S.F. • « . 'V : • 1 S.F. S.F.■ ^ " S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.A S.F.B A B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’250-500’500-1000' A. House X s -n on S.F. Playhouse Length Width X mmm 112 S.F. X sx S.F. X s S.F. B. Garage X m S.F. C. Driveway X m sfiqo S.F. X ss S.F. D. Sidewalk OQf) IiinHiar l-r#al 1 ks)S.F. Qfi__(U7A Ik__tvo =z S.F. E. Patio/Deck 7on .X SB S.F. • X =1 404 S.F. F. Landscwe attached deck X S.F. Uuderlam X SB S.F. By Plastic X =S.F. G. Other on m nr^k .wAlls ss 234 S.F. 144 stoops 0 front & brick wall TOTAL HAlfcCOVER IN ZONE 11-606 S.F. TOTAL PROPERI Y AREA IN ZONE m 43.400 S.F. A 1 1 . fiOfi -5- B dl.ann X 100 s 1(^.1 % pRnpn^Fn hardcover IN zo>ft A. House X 6484 S.F. Playhouse Length Width X B 11 2 S.F. X 8S S.F. X SB S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway X S.F. X 440S S.F. X SS S.F. D. Sidewalk JJ.1 nn S.F. X =■. S.F. E. Patio/Deck Pp vp*r c;X 51 Q S.F. Pp'r(^r»^ pQ X r=S.F. F. Landscape Underlain Ppt“ - wpi 11c:X ss lint;S.F. Pi X s S.F. By Plastic G. Other X =S.F. ^pHo X ss 1 m S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 11,603 .5 S.F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE •S.F. A 11,60^-----B 43,400 ■■X 100 =----24,^7—% » \ A B A B /.< * /■ v\ M7 - V *:i- >\ y V‘-. •'' • > % JTV •,».«*•» I » > ••<' \- Sr- -^ '•;*•./.V / w N% \ W )"N V l.* l~fe \ . ,^f i-v >X/. g» ? 'v X N N 7l N X ^■> V'v X \ - % X 7^V X, '. •>.. y r- '-A ^v\ ' y C ?. I' uc 7S •JlmfT^i' -------r-::: — —••"j »*^ !k > \ ‘^A \ \\ :s\'nJ !1^^ ■ vfe'L/© i v\ J** '!U ‘ X-S /6 1 V. I-'^^P 'J.rY-1-,. / V /. .'/<>// r )' ; . , ’ . ' . ' .- 7 ✓ /?r V >> ‘.V y \ ;\\ tmmmm Ok v\^ e«T> V ,. ■ V iMMW • »-•••■■CB"Sft*ISI!-J-iSi TSSS Sii «>«• • *«# »%( 0 1 i <' A- 3^t-7 fv • •••*•« ((aiitt *Mi Ml* ^«<<(. *•*• •• t«»M< Ml r*»»M«» »« «• m >«••• »t •iM'i «i»t»>i%iM M» M*> • •« » (P»l M;ilM»t> iM» ^*lt»*« «M l**« •« (•« •••ft •» >•••••••• I i *«••• •• ••*!• Mt « mmm T •ai4«|tfM CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY for QRADY A SHELLY NEWMAN s5Wr~U *—«—« (• wtf tM U*« tt tm» II. •taMM'f *I«**H«*«* •^•* »••. •■••I** •••*•. •••. •• **• *••• »*——* • »»»• •«M*« I* ••• ■«(••• *4 »••< >» ■■■ I I ■••« i«iM»J tm 9t . M» •■•*•«• M «t •••la* •• ••< a. ' ■# O o ‘J71^ • • f*..» > i'« a'* • «j J f .4 7 •*C __< •-* V >> Jfctrrty c--. ---------- . »-cat—--. „ r~ ^-«--------——VJ'- lli"l|iaiilIiSllSIBia! 5^L " * ■■■ “ "i-' 3 V i 2X35*, .^^__ -. ' .2^« v _ ' ./^ ^ ; ---■ 'iT-^^ iSMitHi .*SO<pTr» .,,==?^lw.i%-% :r>54»gii!sfes^* 14 Permit Mo fil 5/f ^ 73<0 /^3 s<y-i's> (on3^ ^0^4 7y5<? T PERMIT RECORD Date Type of Permit 9iHf^ 3-6 ^ -g5 7 -;? g - /^-S S'i4 I /0^9~-‘)l /■i ■‘/S ^^tjeoxAje(ttu y. piLinoh'nq— aJJ. ntoc^ c? 3 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 8 818NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VAIUANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 ANT) 2, SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8, AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (J) AND (L), and a CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE NO. 2072 legally described as: Exhibit .A attached ((hereinafter the "propern'"); and WHEREAS. Ihe applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal 7onino Code Section 10.22. Subdivisions 1 and 2. Section 10.55. Subdivision 8. and Section 10 56'subdivision 16 (L) for the placement of hardcover in the 0-75’ zone where no hardcover . f ™aT al owed- and for a variance to Section 10.22. Subdivision 1. Section 10.5b. LS^sion 8. and sietion 10.56. Subdivision 16 (1) for filling and grading work the 0^ ^“etliack zine where no grading or filling is normally atow^; and for a conditional use permit for land alterations in the 0-75’ zone per Section 10.03. Subdivision 19. NOW'. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL\'ED by the City CouncU of Orono. Minnesota: FINDINGS 1.This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2072. The property is located in the LR-IB. Single Fanuly Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. <oi J. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 1 , ]^95^d recommended approval of the proposed variances and conaitional us. permit based upon the following fmdmgs: Pase 1 of 7 1 • •• CITYof ORONO AsiiSx aESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4. A.The existing 604 s.f. deck platform located at the shoreline encroaches into the neighboring propert>' and is proposed to be removed, resultmg m significant decrease in hardcover near the lakeshore. The net decrease m 0-75’ hardcover from 14.4% to 12.5% is a positive improvement to the property. * B.Applicant’s dock similarly encroached the neighboring property Ime extLded and is proposed to be moved to meet LMCD thereby creating an access point offset by approximately 30 from the existing concrete stairway which leads down the lakeshore bank an provides access to the shoreline for the applicant. C.Planning Commission fmds taat it is appropriate to allow a 4’ walkway S’™ ‘Si-.. lakeshore bank. D.sSSHsMs The proposed 12" depth of sand between the nprap and the retammg wall has been reviewed by the City Engineer who finds it accepuble tom m engineering standpoint. The majority of the sand ar« “ revegetated wif. native grasses, leavmg approximately a 10 x20 area ot sand exposed to provide a "beach" character. Plannmg Commission finds that leaving patio blocks in place underneath the sand layer may provide additional subili^ for the shoreline and therefore it is appropnate to the patio blocks in place. The City CouncU has considered this application includmg the “ings ^d recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by co^ by the applicants and the effect of the proposed vanance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 7 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. « fi 1 8 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 variances and conditional use permit 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, oUt is necessary tc 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 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2, Section 10.55, Subdivision 8, and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) for the construction of a 4' wide walkway parallel to the shoreline for a distance of approximately 30 ’ and within the 075' zone where no hardcover or structure is normally allowed, and a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1, Section 10.55, Subdivision 8, and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (J) to allow filling and grading in the 0-75 ’ lakeshore setback zone where such work normally is not allowed, and grants a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 for land alteration in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone, subject to the following conditions; 1.The shoreline maintenance work including boulder wall improvement, riprap improvement and sand fill shall follow the plans submitted by the applicant ’s landscape designer. 2. The existing patio blocks shall be removed prior to placement of the sand layer. 3. 4. The platform deck shall be .emoved as proposed. The walkway constructed from the base of the existing concrete stairway to the new dock location shall not exceed a width of 4'. 5.Applicant is advised that hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone shall not exceed 12.3% per the sketch and listing attached to this resolution as Exhibit B. Applicant is advised that any future proposal to add hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone will likely not be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with the removal of equivalent or greater square footages of hardcover in that zone. Page 3 of 7 .*i’ . •MX.t I -* ^ * CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. S 6 1 8 6.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applij^t, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a buUdmg permit within one year of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (October 9, 1996). 7.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of tins resolution shall constimte a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatical y terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assig^. hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the cham of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of October, 1995. Page 4 of 7 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. '8 e 1 ft )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th da> of October 1995 by Edward J. Callahan. Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin. Mayor and City Clerk of rirv Of-Orono. a Minnesota^jamiUffipal corporation and said instrument was executed on 'i/: \ NOTAPY PUBLiC-fAINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNff My Comn«s»on &0'« J ». 31.2000 ---------.............................................Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Onlhis /£^l_dayof ^'chh^r__________. 199^. before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared (rr,xyi^c^ ^ JiP , . ta"me S be Ore perLnfs) described m and who executed the foregomg tnstrument. and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTAPY PUBUC-MINNESOTA ________ lllTV « HENNEPIN COUNTY My Ccmmissicn ExOires Jan. 31.2000 J. l/x£^ Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this ___________^dayof^---------------- within and for said County, personally appeared • ______in , 199___, before me a Notary Public to"me rbe r^ereonfs) described in and who executed the foregoing instmtnent. and Mknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 5 of 7 J EXHIBIT A Resolution No. 3618 1 Legal Description: Lot 6/BIock 1, Auditor's Subdivision No. 349, Hennepin County, Mmnesota. (PINS No. 17-117-23 11 0002) TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zonmg Administrator T”ly 10,1997 SUBJECT: #2266 Ronald and Robin Hohnnan 190 Cygnet Place Variance(s)-P ‘*blic Hearing Zoning District: % Lot Area: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 Acres) 27,913 square feet (.64 acres) Application:The applicants are proposing the addition of a screened-in porch on the rear of the house and an additional one stall garage attached to the south side of the existing garage. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.28 RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District Subd. 5, B Setback Requirements Section 10.56 Shoreland Management Subd. 16, C, 2 Hardcover Limitations M2266 Ronald and Robin Hohrman 190 Cygnet PLice 6/21/97 Page I ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards RR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 2 acres 200 ft.50 ft.30 ft.50 ft. Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard 27,912.5 sq. ft.192.5 ft.47 ft.49 ft. The subject property does not meet the minimum lot area, lot width, or front yard setback requirements. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 27,913 sq. ft.2,527.9 sq. ft.9% (These figures include all hardcover items on the property other than driveway.) The zoning lot is near a protected tributary, however, the proposed additions are below the maximum hardcover requirements. Hardcover Hardcover is not an issue for the application. it2266 Ronald and Robin Hohrman 1 90 Cygnet Place 6/21/97 Page 2 r STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. It would be possible for the owners to obtain reasonable use of their house and property in its current state. The proposed additions would allow them to derive greater enjoyment from their property. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The zoning lot is significantly smaller than the minimum lot area requirement for the zoning district. The building pad is less than 50' in lot depth. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance for side yard and rear yard will not change the character of the area. The side yard variance request is less than 2 feet while the rear yard variance is approximately 4 fr't. 4. 5. 6. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are not a consideration with this application. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Both the proposed porch and garage stall are permitted uses in this zoning district. ^2266 Ronald and Robin Hohrman 190 Cygnet Place 6/21/97 Page 3 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such propert>’ or immediately adjoining property. The lot is non-conforming in size in this zoning district. Due to this factor, it is difficult to construct additions to the principal structure that lie entirely within setback lines. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The majority of the lots in this neighborhood are less than the 2 acres which the zoning district requires. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicants should be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The variance will not impair health, safety, comfort or morals. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The variance is not only a convenience to the applicant, but also to alleviate hardship. Due to the configuration of the house, as well as the setback lines, it would be difficult to constnict the proposed addition elsewhere on the lot and conform to the required setbacks. Issues 1.The lot area does not conform to the zoning district. The front of the existing house extends 3 feet into the required front yard setback, and the rear deck extends approximately 2 feet into the rear yard setback. U2266 Ronald and Robin Hohrman 190 Cygnet Place 6QI/97 Page A 2. 3. 4. Topography is slight within the lot and is not an issue. There are no major physical impediments affecting the proposed additions. The residence was constructed in 1977. In 1978, permits were issued for a well and septic system. The property was connected to City sewer in 1996. There were variances approved in 1975, 1976 and 1^77 for square footage of new house, and for a one year variance extension for two consecutive years. 5.This property, and likely the entire neighborhood on Cygnet Place, was developed at less than a two acre minimum lot size. STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is advised that the applicants be allowed to proceed with plans to construct the desired porch and garage stall. The proposal is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. Furthermore, with the additional hardcover, the total hardcover on the lot will be 15%, while 30% is allowed in the 250- 500 ’ zone adjacent to a protected stream. Attachments A B C D E F Application Plat Map Lot Setbacks Floor Plans Hardcover Restriction Zones Permit History U2266 Ronald and Robin Hohrman J90 Cygnet Place 6/21/97 Page 5 LocATlokj Mf VUTnMQIM ■ 1 I ©MINNETRISTAsir" SEE MAP ^Jennings C.' •*tir ^ "y "7 f( A**vl HioU/’ U^Hvv1% Putt. Application # ^ Date Received 6/^7/f7 Amount Paid ^ d^o. erd CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.0 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION SiteAddress 1^0 Cy^/Li^r Pi Property Identification Nmnber (IM.D.) plk Date Pro perty Acquired Attach legal description to applif ation if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired I (do) ^ not) also ov Present use of property: .(month/year) I (do) ^ not) also own the^jacent parcels of land. Pr^ent use of orooerty: ix'^idendal ___pother (specify)^ Zoning District: I B APPLICANT/) / n . I . Phone (home") <^*7 0 -H- Nam e Amb MokgHAAj Phonefwori O Address: Me PlAc*£______ City: \ 'fidUu _____Zip: 5'53>U» OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ______________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ _____ Describe request in detail: AbiiJ77d/^ jjo ^eoA. n^x AMmdnAL, / Tt> ScUThf (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area •V^Setback: ___Lot Width Front v^de Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHBPyDESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue harddiip or practical difficulty or vinusual property conditions preventing « • • • •^ItUl'il Hay 220.00 . . « V (attach' additional sheets if necessary) 7 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. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. _ Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy ZV2” x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elev ations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 854" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 854" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is trj^ and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and frnther authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purpose^! 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 & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 N / I •. Id U < -1 Q. UJ o > (J Certificate of Survey for Ronald Hohman of Lot 4. Block 3, SWAN LAKE ADDITION Hennepin County. Minnesota Leq«il nesrripr.inn Lot 4, Block 3, Swan Lake Arid i n ion. Thin survey shows the location of an cxistinq house, dork and septic svsten. It does not nur- port to show anv other Imcro's^nents or encroach ments. 1 I hereby certify that this survey was prepared bv mo or under my direct sup ervision and that 1 an a duly regist ered land suryeyor undm* the laws of tl'jo Sta^-e of Minnesota. Scale Date 0 1 Inch 8 30 feet 1-14-89 Iron market Bearings shown are to an assumtid datum. COFFIN & GRONBERG. INC. ">idrk S7 Grbnberg Mn. Lici^o. l^/bS Engineers, Land Surveyors and Planners Long Lake. Minnesota / ■"T. ' " ' ' —_ 190 Cygnet PlaceT ^ \ .O I .,.. \J y^p* rcfsr^lI’ •■ V jl f4J • ci^Eicurt <si«p<oe i . ! ^ 5|<: R>e(U _ - S 2>4S-2- #22^ / • /S’ ^■STO^AiS^E ^ OTiLOy proK C » • * I * ‘ * / • ' " (**•** ,C-T^ 10 «-6 ^ xe.*' -'c^o, nws ^ e. ot= fZ." ccKtC. Sue. I c CP s< Hvs*^ ojkis ax. “tua. ^iTUOt- f*2.IU ‘‘<^ <roJc nos- 7c- (nx A c ^“hi '&hcuvi : Luci FAMlL>f •as.-c.’y r\ i ?*=ni rns ‘T^r-c sSo^ssiyA ^59* cevMP * -r Si<i» / IT* I^-F K- I_H X .:s- \ 23“yf^: erne. n:». ^ c 3>F»z*'C:;f4i C4j<. \ ? FUPJi<.g__ v-^l<I. f***|\./ PI KatHKli- i 1 ' at {I ft a^r>A “ocMa. •••sfe./i V\ 4., 5Ctf>r rra^ic.ex.-' ^ SM&ceiU'^ “fT ^ BATH- ^FCrteK li I r A . li r' 4 O',.~S^ .'i.mt-sc sun ’••5'V t' 'SO-. V-lrt: CC-U I • 1 .Y<OW tCCKTiOKl; |ii,1)4- (_✓ .^n_. C>l;X.]V’\ !l^ eV'.'!- •2<-" «Vc_ ^ I'iO Pf PERMIT RECORD Permit Mo Date Type of Permit 3 6i4l AioJ--/(AO. 6221.8 - iif~7S ir * ^ ^ f TO:Chdr Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM;Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:July 18,1997 SUBJECT: #2267 John O'Sullivan, 3340 Shoreline/2380 Shadywood Road - Commercial Site Plan Review - Proposed Driveway From Culver's Site to Shadywood Road Zoning DIsirict: Culvers Site: B-1 Church Property: B-5. Application: Mr. O'Sullivan is requesting commercial site plan review and t^roval for a proposed driveway access to the Culver’s site through the church property from Shadywood Road. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Letter of Request E - Survey of Proposed Access Easement F - Sketch of Proposed Driveway G - Concept Plan for Development of Church Property H “ Hardcover Nct'=!s I - Easement Agreement Document J - City Engineer's Comments K - Hennepin County Public Works Comments L - Resolution #3830 Property Ownership The Culvers Restaurant site is under the ownership of John O'Sullivan and others. That site includes the easterly half of Navarre Lane which has been vacated. The church property is owned by Adam Smith Company, which entity has not indicated to the City any inunediate plans to develop the church site. Applicant is intending to procure an easement for driveway purposes over the church property in favor of the Culver's property. Navarre Lane Status The City has agreed conceptually via Resolution #3830 adopted January 13, 1997 to vacate the northwesterly portion of Navarre Lane at the time development of the church property commences. The current proposal for a driveway to serve the Culver's site does not constitute development of the Zoning File #2267 July 18,1997 Page 2 church property. The County Road 19 right-of-way overlaps the torrens portion of the church property at the most southerly comer of the church property. A small triangular portion of the proposed driveway easement is within this overlap area. The only significant impact of this is how it affects hardcover calculations. Site Considerations 1. 2. The submittals do not accurately portray the existing parking layout at the Culvers site. The submittals give no indication of the number of stalls which will be lost, or how they will be replaced. The submittals give no clear picture of existing and propose d circulation at the Culvers site. The submittals provide staff with no comfort level that the applicant has had professional assistance in the design of the new access point, or in how it will relate to the existing situation. Having experienced this site in operation, staff finds a number of concerns regarding circulation in the final parking layout, which does not match the approved plans and which in staffs opinion contains a number of bad design features, including parking stalls that jut out into access points, the need for opposing stacking lanes for the drive-thru and car wash, and the impact of the drive-thru 'waiting' stalls adjacent to the handicap stalls. While the proposed access onto County Road 19 is at the location previously proposed in applicant's original concept plan for the church site, that site plan has never been formally reviewed or approved. The City Engineer's early comments on that site plan were that the southerly access, i.e. the access now proposed for the Culvers site, is extremely near the 15/19 intersection and perhaps should move further north. The City Engineer continues to believe that the southerly access for the church site is too close to the intersection and will create problems with traffic on the County Road, especially if a free right turn lane is ever developed from westbound 15 to northbound 19. He suggests a right-in/right-out only limitation may be appropriate from a safety perspective; this would not serve applicant's intent to provide a way for traffic exiting his site to head southbound on 19 to go east on 15. The engineer indicates that the church site might be best served by a single access, and staff believes it could be counterproductive to accomplishing that if the new access for the Culvers site is located as proposed. It should be noted that Hennepin County Public Works has indicated they will approve the access as proposed by Mr. O'Sullivan. Staff is assuming that the County has recognized the difficulties with O'Sullivan's existing accesses onto County Road 15, and sees this as a solution to the problem. Staff sees it as a temporary solution at bes^ and, if approved as r Zoning File #2267 July 18,1997 Page 3 proposed, the City should reserve the right to have it relocated further north at the time the church site is developed. Staff Recommendation Staff does not dispute that I’ck of access to County Road 19 presents difficulty for customers ingressing and egressing the Culvers site. An access to Shadywood Road will provide an access solution for the site. Applicant clearly had intended such an access during the conceptual reviews of the church site. Staff recommends that applicant be required to retain a qualified site designer to provide an accurate depiction of the current layout and access that will relate to the existing parking and circulation pattern of the Culvers site. Absent such information, staff cannot recommend approval of this additional access at this time. With information that supports the proposed layout, staff will likely recommend approval for a temporary access, reserving the right to have it moved when the church site is developed. Options for Action 1 . Recommend approval as proposed. 2. Recommend approval with specific conditions. 3. Table for further information per staff recommendation. 4. Recommend denial (state reasons). 5.Other. CITY OF ORONO W 6124730510 06/24/97 08:00 :07/14 N0:440 AppUcatlon # 4, 7 Dilt Rccrired <b • c?-7- 9 7 Amoimt PMd CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 3 p. Type of Application to be FUed Cc>n/hJ7?£.A.^ Vrrr __________________ Property Identification Number C^.D.) /q - //n - 2 3 - - g<p<p g.? APPLICANT Name ZTou/^j. 0 'Su. un aJ Addre« 9t<4n ffHOcHiJizuj Lv* ~~ Phone (home) f/^D- ______ Phonefwofirt ^ City /hfiPulTi?diMr Zip srss n OWNER (if different than appli^t) Name ZfM/n S'/) Phone (home) ¥se- ____________(^/»’>?/&T)4/v)ScV Phone(woric) ~763~ 3SS(g Address 7fr£ CcTP/^A^/tc-cTT City ArK/».cp^.<v./;//./ Zip^———— ^ -----a. {ipperty Acquired i>/S'/‘n ___________ (month/year)A aqacent(do not) also own the acQacent parcels of land FEES • CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS • _____S 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$300.00 Comroercial/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 wifijin 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) Afierothe-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS $250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $300.00 Vacation $200.00 Easement Vacation $100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) $350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $100.00 Appeals Other > see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District ft Present Use of Property_____Residential Other (specify). A APPLICATIgN S2i. 2 6175^ITT n^A/ n£; ut Guj SnS 1 I 06-27-1997 10:44flf1 FROM RWM SMITH CO *m —16124719650 P.02 REQUXRKD SUBMITTALS 1. 2. y s. 6. 7. CooipMid Appllcttlon Fonn. Diicrfbt n^ucft IB dctiil> ! i Ccftlllcd Piopw^y Owners List of ewners wIiIubI^, plM nip (xm mu9t obtelfi this Use. UMs wd tuk^ fiom Heanepin Oovaljr PepMi^ of FlMDOti A*603, Oov enuneat Ccmcr» 34l«S271). CstUktfi of Sisvey (sifOBd by t CctiBed lomyor) • refer to heodoot for lurvty ASi^ ii|ri dwrripfion to appUcalioB if aot {adudod ob re^uiitd suev^. TdpognpUe fiwty (txistiag ond proposed eoniem) if lind tltoatioos kvotve Lin of Ibe ta|d atmes (iaclode msital sMus) of ill p—oai svidi n ipletiA in dn prBp^^^ Hvs woidd iaefodt aawO) of ippUcintCs) If not oment ooniftf). t. CoMlraedoo plia, if n>|dicabl6 (mo lUfT fer raquiffoicott). 9. ____At IB tddnduni io«^ ipplkadoo. pleiM attieh a hpmh Hit of toy enker pOMM you udih aoliM of ifeU appUcatloo. YOU ABE BBQUIBEP TO SUPPLY 99 corns or LARGE OOCUMBKTS OR COrV roR itEfiiooucnoR <ir x n** or smaller) for all documents submitted. (Staff win require to scale drawia|t of all docunarols. plms. etc. to be NbfldSod.) Tba AppUoaS and PkOperty Owner nn»t stgn dns appUcatioo. Please isoasibcr (bat your ^^fenioii is not cei^fcile if the above ioltoiMlioQ has not been faicluded. CtitifiMlion by Clttkal Department that Land Use Application is complete. IdiUs of Clerical SiefC______________________Date_________• o • APrUCANTS SIGNATURE The iBplicaal hereby afiees to provide all infoimatioo requirtd or raquesied by the Zoniag Adndidsimlor. atices lo pay additional feet (staff time not covered by miginal fie payment) aodfar uausoal eapeosee Incurred in review of this ap^icattcm, and earSfiet that the iiifiMiiiarton st^Had Is trot aad oonect lo the best of his/her kiwwled|e. G/cJ.i, /l^ f) . Dan I'Zr? IAppikmifi algn OWNER'S SIONATVI The osmer hereby admowledges and agrees to this application and further authorljccd reasonable entry otao the property by Ci^ stafL coatultaatt. agents, commhdon members, and Council membetp for purposes of investigation and verification of this lequeetiben for purposes of investigation and verific Apelkat oiyit tovt lU tiAmitiib faito iHt City offices 25 tfeyi bcfbrt tfit Ptanfihif Commtailon Mtetliig. ri«wiii« CifiMilitioo Mwi^ as )wM OD lb* ihM Mwidqr of Mcb ibmA. Appttonai •uir b« pmwn m ■a irhiiiilTt rwlw* wiwhy A* PIsiiniAi Ceewiiisi— ud CMiaeit. ir «a amOesst U uaSbte to Mend a sdudllad ■»—**1 plMM UMke ■rranacmems to have an anihgritctf atent alientf to your plac and advito Ike Bsttdiai 41 Zoning ORVa of dib changr prior m ike aaectiag. in. TOTfiL P.02 ««i4cr« «§ri» n m »n* ■ It «y<if 5 .! '3 i7j> m m 7^V ;1 v^ j» 1 •*a • 2 *1 * • CD (9)(■!* ■)n 6^ 3 (i) » _ (i9)k«4} (fsi(U] im (79) » !» • ■9 < » ^79) [eo)|t»' a f!tfo)(ii) (»;ir) f 2 itt) rt«? > V V* 9 W ’? '5 . j? ^ JbJJL JLBir »i.M (too ......- 4179 rvX»I7 253 i t n t 1 M 9 (28). f «N («)C' • 0 •OCIC •.■wnw-j c;> I____^ l«0 ^iQi >• ::1 1 t-V •0DIL9 ••«, OLI S^?S (8) a " (18) * 17T 37 «m.ff I (») .::x-. VO ««y (ID (•^).LT V SI---- 19 MUn UAtH Oi/Xi/fit • ^ ^ •BATCH sot'liLifftPlN I I itwi-bni Y JlNi 04uutl Ai..i« ;>i «.•••>■ t. t • SB- X7-lir-tS AS 0001 PROP ADOft 02195 BAYVXEN PL OHNER NAME ‘ R P.HEYERS A J E HEYERS \TA)9AYER’ RICHARD P A JANICE E MEYERS NAH^AOOR. . 2195 BAYVXEN PL - • V . . -V :. HAYZATA Ifl • ; SSS91 ■ ‘ •• V • • * • . r.'. • • * ; * • 1..*? .f; • . •. . • V • ■■ -sb •. i7-ii7-2s « • I ^ •V. AS 0005 PROPADDR' OSAAS CRYSTAL PL OHNER NAME A A L ROOENALO TAXPAYER ADELBERT M ROOENALO ilAME/AOOR SAAS CRYSTAL PUCE' NAYZATA rW 55391 ' PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 17-117-2S. AS 0020 0SA3B LZVXN6STQN AVE SEC OP HS6 A URB DEV SEC OP HSe A URB DEV 220 2ND ST S MPLS MN 55401 - • » / PROi^ AODR* ONNER NAMB TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR .*• ■ * * • •; . SB 17-117>23 AS 002S 03A1A LIVINGSTON AVE ROSEMARY P BURMASTER ROSEMARY P BURMASTER SAIA-LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 ' SB 17-117-23 AS OOAA • . •-.PROP-AODR', .OSAAS LIVINGSTON AVE OPtCR NAME DENNIS L HEGER TAXPAYER - OEMIXSL HEGER , NAME/AOOR SAAS LIVINGSTON AVE ' NAYZATA MN 55391' PROP AOOR OPMER Name TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SO 17-117-23 AS 0070 OSAAA LYRIC AVE P L A S E MITTELSTAEOT MR/HRS PRANK L MXTTELSTAEDT S4AA LYRIC AVE NAYZATA rti 55391 • .* II PR0PERI7 OPMERS LIST ** * • •. * • .• f i .* '. -REI>ORr NO. - PXASfiAUl o»o* -SB 17-117-2S AS 0002 02296 SHADYNOOO RO R L POLK A N POLK MIKE A AIMA PRANZEN 2296 SHADYNOOO RO HAYZATA m 55S91,' SB 17-117-2S AS OOIB 0SA52 LIVINGSTON AVE NILLIAN R MAXNELL II A NXPt NILLIAM R MAMCLL II SA52 LIVINGSTON AVE NAVARRE MN 55391 SB 17-117-23 AS 0021 03AS6 LIVINGSTON AVE STANLEY A MOORE DENNIS THUECKS S177 LAKESHORE BLVD NAYZATA »tl S5S91 . . . . r , AUW H OLSON -•‘SSAA4 LIVZNBSTON AV« NAYZATA m V 5Sm * k* ft • 17- * .» •* •* SB 17-117-23 AS 0062. 03A3S . LIVINGSTON AVE PAUL M HAACEN PAUL MAAGEN 3A3S LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 • . . I * * . ' *P V^i- iB 17-117-2S AS 0022 0SA22 LXVINOStON AVE 0-A SERNAtA 0 L SHELDON 0 A SERNA A 0 L SHEL S422 LXVINBSTON AVE NAYZATA MN 55S91 : M • 'Vvi -r;. •: \ •• • . •• k ■ r - -.r* •'s*- . ^ . ::: •• •• P * - •1 •• • J • • I %•• • . • • B • • , -SAS5 LZVXNBStON'AVE’'' ' • •' kAYZATA W :. 55S91 38 17-117-23 43 0065 03AA5 LIVINGSTON AVE CAROLYN M TXLLOTSON • CAROLYN M TXLLOTSON 3445 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA m 55391 * .* .*. * •' ■'*. ^ •*./• • .V K \ . . • * \ ’ * , . . SB 17-117-23 AS OOiS 0SAS5 LIVINGSTON. AVE .,.0 V.-AE N.BRUCE v.: K. DEMOS V A EVELYN N BRUCE-O.V^ : -r. 5B 17-117-23 45 0075 • • 0SA6B LYRIC AVE . . JANES P HrmtSTAEDT fix . 5- JAMES P NXTttLSTAE^ XXXVy 'j^SA4B:tYRW,A^;^ ■ . .NAYZATA rtf-:; 55S91V ‘ • • • •%*.•» •*. . o;v. y >. 56 17-1X7-25 45 0077 05456 LYPIC AVE LOIS H HUDLOH LOIS MARIE HUOLOH 5456 LYRIC AV NAYZATA Hi 55591 4 . •- *'. • • V • - *. •!*. • ’ .' 56 17-117-iS* 45 0078.. '•: * 05422 LVRXC AVe I".* \ - ■ •, DANIEL E SNANSON DANIEL E SNANSON • SA22 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA M4' 55S91 •f » • . • • » y* • « . y • » . i.V-; j ’ . I * - • , •/. I*" . *1 •' %• : o •' •• •. :VI-.’j-* •. •' •:uX, vv: -.' v.«eNi*tT:-»«»i.w45^ : .• • V**’-ir-uv-** ' - • . * ••'* * * • v' /.. . . » ‘ • *7.'•* f*’"^ .V . * •; V •' .. •. . *• /RUN OATS OS/19/94 * BATCH 502PROP.AOOto/ ' OHNER NAME •. TAXPAYER . NAME/ADDR' • •#. * PROP'ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AODR .r. PROP ADDR miER NAME TAXPAYER .NAHE/ADDR. • .• ^RDP ADOR . .. tWCR NAME. .-•TAXPAYER; • ,• %NAME/AODR I .*• • <•• **. PROP.ADOR • OIMER NAME .. TAW»AYBR .• . NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY IMF0RMAT20N SYSTEM PROPERTY OMNERS LIST58. 17-117-23 43 007» 03408 LYRIC AVE HENNEPIN FORFEITED UNO cm OF ORONO PARK 4/13/79 ; ST DEED .154755 * • . • .•* 38 ,17-117-23 43 0082 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNEO TONN OF ORONO cm OF ORONO PO BOX 44 CRYSTAL BAY HI 55359 38 17-117-23 43 0085 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNEO HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND, cm OF ORONO PARKXNO LOT BUFFER 3-22-91 ST DEED NO 174998 58 17-117-23 43 0099* 03400 SHOREUNE OR DALE S JOHNSON . NAVARRE HARDNARE C/O DALE JOHNSON • 3400 SHORELINE DR PO BOX 40 NAVARRE HI 55392 38' 17-117-23 43 0154 03405 LIVINGSTON AVE SHERYL A PATTEN SHERYL A PATTEN 3405 UVINGSTON AVE . NAYZATA HI 55391 38 17-117-23 44 0007 02344 SHAOYHOOD RD GRACE BAPTIST CHURCH/tUVARRE GRACE BAPTIST CHURCH/NAVARRE 2380 SHADYHOOO RO ORONO HI 55391 38 17-117-23 43 008003408 LYRIC AVE HEHIEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK 4/15/79 ST DEED 154755 38 17-117-23 43 0083 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND cm OF ORONO PARK 4/13/79 ST DEED 154754 /• JB 17-117-23:43 0084 00038 AOrnESS UNASSICNEO HENNEPIN FORFEITEO cm .OF ORONO CONVEYED 2/8/82 ST DEED 141147 184; : .•••v.'., yr-;.- . ; KSSICNED .-/V, •; ’V-v; •• . . LAND. ■: .*• S f.'. ...• /. • •• •V v.,.;-. , . .V A. • •: • .-'1*• • • ■ V S8 17-117-2S 4S 0086 0S465 LYRIC AVE H 0 I D H TIERNEY HILLIAH G I DELORES TIERNEY S465 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA HN 55S9I • .Y •. , 38..17-117-23 43 0098 03414 SHORELINE OR OERH-TOH BARTNERJ .OERM-TOM PARTNERSHIP tOURT MACFARLANi ■;-v.f ^ ^ . d /v . ; .PO 'BOK 1411 HXfMETOHU HI 38 17-117-23 43 0141. 03473 LIVINGSTON AVE* SARANNE H ANDERSON SARANNE N ANDERSON 3473 LIVINGSTON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 Sft l7-ll7-£l 44 014i 03440 SHORELINE DR. • ‘1 NAYZATA M ». • • * f • * * ». * ■ ' N I E mubllEr -v .-''>v;N• RICHARD N BLOONQUIST-.v ' 3440 SHOREUNE DR J . •» . • ••• • • • • t •• •■ *.* I* 38 17-117-23 44 OOOB 00038 ADDRESS UNASSI»4E0 rom OF ORONO i CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 crystal bay HN 55359 •‘■’"OESW SHAOVNOOOvRO ■••r’'' i, ........4b. 17-117-23 44 00b4 GRACE D APnst CHUPCH/KAVAttRS ^ j NORTH CENTRAL C8A ' ' '7240 university AVE N I illO FRIOIlEY HN ; 55432 •. ■ 38 17-117-23 44 0008 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HENNEPIN FORFEITED LANO CITY OF ORONO CONVEYED 2/8/82 ST DEED 161145 38 17-117-23 44 0009 02377 SHAOYHOOD RO MARCEL S DITTRICH . MARCEL on TRICH 2377 SHAOYHOOD RD MAYZATA m 55391 /. •. . * i • .• I •• I ♦. i • * hi i! .• RUN OATC 03/19/96 BATCH 502 PROP AODR 3S 17-117-23 44 0015 OOOia ADDRESS UNASSZGI€D QNNER .NAME HEfMEPZN FORFEITED. LAND TAXPAYER •^'NAHE/AODR PARK CITY OF ORONO • ** • • I , • •'f • 10/17/80 ST DEES 1S9148 . PROP AOOR . S8 17-117-ES 44 0621 0S405 ' CRYSTAL BAY RD '. DNNER NAH6 . ALOHA J OARLXNB ‘ ' .TAXPAYER ' ALOHA J OARLXNO . : NAHE/AOOR S405 CRYSTAL BAY. ROAD y. NlYZATA MN 55S9I ' t ■■ SB 17-117-25 44 0027 PROP AODR . 02225 BAYVZEH PL OMCR HAHE TERESA AMC KOCHTaxpayer teresa koch '.NAHE/AOOR 2225 BAYVZEH PLACE NAYZATA m S5S91' SB 17-117-2S 44 OOSO PROP AOOR 02245 BAYVZEH PL IQHNER NAHE . OAVZD H DEAN A OZANE M DEAN .taxpayer OAVZD H A OZANE H DEAN . •NANE/AObR: 2245 BAYVZEH PLACE . ' .HAYZATA MN 55S91 38 17-117-23 44 0033 PROP AODR" 02305 BAYVZEH PL OHNER NAME R H 8TELLZN0.ETAL TAXPAYER BENE H BLOCK NAME/AOOR '2305 BAYVZEH PLACE ' NAYZATA m 55391 ' . HENNEPIN COONTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0M4ERS LIST38 17-117-23 44 0020 03393 CRYSTAL BAY RO JEFFREY MARK HAMMER JEFF HAfflER 3393 CRYSTAL BAY RD NAYZATA m 55391 38 17-117-23 44 0025 02205 BAYVZEH PL CLEMENT F BZRCH JR Et AL CLEMENT F BZRCH JR fM BARBARA J SIPPRELL-BZRCH 2205 BAYVZEH PL . HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 44 0028 02245 BAYVZEH PL T J A T P HALLOCK TERRY J HALLOCK TZFFZNY POOL HALLOCK 2245 BAYVZEH PL HAYZATA m 55391 . I • r PROP AOOR OlflER NAH6 TAXPAYER ; NAME/ADOR 38 17-117-25 44 0059 03320 KAVARRE lA ADRZANNE L OODGE AORZATtlE L DODGE 3320 NAVARRE U HAYZATA m 55391 . • • •• • »’ ■ • • • ■. REPORT NO. PZ435401 . Vn V* •' ‘ 0225S BAvyiEti PL* V.’.i*;;;X*>* flk A A* - - -— . •••PATRZCZA A. BORNElCe; . ..... PAtRZCZA A.BURNtECE- •'hV'Z2*5-BAYVZEH PL NAYZATA IM .BBS91 •' . /: 1 • % / * ' •. • • •. W 4 .* * .■ * . ' & • . •• . . . > • f • 38 17-117-23 44 0031 02275 BAYVZEH PL JAMES R ANDERSON JAMES R ANDERSON 2275 BAYVZEH PUCE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 44 0041 02250 BAYVZEH PL* CATHY JO TURNER TOM t CATHY TURNER 5537 BARTLETT SLVO MOUND MN 55364 38 17-117-23 44 0060 03324 NA ARRE LA BRETT HALLONQUIST BRETT K HALLONQUIST 3324 NAVARRE U HAYATA m 55391 9 PU/VRK99 AND SHERYLL BLOCK AND SNERYLL block '■ r . ' • • * . 'V.’. , s8 17-11Y-2S 4i WSt’-- 00038 ADDRESS UNASSZOMo GENE< geNe 1. ■ > . . • V . > • V* • . . • 2305 BAWZEN-PUCt~' ’■•:>;":...-:-HAYzATA-.»fi ^ ‘ .... ,• •'i I 0 ;2240 BAVVXEH PU NAYtAtA IM :S8SH < 0 S'8 17-117*23 44 0043- 02344 OLIVE AVE ., J L . CARLSON 8 H R. CARLSON; J L CARLSON I N R CARLSON). • 2344 OLZVE AVE .* • . HAYZATA MN 6^91 ■ . **• * . I , . * • r • . • • * ' .‘.V V •' 9; ; • *.• • t / 0^ *. •• ‘ V ■ • .N: « • ' J *•*’• •* •- * •v*> *. s» RUN DATE 03/19/H BATCH 502 .HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFOmATXON SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST • .#•• / PROP AODR 0»tlER NWE TAXPAYER . ■ NAHE/AObR Zt ■ 17-117-25 44 0064 ' 02538 OLIVE AVE 8 A JAKUBIAK A L H JAKUBIAK BRIAN A JAKUBIAK 2558 OLIVE AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 58 17-117-25 44 0067 02514 OLIVE AVE LOUISE B DAY LOUISE B DAY NAHE/ADDR 2514 OLIVE AVE . NAYZATA m 55591 PROP AODR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER PROP AODR 0»tCR NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 38 17-117-25 44 0075 *02314 SHAOYNOOD RO E A KU6L1N ET AL M/L EST EDMtN A HABEL KUBLIN 2314 SHAOYHOOO ROAD NAYZATA m '55391 I *r • ' PROP AODR •. ONNER NAME . * TAXPAYER , ' ' NAHE/ADDR 38-. 17-117-25 44 0076 02556 SHAOYNOOO RO JOHN C A BARBARA E ERICSON ■JOHN A BARBARA ERICSON 1620 SHAOYNOOD.RD NAYZATA 104 65391 PROP' AODR- OMNER NANE : TAXPAYER .'.';;\>»::hane/ador:. 38 ■•17-117-23 44 0079 02341. SHAOYNOOO RO . N R CROETSCH A C J’OROETSCH LOUISE A OANCELHOFF 2341 SHAOYNOOO RO . NAYZATA m 65391 . ■ ; I 38 17-117-25 44 0083 PROP AODR 02250 BAYVIEN PL 0»MER NAME* J L SCHNECK A P H SCHNECK J L A P H SCHNECK 2230 BAYVIEN PL S . NAYZATA MN 55591 TAXPAYER NAME/AODR .■**. *• • •REPORT NO. P145S401P ..PACE » • ■ .♦• ••38 17-1X7-23 44 0065 02326 OLIVE AVE J T JACOBSON t L D JACOBSON J T JACOBSON A L D JACOBSON 2326 OLIVE AVE MAYZATA MN 55391 » I .. ‘. . •» ; V ./• A * *;'* 38 17-117-21 44 0064 {, '02318 OLIVE AVE. . • PATRICK N SULLIVAN ' ' • • • •, • < *• l.•••• *.' I* .*• •• ‘ > • PATRICK N SULLIVAN 2318 OLIVE AVE ‘-I’. /V * ; '^*. **•• I 36 17-117-23 44 0066 02306 OLIVE AVE KAREN E ANDERSON KAREN E*ANDERSON 2306 OLIVE AVE ORONO MN 55391 *r.V•* ’Y • V.N'f'V •• •• V • t.. • . : 38 17-117-23 44 0O6f-’ ' • • • ; . > \ ’r.'. . ’ V I • .**.. •02300 OLIVE AVE >, HAROARET A NAROARET A ' ■ > ^ /**. t-X • •.V «. *:.;..' -2300 OLIVE AVE • NAYZATA HN 55591 % 36 17-117-23 44 0074 02324 SHADYWOOO RD R J HAEFNER t C F HAEFNER RICHARD J/COLLEEN F HAEFNER 2324 SHADYMOOD RD NAYZATA MN 55391 . ••; • I . -• .■ 1 V V • ■' .V.- V'>• ! , ■ '. ‘ * *.* * **“•' 1 iif 17-117-^3 44 0075 . •.4‘, ' *.• 'V 9 <9 r . * • . 1.^. . . •*•1 02336 SHAOYNOOO RO ' . .1 A B ERtCSON john c a barbaiu E. ERICSQN . ' y .1420 SHADYNOOO RO . .' ■ ^'NAYZATA m v.55391I ^ ^ i tm* > V .V •. *. • I 36 17-117-23 44 0077 03326 NAVARRE LA GRACE BAPTIST CHURCH/NAVARRE GRACE BAPnST CHURCHyTUVARRE 2360 SHADYNOOO RD ORONO MN 55391 56 17-117-23 44 0078 * 00036 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED ,36 17-117-23 44 0060 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO TONN OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55359 36 17-117-23 44 0084 02350 OLIVE AVE NANCY C RUST NANCY C NELSON 2350 OLIVE AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 A.' *\ *• * V* >■ *23 .44 0085..'. ^ • ••.. • • ORELltC' OR ■• ••;•; •'••* . • ERVICE CENTERS INC o '?. * .i‘ t • A 35-17-117 * 05340 SHORELINE :V0YA6EUR SERVICE V0YA6EUR SERVICE CENTERS INC • P 0 BOX 65 • NAVARRE »tl 55392 • . • ' ••' • •v.' • - . * * • 4* •- N ".I .: > . V RUN DATE 03/19/9A BATCH 502 HEfMEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY (M4ERS LISTPROP AODR ‘ 0»MER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR.'.• .. • • ^ M 17-117-25 44 0090 05285 UFAYETTE RIDGE CT SALLY J HCCABE SALLY J HCCABE 5285 UFAYETTE R200E CT ' HAYZATA Mi 5S591 ' • c - t % • 9 V .. ; OMCR NAME .. TAXPAYER. . ' >; ‘NAHE/AMHi i *• J- 58 17-117-23 44 0098 03500 NAVARRE. U * . RAYMOHO N PA8CN RAYHDNO.N PASCH . :‘3300 NAVARRE U • . NAYEATAMN 55391 ' .* •• ■ ' PROP ADOR OHCR NAME '..TAXPAYER • '• NAME/AODR 38 17rll7-23 44 0101* 033*0 SHORELINE DR t it KOEHNEN. leroyVa carol KOENNEN 2*020 .VALLEYMOOO . EXCELSIOR m 55331 PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR H 38 17-117-23 44 0107 02304 SHADYNOOD RO CRAXe ALLEN 80RCHAR0T CRAXO ALLEN BORCHARDT E504 SHADYNOOD RO NAYZATA NN 55391- . • I PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER . NAME/AODR •i. 38 17-117-23 44 0110 '03290 NAVARRE U • ■ CHARALAMPOS MARINOS CHARALAMPOS MARINOS 3290 NAVARRE U NAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADOR OtOIER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 38 20-117-23 11 0017 02455 SHADYNOOD RO JARIBO INC JARXBO INC ■PO BOX 95 NAVARRE Itl 55392 . .. • .« ' ! »•.' ■ ••• .-. *-• • I .• •• t ‘ U•*. *• • •REPORT NO. P1435401 .PAGE *S 'i38 17-117-23 44 009400038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND ^‘•Si;-i7^if>^ia.44'oo9<•••* • %• • V. • •- ,.38 17-117-23 44 0099 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIOCD i>:'. ■ <^* ;• .17-147^':44yoi6o CITY OF ORONO CITY.OF ORONO POBOk '**. ' **;«s^V.^- .'*:',r-.14<00 28TN A CRYSTAL BAY MN 55359. . ?* • '-VPLtMOltni MM 'r ;‘«LAss xi,.pi V*.:BUBS n-PI 38 17-117-23 44 0102 02385 SHADYNOOD RO S H SCHMIDT A S J SCHMIDT STEPHEN H SCHMIDT 2385 SHADYNOOD RO BOX 15 NAYZATA W 55391 .^•^M.••^.3i^47:ll♦iii44^:olor■^ •• ••••. .-02308 SHADVNOOO'RD . •- •'.*• • ■- • -02308 SHAOyttoOORO PHYLUS HENOER^ 'A'' •,.PHy«.Ll8 HENDERSON ' ■ .2308 SHADYNOOD'. RO 'NAYZATA : ••r . - •. . .•* 38 17-117-23 44 OlOO 02260 8AYVXEH PL JACQUELYTM J SEGNER JACqUELYNN J SEGNER 2260 BAYVXEH PL HAYZATA HN 55391 38 i 17-117-23 44‘OlOf 0328* NAVARRE U •• 'V * • • • . '• V;.. y • > GRACE MARIE DAHL -' BRACE MA«B oaHL^ v. .. V,; p;o Box.tz#., <•; V(i(ACONZA ‘MN.' -iSiOT.' '■ - • IV . -.y - i :•>. ••• •. .Vv. " •* \ '.-r/ . •; - ' v* •:•• • • J 58 20-117-25 11 0002 02420 SHADYHOOD RD VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS CO RO 15 I 19 NAVARRE MN 55592 Vr-; i . SB 20-117-23 li'OOlB = .. I . , . 02445 SHADYNOOD RD.. ^ ' ■ ' i 1ST NATL DAM NAVA •• .w •*/ • 8 «• •r' 1ST NATL BAIK.03.N2VARRS ' CO ROAD 13.1 Cd'ROAD ’* .NAVARRE MN : ' sBot V •V, ‘••■'Vv :.ir'yx •■'X'X'X ■ -V.' .». • • « 38 20-117-23 11 0016 02455 SHADYNOOD RO P M EN6LUND ET AL TRUSTEES PAUL H A JEANNE H ENGLUNO PO BOX 95 NAVARRE m 55392 ■ V 38 . 20-117*23 11-0024 .03333 ‘ shoreline ORMot company > super VALU stores INC CORPORATE TAX DEPT PO BOX 990. MPLS m 55440 .. .' *.• . '• V.- * ; •' •* -f' • /• -. .. ** * *■ .‘f • •• ««W.OATB 0S/19/H BATCH 1502 METtlEPlM COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0»tCRS LIST •• • •* !* ff •-.Vi-r : ' •. . ’REi ! . ‘V.VJ... . rnmr’ ’•a'*% *•PACK Y<■ AOOROttCR NAME TAXPAYER ,>MAME/AOOR SB. 20-1I7-2S 11 0031 024AS SHADYNOOO RO 1ST NATL BK OF NAVARRE 1ST. NATL OK'OP. NAVARRE .PBBOX'ltS :. • •• NAVARRE Ml -85392 Vf-v V.,v;./ f • • •. * -t.' %.•• }- : *.% ’ * ■*'.*••• . *-> • • • *.•.*■ • 30 20-117-23 11 0032 00030 ADDRESS IMASSICNEP 1ST NATL BAMC Of NAVARRE,- 1ST NATL BANK OF NAVARRE! P O BON 123 NAVARRE Ml 5S392 . *. ’.•s* , • r. .-PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SB 20-117-23 11 0dS9 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO • FRESHNATER FOUNDATION FRESNNATER FOUNDATION 728 CO RO « ; : NAYZATA Mi 85391* * • PROP ADOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER . NAHE/AOOR . 82* 16-117-23 S3 0030 000B2 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO FRESHNATER FOUNDAHON . FRESNNATER FOUNDATION 725 CO RO 4- NAYZATA MN ’ 55391- *.• f •• •* .*-. I* t • • • t ' V • . • •• • • ♦ . • •• I V • I • *.* • I i . 9 #. • •• 38 20-117-23 12 0034 03423 SHORELINE DR RICHARD M KEAVENY ETAL RICHARD M KEAVENY P 0 BOX 69 NAVARRE MN 55392 f. • TOTAL BATCH 502 00D97 1 : .VO.;--. -V'-rV V-;:.. . ■ .;• •• *..t..?;--.*.- V vVr.-V--:!' .• DATE- ) ARt ^ACCURATE r\- • APPEAtejHIS DATE-. ON'..the RECOROl.-; P^ %• T*'-' • '*. • * • • • ^ • i* - • • •.. - *. *. • , 4 * •• H I. • • ~ • *• ‘ •#• A» fa » • ® }) -y A.,-*., .; r^wsaJ^' D I" » / yijS Cy(n\yO'^^0^^ Q. (/yct^ (X ,^2^/lt.^p/^ CUa J^ (Tr^ ctt^ 1^ ^ f H /"IAjl A£^ ci>\Ayv-e^m^ CAtZpyi^nx. (9 A^^M^A^fiX/Kn I CLuJ^AJ-CA^ /CjtjbL(A\ ^ yC-xJlJ yuLcUi-C^ A^\sl 6-^ ci-&\jCAt^.4> c"tcf yiJl 1^ • //^1 C><-^yjL^rO^ ^ (j(y'Lcd^£il ^ /ICy^^^/A^rtco ^ ^uO-^jjL CLcA'<X>cxJllJi€^^ zAJ^ AS4lS) Oa\ CtC.(y^ C?^ C^ CAz^ yUp (^ Q- Jtc.'^ QyyPuX^U<D f 1 I - i V /\ s» h \ \ \ / \ \ • \ « / V / ^__________________________J!k \/ / \ / tilt ur UKUWU /' © o it:**/ :>UD lu uo/f:5/vr uv 5<r i')i :uj/u> no:‘.o3 r. ( *c> I \ I I • I \iI I I» * V < \ }• -r \ V C/A r/—V-M N • % • • • • • 1* •-•, ri» 1^1 QcHb' I"-. 30 W47- 6 i-r <t'/r <A.v.,j r L'^9/ <e.3 • ••• • • • •••*••• •• # • • • • • •• • ^ . • •> c • M. • •. .:• _ l» •.• • / • ^0 0 0I 0 0 0 W • • •/ • 0 0 f 0 0 • * \ •!• • A 0 # w 0 0!« • • 0 /V > V* •# *i» • • V • • # \•» • • • 'v • •# %. ^*#0*-* *V • • ^ i 1 t *KiVJLj-' *0 0 000»*# ••• • ^ m m §• • ( / / /J 9 4 / w /: // / / / // // /// / y / \ V / / / / // / . i:; /// i /// / i / i 11 /dh 7 / • / / # <3?1\ • • « » \1 I A.\ /s .V X X .........-SN 'v \% \ \ W9 « ^ \ cmoN \ v// X'" ■ Xx'xx ::: -X^i\i( //Xrx i..*' |.'7/ .»• \ \ \■• / “« »7 >//, - nT^ ^ ^ <■":// \ / .• \ • ^ % cO « \ \ IfiO \ \ N • ▼ ^ •''L-'"' . b / • • m «» / L CITY OF ORONO 9 6124730510 06/25/97 09:52 0:02/05 N0:463 PARMNC QICULAT RCTM. smcc 1st FIOOR; 4.344 iWf-IHHU; 3 S7t rfJJJ* ^mm, SNcc M noQR; 7,114 ^W4L nuMc aoon ISJI4 if 1101 /no • C ipoca fifattO. 3DB 40NC OOUyQN IMC; t« tuam C4. M. Nn If: 34 410N6 m mif. IK; 10 IT MHie Wi«. Q loriu IS , FIWaNC SPiCCS 10 K r ■ 30* SSSriSf-SK” «»«D tr *« «0 i 3 ««• X' mt HARDCOVER NOTES: WCLooeoa (•AOcsOgn of Mmof Mevarro); mjii B9.4S9 If jf.704 If I7JS4I if 17.145 If Ult iflUZ; GrNn 4roo: 11/170 If B.0I2 If 3.M4 If SMicnjfui lUMnf Foetprinl: 11,000 ft / 05.4SS If - 130 DRAINAGE POND STAGE-STORAGE INFORMATION mm 936.0 937.0 938.0 939.0 940.0 941.0 942.0 ABEAfin 630 1215 1800 2365 2970 3555 4140 yPLUME fcu. Frm 922 1508 2092 2678 3262 3848 I VOLUME Of POND. AS BUILT - 14^10 Co. FECT normal water LEVa (NWI) - 941X1 ' • ' T'-:. ' — ♦ *• m Pr sil St( su gr( CO* cul ^ cul > cul BENCHMAF PROPOSEt (SEE PLA7 NOTES 1 2 3 Tl AT 0) Rt 3; 5 6 7 ST UT 8 RE ST r CUT 0^ OKUfiU uo/<:<*/yr uo:uu u*: i<J/1<» no :a <»u HARDCXIVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-7S* 7S-2M* ISO-SQT EEISTINC HARnrOVER IN ZONE A HottM iiMkL=S^!S^taO' Lncdi kO ^0- {^lau^) • S.F. WMk ' 7P B. Omgr C. Orivtwsy D. StdewtDc S.F. S.F. SF. S.F.is.. SJ. S.F.^SJ X m *ST. I . ^ • 1 • E Pitio/Declc X (■• • S.P.%X m ST. F. L«Hlm|)e X m S.F.\Uiuferlita .X m S.F. By Plastic .X S.F. 0. Other X ST. * H’. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE •/PX'P ST.A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE fSCC?S.F.B A ♦ B _____X too c:s _H PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X FT ST. a LcBfib WIM) X B ST. X ST. .X • n t S.F. D. Garage C. Driveway X M S.F. » 0 'K av '/VV0 S.F. X »S.F. D. Sidewalk X • «S.F. X a.S.F. E. Patio/Deck X S.F. X • ^S.F. F. Landscape X S.F. Underlain X %■ S.F. By Plastic X S.F. G. Other . 32'ST.cur TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE ,m a.a'ic’S.F.A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE m /^OOO S.F.B A ♦ B X 100 - 'V. I 0 i^ZcUi^ £• « F.ASKMF.NT Ar.RFRMFNT i* V r. '•A.-a;-'" V,^-> THIS AGREEMENT, dated this 5th day of June, 1997, by and between ADAM SMITH COMPANY, a Minnesota coqx>ration (herein^er referred to as “Grantor”) and VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS, INC., a Minnesota corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Grantee”). RECITALS: I. Grantor is the Contract for Deed purchaser and North Central Conservative Baptist Association is the fee owner of the following described property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota: See Exhibit A attached hereto (“Property”); and 2. Grantee is the fee ONWier of the following described property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota. See Exhibit B attached hereto (“Grantee Parcel”); and 3. The parties desire to c*eate appurtenant, perpetual and nonexclusive easements in favor of Grantee for ingress and egres.’ over and across the property described as Parcel 1 and for customer overflow parking over and acioss the property described as Parcel 2, as both parcels are described on Exhibit C attached hereto (‘ Easement Parcels”). NOW, THEREFORE, in consid^tion of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and suhlciency of which are hereby acknowledged. Grantor and Grantee do hereby mutually covenant anc agree as follows: 1. GRANT OF EASEMENT. Grantor hereby grants, quit claims and conveys to Grantee a perpetual, appurtenant and nonexclusive easements for ingress and egress over and across Parcel 1 and for customer overflow parking over and across Parcel 2 for use by Grantee (“Easements”). 2. USE OF EASEMENT PARCEL. Grantor hereby grants to Grantee the right to use Parcel 1 for ingress, egress and Parcel 2 for customer overflow parking. No party to these Easements, their successors or assigns, customers, guests, invitees or licensees, shall in any manner block, obstruct or otherwise prevent the use of these Easements by Grantee or Grantor. 3. DURATION AND APPURTENANCE. The Easements granted herein shall be perpetual and appurtenant to Grantee’s Parcel and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of Grantor and Grantee. •• • 4. MATNTKNANCE AND CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLIANCE. At the lime the Property is developed, the owner of the Property will, at their sole cost and expense, constnict the driveway and parking areas on the Easement Parcels and maintain end repair such improvements C'lmprovements*’)'. Upon completion of said Improvements, Grantor shall keep the parking and ingress and egress portions of the Easements in good repair, with stripes designating parking spaces and in compliance with all applicable rules, regulations, laws and ordinances. 5. INDEMNTnCATION AND HOLD HARMLESS. Each of the parties hereto hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the other harmless from any loss or damage resulting from their use of the Easement Parcels by themselves, their customers, guests, invitees, licensees or other users of said Easements. Grantee shall carry commercial general liability insurance Coinsurance**) in an amount of not less than One Million and No/100 Dollars ($1,000,000) for use of the Easements as set forth herein. 6. ENFORCEMENT. If any party to this Agreement seeks to enforce any tenn or provision of this Agreement against the other, the non-prevailing party, in addition to any judgment or award against them, shall also pay the prevailing party’s reasonable attorneys’ fees, paralegal fees, costs and disbursements. 7. OWNERSHIP. The Grantor warrants that they are the Contract for Deed purchaser of the Property and has the right to make this conveyance. Grantor covenants that the Grantee, its successors and assigns, may quietly enjoy the Easement Parcels for the uses set forth herein. 8. APPURTENANT EASEMENT. This Easement shall be appurtenant to and run with the Grantee Parcel. 9. SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS. This Agreement shall be binding upon the successors or assigns of the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands as of the day and year above first written. CONSENT TO EASEMENT North Central Conservative Baptist Association, the Fee Owner of the Property, hereby consents and agrees to the terms and conditions of this Agreemeni. M • I H2590/2«V$03!.DOC I jm-±m M £EEj NORTH rBMTPAt rAM«CD«j- BAPTIST ASSOriAl li'i ^AM SMITH a Minnesota cocpontkm By;t dta. By; GRANTEE; VOYAOEUR SERVICE CENTERS. INC. a Minnesota cofpofidon By; iStATEQFMINNESOTA \ )ss. COnNTVOp_____________\ The fofegniny in«tninr^nt aclfnftu ^edged h«.fnr^ mi* thU H»iy ■ the 1097^ hy 1 of the STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF ) )ss. ) Notary PuMic The foregoing instrtiment was acknowledged before me this 3 the day of June, 1997, by <»« of Ihe S«e of of Notary Public n 2590/2# VSREDfXX: <;7n‘0Kj cTitri wnr 11 ,1 jOuOugJhL EXHIBIT A (Property) Lots 19, 20,21, and 22, Wiley’t Navam Addition, Lake Min Block 3, Towmite of Langdon Park, described as Mows:ika; and that part of Lot 5, Heonqdn County Abstra^ and Torrens Property Torreos Certificate No. 776469 Qn*^ <;7:n*0N |7T:I7T Kinr :nr noAt7 EXHmiTB (Onatee I>ireel) Sn^ Nu^ 1433. FOesof Regtanr of mies. Corny of Hetnepin. Wise No. i7u65« and vacntad Navarra Laaa« ^ C70* OM trT • trT )C. cr\ Kinr • n T r\r\CH exhibit c (Eastncnt P«rc«l) PARCEL 1 aynof^ A40lb0l PARCEL 2 s:riS.‘a'n <>' —«« ««. OEBii^'ihiy «t bit fTKTit or «M Lot 21 lyivwc^Oua • » .T CtOITM22iSS?iS^ i«s:ih«e, f>o»<tgntt»i«wwi>ttliiltfc»rft«tg,^i^^ TwSSaSiSLfiSlS ’"* MinniM«*tofh* tfmmmtittff •tethB »«m«, m««», 25.00»« ftn•/^ c7n*0M t7i:f7t. hinr §1 » i I nnAt? BONESTROO AND ASSOCIATES W612 6361311 07/16/97 10:27 0 :01/02 NO:855 ^ I Bonestroo Rosene mrv Anderlik& Associates Engineers & Architects 8<y^it'00. And^t.k m^<S Aijoci^res me •$ Jtn Aet>on Oatxyrtu^ity Pr nciQAiS Oxto 0 Bonestroo P£ • Joseph C Ar^ottUk P£ • Mjirv.n L Scrv.ii.^ Pf • P.crard f Turner. PE • C^ertn t Cook P£ • Bcter G Scf^w-'Cht PE • Jttry a Baurdon PE • Pope<'t W BosPE pnd Sutjsn m leertm CPA Sen cf Co^suit^''!i AssoctAte Pr$nctpA/t Hoy^ArO A S^fo'd PE • Ae tn A Gordon PE • Pobert P P^e»fe'ie PF • tichiiftf Of Foster. PE • Ooc n O i o'.iioto P£ • Poce^: C Puiiefc A i a • Mprk A Henson. PC • M»cheer T teuim#nn. Pf • Ted K ».e<fl Pf • K«nne:n p Anpenon PC • Ma*a t Poifs. P£ • S'dney P Wil'.emson p£ . P S • Pooert E Kotsmiin Otficei St Ppui. Pscnesier Wiiimar eno St CiOud mn • Vi APufcee wi July 15. 1997 Mr. Michael P. Gaffion, Asst. Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 06 Crystal Bay. Minnesota SS323 Re: O’Sullivan’s File No. 139-2267 Dear Mike, We have reviewed the site plan for the proposed commercial driveway for the Culver’s site located on the east side of Shadywood Road (CSAH 19), north of Shoreline Drive (CSAH 15) in Navarre. The proposal includes an access easement over the adjacent church property. There are several engineering issues that will need to be addressed. The Phase 2 site plan shows two accesses onto Shadywood Road. The south access is very close to the signalized intersection. This access will create problems with traffic on the county roads. We would recommend that the site be served with only one access at a location furthe*^ north of the intersection. As a minimum we would suggest that the south access be restricted to oi ly righi-tum in/right-tum out movements. Left turn movements should only be made at the north access. Hennepin County traffic engineers should review the site plan to determine the traffic impacts on CSAH 19. Their review should include the proposed access locations and whether or not additional right-of-way is needed in this vicinity. The proposed driveway will create additional conflicts if the County plans to construct a free right turn from westbound CSAH 15 to northbound CSAH 19. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLDC & ASSOCIATES. INC A . Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. jt 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612-636-4600 ■ Fax: 612-636-1311 T Hennepin County JL An Eifiijl Opporluiiil j Emplojer K ■ I • i July 14, 1997 *T> Mike Gaflron City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re: O’Sullivan Proposal, CSAH 19 Mike: As we discussed, Hennepin County will issue a permit for the slight relocation and use of the proposed access to CSAH 19 approximately 150 feet north of CSAH 15. Please remind the applicant to obtain a county permit prior to any work within the road right of way. 1 hank you for the timely inquiry and please call with further questions. Sincerely, David K. Zetterstrom Entrance Permit Coordinator DKZ:jrh Deputruent of Public Works 320 Wasiimgton Avenue South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-S496 (612)930-2500 FAX:(612)930-2513 TOD:{612)930-2696 KecydedFipa -Jl- CITYof OROXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 8 8 0 A RESOLUTION AGREEING TO THE FUTURE VACATION OF AN UNUSED PORTION OF NAVARRE LANE IN SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 117 NORTH, RANGE 23 WEST IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA FILE NO. 2197 • L • WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal coqwration organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on October 25, 1996, John O'Sullivan (hereinafter the "applicant") in conjunction with North Central Conservative Baptist Association filed a petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of a portion of Navarre Lane in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as follows: Beginning at the most easterly comer of Lot 21, "Wiley's Navarre Addition, Lake Minnetonka"; thence southeasterly along the northeasterly line of said Lot 21 extended to a point 33.0 northrsterly from the northwesterly line of Outlot C, "Lafayr R’V.ge", as measured perpendicularly from said northwesterly luic, ihence southw'esterly parallel to the northwesterly line of said Outlot C to the most northerly comer of Tract A, Registered Land Surv'ey No. 1433; thence southwesterly to a point on the northwesterly line of said Tract A, 253.03 feet southwesterly of the most northerly comer of said Tract A; thence North 31 degrees 52 minutes 41 seconds West a distance of 43.82 feet more or less to a point on the southeasterly line of Lot 5, Block 3, "Townsite of Langdon Park"; thence northeasterly along the southeasterly line of said Lot 5, Block 3 to the most easterly comer of said Lot 5, Block 3; thence southeasterly along the southwesterly line of Lot 22, "Wiley's Navarre Addition, Lake Minnetonka" to the most southerly point of said Lot 22; thence northeasterly along the southeasterly lines of Lots 22 and 21, "Wiley's Navarre Addition, Lake Minnetonka" to the point of beginning; and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held before the Orono Planning Commission on November 18, 1996, regarding said vacation and all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and Page 1 of 3 GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. §880 WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended conditional approval of the requested vacation; and the City Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation, as proposed and with suitable conditions, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following findings: 1. The vacation will not affect access to or use of any adjoining prop>erty. 2. 3. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve or use the dedicated right-of-way as a road except for utilities, drainage and access purposes hereinafter described. The unimproved dedicated right-of-way as it currently exists senes no public purposes which cannot be satisfied via the use of easements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of John O’Sullivan and North Central Consenative Baptist Association is conditionally appro\ed and that the City hereby agrees to take fonnal action to vacate said portion of Navarre Lane subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. The City will formally vacate Navarre Lane at the time development of the adjacent 2380 Shadywood Road site is commenced by the applicant. This agreement to complete the vacation shall be more formalized in the form of a Developer's Agreement. In conjunction with applicant’s development of the property located at 2380 Shadywood Road, applicant agrees to construct a sidewalk/bike path near the northwest boundary of the property', linking Olive Avenue and Shadywood Road, the design of such sidewalk/bike path subject to review by the City Engineer and approval by the City Council. Applicant shall grant utilities, access and drainage easements over the portion of Navarre Lane to be vacated. Page 2 of 3 CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 Q------ 5.Applicant shall grant to the Cit>’ a 10' easement for future trail purposes along the northeasterly boundar>' of the 2380 Shadywood Road property adjacent to Olive Avenue. 6..Applicant shall grant t« the City a 10' wide trail easement centered on the centerline of the sidewalk/bike path to be located near the northwesterly • boundary of the 2380 Shadywood Road property. 7.Although the City is being granted u^il easements over the pedestrian and bike pathway, that path within applicant ’s property boundaries shall be maintained by the property owner, not by the City. It is the City's intent that all upkeep, maintenance and snow removal activity will be the responsibility of the property owner, not of the City. 8.Applicant shall legally combine the vacated portions of right-of-w'ay with the adjacent 2380 Shadywood Road property. 9.Applicant shall be responsible for executing the appropriate drainage, utility, access and pedestrian/bike trail easements as noted above. Such easements shall be filed at the time the vacation resolution is filed by the City Attorney's Office. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held January 13, 1997. Gabriel wbbour. Mayors Page 3 of 3 n TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Michael P. Gaf&on, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:July 14,1997 SUBJECT: #2268 Robert T. Callan, 2995 Deer Run Trail - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential, 2 acres, unsewered. Application: Request for front setback variance for construction of a new single family residence on this 'back lot'. Pertinent Code Sections 1. Section 10.03, Subd. 27 - Special standards for back lots created after January 1,1994: Subd. 27(A)(2) - ". . . the street yard or front yard for any back lot will be a yard starting where the narrow ’ access outlot corridor ends and the lot begins." Subd. 27(A,3) - "The depth of the required street yard or front yard shall be 150% of the zoning district front yard requirement." 2. Section 10.28, Subd. 5(B) - Required front yard in RR-IB District = 50 ’. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owner's List D - Survey E - Section 10.03, Subd. 27 Discussion Applicant requests that the 75' required "front yard" setback along the east lot line be reduced to 45' to better accommodate construction of a proposed new single family residence. This lot was platted in 1994 at just over 3 acres to meet the back lot requirements. By definition, the lot line abutting the access outlot is the front lot line of a back lot, hence the east lot line becomes the front lot line in this case. Applicant notes that this is inconsistent with the other lots on the south side of Deer Run Trail, all of which have their designated side lot lines as the easterly or westerly lot lines. 1 Zoning File #2268 July 14, 1997 Page 2 The intent of the back lot ordinance and its more strict standards, is primarily to decrease the impact on the "front lot". When the Planning Commission reviewed the use of back lots in 1994, it concluded that a standard back lot situation would typically place a driveway directly adjacent to the side yard of the front lot, and the front yard of the back lot directly adjacent to the rear yard of the front lot Planning Commission concluded that such adjacencies are not always compatible, and can be mitigated by requiring greater setbacks. Arguably, that ordinance did not contemplate the somewhat unique back lot situation encountered on Deer Run Trail. In this case, the applicant's defined front yard is adjacent to the front lots side yard. However, applicant proposes to orient his house with the functional front yard to the north, similar to Other homes on the south side of Deer Run Trail. Hardship Factors which might be consider in support of the variance request include the following: 1.Applicant proposes to orient his home the same direction as the adjacent homes to the east, hence it would be appropriate to consider the east lot line as a side lot line. 2.Due to orientation of the adjacent residence to the east and the orientation of the proposed house, the lot line in question will function as a side lot line for both the front lot and back lot. Therefore, there is a diminished need for the e.\panded setback as defined in the code, since the expanded setback requirement was intended in part to mitigate adjacency of dissimilar yards. 3. The lot meets all other required back lot standards. 4.Granting of the variance will avoid the need to excavate into the knoll on the west side of the property. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of a reduction of the defined front setback from 75' to 45' as proposed, conditioned on applicant orienting the proposed residence with the front facing northerly and the side facing easterly, to match other homes on the south side of Deer Run Trail. Options for Action 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Recommend approval per staff recommendation. Recommend approval with other conditions. Table for further information (specify). Recommend denial (state reasons). Other. *4 .*'^rr III si< -.moi «rcT’-o rr^DtL CITV OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPL Initial Application Fee S220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variaac Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) fiance for non-conforming structures $220.00 Aftcr-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # j^c^Co ? Date RecelTed 6? '7-<^ 7 Amount Paid f^.^o PROPERTY information SittAddr^s^ <?<?/• _, rroperty Identification Number (P.I D.) A m% t A aB A I J • i /D/V C7^ -------- _______ — — I (do) (do not) also owiT the adjacent parcels of land--------------------------------^(month/yearj —“O'er (specify). APPLICAW Name _febcft (U.^ Addresi;^, rti^h Phone (home) i ” I La ^ ^ OWNER Name Address: LTr..r-cs:r tSo^C Cirv:Zip: Estimated Construction Cost $DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST v^umuucuon t^ost » (attach additional s|ieets if necessary) V ariances required ____Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover ^ Setback: X Front .L-‘l Coverage Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other rsnecifV^ a^y r/if frer /x^< (ej ^fr^,4jr autner (speciiy) _/A/,rA /a” J'/ra^r/^^. ___________ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITION Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property co.-.4.. ;;r s preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ^7/,ca <£>Tf //.' r///f fAjr UAf/T C/AAff AitA^AyiA^g: r/9 r/ic /ucf c/K/j: at f/t.r icr Ct/Af'T r,\c /¥fwu ro />c^ n> /€ CAA^f/J7(^. c-c/nfy rAc ^//r< /i T/^iS fjAf A f^A.iAyr ffT^^CK /A/^ /AAfAfAp/Mc: /S’c9^ A 7_r nrAACk ^^AfACA CKAfJr a AfAyPU . / /f£’UJA (attach additional, sheets if necessary) CUT /A^7^ -7//r Aifjra.Ay.yy/;: a^A.€A . f'/JAT A'rx fAft 6C TAfATg-tA ^ (PF F'AtfAAr FFTSach . UF ' i 7 ^ ’ OO# maZft ^ ^ f •wUrrili 04 »5roji 4ctn«3 UD • required submittals iTiformiti^n tnmt I...... 1. 2. j. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Cenified Propcrt>' Owners List of owners witKm i <n- i v . must obtain this list, labels and m^n fr u P*®* "wp (you Fin.,.„. A-603. Gov , Ccn' ^ Dop.nm.nt of «'iruU.rns°L^«'^!Ld'*7n ^dirton""“'^d’“"'*’'°'^ roproduction. 0) «Py x II" for S'* K2.r.... L.S. Of dt. -«s.i n.m« (Lt:. r." .r^nr: “■•> A rSdorn'to^'t^n =pp>-'(o if nor.:r:::.'~ person, ,00 wt,'!; ^otltd ?ftr ‘.ppa^ido“ ‘ Add.t,on.l „.ms a, may be requested by City staff. mrlanct itnniicalion 1?^"^ enmp'l,™/'v‘®". wl'^^ion- Please remember that jaur ' If ihf ahm information h.. nn. h.., (nrii.drrt APPLICANT’S SIGNATURT Id'mt^!:r, %7Z t?pa'; isv:" Tstn'T and/or consultant expenses ’^ incul^ed in rev “f o This" TT info,m.tion supplied isjn;ym^ect t^ the best of htadter tooTed*. V ___ Date Vld-ATeApplicant's Signal OWNER’S signature e"i!i;zrirpr"opV„X'Tmember, for pu^,."’ Commission members, and Council PurposesjjjjftvCTgSS^-anjt^rjflcation of this request. Owner’s Signature Date ^Cir^e ^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 davs before rhe pu • Co^tsston Meeting, Planning Commission Meeting, are held on ,r thW MonV^T^h month. Appl.e.nt. must be present .1 all ach.dul.d r.vl.,. m..,lng..«Y ,H. F|!nm„ ommlsji.n and Couneil. If applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting please & zoning OfTeTfTT^ha^g^TrTrT dfe'meMT" 8 ^^0,. \y ^ ’■’ '■■ ,,»^ ' %x . / rs^9.6r fe-? »o. 1/ >r»n» &()?• Q< RUN DATE 06/26/97r '*ij ••f:-.•J ' • .BATCH 504• :*'vr .* •PROP ADDR ; • ■ ONNER NAME }TAXPAYER •NAHE/ADDR 16 04-117-23 23 0020 00260 CYGNET PL EUGENE C DETERLXN6 A NIFE EUGENE C DETERLING 260 CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE HN 55356 ' ’ PROP AOOR OMCR NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR • ► . . .' 1. . • U 04-117-23 23 0027 0003S ADDRESS UNASSZGNED H N A S J LAUE MERMAN N A SHIRLEY J LAUE 594 PARK LANE LONO LAKE HN 55354 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR Sa 04-117-23 24 0005 00030 ADDRESS UNASSZONED STATE OF MINN STATE OF MINN iUm) I LUCE LINE TRAIL) ' f. PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR •i •. ». ■ 38. 04-117-23 24 0013 02900 DEER RUN TR * J L BUCHANAN AHA HAHMONO JEFFREY L BUCHANAN HARCIA A HAHHONO 4204 PARKNOOD RD EDINA HN 55434 PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 04-117-23 32 0011 00455 SUSSEX LA N N A D C NILDHAN NINA N A DONALD C HILDHAN .745 SPRING HILL RD KAYZATA HN 55391 J-., • K * *• *• • • ‘."s! ■“ r~‘'‘■ V , » Ji > • HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST38 04-117-23 23 0022 03150 RI06ENOOO CIR CRAMS DENNISON KENNETH A LOUISE OSTMAN 3150 RIDGENOOO CIR LONG LAKE MN 55354 38 04-117-23 23 0030 02995 DEER RUN TR R T A J E CALLAN ROBERT T A JANICE E CALLAN 9051 HIGH POINT CIR EDEN PRAIRIE HN 55347 38 .04-117-23 24 0007 00395 SUSSEX LA N H A D C HILDHAN NINA H A DONALD C HILDHAN 745 SPRING HILL RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 04-117-23 24 0017 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD ASSOC INC ROBERT HARE 1400 LONG LAKE BLVD ORONO MN 55354 TOTAL BATCH 504 00013 REPORT NO. PZ435401 PAGE 24 T p6 •38 04-117-23 23 0023 03100 RIDGENOOO CIR T E A H H CASHIN TIMOTHY E A HOLLY H CASHIN 3100 RIDGENOOO CIR LONG LAKE MN 55354 4 ■•'40 , > * f 38 04-117-23 23 0031 03020 SOMERSET U R P HARE V A B R HARE ROBERT A BENTE HARE 3020 SOMERSET LA ORONO HN 55354 38 04-117-23 24 0012 02945 DEER RUN TR S L A P A BARNES STEVEN A PAULETTE BARNES 2945 DEER RUN TR LONG LAKE MN 55354 38 04-117-23 24 0018 02975 SOMERSET LA COFFIN CORNERS PARTNERSHIP JOE A TERE-"A LAHTI 1180 PHILLIPS DR LONO LAKE MN 55354 . •• : V! V S- .1] 1 .1 Y ^ Y • V ‘ \ * • • i • » • ' • 1* I $• 1 • f • • • ff/——: rAur#^ —. A«A%krr.^ # c^' > ■ ^:■l^/. ■' urauN OAlt oeodmoN t Coffin & GRONBFRr. imp 0>ii<tiltiii\^ Lii^iiiivr<, Luul SimYwrn, .S/ft- I’Ltimcn ■JS2 r.im.ir.Kk Aynuii' • I.ong Like, M,\ 35336 612-473-JI-U " \ . \ »ll 4 • •• I h*^- trtify iKii ihis tun-fv was b»- nw orandn m» dinct mow- o( ^ Civil Enginm and Land Suiyayor under Mart S. Cranb*fg MinnneXj UernTNurntM II7H ORDINANCE NO. ^22 , SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE AND SUBDIVISION CODE BY DEFINING STANDARDS FOR THE CREATION AND USE OF LOTS WHICH DO NOT ABUT A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Municipal Zoning Code Secdon 10.02 and Municipal Subdivision Code Secdon 11.03, Subdivision 2 are each hereby amended by adding the following definidons: "Lot-Back" - A lot typically separated from a public or private road by another lot and which gains access to the public or private road via a narrow corridor. Such a separated lot is considered to be a "back lot" when the corridor is platted as an outlot. A separated lot is considered to be a "flag lot" when the corridor is platted as part of the lot. When the corridor is merely an easement over another lot, the separated lot is considered to be an "easement back lot". "Lot-Front" - A lot abutting a public or private road, across which an outlot has been platted for access to a back lot. SECTION 2. Municipal Zoning Code Secdon 10.03 is amended by adding Subdivision 27 which shall read as follows: Subd. 27. Special Standards for Back Lots Created After January 1, 1994. Back lots as defined in this section which were created as part of a subdivision that received preliminary subdivision approval after January 1, 1994 are subject to the following special requirements in addidon to the standards required in Secdon 11.31, Subdivision 5 of the Orono Subdivision Code: * A. Dimensional standards for bade lots shall be as follows: 1. Lot area shall be 150^ of the zoning district requirement. 2. Lot width measured parallel to the firont or street lot line at the street yard setback line of a lakeshore back lot, or at the front y^d setback line of a nonlakeshore back lot, shall meet the zoning district width requirement. The street yard or front yard for any back lot will be a yard starting where the narrow access oudot corridor ends and the lot begins. Lakeshore back lots shall meet the lot width standard at the shoreline, at the lakeshore setback line, and at the street yard setback line. 3. The depth of the required street yard or front yard shall be 150 55 ' of the zoning district front yard requirement. • 4. The required side yard and rear yard depths for back lots shall be 15055 of the zoning district yard requirements. The required lakeshore yard of a lakeshore back lot shall meet the zoning district lakeshore yard requirements. B. E. Dimeasioiial standards for front lots. A tont lot rmatsd as ot a fr^Stack lot division shaU most all zotung disa.ct area, wrfdi and s^°ba?k ^dards. ercepi that the required side yard of the front lot rdfatent^lhe access oudot shall be equivalent to the s.de street yard requircincac for that zoning district. C. Access requirements, Access oudots shall be 30' minimum width, and sh^ be wide enough to accommodate drainage, snow removal and scieenmg without encroaching on neighboring prop.irdes. In aoproving frontrttack lot divisions, to City may require tot both front lot and back lot share a driveway access withm th access oudot if Council decennines that creatmg an additional access to the existing street will be a potential safety hazard. J. Driveways within a back Ic: shall be located at least 10 from the side or rear lot lines of adjacent lots. 4.No more than two residences may be served by a driveway located within an access oudot. 5.No access oudot may be platted aburting an adjacent access ou o e.xcept when the intent is to combine the two access oudots or creation of a public or private road meeting City standards. D. Screening requirements. Driveways constructed in access oudots sn^ be adeq^tely screened bv fencing or vezenrion ax the discrcuon oficy, a all points to the rear of the required street yard of the front lot, so as to eliminate intrusion of vehicle iieadlights into the side or r ^ yard of adjacent lots. 2 ■ The street yard of the back lot shall be adequately screened by fencing or vegetation at the discretion of the City, so as to eliminate intrusion of vehicle headlights into the side or rear yards of adjacent lots. Standards for accessory structures. Accessory struccures shall adhere to aU reouirements of the zoning code, with the foUowing additioiu.' * requirements: 1. Accessory scrucrureo within a back lot shall be allviwed no closer than 10' to a neighboring property’s side or rear yard. Accessory struccures shall not be allowed within the required street yard of a back lot nor within the required rear yard of a front lot which abuts the scresr yard of a bac.k lot. j.No accessory structure shall be allowed within an access oudot. • j ‘I J To:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moores, City Administrator From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator July 17, 1997 Sabject:#2269 Conley Brooks/Gerald McCourtney, 980-1045-1055 Femdale Road West - Proposed Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 Acre, Sewered Application: 'Uncombine' two small lakeshore parcels that were previously combined, for attachment to adjacent homestead properties. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Survey E - Public Notice F - Staff Sketch: Proposed Combinations G - Letter from Attorney of Property Owners at 960 West Femdale Summaiy of Application Mr. Brooks and Mr. McCourtney are purchasing the property at 1045 West Femdale Road, a half acre tax parcel that contains a small existing house. Applicants propose to remove the existing house, and split the property along the boundary between Lots 11 and 12, each combining their respective portions with their homestead properties. The McCourtney residence is directly adjacent to the west of the portion of property to be combined. The Brooks residence parcel is across Femdale Road from the lakeshore parcel intended for combination. NOTE: The survey work for this proposed division^combination was not submitted to the City until July 15. The survey, as provided, suggests the potential need for other City approvals not directly related to the current application. These potentially include but are not limited to: The separation of Parcel C (see survey) from the property at 905 West Femdale with which it currently is legally combined, and which parcel may have previously been used as area credit for hardcover variances for 905 West Femdale. The formal review and approval of docks apparently existing on the south side of Femdale Road and apparently seiz ing the property(s) on the north side of —i Zoning File #2269 July 17, 1997 Page 2 Femdalc Road, which use apparently has not been formally documented in City records. Resolve of issues concerning the width of Femdale Road right-o^ way, which on the survey spears to be shown as private property but on the plat maps appears to be dedicated right-of-way. Related questions as to whether Parcels B, C and D are legitimately created parcels (they do not appear on the Hennepin County plat maps as separate parcels). Attorney Robert Mitchell, acting on behalf of either one or both of the applicants, has informally discussed some of these issues with staff, and is aware that they may require additional formal applications and/or City approvals. Discussion Staff is in complete support of the proposal to remove the existing house at 1045 West Femdale and split the property between the two adjacent/nearby residence parcels. The existing house encroaches into (or at least abuts) the road right-of-way and the adjacent west lot line. Further, virtually all of this property except the northerly half of the house, is within 75' of the lake where no new constmction would normally be allowed, and the proposed division/recombination avoids the City being requested to grant difficult variances for construction of a new residence on the property. The property at 1045 West Femdale also includes two tax parcels on the north side of the road, one of which contains an existing garage that encroaches into tlic right-of-way. That garage is in poor condition ar • die City's preference would be that it be removed. Mr. Mitchell has questioned whether a new^ garage could be constmcted in its place at a more conforming 'ocation. That issue has not been addressed as part of this review. In Exhibit F, staff has sketched the proposed combinations for clarity. The easterly half of the parcel to be divided will be (after combinations) directly across the road from the 980 residence parcel. It would be reasonable to formally approve the combination as proposed, with the stipulation that if Hennepin County will not technically allow a legal combination across the road, it would be necessary for the owner of 980 West Femdale to execute a Special Lot Combination resolution to be filed on the Chain of Title of the separated parcels, defining the relationship between those two parcels and prohibiting their future ownership separation without formal City approval. This will guarantee that the easterly lakeshore parcel is not sold off to a ihird party with intent to develop it. . i Zoning File #2269 July 17,1997 Page 3 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed division/recombinaf 3n of Parcels G and I with Parcel J, and Parcel F with Parcels A, E and H. Staff is making no recommendation at this time regarding the disposition or use of Parcels B, C and D which may require separate approvals or consideration as noted above. Options for Action 1.Recommend approval per staff recommendation, subject to the removal of the existing house at 1045 West Femdale on Parcels G and 1, and removal of the non-conforming garage structure on Parcel H. 2. Recommend approval with additional or revised conditions. 3. Table pending receipt of additional information and/or formal applications for the separate issues noted in the staff memo. 4. Recommend denial, stating reasons. 5.Other. V.*] #2 <7 Q } ?liOO £-4* • % Application # V>^ . r r^y Date Received 4,7 Amount Paid \3 CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site address 9^^ cm a^aS ^ /^Sf u^.F€A^g4^ v /^Y wT /k ^ '• Properly Identification Number (PID) a-//7‘-/7»yv ^oaij . - ooo3 Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? “ s Attach legal description to application. ^oa ^ ^ APPLICANT Name CoiJi^'f ^HOOKS .Jg ^V» CjiOU dr- ^S^OkS"____________ Address ^}80 UJ’ Phone (home) ¥7S'7^i>Y~ City \*JA^2JCr^ f^A) ^'TV^ ^ • *OWNIfll -(if different than applicant) Name Zip i33 7/ Phone (work) ^ : Address V.fet City4,^ c (atta^ list if i^ore than one) Phone (home)^5^ Zip-5^6;>1, Phone (work) i/7J- </ f EXISTING LAND USE . Number of Tax Parcels Deyelopment Size s Present use (check) Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Acres Dr>’ Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of uni'.s S Other (specify)_________ X Diyision fo’’ Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) _________ Subdiyision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites ^ Existing Units C r ______ New Units 2. Total Units ^/^JUcf jfiuA^ra Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per___Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)________ . I • 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. • ^ — Hennepin County Department of Finance AASOJ Zontag >0“ *his application. 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 ofSurvey or mylar copies of formal plat 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. • * 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit Zoning Official's Signature_____________________________________ iQials ?sa l. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check pC] those which apply) A. Applicatton Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II &. Ill) $250.00 , —Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $350.00 * ' ' _____ Subdivision Application (Class I &. II) $350.00 -------- Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 ■f$25.00/lot (Class III* all non-residcntial) ' " --------- _____ 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 1 1 .62) --------- _____ Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) --------- -------- Renewal of Class 1 and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) ZZZZ -------- Renewal of Class 111, Prelirninary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) ' -------- Renewal ofFinal Class III Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from original application) . TB. Special Improvement Fees: _____ Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + $.50/lineal ft.;_____lin. ft. x .50 - $ _____ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50/lineal ft.;_____lin. ft. x .50 - $ _____ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 _____ Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub _____ Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/stub _____ Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 -------- On-Site System, S=te Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/per lot x ___ new lots ' . i • C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. F*e$ _____ Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100.00 _____ PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit pie applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commissi^and Council necessary^ process t^ applica^n and further agrees pay all additional fees established by Applicant ’s Dat e Owner's Signaturt^ZLA,^Q^ZM----- Date / ' V/ Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Pla.ming Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Plaiuiing 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. * ' % OC/30/1997 03:25 06/27/1997 lf|36 4/i-4435 473-4439 0:iFFir< .?• •9P'i>lE£P-9 03PV1H t . .’• -i- ^ -V-* • w » • ^- I ! Appiiom^ f l>iitc lUcdrtd Amount PUd CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION VHOPERiry LOCATION Si^address, ftywty Idemificadon Nianber (PID)‘ *•* cheek one - Propcfty orAttedi lefal dcacriptioa to appUceiioiL tORttU? APTLICAMT Amiws OWNER (If diflkrsnt ttuui applieenC) Name PhoZMQlOfIM) Pheoe (work) 7r, Addkms 9W(utitb list if mere ooe)Zip Pfapof (hoow) .Phone (vvork) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parealy De%4t<7ment Sisr » I Prei^at uu (check) I I I Pruast Zoning Dimict PROPOSAt Aeree Diy Land Acres Wet Lend Acfft Total, all parcels RaeidentljU; no. of units __ Other (specify). — ' Division for Tax Punioees -----; Lot Line Reanangcmeat Only (no new buildllng sites) Subdivision for New Building Sisas Number of Buildiag Sites ___Existing Units '! _____ New Units TotaJ Units Propcised Otesa Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per I • • I $q. Ft. Dry Buiidable Land Residential Other (specif)_________ « I PA-9E b: o:> 11/12/lS 00:39 TX/RX S’0.0405' • V « . P.)002 Oa/30/1997 06/27/1997 ] Jt IBEP'3 ••»rLr«N«v «.,i,cAT.o.^ g^>li«l^tfm«flOH oa CtiSMte of Survoy. I Co»t Cwl3jltj37^ <W» U« Ihwn Hwxaopm C«^ PA-3E 0 3 • # HACC (74 X y A. —.._ .......t—»''"v««Hjrl^i«tB»rotofrintac.A^02 ._________ ~ ■!___________________imatoual n»fMo(r«fir CortifMolo of S 3. Tklf op|iiion.| I r>ww<irigiog ApprOVU of IVTrmil pf^f if ippI^lffX Af|rcem( '' **^***““<*«l!pqHWM.Ibcl,^,y, =^"^£g~™sas« -------- "“Tv**®" ApplKorioo fCtoM IA n) S930.00 — ♦ W.««« (CU„ m « ~ . ■ L«f«||R*viowio4rirtog; ^ SiiMlvisten only T7y.oo I 1 ___________________ '►'•MWBOmi as4 OOVCBOOU ib K S390.00 —“ gogwi—i lUvlow r— <n tpeuntd^ ---- •mfw^ ofCtau Jirfr?ij!S£^*sBbdtvS5*^^ oH*in*j o^|»li«ii,n; ---- ^ KOO OO * ».5</Uoo^ A ------ - I ---- ^90l>.00 * $ J0/ltn«aJ ft.;U«.ttx.50«S lin. ft. jc ,50 -1 'I2I!S^ *® Accept Exisdac PrivKt ftoad S900.00Er?r?*fj M«“ fiJOCfliloo S250.00 ♦ S23/Sttib EweniUjo S250.00 tl5/«tu9 nniaie Aft^llcstiM Fooi/Miic. Fmc —— {950.00 per eocb eddidonxl vwiaace) Aiioid»u4 >o«j SobdlvlsloB Sioo.oo PW3 A^icatteo with SuMivuion S30.00/Dweliin{ Unit PlinSSi ComSS^yS? Co^iUc'S^^!^^*!!!^ AdminUtneor. City En ginoer. Clly A«on,«,. o»<iMae.. ^ ^pplicr-qea end fjtHm cgrcM to poy d! oadhlpr d foe et*«bH»hed h, AppHe^oi'f signatoici* j» ' T~" ^ Z?^------------—----------:=>n-'- ---------------Dttt Ownc(*a Sigoature ttoh^oa tu third Mdn^o?!lgh^'^ murthewoM^rif^ll^fc^^ mtetjn* FUnnbi« ComrolMion mrrrinri tad Council. If*a ■ppii«„ris unabU to anend at all •ehadulad review mcetiap of ttw IcoAlaf ComntUi.ca p\u* and to advlf th«i8uUd!ns A 2ontofOnfe?SfAht£I3?SlS^^ ** *" e«*orto d a««nt «s<rut ia >o«r ♦ y. • I . I • 1« 1 11/12/15 00:39 TX/RX NO.0495 | 11 P.004 • • • I • m i ^ ^04.5 -v| .• C4 ! i 1 1 f 1 Cl .•-•••.^11 1 1 o 1 1 I < i i 444 ? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 61/. a I5/.0I N0-03'?0*f ^ 174.01 4/1 /' H ✓ * / /0 ** Oiij. y 0 % 0* / OJ 0* 0 0 /. ........350.......... ..■%. /•’ 471 _______________--__________________________^ 0^ StLNQ ?84 . ;I </*•'. • ■ i ■n.-RUN DATE 06/25/97 HENNEPIN COCNTTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LISTBATCH SOS , *1 y •• i* , ;(■> • A PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR \/v: . . . .•* *.» *.* I* ^ > •«(V PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR • i'J • V * ; :, PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER . NAME/AOOR . - I. I i*’I V «•.. , f" PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR f. PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR •Vi -V’, - . riAT«/ADUR <Vi . ■ v: PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NATC/ADDR SB 02-117-2S 42 0009 OOOSa ADDRESS UNASSIGNED THE NATURE CONSERVANCY NATURE CONSERVANCY ISIS 5TH ST S E SUITE S14 MPLS MN 55414 SB 02-117-2S 4S OOOS 01070 FEmOALE RD N HENRY M SKARP HENRY H StCARP 1045 N FERNDALE RD NAYZATA HN 55S91 SB 02-117-2S 4S 0006 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO LOUISE M LONRY NORNEST BANK MN TRUST REAL ESTATE 6TH I MARQUETTE MPLS MN 55479-0046 38 02-117-2S 4S 0020 01101 FERNDALE RD N J G I S M LEBEOOFF JONATHAN G/SARAH M LEBEOOFF 1101. FERNDALE RD H NAYZATA MN 55S91 SB 02-117-2S 4S 0023 01095 FERNDALE RD N B i K FOX B C A KATHERINE M FOX 1095 H FERNDALE RD NAYZATA MN 55S91 SB 02-117-2S 44 0010 00905 FERNDALE RD N C BROOKS JR A C G BROOKS CONLEY JR A CAROL G BROOKS 905 FERNDALE RD N NAYZATA MN 55391 SB 02-117-2S 43 0001OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNEDTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYNATURE CONSERVANCY ISIS 5TH ST S E SUITE 314 MPLS MN 55414 SB 02-117-2S 4S 0004 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIQ^D LOUISE M LONRY NORNEST BANK m C/O TRUST REAL ESTATE 6TH A MARQUETTE MPLS MN 55479-0046 SB 02-117-23 43 OlOBO FERNDALE N N SHIEBLER A J NILLIAM N/JOANNE S60 BEACON ST §2 BOSTON MA 02116 0007 RD N F SHIEBLER F SHIEBLER SB 02-117-23 43 0021 01065 FERNDALE RD N JANE B NELSON TRUSTEE J B NELSON TRUSTEE 1065 FERNDALE RD H NAYZATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 43 0024 01045 FERNDALE RD N HENRY M SKARP HENRY M SKARP 1045 FERNDALE RD N NAYZATA MN 55391 SB 02-117-23 44 0012 00038 ADDLESS UNASSIGNED THE NATURE CONSERVANCY NATURE CONSERVANCY 1313 5TH ST S E SUITE 314 MPLS MN 55414 REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PAGE 16 •*. ■r)SB 02-117-23 4S 000201070 FERNDALE RD NNORNEST BNK MN NA ASSO Tf^TE NORNEST BAMC MN TRUST REAL ESTATE 6TH A MARQUETTE MPLS MN 55479-0046 i-u‘r% i SB 02-117-2S 43 0005 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIMED HENRY M SKARP HENRY M SKARP 1045 N FERNDALE RD NAYZATA MN 55S91 !1 s SB 02-117-2S 43 0016 01105 FERNDALE RD N RALPH C BAGLEY RALPH C BAGLEY 1105 FERNDALE RD N NAYZATA MN 55S91 SB 02-117 23 43 0022 01055 I.RNOALE RD N GERALD T MCCOURTNEY ET AL GERALD T MCCOURTNEY 1055 H FERNDALE ROAD NAYZATA MN 55391 SB 02-117-23 44 0009 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNED C BROOKS JR A C G BROOKS CONLEY JR 2 CAROL G BROOKS 905 FERNDALE RD N NAYZATA MN 55391 ) *• *•. • A 1 *. • i £0 ■ 38 02-117-23 44 0016 00038 ADDRESS UHkSSlGNEU THE NATURE CONSERVANCY NATURE CONSERVANCY 1313 5TH ST S E SUITE 314 MPLS MN 55414 RUN DATE tiOtS/97• ' SA 0?-117-2« 4& 0017 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST\ •-i • •PROP AOOR OHNER MAMC TA>CPAYER NAHE/AODR > > r:-.. SO 02-117-2S 44 0017 00960 FERNO<*E RO N C A J FLOYD OR A MRS CHARLES P FLOYD 960 NEST FFRNOALE RO NAYZATA MN S539X t PROP ADDR CNNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 99 i2-117-21 41 0C05 00702 . CO RO NO 15 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY NATURE CONSERVANCY 1313 5TH ST S E SUITE 314 HPLS MN 55414 *• :. • *• V . • •** • . * • * ■ * ^ '* *. . / i * • ^4 -. A >•• >• i f . -sV ' 30 02-117-23 44 001000038 ADDRESS UNASSIMEDTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY NATURE CONSERVANCY 1313 5TH ST S E SUITE 314 MPLS MN 55414 30 02-117-23 44 0019 00980 FERNOALE RO N M A GUMUCIO i C OUMUCIO MARCELO A A CAROLE GUMUCIO 980 FEmOALE RO N NAYZATA MN 55391 * * *:•'* * . * • \ 99 02-117-23 41 0006 00690 HILLSIDE DR N THE NATURE CONSERVANCY NATURE CONSERVANCY 1313 5TH ST S E SUITE 314 MPLS MN 55414 J ^ ! * • ■ . L, ^ ‘ • » •. . . t, . • TOTAL BATCH 503 00023 i ) [ .. ^ ■ 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 HEMiEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXA'*'iaN, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BFLIEF. DATE • . • . •; * • . • I *. ♦ 4 • * ' ' - ' ' • ‘ *.• 209 ^ § ft* :o |8io>iS^ii o ^ p m o ’ p 'J m 8 m ro z m c/> ^ ^ w rj O -n ^ O S V) CO C- t/ 1&!L L?i:RtYSQNS_______>fiiat a*<f« '•*•' v^c»(*'u^ w • t« «t «4 o* k*c*a wT MC* 4«r 1 *u * CMf r^cnvmMM. '*«• t.« KWt C» ••* l**l| 9 PROJECT proposed lot line rearranci meni for s COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Cwi Engin»i/x Lend Sirvifori lord Ptows 482 Tamor«ii A«true. lorg L(*e. VS356 6t:-4;3-4M1• —— - -----------t*ff*n IMM __<_/' "-- ltt«*« »M*«* 4^-*-------GERALD MCCOURTNEY & CONLEY BROOKS, JR.•ff^ CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone (612)473-7357 Fax 473-0510 NOTICE The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at 2780 Kelley Parkway on Monday, July 21, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. on the matter of application #2269, a request by Conley Brooks of 905 West Femdale Road and Gerald McCourtney of 1055 West Femdale Road for a metes and bounds subdivision of a lot line rearrangement of property located at 1045 West Femdale Road. Subject property is described as Part of Lots 11 and 12, North Shore Cottage Acres Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota and also known as PfNS #02-117-23 43 0024 All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments are solicited. A map of the proposed subdivision is available in the City offices for review. City of Orono By: Planning Commission Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator To be published the week of July 5, 1997. 4- / Ai PtTIONi A lso //une^DS ro Ah^Li'nii^ 3 uKiLiAJeC^ fMc^LS 'Tt) HIS COM6/AJeiS i Todd R. Iliff* Kevin W. D eV ore A nn M. Hale lUFF & Associates, P.A. A ttorneys A t Law Phone; 612/922-4647 Fax: 612/922-4788 July 16, 1997 Ms. Elizabeth Van Zomeren City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 BECENEO JUI' 1 *• Re: * Lake Minnetonka Property Our File No. 1652.9701 Dear Ms. Van Zomeren: The undersigned is an attorney who has been retained by Charles and Joan Floyd, owners of the property located at 960 West Femdale Road, Wayzata, Minnesota ("Property"). 1 have been retained by the Floyds to assist them in protecting their interest in the use and development of lands surrounding their Property. It has come to my clients’ attention that there may now, or in the near future, be requests made by neighboring property owners to the City of Orono ("City") regarding subdividing properties adjacent to my clients’ Property. As concerned property owners, my clients request that you provide them with notice of any applications or other attempts by anyone to subdivide or otherwise change the current use and/or ownership status of any properties in and around my clients’ Property. Please provide such notice and/or information to my attention on behalf of the Floyds at the address stated below. If you have any questions or conunents with respect to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Tnank you. Very truly yours. ILIFF & ASSOCIATES P.A. KWD/mam cc: Charles P. Floyd i:\rpMloyd. om evin W. DeVore Attorney at Law A mericana Bank Building , 5050 France A venue South , Suite 240, Edina , MN 55410 * Certified by the Real Property Law Section of the Minnesota State Bar Association as a Real Property Law Specialist City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 Phone: (612) 473-7357 Fax: (612) 473-0510 MEMORANDUM To:Planning Commission Members From:Brad Bressler, Planning Intern Date:• July 18, 1997 Subject: Variance and Conditional Use Permit Application #2270 Staff recommends that the Planning Commission tables the application by Marsha and Kenneth Hickey for a Variance and Conditional Use Permit for a new garage be tabled until the August 18th meeting of the Planning Commission due to insufficient survey information. In order for staff to review the project, accurate information is needed for: • Total lot area • Percentage of hardcover, existing and proposed in each shoreline setback area • Inventory of all hardcover items as existing in proposed Discrepancies were determined on July 18, 1997 after the revised proposed survey was faxed to staff by the surveyor. Attached you will find information we have to date regarding the proposed garage. Variances are needed for building height and side yard setback. A Conditional Use Permit is needed for the building being located in front of the principal structure, on a through lot and for being greater than 1000 square feet. 1 I GITYof ORONO Mimldpd Offlccs Stmt Address: 2750 Kelley Parireay Orono, MN 55356 ■afltaf Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323^66 July 18,1997 Marsha and Kenneth Hickey 4640 Tonkaview Lane Mound, MN 55364 RE: Variance and Condition Use Permit application #2270 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hickey: This letter is to inform you that your request for a Variance and Conditional Use Permit for your proposed garage will be tabled by the City of Orono Planning Commission on Monday July 21, 1997 as recommended by staff. There are discrepancies in information between the two versions of your survey we have received. We need complete, accurate information on the following items: • TOTAL lot area • PERCENTAGE of hardcover, existing and proposed in each shoreline setback area (250'- 500', 500-1000') • INVENTORY of ALL hardcover items as existing and proposed Your request will be scheduled for the August 18 meeting of the Planning Commission of the above requested information is received by August 8, 1997. If you have any further questions, please contact me at 473-7357. Sincerely, Liz Van 2tomeren Planning and Zoning Administrator Tdephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 ^tWO Td*tk^v/‘(w lA^4. i Application 0 Date Receiredto • ^~7 ~7 Amount Paid ____ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPUCATION Tnitial Applicadon Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each'addition^ vmance) ’ Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for noh>confonning structures $220. After-thc-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFO[FQR^TION SiteAddress *ivlO Li/t Property Identification Number (TJJD.) ^ 7 ~ //7 * 2 3 A IaaaI f/% onn1i/*ofrt/\n if n/^f a*% i Property identmcanon Mumoer o. Attach legal d^cription to application if not included on required Date Property Acquired f)K__________ 32 00^3 survey. Date Property Acquired __________________^(month^ear) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential o tter (specify)_____________________ Zoning District: U2-- I f?______________' _________________________ APPUCAOT;, . /X /a 1, Pbonefliome ) Name i o ^ ntcn^^______ Phone(woric ) Addres^ City: ______Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ___________ Phone (home). Phone (woik)_ Address:City:.Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ----------------------------------------------------- Estimated Coi Constmctian Cost $ ^ ^ 4-0 Zui // ^ 3 ^ 1C> hu (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED . Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:V* Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore y, Other (specify)___t HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ^ _____tn 4^*^iric^ G'C(./‘4Ae*f a>/i ~H- o*j ^^ ^ / Y- (attach ’additional sheets if necessary) *• REQUIRED SUBMITTALS AlI_of the following information must be submitted hv thg application deadline date in order for vonr application to be considered complete; C>SK>»»irv^ 1. 2. X CLCfvuioc^3. 4. — 5 -6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/j" x 11" for reproduction. Topograpnic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8i^" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 854" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that 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. Applicant's Signaturi Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entr>‘ onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date G~2n~ *f~p 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 & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. .... 8 » I. • GOVT LOT 3 »■ « . I . i. V • A \TZK\i Ffr:»r<3 \u? ?? e. r»«‘ ;»*-y <s„j 1 •;■.' i.''-^ -, - ■ --r* ■ • *• *.»? ' *■♦ PERMIT RECORD Permit Ho. 9t! Date -y-th(oO y-7y s- so^ygr <^OV9 Qn-^ c35^3/A-^o •‘^le-^O.zicri'l^Ca. iJi€mJ^d^Ciyi. Type of Permit AOOfT/0^* ■S €\fcA<5 M ■Sr^g.LV jCca '-^Ucl ■i • \ .• •> ; ■'•4'^ . »• • • •• • i/O ^ K 30 ^ d^e/^ ! 1 1 11 14-U,1 1 1 1 1 1 . ii U , M ,! 1-^—r 1 1 1 1 1 1 by 11 n il S 'J11 ffl D 11 11\ V 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' ' I...................II I I I I I I I I i I I 1 ^ •• f'.:- u\ . t I *. / 4 t.. . ’ •; • • ' M* '•*• *.vyr^.y-:.. • %V-, •*c. t., : •• •t**i». • • h• • ‘i • • • . '•-J,-—<v'’•>' ■ W' •k l ’ll?} ••• n*. •'I'.V' «-• i* *.• :\‘r\S-n:. I I I I I I I •• M ' * • ' ^ v‘ •• ••i I.V'l. • ••‘V.’- •. • SI. •Ml *• •• -f."* ’ ai I'. •"• ■•■ . . •■?•*.;..•>* .«■•■*;‘••tJ .%• *••# •. *•• -. . '.j; '.• * : ■,. •*,'■.■ ‘ ••V7 ’I V*?-’ • • j'~. - .*■» ■ i- -.V4>S l*'.: : t • • I MMK MOM. ROOT 2i4 PCRUNS 9 24 ’ft«. «4 aOM COlUMNS ■/ McuD Biwas AS StIOim ON ClOMIIONS (rtpicM. or 3) J'iJ0'«4* CONCROC ATRON (SCAUO) - nicHco i/«‘A» iroiA. coNc. ncR no At HM. y OCPtH BOOK OWOC * HH. y ABOVC GRMIC (won. or 3) ••• • • ■ ■'YK'i:'-- • -r*i- •V,^ ‘ •• Ii3 SMOOtH CQMt talO SMOOIH (XOAR 3/a CCOMt PlYWD. ! IM somi VENT 9 2i4 r STUDS 9 iro.c. «/2i4 top A CM> FlAtC AM) tRCAtCO sou PU^ SNCATHMC BUUM6 PAPER SONG -MPROXJtTaJl A HNGO tHOH top - -riRM. TOP or ^^aOCR to WBt M CURB BIOCX * 5 C- r CONCRETE ftO 20il0 CONC. nC.w/REBA • • • • ^• I %k • • .•-m TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator ao FROM: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:July 16,1997 SUBJECT:#2271 Chad Nilsson 3210 Navarre Lane Variance(s)-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area:Irregular <1/2 acre Application:The applicant is proposing to add a garage stall on an existing one-car garage. The proposed garage would encroach into the required rear yard approximately 5'6'. The existing house and one-car attached garage are setback 24'6" from the rear property line. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.25, LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District, Subd. 6. Section 10.22. Subd. 2., Lakeshore Hardcover and Land Alteration »2236 Chad Nilsson 3210 Navarre Lane Variance PC meeting: 7/19/97 Page 1 iL, ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IC District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Street Side Yard Rear Yard 1/2 acre 100 feet 30 feet 10 feet 15 feet 30 feet Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Side Yard Adjacent to Street Side Yard Rear Yard < 1/2 acre 126.4'39.3'35' approx. 24'6" proposed The zoning lot does not meet the minimum lot size requirements. The proposed addition to the garage would encroach 5'6” into the required 30' rear yard setback. The existing shed will be changed so that it is located at least 5' from the rear property line, as required by the Zoning Code. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 250'-500' 500'-1000'1 The subject property is located within 250' and 500' of Lake Minnetonka as staff measured from Lake Minnetonka. The survey that was submitted did not indicate the total lot area or the M2236 Chad Nilsson 3210 Navarre Lane Variance PC meeting: 7/19/97 Page 2 1 ; ^ 1 3 ..j M I i ii I' I ; t t r“' setbacks from the Lake. The proposed drawing also does not show all the existing or proposed hardcover on the lot, specifically the proposed driveway. The applicant should provide a proposed survey that delineates the proposed hardcover. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant stated on the application form that the existing house and garage encroach in the required rear yard. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1.The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property can continue to be used as a residence. However, many residences in the community have two or three car garages. It is not unreasonable for the property owner to desire additional garage space. 2.The plight of the landovMier is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the iandowTier. The zonmg lot is a comer lot on Navarre Lane and Kenwood Way. Brooks Avenue has been vacated and is owned by an adjacent property owner. The existing residence and one-car garage encroaches approximately 5'6” in the required 30' rear yard setback. 3. Ihe variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The garage addition will be architecturally compatible with the residence and will not impact the neighborhood's character. 4.Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic factors are not a consideration with this application. 5.Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not a consideration. H2236 Chad Nilsson 3210 Navarre Lane Variance PC mt^eting: 7/19/97 Page 3 1 1 * i 6.The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Coimcil may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Residences with attached garages are permitted uses in this zoning district. #2236 Chad Nilsson 3210 Navarre Lane Variance PC meeting: 7/19/97 Page 4 r Bw' ^ 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The conditions that apply to tliis lot are due to the location of the existing residence on the zoning lot and the setback requirements for rear yards in this zoning district. If the garage was detached it could locate 10' from the rear property line. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The 30'r ear yard setback applies to all properties in the LR-IC zoning district. The granting of the application is necessary for the preserv-ation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. In order to construct the garage in the proposed location, a variance is needed. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The variance will not impair health, safety, comfort or morals. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The applicant could move the garage 5'6" south to avoid the need for a variance. Issu^ 1 . The lot does not meet the lot area or rear yard setback requirements. 2. The topography of the lot is not unusual. H2236 Chad Nilsson 3210 Navarre Lane Variance PC meeting: 7! 19/97 Page 5 3.The proposed design continues the encroachment of the rear w'all of the residence and one-car garage into the required rear yard. 4.The existing shed that is closer to the property line than the code allows will be modified to conform with district requirements. 5.A sur\'ey of existing and proposed hardcover is needed to determine if the proposed garage and driveway conform to hardcover requirements. 6. The permit record shows permits for a shed from 5/93 and remodeling in 12/95. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To advise the applicant to provide hardcover information and consider changing the proposed design to coiiform with the 30' rear yard setback. Attachments A B C D E F G H Application Plat Map Topo Map Shoreline Setbacks (estimated by staff) Permit History Building Pad Survey Proposed Elevations Garage Floor Plan »2236 Chad Nilsson 3210 Navarre Lane Variance PC meeting: 7/19/97 Page 6 I"''"LtiatA * - • > ^ U V I crry of orono - variance application Tnitial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each addition^ variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-thc-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # jds. ~~7 / Date Received L ~ ^~7 Amount Paid PROPERTY INFORMATION SiteAddress 1 Property Identification Number (PJ.D.) (1- A3 CiOdn_________ Attach legal description to appl* :ation if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired __________________________^(month/year) «nI (do) (do not) also own the adja^nt parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential other (specify)____________________ . Zoning District: LR - I 0. CC)f\e. FamiliQ Disfyit H Y2 OC/C APPLICANT Phone Oiome), PhonefwDik> \^Q<S3^ City:Zip:_EiSi2£li OWNER (if different than applicant) Name__________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ C^QQ Describe request in detjdl; ^ — (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED . Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side \y^tx 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: /Jojl— Ih^---------------------. .... -r--------------- (attach’ additional sheets if necessary) *• REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All Qf the foUPwing information must be submitt^ bv the anpiicaHon d#at»{n# daf«. in order for vour application to be considered pompletg! 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labeb^and lHfli)^^om Hennepin County Department of Certificate of Survey (signed^ by a hcnised surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/a" x IT for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘/a" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 854" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your yflriftDCe aPDllcatlon is not complete if the a bove 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(sjaff^ime not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred irj.,fe^^iXof this application, and certifies that the information supplied is \x\xtof his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date ip “ 3.‘7 —^7 OWNER’S SIGNA 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. Plaiming Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prioi to the meeting. 8 : 12-4-69 VAC DOC NO 250 NI (62) 4397710—7 ;\ 100 ? r \ /\ 100 /\ .__.\A 46ir-/ / i/ t \/ //# (24) > 10 § \(59y 9 s fV) 8 'X (58)g 5karrt 'Hmbbogpr 80 80 a!0 80 /6- /I7-23 -31 1000.66 N8S*53'E ''cn/ .Cn7 •?5I ?> V <5>tm / /o? 1 a7(88) A? 2 V^itShiA 7 V 1 :: ^ :r. (54) REAWUN mVCNT op LOIS WAUAS'S AOOinON TO Ttc VILLAGE OP MltfCTOMU BEA04. (VAC » 115 UISC. P SSI) ..•5 vHe^iis) -v (61)^V II g 10 8 (24)(5B) M 1 8 3 (4) 3. (33) ^ ^ g outlot a j5 (18) l?0 AllTl M -y^'^^^OLAjQyXJUL C^CX-^rLQ Permit No V^9 /S9Z ^/S' PERMIT RECORD Date /O t:-i 7-& 7 7 A Type of Permit —J^TIClA_____ E i1 ,i I i r SH60 in Sjj (jui«aTW - |2e^A p/upjtA^ CiA^I f(^ 4p hooiP •?<? / <Sr# ? , CITYOFORONO ^SITE PUN __ GRADING PUN a APPROVED H'APPROVED WITH REVISIONS □ DISAPPROVE! BY __mJJ yjM^ DATE. Existing Legal PGscription 20*'feL®mea5S?ea'’arright°Lgles^to®thrN'’'^^r®''^^ N°-^thwesterly in WALLACE'S ADDITION TO^THE VTrTArp^n^^Mrf66, the Dlat tho.=„f OF MINNETONKA BEACH. accnrA<n„ 'all in WALLACE'S ADDITION TO THP vttt.pp sai^ Lotto the plat thereof on fUrorof JecnrA “l^NETONKA BEACH, according Recorder in and for Hennepin°CoSntJ?"S[nnesota! tolh^bo^L^i^ of^ir^boe: desciiblf ^r'"" port to Show any other i.pro^LfntrorlnL^oK^iS^^ts! •: Iron marker found o: Iron marker set Bearings shown are based on an assumed datum. i \ tr ef 5 •7 V I *, ; ? a•r G k' >,v . • SM60 '(-o o •aTH - S'-K ell'll 4p hoaSiP , CITYOFOIIONO j^SITE PLAN__ GRADING PLAN ^ APPROVED K'APPROVED WITH REVISIONS □ DISAPPROVE! BY ___ITufJVjUu^ DATE. Existing Logal PGseription 20 feet measured^at^right Northwesterly all in WALLACE'S ADDITION TO^Thp u?rtI-ot 66, to the plat thereo^on fill nr “°5 9^^ Minnetonka beach, according Recorder in and til Se"nJ:^L°CoS^tjrM[nnL"ot“! tSIhrSdaSns Of-tir^bove ^ port to show any other improvenentf orln^ro^cto^nts! •: Iron marker found o: Iron'marker set - Bearings-shown are based on an assumed datum. L * * I * ! . I p iI •f. ■r. Vi ‘ T I V If I hi ' ••<'..<• -‘v I • • » y. * . « • « , • “ • ' • ♦ V ' • j ‘. .-.i -■ ... .. . **: r • **X*.*< " * • -•.» A-.. ^ • .*.» *^ . * ■ V.. ' •? "*:-•,^ ' ; . * .• ' V .. . • , •: *1 . 6- . fw .\‘*|' » • • ’.ti • V V * ■ \ <*/^ . r * •.*; * T'^ V.. ^•‘* ■•“•.'^^‘ I • k. . j -' r» • t-;- ‘.tC- •;■• •■. r..-‘: V ■*.' •' '* V */"', #' *< f»* V • . X 0 ,. .' »♦* ' . *. . ♦* *^ \* • ^ # - •• - t* ' . A* • . • ••' •f . ' ' . % V • V '. •**n •• , * * • • ^ » > ' ..4 ^ A -L. .* • •' •. ' * • » .... 4 ■• •■ ' -V. V.; 4 t • ^. \ V I JBSSBSBa / ,. * ‘ * % ’■ ■ ■ ** \ I : *. * ,* t \ ; .• * «• ---1 ;j -rsrrl i-i * •I > ■! ' « r— ■ ! * •. . m • ♦ f i .4 • -♦ m • '.' ■•...^*- < ■ i' ' '•■■* . ■ i;. . . •_, .;, N < .<, .• •...;, x^. -r .- •< V • i- ” •'•f • , • 1. •■• ,• J • * • . • ‘‘Z:* •.: ' . Vv 7 • ,, ■ -• . -- •' ..♦. •.’ • •■•' ■ .•.■■’ -.•■•• •••,-. ••«•. ; . f V ^ ..^4 •, I 4 % , '•/ .•:'7 ' •' .1 * . • T :•; » A ’ i». «' 4 I- .-V-.V-''' ;v. ■■ f '' : 7 V..'.ivv.i-I .•'V-r.:;..v.\'V- *{. * . ; • *04, ‘ Vi^ • V t Vi> •...; /Vi'/.V, V • f.. • A •. ; : A » M' \ "l‘ h..,A^';VL‘ ^:W .-•* •4* A n, ^ ' , _ * ■ i r 4 4 > f • - » Vv,- ‘ J • . V • V* ,. . .y. :• . *' ) */*. • ^ -| i ' i t • # • 1 *. • -k • r • * V • i * • ■■■..,•'•' •.. » T* '1 •. . . i * '*.. r. > V ' -i ' V ■ *t y * i'. • ' yj- ^i ' Vr* V ./,; ; •: , I ' • ' .' * :r’:y:-U> • •». • •.*.>•. -, .• '• ••• ’‘ iV’ . •• ■ « • ' r' i .. • V f jV;1- ’• * • ■ • \ .a < - ' ^ .r / ': •* ' V ‘‘''•yyh r aW' . • . s r' - . . f *>• 1 . \ » « h^lf)OH :.t: * ♦ ^zmtL \ * . V ‘I*. : ♦. , • • . » ,* *1 •- • * * . V - •u- • : • I ................... V -\ • V . — r.. y >->' . --------------------------*, V. ■ r 1 1-------------------------------------------------- /2'0 \\ •/ \ . ^ IL'-'O fv . . :r . \ . ' 2V'»- \\ I' I . - ^ • A*' • : * ‘ .- I • * mm • .^• ..*4^ y • , .Vi. ^ >r.\v ;v‘. t :' : •• .V • *. < v» * ' — •' • f' c5-i- To:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:July 16, 1997 Subject:#2272 Wyatt & Nancy Moe, 1220 Loma Linda/1230 Spruce Place - Lot Line Rearrangement and Hardcover Variance 2U>ning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 Acre, Sewered Summary of Application % _ Applicants own two tax parcels on the west side of North Arm Bay, both abutting Spruce Place. The northerly of the two parcels is approximately 0.90 acre in area, is L-shaped, and includes an existing small house. The southerly parcel is approximately 0.23 acre in area, rectangular, and contains a small cabin. A. Lot Line Rearrangement Applicants propose to rearrange the lot lines to more equally balance the areas of the two parcels. Their ultimate goal is to construct a new residence on the southerly parcel, and be able to sell off the northerly parcel with access directly to Loma Linda Avenue rather than across the southerly parcel as is the current situation. B. Conceptual Road Vacation Addiuonaily, although not requested or published as part of the current application, applicants sv.ggest a park/road right-of-way vacation in exchange for a rededication or quit claim deed of portions of their property in which the travelled roadway of Spruce Place currently exists. (See Exhibits E & F.) C. Hardcover Variance In order to accommodate the proposed new residence, applicants have also requested a hardcover variance for the rearranged southerly parcel. The existing 24' x 24' cabin would be replaced with a new house and attached two car garage comprising a footprint area of 2,238 sq. ft. Proposed 75-250' hardcover for the new house/driveway/walks is proposed at 35.7% where only 25% would normally be allowed. Also per the resulting proposed lot lines, 75-250' hardcover in the northerly lot would be approximately 19.4%. D. Lot Area/Width Variance Also Required Under the ultimate proposal (Sketch 4 of Exhibit F), lot area for the northerly lot would be approximately 0.69 acres, and area of the southerly lot would be approximately 0.55 acres. Applicants would be willing to adjust the boundary line between the two lots to balance these even ftirther. At any rate, the southerly lot also would require a lot area and width variance, which also was neither requested nor published. Zoning File #2272 July 16.1997 Page 2 Staff would note that the survey work was not received for this application until approximately two weeks after the deadline, and the application submittals have been arriving somewhat piecemeal, hence staff has only come to a comprehensive understanding of this proposal as a result of the review process.. List of Exhibits A B C D E F G H I J Application Plat Map Property Owners List Letter of Request Survey Staff Sketches M Hardcover Calculations Sewer System Layout Topography With and Without Plat Overlay Documentation from 1970 Similar Vacation Request by Applicants Dbcussion During the course of review, this application appears to have become essentially a four part request, including the lot line rearrangement, street and park vacation/rededication, lot area and width variance for southerly proposed building site, as well as a hardcover variance for the southerly proposed building site. Notice was published and mailed for only the applied-for hardcover variance and lot line rearrangement, hence all facets of this application cannot be formally considered comprehensively at the July 21 meeting. Further, the extent of variances to be granted, specifically for lot area, will be numerically variable depending on how and whether the vacation/rededication is accomplished. The lot line rearrangement impacts the conformity of the existing house on the north lot in relation to not only its lot area but its current and proposed hardcover percentage. Its existing hardcover was not identified on the sur\'ey, hence staff has provided a hardcover analysis below. While hardcover for the north lot is not and would not become non-conforming as a result of the final lot lines as proposed, the future ability to expand or further develop the northerly lot will be reduced in exchange for granting greater buildability to the southerly lot. I ii Zoning FUe #2272 July 16,1997 Page 3 Northerly Lot Existing &. Proposed Hardcover. Per Proposed Lot Lines Proposed 75-250' Lot Area: 78' x 175' = 13,650 s.f. Existing/Proposed 75-250' Hardcover: House: (45x27) + (8x16) Concrete Walks: (6x5) + (3x30) + (2.5x15) + (3.5x15) + (4x16) Wood Deck, N. Side: (6x10) Driveway & Parking Area: (30x18) + (10x15) Driveway on S. Lot per Gronberg: 290 = 1,343 s.f. = 274 s.f. = 60 s.f. = 690 s.f. = 290 s.f. Total Existing/Proposed 75-250' = 2,657 s.f / 13,650 = 19.4% (Allowed = 25%) Southerly Lot Existing & Proposed Hardcover. Per Proposed Lot Lines Proposed 75-250' Lot Area: 58' x 175' *= 10,150 s.f. Existing 75-250' Hardcover: Cabin: (24.3x24.4) Driveway: 510 s.f. Per Gronberg (Excl. 290 s.f. that selves N. Lot) Total Existing 75-250' Proposed 75-250' Hardcover: House & Attached Garage: 2238 s.f. Driveway: 510 s.f + 800 s.f. Per Gronberg Sidewalk: (3x24) Total Proposed 75-250' 593 s.f. = 510 s.f. = 1,103 s.f. / 10,150 = 10.9% 2,238 s.f. 1,310 s.f. 72 s.f. 3,620 s.f. / 10, 150 = 35.7% (Allowed = 25%) Proposed Lot Coverage By Structure, South Lot Total Lot Area Proposed: 58' x 410' = 23,780 s.f. = 0.55 acre Proposed Structure: 2,238 s.f. Proposed Lot Coverage = 2,238 / 23,780 = 9.4% (15% allowed) Zoning File #2272 July 16,1997 Page 4 Issues for Consideration 1. Is the conceptually proposed vacation appropriate? Under what parameters? 2. Is the lot reconfiguaration conceptually appropriate, including the vacation of right-of- ways and park, and rededication of new right-of-way? 3. Will the northerly lot ultimately require a hardcover variance someday when it is expanded or rebuilt? If so, does that affect your view of this lot line reconfiguration? Should the two lots be more equal in area? 4. When will the northerly lot be provided its own driveway access to Loma Linda (it’s already addressed as 1220 Loma Linda); at the time it is sold? 5. Is Planning Commission comfortable with the magnitude of the hardcover variance proposed? Is there sufficient hardship shown? Is this consistent with other hardcover variances granted for similarly sized lakeshore lots? 6. Given that each lot has been separately assessed for sewer and each connected to it, and given the historical use as two separate dwelling units, does Planning Commission have any concerns about the lot area and width variances? Will the resulting lots be consistent with others in the neighborhood? Staff Recommendation 1. The vacation of unused (and likely to remain unused) park and right-of-way, in conjunction wath a concurrent rededication of right-of-way over used (and potentially to be used) private property, is conceptually a win-win situation for the City and the property owner, but should be subject to: a. Granting/retaining of any necessary sewer, drainage, utility or access easements over the remaining private land or over the public land to be vacated. b. The City retaining adequate existing dedicated right-of-way on the north side of Spruce Place (Comprehensive Plan indicates 50' r.o.w. needed for local streets; Spruce r.o.w'. at this location is 40' wide, actual traveled road is centered on the south boundary of the r.o.w.; City Engineer and Public Works Department will be asked to determine r.o.w. needs). 2. Vacation of the park area as conceptually proposed may result in certain questions of ownership, since property owners to the west and south might have a legitimate claim to Zoning File #2272 July 16,1997 Pages portions of the park once it is vacated. At any rate, a fonnal vacation application ^vill be required in order to fully address these issues. 3. The lot line rearrangement is conceptually appropriate if the resulting approximately 1.24 acres of private land is evenly split between the northerly and southerly lots, so that each is afforded a reasonably equivalent amount of hardcover and is subject to relatively equivalent variance needs. 4. In order to accomplish the lot line rearrangement, the northerly lot will h^ve to be added to the survey and proposed boundaries reconfigured per City's final conclusions on this application. ' 5. The northerly lot should be provided with a new access to Loma Linda prior to it being sold by the applicants. 6. Planning Conunission must first reach conclusions on the lot line rearrangement and vacation/rededication before accurate hardcover numbers can be achieved. The hardcover and lot area/width variance request is functionally merely a conceptual request at this point, and cannot be formally addressed until the final lot line locations are resolved. Options for Action 1.Recommend conceptual approval, subject to: a. Applicant to make formal application for vacation and lot area/width variances. b. Planning Commission to give applicant direction on lot line relocations, lot area apportionment, and hardcover variance. c. City Engineer/Public Works Dept, to analyze and advise applicants of right-of-way and easement needs. 2. Table for further information without giving conceptual direction. 3. Recommend denial (state reasons). 4.Other. Application j? X. Date Receiyed L?'bo-<^ 7 Amount Paid __ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPUCATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each "additional variance) / / & ^ ^ Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 Try” (no change from original application) g f~ f" Variance for non-confoiming structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) V.-S >•nso. PROPERTY INFORMATION A, SiteAddress 2>O (U, ______ Prooertv Identificarion Number (T.I.D.) 11 O—Properly Identificarion Number (P.I.D.) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_____I ^_________________ ■iS- (month/year) 1 (do) (do* not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential o ther (gjccify). ZoningDistrict: ________________________________ APPUCAICT’^ ■ -yJ-jN/fy Phone (home ) ___ Name aV _______ Phone (work ) a Address: I City: ________Zip: OWNER (if di&rent than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.. Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ Estimated Construction Cost $ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED • Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTTON OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:____________________________________ (attach' additional sheets if necess^) A * • REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete! L 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. I • 8. Completed Application Fonn Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 814" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 814" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views provide one (1) copy 814" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that 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. Applicant's _____ Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of 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 tWrd Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is tmable 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 Application # rOc^ ~7 P- Itote Received 7 CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICA ^ An^ount Paid . oo______4 ^ PROPERTY LOCATION Site address r-'W I* ' < Property Identification Number (PID)__________________ Please check one - Property____abstract or _____torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLIC Nameame » /L Addr^s 1 V ~X.(0 *^^*^^**T*r*^!~*- City yj^/^ Phone (home) ^' ) h~ ? ^ L V Lip^^ Phone (work) OWNER (if different Name • applicant)t^tj^applic 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)______ PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes ________ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) _________ Subdivision for New Building S ites Number of Building Sites _________Existing Units _________New Units Total Units 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 Departrii?nt of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 5. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other peisons you wish notified of this application. Zoning Official's Signature______________________________________ Date_____________________________ MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Pa>ment 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______ I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: Sketch P(an Review (Class 1, II & III) $250.00 Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $350.00 Subdivision Application (Class I & 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 Totals Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision Applicate $200.00 (No change from original application) Renewal of Class III, Preliminaiy 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 S600.00 + $.50/lineal ft.; _____ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50/lineal ft.; _ _ lin. ft. X .50 = S. 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 Pioposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) 00 On-Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable iral subdivision applications) new l''t<$50.00/per lot x C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees _____ Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per e? ' additional variance) — _____ Easement Vacation Associated <eith Subdivision $100.00 ___ PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00 Thvelling Unit The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commissioned Council necessary to proMss tl^application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinaace. Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature _ Date DtUe Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review 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. ims!^ ■. I nkienTS i (55) (24: \ ynitl L------2^.88 I I |i;Av»u y7■q^LI^CA^<l»>»g»y.g4^ j ^ - LOTS 1.: • •y.15 » ¥ftC'Siw) -------ro _____ % LCVA LiNCA AV^ "Wl'V f (Ml) I ^ I ^ - j* ^ ^ i ** -I o^-l^r^5-|^ es) * ; «' > f i « v» (6<)tss 02) < 4C ' 5c; i »? ! » 0 « 110' 1^0. 3 $ -.r/iiA lInda « $T^ ' I i** i«». i / »' ^1 ar. 4. < «/ (52)W (9?) .a 3W/B HW*i4 .yt i:\44 41 ‘ (14) J. ■ r f (67) /ii 33 i J f i 1 294 Ji S9r04''Tt sT.n «1«»'H / 1. 1^ f (68) ^ S08-o#fi 19? tf ^ > - Ml!*) '.C-'S 7' yx. »IC 38:»e: \(3) - \ L^’A LINCA k'k] I. »l f ■ l-iS ■4$ 't2Si:-5i; ' * V ?4 *> 2!C '"'50 iS: ! •“"rr StT \ ZX.b > »1 (?) T5TSr ^ I S -l.v^ i(b z\B i a n* 5 0 tf :.46»(?3J': (74) i T§ Oi 1 :J?. t* 5SF?:JCE PL ' i:__________I.n >( u/ a - lif. 2^ —ii . V I lO (1) 4^9 A - N 1 ® C« |g ' Uli 1*tv ---------i 5S\ 1 ■"t * u', V __ 4C >- -----------•■ 230 Mf: ' ^Jl-4 i ^ ?x>NO► • ^ y^ l«-.tl— a:cc VX)N _ ~ 1 1 : t6 r‘t>\ «st T(23:c . J ! •, • RtM DATE 07/01/97 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATION SYSTEM PRWERTY (»MERS LISTbatch soi:■ 07-117-25 14 0015 PfIOP AODR OMNER NAHi TAXPAYER HAME/AODR i.r * 011S5 LOHA LINDA AVC EUGENE 6EYEN ETAL EUGENE A GEYEN 1155 LOHA LINDA AVE mJNO MN 55364 36 07-117-23 14 0062 01160 NORTH ARM DR R A A L M KELSEY KENNETH A A LOURITA M KELSEY 1160 NORTH ARM DR HOUND MN 55364 V . *7* ’ PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 58 07-117-23 14 0068 01185 LOMA LINDA AVE D 8 A M J SAMS DOUG A MARY SAMS 1185 LOMA LINDA AVE. MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0006 01205 LOMA LINDA AVE K R HINRICHS ASH HINRICHS KEVIN R P SUZANNE H HINRICHS 1205 LOMA LINDA ORONO MN 55364 HOUND MN 55364 M01V4D MN 55364 ■* y *» PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR i 38 07-117-23 41 0051 01305 SPRUCE PL CLAYTON R FUCHS CLAYTON R FUCHS 1305 SPRUCE PL HQUM) MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0076 01254 LOMA LINDA AVE K L HOFFMANN A L S H0FFMAM4 KEft^TH A LIMA S HOFFMANN 1254 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND MN 55364 PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 07-117-23 41 0078 01295 SPRUCE PL HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO CONVEYED 2/8/82 ST DEED 161167 38 07-117-23 41 0087 01210 LOMA LINDA AVE DONALD R UDELL ET AL DONALD R A CAROLYN UDELL 1210 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND MN 55364 T * •i -REPORT NO. PI435401 58 07-117-25 14 0067 01180 NORTH ARM DR M N ERICKSON A N J ERICKSON HARK A NANCY ERICKSON 1180 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 . r-t.• •' . I < f • ^ » i #. • ‘ ^ A’*. \ V ■ 1 t sa 07-117-2S 41 0007 01225 LOHA LINDA AVE JEFFREY 0 UDELL JEFFREY D UDELL 1225 LOMA LINDA AVE MOUND m 55SA4 r- • • 58 07-117-23 41 0008 sa 07-117-2S 41 0009 • 38 07-117-23 41 0010 •PROP ADDR 01295 LOMA LINDA AVE 01280 NORTH ARM DR 01264 NORTH ARM DR ONNER NAME C 0 ANDERSON A A M ANDERSON P K HUNTSMAN t K 1. HUNTSMAN J B MUELLER A H K MUELLER TAXPAYER CHARLES A ANN ANDERSON PAUL K A KRISTINE L HUNTSMAN JOSEPH A MARY MUELLER NAME/ADDR 1295 LOMA LINDA AVE 1280 NORTH ARM DR 1264 NORTH ARM DR I • l' * • . ■ MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 HOUND MN 55364 : * *.' « 58 07-117-23 41 0011 38 07-117-23 41 0012 36 07-117-23 41 0050 1 •.PROP ADDR 01264 NORTH ARM DR 01216 NORTH ARM DR 01370 NORTH ARM DR •ONNER NAra M B MUELLER A M K MUELLER R L DURKIN ETAL C H BANICK A K L K BANICK ; 'TAXPAYER JOSEPH A MARY MUELLER RICHARD L DURKIN KARI A CHRISTOPHER BANICK NAME/ADDR 1264 r.ORTH ARM DR 1216 NORTH ARM DR 1370 NORTH ARM OR HOUND MN 55364 .*» •. . s , 38 07-117-23 41 0077 01254 LOMA LINDA AVE K L HOFFMANN A L S HOFFMANN KENNETH L A LINDA S HOFFMANN 1254 LOMA LINDA AVE HOUND MN 55364 r l • ' . * •: ' • • ^ • 38 07-117-23 41 0089 01290 LOMA LINDA AVE SCOTT A DEAH UDELL SCOTT A DEAH UDELL 1290 LOMA LINDA AVE MOUND m 55364 / • * ’ ...• • t ■ , , • ’ I RUN DATE 07/U/97 HENTCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST f ••V • V PROP ADOR (MCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 01160 LOMA LINDA AVE MATTHEN M BURNS MATTHEN M BURNS 1160 LOMA LINDA AVE HOUND MN 55364 I < #«i ^ •• •,.* — _ t .!/ '4, '■ y PROP AOOR ORCR NAMi TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR Sa Oa*lI7-2S 23 0627 U1200 LOMA LINOA AVE EDMUND 6RXFFIN ET AL DONALD R UDELL 1210 LOMA LXNDA AVE HOUND MN 55364 > A-. ■V ' V PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR ‘1; ' , i • • 38 08-117-23 32 0007 01240 SPRUCE PL 0 A HALLNER A L J NALLNER DAVID A HALLNER 1240 SPRUCE PL MOUND MN 55364 i *.» *; PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR f» - 36 06-117-23 32 0013 01270 SPRUCE PL K H 2 E E ERICKSON KENNETH A ELAINE ERICKSON 2773 CASCO POINT RD HAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 08-117-23 32 0016 01300 SPRUCE PL HXLLIAM G AHERN HILLIAM 6 AHERN 1300 SPRUCE PL MOUND MN 55364 ; • 4 « • • ( PROP ADDR ONNER »4ME ‘ TAXPA> A • NAME/AODR TOTAL BATCH 502 00033 .•* 38 08-117-23 23 0003 01190 LOMA LINDA AVE M A A E C MITCHELL MArK A/EL12ABETN C MITCHELL 1190 LOMA LINDA AVE MOUND MN 55364 38 08-117-23 32 0005 01220 LOMA LimA AVE N HN'ATT MOE ETAL N HYATT MOE 825 SO 8TH ST MPLS MN 55404 38 08-117-23 32 0006 01250 SPRUCE PL N N HOLFE ETAL PKyLLIS J NOLF 1250 SPRUCE PL HOUND HN 55364 38 08-117-23 32 0014 01280 SPRUCE PL P J A S J SCHUELLER PAUL J A SUSAN J SCHUELLER 1280 SPRUCE PL MOUND MN 55364 38 08-117-23 32 0017 01310 SPRUCE PL JOHN H HALKER JOHN N HALKER 1310 SPRUCL PUCE MOUND MN 55364 J .REPORT NO. PI435401PAGE 6 A.'V 38 08-117-23 23 D015 01170 LOMA Linda avc 616 HOLOXNO CO LTD PTMRSHP 010 HOLOXNO CO LTD PTNRSHP 7019 TUPA DR tOXMA 55439 «v • 4 % • 38 OB-llt 01230 SPRUCE PL H HYATT MOE N HYATT MOE 825 SO 8TN ST MPLS MN 55404 -Is 32 0006 ■■ ■fV 38 08-117-23 32 0012 01260 SPRUCE PL E A ANDERSON ET AL TRUSTEES EVAN A ANDERSON 1260 SPRUCE PL HOUND HN 55364 . . • V7V-f «« Tv3* :'4:»:v• _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ • ■ ■ . • • ' ■‘• I -Lv,'.:!:.'.1 ;■ 38 08-117-23 32 0015 01290 SPRUCE PL HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND 961A0 1/23/97 THURSDAY 9:00 CITY RES 2088 , 38 08-117-23 32 0018 01318 SPRUCE PL PATRICIA A 6R0ETKEN PATRICIA A 6R0ETKEN 1318 SPRUCE PLACE HOUND MN 55364 • i I ^ TO: ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: WYATT AND NANCY MOE 471 -7022 ^£C6IVE o M I 6 /99; ®^0F0fl0.V0 W. purchojed Ihe properla el 1220 Lome Lind. In 1964. Wyelt had rented the property for the summers since 1959. In the eoHu 70'* the drainage way on the south side of the property was eroding and began to threaten the cabin structure on the site. The gully was about 18 Inches from the cabin and it dropped approximately 12 feel down Our neighbors at the time were an elderly brother and sister and they did not yylah to participate In the construction of the culvert and rehabilUallon of the two properties. wo decided to purchase the cabin at 1230 Spruci Place to enable us to build the drainage way and thus preserve both properties Both structures are connected to the municipal sewer, we were offered the option of another cewor connection for what we refer to as the "back forty We chose nntto buu a connection because the rear property is part of the drainage way. It hoi *ome cat tells and is often wet. This drainage way serves many other wTc^ToVdinalod^^ project with the MCWD and the r.lty of Orono. who approved the engineering and the design, but the cost of the storm water management project was paid In total by us The easement for the culvert crosses both properties as shown on the survey. Our request Is to place a modest i story home with a walkout on the lake side. It will ba very similar to the home to the south. It is olso our desire to do a lot line rearrangement and a future street retention areas. r,: r.=.»»»«• -«• We would welcome your visiting the property over the weekend. ZQd wyt-r:8 i66X9T'l»^r I03b Tif cX9 : 3-roHd yyCiH : UiO-lJ u/r-r f J , . t: •••! l’ ' ’'1 ..i:;;; . I "I |- ,1 • •.* ;.•«! •/. '5 •'if.; . »; ’ ‘’-J*: |! I *'*U '• •*‘'•j! i I VV.i., ;r ‘ i-i’ 1 • ■ • • : ’ * *,’•■•* ^ • . r t- * ‘ • '»i =■•■’ ■^l !'•• ; I t • 1 i"l"V if feri"'8r tiz / tt‘l i • • - -/■ •rii: • ••<■•%• »••• • I j I i*>^ / .J\.' V, •fl *4CMK> 'Su I riMW \JI i « ** * % * # ^ • « >jl Uh.vJ w (T0( • l ^» • •• • % f • f # • J I If l%f /I >J«Ji^ V w # % 9T9fi 1 ftf I .I0«00 h f'l ‘ V !i SO 3Wd H:j:3^ IIW ^T^iTiL^3I^ii:0T £6bT/ST/iL0 1 c«TTn tr »iS3*aSs. s B 2 Da O S. 8a.o p .9 ?r g-a ira ? a CA m-mS'feS mmi¥miififW L ¥ * • • • • . V • ' • t> J (X?r ft ST a £L 5nao M Di B fP CO 07/15/1937 10:17 6124717416 MT> ABCW HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET PACiE 02 SITBACK ZONC: (CmcLEOMO HASPCQVgR IN ZQKE 13-lSO*ZSO-I A.'” Hpuie Wi4lli % % % fi. Ctrii^ 4 C. Drivcwiy I X D. SidtWillt X X e! Picio/peck I • X X F. Landscape Und«r]«]n By PUstk % X » G, Other total hardcover in zone OTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONB A ___a + B X 100 roOPQSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. Hotue . X Lrnfih WMUi X X X B. Garage Driveway X X D. Sidewilk X X E. Pxtio/£>cck X m »« F. Landscape UoderiaUi By Plastic X X X G. Other total Hardcover in zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _ _ _ _ _ _ _♦ B X 100 S.P. If. S.F. IF S.F S.F S.F. S.F. S.F, S.P S.P. S.F. S.F. S.P, _ S.F. _ _ _IF. ^_ _ _ _ _ _% S.F S.F. S F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B A 07/15/1997 10:17 6124717416 HARDCOVER CALCULATION 'WORK9MEE1 setback ZONE: (CIBCLE ONE) S-TS' (k •••■ pywTiMfi MABnrftVK 75-JSO*230.500* Pa<5E 03 SOO-IDOO* A. HoyM X —.ST. m LoiifU)WI4iH a %_S.F. X m S.P. . X m Z ST. • 9 B. Caraftf X ^9.P. * C. ■ Driveway X S/'a f Z*90 S.F. 5 X m — ST. 1 l^f SUlewalk X m - S.F. 1•X I __ 'm „ ST. 1 Patio^eli X ^__ m S.P. 1 X ___ m _ $.F. \ •\ F. Landwapt X ___ a S.F. ! Undarido X m S.P. By Plastic X m ” S.F. 1 G. Other .X 1_ S.P. t TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE /J}3 S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE fazso _ S.F. B A f B X too •% PBOPOSFn H^RnrnvRK rriMF A « A. House %m _ S.F Ltngih Wi4Ui X ^m S.P. 0 • t %m X I m S.F. X ^.__ m « S.F. d. Garage X __ ST. C. ^ Driveway X _S/o __ 0rCTti ^ 5t^a 99^ f — £9 ?fpP. 'X _t -t — CJC f-..f ^ 5«C. I• •ra ta^ J D. Sldawalii M X ___ m 7Z - ST. • •X ___ m _ S.F. E.. .Batio/Deck X _ S.F. X - S.F. ,! F. Laodscapt X _ B S.F. Uoderlaln X %" S.F By Plastic _ e _ S.F. a. Other X • S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE •Jc:zo S.F. A *• *TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -" S.P. B A 3 CIO + B _/P j ZS o , X 100 -_____"* % *• * 07/15/1997 10:17 6124717416 MT> a BCH F'm'jE 04 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SCTSACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) Q<75* KltKTlNC IN EQNE A. Ho««« ________________ K 75. WO’1SO.SOO' 7-/r-97 soo-r L«nh «K Ui4lH B. Carafs C. Drivaway •• • • D. SMcwaiii E. BatWDeck F. Ltndtcape UodcrUin 'By Plastic 0.‘"Other X X X X X K X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE O ^ B SIP2 d X (00 • 2ti;£. FHOfOltn HtRnCOVFR IN ZONK A. House _________■■ ■ Unsih Qara*a C. Driveuri^ •D. Sidewtllc £. Pxiio/Deck F. Lindscape Uaderlain By Plastic O. Other X X A X X X X X X X X X m TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ♦ B ____X IX fii $.p. $.F. S.F. S.P S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B A B '•*• • 1.->'■'■ I. :■-< V ‘ .. * -\-:^WrT : •. * . *••<.*•. • • ' • *• • Vi MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16, 1997 (H14) H2251 - TR\CY WHITEHEAD, 1220 LYMAN AVTNUE - SUBDIVISION/SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Mr. & Mrs Whitehead were present. Gaffron reported that this sketch plan is similar to the plan reviewed for a subdivision six years ago. That review went through the preliminary plat process with many recommendations but stopped at that point He indicated that the dedicated portion of Lyman Avenue ends and a private gravel road continues to a partially dedicated cul-de-sac wWch has not been constructed. There are wetlands on the property, an existing house with driveway that runs through the neighboring property with easement rights, steep and hilly topography, and a small man-made pond. Gaffron said the main concern with the plan is the narrow roadway and maintenance He noted that much of the area has slopes of 18+% which would not allow for mound septic systems. He noted these lots were most likely bu'ildable but voiced concern with erosion control. The proposal calls for three new lots in addition to the lot with the existing residence that runs north and south. A drive” outlet would be created for lots 1 and 2 but has to cut across steep slopes Gaffron indicated that there is an issue with the amount of acreage noting the back lot requirement of 150% standard. He said the code does not specify whether the 150% back lot acreage must be all dry buildable but is usually spoken of as such. The back lot would then not meet the area requirement. Lot 2 would be 2.23 acres including the wetlands. Lot 1 would be 3.9 acres. Lot 4 could access Lyman with a house located on the hill. Gaffron said septic siting is critical. Septic locations have been found but are very restrictive The exi.sting hou.se has a new septic svstem with alternate site. One septic site location for Lot 4 may conflict with the needed right-of-v ay for the existing road. The wetland at the north end of lots 1 and 2 is in the National Wetlands Inventory and would require buttering. Gaffron indicated that the cut for the driveway would require filling, retaining walls and be close to the dredged pond area. Gaffron said staff* believes the road should continue with a cul-de-sac at the end but is not within the applicant's control noting the applicant's driveway comes through the neighboring property via an easement. For the short term for this development, Gaffron said a cul-de-sac could be located outside of the property line but would impact the septic sites if located within the property. A cul-de-sac within the property would also cut into the hillside. minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16, 1997 (#14 - #3251 Tracy UTiitehend - Continued) Gaffron noted that during the earlier review, it was suggested there may be only two additional lots instead of three. That review did not reflect the septic site used for the existing house. Recommendations had been made to eliminate the narrow dnveway and the back lot. He presented a sketch ofhow two additional lots might be oriented. He noted all lots would abut the road but require a width variance at the cul-de-sac. He questioned whether access to the house could be accomplished across the pond. Gamron sugsested a roadway with cul-de-sac would impact the neighbor as well as impacting the nir^ feel, hence, this sketch might not be practical. Smith noted the attempt in balancing the needs questioning the cul-de-sac an^se of existing driveway. She noted that there may only be two additional lots. Gaftron agreed that this may be the case with the existing residential lot and two additional lots Mrs Whitehead reported that they currently have two separate tax parcels. Mrs Whitehead indicated that the reason for abandoning the project before was due to a heavy work load. They are now pursumg the issue as they are being relocated She said they would like to create a development with the least amount of impact maintaining the park atmosphere. Whitehead said they do not want to impact the existing house. She noted the property is heavilv wooded Whitehead said thev reviewed the codes in 1991 in order to present a plan that would be in compliance. She said all lots would have two septic sites (designed for 5 bedroom homes), two acre dry buildable, and meet required setbacks. Lindquist was informed by Mrs. Whitehead that they preferred the road being improved without adding a cul-de-sac She felt the road could come up around on the west side and include a driveway. Mrs Whitehead suggested that the focus had been on Lyman Avenue previously. With the plans approvedVor Highway 12, Whitehead suggested a cul-de-sac could be placed on the property fiirther back that will be taken for Highway 12. It was noted that McMillan lives in the neighborhood as does Smith. Whitehead said their home was the second one built on the road, but they are facing consequence? from being the last to develop their property. Schroeder indicated that there is an issue of the road serving the number of lots. Whitehead said one property was subdivided into three lots. 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16, 1997 T' rr\ »r»» \ t. rf 1 t f f .'A A 1 %Ji\. j 9 f tut v-t V- McMillan said she had two concerns regarding Lyman Avenue. She noted the problem with the curve radius presenting a blind comer and adding more traffic on the road. McMillan said cul-de-sacs are more a priority than widening the road She felt the suggestion of using the lot lost by Highway 12 project for a cul-de-sac is interesting. McMillan noted that the correction to the radius of the road would require use of the Whitehead property. Whitehead agreed. Mrs. Whitehead asked about the road width Lindquist indicated that the road would be 24-.'*0’ wide. Gattfon said the City Engineer suggested a 20’ paved surface with changes made to the curve. It would be widened to accommodate a fire truck and equipment staging which presently cannot be done. McMillan was informed by Whitehead that the wetlands have not been delineated. Gaflfon said the Wetland Conservation Act protects the wetlands and will have an impact. Schroeder asked the applicants why they need to make four lots instead of three. Mrs Whitehead said it was a financial matter in maximizing the number of lots adding that she thought the plan would meet the code requirements. McMillan said the wetland delineation may result in the lots not meeting standards. Mrs. Whitehead said she would move forward on having the wetland delineation to make that determination Schroeder was informed by Gafffon that the back lot does not meet the 150% standard. Gafifon questioned how the wetlands would aftect the back lot. Mr. Whitehead said the wetlands are taxed and are then part of the parcel. Gaflffon indicated that other parts of the code have to be considered. The Planning Commission will need to review the code and determination whether the wetlands are included in the amount credited for the extra back lot acreage requirement. Schroeder asked Gaffron what variances are involved. Gaffron noted there is the back lot issue and whether Lot 3 abuts a public road. He indicated that the lot areas and widths are probably satisfactory otherwise. The 50' front and 30' side setbacks should be met. Gaffron said the driveway on the slope may require an easement as this driveway probably cannot be constructed within a 30' corridor. Retaining walls would also be required. Gaffron said septic sites must be located 75’ from wetlands and some sites are Questionable. He also Questioned whether the seotic sites would meet setbacks from the • • • radius of the road. Whitehead asked that Gaffron provide them with a list of the variances. Gafffon indicated that this is not usually done in the sketch plan review but would provide such a list. Mr. Whitehead said he had not thought there would be any variances. nr MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16, 1997 1 » r.'X/^.*A Aiuvj V f %-'\j»iiiaaiviv^^ Schroeder asked that neighbor comments be gathered. McMillan said she is concerned with runoff, the woods, and wetland areas as well as removal of trees, access, and increased traffic. McMillan noted there is a substandard lot adjacent to the property. She believes there may be a more creative approach to a sutxlivision and three additional lots to the one existing will be difficult without requiring a large number of variances. Mrs. Whitehead said she believes the requirements will be met by the proposed plan. Schroeder inquired about the road. The applicant said two lots would be accessed from a driveway and all four lots from Lyman Avenue. Schroeder questioned whether the road is capable of handling this degree of development. Gaffron said the road is in need of an upgrade, and the radius should be changed. He questioned how the area would be affected by the development with three additional houses on a narrow road. Lindquist asked who would pay for the upgrade of the road. Gaffron said the developer would pay for improvements on his property. It has not been determined how the upgrade would affect other properties. Smith asked if one less lot would substantially help Gaffron said it would make the subdivision easier. He is not sure how critical the variances will be. The concern is with the acreage for the back lot and how to bring the road across the slope. He questioned if the road was brought to the west whether the septic sites could be avoided. Mr. Whitehead indicated that there was some flexibility in the septic sites. Lindquist asked Gaffron to put together a list of potential problems for the applicant. Schroeder noted the list of variances A-G noted in the 1991 review. Stoddard informed Whitehead that the list is included in the memo of February 14, 1991 on page 9. Schroeder indicated that the property is subdividable but questionable as to how many lots. He noted the road will be a consideration. Lindquist said if requirements are met, the lots are buildable. Stoddard said wetland delineation should occur next and be used as a tool to determine if the septic sites are adequate. It will also assist in determining the number of lots. The road issue would then remain. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16, 1997 /•Ml A MOOKl *<kv4\\lf A I Aiuvj * T AX^iViaV-UVI \.'\/ilWltLAWiy Schroeder noted the needs of the fire department will be a factor. Mrs. Whitehead acknowledged the need for a turnaround in the cul-de-sac and the change to the radius. Schroeder questioned why the tree clearing that will be required for radius improvement was not done in the past to increase the level of safety. McMillan noted the problem with the hill as well. Gaffiron added that along with the list cf variances, there is also the concern in meetmg the 150% back lot standard and affects on the wetland the Wetland Conservation Act. Gaffron noted the need to create separation distances. There will be less impact on th<» front lots. McMillan added that the driveway and amount of dry buildable are issues. Gaffron indicated that the plan will need to be more fine-tuned, variances addressed, along with the driveway, site lines, septic sites, dry buildable and 1 50% requirement prior to the public hearing at the July meeting. Gaffron Liformed the Commission that they will have to make a deci «‘on regarding dry buildable and back lot standards taking in account how it has been dealt with since the code went into effect. Gaffron will review prior applications. (#2) #2238 - CHIC DWIGHT AND FRED GUTTORMSON, 1220 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCE - CONTINUA l ION OF FliBUC HEARING 11:UM1:02 P.M. The Applicant was not present. Gaffron was directed to determine why the applicant was not present and what are the applicant's plans. 1 he afier-the-fact application and enforcement issues were noted. Schroeder moved, McMillan seconded, to table Application #2238. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#15) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS OF MAY 27, 1997 AND JUNE 9,1997 Smith reported that the Council asked the Planning Commission at the June 9 meeting to study the issue of accessory structures and plumbing therein. It was noted that the accessory structure issue is both a seoarate but related issue to the home occuoation licensing. Lindquist suggested the topic be discussed at the general work session scheduled for June 23 at which the home occupation licensing is to be discussed. n-f ^ t MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16, 1997 ^ P1#> ^ O Cb«*vr^r4 r\^ « r\» » Arl\ y.** * -* A X\.\. yKJ>t % V.*X X.V*UllVti V. L»i 11 It-f V-VI^ Van Zomeren will supply copies of the memorandum that was directed to Council regarding accessory structures, the minutes of the Council meeting relating to the topic, and the notice of publication. (#16) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION A member of the audience indicated he was disappointed with the sketch plans presented under agenda item #14, Application #2251. He is concerned with the roadway. Stoddard indicated concern with allowing ihe cabin improvements (agenda item #9) to be made within the 0-75' setback and possibly setting a precedent for similar situations to follow. (#17) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MAY 19, 1997 MEETING McMillan moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 19, 1997. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#18) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT REPRESENTATIVES TO ATFEND I HE COUNCIL MEETINGS OF JUNE 23, 1997 AND JULY 14,1997 June 23 - Schroeder JuK* 14 - Stoddard ADJOURNMENT Stoddard moved, Schroeder seconded, to adjourn at 11; 10 p.m. Vote. Ayes 5. Nays 0. I tnrininct ^Kair P^rcon xo FROM HINSHAWiCULEERTSON (MON) 7. 21'97 16:16 ET. 16; 15 NO. S760044577 F 2 fflNSHAW & CULBERTSON M E M OR A N D U M To: Elizabeth Van Zomeren From: Thomas Barrett, City ^ Re: 60 day time limit in Minn. Stai. 15.99 Liz, you have asked what procedure the City ought to follow if the Planning Commi.ssion is unable to complete its large agenda at the next scheduled meeting. Minn. Stat. 15.99, Subdivision 3, (f) allows the city to e.xtend the 60 day time limit at any time prior to the expiration of the original 60 days by "providing written notice to the applicant. The notification must state the reasons for the extension and its anticipated lengtJi. which may not exceed 60 days unless approved by the applicant." I would recommend that as to any applications which are not decided by the Planning Commi.ssion at its next meeting that you write the applicant a letter, explaining that time ran out on the unusu.'tlly large agenda, and that the City i.s extending the time for making a final decision hy an .-idditional 60 days. Secondly, W'e discussed systems in place in the city for receiving and deciding land use applications. You told me that the Planning Commission meets once a month, and that the City Council usually meets the week following the Planning Commission meeting. As I understand the timing issue, an applicant who waits until the deadline for the next scheduled meeting to submit his application will easily fall within the 60 day time limit created by Minn. Suu. 15.99. However, an applicant who files the day after the deadline may w’cU need to wait almost fifty days before planning commission decision on the application, and then may be heard by the Council seven days later. As well, applications which are laid over because of the difficulty of the issues, or because the applicants wants to make suggested changes, may involve the risk that 60 rule in the statute will be applied. I am glad to talk with you as address this issue, but for now perhaps the staff memo.s ought to include, prominently, the date on which application was complete. This would allow' both the Planning Commission and the Council to easily determine whether a letter should be provided the applicant to extend the 60 day period. Let me know if you have further questions. Enclosure 7/iim $ 15.98 VKIMKl'.MKNTS W STAl’K IN <;i£Nf :KAL •o vO O o> cvi 521o 5z:o rxi t-U iia_i ‘ > 1 32 O Cx. hT the ll'Sij-lIiy? aastn. UTLSsectiM Joes n»v. Ui renuiiT* iin iwi« wj dlooik> inert unw to one grouo than i» j^ensiaU^ alkieated to other groupi^, or 'S) alfecl a political subdivi- •Win's ability to panl prefereuw iu kiou |» bac«il in the pilitial jiA>diviii«r<. prcvde^l this ptefemiee is not l»3«d ongender. Fir purposes oT tiis section, pnrae iee hnu -nsans the h«ir> 4:00 pjn. to IMO |kn. lltnb} to EVidny and OiOO am. to SrOO p.aa onSaturdays and SiiUlayn. Any sionp that geaerates Kveme as a lesult of tkKets soil to pereoas in attendance at arena eventa anuttbe excluded in detemiijiing if the areaa provide} moie paftne ice time togrenps ofoae gender chan the ocher. LW}l«W.c.6:%ar. 3.f 23. l&M. Tiaw dhadUnc for agiai(9'action Subdivuian 1. Dellnitbn. For pwpoaca of this seetioa, nvency* neans a department, agency, board, i»oririiMtnH, or other gpoup in fie eieeative branch of state govemneot; a cUtucory' or home nie (hanmreity, oouiiy, Iowa, or school distrift; any aaetropsitaii agency orregionai entity; and any atfaer p^bed aibdivisiGnof the state. Sold. 2. Dcadinc fcir lefgiome. Except as otherwise piorided h this sectioD and nccwithsunding aay other law to the coacraiy, an agency must approve or deny wjthm 60 daya a writtea ret>ie« refathig to toning, sejdic systems, or expansioa of die netiopolilan urban service area for a pemnit, icense, or otbv go'.'emmentai afp.'c.'al of an a:;tien F^ure •fan agency to efeay a request within 60 days is approval of che request It' sn ageiqr OMiies the request, it w»iuc state h wridng the rea-ons for the detaai at the time that it <!eaie.s the ie)uest. Subd. 3. dpplieaiion; extensmae. la) Tke time limit hi mndivliian 2 begiiis upon the ageney’s recept of a wrftlen request eontaiidag all infwiaatioa required by law or by a pmiouslj' adcptedrale, ordinance, or pdiey of the agency. If an agency retires awriuea Teqwat that not contahal required inifomation, the SO-day litah starts over <4i|y if the igemy sen^ wtioe wnthin ten hushiesi dqys of receipt of the request tclii^ the requester wlat htfomaton isniiaiig 9i) If an acson sebliag t> zoning, septic systems, or expansioi ol the inetropoUan urban terviee area requires the anNro/al of aiore chan one state agency in die eaeeiiti/e bniaeh, the fi^day period m sabdmsioa 2 Iregina to run for al executive btoach agenciee on the day a request all leqvred information is received by one state agency. Tie agency recehii^ the lequeat must foiward copies to other state ageaciee whose approval is riquind (c> An agency response meete the 66-day tine Unit if the agency can docurnent diat the leqiorse was smt vkhia €0daya of receipt of the written request (d> The lime Umii in subdiviaon 2 is extended if a state statute iederal law, or court order requires a process to ocev before the agency acts on the request, and the time perieds la-escribed in dm mate statnie, iedeni law, or court order make it impossiUe to set on the request within 60 cays. In cases deseribed in this ptfagrapn, the deadUne is extended to 60 dajm after oonpletioo oi the last process required in the appiicabk statute, law, ot order. Fi^ approval of an agtntj reeoiviag a request is not considerei a process for ptryosM of thh paragraph 4e) The time lini in suhdviaicn 2 li extended if: (1) a request submitted to i state agency reqiiies prior approval of a federal agency; or (2) an application subnitted t> a dt?. counqr, covn, sdwMt dsuift, metropolitan or regional entity, or other political subdivision xequiies prior approval of a stde tr fedenl agenqr. In cases dcacriled in this pangiaph, the ceadUne for agency action is extended to 60 daya after the required jprior ippnwal is panted. <0 An agency nay extend the dnw ink insubdividODShcforetiieend of the inkUOtlday period by prodding written notice of the edeaaion to the ^ipMcant The nottlicalkin mmt state the rcasom fer the extension and its anticipated length, wbch may not exceed 60 daya uoless approved bytheappBeaxt. ' DGPARTMEN1S OF STATE IN GENERAL Hiidarkal and StatskoiyNoten l»6ieciUali«i IMiLegUikien eiactiug lhas«e(k»,ii<ffcetiieJdy 1. 1986^ andap^ to nay written leqaemiuluiM *“*?* *?!** !“ •»bdWahn 2* fdate. tnder thh luhIMafoaf*. ISMl. Caatomcraeavtee SuhdnriaionL Deliiiilioni. Fsrpopoaas of tiimMdion and sectian 15.96: ^ heeneee and ether fome ofapfiHwal Ealed ii aediflii ll«J.70k whe clauses (7> and (Ek but does not iadnde those listed la avbdMBioa 2a, chanea G) ^'customer'' meant an MMdud; aannaU basinees as in iwftian 6IA44 uiehidhy a noeprofit cerpontion that odienriae meelB the triteria in that aeetian faro, family farni corporatioo, « faniiy farm partnanUp at dalhMd in seciii suhdiviaoD 2; tr a politieal subdvaioii as defined in sectim 1Q9G.G0S, aahdir 0) -initial agMcy- noeans the stale agency to which a cuBtameraubmitsanapnE a tueoae or mqaifes about «f>inittiKgaD appfieatiai); ml Snbd 2. Rmpoaoiiilitj for cuatomer meda. (aM^ a easUmer aaglias I !S!II2Ll°L? —^ ***^‘^‘ **‘® is respotaiUe for prov wtomer ^ mrernuton the customer needs hora the slate to connlete the « jtelading infonutini <m aay other sgeaqr or agendea that nuat taka actian b • *!“«*• licenaa befotw the cuata yroee^ the activity. The enployaa of the initial sganqr or reraanalbli ap aeoepts the cukmncrh applieation or iaquiiy rtganiitg an application shall im enstemor the employefi name. tit?«d mS^ont mstoiaer that the eaiployaa will be avadabla to provide aeahtaaoe and it/ormtit customer proeeeib wfti the appBcatioa and SMalta the sganeyfa action on ii ‘ESV that anothnr etate <» agendea iBi farwani si neoaasary aipKcaUtn Ibiiiis i Rqiarad mfomatian to the cdher agooey or sgeaciea and whj| eoordinsto wtih t the tone apo<ifiedkiae<tionl&S9t w—w » oonquei* (c) At the of aoaslonier. ^reqwiuibleageBqy ahal pcepam a wrieten w which m not a hiadii^ coninet, settiag out the atepa neeeaiary for ihectiatonier to ^ ’sben the re^oMibla agency outy be axpactadto tokaaotk topUeatioa, thestepa theraapaiiaibleagenqr wOltsha to ferwinnnainlieatioB or to aay other state agntey or agenciea that naat taka action, and toe p agencies may be aqweted to act The work phu ima Mbramtion OB trodeadlute for agcnqraetiin under aection 15.992 and on the roailtc hihiKto mecaitecteadiiae DiewoiliiiiannnBtteprovhlad toacuatoinernolBtei vorkiig daya after Che cuitomer roquoaM the plaa Uvsl9»^e.24g,artl9,5 L AneBchdlvLaw»19t6,e.9IS.ut.l.88. Hiatarical and Slatutaay Notea aatod certain wfcix iim. cetoUctoig. and *!!ff*"*** * wvlim^a iaatmctlm ed pcevUmm and omk aiiacoilaiMoas2f^»S!nSr55SS?S£ 1JJ92. Timelimilatian