The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-15-1996 Planning PacketPLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 15, 1996, 7:00 P.M. 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY - COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE - J. Dianp-Gd^tten ATTENDANCE (J 0 cV Applicants before the Commission are asked to move to the podium at the k'ront of the Chambers when their application is announced hy the Chairman. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS\PUBLI^" INFORMATION REVIEWS 1. 7:00 p.m.#2122 Karen Skoog/Tamera Christensen, 280/350 Tonka Avenue A. Vacation B. Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement 2. 7:30 p.m. #2126 City of Orono - Vacation of Portion of Navarre Lane 3. 7:45 p.m.#2127 David F. Wilde, 4689/4695 West Branch Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement #2130 Norbert Johnson, 1181 Wildhurst Trail - Preliminary Subdivision8:15 p.m. ACTION ITEMS - Review of these items will commence prior to or between scheduled public hearings. 5.#2088 Winfield Stephens, 3770 Bayside Road - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing - Written Renotification of Neighbors 6. #2098 Eva Theobald, 4104 Highwood Road - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing- Written Renotification of Neighbors 7. #2124 John A. Earling, 2165 Colin Drive - Variances - Public Hearing 8. #2125 Richard D. Clifford, 4760 North Shore Drive - Variances - Public Hearing 9. #2128 Orono Hockey Boosters, Inc., 1025 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing i. U'#2129 Jon Pendleton, 350 North Arm Lane - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing 9 ' 1 J i PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - MONDAY, APRIL 15, 1996. 7:00 P.M. Planning Conunission C • j M 111 11 . Other issues for discussion. Additional Items 12. Planning Commission approval of minutes of the March 18, 1996 meeting. 13. Placiimg Commission to select a representative to attend the May 13, 1996 meeting of the Council. Aifjoumment 1 J Public A ttendance Meeting Date i/'^/□ g□ Council Planning Commission Park Commission Other Please fill out the information REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1. 2 3 Mu ("U itAc .n7^ ^ V7^ /\JoCtH S(kcel)\r> /^'7 ^ ■ ( 7.' \^-H}V 7t7STo-Jrrt UfT i) ^ 8. (nctr/fu. Qfjprs^pL 9. 4rcl>at.kist/bskl ^ 8 ^ fiastO^fiL LdM ■s^z- >w ^11. ///r? Cls6n f 0 ^ t-'Y M 11 (] li'7 0t \aJ. |Ca' MfrvU^^swt.2^%6S iVft'N/'. Id /^y UJ^/H^ A/y 1 i/yj fh*1 1 1 ^Vo c' ^ ^' rV-A Wj 0fl395.4 Public A ttendance Meeting Date □ C ouncil Planning C ommission Park Commission Other Please fill out the information requested below for our city records . NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER ^ 5050 Cciftnfic^ 4. 5.. 6. 7, 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 091395.4 m •II IIIII .* •< t'i I 6 I <0 I «» I i Ei S’ p :?a JT 5 P iiJ O •2:o I S ft » \i ^ I > f 5 o 3 p§ I ;o SI 0 1a S'I O g. CX cr a ? 5 = &I § g ? a oo« Q rn.n o b: n •5 I 3 0 □ <n 1 |s ??® g« i £ S.'& II < 5 i S' s 01 I 9 E c K in*.o f \Q I 9I9 3 3.5 p o II fl iiif 2.^ ? Ii• z ca t>l »- C/1 a* I (IQ o01o p ?o; o* 5 tn I s.I I o •— o ►-n oo n ^ 8 ^n c u» •p B o o 5a 1 •n 8 0•-I 13 p I „ 11.^ ss s R- o 3 p ■ae; &n ia ifl|•S " & P & no5P I O s p o P5p iH Jis>- - ils n'-jgPsi ^ o Q i f. :r: /. To:CtiEir Peterson &nd Orono Pl&nning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator April 3, 1996 #2122 Karen Skoog and Tammy Christensen, 280/330 Tonka Avenue - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement/Vacation of Public Road - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA Skoog Property = 12,500 s.f or .29 acres Christensen Property = 12,500 s.f. or .29 acres Adjusted areas after vacation and lot line rearrangement. Skoog Property = 23,750 s.f Christensen Property = 18,750 s.f Annlication: The application involves a lot line rearrangement involv.ng the dmston of two lots previously combined for tax purposes that have been assessed a sewer umt in the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project and the vacation of a 40 ’ ummproved public rittht-of-way Applicants also seek permission of the Council to waive the sewer unit assessment against combined undeveloped Lots 17 and 18. The following ordinances are pertinent to this review; 1. Section 10.12 - Vacation of public road. 2 Section 11.03, Subd. 2, Definition 65 and 66. 3 Section 11.10, Subd. 10 - Class I subdivision-procedures. List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - Application for Subdivision Application for Vacation Plat Map Property Owners List Request by Applicant to Waive Sewer Unit Assessment for Lots 17 and 1 Council Minutes 6/14/93 Staff Sketch Subdivision/Vacation Survey Review of Application - Subdivision At the June 14, 1993 meeting of the Council. Council conceptually approved the proposed ( Zoning File #2122 April 3, 1996 Page 2 subdivision of a lot line rearrangement and vacation of Hill Street and the waiving of sewer unit assessment against combined Lots 17 and 18 Conceptual approval was based on applicants legally combining properties as shown on Exhibit H, survey of the subdivision. Council approved the comprehensive application finding the proposal far more beneficial than collecting the $12,000 sewer unit charge with new residential construction on a 12,500 s.f. lot requiring multiple variances. As noted above, the lot line rearrangement will greatly increase the areas of the two properties. Note the 12' x 12' shed that already encroaches into Lot 17 of the former Patrin parcel (combined Lots 17 and 18). The Skoog house is located 10' fi-om the south lot line adjacent to Hill Street right-of-wa>*. The acquisitioi of Hill Street and Lot 18 will open up the building envelope should owners wish to expand on existing residence. The Skoog and Christensen properties are connected to municipal sewer. Staff recommends approval of the lot line rearrangement involving the properties located at 280, 300 and 330 Tonka Avenue, subject to the condition that applicants apply for the legal combination of the parcels upon the filing of the approval resolutions for the vacation and subdivision. B. Review of Application - Vacation 1 t- I Zoning File #2122 April 3, 1996 Page 3 After the June, 1993 meeting of the Council, staff sent letters out to the neighbors to the immediate east adjacent to the unimproved Hill Street right-of-way advising them of the proposed vacation request by the Skoog and Christensen families. The City has never been contacted by either landowner. Staff has encouraged the applicants to file for the partial vacation of Hill Street. )) 4' Applicants were asked to have their surveyor locate any utilities within unimproved right-of- way. Review Exhfl)it H, note no utilities have been shown by the surveyor and yet the survey has been signed noting only that the boundaries of the properties and all structures have been located. Staff will contact Mark Gronberg and ask him to complete the search for utilities. Staff will confirm at our meeting. John Gcibardson has asked that the Skoogs dedicate a 10 foot drainage and utilities easement through the vacated right-of-way for a future utility connection to Crestview Avenue to the east. Staff will attempt to locate the easement within a reasonable distance from the Skoog residence on Parcel A so as not to restrict future expansions of building envelope. Staff Recommendation To approve the vacation petition of Karen Skoog and Tamera Christensen for partial vacation of 40' right-of-way of unimproved Hill Street, subject to the Skoogs deeding a 10' drainage and Zoning File #2122 April 3, 1996 Page 4 utility easement, the location of which shall be determined by the City, in addition to the . 1 granting of any utility easements over existing utilities that may encroach the vacated right-of- way. C. Waiving of Sewer Unit Assessment Council has conceptually approved the waiving of the sewer unit if applicants completed the subdivision and vacation as proposed. Planning Commission members may wish to note support of the waiving of the sewer unit assessment although this matter can only be acted on by the Council. ^ / CITY OF OROHO Site Address _ SOBOIVISION APPLICAKOH **^ - - - - - - - -7r"^“ -iproperty locrtion 260 7~nn>:a A/ 03*(Please check one - Property abstract or - - - torrens? Attach legal description_J:_o _aPPlif®“°2:---------------------tllS"',----17-----------------s Phone (home) 1 applicant Ha»e Kc . ... 6 ^ (work)A2ai^ Address:cuo - City:Zip: OflNER (if different than applicant) Name - - - --- - --- - - - Phone (home) Phone (work) ^tattach list if more than oneT City:Zip: existing land use Number of Tax Parcels -^ Development Size Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total/ all parcels Present Use (check)Residential? no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no nei subdivision for Nev» Building Sites Number of Building Sites.Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: fcheck) Units per Acres Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential ■* other (specify) mm ■ i raw. I II NINIMOM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR C 1. Completed Application Form PLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' {you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 4. As an addendum to this applicatioUf please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments) 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. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature^_ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II s III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $200.00 300.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision)300.00 Preliminary Review (Class III & all nor.-residential)325.00 + 25.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 175.00 Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Application 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signaturi c Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Conunission 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 S Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. I TY OP ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address I ^ NC-.3s Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ~~ /.!,7z ^ ^ Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. _ ___ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ Phene (home) -<LiC>} WAPPLICANT Name C _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work) ^ ^(yn IMcl zip^52:^k_Address OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _ Address .*"-s Phone (home) Phone City Zip Date Property Acquired __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,- - (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. lication fees - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _ _ _ _ $ 50.00 For each variance request with _ _ _ _ $125.00 Residential accessory Use H323 _ _ _ _ $175.00 Institutional (church, school, et Oe/29/% 17:06:10 $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg It 0.00 0.00 $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration LiM) USE Rm.ICRTlQN 1 t 390.00 •2122 KWEN SKQ06 1 t 0.00 SUBTOTAL Tftt TOTAL SALE RECEI\e 350.00 0.00 330.00 430.00 OMCE 0*00 Grading, seawall, retaining walls wxthin 75 of lakeshor PRD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Fee - $100.00 (no change from original applicatxon) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Applicatxon Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS ^ „n.=,r,+. ^f»es)$230.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant rees; $250.00 Vacation _ $175.00 Easement Vacation ^ ^ $ 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision “ $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule; _ $300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _ $100.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule OF IC1 ill) ■yijo '^338 ?5 (17) l«. >2i / (16) ''I' / /O.tr loa. 5 ■331.1 / ) 1 M :•(») V 6 T(5)T«^ (12) a X vrvfl - g 1.0.4 B « (M) B ' B ,'’2« a '• 12 a " ;(26) " S'; II B 5 (23) " ! B (27) B -* (/.) * ‘ o(26) • B 121 a... htli (12) S „ (ZTTS « ? N 9)tr R (»e): a e s •HILL (WDEVELOPEDi 22121 «4 2 K fCG—RB-?^^'iN / 9^ 19 <X* J (45) .S' )8#.ff a (ill bjj Ml ! (40)^ (31)i R >5^ r (44) ■ ??i, 33 (33) T I?5l?S TsrB- (431 5b (58) ayside (W) QOODS . ..< w^Kr (36) ]i}....• ••••••••••••*• - •••••••.• : ‘ / (37)r 1 , -»4 — (39)!(30);(4 oV.(36) :>c> ^ 8 ' 1 ■( 35)1(32) * Y (60) •'X'^\ n:: 40 J51 6 \, ■ 29^ 9.-p 4 1 4 1 lA¥5ii ■"(CO- ----------:--------Hi--------------------1. MO 04)' iaJiQ*4?4—sns w^s \/*----'J? 93 ^53:-------24' %% Jo6.9* HAi*4riv« S 1 S c?)8»«*3»'2i'*-------rsrs-------- o Ok )io «. . t il •i •4 ♦’ «’** -'}h\l MM DAH 08/M/9i■'•i S'Jit BATCH iirMl ■I if 1 PMP AOM QMNER NAHi TAXRAYCR NAHE/AODR r\ ■ ■«! ■ 'll r^: .>r; 'X •i! MKM ADM OHNER NAHi TAXRAYIR NAME/AOOR Hi ■;i-‘PROP AOOR r ;; u tn-u OIRCR NAHi t TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR rr t* i' f * PfIOP AOOH GHNER HAKE TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 0\i ■# o * r* h’ PROP AOOR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER HAHE/AOOR ] 'ii i . *. PROP AOOR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER HAHE/AODft it- «{r'» il'. % HENNEPIN COUKTY PROPERTY XNfORHATIQN SYSTEH PROPERTY QHNERS LIST SO 05-117-23 lA 002C 00245 CRESTVIEH AVE OOUOIAS J KORZENOORFER OOU6LAS J KORZENOORFER 245 CRESTVIEH AVE iONO LAKE MN 55354 35 05*117-23 14 0023 00275 CRESTVIEH AVE HAROtO R HANSON ETAL HAROLO R HAfGON 275 CRESTVIEH AVE LONO LAKE m 55354 35 05-117-23 14 0024 00250 TONKA AVE P i K SKOOQ PHILIP A A KAREN S SK006 250 TONKA AVE LONO LAKE m 55354 35 05-117-23 14 0029 00230 TCMCA AVE S A OLSON AKA OLSON STEVEN A A KELLY A OLSON 230 TONKA AVE LONO LAKE MN 55354 35 05-117-23 14 0033 00035 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED BERT L ADDISON ETAL HRS A L ADDISON 3352 BAYSIDE RO LONO LAKE HN 55354 35 05-117-23 14 0034 00035 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ESTHER H ADDISON HRS A L ADDISON 3352 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE HN 55354 35 05-117-23 14 0021 00255 CRESTVIEH AVE HICNAEL L HCCALL HICHAEL L HCCALL 5344 PIPER RD ORONO m 55354 35 05-117-23 14 0024 00255 CRESTVIEH AVE C HOSLEY JR A S H HOSLEY CURTIS JR A SHANNON HOSLEY 255 CRESTVIEH AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 35 05-117-23 14 0027 00250 TOMCA AVE P A K SKOOQ PHILIP A A KAREN S SKOOQ 250 TONCA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 35 05-117-23 14 0030 00315 CRESTVIEH AVE 0 S A J H PLAISTED DAVID S A JOY H PLAISTED 315 CRESTVIEH AVE LONO LAKE HN 55354 35 05-117-23 14 0034 00035 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ESTHER H ADDISON HRS A L ADDISON 3382 BAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE HN 55354 35 05-117-23 14 0039 00340 TOrtCA AVE BARBARA H CARLSON BRAD D PETERSON 340 TOMCA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PAGE 5535 05-117-23 14 0022 00245 CRESTVIEH AVE L E BARFKNECNT A J C HORGAN L E BARFKNECNT A J C HORGAN 245 CRESTVIEH AVE LONG LAKE Itl 55354 JO 'll •# • SB 05-117-23 14 0025 00255 CRESTVIEH AVE C HOSLEY JR A S H HOSLEY CURTIS JR A SNAI5KM HOSLEY 255 CRESTVIEH AVE LONG LAKE MN 55354 I • % - # r ^ •; .* ■' ^. ■ 35 05-117-23 14 0025 00250 TONKA AVE GERALD L BRIGGS GERALD L BRIGGS 250 TONKA AV LONG LAKE m 55354 \ * t 35 05-117-23 14 0031 00325 CRESTVIEH AVE -MO * • • • ^ I* • .^0m, • .' ' 0 •• / NULIAM SULLIVAN 312* 58TH ST I flO MPLS MN S5417 APPMits WiLLiaiT) L * * «V •» > •' S8 05-117-23 14 0035 03362 BAYSIDE RO A L ADDISON ETAL MRS A L ADDISON 3382 BAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE (M 55354 I , •,-V ! •» J j <• • *«' :n AM ' A* k • • • •:. 35 05-117-23 14 0040 00330 TONKA AVE L L ANDERSON ASA ANDEfBON DAVID CHRISTENSEN 330 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 '■V' • u <rt \». v' ;-i:* T' f .1 Wy ' 4% : ‘ i. .1 RUN DATE 0D/M/9Siil •\ j; BATCH fl7■'U .ISMCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATIQN SYSTEM PROPERTY (MCRS LIST iI I t ■tj ) SR 05-117-2S IS 0012 PROP AODR 0S420 BAYSIDE RO ONNER NAME RAN ANDERSON '.TAXPAYER . ROMRT F A NENDY S ANDERSON NAME/AOOR S420 BAYSIDE RO LONB LAKE SSS5A 4 vJ •If L PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR ID 05-117-2S IS 0028 0029B TONKA AVE N A R SCHMITZ HENRY A ROSIE SCHMITZ 29f TOMCA AVE LONB LAKE NN S5S5A a PROP ADOR ONCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SO 0S-117-2S IS 0042 0S444 EASTLAKE ST NAN HUNSLEY NARK A HUNSLEY 1444 E LAKE ST LONB LAKE m 55354 ' i^'PROP AODR »tCR NAME Qjf TAXPAYER / it NAME/AOOR SO 05-117-23 IS 0044 0003B ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO 0 A M0N6E ANA NONCE DEAN A A NANCY A NONCE S444 E LAKE ST S LONB LAKE Itl 55354 •• PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SO 05-117-23 14 0009 00270 CRESTVIEH AVE DOUGLAS L NASH ET AL DOUGLAS A SHIRLEY NASH 270 CRESTVIEH AVE LONB LAKE MN 55354 PROP ADOR QIOCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 05-117-23 14 0017 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OOUBLAS L NASH ET AL DOUGLAS A SHIRLEY NASH 270 CRESTVIEH AVE LONG LAKE NN 55354 • ■•i SO 05-117-23 IS 0013 0S440 BAYSIDE RO T M ZIESMER AMT ZIESMER TOOO M A MARIE T ZIESMER S440 BAYSIOC RO LONG LAKE HN B5SB4 SB 05-117-2S IS 0029 OOOS8 ADDRESS UNASSIOCO ESTHER M ADDISON ESTHER M ADDISON SS82 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE EM 55354 SO 05-117-23 IS 0043 03444 EASTLAKE ST D A NONCE ANA NONBE dean a a NANCY A MONGE S444 EAST LAKE ST S LONS LAKE MN 55S54 38 05-117-23 13 0050 00245 Tonka ave nary KAY MCCARTY MARY MCCARTY 245 TONKA AVE LONB LAKE EM 55354 38 0S-117-2S 14 0010 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED DOUGLAS L NASH ET AL DOUGLAS A SHIRLEY NASH 270 CRESTVIEH AVE LONG LAKE IM 55354 S8 05-117-23 14 0018 00290 CRESTVIEH AVE PATTY L CLAPP PATTY L CLAPP 290 CRESTVIEH AVE LONG LAKE EM 55356 REPORT NO. P14Sf4«V PAGE 57SB 05-117»2S IS 0023 00225 TOEiLA AVE CAROLE J NALSH CAROLE J NALSH 225 TOEKA AVE LONG LAKE EM 55S54 V.• 8 .,4 4 * * ‘♦ • ^ 1 ! 38 05-117-25 IS 0050 03400 DAYSlOE RD DAS ESTERS DANIEL A SANDRA ESHRS 3400 BAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE EM 55554 38 05-117-25 15 0044 03424 EASTLAKE ST T E RAOKE ANA RAOKE THOMAS E A MARGARET A RAOKE 5424 EASTLAKE ST LONG LAKE EM 55354 V' • * • ** » f > ’• • « • • •* L 38 05-117-23 14 0008 03310 BAYSIOC RO J H HOJCIK A K L HOJCIK JOM N HOJCIK A KIT L HOXIK 3310 BAYSIDE RO LAKE LAKE EM 55354 * >.r) 38 05-117-23 14 0011 00038 ADDRESS UE4ASSIGEC0 DOUGLAS L NASH ET AL DOUGLAS A SHIRLEY NASH 270 CRESTVIEH AVE LONB LAKE EM 55354 t Of•r .J.* Kk . ' 6 » * • : V. " '■ ■■ • ■•n . I.A 38 05-117-23 14 0019 00235 CRESTVIEH AVE S T ANDERSON A C ANDERSON S T AE«ERSON A C ANDERSON 235 CRESTVIEH AVE LONG LAKE EM 55354 O • i-! | •n / ■ p ^ '• l ' .0 m , ^ ’ fr ’ • . j. \ •y •* *»• • . . •». OM-•V i L fUl MTI Oa/M/fi MTCH 117 NEmEPIN COUNTY PRQKIITV INTOItUnQN SYSTD1 PMPEIITY QMCRS LIST\ ^ MOP AOM^ iMca mm TAXPAYM NAME/AOM M 0S-1U-7S U OMl O0S70 TQMCA AVE t L ANOEASON ASA ANDERSON DAVID CMlISTErGEN S20 TOmk AVE LONB LAKE ffi S5SSA MOP ADOR (MCR NANC «T]I TAXPAYER _ III; NANE/ADDR M 05-117-ES 14 0052 05190 DAYSIDE RO ROOT N A RARRARA HUBER ET AL RORERT A RARRARA NURER 5590 DAYSIDE RD LONB LAKE HN 55354 OMER NAH| TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 50 05-117-25 14 0057 00550 CRESTVIEN AVE ROSE H HADDEN ROSE H HADDEN 550 CRESTVIEN AVE LQNO LAKE HN 55354 t t r' ' > ( • O' a 58 05-117-25 14 0042 00500 TQMCA AVI P A 9C000 A D N CHRISTENSEN PHILIP A SROOO 200 TQMCA AVE ORQNO m 55554 58 05-117-25 14 0055 00240 CRESTVIEN AVE JEFFREY S HELRY JEFFREY S HELRY 240 CRESTVIEN AVE LQNO LAKE Ml 55354 58 05-117-25 14 0058 03300 RAYSIOE RO H S ORNAT A L J ORNAT H S ORNAT A L J ORNAT 3300 DAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE HN 55354 REPORT NO. Pl4SI48t PAGE 5958 05-117-25 14 0045 00500 CRESTVIEN AVI STEVEN R REYER STEVEN R REYER 500 CRESTVIEN AVE S LONG LAKE Ml 55354 58 05-117-25 14 0054 00520 CRESTVIEN AVI JONN F LENHEYER JOHN F LEHHEYER 520 CRESTVIEN AVE LQNO LAKE Ml 55554 I • • « TOTAL BATCH i* • » J A. ’*« r-t A ^..t ‘ I ' /Vf:A: I » > f ■ > •.« ■ ** V. . - r.' f X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF XNFORHATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE REST OF MY KNONLEO<» AND BELIEF • . » * ♦ I DATE •* J I M V ^ * • * r‘ ' • O ■0 r. • < ' ' • • I . . ( il <7 ioh ^ n xr>^ Uyc^ A^-l^ ^^^pUr^eL. *b> Suiy^\’^cXJi^ e^ ^ ^ C_- lUlTL^-^d- Lc^Cl— Z-AA-. W~v*-<vJt 'b-<_i^- '•^ rh 5-u -Wt'^Tl I' -1 «r-»*r^^ ui’* - I 0 f MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 14, 1993 (tl4) 300 TONKA AVENUE - CONCEPTUAL REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION/DROP UNIT Dave Christensen was present. r*ffron explained the applicant and his neighbor propose the Hill Street and splitting of 2 vacant lots, to be cabined with thel? r.sp.ctlve prob.rtl.s. They also request that the sewer unit for the vacant lots be dropped. All members agreed the concept is a good idea. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT A) Hurr reported she has been working with Marge Gasch on ♦ka now ritv Hal I A banner is proposed rnade out of fabric to ^tnc above the ‘n "he Administration building, and the Historical Society is arranging pictures to be hung. There has been S *scu»“i ®r“.Vardln9 o‘n'-90?n9®drsplays fron either th,e Art Center They have discussed using the brick wall In ' Chambers tor name plates to honor Mayors ot the City and citizens. U rrhoped some of the items will be In place for the open house. Kellev said he thought the Ideas were great and did not have the Ume ^oSedlcate to make them happen, but trusted Hurr to use her discretion. Hurr asked that staff arrange for a fire truck and police car to be available for children to view at the open house. B) Goetten reported she and Hurr °i go^'aa^ Cities* conference in St. Cloud, at presentation regarding the process they went through obtain g City Hall. The subject was controversial issues. C) Kelley reported he and Moorse met with '‘f Pf®f ®"^ . port I on Fire Department to go over the budget. He that pay of the budget goes to the firemen for making ’ fluctuates, is based on the number of calls made, Annate Long Lake Historically, if the amount budgeted was inadequa , -rhev have would pay the difference until the ‘ i s unbalance, discussed ways in which Orono could help offset t --n+r-ct to Moorse Is working on a draft of the 1994 fire service be reviewed early July. I HO ) \ \ \ \ N \ \ 1 Vu 3 Va < o V- «’ • * { (S^ II u lO 1 1 1 aso <=1 t !r 6 ! B- ”1 IHILL. 5Tie€.€T" ^«Nb£wF*o«0 % i < I L. pp+p.;« \e io?----^ ^A<. __________________,/V / Okv“l S>T“ 330 6/lf?/ •eA/ -c ' J/iiCkJC* PAm./Ai3od 330- 1 ■ 2 C HENNEPIN COUNTVi MlNN<jS( ** > s S07*<M'£175.25' VI 7 T 2 A fxistini^ ^ House O iV * ..........fri* Ml_____fX^.to^tusrr ■ Tmiir'-ia'! -/--w«ca puoposo)#*•.....>> » / Hill I (no#* ......BE VACATED V * ••*.|i.s : •. .* £ Street N89MIV f I252S / : /7 L. \ CKlifinj \ »w-v 589‘4€t lasl 1- - EKistinf A «>= *« rr :rrr*^•li ! i Ilf* •<' ,-'fc'. '" ; !*• . ExistinP i ^ House ^ t Bf . . ^tiiiffiii9 •'•i *♦ ■• •• s «------k.'i N89*4IV I2S25 j'.:. Ne9 ‘4l'W 12525 rK EXISTING LEGAl PHILIP SKOOG Lots 9 and 10 DAVID CHRISTEI Lots 15 and II PROPOSED LEGAl SKOOG PARCEL. Lots 9 and 10 to Lake Mlnne which lies be* and West line- CHRISTENbEN P. Lots 15. 16, . Lake Mtnrietonl o: denotes i •: denotes i Bearinys showi This survey i described exl existing hous sheds thereon improvemefjt s TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members FROM:Jeanne A- Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:April 10,1996 SUBJECT: #2126 City of Orono, Vacation of Portion of Navarre Lane - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.12 - Vacation of public road List of Exhibits A - Application B - Legal Notice C - Plat Map D - Certificate of Mailmg/Property Owners List E - Original Legal Notice Posted for Application #2107 F - Location Map of Proposed Vacation G - Detail Map of Portion of Right-of-Way to be Vacated with Original O'Sullivan Application Review of Application City Council conceptually approved the vacation petition of J. O'Sullivan and E. Smith that proposed vacating 33' of right-of-way of Navarre Lane at the northwest lot line of the property located at 3340 Shoreline Drive. Applicants would then agree to the granting of drainage and utility easements over the entire 33' of right-of-way over the City water main and telephone utility line within the right-of- way. The City conceptually approved the vacation pending completion of the vacation ot the entire Navarre Lane right-of-way commencing at the intersection of County Road 19 extending to the intersection of Olive Avenue, refer to Exhibit F. All property owners to benefit from the vacation would grant drainage and utility easements over the entire vacated right-of-way. The western portion of the 33' right-of-way contains municipal sewer and gas utility line. The three properties to benefit from the vacation are O'Sullivan/Smith, the church property and Lafayette Ridge. Members may recall that the detention pond that serves the new development of O'Sullivan/Smith will be developed on the church property. Portions of that pond may extend into the vacated right- of-way as long as there is no interference with existing utilities. It shall be the obligation of applic^t's surveyor to locate the utilities within the right-of-way where proposed detention pond is to be located and where either underground tiles or above ground swale is to be installed that would convey treated mnofT to wetland at southeast. Zoning File #2126 April 10,1996 Page 2 O'SuUivan/Smith shall be expected to obtain signatures of authorized agents of the church and Lafayette Ridge homeowners association to complete the execution of the drainage and utility easement The City Engineer estimates the detention pond on the church property that will serve areas of the church property, 66' of vacated Navarre Lane and the O'Sullivan/Smith parcel to be .24 or 0.1 acre in surface area. He estimates the watershed at approximately 4 acres. Staff Recommendation To approve the proposed partial vacation of Navarre Lane commencing at the intcisection of County Road 19 and extending to the west side of the intersection of Olive Avenue subject to the following conditions: 1.Applicant shall legally combine vacated portions of right-of-way with their respective properties. All property owners benefit from proposed vacation shall be responsible for executing a drainage and utility easement over the 66' of right-of-way. Said easement to be filed at the time the vacation resolution is filed by the City Attorney's office. 3.The City shall also ask that the church grant a drainage easement over the detention pond within the church property. I < I 126 CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION Application # -Hi jPlT Date Rccciyed 3 ^ ~9‘4 Amount Paid yfS 3/22:^9^ PROPERTY LOCATION ^ ^ ^ / -f— Site Address ^ Tv«» ftf Armlication to be Filed 1/ ^/H'nr^rU.C A(yx (LType of Application to be Filed 1/ ta Ai Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) i ^t/i applicant Name Phone (home)_ Phone (woricX Address *.e.o*ic (»c OWNER (if different than applicant) Name_______ >S_PK .# Phone (home) Phone (work). Address Citv 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 51 75.00 Residential Accessory Use 5250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.)J r 1 ^ 1^\_# It AlWr VA « VA W ^ ■ 1 — ' S225.00 Guest Housc/Guest Apartments ' $200.00 Duplex Crcdit/Bldg ' $300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use ~ $250.00 Land Alteration . Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplam Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) Afrer-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS u » r ^ $250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) \y $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 - sec Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPER Present Zoning District ^ —. Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify). -------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350 ’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map fi-om Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11” X 17” OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete, Initials of Clerical Staff: ______________________Date------------------ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applic.?nt's signature Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authori2ed reasonable entry onto the prooerty 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 a|i submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning C mmission Meeting. Planiilng Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applic-ats must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Plamiing Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make ar.angements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 4 I I e> CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone (612)473-7357 Fax 473-0510 NOTICE to vacate a aoDroved a vacation of the 33' of Navarre Lane adjacent to the swifc.IV .r the current vacation is as follows. That part of Navarre Lane described as follows; extended to its intersection with the northwesterly line of Outlot C, Lafayette southwesterly to a point on the northwesterly Itne of said Tract A, 25.'.0a leet southwesterly of the most northerly comer of said Tract A; thence North 31de^« 52 minutes 41 seconds West a distance of 43.82 feet more or less southeasterly line of Lot 5, Block 3, "Townsite ot Langdon Park . thence northeasterly along the southeasterly line of said Lot 5, Block j to Ae most eas y comer of said Lot 5, Block 3; thence northeasterly along the southeasterly lines of Lots 22 and 21, "Wiley ’s Navarre Addition, Lake Minnetonka to the pom beginning. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments axe solicited. Plans axe available in the City Offices for review, by appomtment. City of Orono By: Planning Commission Building & Zoning Administrator To be published the weeks of April I, 1996 and Apnl 8, 1996. y ■ • • CERTIFICATE OF MAZLIN@ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF ORONO ) S3. ) ) I, Jamie Bosma, of the City of Orono, Hennepin Coiinty, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #2126, was mailed to the attached list of property owners. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 3rd day of April, 1996. A •f, -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -inm Property Owners lists for City of Orono #2126 Srace Baptist Church North Central CBA 7260 University Ave N E #110 Fridley, MN 55432 Brett Hallonquist 3324 Navarre Lane Wayzata, MN 55391 Nancy Nelson 2350 Olive Ave Hayzata, MN 55391 Brian Jakubiak 2338 Olive Ave Wayzata, MN 55391 1st Natl Bank of Navarre 2445 Shadywood Road Navarre, MN 55392 Super Valu Stores Inc Corporate Tax Dept P.O. Box 990 Minneapolis, MN 55440 Edwin Kuglin 2314 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 eresa Anne Koch 225 Bayview Place fayzata, MN 55391 David & Diane Dean 2265 Bayview Place Wayzata, MN 55391 rason & Lauia Belcourt 2300 Bayview Place Mayzata, MN 55391 Marcel Dittrich 2377 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 John & Barbara Ericson 1620 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 James Anderson 2275 Bayview Pi Wayzata, MN 55391 Voyageur Service Centers P.O. Box 65 Navarre, MN 55392 Freshwater Foundation Gray Freshwater Center 2500 Shadywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331 Glass II Partners 14600 28th Ave N Plymouth, MN 55447 Pat Sullivan 2318 Olive Ave Wayzata, MN 55391 Terry & Tiffiny Hallock 2245 Bayview Place Wayzata, MN 55391 Cathy Jo Turner 2250 Bayview Place Wayzata, MN 55391 Gene & Sheryl1 Block 2305 Bayview Place Wayzata, MN 55391 D J L & M R Carlson 2344 Olive Ave Wayzata, MN 55391 i Adrianne Dodge 3320 Navarre La Wayzata, MN 55391 Leroy & Carol Koehnen 26020 Valleywood Excelsior, MN 55331 I Stephen Schmidt 2385 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Richard & Colleen Haefner 2324 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 James & Lynn Jacobson 2328 Olive Ave Wayzata, MN 55391 Patricia Burniece 2253 Bayview Place Wayzata, MN 55391 i Jacquelynn Segner 2260 Bayview Place Wayzata, MN 55391 ♦ ** y *•■^1 dah oi/ti/H HEifCPiN couMTf nonnvi iwowiation svstihraOPERTY QM€RS LIST. M 17-U7-11 OOtRiS&^fMRAOPil M«M ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OtCR NAHl' ■ HEMCriN FORFEITED LAND •rfiU TAJtpAYER HEMCRIN FORFEITED LAND NAHI/AODt . • I * . ». V* -A, ’ ' »i '' l7-l>7-« 44 RROR ADDR OASM 0101 DMOREIINE OR OMCR NAfC ; I. A C KOEHNEN -iWljTAMHAVER ? lEROT I CAROL ROEMCM 5^. NAHB/ADOR lA .w . . •• I-** f . I^CftSIOil m I53SI so C0-U7-CS II 0015 DE445 SNAOYNOOO RO.i^ 'fROR ADDR ’'■^^ ■CMHER NAME * '• 1ST NATL DAM( OF NAVARRE « 1 TAHRAYER .? IS^ NATL DAM( OF NAVARRE NAME/ADORr; 00 ROAD If A CO ROAD IS mVARRE m S55SE t .‘j* . , ^ / SD'<tO-117-ES 11 OOJS RHOR ADDR ' OOOSD ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OMCR NAME' ,, FRESHNATER FOUNDATION TAXPAYER ; FRESHNATER FOUttATlON NAME/AODR 7E5 CO RD A ^«if;-4.;,/J.:?f.;■;NAyIATA^t^ ssssi » •» * • «t , » r. .F .* > • * • • •; -4 \2' • * ■ I > 4 A . ». • • .r* ’ » •:REPORT NO. RI4SS401 / PACE Si * i. (.S-.'SD l7-ll7-tl 44 DOSS OOOSD ADDRESS UNASSIGNED Cin OF OROND CITY OF OROND PO DOX 4ACRYSTAL DAY Ml 5SS59 SD 17>117>1S 4A 0100 . , OSSai SHORE LIliE OSCLASS II PARTNERS . CLASS 11 PARTNERS 14400 20TH AVE M PLYMOUTH M4 55447 ; •,i , ..*,*•*' .«.f ♦ .’ .»»• f SD 17-117-tS 44 0102 025DS SHAOYNOOD RO S H SCHHIOT A S J SCMCOT STEPHEN H SCHMIDT 2SSS SHAOYNOOO RO DOX 15 NAYZATA Ml 5SS91 SD 20-117-2S ll coot . 02410 SHAOYHOOD RO ; . VOYAGEUR SERVICE CEHTtRS : VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS ‘ CO RD 15 A 19 NAVARRE mi S5S92 i .••V"’ /. • *• ; n • . • •. • *•! * \* • ^ I ; I'.j- ' •'•» ••: r*M •nr-*.” " “ • . ii f 1 ^ \ J * M 20-117-15 11 0024 055SS SH0H£L1N6 DR HCT COHPANY SUPER VAIU STORES INC CORPORATE TAX DIPT PO DOX 990 HPLS HN 5S440 so 20-117-2S 11 00S4 02500 SHAOYNOOO RO FRESHNATER FOUNDATIOIf FRESHNATER FOUNDATION SIRRING HILL CENTER .. 725 SIXTH AVE N MAYZATA mi S5S91 ▼OTAL BATCH 504 0QO2D « I • • •s . ; • . . . S #’ • •'t I I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION^ OF HY KNQNLEDGE ANO RELIEF. oateI Y* 4 • .» H F »,1 • • • • • 4* ' . * %• * ' . • ■ I ♦ • * i • I •J tJ. r * ;• . I v-r;-'. , • 't . > .*r '.1. •• ' T • . I. ii.t''. ■ I- •. I • i' ' * t • 4 - •, ■»* n II* r-Vv-Vv;,,'run SATI 01/tl/HrAS „I •ATCN BOA y.i, •; < •.'k I miMIPfM COUNTY PROPCITY INfORHATlOH SYSTIH PROPERTY 0»*€RS LISTM X7-U7-E1 M ilT! TAXPAYER • * » NORTH CENTRAL CBA ‘ NAIC/AOOR 7tA0 UNIVERSXn AVE N I 0110 . •:. .f; •.$•' 17-U7- PRULIY Ml BBASt •ES A4 0009 PROI> AOOR 0tS77 SHAOYNOOO RO ,,a0CR NAM : HARCIL S OITTRICH taxpayer* . HARCEL MTTRICM NANE/AROR C177 SNAOYMOOO RO NAYZATA Ml 55391 ■ ’vi - ^-T'.-.V .juini ^ T ’ i • i ‘ I » .JC ; ..• ,v. ,I'-!•< 17-117-El. . .. .. . . . . .94 005E , PROP' AOOR OOOM ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO . ; MAMB . (e«IB AMD SHERYLL SLOCKDM«R NAME : ' OENi ANO SHERYLL SLOCK I TAXPAYER < sene ANO SHERYLL SLOCK MAME/ASOR E105 RAWIEN PLACE ^ ‘ NAYZATA If! 55191 S11E4 blOCR MkNI BRETT HALLONQUIST 117-El 44 0040 NAVARRE LA TAXPAYER BRETT K HALLONQUIST , , NANE/AOOR ' 11E4 NAVARRE LA 1#, i’.J •; HAYATA HN 55391r : 50 17-117-E5 44 PROP AOOR :0E114 •«»■*«««*' PROP AOOR OMCR NANS •» TAXPAYER ^■NANE/AOOR 0075 SHAOYNOOO RO ■ JIB ERICSON JONH C A BARBARA E ERICSON >14E0 SHAOYNOOO RO (lAYZATA Ml 55391 10 17-117-El 44 00070Z344 SHAOYNOOO RO 6RACE BAPTIST CHURCH/NAVARRE ORACE BAPTIST CHURCH/NAVARRE ElOO SHAOYNOOO RO ORONO Ml 55391 IS 17-I17-E3 44 0015 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HEMCPIN FORfEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK 10/17/00 ST DEED 159140 IB 17-117-El 44 0051 0E305 BAYVIEN PL R H STELLINS ETAL GENE H BLOCK nos BAYVIEN PLACE NAYZATA »tl 55591 30 17-117-El 44 0043 , 0E144 OLIVE AVE J L CARLSON A N R CARLSON J L CARLSON AMR CARLSON 2349 OLIVE AVE NAYZATA Ml 55391 10 17-117-ES 44 0074 ^ 02334 SHAOYNOOO RO JOHN C A BAROARA E ERICSON JOHN A BARBARA ERICSON 1420 sNaDYNOOO RO < NAYZATA MM 55591 30 17-117-El 44 0004 02550 OLIVE AVE NANdV d RUST . NANOY d NEL^ 2550 OltVE AVdIHAYiATA Ml 5^391 •• tI. .. •* i30 17-117-25 44 0000. 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HENNEPIN PORPEltEO LANB CITY OF ORONO CONVEYED . ^ 2/0/02 ST DEED 141145 .,RE^T l«. PlAliBiiL v, '.: .• PABE .It .*.••• •••,* * v^|l‘ ’• • ***% ^ * *•••>;• *•: .* .. 4*4 • ^ •••r • ♦k- 4 • 1. • ‘ ; Y r . j-.t- ,r • • . I* SO 17-117-El 44 0011 02275 • BAYVIEN .PL . JAMES R ANDERSOH JAMES R ANDERSON 2275 BAYVIEN PLACE NAYZATA Ml 55591 ' • ■*' r J.i »* . •••■ - •• * .*1: *'i. ' • • • ■n • .*• •«? »i • •. V *,. ;,;v: 5.’ "I 10 17-117-25 44 0059 05320 NAVARRE LA ADRIANNE L DODGE ADRIAMC L DODGE 1520 NAVARRE LA NAYZATA Ml 55l91 • « SB 17-lir-El 44 0044. 02330 OLIVE AVE .. . . • B A JAKUBiAK • L H JAkUBtAR Mian A JAKUBIAR 2350 OLIVE AVE NAYZATA Ml 55391 «• i' •• • • n . . m. •• a 36 17-117-23 44 0077 03324 NAVARRE U ' grace BAPTIST CHURCH/NAVARRE gAaCE BAPTIST CHURCH/NAVARRE tiBO SHAOYNOOO RO , OdONO Ml 55391 I •. 44 0065 “1 • • **.;„•!. I iV ♦ • . r*‘ Ir CITY OF ORONO 2750 KeUey Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Ciystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone (612)473-7357 Fax 473-0510 NOTICE The Planning Commission will hold a scheduled public hearing in the Council Chambers at 2780 Kelley Parkway on Tuesday, February 20, 19% at 8:00 p.m. on the matter of John M. O’Sullivan's petition to vacate a portion of a public road known as Navarre Lane and legally described as follows: That pan of Tract A, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO 1433, described as follows: Beginning at the most northerly corner of said Tract A; thence southeasterly along the northeasterly line of said Tract A, 33.08 feet, to the intersection with a line 33.00 feet southeasterly of and parallel with the northwesterly line of said Tract A; thence southwesterlv and parallel with the northwesterly line of said Tract A, 279.64 feet; thence northwesterly 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 northeasterly along the northwesterly line of said Tract A, 253.03 feet to the point of beginning. The application also involves conditional use permits, a commercial site plan review and a side setback variance for construction of a Class II restaurant, convenience store, motor fuel station and car wash at the property located at 3340 Shoreline Drive. The restaurant with drive-in window, convenience store and motor fuel station will be contained in one structure. The car wash will be located in a second structure on the property. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at the specified time. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available in the City offices for review, by appointment. City of Orono By: Planning Commission Jearifie A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator To be published the weeks of February 5 and February 12, 1996 1 /1 f\vti3l/ 3 “i\Jf I « d^i '\y^x\K -?(Wf \i26)/fi/ v*Ai' S ti <y^ IIP/V.,/(4l)_•^1 /\• I•> JnA (>JJ)vy V(90:«• I '‘T (M)| r ^ X/ «v m .'A (2^) 22 •::23j 1' H '(66),M -?.r (90) 006)’i.r j'.(9M 15^. •«0|(69) •r 50«n 90 90 90 <'^3! ^*23 I W) (63) (62) aL_3B__» _fe^ » 77)1(76) /. r(73) t « iB ^v'‘{d4)•A/- .(jJsT L V .%.• (91) ..---^601 /.^ » la^j OUTlOt.C (94). ) Ur » »"sq ES]m "!T "IT :r m •x or T?r«4 5 j”2"15 4 OS)(83")A •t \JL ap mrn% • NJO .3L 90 90 »90 %•(66)m 1 ll n 'i 22? (14?) I 1 ”?2.? (98) JS*? '•??7 (99) ♦ / 70 1 _90 •/ 90 90 1 j d k ^22J .n -COA >>K NO yi47oe^ ^ \ III ^1 I : -------—' ^'-'7 j «V4}-5 o e rti.or 'n \«p'I R! K- 60 -----—'' V \-//. /^WroiTtr 00c NO',2005109-^ \.*v, / ;*'•'2 /»iS7 V •) ? 5 ^-------------ii?>_ _ j 0 1046185-^ •04.60 .....► ■V THs mim \r 2664.61 RES AT UFAtSm ouiior A 'isii |?r?nz;T!£s GOVT LOT 6 STORM SEWER DISTRICT BOUNDARY PI inni r\ r r--r r\ r rs'T r>^.•• ^HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOl ^r“6ifr>6o . TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth^ Building & Zoning Administrator DATE: April 10, 1996 SUBJECT: #2127 David F. Wilde, 4689/4695 West Branch Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR>1B Total area = 6.82 acres Application: The applicant proposes a lot line rearrangement of two existing lots of record. The purpose of the lot line rearrangement is to provide additional area for septic use to allow the residential development of Lot B. Major issue for this review involves the detimng and approval of a legal access to properties. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1. 2. Section 10.24, Subd. 5(B) - LR-IB, lot standards. Section 11 03 Subd. 2 - Definition 65C. Lot line rearrangement requires subdivision approval because of access to property via a new platted road, platted driveway outlot or as proposed by applicant via easement. Section 11.03, Subd. 2 - Definition 66. Class 1, II or 111 subdivision3. 4.Section 11.03, Subd. 4 - A private or public road is required at a three level use. 5, Section 11.31, Subd. 5 - Back lot ordinance. Lbt of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement El-2 • Applicant's Access Plan FI-2 - Gustafson's Report and Profile of Proposed Driveway G - Hennepin DOT Report Received 4/26/80 Updated 1987 H - Weekman Memo I - Topographic Map Locating Accesses to Property J - MUSA/Zoning Bo'indaries 4 Zoning File #2127 April 10, 1996 Page 2 K - Resolution #1442, Approving West Branch Hill Plat 12/13/82 L - Road and Utility Easement West Branch Hill M - West Branch Hill Plat/Dedication Language N - Resolution #2159, Approval of West Branch Acres Plat 4/13/87 O - Road and Utility Easement West Branch Acres P - West Branch Acres Plat/Dedication Language Q - Septic Test Map for West Branch Access, Lot 2 R - Staff Sketch SI-2 - Gaffron Memo and Septic Map Lot 2, West Branch Hill General Review Comments David Wilde of the City Assessor's office represents the owner. Dr. Barbara Sollner-Webb, who lives out of state. A public platted road, Highview Lane, exists to the south boundaries of the property. Highview Lane connects with Garden Lane that extends approximately 2,000' southward to the intersection at Tonkaview Lane. Both Garden Lane and Highview Lane are unimproved dedicated right-of-ways at 60' width. Applicant seeks access from north via existing road and utility easements granted to City on earlier plats. Applicant has consulted with attorneys who advise that the underlying road and utility easements o* er Lot 2, West Branch Hill, are dedicated to the public and may be used to provide access to both Lots 95 and 96, refer to Exhibit J. The purpose of the lot Fne rearrangement is to provide additional area suitable for on-site septic use. The subdivision will have no impact on the required areas of the property as the zoning district requires 1 acre and the properties both exceed 3 acres in area. The proposed residences meet the required setback standards of the LR-IB Zoning District and if any of the lots are classified as back lots, each would meet 150% of width, area and setback standards of the LR-IB Zoning District as follows. A.Area Required = 1.5 acres Parcel A = 3.15 acres Parcel B = 3.67 acres B.Lot width Required = 210' Parcel A Parcel B 223' 339' C.Setbacks Front/rear = 52.5' Parcel A = 200'+ *rfT 1 ■ r Zoning File Wl\11 April 10, 1996 Page 3 Parcel B = 100' front/100’ rear Side setback required Parcel A West = 70' East =110' 15’ Parcel B West = 30’ East = 190’ TTk properties are located within the Metropolitan Urban Sen -- Area and shall be developed wi* on-sitc septic system. Review Exhibit H, Weekman reports sepuc testing confirms each lot can be developed with five bedroom residence. The system will be pressurized moun^ and located on Slones at 6% or less. Review Exhibits E1& 2, applicant proposes development of a dn veway over a 2? wide road and utility casement over Lot 2. West Branch Hill, to gain access to the property. Parcel B or Lot 96 will be served by a 25' easement that runs eastward along the north lot line ot Parcel A to the west lot line of B. Review of Application Sewer vs. Septic The property is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Sewer is over 2,000 Tonkaview Road. Review Exhibit J, with the Norbert Johnson subdivision, scwct will be aoproximately 1,600 ’. Applicant proposes development of the property with on-site septic. wLkman has approved the septic. As sewer is not immediately available to this pro^rty, !.*ie City shall approve the development of the property as proposed subject to the condition that once sewer is extended in this area, the properties shall be included within the sewer project Given the topography and the proposed house location, this may prove to be an expensive component of ftiture sewer project. Review Exhibits SI and S2, Gatfron is concerned that future septic sites may be destroyed on Lot 2, West Branch Hill, if the 25; easement is develop -‘o2, westbrancnniii, uuiea:^ caj^uicuioviwvv.vri^-..--------------- need to provide current septic testing as old septic test information is no longer valid. Review Exhibit Q, Van Sloun’s septic is located to the west of the lot. Use of Easements for Access Review Exhibits B, M and P, note that the County has designated the 25’ of underlying road and X e gr»re “ ,o ie City in Ute plats of West Branch Hill and West Branch Acres as ‘■ J 1 J Zoning File #2127 April 10, 1996 Page 4 individual r arcels su^gert' ig a public dedicated road. In 1980, owners of West Branch Hill aad West Branch Acres contemplated a joint subdivision but some how the owners failed to be abla K) reoch agreement on the layout of the four lot subdivision. In 1982 the owner of the West B' uvri Hill property, Rick Hawkinson, proceeded with a separate subdivision The Ciry asked for a 2.V casement along the west lot line of Lot 2. The easement was to be taken over the 25' land corridor that connected Lot 2 with West Branch road but to extend no further south. It is not clear from the plat resolution. Exhibit K, why the road and utility casement was taken to the southwest comer of Lot 2. Review Exhibit G, Hennepin County advised the applicant's in 1980 that the existing access originally proposed in 1980 as a private road would not meet the sighting requirements for a 40 mph roadway unless property ovmers were willing to reduce hill in County Road to the east of West Branch Hill. This may have been the reason why the ongmal 1980 subdivision application was never realized. In 1987 with the West Branch Acre subdivision, once again a road and utility casement was granted at a specific north-south length providing access to both the existing residence loi and future Lot 2 to the south. Note in that subdivision the developer and future owner of Lot 2 is traced on notice at the time Highview Lane was developed. L.ot 2 would have to achieve access Highview Lane. In West Branch Acres subdivision, the City also sought an additional 30' of dedicated right-of-way for unimproved Highview Lane at the south boundary. Note on page 2 of the Hennepin County DOT report there was an update in 1987 that stated existing curb cut at West Branch Road could never serve more than 3 units in present condition of County Road. Staff recalls that at the time ot the 1987 review another developer was proposing a resubdivision of the properties defined on Exhibit J as future park and parcels detined as owned by bank. Development of an access from the south was very real in the 1987 era. The City Attorney has been asked to review the easements and has concuited that the underlying road and utility easements may serve as access to Lots 95 and 96. The issue is whether this is a legal access based on current code requirements? Access As already noted above, Hennepin County will deny access to fi\ e residential lots at tl«j? *:urrent curb cut unless the hill to the east is reduced. The County has approved tne current dijve '.nit use - Trapp property. Lot 2, West Branch Acres. (Van Sloun) and Lot 2, West Branch Hill (Hcwkin.wn). Note the owner of Lot 2. West Branch Hill, was to develop his own 25 ’ driveway immeciiately adjacent to the Trapp driveway. If Lots 95 and 96 are to be served by this curb cut, the access way must he developed at private road standards with cul-de-sac. The 700'+ roadway must have a tum^und. Applicant must acquire additional lands from the adjacent owners tc meet a continuous 50 wi t standard for a private road and area for a 10' diameter cul-de-sac. Lot 95 may be served by a 30 Zoning File #2127 April 10,1996 Page 5 wide driveway outlet that extends from the cul-de-sac, refer to Exhibit R. Staff has scheduled a meeting with both Trapp, the owner of Lot 1, West Branch Acres, and Hawkinson, the owner of Lot 2, West Branch Hill, to review the potential impact of the proposed subdivision on their properties. Staff will review their concerns at your meeting. Review of Issues Concerning Legal Access to Property: 1.The existing curb cut cannot be used to serve five residential units unless major improvements are completed within County Road right-of-way. Is it financially feasible for applicant to acquire additional area for road and cul-de-sac and also pay for expensive County Road improvement? 2.Is it feasible for applicant to install a private driveway to serve Lots 95 and 96 via Garden Lane and Highview Lane? Review Exhibit J, note Sollner-Webb owns property further south along Garden Lane. There would be three residential units served within the platted right-of-way. Will you recommend an upgrading to a private road or will you allow an upgraded driveway to se^e the three residential units? This may be the best access option available to applicant. 3.Review the existing land use. Exhibit J. The 10 acre tax forfeit land will be a future open space park. The lots currently owned by a bank and designnred on your map may also be added to the open space park. (Saga H*’' ^'re.sfrvation Society has executed an option with the bank to buy the properties avet a specified period of time). Public fund.s will also be contributed to the sale of the property. Garden Lane and Highview Lane may never be developed by the City as a public road. Should this have any impact on your decision. Review Exhibit I, note the drop in topography in Highview Lane to the building sites if an access is developed from Highview Lane. Access should be a shared access to minimize the impact on the steep topographies and existing vegetation. Do you concur that the City is obligated to provide a reasonable access to this property? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the application be tabled providing applicant additional time to meet wi^ “ engineer who will provide comparison of costs for either a north or south access to Lots 95 and 90. If applicant chooses to use the existing public easements for the north access, then applicant must meet with the owners of the adjacent properties for the purpose of acquiring additional nght-of-way i Zoning File #2127 April 10, 1996 Page 6 for a private road. The subdivision would not only include the lot rearrangement but the designation of a private road and cul-de-sac. The subdivision could no longer be ^proved as a Class I metes and bounds division but must completed as a plat. If access is achieved from the south, the subdivision may be completed as Class I metes and bounds division. k I rw%Vir r tr »' Application # ^7 Date ReceiTed Amount Paid cr^ lONAPPUCATION PROPERTY LOCATION West Branch Rd.. No SfrPP>f Nunhprs A.q5^ian«i Property Identification Number (PID) n7-n7-7i-??^nnn7 anri n7-n7-?i--3-3-nnoa. Please check one - Property ____abstract or X .. torrens? Attach legal description to application. Lots 95 and 96, Tonkaview Gardens, Hennepin CJounty APPLICANT Marne David F. Wilde________________________________________________ Address 6715 Sioux Tr. Rockford, MN _______Phone (home) 477-6201 ZiiR5373 Phone (work) a77-QAni Mark Gronberg will attend necessary meetings OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Barbara Sollner-Vtebb Address 17200 Melbourne Dr. (-jjY Laurel, MD. Phone (home) qqi) 604-5619 Ziig0707 Phone fworic K 410)955-7419 (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District 6.83 Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ 7 Sit€S LR1B PROPOSAL X Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites Fioposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Existing Units New Units Total Units 2____Units per 6.83 Acres _____Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land ^____Residential ____Other (specify)_________ Dale Totals MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APHJCATION 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 fliis list ftom Hennepin County Deparnnat of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). . . .. 5. /' s an to this applicatioit please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of thu application. Zoning OfficiaTs Signature ________________________________________ ___________________________ minimum material required for COMPLETE FINAL APPUCATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fe« 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 ________________ L application FEES (Zoning Administrator to check p(] those which apply) A- Application Base Fees: Sketch Plan Review (Class 1, II & III) S250.00 Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement S3 50.00 Subdivision Application (Class IA II) S350.00 ., . Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 + S25.00/lot (Class III & all non-residential) Final Plat Application (Class III) $200.00 Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 __Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. $200.00 Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) ,. . v Renewal of Class 1 and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) Renewal of Class III, Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from origmal application) ----- Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from original application) B. Special Improvement Fees: Proposed Private Roads $600.00 $.50/l ’meal 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, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/per lot x new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/TMisc, Fees Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) ---------- Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $ 100.00 ---------- ^ PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit ---------- The applicani hereby agrees to provide all ipformation required or requested by the Zonittg Adtpittistrator, City Engtneer PtaS Ciuucil neeess^o proce« thU^plicatton and farther agrees to pay all addtttopal lees estabitshed by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature _ T)n.Aj) F UUaX^ p ________Date 3 ~/i- Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning CommL;ston meeting. aiSheld on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Wannmg and cltnciL If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend m y place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. U- pt •••• »«*« yt: “■ • !'■ f ;* TiMPAYtll {J ^?• ■ }'■•' KJ >•'. V • V MfC/ADM. • t ^ •Ut-tt tl ooot ^ Nttr MUNCMIIO J HOMART ir'J HOMART IMS KELONURST TR ' HOUND IM Mm . it or-ii7-ti It oooR ___'OOOSivt.AOORESS UNMSXQNUi R MHi ;'. DARDAiA tOLLMR-NOROMMi TAMAVIR • ’ lARtARA tOLUCR-HEBei .'';^NMi/AoeR ‘ - moo hcldournc or U ■' •• " y; LAURtL. HD tOTOr >: /ID: 0t>117-tl tt 0017 DROD ADOR 04TM ^ HIST SRANCH RO .' f OHNM NAHI s' D I V VAN SURM "'tvTAXRAYIR . t-DRUCI R A VXRVI L VAN SLOUN U ,V MAHb^ADOR ItiOO MRtST H^AOQN OR ’ J5 ^ HtMmnmjk m ssio§ , •*t ».V O.rf.-: ;• .i * :;< OMCR NAHi I .. TAMRAVtR NAHI/AODR ■ 'v 1 «. ‘ j It 07-117-2S fS 0022 DOOM AODOESS UHASSIQNiO 0 UMY Lit ATtH ACCTS 7AYABL2 NZDNAY NATIONAL SANK iITt UKXVfASXTY AVC . 9T 7MJL MN I510A NCMC7XN COUNTY 7M0CIITY XNFCMUTIQN SYSTiH raOKRTY 0NN2RS USTM 07-117-tI 21 0014 04S01 NIST MANCN RO DAVID LIVY DAVID LIVY 4505 NIST BRANCH RO ORQNO m 55IA4-B277 SB 07-117-2S 22 0011 OOOSB ADOmSS UNfSSZQNEO RICHARD i HAWZNSON RICHARD i HANanSON 1576 CORILANO RO HAPLI PLAIN MN 55S5f SB 07-117-2S 2S 0001 OOOSB AOORISS UNASSZ6NI0 HINNIPXN PORFIXTID LAND mrfCPXN PORrixTiD land CQNVIYANCI PINDINO CITY RESOLUTION BSSll-ALSOt HENN CONSERVATION EASIHINT SB 07-117-2S 2S 002S OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNID 0 LARRY LEI ATTN ACCTS PAYABLE HXOHAY NATIONAL BANK 157B UNIVERSITY AVI ST PAUL m 55104 REPORT NO. Pt4Sl4dl PAR 52SB 07-117-U 22 0007 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSZONEO BARBARA BOLLNER-NEBB BARBARA SOLLNER-NEBB 17200 MELBOURNE DR LAUREL NO 20707 SB 07-117-2S 22 0014 04701 NEST BRANCH RO ROBERT L A CAROL L TRAPP ROBERT L I CAROL L TRAPP 4701 NEST BRANCH RO NOUND m 55S44 SB 07-117*2S 2S 0021 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSXGNEO 0 LARRY LEE ATTN ACCTS PAYABLE MIDHAY NATIONAL BAIBC 1570 UNIVERSITY AVI ST PAUL MN 55104 SB 07-117-2S 24 OOSS OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIONEO 0 LARRY LEE Arm ACCTS PAYABLE MIDHAY NATIONAL BANK 1578 UNIVERSITY AVE ST PAUL m 55104 •X 1 « ** PDQP AOOH (MCI HAHI •TAWAYtD HMK/ADM . SD 07>117-2V2A OOSA . .. OQOM ADDRESS UNASSXGNEO Q LARRY LEE « AT1N ACCTS PAYABLE HIONAY NATIONAL DAM 1S7D UNIVERSITY AVE St PAUL Ml 65104 > .» • i ;♦» .1< ' .f/ • i . 4• . •* r. • ' h .*• • •i4 t • •• ‘.-7- tt i • , n *' I»• ^ ■ ** SB 07-117-2S 24 0035 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSXGNEO 0 LARRY LEE ATTN ACCTS PAYABLE MIDHAY NATIONAL BANK 157B UNIVERSITY AVE ST PAUL MN 55104 TOTAL BATCH 51S 00014 I * • • • •» * * A : * * • *, vv • ‘ ’ •'vA f.j V^>:f. v-;. , ■• - -'c V-• .J- ■ . .. •/, .' ^ ^ -A • • >' 'it • K-:.- • * * L#I • . r* . .Wiicrsii eciiiTv monnr xMnuwtm sriwi pnonnvf man usr MPOIIT NO. mssMi ^AOf SB • •• <ki- • •••i’, 0£P«SCMTID ME AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION Of XNfOmUTlON AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDSs sTkSss." isrs,r,r”" * rr ™ “ “ DATE 17 vAr-''V - -4* '. ■ -.. -v -'f ^ • • f ' v.»» ■ , ;. ••: ■* vllr^ • -i' :i^. . • •> ■■:#:' - • , '41' *1 ‘ • f '. 7vt' ri ^ . ' *« •r 'V ‘ • '-‘"af.! I .4 11 • r * V • . Mkt V • .. f. » • • .vTii. • • • • : ■ :'■ 4 v?; i "k ■■ 'V- • • •’V» • » • ' 'fz**• 'a|s- •‘ • ‘ 1 S-' . • ♦. . • . i . /• *1 0- I ; ,* ’ i'E ; ;; • v/^ V*#' %'I •utn • .«1: • r •» PROPOSED LOT DIVISION FOR DR. BARBARA SOLNER-WEBB IN LOTS 95 & 96, TONKAVIEW GARDENS HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA ill/ /\ \ \ \ Tn '/ \ \ a \ '<'S '*Oto, - - -----o ' fik LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PRFfUSFS Lots 95 and 96. TONKAVIEW GARDENS. PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: B. Lot 96, TONKAVIEV/ GARDENS, except that part of the East 55.00 feet of said Lot which lies northerly of the following described line: Commencing at th^ Northeast corner of said Lot 96; thence south along the East line of said Lot 96 a distance of 260.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence northwesterly, deflecting right 150 degrees to the west line of said Fast 55.00 feet, and said line there ending. Lot 95 and that part of the East 55.00 feet of Lot 96. all in GARDENS which lies northerly of the following described line: the Northeast corner of said Lot 96; thence south along the East line of said Lot 96 a distance of 260.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line b^ing described; thence northwesterly. deflecting right 150 degrees to the west line of said East 55.00 feet, and said line there ending. TONKAVIEW Commencing at 0 : Iron marker Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum c/rr caoajo ! B J Corns & Gronbfrc;, Inc,1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct super* vision, and that 1 am a duly.registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota DATE 1-24-96 SCALE fOO* Mark S. Gronberg Minnesota License Number 12755^JOB NO 9S-4S4- 95-4S4 * TO: Orono Planning and Zoning Dept. FROM: Barbara Sollner Wfebb by David F. Wilde DATE: April 5, 1996 RE:Lot line rearrangement of lots Lot 95 and Lot 96, Tonkaview Gardens, Access proposal Access to both lots would be over existing easements frcm west Branch Road. Lot 95 would require a 25 foot easenent over the north end of Lot 96. Attached drawing shows existing and proposed easements, but not lot line rearrangement. itmartf .... . . . .. . . . . . . .. . ' —-. . .~ f • 1 ? • I (6'(8)i1(O e • \. rjo « i <« 5 k (0 K (?.' 2; i M4 i *1 fOCNDVWf^ • uuc m I M c7-M7'2^"2Z (15) 7 1 mTl ^ •• es •S (M> 09 00 *^*0!f* U*F . , r... CT2. Sft <• "01-111-23 '2/ KEST .^.?a JT>.a-&b8*or M*t (M) pj,0 {D ’SHFfTwnor SMCL» f iKAll^Sa , (10 -Iill & u» 4W \ .£y« s "^i £o.i e -*«**-h 1 •tm */V*c0**f**v (12) S!EeOS3!l> as7.».. Nwn'!<*r /at I iiH an' ■sr 5^ Ujiia iACkiO • 19 \ pmku: uz IC2: tAme*irw jbt. f li#.M 30.01 U 30.01-f-IIIGilVIIIW (UN3CVEiO?£9> o§»*39*3rw (2)001(3)§ 1 CO s .iOOlb)§i $ 4'-^’ (7) - 5> •4 (23) 5n 7. i3 j5 ""5J7| m* 304.314 t^Ti*09*9 TXLT5 T7T.3 4*^5.3 M4.f 91 / / ‘-.y / 4 1/1 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects Bonestroo. ffoseee. Anaerhk ^th3 Associates. Inc is en AffirmMi¥e Action. €quM Opportumry finp/oyer P'.niip^s Otto G Bonestroo PE • Joseph C Anpertik. PE • M«rvtn L SorvJl«. PE • Richdfd £ Turner Pt • C.e»^n P C Jufc Pt • Thomas £ Noyes PE • RoPert G Schunichi. Pf • Jerry A Bourdon • Pooer? JV ffoserte PE Jmo Sus^ M Ebertm CP^. Senior Consuftjnis Associate Principals Honiara A San ’ofc* PE • Ke«th A Gordon PE • Robert R Pfefferie. PE • Rich.ird W Poster PE • D«»vid O Loskora. PE • Pooert C Russen. Al A • Mark A Hanson. PE • Michael T Rautmann PE • ><i K Fie»d. PE Offices Sf. PacU and Rochester. MN • Mequon. Wl April 4, 19% ^ --- J y ^Otj, .-4 nat werm^rr Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Solner-Webb Lot Rearrangement File No. 139-2127 Dear Jeaime, We have reviewed the proposed lot rearrangement for Barbara Solner-Webb on Lots 95 and %, TonkaNiew Gardens, located south of County Road No. 151 in the west half of Section 7. The proposed lot line rearrangement is acceptable from an engineering perspective and we would recommend approval. However, there arc several issues that need to be addressed relative to planning matters. 1. Utilities: This site is within the MUSA boundary and a sanitary sewer forcemain presently exists on Wildhurst Trail. Sewer service may be extended to serve this area in the future. 2. Street: Future access to the site may be from the south on Garden Lane. The proposed access is from the north using an existing driveway onto County Road No. 151. In their letter dated February 26,1980, Hennepin County stated that the existing driveway can be shared by no more than 3 lots due to limited sight distance. If the existing driveway is used as an access for five lots, it should be upgraded to a 24 feet wide paved private street with a cul-de-sac. In addition, the County may require that the hill on County Road No. 151 east of the access be lowered to improve the safety of the existing access. 3. Grading: The topography from the existing driveway to Lot 96 requires that the access driveway be constructed at an approximate 10% grade. The driveway construction would require substantial grading and tree clearing which would require that easements be obtained. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MiM 55113-3898 ■ 612-636-4600 \ 4. t*. . ^ #m rai HCMErei DEPARTMENT Of TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. South Hopkins. Minnesota 55343 » o. 935-338^#53 PH JcOTne PHbustK Zoning Adalnittrator Citjr of Ofoao fEB 880 A 'm S5J23 crrr of ohono - •Mim 'T'“ out* 400 ft. ««st CSAPt.19 ToMttitip 117. Plat no 811#--jSy|P^‘ MMIOSOCaoSCOtutOS 505.OZ and 505.03. PUU 004 roolowilDf;proposed plats abutting County roiOo. ■ fi'. T raoalre.County reulOHOd tf«^o!«vo!p1at I 1 o.’ vl •lU., wounv/ conslderttlofi Of tlitst jondftlons:--^^ V -1^* ' - • The 1976 Hennepin County "ransoortatlon System Study (MCTSS} recoewends future «m1clpal jurisdiction for the portion of CSAH 151 frrm CSAM 19 soutli Intersection to CSAH 19 north intersection. * ••I . The existing 40 ft. of right of way 1$ enough for any future Hennepin County upgreding of CSAh 151. ». m •a m - TTie ex1$t1r>9 acce^^s point on the east property line falls by ^^0 “ft. to the 570 ft. minimum slqht distance for 45 mph to the drivers right. Since tnis access exists It can •^emaln open as a driveway but any upgrading to street standards will M Hy M^nn^nln Hoiinty until the hill east Of the access Is cut down. A good street access Is at the top ot tt.ls hill. • Any new access onto a County road or revision of existing access requires an approved Hennepin County entiance permit. See our Iraffic Division for entrance ptmlt fores. f » All proposed construction witMn County right of way requires en approved utility penalt prior to beqlnnlno construction. This Includes, but is not limltM to. drelneoe and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping, see our Hilntenance Division for utility permit forms. V* ■r HENNEPIN COUNTY I . «'jfc * •K I •Viriim pm 2 men Pl«t*(5^ - TH* dtwiopcr mat mtc*-* tit arws dfsturttd Airtit^ eenttmctUa nit ta Cowty a tny rrspo^sp or ou€5tfons to LM llfl9ttt< ■jr ' Amm m. Mold, a.e CUtdf, neming ^od Pro^T'rT'if*^ ‘..-..■r.: A a- ■ t, ■ — r «•• 4. *• -S-i- tip ■ ■ ■ >■- ^ ♦•’i ■ ••-; '*5 - jFe>^ * V •# % > •: •s*- .‘tK. *1^.1. •: * • ^ '*-v . /H V *^'• P4 . ' 1 . «•' # ,> . l!*r r* _»_ __^ dit * # ^ JC TO: • Jeanne A. Mabusth, Planning and Zoning Administrator FROM: Stephen Weekman, On-Site Systems Manager DATE:March 8, 1996 SUBJECT: Subdivision Application #2127, David Wilde - Septic Review The applicant proposes a two lot subdivision requiring the use of on-site sewage treabnent systems. Both lots will nave new residences and two drainfield sites. Soil testing and septic system design have been provided by S-P Testing. The site plan has two drainfield sites suitable for a five bedroom residence on each lot. ihe drainfield site slopes are all six percent or less and will meet the twenty foot lot line setbacks. A proposed twenty five foot casement across the North end of lot A will also meet the twenty foot setback to the drainfield sites. In summary, both lots meet all septic system design enteria for a subdivision, .r-1 ■ <n~rii mm r »i - ' ^ ___________________ ^feyi»V ■ Dftt»<c.io#y "fc 'trfitfiyfiiitiznce t s;m JrJ!/ V uM ; '!;Sf| i'l ■ *>«.» P ll« N ■« /• iimiii \ ^69l.47 RES r. 1. ■> ^^^^4-5-,r0RANCW-i ? g @)s ><•.« SM'OQ'II'C /?/y»//c V/#r 69-4 w. ly iE(9ayi»[[) i (IJ) 1 SIE@0KiD M» ir ^3 !§ (15) B3ESY 155 w mT ^Qa.M " ^::l fir/’/'c i "'"t' « 1:! >OOOV't4 ‘| ---- gKAWeH / HIU ni) 1 ‘I ' 3 ? 2!n^ . ■ t . Ii f..........»- V------ • / ]■ ^ » ^P' on j, ?K*»' i:!i i. i’J \ I 1 ‘ -I ’: :1 • • !;'i K.9 ' t > ■ • » (JO ^ {•;;,-« s JSL lliGflWEW* If. ____________ ■ (j)? ® (3)8 (uss>,„B @) (5)8 (6)8 V/-'’«ll'- -a u %!e>'p • I •Jf.5 ^ 'i Ko' ^ ' So\.H C ON ^ /i e * 'w ■ ■ y,! (41). 1 . i.^ :{■ (">/ (io),7/?» «J .v^eoMjfe tJ5)’ /v^”'/./ • 11 V f!?( '-= p^veLoPeO> /2oa f «•• •' 7 0 • •• • • ’<• •«• * %. • > f- 4 - I • r 1 -w ■fe , ‘ . f > ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUnOW OF THE cmr C0l»ICIL MQ- 1442_______ ; f x>i A RESOWmOM APPROVmG THS PXAT. OF f X^ -* •V T4 X .V WEST EFMiCB BILL % . ‘~V : .• ‘ WBEWEAS. the City o£ Orono Lm a ■untcijMil corporation - I ^ , . . . «_______ .^S 'Xu " ^ * a ' *' •’» rm .1* i. —.................................... ASr City CouiSj ^aa^<T>na 1 *^*°**^f*** ^y->Richard , ^he 3ubd 1 viSn^7L^l)a«m!S5S» **??!“V?? ^^^p£,T!XaadJ^thin .i^ laafadl I'm- ■; _____bF?Jtho- KK* IB zoning diat^ ^ ta-#and^configuration that wlU.vnlXow [•to-ba -located without tba naad o ; '■^"^‘.r.TnHEWEAS, the subdivldar has completed ’th#“ platting regulations of the City» includlagt * * ' Indiag -ttitet^eechllt family ili:r«jttireMts,of rl) Dedication on the plat of rights* y ■•'.r; r'^-:'',^'i ^ #*.' 1 XtirT - *®- public road^ shown as County Rosd Ito* iSlo •%. * J) Dedication to the City of . Rood ejd otillt^'‘ :-- '>r Basement over the %fest 2S feet of Ia>e?2t Blo« 1#iO<no^aisc4 4 w W-* —'e^ww - - - - -- - - " . West Branch Hill for future acoese-to the eooth.v.vf '.'vSv**\V rv^-^S' n m ,>e -id “ • , •» 3) Dedication to the City of a Plosrage and »nsan^tlon Easement providing for li*itaU^on^the^^^of^^ '"': * *• V * • V •’il. » - O * MseoenT^ proviuxiiy -ow* ~ - wetlands and/or drainageways dascribed therein.and shown on the plat aa "drainage eaa “-V" .* t. ■ ,. . . • * . . »>» ,.r/u 1- ‘n?:,- 4) Cowpletlon of required septic io5r.SS.“Sofiid-“ % -• I •ti Uiiciw asww A# — r ------------ . __ , _ -S adequate, suitable soils for septic eTpanaiy ana that Lot 2, Bloc)c 1, West Branch Hill has •*5®*J*' ^ suitable soils for a primary septic system .awl xor -a* .Lf future septic expansion t%m *' *1- '• 1 •fc' “■a* i:.■ L-r »»• *. •% ■- ;X-'-'i..» V < .» ■ /.4i -'4• • Page 1 of 2 ■d U.* .-.v^.T ^ - JlS ‘V '■• ^ -C'. -1 w .i : ■ ^ Jii.- -1 da'^. • V tfl/ \i •.» * *' I * ::.'k I- - .. . * • f-a» "• ^ >■ • • 'i, l.'- -» .! -f •'"•■'iv ■' :• • s V' ' ••; ' •ir ;:: i» .*v-. ■ » 4; V - ff - • St . f «*•': ;(r r V . ( ^ 4 • ORpNO J City of ORONO RESOLUTION OFTNECfTYCOUNaL ' NO. ''.' V Av.w^ the amount of $100.00. Payment to the City of a Park Oedieatlott..Fee in ’ • * ■ .'r^''^Vi >y--•''.V gj Paytnent to the City for the legal'review* -•filing of the plat aad.aaaociated documenta --.V^ , THEREFORE BS JXuR&SOT.VEg- that^'the T The future o«majrsif.Xoft '"^cBill must obtaia ‘Hennepin County constr 7tion. ' Clty^jOcDOxoiio hereby approvea <the»lat90iS|'M g^^^w^^Maota; subject to ;,tl>effollqjd^ c^'’of .)!the^.t. ar^qelation' -•... to the Izing of.the^^^colvert'^forlrthe-nev wivavay V must be eviewed by the llinnehaha?Cieek^1faterahed and the City of Oroao. - 'f - The aforesaid plat shall be filed'by the'City of Orono with the Hennepin County Recorder*srOffice on or before June 13, 1983, together vlth a certified original copy of this Resolution and .i' executed copies of the doeuMats-noted’above. ‘ •* ' w ts- • * »' e . ■ .* •••. ‘jT- • r • ■*' J: - -V '4 I ff.'.v.i.... igThe approval granted by this Resolution shall expirs if tha.^ plat has not been filed by the date specified above. Xa that event# it vill be necessary to file a new applicatioa vith the ;Clty~of Oronow-.> .Ji for subdivision review. .. - ^ . . iC •’? i-Dated this 13 day of December - y'■ ■■:> / 1982 '■5?vr Adopted by the Council of the City of Orono e * a 'I3r'^~ :f c-.- .vv •e-ss* \ #1jn •^ ^ 0 • __ Wz.'>j^.Knxnt * * L r :/AlDerta-M. Strcaa, ci^ Cl IVC ■-an- "t’-S.-r «,r • • •.Page 2 of':2 A 's‘i > •I iAieir | 11 ? "»W "■ • •'»I . ROAD AND UTILITIES EASEKSIT THIS ZmSBtTVnz, made this S 7 d*y of bf and batwcan P •T ?-* • r V h^roiiuiftsr rsf^nred to as "Grantor (s) *» and tiia City of Orono# a Mr'SRxxiicipal corporation, under the lav:k of the State of Kinneaota# to as "Grantea*. .z' t* ^ .'r • C,.* e' , that Grantor (•), in oonsldaration of tha ataa of ^ , Dollar'(91 .'00) and for other good and valuabla conaidaration givan flnntaa i tba racaipt of which is acteowladgad by Grantor (a)» 'do (aa) “•—tgrwitillCbargain, sell and convoy to Grantaa, Ita aueeaawrs Md *.21 ,gn>,aVaaant Tor public ;±a9naaa,/acraaa,^c^ar?:road|^^ uses, on, aczDaa^^and ondarvthaHandSlnStha State of J«inaiasataraa«followat 7br*^at: 00 feet of Lot'2^ Blockil. WEST , d ^tol^bai^acoTdadnpIaC thereof. >• iccordlng^.^. 1 - ;s. V-. «K» '^'^Inrtodiag, but not by way of ^oitation,^a f<^ ^tOtttborlty to aatar upon said land tc ccnatruct, InataXl,' aiaintain ^^opuratu. and rapalr a aanitary aewar intarcaptor, lift ‘^tloa^M-.^ . <;or*Haa« a watar oaln or line, graval or pavad road and ^y aad.^1 ^'appurtanaacas Including drainage control atructuraa, incldmtal '7&ralatad tharato, (such are hereafter collactlvaly rafarr^ to ‘M th^;-^r^^^ :^iirn riann and the Grantee shall hava tha right to maha such •aa ^ ‘aald land as is reasonably necessary and advlsabla to thm conatruc^y^^^^ '^'laatallatioar. aalntanance, operation and repair of tha I^rovaswiw.' Vr '-la addition to any other remedy tha Grantaa «ayw^anforead byxla- ?;• t unto said Grantaa, ita r~ _ Zb addition to any other remedy tha Grantaa may ba^ oovanaots and raatrictions contained herein aay ba '■••-a?"- ' 10;BhVS AHD TO HOLD said eas ^^auceaaaora: and aaaigns, permanently.> j - im■■;••. •.trVq *%»• •V /» ♦ fj k ^Grantor (a) herein certify that tha landii haraln daacrlbad ’*a*a-’fBaa ^and eJaar of all encumbrances aacaptr ;-. •„* --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*n, Tf rO/T-^ •.- *Cw r -ji f.V , “ **t ' »CS*iWSr‘ 'X : virV!^ • '"^. .A"XH WITWESS WHEREOF, said Graator(s) hava s«t tha day and year first abova writtaa . - • V* , >QaC ‘ >- ‘ ^ a - ♦ K» • » * .0 :. •i>' - t ’.mV- oouMTcar.:•.•.*!. Ij#v t- .... '■. ■;. I:'^V ■- • -h ;•-Kp- g/if: • s^r’^ *• "day of, IC r the foregoing their free act Notary Public .-^-- -T* . ’• - SsR^DSSD ria DOB HEREON: Exempt • . ;•- ,v. -'^isiss: __ "f -••Ot**' -• ••■; * •.-^v--v.v.. JLa,:Zastmaat; was Drafted by: POPBAH, HAIX, SCHHOBRICH, ICAOntW-4 - 4344 IDS Center • 1- V v. A>-. " r. _ *-•. Nionaapolis, Minnesota 554021 (612) 335-9331 ' 1 ^ • ' ■■ .>V- ■ ■. ”3>-"' r^f .%; V'r:' 'f ^ • *iC #. .•« ••. i -- ^ y-/ -. • 'rvr-v-sJt:^ •i.',' • •’ • , r • • ■ : ' ■••. . ■■■ -vj^: • - -i • ,••••*.< - \. •» * * . ?; :. * 7;* ’^'.r V^.* *.i- V 7r\rA - . ■ • J5L?y ’ •"r :> • ■>- •*■ •» A . ..* •». •1* •*1. . - J . .*• ‘ai. • w i-V^ • ,•• ■'-V> ; w. ^ • .«r I c *» rac*>' f.7.>.*r •♦'♦‘.a* a •4..■•T." ^' . ■ .4 \ ' ' T*. ' • *«if - •^ •*. . * , .V. *♦**h^'Ty'i*.-. _ - a«. - .;'w •’i5- -Xr i .,9*'. -.p /r' •a * ^ ^/.vV* k.' ■t ■ ;*r;,...e -vw * »' * - lAieST ^/LL plat (^rf/i i;nt if {he NW'U tfMWf^4 of'Sec. 7, tin, gZ3 ^^nn.Co.MtfO Q { Vy n.V'*', r*.' —>. ---------------- —--------------------------------r----------sss’or/4~e.9^- si « %—-nz.QQ.-—••/'ROAD NO,Q|5l ||^ ^ Judici*! l«odmtrk per Torrens C«je |B638 ZOO tK S3 9. ^6 I; ^ .A tK J5> % S' 5S 'N P5 IV V ZO^.7/ r SSS*>C974'‘£ '.- /I 208.73 • -. r oss(/y^<’3c/ >*5n 8 * ^ " 5 e-4 • ?/>» - - 33ZS6 S88^09'/4"£ - ^ X . ''' 1^4^' fiifl Ca iihftH-f joooo ris* ^5t •- —2!1 K V‘ < -j I •dj •7!#V7 '/s are sftoyrrr ffec^S- oo 0) ^S~\ \A ▼5;r n: V : ^ ,Si? ■ ^ ^ UN^ >8: ^ ^ IfN i ^I ^ VoN. Judicial Londmorjt. sci- per Tontfts (asc |80M \ "A , ■■ 5S7.S8'AfSS°09'f4"W-- bnc panUfl wi/h iht mfh lined'{he NWZi^ef'{M'/f T f‘\ ^ I f\ \ /irj M / I v/ I Ml \ Mv II. VV 7//7p' c/* iv<7y % /■' A rirar ^l r* V3/-\I \Lrt_l \ls">/O /^ /’Mctlhtnf (crntr of lof I, B(rg<ni!if enj Wicklundi AdJil:!'* Serjyiii »<■« wuKfund's Park DEMARB-GABRIEL I.AND aiinvpvnnn imp a a <s L'J CC O a -r I >- VC <t CD 5— '/4 »nf>e NW’k if Sec. I Tin, R.Zi )GRF.n i' f \ •~iA u. U. (B 1-^ n M ®» 3 3*^ H* ar CL M A A *0 A tJ A l-a MOT A A ft A ft- 5 o CL H* A A A >1 a ar rr aa A H- 5 Hi rr CL o a'H o A A H rt ft an a* rr A A ft a*n ft a*A ft A M O H o HiA cr C *3 A ft A H < A A A H*H| A ao A AA o a a ft n R 0*«. A < O HA C ft H*V4a a*o A CLA a a A ft H o A SJ A H>a M CL I-* H-* te A*a a a K- •-* n o a 1 VW 1 ^ r» fVi V>J CL -* A VOn Aa.1* cr A -• o ui a* « A H H* A M A tn rc a- c A O CTA § |::o O A C Hi a O A H a oa rr 3* A *a ftc a* T3 CTA »-• t-* TJc H A Aa rr s>ZZAOvjrt aH O A C ov a* A Cr A A f> n H M»T) cr A A ft A A rr A H* A O Aa a A A A ft O Hi O O* H A A < A A C n H < n A A Aa HO O Hi r* CL O CL H H H* A 0> A AO*3»-HHaH 3 AAAHa*a* HHiO W e»CC SAAA 5H*>OAAt^HA r*a 53 aah»- rrcoAH H«3 rtria -•OCLrr rr3r-.AH AA C OA3 OOO ftHAO iQa cc>cLa*a'AHi *• H* 01 A A A A H 1 H H* H AAA H a CL O CLA A A O 3 H A O X A Hi O a A A A T3 A H n H A A A H H — A 00 O 00 n 1 a> H *1 H A 9Q A 3 JO H •0 a A H* A A 3 SH* A A A 3 H CL rra* tr H n MA a* A V] r)Q A H* c:a 3 z A MO O A O H* H OrrCLAOOHaOH i-ri rrHHiAaQOoa" A CL A H» H C v43 H 3 cruiMHA A ov Q. A HA a* H A Z Qv C CL VOo c a vj H Hi K* A HA O CO K) A H 3 Oa cLs: A A H ri > A A r* cLo r* 3 H* 3: a A CO a z H CL cr 03 A C«1 h< M C/) MH hap: A 3 to H c/5 A 01 CO t o ►o HiOa w a to a: a CO H. CL CO A n H Hi*o to cro A A A a 3 A 3 H A A A O O 3 H A Z H CO a-c^H O A Ooa'D'A pro A H tn A • A HMaHiCTHAHZH a cr AAA A A A 3 Arvo CHAA M Oh OHO a'AOo Hr-'r-*H a a H H A O a a a A TT crooo aA HH-o a mhh a c^ a* A •H A • -HO MO a*H tr A O H I-*A^AAMtOOH AAO a*c^ AH a a* A a--»A v^A»-*a*a ahi A C HA -A H H- A 3 A O A a Mcrr«-«HiaAHHOO HHiHH C~5 A Aa H a A a A HO MO* a*O A H H H a aAZ?r HiAa aoa a —o a A MHO- hhhhhao a Lno A M A O H 3*0 A3* MHZ H - • A ft 3 A e-OnCCAaAHAaao A OQ A A rtiCTA M 3 !-• a M 3 Z HtJo cro A Z Z Ho o- H rr a* — U, O voA Hi^ Oa*o C/5 a* !-• A H A M H H H O C M Hi A H A 3 *0 H 3 M H H Hi A Z- A A A a AH-a'Znoa*a* a A O H A W A to •• 3 A O 3 C A H 3 Hi3a* a*A W HA AH O M A A 3 A • A A a >A A H C3 A H 3 f! M A mO A A 3 A Z H H 3*0 H a* a A a i:H* 3 H a a *o HanaH H A A MO H HAH H H z HM a 3 O A a* a* o z HH a a* A A z 3 O n H O A A 00 A H H A O a O H A HiA H AH* H a »H CL • - 3 Z H H H O H AAar*vj to AO O M A H a*-* A>C-*A -• A 2 H O H H» A A i: O t30H3 A M H H 3 H* H A Hi MOOa* A a HiH 3 O 3 a* A a A n Hi HiA a A A 3 Hi A O H c/5 • • a B A H A H M a* z i-n A H HaA H M A r-<H* A 0 *Q o 3 H H H a H z tr H H a H O O O A AH‘ o M A X*H HHHiAAHCTAm A3*AA H*a*AHO Hi HaH* A CL A M-* —• A O 3 C HO O H HO • AMiAAZAtr0*A 3 H M* Hi A O HAv; ooo ZWaA HHH • A H Hi A A A A H o 3 A C-* • A 0 H Z M H O Z HiHa O*a A O OO 0 a a c o a H* A H H A A z §a H- H a a H Z A H A H a n z ZH-Z O Hi H H A A A o M A Z O A C H A A Z M 3 A O H H A H H H O A ZH C Z H-a A M C H H O *0 A H A H Z A H C A O A H 00 A r* A z A 3 A a Hi H H —* A Ah Ha JQ iA H a H H H A Z — A 3 A M M c ^A A A Aa A 3 n A a Aa H*o A H A (L H C A O 3 M 3 r-^ H O A^AAOHOA H r-* A A A H O Hcr M rt o A H- o 3 3 oo A A H a* A A A H* Hi*0 CL A O H H* H a A rr CL A • A H ?0 A H A 3* H A A ZH H o ao a H 3 H »-• a 00 O A r* H A A A a Hi H M a* H H - 3 C A H ro ArtOAAOACUcr rti A o H » A J> H A -• H 3a*' A o Hi • • / L City of OROINO CITY OF OROiMa RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2159__________ A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF WEST BRANCH ACRES FILE NO. 1007 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adoptee subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development or land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for c subdivision by Robert and Carol Trapp, the subdividers; and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of Resolution No. 1979, granting preliminary plat approval; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 1979. 2. Dedication on the plat of rights of way for public streets anc roads, shown as "County Road No. .‘'51" and "Highview Lane". 3 Execution of a Road and Utilities Easement over the north 495.OC feet of Lot 2 for public ingress, egress, access, road and utility purposes . 4. Dedication to the City of a Flowage and Conservation Easement providing for limitations on the use of wetlands and/or drainageways described therein and shown on the plat as "drainage easements". 5. Dedication of the required Drainage and Utility Easements alone property boundaries on the plat. 6 Payment to the City of a Park Dedication Fee in the amount of $100.00. 7 Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat easements and covenants in the amount of $150.00. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City riT-rtno hereby approves the plat of West Branch Acres, Hennepin County, SinnesSlarsubject to the following oonditions: Page 1 of 2 CITY OF QRaWCfe City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________ 1. Lots 1 and 2 shall share a single driveway access to County Road 151 located over the existing driveway. 2. At such time that Highview Lane becomes a developed City road. Lot 2 will be required to gain access from Highview Lane. 3. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with the Hennepin County Recorder's Office on or before October 13, 1987 together with a certified original copy of this Resolution and executed copies of the easement documents noted above. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 13th day of April, 1987. Edward J cK^^ahan/J^TAc^ngMayor ■V •• -r ■ » Page 2 of 2 - . r - l/OeST POS? AWO UTILITIES EASEBEIIT ;::u?;i5*:.;,'j;;r”,!’-“.r‘;;:*?:U’.} KitS'Sf ^#r•1ilaft€^ referred to •Crjntte*# .*• 0^Z mWITNESSETH, ti»*t Grafltor(s). t« consideration •[ *^* *“■ ®f_ «i*#« One Oolloar (SI.00) anc for other good and ealoable «®"*J ?]![?"-?2 by Grantee, the receipt of »hich is acknowledged by Grantor(s), ®o(«*l hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey to Grantee, Its successors and assigns, an easement for public Ingress, egress, access, road and utilities purposes and uses, on, across and under the land in tne County of Hennepin and State of Hlnnesota as follows: -V / • ■ . i Thd north 49S«00 feet of Lot 2% Block 1, WCST BRANCH ACRCSg according to the recoroed plat thereoft Hennepin County* Minnesota '•yr^J u ai ‘ . s including, but not by way of llwltatlon, a full and free *®^ authority to enter upon said land to construct, eoerate and repair a sanitary sewer Interceptor, lift station, hain or lino, a water main or line, gravel-or paved road and any and all »■» T -•V- : ; roladnaO^bereto, (such ar«'hei^f|o^e *" itj, and the Granteeis|^MJIiaaeo» __ as Is reasonablyJhOCOIMpnl ^on, l«tanation,^.alnWnS*8^&2«2^ dditlon to any other !tho:irtghcitO[iMkotsuch .use nd^ddvlsabl^^^^thc f air !of haeo',M!*s •d 4rl I .-“i. cevoAntsrand restrictions co"talned»beroln^«ay_;b^^ InJw|jrt.lon. * '^ ^ onforead by -iA\ .f TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said easement unto Said Grantee, Its successors and assigns, permanently. • t.’-'-r-*. r— Vr are The Grantor(s) herein certify that the lands herein described free and clear of all encumbrances except: Vti.’-'-l ■r,-r=» •ws?»0 That curtain mortgone of record in favor of leomaa 4 Nettluton a Connecticut corporatione dated April 20p 1984, recorded May 17, 1984, as Dociiment No. 4891464, and assigned to Federal National Mortgage Corporation, a United States*of America corporation, said Assignment of Mortgage dated Xarch 13, 1995, recorded March 18, 1985p as Docximent No. 4975206. EasementJp restrictions, a.n.! reservations of record, if any. An easement for ingress and cqrcss in favor of Lot 1, Block 1, WEST BRANCH ACRES, according to the recorded plat thereof, over and across the set their_ _ _ _ _ hind(s) on the day and year first above written. „ •» «•» ^ y ^ a Cxrol L. Tr.pp STATE OF HINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this da/me person.lly appeared L. Tr-^ipc _ _ _ _ _19_ _ _ _ _and carol L. Tranp before »,,.«h.nrt .inrl vi..'. _____. to me known to be tne person}5; desertbeo in <no who' .loncu the foregoing Instruaent, and scknowledged that they executed bame their free act and deed* Notary >uoi1C . z •o X c ai C7- < — A o o c O M o. •o 00 •— -H o ^ft a (t n«o Jktt r» a a vi^fiaitaoa orta-oo-ia-iko a n rr o X X— •» o — !♦ X o « *tl > -.«• f- a a. r- «o ft * *1 X a. (w m It —* X It a C ft «*ftitaftoac/ift tA -1 It a a -♦ -1 a -%fO It a O XOB a. 1 —• It ft O lA O It o -1 A -< O pf It aaitoofiA»ft»-«-t* ft »*< o O tA It neiAo»r»-^u>a -*• H -n »a--ftaft-^ OM A O X o o c 9 o ^^ftit cx»a o CX a m o -% tA tA It It a o*< -1 A 1/1 n It ft a • -• U1TJ <S4 -0 •a —• m ft a vc A o • It -1oa.-«l O o o O X o A o X *o •n o "1 -0-0—.O r* a —c r*a o X pt -1 a ft a o ft o A n m n It It atAAa-io so n ft 1/1 M 5 a <AOf Aaaoa-o ft uo m o » It It (A n tA A a tA VC A X a -1 -1 C —* a. -*• o -1 '«-i a rt to -H>•<^rt -1 t< a rt •• rt ^ a A A c/1»ft <ui It Of o at) It •• a r*a It A It ft A ft o ' a •It VC —* n -1 a t-f -n c o i tit It Ofteftf^Aao-fo A -» H -t -1 cx a-^aaoao*«4w ft-o a o 1 o tooaitftn-i A O A pt n O ic a -^a • ft X o cx -1 rt c a a. a — a fi ►- ao €A tit *o • O.A A • A n — ft X It tA A —• ft a a -«• o CX« Of ft *o rtA «A a ao«A«*>ato o* aaar —f a o o A ft a •ft a A rf !-• a It Of O. Q. C -1 A a a* -1 a to ft A ft rttO A X A A rt It —• ft tA a a a^ —o a tA A lA Of It n-^ASco-oan o r* It a o.-»tAtA--*a toi o c=* o It -4*rt —ffAtAOAA c a *o • —Of a A VC ft ft A a a -H 1 ^ tA A a A a rsj A ft ft 1 It ®» r-a cx ft -o -1 A OO.COO.Vc A A tA) a *Q> X 1 -• a -»ax It1 a.m —• Uf O *< CXctC/lKO O Xa1 -t ft CA to 9 a A A -1 -It 4/1 r» lA “1 a -H a ctt X rt tA A ft A t/'1 CO Ol It A* fto—-«ftrt9 X A 3 -fcTJ 00 tn a — o —. -fc -i.A ft a rt- a*o c »ft A-^A-aooiA a A 0I «r¥ >o-it O—Aa-HA a A o -n — X A X S C tA A A a It a —• o ftA o -^a X O 1 II1 o. c X a ft a o. -%• a -*•-0 0 It tA ft A a to • A a —• tit -1 a VC >A ft tA Ok a. H • > ^01 CO o *0 A ft A Ul a 9 r- tc > —* a » »OtAOa>—>AfTA t/> A • Ml1 a.a m — ft -<» A cx cx rt a rt ft n fi» X o. CO a cx A A H a M fe*fto aa --003 xro ft O -1 ft a Ol Of -OAOftAft-iA AAAa -«• a -I a a to -1 — rt -*• 1 X V|c o Of Q.A rt-«<rto rtAa ft O O Xa <<b 4<to aa aa -^oo -to* a o.-n A3A CM-f. O -1 rr — Ml •f o a —‘ifta^o-it XX a tA It to a S a o at A -«• o c x«It a -«• A to VC ca ft a 1 trt o It a tA CB a -o a a A a -1 -1 a It -1 UOftftaAtOAXA A ft A O rt 0»0« ft • O O -1 • A A ot a *0 to <lA a ^ C «0 utrt 1 c o o a It 0* It It VC C A a 40 -«• A rt a m1 to 3 A o. C -O A a tA A • A It a It CL -1T3A-^AA — ft a t3 It a o ft O -1 tA A Ot A ft 3 a -A O 1 ff a A -^Vc ft rt rt 3 o o•t O It Ul Of -13 -•-• s— n c r»rt o A o CX ro « ftO T3 3 Of ft O tk 3 rt A •—to -t» 1t O rt (A o — o. a lA o ft A A A «-1-10 Cff 1 a tA A rt n -tk • • lO « 1A Of tA a a A X a a -1 A ft tA a o.A rn ft A ft A -t ft ft O n A o. ri A a a • A•a O ft € CL tA 9T a A A Aaa It o ft > — tA o cx O(lA • ft cx -0 cx C O -1 X -t o a o —.A cx a C ft A o s Of It a o tA a cx r* a 4A 1 ft 3 \ "**Of A cx ft «a s rt a A MCZ-i ft rf tA A A -ti a A -I > ^a It O. X O 3 «A o s tA ft A 3 X —• ft —• A « ^rt CO rr tA A ^ —« lA \ ft a *0 O ft ft -1 O ft A 1 a. o.O A* r* c a tA Of ft * O lA o. ft a f • 5} O ooo I'll /-.................... ir* • - J. /- JeST rfie/?ar/A///7fi a//• //^^ fX^-r 40Z.S" 'jV Q C) ri> a ^ • ^ I I n/Ai\jv,.r! r"/5? -• ii i,^ ^369.50 SS8<^09’i4’‘l . |^< C'A [) ? Cor^r^.ffec. 7 ^n/7. C>. A4a/rtjir77a/r/J •n N> 4 's 4 'Is I ni s b sS v;v^l o 13 < -J Ci -___ r) -- J r- o uj <r [CggROAD NO ISI \N0 34^.40 ll^wxI V j \ \ 1 ; o <i V _J / ^/i?^700i_ ^cfse/rre/r/- ^L//22;l7 ^-'/-•J :> / I I , yts t * - soo.oo ft89^44 ’$/'*^ • I ^S89^a2'28"£ II f/vV ^€€,00/ 0 0; -I M. fe/ purtuant ^» */rens Case fih. /tiii .1 -J ^ J: ^_L Q S ■S89°52'28 ”B ^J.LM. Sef pursusnHo f«rreo» fate N«.(it)| 'OS f0~\ _______3C>C>.(.4- \ mOHVIEW LflNF _ ''f 38£.57 /^SS^0974''iy -* 'f/°lf^ry/Ae wts//z of ffie/ViV/^ of ffo'c.y Ssot o 0 if) I. I Uft/i/y • A Mr* l./-\l Hl\ ~o:Z • % ' / B&f’n Uff/iff. I _l_i_X /^ *1 <y.r J .] 1 -I sS- I To: From: Date: Subject: Jeanne Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator April 10. 1996 Tested Drainfield Locations. Lot 2, West Branch Hill I have reviewed subdivision file #556, which resulted in the creation of Lot 2, West Branch Hill in 1982-83. While an experimental shallow trench system was initially proposed for Lot 2, that plan was later dropped. Additional testing was then presented indicating a site suitable for shallow trenches at the south central portion of Lot 2. with an alternate site requiring a mound system at the southwest comer of the property (See Bob Koch drawing, 1982). This alternate site was only tested via one perc test and one boring, inadequate to meet current standards. Further, the City has since adopted a 6% slope limitation for mounds, and no slope information was presented. Finally, it appears this site may conflict with the 25' easement along the west side of Lot 2. Note also that staff has not confirmed whether the shallow trench system for Lot 2 is actually feasible, since mottling interpretation has been tightened up considerably in the 14 years since this testing was done. Given the soil type, it is possible that actual mottling is much shallower than the 4.2-4.6' reported by Koch in 1982. For the above reasons, before any approval is considered for use of the 25* easement for access to Lots 95-96, additional testing should be done on Lot 2, West Branch Hill, to confirm that feasible primary and alternate drainfield sites are available that won't be impacted by use of the easement iI To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator April 10, 1996 #2130 Norbert Johnson, 1181 Wildhurst Trail - Preliminary Subdivision Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Total area = 7 acres Applicthm: Applicant proposes a preliminary plat of five lots to be served by mumci^ sewer. The sewer improvement includes an expansion of the municipm lin within Wildhurst Trail. The applicant followed the majority of the guidelines provided by the Planning Commission at the sketch plan review of February 20, 1996. A private road with no road extension connecting with Garden Lane has been proposed. A sewer easement will be extended to Garden Lane. Lot 3, the most northern lot, has been platted as a back lot. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: Section 10.24, Subd. 6 (B) - LR-IB lot standards (Lots 1, 2, 4, 5) Required Area = 1 acre Width = 140' Setbackf'udc =10' 1. Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 4 Lot 5 1.32 ac I.IO ac 1.20 ac 1.08 ac 390'140'140'380' 10'35'*35'*10' * Side yards adjacent to driveway outlot serving back lot require street setback of the zoning district. 2. Section 11.31, Subd. 3 - Back lot standards (Lot 3). Area Required 1.5 Lot 3 1.5 ac Width 140'232' Setbacks: Front 52.5'52.5' Rear 52.5'52.5' Side/street 52.5'52.5' Side 15'15’ 3.Section 11.31, Subdivision 5 (C-1) - AppUcability. Necessary findings for approving back lot with subdivision in excess of two lots.•4 j Zoning File #2130 April 10, 1996 Page 2 4.Section 11.03, Definition 24 - Minimum lot area. For urban lots, area of pedestrian easements must be excluded firom lot area. Such easement must be placed so that a minimum half acre of dry contiguous land is available for the building envelope. 5.Section 11.33, Subd. 4 - Typical section for road. There is no direction in the Sub'^lvision Regulations for determining whether a road should be public or private nor has the policy of the City been consistent in designating roads public or private. 6. Chapter 11 - Class III subdivision requirements. List of Exhibits A B C D E F G H - I J K L M N Application Property Owners' List Plat Map Park Commission Minutes 4/1/96 (Draft) Cross-Profile of Bluff Location of Control Cord in Determination of Bluff Engineer ’s Report 4/10/96 Sewer Plan Wildhurst Court NURP Pond Detail Sewer Plan Wildhurst Trail Sewer Profile Wildhurst Trail Planning Commission Minutes 2/20/96 Area Map Preliminary Plan Revi^ Comments All five of the residential lots meet the pertinent lot standards. Each building site has been found to meet the required setbacks of the LR-IB zoning district and special setbacks for back lots. The properties shall be served by municipal sewer and on-site wells. At the February 20, 1996 meeting of the Planning Commission, members did not support staffs request for a future road extension to Garden Lane but did support a utility easement that would allow extension of sewer to Garden Lane. Members also advised developer that if northern lot could meet special standards for a back lot that they would accept a back lot with this suWivision based on the unique, narrow shape of the lot to the north and the location of the ravine. -Ji Zoning File #2130 April 10, 1996 Page 3 The developer was also advised to meet with adjacent property owners to discuss the preliminary subdivision before presenting it to the City. It is staffs understandmg that Johnson did offer to hold a meeting for the property owners listed on the enclosed property owners' list. Exhibit B. Members also advised developer that g^ing and drainage plans were to be designed to minimize any impact on adjacent properties and on existing municip facilities and improvements. Sewer As already noted in the sketch plan review, there is adequate capacity within the i^cipd lin«» to serve the five new residential units. Review Exhibit G, Gustafson ’s report, ^le City shall take utility easements over the sewer line extension within Wildhurst Tral and Wildhurst Court (private road) through extension utility easement at Garden Lane. Gustafson asks that the sanitary sewer line be installed at least 20’ past the proposed curb line (cul-de-sac) and possibly all the way to Garden Lane. E.xtensions of roads and municipal services are always a problern at a future date when neighborhoods have been developed. The Engmeer asks that Ma^ole be lo^vered 4 ’ to adequately serve Lot 4 and that Cleanout 4 be lowered 1’ to serve Lot 3 1^ on the proposed house elevations shown on preliminary plat. He also does not approve of the connection as shown on the plan for Lot 3 and asks that the sewer extension not be a direct connection but to be shown as a wye connection to the sewer line. Review Ae grading plan, note sewer along Wildhurst Trial will be up to 16 deep m places due to the high ^T^p banks adjacent to the road. This path will reduce costs as it would riot involve reconstmetion of road but the impact upon the higher elevations^d existing vegetation wodd be intense. We must recommend that sewer line be extended within the road nght-of-way and eliminate Manhole 1. Street - Public vs. Private Lt the road should reioain a simple cul-de-sac road, not a through road coitnecttitg Lane. If the road was to have an extension ouUot for future connecuon. this may suggest more public interest. A road extension to Garden Lane would have a major impact on Lot 4 already tailed by the utility easement that will divide the building envelope. Members shotdd of the road and decide if the road is to be publtc or pnvate and if it is to be pub.ic. an extension outlot road should be provided to Garden Lane. This will require a major redesign of the plat. Zoning File #2130 April 10, 1996 Page 4 Staff was also concerned with the potential for erosion in the ditches along Wildhurst Trail as a result of both sewer and road construction. Gustafson recommends in stallin g the plat road as an urban section with curb and moving the catch basin and drainage pipes further east to the intersection of Wildhurst Trail. Drainage can then be directed to the detention pond and minimize flows out to Wildhurst Trail. Grading/Drainage Gusta&on advises that the grading plan and pond detail do not match. The pond would require up to a 20' excavation if constructed in the wooded area, along with the loss of all the vegetation and plantings in area. The developer may be advised to work with property owner to the immediate south so that a pond can be constructed closer to the existing culverts and existing municipal facilities at Wildhurst Trail. The grading plan must include a proposed ditch along Wildhurst Trail and type of erosion control to be used both during construction and after work is completed until ground cover is not restored. Grading activities are shown to the southeast of ravine at north of property within Lot 3. There can be no filling or excavations within the ravine. The City will protect this area of ravine with a conservation and flowage easement. Drainage and ponding calculations have yet to be provided. Detail on outlet structure should include invert elevations for all pipes and show the normal high water level and 100-year flood level. The utility easement extending from the cul-de-sac to Garden Lane must be widened to 30' and, as required by Code, drainage easements be shown over all drainageways and ponding areas. If the developer is able to install a comprehensive drainage plan that would mclude the property to the southeast, the owners would also be asked to grant drainage easements over their property. Park Commission Recommendation There was discussion at the Park Commission's meeting concerning a desire to have a trail that would connect from the plat road through Lot 4 to Garden Lane and eventually to a future park to the west and north (refer to the Exhibit M). If the plat road is to be a private road, the public has no right »o drive or trespass over the roadway. The Park Commission recommended that a trail easement be placed adjacent to the utility easement that divides Lot 4. If the easement was put on the north side of the sewer utility easement, it would have no impact on Lot 4's building envelope. The building envelope must maintain a minimum of one-half acre not divided or encroached by pedestrian or vehicular easements. i i n H||tinyiiia-girr Zoning File #2130 April 10, 1996 Page 5 Review Exhibit B, the Park Commission recommended taking cash in lieu of a dedication of land for park use. The motion included a desire to have a trail that connected to Garden Lane as long as the plat road was public allowing the public to use the road as access to the trml. If the roadway is public, the area of the trail would then be deducted from the park dedication fee. If the developer installs private trails linking Garden Lane to residential lots, this area would not be deducted from the park dedication fee. Issue of Bluff Review Exhibits E and F, Mike Gaffron has developed a profile of the bluff and the A/B chord located on the topographic map. He advises that based on the directives of the Code that the property does not contain bluff areas requiring additional setbacks. Hardcover The eastern portion of the property is located within the 250-500' setback area ^d the western portions within 500-1000'. In fact, the entire property would be located within 1000’ of the shoreline of Forest Lake and subject to all hardcover controls. Issues to be Resolved by Planning Commission 1.Do members still concur that five lot plat road should remain private with no foture extension to Garden Lane? If members disagree and der ide road should be public, an extension corridor must be provided to Garden Lane. Utility easements could then be located within the road extension and trail easement located adjacent to roadway extension. 2.Planning Commission members were concerned with the questions and issues raised by adjacent prop-uy owners that attended the sketch plan review. The applicant should be asked to advise the Planning Commission as to the outcome of his meeting with the neighbors and their opinion on the proposed preliminary plat. 3.If the road remains private and a utility easement for the sewer line is extended to Garden Lane, should the sewer line be extended to Garden Lane as urged by the Engineer and recommended by staff? 4.What about a drainage easement over the ravine area to the north? At an earlier 1980’s review, the Engineer recommended a 50' easement along the west and as it extended to the northeast expanded to a 75' width. i Lt Zoning File #2130 April 10, 19% Page 6 Options of Action To approve as proposed or amended; OR Table, if road is to be redefined as a public road with a future road extension to Garden Lane, plat must be redesigned. Amend grading and drainage plan to include property owner to immediate south per Engineer ’s recommendation. If road remains private. Planning Commission members may recommend approval. The following conditions should be included in your recommendation: 1. The final plat of Forest Lake View shall include the following: a.Drainage and utility easements along all lot lines to be designated 10' along the perimeter and street lot lines and 5' along the shared lot lines. b.Drainage easements to be shown over the ravine area as specified by staff, ponding areas, drainageways and storm sewers. c.Sewer utility extending from cul-de-sac to Garden Lane to be expanded to 30 ’. 2.Grading and drainage plan to be amended prior to scheduling preliminary subdivision before the Council. Amendments shall include the following: a. b. Proposed street section. Redesign Wildhurst Court to an urban section and relocate catch basin and drainage line to the east at the intersection of Wildhurst Trail. c. d. Show ditches along Wildhurst Trail. Relocate pond further south closer to existing culvert and municipal improvements at Wildhurst Trail. If approved, to be extended into property to south if approved by owner. e.Provide drainage and ponding calculations. Outlet structure detail should include elevations for all pipes and levels of pond at normal water level and 100-year water level. f.Show erosion control. -1 a i I 1 1 Zoning FUe #2130 April 10, 1996 Page 7 3. Utility plans to be amended as follows: 4. 5. 6. a. Manhole 4 to be lowered 4* and Cleanout 4 to be lowered 1*. b. Extend sanitary sewer 20* past the proposed curb cut? ... or to Garden Lane? c. Revise connection to sewer line for Lot 3. d. Relocate sewer line to Wildhurst Trail, excluding Manhole 1. Future owners of five residential lots shall be responsible for making a sewer unit payment of $4,825.00 (fixed charge $225.00 + unit charge $4,600.00) based on 1996 Fee Schedule upon {^)piication for a building permit. Applicant shall enter into a Developer ’s Agreement and post a Letter of Credit written to 150% of the cost of the improvements in order to ensure that required improvements have been installed to the City's satisfaction. Applicant's contractor to provide an estimate of the total cost to be reviewed by the City Engineer for final determination of the amount of the Letter of Credit All residential development of Lots 1-5 are subject to the hardcover controls of the Shoreland Regulations of the City. 7. Other conditions of approval recommended by Planning Commission. i; i t''' * T. .• •. • . • < , *»•;. ^ . ** _ Vi* tm • ' . f7i* fM *u y . ^ * «»•>> Applicatioii # -^7 3r> Receired . ■?- Amount Paid /. L> <>*> V CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION H ft 1 NA/ \ \ dho r ----*JL ^JL* Property Identification Number (PED)__Q~7 ~ \\7 QQ^$. , .____ ri__V viKctrartnr torrens?Please check one - Property _abstract or -------torrens? Attach legal description to application. 2^BlocV<. I, VAe cx.VV» ev*cro V T APPLICANT . Name NiC)v\oP>rV J^rN\nr> SOn 0 cf ' Oo c Z50Q ^ VqxnKq.Zip hone (work) (home) -b ‘jl5 IIjS) OWNER (if different than applicant) Name y yt. \ ^ N\. ^ o W t V\ Address ftO?_ fc-A^P tprtr>r\y Plr~\\f.£. rity ^p( p\c.\ v\ <=•> j------------------- (attach list if more than one) Phone (home) Zip 55305 Phone (work) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size ’i I Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Present use (check) Present Zoning District J2 ____ Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify) X/rtc ani* aiAv PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites Existing Units New Units Total Units City of Oram P.O. Bm tf Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) 0,1 Units per 1 Acres Oystal Bay, m SS323 (fii2)473-7S7 AA^CiO Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land K Residential _________Other (specify)_________ 03/22/X lBi4St2S UN) USE flPPUOinON 1 I 16&00 12130 MMERT JIHfiM 1 • 0.00 1805.0 0.00 suBTarn.TD| TODL SEE RECEIVED 1,6&0C 0.0C 1,805b 00 1,805.00 CHtWE dJElIttOS TRfMBI 1166 O.OC - ---------- r W'.L "■HBJ MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPUCATION 1. Payment of fees (refisr to "applicatioii fees” listed below. 2. Completed applicadon fonn. 3. Preliminary plat infonnadon on Certificate of Survey. 4. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this Ust fiom Hennepin County Department of Finance A-d03 Govt Center 348-3271). 5. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Zoning Official's Signature _______________________________________ D®®-------------------------------------------- i MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. S. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit Zoning Official's Signature_______________[)ate L APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class 1,11 & III) S250.00 _____ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $350.00 Subdivision Application (Class I Sc. II) $350.00 Totals Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 + $25.00/Iot (Class III & all non-residential) ___ Final Plat Application (Class III) $200.00 ___ Legal Review and Filing: Subdivision only $75.00 Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. $200.00 Park Fees (to be determined per Section 1 1.62) Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) Renewal cf rh.«r HI, Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change fit»m original application) B. Special Improvement Fees: . \/ Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + $.50/lineal ft.; H h O lin. ft. x .50 = $ 00 _____ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50/lineal ft.; lin. ft. x .50 = $_____ oo Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 ___ ^ » A • ^ ^\y^ Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub ___ Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/stub ___ Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 ___ On-Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/per lot x new lots 1-7 OO C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees _____ Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100.00 _____ PRU Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit ^/6 95'. OO The applicant hereby agrees to provide all inflation required or requested by the Zoning Administrator. City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and^c^cibneodfe^^lfl piO|^ this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. 7II /. .i! / LV/y__ O ______________ Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have aU submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Coini^ion me^gs 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 agmt attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. n. \ V . 1 NUN at nk» AB ‘V riH •■'uW ^■ ’ iAvvfe":-;'.'V ';■ . mHUHIt ' »- • . ; ' ••*- % \'J ‘ • .,i.. 1 >*.NitliEPXN COUNH PKOPERTY.XNPORilATXON SYSTCH PROPERTY 0»MEI» 'LXST •s5'5»; Ti; «■ • •. ; • ■ES El OOOi -It iRESS UNASStdNEO . •. 4lS5S,r:lS^'BS5SS \SZ-^ NINE/MM’!!:-MiliY PENoxio,u , •’» -1 IvcrtY; RtaoumoN Assiiaisdi K ' tCNM MNSEir^ATXON EASEHENT * • ■) }JpW• €M«R MMB i-. [itAbtfiir-ES ES ooti , <1 ...i'OOOM? AOORESS UNASSXGNEO _____«jaojii^'.UB ^••• ,jj;.>A)(PAyER{;:;^i^il^ MYABU %^Nai«/ABON=%Hm^n MM( OAtEO.^: TOIKAVXEN U :NTlV^> • ^->; ;\^il!RtMN,PARIl Ml ' 85S84 ' '• *♦ OOEA PROP AOON - ^OAATI ? forest LAKE LANDXNO ''--’r'a 0M«R NMRRAY:B:HURLEV Oif TAXPAYER ; >yvRAY;B HURLEY * I »* 'k '• ^ & A A A a A ^ rjl. A a MM I^ NANE/MNMli? :fMTB FOREST LAKE LANDXNO _ _ _ _ _ ES EA OOSA .. ra,-- a..a 1- OOOSB . ADDRESS UNASSXONED ^.;v^ OM«R NAME''i'O ’URRY LEE *' TAXPAYER :‘ ATTN ACCTS PAYABLE ^.vf. .|MME/ABBR/^NtBNAY MATXONAL BAMC • *>;.:■■• ■' •>••■;•'• -IBTBiUMXVERSXTY AVE I. . ■•.•r 4/; -ST, PAUL .Ml BSXOA 'I • .■*.• t.s : • '• bT- ;...k 5»;’: ■ a-iI7-ES EA DOST ^^,i;| .PRDP ABOR LANDXNO c ’'; ;0M«R tMM '/t M A H J ERXKSON # t . • * • • ^ • * * •’ ) i«\• • f * v-> TA)»AYIR U ;iANrORO A MARGARET ERXKSON , NmC/ABDR ). MSB FOREST LAKE LANDXNO. •- ' V Hound Ml ibsaa . .••'I ••.•v V. ■ i ■ ■ ■■ ■■’ >■ ?;• ! 'J. * i #• IB ‘07<*llt-ES ES 0019 # ’I 7 .* I. R^»I 'REPORT m. PiAlfRoi •k . •^V A S V V!' • ;XtJ't. OOOSS AOORESS UNASSXONED BARBARA SOLLNER-NEOB BARBARA SOLLNER-NEBB 17E0O Melbourne or laurel HD 'EQ707 f’j •• I SB 07>117>ES ES OOEE OOOSS AOORESS UNASSXGNED0 larrY lee ATTN ACCTS PAYABLE HXDHAY NAHONAL BAMC 1570 UNXVERSXTY AVE ST PAUL Ml S510A K SB d7«117-ES EA 0007 OllBA HXLDHURST TR B 0 RASMUSSEN/S J RASMUSSEN BRXAN 0 A SANDRA J RASMUSSEN IXBA NXLOHURST TR HOUND Ml B5SS4 .A SB 07-X17-ES EA 00E7 OIIAA NXLDHURST TR’ LYLE E RAHN ETAL LYLE E RAHN llAA HXLDHURST TRAXL MOUND MN S5SAA SB 07-117-ES EA 0035 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSXGNEO 0 LARRY LEE ATTN ACCTS PAYABLE HXDHAY NATXONAL BANK 157B UNXVERSXTY AVE ST PAUL Ml S510A SB 07-117-ES EA OOSB 0AA65 FOREST LAKE lANOXNO JON D BLACKSTONE ET AL JON 0 BUCKSTONE AAAS FOREST LAKE LANDING' MOUND Ml SSSAA SB . 07-llt-ll El OOEO,■ , OOOSB AbbRESS UNASSIbNib 0 URRY LEE . ATTN ACCTS PIyABLE HIbHAY NATXbNAk BAMl 1S7B UNXVERSXTY,AVE ST PAUL Ml S510A so* 07-117-ES ES DOES OllBl NXLOHURST TR ARNOLD N SOSKXN ARNXD H SOSKXN BOE EOOEHOOR OR HOPKXNS Ml S5S05 ■' ■■■ ;v- . ' / • • .K :}■• I I ;■} i . l T . vA l!l B si 07-li7-ES EA DOES D447B FOREST LAKE lAiDxNO RAY 0 HURLEY ^ RAY DONALD hurley AA7S forest lake LANDiNO HOUND HN 65SAA I SB 07-117-ES E4 00E9 OlOBS NXLOHURST TR H A SCHULTZ ETAL HARVEY A SCHULTZ loss HXLDHURST TRHound nn sbsaa . v j-A •Vf i U ! ^ i • .t’t. -r 1|-' i *. '• • - I* A •. f... . SB 07-117-ES EA OOSA OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSXGNEO Bib Hemcssy RXCHARb L NEM«SSY 7ll0 BLOOHXNOTQH AVE b RXCHFXELO Ml B5AES v! sB 07-117-ES EA 004S bliSl NILdHURST TR J .l C eULLXTON . JOHN H I CXNDY L CULLITON llSl HXLDHURST tR HOUND Ml SSI44 ti * • * . V •• •• J' n -wt : ■.■'i'.iC* k’i . > T. ^ * *r r* ’ . ! K‘ : ‘ .1 f Ai.‘-I*- ''i f{i^>I»’i''ii i; '‘Kv:\ M»p AOOl i^tl»?s MILOHURST TR .( :V.NEtMEPXN COUNTY PROKRTY MPORHAItON SYSTEH PROPERTY OMSRS UST ■. •■•1 *r ‘ / i..;.T.*> V ■•s* : * * •-.;; OMCR NMl;^}^PAVXO;>i RAHN ■I'ikAlk . A l<r ! ’4 .‘ kMiUiP* AAA .. v^r4r'—mm/»oentyj^ M': OT-li7-ES Si, ooA4 ' Oitl4,f NXLOMURst TR <~MRt ) MUM ETAl MUM - UMURST tR l ‘ - U1A4 . •*. ItMt ^ tiiN i • 0040 :01;5.qmcr NiMoliEtioMf ITittoMuiT ’ -^vA'TA)»AYtR '-^>TOOB iUEONART NAMi/ADOR ItRt KXUHURST TR - vv ^’ftHOUMB ■*•1 ,•• M504 • • _ >» sc OOC4 .ADORESS iMA^QNEO Ofwii iwnB,:,;.ii««u*. k MEYER ’* :0lltOA A MEYER • ' ' > HUm/MDOU ■ ’4400 .NORTH SHORE OR i.1,' PROP. AOOR :•: \i ROOM;'i OMCR MMC.Vx.BEMaf. ir-.*"NOMNOIM ASSA4 . -v.r". . '••.’■. •■*•• ■ • .-if '■• -vEift'lii •*. • »* • •• . ,. y . 1^/RY-117-*X sc 0044 - . PROP ABORA* 0400 ' TOtiCAVSEN li •_V\o»OliA NAMR/ilr J D OOIRZAL A J A ROSTAO t'f: TAXPAYER r^;4J.O,0OUtAU A J A ROSTAO : ;r MAME/AOOR a : litb^TOMCA VXEH U I . B5S44 M « •' ‘M •'. X • r* Vi* W 1‘•'S-H. . . ■■■■ ■ i*.' t • • r TAXPAYER ' *"■ -k>NAME/ADOR '' SIB OOOSS • 1 • k'.i*: ,• .Ak'N*>"vK;j ■• . • • •■ •• .** d, ■ • . :> Uj,;/ ,' V. Tv--V vV .. *' i* * v':,' *V*' -I • •*, I ^ '17; ■ OPERTY OMSRS. LIST ' :. I/.. .W..; -'•]•■:•■>•: '• ■: •, • "I' •• I • . ■■":*• ,:m •; ': -• >•'. :• .■, •■•I-,: ' ,t ,. . .y, IV ,; . '.•>■•?r; ' aepm T NOSO 07-117-CS SI 0015 OICYO NtUHURST TR JAR STASIK JAMES STASIK 1C70NZL0HURST TRAIL MOUND M B5S44 f.’ 07-117-AS.il 00C4. OOOSS AOORESS UNASsIoMEDRobert L sirkelAno etAL ROBERT L BXRKELAND .?•»:>• •;• lEYA mxlOhurst trail • MOUND Ml BSS44 te>i J> -lA -i-dJi! IS®1 I ‘.l’ 5* SO D7«117-CS SI 00S7 OICOO MlLbMJRST TR ' ; OAVlO J KRUSKOPF A NIFE OAVXO J KRUSKOPF ICOO MILOHURST TRL HOUMb HN S5S44 . ’X . • -. • -p» ; *•' • Viil sR ■ 6Mi7-tS sc 00C7 044iM TOMUVXEH U H A A I A ALERY MieHAtl A A LOU AMI ALERY 44Si tdMUVXCN U HbuMO HM B5S44 St 67«il7-ki SC 004S 04440 TONKAVXEM U KEMUTH j HICKEY KEMIETH J HXCKEY . 4440 TONKAVXEM U mound mi B5S44 SO 07-ll7-*ll SC 0047 04440 TOUUVIEH LA NAS fiUlL NXLLIAH a BULL 4490 TOMCAVXEH U MOUND Ml BSS44 •I •I sR' o7^il7-cs si oose OllAl MXLDHURST TR S0OTT MXCHAEL HEMCSSt MlSOOTT M HEMCSSY 1141 MILOHURST TR MOUND Ml 5SS44 Si 07-117-CS Si ooct .. 044B5 TOMCAVXEM U OEMIXS A MEYER DENNIS A MEYER 4460 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND Ml 5SS44 it 07-117-CS St 0045 ,, OOOS6 ADDRESS UNASSIDnED J 0 OOLEZAL A J A ROSTAO J 0 OOLEZAL A J A ROSTAO 4450 TONKA VXEM LA MOUND Ml 55544 - ., vj• ..'--(Of! < t , A ... , /'J’l J! so 07-117-CS sl 004S, OOOSS ADDRESS UNASSlONEO TObD R COURNEYA tOOO R COURNEYA 0109 OEORBIA CT BROOKLYN PARK Ml 55445 r*. t > **' • i''*r* f fft t ' I • 1/ -v- -J. II 4^; t J 11, :<4v'* ■ 'fTr’rTTt tt nn i ' ( r VIi 1 0 ..'4♦ ♦ M;*i \ *' /'»•■•■•■ .‘4 • - A 0»'* jV,V;r •• , S‘!% PHJ'I Kii "V • ••'" " •* •* • :' . .''• ' ••• .•• • v< . *• . • ‘ ■■■'■ ;■ •'. :•';■ ■',•■ ■•., '.'. .. • . • :l •. •.?;;•> • •■ • ^ '■ ''' ■ • v .' •rV.-;:. !?v ••'i'* . • ■ ..'Vk, V.i,| - Vf >y«%' •»«M i- •••M' -./v «^ «I 'i': I • ■#»*-*’*■• • • ■ :'• .. .f ;! -v. ■ ' :• , •.• • ••• • ■ . . * ! 1*' t *. •'» . I ' •■?'•'■ ■/ • # i I • •.• REPORT NO. PARC m'lt: ^ • » *• ^ a •• ^ .1 * •» > • t-; « • I * , • y • • S : f s •■ , ^ i! • . -A# - ■ ...**•• •**•' ' . • • . *' ' • '; .i\ :’■ ■ * ■*'• nL •‘* iPi- ' ■• •.‘* ■ • ^ ..V V '“t y-• {vflBi- . •*• • ‘ r ■ • ^ • ‘ •! • ; ' ( . k « ♦, I : V? . */. *. . <*• t. • r , mi ■■' ■ 'A-•t «• 'V » »•f V '• ,v . * • V * • '• * •■ *. •.* *!* I i cERnFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE M ^CCURAW AW 321!*«tf».Aii4 REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION ^"/SKJSTl^tLATMM^^TdTTHE OF THE MEIWEPIN COUNTY DEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BIST OF HY KNOm^DOE AND BELIEF. ' ■ B • y *•- V* S '-A.*•V. : . ?•« t -- - - -- ™.-..,- ,y.-; j'jb-n.. ^.^oioncme^C'^J ■.:,. * • •• ^ •-.•i t'"*. , 4./>. .•. • :• V. * • < . ^ • V.. < i I* .’■• I *. •% n;i ' •• .*-*•! / »• ■ *• i ^ L M ■ i w‘ . I_ •■.•.;• ; V v.:.:^ v>'?f5 )8 1 8 § § 07-(n-l3-3> EAST UNI OMU s n» MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON APRIL 1,1996 D DRAFT Flint said City Engineer. Glenn Cook, was asked to detennine how fir the bike trails could be constructed along Old Crystal Bay Road for SIOO.OOO to enable the City to use the matching grant, which would be in the amount of S30.000. It was noted that the grant money could be used to assist with land purchase but not with sewer costs or needed improvements. The costs to be provided will include the engineering cost. It is the hope that the trail could be extended this year to the bridge area. It was noted that the City is still awaiting a decision concerning Hwy 12 on the Baker Park area of the traiL (#7) SUBDIVISION REVIEW OF APPLICATION #2130 - NORBERT JOHNSON, 1181 WILDHURST TRAIL Jim Stefanson. representing Saga HiU Preservation Society, inquired how the Park Dedication fund received its credit from properties and questioned if a uail could be established through the Johnson property, which is currently under application proceedings for subdivision. McMillan did not sec the need for such a trail with access available through WUdhurst Trail. She did note, however, that WUdhurst grade was very steep. Stefanson said he was concerned with the runoff issue from this property into the homed area nearby. Bran Rasmussen was present and added that the runoff currently drains to his yard. McMillan informed Rasmussen that the Planning Commission would address this concern during their review of the application. 8 1 • i I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON APRIL 1,1996 D DRAFT Flint, as well as McDennott and White, saw the approach on Wildhurst as being very difficult for travd. Flint said he did not object to obtaining the 8% of land for Park Dedication but did not view the access considered as the best access. A consideration discussed was obtaining a pedestrian easement over the e?dsting drainage and utility easernem. Use said she would need to obtain some sense of where the Saga Hill Group were in realizing the funds necessary to purchase the bank property in order to consider such an easement. Use noted that if the group were unable to purchase the bank property, there would be no need to gain this easement as it leads to the bank property and not to the park property in process of being owned by the City. Stefanson said the group has raised about 1/3 of the necessary funds. It was noted that this amount includes the grant portion. McDermott inquired if the grant included a stipulation that the bank property be turned over to the City as park land. The answer was unknown by any present. The City is assisting in obtaining the grant money for the group by their application for the grant. The grant money does go to the City. Stefoison inquired if the Park Dedication money which could be obtained firom this subdivision could be donated towards the purchase of the bank property. He was informed by Flint that such a recommendation could be made. However, Flint said the Saga Hill group was informed that they were responsible for raising the necessary funds. Flint said if the group came close to raising the necessary amount, there was the possibility that the City may consider such an option. M r minutes of the regular orono park commission MEETING HELD ON APRIL I, 1996 E draft nse asked Johnson if he had considered constructing a trail to the park land Johnson said he did not believe it would have any bearing on his property as the homeowners could walk there from their own property. It was noted that only one of the properties abut the park property and would, therefore, not be obtainable by the other homeowners. The Commission noted that a trail would be an imcgral part of a good neighborhood. Johnson said the easement was for drainage and utilities. He added that there was only two lots that did not abut the easement area. When asked by McDermott, Flint said the road for the subdivision could be either private or public. nse commented that if Garden Lane was already platted, there would be no need to obtain the trail through the subdivision since access to the park property could be gamed from Garden Lane. Johnson said he was concerned that residems of other areas would drive to the cul-de-sac, park, and then walk to the park property bringing extra traffic to the area, nse said the traU easement being referred to would not present access to the park property itself. Gerhardson asked if the trail easement would extend from the cul-de-sac to the bank park property over the drainage easement. Flint responded that consideration of this option should result in increased value to the lots in the subdivision with access to the park property. Flint noted that a public easement would be included in the calculation tor the 8% Park Dedication, but if the easement was private, it would not. McDermott asked if it was possible to take a portion of the 8% via the easement and the remamder m cash. h i 41 minutes of the regular orono park commission ^ MEETING HELD ON APRIL 1, 1996 L/K AFT Ilse asked for consideration of another option. She asked the Commission and developer to consider a private trail over the easement as the trail would only accommodate those Uving in the subdivision. Use did not beUcve taking a pubUc easement would be a good way to spend City money. Flint said he did not see it as a secondary access. Use responded that this would all be assuming that the bank property was obtained. McMillan moved. White seconded, to recommend taking cash for the Park Dedication. McMillan said it would be great if the developer decides to add an internal trail but could not see spending the Park Dedication amount for a possible future access. Flint responded that if only a 10' easement totaling 1500 s.f, or 3000 s.f if 20* were taken, out of a total development of 7 acres, it would be less than 10% of 1 acre. Fl'uit did not see this as a significant dollar amount. Flint said without a public access, a problem could be created and saw it as a mistake not to take this small portion of land for Park DedicatioiL rise asked Bran Rasmussen his opinion of such a trail from a neighbor standpoint. Rasmussen saw the trail easement as a large advantage and resulting in reduced parking. Hse questioned if the road was private, if a person could walk down the road who did not Uve in the subdivision. KeUey informed the Commission that this area was sewered which would most likely result in the City taking the road as pubUc. Flint said this would not make a difference as he saw the access as avaUable for the homeowners in the subdivision. i '■> ’ Mn«IUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION meeting held on APRIL 1, 1996 DRAFT McDomottaiidllse asked ifGarden Lane could be used as a tnul. McMillan noted that if to smaccomplisl«d,tl« City would have to maintain it. McDennott said it would ju« be an easement and could be left as it is adding that Garden Lane might not be changed. White noted a lot with the driveway over the drainage easement. He also commented that three of the lots were adjacem to the easement leaving only two that would not have access to the drainage easement. Use commented that she would wish the developer would see the reason for making a traU if to road was private. If to tod was public. Ilse said this then could be used to grin access to the trail. Difierent viewpoints came from members on how residems respond to other people coming omo a private road, both rilowing it and forbidding it. Johnson said he was unsure how he felt about such a trail If an access was done. Johnson feh it would be used by people from other areas and result in cars being parked on Wildhurst. Suggestions of no parking signs were given. Flint questioned what the topography was of to bank property to the east of Garden . stefanson said this ponion was flat, but then dropped off. Gerhardson satd themLane was a 20- drop in grade from to Johnson property to the bank property. Flint said he would be troubled by not taking 8% of to property. He noted to area as environmentally sensicve and close to to area to City is looking at for a park. White responded that it was unknown whether to bank would be obtaining to land. It was J 9 % >MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON APRIL L 1996 DRAFT* noted that the area around the ravine was unusable. Flint suggested making the lendation of taking 8% of the land contingent on the bank property being obtained.ajiiMi The problem found with this option was the Council would be considering a recommendation for approval prior to the grant deadline. McMillan said she understood what Flint was saying but as a property owner, she did not like decisions made contingent on other events occurring. Use said she would consider the trail easement if the developer would not agree to internal trails; but if the money were obtained, Dse would like to see the money used to assist the Saga Hill group in obtaining the bank property. Flint said the money amount would probably only amount to about $5,000. McDermott thought it would be better to give the money than a small piece of land. Flint noted that it would be best for the developer for the easement to be taken and then never go in, but it would be the worst case scenario for the City. McDermott moved. White seconded, to amend the motion to take a 10' pedestrian easement and the remainder in cash from the cul-de-sac to Garden Lane across the drainage and utility easement. Vote: Ayes 3, McDermott, White, Flint; Nays 1, McMillan, Abstain 1, Use. Amendment to motion passed. Vote on main motion with amendment of 10’ pedestrian easement: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Johnson asked if the motion was tied to parking on Wildhurst. He was informed that it was not and should be discussed with the Council BONESTROO ASSOCIATES ® 6126361311 04/10/96 15:22 S:01/02 NO:755 Bonestroo Rosene Andeiiik & Assodates An**^!* .rfM/^at* OmHJttsjtuiy rtmi/fjoit Ollu C- d'Vrt*; irrv*<^ »*► • ic.ri*#'C. Ancl«»lfll Tl • M*rvm i. SnrvM.v • *»* ^ • TI>oiti4H Z Hoycx. • ifnnea G S(^ull1chL TC • ^««ry A A/HiffKMi • tccliir'i W Pi«kw*»« 'C ind !kuMin M in«*tin.f i*A.. Isti'ut /^iJOcOff ^rjor»p;»»c Hnw.i#fJ A ^unr«i«U. r*C • IC4}itrv A (>A«(iAn. PS.« 4oUirfl R. rftff«ile *?C- • l» <norn W i n%trr > i. • Pjwici C Hu\%mk. Al A • M*/k A N«A«Aa •**» • f f'C • *r<l K (S: iifftrrt Sf MM • KU-^»r^ M/i Engineers & Architects April 10.1996 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Forest Lake View File No. 139-2130 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the prcliminafy street, utility and grading plans prepared for l^rbcrt Johnson on the proposed Forest Lake View subdivision located west of WUdhurst Trail in the west half of Section 7. There are several inconsistencies shown on the three plan sheets and several issues that need to be addressed relative to engineering matters. 1. Utllltlas: Sanitary service to Lots 3 and 4 will be a problem based on the proposed bouse elevations. The invert of Manhole 4 should be four feet lower to adequately serve Lot 4 if the house will have a full basement, and Cleanout 4 should be one foot lower to serve Lot 3. The sanitary sewer should be installed at least 20 feet past the proposed curb line and possibly all the way to Garden Lane. The sewer service to Lot 3 should connect to Manhole 4 at a different location than the sewer extension or to the sewer line with a wyc. The plans should specify PVC pipe instead of VCP and VCT. The proposed sewer along Wildhurst Trail from Manhole 2 to Manhole 1 will be up to 16’ feet deep in places due to the steep slope. Shifting the alignment near the center of Wildhurst Trail would eliminate Manhole I ftmj allow the sewer to be more shallow. Installing the sewer in this location would require that Wildhurst Trail be reconstructed. 2. Sircatt The City and applicant should determine if this street will be public or private as different standards apply for each. The street grades appear adequate. The proposed street _section should be included in the final plan set. There is st^mc concern that there may be erosion in the ditches along the proposed street. It may be desirable to construct Wildhu«t Court to an urban section with curb. If done, the proposed catch basins and pipe should be moved east to the intersection of Wildhurst Trail. Drainage can then be directed to the proposed NURP pond and minimize flows out to Wildhurst Trail. 3, Gradings The grading plan and pond detail do not match. The pond will require up to a 20 foot excavation to construct In the wooded area. It may be easier to construct the pond closer to the existing culverts near Wildhurst Trail. This may require easements from the adjacent parcel. The grading plan should include the proposed ditch along Wildhurst Trail. Erosion control measures should be sht>wn on the plans. 4. Drainage: Drainage and ponding calculations should be provided. The outlet structure detail should include invert elevations for all pipes and show pond normal water and 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113*3898 • 612*636*4600 BONESTROO ASSOCIATES ©6126361311 04/10/96 15:22 0 :02/02 N0:755 4; Mm. J mtmt A. Mmhtuth City of Onmo Pott-2 ’ Afftt 10, iff# 4 100 year high water levels. 5. EaMBMBts: The utility easement should be 30 feet wide from the cul<dc>sac to Garden Lane. Drainage easements should be shown across the drBinogcwa]rs and ponding area. We would recommend that a 50 fool outlet be platted from the cul*de-sac to Garden Lane os a potential through street, as discussed in our 2/6/96 letter. Fiuncial GuarMicc: When the plans have been completed wc will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required, unless the plans will be prepared by the City. It is our opinion that the plans require significant changes and a meeting between the City and applicant may be needed to resolve all of the issues. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E i 1 4 4 » 1 11 I V : .,v.. I i. / i! oo d H PtAN • V OATI SUlVfVID ' NOTE BOOK No ________ KoniD AilONMIMI CMiCIfb II Of WAV CNiCKfn WtLDHURST TRAlj' tL c •< c c- i 11. M trJi v' PUN •Y OATt Aa t A n NOTCBOOK No._ .. FROFILE • V OATC UJtVI^IQ Pinttin NOTE BOOK No. ___ CtADE& CHiCKfQ ft It ■ NOTID * StftOCrUtI NOIATtONS tMftCKID r» tOUlPMEN* »uf<M •» 5»osn MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 20. 1996 (#7 - M2111 T.J. Bicker - Continued) Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2111 for the construction of a permanent 24' long dock as specified in the application. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. SKETCH PLAN REVIEWS (#S) #210S NORBERT JOHNSON. 1181 WILDHURST TRAIL - SUBDIVISION/SKETCH PLAN REVIEW This review is a sketch plan for a proposed 5-lot subdivision and is for input only. It was noted that no vote will be taken for any action at this time. Mr. Johnson, the applicant, was present. Mabusth reported that the proposed 5-lot subdivision is on 7 acres bounded by Wildhurst Trail and unimproved Garden Lane Mabusth reported on the history and background of titc area in which this property is located. The Saga Hill Preservation Society, of whom many were in attendance, were interested in gaining tax forfeit land for a park as well as land currently owned by the Midwest Bank. The Saga Hill Society group are working with the City and the Park Commission regarding this endeavor. The Society is interested in what happens on the property in question, currently owned by Arnold Soskin. who was said to not reside in the area. Mabusth noted that the property is within the MUSA with the nearest sewer located on Tonkaview and Wildhurst. The plan is to gain both access and sewer from Wildhurst. The proposal is for Lots 1-5 and with a platted road with a aildesac A 20’ easement corridor would provide access and sewer to Lot 3. The code requires a 30* outlot for back lots, which would run along the shared lot line between Lots 2 and 4. The Engineer's report gives various options for access and sewer in the Tonkaview plat. The Engineer has suggested vacating Garden Lane and bring access in another way with a major road to Wildhurst as well as sewer. A second option by the Engineer would be to constnict a private road with a future extension outlot connecting with Garden Lane, which would stay private. A 30’ outlot would also be required for back lot. Mabusth said there is adequate area for a back lot. The zoning only asks for 1 acre and the property has adequate area to meet the 150% area standard. All lots meet the code for area. Option 3 includes an outlot with an extension, but instead of creating a backlot. Lot 3 would be realigned so it does not go through the ravine area Driveway access would be proposed in unimproved Garden Lane.. i 1 j: MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 20, 19% (#8 - #2108 Norbert Johnson - Continued) Schroeder asked what was the purpose of Garden Lane. Mabusth said it was platted but currently serves no property. Mabusth said 4 undeveloped parcels within the surrounding Tonkavtew plat need access and sewer and noted the opportunity at this time to gain an easement for the sewer. Mabusth outlined the drainageway for the area. There is one major drainageway which drains to the northeast and one along the shared lot line at the south to Wildhurst. During the review of an earlier subdivision, Mabusth said the Engineer asked for a 50-75' wide drainage easement over the ravine. Schroeder asked if this would still result in a buildable lot. Mabusth said as long as there is at least 1/2 acre contiguous land in Lot 3, it is considered buildable. If a backlot is created, the access cannot cross the ravine area according to the flood plain ordinance Schroeder asked the applicant if he had anything to add. Johnson said his interest was strictly limited to the parcel under consideration only It is his plan to sel! the lots, build homes, and also live there. It was noted that he is not a professional developer. Mabusth brought attention to the bluff area noting the need for a surveyor to define the bluff area in the grading plan. Johnson said he understood the bluff issue During public comments. Gary Welsh. 1214 Wildhurst. inquired about the proposed access road off Wildhurst, which would be located close to his property, and questioned the straight uphill look of the road. Mabusth said Staff was out on site and found no problems with sight lines for curb cuts. Welsh asked if Staff has r*nK.ned to the applicant on the stormwater runoff problems. Mabusth said Exhibit F aodfrtsrd tiie stormwater issue, questioning whether the project would intensify the storage of runoff for the site or if an off-site improvement would be necessary Welsh asked if the developer received input from the Staff on the preliminary sketch. Mabusth reported that a stormwater retention area is needed for the project, and the developer is responsible for providing retention. She noted that the runoff cannot leave the site at a greater rate than at its undeveloped rate Welsh asked if Staff has studied the impact of the runoff since the application has been made. Mabusth said it has not yet been done for the sketch plan but will be as part of the formal application proces.s and noted awareness of the problems. Schroeder added that the property is steep and noted the need to understand the issue and consider the stormwater management. Sandy Rasmussen, Wildhurst Trail, asked if the proposed road was not wider than necessary at 66' with a 120' diameter culdesac. Mabusth said the code calls for a 50' wide road with a 100' diameter noting the plan would be amended. Rasmussen asked if it would be the intention to minimize the road size. Mabusth said the road size would be an issue for discussion as well as storm sewers for the road. \ r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 20, 1996 (#8 - #2108 Norbcrt Johnson - Continued) Norbert Johnson said it was his plan to have a curved road, not a straight forward road design He said he did not make note of the width but thought it would be designed at tlie minimum width. He said the tirst time that he became aware that the road was designed larger than necessary was when he spoke with a neighbor of the property, John Culliton. He said he is willing to look at a different configuration to aid in controlling the runoff. Mabusth said the topography of the land will be a limiting factor. Rasmussen reitereated the comment made by Welsh on the concern of runoff. She noted challenges with runoff and noted the need for a ma.\imum confidence that there be a zero variance in the incremental runoff from the project. Cindy Culliton, 1131 Wildhurst, noted the major concern expressed by the MCWD when they asked to add a 12’ golf green on their property, which borders the ravine. She questioned the effect of five houses, and asked when the MCWD would come in to evaluate the project. Schroeder and Mabusth informed her that the MCWD is also required to approve the project Culliton asked how much power was given to the MCWD? Mabusth noted conformance was required and both entities, the City and the MCWD, abide by the same guidelines. Jim Stephenson. West Branch Road, inquired about the Morgaard property to the north noting the same issues apply to that property. Mabusth said these properties were not included in the MUSA, and access to the property would be at Wildhurst. not Garden Lane. David Rahn, 1134 Wildhurst, questioned the comment about the best access being from Wildhurst, noting his disbelief that the Engineer would want a paved road going straight up hill with what he felt was probably a 120' elevation change of the road. Ryan saw the runoff washing straight across the road onto the property. He said this was the first proposal he has seen with access from Wildhurst instead of Garden l^ne. Mabusth responded that the earlier 7 lot proposal involved two lots achieving access to Wildhurst via a shared curb cut. Schroeder asked Rahn if he was in favor of access from Garden Lane. Rahn said he was not but neither was he in favor of the proposal as presented as far a.s the road was concerned. Rahn said he cannot imagine controlling the water that would run off the proposed road. All agreed on the steepness of the incline Lindquist said there were alot of questions to be answered concerning the road and would need input from the MCWD and the Engineer. Mabusth said the Engineer would address these issues with the filing of the preliminary plat. Lindquist also noted the bluff issue and the need for a lot line rearrangement. J MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 20. 1996 {its" #2108 Norbcrt Johnson - Continued) Rahn asked how the property was proposed to be divided in another recently application. Mabusth said the previous application was a preliminary review only and did not go beyond that. She said there were 7 lots, but that number was questionable. Rahn said he was not for the development and the access from Wildhurst. He saw the only benefit was with extending the sewer. He questioned the ability of a developer going from 7 to 4 lots, being able to build a road and gain access, and whether there was an ulterior motive. Johnson said he had no ulterior motive. Johnson said he would like to have the road reconfigured as he understood the design could be improved upon. He said he w?s not clear on all the concerns the Engineer would have. Brian Peterson, CoRd 19. noted the problem with water quality in Forest Lake, and asked if the project would need the approv al of the LMCD. Mabusth said the MCWD deals with the water quality, velocity, and quantity issues. Peterson noted the silt and by products that would go into the lake from the development Schroeder informed Peterson that there are City ordinances that protects the water quality He noted that existing problems in water quality are from existing development and the setbacks and ordinance requirements are there to protect the lakes. Peterson asked if the LMCD would be involved in the project. Mabusth said the LMCD does not deal with land use, only lake use, from the 929 4' elevation to the lake. Mabusth asked if his concern was not with the permanent structures but with the problems arising from construction. Mabusth said the plans have to show how these problems will be handled. She noted that the City is aware that the southeast area drains to a wetland on eastside of Wildhurst and eventually to the lake and needs to be controlled. Schroeder asked Patti Affeldt to tell what the Saga Hill Preservation Society is about. Affeldt said the group are neighbors who have banded together to preserve the area. She noted they would prefer to gain ownership of the Soskin property but are unable to due to manpower and financial limitations. Affeldt said their group is interested in keeping the area undevelooed. Lindquist asked Johnson if he has spoken with the Saga Hill group. Johnson said he offered to through John Culiiton but has not yet reviewed the development with them, noting no one has as of yet called him. Lindquist noted the many issues to consider with drainage, roads, the blulT, and the need to determine what is reasonable. He said it would be helpful for 'ohnson to meet with the Saga Hill group to gain their input before coming back before the Planning Commission. Lindquist noted the time tables for meeting agendas and the usefulness of informal meetings. N/CTNUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION meeting held on FEBRUARY 20. 1 996 (#8 - #2108 Norbcn Johnson - Continued) Sandy Rasmussen commented in general from a property ow.iier standpoint on the largeness of the development and the ninoff as major concerns. She noted the value of open space. Rasmussen said individual site development has been anticipated but the size of this development has come os a surprise. She secs the interest in residing in the area to preclude the larger development. Schroeder said any lots that are deemed buildabic can be sold and developed. He noted Johnson's willingness to consider the input of the neighbors. Schroeder noted the major concerns, such as drainage, and the difficulty with developing this particular property. He commented on the need for Johnson to work with Statt and the neighbors Johnson said he was willing to meet with the group and make improvements to liis plans adding that he had no grander plans than as presented Lindquist told him to get the plan together first and to meet with the Saga Hill group Schroeder thanked the neighbors for their input and for coming to the meeting. Smith suggested that those representing the constituent should introduce themselves to Johnson Mabusth a.sked the Saga Hill group to inform Johnson of whom to contact. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#9) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12, 1996 (ELIZABETH HAWN) There was no report at this time. (#10) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Mayor Callahan reminded the Commissioners of the new 60-day rule that went into effect on January I, 1996. relating to the time limit for action on applications. ADDITIONAL ITEMS (#11) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 16,1996 MEETING Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to approve the Minutes of the January 16, 1996 Meeting of the Planning Commission. Vote: Ayes 4. Nays 0. (#12) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND THE MARCH 11, 1996 MEE'HNG OF THE COUNCIL No representative was chosen to attend the above mentioned meeting. r w .j, • • «.Ta ;-i '1 ’“ *'W «.«• ^•.•, *t, ,-r •* »v •n^ ' > * ♦.-• 4 • ♦ '•> ^ ”x* ** r-/ ■••:MPiSMV b:5>L\:v ii^«> * .#.*■_ iV i«'» ■ • ■••»»-•■* ^ •■»■»«■■ -^«i. • '. •• “*V* - ' ' » V : f 4..V ' - w -fc. ^ .9. r' • • •• rr':* -f *»• ftr": ■ ♦' *»•V- I ; . *i V . t* •;■* •;• " •:.*• r ‘ . f •j.r^'^’ - • - •• > f ^ '• •*. '■ -■^. J »nV Jk "■’•■ ^ ^wWw. ^ (%/^d flid:MPc/y^r//s!^cor^■ - rgii^’^v:, .'V- ---------.—... . wm- ♦“I ■p Q^P£(yrA/u^ 2 ^oAO/i//srM' fiPPUtjfrT/6/</ TT T MUST Pfr (\t)r r?ia)/^ Z>c/t^'?"'^ ifhY-' w. * . • .V g ygyga. i:r jc.i Jiff^/fje/-9^1^ n^. rh Ke J>figcefr^-r AT ^a>v i:;* » » (IMOiAfC » Wi?r for^/ALE' t7^ ra — * * ■ ’/‘.w ■ •« ,.« »■: *' w«4». - - •■ * - • — Vi • fb^ TTV/^ yVdf^^/rC.. %- 9 * ... » ;. • ,-r. % ^ . .t . f . •• .V.v ' . ‘.N > •- ^ ^w r.•*.< %iv '. • V. •* ■ . ► ' • Jt J'> V . . -1 - * * -•* '•^ ~' i'' •'.■• ..v>- ■-'^.i;;-','^";-;:;#^:- • , • •■ < A *• -• . .- » - ;f* '• ^ M , V- .' •*. .*',- •# • -. . • *J 1 .• " ''. -• - .' v;k •• .•. - / * 4 * 9*T9 »-.;-V«■■:•'» ""•• »v^ ’• ~-- • • * - >- --•^v- -.* . • . , «» ■ ^ ’ -* - • - - Ti I 'r ■ <..■■■>! mi .■■■'»■■■■ I '-' i’Ji**-rr llWTF ■' '- ^ ■•.- ■ • \. •• - ■•:-------• j;^'- • \/Iv -:-V' . :. :, ■■: *:• ’*».-• f». ::li ■’■■.■ ■■ ■ M.-'- —i-------------- ‘ ~ ‘^"■'.■* ■ « . • :'T • ' • /•. ‘ • •’ “' " - .-. .-*.v*-“‘» • -I Tr «--if . * • -• »<*.**. V4-;^,,.- ■::’ WgN^-^- :A;r? ff ^ M ^ • y .r*.^ \ ,--. :»' ■• ' -__^*T-»t ■ "-t?*- */t.-r *'v. V, -:• - ■ *'^. • ••’ -* • ' / •'"•7 ik:* ■■:. -i ,.4 ... ti ' r ^ • . *V^ ;Jf^ **r.t ■'% V'. -• ■. . ' • ■ ■’ ^ .^•,^ ;: r. i". ;,v ' ::.*r * » ............. « ,4 - 4 '■* ■ »f -• 4V-, • ...^ ««►•^..^.»-4 • -.4W -'' 4 » » • i ‘•• ' •- . -'. ^k*T.', ‘ t irT'^«MC ' . * t i*i' ■' / — -• j . . .--. - 4»; - .- . -4...... - . ., ' r v.:c-V ’^ >;vr^c^J-4SSr itraw-sajs It • • •- j.: T—> .» , r' —- DNR METRO REGION TEL:612-772-7977 Apr 12.96 13:34 No.013 P.02 I ^HONENO. STATE OF 772-7910 FW.E NO, Ml Km) r . April 12.1996 Ms. JemiM M* bustli CityofOrooo P.O. Bok 66 CiyMsl Bay, MimiMoU 5S323 RE: LAND USE APPUCATIONS, CITY OP ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY Da^ Ma Mabuath: 1 have oofmnomsoD the fbUowing land use spplicatkns on the Planning Coflunisaion agenda for April IS, 1996. #2125. Rhfrawi P AT6Q Noftli Shore Drive Minnitonka - Jepninys Bav. 27»133»16) Orsdlng for a proposed residence would go 3 feet into the blufTimpea zone. It is my understaiKling that the ranoffftoai the site would actually be slowed down, and possil^ ponded on the site a bit, with the regradinf and that the doiriineittal impacts on the blulT would be reduced. Given the ciroumstances for the proposed grading, we do not otjeci to the city approving grading in the bluff impact zone. #2130. Noffaert Johnson. 1181 Wildhuts* Bpgtf fTpiyat Lake 27.139V The applic^ lequests approval of a 5«k>t residential aubdiviskm on undeveloped land. It is my understanding that no variances are required. I have no objectioa to the subdivision being approved, however, I do see some concerns with the stormwater management on the property and grading in the area of the existing ravine. 1.In the currently proposed grading plan, the stormwater would be directed to a **NURP*' pond in the smaller ravine on the south side of the propeity. We strongly encourage the city to work with the developer to (^alternatives for management of the runoff. Riuining the wetar to one of the steepest and moat erosive parts of the site is not a good idea. In addition, the proposed pood excavation would be in a location wdiere the necessary gi^ng would diaturb an area that already has steep slopes and is sensitive to disturbance. The feasibility of diverting the runoff to a ponding area in a flatter area (prefienbly not a heavily wooded area) should be seriously pursued, including the possibility of u coordinated effort with a neighboring property owner. 2.Based on review of the proposed grading plan, it appears that the grading for lot 3 may extend into the larger naitval ravine. The extent of the grading should be Held verifled. If the grading does extend into the ravine, the city should work with the applicant to avoid such disturbance, using retaining walls or steeper slopes, u appropriate. 3,Wo iBuksWid that an easement will be placed over the larger ravine (that tuns from the western to the northern portion of the property), although that did not appear on the copy of the jp-ading plan I reviewed. We strongly support placing a protective eaaement over this ravine, which is a si^iificont natural resource within the City of Orono and a great amenity to the properties within the proposed subdiviaion. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER >* • % « • •• • ••••.«• .*• 5 ... . ... > m- DNR METRO REGION TEL:612-772-7977 Apr 12.96 15:36 No.015 P.03 Apdll2.1996 For your ialbnintion, I diMUMod • couple Other poMiUe ttonawtler nuMtenNiit ledniq^ wKA at leeat raeideot of project tree. There eie tedmujiiee which mey not he feasihle for thi« iite» hul which the city iwty went to keep in mind for i\iture prtyecta. Wlwlvn^eerencw ’ the tope of hlufTr or ftcep rlopee, euch m ere often ceen eloog credsa or ravinee, nmofTfixim (uHert or fiom the sttuctuie ita^ can become concentrated and cause eroaionproUflnH. Hb^vever, in onkr to nuninuae these probkma, die gutters on the homes can bedirsetedtotbeflonisofthestiiiMifes (ie., away fkom the steep slopes) and nm over a vegetated area or thfou^ a longer, flatter area befbre entering die area with the steep slopes. With smaller rains, most of the water ibould have an opportunity to infiltrate before leacUitg ^ steeper, erosive areas. I know, Ibrexamplei that Riltyr-Purgatoiy-Blufr Creek Waterriied District has succestfliUy required this type of naiofr redirection for doveloprooots along stoqi creek valleys. b.Current development standards usually require ponding to detain the excess runoff produced with a devdoptnent (over pie'pngect conditions), with the intent to keep tho rate of runoff and the flooding elevations no hi^iw than before the devek^mont More recently, ponding for piapaaea of improving the water quality of the water that leaves die site has been a requirement While the impoitanoe of dm cunent design of ponds for water quality UPsatmeot a^ flooding oonbol should not be minimiaod, it diould be lecoghiaed that even if this ponding is ptovidod that the t^vc4umeofitaioffftqm the more impervious siteaii increased. Although the flows nuty not be increased for the peak flood periods, the base flows or more “normal’' flows are increased. This leads to changes in the character of atreamt or ravines, and can cause sorious eroiioti md aedimenlilion probloma as well as loss of vegdatioa and habitat for fish or wikllifit Therefbre, where it is ftatible, we would encourage ponding that is intended to hold dieexoess iunttfflD>8it6 and not overflow to existing flowage systems (except for in extreme events, sudh as the 100-year storm). PlesK contact me at 772-7910 (772-7914 direct/voice mail) should you hava any questions ragarding these comments. Sificarely, Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist c: • > « ■ 1 r' \• • • I L / TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Admimstrator DATE:April 11, 1996 SUBJECT: #2088 Winfield Stephens, 3770 Bayside Road - Variances Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA Lot area = 20,143.32 s.f. or .46 acres to the propettT«><i '»hether adjacent property owners would have any claim <o If right-of-i^y. The vacation portion of the application was once agam reviewed by the Pla^g Commission at their January 1996 meeting and was approved by the Coimcil. Applicant w« ^vised at the November meeting that the Planning Commission could nW make any dete^Uon on setbacks until it was known whether applicant would acquire die presents a revised constraction plan seeking hardcover and setback vanances. The folio gnow ordinsinccs arc pertinent for this review. 1.Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Review of structural coverage Total area = 20,143.32 s.f. Allowed = 3,021.5 s.f. or 15% Proposed =“ 2,891.1 s.f. or 14.3% No variance required. 2.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover A. 75-250' setback area = 15,237.82 s.f. Allowed = 3,809.5 s.f. or 25% Proposed = 934.29 s.f. or 6.1% B.250-500’ setback area = 4,905.5 s.f. Allowed = 1,471.7 s.f. or 30% Proposed — 2,367.33 s.f. or 48.2% Variance = 895..63 s.f. or 18.2% i II Zoning File #2088 April 11,1996 Page 2 C. Total area = 20,143.32 s.f. Total hardcover = 3,301.6 s.f. or 16.3% 3.Section 10.23, Subd. 6(B) - Setback variances A. Side street setback variance Required = 50’ Proposed = 15* Variance = 35’ or 70% B.Rear setback Required = 30’ Proposed residence = 3.5’* Proposed attached garage = 27' Variance = 26.5' or 88.3% * Applicant has been advised that a second story cannot be constructed over the foundation of the existing single story structure. Existing foundation shall be replaced requiring approval of the setback variance of 3.5’ for all new construction. C.Street setback Required = 50’ Residence ** 50' Covered deck = 45’ Variance = 5' List of Exhibits A - Planning Commission Minutes 11/20/95 B - Renotification, Certification and Notice Sent Out to Neighbors C - Plat Map D - Vacation Resolution - Approved by Council 2/12/96 E - Easement Driveway F - Agreement with Residents of Landmark Drive G - Floor Plans H - Footprint of Building I - Elevations J - Proposed Improvement Plan K - Revised Survey L - Staff Sketch of Setbacks M - Hennepin County Confirmation of Inclusion of Vacated Right-of-way with Property f j 1 Zoning File #2088 April 11,1996 Page 3 Review of Amended Proposal As recommended by Planning Commission during the November review (Exlubit A) the applicant has placed the addition to the south side of the existing residence so as lo minimize any visual impact upon the Wicklund residence to the immediate north. At the request of the Landmaric Drive neighbors. Exhibit F, the sitructure is now placed 15’ from the newly detoed west lot line. Residents of Landmark agreed to not pursue any claim to vacated alley if applicant agreed to meet the 15’ minimum setback. The structure measures approximately 71' in an east/west direction. And at the west side the structure averages 26' in depth and at the east 58' which includes a 21.8x8 covered deck at the southeast comer of residence. Applicant's surv'eyor. Exhibit K, has not located deck at southeast comer that will be 45' from County Road. As already noted above, the applicant has been advised that the existing foundation under the old stmcture cannot support the proposed second story. Applicant shall install an entirely new foundation. Applicant has applied for approval of the existing setback at the side/north lot line at 3.5'. Applicant has also placed garage addition at existing detached garage setback of 27' from the side north lot line. Hardcover in the 250-500’ setback area is excessive because setback area is limited. Total hardcovCT is maintained at 16.3%. The 75-250' setback area will contain only 6.1%. Major issue for this review is resolve of the intense setback variances sought by applicant. Hardships The hardships remain the same as in the earlier review. 1. 1 Triangular or unusual shape of property. Property is surrounded by either roadways or driveways on all sides, 3. Property has been assessed and is served by sewer. 4.Desire of applicant to balance visual needs of property owner to the north and preserve lake views where applicant has no legal claim as property is not a lakeshore lot. 5. Agreement to maintain 15' setback from west lot line. Zoning File #2088 April 11,1996 Page 4 Issues for Consideration 1.As we are dealing with a new foundation unu>.. the structure, how can proposed substandard setbacks be improved? Will you approve a more intense setback to the County Road right- of-way? Should structure meet the minimum 10' setback from side north lot line? 2.Is the 15' setback acceptable from west lot line. Neighbors have approved the 15' setback. Staff has faxed a copy of the improvement plan to the chairman of the homeowners' association and he has approved the plan as long as the 15' setback is met. Orono code requires a 50' setback. Note the structure will be expanded 6' along the east lot line beyond the existing residence. Will the 6' expansion result in the loss of the maple trees? 3. 4. Could the footprint be reduced in size? Will an excess of hardcover in the 250-500' setback area be of concern? 5. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Options of Action To deny, approve as proposed or as amended. If the improvement plan is to be amended, applicant must provide a revised survey and updated hardcover inventory before the application can be scheduled before the Council. I ■M m L_: MTNTiTES OF THE O^^ONO PLAl^TsIN'G COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOV*EMBER 20. 1995 (m - #2085 Depannieai ofKaiurai Resources - Coniinued) Ga»on inquiitd about the consouction schedule. LumeU said it w^d next gi^to the Council inDecember. If no maior channes were necessary, the final ola« »<>“><» ^ ^ed in Januaiy and Febniary with bidding for early spnng. Constnicnon would begin in Mav and comolcted durina the summer. No formal actiou was required at this meeting. Wigen asked if a motion could be made on signage regarding trespassing. He was told these concerns would be addressed by Staflf. Lindquist asked that the comments be passed on to the CounciL Peterson closed the public information meeting. (#5) #2088 WINFIELD STEPHENS, 3770 BAYSIDE ROAD - VARIANCESA^ACATION OF PL^LIC ROAD - 9:06-9:35 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and AfiBdavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth reported that the application was for the vacation of a 30' alley and »«back variances for maior additions to existing reside.ice. The prooeity is made uo of 4 seo^ate parcels and involves an improvement plan. Existing on the property is a 1-1/2 O'Y with a garage that is located totally within the 3ff aUey. The improvOTent consists of wo options! option #1 involves an addition to the south side and option #2 an addition to the eL The Staff memo was said to discuss the setbacks and hardcover for the prooertv. Peterson said there would appear to be no major concern as tong as the applicant was able to acquire the alley. Mabusth advised from caUs she received, it appeared that the adjacent owners may make claim to the alley. Mabusth said she had spoken vvith Dennis HiU at the County who said the entire alley would probably be granted to the applicant as owner of lots 2 and 3. Mabusth said she had spoken with HiU again after calls had been receiv^ from the neighbors, and he advised that the matter may have to be funher smdied. ftll Mabusth if the neighbors pressed for a piece of the alley, these claims may be raised durm. a required legal proceeding. Peterson asked if the appUcation was not one step ahead of itself He asked it Staff was awaiting information on utilities. The City Engineer reported there were no sewer Imes encroaching the alley, and there are no power poles. 4 .1^ i ■ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#5 - #2088 Winfield Stephens - Continued) Both the current owner, Steve Gardiner, and the new owner, Winfield St^hens, were present Stephens said the vacation was suggested to minimize impact of vanances with the proposed improvements. The vacation had also been recommended by Staff. He^d the area where the alley is located seems to be part of the lawn, and the entire detached garage is located within the alley. Peterson asked if the issue of the vacation was frivolous on the part of the neighbors or not. Mabusth said she had just been made aware of their interests. Peterson asked the applicant if he was aware that he would need to combine lots 1-4. Stephens said that was not an issue. Lindquist asked the applicant if he did not gain the vacation of the alley, if he stiU wished to proceed, and Stephens advised he did wish to proceed regardless of the outcome of the alley. Peterson said the applicant could not proceed without the 30' alley as both development plans show garage remaining in aUey. Option #2, Mabusth said entailed an issue of impact to the neighbor if the addition was to the east. The Wicklands report an impact on their views. There is no legal claim to the view but option #2 also involves new construction at 3.5' from north side lot line. Setbacks and hardcover variance are less intense with the inclusion of the additional area from the vacated alley. Peterson asked the applicant what he would prefer. Stephens said he preferred option #2 in order to save 2 big oak trees in front yard. Option #1 does require the removal of 2 large mapl<- The old owner said the oak trees were beautiful. He noted that one of the tree.s was 7 ’ in circumference and would be a shame to lose it. Hawn asked if the addition couldn't be altered and sit where the diseased maple is located but skirt the oak and save the other maple. Stephens said it could but would be within the 50' street setback from County Road, which he thought was more critical. Mabusth said it would be difficult to approve an encroached of the 50' setback. She noted that we are dealing with limited building envelope. Lindquist said he had a problem with 3-1/2* on the north lot line and then doubling the amount. The old owner, Steve Gardiner, remarked that this was the way it had always been. Lindquist said although this was true, he could not ima^e doubling the area. The applicant and owner said they had a notarized copy of the easement that provided access along the north lot line. NflNUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#5 - #2088 Winfield Stephens - Continued) Christine Vakrius reported that she owns the property they were ref^ to noted that the Wicklands use the driveway but that there was no easement m&vor of ths property She said she looked when she purchased the prop^ Md found no ea^ent Ste^ reported on the attorneys who had searched the nUe and showed Valerius a copy of the easement. Peterson said there were other concerns with the garage encroachmrat and cl^ up of area to the west. Gardiner said a boat had been there and rubbish left by previous owner of Landmark property. Undquist asked if anv improvements involved the tearing down of the garage located on the ^eywav. Stephens said he had no plans to do so. Lindquist said he could no approve any improvements with the garage in that locaoon if the vacation was not approved. Berg said it was imponant to make sure the easement exists. She added that she did not feel the Commission could proceed to approve any improvement without the aUey vacation. Peterson agreed that this would be an integral part of the application. Peterson said he favored option #1 and the vacation and asked if the survey (1988) on the alley. .Mabasth said there has been no new construction to require a new survey. Lindquist said the variance should be based on whether or not the vacation is granted. He was not in favor of any further encroachment of the west side yard. Smith commented that the addition was very aggressive and could not take a position without a decision on the alleyway. There were no public comments. Gardiner remarked that the connection charge to City sewer was $1.5,000 and would be a verv ’ expensive sewer for a 1 bedroom house. Gardiner said that is why it should be expanded and noted that the neighbors had expanded. The Wickslands commented that their lot was 1-1/2 acres, and they had to sacrifice a large tree in order to meet building setbacks. Stephens was asked if he planned on living in the house and was told he did. 1 minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#5 - #2088 Winfidd Stephens - Continued) Mabusth asked for Plannmg Commission's view if the vacation was not part of the appUcation. Lindquist said he was of the position that the ^e shodd come down if it is not located in the legal building envelope. He noted that it was to the benefit of the applicant to proceed with the vacation of the alley. Gardiner said he had offered a neighbor $2,000 to consider the vacation but had received no reply. Gardiner asked if the Commission would consider option #1. Berg asked where the garage would go. Stephens asked if the vacation of the alley could not be done, if the process could proceed, Peterson said the garage would still need to be addressed. Gardiner remarked that he had purchased the property in 1982, and the garage was built before that time. Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to table Application #2088. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Peterson suggested the applicants put the burden on the neighbor to determine the driveway easement. (#6) #1958 LOUIS OBERHAUSER, 2405 DUNWOODY AVENUE, 3865 AND 3877 SHORELINE DRI\T - PRELIMINARY SL^DIMSION - 9:35-10:02 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Aflfidavit of Publication were noted. 0 The applicant was represented by Jack Neveaux. Mabusth said the application was for a lot line rearrangement and replat of two lots. The original subdivision appUcation was filed in 1994 had also included appUcant’s homestead parcel. The current appUcation includes 3 substandard lots. The property is in the 1/2 acre zoning district. Lot 1 to the west contains 16,500 s.f., and Lot 2 to the east contains 20,000 s.f. E.xisting now, according to Mabusth are two boarded up structures, one structure had been removed, and one rental unit structure. Mabusth reported that the appUcant seeks approval of lakeshore setback variances for lot 1 involving a 6' encroachment of lakeshore setback line. The structure wUl be located 10’ fi-om street lot line and existing detached garage is 6' into the right-of-way. Both struemres would meet the 10' side setback. A timber retaining waU is located in lot 2, and the appUcant is wilUng to remove the waU if able to gain the variances for lot 1. There are no lakeshore decks proposed with new construction plans. •14 « . #. 'I ■'■1 i ---. P‘" ' k CERTIFICATE OF MAILING f . O STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )> ■* COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. ) CITY OF ORONO ) j a'* I Jamie Bosma, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Re-Notification of a PubUc Hearing concerning the matter of #2088, was mail^ to the attached list. In Witness Whereof. I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 27th day of March, 1996 Jamie Bosnia A* \ r GITYor ORONO MankiiMl Offic StTNt AMrass: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 MaMii Mims: P.O. Bn 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 To All Property Owners Originally Notified of Application #2088 for Winfield Stephens Involving the Property Located at 3770 Bayside Road: The Public Hearing will be continued at the April 15, 1996 meeting of the Planning Commission at which time the Planning Commission will consider the variance portion of the application. Variances involve setback and hardcover variances for new residential construction. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this meeting. Written comments are requested if property owners have any concerns. Your written comments should be submitted no later than Monday, April 8, 1996. Plans are available in the City offices for review by appointment. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator JAM/lsv Tdcphooe «U) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 V i \ * t' taxrayIr . NAHi/AOM ,i * ■■; *» 1 _• • '■I QH'/ MOR AObll TAMPAYIR .; ! NAIC/A PERKINS 1 = • i' » ‘I ' i\ '■ 0I-U7-ES tl 0005 0S780 BAYSIOE RO C L' I R J HICKLUND eRAtO L I RENEE J HICKLUND vl S7M RAYSXOE RO . i'rUMR.UKC Ml S5S5A ^ ‘ ^>;M r^0f-117-ES E2 0010 '■' •.OORkI/ '. LANOHiUlk OR OMCR NAHi;i\0 rKRKXNS A.R N PERKINS i DANilL S A PATRICE H U LANOHAHK DR .: ORONO Ml 55S54 tt OOiK CRoiti lanohark d R.. R E I K A KYLE RXCHARO P A KATHLEEN A KYLE UAOjTQMUMA RO LONO, UKE HN BSSSA *• t’i. HENNEPIN CtxAlTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OMCRS LIST58 05-117-25 21 OOIA 05700 BAYSIOE RO j B naus a J E MAUS JAMES B A JOAN E MAUS 5700 BAYSIOE RD LONO LAKE Ml 55554 ' "X ' MiOR AOOR'.' *;o»MER NAHI . ■ ; TAXPAYER . NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER 5B .05-117-25 25 0057 002U: landmark OR HARR L A KARENA S CASEY HARR t A KARENA S CASEY NAME/AOOR ^ .OAtO. ENCNANTEO OR ' HOUNB m 65544 li- “* : •i.' *ji< •'' V SO ’ Of-117-25 24 0070 PROP AOOR „ 'OOOM\ ADDRESS UNABSXGNEO OMCR NAME J » NAUR A J E NauS TAXPAYER . JAMES BOv^ E MAUS _ / V ' NAME/AOOR > 5700 OAYSriE RO <J : -' . • • UMO UKE Mk 55554 V's v*!; • • t* • \. ,1 r'r ■ r { PROP AOOR >.* OMNER NAME j TAXPAYER NAME/AOORu:. ;r ' < ‘ sa : 05-U7-2S 0101 0S770 BAYSIOE RD 8 A C QAROXKER O STEVE GARDINER ESS 6AHE FARM RD N 55S59... HAPLB PUIN m ‘ -, x r 1 .4 5ir , i - I- >. *,»« V J* U.-*. 1*^ j\ •• > •i • V • rj.» t . ' * f •*. A ■ ' I• • • V in • r / 50 05-117->25 22 0011 00175 landmark Drt L £ harreN.a j H HARREN LEE C A JULIE N HARREN 175 landmark DR LONO LAKE HN 55554 58 06-117-25 25 0055 0005B ADDRESS UNASSXGNEO DIANE EVANS ET AL MARK A CARENa CASEY 255 lanohark DR ORONO MN 65554 5B 05-117-25 25 0050 05B50 BAYSIOE RD p M madsoN a K F MADSON PAUL N A Karen f madson 520 GEbROlA AVE N GOLDEN VALUY mi 55427 50 05-117-25 24 0002 00050 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED DANIEL P CAHILL HRS DANIEL CAHILL 224 N 5TH ST DELAVAN NX 55115 50 05-117-25 24 0102 00058 AOtiRESS UNASSXGNEDSAC gardXner ^ STEVE OARbXNER 255 GAME FAI MAPLE PLAIN REPORT NO. Pi45640l PAGE ASB 05-117-25 21 OO2O 05750 \BAYSI0E RO JOHN A.KRRY JANE BURGER »Q CHRXSTINeNA GARY VALERIUS ^ 5750 BAYSIOE RD LONG LAKE MN^> 65554 50 05-117-25 22 OOlS 0005B \A00RESS UNASSIGNED 0 S PERiOIM a P H PEtOCXNS DANIEL S^PAT 55 lanOhariNor ORONO Ml sra PATRICE H PERKiHS 154 . . •-A■ . .-V'^vMf.. i V-,; -' ^ .1* * 4 . ■ n ”IvK •. . '• :.S' ■.■4*.-., V ML ■ Mit-y '. -A'-t- • V- / 'vij Vi_ SO 05-117-25 25 0050 00050 address unassxoned LANDMARK DR HoHEOMCRS ASSOC LANDMARK OR HOMEOMCRS ASSOC C/O LEE C HARREN 175 landmark or LONG LAKE »«l 55554 50 05-117-25 24 0044 00050 ^DRESS UNASSXGNED J B MAUS 5 MAUS JAHES B a JOAN E MAUS • V • • Mo'.::'';-'®- 5700 BAySIDE LONG lake mi fv- i-.' V,..'. 50 05-117-25 24 0100 00050\ ADDRESS UNASSXGNED SAC GARDINER ^ STEVE OARBXNER , V 255 GAME FAm RO N HAPLE plain m 56559 * 4 •» t • » . p • . : •*; .* •• • *. •« ♦' •• : ^ J .>.v". .”! I ' X if 50 05-117-25 24 0105 00050 ADDRESS UlASSXONEd SIC GAINER ^ STEVE GAR oXNER V.- 255 GAME F'ARH RO N MAPLE PLAIN 55559 ♦ • l’ • ^• • . ;V ’ < • /»• i‘! -••V •* . 1*1 ; •Vi .41; •!U' ;v.; • / "4V V*"4v V-. ; * .* ■ .• V. 'i';. • •• ' V-'V>>.igV ' \ * 'f. -I Ec •' • V*. I f ' \r-,! k-' -rr■iiH[si :l i-'ti' iS'iu?V; •. 'IV *^’h' *'• 4 ■ ’| *MOr AOOH. OM«l HMI' TMVAVEII ^ f*ll7-tS t4 OIOSSoosi.v Aoontss unassigned FORFEXilO LAND O’i'' .■ j ■ •■• • ERVATXON ED omsAi pis&tiisiis -'•i:{^«ftA»AY ' oi-ur-ts M oiii AOORESS.UNASSkSNEb LJV.‘:!:-:.. - 'V -Uy •. r .i,»^tTA»AYli 'i^fenY’OKpMNO ■ i NAHE/AOOt^^COlMVf^v .'>.?■ 1- ■,;•■.•• .<:. t/M/t ^NttlO i m * ^ FORFIXTED LAND r»uiia V . • . i v,,: .i. ; » . % • •■!•■• . "i ■' vi^‘ ' •''* '■ - Li- ; v<v\* ••• i’’ ; •.• /#V-^ i »: * • u.^-.-r ,■ > .• * . SI f.^ » ■.. *j* -'■-L V,;--/': .. Vt'.,'ll.-. »^ ’^V '* ’; 'Z' .■ • 'f ^ '* V t ■■ ■■)] Pir*. y i:.A • % ’ • - M . :».» f • .. • • • ‘*1 *> ft . V t ..<> yH» • I I s. *♦' ' • ** * •' C ' ' i ^ •»; * f :* : ‘ ’ fP, il' ■ • V • * J:- ■ •.*Uv • /*• V • A AAiAri A.'I >■..■••••■ t* i. AdLahiW HE»MEPXN COUNTY PROPEAtV XNFORHAYXON 8YSTEH FKOPSRTY dHNERS UST ,r. ...• '*JJ* ^: *tU.IfC u * >■ • M OS-117-XS EA oin 0S775 SAY810E RO b A A CE iiQNLETTE OERALO L AoNlETTE . S775 OAYSibb RO LqHB lake m S5S5A .■' " 'I'i’l ^iO OS*117-ES EA OUS '. ‘ •, ‘ ,* !■•' tsp-.’^sbv AOORESS UNASSXOMEb •"M ■ NtNNE^ FORFEXTEO land • ill f OOOSbv AOORESS UNASSX6MED I FORFI CXTY OF'DRONO PARK \ A/IS/74 ET ^ID 18A78S • ’ • • /»v •* ■ •■ ■ r’h^.^yAJ. V.' ?■•• 'V-‘- y- ' • ;•:*' •i' " ‘..^i 11 *•■• „ * vj./jSi SO 0S-117-ES EA 0117 OOOSO ADDRESS PENDXNO JOHN A HART JANE BURGER CHRXSnNl A CARY VALERIUS S7B0 BAYSXDE RO Long lake im bbs5« •J • 1 ’ • . • *•< TOTAL BATCN L i A BOA oobli N i;t ’ '5k{ t I « ■ *% ,y. A >•». ;; » V t CERTIFY THAT THE ^ACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTAttON OF INFORHATION AS XT ApPEARA THXS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HE»ACPXN COUNtY DEPARTHENT OF FROPERTY TAXATION* TO TiA REST OF HY KNOM.EDOE ANO BELxEF. • r.'- • • •« •*.•>.•. t . , . ;|»\ DATE rARTnENT Of PluIPCRTT TJOCATluNf TO THE REST ; * . •ja-', ’ lolanlim* 1^ Hif,' A.' • • •» * - ■/ • V ''- A • • • • •., .* •.•F ,. .V.■ *.• » l|!. U ■ ■■.. .•?’■• '<.• »V ' : •. wV' I;i.; • •,i « J y-, • A'A. A (10) 0=3 •U7. I (19) # 176.76 I6’W 14Q.C5 % ✓ ! PT Of LOT 53 (14)i (Lnj 0=0 m f * .\C9*35'4i*» 67 .16 .^05 7I5.65 Ka9*44';6*l 1 4a. 6 *,« —• / / * *^} .T*^ isTm NM*40** S- / slioz 2: -T'% w. OUTLCT a! S? ^(lll) (105) ?20.3fl 303.4? N67*V ^ OiiTLCT a . s (119) 2 •e 3->J $r3*<&>. . 62 (116) ^ 17 i^tv >3 U6 03 13 >.•(115) 1 14 /•\ 3 •3.*' « \ 3 1 /'^ iO«\j \ It.• V‘‘ # •• 10 9 6 7 •% 4• 6\5 • \M 13\ T7 %..*• /4 / (116)^ IV •*.:•wem 7 6 >c.d ; , crr.ci : Z' IS7.2 \ •* • S- 193 >S)533. 22 ! ^I 5 167 *v<A' ^n? / ' *a 3c / yi_^ 3 ,y . V / ^ IIW5 J69) S.' 86 / ,'J? 87 j (14) 7 U *14. 17 1 «: M 1 (.5) 3 810.49 - / •S 79 / (16) 9 K6.7 /a* 60 / ( 17) '9 489 1 "■■J 11» - *.-/ 1/ ^--.^•3! * J4'# PAiii cf (in; (\96^ 1' ^Vftrl D/)/T\Ai^p,^'f ^ntaantu 4) A RESOLUTION VACATING AN UNIMPROVED ALLEY WITHIN THE PLAT OF OTTOVILLE ON LAKE MINNETONKA IN THE CITY OF ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA FILE NO. 2088 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State wf Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on October 31, 1995, Steven A. Gardiner (hereinafter the "£^)plicant") filed a petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of an unimproved public right-of-way adjacent to his property originally dedicated in the plat of Ottoville on Lake Miruietonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota in 1887 and legally described as follows. that part of alley adjacent to Lots 2 and 3 dedicated in the plat of Ottovihe on Lake Mirmetonka lying southerly of the westerly extension of north line of said Lot 2 and northerly of the northwesterly right-of- way line of County Road 84 (AKA Bayside Road) according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Mirmesota; and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, public hearings were held before the City's Planning Commission on November 20, 1995 and January 16, 1996 regarding said vacation and all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Plaiming Commission recommended unanimous approval of the proposed vacation; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation as t-roposed is in keeping with the public interest and in consideration of the following findings: 1.The right-of-way as it exists today will not serve for public road use based on tho pattern of residential development and access to adjacent properties. 2. The unimproved right-of-way contains no municipal sewer nor other utilities. Page 1 of 2 I 3. The dedicated road right-of-way as it exists today serves no other public purpose. NOW» THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of Steven A. Gardiner is hereby granted by the Council of the City of Orono and that the unimproved alley legally described above is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subject to the following conditions: 1.Applicant shall apply for the legal combination of the vacated alley with Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Ottoville on Lake Minnetonka. V 2.Applicant is hereby advised that the City will not consider an improvement plan for this property until Hennepin County has completed the vacation and resolved the final dispersal of the vacated alley. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on February 12, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward . Callahan, Jr., Mayor Page 2 of 2 a Jnbenture, .PebruAry. ‘i/oiaoo ^igi<^S8 Mods amd erUtred inio this.----------------TlC-------—day of __, 19.&1., by and baitattn__ ™ «M*...S.tes«a...Ax„aftr.diner.Juidl------------- ...—J».^Gardi.ner» husband and. -3o-ifi>t--tenants---------f^wUoo^, T)uU whtreoM Maid grcLfUar U tho aumar of tract....of land in the County of --------------------------- Stato of Minnoaotoy vis,: .. ''I Lot 1, Block 1, Burger's Bayside and .laid granite it the owner of th At... traet ... of land in tlte County o/..HENNEBXK..--~~~.~."........-...... •btcitc of Lftticsotaf tns.« .......... .............................. .............................................................................. ' Lots 2, 3, and 4, Ottoville on Lake Minnetonka which adjoins said land of said grantor^ . on tho. .?.9.}^^Z^.^.?..%^; and said granto^.... and grantoo S,. have agreed upon the easement hereinafter desorihed: ^OtD, iEf)trt(Ort» The said graj^r^. , in oonsideraHon of^--------------------------------------—.... ....................................................................................................... I y i|p.»................. ttf ___________in hone paid b^foid grantee?-, reeeipt of which it htrelnj acknowledged, and other good and valuable consideration,. Ttireby grant — to said grantee .......—------------heirs and assignsf tHo easeynent of n xn^jr&^^^...aTid««-e^jresa»*»*«»»»««»«»‘»......—........................................................... —> (P—cnbe Emmrmm) QSI *• t- in, over, and upon, that part of said land of said ^roniorfiL. described as follows:dka**oao ew •«<I4 • •••«#« •*• a 16 1/2 foot easement over that part of Lot 51, Auditor's Subdivision No. 203, Hennep-n County, Minnesota, lying South of Lot 52 in said Auditor's Subdivision No- 203, and the South line of said Lot 52 extended easterly to the westerly line of County Road 84; TO HAVE AHD TO HOLD SAID EASEMEHT unto said grantees.theix-.heirs and assigns forever • eA* ••*•«••••*•• eee •• • •«# •• »■•*••••>• • »•«« ♦>••»•••♦»« OS a>p Arte/*ant to ...• ♦•4 •«44»«*4#4«e4M4«««4« *• •«♦•••••.said lands Jll VBS^tXtxAy Said grantofi^.... hoif9..... hereunto set___.tixeix. the day a.^i year first above written. .Aojw& KZ DUl A^a/u^ • • • X y • • ; . V* Deed of Appurtenant Easement .. ««vo< •«««» Offtcc nl Ciiunly Rcci>rHi.'r ikialc o( ifUniicsota ICounty of...... t hereby certify that tfi^ irUhin DeefI tvn» filed in thin ojficr fur record on the j .......... . day of .......... • i ....., at oVforA- .U., ; onH MU* duly recorded in Hook' of DeedM, page................. or . . ‘ Q £2 Microfilmed . and wan duty recorded o» instrument *•* ei\ 0$....... ) By • »•«••••••♦»•••• 40«»**««**«* County lieeorder. ................ Deputy. Xo DtUnqutui Taxer and Transfer entered thie..........—day of . !9 ................. «•«»•••« •»««««• County Juditor. ................... Depu ty. Tax etatementi for the real property deacribed in this instrument should be aent to: oaaai Xame .lddrcs% orrcE Of COUNTY Kicoi?:f a uLm. pw couN IV. h:w soTA cctSii’iiunrsANoos; ••t cr^DtOnN I983IIAR30 PNI2:37 tsi-ocuwNi 4781988 ^ coyccoMia puf r No deftnquent turn and trana^ sntorod DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION HENNEPIN COUNTY MINN MAR 30 1983 by --------- laaB a rtta:: a FPUTV • •*.» air .turi »ioi rciatt to UaoA ta» iNi kuMt^N ^ _ a'^'* >**a* ,v'iiat •►a tw uani , ffiCbJ * Ql^rcil^sr V.l^i^Vd'k ^iiAf 5 r Yct X H* 3 3n> rt O 3 X M vj <7\ O S H« O ? (* < s •4. ^ s L/l L/1 d n O i n AgaggMHMT Thio Agreement is made this day of vJa*U4 , i I _, 19 9 6 between Landmark Drive Homeowner's Association, 5 Minnesota non profit corporation ("Landmark"), and Steven A. Gardiner and Carmen B. Gardiner ("Gardiners") . RECITALS 1. Landmark is the owner of Outlot D, Bayside Landing, Hennepin County, Minnesota. This property was a part of the original plat of Ottoville on Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 2. Gardiners are the owners of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Ottoville on Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lots lie Easterly of said Outlot D, Bayside Landing. 3. The plat of Ottoville on Lake Minnetonka includes an alley located immediately Westerly of said Lots 2 and 3, Ottoville, and located immediately Easterly of said Outlot D, Bayside Landing as now platted, and separating said Outlot D from said Lots 2 and 3, Ottoville. Gardiners' garage is located near the Northerly end of said alley and encroaches slightly onto said Outlot D. The alley has not been used as an alley and appears as an extension of the Gardiners' yard. 4. Gardiners have requested the City of Orono to vacate the alley. The matter is scheduled to be heard by the Planning Commission on January 16, 1996 and by the City Council on January 22, 1996. 5. The parties desire to make certain agreements with regard to the property as stated below. AORBEMEMT In consideration of the promises and covenants made herein, the parties agree as follows; 1. Both parties will support the vacation of the alley by the City of Orono. 2. Gardiners, for themselves and for their successors in title, agree that the garage now existing on the alley and encroaching '.1 o said Outlet D, shall be removed or remodelled not later them /•u If 19^ 7 so that it does not encroach onto said Outlet D and wiSLl be at least fifteen feet Easterly of the Easterly 013^0 9^L-Il boundary of said Outlet D 3. The entire interest and ownership in the vacated alley shall be in Gardiners or their successors in title. Landmark will execute and deliver a Quit Claim Deed conveying its entire interest in said alley to Gardiners. Such Deed shall be prepared by Gardiners, at their expense, when the exact legal description used by the City in its vacation of the alley is known. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The parties have executed this Agreement on the date set forth above. Landmark Drive Homeowner's Association Steven A. Gardiner 01Qe96/ORS/ORS2/C:^V^^V1N6O^OATA\RE^GAROINERORSVAGREEMEN 23 ’ 20 ’ 4' 7* T Scale 1 /8” : 1 * Second Floor Plan r\- Hardcover Actual House 2717.77Sidewalk 111.19 Deck 173.33 Total 3002.29 Hardcover Allowable 15Hx 20937-3140.55 Scale 1/8" ^1* 3 *7 1 o • 111.19ft 2717.77 ft 173.33 ft ‘1 4 Certificate of Survey /AREA: (Computed By AutoCAD) Tolol Lot Area = 20143.32 S.F.* House Area * 865.12 S.F. Garoge Area = 846.43 S.F. Drivewoy Area « 1233.76 S.F, Deck Area *=» 244.54 S.F. Wood Step Area = 49.6 S.F. Retaining Well Areo = 17.50 S.F. Fotol Hordcover Area = 3256.95 S.F. Existing Hardcover Percenloge = 16.17% To R/W line, not Including land between R/W line and Highway pavement. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF RECORD: Lots 1, 2, 3. and 4, OTTOVILLE ON LAKE MINNETONKA. Minnesoto, according to the record plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesoto, AND, thot port of the olley adjacent to Lots 2 and 3 dedicated in the plot of OTTOVILLE ON LAKE MINNETONKA lying Southerly of the Westerly extension of the North line of sold Lot 2 and Northerly of the Northwesterly right-of-way line of County Rood 84 (AKA Bayside Road) according to the record plot thereof, Hennepin County. Minnesoto. I hereby certify thot this survey, plan, or report wos prepored by me or under my direct supervision ond thot I am 0 duly Registered Lond Surveyor under the lows of the Stote of Minnesoto. . I .» Lond Surveyor Reg. No. 14343 • denotes iron monument found O denotes iron pipe set and marked R.LS. No. 14343 9 denotes soil boring Q denotes percutotion test hole Requested By: W.R. Stevens,III Date:Drawn By:Scale:Checked By: 0 West Diviilon Buffiio Wf. usia Ph: m-iW pRx: U2 3822 Revised: Job No.sm • • » -------------------------Gyav5rarwew5yTEa55K^ WestU 4 Scale : 11 ^77n Ravside Road «;>thack2one ZofwArg^Bldg. Hartteurface Area 0 to 75 0 75 to 250 15237.82 p«;n tn son 4905.5 ■ Totals 20143.32 7 £4-6 ^ dv.^ujo.'/ r-»o' 2761.62 LSCAL DISCRIPTIOM IKPORMATION mouiiur CODE 103 property id 05 117 23 SLSS.’JLS5^ ^ *"• TAXPAX M/A 8TBVB CAROIWBR 23S GAKl PARK RD M MAPLS PLAIM MM S5359 PAGE 1 NEXT - 24 0102 PSC C MOMZC 38 PLAT 42880 PARCEL 1200 DIV STATUS iilUi situ. WBU IXUilL CONDHM * dot 003 OXiOCX PKSVIOUS OWMER > A0M OTTOVUjLD OM LAHD MlllMDTOlTOA APPROX PARCEL SIZE S 130X135X95X45 TRAN dates 03/12/96 10/20/94 12/14/92 ADDM date filed 02/05/1887 A KETES / BOOHOS DESCRIPTION XNCL ADJ VAC ALLEY legal DESCRIPTION INPORHATION ZtlQUrSY OODB 103 rROrnilTJf id OD 117 23 sea DST 278 WTRSHD 3 SWR DST IPPROJ P earliest DKLIMQ YR ACREAGE .00 qHMSR S 6 C GARDINER PROP ADDR 3770 BAYSIDB RD TAXPAY M/A 3TDVO OARDtMBR 235 GAME FARM RD N MAPLE PLAIN MN SS3S9 PAGE 1 NEXT ■ 24 0101 POC C MUNIC 38 PLAT 42860 PARCEL 0800 DIV STATUS last stat cho CONDMN # I-OT 002 BLOCK PREV10U3 oimnR 1 APPROX PARCEL SIZE 5° * J ,0/14/03 TRAN OATES 03/12/96 10/20/94 12/14/92 ADN OTTOVILLE on LAKE MINNETONKA ADDN DATE FILED 02/05/1887 A METES / BOUNDS DESCRIPTION INCL ADJ VAC ALLEY -^10/10 *d 9T<L68F£xyi Aiasdoad cd nneh 96dT“2T “dbW if-—w TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members FROM:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:April 9, 1996 SUBJECT: #2098 Eva Theobald, 4101 Highwood Road - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 acre, Application: Revised request for lot area, lot width, 75-250' hardcover, front (street) and side setback variances to replace existing residence with a new home. Note: Applicants, Kari and Paul Romportl, are no longer involved with this application. The owner of the property, Eva Theobald, is continuing the application in conjunction with realtor, Stuart Hoam. The proposal has been revised to address the issues noted by the Planmng Commission at the January 16th meeting. The neighboring property owners have been re-notified. List of Exhibits A - Letter of Revision B - Notice of Plarming Conunission Action 1/17/96 C - Revised Site Plan D - Revised Floor Plan E - Revised Survey F - Letter from anonymous Person G - Memo and Exhibits of 1/8/96 Revised Proposal On January 16th the Planning Commission tabled this application in order that applicant provide a revised site plan attempting to reduce lot coverage by structures from 1,795 s.f. to the 1,500 s.f. allowable limit; and to maintain 10’ setback from the side lot lines. Applicant has made the following changes: 1 : ' •'VI 1 Zaaing File #2098 April 9, 1996 Page 2 EXISTING ORIGINAL PROPOSAL REVISED PROPOSAL CODE REOMT VAR REOD? 1. Street setback 70'25'25'30'Yes 2. West side setback 13'6.8'9.5'10’Yes 3. Gar. to Gar. setback NA 9'll'-*-10’No 4. East side setback 10'8'8' (6' cant.)10'Yes 5. Lake setback 75’88'99’75'No 6. Lot coverage 690 s.f.1,795 s.f.1,492 s.f.1,500 s.f (17,5%) No 7. 0-75' Hardcover 0 s.f.0 s.f.0 s.f 0 s.f No 8. 75-250' Hardcover 1,452 s.f. (29.7%) 2,551 s.f. (46%) 1,956 s.f (40%) 25%Yes 9. Lot area 8,550 s.f.8,550 s.f.8,550 s.f 43,560 s.f Yes 10. Lot width 50'/46*50'/46'50'/46 ’140'Yes As noted in the letter of revision, applicant has reversed the house and revised and reduced the floor plan. The result is that the let coverage by structures limit of 1,500 s.f. is met; the "structure to structure" setback of 10' between applicant's proposed garage and the existing detached garage to the west, is now met; and 75-250' hardcover proposal is revised downwards to 40%. The proposed side setbacks are mostly conforming on the west side and still at 8' (except for the section of cantilever, at 6') as originally proposed on the east side. The proposal appears to be more in keeping with the standards for this small size lot in this constantly redeveloping neighborhood. Also, while drainage is a concern in the neighborhood (see the anonymous letter), it appears that drainage from the new construction on this property can be dealt with on site, and the City will work with the property owner and Mr. Seran to the east to address their joint drainage needs. Issues for Discussion 1. Has adequate hardship been demonstrated to Justify granting lot area and width variances? } r ►' Zoning File #2098 April 9,1996 Page 3 2.Have the revisions to the house location adequately met concerns the Planning Commission had regarding side setback variances? 3. Does Planning Commission have any other concerns regarding this proposal? Staff Recommendation If Planning Commission finds that adequate hardship and justification are present for granting of the proposal as revised, then a recommendation for approval would be in order.vanar^e Options for Action 1.Recommend approval per revised proposal, with City staff and OTgineer to work with applicant and adjacent property owner to the east, in addressing drainage. i 2. Table for further review. 3. Recommend denial. 4.Other. Request for Early Council Action Per applicant ’s written request, if Planning Commission recommends approval, this item will be placed on the Council ’s April 22nd agenda. I r ra-l I I r mm i ititfah#'I'V **• Tn TT-fTT f"- - *i-i- i ’T’ftP #f lUlRNII I N f April 1, 1996 Minnetonka Office 19400 Highway 7 Excebior.MN 55331 612/474-2525 Fax 612/474-9583 TO: Mike Gaffron, City of Orono FM: Stuart Hoarn (470-2550) RE: 4101 Highwood (revision for variances application) On behalf of Eva Theobald, here is the revision for consideration by the Planning Conmision. Pursuant to direction provided by the commissioners on January 16, we have: 1. Reduced "lot coverage by structures" from 1795 sf to 1492 sf, slightly under (by 8 sf) the 1500 sf target set by the Commission. 2. Increased side setback and separations from structures on the adjacent properties by (a) narrowing the house by one foot (from 25* to 24') and (b) "mirror-reversing" the footprint. - While these changes don't result in ideal 10' setbacks on both sides — pretty unrealistic on so narrow a lot — improved separation from sur rounding structures was achieved. - Of particular concern to the Commission (as expressed 1/16/96), sep aration between the proposed garage and the garage on the property to the west was increased by an additional 3.5 feet (as a result of revers ing the footprint of proposed home). - The revised proposal increases the already generous lakefront setback by an additional eleven feet. - Note that separation from the new house to the east is 27 feet, seven feet more than would be the case if both structures were the standard current setback of 10' from the common property line. 3. Also herewith is a copy of the floor plan as revised. Elevations are not included for the smaller floor plan footprint because the exterior ap pearance of the structure has been essentially retained — only reversed and downsized. 4. We hope you and the Commission agree that the revisions substantially comply with the Commission's direction, and that the Commission will give favorable consideration at the April 15 session. If so, we also request that the application be put before the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council. Atch.: 1. Revised site plan 2. Revised floor plan (3 pp) 3. Commission recommenda tions, notice, 1/17/96 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2098 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: 1/17/96 TO: Kari & Paul Rompoitl 10132 I\'>'^^■ocKl Ct. Eden Prairie. MN 55347 COPIES TO:Eva Theobald 4101 HighwoodRoad Mound, MN 55364 Stuart Hoam Burnet Realty 19400 Hwy. 7 Excelsior, MN 55331 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variances DATE OF MEETING: 1/16/96 VOTE:4 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Tabled in order that applicant provide a revised site plan attempting to: Reduce lot coverage by structures from 1,795 s.f. to the 1,500 s.t. allowable lunit Maintain 10 ’ setbacks from side lot lines. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the February 20th meeting is Wednesday, February 7th. 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. jd i NOTE; Only copies which bear an embossed seal are certified copies i 1 ^5 f5?|3 T? ?■ ^ *zs ^ >0 N sT\? 1 ,^ •ii: f / . '*.' ' a?M« ^A[0 * I O’?4\^nw( . W^- Htvx& . , lllfl!^tii> irtl? / .»?b'-<?" f^tfi^C \ Sv l»X*J ^ i=t I* 674&AMHEi8llAN6 RCSiOCNnAL DESIGN IVStuart Hoam 612/937-2033 ©1996 EDCN PRANK. MMNESOIA »M6 - ....... /{’•/' - irsiirjMr I -/ 0 I fy.\ 7t==fc=t=£ / I fA-d " / /_. _.. 0 » c\) 4.— ••w > ■ / / /\ • •• « • • • t _A\:0, .^pi£i2f/Uf p^li- \-i^t / ■■ ■ vv:! V i 1 I * . A*«749AMHBSUAr« RESIOENIIAL OE9GN BYStuart Hoam; . 612/937-20M - ©1996 EOCN HMHE. MMCSOU »546 • • • m m -m , A74SAMB8IIANE I ! • RE90€NnAL DC96N BYStuart Hoam612/937-20M r . ©1996 EOCN PRMRE. MMUOU Ul4* * > [ I. • » - •1. 'JAN 18 1998 lY^2j*,Xr-—yto — ----------j------— •, rx>iX^ p^ “rf/uc^ yv'£^[r<^ <X- .^^£^e^- T\-^'"^------n----------------------------------- iif LC-l n# • f• • i ij x4^-<r Lklx /yOCi^ ^t>-.i2>-^/L^-^^ -------- ^ QPQi2.y^^^ o-OL cl •N O MPUS MH Ol-^IZ-^S*® 10‘2< r^ ir^. ■>’1 [S 17 •«|i <-0 j ■ -*' ' /5Sb Jl-r «**"T //• TO:Cha?r Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Michael P. Gaffron. Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:January 8» 1996 SUBJECT: #2098 Kari and Paul Romportl/Eva Theobald, 4101 Highwood Road Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 acre. Application: Request for lot area, lot width. 75-250’ hardcover, lot coverage by structures, front (street) and side setback variances to replace existing residence with a new home. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Letter of Request E - Survey F - Hardcover Worksheets G - Floor Plans and Elevations H - Topographic Survey of Neighborhood Pertinent Code Sections 1.Section 10.24, Subd. 5(B): A. Required lot area = 43,560 s.f. E.xisting = 8,550 s.f. B.Lot width required =140’ Lot width existing = 50' (46* at 75' setback line) C.Existing front (street) setback = 70’± Proposed front (street) setback = 25' Requfred front (street) setback = 30' Existing north .ast side setback = !0' Proposed = 8' Required = 10' Existing southwest side setback Proposed = 6.8'-7.1' Required = 10' = 13’ Zoning File #2098 January 8, 1996 Page 2 Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C): Lot coverage by structures limited to 15% or 1,500 s.f. whichever is greater. E.xisting lot coverage = 690 s.f. or 8.1% Proposed lot coverage = 1,795 s.f. or 21.0% 3.Sections 10.22, Subd. 2/10.56, Subd. 16(L): Hardcover limited to 25% of 75-250’ zone. Existing 75-250’ hardcover = 29.7% or 1,452 s.f. Proposed = 46% or 2,551 s.f. 4.Section 10.75, Subd. 3: "Additional heights on sloping lots. On any lot sloping downhill from the street, which has an average ground slope on that portion of the lot to be occupied by the main building of 25% or more (measured in the general duection of the side lot lines) an additional 12’ of height may be permitted in such main building and the garage or parking space may be in the required front yard provided a yard of 10’ or more is maintained.": The average slope of the northerly 1/3 of the lot is 25%, although the area to be occupied by the garage/house structure has a slope of only 20%. It can therefore be argued that this code section does not apply and a front (street) setback variance is required. (Note also that staff has determined this is not a bluff situation.) Discussion Please review the applicants' statement of hardship and description of unusual property conditions, E.xhibit D. A significant number of variances are requested for construction of a new house to replace the existing residence structure on the property. The lot area and lot width variances are not, of course, created by this specific house proposal, although the small lot area impacts the hardcover and lot coverage percentages, and the minimal lot width results in the need to construct a relatively narrow residence. The steep slooe downward from the road clearly has a significant impact on the house location, suggesting the appropriate use of a spancrete floor garage with living space below it. The 25% slope provisions of zoning code Section 10.75, Subd. 3 (if applicable) would allow the garage to encroach into the 30 ’ front (street) yard to within 10’ of the street right-of-way. In this case a 25’ setback is proposed which will leave enough depth for off-street parking of two vehicles side by side in front of the garage The proposed 8’ side setback (2’ variance) on the northeast side still leaves a setback of approximately 25’ from the adjacent residence of A1 Seran. which was recently rebuilt. However, on the southwest side, the corner of the proposed attached garage will be Zoning File #2098 January 8, 1996 Page 3 approximately 9’ fiom the neighboring detached garage. The City has consistently attempted to maintain a minimum 10' setback betv»’een structures, and the code requires a separation of 10’ between principal and accessory structures. The proposed house will be setback approximately 22' from the neighboring house to the southwest, which also encroaches its required side yard (see survey). Lot coverage by structures is proposed at 1,795 s.f. or 21.0%. When the lot coverage ordinance was developed, it was recognized that even on very small lots the propert>- owner should be allowed a minimum 1,500 s.f. envelope for structures including the principal structure and the garage (Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C): Exception). In this case 15% of lot area would be 1.282.5 s.f., so the applicants’ 1,500 s.f. allowance would be equivalent to 17.5% lot coverage. The proposed e.xcess therefore is 295 s.f. or 3.5%. It can be argued that this is a variance created by attempting to construct a house of a certain size. Applicants hardship statement suggests that in the context of new construction, this house is not oversized and the footprint is not excessive. Certainly a house can be built that meets the 1,500 s.f. standard, but to do so would essentially elir->inate the porch, deck, and anothei 50 s.f. of house or garage. The hardcover proposal for 46% in the 75-250' zone where only 25% is allowed, might be somewhat tempered by the fact that there will be virtually no hardcover in the 0-75' zone. Also note that the overall hardcover on the property yields appropriately 26% where the DNR standard would be 25% of the lot in hardcover. Drainage Drainage on the property is of significant concern to the City, because this property and the Seran property adjacent are the receivers of significant amounts of nmoff from Highwood Road. One change which staff would strongly recommend i^ that the bottom of the swale to the northeast be centered on the lot line between applicants’ residence and the Seran residence. Staff will be discussing this drainage plan with the City Engineer to determine if there are additional concerns. Note that the existing catch basin, storm drain tile and rip rap spillway were apparently constructed by the neighboring property owner, and it may be appropriate to keep that stoiin drain in place if the rip rap spillway is moved back to the 75 ’ setback line. Issues for Discussion 1. Has adequate hardship been demonstrated to Justify granting the lot area and width variances? 1 •. ■fb y .. . Zoning File #2098 January 8, 1996 Page 4 2.Does the narrow lot width justify the granting of side setback variances on both sides of the proposed house? Should the house be shifted or redesigned to meet a 10 separation from the neighboring garage to the southwest? 3.Docs the topography of the lot suggest that the requested street setback variance is appropriate? 4.Given that the existing house meets the lot coverage standards and the total house replacement* proposal would allow something new to be constructed that meets all standards, is there any justification for granting a lot coverage variance? Staff Recommendation If Planning Commission finds adequate hardship and justification for granting of the variances requested, then a recommendation for approval would be in order. Conversely, if Planning Commission finds that certain aspects of the proposal are not justified. Planning Commission may wish to provide the applicants an opportunity to revise the proposal. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval as proposed, with City staff and engineer to review drainage. 2. Recommend partial approval. Recommend denial.3. 4. 5. Table for further review (provide applicant direction). Other. i CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S200.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming stnictures $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) #209 PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address V/g I —- , . ., ^ Property NiitViher fP.I.D.) /’ 7 / I ^ ^ 0 ^ (A Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey- Date Property Acquired Cesr^^^JL —s—tifil I (do) n^ also own the adj«fcent pat(^ of land.'/ PrescntusTof property: V residential ___other (specify). Zoning District: APPLICANT Name Pji'H I Ren)pori-L Phone (home) '^42 Phooe(woric) Address: fpl^7 TuyiVf^ri CF City: ^AfW ?ax\Y\t OWNER (jf-different a^icant) Name ______ Addrei Tv»V City: Phone(home) Phone (work)_ Zip: ^^3^ Zip: description OF REQUEST BtimatedConstnictionCostS ^ Describe request in detail: Rep\ac^ ^ r? __.1^1 ___L 0t0uy a/id—rzr/^V ^f^***-— ^(attach additional shfeels*^f neCessary) Sc/rV^y, VARIANCES REQUIRED X Lot Area X* Lot Width X Hardcover X Lot Coverage ^ Setback: JL Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) (attach additional sheets if necessary) i \ ML O r.^ O • * ^ .nfjik'?- •» REQUIRED SUBMITTALS J i All of the following information mu$t y^|hmitted by the application 4gadUp^ date in 9r^.6£ for vour aPDlication 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 8'A x 11 for reproduction. ... Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existmg grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'A" x 11" for reproduction.^ V Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'-A x 11 ). i/ 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 VQHE variance aoDlication is not complete if the above infQnn^tion, haj npt ly^n in^tf^e^A APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE , . u 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 ofjhis application, and certifies that the iafonnadon supplied is ^ s~ Applicam's Signamte ■ Q _____Dale gi ii --------- ■ OWNER’S SIGNATURE ^ , The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authonzes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. 4^ ----Owner’s Signamr^Date I / — this change prior to the meeting. 8 % •RUH.OAii itni/n HRiCPXN COUNTY PfK»EITV ZNFOiSttnQN SYSTCH PRQKITY OMCRS LIST uronT NO. n«ssMi* . \ : ;PACE k.•ATCN B07r^.^:'r . ■fiPROT AODi NAME TAXPAYER HAHE/ApOR M 07-U7-E3 A4 0010 P4079 HXGHHOOO RO JOHN r SANRORN ETAL J T SANBORN 0079 NIGNHOOO RO NOUND m BSSM I . h *. f PROP AODR (BfCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR r ’ V-*; I ^' . * ? <. so 07-117-2S 44'OOIS OOlOl NXQNNOOO RO EVA TNEOOALO EVA A TNEOMLO OXOl NX6HN00D ROAD NOUNO NN 05SAO : V'I PROPAOOR OmER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR so 07-117-ES 00 OOSl OOUE HXONNQOO RO icon 0 A CATNERXNE ANDERSdN icon 0 i CATNERXNE ANDERSON OISE NXQHNOOO ROAO NOUNO MN fiSSOO L k ’.r 1 ' .h 4 * * ' se ■ 07-U7-M 4A OOM PROP ADM ‘ ' 04i04 NX6HH000 RD OtCR NM« • OLCN A SEVERLY SAUER TAXPAYER .. >eiEN A REVERLY SAUER HAME/AOOR '.>4104 HX6HH000 RO , NOUND W 55544 / '-.1 . .1 - • t 4 • . I • ’j'y V-*'*. : -I 't L*♦» •V, i;.- • • h,’*.' ‘I* 4 »*A» • .,* • . V‘» . tgijs., . T • . ‘.*;V "f SO 07-117-ES 00 0011 00091 NXQHNOOO RO F L JOHNSON i 0 L FOSS FREOERXC JOHNSON 0091 HIGHNOOO RO HOUND Itl 05S40 SO 07-117-ES 00 OOIE 00099 HXGNNOOO RO O L A R NELSON ALONZO 0 SERAN XXI 0099 NXGNHOOO RO MOUND MN B5SA0 • i ; .V.' * ‘ . :*t * • • rl/7- •••»*• • U'l ‘ 30 07-117-ES 00 0010 00105 NIOHNOOO RO CHARLES E OA MART HXLLIAH 0 BRICKLEY 0105 NXQHNOOO MOUND m 55S40 SO 07-117-ES 00 0010 00109 NXQNNOOO RO GEORGE N APPLEBAUM GEORGE APPLEBAUM 0109 HXGNNOOO RO MOUND MN 5SS40 iv' s . ‘ *v^ t A.> J*:r ' *| '■ ' 7 i 4*>:i ;;V •4 .r ' i ‘j| ’>«.|V ? « •. \.7^f ■■»•? ^9 5« 07-117-ES 44 0055 04100 HX6NH000 RO JASON H THEXS JASON TNEIS 4100 HXOMNOOO RO NOUNO m 55544 SO 07-117-E5 44 0004 041E5 NXONHOOO RD JOHN N A RODERTA J HENRICN JOHN N A RODERTA J HENRXCH 41E5 HXOHNOOO RO ORONO IM 55544 ‘ HL 4 4 * ' f t, ; \i< ■JS‘! »-s 50 07-117-E5 44 0007 04114 HIONNCOO RO PHXLLXP N OTTO PHILLIP OTTO 19050 STRATFORD RO 0E09 NINNETONKA M4 55545 TOTAL DAtCN I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND REPRESENTATION OF XNFORHATXON AS IT APPEARS THIS DAH ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEItCPIN COUNTY DEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE REST OF NY KN0NLED6E AND BELIEF. f07 00011 DATE I2-I2g.. ■ r Vi' >• ■ .'i .''VI*V* *• n,^ .V" Vl i O.' ’\i/ )/ / A'56y / <#/"0o/ //W ' ‘=T7V. r-r^^/ 5/71 / / r-, / / ^ r iTf'> ^ / <^/ • (■ / //47 ■y'’^'4V-!5^Y / / -^39V '/ '■/" tfi7'l/ "?/ 'mpi/u L, ' -'’'MI'’/fyj-T^'^^'-hLliil ='c, . / ■'/ .C:'-' 41 ' V V 4 / . / y4^ >■ 4C^''.':: //, • .'Z / /'^v >/ “)h ^•/•7't/ ./ >.: - ,■' I, .•, / 4^./ A-291/t 30V(Y/ ^ /-:.,4X.u —~^\—^ '0,< N-’ \ Vv:v ;-:v\ ^\ J>' -_\ ll:l^ '^\c 11) / /uS /■ 40 ' 40 40 24 / /to t/' , , ; ifo .100 IfOo i>.r^n ; uil ^ ":/ / 23 j 22 I 2i• f w «/ I ft. 4- I 0)/ /(I9)h6)| —r- —i------f 3\- ^ *•'•*•*»*•“ V laVlW IPi '■ ;iC? ' ! W j I ^ ! J20l 50 I t ' " " ;/'/ -- ^ / IfO r\j r-r 'I ^0 ^ I r rj\ O) 'V " h j . *,.% #t' *. J' <1 i ' v'i T I 0 / #2098 HAROSHIP/DESCRIPTIQN OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Subiect property is encumbered by several hardships: very small (8550 SF) ; dimensionally narrow and deep; the grade drops steeply from street-level; the condition of the obsolete existing dwelling is beyond reasonable repair; the property lacks adequate off-street parking while being located on a narrow roadway lined with narrow lots resulting in exceptionally poor on-street parking capacity. Originally constructed as a "lake cottage' with no garage, the tiny existing house is now over 73 years old. Its utility is adversely affected by deferred maintenance, areas of decay and structural failure, and functional obsolescence. Some unsafe conditions are This building isn't a candidate for rehabilitation or expansion and should be replaced. hardship of the lot's small size and steep terrain while allowing for a modest-sized modern residence, garage, and ^^^veway for added minimum off-street parking. hardcover with shorter driveway than is the with 30 setback; and (3), helps to overcome the hardship of the steep grade, while still accommodating off-street parking for four vehicles (two garaged and two in drive). The minor side-setback and the 5 (25 vs. 30 ^ setback variances seem more than offset by the fact that the proposed new structure is 15 farther back from the lakeshore than the existing house ..(which is at the 75' minimum) . The proposal maintains ample sideyard separations from neighboring buildings. With relatively modest "footprint", the overall proposed improvements represent a reasonable solution for substantially overcoming the hardships. These improvements would also enhance the neighborhood by (1) replacing the worn, outmoded building in a way that offers an attractive new home which meets the modern needs for year-round permanent residency without disproportional "over-building or adverse impact on adjoining properties; and (2), by providing adequate off-street parking for four vehicles (two garaged, two in 25' driveway). 1 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ( 0-75’ NG HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______ Leafth X X X B. Gartga C. Driveway X X 0. 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 A 0 - B . ________ tf/tltnCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ * 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 75-250’250-500’ Widtt 3668.16 X100 3668.16 Wtth S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. mm • • “ B 3668.16 X lOO 366f S.F. S.F. A B Cf/O 1 —• *■ »- Mgupiiii..« I,. SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75 ’ £ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 250-500* SG HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X X X B.;o C. Driveway *■ — . (Gravel parallel parking area^ D. Sidewalk X X E. Pado/Dcck (Stoop) 3.5 X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other 2.5 PROPOSED ^ ^ ^ A. House 21.------------ •m:-38.5' Triangle 4' x 4' at entry ' 4' ~ X X X Viddi .5 12' B. Garage C. Driveway 28.5* (ave.)X X D. Sidewalk 2S.7S_ Raised along_ _ _ _garage E. Patio/Deck . X X 12.33'X X 10' F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic X X X 12.67' a CATCH BASIN TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY i\REA IN ZONE * ^ 1452.5 _______ B 4882.21 x 100 G. Other _ PORCH total hardcover in zone total B <882! 21 X 100 A _____________ ~ 600 480 261 in 924 8 48 H 440 456 103 Z.Z1 i S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. m S.F. S.F.C "■ S.F. S.F.c'.s S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. i T . 7.5 S.F.* 1452.5 S.F. ■488777T s.F. % A B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 123.3 s.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 126.7 s.F. 1.00 S.F. S.F. A B 1i % "T—]1 i. jr?"^ r U- »#f 1 ___ • 1 • • 1 £=t=.-J- Mipptfc fT!)vtrr>* ) •■fc 4 1 I’y % ■( .f ''I ....> ■n- / ;...yTyy- y ^:= i|----ii-------------i r 1 t '' ' _ mm _" :^30ut\^ i ^ llil>»i.!' nI =T [=e4=|-♦i 1 II n - 4 ruzr?' i L 7. To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mahusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:April 2, 1996 Subject: #2124 John P. Earling, 2165 Colin Drive - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB Lot area = 2 acres Brief Review of Application The applicant has applied for setback variances to permit the construction of m 18 x 24 detached garage to be located in the street yard in front of the front line of the principal structure. The structure will meet the required street setback from the <lcvclo^ cuMe-^ road but does not meet the required 50’ setback from the extension outlet road, OuUot C. The following ordinances arc pertinent for this review. 1.Section 10.03. Subd. 9 (D) - The structure is placed 50' in front of the front line of the principal structure. Section 10.28, Subd. 5 (B) - 50' minimum setback required for all structures from street lot line. Required = 50' Proposed = 50' from developed cul-de-sac road Proposed = 10' Outlet C, future road extension Variance =* 40' or 80% List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - Application Plat Map Property Owners' List Hardship Statement Survey Proposed Site Plan Elevations Floor Plan Septic Map Topographic Map Zoning File #2124 April 2, 1996 Page 2 Description of Request The residence was constructed in 1986 and meets all required setbacks of the RR-IB zoning district. Applicant now seeks to install a detached garage within the street yard requiring setback variances as noted above. Review Exhibit D, applicant's hardship statement He notes specific site limitations such as the location of well to the east side of existing attached garage restricting garage addition at the east. The internal layout of the residence would not aesthetically permit an addition to the west side. Applicant nctes the uniqueness of the area and the fact that the residence is located at the end of a cul-de-sac road that abuts another cul- de-sac road to the west There are no adjacent homes that will receive negative impact with the proposed location of the detached garage as structure will be placed on a down slope at lower elevations from residence to the immediate east Applicant notes existing wooded area and additional plantings adjacent to the structure will also minimize the impact. Issues for Consideration 1.An 18' X 24' garage addition could be attached at the east side and meet the required 30' side setback. Is the location of the well a hardship? 2.Should we distinguish between the required 50' setback from developed Colin Drive and future extension of road Outlot C? Should the detached garage be moved 40' further south or maintain minimum 30' setback from outlot? Note garage doors will open to side (east) and not to future extension road (north). Staff has received no written comments from adjacent neighbors but staff did receive a call from another resident advised of the proposed variances. The resident questioned why the detached garage could not meet the required setback and if this wasn't a negative precedent to establish in the area. Options of Action To approve as proposed, as amended or to deny. rcr r-.T.-Si—it- rc-rsj L # Jd 'l City of Orom P.IL IM tf CraUl Im, HI9S323 (U2)47>7S7 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION 03/11/%13:W:39 Initial Application Fee $200.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Varianc e for non-conforming structures $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) UW UK mUCRTIOl 1 • 220.00 K120 JM BMJIS If 0.00 a.Q0| 0.0Q SUnUTIL mi Torn. SOLE KEEIVED 220.00 0.00 220.00 220.00 PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Co/i'^ Onvc. ^ (^rpriO DOME CL£»a03 TMGI 1116 0.00 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) O*^ ~ i (~ ^3 ** ----^PHL ^ M ^ * % _9 _ J ^ ^ #Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired ^ ^ P (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: V** residential ___other (specify) Zoning District:_________________________________ APPUCANT^ r^ ^ i- Name 3oV ny \ fi> Address:JD-lfoS* Colin prWe. Phone (home) _ _____ Phope(work) 3oY9 City: ______Zip:1 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ________________ Phone(home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail:____ Estimated Construction Cost $ S|^OOQ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage l/* Setback: Front Side Rear \/Other (specify) g ___CfiFLi 4^— r ! A .sX.. _ __ Average Lakeshore /::r fv \ ri c. I; -,J C. c.'f > HARDSmP/DE^RIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions prevenung compliance with Zoning Code requirements;_---------------------------------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must <riihniitted bv the aPPUi for vour application to be considered comol^tet / ^ rfi^dling date in order 1. 2. I 3. 4. V / 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). ^ j v/ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and mclude hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8Vi" x 11 for reproduction. - a Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes mexistmg grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/i" x 11" for reproduction 5. 6. / are proposca. in aaaiuon, pruviuc \J Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8/i x 11 ). — . . r. t ____^11 M«>cnnc \1/Ifh an infPrMt in H 7. 8. v OKClCnCS Ur puuu nwi --------vr------------ . . • . • ,u- J List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an mterest m the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owiwr(s). >/ As an addendum to this application, please attach a sepmte list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this applicauon. Please remember that ysm vnriance aDDlirafion is not complete if the above informatiQn PQt and/or consutont expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and corwt to the best of his/her knowiedge. Applicant’s Signature Date 0 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 investiga^n and verification of this request. Owner’s Signamre Date ill4 Aoolicant must have ^submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Plannmg Co^sion Meeting Planning Commission Meetings are held on the thiM M^day of each mon±^ A dd Uc Lis must be present at aU scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission If an aoDlicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements “taveTaud!o“^^^ in your place arai lo adviae d« BuUdiug & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 r mmmm •••••■ *•*•***•* *•xjx|>:-:’:::;i;|:;:;:;:; i*.‘ *.‘.‘.v.*. j!v-^_;X*X' V'vX*/!-! ...... 64 . 3 b I .-.•.•.•.V.V.V.•.•.*.•.'** ••••••••*« • X 173. : ouuo (l‘ * rt;r (>5)Ui '■R i?. Mil ts/u/n>2|SR''«’■■■•’ ./'<•■•■••i%£ • ■ . ’i»itPlN COUNTY PMPlilTY IMTOWUnON SYSTEH pnPEIITY CM€ES LIST Ixii ' ^ •. .f« - i\ is M ooon i 0S>117-tS U 0010 , AOSRESS UNASSIGNEO ; OMCt NMI .l mUIM P NARTFXEL JR ET AL TMOAYII i^^I'H iuxah r • nelen c mutmiLi MtIM/AMII r tttt OtVXN U ■ UMB URE Ml BBSM ♦ M’01>U7-tl n 0011 ■V PROP AOOR OOOSO ADDRESS UNASSIONED JfOMCR NIHil '.TNI NURSERY NQHEONCRS ASSOC ^TAMPAVtR ‘ MaSfRY NONUMCRS ASSOC V . NWI/ADOR . me NVXN U liUNDUyilMI iSSSA . t i Kt m 9 El 0017 ''‘■'PfOp-ADOR '■'••lOtlAD eotw DR OMCR NAM .'fgONN P EARLXNO TANPAVIR ' . P EARUNO NANE/ADOR UfUS COLXN OR ' ‘ 7 LONB lake Ml EBSU OS-117-tS El 0021 PROP aDor v;'ooios dromi ro s OM«R NAM it » J RROONESS TAXPAYER f.’; CHARLES A JEAN RROONESS 117-ES sRom • f 'h •« t V v HANE/AOOR : i IDS SROMI RD s fSSDA •T, •• •/ / - 5,-, '■! i,—r ■ ■ ; 'A .M*‘ ’.7 - ^ ■■ .' V- • •i •3J* • • ■' V ' ■•j -'i rr 7^.. L* T * .%. .r I •I '•r V l' I • so 0S-117-2S El 0011 OEEOO DEVIN U T A S NAJOR THCHAS S I SUSAN S NAJOR CtOO DEVIN U LONB LARE Ml BBSSO SS 0S-117-ES El 0015 02150 COLXN DR C K 8HAUCHNESSY ET AL C R SHAUGMNESSY E150 COLXN OR LAND LARI Ml 55550 ■••••; k‘- • ^ ■ ■!■ •• •- ; SS 0S-117<ES El 0019 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIONED J P EARLXND A C P NALDRON IT AL JOMI P EARLXNO 2155 COLXN DR LOND LAKE Mf ISfSA .1 • * • TOTAL DATCH • * -•1 : ^ SOB 00010 L* % • tf- : t •;i 4ff i J IMPORT NO. PXA5MD1 PACE A5MD1.‘ - ; f. >' 50 05-117-25 21 OOIE 02EE5 DEVIN LA N F NARTFXEL ARC NARTFXEL NXLLXAN F A NELEN C NARTFXEL EEES DEVXN U LOND URE Ml 1555A 50 05-117-25 El 0010 02155 COLXN DR A C ANDERSON A P A ANDERSON ANDREN C A PAUU A ANDERSON 2155 COLXN DR LOND LARE Ml SS55A • • ; > i'lU {<''•>■ 'i.'!‘ ‘ »•' w V r'r** .% n • •' - . i».‘r ;T - 50 05-117-E5 tl 0020 00050 ADORERS UNASSXQICD J P EARLXND A C P NALDRON IT AL JOHN P EARLXND 2155 COLXN OR LOND LARE Ml 55554 X CERnFY that the FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATXON OF XNFORNATXON AS XT APPEARS THXS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEMCPIN COUNTY DEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE REST OF HY KHQNUD6E AND SELXEF. ^ tt' 'm _■ ‘v >V A/:;Sc'rivs;0 imku ^DY .* i ’-I-:; f-• .• HARDSHIP STATEMENT 'I O ,/i ^ I C..>z::r ^ D The hardship aspect of my present variance request is based on the dire need for a third garaqe stall and certain site limitations. My present garage site is adjacent to my well head and thus inappropriate for additional construction. The opposite side of my house is the master bedroom and while this area is buildable, it is not aesthetically a desirable location. I believe that my request for a setback variance is warranted due to the amount of open space on my lot in front of the existing structure and the unique end of the cul-de-sac location with buffering outlets, with the existing wooded area as a partial block of the proposed structure and the addition of more plantings, a garage structure would be very unobtrusive. The site of proposed structure is also on the down slope (lower elevation) of the only affected neighbor's house giving to a further diminished impact on the neighborhood. I will be locating the proposed structure fifty feet from the side lot marker as requested by ordinance with a 10 foot setback from Outlet C. CITY OF ORONO V SITE PLAN__ GRADING PLAN Approved —• ft ^S^rrnuvcu □ APFnOVED WITH REVISIONS L DIS^°PRCVEO y QATP SitICsrti'fiCdtfi of Sl. ^ *2^^’ V for Greg A. Beck ^^^.7 f Lot 2, Block 2, Kelley Green ;.;;-JT?3 Hennepin County, Minnesota Oo^loV b 3-W.09' 1 hereby certify that this Is a true of anv wereoi and\he P^posefiocati^ ofta proposed bulld- ino t^does’not punort to show other Improvements or encroachments. COFFIN & GR0NBER6, INC-Scale: Date : 0 : 1" = 50' 8-27-86 Iron marker kB ^ #. V. t u *1 >jL r.J «Mark S. Gronberg Lic<^No. Jf755 Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners Long Lake, Minnesota i ■i ' ! EmZ o o ' J Itlit V) n 4 4 € A. T I ^ M lb I H A31>10 I I <^ H I C M (^ •« M G -4. •i •MJffc y —1 '1 •> i 4 • 1 - «—' 1 L #y •4 A i' «H.0<VIL V ' a** ^ ^ <M t r uo<j [c p u A H (l* si'O* C «ij» IS I* /V i # .• *. <; ;r ""? ' ^ / » i yf 1__11---- - V«ifari>if--??i»‘<.- •* ( ) ? •gfSiT ?g*‘L» > A./. Si* . \ • ¥ •» - • • • .• •« . » •• •.V..:• : 1 »•» V— -*•■ ik. •i. I . r- ' #T- T ..v. .*- v*^ - - \ ^ .. I ... . *;r?;‘•.gr*/: ff ‘I • :| f4 r* •>'T-Ts*--• .• ♦ rs - *. »■• -• • •’•^•r.-Anr. . - « • — *r^’-*~ ' .'u.. -r«M*i . i«>«. ^ ^ T—•.««.. -~TT • » ..g ^ — ^ .^** • - ■ % 4 .-* *.; &. . ..r . . •. w -. * ^ .* * ^•. . I *. i-4^ *. • ■ J •• • • 1 I . - - I — . - ,^ r« ^ *i ^ « •.TTT-r,* -V^« ;-r * TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members FROM Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:April 9, 1996 SUBJECT: #2125 Richard Clifford, 4760 North Shore Drive - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR* 1B Lot area Required =* 43,560 s.f. or 1 acre Existing =» 17,030 s.f. or 0.39 acre Variance = 26,530 s.f. or .61% Lot width Required = 140' Existing =* 100' Variance = 40' or 28.5% Application: Applicant has filed a lot area, lot width and a setback variance for land alterations within the required 30' setback from the top of a bluff. The property owner had received lot area and lot width variance approvals from the City in both 1984 and 1986. Since the passage of the City’s new shoreland regulations in April of 1992, a bluff is now defined within the street yard adjacent to the County Road. The following variances are pertinent for this review: I. Section 10.24, Subd. 5(B) - Lot area and lot width variances as noted above. 2. Section 10.02 and Ordinance No. 126,2nd Series - Definition of bluff, toe of bluff, top of bluff. 3.Section 10.56, Subd. 16(C-2) Required = 30' Structure = 36' No variance required. Land alterations = IT from top of bluff Setback variance for land alteration that encroaches 13' into bluff setback area. 4.Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) Total lot area = 17,030 s.f. Allowed = 2,554.5 s.f. or 15% Proposed = 2,128 s.f. or 12.4% No variance required. I I ^4 Zoning File #2125 April 9,1996 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat C - Property Owners List D - Hardcover Inventory E - Hardcover Map F - Neighbors Acknowledgment Form G - Gustafson Report HI-2 - Floor Plan I - North/South Elevations J - Site^Grading Plan K - Resolution #2008, Application No. 1029 L - Resolution #1698, Application No. 873 Review of Application In 1978 the property was sold to the applicant at a tax forfeiture sale. The propeity has been assessed for a single sewer unit that included front footage charges. The S225 plant unit charge has yet to be paid. A sewer stub is available to the property at North Shore Drive. The property at .39 acres is similar in size to the surrounding neighborhood at an average area of 0.4+ acres. The property falls within the 250-500' setback area and would be allowed 30% hardcover. Applicant proposes 25.5%. Review Exhibit J. the structure has been placed on the property meeting all required setbacks except for required land alterations for walkout that will encroach 13' into the required setback area. The structure has been placed at the 35' front setback from Park Avenue or north lot line. The elevations lend themselves to the creation of a walkout design. Review Exhibit J, Gustafson has approved the grading plan noting the need to install silt fence at the southwesterly boundary of the site until vegetation is established. As with the review of a recent conditional use permit where drainage from development is directed to County right-of-way, th; City will ask that applicant arrange for a meeting with both the County DOT and the City staff to determine if there are additional improvements needed to maintain surface runoff from new development within County right-of-way. Upon your inspection note there is a ditch that drains to the east to a catch basin that di^ns under the County Road eventually to the lake. Staff has oeen in contact with Cei! Strauss of the DNR. She advises she has no clear guidelines for land alterations that encroach the 30' setback. She has asked to review the grading plan and will get back to us if she has any additional comments for our review. 1 [■■' Zoning File #2125 April 9,1996 Page 3 In order to minimiTg the visual impact of the altered bluff, applicant will be asked to plant additional shrubs within the north yard that will also assist in minimizing erosion, the noises and direct view of the Countv Road. Statement of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit A, and Resolutions #2008 and #1698, Exhibits K and L. Issues for Consideration 1.The presence of the bluff has created additional hardships for this property. Although elevations lend themselves to the creation of the walkout, does the existence of the bluff call for modification in design. The structure has been placed at the 35’ front setback line ^d cannot be moved further north away from bluff. Should structural footprint be reduced m size? 2.Review the topography of the north street yard elevations. The steep topography would limit exterior yard use. 3.Does the fact that the property is located within the 250-500' of the lake have any bearing on vour consideration? Options of Action To deny, approve as proposed or approve as amended. Any recommendation of approval must include the following conditions; 1.Prior to the City issuing a building permit for the new construction, applicant must arrange for a meeting* vith Hennepin DOT and the Orono staff to determine the need for any improvements within the County right-of-way or on property to minimize impact of additional drainage. 2. Pavment of $225 sewer unit charge with a building permit application. 3.Access to the property shall be gained via unimproved Park Avenue to the north at the intersection of Park Avenue and Tonkaview Lane. Applicant to install signage for address at intersection of Tonkawview Lane. 4.Silt fence to be installed on the southwest boundary of construction site until ground cover is established. 1 Zoning File #2125 April 9, 1996 Page 4 5.And, if Planning Commission members support staffs recommendation, the following may also be included: prior to scheduling the application before the Council, applicant shall provide a landscape plan providing additional shrubs and plantings in north yard in area where bank shall be altered. t L Mm t *y Applicsiion # _______j(k ^ Date R^cdTed a/j^Mco _ *' AlDOllDt P^id ^ ^ 7’>o • IliiLi, TFoTT^ crrv OF ORONO - variance APPUCATION Tnitial AppUcatioa Fee S220.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original appUcatton) Vcriance for non-conforming smicturo S2- . After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFO^^TION^^ ^ _ SiteAddress____x2i^------ ——-SSTT- 07- //7- Property Identification Number required siuver Attach legal descripuon to appUcauon if not mciuaeu Presenrtrse-ofproperty. —^resiaenuoi ------ QO// (month/ycar) LA*JQ _ I i 't property — dopingnistnet: L .K ** i Phone (bnme'i applican . OWNER (if differentjhanj^cant)^,^^ ^ Name _ ---- Address: Phone (homeX Phone (work)_ Zip: _____ ______________—--------------------- P request Estimated Construction Costdescription OF request ^ ^ ^ ------ Describe request in detail: - w fu .-d-— (attach additional sheets if necessary) Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore y Other (specify) —^ /rv-5 c.C f/6^ — utner ^5pcv.ii>y —- ^—'——7 hardsiiip /desc ^on OF -tiu< -----i=----V/liA.^Air-^ -------^ • . -H* COA>S'L— ----S=----- Tatt^titionai sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS A All of the fnllnwinff infonnafion must h* submitted bV tht aPPlKatlOH dttdl UH 111 order for vour apniication to be coD«»dered complttfil 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form „ . , , . , / Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150 , labels and plat (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 mcli^e haMcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8/2 x 11 for reproduction- Topographic survev (e.xisting and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grtSe are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8-/," x 11” for repi^uctio^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8Y2 x 11 ). List of the legal names (include marital status) of ail persons with an interest m the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that yttUE nnniicnrinn is not co mnlete if Ihe qbQY? information ba« not bttn mtlud fiiL information supplied is trup^^rrot to knowledge Date -Applicant's Signature OWNER'S SIGNATURE ' , . ui The owner herebv acknowledges and agrees to this appUcation and further authorizes rei^onable entry onto the propertv bv City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Councu members for purposes gi^^iigationjmd ^yeri^ion of this request. Owner ’s Signature /Date CoSon ”t^°Moly “h moT Appncan« mus, be present a. aU scheduled review meetings of the Plannutg & Zoning Office of this change pnor to the meeting. 8 i % t • i • ¥=K93d0^3 tr» c'> \i > ^ oce j ^li<r<\\ ® rsi J T3 '(52)/IJb ,»5-^S\K/= j5<irsAOi? -------i l/> t/> ^ A.'o o \ o o QC rt 0iHU /•V ® ■»/. CNoao JO AlU VlS.dlsNNl.l iO AiiJ s»x Bia *3 ^ rvj Z>9tt t9 lOt / 1 n 1 / i iTT / rtM 01 a/M on 01 53a zi ese 'f rr.T* .-■"-jo;’ < f -.« y DU 01 «JH f : "V • » • • • ••.* .* ** *. t* ••• ( : illsill; ’ ■ ' ■Jk j.i . ‘ ,Io ^ i-l .* i rj J-% ■ u •-ftsi^07-117-tl n 0077 TOMtAVIEH Ul»i MOO AMM ; H 04/4f , fMCR NIMi^,'^ 0 A 0 I AfrCLOT TAXOAYM ;r ■ OkZOHt 1 OATAXClA AFrELOT ; V - NAHE/A«m r 4740 TCMKAVIEN LA * ^ ^ 'ii ^ ^ M II ^vb7-ili7-EX St OOU O' ^ MOP AOOR oooii AOOAiSS UNASSXGNEO T. ’ *0»0«« HAHt'i RXCNAM 0 CLIFPOAO . : TAXPAYER 7-i RXCMAR0 D CLIFFORD ' ‘V- NAME/AOOR. ^ iOlAf OREENMIER RO OtOO O .. -vl^ H»0€T»i(A m 55505 : ■ V:'. -i . • ’ -v: Mi ISrtCPXN COIMTY PROPERTYPROPERTY OMCRS I:tlON SYSTEHT SO 07-117-tS St 0009 04754 NORTH SHORE OR CHRISTINE J SCHANZENDACH CHRISTINE J SCHANZENDACh 4754 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55544 SO 07-117-tS 5t OOlt 04704 NORTH SHORE OR S A schaueR a F E KOUOSRY S A SCHAUER A F KOUBSRY 4704 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND »04 55544 REPORT NO. PX455401PAOE SO 07-li7-Z5 5t 0010 04750 »A)RTH shore OR JAMES R Thomson etal JAHES THOHSON 4750 north shore OR I M4HOUND 55544 SO 07-117-t5 5t 0015 04790 ^NORTH SHORE OR eHlii H MPONT «HEN H bUPONT . 4790 north shore DR HOUND Ml 55544 •• * it V, '• * i‘r-J J % t: -.V r . jT4ll7-t5 St OOtl PROP Aooh’^^ 047IS NORTH SHORE OR omcr nahE/^.o r.everson p h e everson h<. ' taxpayer;,"rf OARRV A MARIE EVERSON >; ’ NAHE/AOOR i. 4751 NORtH SHORE DR / '-'r^’MWND »4l 55544 U , V ■;r J f v sa* b7-:i7-n 3z oos? PtOP AOtm M7U TONKAVXEH U C»tCP NAHE.;t LIUND S NAPTINEAU ET AL TAXPAYEP ULANO I PATPICIA MAPHNEAU .J.* ww. . t ;NAME/AMm 64755 TOMUVXEH LANE HOUND Ml 55544 * r ' ' *: V. “ VM':1 #< \- *. »• <. , ■' i* •' ».. * . . •*. .;n ’ Yk. 6":v •/ • •••.-•• :»-t> I ;6 '6-." . • *4 ,* *• 4 i * • . •» ■! * u- ' t r'Yrx #: • f V - -5 .:'V• . 7 O' - •:V" . .: ‘ > {Mil • . : • • - Y • t I »’ ' U-. f ■ • fi -SV' • i' ’ v'f V.; • •• 1 so 07-117-45 St OOtt 04775 NORTH SHORE OR D E OOLL A S E BOLL DOUGLAS E A SANDRA E BoU 4775 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND Ml 55344 TOTAL BATCH 50Z 00010 SO 07-117-EI St 00*5 o479S , NbRTH SHORE DR HEMCPXN iTbRFEXTED LAND cm OF.ORONO lake accesO lanes 4/19/70 ST DEED lS405t X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCU^TE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS Xt APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEM«PIN fcoUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF HY KN0MLE06E AND BELIEF. 10-2-V ,DATE f I. ••. • -i.'. « • •J h SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) O-TS* CALCULATION WORKSHEET 75-250* £ A. .IKHII V<7 HARDrOVFW IN ZONE House Lenfih Width X X X B. C. Garage __ 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 -s- B fpnPnSED TTARDCqVEW IN ZONE A. House / C'Vt X X X Width \x. B. Garage _ C. Driveway _ \7- 1 ^X X . ) D. Sidewalk X X E, .'atio/Deck X X \ 0 \ ^ F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic a\ i X X X •JO G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 7 ^ B QO'^O 250-500’ X 100 X 100 = 500-1000* • H • W w-V 4 S wO D SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B S.F. J _ s.F.'i; _________S.F. S.F. 3 J S.F " S.F. I .ij?- S.F." S.F. 7/ S.F. S.F. 'SiO S.F. V S.F. > S.F. " S.F. S.F. V?3 ® Fw. • 1 • / 70^0 S.F. A B %fO Mun CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR RICHARD CLIFFORD OF LOTS 5 & 6, BLOCK 3. BERGQUIST AND WICKLUND’S PARK * • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA s /T,f0o fra.rr rA,A», LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lots 5 & 6, Block. 3, "Bergqulst and Wlcklund*s Park" . p; denotes Iron.marker (lotf.g): denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum denotes existing contour line, mean sea level datum • t ■ f Bearings shown arfe based upon an assumed datum. This survey Intends to show the bound aries of Lhe above described property. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. jff: denotes distance as shown on the plat of "Bergqulst and Wlcklund's P Coffin & Gronberg, Inc. t I •! . i ,m I X • - '>ifi J Ijilili I • • I iiit ir.Kk Asnitit' • \1\ i.i: ihi I hereby cerlify lhal Ihls survey w,is prepared by me or iiiuler my direci super vision, and lhal I am a duly registered Civil nn^ineer aiul Land Surveyor under the laws of die Slale of Minnesota. Mark S. Grunlierg Miimesota License Number 12755 DAiu 2-7-96 soM i: r'rgo* loiiNo 96-Oli 96-OIS 7/ ’ 1> Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we)vSa riXL^Th^t^ U T 50 AJ ~T)jP , [print name(s(|j"[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 confinn for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor ’s project or use requires Council approval. Property Owne Date 3 • ^ I.. “3 ^ ~ Property Owner Date I (we) ' bkS/kJ /\CUJ^^Y [print narae(s); of V" Y [print address] (7A^<J)n 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 o<^ the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Date (o ~ ?Co k 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. 4-04-1996 3:4G»3f;|FROM BONESTROO “ ASSOC 612 636 1311 P. 1 ^ m Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects AprU 4, 1996 Af>^rUk a ffoc^:tS. kH. it .v» Action, OPOOfn^ffy Otto Q. SOf^eurea. • ^oitoh C. Antferiin. KE. • MArvm t Soryjia. Pt • QiZh^ra L turner P£. • Cienn k C.qok. • Thomnt S Novts. ,*t • 'ToDert 0- Scrtun c^^t, PS • JOtry A dnuroon. PE • PoOert W ftoic^e Pff. snd Swk/Mi M eotnfn. C PA.. Senior Asioct.rtr *^fKt09tS' HCwird A S/«h^ro. Pg^ • Kertn A Oo^don. Pg. « ffoberr <?. f C • Ptcnmd W ^OJtCf. Ft. • DpviU O. Lesvota. Ft. • PoDert C PuSSO. A I A. • M.'vn A. H«tSOA. Ft • Micfu^ei T K^gtwam. F.t • Ttd K F*'?»a Ft Oftfzcs; St. Piui «Ad Pcc‘‘«st^. MN • Vtqudit W! Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re; Clifford Residence File No. 139-2125 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the house and grading plans submitted by Richard Clifford for the property at 4760 North Shore Drive. The proposed grading plan is acceptable from an engineering perspective and we would recommend approval. Although it appears that the existing ditch on County Road No. 19 can accommodate the additional drainage from the site, the plans should be submitted to Hennepin County for their review. Silt fence should be in place on the southwesterly boundary of the construction site until vegetation is established. 0 Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. JL^ Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 - St. Paul. MN 55113*3898 • 612-636-4600 Sr ®—A\ \ Q i:'.'Mi... *l > > ^ r'. — — A « \ • :^V L >• < 1 .........• fv < iV .. ///W X •'S3?' A=8^ I ,-K CT. SE<^jC>4b SQMS.: ’/5 ✓ f — /' . V 1 i-.^-r^ •.’ *r r“ *1—^S^r--------. -«-i *: , ••Mil CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR RICHARD CLIFFORD OF U)TS 5 & 6. BLOCK 3, BERGQUIST AND WICKLUND'S PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA LEGAL DESCR PTION OF PREMISES: Lots 5 & 6, Block 3, "Bergquist and Wick 1und's . ark" o: denotes iron marker (toi9.B): denotes existing spot elevation mean se level datum denotes existing contour line, mean se. level datum Bearings shiwn are based upon an assumed datim. Jr tm 5 /7f900 i TCk,rr. fT0*T. . MO. ei€t^MTt0A/J /) fiMAAag s /fiZ9.5 z) TtfA OA s /02J, 5 i)^OU>etr AtafiA Z /02O.0 This survey intends to show the bound aries of th. ibove described property. It does not liurport to show any other improvement or encroachments. denotes distance as shown on the plat of “llergquist and Wicklund's Park CoiiiN & Gronbiug , Inc . I) ^lll I. • >ti. I'liiiiii' 1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me lu uuier my direct super vision. and that I am a duly registered Civil Engineer ai' i I and Surveyor under the laws of the Stale of Minnesota. . Ml <. N V'. >.iin • M\‘"I'x • i: in ini Mark S. Grunburg Mlimuvola Llwwntu Numbur 13759 DATE 2-7-95 SCALE 0 lOUNO. 94'OIS •/5206865 City of OROINO CIT V Of RESOUITIOM OP THE CITY COUNCIL NO. *308_________ 'ORONO k M W>l u »n I . A VAUAKX TO nmxczfAL sonao oora SKTXoa io«24, wnovriBicm s FILS #1029 mU MiMN DtMY V11BIA8# L«o and Haila Clifford (horoinaftor *tha applicanta*) ara tha ovnara of tha proparty locatao at 4760 Worth Sbora Driva within tha City of Or one (harainaftar *City”) and logally daacribod aa followai Lota 5 and 6# Block 3, Bargquiat and Wickland'a Park, (harainaftar *tha prcparty*)i and WMEMMAB, tha applicant haa appliad to tha City for a yarianca to Municipal Zoning Coda Baction 10.24# Bubdiviaion 5 IB) to approva tha conatruction of a raaidaoca on a aubatandard lot of araa 17#030 aqoara faat whara 43#560 aquara faac of araa ia raquirad# and width of 100 faat whara a lot width of 140 faat ia raquirad. WOW, T .1 4 « t VMM, BB ITBMSOLTBD by tha City Council of Or J-V; /application 2. Th. prop«rty 1. loe.t.d.la th. LB-IB Slagl.jpodly .UJcMbera-^^ R.sl4mtial ZOBiaf Olatxiot* ^ - 3. This 1. » r.D.wal «pplleatloii for ..ri.no.. gr.at.d pr..ioa.ly by th« Council on Mov«iib.r 13> 1964 p.r ...olotion Me. 1696 of r.eord. Th. .pprov.l grnnt.4 with that Raaolotion aspir.d on Vovaabar 13, 1965 baeau*. tha applicant, failad to apply for a building parmit within tha ona-yaar tiaa lialt. 4. Tha Orono Planning Conaiaaion raviawad thia application on May 19, 1966, and racoMBandad approval of tha propoaad variance baaad upon tha following finding.! A) Vo other adjacent land la available to be cooibinad with tha property. B) Bawar la available and tha property haa bean aaaaaa.d for footaga and one aawar unit. Page 1 of 4 r;»T y ORONO City of ORONO RESOUfTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2008 C) Tbit lot ii coDSiotont with th« oxlstlng dovolopaont pattora of tba naighborhood. 0) Tba flndingt of fact of Raaolntlon 1698 ara atill appropriata. 5. Tbara appaar to ba no otbar altarnativa uaaa of tba proparty. <• Tba building aovalopa for this lot with atandard aatbacka of tba LS-IB Zoning District it sufficient to davalop a rasidanca and tba ordinary driveways and appurtenant iaprovanants while still Mating hardcover raquiresMnts. 7. Tba City Council has conaidarsd this application including tba findings and racouandations of the Planning CosBissionr reports by City staff, couants by the applicant and tba affect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of tba lity. \ V { •-V s 8. Tba City Council finds than the conditions existing on this property ara peculiar to it and do not apply general ly to otbar property in this zoning district} that granting tba variance would not advarsaly affect traffic conditions, light, air nor j, pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property} would not naraly serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is ‘.'i^®******^ alleviate a deMnatrable hardship or difficulty} is^K^^i.., to ^fmvym m substantial property right of tbaj«t5^*h .--♦.^! .’5'applicant}*and would be in keeping with the spirit and inteitt of « . Pthe Zoning Coda. and Conprahansiva Plan of the City. ^ J'..Vrr-4-^ ___. ' ’ • r •' * :i t ooKLonow. OBDB JUD coMDinon Based upon the above fi]idings. the Orooo City Cou^libazab^^ij^ ^'grants'*a ' variance to the Municipal Zoning Coda Section 10,24, . ~ Subdivision 5 (B) to approve the construction of a rasidanea on a snbatandard lot of area 17,030 square feat where 43.560 square feat of «<sa is required, and a lot width of 100 feet where a lot width of 140 foot is required, subject to the following conditions} 1. PayMnt of 8225.00 sewer unit charge with the building pamdt. 2. Dedication of the platted portions of County ig. 3. «o setback or hardcover variances will be granted. MaxiauB hardcover on the lot to be 5,109 square feet or less including buildings, driveways, patios, decks, etc. Page 2 of 4 City of ORONO CITY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2008 ORONO 4. Access to tbs property is to be gained vis anlaproved Perk Avenue to the north onto Tonkevlew Lens* S. PsyMnt of stenderd building peralt fees Including SAC end perk dedicstlon fee et the tlae the permit Is Issued. 6. Authorities granted by this variance run with tbs property net with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 9. 19S7). 7. Violation of or non'complienee with any of the terms and eondltlens of this variance shall constitute a violation of the soning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdameanor. 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 assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. 'fi the Orono City Council on this 9th day of June. •rk Pr0p«rty Oimdrs i ■ r ^ vr . A * ^4 : .. • \3 of 4 1 caty of ORONO Cl T > 'Jf ORONO RfSOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1698_ _ _ _ _ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO nUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION S (B> ZONING FILE NO. 873 whereas. Loo otuS IU.‘il-« Clifford ter **th» applicant") !• owner of the property lo'"-'*od at •l/ow North Shore Drive within the Cltv of Oreno Ni.^rwafLcr "City") and legally described as follcwsi Lots 5 and 6, blonl-. l<cr-)gijict and UicMuiid's Park Ihereaftor "property") , <n.i WHEREAS, the upoli'*..pf >pptied to the City for a variance* to Municipal Zoning Lc>d*i section 10.24, Subdivision t» <8) to approve thu construction o) a residence on a substandard lot of area 17,o30 square feet whero -li.Sbo square foot of area ia required, and width of lOO fi»r»t where a lot width of 140 feet is required. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Oronog hlnnesot’A: FINDINGS Upplication w-4*4 ro^iowoJ as Zoninu Tils MOe ■' ■ ‘ ■- ■’.» »?*■’ ^?«Ji'»-t.The' property •' wr; j Th#‘^‘prcipsr*t.V ■ i •‘I in i LH*IB Glnuls Ks^ily LakMhoro Rirsidaotial .'"fit i«i Piitricte 'Oronctl Planning Lomm^^ion rsviQ*««d thim application on October 22, and rocosmt^dsd approval of the pro;fO^►'^1 vari .*nci? b.i*.t*d upon th# fol lowing f indingta: a) ffo othor adjacint land i*i available to bo comblnc^d with the prcprrtve b) 5uw4.-r IS .iv.filvhlc ‘f»d ►ho property has boon uocusf^c*d tor root.MU? *nc1 one# *.:i?wc#r unite I *1 /i/gvac t«'{^ O/- //,/:>_ rt I *.. - . *»♦ i ... . •aw- - • ^ .■«aj 1 city of ORONO Cl TV ORONO RCCOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. - 1698________ C) This lot IS consistent with the devo^^pment pattern of the nciqhborhood. existing 4. There appear to be no other altcrn^itivo uses of the property. b* Iho building cn/clopo for this lot Nith standard setbaclis of the LN-llJ ronmg district is sufficient to develop a residence and the ordinary driveways and appurtenant improvements while still meeting hardcover requirements. 6. Tho City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the owner and the effect of tho proposed variance on tho health, safety and welfare of tho community. V 7. The City Council finds that tho 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 firo hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to tho owner, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or dif ficulty;^ ^is necessary to preserve a substantial property-^right.of the owner; and would be in keeping with and intent.of the Zoning Code and *^/Comprehenetve Plan of tho. City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS 1 . r» * Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to llunicipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B> to approve the coneLruction of a residence on a substandard lot of area 17,030 sq.'^^u feet where 43,S60 square feet of area is required, and a lot width of 100 feet where a lot width of 140 feet is required, subject to the following conditionsi *•»* t I. Payment of $22S.OO sewor unit charge with tho building permit. 2. Dedication of the platted portions of County Road 19. 3. No setback or hardcover variances will be granted. Maximum hardcover on the lot to be 3,10V square feet or less including buildings, driveways, p.^tins, decks, etc. Page 2 of 4 CttyorORCX^O -ft i*»« Z» AecM« to th« propurty is to Do n»*nort via uniaprovptf ^arl*. Avpnua to tho north nnte rontrayiCM Lane. 4* PoyMHit of -;itandjrd betiding porott mcludtnq (MC and pork dpdicatimi fee at the ttoo the pproit is tstupd. S» AuthoritiPS «|Tpritifd by this vanaore run with ttip property not mtn th# cmoipt, tnit »ru evroisstwo only piid dust bo *wurri«.*<d by application inr 4 (•ijiteinn porptt Mi thin nn«i yp*/r o* the date of Coeni.il ''Dn. •>.'.'I« or thip variancM Mill oisnire nn that dato •Mn.Lmbt.-r li, IVlIbi* 4. Violation ot or nor.eoapltanco-aitft .mi *, of tho t«ros mm conditions of •.his veriinco Cii.*ll <*rn»:tifytc a violation Of *ho 2onln«i redo* *ihai t •lutonaticai 1 / ^criMn.ite -yny authority Or>nfod heroin* >nd sticlt bo punt *hvbl ao •• aicdnaeaner* 7. Tho undorst<ine<l ouner nas road, ondr .*«:tood and hprpQy apreos to the t>:ras of this resolution >nd on behalf of hlPSolf, hiE hotrs* successors and af.str|iio. hereby aorops to tho recordin'-, of M.ie resolution in tl.c if title of the prep«*rty. m • •••foptod ' b> tho I'ronn uit-y rouncil on i.hi** I :tii dp-/ of , 19M. ATTatir* i h Dorothy N. Hpllin«i^Ctlv Clork » ; { .{;ltiiry »:o ^4* (tf ^epprty Omopt • 44 « »• • im • 4 r^Mt* *• Of •! i :■{ yra a* ' -hi* . TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:April 12, 1996 SUBJECT: #2128 Orono Hockey Boosters, Inc. - 1025 Old Cr\stal Bay Road Conditional Use PermitA^ariances - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB Total area = 4.4 acres Brief Review of Application Applicant is applying for a conditional use permit for an enclosed ice arena on the school property per current code amendment. Application involves variances to the required number of parking stalls to support the use. Applicant also seeks a variance to the front street setback for exterior parking area adjacent to Old Crystal Bay Road. Applicant is in the process of developing an agreement with the School District, the draft terms of the agreement have been submitted with the application. The 4.4 acre parcel is included in a Comp Plan Amendment that would expand the MUSA to include the entire property. Met Council has not completed its review. The property is also located within Area Four of Highway 12 study by the City. Applicant has applied for a variance to the moratorium to be reviewed by the Council at a public hearing to be held on April 22, 1996 at 7:05 p.m. Other issues involving sewer capacity and the ability of the existing sewer lines to maintain additional waste water from the project is currently being studied by the Cities of Orono and Long Lake. Metering is currently underway and the findings of the results of the metering will be submitted in a month, fhe following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.20, Subd. 3(A-1) - Conditional use permit required for construction of indoor ice arena on Orono School District property. The standards of the code amendment are reviewed below: A.The facility shall be located on the same tax parcel as the principal high school use. School District shall complete the legal combination of the 4.4 acre parcel with the High School parcel. Zoning File #2128 April 12, 1996 Page 2 2. 3. B.Setbacks for ice arena Required = 50' West = 50’ North = 49 ’ at northeast comer of structure. Applicant can adjust structure to meet 50’ setback. East = 180’ South = 180’ No variance required. C. The structure will not be separated from the High School by a public road. D.The facility shall be owned by a non-profit organization under a lease agreement with the School District. Review page 1 of Terms of Lease Agreement, Exhibit C, the non-profit organization will be a newly fonned Minnesota non-profit corporation that will maintain Section 501 (C-3) status specially as a supporting organization to the Orono Hockey Boosters Inc. E.Applicant shall demonstrate financial ctqjability to complete construction of facility. Applicant has confirmed that they have collected $1,625,000 in cash and hard pledges, review Exhibit B, page I. Refer to Exhibit C, the School District would provide Orono Hockey Boosters with an additional $175,000 bringing the total of committed of funds received to $1,800,000 or 83% meeting the required 80% of committed funds. The City Council shall decide how they wish the financial confirmation to be made. Section 10.61, Subd. 2(A-3) - Use is permitted as a conditional use permit in a residential zoning district Such uses are permitted 12 s.f. of signage. Applicant should provide more detail information on their signage needs as a variance may need to be granted. Such signage will be limited to an 8' height at a minimum 5' setback from lot line. Section 10.61, Subd. 5(A) - Exterior parking setback variance. A. Front/street setback Required = 50’ Proposed at Old Crystal Bay Road = 2T Variance = 29' or 58% B Side/rear setback Required = 10' Proposed at west/rear line = 48.3' Proposed at south side lot line = 25.34 ’ No variance required. L.. Zoning File #2128 April 12, 19% Page 3 4.Section 10.61, Subd. 10 • Parking stall variance. Subsection E - Churches, auditorium, etc. One space for each 4 seats. Subsection F - Theater, athletic field. One space for each 6 seats. Staff has opted for Subsection E requiring 1 space for each 4 seats. Required = 200 Proposed = 88* Variance = 112 or 56% •Applicant’s addendum. Exhibit B, notes 100 stalls. Applicant should provide clarification or locate the additional 12 stalls at our meeting. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant’s Addendum C - Outline of Terms of Lease Agreement with School District and Applicant D - Property Owners List E - Plat Map F - Gustafson Report 4/10/96 G - Soil Test Map, G & E Report H - Gustafson Report 1/5/% I - Orono Hockey Boosters Letter to Jim Graybeck 4/2/96 J - Orono Hockey Boosters Letter to G Timm 4/2/96 K - Section 10.20, Subd. 3(A) - Ordinance Amendment L - Existing Topography M - Floor Plan N - Grading Plan O - Storm Water/Utility Plan P - Roof Detail Q - Elevations R - Exterior Electric Plan S - Planting/Landscape Plan Review Comments Building and Site Plan The structure is 163’x25 1’ and will meet the required 50' setback fi-om all lot lines. Per the definition of a legal building height the legal height of the strucUire is 20.5' defined at the west elevatioi.. Review Exhibit Q, for peak elevations for remaining sides. Applicant has had at least two information meetings with adjacent neighbors. One of the main concerns with the building was the starkness of the structure at County Road 6 or the north side. Review Exhibit Q, the north elevation. Zoning File #2128 April 12, 1996 P^e 4 the structure has been reduced in height from a 40'+ peak height to 30'. Translucent panels shall be installed resembling windows in an attempt to soften solid precast concrete walls. The entire structure will be constructed of precast concrete wall panels. Foundation will be slab on grade. The 800 seat capacity bleachers will also be constructed of a precast concrete. The structure will be fully sprinkled. Review Exhibit M, the strucuire has been designed internally to minimize any noise producing elements that might impact adjacent residence. Another concern cited at the information meetings was need for applicant to minimize impact on residence to immediate west. Applicant shall meet with the owner when strucmre is erected to discuss strategic placement of plantings along west lot line (review Exhibit J, letter to G. Timm). Applicant also plans to discuss the installation of an appropriate type fence and to locate the fence with the goal of reducing the impact of use and location of arena structure. Parking is shown in the east within the south yard. Note parking has been moved out of the Type I wetland. The remaining Type I wetland that runs along Old Crystal Bay Road along the east lot line will also be protected with the installation of the detention pond in the east yard. As noted above the parking in the east or street yard will require a variance setback. Applicant's current site plan shows 88 stalls (4 handicap). Applicant’s addendum suggests 100, we should ask applicant to locate additional 12 stalls. The terms of the agreement note that applicant and School District will be entering into a joint parking agreement with School. As requested, a walking lane has been provided along the east lot line. Note engineer ’s report. Exhibit F, asks for an additional walking lane at the west side. This may have an impact on the School's use of the practice soccer and football field to the immediate south of the 4.4 acre site. It is not certain why this pathway would also be needed as we have never noted this need in our earlier review. Review Exhibits N and O, surface runoff from the developed site will drain directly to the detention pond in the east yard. Note swales have been installed along the west lot line directing drainage either to the north or south then draining around the structure via swales or storm sewer. Grading/Drainage/Access Refer to Exhibit F, the engineer has approved the grading plan and access location. The engineer and the School District's advice to the applicant are well-founded. The second lift of bituminous should be delayed for a year allowing for initial settlement of the ground. The engineer has specific guidelines for installation of the paving within driving lanes and in the parking area. Another issue raised by adjacent neighbors was the question as to why the structure could not be moved as far south as possible in order to preserv'e view of residence at immediate west lot line. Review page 2 of Gustafson’s April 10th report, the last sentence in the grading paragraph, he notes the following, "The soils found at boring 95-4 near the wetlands, (refer to Exhibit G), are considerably worse than at other areas on the site and it is wise to avoid construction there." The applicant has chosen to Zoning File #2128 April 12, 1996 Page 5 move the structure as far north as possible to stay away from the bad soils area so as not to increase construction costs. Utilities/Easement Refer to Exhibits F and H, waste water shall be pumped from a grinder pumping station through a force main to the existing gravity sewer line within Old Crystal Bay Road. Gustafson notes the pumping station should be located near the driveway for future maintenance purposes. Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall prepare construction plans and specifications for the pumping station, force main and water main with as-built plans provided to the City upon completion. The City shall take easements over all lines located within Old Crystal Bay Road right- of-way. Note 33' of Old Crystal Bay Road has not been dedicated to the public, fhc City will ask for easements over the detention pond and storm sewers. The Type I wetland should be protected via private covenants to be filed on the chain of title. It is possible that the conditional use permit resolution that wall include an attachment of the site plan locating the wetlands can guarantee the same degree of protection. Refer to Exhibit H, Gustafson's report of January 5, 199i, specifically page 2, third paragraph, the engineer asks for drainage and utility easements along the perimeters of the property as we are not dealing with a subdivision, the applicable code for this review would not require the granting of easements with a conditional use permit review. We don't see a reason for asking the County to review this plan as we are proposing no alteration within the County right-of-way nor does this applicant propose access on to the County Road nor would the City encourage direct access on to the County Road. MUSA Amendment/Sewcr Capacity Members are aware that the City has filed a Comp Plan Amendment dealing w'ith the realignment and expansion of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area within the City for not only ten specific neighborhoods but also the School property. The Metropolitan Council has asked for an extension of the review time and we will probably not hear from the Council until the end of May. Ron Moorse has met with Carl Schenk of the Met Council on April 12, 1996 and advised that Mr. Schenk felt that the School property could be reviewed separately and possibly placed on a consent agenda at an upcoming meeting. He will be checking with other members of staff of the Met Council to determine if an "amendment of the original amendment can be expedited for the School. The applicant had been advised by the City that a building permit could not be issued until Met Council had approved the plan amendment. Another major obstacle is the issue of sewer capacity. It is not clear whether Orono has additional capacity in the existing lines down stream. It may be necessary to complete certain improvements for increased capacity for the City. Both Orono and the City of Long Lake are in the process of Zoning File #2128 April 12, 1996 Page 6 metering the down stream areas to determine what improvements, if any, will be needed. This will probably not be accomplished until mid-May. Staff notes that intense use of the ice hockey facility is in the winter months when I & I is not of issue. The City has set aside funds for the upgrading of down stream facilities based on the original Comp Plan Amendment No. 2 (1987) improvements proposed for the Highway 12 area. The City will work with Long Lake to make the necessary improvement by a reasonable date. Applicant's architect shall be responsible for presenting final construction plans to the appropriate agency of the Metropolitan Council to determine the exact number of SAC units. Applicant shall be charged sewer and water units based on the number of SAC units. Based on 1996 fee schedule combined sewer unit and water unit charge will be $8,525.00. Landscaping/F encing/Signage/Exterior Lighting The landscaping plan has been found to be adequate. The applicant will be working with the property owner to the immediate west to select location of additional plantings. A neighbor in attendance at one of the informational meetings noted that the allotment of $29,000 for plantings of this scale is not realistic. Applicant may have to phase the planting schedule over a two to three year period. Signage information has not been provided but applicant's signage is limited to 12 s.f. If they seek additional area, they must advise staff before the application is scheduled before the Council so that signage area variance can be determined. It is not clear whether Exhibit R, shows the location of exterior lights on the property. Applicant should advise as to the location and type of lighting to be used. Lighting must be shielded downward away from residential boundaries and public roadway. Operating Board The facility will be operated by a Board of Directors consisting of five members, three shall be appointed by the Orono Hockey Boosters. Applicant proposes that the School District appoint the two remaining Board members in an attempt to establish an official property owner liaison position. The Board, in turn, will hire a professional arena manager or management firm to maintain the facility. During the heav'y use months of the winter season, the facility will be operated firom 5.30 a.m. through 11:30 p.m. The applicant has provided no information on the off season hours of use. Review Exhibit B, applicant's addendum specifically page 3, off season uses are reviewed as follows: School District Educational activities for school productions, meetings, affairs or other flmd raisers and may also serve as classrooms. Zoning File #2128 April 12.1996 Page 7 Community Education Uses such as classes for roller blading and other recreational programs, for teen dances and other vouth activities. Youth Athletic Association Softball baseball, soccer or tennis for indoor practice with batting cages and screens, Community At Large Meeting space and other appropriate functions and events, Should the City consider controls on events that fall under or are defined as community at large ftmctions? What about control of hours of use during the off season time? Variance The applicant seeks approval of two variances - the pariung setback and variance for required number of parking stalls. The parking stall variance of 112 stalls is less objectional as the school and hockey arena will share parking facilities. Should there be two pathways accessing parking facilities at hockey arena from School? Are there other improvements needed such as signage to alert visitors to hockey site if there is an overflow and need for additional parking. Other recommendations ot the Planning Commission should be noted. Is the 29* setback variance from Old Crystal Bay Road of concern? Note the paiking lots of the High School, Elementary School and Middle School to the south would not meet the required 50' setback to the lot line. Wetland vegetation is proposed along Old Crystal Bay Road adjacent to parking lot. What other types of planting or vegetation should be considered - note also the need to protect sighting distance at the intersection. Options of Action To approve as proposed or amended. Your recommendation of approval must include the following conditions: 1 Upon application for a building permit the following must have been completed or submitted to the City: A. Legal combination of properties by School District B. Permit from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. C. Final plans and specs for extension of the utilities for engineer's review., I Zoning File #2128 April 12, 1996 Page 8 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Written report from applicant’s architect confirming number of SAC units required by Met Council. E. Grading/'paving plans to reflect Orono's engineer's corrections. F.Payment of sewer and water unit fees to City of Orono to be based on number of total SAC units charged. Applicant/ or owner to grant drainage easement over detention pond and storm sewer facilities. Prior to scheduling the ^plication before the Council, applicant shall provide a fuial executed draft of the grounds agreement with the School District. Applicant to obtain an access permit for the new curb cut from the Public Works Department of the City of Orono. Planning Commission to include any specific amendments to landscape plan, controls or limits on use of facility during off season, limitations on hours of use in off season, northeast comer of structure to be realigned to meet 50' setback from County Road right-of-way line, parking agreement included within "ground lease"... others Approval of variances per findings or hardships set forth above or in applicant's letters to neighbors and addendum (Exhibits B, I and J). Applicant to be placed on notice that a building permit cannot be issued until Metropolitan Council has acted on the Comp Plan Amendment extending the sewer to the 4.4 acre parcel and issue of sewer capacity and defining type of upgrade or improvement needed within downstream lines. It will be necessary that both the City of Orono and Long Lake agree to the increase of waste water to enter jointly used lines. 4 r nftR-22-lS96 13:30 DCrtwNcT feHUCD^TSoN 0^£. r . u«.' «->•♦ S 1 /w CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE AFFUCATION Appikatkm i _ Dctc Rtccitcd 3-c3i9 Aoioau FaW ^3^-^-----Pr Type of ApplieloD lo be Filed Propeity Identific«bon Number (P.I.D.) —- ----------/7>oa affucant Ko<*=er Addr^ Phone Phone City OWNER (if different thMi applicant) ivif I^ciiy j^dfeJ ‘il Date Property Acquired--------------H ^Q-■—-—■ I "•** adjacent parcels of land. fees . conditional use permits - s 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application SnS.OO Residential Accessory Use ’ S250.00 Inatitulional (church, school, etc.) 5225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ’ $200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg 5300.00 Coininercial/Indusirial Use -------- - designated weUand or floodplain ------- Grading and fiUing - 101 cu. yd. or more ------- Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule r ,• % SISO.OO Renewal Fee (no change from onginal applicaUon) Afler-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee City of Qrono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. HI S5323 (612)473-7357 OTHER ^j50.^™iSmcrdd Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) " ^ $300.00 Vacation $200.00 Easement Vacation 03/22/% I6t44:ll UM> USE (yRicnTim 1 I 230.00 •2128 OROO HOOEY 1 B 250.00 1ERS 0.00 0.00 ^ $100.00 Easement Vacaiijn With Subdivision --------$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ~ $350.00 Coraprehensive Plan Amendment $100.00 Appeals SUBTDTM. TAX TOTAL SAL£ RECEI%D 250.000.00250.00250.00 " Other - see Fee Schedule CHANEE CLEIKI03 TBA 0.00 1165 PRESENT USE OF Present Zoning District f^ p^t Use of Property ----------Readennal ^ Other fspecify) nPR-22-1996 13:33 612 334 3332 99>J P.02 J nP«-22-lSS6 13:30 LOUiNc I CT'IUCSI^C 1 3U<N wWwte • • 7 7 ^ x-:‘ ? -. ir # 9 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. S. 9. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. ____ Completed Applicaiioii Foim. • j' . ■ List of 0»«B witto 3S(y. • a^obfi.^ bbeb »i o»p fcpm H««pi« Cotmijr Dep«l««t of CoiS^on plon. if «|>plieabl« ($«* staff for requiems). ^ " As an to this application, ple^ attach a sepant y persons you wish notified of thb application. ”»«“r?rT”r—- submitted.) Tb« Applicant and Ptopeity 0««r must sign this applicati(^ Please rnnember that yow U not complete if the above information has not been meluded. CeitSficntion by Clerical Deparimenl that Land Use Applicj^ is complete, of Clerical Sta£f;_--------------------------------------------------------- TK provide •!! infonnation required or requested by the Zoning .. fus- 6 1?«Ibv^»^wledgcs and agrees to this application and furth» authorized f\rv ^^^ \ I ^ _____Date ^ (iiTO ih« Cify offlcRi 25 Owner's signature A rPR-22-1996 13:33 612 334 3332 SSZ P.03 / . • ,! i -* ORONO HOCKEY BOOSTERS, INC. ■0X205 LONG LAKE. MN 55554 March 22, 1996 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Long Lake, MN 55356 Re: Orono Ice Arena Dear Jeanne: Orono Hockey Boosters, Inc. is today submitting its application for a conditional use permit for its indoor ice arena project north of Orono High School. In this letter, we want to cover several topics that aie associated with that application and that are not otherwise addressed in the application materials. Project status Update For purposes of our overall project schedule, we are aiming at a construction start on May 1, and a project substantial completion on October 1, 1996. We understand that those dates depend on our meeting the City's standards for approval of our conditional use permit by the Planning Commission on April 16, and by the City Council on April 22, and also depend on our having figured out with the City what the timing can be for issuance of a building permit. Achieving that schedule also requires that all our project pricing and our fundraising arrangements be completed by the second week of April, and at this point we remain on track to accomplish that. Currently, we have raised $1,625,000 in cash and hard pledges against a projected total cost to open the project (with some interior improvements still to be completed) of $2,150,000. Mark Engebretson President 475-3460 i Hs. Jeanne Habusth March 22, 1996 Page 2 N MUSA Line Extension We understand that final City permission to commence construction of this project depends on the Met Council's approval of a comprehensive plan amendment which extends the MUSA line to cover our site. If, however, that amendment continues to be delayed, we would like to be investigating with the City whether there are any approaches under which we could still commence construction. Our architectural and soils engineering firms tell us that the watershed district has finally determined that there is some technical wetlands on our site, and we have reconfigured the parking lot (as shown on the site plans included in the application) to avoid that wetlands area. That reconfigured parking produces approximately 100 spaces. We have committed to the School District that we will continue to work on the wetlands and parking issues, and we expect to be helped in that regard by pending legislation which will loosen wetlands requirements in situations like ours. Our aim will be to return the parking capacity to the 130 stalls which we had originally programmed. Ownership of Improvements We are planning to have the arena improvements owned by a separate non-profit corporation, which will operate technically as ^ Section 509(a)(3) supporting organization under the Internal Revenue Code. That entity will support Orono Hockey Boosters, Inc., itself a Section 501(c)(3) organization. As a supporting organization, the arena entity will have a majority of its board of directors (three of five) appointed by Orono Hockey Boosters. Our current thinking is to have the School District and the City appoint the other two board members, and establish an official property owners' liaison position. That arena entity will, in turn, hire a professional arena manager or management firm. School District Lease We have commenced the ;::)rocess of documenting the actual lease agreement with the School District, with r Ks. Jeanne Mabusth March 22, 1996 Page 3 7 ; • •/ A ,C J* »*«/• • idt execution of that document targeted for mid-April. An outline of the lease's terms, which we have presented to the School District and its coxinsel as a drafting starting point, is enclosed. We expect to sign a lease with the School District after it has approved all aspects of our design, our costs and our fundraising, so that the lease itself will be contingent only upon receipt of all necessary City approvals. Project Uses Our initial programming is to operate the arena with ice from mid-September through mid-March. That ice season is subject to expansion, potentially to year-round ice, as and when demand for indoor ice warrants. E>uring the ice season, the project will be used by o\ir youth hockey program for girls and boys, the Orono High School boys* and girls' varsity and junior varsity teams, figure skating and skating schools (perhaps run through the School District's Community Education function), other contract users such as figure skaters and recreational hockey leagues, and open skating for the community at large. Any available excess time will be sold to youth hockey associations or other users outside of our community. Off season, the project will be used by: the School District, for educational activities (using our meeting room and the arena floor as "classrooms"), and for school productions, meetings, fairs or other fundraisers, and so on Community Education for classes, for rollerblading and other recreational programs, and for teen dances and other youth activities other youth athletic associations, such as softball, baseball, soccer, or tennis, for indoor practice with batting cages, nets and screens the community at large, for meeting space and for other appropriate functions and events Our proposed hours of use, and other use restrictions, are set forth in the lease outline. 1 i Ms. Jeanne Mabusth March 22, 1996 Page 4 •4 J i • Parking The project's parking lot will be large enough to accoBUBodate use of the project, except for hone High School hockey games (and possibly special events that have been coordinated with the School District). As the summary of the School District lease indicates, the School District will permit overflow parking on its parking lots. That overflow use will occur during home hockey games, and we will be working with the High School athletic department on the extent to which those games can be scheduled around other large parking requirements such as a home varsity basketball game. We note that we are currently proposing with the athletic department to have the boys' and girls' varsity and junior varsity hockey games still played at Pond Arena for the first year or two of our operation, as our project may not open fully "game ready" with an operational concession stand and completed team rooms. As the lease summary also indicates, the School District will retain rights to park on the arena's parking lot to meet its own needs (primarily day parking by high school students). Parking Lot Curbing and Paving Given the condition of the soils on the site, particularly under the parking lot location, the School District has suggested from its experience that we defer paving and curbing work for one year. That time will let us test the soils remediation and parking lot preparation, and let us benefit from the additional compaction that actual use of the lot will bring. If you have any questions, or need more information, please let me know. with you. We look forward to working on this application Very truly yours, Mark Engebretson MFE/pkb 4597 • *N Parties: Premises: ill Term: Annual Rent: Use: \ ^ / v^v ■ i OUTLINE OF TERMS ORONO ICE ARENA GROUND LEASE Independent School District 278 ("Landlord") Orono Arena Company ("Tenant") Tenant will be a newly-formed Minnesota non-profit corporation. It will apply for and maintain Section 501(c)(3) status, specifically as a Section 509(a)(3) supporting organization, with Orono Hockey Boosters, Inc. ("OHB") as the supported organization Approximately 4.4 acres at the southwest corner of Old Crystal Bay Road and Hennepin County 6 a complete legal description will be attached as Exhibit A 55 years, commencing May 1, 1996 One dollar due on the first day of the Term, and on each and every anniversary thereof Construction, operation, repair and replacement of em indoor ice arena tenant is obligated to maintain ice in the arena for at least six months each school year, commencing on or about September 15 of each school year during the off-season, use of the arena will be limited to sporting, recreational, educational and other community purposes, and for such private meetings, shows or expositions or other programs as may be reasonably approved by Landlord from time to time All uses of the arena shall be subject to the following requirements: during the ice season, rental of ice will not commence before 5:30 a.m., and will not extend past 11:30 p.m. A 11 '• ii Landlord's Rights: r ® in all uses of the arena, priority will be given first to civic, community or non-profit uses, and second to private for-profit uses • in all uses of the arena, priority will be first be given to uses or users serving the Orono School District, and second to uses or users serving areas outside of the Orono School District • the arena parking lot will be used only for parking purposes • no smoking and no alcoholic beverages will be allowed in the arena at any time or in any circumstances • Landlord and Tenant will developjMf. and review from time to time a complete set of rules and regulations for use of the arena, and Tenant will diligently enforce those rules and regulations on all arena users Landlord will hold a first priority for rental of ice in the arena for its boys' and girls' varsity and junior varsity hockey teams, subject to the following limitations: • the total number of hours for practices, scrimmages and games for such teeuns (other than playoff games) will not exceed _ _ _ _ • generally. Landlord's times for practice will commence at 2:30 p.m. on school days and run until _ _ p.m. • Landlord will cooperate with Tenant and with OHB regarding practices in the morning before school or on weekends, so that times available for OHB's youth program during school days can be improved such cooperation shall be reflected in written policies among Landlord, Tenant and OHB • Landlord will pay for all such ice at rates established annually with Tenant [c -r T. ^ ^ 1'■•I Tenant's Additional Rights: Tenant's obligations: Landlord shall be entitled to use the parking lot on the Premises for its purposes, in common with Tenant Landlord's community education programs and physical education programs will be entitled to use the arena during the ice season and the off-season, with a priority during the ice season immediately after OHB Landlord shall be entitled to use the arena for its educational and other programs during the off-season, with a first priority Tenant shall be entitled to have arena users and visitors park on the parking facilities of Landlord, as and when Tenant’s parking lot is full Landlord and Tenant expect that such overflow parking need will occur in connection with Landlord's use of the arena for varsity and junior varsity hockey games At all times during the Term, Tenant shall: perform all maintenance, repair and replacement of improvements on the Premises, interior and exterior, structural and non-structural, and ordinary and extraordinary, except that Landlord shall be responsible for cleaning, sweeping, striping, ordinary repairs and maintenance and seal coating of the parking lot; Tenant shall be responsible for replacement of the parking lot paving or curbing or significant parts thereof maintain all property and liability coverages with respect to the Premises and improvements thereon and operations therein, with Landlord named in such policies as Landlord directs pay all real estate taxes; and installments and special assessments j ♦1 . J »1 .•s payable during the Term, with a reasonable right of contest comply with all legal requirements relating to the Premises, the improvements thereon and all operations therein on or before September 1 of each school year, deliver to Landlord an annual operating and capital budget for Landlord's reasonable review and approval on a quarterly basis, deliver to Landlord operating statements for improvements on the Premises and unaudited financial statements for Tenant Negative Covenants:Tenant shall not: • make any alterations or additions to improvements on the Premises which would change their size or exterior appearance, or which would change their character or suitability for the uses specified in the Ground Lease • assign the Ground Lease or sublet the Premises in whole or in part in any fashion, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, or by operation of law, except that Tenant may assign its interest in the Ground Lease to another Minnesota non-profit corporation as long as Landlord consents to such transfer (which consent may be withheld in Landlord's sole discretion) • encumber its leasehold interest with a lien for any financing or other obligation, whether voluntarily or involuntarily — Landlord acknowledges that Tenant may incur up to $250,000 of debt in connection with the payment of project costs for the arena's development, and that such debt may be secured by Tenant's personal property % I .. t• 1 Net Lease:Except set forth with respect to the parking lot. Landlord will have no obligations of any kind with respect to the Premises or the improvements thereon or the operation thereof Default:[Usual default provisions with notice and cure rights] Damage or Destruction:[Usual provisions) Condemnation; [Usual provisions] Miscellaneous: [Usual provisions, including provision for estoppel certificates, filing of a memorandum of lease and simple reps and warranties] Initial Construction Obligations: 4564 Tenant will commence construction of the arena improvements promptly after the execution of the lease, and will pursue such construction diligently to completion. All such construction will be in accordance with legal requirements, and will be in accordance with the plans and specifications for the project approved by Landlord Tenant will cause the arena to open with indoor ice not later than October . 1996, subject to events or circumstances beyond its control Tenant shall keep Landlord advised of the progress of construction and Landlord's representative shall be entitled to attend all project meetings On or before 1996, Landlord shall pay $175,000 to Tenant, to be applied by Tenant to the costs of construction of the arena project, its parking lot and related soils correction Landlord agrees that Tenant need not complete paving and curbing work for the parking lot for a period of up to two years after project opening, so that the condition of the remediated soils under the parking lot can be tested 4 •1 _ _ _^ I ^ If v .? ■ • -I . I '•?■•■' I .■ w OOOXn» AOM r;oi^ ;<(vtxxrN Avt n U .0»tCR NAHi yStONlMft rARH INC * TAXPAVEH . ^fhMiMtE rARH INC Mil rLViNS CLOUD OR EOCN MUXRIE HN 55544 • >• 4J ' .. I • t • » NANE/AOM u:.- ICNNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHAHON SYSTEH PROPERTY OmEia LIST5® 28-118-23 51 0002 . 00058 ADDRESS UNASSICNEO SCHOOL DIST NO 278 SCHOOL OIST NO 278 485 OLD CRYSTAL DAY RO N LONC LAKE tM 55554 I V : / ' LJ!\ ' PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYERI ■■.■'v. '*■ 58' 2i-118-2S 51 0007 02881 SIXTH AVE N C R A 0 L Tim CHARLES A 6ERRY Tim . U' NAME/A00Rfnt888 SIXTH AVE N V V^;L0M8 LAKE m 5 •4 L* 55554 •.‘I '/ -4 •V PROP AOOR OHNER NANE TAXPAYER NAME/AODR * ^ ’* * '^r PROP AOOR INNER NAHi TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR ■ ‘ i ■. u‘ “*? '*1;’*' ‘ I ■ ■ 58 ''28*il8-23 42 0004 00058 ADDRESS UNASSI6NED ROGER A PAZENOIN ET AL LOU A JEAmiNE DEASLEY 1241 HAPLENOOO DR - LONG LAKE m 15554-4550 ■ ■ ' ■ .» ' 'r ; " 58 28-il8-25 45 0008 0D058 < ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO INO SiHOOL DIST NO 278 INO SCHOOL DIST NO 278 AOHIN OPPICE- SUPERINTENDENT 485 OLD CAPITAL BAY RO N LONG LAKE m 55354 • 0 'w;,** ,Vv ^ » , * 4 » • • . r I • ^ - 4 LL ■ V.’ •. 'MB I • • ‘ , “ ;.»• .f r I • V.r-^ -r >: » » ••>.*. i! t ■ ■T., • * • * . A • '‘i* ••• i V • ■ * » •* ‘.T'■ ■ »:,4- • • • ,'* ■ REPORT NO. 81415401 •>AGE 4 -■ » . . , < '■ < .1 ■ ' V • * 'j; t ■ ■ » « 38 M-118-25 34 0001 00745 OLD CRYSTAL DAY RO N SCHOOL DIST NO 278 ORONO SCH OIST NO 278 485 OLD CRYSTAL SAY RO N LONG LAKE m 55554 58 28-118-25 42 0005 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO INDEPENDENT SCHL DIST 8278 ATTN SUPERINTENDENT INDEPENDENT SCHL DIST 8278 485 OLD CRYSTAL DAY RD N LONG LAKE HN 55354 58 28-118-25 51 0004 02405 SIXTH AVE N R A R ZEES ROGER H ZEED 2405 4TH AVE N LONG LAKE m 55554 58 28-118-25 42 0002 02700 SIXTH AVE N JOm LEIN JOm H LEIN 2700 4TH AVE N LONG LAKE m 55554 38 la-118-25 45 0004 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO AL8IN F THIES ET AL ORONO INDEPENOT SCH DIST 278 485 OLD crystal DAY RO N LONG Lake m 55354 •y'., Vf.- •.■.'vll;- ,y -:* ♦ . *. 4 } •. < ,1.., V • J \> ^ f w" • TOTAL BATCH 502 00010 I > v*'1 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORNATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COINTY DEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF HY KNOHLEOGE AM) BELIEF. .'.f DATE /Z-2^?5,• •• *. ■ -W-‘ ■* <' ‘•'•i }'IR«f PATE Ol/OS/Mfr -.‘r * ’ i *^.BATOfOOB V;t* ‘ ■ , ‘ i 'HENNEPIH COUKTY PROPERTY IHFORHATIQN SYSTEH PWPERTY QNNERS LIST CMNER HAHi LiTAXPAYIR NAHE/ADO SS t8*118-» 31 0004 0E045 JAICSTQNN RO J A K SHANSON S T SNANSON ROW JAKS TQNN RO tONO LAKE m 85354 • • • PNNER NAHi kVfRTAMPA) NAW/AOim ' * ’•* ■ '-■ • ' ■ mm: »«- SP Et-UA>2S SS OOOP OSOAB JATKSTOHN RO J P A S K Kooe JOHN P A SUSAMC K KOOP SOAB JAtCSTOHN RO UMB LAKE MN SSSSA .,.-fROP ADOR . Q»tCR NAHI TAMMYER l£-. NAHI/AOOR SR • ER-UR-ES SS OOIE OSISS JAHESTOtl RO SIS STROUP STANLEY S STROUP SISB JAHESTQNN RO LGNB LAKE IM SSSSA k PHDP AOOR ' OltCR NAHI <: TAMPAYER ! NANE/AODRm.Vf ' 3'b‘r-ir*'■ SR ES-UR-ES SS OOIA OSISB JAHESTOItl RO H H LURTON A S E LURTON M NXLLIAH LURTON SISS JAHESTONN RO LONB LAKE MN SSSSA • i PROP AOOR Z 0»tCR' NAHI p, TAXPAYER NANI/AOOR RO E8-11S-ES .1 , OlEAS HAPLEI 13 OOAl 000 OR J C OANORON A 0 HAU6LI0 J C OANORON 1E4S MAPLEHO( LONB LAKE m OR SSSSA ^ 1:*1. •»#• # • A j • / ji** I g'r:fek A;- 1:55 - f-V-: SR ER-UR-ES SI 0005 0E9AS JAHESTOMT RO N A J NAHLIB NXCHAEL J A JO fLLEN HAHLZO t E94S JAHESTONN ROAO S LONB LAKE m SSSSA , ' « a> 38 E8-118-E3 33 0009 00038 AOORESS UNASSXGI^D JAHES R GRABEK ET AL JAHES R GRABEK 3050 JAHESTONN RO , . LONG LAKE HN 55354 •< ‘ 38 28-118-23 33 0014 03175 JAHESTONN RO HICHAEL AHES A LAUREL AKES HICHAEL A LAUREL AHES 3175 JAHESTONN ROAO ORONO HN 55354 38 28-118-23 33 0017 03145 JAHESTONN RO H A K I^LSON H0R6AN K A KAREN E NELSON 3145 JAHESTONN RO LONG LAKE HN 55354 80 28-118-23 13 0042 01225 HAPLEHOOO OR 0 R ROACH A N J ROACH OANIEL R ROACH 1225 HAPLEHOOO OR LONG LAKE MN 55356 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 538 28-118-23 31 0008 00038 AOORESS UNASSIQNEO LORRAINE H NIICHEL LORRAINE H NIICHEL NO 4 JAHESTONN ROAO LONG LAKE HN 55354 •' . .k I-*:.'* 4 . Vj'. ; *.• • •; .‘ivMA i"-. f 4 38 28-118-23 33 0010 03085 JAHESTONN RO GAB LARSON GARY A LARSON 3085 JAHES1TM4 llO LONG LAKE m 55354 t -i'V*: .5 • :>x ^ fs* *■»; i'. - 8 I 38 28-118-23 33 0015 03050 JAHESTOm RO J R GRABEK A P J GRABEK JAHES R A PENELOPE J GRABEK 3050 JAHESTONN RO LONG LAKE HN 55354 V’V ' . ’ ‘ ‘.'‘ v . h _ y ) rt I •».1 . *. «V s 80 28-118-23 13 0040 01265 HAPLEHOOO OR LOU A JEANNINE BEASLEY LOU A JEANNINE BEASLEY 1265 HAPLENOOD OR LONG LAKE HN 55354 TOTAL BATCCt 005 00014 n OATH;-' • •t H .OUN OATI 01/01/M ^<'OATCH OOi . '■Mx, ;•If 4 ’-1?. :V 'I-4 ' tvvf'* fii • 2^v;v‘ ‘/A ■ . • 55i• ;1, ;■/■.■;.>V v^- . •.' r.‘.vvii ••;■;•'» ' • • tiV' vF'v- • •• Br ?L '• •'*■ --V , i; -s! ; ♦*s|V i;:.' : HEWCPXM COUNTY PROPERTY XNFOIOUTXON SYSTEH PMPERTY OHNERS LIST REPORT NO. PX415401 PACE • 4 H ' • *•.«f •' f 'f . • • '^v ^ •• ••.*' ’ * * V.'t • Lit «»*. '• (V' • *• t*.% ! > < 4 i '. - ;V t I /••• ,: P\C»Vr:;ir.' •’- •! •!> -'■.If. 1 ; X CERHEY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESEKTATTON OF XNFORHATXON AS XT APPEARS THXS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATXON. TO THE DEST OF HY KN0NLED6E AND OELXEF. /O 1'"^'’% BY. •DATE • « ' .♦ ♦. •;. t• • I • '• * ' * BONESTROO ASSOCIATES J/ J Bonestroo Rosene vS Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects April 10. 1996 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re; Orono Ice Arena File No. 139-2128 Dear Jeanne, ^6126361311 04/11/96 10:25 0 :01/02 N0:801. .»v /• tf» n r A»HJrfi*t ft •M.ifViriL f'f »•» • iVenfiP fc MOyrv • HnnrfI '* ►► • r.ry A ;i*v. rz . \A T* *«.•* rf ►fw I »*A Mr.-.. . .............. . -r v.H! r, .»/ Mmw .f«i A ''C • <S»U» A O.f.lon. PE • toOvif W frcf’crir r* • t w • ox.-.. r-| . . O • •' » ••• -» . i a. A . A • M*triAVl T 'L • >• ‘1 ► ^ 0#/.€r» .HiU roi»*C>fcf jW^'*W . A «««««•vx* I. We have reviewed the plans for the proposed Orono Ice Arena located west of Old Crystal Bay Road and south of CSAH 6 in the southwest quarter of Section 28. We have the following comments relative to engineering matters. Utllltlca: Wc have reviewed the 1995 saniUry sewer flow measurements done by Metropoliun Council Wastewater Services for this area of the City. Based on their daU there appears to be adequate sewer capacity available for this facility. The City of Long Lake will be monitoring the wastewater flows in their system to determine if there is capacity available for additional units in Orono They expect to complete the monitoring by the end of May 1996. Assuming that the City’s Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved by the Metropolitan Council, both sanitary sewer and water main will need to be installed as shown on the plans. The applicant should either install these utilities or petition the City for the improvements. The wastewater should be pumped from a grinder pumping station through forcemain to the existing gravity sewer. The pumping station should be located near the driveway for future maintenance. Construction plans and specifications should be prepared for the pumping station, forcemain and water main, with as-built plans provided to the City upon completion. Drainage: The proposed storm sewer, stormwater pond, outlet structure and drainage calculations arc acceptable. The specifications .should be provided for our files. There is a wetland on the site which has been delineated. The wetland will not be impacted by the construction which is consistent with the Wetland Conser\ation Act sequencing which requires first avoidance, then minimization and finaUy replacement. The locations for erosion control measures should be shown on the plans. Access* The proposed access location and parking lot layout are acceptable. The parking lot provides 100 spaces which will not be adequate based on a seating 3. 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55T13-3898 ■ 612-636*4600 30NESTR00 ASSOCIATES ©6126361311 04/11/96 10:25 0 :02/02 N0:801 Ms. Jeanne A. Mahusth City of Orono Page •2- AfoH 10, 1996 capacity of 800 people. The proposal to share parking spaces with the school may be an acceptable solution on game nights. A paved trail should be constructed as shown on the plans. Because the school plans to use the arena parking lots during the day there should also be an additional paved trail between the west parking lot and the school entrance. 4.Grading: The grading plan is acceptable. The recommendations discussed in GME Consultant ’s geotechnical exploration report should be implemented during construction. The pavement section for the parking areas is accepuble, however we would recommend at least 3 inches of pavement with 8 inches of aggregate base. This would allow the pavement to be done in two lifts. The second lift should be done the following year after initial settlements are repaired. The driving lanes within the parking lot should be a 9 ton design based on an R value of 10. Because of the poor soil conditions at the site, the pavement section should include a non* woven geotextile fabric and draintile lines connected at the catch basins. This will provide separation between the aggregate base and soft clay subgradc and some relief from the .-‘n ts of shallow groundwater. The geotextile fabric may not be necessary if the upper 2.5 feet of the subgrade below the gravel base, consists of select granulf recommended in the GME report. The proposal to delay the pavement < *#te curb for one year may be allowable due to the site conditions./Thc s ♦ found at boring 95-4 (near the wetland) are considerably worse than at other arc on the site and it is wise to avoid construction there, j 5. Screening: The planting plan appears adequate 6. Easements: Please see our January 5, 1996 comments regarding easements. 7.Financial Guarantee: We have not yet prepared an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please conuct me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK Sc ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. I o'a Job 554 P.6* 14^24 L - - ------- coun t HOA'i 6 4* •li a 55-3 94-3 PROPOK a U' ARfcrMA a-fis 2 94 : IWOSLD PARK>4G AREA TP-CP. TF-S ■TP-7' PROP05LO PARKI>;C ARfcA IP-1 •ROPEHTY V lUgOFAQ . « 80M«M 0Rli£O Tm R£P<«t ^ BCRKC'. ORLI.Dl r«-‘;»J5 ItLPOHI. ___ _ . kl kfvau -0 sCHoa. , ACT WHY F-LLD J-/C*- /•’ a: APPRC5«<ATE SCALE PE-ET Wt-lUWO THSI WTS MOn- Oft TLAM> ftOlACARY LOCATIONS ABfc *PW>0X»!AT6 OME CON3UUTANTS. TNC. —____________I •4000 2«*t f%rmr-^ 55447 ^0»Ol 550-P5* Em rs l mjrmtt rwifc. APPHOXPIATE WCTT.AND BOOOARES PROPOSED KX AflCNA ORCNO. P»4araOTA TFM |DCC ^ GWE PrBi»<t No. 4667-ft 12/19/95 15:11 TX/RX NO.0488 P.006 ft ^f4 •:*^- . . V tk . * v^5 ;.M; ‘4fS- 4^; •;3^^: # 'jp»* y^. n?:‘'9» *55 . ■••* ?■>; •{,*- *:4 :•: ? 1^*1 i- •..-•- .-* •i?s >..n 4 ;:i K; •? *‘yil• -.A••r : "•V- Ya MSS« .JK» 1 rrmr ~Tnfii~ i iri49i> iri ■ i I rr m«. Mt-rt ^ M im at m «i ■ 1/1 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & ^1 Associates Engineers & Architects Otto a •onestroo. PX to6m W tosane. ^ £.* Joseph C Ahderfik. P C. Mervm L Sorveie. P C Kichjrd E. Turner. P £■ Gtenn R Cook. PX rhoffi« E. Noyei. P C. Roben G Schunicht. P C Su&vi M. CDeriin. CP A * * iemotr Coruulu January 5. 1995 ilpwurd A. Sanford. RX Keilfi A Gordon^ PX teoert R. Pfefferfe. PC. Richard W Poster. PE David O LoMotai P E Robert c. Russek. ALA. Jerry A. Bourdon PX Mark A. Hanson. P X Michael T Rauemann. P X Ted X Field. P X Thomas R. Anderson. ALA James X Rosenmerk eL PX Donald C. Burgardc. P X Thomas A Syfko. P E. Fredenc J. Stenborg. P C. Ismael Martinet. PX MKhael P Rau. P X Thomas W Peterson. P E Mktiael C Lynch. PX James X Maiand. PX Jerry O. Pertisch. P.E. Scott J. Arganex PX KermethP Anderson.PX Mark X Rods. P E Mark A Smpi PX Gary W. Monen. PX Pam J. Garsnon, ALA Daniel J. Edgerton. P X A Rick SchmidX PX Dale A Grove. PX PhfNp J. Casweit. PX Mark D. Watfis. PX Miles B Jensen. PX L Phtnig Gravel. P X Karen L dhemeri. PX Gary D Kristofiti. PX Brian X Gage. P X P. Todd Poiior. PX Keith X rapb. PX Douglas J. Banoit PX Shawm O Guttafton. PX CecMo ONvier. PX Kard J. Wagner. PX Paul G Neuer. PX John P. Gordar. PX Dan O. Boyuak PX Joseph X RhtiA PX Lee M. Mann. P.L Charles A Crtckion Leo M. Pawfetsky Harlan M. Olson Agnes M. Rmg James F Engemardt Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 - , Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 I ‘JAN S 1996 Re: Orono Ice Arena File No. 139-2103 ^ PR Dear Jeanne, J » / V 1 A —yr^ ^ ”* I ^ We have reviewed the schematic design for the proposed Orono Ice Arena located west of Old Crystal Bay Road and south of CSAH 6 in the southwest quarter of Section 28. There are several issues that need to be addressed relative to engineering matters, and added to the plan set. Both sanitary sewer and water main will need to be extended north along Old Crystal Bay Road for seivice, assuming that the City’s Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved by the Metropolitan Council. Due to the elevation of the site, wastewater should be pumped from a grinder pumping station through forcemain to the existing gravity sewer. An 8-inch DIP water main should be extended from the existing water main to the northwest corner of the site for a future connection to the City of Medina ’s water system. A 6-inch service line and hydrant should be extended within the site. We do not recommend 4-inch copper for the domestic water piping due to the high cost. Plans and specifications should be prepared for the sanitary sewer and water main extensions, with as-built plans provided to the City upon completion. The existing sanitary sewer and water main are located approximately 400 and 1100 feet south of the property, respectively (see Record Plan A132). There are two wetlands on the site which have been delineated. The wetlands are regulated by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Dis‘rict (MCWD) at the State level as part of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), and under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) at the Federal level. It appears that both wetland areas may meet the requirements for a WCA exemption. The applicant should obtain such exemptions or permits that may be necessary from the MCWD and COE for filling or draining the wetland areas. The proposed drainage on the site is directed northeasterly through a proposed stormwater pond to an existing culvert. This concept is acceptable. Drainage and ponding calculations should be provided for our review. We recommend that some type of skimmer structure be included at the pond outlet. A detail of the outlet structure and pond elevations should 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612*636*4600 L J Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth City of Orono Page -2- January 5, 1995 be shown on the plan. We recommend that the parking lot and entrance have storm sewer for proper drainage. The proposed access locations appear acceptable. The parking lot provides 130 spaces which will not be adequate based on a seating capacity of 800 people plus players and game officials. Recommended parking for an ice arena is 1 space for every 4 people, unless shared parking or on-street parking is available. If the existing school parking lots are available for use on game nights, a paved trail should be constructed from the school driveway to the arena parking lot. Old Crystal Bay Road is not adequate for on-street parking unless the shoulders are improved. The parldng lot should be paved with concrete curb and gutter. The driving lanes within the parking lot should have a 9-ton pavement section for buses and delivery trucks. Due to the existing soU conditions, the pavement section should include geotextile fabric, a foot of granular material and draintile. There should be some consideration for a landscaped berm/screen between the ice arena and adjacent residential property. t^/Drainage and utility easements should be provided 5 feet wide along all lot lines and 10 feet ' wide along the roadway right-of-ways. Drainage easements should be provided over the ponding area. Hennepin County may require additional 10 feet of right-of-way along the south side of CSAH 6. If not, the easement along CSAH 6 should be 20 feet wide; described as a perpetual easement for utility, public roadway and trail purposes. The site plan should be sent to the County for their review and comments. The planning commission should discuss options for trail locations in this area. The most logical location is along the east side of Old Crystal Bay Road and the north side of CSAH 6, as proposed previously. However, with the development of this site there may be additional planning issues to consider. When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. i ORONO HOCKEY BOOSTERS. INC. toxzos LONG LAKE. MN SS3M April 2, 1996 Ms. Gerry Timm 2885 6th Avenue N. Long Lake, MN 55356 Re: Orono Ice Arena . Dear Gerry: I want to follow up on a few items related to our March 21 meeting and your subsequent call to me. First, HGA reports that additional terming along the west property line is not possible, given the drainage pattern along the west side of the property and around the north to the detention pond. We will, though, provide a fence as you requested between our project and your property. As a matter of appearance, there seems to be two c[uestions about that fence: should it run all along the property line, or should it run up from the south end of the project site, and then turn 90 degrees down the hill to south end of the building? should it be a typical school chain link fence, or some version of a wooden fence, or a combination? Our sens^ at this point is that it may work best to get the building up, and then have you make a decision on where the fence should be. Under this approach, we would want to have agreed with you up-front on what the wooden fence alternative would be, but otherwise would follow your direction. Second, we will add more trees to the landscaping plan along the west side of the building, so that we are doing more than plugging the gap in the existing evergreens. Mark Engebretson President 475-3460 ORONO HOCKEY BOOSTERS, INC. BOX 205 LONG LAKE. MN 55355 April 2, 1996 *ab«k Road 55356 Orono Ice Arena t to follow up on our meeting on March 21, tinuing concern about the appearance of the rom County 6. dvice from our architects and engineers is ng should still be located at the north »unty 6 (approx. 70 feet from the roadway). ?ns: we should have a south-facing lobby and entry, given the arena's primary winter use, and to the extent possible, the parking should orient to that entry on the south side parking on the south also fits the day use of the parking by high school students, and supports the more general integration of the arena's and the School District's parking lots sliding the building to the south, and having its north face rise off the edge of a parking lot, is a less desirable aesthetic outcome than having the building face rise up out of the landscaping, even though the face is closer to County 6 drainage of the site around the wetland and into the detention pond is better accomplished with the building on the north President 475-3460 uth forces us >ecially >articular ;o develop a 100 rink floor ttle at all lat these soils since money t have asked HGA trough the City) on the site. tg, we have trs of the lorth side) this project, and ich. We look id toward the *s ORDINANCE NO. 145 . SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3(A) THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20. Subdivision 3(A) is hereby deleted and the following language substituted in its place: Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any R-IA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Schools. Public schools and parochial or private schools which te:u:h a curriculum similar to a public school provided no building shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R” District and that a fence be erected fifteen feet or more from all street lot lines where the abutting use is for open play, and nursery schools providing fifty square feet of playground space per pupil. 1. Uses Accessory To A High School. The following uses arc accessory to a High School use and require a separate conditional use permit; a. Indoor Ice Arenas. All such facilities and structures shall be located on the same tax parcel as the principal High School Use to which they are accessory. No such structures shall be located less than 50 feet from any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District. Such facilities shall not be separated from the pnncipal High School use by a public road. All such facilities shall be owned and operated by the school district, or by a non-profit organization under a land lease arrangement with the school district. The developer of such a facility, prior to final Conditional Use Permit approval by the City Council, shall demonstrate financial capability to complete construction of said facility, by providing suitable documentation that at least eighty percent (80%) of the estimated project costs are in the control of the school district or non-profit lessee. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication according to law. Adopted by the City Council of Orono on this 1 Ith day of March, 1996, by a vote of 4 ayes and __a nays. Gabri^ Jabbour, Acting Mayor Ptiblish in the Laker/Pioneer newspapers the week of March 24/ 1996 1i1\■1 oo r || y VI li*i I AJ'-, /’/111 •*• K t. ' ♦ :, •'. i . I -JV. i ' :F ii w O w o IJ> »-How -Bsare- f O IM!If ll! I ‘■if (I \) i, ’ ; o !«§ f M ! % i 4 • •• r i 1 1-. i.\ • \ * i lH T 1 - I : 1 lH T • I 1 I A r S o oo m*m Ws (i !}V^„ I >. .* v4 V G, •> Ml/ O M 1111-« I «1« \ m 1* !■ 1« !>• !■ !■* I* i« i* I-* !** \ • !■ 1* 1 n COo\o A li£! ‘^Aftr Q^* o 1 :F Ir *1 m |i£:i^ tom o go >o \' O •; I■0. Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:April 5, 1996 Subject:#2129 Jon Pendleton, 350 North Arm Lane - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning Dutrict: LR-IA (2 acre minimum requirement) Lot area = 4.4 acres Brief Review of Application The applicant has filed for a conditional use permit to allow the keeping of two horses at his lakeshore residential property. The property is considered a lakeshore lot bounded by a channel that has direct access to Lake Minnetonka at the east lot line. The property meets the area requirements at 4 acres for the maintenance of two horses (required *= 4 acres, existing » 4.4 acres). The applicant proposes future (summer) construction of a stable to maintain horses. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review; 1. Section 10.02, Subd. 2, Definition 5 - Animal units. Section 10.23, Subd. 4 (A) (refer to Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (M, N)] - For all properties located within the LR-IA zoning district, a conditional use permit is required for the keeping of horses and for construction of a stable or bam on the property. Stables or bams must be located 150' from residences on adjacent properties and 75' from the nearest lot line. 3.Section 10.56, Subd. 3, Definition 1 - Animal feedlot. The Shoreland Regulations would define Mr. Pendleton's proposed keeping of horses as a feedlot and subject to all pertinent ordinances under the Shoreland Regulations. 4.Section 10.56, Subd. 13 - Conditional uses. A. Evaluation criteria. B. Conditions that may be attached to a conditional use permit. 5.Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C-6) - Average lakeshore setback for proposed bam. If stable is to be installed to the lakeside of the residence, a variance to the average lakeshore setback would be required. 1 l» Zoning File #2129 April 5, 1996 Page 2 6.Section 10.56, Subd 16 (N-2) • Setbacks for animd feedlots from lidte or channel. Required = 300' Proposed = Applicant has not provided to-scale drawing of the location of the open pasture areas. Refer to Exhibits E, F and G. Pasture I is not acceptable. Pasture 2 is restricted by the existing septic system, septic setback and drainage setback. List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - Application Applicant's Addendum Plat Map Property Owners' List Applicant's Partial Survey Applicant's Sxetch of Pasture Locations Staff Sketch Septic Location Survey Locating House at 340 North Arm Lane Survey Locating House at 360 North Arm Lane Survey Locating House at 366 North Ann Lane Description of Request Applicant seeks to maintain or keep two horses at his lakeshore lot located to the east side of North Arm Lane. This property and the property to the immediate north received hundreds of cubic yards of fill or spoils resulting from the dredging of Norm Arm Channel at the east lot line. Although the properties are over 4 acres in area, the filling created major problems in locating suitable septic sites. Refer to Exhibit H, these are the only areas suitable for septic use on this 4.4 acre parcel. The area of the property meets the area standard for the keeping of two horses. The problem is the more restrictive standards for maintaining animals (or feedlots) wdthin shoreland area. Refer to Exhibits E, F and G, based on the guidelines set forth in the definition of a feedlot, the keeping of two horses at this property is classified as a feedlot. The Shoreland Regulations would require a 300' setback horn the channel. Pasture 1 would no longer be allowable. As applicant has not submitted a to-scale drawing, in reviewing the septic map (Exhibit H and the G) it would apftear that the primary septic system is located within Pasture 2. If we are to meet a minimum 26' setback from the drainageway and 20' from the drainfield area. Pasture 2 is severely restricted and inadequate for the keeping of two horses. Zoning FUe #2129 April 5, 19% Page 3 Review Exhibits 1, J and K, the residences at 360 and 366 North Arm Lane are each located approximately 100' from the shared lot line with subject property. The new house being built at 340 North Arm Lane is j^roximalely 45' from the lot line. If a stable was to be installed on this property, it would require an average lakeshore setback variance. The stable must be 75' from all lot lines and 150' from adjacent residences. The Shoreland Regulations have severely limited the areas suitable for the pasturing of horses. The previous filling of the property would also restrict locations for construction of stable. The Police Chief advised staff that some form of shelter is required for the horses, at a minimum a lean-to so that they can gain protection from the elements. Staff Recommendation To deny the conditional use permit of Jon Pendleton that would seek to allow the keeping of two horses at his lakeshore property located at 350 North Arm Lane, based on the following findings: 1. The shoreland setback standards for a feedlot limit pasture area to 1 acre or less. 2. Both setbacks and filling within the east yard restrict construction of stable. J. 4. 5. The property is in a sensitive area (adjacent to drainageway and channel). The keeping of animals in a substandard pasture area would result in the loss of vegetative cover, erosion and potential pollution of adjacent waterways. The keeping of horses in this area would not be consistent with the surrounding land use and would appear to be in contrast with the existing "noiseless/odorless" environment found in this North Arm Lane neighborhood. Applicant may be best advised to withdraw his application and to ask tor a refund of the fee money not expended for publication and staff time. / t • § *.c»- i f ■\ ‘j » •» * ' Apfrikation # oZ/ Date Receired Amount Paid ■9»/7iT ___ 4~ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION , j Site Address 3T* yTjljr. Tvpe of AppUcadoo to be Filed uft ttr«> -------^ piopeity Identification Number (P.I.D.)__o(,-H7-«- °»'.1 APPLICANT ^ ^ Name Phone rhome) Z ■ 5^4 Phone (work) -yzt-^/ro ^ ^ ^ iCity Zip :T5'3<^ OWNER (if different than applicant) ^ j ^ — Name_____________________________— Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address City Zip. Date Property Acquired 8(?3 (month/year) I .^40^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 Instimtional (church, school, etc.) $225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use " $250.00 Land Alteration Grading and llling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filing - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OlHER APPLICATIONS . r ^ $250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $300.00 Vacation ” $200.00 Easement Vacation $100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $350.00 Rezoning (PUD - reter to fee schedule) " $350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ^ $100.00 Appeals Other - sec Fee Schedule present use of property Present Zoning District_____________ Present Use of Property X _ Residential Other (specify). REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. J. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map fiom Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey informadoTL Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11” X 17” OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:_________________________ Date----------------------------------- APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the Information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and funher authorized reasonable entry' onto the property by City statf, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. , • DateOwners signature____ uate 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 m-ist 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 arrangemenu to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 77 a. o A fi I .?> • i« »MIL»JI*'-I Use Pernh Applkilkn for Hons <» Propoty Jon M. Ptndleton 350 North Ann Lane. Orano MN 55364 472-5685 H/720-6170 W Ma:22.19% I am proposing to keep two (2) horss on my property at my rsidcnce at the above addrst. I imdersund that this requirs a Conditioiial Use Permit based on information provided by the city olBce. I have a s*^*-*^** of the proposed location for a fence which would contain the horses. I have two npaiili aicai. both of which ate at least 200 feet from the channel at the lower end of the property. The property is over four (4) acts of "hard" land (not wetland), and therefore should comply with the acreage requirements for two horss. 1 would like to have horss on the inoperty by mid-summer 19%. and tocr in the summer determine if we are iitterested in constructing a smaU bani/sthble for a year round operation,« whether we would board the boss off of the property for the winter. Rmher than go through the time and expense of detailed plans re the potential stable, I wanted to first determine that it would be permisiihle to keep the horss on the property at all. If and when that approval is granted, 1 will develop nane detailed plans and update the survey of the property in consideTmion of planning a fimue boUding. I have spoken to my two neigbbon (Jim Neilson and Rod Badcmd) and neither seemed to have an objection to the proposal. I would work closdy with them in the event 1 wanted to pursue building a structure for the horss. and of course, apply for appropriate city permits. Thank >nu for your consideration, and please let me know if I can answer any questions re my proposal. V JonlJon M. Pendleton 2 k t> P Cj.ua, fj. /Ir-i 3 \ ■ ■ nu •'iMY.............. .’St If • •..A ■|5?:' HUM OATl Of/W/t#NEMCPIN cbUKTY PROPERTY INFOMUTION SYSTEM PRffl>ERTY (MCRS LISTBATCH MPPMP AOM OMER NAME ^JAMPAYER • NAK/AMR u • 1 • •• ■■'r- . • . I '. -PROP ABORt .OtCR NAME ‘.TAXPAYER NAHE/AOeH M OA-117-ES It BOOS OASSS MYSXDE RO vex CAPITAL INC vex CAPITAL INC PO MX STS UINB LAKE IM SSSSi SS M-117-tS tA 0001 eOtlS NORTH ARM U C A PASS ET AL TRUSTEES CAROL ANN PASS EISA IBTM AVE S .^^’NPUm S5A04 PROP AMR r OMCR NAME >. t TAXPAYER SB 0«-117-tS tA 000* 0AB90 NORTH ARM DR N • L B J R NA6LUN0 BARRY L A JANICE R HA6LUN0 f; NAME/AMR ;l;AB90 NORTH ARM DR N MOUND m S5SAA t , , , > Tc J V ‘ ^ ‘ V •• ‘* ’ . Jraop Aoofi ‘ ^ V CM«K NAHf taxpayer NANE/ADDR im !;4 SB D4*117>tS tA OOIt MSAO NORTH ARM LA R D BACKERUO AOS BACKERUD ROONEY 0 A DIANE S BACKERUD SAD ARM LN N MUNO Itl S5SAA ~,J- c .) ir•» • 4 PROP AMR’^-'-'.r‘# 0»tCR NAME taxpayer TOTAL BATCH SOT OOOlt HANE/AOOR ..-k * ’ - •>, ' ->4 C SB OA-117-tS tS 0002 DAAtO NORTH ARM DP N 0 A A N H WINTER DON A WINTER AAtO NO ARM DR NEST MOUND Ifl SSSAA 38 0A-117-2S EA 0002 MEIS NORTH ARM U C A PASS ET AL TRUSTEES CAROL AMI PASS tSSA IBTH AVE S MPLS Ml SSAOA SB 0A-117-2S 2A 0008 00S70 NORTH ARM LA RAH SMITH ROSCOE S A HARRIET C SIOTH S70 NORTH ARM LANE MOUND Ml SSSAA 38 0A-1I7-2S 2A OOlS OOSAO NORTH ARM LA JAMES R A AORIEMIE M NEILSQN JAMES R A ADRIEMC M NEILSON ITO hunters SLEN RO NAYZATA Mi SSS91 •4 4 > •REPORT NO. PXASlAOl':SB 0A-I17-2S tS OOOS 04440 NORTH ARM OR N DAL IVERSON DANIEL A LINDA IVERSON AAAO NORTH ARM OR MOUND Ml SSSAA SB 0A-117-2S EA OOOS OOOSB ADDRESS UNASStONED R N ARNSTRONB ETAL JEAN T ARMSTRONB 2SS NORTH ARM LANE MOUND Ml SSSAA SB 0A-I17-2S EA 0011 OOSAA NORTH ARM LA MAM LARSON MARK JAM LARSON SAA NORTH ARM U MOUND Ml SSSAA ■ / ’’■ ••'.•I- vs‘ * ly :v J. i i;*; A '*• * * * . . . .. . ■'’■■■-A, SB 0A-117-2S 2A 0014 00S50 NORTH ARM U JON M PENDLETON JON M PENDLETON SSO NORTH ARit LA MOUND MN SSSAA y. RUN DATE 0S/22/f« •ATCN SO*I « I i HEIMEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFOfaunON SYSTEH PROPERTY TMCRS LIST f <*f * / ■\y%< • s ^ •;■''-'r’ ' 5:.v^\- *v ^ . -« r J • ♦ • • ? *• i i < • ■■■».;• i.; . y r.' • '.I .-V* it-. r ••It*. Vf/ -V * *• A- vC . • ■ ’ * *’ * - »• ’ 'hy- ■-■i ;• V..- - . ' :V • • i* ^ ’ *v • ;• •' > ., r-’ •• ;-:V. L-' ... L . • > ’ ! • i ‘ i * . i- n ■ <C', r't * ?•'■ * < ^ v: v:-', .,i-'■ .L f • isi Tla r*f ' '* * /' v* ; if • •* ■> ‘i"^ ' M ' V • t S >• I •iVr'/* • ' B{-»VV.-' “.M*./•:'.« S-.‘. t'; ■ I^BAAI . «• i ’. V*; i i Ki •■<•«..■■REPORT NO. PMESWl; ‘ .. PACE ;; • •?.,!>- :tv; •■• ;*, .^;ii.-'y! > .■^,. .•■;•; f ..v‘,‘*'• • . , ■ •• . ' . . V *- * , .1. . *. .*■ s •. X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNT. DEPARTNENT OF PRO^RTY TA^TION» TO THE REST OF HY KNONLED6E AtO BELIEF. m'-nut' OH THF ■RtPBRS'" ¥■'*•. .'i?? h '. •'. !.^ ' • i-• '>l;-' tv'.• ‘ .^v .i ». *'*:•.* r • . ' . - • • -f’ . * ;• i, !. • • •ilv, -m ■ pA' •3^* ; • •;■•-tVv. ' J ♦ 1 4* .'■'■•:• t-'i• i . f» DATE 'f. > . '.•.! ■ v=-4 r • •■ ••'■ -V ■•.' '.i • V •; ... j . I ‘;>V •f • A 1'.' ' ‘4 . . ' * • t vJ '. % A*» **•’ ? , •r * * ■ > *1 ’?■'• ?• '. !...>. 1;. . > j <• ’ - >* .^nV "^»’4aCI- , ••>rC' ^ / v.: .g r. •*«.'•' k.-?' "/ t)' ■ ; ‘ • I > t * PIONEER ^ englrieeRihig wrasSraSSslyp Kiii'y UlUvi Memli^lo Mil 2,5120 (6»2) 6Bl-19M-rox 681-9,00 635 HlQhwoy 10 NoriheosV Blaine. MN 55131 (812) 7e3-ieeO-Fox 783-1083 Cerlincate of Survey for: _Da yjd Williams. nfir^«^iri jrNp House Address:-------North Arm RonH |^|., ' Model Name: Customer: jj. ir ' \ r tiira rUL lASUCNT 1 PROPOSED MOUSE CARAGE 1 t.t7 iioo3^3ti.oo9l §CITY OF OROHO A SITE PLA"__ GRADING PLAN HOUSE BCTM. SOME I* - » mi n APPROVED ;<J APPROVED WITH REVISIONS IIDISAPPIIOVED 0^ I RY„ DATE lzL.il. terniAfiAi^ oo-€/< V'A<5(, rwsr »<Cfei»^ecP 4 ^ 1021.66 NMMrj|*iV SW^iQt oy C.C.tor OriAJL iCAIt, 1* • 100 reel NOIE: CONIRACTOn MUST VERIFY AIL DIMENSIONS AND DRIVEWAY DESIGN • *110 Donotoa EiilaUng Elevation «c@3> Denolea Proposed Elevation EBflEQ$EP...HO USE ELEVATtnn -- — Dwiotes Dralnogo Ic Utility Eanemcnt Lowest Floor Elevotlon: gq c£ ——Denotes Drainage Flow Direction Top of Block Elevation!//o uc, —o- Denotee Monument Garaoe Sloh Fi-.unii««..h.„ rf. „^Z LOT_2_, BLOCK_L MARKOF AnniT inM , HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA H> Wii liwi ol II,e Si.ie ol Mlnnnoi.. OmdThi'. "ao * '*“'r "•O'iti.tU l.nU 5u,«»of ^=2^/T.ft SiKICH Aco. MO. Rduijeo S.QakL-l»^-^-30w nooE«^^.i;ii<iCH 14141 ii. fiizi 83208.00 I • « i ; I , . i I ! wt* j * i i • - h o tn •> n **- L(TTI N •• • •t ii: llJInits Mi 45** s m O 2 99 ^ m 2 ni 2 PJ ^ S? o o ^CD crt m c a a o < • 5 5o p» ;</» c »> 2 2ma 1/1 M•;b I *n»mr- 2 l» ai •< *D C H ■noa * L.li of Ur^ !| It IX iv ; w J • • * • ' .*•:•••■• •.•-‘>.n''' • • * /. i : :r>' HOUSE DETAIL CERTMi I .'I 42.33 PROPOSED HOUSE 6.33 ♦nou lO t't 10 0 G 33 15 wCT Oi \ -♦ 'r>.*a 23.50 OARAGE 311;P 10.1 ;| 'iX “• ■r <• t 101.16 Scale in feet ~ 30 ^ ijo ^ ■?'J: •c. . .* • •. ♦.* :seTi3ACK r^c2i pbi^ c?riiv>«^#\y ^ N 89*48 ’39" W 73 290.00 281.50 ^ o b9 p in oo TuS. driveway 6 6 e; « « ‘Ml 7 ‘.X «40 Bi • 9000 Denotes Ehistinq EtevaUon *d^33 Denotes Proposed Elevation — Denotes Dromoge flow Offcction — tienot^s Oromci^e Sf Utility f.ose»penf Denote? Monument ()en'»tri »)//s#'t Hut* Deuiinq'- i|f*! ns’inned ORONO COPY pRQj^sPum£mjMYm lowest Floor Elevation: Top of Block Elevotlon: ,9^0.^ Garage Slab Elevation: 96p.( m ■ ^ K • NOir Prop(>*.nJ building site qiaJinq is in Of gKidmg pi'jns upproved by Ibe city en N'llt ( «>mIi Ml. li)i nui il \erily oH dimensions (s> Cc> ^ (H-^TU CtAu,4t>— Plat of Survey for Engner L. Johnson in the Northwest l/4 of Section 6-ll‘7-23 mm MS BBSitVil . f r-‘IOI9.W m—.%.V»$.V i««c. Um. pMUkU lavHk 4^ W Uf%«. 0^ VWc 6(/4 ML)T4 o4 b-Ut-Xf Line pereUmi •VUe S.\m % "2>(a(p hl^'CZK o4 S44^iM% W*lf*£| ;4. wi: H* 1.^toto.i s u K’ i’fACl*rrOfcrr 147.7I4'TrrOe % e **• J i©.“•:_a: iS J »• I : xtAfr ttOtt ^74t* tot 0.4* ^ d«A4tf^ Vin% -li------------——^>__ •••* • iU49* 5. NlilS^ m4 So^*«« W-<17-21 crer^T C^pff^r of S^c^rt^-tn'22 •, 47J49*S544fc'lOt.bft' ««% W•• *** l02O.b ‘ i 4««e% Certificate of Survey; I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a sxirvey of darles of; (a) That part of the i*ollowinf'-descrihed property: The South half of that part of the Northwest quarter of Section 6, Township 117 North, Range l#f5^T rtf* rt.n 1 ao T r\t-jo • Da <*4 •ev%4 vi rr «f ♦ ie boun- V.cst of thft 5th Princloal hsridian, described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Northwest quarter; thence West along the South line of said Northwest qtuirter a. distance of 1020,h feet; thence North parallel with the West lino of the Southeast Gi:iaz*ter of said Northwest quarter a distance of 354.5 feet; thence 2ast parallel with the South line of said Northwest q\;arter a distance of 1018,1 feet to the clast line of said Northwest atiar> ter; thence South along said Sast line a distance of 854.5 feet to the point of beginning. lying North of the South 171 feet thereof, and (B) The South 171 feet of tliat part of the Northwest quarter of Section 6, Township 117 t*orth, Range 23 West o^ the 5th Principal i'iexd.dian, lying East of a line described us follows: CoraRencing at the Southeast corner of said Northwest qi:arter; thence West along the South line of said Northwest quarter a distance of 1020,6 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence North narallel with the West lino of the Southeast quarter of said Northwest qxwrter to the North line of said South 171 feet, und there ending. And of the location rents or encrcachx ’.ents. cf all buildings thereon. It does not purport to show other improve- Scale : Date : 1« = POO' 1-28-75 Iron marker Gordon R. Coffin Heg. No. 6C64 Land Surveyor and Planner Long Lake, Minnesota V • .*.! ■*. V.'; *1 T nyir ffmm- Ptoditon Voter To City o#0rooo Pogololl 2:42:2»pm IL. _ 15, 1996 To: C»rono Planmng cr^nronission From: Jon M. Pendleton Subiect: Conditional Use Pennit Application re Horses Alter reviewing the study of this application by the city coning administration. I would like to withdraw my request for the conditional use permit. I will study the requirements in more detail and submit another application in the future if I determine an alternative proposal is worthwhile Thank you for jxmr a-ssistance on this matter JonM Pendleton 350 North Arm Lane Orono. MN f i 1 ilfcifi a V li 4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 18, 1996 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Stephen Peterson, Charles Schroeder, Sandra Smith, Janice Berg, and Elizabeth Hawn. Dale Lindquist was absent. The following represented the City Staff: Buildmg and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, City Engineer Shawn Gustafron iind Recorder Sherry Frost. Representing Council was Mayor Callahan. Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (#1) #2120 LOREN BRUEGGEMANN, 372 WESTLAKE STREET - VACATION - 7:17-7:21 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Af^licant was presem. Mabusth reported that the application was for approval of the vacation of a 10 ’ alley platted in 1912, that also included a canal connecting Westlake Street to main lake. The 929.4' elevation or O.H.W.L. of the lake encroaches over this area. There is no dry land corridor connecting the 10' alley with Westlake Street lake access. Schroeder asked why this was necessary to do since there was no public interest. Brueggeman said it would clear up the title for the property. Peterson asked if there was any response to the application fi’om the DNR. Midnisth said the application was discussed with Ceil Strauss ai^ no changes were requested. There were no public comments. Hawn moved. Smith seconded, to approve the vacation of the east/west alley as platted in Hillside Park plat, immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of the property located at 372 Westlake Street. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#2) #2121 ELAINE A. SLECHTA, 3700 NORTHERN AVENUE - 7:55-8:07 P.M. A. CLASS n SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTIES LEGALLY COMBINED FOR TAX PURPOSES B. VACATION PETITION The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. 11 minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#2 - #2121 Elaine Slechta - Continued) Mabusth reported that the property consists of three parcels, two of which are Torrens property. The certificate of tides have not been updated and do not reflect the 1912 vacation. Mabusth said there is no vehicle available to the City by which to certify actions taken in 1912 by the Orono Town Board. Applicant has chosen to file a vacation petition for Northern Avenue rather than pursue a lengthy and expensive legal action. In 1982, the City reviewed a subdivision for a property owner to the west. The property was abstract, and the vacated right of way was included in the legal description. The City asked for 22' to 24’ of right of way dedication for the travelled road bed of Northern Avenue. Half of the road bed is located within the Railroad property. We will also ask for a dedication of road right of way and for an additional 10' wide (trainee and utility easement adjacent to dedicated road. The boundaries of the designated wetland must be located and confirmation by survey that 1/2 acre of dry land exists between wetland and road within Tract B. Elaine Slechta brought to the Commissions' attention the remarks of the Engineer regarding the drainage flowing to the northeast fitjm the wetland to the north side of Togo Road. A neighbor has voiced concern with drainage flowing through their property. Mabusth said this matter may be further reviewed. She noted that the pond is functioning as a retention pond. Slechta said she would be willing to enlarge the pond to control the drainage flow to the east. The tract C parcel was said to be very wet and not usable in the rear. Gustafeon said the wetlands would still need to drain to the east but suggested a swale to define the drainage. Mabusth said this improvement was not included as part of the application and would have to be considered under a separate land use application. There were no public commems. Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2121 as outlined with the Applicant and Staff to work together on a drainage improvement plan Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#3) #2063 GERALD AND CANDACE ROWLETTE, 3775 BAYSIDE ROAD - CONTBSUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - RENOTIFICATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS 7:01-7:17 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted Applicant. Gerald Rowlette, was present. \ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#3 - #2063 Gerald and Candace Rowlette - Continued) Mabusth reported that the appKcation was tabled at the September, 1995, meeting to discuss drainage problems with Staff. The applicams had reported that the construction of Landmark Drive to the north has had a major impact on drainage on their property. The request is for hardcover and setback variances to replace an e.xisting deck that was built in 1976. The current lakeshore regulations adopted in 1975 governed the building of the deck and applicants received variance approval. The applicants had reported that the construction of Landmark Drive to the north has had a major affect on drainage on their property. Rowlette said the drain^e flows correctly during minor rain falls, but when excess rain occurs, the west side of their property is inundated with surface rurx>ff Staff advised that a County representative suggested constructing a 1' high berm in the County right-of-way. Mabusth said a permit would be required from the County. Rowlette said the deck replacement is an exact replacement in the existing envelope of423 s.f and located 10* out from the house. Rowlette said they have come up with a compromise for the excessive hardcover with the elimination of220 s.f of landscape underlayment to the east of the driveway. Mabusth commented that this landscape area is within the County right-of-way and is not calculated in the hardcover facts. Rowlette said the rock on the side of the house, along with the sidewalk from the driveway, is necessary for drainage for the ground gutter in order to keep runoff away from the house. Smith asked what compromise could be made to effect hardcover reduction on the property. Rowlette said he had no areas where hardcover could be eliminated as the landscape areas were wood chipped only. He noted that l/3rd of the concrete patio was removed in 1988, but the remainder is needed for safety reasons to allow for an exit in case of fire and to eliminate ground heave. It was clarified that the landscape areas do not have any plastic underlayment but were figured in the calculation as hardcover. Schroeder inquired if the berm was to be installed in order to change the drainage patterns. Rowlette said the purpose was for privacy. Mabusth added that it would redirect the drainage also. Mabusth questioned why a berm would be installed just to the west side of driveway when the drainage flows from east to west, and Rowlette said it was a matter of preference. Mabusth said the berm could be located in the right of way but trees would not be approved by County. Schroeder noted that the application was for reconstruction only of the deck and did not affect the hardcover that exists on the property. Smith said the Commission would nonnally look for areas for reduction but did not see any area to reduce since there was no plastic underlayment under the landscape areas adjacent to house. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 " ^206j G^ald and Candace Rowlette - Continued) Mabusth advised that she would have Mike Gafifron reconfirm his hardcover findings before scheduling the application before the Council. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to recommend approval for the deck replacement with removal of the Russian olive area underlain with plastic and located within County right of way. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#4) ERWIN SMITH/JOHN O’SULLIVAN, 1340 SHORELINE DRIVE - REQUE;^T BY APPUCANTS TO BE REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION - 7:21-7:55 P.M. A. VACATION OF PUBLIC STREET B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, VARUNCES, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants, John O’Sullivan and Mr. & Mrs. Erwin Smith, along with Consultants, Rob Thompson and Jim Coen, were present. Mabusth reported that the original application was presented at the February meeting of the Planning Commission. The comments relating to the proposal were then discussed with the Applicant, Staff, Engineer, and Consultants to include the internal traffic issues. Changes were made in the proposal to answer the concerns brought up by the Commission and others. Mabusth continued that the application is for three variances. One variance is for a 30' setback for the car wash. The neighbors in the Lafayette Ridge area support the proposal in view of the wetland separation fi-om their residences. The car wash location was considered to reduce the effect of noise and lighting. Another setback variance is required for parking area adjacent to residential lot line requiring a 10* setback. The parking is set to be at 3' for a T variance. The third variance is for structural coverage exr^s" over the allowed 15% proposed at 20.2%. A fourth variance has been added for s.gnage area. With the footage of the fi’ont lot line, 100 s.f. of signage is allowed. The applicant is asking for 308 s.f of signage for a 208 s.f variance. i .4 i - -I -Til II MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#4 - #2107 Erwin Smith/John O'Sullivan - Continued) Mabusth noted that the sfriit vote on the application at the last meeting related to concerns over trafBc and safety issues. These issues have now been addressed, and Mabusth said the Staff and Engineer are satisfied with the changes made. The exit lane of traffic from car wash has been moved back 40' from eastern entrance. Signage will alert those pmons exiting car v/ash of oncoming traffic. Sheldon Johnson, Bonestroo's Transportation Group Leader reported on the concern of exiting traffic and access by the west side doorway of the restaurant. He suggested widening the sidewalk and installing a railing. A ramp was also discussed with those represemed. Mabusth said the concern over the tightness of the area between the canopy and parking has been resolved with diagonal parking, which will provide an adequate amount of separation space. The lanes will also have paimed centerlines. Peterson noted that according to the minutes from the meeting, another issue was the intensive use of the property. Shawn Gustafson, Engineer, was in attendance to answer any questions. Gustafson noted the issues relayed in the report by Johnson, and the results from the changes made. He commented on the lane marking to eliminate confusion in leaving the site, and the change to 4S degree paridi^ to resolve the issue of parking along Shoreline Drive. Gustafson said the County has reported their satisfiiction with the entrances and their opinion that there would be no impact on the signal intersection. Gustafson said the revised plans detail the issues that had been brought up, and he is satisfied with the traffic circulation. Peterson asked Gustafson to remark on the wetland issue. Gustafson said the property lines have been staked. It appears that the distance from the wetlands is satisfactory but would need wetland delineation along with grading plans to verify that the 26' separation is met. Gustafk>ii said there may possibly be a need for a 4' retaining wall by the entrance lu the car wash. Mabusth said the County would not need any additional right-of-way. The City Engineer has recommended taking an additional T, however, to allow room for a possible future sidewalk if road is expanded. Hawn reported having spoken with Sheldon Johnson over the specific issue of pylons. She said they were in agreement over the need for a railing extending all the way to the crosswalk. Hawn had suggested a stop sign but Johnson said that people would ignore the sign adding that the crosswalk would be sufficient. Hawn said Johnson wanted the pylons in a fixed position so there would be no reconfiguration of traffic patterns on site. He had also suggested painting the lanes to which O’Sullivan has agreed to doing.I i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#4 - #2107 Erwin Smith/John O'Sullivan - Continued) Smith asked Gustafson if there was anything he would change if he could start over again at the be^nning, especially concerning intensity. Gustafron said his background was in the road issues and saw additional control at Shoreline Drive in the future. Internally on the property, Gusta&on said the lane markings, signage, and pylons would adequatdy address the density. When asked by Smith is there was anything quite so intensely developed within Orono, an example was given of the car wash, and restaurant on the north side of Wayzata Boulevard in Wayzata, which is fed by two accesses. Schroeder inquired about the distance between those picking up food at the window and those coming into the parking area. O'Sullivan said there was approximately 30', or 2-1/2 lanes of traffic separating the two. Peterson said he was in fiwor of the changes and felt the concerns were addressed. He noted the use was intensive but saw the variances as consistent with development for the Navarre area. Peterson commented that the neighbors of the property had asked for a femily-type restaurant or a pharmacy. There were no public comments. Smith brought up the new variance under consideration for signage. Mabusth referred the Commissioners to the exhibits relating to signage. The O'Sullivan's property across the street, consisting of 3/4 acres, has 450 s.f of sign^e, which is based on the amount of fromage. The property under consideration, due to its configuration, allows only 100 s.f. of signage, althou^ it is a larger lot. The applicant has asked the City to consider basing amount of signage based on lineal footage along Shoreline Drive. Berg asked if the signage would be similar at the two locations. O'Sullivan brought their attention to Exhibits E and F. He said the restaurant would have a single pole identification sign. The gas sign would be an identification sign with pricing of a lower monument type on the boulevard. "O'Sullivan's” would be in signage on the building with identification on the canopy and "Culver's" on the restaurant building. Hawn noted with the multiple uses on the property, there would be the need for instructional signs. Directional signage is not included in the calculations. V _____r . 3MM. UL-T ■ !L MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#4 - #2107 Erwin Smhh/John O'Sullivan - Continued) Smith a^ed Berg what her opinion was of the project as she lives in the neighborhood. Berg said she prefers signs over the usage of other symbols, which have been used, and allowed, for Ihnhed periods of time in the neighborhood. Berg said she is concerned over the intensive use of the property but felt it was the best use of the property. She hoped the two gas stations would alleviate the need to wait for a gas pump. Mabusth asked if there was a need to have any controls on what is sold in the store. Berg said she would not want to have any controls and saw the other store setting the trend for what this store would sell. O'Sullivan said he would hope people would have a reason to visit both properties. Schroeder asked if there was any remediation of the gas tanks on the property. O'Sullivan said one tank is still in place but would be removed and replaced with a new tank. The hours of operation were discussed. Schroeder asked that the hours for operation be stipulated in the conditional use permit. With O'Sullivan's agreement, the hours for operation of the restaurant will be from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The store, gas, and car wash will be open between the time frames of 5:00 a.m and 12:00 midnight. A car wash attendant will be on duty during the hours of operation. Peterson moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2107 with Staff conditions #1- 6. The hours of operation will be from 10:00 a.nt-lOOO p.m. for the restaurant, and from 5.00 a.m.-l2:00 midnight for the store/gas/car wash, which will have an attendant on duty during operation. The railing shall extend to the crosswalk. The pylons will be fixed to the pavement. The lanes will be stripped along with directional arrows. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#5) #2113 DAVID AND JEAN SAHLSTROM. 129 CHEVY CHASE DRIVE - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:0741:19 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present, Mabusth reported that the applicants were seeking approval for a side setback for a garage addition to the north side of their residence located on Chevy Chase Drive. The 1 acre zoning requires a 10' side setback. Mabusth noted that there were mature evergreens located on the lot line near where the new driveway would be located and asked the applicant what affect the instaUation of the driveway would have on these trees. Mrs. Sahlstrom said the trees would be left, but the Commission was concerned that the improvement would result in the destruction of these trees. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#5 - #211 3 David and Jean Sahlstrom - Contiiiued) Mabusth asked the applicants if they had considered staging the garage to meet the 10* setback. Gustafion said he did not believe this would impact the drive-out apron for the garage. Gustafson also noted that the garage apron must meet the 40 degree backout alignment but calculated that this was possible. The applicants voiced concern with the aesthetics of the roof line by such a change Hawn asked if the applicants had spoken with the neighbor, whose house is oriented to foce the new garage addition. Mrs. Sahlstrom said the neighbor has recently moved to a nursing home. She added that the neighbor's home sat far back on the lot, and in her opinion, would not be impacted by the addition. It was questioned as to who owns the evergreen trees. The Sahlstroms said they were located on the lot line. Peterson commented that if another variance was required, he would not recommend approval, and noted the lack of need for 3 car garages. He would like to see the applicant confer with the neiglfoor, however. Schroeder said if the trees were affected by the addition, he would have a problem with the application. Mabusth noted that the City does not deal with tree issues in such cases but that this matter is left for the resolve of the private property owners. The Sahlstroms said they would like to see the trees remain and would consider setting the garage addition back 10' to aUow thi.* to occur. The Sahlstroms then withdrew their application. (#6) #2114 CLARK WINSLOW, 1595 BOHNS POINT ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE - PUBUC HEARING - 8:19-8:40 P,M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was represented by Dale Gustafson. Mabusth reported that the original application was approved in 1987 for maintenance dredging of 1500 cubic yards of spoils from an existing pond in a designated wetland. During this dredging, yellow clay was found and, subsequently, used by the City for the widening of the roadway. The current ^plication is for 80 cubic yards of dredging to provide a 8:1 slope on the east side and 3:1 slope on the west for a 12 ’ pond depth, which is currently about 6-8' deep. Gustafson said the pond is clogged with weeds and vegetation. The dredging would remove the portion to the south full of muck and branches. 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (MS - #2114 Clark Winslow - Continued) Mabusth said she, as well as the DNR, question udiat is lacking in the de»gn that create the need to redredge. Gusta£K>n said the problem arose fiom construction; and with the property to the side now in turf and plantings, he does not expect the problem to arise as frequently. Mabusth questioned the lack of wetland vegetation. Gustafson said the vegetation has dis^>peared, but the purpose of the pond is to maintain open water. Mabusth did note that the original intern of the pond was to rid the area of odors and algae. Mabusth asked if the iment in opening up more open water area was to gain any vegetation. Gustafson said cattails could be replanted if the City would desire the maintenance of vegetation. Hawn later asked if the owner would approve cattail piaming. Gustafson said h would be done if it was necessary. Peterson said he normaUy would prefer a pond to remain natural and be opposed to open water. With how this pond sits in the neighborhood, Peterson said it would be consistent to maimain the pond as open water. He would like to see cattails planted on the south side. Schroeder questioned the amount of dredging and the depth with relation to vegetation. Gustafron said the depth would reflect on the slope of the pond. Gustafson said a 8; I or 10:1 slope was necessary to allow emergem v^etation around the perimeter. The property location to the lake and the effect of pond runoff considered. The culvert was said to be functioning. Peterson questioned the sprinkler riinning from the lake. Gustafson said the sprinkler is there to ^d water from the lake to the pond to maintain the water level, if necessary, but added that it was not used. Mabusth noted that this was never approved nor addressed in the original application. Hawn commented on the smell from the pond on the neighborhood necessitating the need to maintain more open water. She suggested a design be drawn to allow aquatic vegetation on the south side. Gustaf^n said it would be helpful to have dimensions if this was necessary. There were no public comments. Hawn moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2114 for conditional use permit and variance to permit the dredging and removal of 80 c.y. of spoils with the establishment of a high water level for said pond. The slope of the pond is to be maintained at a 8:1 slope with reimposition of aquatic and wetlano vegetation in the area of the excavation. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. __ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#6 - #2114 Clark Winslow - Continued) Gustaiwn confirmed that there would be no problem with the 929.4 devation. Peterson noted that this was his first recommendation for approval of pond dredgii^ in a designated wetland. (#7) #2115 FRANK BENNETT, 31S/40S TONKAWA ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBUC HEARING - 8:40-8:58 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Appficant was represented by Dale Gustafkm. Mabusth reported that the pond will be located in a low area of the 7 plus acre lot and is made up of types 1 and 3 wetlands. The wetland is not DNR protect^ nor on the National Wetlands Inventory Map, and would not require either Corps of Engineers or MCWD approval. The <mly approval necessary is that firom the City of Orono. The proposed pond is at 4; 1 slope with a overflow drainage through the ravine arxl to the southeast and eventually flows under Tonkawa Road. The ravine on the Gage property suffers major erosion. Mabusth noted that the pond would serve as a stormwater retention area. The proposal is for removal of 1900 cubic yards of fill. Gustafkm suggested asking why the dredging would not be a permit issue of the Corps of Engineer. He noted the Corps of Engineers have guidelines for permits in areas of under 1/2 acre that qualify for nationwide permit. He noted applicant may still need permission. The Commission was informed that the survey work was completed by Mark Gronberg. Peterson asked if the intention of the dredging was for a wildlife pond. Gustafson said this was not the intention. The imention was to gain an aesthetically pleasing look with open water. The erosion of the ravine on the Gage property was noted. Gusta&on said the location of the pond has spinoff benefits and would allow for diversification of habitat. Gustafson said the pond would aid in creating a water retention area for ninoff, protect and slow down the runoff^ and the drainage running into the ditch would be metered. It was further noted that the proposal calls for the removal of the existing access off of Tonkawa, and the fill would be used for the shoulder of the new drive. The driveway would then link with the drive further south on Tonkawa. Hawn commented that the application was not proposed as wildlife pond for permit reasons, but if the applicant would want wildlife, a greater slope would be required. Gusta^n said the depth must be obtained as the pond would become shallower over time, and it was important to maintain the water retention. The possibility of a larger, shallower pond was discussed, but it was noted that it would disturb a larger area which was not desired. L,—... MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 {in - #2115 Frank Bennett - Continued) Hawn asked if any of the qxMls would be used on the property. Gustafwn said the m^tmty would be taken off the property to an appropriate, suitable she. Some of the spoils wiU be used by property owner to the south with new construction, and applicant would use some with construction of new road. Mabusth said there was no road or weight restrictions as Tonkawa is a County road. Smith inquired about the slope at the edge of the pond. Gustafk>n said the 4:1 slope would have a fluctuating water level. He proposes the house side of the pond to be a cleaner took and a meadow look to the back side of the pond. There were no public comments. Peterson moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2115 with Staff recommendations 1-5. The applicant is to work with Staff and Engineer to develop a proper drainage plan in staging. The back side of the pond is tc remain natural pasture land as it now exists. Staff will verify whether the application needs Corps of Engineer approval before going before the Council. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#S) #2116 JOHN AND LYNN WALSTEDT, 3470 BAYSIDE ROAD • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING • 8:50-9:03 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Aflidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Walstedt was present. Mabusth reported that the new ownm of the property propose an addition to the west side of the residence. It is their intent to dig under the upper level to add a walkout design. The entire project involves 1000 cubic yards of earth movement. 500-600 c.y. resulting fi^om the excavation for walkout would be placed in the rear yard. A swale would also be excavated, which would drain along the west side of the residence to Bayside, redirecting the flow of 1 acre of the property to Bayside. Mabusth said Staff will meet with the applicant and County representative regarding improvements to the ditch area. Mabusth noted that the application did not require a variance. She further commented that the proposal would result in a hardcover reduction in the 75-250* zone from 40+% to 24.1%. minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON MARCH !8, 1996 (its - #2116 John snd Lynn Walstcdt - Continued) Gustafson commented on the dramage on the she. The low ^x)t on the property collects nmoffin the weUand and takes it to an area near Bederwood. The change to the drainage would allow more drainage to the south to the county road. The County will review the plan for possible improvements on Ba3rside, but Gustafson felt the drainage by Bederwood was a larger problem. He did not see any potential for erosion and was in tiivor of the swale. There were no public comments. Smith moved, Hawn seconded, to approve the conditional use permit for the new construction and for the erosion control whh County review prior to project beginning. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Schroeder was not in attendance during this application and did not partidpate in the vote. Hawn was excused from the meeting at this time.) (#9) #2117 THOMAS MCCUNE, 1473 BAY RIDGE ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 9:07-9:12 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth noted that the property has suffered m^or erosion problems. She recalled the emergency ordinance of 1987 blowing property owners to make repairs with Staff approval after a major rain storm. 24* of retaining walls at the northeast comer were installed at that time. Mabusth commented that it has been the Engineer's recommendation to install masonry walls but the Engineer has approved the timber wall dedgn and detail. The timber wall design ties in with what is presently on the property. Petoson commented on the necessity of the retaining walls with its proximity to the roadway. Peterson explained that the trend for masonry is being encouraged due to the eventual failing of timber-type walls. Mabusth said she had informed the applicant of the need for County permit but added that Dave Zetterstrom of the County had verbally voiced his approval. Berg moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2117 for a conditional use permit with Staff recommendations #1-4. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Mabusth said the application would be on the agenda of the Councf! meeting of March 25, 1996. • • • i « MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 SKETCH PLAN REVIEW (Schroeder left the meeting at this time.) (#10) #2119 BARNETT DIVISION CORPORATION AND HILLOWAY CORPORATION, 180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WEST > SUBDIVISION/SKETCH PLAN Mark Gronberg was present along with Lori Lundeen, representing Barnett Division Corporation, and Jim Pfennig, representing Hilloway Corporation. Mabusth reported that the sketch plan review involves a 17 acre parcel. The City granted preliminary approval of 2 lot division in 1988. At that time, one residential area was created with a 13 acre outiot set aside for future development. The subdivision was never fiiudized. The preliminary resolution provide guidelines for the future development of the 13 plus acre outiot. The current proposal is for a 6 lot subdivision with a cul-de-sac located in the northeast comer serving 1^ 1,3, and 4. Lots 2 and S would each have a separate curb cut at CoRd 19. Lot 6 was to continue to be served from the existing driveway. Mabusth said the access for the lots was reviewed with Gustafson. It was determined that the existing access for lot 6 was considered unsafe and suggested a shared driveway with lot S. City guidelines had stipulated that an internal road should serve the maiority of the lots. Mabusth said she would like to see a redesign of the accesses with lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 served by an internal road. Mabusth continued that the proposal also involves wetland issues. There are designated wetlands on the property along with a wetland designated on the National Inventory Map in the northwest comer, which would be deducted from the total acreage. Midxisth said Staff would ask for wetland delineation. Type 1 and 2 wetlands are not deducted from the acreage. Another issue concerns a recently completed lot line rearrangernem with the Geffrc property to the east. The imemal road should connect to western boundary of outiot C of Bayview Farms providing access for future development. Mabusth reported that septic testing was completed in 1988 for the existing residence. The alternate site tested did not meet the 75 ’ setback from designated wetland. The On- Site Septic Manager confirms signs of serious leaching from the ousting septic. Staff will require septic testing for a new principal drainfield site which must meet the 75 ’ wetland separation. This may present a problem due to the additional right of way being dedicated for CoRd 19. "I- MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#10 - #2119 Bamett/Hilloway Sketch Plan Review - Continued) C^nberg asked if the septic site be located in lot 5 if theie would be the need to meet the 2(W* setback for the frontage noting the 1T taken from the lot for right-of-way. Mabusth said the Commission would need to decide if they would allow that variance. Gronbcrg agreed that the access was unsafe to that lot. Mabusth said there was also the issue of number of lots if the internal road was built. There is 8 acres on the north between lots I -4. Gronberg said there would be a problem with the steepness of the slope on the east lot line, and it would require fill. Gustafson was informed that the road would be a private road built to City standards. Gustafron said the road would be allowed up to a 12% grade, though 10% would be preferred. Jim Pfennig of Hilloway was informed that a private road can be used by another homeowner through an underlying public easement. This would allow the adjacent land owners use but remain private. Mabusth said the costs involved in maintaining the road would be shared and could have an introductory fee but it would be decided with a private maintenance agreement resolved by property owners. Pfennig was concerned that an internal road would destroy the look of the lots and would like an additional curb cut for lot 2. Smith said a shared driveway could be used. Mabusth noted that the County may not approve an additional curb cut. Gustaf»n said there was good site distance, if kept far enough away from the intersection, but it would require following County jurisdiction. Mabusth asked if the internal road was possible and whether it could go beyond the Gefire property. Gustafson suggested putting together different options on what is or is not feasible in determining the road's location. Gustafwn said the parcel does have the acceptable location for access road but questioned whether it was desirable to have all of the lots achieve access from internal road. Irv Wackman was in the audience. Wackman said he has a purchase agreement to purchase the property to the east and is curious about the road situation. It is his intent to build one home at this time and has no current plans to subdivide. Peterson reviewed that the issues for the sketch plan pertained to septic sites, wetlands, and the roadwav. Mabusth noted the limited area in the northern part of the parcel. Peterson and Smith said they would be willing to consider a lot width variance for an internal road. They were undecided on a variance if a backlot was created. Gronberg commented that with a cul-de-sac, parcels usually do not meet the 200* requirement and are routinely granted a variance. «■ • i .... .A • *- MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#10 - #2119 Bamett/HUloway Sketch Plan Review - Continued) It wa^ determined that there was possibly not enough area for 6 lots if lots I thru 4 were to be served by internal road. Mabusth noted that the slopes may also change the lot configurations. Berg said she has a problem with a single road. She would be in favor of the present configuration, which she noted was opposite of what is normally done. Berg said she would need to explore this issue further and would like to receive input from the County. Lori Lundeen of Barnett asked what the purpose was for an hnemal road. Mabusth explained that the purpose was to reduce the number of curb cuts fi'om the county roadways. Mabusth also noted the desire, in this particular case, to tie imo the property to the east. It was discussed whether a full road would be necessary or a driveway easement for the property to the east. It was noted that the connecting property has the potential of 4 lots at 14>l/2 acres for future subdivision. Gustafson added, if a roadway was not possible, a driveway easement should be requested. Mabusth said StafiT would like the internal road but would also like to see acceptable lots. Gronberg added that the slopes were an issue. Pfennig was concerned with erosion problems of 8% slopes. Gustafson said there was potential for erosion, and this would need to be reviewed in order to slow down the drainage. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#11) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Mabusth asked the Commissioners if they would like to consider having two meetings per month when agendas become lengthy. Peterson will canvas the Commissioners and report back to Mabusth. Mayor Callahan informed the Commissioners that Staff has advertised to fill the vacancy on the Planning Commission and is awaiting a response. ADDITIONAL ITEMS (#12) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20,1996 MEETING Peterson moved. Smith seconded, to approve the Minutes of the February 20, 1996 Meeting of the Planning Commission. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. p • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (^13) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND THE APRIL 8,1996 MEETING OF THE COUNCIL No representative was choi ADJOURNMENT Peterson moved. Smith seconded, to adjourn at 9:46 p.m. Stephen Peterson, Chair Person .4* ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 18, 1996 ROLL The Orono Planning Comniissioo met on the above date with the following membm present; Chair Stephen Peterson, Charles Schroeder, Sandra Smith, Janice Berg, and Elizabeth Hawn. Dale Lindquist was absent. The following represented the City Staff; Buildup and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, City Engineer Shawn Gustafk>n and Recorder Sherry Frost. Representing Council was Mayor Callahan. Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 7;00 p.m. (#1) #2120 LOREN BRUEGGEMANN, 372 WESTLAKE STREET - VACATION - 7:17-7:21 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth reported that the application was for approval of the vacation of a 10’ alley platted in 1912, that also included a canal connecting Westlake Street to main lake. The 929.4' elevation or O.H.W L. of the lake encroaches over this area. There is no dry land corridor connecting the 10* alley with Westlake Street lake access. Schroeder asked why this was necessary to do since there was no public interest. Brueggeman said it would clear up the title for the property. Peterson asked if there was any re^nse to the application fi-om the DNR. Mabusth said the application was discussed with Ceil Strauss and no changes were requested. There were no public comments. Hawn moved. Smith seconded, to ^prove the vacation of the east/west alley as platted in Hillside Park plat, immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of the property located at 372 Westlake Street. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#2) #2121 ELAINE A. SLECHTA, 3700 NORTHERN AVENUE - 7:55-8:07 P.M. A. CLASS n SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTIES LEGALLY COMBINED FOR TAX PURPOSES B. VACATION PETITION The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. 1 minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 - M2121 Elaine Slechta - Continued) Mabusth reported that the property consists of three parcels, two of which are Torrens prop^y. The certificate of titles have not been updated and do not reflect the 1912 vacation. Mabusth said there is no v^cle availaUe to the City by which to certify actions taken in 1912 by the Orono Town Board. Applicant has chosen to file a vacation petition for Northern Avenue rather than pursue a lengthy and expensive legal action. In 1982, the City reviewed a subdivision for a property owner to the west. The property was abstract, and the vacated right of way was included in the legal description. The City asked for 22' to 24’ of right of way dedication for the travelled road bed of Northern Avenue. Half of the road bed is located within the Railroad property. We will also ask for a dedication of road right of way and for an additional 10’ wide drainage and utility easement adjacent to dedicated road. The boundaries of the designated wetland must be located and confirmation by survey that 1/2 acre of dry land exists between wetland and road within Tract B. Elaine Slechta brou^t to the Commissions' attention the remarks of the Engineer regarding the draiiuige flowing to the northeast fiom the wetland to the north side of Togo Road. A neigtdxir has voiced concern with drainage flowing through their property. Mabusth said this matter may be further reviewed. She noted that the pond is functioning as a retention pond. Slechta said she would be willing to enlarge the pond to control the drain^e flow to the east. The tract C parcel was said to be very wet and not usable in the rear. Gustaf^n said the wetlands would still i»ed to drain to the east but suggested a swale to define the drainage. Mabusth said this improvement was not includ^ as part of the application and would have to be considered under a separate land use application. There were no public commems. Schroedo* moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2121 as outlined with the Applicant and Staff to work together on a drainage improvement plan. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#3) #2063 GERALD AND CANDACE ROWLETTE, 3775 BAYSIDE ROAD • CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - RENOTIFICATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS 7:01-7:17 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Applicant, Gerald Rowlette, was present. 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#3 > #2063 Gerald and Candace Rowiette - Continued) Mabusth reported that the application was taUed at the September, 1995, meeting to discuss drainage problems with Staff! The applicants had reported that the construction of Landmark Drive to the north has had a major impact on drainage on their property. The request is for hardcover and setback variances to replace an existing deck that was built in 1976. The current lakeshore regulations adopted in 1975 governed the building of the deck and applicants received variance approval. The applicants had reported that the construction of Landmark Drive to the north has had a major affect on drainage on their property. Rowiette said the drainage flows correctly during minor rain falls, but when excess rain occurs, the west side of their property is inundated with surface runoff! Staff advised that a County representative suggested constructing a 1' high berm in the County right-of-way. Mabusth said a permit would be required from the County. Rowiette said the deck replacement is an exact replacement in the existing envelope of423 s.f and located 10* out from the house. Rowiette said they have come up with a compromise for the excessive hardcover with the elimination of220 s.f of landscape underlayment to the east of the driveway. Mabusth corntnemed that this landscape area is within the County right-of-way and is not calculated in the hardcover facts. Rowiette said the rock on the side of the house, along with the sidewalk from the driveway, is necessary for drainage for the ground gutter in order to keep runoff away from the house. Smith asked what compromise could be made to effect hardcover reduction on the property. Rowiette said he had no areas where hardcover could be eliminated as the landscape areas were wood chipped only. He noted that I/3rd of the concrete patio was removed in 1988, but the remainder is needed for safety reasons to allow for an exit in case of fire and to eliminate ground heave. It was clarified that the landscape areas do not have any plastic underlayment but were figured in the calculation as hardcover. Schroeder inquired if the berm was to be installed in order to change the drainage patterns. Rowiette sa«d the purpose was for privacy. Mabusth added that it would redirect the drainage also. Mabusth questioned why a berm would be installed just to the west side of driveway when the drainage flows from east to west, and Rowiette said it was a matter of preference. Mabusth said the berm could be located in the right of way but trees would not be approved by County. Schroeder noted that the application was for reconstruction only of the deck and did not affect the hardcover that exists on the property. Smith said the Commission would normally look for areas for reduction but did not sec any area to reduce since there was no plastic underlayment under the landscape areas adjacent to house. t1 f minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#3 - #2'' ' > Gerald and Candace Rowlette - Continued) Mabusth advised that she would have Mike Gaffix>n reconfinn his hardcover findings before schedulii^ the application before the Council. Smith moved, Schroeder ^nded, to recommend approval for the deck replacement with removal of the Russian olive area underlain with plastic and located within County right of way. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#4) #2107 ERWIN SMITH/JOHN O’SULLIVAN, 3340 SHORELINE DRIVE - REQUEST BY APPLICANTS TO BE REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION - 7:21-7:55 P.M. A. VACATION OF PUBLIC STREET B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, VARIANCES, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted, The Applicants, John O’Sullivan and Mr. & Mrs. Erwin Smith, along with Consultants, Rob Thompson and Tim Coen, were present. Mabusth reported that the ori^al application was presented at the February meeting of the Planning Commission The comments rel^ng to the proposal were then discussed with the Applicant, Staff, Engineer, and Consultants to include the internal traffic issues. Changes were made in the proposal to answer the concerns brought up by the Commission and others. Mabusth continued that the application is for three variances. One variance is for a 30* setback for the car wash. The neighbors in the Lafayette Ridge area support the proposal in view of the wetland separation from their residences. The car wash location was considered to reduce the effect of noise and lighting. Another setback variance is required for parking area adjacent to residential lot line requiring a 10 ’ setback. The parking is set to be at 3' for a 7* variance. The third variance is for structural coverage excess over the allowed 15% proposed at 20.2%. A fourth variance has been added for signage area. With the footage of the front lot line, 100 s.f. of signage is allowed. The applicant is asking for 308 s.f of signage for a 208 s.f variance. 1 I ! MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#4 - #2107 Envin Smid^John O'Sullivan - Continued) Mabusth noted that the sfrfit vote on the application at the last meeting related to concerns over traffic and saf^ issues. These issues have now been addressed, and Mabusth said the Staff and Engineer are satisfied with the changes made. The exit lane of traffic from car wash has been moved back 40' from eastern entrance. Signage will alert those persons exiting car wash of oncoming traffic. Sheldon Johnson, Bonestroo's Transportation Group Leader reported on the concern of exiting traffic and access by the west side doorway of the restaurant. He suggested widening the sidewalk and installing a railing. A ramp was also discussed with those represented. Mabusth said the concern over the tightness of the area between the canopy and parking has been resolved with diagonal parking, which will provide an adequate amount of separation ^ace. The lanes will also have painted centerlines. Peterscm noted that according to the minutes from the meeting, another issue was the intensive use of the property. Shawn Gustafson, Engineer, was in attendance to answer any questions. Gustafron noted the issues relayed in the report by Johnson, and the results from the changes made. He commented on the lane marking to eliminate confusion in leaving the site, and the change to 45 degree parkii^ to resolve the issue of parking along Shoreline Drive. Gustafron said the County has reported their satis&ction with the entrances and their opinion that tl^ would be no impact on the signal intersection. Gustafson said the revised plans detail the issues that had been brought up, and he is satisfied with the traffic circulation. Peterson asked Gustafson to remark on the wetland issue. Gustafson said the property lines have been staked. It appears that the di^ance from the wetlands is satisfactory Init would need wetland ddineation along with grading plans to verify that the 26' separation is met. Gustafeon said there may possibly be a need for a 4' retaining wall by the entrance to the car wash. Mabusth said the County would not need any additional right-of-way. The City Engineer has recommended taking an additional T, however, to allow room for a possible future sidewalk if road is expanded. Hawn reported having spoken with Sheldon Johnson over the spedfic issue of pylons. She said they were in agreement over the need for a railing extending all the way to the crosswalk. Hawn had suggested a stop sign but Johnson said that people would ignore the sign adding that the crosswalk would be sufficient. Hawn said Johnson wanted the pylons in a fixed position so there would be no reconfiguration of traffic patterns on site. He had also suggested painting tlie lanes to which O'Sullivan has agreed to doing. i 4 minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#4 - #2107 Erwin Smith/John O'Sullivan - Continued) Smith asked Gustafson if there was anything he would change if he could start over again at the beriming, especially concerning intensity. Gusta&on said his background was in the road issues and saw additional control at Shoreline Drive in the future. Internally on the property, Gustafson said the lane markings, signage, and pylons would adequately address the density. When asked by Smith is there was anything quite so intensely developed within Orono, an example was given of the car wash, gas, and restaurant on the north side of Wayzata Boulevard in Wayzata, which is fed by two accesses. Schroeder inquired about the distaiKe between those picking up food at the window and those coining into the parking area. O'Sullivan said there was approximately 30', or 2-1/2 lanes of traffic separating the two. Peterson said be was in ^or of the changes and felt the concerns were addressed. He noted the use was intensive but saw the vanaiKes as consistent with development for the Navarre area. Peterson commented that the neighbors of the property had asked for a family-type restaurant or a pharmacy. There were no public comments. Smith brought up the new variance under consideration for signage. Mabusth referred the Commissioners to the exhibits relating to signage. The O'Sullivan's property across the street, consisting of 3/4 acres, has 450 s.f of signage, which is based on the amount of frontage. The property under consideration, due to its configuration, allows only 100 s.f of signage, although it is a larger lot. The applicant has asked the City to consider basing the amount of signage based on lineal footage along Shoreline Drive. Berg asked if the signage would be similar at the two locations. O'Sullivan bi ought their attention to Exhibits E and F. He said the restaurant would have a single pole idemification sign. The gas sign would be an identification sign with pricing of a lower monument type on the bouleN'ord. "O'Sullivan's” would be in signage on the building with identification on the canopy and "Culver's" on the restaurant building. Hawn noted with the multiple uses on the property, there would be the need for instructional signs. Directional signage is not included in the calculations. f * .'I MINUTES Of THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#4 - #2107 Erwin Smith/John O'Sullivan - Continued) Smith a^ed Berg what her opinion was of the project as she lives in the nrighborhood. Berg said she prefers signs over the usage of other symbols, which have been used, and allowed, for limited periods of time in the neighborhood. Berg said she is concerned over the intensive use of the property but feh it was the best use of the property. She hoped the two gas stations would alleviate the need to wait for a gas pump. Mabusth asked if there was a need to have any controls on what is sold in the store. Berg said she would not want to have any controls and saw the other store setting the trend for what this store would sell. O'Sullivan said he would hope people would have a reason to visit both properties. Schroeder asked if there was any remediation of the gas tanks on the property. O'Sullivan said one tank is still in place but would be removed and replaced with a new tank. The hours of operation were discussed. Schroeder asked that the hours for operation be stipulated in the conditional use permit. With O'Sullivan's agreement, the hours for operation of the restaurant will be from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The store, gas, and car wash will be open between the time frames of 5.00 a m. and 12:00 midnight. A car wash attendant will be on duty during the hours of operation. Peterson moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2107 with Staff conditions #1- 6. The hours of operation will be from 10:00 a.m.-l0:00 p.m. for the restaurant, and from 5.00 a.m.“12:00 midnight for the storc/gas/car wash, which will have an attendant on duty during operation. The railing shall extend to the crosswalk. The pylons will be fixed to the pavement. The lanes will be stripped along with directional arrows. Vote. Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#5) #2113 DAVID AND JEAN SAHLSTROM, 129 CHEVY CHASE DRIVE - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:07-8:19 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present. Mabusth reported that the applicants were seeking approval for a side setback for a garage addition to the north side of their residence located on Chevy Chase Drive. The 1 acre zoning requires a 10’ side setback. Mabusth .noted that there were mature evergreens loc-Jted on the lot line near where the new driveway would be located and asked the appUcant what affect the instaUation of the driveway would have on these trees. Mrs. Sahlstrom said the trees would be left, but the Commission was concerned that the improvement would result in the destruction of these trees. i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18. 1996 (#5 - #2113 David and Jean Sahlstrom - Continued) Mabusth asked the applicants if they had considered staging the garage to meet the lO* setback. Gustafkjn said he did not believe this would impact the drive-out apron for the garage. Gustafson also noted that the garage ^ron must meet the 40 degree backout alignm^ but calculated that this was possible. The applicams voiced concern with the aesthetics of the roof line by such a change. Hawn asked it the applicants had spoken with the neighbor, whose house is oriented to &ce the new garage addition. Mrs. Sahlstrom said the neighbor has recently moved to a nuraing home. She added that the neighbor's^ home sat far back on the lot, and in her opinion, would not be impacted by the addition. It was questioned as to who owns the evCTgreoi trees. The Sahlstroms said they were located on the lot line Peterson commented that if another variance was required, he would not recommend approval, and not^ the lack of need for 3 car garages He would like to see the applicant confer with the neigM>or, however. Schroeder said if the trees were affected by the addition, he would have a problem with the application. Mabusth noted that the City does not deal with tree issues in such cases but that this matter is left for the resolve of the private property owners. The Sahlstroms said they would like to see the trees remain and would consider setting the garage addition back 10’ to allow this to occur. The Sahlstroms then withdrew their application. im) #2114 CLARK WINSLOW. 1595 BOHNS POINT ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:19-8:40 ?M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was represented by Dale Gusta&on. Mabusth reported that the original application was approved in 1987 for maintenance dredging of 1500 cubic yards of spoils from an existing pond in a designated wetland. During this dredging, yellow clay was found and, subsequently, used by the City for the widening of the roadway. The current application is for 80 cubic yards of dredging to provide a 8:1 slope on the east side and 3.1 slope on the west for a 12’ pond depth, which is currently about 6-8* deep. Gustafson said the pond is clogged with weeds and vegetation. The dredging would remove the portion to the south full of muck and branches. 8 1 f L MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#6 - #2114 Clark Winslow - Continued) Mabusth said she, as well as the DNR, question what is lacking in the design that creates the need to redredge. Gustation said the problem arose from construction; and with the property to the side now in turf and plantings, he does not expect the problem to arise as frequently. Mabusth questioned the lack of wetland vegetatbn. Gustation said the vegetation has dis^>peared, but the purpose of the pond is to maintain open water. Mabusth did note that the original intent of the pond was to rid the area of odors and algae. Mabusth asked if the intent in opening up more open water area was to gain any vegetation. Gustafson said cattaHs could be replanted if the City would desire the maintenance of vegetation. Hawn later asked if the owner would approve cattail planting. Gustation said it would be done if it was necessary. Peterson said he normally would prefer a pond to remain natural and be opposed to open water. With how this pond sits in the neighborhood, Peterson said it would be consistent to maintain the pond as open water. He would like to see cattails planted on the south side. Schroeder questioned the amount of dredging and the depth with relation to vegetation. Gustation said the depth would reflect on the slope of the pond. Gustafson said a 8:1 or 10.1 slope was necessary to allow emergent vegetation around the perimeter. The property location to the lake and the effect of pond runoff was considered. The culvert was said to be functioning. Peterson questioned the sprinkler running from the lake. Gustafson said the sprinkler is there to add water from the lake to the pond to maintain the water level, if necessary, but added that it was not used. Mabusth noted that this was never approved nor addressed in the original application. Hawn commented on the smell from the pond on the neighborhood necessitating the need to maintain more open water. She suggested a design be drawn to allow aquatic vegetation on the south side. Gustation said it would be helpful to have dimensions if this was necessary. There were no public comments. Hawn moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2114 for conditional use permit and variance to permit the dredging and removal of 80 c.y. of spoils with the establishment of a hi^ water level for said pond. The slope of the pond is to be maintained at a 8:1 slope with reimposition of aquatic and wetland vegetation in the area of the excavation. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. KKTT*:rr>«s&l&a&aBi.aju.-^«rrmr • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18. 1996 (#6 - #2114 Clark Winslow - Continued) Gusta£son confirmed that there would be no problem with the 929.4 elevation. Peterson noted that this was his first recommendation for approval of pond dredging in a designated wetland. (#7) #2115 FRANK BENNETT, 315/405 TONKAWA ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:40>8:58 P.M. The Certificate of Mailii^ and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Appficam was represented by Dale Gustafk>n. Mabusth reported that the pond will be located in a low area of the 7 plus acre lot and is made up of types 1 and 3 wetlands. The wetland is not DNR protect^ nor on the National Wetlands Inventory Map, and would not require either Corps of Engineers or MCWD approval. Theonlyapprovalnecessafy isthatfi ’omtheCity ofOrono. The proposed pond is at 4; 1 slope with a overflow drainage through the ravine and to the southeast and eventually flows under Tonkawa Road. The ravine on the Gage property suffers major erosion. Mabusth noted that the pond would serve as a stoimwater retention area. The proposal is for removal of 1900 cubic yards of fill. Gustafson suggested asking why the dredging would not be a permit issue of the Corps of Engineer. He noted the Corps of Engineers have guidelines for permits in areas of under 1/2 acre that qualify for nationwide permit. He noted applicant may still need permission. The Commission was informed that the survey work was completed by Mark Gronberg. Peterson asked if the intention of the dred^g was for a wildlife pond. Gustafson said this was not the intention. The intention was to gain an aesthetically pleasing look with open water. The erosion of the ravine on the Gage property was noted. Gustafson said the location of the pond has spinoff benefits and would allow for diversification of habitat. Gustafson said the pond would aid in creating a water retention area for runoff protect and slow down the runoff and the drainage running into the ditch would be metered. It was further noted that the proposal calls for the removal of the existing access off of Tonkawa, and the fill would be used for the shoulder of the new drive. The driveway would then link with the drive further south on Tonkawa. Hawn commented that the application was not proposed as wildlife pond for permit reasons, but if the applicant would want wildlife, a greater slope would be required. Gustafson said the depth must be obtained as the pond would become shallower over time, and it was important to maintain the water retention. The possibility of a larger, shallower pond was discussed, but it was noted that it would disturb a larger area which was not desired.1 r"- - - ■k • % MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18,19% (#7 - #2115 Frank Bennett - Continued) Hawn asked if any of the ^ils would be used on the property. Gusta&on said the m^ority would be taken off the property to an appropriate, suitable site. Some of the spoils will be used by property owner to the south with new construction, and applicant would use some with construction of new road. Mabusth said there was no road or weight restrictions as Tonkawa is a County road. Smith inquired about the slope at the edge of the pond. Gustafson said the 4:1 slope would have a fluctuating water level. He proposes the house side of the pond to be a cleaner look and a meadow look to the back side of the pond. There were no public comments. Peterson moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2115 with Staff recommendations 1-5. The applicant is to work with Staff and Engineer to devdop a proper drainage plan in staging. The back side of the pond is to remain natural pasture land as it now exists. Staff will verii^ whether the application needs Corps of Engineer approval before going before the Council. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#8) #2116 JOHN AND LYNN WALSTEDT, 3470 BAYSIDE ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT • PUBLIC HEARING - 8:58-9:03 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Wabtedt was present. Mabusth reported that the new owners of the property propose an addition to the west side of the residence. It is their intent to dig under the upper level to add a walkout design. The entire project involvc'r »000 cubic yards of earth movement. 500-600 c.y. resulting from the excavation for walkout would be placed in the rear yard. A swale would also be excavated, which would ."rain along the west side of the residence to Bayside, redirecting the flow of 1 acre of the property to Bayside. Mabusth said Staff will meet with the applicant and County representative regarding 'mprovements to the ditch area. Mabusth noted that the application did not require a variance. She further commented that the proposal would result in a hardcover reduction in the 75-250' zone fi-om 40+% to 24.1%. } i i 4 I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18. 19% (#8 - #2116 John and Lynn Walstedt - Continued) Gustafson commented on the drainage on the site. The low spot on the property collects runoffin the wetland and takes h to an area near Bedcrwood. The change to the drainage would allow more drainage to the south to the county road. The County will review the plan for possible improvements on Bayside. but Gustafson felt the drainage by Bederwood was a larger problem. He did not see any potoitial for erosion and was in favor of the swale. There were no public ccnmients. Smith moved, Hawn seconded, to approve the conditional use permit for the new construction and for the erosion control with County review prior to project beginning. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Schroeder was not in attendance during this application and did not participate in the vote. Hawn was excused from the meeting at this time.) (#9) #2117 THOMAS MCCUNE, 1473 BAY RIDGE ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITA'ARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 9:07-9:12 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth noted that the property has suffered nuyor erosion problems. She recalled the emergency ordinance of 1987 allowing property owners to make repairs with Staff approval after a m^or rain storm. 24* of retaining walls at the northeast corner were in^led at that time. Mabusth commented that it has been the Engineer's recommendation to install masonry walls but the Engineer has approved the timber wail design and detail. The timber wall design ties in with what is presently on the property. Peterson commented on the necessity of the retaining walls with its proximity to the roadway. Peterson explained that the trend for masonry is being encouraged due to the eventual failing of timber-type walls. Mabusth said she had informed the applicant of the need for County permit but added that Dave Zetterstrom of the County had verbally voiced his approval. Berg moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2117 for a conditional use permit with Staff recommendations #1-4. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. Mabustii said the application would be on the agenda of the Council meeting of March 25, 1996. ••4 « • » MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 19% SKETCH PLAN REVIEW (Schroeder left the meeting at this time.) (#10) #2119 BARNETT DIVISION CORPORATION AND HILLOWAY CORPORATION , 180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WEST < SUBDIVISION/SKETCH PLAN Mark Gronberg was present along with Lori Lundeen, representing Barnett Division Corporation, and Jim Pfennig, representing Hilloway Corporation. Mahusth reported that the sketch plan review involves a 17 acre pared. The City granted pretiminary approval of 2 lot division in 1988. At that time, one residential area was created with a 13 acre outlot set aside for future development. The subdivision was never finalized. The preliminary resolution provide guidelines for the future development of the 13 plus acre outlot. The current proposal is for a 6 lot subdivision with a cul-de>sac located in the northeast comer serving lots 1,3, and 4. Lots 2 and 5 would each have a separate curb cut at CoRd 19. Lot 6 was to continue to be served fi-om the existing driveway. Mabusth said the access for the lots was reviewed with Gustafson. It was determined that the existing access for lot 6 was considered unsafe and suggested a shared driveway with lot 5. City guidelines had stipulated that an internal road should serve the majority of the lots. Mabusth said she would like to see a redesign of the accesses with lots I, 2, 3, and 4 served by an internal road. Mabusth continued that the proposal also involves wetland issues. There are designated wetlands on the property along with a wetland designated on the National Inventory Map in the northwest comer, which would be deducted from the total acreage. Mabusth said Staff would ask for wetland delineation. Type 1 and 2 wetlands are not deducted fi^om the acreage. Another issue concerns a recently completed lot line rearrangement with the Gefffe property to the east. The imemal road should connect to western boundary of outlot C of Bayview Farms providing access for future development. Mabusth reported that septic testing was completed in 1988 for the existing residence. The alternate site tested did not meet the 75' setback from designated wetland. The On- Site Septic Manager confirms signs of serious leaching from the existing septic. Staff will require septic testing for a new principal drainfield site which must meet the 75' wetland separation. This may present a problem due to the additional right of way being dedicated for CoRd 19. 13 »j ■ ranr-aivmii iir--v-w-n ■irAlaA . 1 -a-'i-i'•-?»•»<-----■---------------rmitiw-------a m—tf-run*•—ni*«-i-i-i r.Tffeki .• -la wi ■.« n r-Try" » i lufiu MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELT- ON MARCH 18. 1996 (#10 - #2119 Barnett/Hilloway Sketch Plan Review - Continued) Gronbcrg asked if the sepdc site be located in lot 5 if there would be the need to meet the 200* setback for the frontage noting the IT taken from the lot for right-of-way. Mabusth said the Commission would need to decide if they would allow that variance. Gronberg agreed that the access was unsafe to that lot. Mabusth said there was also the issue of number of lots if the internal road was built. There is 8 acres on the north between lots I -4. Gronberg said there would be a probl^n with the steepness of the slope on the east lot line, and it would require fill. Gustafson was informed that the road would be a private road built to City standards. Gustafson said the road would be allowoi up to a 12% grade, though 10% would be preferred. Jim Pfennig of Hilloway was informed that a private road can be used by anotho’ homeowner through an underl>'ing public easement. This would allow the adjacent land owners use but remain private. Mabusth said the costs involved in maintaining the road would be shared and could have an introductory fee but it would be decided with a private maintenance agreement resolved by property owners. Pfennig was concerned that an internal road would destroy the look of the lots and would like an additional curb cut for lot 2. Smith said a shared driveway could be used. Mabusth noted that the County may not approve an additional curb cut. Gustafson said there was good site distance, if kept far enough away from the intersection, but it would require following County jurisdiction. Mabusth asked if the internal road was possible and whether it could ^ord the Gefifre property. Gustafson suggested putting together different options or wh«t ur is not feasible in determining the road's location. Gustafimn said the parcel does have the acceptable location for access road but questioned whether it was desirable to have all of the lots achieve access from internal road. Irv Wackman was in the audience. Wackman said he has a purchase agreement to purchase the property to the east and is curious about the road situation. It is his iment to l7uild one home at this time and has no current plans to subdivide. Peterson reviewed that the issues for the sketch plan pertained to septic sites, wetlands, and the roadway. Mabusth noted the limited area in the northern part of the parcel. Peterson and Smith said they would be willing to consider a lot width variance for an internal road. They were undecided on a variance if a backlot was created. Gronberg commented that with a cul-de-sac, parcels usually do not meet the 200' requirement and are routinely granted a variance. MK'Vi- A.- •- wr'/--f - I t * L » • • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#10 - #2119 Barnett/Hilloway Sketch Plen Review - Contimied) It was determined that there was possibly not enough area for 6 lots if lots 1 thru 4 were to be served by internal road. M^sth noted that the slopes may also change the lot configurations. Berg said she has a prd>lem with a single road. She would be in favor of the present iguration, which die noted was opposite of what is normally done. Berg said she would need to explore this issue further and would like to receive input fi-om the County. Lori Lundeen of Barnett asked what the purpose was for an irrtemal road. Mabusth explained that the purpose was to reduce the number of curb cuts from the county roadways. Mabusth also noted the desire, in this particular case, to tie into the property to the east. It was discussed whether a full road would be necessary or a driveway easement for the property to the east. It was noted that the connecting property has the potential of 4 lots M 14-1/2 acres for future subdivision. Gustafdin added, if a roadway was not possible, a driveway easement should be requested. Mabusth said Staff would like the internal road but would also like to see acceptable lots. Gronberg added that the slopes were an issue. Pfennig was coiKemed with erosion problems of 8% slopes. Gustafson said there was potential for erosion, and this would need to be reviewed in order to slow down the drainage. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#11) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Mabusth asked the Commisaoners if they would like to consider having two meetings per month when agendas become lengthy. Peterson will canvas the Commissioners and r^ort back to Mabusth. Mayor Callahan informed the Commissioners that Staff has advertised to fill the vacancy on the Planning Commission and is awaiting a response. ADDITIONAL ITEMS (#12) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20,1996 MEETING Peterson moved. Smith seconded, to approve the Minutes of the February 20, 1996 Meeting of the Planning Commission. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. a MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#13) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND THE APRIL!, 1996 MEETING OP THE COUNCIL No representative was chosoi. ADJOURNMENT Peterson moved. Smith seconded, to adjourn at 9:46 p.m. Stephen Peterson, Chair Person i>' * ^ «|l %089 {)7'II723 JOIINSON.NORIU.RI I ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING CO. 531K)S.II»> No 101 Mi!incloiiloi.MN5514S l>tiora:(6i;|.174 7<JM Ia«I6i:i474«267 PUM.IMINAKY Pl.AI lOR: NORBERT JOHNSON FOREST LAKE VIEW StJRVl.Vi-D: Mun:h22, tW5 »RAHTI)i Moah 25.1*^(1 t.KCiAl m:sc Rn>TK)N: Iam 2. Bktck 1. licaihcfvmn. Hennepin ( o(.nty. Minnesuui I \\’c lu\c surveyed ihc property Jescrihed uKivc as it appears on lav records you have lumished BeJorc iIk final vwillpUi is completed, an uccurutc legal description, based on a title iiuurancc p»»!icy will be needed We show *'nlv such mailers ol record as we happen to become awnre ol wbcn we don't have accurate and complete title work to rvi' . We2. We show on this survey, a proposed division ol the pnipeny in this preliminary plat. We do not purpi'ri u> km»w vvhal governmental agencies may have junsdiciion over these proposals m>r what their many and .:.^5ing requirements may he We urge you to submit this preliminary plat and such other exhibits u.s may poitM> your proposals to such governmental agencies for approval and to obtain those appritvals before milking any inipirtanl decisions ragarding this property. Wc ore ni>i your rapresenuitive with governmental authorities nor your t'lrcgK* •rovals Willi a .t ll with the city and other agcmcics to detemtine what ussessttKnis ami fees will he involvc'd tluring the pi<K'< advisor in ilnr matter of tills preliminary plat and it will he your sole responsibility to pursue approvals wiilt any checkgovernmental agencies and to Jetc*rmirK for yourself whether or not tire project is feasible. We suggest that \ou cl V Wc show existing contours on this map ho.scd on topography pua'luiscd from llie City of Orono hut luve nut veril'ed those contours. .1 i - - Q^-/ /r me n:mim AiiiiN I hereby ccriilv that this survey was prepared by iik* or under my direct supervision oikI dial I \ il Surveyor under the Laws of the stale of Minnesota.I.nginccr and a Prulessiuaal^Survevor undei S( All t»M. INI II Lt.)l Al.S 5n KKUT SI ASDARDSVMHOt.S A: CUNVl NIIONS ’o" Dcmitcs I 2 “ ID pipe with plastic plug hearing Stale License Number ‘>2^5. set. if "o is tilled in then dtiaies found iron monument