The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-16-1996 Planning PacketPLAiNNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 16,1996,7:00 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY - COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE - Gabriel Jabbour ATTENDANCE Applicants presenting proposals before the Commission are asked to move to the table at the front of the Chambers when their application is announced by the Chairman. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS\PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING 1. 7:00 p.m. #2094 Rodney A. Crawford, 4705 North Shore Drive Unimproved Public Road 2. 7:30 p.m. j.8:00 p.m - Vacation of #2101 Jeff Bowen, Charles Hommeyer and Ken Rolland, 4119, 4125 and 4127 Oak Street - Preliminary Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement and Vacation of Unimproved Public Roads #2096 Diane and Kevin Holmes/Orchard Park Farm Inc., 555/585 Stubbs Bav Road North - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement 4. 8:30 p.m. #2099 Loren Brueggemaim, 372 Westlake Street - Subdivision of a Replat and Variances 5. 9:00 p.m. 6. 9:30 p.m. Proposed Zoning Amendment, Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (A, C, E and F) Proposed Zoning Amendment, Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subd. 9(C) 7. 9:45 p.m. Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 6 - MUSA Boundary Revisions ACTION ITEMS Review of these items will commence prior to or between scheduled public hearings, 8. #2088 Stephen Gardiner, 3770 Bayside Road - Vacation of Unimproved Public Road Continuation of Public Hearing 9. 10. 11. 12. #2095 Stephen M. England, 3855 Cherry Avenue - Renewal Variance - Public Hearing #2097 Patricia A. Guttormson, 3315 Crystal Bay Road - Variances - Public Hearing #2098 Kari and P.iul Romportl, 4101 Highwood Road - Variances - Public Hearing #2100 Robert and Debra Edmunds, 1030 Tonkawa Road - Variance/ Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - TUESDAY, JANUARY 16,1996,7:00 P.M. 13. #2102 Howard and Eluabeth McMillan, 1275 Lyman Avenue - Conditional Use PermitA/^ariance - Public Hearing 14. #2104 B. Scott Ball, 1065 West Femdale Road - Variances - Public Hearing Sketch Plan Review 15. #2103 Orono Hockey Boosters, Inc., 1025 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Conceptual Plan P.eview Planning Commission Comments ^ u 1 1 16. Report by Planning Commission Representative attending Council Meeting of December 1 1, 1995 ^ ♦ 17. Other issues for discussion Additional Items 18. Planning Commission approval of minutes of the December 1 1, 199a meeting 19. Planning Commission to select a representative to attend the February 12, 1996 meeting of the Council Adjournment /. To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: % Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator January 9, 1996 #2094 Rodney Crawford, 4705 North Shore Drive - Vacation of Unimproved Public Road - Public Hearing Zoning Dbtrict: LR-IB Application: The applicant has filed a vacation application to vacate platted road along shoreline of property as the issue of the platted roadway has created problems and delays in the sale of the property. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.12 - Vacation of street Lbt of Exhibits A • Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners' List D - Neighbors' Acknowledgement Form E - Plat of Tristana Cove 1981 F - Sewer As-Built G - Legal Description of Vacation H - 1960 Plat Map 1-1-2 1962 and 1989 Survey of Lots 8 and 9 J - 1990 Survey of Lots 5 and 6 K - Survey of Proposed Vacation Description of Request As a condition of selling applicant's property, he has agreed to file a petition to vacate the platted right-of-way of Lake Street located at the shoreline of the property. Review Exhibit B, the current plat map suggests that the remainder of Lake Street has been vacated. Review Exhibits I-l, 1-2 and J. Note survey of Lots 8 and 9 of 1962 (M) shows Lake Street not vacated but the 1989 survey of the same property (1-2) shows Lake Street vacated and J, the 1990 survey of Lots 5 and 6, shows no reference to Lake Street. Staff searched the various plat maps to determine if there was a visible sign of a document number to reflect the legal vacation of Lake Street. Staff found no document number and contacted the County Rick Jorgenson of Hennepin County advised that Lake Street, originally dedicated in the 1888 plat of "Bergquist and Wicklund's Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota", was never vacated. Somehow recent plat maps failed to show Lake Street. The 1981 plat of Tristana Cove (Lot 1, application property) designated Lake Street at its shoreline. Zoning File #2094 January 9, 1996 Page 2 Refer to Exhibit H, the County advised that the majority of Lake Street was platted at a 20’ width and is probably under water. As it extends eastward towards the Tristana Cove property, the road measures from 33’ at the west border to 47' at its eastern boundary. Refer to Exhibits F and K, the sewer manhole is located in applicant’s property at the east boundary. John Gerhardson has advised that the sewer line ends at this manhole and does not extend westward. The western lots (to west of subject property) are served by sewer lines in North Shore Drive. The City must obtain utility easements over that portion of the sewer line if Lake Street is to be vacated. Refer to Exhibit E, note the 20’ wide sewer easements at the east side of Lot 2, Tristana Cove. Note also that portion of Lake Street adjacent to Lot 2 at shoreline is not included with this vacation petition. Steven Ward, the current owner of Lot 2, may wish to join in a comprehensive vacation petition wnth the remaining landowners to the west to complete total vacation. Staff has determined no public interest in the remaining portions of the unimproved Lake Street. SuffT Recommendation To recommend approval of the vacation application as proposed by Rodney A Crawford for the property located at 4705 North Shore Drive, Lot 1, Tristana Cove, subject to applicant granting a 20’ utility easement over existing sewer line and manhole within unimproved right-of-way. ^__ \ i:^ c ',9^/ •V -i K CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAM) USE APPLICATION-^ Ci •• ^ ifPROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^7o< /2//y?r^ Type of Application to be Filed _ _______T \ A % ^ I ype or Appiicaiiuu lU i uwia ^ -------------------- — Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 0*7 I > &. APPf irAVT Phone (home) ^ H8^S ^ g4V~ City ^Zip gf^aox /P~3/*'S7 OWNER (if different than applicant) ---------------------- Name ------------------------------------- -----(wortc), ---- Address Citv Zip. Date Property Acquired_______________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. _(month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 50.(X) For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential Accessory Use $200.00 Instimtional (church, school, etc.) $175.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ^ $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration -------- Grading and filling - designated weUand or floodplam Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more i ■ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule “ $100.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) ~ After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS , r n $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) 1?^(i250.^ Vacation ST75T6 o Easement Vacation $ 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) $300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District ______ Present Use of Property /Residential Other (specify) I .V - HI-^3 3?c o ^ 2. 3. 4. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. v/^ Completed Application Form. ^ ust of O*™. Ubc^ and Mp (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). ^ r Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. . Attach legal description to application if not included on rcqui^ survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterauons mvolve fegal namefonclude marital satus) of aU persons with an mterest m the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (sec staff for requirements). As an addendL to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. . riflj /o. \ ci W 5. 6. 7. S. 9. FOR ‘ir TOR ALL DOCUMENT SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) Certification by Clerical Department that Lind Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff __________________________ ---------------- Th **^*^i>^ Lre^bv^a^rcw^ provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Admidstrator agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) an“ S expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her kn^edge. Applicant’s signanire Date 3 /fj$ OWNER’S SKNA-^E application and further authorized reasonable the property by City staff,"consultan^.^ents commission members, and Council members for purpLs of investiga^and venfic^ of this request. Owner’J Date_If //i/f.s Commission Meeimgs are teW coimcU. If an applicant is unable to anend a scbeduled m«tmg. of this change prior to the meeting. 1 j 'f lot I !z: i* •A r 13) M (19) v>> ' T"*' 3V V rVv '7. J LiS ft i U• 1 ^-5)\L HO 3364432 _,. T';/^‘<> I < - ^v^.‘ v-,2i:|fM)i >s. N;:^ (9)'.. ; I’ - ' ' ( ^ »• J 'S-x \ <v ^'■r V V \ Y / 1.27) N ' ' \ fB. 7M.36 ? lhi.t ^ > w:^'"/isfiams. ?6> SiS / ' / .'• V'' • ' ' XL I ■<?■/. ^v/ / -^ v'-.' s'»y.?\ J^U< -V -v .*• 'J I .y>. : ?it»S»«»H'%>JS:3rTJTr-p ^"'■**M^V'*'»>/'^- X'® “'? ('. yr.;'^V' V -i '''f*Xr-Vi^ r-^ 6^ ^ /rc ' <?T7yXi' \ A(P;A\ 2 \ / I'iV \ hx y ’ r->- ■; • \ ' -X \ V ' '* ' , .£. . . !r\ 1.-!? ^ / .•L^VS4 iioV*'-V^\V; f»-' (fcO) *V6272. 3 fK. n« 'i XyL-’Al#-'. £n,#''7iXS t' « T. .oV>\ six \ Jyv .5-2'^/-^ <.-w* \ s J". \ .iV ,< - ■ / / -j- v '•• -.4 \w''X \>" \ •>.-;,.y;.\ >,•tot / /? •: •S' •j:nV.(2y\ I ■ (1) / / /A''I . } RUN O.'TE 11/lS/fS 'j' aATOi 50S HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEMMOP ADM ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP AOOR CPfCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOM PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOM ' PROP AOOR ^ 7 V ONNER NAME taxpayer NAHE/AODR * * » • /.•'i ^ • -•<VJ PROP AOOR 0»tCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 0^>: V? D:[\ PROP AOOR , C»t«R NAME ‘ TAXPAYER - , NAME/AOOR so 07-117-ES SE 0002 01S40 REST POINT LA J H HOUTHAN A R J HOUTMAN J H HOUTMAN A K J HOUTMAN ISAO REST POINT U NOUNO HN S5SA4 M* 07*117-21 S2 0004 047SA NORTH SHORE DR CHRISTINE J SCHANZENOACH CmiSTINE .1 SCHANZENOACH 47S6 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND in 55S64 SO 07-117-2S S2 0017 04725 NORTH SHORE DR J P HENRY ETAL J P HENRY 4725 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55S64 SO 07-117-2S S2 0020 0475S NORTH SHORE OR JOHN FRIDAY JOHN FRIDAY 475S NORTH SHORE DR ORONO m 55SA4 SO 07-I17-2S S2 0028 04655 TONKAVIEN LA DENNIS A MEYER DENNIS A MEYER 4680 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND m 55S64 S8 07-117-2S S2 0034 01S50 REST POINT RO LAS 6RABILL URRY A SHARON 6RADILL 1S50 REST POINT RD NOUNO HN 55364 t •.jt • PROPERTY ONNE'^J LISTS8 07-117-2S S2 OOOS 04725 TONKAVIEN LA EAT CHRISTIANSON EARL A TERRY CHR1STIAI60N 4641 TONKA VIEH LANE NOUNO MN 55S64 S8 07-117-2S S2 0014 047S4 TONKAVIEN U LARRY ARNOLD 6REENHA6EN ET AL L GRCENHA6EN A V 6REENHAGEN 47S4 TQNCAVIEH LANE HOUND MN 55S64 38 07-117-23 32 0018 04731 NORTH SHORE DR DENNIS A MEYER DENNIS A MEYER 4680 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0025 04625 TONKAVIEN LA R N SHELTON A N L SHELTON R H SHELTON AML SHELTON 4625 TONKAVIEN LA NOUNO m S5364 38 07-117-23 32 0029 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED DENNIS A MEYER DENNIS A MEYER 4680 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0050 04680 NORTH SHORE OR DENNIS A MEYER DEMUS A MEYER 4660 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND MN 55364 REPORT NO. PX435401 PAGE 738 07-117-23 32 0004 04735 TONKAVIEN LA 0 M A J R STANLEY DAVID M A JULIE H STANLEY 4735 TONKAVIEN LA ORONO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0016 04731 NORTH SHORE DR DENNIS A MEYER DENNIS A MEYER 4680 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND MN 55364 10 38 07-117-23 32 0019 04745 NORTH SHME OR HERMAN CRANFORD ETAL HERMAN CRANFORD 4745 NO SHORE DRIVE MOUND HN 55364 o SS 07-117-2S 12 0024 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED J R AORAHAHSON/0 ADRAHAHSQN JANES R A DANN A0RAHAI60N 4429 TONKAVIEN LA NOUNO HN 5S344-MS1 CD 50 07-117-23 32 0030 01373 REST POINT RO K E ANDERSON OAK KRAKR KIRK ANDERSON 1373 REST POINT RO NOUN) tN 55344 V '... *•:*• • ' •• ’ - A ■ . . . . • ■ . ... • •: V •• M J . •V : ‘4-• ! 4 t *% * “ j .n 38 07-117-23 32 0052 01315 REST POINT LA K J GROVER ASK GROVER KEVIN J GROVER AND SUSAN K GROVER 1315 REST POINT LA MINNETRISTA NN 55344 * V•* f» ^* * > J r 4" t *•! V., • * a’ . • • • Vi; •{.!j ; - i ■ ■. -• ■ ■■ . ■■ .' —7f..r in'- ISM DATE ll/lS/W '‘'I! BATCH BOS HE»i4iPXN COUNTY PROPCRTY INFOWUTIQN SYSTEM PROPERTY OMCRS LISTV*'•VI» /V^ * raop ADM V’ I v<? . ONNCII NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR >v>- iv; r SB . 07-117-23 32 0053 04475 NORTH SHORE OR T C CORBIN A J L HISFELOT TYLER C CORBIN 4405 NO SHORE OR MOUND MN 55344 ■*« \ IT ^ 1l; '<» PROP AODR > QMCR NAMB ^TAXPAYER i MAME/ADOR I f > 'v: •• 3B 07-117-23 32 0050 04705 NORTH SHORE OR R A CRANFORD A A C CRANFORD ROONEY A A ANN C CRANFORD BOK 845 CAREFREE AZ 05377 :;ivr f'>V , . - j V. f.:- ;-.{!■ PROP ADDR CM«R NAME ’ P T I TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR TOTAL BATCH 603 00024 ;■ ;•TtUv r.r • V.. . V t»n:' i'fc •■■■•'U'-; • ■r'l •‘I <■t 14 V V. • ‘ i ? \ : \ -V- # *>.*/• • • f'fi ^ i ' V i . *• *' *lyi.2 • * *•' * •> . ■ • * ♦ V.J *• ‘ . * • • .♦ St > :* 7y?-' ;:N vt-r, • rv ‘* REPORT NO. PIASB401 PA« asa 07-117-2S S2 0054 01545 REST POINT LA JOSHUA 0 URAN JOSHUA URAN 1345 RESTPOINT LA HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0054 04685 NORTH SHORE DR T C CORBIN A J L HISFELDT T C CORBIN A J L HISFELDT 4685 NORTH SNORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0054 04645 NORTH SHORE DR STEPHEN C A JOANNE A HARO STEPHEN C HARO 4645 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0041 01371 REST POINT LA KENNETH N A RENEE G EGKRT KENNETH N A REMEE 0 EG6ERT 1371 REST POINT U HOUND HN 55344 > • I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEftCPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KN0MLED6E AND BELIEF. DATE 'tifi Ud^jui) •7 J % ' f '.f t 4v.* ■:rr » > I. 10V 1. •••-N O ' ^ 1 ■ • I n .* f’ I •* ♦ V. f , ‘4 .r .n- * r »• ' • « . # • t' • •■ri ''VV''-‘T'-l ' f-.v ; • r .V .’ i !• • ' '• 4 * r ■ • * • t\ I- :•ri.' V'• i •* •.-.ir; i. •. ■if t iiL D Adjacent Propern* 0>vners* AckndwfedgemenrForm- 1 rw.^ I ._ of / ^ [print name(s)l [pnnt address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at aJ- also referred to as Land Use Application No.------------• I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I («ve) am declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbo project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date loi_^ Property Owner L) t ¥ /5^ b Date mmm^mmmm***mmrn***0*****************************jd<i i« j|« in ♦<»<* *i* *i* ^ ♦ ^ *^ * *^ * ^ *^ *^’**’** *^ I (we) [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located _______________ also referred to as Land Use Application No.------------• I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement. I (we) am (ate) not “ked to declare aooroval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for *e Ci^ CoOT.il tot I (we) ar.t (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor s project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If vou have any information that may assist the City in the review of Appifcarn.7ease Ibmit your comments to Use BuUding & Zoning Office at least 10 days pnor to the scheduled meeting date. ^W*M, Mimtym 13 ^ SH^M fl ^MMm^mm C0tm¥y emM/ m^ ( 0^ $!^ €mrr^r m/T 7^^- \ ii^ //T Alf^A, mn9f0 £3 0/JM 7H0.00 A'M3*30'^ _______ SCALE m FEET 40 —I- 90 -4- 190 -I I CORDON R. COFFIN % LMO SUOVEYOO 0 PLANNEO LONG LAKE, OIMMOSOTA N. * \ ‘V \ ^ I f -. ,.. V U. "*^'v - ^O/,. ; ^ '-o/„. ' • <? •N;’ ^__^r4km0 ‘fx I !»>#/ •/* ^ « 4 p0*»*4 m H0 A* •f i#/ T9 £»t4^n4 ti £miTmtf^rJy fr^m 4l0 ^0rt tmrmpr mf sm»£ ht .9 Dr0i0^m^ 009 9matmm0^ »rm ^A^mm Mtfw : X T h_ Amtny S W aJlj^thmj />»rW ’/«r /»/ /m9t, 00d to in at^athf 'n^ i/otk kn»%, 9S sAmwrj on 4Ao ^4o^. Wof*^ mUvoii§n on J*tty ii,t9§Of mfOM * 9i9tt Uoi 9/CV 9-/9if. Htokmf known wm^9 o/fvohon of Loko nX^^Homko wmtUBStfMi NOVO Iftf sttOf^mj io Aft mm Oopt of ChntooymAton Bootkmork to m ihsojjod N* on iko roncnoAo bmo NTT cor.mor or pump- kooJO oi Crorr Boy dmm', no^orAtom twOSIifforA N.a.VO-t9Z9 \fA.i Nriy itnO •\V •/w Afoti £m»forAy Ofiof^ro -f\ V 'V ? A pmnti on iko tkoro mi loko MinnoAonko N,7hn4 AO 99 fooA ST Ay mtootorof oUnm $Aono of oot£ foko from Ako SB €mrm^/A# o f ootN ioA TO O rfonoAos tron monumorrA Ail heorinot sttown an p/of otoomod. •' %V% SOfy or Sooikorty ^ \ Comon of lo9 70' \ ' I cy / / / LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 1. Block 1. TRISTANA COVE PROPOSED DESCRIPTION OF ROAD TO BE VACATED: That part of Lake Street as dedi cated to the public In the. plat of “BERGQUIST AND WICKLUND**S PARK. HENNEPIN CO.. MINN.** which lies between the extensions across It of the westerly line of Lot 1. Block 1. TRISTANA COVE, and the southerly portion of the easterly line of said Lot 1. 0 : Iron marker Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. \ T, ^0/ % i 4 > ri >S^J1isH•#/*/J % M N N 1^ *' L2P#9m *;5j f yC~~~' W HOO p/I M • * 1r u r 1 f.1 'i > 1 1-// I-r I. j V. 4 '**s5 i I Phont: GReenwoed 3*€3SZ RtgUttrcd Prof#ision*l Enginttt «nd L*nd Sor»«TW- *. 1521S \VaTX»tt BouLvard WaT*«»«. MlaBaaola r,', ARLEIGH C. SMITH PIAT OF S08VBY ; yy:, ; ’ .'_ '• ■ -'•• * 'V' Tkj^. il. \ •■u&>irC2y.v */c. Lc-^- -T. ‘ 6 M 0 5 K C^a>Q, i \AJ I c. !^e.u jj tt^.5 r^'C! Ul ^ —Hid OF PROPERTY OF described as iollows: £. - .1* ^ Q CEHTiricATE OP LOCATION OF BUILDING \ I hereby certify that on— i *^-77- ^ made a survey of the proposed location of the buudin« on the above deaiTibed property and that the location of 5a»d building is coixecUy sbovi’n on the above plat • • »A* t I • • •»* • • • < I ^ * • * •* •. • • * - * • */•* * * *• r* - *- • V ;• . • ¥ .. . • I •■•• ..*• • . . .•.♦■.••• -• . ’'-jT ' CEHTinCATE OF SURVEY • • . '. • • • • I hereby certify (hat od-^lHSL^s—19-t—= I surveyed tlio property described above and that the abavb plat is'a correct representation of said stirvey. f I’t* \ ^ i ^ *•' - % ^ TO M ^ VO : %» •C •*:\ •.V!l !*• s: / /'a ■*\2; 7 7/^ / / / / / '/ / y / / % 4 W //. '/%SrJd(Ui. / /^ / e Z/W//' '%J^ /////// /v #/ /■ / / %','i ///II / 7 ^V/ / ^ / /7/ / / / / / / / / / > • ■ ,. A V' *o*•» rt» .A w <?, «- •’ " •?, •j> <>. * n <» o> ,1 r« r» V, ■;ryo-s? - ?i o ■:> nS vD .t I- .>•) •VA • « TOME » II LEGAL DESCRIPTION: HMIOCOVICR calojutiomei (AvMt Jo t€M) The southeasterly One-half of Lot 7, and Lots 5 and 6, Block 6, BERGQUIST AND WICK- LUND'S PARK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Henne pin County, Minnesota. toMe HAItOOMt ana AtiA 0*-iy I0,o»5 430 4% Cow«r*^e 14-150’ »0,309 5150 %•/• GENERAL NOTES 1939.7 Denotes iron monument Denotes cross chiseled in concrete Denotes existing spot elevation Denotes proposed spot elevation Denotes surface drainage Proposed top ol foundation elevation ' Proposed basement floor elevation - Proposed garage floor elevation = BENCHMARK: Ooshed contour lines denotes proposed features Solid contour lines denotes existing features ALL-METRO LAND SURVEYORS 2340 Doniels Street Long Loke, Minnesoto 55356 Ph*. 475-1433 1 htrtby certify Ihot thie eurvcy, plon or report A A A a 2 . A _ I X ^woe prepored ^ me or under my direct eupervieion ond that 1 am o duly Regietered Land Surveyor under the lows of the Stole of Minnesoto.e loosjpf the state ot minnesoto. DATE RE6. NO.mti SCALE i”« yo' FILE NO. <)0«47 A ' T*a ■.V I t* BOOK mOE,. ; n e . • > .• : e , ■ • V‘- i ; - 'I •3 ** • f ‘T -A * 'sitf ■e" • .. i < s . • i'v' ■,«M • • • •. A• » ■ K .. • I . S 0 ♦ ’■ ! •* ■ t S ♦ .• •• e ‘ ^V. f i . \ . : i' t 4^ h ■ r * s’..* -V . *. I • ‘ ; *•> . t » V ‘ : / ^•e V ‘ ^ t e A A* . • t i m * •CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY EVERSON RESlDc-MCe . ' I LEGAL DESCRIPTION: HARPCtweR CALOlUTWMil 111 ficl) ‘LMC tout HMlOCMt AM AtfA The southeasterly One-half of Lot 71 and Lots 5 and 6, Block 6, DERGQUIST AND WICK- LUNO*S PARK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Henne pin County, Minnesota. 10,015 410 4% »0,I05 51 so SSV* GENERAL NOTES o 1939.7c «• Denotes iron monument Denotes cross chiseled in concrete Denotes existing spot elevation Denotes proposed spot elevation Denotes surface drolnoge Dashed contour lines denotes proposed features Solid contour lines denotes existing features EQ] Proposed top of foundation elevation s Proposed basement floor elevation ^ Proposed garage floor elevation = benchmark : ALL-METRO LAND SURVEYORS 2340 Donlets Street Long Loke, Minnesoto 55356 Ph*. 475-1433 1 htrtby certify ihot this survey, atan or report woe prepored by me or under my direct eupervieion ond ttiot 1 om 0 duly Registered Lend Surveyor under the loweof the Stole of Minnesota.0 lowejsf the Stole of Minnesoto. DATE nco NO.mis SCALE 1 30' BOOK «8E).u n FILE NO. *)0047A y ?• «• •• r *. * ' i • ♦ < ' I' V*’ * Vi' > ^ • *.*•» % ■ > . '1 ■ K \ ; I t i' s'. ;• U: ‘ i r • V- '•i-. ^ r I 7 To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Comnussion Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:January 9, 1996 Subject: #2101 C. Hommeyer/J. Bowen/K. Rolland - 4119, 4125 and 4127 Oak Street Zoning District: LR-IB Total area “ 3+ acres Application: The application involves a lot line rearrangement of 15 lots into three lots each totaling one acre or more in area. The application also involves the vacation of unimproved public right-of-ways that intersect the property. The application was conceptuafly reviewed at the October 16, 1995 meeting of the Planning Commission. Applicants were encouraged to proceed with the subdivision and vacation application subject to the conceptual directives developed by the Planning Commission. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.12 - Vacation of public road/street. Applicants have petitioned for the vacation of unimproved Clyde Place, Park Avenue and portions of unimproved Oak Street. 2.Section 10 24 - LR-IB standards. Subdivisions of lot line rearrangements do not require that lots be brought up to required standards of the zoning district as the division does not propose the creation of new building sites. All but one lot will meet the area requirement of one acre, 43,560 s.f 3. B Chapter 11. A. Definition 65 Definition 66 (C). Class III subdivision applications. The subdivision involves the vacation of streets and the dedication of additional right-of-way, utility easements aiid drainage easements. The Code will require that the division be completed as a plat. The area of the three lots are as follows; Lot 1 = 44,300 s.f Lot 2 = 43,400 s.f Lot 3 = 55,700 s.f List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - Application Plat Map Property Owners' List Map of Current Ownership of 15 Lots Engineer's Report 1/5/96 Topographic Map Defining Drainageway Plat of Lot Line Rearrangement 1 1 Zoning File #2101 January 9, 1996 Page 2 Review of Application The original subdivision application or sketch plan has been amended so that only a portion of Oak Street will be vacated. Both Lot 3 and the Siegel property (refer to Exhibit B) will continue to be served by the remaining unimproved platted right-of-way of Oak Street. Clyde Place and Park Lane will be completely vacated. Lots 1 and 2 shall be served by a shared driveway at Linden Avenue. The addresses of Lots 1 and 2 currently assigned to an Oak Street address will now be changed to Linden Avenue. Mr. Rolland, the owner of Lot 3, can continue to use the Oak Street address The tq)plicant's surveyor has located tfll utilities within the areas to be vacated. The majority of the utilities are located within portions of Oak Street and Park Lane. Applicant's surveyor has recommended that since all utilities are grouped in one area that a blanket utility easement be taken over vacated Park and Oak. The utility easement should be extended outside of vacated right-of- way if necessary to meet desired width for easement. Refer to Exhibit F, the topographic map locates the drainageway located just to the east of Clyde Place. The City will ask for a 20' wide drainage easement over drainageway. The drainage easement shall also include portions of vacated Oak Street (over culverts beneath gravel drive). Applicants have met with staff to discuss the dedication of additional right-of-way for Linden Avenue that would also include suitable access to the Bennett property (refer to Exhibit G). Following guidelines suggested by the Council at a recent workshop, staff has recommended that applicant grant an additional 10' of right-of-way for Linden Avenue (total width 40') and a 30’ wide extension to the northwest providing a public access for the Bennett property. h4embers may recall that Council advised that standards for new development (i.e. road dedication, required improvements) should be modified when dealing with developed properties in order to minimize the impact upon surrounding development. The final plat shall show the extension as part of the dedicated public road. Linden Avenue, ^d not as an outlot. If the property to the northwest is to be subdivided, a cul-de-sac shall be provided at the end of the public road. The need to retain a walking trail over vacated Oak Street providing access to the lake and ravine area is no longer necessary since only a small portion of Oak Street will be vacated adjacent to Lot 3's boundary. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the lot Une rearrangement for the properties located at 4119, 4125 and 4127 Oak Street that would propose the replat of 15 lots within Blocks 3, 4 and 5 of the Minnetonka Summit Park plat into three lots. Staff also recommends the vacation as proposed that involves the complete vacation of Clyde Place, Park Lane and the partial vacation of Oak Street as shown on the survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc. and dated September 21, 1995, Job #95307, subject to the following conditions: •' ^ » m*. f i :'■?;. Zoning File #2101 Jartuary 9, 1996 Page 3 1. 2. 3. Applicant to grant a drainage easement over the drainageway that runs from the north to the south over portions of vacated Clyde Place and portions of the proposed residential lots. Drainage easement to extend over vacated portion of Oak Street and culverts that run under gravel drive. Lots 1 and 2 shall access properties via a shared drive at Linden Avenue. Oak Street addresses are to be reassigned to a Linden Avenue address. Applicants to dedicate utility easements over all utilities located either within dedicated right-of-way or outside of vacated right-of-ways. Drainage and utility easements 5’ wide adjacent to all internal lot lines and 1 O' wide along Jl exterior lot lines to be omitted along shoreline. 'IT; a r Jj. b > . : 7/ / / r^Tny' ® 'll CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address t¥/f1 ■ ^/IS /7Ak rr^<rr Type of Application to be Filed —C JTAffr L. Propeny Identification Number (P.I.D.) APPLICANT Name r'x/jd f f Address ^/LS adit. sT.__________Citv Phone (home) Y7 J* Phone (work) ______Zip S rf* OWNER (if different than applicant) -------- Name Tffftfr A. ^ Address___________________________ City------------------------^ip. DateProperty Acquired (month/year)! I (do)CjH^^^Iso own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application “ $125.00 Residential Accessory Use $200.00 Instimtional (church, school, etc.) $175.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg (S^. 9/^^^ $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use } $200.00 Land Alteration -------- Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule ~ $100.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) ~ After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS , . r ^ $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) “3<” $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 PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District_____ Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) I nNIMUM MATERIA. Rl V JIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION , Payment of fees (rei." : ’application fees* listed below). . Completed application form • .ab.. and p,a. (yen n.na. :.ia Us.. laUdU and osap . a“L."“'^; wish no.m.d of .Uis app.«oo. 'oning Official’s Signature _____________________________________^ .onimum materl \l required for complete final application Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicaoie>. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, covenants, etc. i. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. ^ Zoning Official’s Signanire __________________________—-------------- —--------- I. application fees (Zoning Administrator to check pC] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: Sketch Plan Review (Class I. II & HD S2(X).00 X. Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement S3.TO.OO ' Subdivision .Application (Class I & II) S300.00 rrr e n -------- Preliminary Subdivision Application S325.00 + 525.00/lot (Class HI & all non-residential) Final Plat Application (Class III) 5175.00 ' Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. 5200.00 Totals Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) =Si ff B. Special Improvement Fees: ,• f, , cn - « Propo^d PrivM Roads $600.00 + $.50/lmeal ft.;--------jdl. ft. a ^50- $--------- Proposed Public Roads S900.00 + S.SO/lincal ft., ui. . x . ■ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road 5900.00 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension 5250.00 + 525,'’tub Proposed Waten^ Extension $250.00 + 525/smb SJ*-Site System. subdivision applications) $50.00/new lot proposed for on-site x--------new lots C. Flexible Application FeesAIisc. Fees Variance $200.00 c-e nr, Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision 5/5.00 PRD Application with SuHivision 530.00/nwelling Unit stablished by ordinanc^ Q \l)>^v\UV<gK/A^________________Date ---------- \^}vWiVu4. Applicant’s Signature Iwner’s Signature -V Dare I 2.- ^Uoap. .03. have .. « meetings are held on thc_third Monday o P ^ arrangements to have an authonzedaeetings are to anend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized “ yov^^lace and o^vise the Budding & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meetmg. 4V.t QUnOT c (?) S)%R • 9 9 • s ^ • 8 • •; • • 8 1 '® '-■ 1! 9 \2 i: B 'fs -a., 9 ,1 -?■' * a ^■1. " (lOU) 19 ^ * 1 IS <• “ (105)si- * 9 C (_ 1) la 1 c " (23) J" (14) tu R N 14 8n 3 a ?*• (22) (15) *^ 1 13 B i « a• :-?F 40L« „ Ol 1 * _• ^ (2I)P'®P?/KjlWI » *N (16) ^»!,T(90) •a I (9*2) a >a'^In a^ • a » (m *B /'® •?.*1(97) * ^.6)«a^ • 5" »>4 ' rv O Mm to/.i )^IQs a »« Ga 1 5 -------- jfi A .II9.M /. fl* fc- • '* (06)a * $*• ill BN* a ■II«TiTI B : 121 S j? 154.71 • n Kk 156.6__^a * * f" j 121 7^«44 40 b ....r « *0 ^ « j, ~a j(4) ® '7 MM lun n/tt/H ''4’ 4-'♦’• 'V 7,MTCH BO* NCItCPIN COUNTY POOPEOTY INFOmATXON SYSTEM PROPERTY OIMERS LIST » \ MOP Aom OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR M 04-117-ES 15 0005 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO VEDA INC VEDA INC PO BOX 575 LOND LAKE MN 5555A PROP ADOR OMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 58 D4-117-25 18 0020 00805 TONKAMA RO r 8 A N H BENNETT FRAM A MARTHA BENNETT CA> MAYCROSSE INC PO BOX nOO DEPT 2B . MPLS MN 55880 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 58 08-117-25 81 0018 00885 PARK AVE DONALD L MEYER ET AL DONALD A CATtOERINE MEYER 885 PARK AV LONQ LAKE MN 55558 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 58 08-117-25 81 0019 00880 LINDEN AVE JOHN D ALBERS JOHN DAY ALBERS PO BOX 888 PARK RAPIDS MN 58470 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 58 06-117-25 81 0022 00880 LINDEN AVE JOHN 0 ALBERS JOHN DAY ALBERS PO BOX 888 PARK RAPIDS MN 58870 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 58 08-117-25 81 0028 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO CHARLES H A ANN N HOMMEYER CHARLES N t ANN N HOMMEYER 8125 OAK ST LaiG LAKE MN 55558 58 08-117-25 18 0012 08185 BAYSIOE RO ALLAN E REZABEK ET AL ALLAN I SHIRLEY REZABEK 8185 BAYSIDE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55559 58 08-117-25 81 0018 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO JOHN R GERHAROSON JOHN R GERHAROSON 551 LAKEVIEN AVE LONQ LAKE MN 55558 58 08-117-25 81 0017 00895 PARK AVE DONALD L A CATHERINE A MEYER DONALD L A CATHERINE A MEYER 885 PAM AVE LONQ LAKE MN 55558 »58 08-117-25 81 0020 00880 LINDEN AVE JOHN D ALBERS JOHN DAY ALBERS PO BOX 888 PARK RAPIDS MN 58870 58 08-117-25 81 0025 00880 LINDEN AVE JOHN DAY ALBERS JOHN DAY ALBERS PO BOX 888 PARK RAPIDS MN 58870 58 08-117-25 81 0027 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO CHARLES N A ANN N HOMMEYER CHARLES N A ANN N HOMMEYER 8125 OAK ST LONG LAKE MN 55558 REPORT NO. P18558dl PAGE U SB 0.-117-25 1. 0019 04195 MYSZDE RO J • H AIT JAMES A A MARIE A ALT 4165 BAYSIOE RO ORQNO MN 55S59 19 06-117-25 41 0015 0005B A00RE3S UNASSIGNEO' JOHN R GEHAROSON JOHN R GERHAROSON 551 LAKEVIEN AVE LONG LAKE M4 55554 50 04-117-25 41 OOlt 00495 PARK AVE OONALO L A CATHERINE A MEYER OONALO L A CATHERINE A MEYER 4B5 PARK AVE LONG LAKE MN 55556 50 06-117-25 41 0021 004B0 LXNOEN AVE JOHN 0 ALBERS JOHN OAY ALBERS PO BOX 64B PARK RAPIOS N4 54470 50 04-117-25 41 0025 00050 AOORESS UNASSIGNEO CHARLES N A ANN N HOttCYER CHARLES N A AtM N HOMMEYER 4125 OAK ST LONG LAKE MN 55556 56 06-117-25 41 0028 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO CHARLES N A ANN N HOMMEYER CHARLES N A ANN N HOTtlEYER 4125 OAK ST LONG LAKE MN 55356 it It% • » V •fwl •n-. i’ L •. j -hr ^ *. t • { ’ y . %tTt •• i. i > * »* /..T l VI J » . I.» - r.f:>?«*•>■ • • *'•■ •■ ‘ j •.< > V. . Q C MM OATl 0»/0*/W L ;*' •« .» •HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATIOH SYSTEH PROPERTY OltCRS LISTMTCH 504PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR M 06*117-25 61 002f 00058 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED J A MNEN A 8 L BQHEN JEFFREY BOHEN A BRENDA BOHEN 6127 OAK ST LONG LAKE NN 55556 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 38 06-117-25 61 0052 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED K B ROLLANO A K S RODEN KENNETH A KAREN ROCLANO 611F OAK ST LONG LAKE MN 55556 * PROP AOOR Q»tCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 006058 06-117-23 61 00525 PARK U 0 C BEUCLER A S R BEUCLER ORIS BEUCLER>^ANDRA BEUCLER 525 PARK U iat% LAKE MN 55556 f V J PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 58 06-117-25 61 0088 00625 TONKANA RD 8 KNIGHT A J RIESNER KNIGHT B KNIGHT A J RIESNER KNIGHT 625 TONKANA RO LONG LAKE NN 55556 REPORT NO. PAGE PI65560116 , V •*. • «» ’• . •f *58 06-117-25 61 005000058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED C M HOMNEYER A A H HOMMEYER CHARLES A ANN HOMMEYER 6125 OAK ST LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 06-117-25 61 0051 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO C A A HOmEYER CHARLES A ANN HOMMEYER 6125 OAK ST LONG LAKE MN 55556 w ‘ J 58 06-117-25 61 0055 06125 OAK ST CHARLES N HOMMEYER ET AL CHARLES H HOMMEYER 6125 OAK ST LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 06-117-25 61 0056 06119 OAK ST K B ROLLANO A K S ROOEN KENNETH A KAREN ROLLANO 6119 OAK ST LONG LAKE MN 55556 ■»., ri-.. :.F: • i* • IN 58 06-117-25 61 0061 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO ED BOSMA ED BOSMA 550 PAMC U LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 06-117-25 61 0066 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO MICHAEL F SMITH MICHAEL F SMITH 11905 MARKET AVE COLOGNE MN 5522 1 \ 0 ••• ' ' L • •' "«v‘' t I . )‘i. » • 4. \ 7 ' •*,i • • ' 58 06-117-25 61 0090 00680 PARK AVE TODD E A TERX L HOOO TOOO E HOOO 680 PARK AVE LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 06-117-25 61 0095 00507 PARK LA ERHIN 0 SMITH ET AL E 0 A M 0 SMITH 507 PARK LANE LONG LAKE MN 55556 i i »■> . .7- i -1 . V r V ‘h. .•‘•i:•58 06-117-25 61 0096 38 06-117-25 61 0095 58 06-117-25 61 0097 • ' J . , • * «PROP AOOR 06111 OAK ST •06X05 OAK ST 00699 ntfCAHA RO ONNER NAME DAD SIEGEL M J ALBERS AMR GILDON M S A R OOMBECK • « • TAXPAYER DAVID H SIEGEL M J ALBERS AMR GILDON MICHAEL S A RONANNE OOMBECK NAME/AOOR 6111 OAK ST 6105 OAK ST 699 TONKANA RO .. —^ 1 >1^ • • • LONG LAKE MN 55556 LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE m 55556 • , S EHB' 58 06-117-25 61 0099 • 58 06-117-23 61 0100 58 06-117-25 61 0101L.PROP AOOR 00550 PARK U 00658 LiraEN AVE 06127 OAK ST ONNER NAME E A E BOSMA M 0 OIETRICK-BLOCKER ET AL J A BOHEN A B L BOHEN TAXPAYER ED BOSMA M 0 OIETRICK-BLOCKER JEFFREY A BRENDA BOHEN ♦ •NAME/AOOR 550 PARK LA 658 LINDEN AVE 6127 OAK ST M % *LONG LAKE MN 55556 LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 * S At-* » / • Ail • • /■ • y V ‘ i , * • vr * *• •" k.•hi i rt i- V •? MM OATI 0f/0*>»^ n .hemcpxn county property infomiation systemPROPERTY ONNERS LIST REi^ NO. PX«55M)l PACE 15 >i.-Vasili J.i ' iJ'r,•ATCN 5(K > . o PROP ADM OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR M 0A<117-Z3 41 0102 005S7 PARK U !oU6US?KAREN OLSON S57 PARK LA LONO LAKE MN S5S54 u PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SO 04-117-25 41 0105 * 00030 AOORESS UNASSX6NE0 A A T DEVELOPMENT L L C , AST DEVELOPMENT L L C 19455 MUXRFXELO CXR SHOREHOOO 104 55531 C •/.: :,V • ■» PROP AOOR QltCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR * ■ «r».- TOTAL OATCii 504 00042 . » \ *«*' .« • ♦ * if L. L. . • fN # _ .1 V.' 58 04-117-25 41 010304085 OAR ST T A 0 AR6ABRXGNT TIMOTHY A 8AR8ARA AR6ABRXGHT 4085 OAR ST L0N6 LAKE MN 55554 58 04-117-23 41 010404081 OAK ST NXKLAS A 0AM4 HAMMAR8ER6 NIKLAS A OA»M HAHUROERS 4081 OAK ST LONG LAKE MN 55554 V • M ■ V ' .» * • 1 * _ •S‘ ‘ ' A^*-viCu i AJi . /... A>» •»»• 1^0 Y* -A* * ‘. . A , V .1. . j I * ' : ^ ’ r ‘i. ■ ■ • 38 04-117-23 42 0004 00058 AOORESS UNASSIGNED ALLAN A SHIRLEY REZA8EK ALLAN A SHIRLEY REZA8EK 4185 OAYSIDE RO MAPLE PLAIN MM 55559 . S8 04-117-25 42 0007 00058 AOORESS UNASSIGNED VICTORIA ESTATES HOMEONNERS VICTORIA ESTATES HOMEONNERS C/0 THOMAS MAZER 540 NORTH ARM OR HOUNO >94 .55544 ' -f V •• I • * • r I' v ’.i •# «• % ' ' ' *^4^liL.- .*• 'AS;' .V -V' Uil'. 7 ■ vt W.;'r, in V * f • \ •. . *• 4* ' ■ .. * ■\ ' ‘ 4 -'- V J ■ ■■ -.‘r-h tH *• 1 4 a W/S^ V • VI 4 »- ^ f n (Eae^i !L. •• 'f.;. ■•.r •.•■Atf;- V.*'.'^vK • n .n. •:: TV. ■ '1;'^ i «?• 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AM ACCURATE AW Sepresentation of information as OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATICM, TO THE REST OF MY KNOHLEOGE AND RELIEF.. Y * *- i.* J DATE » * i.. yv •;». ...• ?*'• -tr •• r-V;- 1 » . ’ • ' .4 ' • t ‘' .;v I- u • .• i • * 4 ' . ■ • * ,1 i 4 ■’ • .* ' ' • ,4 ..‘vi ..nU „ :« . • U‘\ i ‘ r-r.v ’ :h *r» •* *» 4 * 1/1 Bonestroo ^yiRdsene wjT'M Andcrlik & Associates Engineers & Architects iantitfoo. Roscnc. Andtrtik «nd Aisoctjt«s. ifK. n an Afflmigiiw# ActlOfVt^Mt Opportunity Cmploypr Otto C. tor«eitroo. ft. tobert W loscne. f f JoMph C Anport«b. P L ^arvm L SorvM. P t Pichjrd f Turner. P£ Genn II Coot. PL Thornes L Noyes, ft. •oOcft G SchuHKm. f t Susen ML Eberfin. CPA.* * Semer Consuilent January 5, 1996 Ms. Jeanne /V Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 ilowtofp A SontorOl ^C. Ke«m A. Goroon.. P L Pooert t. Pfefferto. ft fficnero W foster, ft Oevid O Lotkota. P L iloOcrt C. PusseL A LA Jerry A tourdon. P L Mar* A Hanson. P L Michaet T. Kaucmann. P C Ted A field. P L Thomas P Anderson. A 1A James P. Posenmertei. P L Oor>ald C. Purpardt f t Thomas A Syflto. PL. f redertc J StenPorp. P C loviaei Martif>ei. f E feMchaei P Pau. P L Thomas W. Peterson, ft C lynch. PL James P. Maiand. P L Jerry 0 PtrUfCh. ft Scon X Arpanet. .*L Kenrutn P Anderson, ft Mart L Poifs. P L Mart A Se«p P L Gmy Mot .en. PL Paul X Gannon. ALA Oamei X idperton . PL A. PIct Schmidt P L Dale A Orove. f L PhMM X CasweM. P L Mart O WaiUt P L Miles L Jensen. P.L L Phifflp Gavel. P E. taren L WIemen. P L Gary O. Kristofiti. PL I. PL f Todd Poster. PL Peith P. rapp. PL OoupMi X lenoit PL Shawn a GustaTion. PL CeciNo ONvier. ft Kent X wapner. ft Paul G Hcuer. PL John P. Qofder . ft Oan O. Loyum. PL Jeffrey X ChNrmper. PL Joseph L moth. PL Lee MMwvi. PL Charles A Ertctson Leo M Paweisty Harlan M Olson Apnet MPinp James f. InpePsardt Re: Hommeyer Subdivision File No. 139-2077 Dear Jeanne,JAN 8 1996 We have reviewed the revised subdivision and right-of-way (ROW) vacation in Blocks 3,4, and 5, Minnetonka Summit Park on the properties owned by Charles W. Hommeyer, Jeffrey A. Bowen and Kenneth B. RollanX The proposed subdivision will result in the combination of 11 existing parcels (originally 15 lots) to create 3 larger parcels ranging from approximately I to 1.5 acres in size, all within the MUSA boundary. The proposed vacation is for the ROW of Park Lane and a portion of Oak Street west of Linden Avenue, both existing gravel roads; and Qyde Place, a non-existing roadway. We have the following comments in regards to engineering matters. The proposal to vacate the ROW may be appropriate if the following casements are either retained by or granted to the City. Specifically, the vacation and subdivision should accomplish the following: 1. The subdivision must be dune by plat to adequately describe the easements. 2. 3. Utility casements must be shown on the plat 20-fcet wide centered on the sanitary sewer line. Drainage and utility easements should be shown 5-fecl wide on all lot lines and lO-feet wide along the existing and proposed right-of-way. 4.Drainage easements must be shown on the plat centered on the drainageway running south down Clyde Place to Oak Street. 5.Utility easements must be shown on the plat for all electric, gas, telephone and cable television lines that cross one or more lots to serve an adjacent lot. It is apparent that meeting these criteria will in effect duplicate the ROW that is proposed for vacation. We would not recommend approval unless all of these criteria are met. The easements are needed to protect the access, drainage and utility service rights of adj:iccnt properties, that can only be provided across the subject parcels. Plca.se contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612-636-4600 sI TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator 3. FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:January 8, 19% SUBJECT: #20% Kevin and Diane Holmes/Orchard Park Farm Inc. - 555 and 585 Stubbs Bav Road North - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Zoning District: RR-IA Total area of property = 39.07 acres Application: Applicants propose a lot line rearrangement of the properties located at 555/585 Smbbs Bay Road that would result in the existing 1.5 acre lot located at 585 being upgraded to a conforming lot within the 5 acre zoning district. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.27, Subd. 5(B) - RR-IA lot standards. Required = 5 acres Proposed Parcel A = 33.87 acres Proposed Parcel B + C = 5.2 acres Section 10.03, Subd. 9(C 2&3) - Oversized accessory structure area standards/setback requirements. A. Allowed area for oversized accessory structure (5+ acre parcel) Allowed = 2,200 s.f. Bam = 1.125 s.f. Shed = 990 s.f. B. Setback Required Proposed Required Proposed 50' side 75'+ 100' rear 300'+ Secuon 11.10, Subd. 10 and Section 703, Definition 66, Class 1 Subdivision - Subdivision is required because of the need to dedicate right-ol-way of road as both lots meet the ^ zoning standards and would normally not have been required to follow through with the subdivision application. « Zoning File #2096 January 8, 1996 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Mup C - Property Owners List D - Survey of Metes and Bounds Division 10/13/69 E - Topographic Map F - Wetlands Map G - Proposed Division Description of Application Refer to Exhibit D, Parcel B, the 1.5 acre parcel was created by the City in 1969. Zoning at that time would have required that the lot meet the minimum 1 1/2 acre area. In 1975 the lot became nonconforming when the RR-IA zoning district was created. The proposed division and combination will bring the legal nonconforming lot into conformance with current zoning standards. The accessory structures located on larger parcel were nonconforming as there is no principal structure on the property. The subdivision will now bring the structures into conformity. Mr. Holmes has advised the owners of the larger parcel have allowed him to make use of the structures. Review Exhibits E and F, there are designated wetlands in Parcel A that City will obtain Flowage and Conservation Easements over when property is further subdivided. The owners are planning to sell properties owned by Orchard Park Farm Inc. for future development. The drainageway defined on topographic map should be reviewed by engineer to determine need for acquiring a drainage easement over Parcels B and C as City will not be dealing with a future subdivision of the 5 acre parcel. The City will ask for road and utility dedication for 33’ of Stubbs Bay Road by both property owners. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the lot line rearrangement as proposed for Kevin and Diane Holmes and Orchard Park Farm Inc. involving the properties located at 555 and 585 Stubbs Bay Road finding all standards of the RR-IA zoning district have been satisfied. Approval is subject to the following conditions: -»ii I r -rr- »tfl Wmi i-r* i tw* li Tawr iiifl nr Zoning File #2096 Januarj' 8, 1996 Page 3 i 1.Prior to the application being scheduled before the Council for approval, the applicants' surveyor shall provide an amended survey including signature lines for all property owuers, mayor, clerk and date of Council approval. 2.Applicants to grant road and utility' easements o\*er 33' of right-of-way of Stubbs Bay Road along east side of all three parcels. City' Engineer to determine need for dedication of drainage easement over drainageway in Parcels B and C. ij/<a CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATIO PROPERTY LOC^ION Site address ^ 4) iiie aaaress ^ w<7 —_________________ Property Identification Number •T.'hZ.^'-COO^ Please check one - Property a abstract or____lorrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name 4. ^ Address ciUg. Citv 3%fcg> gb. ________^ HfttC hW Phone(home)<P^73>67:t^ Zip S«3S^hone (workyP^7 / • 16i# ------ ^7/ < ItiS^ .OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ____<JVig: As A£>c>y/C Address Citv'Zip Phone(home) Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District gg • IA Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres total , all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes X Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites _________Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)_________ A MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to "application fees* listed below). 2. Completed application form. 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. . . , 4. CertifiriPr^terty Owners List of c vners within 350*. labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, (jovemment Center. 348-3271). ,™,i:ratinn 5. As an adrfgndum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notifi o app Zoning Official’s Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ ___ _ _ __ _ 2 - - - - - -- ' MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if apptcawe). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. • ,. . 5. Developers Agreemoit and Letter of Credit. . ‘ . inning Official’s Signature — ^ I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check (XI those which apply) . . A, Application Base Fees: Sketch Plan Review (Class I. 11 Sl III) S200.00 Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $3(X).00 Subdivision Application (Class I & H) S300.(X) , . „ .• t\ Preliminary Subdivision Application S323.00 + S25.00/lot (Gass III & all non-rcsidcnttal) Final Plat Application (Class ni) $175.00 Legal Review and Filing; Subdivision only $75.00 Subdivision w/easements and covenants rain. $200.00 Totals Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) -------- IZJd of Clas 111. Prclimioonr Subdivision Applical.oo $150.00 (No .±sngo from ongd^ w .««<>») -------- Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Applicalion SIOO.OO (No change from onginal appliealion) B. Special Improvement Fees; i- iv , <n - < Proposed Private Roads S600.00 + S.50/lineal ft.,--------a c ” -------- Proposed Public Roads $900.00 -t- $.50/lincal ft.; Im. ft. x .50 - $-------- — * . wm • ___________I.....*..■ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 ■ Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + S25/stub “ Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/stub Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) S200.00 ^ " On-^te System. Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/new lot proposed for on-site x----- new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees Variance $200 00 . ^ c uj- • • nnEasement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $75.00caocuiwui ▼ ow*«ti*v** ---------------- PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwellmg Umt 'm p'^s iT^Ptolton and ftiiSier agrees in pay all additional fees established by ordinanc^^ Date __________________ » Applicant’s Signature <1. Owner’s Signamre Y>/^. c Cy Date V II K niffi' • into the City Off*cc 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Coi^ssion Applicant must have J1 i Applic^ts must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planm^ i f- \•«r t «M PAH lt/u/9i 5^' -\ MTCN IOT' : ■ • ■ ' * :'■ • If It OOOl’ ^ raop AOM ' OISM NAYZATA BkVB M T'/ C ' t (MCA NAM t; H WLLIAN MJATOM ; - i TAXPAVEK :; N NXUXAN LUNTGN NAM/ADOt , SUS JAMSTOM NO • LONB LAKE Ml S5SSA "' v KI«EPIM COUNTY WKJPEATY INFORHATION SYSTEH '/* %- n • ' ' I mm AMR ; mmn mahi TAXPAYill NAME/AOCMI ^ t S6 S2-na-2s IS 0004 00440 SnJBBS OAY m N FREDfRlC P RIEOfL mcoiiiic p ucscL P 0 BOX 194 UNO LAKE HN 65SM ..ft; •! ?■ *r ‘ ,/ .• * PAOA AOOR ONNER NAM TAXPAYER NAM/AOOR PROP AOOR OmCR NAM TAXPAYER NAM/AOOR PROP AOOR , QMCR NAM TAXPAYER KAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAM TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 50 St-ll8-2i tt 0004 00050 AOORESS UNASSXGNEO ROOERT T HICKELSEN ETAL JXN NHALEN 14425 58TH AVE N PLYNOUTH Ml 5S44A SO 52>110-2S 24 0005 00405 STUBOS DAY RD N R C JOCHIHS A S J JOCHXHS ROBERT A STEPHANIE JOCHIHS 405 STUBOS BAY RO N LONO LAKE Ml SS55A 50 52-110-25 51 0005 00555 STUBBS BAY RO N T R SCHUPP A J H SCHUPP TIHOTHY R/JEANETTE H SCHUPP 555 STUBBS BAY RO N LONG LAKE HN 55556 50 52-110-25 42 0001 00400 STUBOS BAY RO N RICHARD N STUBBS RICHARD N STUBBS 400 STUBBS BAY RD N LONB LAKE Ml 55556 . .» ■ ' . '!vv ; ■ PROPERTY OMCRS LIST 50 52-110-25 15 0002 00550 STUMS BAY RO N J A J EOERMIER JAMS S A JANIE F E6ERMIER 550 STUBBS BAY RO N LONB LAKE Ml 55556 SO 52-110-25 21 0005 00605 STUBBS BAY RO N SAN KROGMSS STEPHEN N KROGMSS 605 STUBBS BAY RO N LONB LAKE Ml 55556 50 52-110-25 25 0006 00050 AOORESS UNASSXBMO STEPHEN 0 TONLE STEPHEN 0 TONLE 5115 PINNACLE OR OLOSHAR PL 54677 50 52-110^5 24 00050 AO LISLE VlCKEmNfts(R ET AL ORCHARD PARK FARM 5460 NAMRTOMN RO HAPLE PLAIN Ml 5555 50 52-110-25 52 0001 05440 NATERTOMI RO V N A K P MLXN V NILLIAH A KATHLEEN P MLIN 5440 NATERTOMI RO MAPLE PLAIN Ml 55554 TOTAL BATCH 507 00016 REPiMT NO. PAM PX4Si40l27 • i. 50 52-118-25 15 0005 00400^ STUBBS BAY RO N TOOO H I DONNA N 6AUSE TOOO A OOMIA GAME 400 STUBBS BAY RO LONB LAKE Ml 55556 50 52-110-21 21 0006 00050 ADDRESS UNASSXBMO BURLXNBTON NORTMERN RY BURLINGTON NORTHERN RY ■ ■ • I ■' . . * — • . *1T)* ■ I V . ■ V./ I • ■ V • ••• ' :''0 58 52-110-25 24 0001 00505 STUBOS BAY RO N K HOLMES A 0 HAERTEL HOLMS K HOLMS A 0 HAERTEL HOLMS 505 STUBOS OAY RO N LONB LAKE Ml 55556 50 52-118-25 51 0001 00505 STUBOS BAY RO N PIMLA F GREGORY PAMLA FROST GREGORY C/O HOLLYBROOK A CO 400 BAKER BLOO MPLS MN 55402 50 52-110-25 52 0005 05050 NATERTOMI RO S M t C A HARRIS STEVEN H HARRIS 505 TURHAH RO MAPLE PUIN MN 55554 • r‘>. ■ * ■ h T '' • A"-* •. • .... ■ V- *• . .. . * • ' ’• ■ ................................. > ' •■ ■■ “■*'':'l "i' <t*j -i*'.'. • , »1 > f'■ RUN DAT! U/l»/^VV. I : ij • .w/.-• * . 1.. •_•: •.■•. • . ?XN COUNTY raOPElTY INrCWUTXQN SfSXm PMMIITY OMEK U$T I t ■I * *■’•* -*1 V • ►*;- y A. f ’. . '.V'( • ' .. 38 ‘ 32-118-23 21 0009 STEPHEN DAVIS TOWLE V ‘ STEPHEN DAVIS TOWLE . .. *• 5115 PINNACLE DR ' •/' OLDSMAR FL 34677 *' • <■- , r K'«- . » y •; V'i.V-’' ■• '‘V"'* i- 9 V • ‘ k* /*, ;<•• f % ’• L/i • . w V . V- •. ♦ »• # A V- » I '• s•* • t i « ^9 I • < N # .♦ ♦; • I \ . / « 38 32-118-23 23 0008 460 ORCHARD PARK RD ROBERT J & LORRAINE E RODEN ROBERT J & LORRAINE E RODEN 460 ORCHARD PARK RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 'J KRORT f«. RlASMOl RAOt tR f 38 32-118-23 24 0005 ORCHARD PARK FARM INC ORCHARD PARK FARM INC 3980 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 ^'>»Y i . vO rE ^\k ■ *■ ♦' / •> '•■ ■■.'■= ■•: ••Wi % i. ■*. ** . i,. J- V' ijj; - *,#i > ; . * ■ r . . ‘ . AK,: * - • * *v ■ ♦ f V '• ‘ ^ lA ■' • V tCD• ."'J V'' *A7- »• * *•* ** I * * * fc ^ ^ • * V V : • •' * • ■ 14..' X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECMDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNONIEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE -M' ML>J o 01 - <• t s i n . • ..J-/* * ' t : -V’ •* .; -iV 1 ’ ’ Vi ‘ • .♦ *1 k' •'• r • ‘ ,• •i ■• \ ,."f sf v^V**- V* M ^ •'I4 • * ' . • , * » tv ■’.'viTI ft.7“* 'i-* }< I. r*. *• » , < ' 'th ' ^ • -C,' ' ' \ " * V . 'V N i Steteh for M. Bollun in th® northwest 1/4 of Section 32-U8-23 showing proposed subdivision Msrldlas. Scale; 1" - 2C0' Cate : 10-13-69 THIS ITEM HAS BEEN MICftOFilMEO Gordon R. Coffin Land Surveyor and Planner Long Lake, Minnesota ril f ■^\6. ;r--f CV: ^* ••■" ' ’'w—^ •c? *. *■• u^m tr i« '^^i£c< Z?kW-Hv r r^'s’-i^-: 'Zll-V^. • •''^ ^ P " "* ^ ____ ______ —- —j—1- •• m 'rrT- ^ ^ % •I yr- vm. s • r -T »•• * • *•* .* . > N.V ' ri; ^ • • ’ • ► . r - ^ - .Kjy r“; i :':^4r T_ —.~' ■ v.’^ i! _. ~ '^W',#f/rd r v!: :JI i,' *1? { VrrrC'^S:^ *Sl ^'t3£ IS i ■‘ ' mxrM SjA: ;•« Vv*_r:JS? -»'i ' ;¥ r L /J TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administfator DATE:January 10, 1996 SUBJECT: #2099 Loren Brueggemann/Dean Maeser, 372 Westlake Street - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement (Replat) - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 acres, sewered. Application: Replat three existing substandard lots of record to result in two substandard building lots. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Narrative Submitted by Applicant E - Survey - Existing F - Survey - Proposed G - Staff Sketches - Applicant's Proposal - Incorporating Outlot H - Proposed Hardcover Calculations I - Neighborhood Lot Sizes J - Documentation from Sketch Plan Review, 9/19/95 K - Zoning/Subdivision Code Excerpts Pertinent Code Sections 1.Section 10 03, Subd. 6 - Existing lots of record: "2. In "R" Districts of Greater Than One Acre and Served by Public Sanitary Sewer. A lot of record m any "R" Distnct in the Cit\- in excess of one acre, which does not meet the requirements ot this zoning chapter as to area or width only, may be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes if the Council finds: (a) It is at least 1 acre in size, and the average width of the lot is at least 100'; (b) It is served by public sanitary sewer; (c) It otherwse meets the requirements of this chapter or other applicable City code provisions . (See entire Subd. 6 attached). 2.Section 11.03, Subd. 2.65 & 2.66 - Definitions of "subdivision" and "subdivision classification"' - The proposed lot line rearrangement does not qualify as a non subdivision because relocation of the common li^boundaries does not resuU in subdivision, requiring a plat. Zoning File #2099 January 10, 19% Page 2 Section 11.30, Subd. 5(C) - Front/back lot subdivisions. The proposal as dnigpied results in a lot configuration that meets the definition of a frontback lot subdivision. The definition of "back lot" per Section 10.02 and Section 11.03, Subd. 2 is "a lot typically separated from a public or private road by another lot and which gains access to the public or private road via a narrow corridor. Such a separated lot is consider^ to be a 'back lot’ when the corridor is platted as an outlot. A separated lot is considered to be a 'flag lot' when the corridor is platted as part of the lot. When the corridor is merely an easement over another lot, the separated lot is considered to be an 'easement back lot’". Section 11.30, Subd. 5(C) states that flag lots and easement back lots as defined in this chapter sh.^H not be created. Therefore, the proposed lot line rearrangement must make use of an outlot per the provisions of Section 11.30, Subd. 5(C). (See Exhibit 1) 4.Section 11.10, Subd. 14(A)- "A. Zoning Regulations. Every plat shall conform to existing zoning regulations and subdivision regulations applicable at the time of Final Plat Approval. Variances shall not be approved to increase the overall subdivision density above the minimum lot area requirements of the applicable zoning district and this chapter." Pertinent Facts 1.The property at 372 Westlake Street is owned by Dean Maeser and consists of three tax parcels as follows: Lot 10 = 50’ X 544* = 27,200 s.f. = 0.62 acre Lot 11 = 71.16’ X 519’ = 36,900 s.f. = 0.85 acre Lot 12 = 49’ X 462 ’ = 22,653 s.f. = 0*52 acre Total I -99 acre Lot 10 contains the majority of the driveway and 2/3 of the existing principal residence structure. 3.Lot 11 contains 1/3 of the existing principal residence struemre; a second "house" used only for storage; and small comers of two rental cabins. 4. Lot 12 contains the two rental cabins. 1 i i Zoning File #2099 January 10, 1996 Page 3 5. 6. U. The three properties have been commonly owned for more than twenty years, have been used as a singe homestead with two rental cabins for many years. Early in 1995, the City Council reviewed this property in regards to ihe over due sewer connection. Council concluded that: ..... j i. • The existing principal residence, which is provided with and Im been assessed for one sewer unit, must be connected to sewer immediately (it has not been). The two rental cabins are nonconforming structures due to their location and are a nonconforming use due to the rental status, ^ve not been assessed for sewer, and must be eliminated by the end ot 1996. The three tax parcels must be legally combined within ninety days (deadline has passed with no combination occurring). All of the above to be formaUzed in an agreement with the property owner (agreement has been drafted to City satisfaction but has never been signed by the owner). The basis for this Council action was the need to make a decision about the rental cabins ’ sewer connection. Applicant either had to spend nearly $14,000 each to cor^t the cabins to sewer, or discontinue them. Council agreed with staff that providing sewer to these nonconforming structures with nonconforming uses would not be appropriate for this property. As part of the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project, this grojiP of three properties was assessed only one sewer unit, to serve the existing house If the proposed subdivision creating two lots is approved, a sewer connection charge of $13,813 (1996 fee schedule) would be required for the second unit. Tl.e current proposal is to reorganize this property from three tax parcels into two useful building sites (property owner notes that the apparent market value of the property as a single building site is less than the amoun ‘ he paid for the property). r' Zoning FUe #2099 January 10, 1996 Page 4 7. Proposed subdivision facts: Item OUTLOT Proposed Required LOT 1 Proposed Required Proposed LOT 2 Required Lot Area: • as proposed 0.81 ac.2.0 ac.1.19 ac.3.0 ac. (back lot) r r - with 30’ outlet 0.14 ac.0.76 ac.2.0 ac.(.09 ac.3.0 ac. (back lot) (The foUowiiig iten s assunc the incorporat ion of the required 30* outlo0 Lot Width: - at street setback (30') 30'NA NA 190'*200’ - at shoreline NA NA 223’200'210f 200' - at 75' setback NA NA 240'200'205’200’ *Lot 2’s defined street lot line is the angled line separating Lots 1 & 2 Setbacks: - north • •20'50' side street 45’45* (I50*/o of 30’) - south (lake)m ^75’75'75’75' • east m •50’50' rear 75’75’ - west ^ m 50'50' front 75'75' front Zone Zone Zone Hardcover:Aisa Aks Area 0-75’(•) -0 s.f. (19,425 s.f.) 0 s.f.0 s.f. (24,750) 0 s.f. 75-250'2,150 (6,135 s.f.)l,534 3,907 (13,555 s.f.) 3,390 4,735 (23,061) 5,765 s.f (35.0%) (25%)(28.8%)(25%)(20.5%)(25%) Lot Coverage by 2,730 s.f. (8.3%)2,580 s.f (5.4%) Structures; (15% allowed) Zoning File #2099 January 10, 1996 Page 5 8.Technically, any structure placed on proposed Lot 2 will require an average lakeshore setback variance. Front/Back Lvt Issues As is noted in the previous table, the proposed subdivision configuration clearly create a front lot and a back lot under the zonin^subdivision code definitions. Because this is a new subdivision, the front^ack lot standards apply, requiring the use of a 30* wide outlot for access to the back lot, requiring the back lot to meet 150% of the 2 acre standard, and requinng the back lot to meet 150% of the normal side and street lot line setbacks. Further, the house on the front lot is required to meet the standard "side street" setback from the outlot, which in this case is 50'. Note that the proposed house could only meet a 20’ setback from the outlot in order to maintain the 75’ lakeshore setback. Note also that the required front or street setback for Lot 2 is 75', which is met. Hardcover Lot 1 becomes somewhat smaller than proposed by applicants when the 30' outlot is created. The site plan proposed would yield 28.8% hardcover in Lot 1, which is approximately 500 s.f. over the limit. In Lot 2, which has a larger 75-250’ area, hardcover will be under the 25% limit Hardcover within the outlot itself will be 35%, above the 25% limit. Overall, hardcover on the property under the current proposal will be 10,642 s.f., or approximately 12% of Ae entire lot area, as compared to the DNR’s standard of 25% for the entire property. Under Orono’s more restrictive standards, the 75-250’ zone will be approximately 24.9%, just under the limit. Subdivision Issues Aside from the need for variances to lot width, setbacks, average lakeshore setback and hardcover, the primary issue with this subdivision is the creation of two very substandard building lots from three existing record lots which individually would each be considered unbuildable without manv variances. Further adding to the problem is that the three existing lots have historically been used for all intents and purposes as a single property. The existing situation is nonconforming in a great number of respects. 1.Each of the three existing lots is less than the required 2 acre minimum lot area [Section 10.23, Sub. 6(B)]. IniBMk rr Zoning File #2099 January 10, 1996 Page 6 3. 4. 5. 6. 9. 10. 12. Each of the three lots is less than the required 200' minimum width as measured at the appropriate points [Section 10.23, Subd. 6(B) and definition of lot \\'idti]. The I'iuse on Lot ’ dcwS not meet the required 30 ’ side setbacks [Section 10.23, Subd. 6(B)1 and encroaches the required side yards [Section 10.03, Subd. 15]. The house on Lot 10 encroaches into Lot 11 to a significant degree [Section 10.03, Subd. 15]. The accessory building on Lot 11 is not subordinate to any principal structure existing on Lot 11, since the principal residence structure is primarily on Lot 10 [Section 10.03, Subd. 9(A)]. The septic system which serves both the house on Lot 10 and the cabins on Lot 12, is located Lots 11 and 12 [Section 12.30, Subd. 5]. 7. The septic system is within 75' of the lake [Section 10.56, Subd. 16(C)]. The septic system is nonconforming due to lack of 3' separation above seasonal saturation zones [Section 12.30]. Two cabins ("dwelling units") exist on Lot 12 although only one dwelling unit per property is allowed [Section 10.03, Subd. 7J. Th-:* )*• cabins are less than 75' from the lake [Section 10.55, Subd. 8, 10.56, SuM. i6(C) and 10.22, Subd. 1]. 11. The two cabins on Lot 12 each encroach over the lot line into Lot 11 [Section 10.03, Subd. 15]. If the larger cabin is considered the principal structure on Lot 12, then the accessory building (i.e. the other cabin) cannot be used as a dwelling, since no accessory building can be used as a dwelling [Section 10.03, Subd. 11]. The above nonconformities and the historic use of the property as one site, as well as the common ownership which supports the use as a single site, leads staff to the following premise: A. Each of Lots 10, 11 and 12 is an existing lot of record. Zjning File #2099 January 10, l?96 Pace 7 B.None of Lots 10, 11 or 12 are conforming in lot width or area to the zoning requirements, and none meet the 1 acre/100' width standard of Section 10.03, Subd. 6(A-2) required for buildability of existing sewered lots of record in zoning districts of 1 acre or greater. C.None of Lots 10, 11 or 12 could be built on without many other variances e\-en if lot area and width \’ariances were granted. D.Any lot line rearrangement proposed to realign these three parcels into parcels, will result in the final lots not meeting the area standards of the zoning code. Therefore such lot line rearrangement is not exempt from subdivision, but is classified as a Class II subdivision [Section 11.03, Subd. 2.65, 266] which requires a plat. E.All plats are required to meet existing zoning regulations at the time of plat approval. Subdivisions may not increase the overall subdivision density above the minimum zoning lot area requirements [Section 11.10, Subd. 14]. F.As compared to other properties which have been allowed to replat at densities higher than those allowed, other cases (i.e. two recent ones are Scotch Pine Lane and the Oberhauser project) involved clear and distinct use of each of the pre existing properties as separate from the others. In the Maeser case, however, no such distinction exists since: - buildings are over lot lines buildings on separate lots have made use of shared sewer and water facilities the three lots have been used and maintained as a single property the three lots have shared a single driveway. All of the above factors lead staff to conclude that the mere fact that the three lots have been kept as separate tax parcels does nol result in an inherent right of the property owner to have three building sites, or even two. The fact that a subdivision with significant variances is required to make the property marginally feasible for two building sites, and the fact that a subdivision must result in lots that meet standards, is critical. The City has only rarely granted lot area variances when approving subdivisions, and then only in e.xtremely unique cases. Impact on Property Owner/Impact on Neighborhood The property owner has concluded that the market value of the property as a single building site is less than the amount he paid for the property, and unless two building sites are allowed he is in a position of losing money when he sells the property. However, Planning Zoning File #2099 January 10, 1996 Page 8 Commission is fully aware that the zoning code [Section 10.06, Subd. 3(A-4)] states that ''economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter". Planning Commission should refer to Section 10.06, Subd. 3, Section 10.08, and Section 11.02, Subd. 10, cll attached, re£irding the standards for granting variances. One additional factor Planning Commission may wish to consider is the compatibility of the proposed development with the surrounding neighborhood. Exhibit 1 is a topographic sur\ey of the neighborhood with plat overlay, indicating tl.e locations of existing residences and the existing lot sizes. It is obvious from that map that the average lot size in the neighborhood is approximately 1 acre, even though this is a 2 acre zone. However, e.xisting properties to the south, west and north of this neighborhood have substantially larger lots. And, even though the zoning district boundaiy between the 1 acre and 2 acre zones is nearby, this property does not abut the 1 acre zone, and individually would not be a reasonable extension of that zone without including adjacent properties on the west side of Westlake Street. There may be a pattern started in this neighborhood by the Blake Bichanich project at 332 Westlake where two 0.7 acre lots were combined to create a 1.4 acre building site. It is not beyond comprehension that additional properties along this shoreline could be purchased together and combined to create more usable building sites. It would be consistent if Lots 10, 11, and 12 were combined into one building site. RczoniDg Potential The City Council has over the last twenty years consistently refused to rezone existing neighborhoods in the 2 acre zone when they are provided with municipal sewer. The result is a number of sewered neigi»/- hoods with substandard lots (in some cases 1/4 to 1/2 acre lot sizes) which are still required to meet the 2 acre zoning standards. This results in the need for a variance even when an addition or accessoiy building consistent with the neighborhood is proposed. It can be argued that rezoning should occur in these areas. However, the opposite argument is that rezoning these leighborhoods would potentially result in higher density as the interspersed larger lots could perhaps then subdivide, res Uting in additional homes which create higher density. While such densitv' might be consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, it would not be consistent with Orono's low density philosophy. Alley Along South Boundary It appears that a 10’ alley was originally platted along the south boundary of Lot 12, leading from Westlake Street to the lakeshore. Apparently a canal was also dug at some past time parallel to the alley, connecting Westlake Street to Smbbs Bay via a water route. It would appear likely, then, that if the portion of alley still above the 929.4 water level and adjacent to Lot 12 is vacated, its ownership would revert to Lot 12. As it currently exists, proposed Lot 2 abuts the lake only at its east end and not along its southerly boundary. Zoning File #2099 January 10, 1996 Page 9 History of Zoning and Use of the Site: The Westlake Street area was originally platted in the late 1800s. The t>Tjical development of the area was for summer cabins. As the decades progressed, more and more property owners became permanent residents of the Lake Minnetonka area, converting the cabins to year-round residences. The Stubbs Bay area including Lots 10, 11, and 12 wiis not zoned bj* the Town of Orono until July 10, 1950, at which time the "Stubbs Bay District" was created requiring minimum building lot area of 1 acre. The Ciw Assessor’s records indicate the residence structure on Lot 10 was built in 1951. The City has no apparent record of when the cabins were constructed. In 1967. while the property was zoned 1 acre, a prior owner proposed a subdivision very similar to that proposed now, resulting in two lots of approximately 1 acre each. That was tabled by the City Council and no final action to approve such a suMivision ever occurred. In 1975 as part of the Cit\-wide rezoning, this property and much of the Stubbs Bay area was rezoned LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 acre minimum lot size. Rental Cabin Nonconformity The nonconformities associated with the two rental cabins are long standing. As early as 1962, Village Ordinance No. 45 stated that "There shall be no dwellings for more than one family upon any lot or parcel of land, and there shall be but one single family dwelling u[wn each lot or parcel of land', and went on to state that "Each strucUire to be used as a dwelling shall be set back ... at least 10* from any side property line . . City Ordinance No. 155 ^opted October 24. 1973 required that "No principal building shall be located closer than 75’ to the natural ordinary high water mark on a lake abutting the property ". The 1975 zoning code strengthened this to allow no buildings within 75’ of the lake. The lakeshore cabins have therefore been nonconforming as to their location since 1975 or earlier. Further, considering the historical use of Lots 10. 11, and 12 as a single site, the rental cabins have acted as accessory buildings subordinate to the principal use, and could not legally be rented out as dwellings. It is the City's position that the rental cabins are no longer a lawful nonconforming use. Per Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subd. 5(F) "... any lawful nonconforming use involving a structure with an assessor's fair market value upon the effective date of this zoning chapter (1/1/75) of $3,000 or less may be continued for a period of 36 months after the effective date of this zoning chapter, where upon such nonconforming use shall cease, unless brought into conformity with the zoning chapter". A review of the City Assessor’s records indicates the fair Zoning File #2099 Januar>’ 10, 1996 Page 10 market value of the tu'o rental cabins as of Kl/75 appears to have been approximately $1,900 combined. Technically therefore the nonconforming use for rental purposes was required by code to cease as of 1/1/78. In effect, the City has tacitly allowed this use an eighteen year grace period. The fact that the Citv allowed the cabins to continue in use after 1/1/78 is likely a result of lack of enforcement rather than a conscious decision b> the City to allow the commercial usage to continue. In 1980 when the City allowed the then property owner Leo Le\ens to upgrade his septic system, which at that time already served the cabins and principal residence with a single combined system, the City advised Levens of the future Shoreland Regulations which would make his system nonconforming and since municipal sewer was not anticipated at that time, the City allowed the drainfield to be upgraded in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare, without making any conclusion regarding the zoning status of the dwellings to be served. The issue of the cabins’ nonconformity came to a head in 1992 when the City reviewed the issue of municipal sewer and determined that only one stub and one sewer unit for this 2 acre site was appropriate. Granting of additional sewer units would have resulted in the perpetuation of a nonconforming situation which the City concluded was not in keeping with the zoning or Comprehensive Plan. Issues for Discussion 1.Since the proposed subdivision creates a front/back lot situation which requires the 30’ separate outlot access corridor, is there any justification for a variance to allow the outlot to be less than the 30' minimum required width? Given the need for lot area variances for both proposed lots, is there any justification to ailow two individual building sites to be created on 2 acres of land in the 2 acre zoning district? 3.If the proposal could be revised sc that each of Lots 1 and 2 as well as the outlot could meet the City's 2.5% 75-250’ hardcover limitation, would the proposal be more feasible? 4.Is the proposed subdivision consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood? 5.Does the average setback variance required for Lot 2, or the side street setback variance required for Lot 1, have any impact on Planning Commission’s view of this proposal? 6.Could approval of this subdivision set a negative precedent and result in pressures for higher density development in Orono’s 2 acre zone? Zoning File #2099 January 10, 19% Page 11 7.Has the property oNMier demonstrated sufficient hardship that N\x)uld allow Planning Commission to justify granting of the many necessary variances required? 8. 9. Should this neighborhood be considered for rezoning? If subdivision of this 1.99 acre parcel is deemed not reasonable, can Planning Commission offer the applicant or property owner any other relief? For instance could a portion of the oroperty be sold to an adjacent property owner and still leave a reasonable building site? Staff Recommendation Although one might argue that the proposed subdivision is consistent in many respects with other development on Westlake Street, it is inconsistent with the 2 acre zoning standards in effect, and requires the granting of a significant lot area variance for each newly created lot. The City of Orono has consistently held to its 2 acre minimum lot standard in the 2 acre zoning districts for new' subdivisions. If the existing separate tax parcels were configured such that they were buildable with only lot area and width variances, then there might be some justification for allowing them to be built on, but that is not the case. None of the individual existing lots are buildable witliout major setback variances. That is why the City provided and assessed only one sewer stub to the property (the fact that the contractor installed two stubs in the street is of no consequence, since the second stub was not specifically intended by the City to be constructed, and the mere placement of a stub does not suggest that a zoning decision was made). With only 1.99 acres, the property owTier technically has no excess land to sell to a neighboring property owner. However, it may be reasonable to allow a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement between Lots 10, 11, 12 and the neighboring Lot 9, giving Lot 9 additional acreage, while still leaving a reasonable building site within Lots 10, 11 and 12 that can meet the hardcover and setback standards. Planning Commission may wish to consider whether rezoning of the neighborhood is appropriate. However, under the current zoning, staff recommends denial of the requested subdivision. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval with conditions, specify ing the hardships that support granting of the variances. 1 Zoning File #2099 January 10, 1996 Page 12 2.Table for further information or discussion (at the sketch plan review in September, Planning Commission suggested this proposal might be the subject of a joint Council/Planning Commission work session). 3. 4. Recommend denial stating reasons. Other. ^ 7^0 * • PROPERTY LOCATION Site address 3 1 7-. <*V' CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION^/ Property Identification Number (PDD) Q og LfL Please check one - Property'____abstract or >c. _ torrens? Attach le2al description to application. APPLICANT I Name Address ~^\ 1-<rlw i~W^ City' PijrA(^'Ur, /VI/I OWNER (if different than applicant) Name *0<»«.^ Address ___ City >^■2^ VOg, ^ t:^ Al^-j_______ (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District ^ W Phone(home) (7r<t fUB»G Zipj^jev] Phone (work) un “\_ Phonethome)M-l ^ ZipjV^yZ/ Phone (work) 2^6^Acres Dry Land __ Acres Wet Land 2-c«-^o Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units L/l Othei (specify) I PROPOSAL Number of Building Sites Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites ^ Existing Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) / New Units Total Units Units per / Acres f Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) _________ jnimum material required for complete preliminary application Payment of fees (refer to ’application fees’ listed below). Completed application form. Preiiminarv plat Information on Cenificate of Survey. thU list labels and map from SSteptny 0™n Lm of o^-uon 350’. labels and plai ^ labels an map Hennepm Counly Depamnem of Finara. A.M3 Govern^. CraK. ^ applioanon. As an ad<^*mdum to this application, please attach a separate list or any otn p ^ning Official’s Signature ----------------- INIMUM material required for CO-MPLETE final application . ,, s Payment of fees (refer to Prelimmary Subdivision .\pproval resolution and pane fees if app Si^ed Cenificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. naie oning Official’s Signature --------------------------- APPLIC.ATION fees (Zoning Administrator to check [XI those which apply) (Qsss 1, 11 A im S-.00 Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement SjOO.OO ................_ //-s_____I jg, m no Totals :^UDaivi5iuu ui a A-ww -----------------------c-*nn no ■ Subdivision Application (Claw 1 & Sa°aoo non-residenual) Preliminary Subdivision Applicanon Sa25.00 ^ S.5.00/lot (i,*ass ” Final Plat Application (Class III) SI75.00 Legal Review and Filing: Subdivision only S75.00 Subdivision w/easements and covenanu mm. 5d.00.uuOUlAllVISlUll —------- ^ark Fees (to be determined per Section 11.6x.) - ^ Sit! Zli==*ion WUcmo")oJ pits SJ'mISi'on a TpII-^^ sToS.“oO ,N o change from ongmal applicalion) “• SbOO.OO . S.50.mc^ f.-:------------------------------------- -------- Std Sbllc Rcaua S900.00 + S.50/lin=J l‘“- »• ' * - ' — r_Arr^nf Rxistins Private Roaa S50 00/ncw lot proposed for on-sue x-------- .. ..__I7..^/X,f:cr F*«SC. Fle.xible AppUcatio** Fees/Misc. Fees ______ Associated with Subdivision S73.00 ---------- . p. hlished by o^ajj^ J _____________ ___________ Date / Z^/3^ plicant’s Sign! gnaturc A ia .— ---------. . . before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Com^sion ist have allsu^m^ inw ^ ADolicanis must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planni^ held on the third Monday of ^ scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized r'nimcil. If an applicant is _ nmr-m. nf this chanffe nrior to the meetinz. ner’s Signature MM OATS 12/14/W HE^MEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OMERS LIST^ - BATCH SOB? f /PROP AOOR CMNER NME TAXPAYERM N . • **r- ‘ .' -Jt r , . .-*1 NAHE/AOOR i ‘ sa os-117-0 SS 0009 0SO95 BAYSIDE M n D KELLEY A C A KELLEY mCRAEL 0 A CONNIE KELLEY S09S BAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE m 55356 V *■ jj • ]}yi M PROP AODR OHNER NANI TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR M 0S-117-2S 23 0014 00S4B* NESILAKE ST ROBERT A OLSON ROBERT A OLSON SAB NESTLAKE ST LONB LAKE HN S5356 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR SB 0S-117-2S 23 0017 00372 NESTLAKE ST ORAN HAESER OEAN NAESER 17t NESTLAKE ST LONB LAKE NN 55SS4 PROP AOOR OltCR NANS TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR .. .IV so 05-117-CS IS 0022 OOS2S NESTLAKE ST I E A H K BER6SA6EL IRV OERGSAOCL PO ROM 149 NAVZATA HN BBS91 t! * YV'y-t t V .V • I OltCR NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ABOR SB 05-117-23 23 0025 00349 NESTLAKE ST EDNA T ANDERSON ET AL N/L EDNA T ANDERSON 177 PENINSULA RO NEDICINE LAKE HN 55441 'V PROP ADDR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER ^ NAHE/AOOR SB 05-117-23 2S 0028 OOS0 NESTLAKE ST P N LAN6ERT ET AL N/L EST PRISCILLA H LAN6ERT STS NESTLAKE ST LONB LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 23 0010 03865 BAYSIDE RD OAK DIANIS DAVID DIANIS579 NE PLANTATION RD ttlON STUART FL 34996 SB 05-117-23 23 0015 00356 NESTLAKE ST E C ANDERSON ETAL EDHARD ANDERSON 356 NESTLAKE ST LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 23 0018 00372 NESTLAKE ST D R A N HAESER OEAN HAESER 372 NESTLAKE ST LONB LAKE HN 55356 58 05-117-23 23 0023 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED X i A H K BERGSAGEL IRV BERGSAGEL PO BOX 149 NAYZATA HN 55391 38 05-117-23 23 0026 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED E C GAGE III A B C GAGE EDHIN III A BARBARA GAGE 460 TONKAHA RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 23 0029 00365 NESTLAKE ST NESTERN UNITED LIKE ASSUR CO JOSEPH D A HARY B FIEDLER 365 HESTLAKO ST LONB LAKE m 55356 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 11 /*38 05-117-23 23 OOlS 00340 NESTLAKE ST C K HARDER A T R NARRER CYNTHIA K A TIHOTHY R HARRfR 340 NESTLAKE ST iONG LAKE HN 55356 4 ‘ <•» . ‘1 Vu 38 05-117-23 23 0016 00364 NESTLAKE ST NALLACE N PAASCH N N PAASCH 364 NEST LAKE ST LONG LAKE HN 55356 i 05 38 05-117-23 23 0019 00372 NESTLAKE ST ORAN HAESER OEAN HAESER 372 NESTLAKE ST LONB LAKE HN US56 0^- o 38 0B-117-2S tS 0024 00341 NESTUKE ST I E S H K BEROSAOEL IRV BERGSAGEL PO BOX 149 NAYZATA rtl BBS91 (M U .V / 38 05-117-23 23 0027 00389 NESTLAKE ST JANET DONALDSON JANET DONALDSON 389 NEST LAKE ST LONB LAKE HN 5056 i \ ‘ ■r ;v‘. ' . yr r/* . > ..••V I' I- •• > »!■ 38 OB-117-23 23 0039 00332 NESTLAKE ST. B N BICHANICN A M B JANSSEN B H BICHANICH I H B JANSSEN 332 NESTLAKE ST LONB LAKE HN BB3SB . 7 ' i’' • ■'1 a.• ’:.v> • : i t V ;■ . - < *. • 'i • ' U / . • ,'V in’-'-' .1 p C . i 'll s 4. .r;'v-;/V RUN DATE 12/14/98‘v* f NEWCPXN COUNTY PROPERTY INPORNATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0«CRS LISTV. BATCH 504i» * • PROP AOOR Olf€R NAHE 5 V- taxpayer U: NAHE/AODR M 05-117-2S 24 0112 OOOSa ADDRESS UNASSIGNED NEmEPIN FORFEITED LAND NEItCPIN FORFEITED LAND • • > * PROP ADDR CMNER NAME ^ TAXPAYER V t.. -1 : •NAM/ABOR TOTAL BATCH 504 Boon rll^• *• .1 'I f • * • V 1- ‘ ^ 4 • ^ > ^ V j • • • a 4i y ’■ ■ '*;> •.» V f ' * * 4* . • * f .* * ■•3:r t 4* • • 4- * ». ri"-. . V,: I*;: V . •>.Jf ;V J •;> ■'I '- , v ‘‘ ' > •.Al'A =fe •y'i • • -f'- ■ ■•'.I f ,’*v ^ ^ ‘ •• *4 *: .. •• '*1. ; . t V0% -y 'fvi ;- ij/ ai;-'. j ..■ ■■, .• M * .-t. •• A. REPORT NO. PX4SS401 PAGE 12 Vso 05-117-2S S2 0001 00420 TOMCAHA RO AttITCK R H PRATBERNON EOHIN C GAGE III BARBARA C GAGE PO BOX S91S9 MPLS HN 5S459-B2S0 SO 0S-117-2S S2 0002 00440 TOIBCANA RO EOHXN C GAGS ETAL GAGE EDNIN C 12715 B STATE »0<Y 55 NPLS HN 55441 38 05-117-23-23-0040 309 Westlake St Gregg S S Bette J Perl Gregg S & Bette J Perl 309 Westlake St Long Lake MN 55356 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION^ TO THE BEST . OF MY KNOMLEDGE AND BEUEF. DATE /2-/J-55., Z^(2 w (TV^ • f y 1 9V,. • H "3‘ » •» - Uy I • * •; ' ' • ■ #A • *,> B • \ ] >•. ‘ \ •* > . /1 ,• V / \}> 4:. \ : ■ L * J •v •« t • > *• • * i •"* • 4 . « 9 } -i f=f- i. » '..y 4^ i I ^ ’ f f* ■* ■ ‘U ■ I » ^ iri'\ I • , - • *^'i-*\ * J L ' V ‘ ' t • Brief Factual Narrative - Maeser Property The following is summaiy of facts to consider in allowing the Maeser property to be lot line rearranged to allow for two single family lots; 1. When revie*.ving the history of the Maeser property at 372 W. Lake Street, the City of Orono consistently allowed and accepted an on going and non conforming commercial usage of said parcel. This acceptance continued through changes in the single family zoning status of the property from 1 acre to 2 acre minimum lots. This allowance of commercial usage of this parcel continued through multiple different ownership's including the final sale to Mr. Maeser in 1985. Throughout such ownership change the City continued to allow »uch commercial usage even though per the City's own testimony, such usage should have been stopped by the City in January of 1978. 2.The City issued the prior propertie's Owner a permit in 1980 to enlarge and enhance the existing drain field to allow for the multiple dwelling units even though such drain field existed in a non conforming condition. 3.1t took until the Spring of 1995,for the City of Orono to require that Mr. Maeser must finally conform and subsequently suffer financial hardship by closing his cabins, connect to City Sewer, and pay the City's sewer connection 'c. o. The order did not allow Mr. Maeser, who is not a real estate professional, any reasonable alternative. 4.Mr. Maeser purchased this property in 1985 believing, due to the properties history, that such commercial usage was in fact tolerated by the City of Orono. In fact the City allowed Mr. Maeser to operate his property status quo through Spring of 1995. A period of ten years. 5.The property was considered by the Orono Council in years 1967 through 1969 that it should be placed into two (2) one acre parcels, with the only condition being that only one dwelling unit per parcel be allowed. 6.The property is served by two (2) sewer stubs (connections), indicating that this parcel was allotted for as two parcels with two dwelling units when sewer capacity was considered. 7.The proposed lot line rearrangement and subsequent development is a significant improvement over the current condition yet it matches the character of the neighborhood where the bul'* >f the existing dwelling units of this built-up neighborhood are on (.7) seven tenth* of an .ncre parcels. S.The council recently allowed a neighbor to combine two (.7) acre parcels, armd significant variances, to create a 1.4 acre parcel with one dwelling unit. (1.4 acre being less than the 2.0 acre minimum). 9.This lot line rearrangement meets the majority of City of Orono ordinances, including hard cover and Lakeshore set backs. The dwellings are placed to minimize impact on the neighbors and in fact significantly improve such visual impact on the adjacent neighbors. t 11 C O Z ^ o ■I !l;f I'l £-J B I It iUH hh^% ii g Va }f3 ? ^3 -a N e jii a HILLSIDE PARK .*.• • **. ; • • I :v • • : ;* .•: • r A'‘ *'V •ti CO • §? 1^; § » .;. ••1 1 ''l ty 1;| i^,•*i •^d• I'* §y' •f. • r' I: I I » •;/• • :-;‘'r..: ' ■■:\--^-::;i -••:•‘7 ;.’’T.' :-X'?;V •■•••'• ■••'. : ;■• •• -V ’ ’ ••- ’■••* V--V:'y'-' ' V..* /•;; . •’ . , ■■••. •/;•••;; :••>, •• •,/• .. V •■ • • y • ••• •• . •• . . • s .,• . • • • ‘ ' i|ODQ im ii;i li A I f I t milm !»* gso I i; I ' I i I • ^ . ! * *; 11; M ■ Iimnmii mliimii 1' iiii'i IS* ! i:h! I I I t ! --------------«• !«.----------------------— Ss 73 ^g s^ XU I' c! S'? Z H -i<v^ 5 C' M ?& HARDCOVER CALCtLATlOiN VVORR^HEEl /SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 75-250’ 25-500’ • EXISTING HARDCOVER tN ZONE ---- / A. House _____________ X ______________ " Lenfth X % X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Stde^vailc X X E. Patia Deck X X F. Landscape Uoderlaio By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____ - B . PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House_____________ Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other __ WUib X 100 WUlli total HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 0 f B ^25~ 500-1 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. X too 41^ S.F. O_____f'* A B A B Lot]C>-7S' ii aA ■i i i mk HARDCOVER CALCtXAJlUilVVUlOiSHEEr /SETBACK ZONE: (CmCLE ONE) 0-7S’ ( 75-25^ 2S-SOO* • EXISTING HARDCOVER !N ZONE / A. Hoax X 500*1000' X X X B. Cmse C. Dri«Tway X X O. Sidewalk E. Paiio/Deck X X F. landscape Usledaix By Plastic Ot F^m X X X G.•riT TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A -i* B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______________ * Leafth X X X B. Garage C. Driveway 27 X X D. Sidewalk /« 1 X X E. Patio/^Deck X X F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Ollier Wi*fe X 100 ^6 26»9a Waidi 8 a (afin 4 4o S IZ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 39 Q 7 + B /S~ Co95 39 0 7 X 100 z s S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B A B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET /SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 75-250’ 25-500’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN Z< A. House Leftftfi X X X B. Ctrage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Undertain By Plastic Or FAric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A + B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______ Ltfiftli X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other WMih X too WMtfi TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A O -f* B Zi4 7S‘Q X 100 500-i 2.a 7S~0 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. /• A B A B (_ho 0uri-t>T^ IE U • a HARDCOVER CALCULAT / SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Leiifih B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patto/Dack F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X X X X X X X X X X VVORKSHEEl 25-500’ WUik L-W I 500-1000' _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. G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A •<- B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONF. A. House B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric G. Other Length 3ft X X X 3o Z\z. /9sr *5* X X X X X X X X X X 100 3o WMtfi 10 ZZ- TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^ V -i- B 2.1 OCa I X 100 = LMo Ca&O zizo /9'5 5T S.F. S.F. S.F. % & T5S 7-1 OU> i S.F. S.F. S.F. ‘s.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % l^or Z- ^ f^O A B A B » . i MINUTES OF THE CRONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 1*1 (#18) #2070 L. E, BRUEGGEMAN COMP.AMZS, 372 SKETCH PLAN OF PROPOSED TWO LOT SUBDIVISION - PLiBLlL HEARING The Certificate of MaiiLng and .Afi5da\-it of PubUcation were noted. Developer Loren Brtieggeman and property owner. Dean Maeser, were present. I.W»p.«.. «■ 11T- Io.s 11 and 12 but are mainly located in lot 12. The property currendy operates « one single property. One sewer unit was assessed to the existing ho^ but not cabtewhich are non-conforming and are in need ot anolicant earUer this vear to connect the house ro sewer and allowed the cabins to remain in^Sse for two more years before they must be removed. The cabins are system on the property, and the house must be connected to sewer immediately. The cost of connecting to sewer is SI4,000 per unit. The applicant decided to pursue a lot line rearrangement or replat the building sites The lots would meet the required setbacks with 50* front and 30 side but c^g^brs^OT^^^^^^ by hardcover ma.ximuras. An average lakeshore setback variance would also be requued. In the Question of a replat, would the City aUow a narrow corridor to access the back lot is no. possible, City ™-hat reUef rould be |ven to the owner. Would it be possible to sell land to a neighbor? Lold contain a 2-s.ory residence,s.f^fprirvlit a wXm“s.;ie home: square fooiage ^wUch would be 4000r s.f ^h both upper and lower levels. Both would be on substandard lots but would be sellable according to Brueggeman. 30 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 (#18 - #2070 L E. Brueggeman Companies - Continued) Gaflfron questioned whether the driveway across the top portion of the property was included in the calculations. Brueggeman said the parcel contained 49.680 s.f. He eliminated the area within the 75'zone, netting 28,000. 25% of that figure equ s s.f and took off the driveway for a net amount of 4500 s.f Peterson questioned the ability of the property to have two homes on one lot. Brueggeman said this is consistent with . 'it homes in the neighborhood at this time which average .7 to .8 acres with the largest at l-J/2 acres. These two lots would be 1.0 acre and .9 acre in size. Rowlene said she saw this application as an opportunity to gain a 2-acre lot m the ^.-acre zoning district adding that as a single building site, it would be beautiful, ^e applicant s concern is with property value and overbuilding for the homes in the neighborhood. Peterson said he liked the proposal but questioned whether it should be two lots when it is one to begin with. Lindquist noted that other lots built on were I acre in size. Hawn asked if the adjacent homes in the neighborhood were conneaed to sewer. Gaflfron said sewer was available to ail of the homes but not necessarily connected. Hawn asked if any other lots were combined in the neighborhood. There was one other lakeshore lot that'was combined and is a 100' lot. The rest of the lakeshore lots were individual lots. Brueggeman said this was an unusual case with 4 buildings on 3 lots adding that the proposal would clean up the site. Peterson commented that the cabins have been directed to be removed anyways regardless of the result of this proposal. Gaffron noted that the property has existed as a non-conforming use. When the sewer came available to the property, the non-confomiity was brought to a head. Maeser is looking at the options av^able. Gaflfi’on added that the deadline of June 1995 for connecting the house to sewer has yet to be dealt with. Brue,ggeman said the rights of Maeser need to be considered by the Commission and Council, which he felt has not been done. It is his desire to solve the problems. Gaffi-on said the property is 3 separate tax parcels. In the sewered zone, it is required to look at each separately as to their buUdability. The current standards do not allow these lots to be buildable. 1 1 \flNUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMipiON MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 1995 (j^l8 #2070 L. E. Brueggeman Comp, 'ies - Continued) Lindquist commented that with one parcel, 2 acrw in size, wiA t^ ^"o^^on that it property and the houses in the area on I acre or less parcels, i w . o-j-jon of the would be difBcult to enforce the standards. Lindquist suggested gairu g P City Anomey. It was decided to gather more information, gain the counsel ot the Attorney, and Council for their direction regarding the property. PLANNING CONLVIISSION COMMENTS LEflMJUIST) Lindquist noted the delay in the start of the meeting due to a lack of a quotum. tn^nt REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE a XSS g P^ COMMISSION MEETING OP SEPTEMBER 4, No representative of the Planning Commission attended the Park Commission meeting of September 4, 1995. (#21) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Schroeder wUl anend the Oaober 2 meeting of the Park Commission. Gaffion brought to the anemion of the lake use committee possible meeting dates of Oaober 4, 5, or 6. Gaffron asked that aU open space suneys be completed and turned m to City Administrator Moorse. Gaffion said Mabusth has suggested a wotk meeting be scheduled concerning zoning issues. additional items (M2) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 21, 1995 meeting Schroeder moved, Havm seconded, to approve the Minutes of the August 2t, 1995 Planning Commission Meeting. Ayes 6. Nays 0 CITY OF OttONO P.O. Box 6<> Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2070 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: 9/29/95 TO: Loren Bnieggeman Co. LLC 2125 W. Hwy. 13 Burnsville, MN 55337 COPIES TO:Dean Maeser 372 Westlake St. Lcxig Lake, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Sketch Plan DATE OF MEETING: 9/18/95 VOTE:-FOR -AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: No action required. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission indicated the she plan proposed was well done, and showed how two residences might be developed meeting most performance standards of the 2-acre lakeshore zone. However, Planning Commission had difficulty with the lot acreage variances, and generally felt that the Idstoric use of the 3 tax parcels as a single property was a significant factor. It is staffs expectation that this site and its property rights issues will be a topic of discussion at an upcoming joint work session of the Planning Commission and Council. Enclosed is a brief synopsis of the Casco Point situation in the early 1980s regarding a substandard existing lot of record which was the subject of a lawsuit. Perhaps the most significant differences between that situation and yours is that on Casco Point, no subdivision was involved, i.e. it was simply an existing lot of record; and the lot could be developed without the need for any variances except lot area and lot width. In your situation, none of the individual existing lots of record is buildable without many variances in addition to the lot width and area variances. With a sketch plan, no formal action is taken by the Planning Commission. However, please stay in contact with City staff as we will advise you on any discussions which may ensue at the Council level. BRIEF SUMMARY OF LORGE CASE, 2695/2697 CASCO POINT ROAD (LOTS 3 AND 4, AUDITOR’S SUBDIVISION NO. 265) Two 60’ wide lots on Casco Point Road were owned in common but had not been combined for tax purposes. A house existed on Lot 4, Lot 3 was vacant. The property owner sold Lot 4 to Mr. and Mrs. Kane, but kept Lot 3. He eventually sold Lot 3 to Mr. and Mrs. Lorge. Lot 3 contained steeply sloping land which drained on to Lot 4. When Lorge attempted to obtain a building permit for Lot 3, the owners of Lot 4 objected. Although the Planning Commission recommended approval of variances necessary to make Lot 3 buildable, the City Council determined it should be unbuildable based on the drainage issue as well as for other reasons including the fact that the lots had previously been used as a single property. The owners of Lot 3 sued the City in order to compel the City to grant a building permit. There are many nuances of this case such as the issue of due process and how the City Council took certain actions to deny buildability of the property. Ultimately, before the case went to trial, the City and the owners of Lot 3 settled, and the case was dismissed. The settlement grants width and area variances to render Lot 3 buildable, but allows no other performance standard variances. Further, it stipulates that the owner of Lot 3 must deal adequately with the drainage issues. The main reason City staff considers this case significant is that prior to it, the City refused to accept applications for variances on substandard vacant separate tax parcels owned in common with an adjacent homestead parcel. Since this case was settled, the City has allowed variance applications to be filed on such lots in order to preserve the property owners’ due process. However, the specific facts of the Lorge variance request are unique as compared to every other variance request, and the only conclusion the City has drawn from the case is in regards to preservation of due process. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT STATE OF MINNESOTA FOURTH DISTRICT Richard J. Lorge and Jaan t. Lorga» Court File: 4-82-139 va. Praintiffs, . • n ^ ^^^^^^STIPULATION*OP SBTTLBMBMI , __Clty 'of ^Orono» a Minne sota :^^StatutoryrCity, William V.I>fei van noBbr na/w& wt ww..v, Hannah* Orono Councilperson, ' Mary Butler* Orono Councilperson, ^ Ja Bllen Rurr. Orono Counciloerson.7/a .• . ‘Jo Ellen Rurr* Orono Councilperson,^, .> and fomer Councilpersons, Robert * Searles* Gary Welsh* and Paul Taaek * 'H» jf- r*;- Defendants. t4HEREAS* Richard J. Lorge and Jean L. Lorge are the fee owners of the following described real property located in the City of Orono* Hennepin County, Minnesota: That part of Government Lot 4, Section 20* Township 117* North* Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian* described as follows: Beginning on the «hore of Lake Minnetonka at the point of intersection of said shore with a line drawn parallel with and 90 feet Southwesterly* measured at right angles* from the Southwesterly line of Lot 134* Spring Park* thence Southeasterly along said Southwesterly line of usco Point Road to Its point of intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 150 feet Southwesterly* measured at right angles* from the Southwesterly line of said Let 134 and its Southeasterly extension! thence Northwesterly parallel with said Southwesterly line of Lot 134 and its Southeasterly extension to said shorei thence Northeasterly along said shore to the point or beginning. -1- •• ■* •* »• % ** •: .•V \ • m •' m ^-7. * •, *.. ^ .• • -J* V ■,.i - ■ f . ■ UV;«n<>*«I 1.4^*? V 1 . ■'■ *fIIBtEAS» Mid property (hereinafter referred to aa "tot 3*) . * ^ a haa been the subject of the above-captioned litigation coonenced w,*. ‘''’ '••'by Richard J. Lorge and Jean L. Lorge* said litigation coonenced to . r-V-V • ■ • .resolve the buildability of this lakeshore loti and ' •T^, 2** ^ ‘ * Richard J. Lorge and Jean L. Lorge# their attceessors^' assigga^^ereinafter "Lorge") and^the.City of Orono ~ dosiro to’aiidcabl' ^AGRSBO: ♦ ^ ;:jt' eitoitJ •« “ *»■•».' ' t-^ ' ...- * \ ■•s Vi. . .J J tyj.hereby granta W^’ l^MUrariM width and area'Tfron • ■ -F . 5 * : ;?^i^ordinanceii .of the. City in order to^r ti^^<axpreaaly ondarstood and agreed by Lorge and the City, that‘no other’*'' v/ ' aJO—^♦v' * . * . ,. * r ‘ 7 ,#■*'«. varlancea are hereby granted as part of this agreenent.r All''other ./^52*?*^V*^**®**^* of the Orono Zoning Code ^ir^tga and/or future owners of Lotfmy • R . • buildable jf5zt ;is <» .- .. ode shall be conplied with .by .' - V i''VV.- ■■" • • iC''* . >T>t?^.2v-:>vLorge'shall comply with all state and municipal building ^ • .t ^ », • • i * . - » V w V '.» . ^ *'••>.*. V.:eodaa'applicable to the development of Lot 3*. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' * ^ , r*.‘; ^ ** * a residential dwelling for ‘lotf3 in a - ' ^ * ^-*^1^sauuier such .that no aggravation of existing' drainage probleiw in :jr«v* ,V-T.- • •• y s\ - ■ ■^• the .neighborhood shall occur. The City shall supply to ^lorge .and ,0%*. . i... >< J!^^thair'designated engineer and arehitect'On'.request all data.of ..any 4r*' - ;:> ■. ■ • • “Vv^i'■ ge and . '1*/ ;?«^kijid'auilntained by the City regarding current, drainage conditions ..... -/ ■ ^ there it no coit to the City, in efforts to alleviate any drainage problems in the area. 4. The City shall pauj on any application for a dock permit without discrimination or preference and shall not consider in any such deliberations the width or area of Lot 3. $• Lorge shall be permitted a curb cut for Lot 3 at their 'iM^nse. 4 ^ • : 6. Lorge may be subject to new special aases8wenta,^and/or , . ' -------rservicelto^^i3 VVconnection^charges • for municipal waterfand^ewer^i ‘ '“^iccordance with standard procedure a^g^Jt*“~ Lorge •year period in • *4 which to procure a building permit in the event that procurement of the building permit is delayed by litigation arising out of the development of Lot 3. . * * " ' fl. The parties hereto represent that the foregoing is ••• e entered into in good faith and that all reasonable cooperation' • a shall be extended in fulfilling the terns and conditions of this'*,. . • *e Agreement. , 9. Richard J. Lorge and Jean L. Lorge hereby dismiss with prejudice and release the City, all other named defendants and its employees, officers and/or agents from any and all claims made or that could have been made in the Federal District Court action file 4-82-139 regarding the above-referenced property without costs, disbursements or attorneys fees to either party. 10. Lorge agree to enter into a Contract of Indemnification in favor of the City, all other named defendants and its employees, officers and/or agents, a copy of which is attached hereto and the • * - ‘ . -3- ./• •• •»• • •• i. V.-* • —., * • • • • t . * < • .'t •»• a a .4^ V* 3.In the event litigation is cormenced the City shall cooperate with defense counsel appointed by Lorge and shall offer all possible aid and assistance to defense counsel in the conduct of such suit. 4. Richard J. Lorge and Jean L. Lorge shall have iff *^i^^axclusive and final control !>over"the^conduct'of ' ^s conduct’'.ndfe;^'S£ ithe defense of any such litigation *andishallvhave..>«^ r •' ^; ■ •». ; IX. . *•* ^ a’Aany such c la ins. *’ >>^^ettlenent ■ , Richard 4. Lotfge / CITY OF ORONO by Aor/^ ^yor “>fc • "J * I r . . - • . .. r a r • :•!. :-’w^ >s « ^ J-3 TO:Chair Peterson and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE September 15, 1995 SUBJECT: #2070 Loren Brueggeman Development/Dean Maeser, 372 Westlake Street Sketch Plan Review Zoning District: LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 acre Application: Sketch plan review of a proposed lot line reairangement/replat to result in two building sites from this 1.99 acre group of 3 tax parcels. List of Exhibits ^ A - Application ^ B - Survey - C - Letter to Property Owners 6/5/95 J D - Staff Memo 3/8/95 ^ E - Cit>’ Council Minutes 3/13/95 F - Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subd. 6 G- f Pertinent Facts - Existing Lots of Record ' Sack Lots 1.The Dean Maeser property at 372 Westlake Street consists of three tax parcels as follows: Lot 10 = 50’x544’ = 27,200 s.f. = 0.62 acre Lot 11 = 71.16-X519’ = 36,900 s.f. = 0.85 acre Lot 12 = 49’x462’ = 22,653 s.f. = 0J2 acre 1.99 acre 2.Lot 10 contains the majority of the driveway and 2/3 of the existing residence structure. 3.Lot 11 contains 1/3 of the existing principal residence structure; a second "house" used only for storage; and small comers of two rental cabins. 4. Lot 1.’ contains the two rental cabins. 5.The three properties have been commonly owned tor more than twenty years, and have been used as single homestead with two rental cabins for many years. Earlier this year, the City Council reviewed this property in regards to overdue sewer connection. Council concluded that: I Zoning File #2070 September 15, 1995 Page 2 The existing principal residence, which is provided with and has been assessed for one sewer unit, must be connected to sewer immediately (it has not been). The two rental cabins are non-conforming stnicmres due to their location and are a non-conforming use due to the rental status, have not been assessed for sewer, and must be eliminated by the end of 1996. The three tax parcels must be legally combined within ninety days (deadline has passed with no combination). All of the above to be formalized in an agreement with the property owner (agreement drafted to City satisfaction but not signed by owner). The basis for this action was the need to make a decision about the rental cabins sewer connection. Applicant either had to spend nearly $14,000 each to connect the cabins to sewer, or discontinue them. Council agreed with staff that providing sewer to these non- conforming structures with non-conforming uses would not be appropriate for this property. 6.Property owner has asked whether there are ways to "reorganize ” this property from three tax parcels into two useful building sites. Property owner notes that the apparent market value of the property as a single building site is less than the amount he paid for the property. Sketch Plan Proposal Loren E. Brueggeman Development has submitted a sketch plan for a lot line rearrangement to result in two useable building sites. His proposal is that all existing buildings on the property would be removed. The resulting configuration would be 0.93 acre Parcel A abutting Westlake Street, and a 1.06 acre Parcel B to the east of it. Parcel B would take on the configuration of a "back lot". Please note the following lot standards data; Zoning File #2070 September 15, 1995 Page 3 Parcel A Proposed Required Parcel B Proposed Required Standard Lot area:0.93 ac.2.0 ac.1.06 ac.3.0 ac (backlot) Lot width: - at street setback - at shoreline - at 75’ setback N/A N/A 297 ’ 200 ’ 190’±* 310’ 235 ’ 200’ 200’ 200’- at 262’ 200 ’ *Note: As a newly created "back lot". Parcel B’s access corridor would have ^ be a 30 oullot, and it’s defined street lot line is the NW-SE line separating Parcels A & B. Setbacks: - North - South - East -West 30’ 75’ 50’ 50’ 30’ 75’ 30’ 50’ 30’ 75’ 75’ 30’ 30’ 75’ 75’ 50’* These two setbacks can easily be met. Hardcover allowance: - 0-75’ 0- s f- - 75-250 ’ 4,800 s.f.± ♦Excludes area of 12 ’x222 ’ driveway corridor, which could reduce this allowance significantly if corridor is part of Parcel B instead of a separate outlet 0 s.f. 4,750 s.f.±* • • • Lot coverage by structures allowance (15%) 6,075 s.f. - Note that in both cases this exceeds allowed hardcover. 6,925 s.f. Additionally, any structure placed on Parcel B will need an average lakeshore setback variance Municipal Sewer As part of the Stubbs Bay project, this group of three properties was assessed only one sewer udt to seJve *7«ist4 house. The City Council had earlier concluded that tt was not appropriate to provide sewer to the existmg non-conformmg cabins. If the proposed lot line rearrangement/ replat was approved, a sewer connection charge of $13,097.00 (1995 fee schedule) would have to be collected for the second umt. Zoning File nOlO September 15, 1995 Page 4 Lot Area Variance/Existing Lots of Record Please carefully review the June 5, 1995 letter to Mr. Maeser. Clearly, the City has viewed this property to-date as a single entity for zoning and sewer assessment purposes. Even though the property exists as three separate tax parcels, the use of those parcels has overlapped from ^th a physical and practical standpoint. Strucmres exist over lot lines, and the property has been owned in conunon as a single entity for many years. Specifically review scenarios 2 and 3 on pages 2 and 3 of the June 5th memo It is sta^s o^nion that because none of the three parcels individually meets the standard of Zonmg Code Section 10.03, Subd. 6 (A-2) regarding buildability of lots of record, the City is not forced to grant buildability. This concept is addressed more fiilly in the June 5th letter. Issues for Consideration 1.As proposed, is the subdivision configured as a lot line rearrangement, or is it essentially a replat? 2.If there any justification to allow the access corridor to Parcel B to be part of Parcel B? Should it, as required in the back lot ordinance, be a separate outlot? Should it meet the 30 ’ minimum width required for such access outlots? 3.Is there any justification to allow two individual building sites on 2 acres of land in the 2 acre zoning district? Should the City consider rezoning this property to 1 acre standards? A lot area variance would still be required. The parcel does not abut another 1 acre zone, hence it would certainly be looked at as spot zoning . . . 5.Can suitable residences be built on the two parcels within the hardcover allowances? 6.If subdivision of this 1.99 acre parcel is deemed not reasonably, can Planmng Commission offer the applicant or property owner any other relief? For ^tance could a portion of the property be sold to an adjacent property owner and still leave a reasonable building site? Staff Recommendation Please review the various attachments which detail the issues with this proposal. Mr. applfcant is requesting direction from the Planning Commission as to whether this subdivision is feasible, and if so, under what conditions. li CITY OF ORONO - f\T)h -J SUBDIVISION APPLICATION ii »« A ChECK 1. 2\0.00u-crr-:-*-••Uiiv yyil..*^tl\PROPERTY LOCAT^^ L.Vc^ , Oro^o 'IJUtl riS: Site address Property Identificiuor Number (PID) Or//-7^?t-^gQ''7 P£li /nn. Please check one - Property abstract or K torrens; Attach legal description to applicauon. APPLICANT Name A ^ ^tru Co_^r^ Address - Citv Cn»LLL Phone (home) 9¥*f-0(,^C ■4- ZivSSr^? Phone (work) 0\VNYR (if different than applicant) Name "Od-i2.- Address City P, n , t- U> \C<. ^ tL •_______________ Phone (home) (CQrsa ^ O Zip 51^^/ Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Z-J=. 2^ Present use (check) y____ Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify) ^2^ ■*»•»»< re,<* I Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes -----Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) ’ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites ^ E.xisting Units Z New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) /___Units per / Acres //-45S'0 Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) 1 f\ > ” ’ f1 O' channel 1 tr« •• ito ««| f»Qn^ • *i»«kt «••»>•» «••• * •« MOMr* M*w« < »—kUp.— «*4-WM • %m-»» • ««• • »• ••• •••■• • 0 •• 0 mmm» • •m m- ><■ ■>— 0 tmm • t»m 0 tmm <• •• via IJ • M m m ■■a •««(•«• . ••• 0 * «otli t*« I*#! t>m»L »•«■ # >*r.v a M«»« 0 4 MtU *««(••• • •«• 0 ^0%0 • •« lat «Mi II a* «w«ai %»< .aa »«• 0 0 mm%0 • »JM «• II MM vmI -5—a. m Imi jssisyitA.^ra**•i«« • Mi «*• ««r **** •sry^'S.r —--M AMW 00 *«t la^ A. M I ■« • 0 wm tM» «f •*»« ItM ^ li rnjmm 99 •0€U 9 tS%OO0HX. MC Rmhdmr and Ammoetotmm, Inc. •M-«n«J4 O/i M-Ul y •! li \ -\o \ ,\CITYof ORONO ‘ Wl Municipal Offices Strut Mdrvss: 2750 Kelley Partway Orono. MN 55356 Mailiiit Mdrt» P.O. Ba 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 June 5, 1995 Dean Maeser 372 Westlake Street Long Lake, MN 55356 RE: Follow-up on our discussion regarding your property Dear Mr. Maeser: As a follow-uD to our meeting on AprU 17, this letter is to address some of the options that were fumm of ylnr property. We discussed the foUowmg concepts: 1.Rezone from LR-IA - 2 Acre, to LR-IB - 1 Acre, then replat into 1 + acre lots. Replat three lots into two. requiring a lot area variance. 3. Lot line rearrangement between existing lots, existmg mam house cither remaining or removed. •y Rach of these scenarios has pros and cons, and none are guaranteed to be approved if Howeve? before addressing each scenario. I will address the tax situaaon which you quesnoned. 1974-76 - Greatest value consistently placed on middle lot. 1977-82 - Steady large increases in land value, main building value sti middle lot. u • i »1983-present - Main building value placed on the northerly lot. 1986 - Apparent reapportionment of homestead/HACA between north and middle 1988-89 - North lot apparently got no homestead/HACA, and taxes extremely high (-1-40-50%) for these two years. . 1990 - Taxes on north lot back to 1987 level - apparently received c^us. 1991 - Further major credit on middle lot, but disappears agam m 1992-yj- 1992-95 - Taxes and valuation fairly stable. Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 1 Dean Maeser June 5, 1995 Page 2 If you have further questions regarding the above information or tax data, please address them to Rolf Erickson, the City Assessor at 473-1844. Regarding each of the scenarios noted above: 1. Rezoning. Your nrocerty first came under zoning regulations in 1950. when the Towns^ KrSa number of private residential districts. Your^P*.^ ^ "^nihhs Rav District** rcQuiring a one acre nnininiuni lot size. nonhwest portion of the «zo^ « eS^ «o^“ti,; l^lstore’TOT rero^aT-LR-lA. One FamUy Lakeshore Residential ^uiring a two acre minimum lot size. Each of your ^ lots Jf leM than one acre, and therefore each has been non-confomung m lot size since 1950. Sewered oroperties directly south of "Hillside Park" remained at the one acre Tonina standard in 1975. One of the main reasons the City chose to place a two LT—fst^ on unsewered properties was that one acre lots genenj^ were too small to support septic systems on a io^-term basts. ^ 1975 the City has brought sewer to a number of two acre zoned are^, but has cSo Seduce theLmnum lot size requirement to one acre m those areas. me rezoning of individual parcels in Orono is a rare occurrence, to niThans ten cases since 1975. Each of those cases was umque, and those ^perries were uniquely situated. The majority involved commercially zoned property. By comparison, your property is zoned residenual. and is doz^of other sinular sewered properties in the two acre zone although you are located very near the one acre zone, your Ihat zone but is separated from it by right-of-way, the lake, ^d other lots. I cm onlv envision the Planning Commission and Council considering a vour moZZ ioonc acre in the context of rezoning your entire neighborhood. 1 expe« die^ity would be reluctant to do so, especially if a rezomng would allow more houses to be developed in Orono’s low density rural zone. Replat with lot area variances. In this scenario you would propose to replat your three lots into wo lots, and request lot area variances, me assumption is that your existing residence woul recMin all other buildings would be removed, and a new house wouW co^ti^aS on a lot to the west of your house. However, there are a number of 2. Dean Maeser June 5, 1995 Page 3 3. other code requirements that would require a variance to accoiimiodate to sceLo, and Lch ultimately would very likely result m the Cty denymg to request. They include; The need to create a "front lot" and "back lot" in relation to the road The back lot (with your existing house) would have to meet 150% ^the lot area and width standards of the zoning district under codes adopted by the City about two years ago. In a new subdivision, the City is unlikely to grant lot area vanances, having done so for a standard residential plat on only two occasions since 1975, both of which were very unique circumstances. If lot area variances were granted, and assuinmg a 20 . platted to the back lot, your westerly lot would likely be allowe Lnroximately 4.000 - 5,000 s.f. of hardcover mcludmg its sh^ of a shLd access driveway. This might be a limiting factor for of a new residence on that lot, and is unlikely to be granted a vana^e for more hardcover, especially for new construction. Hardcover might also if you w^ to mmove your existing house ^ construct a new one in its place. After excluding the first 75 back from easterly lot would be allowed a relatively small square footage of hardcover. Lot line rearrangement (with or without existing house remaining). The purpose of to would be to simply move a lot Ime to place S'®" house witot a single tax parcel, leaving the remaiiung property m a SMond IM p^l Tor^nstruction of a residence. Your basis for this ,*®““ ““ Sie fact that the three parcels have remained separate yet ®°"™®”*S'®*^^ might at any time be sold individually to 3 separate buyers. You could also argue that the property has sewer avaUable in the street. The City’s argument against such a proposal would include the fact®“ «wer Slit ww^sessed; that the house and its appunenant s^nc sysrem tove made use of all three parcels as one; that Zoning Code Section ‘ 6 (A) (2) regarding loo of record, allows use of your second ^ third .inCie f^v dweUing purposes aiJi if they are one acre m size and have an average width of 100 ’. standards which your probities ’ Ld therefore even if sold separarely would not be granted building permits. ■i* r^l Dean Maeser June 5, 1995 Page 4 In doing a lot line rearrangement, you would be asking the City to treat each of your lott sepa^ly as individual parcels. If the City was convinced that ^u could con^ct a reLence on each parcel as it exists today. whUe meeting aU standards except for lot area and width, then the City might have a basis to consider more useful lots. However, because the zoning dismct , towise setbacks, no house could be constructed on Lot 10, which « 50 wi^. Likewis , a house only 11.6- wide could be constructed while meetmg the side sabacte on L and no houre could be constructed on Lot 12 because that entire lot is less tto 75 from th^ lake Therefore, given that none of the three lots is individually buildable u^r to ^n!^ codTrequireinents even when lot area and lot width City would be unlikely to recognize your nghts to more than a single bu Idmg s . faS! by definition a lot line reanangeraent is only allowed when the sailimg lots meet all zoning standards, which is impossible in your case. It is my opinion that none of to scenarios described above are likely to result ” to «liof desire With that in mind, I would not encourage you to make an applicatton for any of^^» scenarios Hoover, if you feei compelled to formally pursue one of these routes, ton I believe Council will be persuaded to ignore the lot area issues. T » frs a cite nlanner vou might want to procure the services of an attorney who spe^Siis in land usc^to help you understand the intricacies of land use laws and ordinances. I hope this information is of help to you, and I apologize for it taking of to two to three weeks promised. Please feel free to contact me at 473-7357 tf I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator MPG/Isv Enc. Tax Information 1974-1995 a %• • *- ^# * « •« m.t -k« • ^lAf*•f*.. •.,.*■# I i fei!-;’ /17Y /f?r:: ;f77 /).78.. /1i1_ /fw._! Miloo f.ioo 5;ko 17(1 w 72,«CO Hfoo 4100 — o tfX ^,’SCO • • 3Z fclo ^ C«ii^ 3-2,t9o — is;nM0 — 6^i) 33/?o5(||I^ ^,woo ^s;o^c(/®^^ ^,qoo . B9,3»0^-b! cPor*?(£>1 _^o UdjuDo. 3«,3oo(l»4^ _____■ 0 U’t,coo .51.^0^ . l-^'i.i.QP___Q -1.C 6*h? /f8?__. coo ^f)00 0 ^i.ceo . 14©oo j 55;o«> - Kooo^)^ 1 U/)-^ SSJboo ^ 2,i3s') I1.000 {3Hs) S570OO {/SDC^ 7?,£500 /,COD Ol*//^ cr,oco ss-^coo 610 I ^7 px> 1,0X> (liv^ r?.?co ^MlO* /.eoo (ifnj yfej : I '..iHo^ooo ijtr? |;.7r,£wo vr^ooo/tea /ft? /^7o /^V Hn im HlfOOO ^S^fOOo ^,lpO Fitts') Zlpoo s^iLoo Cl70S) 51ptx> Oto''^ r?,noo ji,i/oo (ifc«)'^> 6o,too {zo^i) Ifff.. ...!;„. it.cto ^,no 0 /!tl r>^- /46cA c>^ C |W2- 51?.ooc> r,^.tK)o r9,cx»c> SB|C)Od ftO.^oo (fiO^ loo |,c*o (JIPU, 1,000 OWi'' /,ceo 6*^^- ),o(?o (|S^£f) I,ooo6ju^ .N 0/S /o,7oo 11,100 Ji,60O n.loo .N MJi Ijloo (sjO 1,100 >Sj<eco 3,000 (^>) 30pcO C.ooor*h») 3o,eoo ^^ooo^lOTl) 3000O 5,000 ^llOj 30,eoo SjCOoClo^’^)! 35,oco 5,oOo0H»S^ 15^,000 iT,oco(lfrt): ^9,(00 S,iooO‘llt^ VSjeoo S;loo()^^^ W5,rt)C> 5,'/to6suv) Vr^oo# r'/oo/lli^ ir,oco 5,v/oo0^^i> 5/VOo ('/rn'i •/6.boo 5,WM>0«'aO I ■ Torp^i E.ufc»C^S T?0< '^%,/eo ___ .l-‘/^»,290_____ '20^197 27,qCD S7,/0Q_ _ 5r,500 79^100 ..\lf,l0Q. i\z,boo 112,600... |12,COC> |12,000 |2i,C)oO izZfOoo 152,900 159,000 juopoo 3«O;l0O 70,2-00 VO, 200 a2,too ^ /V<?<^ . - ..........._________________________ /00s /6SD ___/Btr____ ---/I I3 ^37/>♦• 2eJ fi “ “ — ^2,20£>...............3c?t*^y--------- - ^1, Coo I fc/, ^>00 t>l,ooo 3s6!T 31V7 > ■♦ /O.b /• > - i.;i Vi------------ -'>“■ (alfOoO ._ <^/,0(?o h{, OoO 6i,Voo UHpoo 3100 ... ..... _ ^ > */a.i y. /*'rr - 63/00 0 Ihopeo )lpO,~>oO M/loO ni,6(?0 69,OoO , 9>oO 63,700 63,7^^ > •♦II.') '/< ^726- ■ . 39*23 5-)ll t/107 r"/// KI6H 51<‘ J>/b fior fJAcA OolS VI .I !i;* *• ’ !Ii ___ ^ • 8* i . .* V .- •» • •.# »• • ••»« ■• • •: c- • V .» ••’• • ♦ :• •♦ ■ ■' •;•• ; V I' • • *^ * • • * , « '.• • •• • • **i'• ••‘4 , • 4 • • *V - •..• •;•• • , ,:*U^; a »• • *• •,♦ •*/• 1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: March 8, 1995 ITEM NO, Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Summary Dropcrty It was noted that the cabins are nonconforming, and providmg/assessmg additio^ uniK wLld potentially create a strong argument for prolonging the nonconformmg use or for a subdivision with lot size variance request. The property owner has not met the 16 month deadline for connection of the principal residewe, and staff has provided a number of options for resolving this simation as indicated in Ex^b . The septic system serving the residence and cabins is nonconformmg m setback from the lake and height above water table. Esrr.r^ owner has been aware of this issue for approximately three years. List of Exhibits - Letter from Michael Perlman *./10/95 B - Letter to Property Owner 2/1/95 C - Survey D - Ordinance #105. 2nd Series E - Letter to Property Owner 8/8/94 F - Lener to Property Owner 3/24/93 G - 8/21/92 Staff Meeting Notes H - 3/17/92 Letter to Property Owner I - Staff Memo 2/24/92 (Excerpts and Plat Map) J - 7/28/80 Letter to Previous Property Owner K - Nonconforming Use Code Sections L - Code Section Requiring Separate Sewer Services I iI 1 Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 3 March 8, 1995 Sewer Connection - Maeser Additional Information Exhibit B defines the City ’s stated position on this matter based on code requirements, past City actions, and past actions by the current and previous property owners. Three of the four options proposed by staff for resolving the issue require City Council approval. Additional exhibits have been provided as further background on this issue. While the cabins are not falling down, staff las been called on by tenants in the past to deal with substandard electrical wiring in the cabins, which was repaired. Staff has concluded that the nonconforming use sections of the code technically could apply to these cabins, and that their nonconforming use for rental purposes could have been required to cease as early as 1978. The current owner purchased this property in 1985 Staff Recommendation Given that this 2-acre property in a 2-acre zone is too small to subdivide, and given the property owner’s understandable reluctance to spend nearly S28,000 to connect the cabins to sewer, staff would recommend that Option 4 of Exhibit B be conceptually approved via execution of an agreement to be drafted by the applicant’s attorney and approved by the City Attorney, containing as a minimum, the following conditions: 1. The principal residence shall be connected to municipal sewer within 90 days The two cabins shall be connected to the municipal sewer within 90 days. Such connection shall be a separate connection from the principal residence connection. 3.Connection of the cabins to municipal sewer is considered temporary, and such connection is allowed for a period of___years. At the end of-------years, the property owner shall remove said connection, remove plumbing from the cabins, _fonfoi iic#» nf fhp rahini? The cabins then shall either be removed property owner snaii remuve -------- and discontinue rental use of the cabins. The cabins then shall either be removed from the property or moved to a location on the property that conforms with all provisions of the Orono Zoning Code governing the location and use of accessory storage structures. I 1 Request for Council Action continued page 3 of 3 March 8, 1995 Sewer Connection - Maeser 4.Prior to connection of the residence and cabins to municipal sewer, the property owner shall pay the appropriate Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) and obtain the appropriate connection permits. 5.The property owner shall not be required to pay die connection charge of S13,(W7 per cabin since the connection is temporary in nature per the terms of this agreement. 6.Bv allowing temporary connection of the cabins to municipal sewer, the City is in' no way granting any specific rights to future reconstruction or replacement ot the cabins. Further, connection of the cabins shall not be used as justification for any request by the property owner for fumre variances, subdivision of the property, etc. 7.There shall be no refund of any SAC or permit fees when the cabins are discoimected. 8. All three tax parcels shall immediately be legally combined into one tax parcel COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Give staff and the property owner direction regarding whether the proposed option is conceptually acceptable. If so, take the following action. 1.Determine how many years the temporary connection will be allowed. • Advise applicant’s attorney to work with the City Attorney in drafting a mutually acceptable agreement for Council approval. \ J >nNirrES of the regdi ^ meeting held on march 13,1995 (#12) SEWER CONNECTION, 372 WESTLAKE STREET The Applicants, Mr. & Mrs. Maeser were present, along with their attorney. Mr. Perlman. Gafiron reponed that this property There are U«e tax parcels wtth 7'?"“'’^;'^“ are non-confottning as to the lake, and one strucnrre u«d ^ ^f^(,ins in a single family :s:otrrao=u. :^e rrn^rrhr L locked on ^.o parens. T.S arc^ is e two acre zone. Gaffion repor.ed the need to Each residence is connected to sewer. be S13.097 per rnSM‘‘il°oc:.S i::s .KomTrL. and less than 3' above the water table. Staff has given several options for the option #4. This conneas sewer „ust be removed after a defined «wer, but not have to pay the S26.000 conneetton charge. Caliban asked not'lo “««'Gaffron acknowledged this, uanron nth«-ontions aiven were 1) disconunue ^O years 2) , rental use of ® for the two cabins, which requires imenstve and construction of a hold^^^a conneaed to municipal sewer on a eapensive povment of the connection charge. Option #3 would 2f^“tf±Xu"se m sewer but allow the cabins to remain on sepne for a shoft ttme before removal. “ 'Sirs; '=™ 1=Sir..Ur«oi«d.,l..«da..Ai™rw««mmAu*u«on9W regarding the need to connect to sewer. V MPfUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY CODT^CIL MEETING HFT.D ON MARCH 13, 1995("12 - Sewer Connecnon - Condnucd) Goetten voiced her concern with the need to hook up sewer for the house, but does not want cabins to be connected. She does not wish for a precedent to be set and wants to see that codes are met. Attorney Periman reponed he had discussed options with Mr. Weclonan in 1994, and later with Gar&on, who indicated he would comaa the owners with additional options. The letter from Gaffron sent last month was the next communication with the City according to Perlman. Perlman said that the owners are willing to connect the house to sewer. The issue of the cabins is their main concern as the cabins present a source of necessary income. It is cost prohibitive for the owners to connect both the cabins and house to sewer. Perlman said the owners are asking for option s=4 and are resolved to remove the cabins, but wish to allow for a longer period of time before this occurred. The owners are willing to pay the costs involved to connea the house to sewer, pay the SAC fees, and permit fee. Kelley inquired of the current septic system. Galiron said it had been added onto in 1980 and does present problems with the current code. It is handling the use by the two cabins at this time, but would need upgrading at the end of the stipulated two year period allowed for upgrade of nonconforming systems. Council questioned whether the cabins were legally, or illegally, non-conforming. Gafifron said, due to the proximity to the lake, they were legally non-conforming as to location; but with no evidence in the files of any CUP for rental use, that use is likely ngt considered a legal non-conformity. The condition of the storage building on the site was said to be mediocre. The parking for the cabin rentals was noted to be a blacktop area next to the main house. It was noted that the survey was not current but found to be accurate. Gafifron said that an updated survey was not needed for this request. The owners •w^rt asked if they knew at the time of purchase whether or not cabin rental was conforming. The applicants said 'adn’t checked, but had thought so, since they were being rentcti the time. Hurr moved, Jabbour seconded, to require the sewer connection to the house within 90 days: to permit rental of the cabins for such time as the code allows the septic system to remain until it is required to be upgraded; upgrading the septic system will not be allowed. The cabins must then be removed at that time. The owners are also required to combine the three parcels into one tax parcel. An agreement between the owners and the City will be drafted by the owners' attorney in conjunaion with the City's anomey in order to ensure the owners will abide by these conditions. Barrett noted that if the septic system fails prior to the date allowed, the use of the septic system would have to be abandoned and the time period ended. Ayes 5, Nays 0. r %K gxce^P TS > vr>‘ lO S 10.0) SEC. 10.03. C3BHERM. P8CWIS10HS. “• »' "• P“““' htilth, MiiUty, BOC*!*, and -elfara. « 1 unrm R««*rlctl»a Provlflona To Apply. What# Subd. 2. **, * orovltlon of th# tonlnq Chapter ate th« conditions Imposed by • y restrictive then comparable either more ^**5^^*^^„* .w.r law. City Code provision, statute, conditions imposed ^ - kind, the regulations which are M“^«.ttlct®^.?l“ Which l.po.^ higher etand.td. or requireeenta Shall prevail. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 - n xll Permits Compatible With Agency ®B ^k.i4 iiiina oermlt, conditional or special use Requirements. A necessary permission of the Councllp pecBtt. or other ?he cUv Code -ay be denied if the wherever or whenever required ^ ‘ with the intent and proposed .ction or per elt^l Plan, the Stor* Hater in the City Ball. Source: Ordinance Mo. 172 Effective Date: «.ihr4 a Prohibitions. It is unlawful to convert, with the tonlnr Subd. 5. Non-Conforming Uses. Any land or specified. A. The non-conforeing use may not be changed to another non-conforming use. B. Nothing in this Zoning Chapter Placing of a structure in safe condition when said ‘““^“'tary declared unsafe by the Building Inspector, providing the neces. y ORONO CC (4-1-84) . V • a-* ^. ( ■•j f 10.03 scceeeory features sttached to the structure or located anywbetm on the land, such as signs, narqueea, monuments. C When any lawful non-conforming use of any structure or lend in any district has been changed use, It shall not thareaftat be changed to any non-conformlng usa. D. Whenever a lawful non-conformlng structura ahall have been damaged by fire, flood, eaploslon, earthquake, war, riot, or act of God,’it may be reconatructed and used aa teconstructad within twalve (12) months after euch the damage to the building or structure is eeventy-flve percent (75%) or lore of its fair lerket value ea shown on the rl^orfia MtL timt of damsgsg In which csss ths whols thsrsof Shall b. demolished, and any Chaote^ *use in accordance with the provisions of this Zoning Chapter. E. Whenever a lawful non-conforming use of a atructure or land is discontinued and rtmsins discontinued • period of twelvJ (12) nonthe, any future use of ‘‘K Vonlno land shall bs in conformity with the provisions of this Zoning Chapter. F Any lawful non-conforming use of land not involving s structura, and any lawful non-conformlng uas involving unUaa bright into conformity with the Xoning Chapter. C. Any proposed structure which will, under thla Zoning Chapter, become non-confoimlng but for which a l^lldlng permit has been lawfully g wted not more then els (6) to the effective dtte of this Zoning Chapter, may b. complatad In alcord.nc. with the approved plena, provided .i* started within eis (6) months of the effective date of thla Chapter, and continues to completion within two (2) y****; structure end use shell thereafter be a legally eslstlng non conforming etructure end use. H. Normal mslntensnca of a building or structure containing or related to a lawful non-®®"*®"!');*. permlttad, including necessary Jin- incidental altarations which do not sxtsnd or intensify t conforming usse ORONO CC (4-1-I4) t m ■ a 1 I 10.03 u!iblirt?”th«#of. proyldkd tb.jr will not Inert... th. nu.b.r oC iimiil U«‘ot buf. of th. bufxdin,. Sourcci Ordlntnct Ho. 172 Effectivt D*t#i 1-1-75 protfliiowi of th® Xonln9 P iltaatlon* whtr® Lnd .nd tJl:„ f«tor. not location or ***^9***,®^ * or ■ *trlct confotn.nc. with Involving th. u«. of th. P** chSpUi. wn.r., hov.v.r, much a;K.ir.5 ‘v*".ra ^,'.7...?a 10.08. Source: Huniclpel Cod® Effective Date: 9-14-67 ■etx Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 .uk kkku. s.ku.kV sfis: .ff.ctlv. dat. of this 5- f*!! lot 1. ..rvlc.d by.ff.ctlv. dat. of this zoning v.n«p«i m " --- by City of up to and .“V.tt th^ t.guir.nent. ofpublic aanitary a.wer and which ‘*®*‘ , * ^’utllli.d for this Zoning Chapt.r as to area or width ®"7* approval ■ingle fa.ily detached **“*^“"’ lot are wlthln^lghtyIf the area ■eaaure*enta and width of that lo Howeverp percent (80%) of th. t.qulre.ont. of ^.v^ioped unlessthe lot of record shall not be sore intensely develop. ORONO CC (4-1-84) I I ! : i; * •** % W" * ^ • -»f # . vlr . ... cosbined with one or .ore abutting lots or portions thereoC so m j to create a lot stetlng the requireaents of thia toning Chapter. 4 Source! Nunicipal Code Effective Datei 9-14-67 2. In *R* Districts of Greater Than One Acre and Served by Public Sanitary Sewer. A lot of record in any "R* District in the City in excess of one acre, which does not aeet the requireaents of this Zoning Chapter as to area or width only, aay be utlllxed for single faaily detached dwelline purposes if the Sv%“r"aV; -Vd"tf;f t'h-e’ loV ii\t'\.V.VloS7..V/%r tVr.'s.VvVg public sanitary seweti (c) It otherwise ...ts the reguire.ents of this Chafter or other applicable City Cod. provisions. J. in Districts Mot Served by Public Sanltarv Sewer. K lot of record in any District in the City Sou .•f ■ C<\/ Code I ^:^stex 4-1-84 / B. Coabination of Separated Parcels Prohibited. No lot or parcel of land which la divided by a public, private or platted road or road easeaent, which results in any segaent thereof being less thin the ainiaua acreage required for that sonlng dis trict, shall be allowed to be coabined with any separated land across the road for purposes of qualifying under the acreage, open space, required yard, setback or •anitary or septic syitea requireaents, nor shall building or density credits be credited or transferred between such parcels under any Pjfovisiona of this Chapter. Each separate parcel must individually confora to the provisions of this Chapter in connection wit!) construction of improvements thereon. Source! Nunicipal Code Effective Date! 9-14-67 C. The sepacetion by th. transfec or sal. of non- building sites that satisfy the area an<Twidth requireaents of the Zoning Chapter. Sources City Code Effective Dates 4-1-S4 ORONO CC (4-1-84) * r >S 10.03Sttbd. 7. Onm iuildlD^ Mr Lot. Bxcopt in tho coso of flanaod Msidoatial Dovolopaonts os providod for horoinoftor# no ■ors thoa ono prinoipol boilding sholl bo locotod on o lot oxcopt thot stoff Boy issoo o porait to uso o sooufocturod hoao thot sholl ■oot oil roquirod sotbock stondords or on oxistiog dwolling whilo o MW prlneipol stmcturo is boing constmctod. Sach pomit sholl bo iosnod for o poriod of 3 omths, ony oxtonsions smst bo spprovod by tho City ond sholl oxpiro vpon issosnco of o csrtificsto of oeeuponey for tbs now structuro ond such structuro rosiovod. Sourest Ordinoncs 2€« 2nd Ssrios Adoptsdt 7-14-tS Subd. f. Lots to Poes Stroots. Eoch lot shsll fsco on o pttblie ttrsot or oppropriots privoto oosoaont. ¥itructu Subd. f. Acesssory Buildings. A. Tis« of Construction, Vo occoisory building or structuro sholl bo constructed on ony lot prior to th* tins of construction of tho prlneipol building to which it is occsssory. B. Bsight Bostrictions. Vo occsssory boilding in tho *B ” District sholl sxcssd ths height of the prlneipol building, nor sholl on occsssory building sxcssd 30 feet in height. Sourest Ordinoncs 72, 2nd Series Adoptsdt S-14-89 C. Ares Restrictions. Zn oil *R* Districts no occsssory building shsll sxcssd 1»000 squors feet of footprint ores except thot occsssory structures in excess of 1,000 squors feet will be ollo«#sd under ths following conditions! 1. Not nors then one Ovsrsised Acesssory Structure (OAS) sholl be psrsd.ttsd on ony property. An *Ovsrsizsd Accessory Structure* is defined os on occsssory structure of foot print ereo in excess of 1,000 squors feet, except thot ths following non-roofsd occsssory structures which sxcssd 1,000 s.f. footprint ores ors not considered os *Ovsrsizs Acesssory Structures”, but ors subject to ths specie1 sstbock restrictions of Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (D)i - Tennis courts - Pools, when pool bosin structure (excluding non- encroechs«nt-type potios) is greeter then 1,000 s.f. - Peddoeks or orenos OBONO CC (4-1-84) vwr.. * I* • •• 8 *A.2. Ovsrsisedreguloted by the following toblet f 10.03Accessory Structures ere• ( • • ^ Moxieue Individuol Accessory Structure Noxissn AllowedTotol of All Aceeeeery Structure footprint Aress* !-?-1 ! Lot Area footnrint Area on 0 Property 0-1.9$acre 1,000 s.f.2,000 s.f. 2.00-3.00 acre 1,200 s.f.2,400 s.f. •3.01-3.50 acre 1,4~^00 s.f.2,800 s.f. 3.51-4.00 acre 1,600 s.f.3,200 s.f. •4.01-4.50 acre 1,800 s.f.3,600 s.f. •4.51-5.00 acre 2,000 s.f.4,000 s.f. 5.01-8.00 acre 2,200 s.f.4,400 s.f. /6.01-7.00 acre 2,400 s.f.4,800 s.f. 7.01-8.00 acre 2,600 s.f.5,200 s.f. 8.01-9.00 acre 2,800 s.f.5,600 s.f. 9.01 acre or sore 3,000 s.f.6,000 s.f. * Excluding non-roofed tennis courts, pools, poddocks orenes 3. Any Oversize Accessory Structure shell be subject to the following conditions! o) No such eccessory structure shell be locoted within o required yord ores (prlneipol structure setbocks Bust be met), further, no ouch structure sholl be neerer the front lot line then the front line of the prlneipol reoldeoce on the property, ond no ouch occsssory structure shell be loceted less then 30* froe the side or eor lot line regordless whether less strict principol structure setbocks opply. b) The BoxiBUB height for such accessory structure sholl be 30* or the defined height of the principol residence structure on the property, whichever is less. c) Such structure sholl be silowed only when the property owner ogress ond covenants in writing with the City os followsi i. No future subdivision will be approved thot places the structure within o lot that hoe no principol structure, except thot the City in its subdivision approval Boy grant o finite tine period in which the oversited accessory structure Boy rsBoin without o principol structure, in order thot o principol structure nay be constructed. At the end of this tine period the oversized accessory structure Bust be reBoved if no principol structure has been constructed. ORONO CC 255-1 (8-14-89) .X.• • * *• I* •*»l f I 10.0311. If tho property is.sbdi^idsd. th. ov.r.i.. •'':!:rL.Vi“';"'io‘t ‘hft«."«tU•craetur* -111 b. loe.tsd ‘°9** * J. oiSsi si*s of "c.s.ory ■iniaiaa lot oroa raquiraaant for too givan buildiaf. ill. In •ubdlvltion approval# tbo ••tb.ek rsqulrsd lor tbs os.r.l*. sccsory stroctor. s. dsflMd hsrsln shsll rsasin. ■...h oa-Mant shall bs biadlnp on currant and tutors proparty S«!rr.nd“:?ll!^ liir- in tba’chaln of tltla of tha proparty. Sourcai Ordinanca 72# 2nd Sariaa Adoptadi i-14-29 0 Location. Mo datachad garaqaa or rl r'ifqurr^antV «7'Sa'cVi^^'o!"!': ::«lo« th.ll no'r.pply to l.t..hora lot. dlaidad by ro.d-.y. or corner lotas Sourcai Ordinance 26# 2nd Seriea Adopted! 7-14-86 1. Location of Principal iuildlnq to sttrsrt-hs n*7t5r'irirdintti^^^5x • *4 ‘‘v “r Slit.nc*^'L^tJa\n -tar larh on tha lakashora Md tha allo-abla bulldlnq llna. 2. Varlanca Pro. Lakashora Satback. *ny npollcatlon for • varlanca fron tha raqulranant. of shall ba rafarrsd to tha Hinnahaha Craak Matarshad Olatrict for its approval bafora final action by tha Council. Sources Ordinance No. 155 Effective Datai 2-14-74 .i •to* a* - J •I ifr S lOaOl;S.Vri.. ...1 ».U ti •• *• *“Sourcai ordinanca 72. 3nd Sarlaa jLdoptadi S-ll-M auhd 10 Conditional Osa Parolt Saqulrad. *11 .... h.ii5I.“; .i i.<* 1““*' ••• require e conditional uae permit. eithfi 11 Dwelline Oae Prohibited. So celled# beeem^t# .....•«»»“• •••- •• an occupied dt^ellinf. ■i3- I • •4 OtOMO CC 255-2 (4-1-84). S OSOMO CC 2S5-3 (4-l-t4i • I .... ‘a>a «>• *• ... s> '• I •• •■. . . • .i! S 10.03Sttbd. 12. Crowding Principal Bollding. Ho accaaaory bnilding or atroetoror onlaaa an integral part of the crinclDAi ', building, shall be aractad, altered, or sowed within ten feet of *• ’ w** principal building, nor within ten feet of another accessorystructure. ' Source I Ordinance 72, 2nd Series Adopted; i-14-19 Subd. 13. Garages. Accessory buildings which are for the storage of autoscbiles shall have the doors thirty feet or sore froB the property line when said doors face on a public alley or street. * % Subd. 14. Tards and Open Spaces. A. Keduction Prohibited. No yard or other open space shall be reduced in area or disensions so as to sake such yard or other open space less than the sinisus required by the toning Chapter and if the existing yard or other open space as existing is less than the sinisus required, it shall not be further reduced. B. Application to Only One Dwelling or Group. Ho ^uired yard or other open space allocated to a building or dwelling group shall be used to satisfy yard, other open spaces, or sinisus lot area requiresenta for any other building or dwelling group. C. Lot coverage. In all soning districts, for a 1 lots of 0-l.ff acre in total area, the total cosbined footpri.t areas of all principal and accessory structures shall not exceed ^*.^“** following shall be included in calculaticn of lot coverage by structures; Bll roofed structures which extend sore than (* above grade level. , ,, . . 2. Tennis courts, patios, decks, and all sisilar "open* structures when partially or fully enclosed by walls which extend sore than 6* above grade lo^oi 'if sny portion of such structures extends sore than S* above grade level, the entire structure shal^ count toward lot coverage). 3. Pools, including pool basin and associated deck or patio areas, regardless of whether such pool basin, deck, or patio is enclosed with a fence. Source; Ordinance 80, 2nd Series Adopted; 2-26-90 . 7 residence and garage structures. ^ ^ ^ ancxpai V®***®'^ •tructur.* •V.‘*footprint*^.?Jlj•h.U b. .ubjact to th. followia, sp.cl.l s.tbaek r.strlettoa«i Front - 30* .ini.ua and not within th. roquirod front yard aer batwaan th. front lot lin. and th. principal atruetur. on th. proparty Sid. - 10* .inlmaa and net within tha raquirad aid. yar^ * ^a n.ar - 30* .inlmia and not within th. r.quir.d raar yard araa Sourcai Ordiaanc. 72, 2nd Sariaa Adoptadi a-K-t* Subd. 15. aon-Encroach.«Jta. Tb. followia, aha 11 n.t b. considered to be encroachjnents on yard requiresentsi Chisneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills, F^^ssters, lintels, ornasental features, sechanical devices, comicaa, aa.ai, quttara and tha Ilka, provided they do not aictand raqulatl/d* fact, off-atr.at parkZn, aacapt aa h.r.lnaft.r V. * tot on. fa.lly dw.lllaaii lights for illusinaiing parking areas, loading areas or yards for tafaty and aacurity purpoaaa, provided tha direct aourc of liohb la not viaibla fro. tha public rlqht-of'way or adjacent reaid.ntial property .ay b. located to within five fact of the front lot line. C. Fancaa which do not exceed 3-1/2 f.at in heleht, lencea not over 6 f.at In height along th. atraat let line of lake frontage lota which front on a .ajor thoroughfare, if fill la required, the total cosbined height of both fence and fill shall not exceed 6 feet above the height of the crown of the road, •taps, uncovered porches, stoops or sisilar structures, which do not extend above the height of the ground floor level of the principal building and extend to a distance of not less than 2 feet fros any lot line. exceed adepth of 2 feet nor to contain an area of sore than 20 square feet, lira .acap.a not to axed a width of 3 faet, fanc.a and walla not to axc.ed a height of C f.at abov. original grad, and opan off- ^^klng .xcapt for lak.ahor. lota, no frac. or wall ovor 42 Inch.a but not in axcaaa of 72 Inch.a in haight abov. original grad, .ay ba locatad cloaar to th. ahoralln. than tha avarag. **'"/horallna of axlatlng raaid.nc. bulldlnga on *, fancaa shall not ba conatruct.d within 75 f—tot the shoreline. •a.-- ORONO CC (4-1-84) ORONO CC Sources Ordinance 9, 2nd Series Adopted! 1-28-85 256-1 (4-X-84) Mai !► . .»- 7i •r — 1^^ ••%... ' «■ . • • • ^4 S 10.03 \ E. R mx yard only; balconiat, braasawayi, datachad outdoor picnic ahaltara and racraatlonal aqnlpaant axcapt aa romlatad harainaftari no accaaaory atructura ahall ba cloaar Ulan • S foot froai a rear lot lino nor aball a fanca or wall conatructadwithin o roar yard aacaad a hoight of € foot abova original grada. r. Sida yarda onlyr no accaaaory atructura ahall ba cloaar than 10 foot from any aida lot lino nor shall a fanca or wall conatructad within a aida yard axcaad a haight of a feat abova original grada. Soorcai Ordinanca 9, 2nd Sariaa Adoptadt 1-28-aS V 9 Planting nc lota ahall Sobd. la. Traffic Vlaibility. Mo fancaa# atructuraa or lora than thraa foot high in t\• ”R” Diatrict on cornar ba parwittad to obatruct traffic visibility within a triangular araa dafinad aa follows: "Baginning at tha intarsaction of tha projactad curb linos of two intarsacting straats, thanca thirty foot along ona curb lino thanca diagonally to a point thirty foot from tha point of baginning on tha othar curb lino* thanca to tha point of baginning. Sourca: Municipal Coda Effectlva Data: 9-14-67 <' ' • \i 8ubd. 17. Essantial Sarvicaa. This Zoning Chaptar ahall raquira a parsiit for all atructuraa including utility polaa# and right-of-waya which ara an intagral part of a systaw for public transportation# aa for tranaaitting powar, watar, haat# conaiunica- tiona# gas or sawaga by any public utility, tha Council shall grant a conditional usa parait only aftar a ahpwing that tha public aafaty# haalth and walfara will not ba haraad by tha assantial sarvicaa. Subd. IS. Faraing. All faraa in axistanca on January 1. 1975 ahall ba paraittad to continua oparation aubjact to tha following conditions: A. No naw "stock faros" shall ba craatad or axisting stock faraa anlargad aora than tvanty-fiva parcant (25%) ovar tha total nuobar of anioals that axistad on tha fara as of January 1# 1975 with aniaals ovar ona yaar old axcapt undar tha provisions of a conditional usa parait. Zn considaring any such arait# tha aaxiaua nuabar and typa of anioals to ba kapt shall ba atarainad by tha Council. Tha sita dasign and aathod of oparation ahall ba raviawad and tha Council shall find that tha proposad or axisting "stock fara* will not in its opinion ba datrimantal to tha public aafaty and tha ganaral walfara. I •-C I OROMO CC f- # —•• • ».••• • • . ^ ■ . • • « J Cl ORDINANCE NO. »COND SERBSthe MlffOOPAL ZONING 1*1 •n-ANDARDS FOR THE CREATION AND USE OT LjOT NOT ABUT A PUBUC OR PRIVATE ROAD Code the city COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: "Lot-Back* - A whicb f rvBicsUv ftDsnied ftoa a public or privaia toad by aaotbar lot ^ _________ - ■ back loc*. *Lo.-Ftoof . A t J a«»«no« 4 or |*r#i« platted for acces^ t back lot. ______2. M«ap- 2o«, o. S-I- loo . -»« *) «““• Subdivision 27 which iball read as foUowi :ision —----- Subd 27 SpecUl S«od«I. tor Back u defined in Uiu ieetioo which wm wnd p« ^ ^ ^ ^ foUowiog 5 of the Orooo Subdivisioa Code: A. Dfaaeiiiio..l ittiidard. tor bKk loo ihnU b. » toOow.: Lotam jhaU be isO* oI ib» lOotoR dUttfci ioqol««»*'“- Lot width measuted pwaOd » setback Una of s nooUkeihoca bacs loc, %/mrd for say dUtria widih lequireineB. Tbo iaw< bw:t lot wiU be a yaid aaitiin w^ comdor cods and the hwheiina. Lakeahoio badetoow^^ the lot width standard at the shoceiine. at iba lakaaboia line, and at the street yiid ictbark lias. 1. 2. D *.w 1 • 1 : r w i. •* “ s i*v 'j. , -.i. ^A -- 9 3.ne de«b of tb« i«q«W *«« J*"*.* *®“ ofttae aooiiv di*itt fto*» itijiiif*™'*. TV—r^^vMdiadietrnrtdtpdiifacbtcklottthinbe llo*rfS« »«»« teiet y«i neiwini^ «ri »f . Iikeriw* b«± loc than met! ifae ioiud» (liflrirt UkesiKMc yard i«qyii«Deiiu. rj 1 1b« «« Jirt of d» b«* k* itaB b« otfiqyMriy wm«4 kf or iiiiinrt- « tK ^KnUoa of tto Cky. m m a » •■ . fi.—4«g or miiiititto II OK owci wigQ a no «.ar. ^;-.i^hM«««iafwWrlfli8idliihliliilottietMeorrMty«i<i of a4iao»i loo. nineiiik«l mndwli for ftooi loo. A ftw* lot cienrd u of • jtatt am iB xooiiw diariet mi. width 22riilidi. ereepi ttai do «l<di«d tide yii of ^ ^ ^ 3S »*rS^^«doi thiu b* equivelem w the tide totet yard itquwaeiii foe that MO«g diioia. Accen itqyircoieno. wiiboui eoBoechim oo Ki|hboriii| propeniet. Suadaidi tor acceiioqr loocoiie*. Acccnorr nnichim ihall a«i« to aU icquncMoa of ibe noiiig code, whb Ibc foilo«n( «***»*»—* requifCBeflo: I. Act ry ttroennet within i bach kx ihall be allowed do ctoter . .^•bakewoM nmncftv'ft tldo Of mf Vtld. Accessocy fownirea wiumb ■ ——— ibaa 10' 10 a oetflibonof prop«ty’* iid« or rear yod. 2.Accessory tmicfures fball ooi bt allowed within dM required mM yaid of a back lot nor wiitaia tba laquifcd mar yaid of a from lot which abuts tha socci yard oi a back kn. to approvim fcooiftiaek tot dhriiiooi. the CUy may «<1^ bo^ftfootte aod back lot thaie a driveway acceti wii^ the oulloi If Council deieimiiiea that «^| “aeceu »the exiitiiil loeei wiU be a potential tafety haiatd.C 4. Drivewayt within a back loi ihaU be located at kait 10-from Ibe tide Of rear lot Unea of adjtceot Iota. No mote than two letideiicci may be lerved by a driveway located within an acccii outloc. J.No acccstocy orocnitc thaO be allowod within an section j . Orooo Municipal Code Settioo 11.31. Subdiviiloo 3 ii hereby and the foUowini languaie fubtonucd in in place: r Subdivision 5. Double boonfe loo. acceti » km. and toont/back lot divitiont. Double Ctootaie Ion. Double ftootaie and reversed ftontaie loti bo of topography and onentatioo. S. 3.No acecn outlot may be planed abutiitig an adjacent accen ouUot when the toicol li » eooiblno the two acceti ouUou to S. oTa pUlH^privan toed meeting City t-odatd*. Satening rcquixcmcoi** Access frcMi toy anerul nMdwsy. Loa ibill not, in |cnenl. der^ cxclustvtiy from an anenal roadway. Where driveway access ucw In order 10 lank |»iiibleiiimcbaaaidoo such loidwty. driveways shall be designed and ananged so u to avoid requiring vehiciea CO iMo crallk oo any aneiial roadway. Driveway, eoonroemd in ux«« oudon thril «:Rened by fencing or .egeiitlon at the “ aU poimi to the rear of the required tneer yard of ite 6^ to^M STSminam intimioo of vehicle headUgbtt into the tide or rear yaidofadjacemloa. S;-:SSS23H£s—i-==:=:=s.-sm.3 cither the back or from Ion. Finm/Uack lot nibdlvbioni ihaU.. Acre to ifae following staodaids: Q • >•4 til w-. T*•f . *f-' ^ -1 •. e •/ :' i 4 C -Agii ■*: .* ^ • t’^ P • V,--- •* ’ 1. Apirtlcibaiijr.- _.i,.„i. w divtsioot may be toed when ffiirtmogiloi Kcest eotndoc is excluded. k Ffooi/bKk lo» dl»iiioiii mxy be used lor individual *loc may nos be used when sUbdivWm* a tov il^’uiiD nunierous loo if oeatioo ol a back toe IS i^ly re^nieoce » ibe developer iiiber tban supported by siie> ftctort. a smuAiack IM diviskM *a0 001 be allowed when any «“ • ptopeity abuin^ the « toc«ed neam lo affected side lo U^Oian a distance equivaleol to the zooio| dtstnct Rquifcd boat yard depth. Dunenstoosl standards for back too shaU be as follows: a, Lp, area shaU be l»* of iheioiiio* district reijuiretnent S* ^Vd or ln»i yard for any back lot WIU b^ tlSTstSli^ « Ibe aborehne. at toe lakesbore .etback tioe and at Ibe mtei yard setback line. C The depto of toe lequiied street yard OT from yar^^ 150% of toe loiung district trooi yard lequuement. d The itquired side yard and rear yard depths far t»ck ^ thill be 150% of the xoninf district yard letjuireme . laeci the zoning diiaict lakesbote yard requuetnenis a * . •••• « WIM vu^ - ^ • ■la. i mmm A- . A,»« •* e--w. •• cac c r.........—2i‘S2L“.i22S w'S 2 5^^toe ftotd tot adjacetd » d* aeceas«^^«de street yard itquirwiie:: x that «t»ta| dtiatfct.Access icquirefflcna: Aeeeas outtoa shall be 30* fflialoinm wMih. arf shall U ■Ala aanueh to jccowindaw dtaiante. snow ittooval ^ J^^tltoout eiwoech^ h In sittrr~it«t fcMt/back tot divistoei. toe City tnay leguhd lot and beck tot a <««*v^yjc^ within toe access outtot if CouneU deaessninea that creati^ ID addiliooal access lo ibe eaistiog meet will be a poteoiial saftcy baxard. Dnveway. witol. a back tot -f•«* ‘®’ fioin toe side or tear tot lina of adjacent lota. Ho mote than two lesiikheea may be aenied hy a driveway wuhin an acceis outloc. , No access ouitot may be ptowdabtming an adjacent 0^ extxpi when toe intern to to combine dm w ac^oo^ for ertaiion of a public or pnvate toad meettng City Standards. S Scfeenine letpiliementt and accessory?rSSrtot^vtoto«shaUbettosl|ned«atiiai.nm^^ SiTlkiuni i^iuireomots and accessory iouchue status Section 10.03. Subdivisioo 27 can be met. «. Theietpiir«imin.atto«atala.*of^t^ those ftweArtCk lot divisions wbicb receive pieiiiBMi«/ i— ippiwal after Jasuary 1. \994. /C. d. Q o- • > W to^ • «•VT"* ** I .-v •oo this _1J_ d«» of J*'. PubUoh*d in tho tak«r/PionMt n.w.p.p«r. tho we«k of 12/27/93. V .. ( c ! O yrr>‘>n:v — r -.rTr"* ’ i 10o0€SIC. 10.04. uaamisnkricm aidSobd. l. toning Adainiitrator. Th« toning Chapter shall ba adalnlatarad and anforcad by tha Sonlng Adiiniitrator# aho shall ba appolntad by tha Council.Subd. 2. Dutiao and Authority. Tha toning Adiiniatrator shall anforca tha toning Chaptar and also shalli Cl) datariina that all building pariits coaply ulth tha toning Chaptar 1 (2) Issua all zoning occupancy cartificatas and lata and laintain raoords tharatoi (3) conduct inspactioos of buildings and «*«^of land to dataralna coaplianca uith tha tans of tha toning Chaptari (4| maintain paraanant and currant raeords of tha toning Chaptar, including but not liaitad to, all aaps, aaandaanta, and spacial usaSp varlancaSp appaala and applications tharafori (S) racaiva, filt and forward all applications for appeals, variancaSp spacial usas or other aattara to tha designated official bodies? (() institute in tha naaa of tha City anj apfiropriata actions or proceedings against a violator as provided (7) serve as an as officio non-voting aaabar of I Coaaission. ^ lavy and. Sources Municipal Coda Effective Dates f-14-17 Subd. 3. Appeals. ^ A. hoard of Appeals and Adjustaents. Tha Planning Coaaission is constituted as the Board of Appeals and Adjustiants* The decisions of the Board are advisory to the Council. B. Powers of the Board of Appeals and Adjt Tha Board shall have tha following powers? 1. toningy Appeals and Adjustaents. Appeals to the Board of Appeals and Adjustaents aay ba taken by any affected person upon compliance with any of the conditions imposed by the toning Chapter. The Board of Appeals and Adjustaents has the following powers with respect to the toning Chapters (a) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, raquiranant, decision, or deteraination aade by an adainlstrativa officer in tha anforceaent of the toning Chapter. (b) To hear requests for variances from tha literal provisions of the toning Chapter in instances where their strict enforcement would causa undue hardship because of circuBStances unique to tha individual property consideration, and to grant such variances only whan it is daaonstrated that such actions will ba in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Chapter. "Undue hardship as used in QRONO CC 260*(4-1-14) • f > * 'f. ‘r. ,* ^ , . ,S 10.06eoniiftctioii with the 9rantln9 of a variance aeanst (I) the property in queition cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controlsi (2) the pli9ht of the landowner it due to circuastancea unique to hia property not created by the landowneri (3) the variance, if qranted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; (4) econoaic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property esists under the teras of this Chapteri (5) undue hardship alto includes, but is not liaited to, inadequate access to direct sunlisht for solar enersy systeas. Variances shall be qranted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section liej.06, Subd. 2, when in haraony with this Chapter; (6) the Board of Appeals and Adjustaents or the Council aay not pernit as a variance any use that is not peraitted under this Chapter for property in the tone where the affected person's land is located; and (7) the Board or the Council aay perait as a variance the teaporary use of a one-faaily dwelling as a two-faaily dwelling. (c) The Board or the Council aay iapoae conditions in granting of variances to insure coapliance and to protect adjacent properties. 2. Subdivisions. Appeals to the Board of Appeals and Adjustaents nay be taken by any affected person upon coapliance with any reasonable conditions iaposed by the subdivision regulations. The Board of Appeals and Adjustaents has the following powers with respect to the subdivision regulations: (a) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requireaent, decision, or deteraination aade by an adainistrative officer in the snforceaent of the Subdivision Chapter. (b) To hear requests for varying the regulations as they apply to specific properties where an unusual hardship on the land exists, but variances nay be granted only upon the specific grounds set forth in the subdivision regulations* Unusual hardship includes, but is not liaited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systeas. 3. Official Map. After an official aap is adopted, designating locations for future land that is needed for future street purposes and as sites for other necessary public uses, if a perait for a building in such location is denied, the Board of Appeals and Adjustaents shall have the power, upon appeal filed with it by the owner of the land, to grant a perait for building in such location in any case in which the Board finds, upon the evidence and the argusents presented to it: ORONO CC (4-1-84) Tn- L.____ I 10.<4(a) That the entire prop%:ty of the appellant of which such area identified for public purposes foras a part cannot yield a reasonable return to the owner unless such s perait is granted; and.(b) That balancing the interest of the City in preserving the integrity of the official aap and of the Coaprehensive Municipal Plan and the interest of the owner of the property in the use of his property and in the benefits of ownership, the grant of such perait is required by considerations of justice and equity. C. In addition to the notice of hearing required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.354, Subd. 2, a notice shall be published in the official newspaper once at leaat ten days before the day of the hearing. If the Board of Appeals and Adjustaents authorises the issuance of a perait the Council shall have six aontbs froa the date of the decision of the Board to institute proceedings to acquire such land or interest therein, and if no such proceedings are started within that tine, the officer responsible for issuing buildine peraits shall issue the perait if the application otherwise conforas to this Chapter. The Board shall specify the exact location, ground area, height and other details as to the extent and character of the building for which the perait is granted. 0. Appeals Procedures. The applicant or other person or officers of the City affected, aay appeal by filing a written notice stating the action appealed froa and stating the specific grounds upon which the appeal is aade. The notice shall be accoapanied by a fee in the aaount prescribed by the current City fee schedule payable to the City, which fee shall not be refundable. B. Review by Council. The Council aay review and revise any decision of the Board of Appeals and Adjustaents. In reviewing such decision, the Council shall be guarded by the saae authority and guidelines set forth in this Section. P. Bearings by the Board of Appeals and Adjustaents shall be held within such tiae and upon such notice to Interested parties, as follows: The Board shall within a reasonable tiae aaka its order deciding the aatter and shall serve a copy of such order upon the appellant or petitioner by sail. Any party aay appear at the hearing in person or by agent or attorney. Subject to such limitation as aay be imposed by the Council, the Board aay adopt rules for the conduct of proceedings before it. Such rules aay include provisions for the giving of oaths to witnesses and the filing of written briefs by the parties. The Board shall provide ORONO CC (4-1-84) N . • •• •• . £'** * **L — i - • ••» .’mm . m > <• ^ V .' r--. .1*I - ' - . J-L ^ m 4 •* ♦ _• Vf» - ^ » ' ••-♦* • ^ ^ •* ^! > *r« I*' ^•\:.-j N.' i • ‘•O S 10.04for • record of It. ptocdlng. whichIts asstlngs. Its findinft and ths action takan on aacb aattac heard by it# inciudinq the final order.Source: City Codeeffective Date: 4-1-84SIC. 10,07. OCCOPAIiCY OWTIFICSTIS.Subd, 1. When Required. A zoning occupancy certificate ■hall be required for occupancy and uae of any buildings bactlnaftac aractad oc stcuctutally altatadjUS. of an aslstln. balldln? whan tha naw uaa la of a dlffatant tonln# clast If tea tloni for occupancy and usa ®* ' ?•“ uaa of aacant land whan naw usa la of a dlCfacant elasslfleatlont for any changa In tha usa Shere epproprlate, the zoning occupsney certificate ney be Issued ■■ pert of building permit. Subd. 2. Prohibition. It Is unlawful for any person to do any of tha thlnga aantlonad In Subdivision I abova as ragulclng an occupancy cartlflcata without having on. In . *"y cartlflcata Issuad upon a falsa stata.ent of any fact which Is ■•eaclal to tha Itsuanca tharaof shall ba void. Whanavac the fact of such falsa atata.ant shall ba astabllshad to the satisfaction of tha Sonlng Ad.lnlsttatot, ha shall forthwith ravoka the occupancy cartlflcata. by notice to tha holder. It Is unlawful for any parson to procaad thereafter with such work or usa without having obtained e new certificate. Subd. 3. Application for Occupancy Certificate. Every application for a building paralt to erect a new building or to .•l(. a aajor alteration ahall ba daaaad to ba an application for an occupancy cartlflcata. Every application for occupancy cartlflcata for a usa of land where no building paralt Is ragulrad ahall ba made directly to the Zoning Administrator. Subd. 4. Issuance of Occupancy Certificate. An occupancy certificate shall be approved within ten (10) days after construction has been completeda the premises Inspected and certified to be in conformance with the provisions of the Zoning Chapter. Where vacant land or change in the use of occupancy of an ezlsting building# or for change in a non-conforming uae is involved# the certificate of occupancy shall be approved as soon as the Zoning Administrator hae ezamlned the premises and determined that the requirements of the Zoning Chapter will be met. Subd. 5. Occupancy Certificate Required for Conforming Ose. Application for such occupancy certificate for all lawful non-conforming uses or buildings created by the adoption oc the Zoning Chapter shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator by the owner or lessee by January 1, 1976. The Zoning Administrator OROHO CC (4-1-84) • ^I ii • U S 10.07.ball .pprov. •SlirS'prlir’f^Ulawfully ezUt on January 1# 1885.Subd 4. Building Pat.lt. It ta unlawful for any P*fonbuilding pat.lt ahall have wn ». land eo.ply with thlaacco|M>aniad by t^aa (3) coplaa co.poaad of conalata of land not a pat tot a attached to a autvay by a SBC. 10.OB. vwiiaiick;. * Subd I Vatlancaai Whan Ctantad. Tha Council .ay Ot*"* vatlanc.a tha attlct application of th. zoning Chapter and l.poa. dif Acultlaa'ot V«Aculat hatdahlpa ®chapUt and*'*whifdd^a‘::t‘-r.*tV.r/r the Zoning Chspter nor the health or welfare of the publl . Sources Municipal Bffective Date: 9-14-87 Subd. 2. Variancesi Reference to the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. A. The Planning Commission is Boacd of Appeal, and Adjuat.anta. The -VtUn^^^^ ?Sa ragia.t therefor .hall b. c.fatrad to ‘h. Board of *pt«al..M Adlustments for study concerning the effect of the p p vaAanca upon tha Co.ptahan.lva (i,“it.*t^oM*ndatlon toand davalopnant of tha naighbothoodi and for it. taco...n tha Council for tha granting of raa^^^^^^difficulties or hardship to the degree considered mcA (4-1-84)ORONO CC 264 i* at i I .. • • V'l' ' •• •• ’v;V *t* ‘ - #f*"’* ’ ■ “ •* - • • . ,m,miir; . V f <•{ ■I. ..i S 1^.08without lopairing tho Intent end purpose of the Soning Chapter. The Board of Appeals and Adjuataents shall recoanend such conditions related to the variance regarding the locitlon, character, and other features of the proposed building, structure, or use as it aay deea advisable. The Council by unaniaoua action aay waive reference to the Board of Appeals and Adjustaenta.B. The Board shall hold hearings as required by Ninnesota Statutes, Section 462.354, Subd. 2. A notice shall be published in the official newspaper once at least ten days before the day of the hearing. Any party aay appear at the hearing in person or by agent or attorney. For the purpose of giving aalled notice, the person responsible for nailing the notice nay use any appropriate records to deteralne the naaes and addresses of each owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within ISO feet of the property that requires the variance. A copy of the notice and a list of the owners and addresses to which the notice was sent shall be attested to by the responsible person and ■hall be nade a part of the records of the proceedings. The failure to give nailed notice to Individual property owners, or defects in the nature shall not Invalidate the proceedings, provided a bona fide atteapt to coapiy with this Subdivision has been nade. C. Subject to such llaltations as nay be imposed by the Council, the Board nay adopt rules for the conduct of proceedings before it. Such rules aay include provisions foi the giving of oaths to witnesses and the filing of written briefs by the parties. The Board shall provide for a record of its proceedings which shall include the ainutes of its aeetings, its findings and the action taken on each natter heard by it, including the final order. Subd. 3. Variances; Issuances. A. In considering applications for variance, the Council shall consider the advice and recommendation of the Board and the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the ccmnunity, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. Before granting a variance, the Council shall hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of this Chapter in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. "Undue hardship* as used in connection with the granting of a variance means: 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. ORONO CC (4-1-84) ■ i. *.■!‘ 'T m iV t II t Tf 10.oa2. Th. plloht of tb. l.ndoMO.r 1. du. to eircumatanc. ualquo to hia prop.rty not craatod by tb. Uadowioc.3. Tb. .arlaiico. It pr.nt.d# will oot oltor tho oaa.ntial char.ctor of tho locality.4. Econo.le eonaldoratlona a Ion. aba 11 not conatltut. an undo, bardabip If r.aaonabl. oa. for tb. prop.rty axiata undar th. tanaa of tbia Cbaptor.S. Ondu. bardablp alto Inclodoa, but la not llmltod to. lnad.quata accoaa to Subd. 2, when Ir. harmony with this Chapter. 6. The Board of Appeals end A/*justments or the person's land is located. 7. The Board or Council may permit as A variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. i. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. 9. other land or structures located. The conditions do not apply generally to as in the district in which said land is 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way Impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Xoning Code. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the apolicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-16 ORONO CC (4-1-84) . ^ V •' -j. e • %• S 10.ot,cI /• »B. Th« Board or Council aay Inposa conditions in graitting of variances to insure cosqpliance with this Chapter and to protect adjacent properties. Bo variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this Chapter in the district where such land is located.Sources City Code Effective Dates 4-i-i4Subd. 4. Variances in Border Areas. The Zoning Chapter seeks to regulate land use throughout Orono so that the location of the various tones will be cosipatible to each other and to existing uses ani regulations. Hhere property in the City adjoins property in another siunicipality which is subject to regulations substantially different frost those applying to the City property, so as to make strict enforcesMnt of all the City regulations as to such property unreasonable, the Council may take into account the location of the property and the regulations of the adjoining sninicipality in considering application for variances hereunder. Source! Ordinance No. 172 Effective Datei 1-1-75 Subd. 5. Variances! Denial. Variances may be denied by motion of the Council and such motion shall constitute a finding and determination that the conditions required for approval do not exist. Ho application for a variance which has been denied wholly or in part shall be resubmitted for a period of six (6) months from the date of said order of denial, except on grounds of new evidence ui proof of change of conditions found to be valid by the Planning Commission. Source! Huni ipal Code Effective Date* 9-14-67 Subd. 6. Variances! Failure of the Board to Act If no recommendation is transmitted b/ the Board within sixty (60) days after referral of the application for variance to the Board, the Council may take action without further a«aiti^g such recommendation . Source! City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 Subd. 7. Variances! Violation of Conditions. A viola tion of any condition set forth in granting a variance shall be a violation of the Zoning Chapter and automatically terminates the variance. Source! Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 ), ORONO CC 266-1 (4-1-84) f• s..... .* • • •' . ! I I .1 f I ■ I I ^ * a •V..*«» .» * ■ • a .■ V • • • ^ » * .S 10.01Subi. 0. Variances! Expiration. Variances shall expire one year after the date of Council approval if not used. Any change in use of the property shall require a new variance.Source! Ordinance Bo. 172 Effective Date# 1-1-75 sac. ke.Of. GOHDITIOHAL 08BS Subd. 1. Conditional Usasi Purpose. In order to give the district use regulation the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of the Zoning Chapter, in certain diatricta, conditional uses srs permitted, subject to the granting permit. Conditional uses include those uses generally not suitable in s particular toning district, but which may under some circumstances be suitable. When such circumstaneee **^*^/. ^ conditional use permit may ba granted. Condltiona may be applied to iatuance of the permit and a periodic raviaw of the permit mav be required. The permit shall ba issued for a particular use and not for a particular person or f^-m. Because of their unusual characteristics, conditional uses require consideration to they My be located properly with respect to the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the Comprehensive Municipal Plan and witn respect to their effects on surrounding properties. In ordsr to achieve purpose*, the Council is empowered to grant end to deny '.racatlons for conditional use permits and to impose reasonable •'Auiditlons upon the granting of these permits. Sourcs! City Code Effective Date! 4-1-14 Sourcs ! Municipal Code Effective Date! 9-14-67 ORONO CC C4-1-64) Subd. 9. A certified copy of every variance granted under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.391 and 462.399 shall be filed with the Bennepin County Variances filed with the County Recorder pursuant to Minnesota Statutaa, Section 462.36, Subd. 1, do not constitute encumbrances on real proparty. The order issued by the city shall legal description of th# property involved. Failure to file a variance shall not affect its validity or enforceability. Subd. 2. Conditional Oses! Reference to Planning Cosmiission. Before the Council may grant conditional usm parnits for such conditional oses as prescribed in the district of the Zoning Chapter, the request therefor shall be referred to the Planning Commiaalon for study concerning the affect of tne proposed use on the ordinance and on the character and of the neighborhood and for recommendation in rsgard to granting such conditional use and the conditions thereof, if any, or for rne denial of such conditional use. The Council may by unaiilBOU action waive reference to the Planning Comsd.asion« ';S 10.20D. Public Survicu Structuruu. Public surTicu •tracturus* ii 'luding but not liuitud to uluctric transuittion linus# buildings such ss tslsphoos sxchsngs stations, boostsr or prsssurs rsgulating stations, walls, and plunbing stations, •lawstad tanks, lift stations and alactrical powar substations, prowidad no building shall ba locatad within SO* fron any lot lina of an abutting lot in an District. Prior to granting such pamit it shall ba found that tha architacturaI dasign of sarvica atructuras is coapatibla to tha naighborhood in which it is to ba locatad and thus will proaota tha ganaral walfara. Public sarvica atructuras as dafinad abova that hava baan approvad by tha City at roqulrad public haarings for public inprovaaiant projacta shall not raguira a conditional usa parvit but such structuraa shall ba aubjact to all othar appropriata standards sat forth in this aactioai anandnants to approvad plans involving dasign and/or placanant of thasa atructuras will raquira writtan notica by tha City to all affactad proparty ownars 14 days prior to tr.a adoption of tha aaandad plans by tha Council. Sourcai Ordinanca 29, 2nd Sarias Adoptadt 2-23*87 E. Graanhousas. Connarcial graanhousaa provided all outaida storaga is fancad in such a nannar so as to scraan tha ntorad natarial froai view whan obsarvad froa tha public straat or adjoining lot. Coauiarcial graanhousa structures shall not ba locatad in a required yard area, and are subject further to tha ganaral zoning coda raquiraaants pertaining to accessory structures. Sourest Ordinanca 72, 2nd Series Adoptadt 8-14-89 P. Recreation Areas. Private gun clubs, archery ranges, ski slides, provided the area is fenced and no part of tha principal usa is less than ISO feet froa any lot line. Source! Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 G. Guest Bouses 6 Non-rental Guest Apartments. 1) Guest Bouses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for tha sola use of tha occupants of tha principal buildings, including their doaiestic amployaas or their non-paying guests. All regular loc requirements shall ba mat by tha guest house. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 OROMO CC 280 (4-1-84) A .‘*r * V .-^1 ■S 10.202) Non-rental Guest Aparts^nts. An apartment within tha principal residence structure on a lot for the sola use of th. occup.nt. of th. trincip.X r..ld.nc.. Including tli.irVci.n* drr‘%r fVo-Structure, and such door shall ba the primary access to tha apartment. Application for such a guest apartment shall address tha concerns of parking, sawaga treatment, antryway and interior access method. Such apartmants shall |iot ^Rva utilities metered separately froa tha principal rasidanca utilities and ssall not have a separate street address. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Sarias Adopted: 2-23-87 B. Planned Residential Devalopmant. Limited to detached single family dwellings only and subject to the limitations cf Section 10.32. I. Duplex Credit. One duplex may be locatad on a single lot as a conditional use upon application therefor provid^ that public sanitary sewer service la available, and the lot is adjacent to a commercial or Industrial district, and tha duplex is constructed within 200 feat of tha commercial or industrial district. A duplex is defined as a two-family unit residential building. J. Apiaries. f. Antenna Structure. One independent antenna structure with antenna or combination of antenna attached thereto, subordinate to and servicing the principal use or structure same lot and customarily incidental thereto that is not attached to another structure provided the height of the antenna structure does not exceed 65 feet and the antenna structure is set back from any lot line a distance at least equal to the total height of the antenna structure. L. Perms (Crop and atocki is ten or more acres. Provided that the area M. Animals. The keeping of domestic animals for non-coBimercia 1 purposes including horses for the use of the occupants of the premises. A minimum of one acre in exclusive of one acre for the principal building, must be available for each animal unit, except as hereinafter set forth. A minimum of two acres of open pasture must be available for a single horse and one additional acre must be available for each additional hwue. When the hcries are kept stabled and do not require pasture for feed purposes, the minimum pasture requirement may be adj*’sted at the discretion of the Council. Such minimum pasture acreage shall not include low lying lands unusable for pasture or gracing. Any person keeping such animals must comply with the provisions of the City Code. ORONO CC 280-1 (4-1-84) T** • • • #4^ • -r.il- ^ • .V* -S 10.21Sabd. 5. Arot Height, Lot width and Yoxd BoquiroMntsA, lolfht. Wo ttrocturo or building shall oxcood 2-1/2 storias or thirty foot in haight axcapt as providad in Sactioa I0«7S.bo obsarirodi B* Lots. Tha following oiniau® raquira®ants shall Lot hrai 1/2 sera Lot Width I5T7aat Front Tard ir?aat Sida yard 16 7aat Sida Yard hdjacant to Straat IS faat Basr Yard S6 Fast IBC. li.22. BB60LJITI0W8 FOB *LB- lA",•LB-lA-1*•LB-ir •LB-1C* ‘l-l-lC-l* OBB FAWILT LAKBSBOBB BB8Z0BWTXAL DISTBICT Within any •LB-lA*. -LB-lA-l*, -LB-ll-, -LB-IC-, or •LB-lC-1- Ona * r«Mily Lakeshor. ti..id.ntlal Oiatrlct th. following r.gulatlon. ahall applyt Snbd. 1. Lakeshora Sat Back Bagulations frosi tha shoralina for lakeshora lotsi Tha satback A. Shall ba 75 faat for all structuras axetpt that on Ukashora lota dividad by a aajor thoroughfare, a lock box not in axcass of 20 square faat in area and 4S inches in haight is allowed on tha lakeshora portion of tha lot and requires a building permit from tha city. B. Wo principal or accessory structure shall ba located within 75 feat of tha lakeshora nor closer to tha lAkashora than tha average distance from the shoreline of existing rasidaoce h* hidings on adjacent lots (refer/ to Orono Manual of Design Standards and Specifications) except that this does not apply to structure allo«#ad in subsection A above. Subd. 2. Lakeshora Hardcover and Land Alteration BagulstionB. Withir 75 faat of shoralina there shall ba no excavating# filling, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures except as permitted under Subdivision 1 of this section. Within 75 to 250 faat of tha shoreline there shall ba no greater than 251 hardcover. Within 250 feat to 500 feat of tha shoreline there shall ba no greater than 30% hardcover. Within 500 feet to 1,000 faat of tha ehoralina there shall ba no greater than 351 hardcover. ;/ •) OBOWO CC (4-1-64) ____---------------------------------- ■RIMI I. fm ■ — • 4,•’ 4-■* I*. ///s 10.aaSubd. J. Tr.. Bwo»«l 0.9ul.tlon.. Co IIto tcoo within 7S f*#t oC th. .hor.lln. with • diaaot.t of oix (I) inch.6 or nor* ■hall bo rooo.od without first obtalnln, a p.r.lt fro* th. City.acc.ptabl. to th. staff ar. planted, any quastlon iBwolwin, th. nuabor of trMS to bo rsplacsd will rsqulr. approval.Sourcet Ordinance 2i, 2nd Series Adopted! 7-14-li ^^BC. IB.23a LA-IA QWl FAilZLT LAOSBORB RMUmTlAL DISTRICT. 1. Purpose. The •LB-IA* One Family Lakeshora Besidantial Districc is intended to provide a district which will allow a coebination of low density residential development and limited agricultural activity. Planned residential developments may be allowed by conditional use permits. The proposed land use nay not endanger the quality of storm water runoff i*^o Lake Minnetonka or Long Lake. Because of the location of the district near Lake Minnetonka or Long Lake, special regulatio.is are necessary to protect those natural resources from the effects of dense development. OROWO CC 213-1 (4-1-14) . f-■r •••r w • . 6 . • .. . ,, ‘ • tr S« 2.Aaaoval Ra9uXationa.takeshoca Sat Back, (Saa Saction 10.22)•Hard Cover,f 10.23 and TraaSubd. 3. Faralttad Uaaa. Within tha ^*IA* Ona Faaily Lakaahora laaidantial Olatrict, no land or atcacturaa ahall ba usad axcapt for ona or noca of tha follonln9 uaaa:Diat‘ *ct.A. Any paraittad uaa aa ra9ulattd In tha *R*IA'Subd. 4. Conditional Oats. Within any "LR-IA* Ona raally Lakaahora Raaidantial Diatrict. no atcuctura or land ahall ba uaad for tha followin9 uaaa axcapt by conditional uaa paraiti Diatrict. A. Any conditional uaa aa raqulatad in tha *H-IA* Subd. 5. Accaaaory Uaaa. Within any "LR-IA* Ona Family Lakaahora Raaidantial Diatrict, tha following uaaa ahall ba a paraittad accaaaory uaai A. A.iy accaaaory uaa aa ragulatad in tha *R-IA* Diatrict and 'privata docka* aubjact to tha City Coda and othac applicable raguiationa, including boat atoraga danaity ragulationa. Subd. 4. kcaa, Haight. Lot Width and Yard Requlramanta . A. Haight. No atructura or building ahall axcaad 2-1/2 atortaa or thirty faat in height except as provided in Saction 10.75. / ba obsarvadx B. Lots. Tha following nininufi raquiraaents shall Lot Lot front Araa Width Yard 2 acraa 200 ^aat 50 ^eat Side Yard lO^eat Sida Yard Adjacent to Street 50 feet Rear Yard ^0 i!eat SBC. 10.24. LR-IB ONB FAMILY LAKESBORB RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Subd. I. Purpose. Tha *LR-lB* One Family Lakeshora Raaidantial Diatrict ia intended to provide a district which will allow a combination of aadlum danaity raaidantial developments and liaitad agricultural activity. Planned residential davalopmants may ba allowed by conditional use permits. Tha proposed land use may not endanger tha quality of storm water runoff into Lake Minnetonka or Long Lake. Because of the location of tha district near Lake Minnetonka or Long Lake, special regulations are naoataary to protect these natural resources from the effects of danse development. ‘^is district ahall have immediate access to highways and public a .Itary sewer. ORONO CC (4-1-84) • •* < • IS. » m, ^*14^ »' Til-S 10.55Subd. f. foning Dsa Districts. Tha loning Dsa Districts as designated on t;.a Official loning Nap shall remain unchanged with tha adoption of this Saction. Tha provisions of this Saction, including tha designation of Flood Plain and Wetlands Cofisarvation Areas, shall ba in addition to all other provisions of this Chapter. Whenever conflicts occur between other provisions of this Chapter and provisions of this Saction, tha most rastrictiva provision shall prevail.Subd. 7. Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. Tha Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation shall ba an elevation no lower than one foot above the elevation of tha regional flood plus any increases in flood elevation caused by encroachments on the flood plain. A. The regulatory flood protection elevation within the Floodway and Flood Fringe Districts shall ba established by adding l.O foot to tha Base Flood Water Surface Elevations within Floodway listed in tha Floodway Data Table contained in tha Flood Insurance Study. Regulatory flood protection elevations between cross-sections shall ba interpolated. B. Tha regulatory flood protection elevation for Lake Minnetonka shall ba 932.5 MSL. C. Tha regulatory flood protection elevation within tha General Flood Plain District shall ba calculated by a qualified registered professional engineer in accordance with procedures set forth herein. Subd, 8. Development Restrictadi Prohibition. Except as hereinafter specifically permitted, no filling, grading, dredging, excavation, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures, obstructions, septic systems, wall or other construction shall ba allowed within the Flood Plain and Wetlands Conservation Areai nor on any lands within 26 feet theraofi nor on any land within 75 feet of the ordinary highwater elevation of any lake shoreline, not on land abutting, adjoining or affecting said area if such activity upon those adjacent areas is incompatible with tha ^llcles expressed in this Section and tha preservation of those conservation areas in their natural state. Subd. 9. Floodway District (FW). Tha following uses have a low flood damage potential and do not obstruct flood flows. These uses ahall ba permitted within tha Floodway District to the extent that they are not prohibited by any other City coda provision and provided all permits or authorisations are received as may be required by other City Coda provisions or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction, including without limitation, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, tha Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, and the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. In addition, no uaa shall adversely afreet ORONO CC (4-1-84) >»•V # A.$ 10.s;Subd. 2«. Won-confotminfl 0*««. » ttcuctuc* ot th* us*at a Btcuet^ ot Dt*als«s uhich wss lawful b*fot* th* passa<j* ot •■•ndasnt of this Saction but which It not in ‘{**ptowltlont of this Saction aay ba continued tubjact to th*following conditionssJla No such ua« ■hall bt tiptndtd, changed * anlargad oc iltarad In a way which Incrtaats Ita non-confornlty*B No atructural al*^«rttlon or addition to any non- COiiforNlng itruciurt ovar tha Ufa of tha atcuctura fhall «caad 50 paccant of Iti valua at tha tlna of Iti bacoaing a non-confornlng uia* unlasa tha *tructura I* parnanantly changad to a conforalng Ufa or unlafs tha altaratlon or addition would ■ubatantlally raduca potantial flood daMgat for tha tntlra itcuctura. C Any altaratlon or addition to any non-conforalng UM Which would 'tasult In substantially Inctessinq potantial ahall ba protactad In accordance with Subdlvlilon 14 Subparagraph B of this Section. - Q If auch uia la dlacontlnuad for tualva consacutls# .onths, any future us* of th* P«“‘V*i<fnfnoconfotb to this saction. Th* assassor shall notify *onln9 AdNlniatcator In writing of Inttancai of non-conforning uses which have baan dlacontlnuad for a period of twelve nontha. Ba If any non-conforaing use !■ ia*troyad by any ■aans, Includlna floods, to an aitent of 50 patent ot "O'* of valuap It shall not ba reconstructed except In conforalty with tha provisions of this Saction. However, tha City aay Issue a conditional use permit for reconstruction If tha use Is located outside tha floodway and, upon tha raconatraf iion, Is adequately flood proofed, elevated or otherwise protected in conformity with this Saotloii. P. Uses or adjuncts thereof which are or become naisancas shall not ba entitled to continue as non-conforming uses. C. Except as provided In Subparagraph E above, any use which has baan permitted as a conditional use shall not ba considered as a non-conforming use. H. Hon-confocmlng uses located In the floodway District shall be eliminated or brought into conformity standards contained In this Section within a reasonable period oc time as detarmlned by the City, after a hearing for aach auch non- conforming use. The Council shall make Its determination upon the basis of the normal ueeful life of any Inprovement premises. In addition, the monetary value of any competitive advantage derived by the operation of auch non-conforming use, oy reason of the limitation on establishment of competing businesses mi •S'- « .•• a : w •• -•"*• •« ^ S'f 10.ssas a rasult of this Saction. sh*H ba conaldatad as a tma^.zlon of losses resulting from the requirement ot termination of the use under this Saction.Sabd. J7. bwandnanta. Th* flood plain dosignation oncMtig2Sui*tS‘undt*^utaidJ th^Yl^ood plain. Spoclnl aacaptiona to ¥him mMv be oermitted by the Coemiieeloner of Natural Beaouremaif he determine! that, thromghprotactad for the intended uae. All ammndmmnta including amendments to the official maps must be submit tad to a^ approved by the Commlaaioner of Natural Basourcea prior to aSoption. Oiangee in the official maps also require prior approval by the PederaX Inaurance Administration. ibd. 2f. Interpretation. In their inter-retatl'n end '« th. Ptovl.ion. of this saction .hall b^ ^Subd. ■appad boundary and actual fiald conditions, th* City ahall Mk* th* nacaasacy intarpratatlon baaad on 5{JJ reqional (lOO-year) flood profile. The person contesting the location of tha district boundary shall opportunity to prss.nt his cas* to tha City and to submit tachnical evidence if he so desires. Subd. 2». Abrogation and Graatar taatrlctlons. ft is not Intandad by this Saction to rapaal. abroflat* aslstin^ ordlnanca, ra^ulatlon. aas***nt. cowa.iants or oa* raatricelona. Bowavar. wbara this Saction l*pos*s graat* raatrictlons, th* provislona of this Saction shall pravsll. Subd. 10. Warning and Olsclalbar of ^ Saction doaa not tnpiy that araaa outald* or land usas parnittad within auch diatriota will ha floodino or flood daaa^os. This Saction ahall not craata liability on tha part of th* City or any off'.-ar or anployM *“5 J flood damages that result from r fiance on this Section or any adadnistrative decision lawfully made thereundar* Sources Ordinance Mo. 213 Effective Oates 1-11-79 ORONO CC (4-x-a<i ORONO CC (4-1-84) - ■* ^ •‘ -to •' --------1.... .u..;.....••Af 10.scC fl4c«®«iit of Stmctoro* on Lot*. When aorothan on. ••tback appU.s to a alta, ba locatad to ...t all s*t.backa. Structura. aha 11 ba locatad aafollowss1. Structur* nod On-*lto Sowa^o Systca Sotb«ckfl (In fnot) froa Ordinary High Vntnr LoiroliHotbackaPublicWaterClaaaification Wl HO CD Tributary Structures Onaavarad Savarad—nu iS6 c^cS:> Sawaga TraataantSvstaa ISO d:> 2. Additional structure setbacks. Tht following additional structure setback* apply, ragaxdlass of the classification of the water bodyi Setback (in feat) 53 SO Setback frowi - Top of bluff - Unplatted cesMtary • Hight-of-way line of federal# state or county highway and local public and private roads JO • Except for detached garages on lakashore lot* a* regulated in Section 10.03# Subd. f (0) and except for structures subject to less restrictive "aide yard adjacent to street* setbacks aa regulated in the various toning districts. 3. Bluff impact tones. Structure* and scoessory facilities# except stairways# landings# and lock boxes# must not be placed within bluff impact tones. 4. Uses without water-oriented needs. Uses without water-oriented needs must be located on lots or parcels without public waters frontage# or# if located on lota or parcel with public waters frontage# must either be set back double the normal Ordinary High Water level setback or be screened from view from the water by vegetation or topograpny# asauiaing sumswr# leaf-on conditions. 5. Fences# docks# retaining walls. Ho tence shall be placed within the shore setback zone Portion* of dock located landward of the OHWL shall be considered as a 1*"°;”^; aubiect to the regulations for landings per Subdivision 16 (FI or this section. Retaining walls shall not be placed within the shore setback sons. I ' — ORONO CC 376-11 (2-24-92) -j *. • «.■ • - u^ r • V ,I 10.S€6. Average lakeshore setback. Wo priBcipal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lota# except that this doe* not apply to stairways# lifts# landings# and lockboxes. Further# the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes# and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots.0. Minimum Lowest Floor Blevations. All structures located within the Hhoreland Overlay District which are subject to the flood plain regulations of Section 10.55 of this ordinance shall be placed at an elevation consistent with the requirements of that section. The regulatory flood protection elevation shall be established as set forth in Section 10.55# Subd. 7 of this code. All structures constructed within the Shoreland Overlay District shall have their lo%#est floor# including basement# placed at an elevation no lower than the regulatory flood protection elevation. Where the regulatory flood plain elevation cannot reasonably be determined# the minimum elevation at which the lowest floor# including basement# may be placed shall be determined as followsi 1. For lakes# by placing the lowest floor at a level at least 3 feet above the highest known water level# or 3 feet above the Ordinary High Water Level# whichever is higher. 2. For rivers and streams# by placing the lowest floor at least 3 feet above the flood of record. B. Water-oriented Accessory Structures. The only water-oriented accessory structure allowed to be located nearer the Ordinary High Hater Level than the normal structure setback as specified in this section shall be a lock box no greater than 20 square feet in area and no higher than 4S inches in height. Such a structure requires a brtiding permit from the City. F. Stairways# Lifts and Landings. Stairway* and lifts are the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving acces ' up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore areas. Stairways# lifts and landings shall be allowed in the shore setback tone and must meet the following design requirements! in width. 1. Stairways and lifts must not exceed 4 feet 2. Landings for stairways and lifts shall not exceed 32 square feet in area. 3. Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways# lifts# or landings. f r ORONO CC 376-12 (2-24-92) ..A... .• % • • . 1*“ # .*■- f 10.sct. gM««« Tr«*t»Mit. tor pr««l««* tor huunn::t::2 r.“ r.iKr.S'c.-:“J.av."s.v.*. ::::i:Sobdivlsioa 1C (C>. lloB-conforml«9 ••wa«« ‘t***^"‘/y*V"* ^ ^ b« r«««lat«d and np9radad In accordanca with Subd. 17 of thisordlnaae*.8. Significant historic altaa. Mo atructura nay ba placad on a algnlfleant hlatortc tlta In a aannar that affacta thm valQSfl of tbo sito unloto odoquato Information about tha aita liaa baan raaovad documantad In a public rapoaitory* Subda 17a Ronconfonaitiaa. All lagally aatabliahad nonoonforaitiaa aa of tha data of thia ordinanca may continua aubjact to applicmbla Stata Statutaa and aa ragulatad alaawhara in tha Orono Municipal Coda. In ahoraland araaa* tha following atandarda ahall alao apply: A. Conatruction on nonconforming Lota of Aacord. O^galopmant or uaa of axiating lota of racord ahall ba ragulatad aa aat forth in Saction 10.03, Subdiviaion € of tha Orono Xoning Coda. B. Additiona/Expanaiona to nonconforming Structuraa. All additiona or axpanaiona to tha outaida dimanaiona of an axiating nonconforming atructura muat maat tha aatback, haight, and othar raquiramanta aat forth in tha Orono Zoning Coda. Any daviation from thaaa raquiramanta mua^ ba authorixad by a varianca purauant to proviaiona of tha xoning chapter. C. Honconforming Sawaga Traatmant Syatama. A nonconforming aawaga traatmant ayattm aa dafinad in Saction 12.30 and locatad within tha Shoraland Ovarlay Diatrict muat ba upgraded and mada conforming, at a minimum, at any tima a parmit or variance of any type ia raquirad for any improvamant on, or uaa of, tha property. further, tha nonconforming aawaga traatmant ayatam proviaiona of Saction 12.30 ahall apply to all ahoraland araaa. Subd. 18. Subdiviaion/Platting Proviaiona. A. Land Suitability. Each lot created through aubdiviaion, including Planned Unit Davalopmanta or Planned Baaidantial Davalopmanta authorixad alaawhara in tha Zoning and Platting Codaa, muat ba auitabla in ita natural atate for tha propoaad uaa with minimal alteration. In analyaing tha auitability of land for a apacific uaa, tha City ahall conaidar auacaptibility to flooding, axiatenca of watlanda, aoil and rock formationa with aavara limitationa for development, aavara aroaion potential, ataap topography, inadequate water aupply or aawaga traatmant capabilitiaa, naar-ahora aquatic conditions unsuitable for water* based recreation, important fish and wildlife habitat, praaance of significant historic sites, or any othar feature of tha natural land likely to ba harmful to tha health, safety or welfare of future raaidants of tha propoaad aubdiviaion or of tha community. r c S 11.031.1 siah.r atandarda than tna caquliananta oJ thisraatrlctU., J’^’^tLllnatlona of tha City in approving S Chiptar. or tha thla Chaptar, and auch prlvst*aubdiviaion or in a clng ^ chaptar or dataralnatlonsprovisions provisions ahall ba oparaclv. andj“p'iV;.nV. 1 ..r.Tha city will not anforca prlvata provisions.chd t Saving Provision. Thla Chaptar shall not bo..y ^ thfa ChaVta?, orvacating or annulling any rights y 'f-l; 5', “shall ba expetaaly provided for In thla Chaptar. .. :4.S‘ E:\Sf., of tha araendment. Subd. 8. Ana-dnants. ^?v Mv’fwa tha public health, aafaty and ganaral *f5^***',^~ 5^-? ^ tins to tins aaend tha ptov.'aiona Inpoaad by thla Chaptar. subd. 9. Condition.. tV.‘’tlidVvUiMland and tha attachnant of raaaonabla conditions to tha aubdiviaion of land is an aiarciaa of valid pollca powar dalagatad by tha stat. to thla City. Tha aubdlvldar has tha duty o p . reasonable conditions laid down by the City to tha u“rov.ment and restrictive uaa of tha physical and aconomlcal davtlopaent of the .g welfare Comprahansiva Municipal Plan and community atof the future lot owners In the subdivision and of the commun* j large. Subd. 10. Variancaa. OROHO cc 376-20 (2-24-92)i . compliance with the proviaiona of cu^tar may baprocedural proviaiona, and tha purpoaaa of thla Chapter y sg, (4-l-i4>ORONO CC 413 * m A. : ^ s- > ». > . « — • • ■• •'■^ »- m ■-‘ • •s 11.02Mt.-’ to • ote.t.c ..tent by «n «lt.rnatlw* ptopcl. th. City >ay awcov* varlancta to tnia Chaptac so that aubatantlal Juatlca aay b?dona and tha public Int.tastvariance ahall not bava tha affact of nulllfyin9 tha Int*"* purpose of this Chapter* and further provided tha City shall not app?^»a variance* unlesa it ahall sake finding* based upon tha avidanea presented to it in each specific case that;1. an unusual hardship on tha land asistSi Including but not llaitad to, Inadaguata access to direct sunlight tor solar anargy •y«'“the variance -ill not be d«trla«ntal to tha public taCaty, haalth, or wtlfatt or Injarloui to othar pcoparty; and* 3. Tha conditions upon which tha caquait foe a varianca ia basad ara unlqua to tha pcopacty for which tha aarlanca la aouqht a.id ara not appllcabla ganarally to othar ^ 4. Bacausa of tha particular phyaical aurroundlnqa, ahapa or topographical condltioua of tha apacific raault in an anvlronmantally unsound davelopiaant of tha land; and. 5. Tha varianca alll not In any aannar vary tha proviaiona of tha Coaprthanslva Municipal Plan; and, 6. Tha varlancai will/not in any aannar vary tha ainiaua raquiraaants for a lot as set forth In the Zoning Chapter of tha City Coda as applied to the entire subdivision; and. 7. The varlancea will not tha procedural raqulrtaants of this Chapter. In any aannar vary B. Conditions. In approving tha varianca, tha City ahall require such conditions as will, in Its judgment, secure substantially tha objactlvas of this Chapter and tha subdivider shall agree to be bound by tha conditions. Ca Procadura. An application for any such varianca ahall be aubaittad in writing by tha aubdlvidar at tha tiaa whan tha pcallainacy plat ia filed. Tha application shall state fully tha grounds and all of tha facts to justify the granting of a variance and will be approved or disapproved at the tlae the Council reviews the praliainary plat. 8ubd. 11a Enforcement, Violations and Penalties. hm Enforcanant. It shall be tha duty of tha Zoning Adalnlatrator to enforce this Chapter and to bring to tha attention of tha City Attorney any violations or lack of compliance therewith• ORONO CC (4-1-34) ^1 S 11.03i3 ■subdividar* - Any parson who (I) has an interest in land, who causae it, directly or indirectly to be divided into a subdivision or who (2) directly or indirectly sella, laasaa, or davalopa, or advartlsaa for as la, lease, or davalopaant, any interest, lot, parcel, site, unit or plot in a aubdivision, or who (3) angagaa directly or through an agent in the buainaaa of sailing, leasing, developing, or offering for sale, lease or davalopaant a subdivision or any interest, lot, parcel, site, unit or plot in . aubdivi.ioo, or who (4) 1. directly or Indiraetlr controlled by or under direct, or indirect comon control with any of tha foregoing. 4 €4. -Subdivldar's Agent* - Any parson, fira, corporation, or realtor who rapraaants, or acta for or on behalf of, a aubdividar in aalling, leasing or developing, or offering to sull, lease, or develop any incaraat, lot, parcel, unit, iita or plot in a subdivlaion. 45 "Subdivision” - Tha separation of an area, parcel, or tract of land under single ownership into two or more parcels, traers, lota, or long-term laaaahold interaats where tha creation of tha leasehold intaraat nacaaaitmtaa tha creation of atraats, roads, or allays, for residential, coauMreial, industrial, or othar use or any cood^ination thereof, except those aaparationai a Where all tha resulting parcels, tracts, lots, or interests will be 20 acres or larger in sisa and 500 feat in width for residential uses and five acres or larger in sisa for coBusarcial and Industrial uses; b. Creating cemetery lots; c. Resulting from court orders, or the adjust ment of a lot line by the relocation of a common boundary as long as each of the two leaulting lots meets the requirements of the Zoning Chapter of the City Code. €4. *Subdivision, Classification”. a. *CIasa I Subdivision* - A Class I Subdivision shall be exempt from platting by the City end *^*^1 ^ permitted subdivision by metes end bounds description described by a Registered Land Surveyor if it meets one or more of the fol lowing crlteriai 1. The aubdiviaion reeults in no than two buildable lots wherm each resulting lot meets or exceeds five acres (217,600 square feet) of land, and aach lot has at 300 feet of frontage on a public roadway which has been *®®*P^*® and opened by the City or on a private ro ’way an to vehicular uae pursuant to an easement between persons or between persons and the City, and where no flexible soning application or extension of municipal utililties is involved; ORONO CC U-1-64)i S 11.03• ^2. Th« *ubdivision is • division of property previously combined for tax purposes; or#3 The subdivision consists only of the er..tloa or .It.r.tloa of . public or priv.t. ..s.-.ot for .ny purpose.b "Class II Subdivision" - A Class II Subdi.Ulon .h.ll b. . pl.t and ..y qualify for • lioit.d r.vi.w proc.dura ..t.bli.h.d In thi. Chapter if it aeeta all of thafollowing criteria;1. The subdivision results in no morethan two boildabl. lots, one or both of which “’Iacres (217#S00 square feet) of land or one or both of *f*'lchthan 300 feet of frontage on a public roadway which has been ;2 ”pted and opened by the City or on a P*^^^*^*^ travel or vehicular use pursuant to an easement between persons or between persons and the City; and# 2. The subdivision does involve the vacation or dedication of public roadways or extension of nunictpal Utilities! and# 3. The subdivision does not involve any flexible toning application! and# 4. The subdivision may include the creation of outlets and easements for access# open space# flowage# conservation# etc. in addition to the two buildable lota. "Class III Subdivision" - A Class III Subdivision shall be a plat which includes# but is not limited to# e subdivision which meets one or more of the following criteria; 1. The subdivision results in three or 2. The subdivision involves i flexiblemore buildable lots! or# toning application! or# 3. Tha subdivision Involves the vacation or dadication of a public roadway! or#4. The subdivision involve! the extension of municipal utilities. 67. "Temporary Improvement" - Improvements built and maintainad by a subdivider during construction of the subdivision. 68. "Tract (or Subject Tract)" - The parcel or parcels of land comprising all the contiguous land ® control lad by tha subdivider and included in whole or part in the subdivision. ORONO CC (4-1-B4) ' 1 r ^ ** 4*S 11.10Subi. 14. Special Raquirementt For PlatsA. toning Regulations. Every plat shall conform to existing xoning regulations and subdivision regulations applicible at the time of Final Plat approval. Variances shall not be approved to increase the overall subdivision density above the ainioum lot area requicaments of tha applicable toning district and this Chaptar.B. Public Impcoveaents. Tha Planning Commlaalon may recommend that all public improvements be installed and dedicated prior to the signing of tha Final Plat by tha City. Xf the Planning Commission does not recommend that all public improvements be installed and dedicated prior to signing of thm Final Plat by tha City# tne amount of thm bond shall bm established by the Zoning Administrator baaed upon the recommendation of thm City Engineer* which bond shall ba submitted by tha subdlvidtr at the time of application for Final Plat approval. Tha Plannina Commission shall require the aubdivider to indicate on tha plat all private and public improvements# which shall be required to bm established or extended and any other special requirements dammtd necessary by the Planning Commission in ordar to conform tha plat to the Comprehensive Municipal Plan and this Chaptar. C. Grading of Sica Prior to Final Approval. Subsequent to Preliminary Plat approval by the Council# tha aubdivider aay apply for a land alteration perait from tha City and upon receipt of such permit may commence construction to the grades and elevations required by plans approved by the City. D. Referral to Other Gevernaent Agancies or Jurisdictions. Following action by tha Council on tha Praliminary Plat# the Zoning Administrator will refer the Preliminary Plat and the Council's action to other government agencies or jurisdictions for their review and action as may be appropriate prior to Council action on the Final Plat. Subd. 15. Effective Period of Preliminary Subdivision Review. Planning Commission recommendations concerns.'tg any Class I Subdivision and the Council resolution concerning any Class XI and Class III Preliminary Plat srisll remain effective for one year. Failure to file a complete Final Subdivision application within this time period shall be construed as formal withdrawal of thm proposed subdivision. For one year following preliminary approval# ity agree otherwise# no amendment tounless the subdivider and the City agree a comprehensive plan or official control shall apply to or affect the use# development density# lot size# lot layout# or dedication or platting required or permitted by the approved application* Thereafter# pursuant to its regulations# the City nay extend thm period by agreement with the aubdivider and subject to all applicable performance conditions and requirements# or it *•/ require submission of a new application unless substantial physical ORONO CC (4-1-84) L 5 “ To;Chair Steve Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Michael P. GafiEron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator January 11, 1996 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment - Section 10.20, Subd. 3 - Conditional Uses in Residential Zones Summary Planning Commission is requested to consider the compatibility and suitability of specific conditional uses as to their potential impact upon adjacent single family residential zoning districts Planning Commission is also asked to determine if there is a need to provide additional performance standards or to eliminate specific uses in order to protect and ensure the integrity of all residential districts of the City. Some of the conditional uses to be reviewed include tennis clubs, public swimming pools, greenhouses, ski slides, archery ranges, scout camps, YMCA and YWCA camps, etc. Additionally, it is proposed that Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (A) which defines the conditional use minimum standards for schools, be amended to list the accessory uses associated with a school use such as enclosed and open ice arenas, game fields, playgrounds, tennis courts, etc. Planning Commission should consider whether there is a need to develop reasonable setback standards, screening requirements, location and proximity to principle use, etc. for the school conditional use. List of Exhibits A - Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subd. 3 Other Residential Zoning Districts Refer to R-IA Standards In the Zoning Code, all of the residential zoning districts use the R-IA conditional use standards in Section 10.20, Subd. 3. While most of those listed conditional uses in Section 10.20, Subd. 3 apply to al' districts, some districts add or delete specific uses. The conditional use sections specifically proposed to be reviewed at this time include the listings for "C. Clubs, Camps, etc."; "E. Greenhouses"; and "F. Recreation Areas". If* Proposed Zoning Code Anwndment - Section 10.20, Subd. 3 - Conditional Uses in Residential Zones January 11, 1996 Page 2 of 6 A. Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (C) - Oubs, Camps, etc. This conditional use section lists a number of social/recreational uses with varying degrees or intenaties of use, which may require a wide range of facilities, and which may result in a wide range of impacts on the residential neighborhoods in which they exist. For instance, golf courses are a rather low intensity use except for the area around the clubhouse, wth otherwise generally low concentrations of users in any given area, a rather quiet use taking place on a large site, having relatively little impact on neighboring properties except for the occasional errant golf ball. Country clubs, with the expectation of additional uses such as buildings for social fiinctions, restaurants, etc., suggest a step up in the intensity of use and may have a grea.wf impact on a neighborhood. The ’’tennis club” use may suggest a need for indoor facilities in winter as opposed to outdoor facilities in summer, and may tend to concentrate the use into a relatively small area as opposed to a golf course or country club use Next on the list is public swimming pools, which might tend to have a high impact on a neighborhood if such pool is open air, as opposed to a public swimming pool which is constructed within a building. Scout camps, YMCA camps, YWCA camps and church camps perhaps all share similar functions and facility needs, generally requiring a large site, with the expectation that there will be overnight or long-term residency by campers either in cabins or tents. These use.s generally include a number of buildings devoted to various activities scattered around a large site, with the potential for having some concentrated uses impacting adjacent properties. The final uses listed under "Clubs, Camps, etc." are private non-prom parks, playgrounds and other similar uses. An example of a private non-profit park might be 3M company's Tartan Park in the eastern metro area, which includes a golf course and other recreation facilities for company employees. It is unknown whether this type of use was envisioned when "private non-profit parks" was originally listed as a conditional use in the Code, but it is conceivable that such a use could be proposed in Orono. A private playground might be associated with a private school, day care, apartment complex, or other use. The only performance standards required for "Clubs, Camps, etc. in the current Code include. 1 The principal structure shall be iOO feet or more from any abutting lot in a residential district. 2 Accessory structures shall be a minimum of 50 feet from any lot line Proposed Zoning Code Amendment - Section 10.20, Subd. 3 - Conditional Uses in Residential Zones January 1 1, 1996 Page 3 of 6 Section 10 20, Subd. 3 (F), "Recreation Areas", appears to be very similar in scope to "Clubs, Camps, etc." in that both entries suggest recreational uses. It appears, however, that the entry for "Recreation Aiea;’* is intended for primarily outdoor sporting or recreational uses, listing "private gun clubs", "archery ranges", "ski slides" (was this supposed to be ski slopes?), with just two specific performance standards to be met: 1. The area must be fenced. 2. No part of the principal use can be less than 150 feet from any lot line. (Note that prior to July 14, 1986, this section also included riding stables, and the standard was 100 feet rather than 150 feet. In 1986, riding stables became a separate conditional use entry). These recreation area uses, as well as the clubs and camps uses, all suggest activity that is not directly related to a single family residential use, but which are public uses and which tend to have possible negative impacts on adjacent lesidential property owners. It seems reasonable then, to expect that such uses should meet a higher standard than a strictly single family residential conditional use. Questions for Discussion 1 Are any of the uses listed in the "Clubs, Camps, etc." ai‘J "Recreation Areas" sections inappropriate to be located in a residential zone adjacent to residential development? 2. Are there certain elements of some of the uses which might be inappropriate while some elements are acceptable? 3 Should any of the uses be eliminated from the list of allowed conditional uses, or should some of the uses be subject to a higher performance standwd (for instance, a greater setback required for an outdoor activity use than for a building housing such a use)? 4. Arf mere certain uses similar to those listed, which should be listed? Are there listed u'. -s that should be totally eliminated*’ B. Section i0.20. Subd. 3 (E) - "Greenhouses” Commercial eenhouses are listed as a conditional use in residential zones provided that "all outside storage is fenced in such a manner so as to screen the stored matenal from view when observed from the public street or adjoining lot". An additional requirement was added in 1989; "Commercial greenhouse iiructures sh'>'l not be located in a required yard area, and are subject further to the general zoning code requirements pertaining to accessory structures . L Proposed Zoning Code Amendment - Section 10.20, Subd. 3 - Conditional Uses in Residential Zones January 11, 1996 Page 4 of 6 The City of Orono has historically been home to at least three commercial greenhouse operations, all on Watertown Road, two of which were owned by the Butterfields and one by Kelley and Kelley Nursery. These greenhouse operations have not been a source of complaints, and apparently have been good neighbors. Conditional use permits granted for greenhouses in the past generally place a limitation on the retail activity occurring on the site, and this has generally not been abused. Due to the typical large size of greenhouse structures, they are normally subject to Orono s oversize accessory structure requirements, and therefore required to meet principal residence structure setbacks. The associated tractors and motorized operations occurring within a greenhouse are one of uie non-residential type activities occurring. Issues for Discussion 1.Are there any specific aspects of commercial greenhouses which have potential negative impact that needs to be addresM^ti*^ 2.Are there other uses similar to greenhouses, such as open commercial growing of plants without the use of greenhouse structures, that should be considered as a conditional use? Orono has one such operation which is operated as a home occupation, and activity by employees is strictly limited in the license. C. Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (A) - Schools Public schools and parochial or private schools which teach a curriculum similar to public schools, are a conditional use within the single family residential districts. The only performance standards the Code places on the school conditional use are: 1.No building shall be located within 50 feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in a residential district. 2.A fence must be erected 15 feet or more from all street lot lines where the abutting use is for open play. Nursery schools are allowed as long as they provide 50 square feet of playground space per pupil. (Note that the City has used this section to grant conditional use permits for day care uses, which are deemed similar to nursery schools.) Proposed Zoning Code Amendment - Section 10.20, Subd. 3 - Conditional Uses in Residential Zones January 11,1996 Page 5 of 6 The proposed amendment of this section would list the various accessory uses associated with a school use. These associated uses might include playgrounds, tennis courts, ball fields, running tracks, spectator seating, concession stands, hockey nnks. nature areas, parking lots, etc. Additional associated uses might include separate and free-standing athletic facilities such as swimming pools, ice arenas, etc. which might serve a school use as well as a general public use, and which could conceivably be operated privately by for-profit or non-profit entities. The potential impacts on surrounding properties of any of the above uses is widely variable. The location of a specific use or facility in relation to adjacent residential property can have impacts due to noise, lighting, vibration, odors, encroachments on open space, and extending to concerns such as trespass on private property during sporting events. The wide range of potential uses suggests the need for development of reasonable setback standards and screening requirements, as well as some standards for a location that is in reasonable proximity to the principal use for safety and security reasons. The listing of accessory uses associated with a school use suggests that (and the City should have an expectation that) accessory uses will occur on the sam e propertv as a principal use. I.e., in the case where the school would own multiple tax parcels, an accessory use should occur on the same property as a principal use, which might require legal combination of parcels. While this may seem to be a minor issue, the possibility of outside organizations operating a "school-associated use" on a separate property, suggests the potential for that use to "break away" from the school and become a separate and possibly commercial recreational entity in a single family residential zone. Two specific applications have lead to the current discussion. The first was the Orono Baseball Association use of school properly for baseball diamonds. The property is o\vned by the school district, but leased by the City, and the City sub-leased the property to Orono Baseball Association for construction of baseball/softball fields which are totally under the control of OBA as far as operations, maintenance and scheduling. In this case, it is far-fetched to suggest that OBA’s use of the site is accessory to the school. In the second situation, Orono Hockey Boosters, Inc. proposes to lease a ciirrently vacant separate tax parcel fi’om the school district for the purpose of constructing an ice arena. The school district will own the land and control use of the site, but the Orono Hockey Boosters will own the improvements, i e. the building, parking lots, etc. In this case the school district will be a heavy user of the improvements on the site and will have right of approval over the design of the improvements. L ——■ Proposed Zoning Code Amendment - Section 10.20, Subd. 3 - Conditional Uses in Residential Zones January 11,1996 Page 6 of 6 Issues for Discussion 1.Should the "schools" conditional use section include a listing of accessory uses associated with a school use? 2.Should those uses be limited to just accessory uses that are owned and operated by the school, or should such uses be allowed to be owned and operated by other entities? 3.Should specific accessory uses be required to meet special performance standards that mitigate the negative impacts of those uses on adjacent residential properties? 4.If so, what specific standards should be created? Setbacks? Screening? Location and proximity to principal use? Lighting? Security issues such as fencing? Noise or odor limitations? (Some of these are addressed in other Code sections already.) 5.Because these school-associated uses are likely to occur in a residential zoning district, what other performance standards should be established for the school and its accessory uses? It is difficult to translate residential performance standards such as setbacks, parking, etc. into rational performance standards for facilities and buildings that are institutional or commercial in nature. Stair Recommendation Planning Commission is requested to consider each of the above issues and determine what changes, if any, are necessary or appropriate in regards to the conditional uses allowed in residential districts, specifically those addressed above. It may be appropriate to schedule a work session to review these issues in greater detail. 1 1 t.. — CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 553^ Phone (612)473-7357 Fax 473-0ol0 NOTICE The Planning Commission wiU hold zoning amendments: Kelley Parkway on Tuesday, January lo, ly ^ ^___X Tnnina COC 1. 9:00 P.M.™ CB M—”„"'rr.r“£ Commission shall consider the ;i„gie family conditional uses as to their a need fo provide residemial zoning districts and to in order to ^X'ZlrX YWCA camps, etc. The Planning Commission will would propose the listing ot access o niav<rrounds, tennis courts, etc. “ftteTm“deTelop masonable' setbacic stands, screening requirements. location in proximity to prmctpal use, etc. 2. 9:30 P.M.zoning Code Section ^ / ^„wn as Oversize rSoS "owe^fo^otpL area of such accessory huildmgs on properties of 10 acres or more m area. proposed amendments. City of Orono By; Planning Commission Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator To be published the wee k of January 1. 1996 I ■v*«iru«ui — .~'/7 *•?- - ' - § 10.20 SEC. 10.20. R-IA ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. 1 purcose. The "R-lA" One Family Residential combination of iSw^dennit^re^^iden^^l immediate access to highways and public sanitary sewer. 2 Permitted Uses. Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: A. One family detached dwellings. B. Public owned parks and playgrounds. C. Municipal buildings. Subd 3 Conditional Uses. Within any "R-lA" One Family R.sidentiafDistrict, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. SI*?/siiSline of an abutting lor xn an ^ lot lines where the Ib^«inVusV?s%oVVen "an" nursery schools providing fifty square feet of playground space per pupil. ?h^chuiSh proper, convents or homes for persons related to a rrelid^Ll^sfaiT be" "iScaUrwimn'^'fYm'e"^^^ o“ any \o\ Une of an abutting lot in an "R" District. tennis clubs, public“s‘'wi'mi5in|"polir serving" more than """fltTarVs "p“ygT^unds"'fnd"o"th%"; slmriarTsVs'. " Xh^pTincipal l^l^iL^rVfo'r 'a^n7lf°the above_ lis-^.u-s^shall « A •s?”clJr?s sh’Ll^Sra'SInimumtf fTfty"feet from"aAy lot line.' ORONO CC 279 (4-lr84) • * • • S 10.20 D Public Service Structures. Public service \\“Vha ”A b°e ‘fo^n^thSt thich'it'irtrSe located ”nd \hu7prLote ’'tL“geL« required public hearings for public improvement projects »h»ll not ^^uire a conditional use permit but o“=h structures shall be subject to all other appropriate standards set section; amendments to approved plans placement of these structures will the adoptionCity to all affected property owners 14 days prior to the adoption of the amended plans by the Council. Source: Ordinance 29r 2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 E. Greenhouses. Commercial greenhouses provided all outside storage is fenced in such a manner so as to screen the stored material from view when observed from the be adjoining lot. Commercial greenhouse structures shall located in a required yard area, and are subject general zoning code requirements pertaining to accessory structures. Source: Ordinance 72, 2nd Series Adopted: 8-14—89 F. Recreation Areas. Private gun clubs, archery ranges, ski slides, provided the area is fenced and no part of the principal use is less than 150 feet from any lot line. Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 G. Guest Houses & Non-rental Guest Apartments. 1) Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings, including their domestic empllyees or their'^non-paying guesta. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 ORONO CC 280 (4-lr84) S 10.20 Kon-rental Gue^t Apar««ents.^^ within the_Principal one access door to the ,, . primary access to the structure, and such guest apartment shall address apartment. Application | ^^.g^atmentfentryway and interior the concerns of parking, have utilities metered access method. Such _iJguEi”utilities and shall notseparately from the principal residence urxxi^x have a separate street address. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 H Planned Residential Development, detached sin/le “ly dwellings only and subject to the limitations of Section 10.32. T nutalex Credit. One duplex may be located on a single lot a„=-^“t°e«er service ^”a\'afAb"le!’"n1°tY'"i°^ 'N district' A diplex i^““defrned°as a two-family unit residential building.j. Apiaries. K Antenna Structure. One independent structure with a'ntenna or subordinate to and ^ont-a^l thereto that is not attached to same lot and customarily antenna structure does another structure provided '^e back from any rot”fn%"^*liVtVnc%"\f!easVegl/rto the total height of the antenna structure L. Farms (Crop and stock). Provided that the area is ten or more acres. M. Animals. The keeping of domestic animals for non-commercial purposes i"=^"'?^5f,„^°o|®|ne*°a*cre in aggregate, occupants of the premises *nIn”i^Tl%uild"ingr“m“ t be I?a^able Ifr'elcranlmTr I^t, elcept^as hereinafter set forth A mi„i„um Il two acres of open pasture must he |vai lab le^for^a^ sing^le^h^ shall not include low lying lands unusable ^gUre « gr^^ g- Iny person keeping such animals must comply with the provisions the City Code. ORONO CC 280-1 (4-1-84) -----ITT-W ItB ■ § 10.20 N. Stables and Barns -' Private. The use of an accessory buildinc for keeping animals for non~connnercia 1 purposes provided it is for the non-commercial use of the property ovmer or resident and meets the available area Paragraph M of this subsectxon. Further, no such structure shall be located less than 150 feet from the nearest adjacent residence and no closer than 75 feet from the nearest lot line. 0. Stables and Barns - Public. The use of accessory buildings or land for the storage or rearing of animals line. P. Riding Academy. Any such instruction maintained as an accessory use and conducted by the owner shall meet the requirements of Sections M, N and 0 of this subdivision and no such instruction shall occur less than 100 feet from an adjace residence or less than 75 feet from the nearest lot line. Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 ORONO CC 280-2 (4-1-84) i TO:Chair Peterson and Planning Commission Members FROM:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:January 4,1996 SUBJECT: Proposed Zoning Code Amendment - Oversized Accessory Structure Table List of Exhibits A - Section 10.03, Subd. 9 B - Amendment Option I C - Amendment Option 2 D - List of Typical Oversize Accessory Structures Summary It was recently pointed out that the oversized accessoiy' structure ordinance adopted in 1989 places a 3,000 s.f. limit on the footprint area of individual accessory buildings, and a 6,000 s.f. limit on the aggregate square footage of all accessory buildings on a property, regardless of acreage in excess of 9 acres. It was suggested to staff that this be expanded to allow additional square footages for properties larger than the current 9-acre threshold. A number of options are presented for Planning Commission's consideration. Background A recent building permit application for an accessory structure on a 20-plus acre residential parcel required a variance application due to the 6,000 s.f. accessory structures limit per the table in Section 10.03, Subd. 9(C-2). That table, and the requirements for meeting principal structure setbacks, limiting height, and requiring execution of a \NTitten covenant, were adopted in 1989 to allow some flexibility for accessory structures on large properties without the need for a variance. The current table sets 1,000/2,000 s.f. limits (each accessory structure/all accessory structures) for lot areas less than 2 acres. The table then adds 200/400 s.f. for the third acre; an additional 200/400 s.f. per each additional half acre until the 5 acre threshold; then 200/400 s.f. per additional acre up to the 9 acre threshold, above which no additional square footage is allowed. In each case, the allowance for total accessory structures is double that for individual structures. The table yields a decreasing percentage of lot area potentially covered by accessory structures as lot area increases. For example, a 2 acre lot with 2,400 s.f of accessory structures is 2.20% covered. A 5 acre lot with its allowable 4,000 s.f of accessory structures is 1.93% covered. A 9.01 acre lot with its full complement of 6,000 s.f of accessory structures is 1.45% covered by accessory buildings. r: liL- : — I'-t, Proposing Zoning Memo January 4,1996 Page 2 With the current 6,000 s.f. limit, a 20 acre lot would be 0.69% co\ ered, a 30 acre lot would be 0.46% covered, etc. Two Options for Table Expansion Option 1 would limit individual and total accessory structure square footages based on a specified percentage of lot area. One possible limit is 0.70% of lot area per individual structure, and 1.40% of lot area for the total accessory structure areas. For a 20 acre lot this yields 6,100/12,200 s.f.; for a 30 acre lot yields 9,150/18,300 s.f Option 2 takes a slightly different approach, adding 200/400 s.f for each additional acre above 10 acres. The yield here for a 20 acre lot is 5,000/10,000 s.f; and for a 30 acre lot is 7,000/14,000 s.f. Option 2, therefore, yields slightly reduced square footages than Option 1. Why Change the Current Table? The argument in favor of extending the existing table is that it currently gives no direction as to what may be appropriate for larger acreages. It dictates that any individual accessory building over 3,000 s.f, or any total of structures exceeding 6,000 s.f, will require a variance. Why not require a variance for such large structures? Perhaps the main concern is that it is difficult if not impossible to define a legitimate hardship that justifies exceeding the limits. Is there a reason for setting an absolute size limit on individual accessory buildings regardless of lot size? There are no specific limitations in the Building Code, other than requiring higher design standards as buildings get larger. However, recall that Subdivision 9(C-3), Item c, requires the owner to execute a covenant that limits future subdivision of the property as long as the building exists. The owner clearly accepts the risk of constructing an expensive building that may become a liability to the property by hindering its future subdivision. Is there a threshold at which building size becomes an aesthetic issue regardless of the size of thfi property ? Should there be specific screening requirements for structures over a certain area or dimension? Should there be compatibility requirements such as exterior wall finish, color, etc. for extremely large buildings? Should they be set back further from lot lines than principal structure minimums? Should the limit on the size of individual accessory structures stay at 3.000 s.f? If so, we might still want to allow more than 6,000 s.f of total accessory structures for properties of 10 aeres or larger. Recall that a property is allowed only one oversized accessory structure. Proposing Zoning Memo January 4,1996 Page 3 Third Option Option 3. If there is no legitimate hardship for an oversized accessory structure, and if the City wants to have some aesthetic control over individual buildings over 3,000 s.f, then consider expanding the individual building table via a conditional use permit. Make individual larger buildings a conditional use, and require additional necessary controls as part of conditional use permit approval. Expansion of the "total accessory structures" allowance could be accomplished by changing that part of the table without making it a conditional use. Staff Recommendation Planning Commission should discuss its goals regarding oversize accessory structures and conclude whether the current limits are appropriate; whether the individual structure limits or total structure limits or both, should be revised to avoid the need for variance requests; or whether the table should be expanded to allow larger stiucturcs (or more total square footage of structures) via a conditional use permit or under stricter performance standards. WffrA § 10.03 . ! . • ... . ^ ; .i • '•■•.< V 'U ... V * . *» • •» . • » • • >• •. I* / / Planned ReViSilSVi^velopMatl VM'be^loc occupancy for the ndw struc^^^and suSv^ructure remove . • . #•• • Source: O^^^iance 26» 2nd Series Adopted: 7-^'^B6 SuiJS. 8. Lots to Face Streets. Each lot sha public or appropriat^prrvate^^easemei^ face on a Subd. 9. Accessory Buildings. A. Time of Construction. No accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any 1°*.«,ct«so\"v construction of the principal building to whxch it is accessory. nor shall an accessory building exceed 30 feet in height. Source: Ordinance 72» 2nd Series Adopted: 8-14-89 accessory bulld^i;, s^hVA r«e%^i'i%n,bir"e except that accelsory structures in excess of 1,000 square feet will be allowed under the following conditions. 1. Not more than one Oversized Accessory Structure (OAS) shall be permitted on any property. An "Oversized Iclesso” Structure" is defined as an accessory LA\”:winVU:ro*oTerlc:e^sVrr“st^u\“fe^ Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (D); - Tennis courts encroac^ent-type°^^^^ gr^'ater'^than 1,000 s.f? - Paddocks or arenas ORONO CC 255 (4-1-84) i * * • . $ 10.03 • t. •• ;; •. : 1 j••• V.*‘ t ^. .i • • • r • * • * ■* !• • ; - *: * ^ •*< *. •• . 2. oversized Accessory Structures regulated by the following tables are Lot Area 0-1.99 acre 2.00- 3.00 acre 3.01- 3.50 acre 3.51- 4.00 acre 4.01- 4.50 acre 4.51- 5.00 acre 5.01- 6.00 acre 6.01- 7.00 acre 7.01- 8.00 acre 8.01- 9.00 acre 9.01 acre or more Maximum Individual Accessory Structure Footprint Area 1.000 s.f. 1,^00 s.f. 1.400 s.f. 1.600 s.f. 1.800 s.f. 2.000 s.f. 2,200 s.f. 2.400 s.f. 2.600 s.f. 2.800 s.f. 3.000 s.f. Maximum Allowed Total of All Accessory Structure Footprint Areas* on a Property 2.000 s.f. 2.400 s.f'. 2.800 s.f. 3.200 s.f. 3.600 s.f. 4.000 s.f. 4.400 s.f. 4.800 s.f. 5.200 s.f. 5.600 s.f. 6.000 s.f. * Excluding non-roofed tennis courts, pools, paddocks arenas 3. Any Oversize Accessory Structure shall be subject to the following condit.-* ons: a) No such accessory structure shall be located within a required yard area (principal setbacks must be met). Further, no such structure shall the front lot line than the front line of the f^^®ted on the property, and no such ac-essory structure shall be located less than 30' from the side or rear lot line regardless w less strict principal structure setbacks apply. b) The maximum height for such accessory structure shall be 30' or the defined height of the principal residence structure on the property, whichever is less. c) Such structure shall be allowed only when the property owner agrees and covenants in writing with the City as follows: i. No future subdivision will at-nr-oved that daces the structure within a lot that has no prinlipal structure, except that the City g^Q^g^sizedacoroval may grant a finite time period in which the oversize accessory structure may remain without a principal structure# in o?der that a principal Structure may be constructed. At the end of this time period the oversized accessory structure must be removed if no principal structure has been constructed. ORONO CC 255-1 (8-14-89) .• • • • I. • f • • • • ^ •. ^ % •« . Wl. - ». ... . » • ^ .1 ,»J . ^, I •-. <» X ■ » V* # «• J..#-5;* V: • V ,-4 -V-* ^ -r *: •.*..* ' *• • .4 c*. *. . ’ * • -i «. ^ ; .*v <'*1. j ^*1■* 7 • .t S 10.03 ii. If the property is •ubdivided, th. oversize thet structure will be l»<=«««'>.V/Vor*'thi ui?eS size of accessory minimum lot area requirement for the given building. iii. In subdivision approval# the setback required for the oversize accessory structure as defined herein shall remain. Such covenant shall be binding on current and owners and shall be filed in the chain of title of the property. Source* Ordinance 72# 2nd Series Adopted; 8-14-89 D. Location. No detached garages or other accessory building shall be located nearer the front or line than the principal building on that lot except on -treet# Sb.d^?rf^''e^*Vr^A^e^«*eVror ‘^fJ seltiln'ah^'i'l ’noraypry ?o ”a!lethors lots^ivided by roadways or corner lots. Source; Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted; 7-14-86 ■ 1. Location of Principal Building to No principal building shall be located closer than 75 wu _____marV nf a lake abutting the *V : O’" 2, Variance. From Lakeshore Setback. i4w,,<=r,v a variance from the requirements of Item 1 above shall be referred to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for its approval before final action by the Council. Source; Ordinance No. 155 Effective Date; 2-14-74 ORONO CC 255-2 (4-1-84) > %• •L_ S 10.03 ••*T footprint are. shall be located at least 15 feet from any lot line. : Source8 Ordinance 72» 2nd Series Adopted; 8~14~89 . .■-• > >. -a *4 i^V. Subd. 10. Conditional Use Permit Required. All acces sory buildings on through lots located in "R" Districts s a require a conditional use permit. » Subd. 11. Dwelling Use Prohibited. No cellar, basement, tent, trailer, or accessory building shall at any time be used a an occupied dwelling. •.. ■ S ' ^ ^ ORONO CC 255-3 (4-1-84) - S 6rW. 8 Option 1 - Based on % of Lot Area following table: 2. Oversized Accessory Structures are regulated by the Maximum Allowed Approximate »Maximum Individual Total of All Accessory Percentage of Accessory Structure Structure Footprint Areas*Total Average Lot Area Footprint Area on a Propertv Lot Area 0-1.99 acre 1,000 s.f.2,000 s.f.4.59% 2.00-3.00 acre 1,200 s.f.2,400 s.f.2.20% 3.01-3.50 acre 1,400 s.f.2,800 s.f.1.98% 3.51-4.00 acre 1,600 s.f.3,200 s.f.1.96% 4.01-4.50 acre 1,800 s.f.3,600 s.f.1.94% 4.51-5.00 acre 2,000 s.f.4,000 s.f.1.93% 5.01-6.00 acre 2,200 s.f.4,400 s.f.1.83% 6.01-7.00 acre 2,400 s.f.4,800 s.f.1.70% 7.01-8.00 acre 2,600 s.f.5,200 s.f.1.59% 8.01-9.00 acre 2,800 s.f.5,600 s.f.1.51% 9.01-10.00 acre 3,000 s.f.6,000 s.f.1.40% 10.01 acre or more 0,70 % of lot area 1.407o of lot area 1.40% This yields as follows: 10.01 ac 3,050 s.f.6,100 s.f. 15 ac 4,575 s.f 9,150 s.f 20 ac 6,100 s.f.12,200 s.f. 25 ac 7,625 s.f 15,250 s.f 30 ac 9,150 sf 18,300 s.f 35 ac 10,675 s.f 21,350 s.f 40 ac 12,200 s.f 24,400 s.f 60 ac 18,300 s.f.36,600 s.f. i.e.+305 s.f./acre +610 s.f./acre * Excluding non-roofed tennis courts, pools, paddocks, arenas Option 2 - Based on Additional Increment S.F. Per Acre following table: 2. Oversized Accessory Structures are regulated by the Maximum Individual Accessory Structure Maximum Allowed Total of All Accessory Lot Area Footprint Area on a Property 0-1.99 acre 1,000 s.f.2,000 s.f. 2.00-3.00 acre 1,200 s.f.2,400 s.f. 3.01-3.50 acre 1,400 s.f.2,800 s.f. 3.51-4.00 acre 1,600 s.f.3,200 s.f. 4.01-4.50 acre 1,800 s.f.3,600 s.f. 4.51-5.00 acre 2,000 s.f.4,000 s.f. 5.01-6.00 acre 2,200 s.f.4,400 s.f. 6.01-7.00 acre 2,400 s.f.4,800 s.f. 7.01-8.00 acre 2,600 s.f.5,200 s.f. 8.01-9.00 acre 2,800 s.f.5,600 s.f. 9.01-10.00 acre 3,000 s.f.6,000 s.f. 10,01 acre or more 3,000 s.f for first 6,000 s.f for first 10 acres plus 200 s.f 10 acres plus 400 s.f. for each additional for each additional acre acre This yields as follows: 10.01 ac**3,002 s.f**6,004 s.f.** 15 ac 4,000 s.f 8,000 s.f 20 ac 5,000 s.f 10,000 s.f 25 ac 6,000 s.f 12,000 s.f 30 ac 7,000 s.f.14,000 s.f 35 ac 8,000 s.f 16,000 s.f. 40 ac 9,000 s.f 18,000 s.f 60 ac 13,000 s.f.26,000 s.f i.e.+200 s.f./acre +400 s.f./acre * Excluding non-roofed tennis courts, pools, paddocks, arenas *♦ Interpolation would be allowed for 10.01 acres or more Comparison of Options 1 and 2 Area 10 ac 15 ac 20 ac 25 ac 30 ac 35 ac 40 ac 60 ac Individual Structure -Option 1 _QDtion 2 3.000 s.f. 4,575 s.f. 6,100 s.f. 7,625 s.f. 9,150 s.f. 10,675 s.f. 12.200 s.f. 18,300 s.f. 3.000 s.f. 4.000 s.f. 5.000 s.f. 6.000 s.f. 7.000 s.f. 8.000 s.f. 9.000 s.f. 13,000 s.f. em c~i All Structures Option 1 ■ Option 2 6,000 s.f. 9.150 s.f. 12,200 s.f. 15.250 s.f. 18,300 s.f. 21,350 s.f. 24,400 s.f. 36,600 s.f 6.000 s.f. 8.000 s.f. 10.000 s.f. 12.000 s.f. 14.000 s.f. 16.000 s.f. 18.000 s.f. 26.000 s.f. '^^li .’■* ni-. ti j n Example of Existing OversUe Structure To Use As A Six. Reference Location Bam North of Orono High School EoQtprint. 30'x 60 ’= 1,800 sf Newer Bam West of Co. Rd. 6 at Watertown Road Daycare at Co. Rd 6Hwy 12 30'x 80 ’ 60'x 60 ’ = 2,400 sf * 3,600 sf Daycare at Hwy 12 & Luce Line (Southwest Side)50'x 75'= 3,750 sf Windward Marina Building (Co. Rd.15)45 *x 90 ’= 4,050 sf Orono Council Chambers 80'x 55'= 4,400 sf Orono Administration 95'x 65'= 6,200 sf Typical Tennis Court 60 ’x 120'= 7,200 sf Orono Police Dept.I15'x 165’= 7,500 sf Lupient Bam North Side of Hwy 12 West of the Orono Schools 70'x 110'= 7,700 sf Former Kokesh Barn NW of Watertown Rd. & Orchard Park 60'x 160'=* 9,600 sf Orono Public Works Building IIO'x 235'= 26,000 sf Long Lake Tennis Bubble 160'x 210'= 34,000 sf exM. fi t. . . - -I • S 7. To: From: Chair Steve Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: January 8, 1996 Subject: Comprehensive Plan Amendment No, 6 - MUSA Boundary Revision List of Exhibits A - Maps of Existing and Proposed MUSA Boundary B - Legal Descriptions of Proposed MUSA Inclusions C - Selected Excerpts from Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application to Met Council; Background and Summary of Request Current and Proposed MUSA Acreage (Table) Analysis of Need Orono Schools Campus Map Related Issues Non-Related Issues Letter of Transmittal to Metropolitan Council Discussion The Citv Council has been studying options for sewage treatment in the rural area and ten neighborhoods have been identified as potentially being best served by installation of municiptd sewers in the long-term, as opposed to continuing with the use of septic systems. These ten areas are existing residential neighborhoods either close to the lakeshore or having average lot sizes significantly less than the two acre minimum necessary for long-teiro use of septic systems The City Council has determined it would be appropnate for the City to niake application to amend the MUSA (Metropolitan Urban Service Area) boundary in order to allow for the future construction of municipal sewer in these areas. Further the Council has suggested inclusion of portions of the Orono schools property currently Lside’the MUSA which may be necessary to accommodate a new ice arena as weU as otto school facilities, and has included one additional existing residence property and an undefined 50 units for future use by the City, in this proposed MUSA amendment. Exhibit B contains the proposed legal descriptions for the aretorr be included in ^A Exhibits A-1 and A-2 show the City’s current and proposed MUSA boundary. B«au« the Citv has chosen to develop its rural area using septic systems, but has recogmzed that pre existing neighborhoods of high density development may not be suited for long-term septic system use* the Orono MUSA boundary is not a continuous "fronf across the Ci^, but contains many non-contiguous ’’islands" and odd-shaped configurations based on property and neighborhood boundaries. The Dublic notice for this proposed amendment has been published as is legally '"equired However no individual property owners have been notified of this amendment, ^ staff have met with each of the ten neighborhoods to review the issues surrounding septic systems and sewers. r Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 6 - MUSA Boundary Revision January 8, 1996 Page 2 Note that if the City is successful in its application to the Metropolitan Council, the City Council will consider in more detail which areas of the City will be immediately scheduled for municipal sewer installation. Not all ten areas are proposed to be sewered immediately, and it may be five to ten years or more before all have been served. A few of the areas have requested sewer as soon as possible. Related/Non-Related Issues The Metropolitan Council considers a number of related and non-related issues when reviewing cities’ requests for MUSA boundary amendments. These include; Viability of the City’s on-site systems management plan. Sewer in-flow/infiltration management plan. Status of local stormwater planning. Land use policies including rural density. Transportation. Housing, especially in the areas of affordable and life cycle housing. In its application to the Metropolitan Council, the City has addressed each of these issues in a manner that we hope will gain acceptance from Metropolitan Council. Some of these issues may require additional actions by the City in the form of specific ordinance adoption and/or additional comprehensive plan amendments. It is the City's expectation that Metropolitan Council will review the proposal within a 60-day timeframe and by mid-March the City should have a good handle on what, if any, additional requirements or conditions will be placed on approval of this amendment. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed MUSA boundary revisions as presented. Options for Action 1 Recommend approval as presented. 2. Approve with conditions or revisions. 3. Table for further information 4. Recommend denial. 5.Other. Eji u« lil ?on-:osxo^ 2n£-|w|? g SIP" e-3 s-$ I'-ssS. laa tn o i» Fa ^ f I 3 ^ ^ a < r» 7 “g g. a. I >• P.in> to n“ Siacj 3 Swf: pi f?? S T? 5 pg>ii| 3| I ^|••SI?5 ? P |52 ^ £ S r uuu X X X X X X ^ X X X r;; r g*=•?? s« &| Q. c nj *o *0 •« *osssss ^ ^1 5 = 3c<-='o s> >cc 3o :4 (/] ;? s» 3»;? ? S’7 2»_ U ti" .^ ^ ^ «N» ^ ^ 1P« ^ g^<<<= = '»^nn2:n=:x -• SS'*3 § S' o 1 IB. “--5 2) ca »1'^ - a •< E*2 Q ^ 5gnc3 o 5.ra7 k « H. ^ a *T1 o z 3a a o :? t/» o II 1^ Ji ° S35S3I55S xxxxxxxxx <<<<==“< S X S |g f* 3 pG-l-; i?si*a 11 r* ins ?9*S — ri 3 I *a 3 •S a *< -i3X li H o 1 = ^ CO »J J3 nn3^00 z eIff I Appendix J CITY OF ORONO 2750 Keilev Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crvstal Bay, MN 55323 Phone (612)473-7357 Fax 473-0510 VOTTCE ,• u -no in the Council Chambers at 2780 Kelley The Planninz Commission will hold a public hea , maner of a proposed amendment Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary to mclude the foUowmg . A. B. Part XDC - North Long Lake Commencing at the northwest f ^eTs^d^Sou^iwest Quarter to its intersection with the centerlme of f’Quaner of Section 26 to the be<^inning; thence south along sai w shoreline of Long Lake to the easterly shore of Long Lake; thence sou^easterly alot^ ^ h ^ southerly line intersecting line of RLS No. 1 j ; g norSi 403’00 feet; thence west 200.53 of RLS No. 1379; thence east .35.5 j fe.t. . of RLS No. 934; thence feet; thence north 46.1 feet more ^est line of Section 26; thence west 115 feet more or subdivision No. 291; thence west to the east north to the south Ime of Lot Addition; thence north along said eSAH 6 to the point of beginning, and there endmg. Pan XX - Long Lake Country ClubPan AA - 1-WU5 ------------- r rnmer of the Southeast Quaner of Section -7, Towns ip Commencing at the northwes Southeast Quaner to 118 North Range 26 West. ^ intersection being the actual point of its intersection with the ^olr of the Northwest Quaner of die beginning. Thence south ^ ^^e north line of Tract B. RLS No. Southeast Quarter ^ disunce of 401.94 feet; thence easterly along 926 a distance of 4 comer of Lot 3 ending. c. Part XXI - East Long Lake D. Part AAi - tast j-uug KnnnHarv of the Citv of Oroflo. said point being the acnm PEwmmme.c:« so-ath .0 a point 1754.76 teat Une of said Section 35 to a distance of 234.52 feet; ‘hence south..iy par^ centerline to a point the centerline of Old Long Lake Road; 590 feet; thence west 99_ :> 799.8 feet west of the east line of said Seca . jjne of the feet; thence north 350.5 feet; south to the centerline Northeast Quaner of the Southeast centerline of U.S. Highway No. of U.S. Highway No. 12. ’ f the'^Northwest Quarter of the Southeastj,iiro?trnSirce^rtrth!r^oLofhc^^^ Part XXn * Orono Orchards Commencing at the northeast Qt^aner to the North Range 23 West: whence point of beginning. Thence centerline of Lyman .Wenue. ^ centerline e.xtended of vacated westerly along the centerlme of L, man A . gpencer Avenue to Spencer Avenue; thence °°^^'®^‘'^^eswriy line of Lot 37, Orono Orchards; thence its intersection with the extende ^ easterly comer of Lot 1, southwesterly along the -"f" lines of Lots 41, 40 39 and Orono Orchards; thence Line Trail; thence southwesterly along the 33 e.xtended to the centerlme intersection with the centerline of Orono Orchar cenieriinc of the Luce me ,.o„fhwesterlv alona the centerlint of Orono Orch^ oa Road; thence southeasterly an southeast Quaner of the to a point 400 feet south of the Auditor’s Subdivision No. j 07, Quaner of Section 2; thence e:^t ° f';“;,‘^L;t 2 m the south line of Lot 1. Auditor's thence northerly along the east seconds west a distance of Subdivision No. 307; a distance of 190.97 feet to the centerlme 65 feet; thence nonh ^j^ion^ the centerline of Woodhill Avenue to the east AvMue: thence easterly aion_ m __ . 5 east a distance of 190.y / leet to uic 65 feet; mence uoiU4 ‘ centerline of Woodhill Avenue to the east Ou^=r^S«uon 2^ ”toe oTthe Northwei Quaner of Sectioh of beginning and there terminatmg. Pan aXXin - Fox Ridge Coounencing a. the -nhwen^^^^^ 146 the Nonh Range 23 -f„ Ridne'. said point being the actual point of trended nordl .me toe of'Fox Ridge’ to the nordie® comer of beginning; thence '“■“‘1'east toe of ’Fox Ridge’ to the southeast comer ’Fox Ridge"; thence »“ J -pox Ridge' a distance of 550 feet; then thereof; thence ^jong the somh toe of ’Fox Ridge’ to the centerlme of north 50 feet; thence wester.y ai , to the south line extended of the County Road No. 146; thence south along ^ ^ of 700 feet: plat of "Byfield" thence 89 degrees^ 58 distance of 415.39 feet; thence north centerline of County Road No. 14«; thence south along the center 146 to the point of beginning and there tenninaung. F. Pan XXIV - Webber Hills u thf* Southwest Quarter of Section 3, Township 117 Beginning at the southeast comer or j^id Southwest Quaner to the North Range 23 West; thence north along the eas 5^,^ northeast comer thereof; thence westerly ^ ^ j^id Southwest Quaner; southwest Quaner to a P°ir4 ^^e. eas^ or ^aid centerline thence south to the centerline of Wdlow Dnve. ^ of to its intersection with the south line o southwTSi Quaner of Section 3; the southeast comer of the Southwest ua Quaner of the Northwest Quaner thence south parallel with the ^ ^ distance of 600 feet; thence east to of Section 10, Township 11/ Nor^ alon- the centerline of Willow Dnve to the centerline of WUlow Dmr; die north line of Section 10 to with the point of beginning. G. Pan XXV - Edge wood Hills u nf RLS No 1098; thence north 0 degrees 5a minutes Beginning at the southeast comer of • • ^dnutes 08 seconds west a w«l a distance of 433.6 f«t; , distance of dUance of 525.59 feet; a distance of 271.12 feet; thence 464.46 feet; thence soudi a ^ distance of 94.8 feet; thence south 7 degrees 57 south 38 degrees 49 minutes we ^ 3 distance minutes west a distance ^.49 feet. ± ^distance of 292.77 feet; dience of 518.3 feet; thence south 26 d - g, Une of the Burlin^on ?4°o"Sd ”l^n) right.f-way; thcnco northeasterly along said north Ime to the point of beginning. H. Part XXVI - Bracketts Point e riiirinr n "Green Trees on Tanager Lake , thence Beginning at the Qut tot o'to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence southerly along the east ^ ^ak, Minnetonka to the most southerly southerly and point"' thence continuing easterly and northerly along point of Lot 3, Block '• B"ck=^Po>^J m uie the shoreline of^= M Tanager Uke bridge); thence centerime of CSAH ^ intersection with the east Ime extended of along the thence southerly along said east line extended to the F) "Green Trees on point of beginning, and there endmg. I. Pan XXVII - Foxhill J. Pan XXVU - t-oxmii nonheasierly line of the soutfav-wierly ” * ' Une exieaded to the shore o Subdivision"; ±ence southeasterly alon, shoreline of Lake Minnetonka to its Lake Minnetonka; thence north^ter y , northerly along said west intersection with the west line or southwesterly along said nght-of- line to the north right-of-way line ot ^ poxhill; thence northwesterly. way line to the most <^-^«^^V°'^^?easterW ^nonhcrly and oorahaaa«r y „o„h 20 dajr«s 4 joa^«s ^7 southeast comer of Lot 8. BJock l northerly comer ol Lot I, BIock seconds west a distance ot 5o.O line of the Dakota Rail, Inc_ Foxhill; thence southwesterly ^ northerly point of Railroad right-of-way to a pomt directly e . riaht-of-way line ot Dakou the County Road No. R^ad No. 146; thence southwester y Rail. Inc.; thence west to the ‘ ^ there ending, along said centerline to the point ot be^innin,. an Part XXVni - Bayridge/Hartwood Conmiencing at the ce^er^f *e Rarinl Railroad, said southwesterly along said euKt y , line a distance of 1292.86 f“‘- continuing southwesterly along satd n,n „onh 7 west to the westerly jji.g fear: thence south 73 degrees west a degrees 42.5 minutes west a ~ .q jj^^utes west to the shore of Lake distance of 200 feet; along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to the Minnetonka: thence so>hherly and ^t. ^ ^ shoreline of centerline of CSAH la; of County Road No. 51; thence w^terly along “ou^'Road-No. 51 to the point of beginning and there endutg. Part XXrX • Orono Schools Campus Conunencing at the l!™g“te wesUine of County Road No. 6. the actual p Northeast Quarter of of County Road No. 6 ^ P° section 28; thence south to the south line of the the Southwest Quarter of s Section 28; thence westerly along said south Im Quarter of the Southwest Northeast Quarter of the Southwwt r point 66 fee. east f “"^66 feet; dience soud. 0 degrees Quarter; thence sou „otth 89 degrees west a distance of 331.04 eet. a distance of 485.96 leet. V 1 t i<i south 0 degr=« 10 miuuKs w«t a degreos 10 mtnutts west to^ oi U^S ^ -3_ said cenierline to a point 900 feet west of the c^t line or m . Township 118 Nonh Range West; ^nce ^ 3^,,, 28 line of Section 33; thence north parallel , section 28 a distance of a disance of 750 feet; thence east panUel U» point of 900 feet; thence north along the east line of the west half beginning and there ending. L. Part XXX - Dillman Property Beginning at the southeast comer of fcetf’thracf^MS profheghttung and there ending. An persons wishing to be heard wUI of the area proposed to be included in the MLbA is avauau City of Orono By: Panning Commission Michael P. Gafffon Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator To be published the week of January 1. 1996. ; • CITY OF ORONO JANUARY 1996 PROPOSED AMENDMENT: COMPREHENSIVE SERVER POUCY PLAN MUSA BOUNDARY TABLE OF CONTENTS o Cover letter O Application (Standard format) Page O Supporting documents: ..............................I Table of Contents......................................................................... List of Maps and Tables....................................................................................... I, Background and Summary of Request......................................................... Table 1 - Current and Proposed MUSA Acreage Map 1 * Current MUSA Map 2 - Proposed MUSA Additions n. Analysis of Need............................................• ........................................^ A. Existing Septic Systems Inventory & Analysis 1. Overview of Problem 2. "Nonconforming" vs. "Failing Systems 3. Evaluation Methods 4. Table 2 - Summary of Systems by Neighborhood 5. Individual System Data and Neighborhood Maps 6. Summary of Results and Prioritization B. Alternatives Considered 1. Identification of Alternatives 2. Analysis of Alternatives 3. Conclusion C. Orono Schools and Hockey Arena Site I. Orono Schools Campus - Map 3 D. Additional Needs 1. Dillman Property - Map 4 2. Additional Undefined Units in. Projected^^^^ I ^.rr ■> A- ■ B. Flow Projection Data Table 3 - Sewered Households 1995/2000/2010 Table 4 - Sewered Employees 1995/2000/2010 Table 5 - Sewered Population 1995/2000/2010 Table 6 - Residential Equivalent Connections (REC’s) 1995/2000/2010 Table 7 - Projected REC’s and Sewered Population 1995-2000 Table 8 - Projected Wastewater Flows 1995/2000/2010 IV. Proposed Infrastructure Additions & Improvements .....................................^ A. Description and Preliminary Design by Neighborhood B. Future Planned Trunk Upgrades Upstream of L.S. 60 C. Capacity and Design Flow Data D. Construction Timetable E. Assessment of Costs ........................59V. Related Issues..................................................................... A. On-Site Systems Management Plan 1. Philosophy 2. Ordinances and Management Program B. Inflow/Infiltration Management Plan ....63VI. Non-Relaied Issues................................................ .............................. A. Interim Strategy for the Reduction of Nonpomt Source Pollution B. Land Use Policies for Funire Development 1. Rural Density Analysis - Table 9 2. Current Status of Development in Orono C. Transportation D. Housing ................................69 Appendix...................................................................... A. On-Site Sewage Treatment Systems Ordinance B. Sample Individual System Record Card C. Sample Inspection Report Form D. MWCC Matching Grant Request (7-12-93) E MC Approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment tfj (4-Zo-yi) F. Figure - Correlation of Annual Sewer Flows with Elevation of Lake Minnetonka G. Excerpt: 1993 Orono CSPP Update - I/I Abatement Program H. Ordinance #129 re: I/I Abatement I. Public Information Brochures and Letters re: I/I J. Hearing Notice/Proposed MUSA Legal Descriptions \ 1 L.. i i List of Maps and Tables Page Map 1 - Current MUSA.....................................................................^ Map 2 - Proposed MUSA Additions ...................................................^ Map 3 - Orono Schools Campus......................................................39-A Map 4 - Dillman Property..............................................................39-B Map 5 - Interceptor Service Areas/Intercommunity Connections ....41-A Individual Neighborhood Maps: Part XDC; North Long Lake.......................................................H Part XX; Long Lake Country Club............................................14 Part XXI: East Long Lake..........................................................16 Part XXII: Orono Orchards........................................................19 Pan XXm: Fox Ridge ...............................................................21 Pan XXIV: Webber Hills..........................................................24 Pan XXV: Edgewood Hills.......................................................26 Pan XXVI: Brackett’s Point ......................................................28 PanXXVB: Foxhill..................................................................31 Pan XXVni: Bayridge/Hartwood..............................................33 Proposed Infrastructure Additions, Maps for Parts XDC-XXX............44-55 Table 1 - Cunent and Proposed MUSA Acreage ....................................3 Table 2 - Summary of Systems by Neighborhood ...................................8 Table 3 - Sewered Households 1995/2000/201C....................................41 Table 4 - Sewered Employees 1995/2000/2010.....................................41 Table 5 - Sewered Population 1995/2000/2010.....................................41 Table 6 - Residential Equiv. Connections (REC's) 1995/2000/2010.......42 Table 7 - Projected REC’s and Sewered Population 1995-2000.............42 Table 8 - Projected Wastewater Flows 1995/2000/2010.........................42 Table 9 - Rural Density Analysis...........................................................65 _.J SUPPORTING DOCU jVIENTATION I. Background and Summary of Request In 1975 the City of Orono adopted as its key guiding principle, the enhancement and preservation of the water quality of Lake Minnetonka. Orono s plan to accomplish this goal is many-faceted, including: - preserving existing wetlands to enhance stormwater runoff quality - strict lakeshore setback regulations and limitations on hardcover percentages to maximize infiltration of runoff - limitations on development density in the upper watershed areas to no more than one dwelling unit per 2 acres Orono has experienced great success in each of these areas over the last two dwades. Wetlands have been protected and enhanced by private property owners throughout the Cit>’ and virmally no wetland acreage has been lost by filling or draining. Stnct enforcement of setback and hardcover regulations has resulted in a substantial green buffer along the majority of Orono’s 40 miles of Minnetonka lakeshore. And with 80% of Orono’s land area zoned for single family residential use with 2-acre and 5-acre minimum lot sizes, development of the rural areas of the City at low densities has continued at a slow but steady pace. Residential Areas Orono's 1980 Comprehensive Plan identified within the city's rural areas a number of neighborhoods developed long before the 1975 city-wide rezoning. Ttese ar^ included lots ranging from one-fifth acre to just over one acre in size. Five neighborhoods were identified as 'critical' in terms of continued septic system use, and a number of others were identified as 'rural clusters' which should be monitored. During the 1980's and early 1990's, each of the five 'critical' neighborhoods was the subject of an Alternative Waste Management Study conducted by the City. In each case it was concluded that long-term septic system use was no» a viable option, and all five neighborhoods were sewered during the period 1981-1993. Six neighborhoods originally identified as 'rural clusters' and four additional neighborhoods are now being proposed for provision of sewer service. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regulations were revised in the late 1980 s to define existing septic systems not meeting a three-foot separation from seasonal water tables as ■nonconforming'. DNR Shoreland regulations and Orono ordinances require that nonconforming systems be made conforming. It is estimated that 50% of the existmg septic systems in Orono will be classified as nonconforming under the regulations. Lk._____ In 1993 the City conducted a study to detennine if cenain areas of the City *9 ““ ^ served by installation of municipal sewers rather than replacement of sepuc sys Ten individual neighborhoods were identified for analysis, including six wWch wra originally recognixed in the 1980 Comptehensive Plan as tequirmg close momtonng. ^h of L identified neighborhoods exhibits a smaU numb« of failing number of nonHtonfotming systems which must be replaced. municipal sewer may be the most appropnate solution to existing or exp in replacing nonWorming sewage systems in these areas mclude lot SJKS too smaU to accoLnodate replacement systems; steep slopes or other site-spec.fic proximity to lakes, wetlands and tributaries; and septic system replacement costs similar to the costs of municipal sewer. Six of the ten neighborhoods have submitted petitions to the City rec^esting that municip^ sewer be provided. The other four neighborhoods have yet to take a position or have indicated they are not interested in obtaining sewer service at this time. While the Citv of Orono proposes to construct municipal sewer for My of fh® idMtifi^ neighborhoods requesting it, the City has no intent to provide mumcip^ sewer (nor amend the \nJSA) for new residential development. Th^e ten MUSA additions wiU provide service only to fisdsting homes and a handful of interspersed vacant lots. «srhnnl Property Additionally it is the City’s intent to expand the MUSA to encompass the entue Orono School District campus, incorporating existing sewered school buildmgs which were from ±c ituttal 1980 MUSA boundary descrtpttons. and incorporating additional school district property on which a hockey arena is proposed to be constructed in 1996. ^^^^rinnal Needs adiacent to existing sewer lines, but whose properties are outside the MUSA. Rather than haring to apply fo^r an individual MUSA amendment each time such a request occurs, it would be pSerable if ±e City could honor these requests in a timely m^er ^nd up with a comprehensive MUSA amendment mcorporatmg a number of properties. Table 1 and Maps 1 and 2 on the following pages provide an overview of the proposed MUSA additions Table 1 - Current and Proposed MUSA Acreage MUSA Part/Name Gross Zoned Zoned Acreage Residential romm’l/lnd'l Existing MUSA I- U- m- IV- V- VI- DC- X - Navarre/Forest Lake/Tonkawa 1416 1370 46 Oroix) Scbools/Ind. Pk.89 44 45 Hackberry 20 20 • Herrick Circle 8 8 * Chevy Chase/Femdale Green 54 54 • Mtka BIufft/W.Femdale 87 87 m Co. Rd. 15 Marinas 3 1 2 Crystal Bay 63 61 2 Fulmer Property 8 8 Highway 12 Coridor West 251 228 23 Highway 12 Corridor East 12 12 North Shore/Scotch Pine 140 140 XIII - 650 North Brown XIV - Fairway Hills Addition XV - Long Lake/Fleming Trail XVI- Stubbs Bay XVII - Orono Sewer Plant Property XVIII - Nettles Property Total As Of 12-31-95 3 5 3 5 (Annexed to City of Long Lake) 199 6 4 199 6 4 2368 AC. 2250 Ac. 118 Ac. Proposed MUSA XDC - North Long Lake XX - Long Lake Country Club XXI - East Long Lake XXn - Orono Orchards XXin- Fox Ridge xxrv - Webber Hills XXV - Edgewood Hills XXVI - Bracketts Point XXVII- Foxhill XXVIII - Bayridge/Hartwood XXDC - Orono Schools/Hockey Site XXX - Dillman Property Total Proposed 26 29 24 43 17 58 20 36 53 35 26 29 24 43 17 58 20 36 53 35 Combined Total 56 56 - 399 Ac.399 Ac.0 Ac. 2767 Ac.2649 Ac.118 Ac. nnuaacre.wpd I I mat > « itl tf T r M e'««i ■ ■III iiimira II. Analysis of need A. Existing Septic Systems Inventory and Analysis 1. Overview of the Problem ssisiiss seasonal zones of saturation. By definition, these systems m nonconfonmng according to current state and local codes, and must be upgraded. In most cases, upgrading will require replacement of a trench or bed sysmm with Orono. neiLborhoods of high density or close proximity to lakeshore. These areas were an^zed to determine whether they have the capabUity of repairing/replacmg septic systems. Current system conditions were analyzed, and cost estunates or mi.”.ucipal sewer were developed. 1980 plan that ±ese neighborhoods were not at that time experiencmg sep^ probleL but would be monitored. While the incidence of failure has not mcreas^ in these neighborhoods, new definitions of "non-conforming systems and the requirement to upgrade such systems has become a senous concern. 2. "Nonconlorming" Versus "Failing" Systems. In 1989 MFC A Rules Chapter 7080 were revised to include in the definition of regulation defines limiting soU charactenstics as "those soU characterisucs whic preclude the installation of a standard system, including evidence of water table . L. n Water table is defined as "the highest elevation in the soU where aU voids are fiUed with water, as evidenced by presence of water or soil mottling or other infonnation". In the State of Minnesota, soil mottling has become the key factor m detenmmng the highest level of seasonal saturation in the soil. In Orono's loam and clay loam soils soil mottling and seasonal samration are commonly found from 2 ’ to 5' below the ground surface. In order to meet the 3 ’ separation requirement, a majority of new septic systems are mounds, which maintain the 3 separation. The use of soil mottling ior determining seasonal samration is subjective at best, but is the onlv practical method identified by the State for determining seasonal samration. However, in some years samration may not occur at the mottlmg level, and in other years saturation may occur at the mottling level for only a few days, weeks or months in a given year. The State has taken the position that even though the system might be too close to the water table for a short period dunng any given year, that system is not conforming. Verv few septic systems in Orono are failing at any given time, perhaps 3-5% or 1 in'25. However, as many as 500-600 of the 1150 existing systems are estimated as fitting the definition of "non-conforming". While these may treat sewage quite adequately most of the time, during some periods they may not. 3. Evaluation Methods. Each neighborhood was evaluated in terms of soil and water conditions, proximity to lakeshore or other water bodies, and lot sizes. Within each neighborhoot^ individual svstems were analyzed to determine system type (trench, mound, bed or cesspool), system condition (working, marginal or failing), conformity with 3 separation requirement (conforming or aonconforming). whether the system is m the designated "Shoreland" district, and whether or not an alternate drainfield site is available. Note that in analyzing system conditions, systems exhibiting no surface discharge and generally in working order were considered as "working"; systems obviously discharging to the surface were considered as "failing"; and systems^with a drainfield area saturated but not discharging were considered as "marginal". It is, therefore, possible and quite common to have a system that is working but is still non-conforming. 4 Table 2 - Summary of Systems by Neighborhood (Page 8) 5. Individual System Data and Neighborhood Maps (Pages 9-33) i 6. Summary of Resu'.is/PricTliization Evaluation of the accumulated data suggests that some neighborh|^s am mom "ssfts at th^iime but may be able to share in the cos: if the projects are sch^uled o a ten to twenty year period. As a result, each neighborhood was tanked in order of priority as to the need for an alternative to septic systems. Each neighborhood was ranked on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 being tta g^atest nerf for sewS in regards to: a) incidence of failing systems; b ma^tude o nonconfoLies; c) availability of futum sites ste for homes fiinin» «ite«; for homes with failing svstems; e) availability of ftiture sites tor ^^om systems; aJ fi shoreland impact. In that smdy, margmal and failing systems were both treated as failing systems. This analvsis resulted in a numerical rating for each neighborhood, and neighteiv iSids were then prioritized by tanking into areas of high, medium and low pri ty for installation of municipal sewer, as follows: high priority North Long Lake Long Lake Country Club Addition Orono Orchards medium priority Fox Ridge East Long Lake Webber Hills LOW PRIORITY Bay Ridge Edge wood Hills Bracketts Point Fox Hill The Citv Council in November 1994 concluded that although die Long Lake Country Club Addition had a medium tanking, it was a link m •’"“Sjng sower hShest priority area. North Long Lake, and therefore the North Long Lake/Long Uke Qmntrv Club area should be placed on a highest pnori^ for sewer installation in the near fomre. The Council ftirther concluded that Or^ Orchards is a slighUy lower priority, but sewer construction in that neighborho woufo also apl^^ m be pLent as soon as the Nord. Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club project is complete. The remaining seven neighborhoods were not placed on a specific time fraine for lewer.” «r. the City Council suggested if a.^- of foose ne-g^^ petition for sewer and agree to pay the entire cost of installation, the City proceed with those projects The Council further directed that the necessary MUSA amendment application Ifocess be commenced so that if any of these neighborhoods request sewer, the City will be able to accommodate them. j r It should be noted that the average lot size within the areas to be included in the MUSA is 1.3 acres, as compared to an average lot size of 2 to 3 acres for ^ new residential development occurring in unsewered areas of Orono smee 197^ Further, it should be noted that of 193 units proposed, only 4 \mis would be allocated to vacant lots. It has been and continues to be the City s position that rh«e ngighhorhood^ not result in nrpvision of capacitv for n£W development. musaanal.wpd B. Alternatives Considered 1. Identification of Alternatives - A number of alternatives to the continued use of standard on-site sewage treatment systems were considered, including installation of municipal sewers. The alternatives included: a. Demolition. Removal of homes that have neither acceptable on-site systems nor available alternate drainfield sites. b. "Alternative Systems" and "Experimental Systems" which might include: o Conforming design/substandard capacity systems on lots with minimal space, using holding tanks as an overflow mode. O Surface discharge systems (home plants). O Aerobic tank systems with reduced capacity conforming dra infields. c. Holding tanks. d. STEP systems (Sewage Tank/Effluent Pump) - each home has a septic t^ with effluent pump discharging to a shallow small diameter force-main leading to City sewer system. e. Neighborhood collector system with community drainfield, f. Enforced flow reductions (reno-fit with low water use fixmres). 2. Analysis of Alternatives a. Demolition - High cost of acquisition is not affordable to City. - Negative impact on existing neighborhood. - With high percentage of homes in some areas not having alternate sites, entire neighborhood would be subject to demolition. - Removal of "every other house", for instance, does not likely yield suitable drainfield sites for those remaining. - In older neighborhoods, reduces already-limited stock of affordable housing. - For the above reasons, demolition of selected homes in an existing neighborhood is not considered as a viable alternative. b. "Alieraative/Experimeniar Systems i. Surface Discharge Systems - Typically a packaged home-use individual treatment plant. . Surface discharge not approved in Minnesota. - Disposal of effluent in winter is a severe problem, may also be a problem in summer. - High individual system cost. . Ongoing individual plant maintenance required. ii. Aerobic Tank Systems ^ u - Claim to provide adequate treatment to allow drainfield size reduction. - To date. MPCA/UM have not fully approved drainfield size reduction concept. - Drainfield must still meet the 3-foot separation requirement, which cannot be met on many properties except by standard mound sytcm technology. - Ongoing maintenance required. iii. Conforming design/substandard capacity/holding tank - Concept is to use substandard capacity but conforming- location drainfield to its maximum capacity, then overflow into a holding lank (for re-entry to drainfield in off-peak hours, or for hauling away). - Concept assumes a small conforming trench drainfield can be constructed, which is not the case on many sites; not a viable system when drainfield is a mound. . This has been used as a short-term retro-fit in Orono (by adding holding tank to existing system) in developed ares where no other options e.xist or until sewer is available, but is not a long-term solution. None of the above methods are considered as viable alternatives to sewer for the reasons noted. c. Holding Tanks - Technically feasible for most sites. - Permanent maintenance requirement can become a problem and a burden. - High maintenance cost leads to restricted lifes7les not acceptable to most residents. - Estimated costs (1994 daa): - Holding tank instaUaiion 5-,^ - Regular maintenance (pumpouts) $5,0(X)/year ♦assumes 3 occupants x 75 gpd x 365 davs x Sl20/pumpom 2,(XX) 2al. per pumpout d. STEP Svstem . , , • . i,. Requires continued maintenance of individual septic tanks. . With each house having a pump to maintain, costs are ongomg. - This is a low front-end cost alternative to standard sewers, but may create permanent maintenance headaches. - Still requires hydraulic capacity in local sewer system. Neighborhood collector system with community drainfield - Sensitive to soil/water table conditions. - Ongoing maintenance required (may be individual tanks or community tank). - Need future expansion area available as safety factor. - High cost of site acquisition. - Failure risk may be higL. replacement cost expensive. - Unlikely that technically luitable sites can be located due to high water tables. - Community drainfields risk groundwater moundmg and resultant inadequate treatment. - Collection system cost is equivalent to cost of mumcipal sewer collector system; the cost of community drainfield construction is likely to exceed the cost of force mam to existing sewer system. f. Flow reductions - Cost to retrofit each residence with low-flow fixmres is variable. - Benefits will be variable from household to household. - Use of fixmres (or theii* evenmal removal due to frustration) is impossible to monitor). - Flow reductions will not solve the problem of lack of 3-foot separation between the seasonal water table and the bottom o the treatment system. - While applying flow reduction technology to individual homes might result in 20-50% reductions in sewage volumes, and mieht even restore some failing (discharging) systems to a hydraulically functional condition, treatment may still be inadequate. 3. Conclusions [■ •» Th^ ritv has reviewed and considered alternative methods of sewage treatmem di^al prior to construction of each and every naunicipal sewer project m the last 15 years. None of the identified alternatives provides a ^rmanence of nmnicipal sewer. The f«»rs consrdered mclude. -Technical feasibility/site availability -Long term reliability -Individual maintenance requirements -City maintenance requirements -Technical limitations -Public acceptance -Cost preferred method of sewage disposal. c. Orono Schools and Hockey Arena Site (Proposed MUSA Part XXIX) _____ _____eKitt The Orono Schools Elementary School, the L'no Sldd'leThool O School and the District 278 Administrative Offices. Z well as numerous athletic facilities and playmg fields. wwii ------------ 1« oi arre«; are currenilv within the MUSA, consisting of 51 acres * f Md Cm'tarSt Road and 40 acres on the west side. Of the remaining n o n ^ east of Old Crystal Bay crvstal Bav Road), 10 acres are wetland and 56 area, and the high school cafeteria wmg.iUCa, The proposed amendment includes wetland acres. This acreage abuts Orono s cuirent M jj established *' but the legal description did not, tou'^wn ^oS Jude the cafeteria wing or maintenance buildings. ______ Aa the school Distriefs MUs""am ^To pro^rse"^ Jice for I proposed hockey arena jusr norti. of the high school. 39 L-. either not suitable for the arena or have been planned for other uses. None of this 56 acre MUSA addition is intended for residenual. co^rcial or industrial use. The intent is to merely incorporate the entire existmg school c^pus within the MUSA, to provide District 278 the HexibUity it may require for ftiture school facility development. All of this 56 acres is zoned RR-IA, Single Faimly Rural Residential use. TJe Comprehensive Plan in Map 21 (Existing Land Use) and Map 7 (land Vx Plan) land now being proposed for MUSA inclusion, and this land has been contmuously used for school purposes. D. Additional Needs 1 This is an existing residence on a 2 acre lot situated adjacent to an existing sewer line which was constructed in 1973. While this property was neither assessed for sewer nor included in the MUSA at that time, two sewer smbs were provided in the street specifically to serve the property at a later date. The owner has requested that this property be included in the MUSA since it is his expectation he will be faced with having to replace his 20-plus system in the near fumre and would prefer the option of sewer. This MUSA addition is to merely serve one existing residence. The owner would be expected to pay a connection charge if and when he makes use of the existing sewer. 2 Additional Undefined Units , The City is requesting that Metropolitan Council approve an additional 50 "undefined ” sewer units for fumre use by the City as individual connection requests occur. Often properties outside the MUSA but simated adjacent to existing se-ver lines wish to make use of the sewer, and can physically do so without the need for Citv extension of sewer laterals. Orono would like to be able to accomo<f' • J such requests without the delay of a MUSA amendment. A MUSA amendm •• woiud, of course, be completed at a later date, either as part of another Comp ‘a ^ -ve Plan amendment or when a number of individual connections have accum'!.t.-.;d. i musaalts.wpd h; V. Related Issues A. On-Site Systems Management Plan 1. Philosophy In 1975 the City of Orono made a commitment to long-term iwe of on site «wa« svvttms for majority of fumm developm^ in te ntral a^ of tli City not adji*ni to Lake Minnetonka. The basis for this cotnttu^nt was fcity CtSIncil decision to protect the quaUty of lake Minnetonka by avoKlmg high- density development within the Lake's watershed. Historically, residential development in Orono was located Mm«tojto and its numerous bays, and in three widely scattei^ cteamd a natchwork quUt pattern of development. The large number of wetland areas m the Srriso lm^uted to to this pattern. This pattern of elements contributing to it. caused the City to be ^ of the Citv was allowed to be developed with sewer, the high cost ot proviamg ^ev^ «^ice wodd create a demand by developers fo^ety stnaU lot sa« ^ tab d“iSties throughout the City. Therefore, the City determined that tte mijoriiy of land in Orono would be planned to be developed usmg on-site septi systems. To pneure that seotic svstems would be constructed and maintained properly, in L7sTr^no"“a Management program and U- a , fiill time insnector The inspection program not only dealt with new clti^c^n. but incS^ maintenance inspecuons of all existing systems on a regular basis. Also in 1978. Orono adopted ordinances requiring adherence to a “‘‘a rmTea TtS" ^ City ordinance established system maintenance reouirements and placed the responsibility for mamtenance on the individual homeowner, providing penalties for noncompliance. Rv 1980 the initial round of existing system inspections had bem completed a^ records created for each of the approximately 1000 systems m the C%™The ins^tion program confirmed, however, that while new development on 2>acre lots could be sustainable without sewers in the long term, pockets of existing development on smaller lots would eventually have to be served with sewer. This fact was mad e clear in Orono's 1980 Comprehensive Plan, in which five historically high-density existing neighborhoods were identified as critical. During the period 1980-1992. each of these neighborhoods were provided with municipal sewer. The currently proposed MUSA additions are similarly a result of Orono s comprehensive approach to septic systems management. Rather than using these older pockets of pre-existing dense development as an excuse to sewer the entire City and compromise Lake Minnetonka, Orono chooses to provide sewers only to those existing neighborhoods where septic systems are not a viable long-term solution for sewage treatment and disposal. Further, Orono chooses to not provide municipal sewer to accomodate new development in the rural area, which comprises the majority of the Orono's remaining developable land. 2. Ordinances and Management Program Orono’s On-site Sewage Treatment Systems ordinances including technical standards and the management program are included in the appendices. The City has adopted by ordinance MPCA’s Chapter 7080 regulations plus some additional more stringent technical requirements for certain types of systems (Section 12.30, Subd. 5). "Code" and "Conforming” systems are inspected biennially. "Nonconforming" systems not meeting the 3-foot water table separation must be upgraded to a conforming status by the end of the second year following date of initial non conformity notification (Subd. 8(B)(4a)). "Failing" systems must be repaired within 90 days/1 year (Subd. 8(B)(4b)). A complete record of the design and location of of each existing septic system is kept on file, and maintenance records for each system are updated annually (see Inventory Card sample in Appendix). Permits are required for system repair/replacement and all new construction. Contractors and site evaluators/designers are currently licensed by the City, although City licensing wUl be discontinued when State licensing takes effect in 1996. All inspections of new and existing systems are completed by City inspectors certified by the MPCA. The position of On-Site Systems Manager is currently held by Steven Weekman. B. Inflow/InfUtration Management Plan sjssrsssjss SS,1C includes the following tasks and procedures: » a ^ 1. Review and update the 1981 I/I Analysis by 2. Inspect manholes, sewerlines and lift stations to idenufy I/I pr areas 3. Analyze lift station pumping records to idenufi- existing I/I sources 4. Ongoing ftow dau collection and analysis to idenuiy new I/I sources quickly if they occur 5. Continue rehabilitation of existing sewer ifrastruemre 6 Initiate a public education program 7 Adopt ordinance prohibiting the connection of sump pumps to the ■ sanitary sewer system, and initiate a sump pump inspection program 8. Submit annual progress report to MWCC (MCWS) The City has followed through with this program as follows: 1993 - Established and commenced a sump pump inspection program o identify illegal connections and require changes to private ijlumbing systems when iUegal connections are encountered. To date, approximately 200 of Orono's sewered propemes have been inspected and 12 Ulegal connections have been identified and converted to a legal status. 1994 - Adopted Ordinance # 129 prohibiting discharge of groundwater and stormwater to the sewer system (The sump pump impection program was initiated under an earlier ordinance). Ordinance #129 establishes a SlOO per month surcharge for properties not m compliance. 1994 - Established a public education program regarding I/I. induing disnibution of information brochures and availability of staff for answering queries. 1995 -The City has been spending approximately S65,(X)0 per year to replace its oldest lift stations which have some of the greatest inflow problems. In 1995 the City completed inspections of manholes lift stations and sewer lines in the Saga Hill area - the ^taown to to have some of the greatest I/I problems. These inspections have identified specific manholes and lift stations to be sealed in 1996. 1996 and Beyond - During 1996 those lift stations and manholes identified as contributing large volumes of I/I will be sealM. Also, manholes and lift stations in the County Road 15 and Femdale Road area wUl be inspected to identify lA problems. The process of identifying and addressing III problems will be an ongoing process. The savings in sewage treatment charges through the City's T/I reduction efforts will be targeted toward continuing I/I reduction efforts. The following additional exhibits related to I/I are provided in the Appendix: - MWCC Matching Grant request (7-12*93) - Met Council approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment ( - Table: Correlating Annual Sewer Flows With Elevation of Lake Minnetonka Excerpt: 1993 CSPP Update - I/I Abatement Program Ordinance #129 Public Information Brochures and Letters 62 J VI. Non-Related Issues A. Interim Strategy fo»- the Reduction o*’ Ncnpoint Source Pollution The City of Orono Community Management Plan was amended on October 25, 1993 via Resolution #3348 by adding language indicating NTJRP standards will be applied to the design of new stormwater ponds, and indicating the City will apply MPCA's "Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" to tlw review of proposed development. On October 11, 1993 Resolution #3335 was adopted, indicating that the City will implement the use of NURP standards and Best Management Practices via amendments of the Subdivision and Zoning Codes no later thin May 15, 1995. This date coincided with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's 2-year timeframe for local water management plan adoption (MCWD Plan, Section Vn, P.19, Subsection C-3) per State statutes 103B.235 Subd. 1(a). It was and is the City’s intent to incorporate NURP standards and BMP s via City ordiiiance as part of the comprehensive local water management plan implementation when that plan is adopted. The City has not commenced preparation of a local water management plan due to past budget constraints. Orono expended 580,000 in 1993-94 to acquire 2-foot contour topographic mapping of the entire City in anticipation of the preparation of a local WMP. The City Council has designated 550,000 tor work on the stormwater management plan. It is likely that the plan will not be completed in 1996. Because a comprehensive local water management plan cannot be completed within a timeframe coincident with Orono's need for certain facets of tlm proposed MUSA amendment, the City’s options for complying with the "Interim Strategy requ ireme nts inc lude: 1 Request a further delay of Met Council imposition of the "Interim Strategy requirement QE 2. Incorporate (by ordinance) the NURP standards and BMP's into Orono ’s existing stormwater management controls which are contained in the following code sections: 10.03 Subd. 19/20/21 (Filling & Grading) 10.52 Subd. 4 (Hwy 12 Corridor) 10.53 Subd. 8(A)(4d):8.10 (Hwy 12 PUD) 10.55 Subd. 11 (Floodway, Flood Fringe) • i II11 10.56 SuM. 16(G),(D,(D,(K) (Shoreland) 11.10 Subd.21(C) (Flowage & Conservation Easements) 11.41 Subd. 1.2.3 (Drainage & Storm Sewers for Subdivisions) B. Land Use Policies for Future Development 1. Rural Density Analysis The Metropolitan CouncU’s AprU 22, 1993 approval of Orono’s Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan update declared that Orono's "rural service area policies ^ land use controls qualify the City as an exception to the Council’s Rural Ser^e Area policies". This was based in part on the fact that per *e City s 199 analvsis. 15 of Orono's 21 ’rural* sections already exceeded Met Coun i s upper limit' of 1.0 units per 10 acres. In 1995, that figure has risen to 17 of 21 sections. Table 9 is a 1995 update of the 1992 Rural Density Analysis, includmg Proj^uom reflecting the rural (unsewered) area after addition of the currently proposed MUSA amendment. It can be concluded from the analysis that Orono cannot te expected to meet the 1 unit per 10 acres standard without removal of approximately one-third of the City’s existing rural housing stock. This is not feasible. The City s ou therefore 'continue to be considered as exempt from this standard. 2. Current Status of Development in Orono The City is currently conducting a review of the 1987 CMP amendment which planned for commercial uses along portions of the Highway 12 corridor, o determine if that plan should be updated. Residential erowth in Orono has remained steady during the period 1975-1995, averaging 30-40 new single family homes per year. Orono’s 2-acre and 5-acre residential zones comprise 81% of the City’s land area, and are for the most pan with municipal sewer. The LR-IA and RR-IB 2-acre zo^ (approximately 7000 acres in total area) are estimated to be currently at 60% of fiiS development, with the potential for approximately 70^8^ additional homes. The 5-acre RR-1A zone (1330 acres) is 80% developed, with the potential for 3040 additional homes. Orono’s urban 1-acre and 1/2-acre zoning districts (totaling about 15W acres) are 98% developed. Most fumre development activity in these zones will be infill or redevelopment. At current rates of development, Orono is expected to reach final development in 25-30 vears. Rural Density Analysis 1992/1995/Post-MUSA Amendment Densities by section: Section Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 5 Sec. 6 Sec. 7 Non-MUSA Area (Acres) Post- 1992 1995 Amdmt. Sec. 9 Sec. 10 Sec. 11 Sec. ^ Sec. 26 Sec. 27 Sec. 28 Sec. 29 Sec. 30 Sec. 31 Sec. 32 Sec. 33 Sec. 34 Sec. 35 Sec. 36 449 640 635 449 640 592 386 566 592 350 535 72 1% 535 72 1% 535 72 128 310 65 ’308 309 _290 178 287 3(X) 123 307 65 308 309 290 123 219 29 308 283 261 178 287 300 143 287 300 640 605 J60 13? 272 535 640 605 3W T39 272 535 o40 605 351 ”139 248 535 # of Existing Residential Units Post- 1992 1995 Amdmt. (1995 Estimate) Density (Units Avg. Gross Ati^\ Units per 10 acres) Lot Area (ac.) Possible Under Post- Current 1992 1995 Amdmt. 1992 1995 Amdmt. Zoning 53 55 116 118 123 109 24 72 109 112 xO 52 59 10 .0 20 59 10 7407 7202 6818 9 9 75 79 21_ _22 29 31 60 63 72 79 9 40 8 31 32 59 26 11 19 83 58 53 26 14 ”8”8 59 58 26 14 88 59 58 28 42 62 28 43 63 28 33 63 1114 1055 866 1.18 1.81 1.94 1.22 1.84 1.85 0.62 1.27 1.85 3.20 0.97 1.39 1.02 1.09 1.39 1.02 1.09 1.39 0.70 2.41 3.23 0.94 1.94 2.48 1.46 0.38 O.M 1.30 0.96 1.47 0. 73 2.57 _^38 1. dl 2.04 2.72 T46 0.49 0J3 1.38 0.98 1.61 0.73 1.88 2.76 2.01 . 4 i.l6 2.01 1.58 1.18 2.01 1.33 1.18 1.50 1.46 1.27 8.5 8.2 16.1 25 5.5 5.4 7.9 40 5.2 5.4 5.4 60 ~3TT””9.8"9.8 35 10.3 9.1 9.8 105 7.2 7.2 7.2 6 14.2 13.7 12.7 16 4.1 3.9 5.5 35 3.1 3.0 3.6 ’ 10.6 9.9 9.9 85 5.2 4.9 8.8 55 4.0 3.7 4.4 20 —6.8 6.8 5.5 15 26.1 20.5 20.5 6 15.8 13.6 13.6 3 —7.r"7.3”'773 "16 10.4 10.3 10.3 70 6.8 6.2 6.1 55 5.0 5.0 ■5.0 12 6.5 6.3 7.5 30 8.6 8.5 8.5 75 6.6 6.8 7.9 766 Av?a« ^Mr”o?raS^(u”ewered) area (Lrently is 1.46 10 Kres - Averaie gross^ lot area (incl. roads & weUands) currently is 6.8 acres . Assuming all 766 fumre lots are developed under rural standing, at buUd-out: - Average density of rural area will be 2.39 units per 10 acres - Average gross rural lot area will be 4.2 acres C. Transportation Metropolitan CouncU’s 1988 Transportation Systems St^ent required that Orono determine whether a comprehensive plan amendment is necessary to demonstrate consistency with the revised Transportation Development Guide/ Policy Plan. In January 1990, per Metropolitan Council Resolution No. 90-2, Orono and a numt«r of other Cities were granted a time e.xtension for meeting the requirements of the Metropolitan l,.and Planning Act, which extension has since expired. The City has determined that a coroolete update of the transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan will be warranted as soon as a decision on the fti^e nature and corridor of Highway 12 is reached. The City of Orono smee involved in a study of the U.S. Highway 12 Corridor in conjunctior with i'?n/DOT and other cities west of the metro area. That smdy will address both local and traffic flowing through Orono to and from communities to the w«t. The forthcoming results of that study will potentially significantly impact Oro/f ^ transportation plan, and therefore it is unwise for the City to proceed with a comprehensive transportation plan update at this time. A number of projects enhancing the safety, accessibility and capacity of existing transportation roates in Orono have been recently completed, are underway or are planned for the near fumre. These include: 1. Construction in 1995 of safet>- improvements to U.S. 12 in Long Lake, including lane dividers, turn lanes, lesurfacing, and a semaphore at the intersection of U.S. 12 and Willow Drive. 2. Replacement in 1994 of the Old Crystal Bay Road Bridge crossing the Burlington Northern Railroad. 3. Resurfacing and mm lane consmiction in 1994-95 on County Road 15. 4. Proposed redevelopment of the intersection of County Road 6 and U.S. 12, to include a grade separation. 5. Entire or partial reconstruction of a number of existing City roads, D. Housing On November 14, 1995 the Orono City Council adopted Resolution No. 3641 resolving that the City of Orono elects to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Local Housing Incentives Program during calendar year 1996. ■nc City of Orono Community Management Plan includes the foiiowing housing goals: 1. To improve the housing conditions of persons residmg in substandard housing. 2. To provide safe, healthful and hlight-ftee residences and neighborhoods. 3 To provide oppormnities for a mitt of housing types, locations and com rages »Wc7wm m«t the needs and provide adequate housing for all age and tamrly groups. 4 To nrovide housing tvpes and residential densities consistent with environmental a^'^te^and^tth the availabUity of public services and faclmes. 3. To provide immediately beneficial housing programs for the greatest number of low and moderate income Orono residents. Challenges facing Orono in meeting include: Affordable and Life-Cycle Housing goals Available land zoned to allow up to 4 dwelling units ^r building ^oi^ m Lroximatelv 20 acres. This is all withm the MUSA, but land costs may be too'high to support housing meeting Affordabdity gmdeltnes. A ..ion of the Hiehwav 12 corridor north of U.S. 12 between Willow Drive and Old Crysul Bay Road is plai^ for dtveloomem The available ac -age will yield perhaps 50-100 umts. Howev^e.-. it is again questionable whether such development could meet Affordability guidelines due to high land costs. Land values surroundtog Lake Minnetonka are so high that development of Affordable housing may not be econormcally feasible. A )ldcr nei^hborhoods near the lakeshore are redeveloped, it is increasiPdv difficulim maintain the existing level of increasing, renlacine old seasonal lakeshore cabins with high v7rho7s does not seem to be waning, rnn.;miction valuation in the rural area averaging nearly $400,000 per timt an? Ae Existing affordable housing stock constantly being upgraded by ad^tioiii and remodeling, it wiU be very difficult to mamtain the curren percentage of housing in the Affordable price ranges. A key element in Orono's affordable housing efforts is the maintenance of its current affordable housing stock. Several older more densely developed areas of the City provide a jcuhictanrial supply of affordable housing. Because these homes are older it is in^rtant they be adequately maintained to prevent them from deteriorating beyond the point of livabUity or rehabUitation. The City has over the years targeted the majority of its CDBG funds toward housing rel^ilitation. A priority housing goal is to more specifically identify housing rchabUiution needs and determine how to provide adequate resources to meet those needs. The Orono Community Management Plan indicates that "Orono will cooperate with neighboring cities to fulfill area-wide housing needs". The Lake Minnetonka area is comprised of many small cities which, when considered collectively, provid'. a wide range of housing opportunities. Metropolitan Council is encouraged to /iew the Lake Minnetonka area as a whole when considering guidelines for affordable and life-cycle housing for individual cities. 68 T" * CITY of ORONO Munidp*! Offices StTNt Address: 2750 Kellw Psrtwsy Orono. MN 55355 MaiHaf Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-006S January 9, 1996 Metropolitan Council Mears Park Centre 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, Minnesou 55101 Subject: Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Proposed MUSA Revisions Dear Members of the Council: The Citv of Orono is requesting approval of an amendment to the MUSA boundary. The amendment will make possible constniction of municipal sewers to serve 10 exmmg residemia neiehborhoods comprising 189 existing homes and four vacant lots on a to^of 341 ^cres^ t is important to note that each of the ten neighborhoods is fully developed. The proposed additions will provide service only to e.xisting homes and a few interspersed vacant lots, ^th no intent by the City to provide service to new land for residential development. Each neighborhood has been found to have a significant number of non-confonmng septic systems that, although not necessarily failing, must be replaced to meet State and Orono standards. Six of the ten defined residential neighborhoods are within Orono's designated Shoreland District, located within 1000' of either Lake Minnetonka or Long Lake. One-fourth of the 189 residences are on lakeshorc lots. A maioritv of the ten neighborhoods have potentially severe limitations for the replacement of semic svstems All were originally developed prior to Orono 's 1975 rezoning which henceforth reuuired minimum lot sizes of 2 acres for new residential development. Two acres of dry buildable land is considered by Orono as the minimum individual lot area necessary to accommodate septic systems on a long-term basis. The average lot size m these neighborhoods is 1 3 acres or just 65% of the minimum area requirement. SLx of the ten identified neighborhoods have requested that the City commence sewer construction within the next few years, to avoid the costs of septic system replacement. Additionally. 56 acres of land owned by the Orono School District as part of their main campus wUl be added to the MUSA to accomodate future school needs includmg a proposed ice hockey Tdephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 January 9, 1996 Metropolitan CotuKil Page 2 arena. Also, one 2-acre e.xisting developed residential property adjacent to existing municipal sewer lines will be added. The City is further requesting th.it an additional 50 unspecified sewer connections be allocated for use by the Cir/ to accommodate future requests for connection of existing homes situated adjacent to existing sewers but not within the MUSA. The City occasionally receives requests from the owners of such properties for sewer service in lieu of having to replace their existing septic systems. It would be preferable if the City could honor these requests in a timely manner, and followup later with a comprehensive MUSA amendment incorporating a number of such properties. These 50 units would be used only for existing development. We request your approval of our application and stand ready to address any questions you may have. Sincerely, Ronald J. Moorse Citv Administrator mpg 1 ’-r TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. Cit\- Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabuslh, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:January 8, 1996 SUBJECT: #2088 Winfield Stephens/Stephen Gardiner, 3770 Bayside Road - Vacation Continuation of Public Hearing Status of Application The comprehensive vacation and variances application was tabled at your November 20, 1995 meeting as Planning Commission felt before they could act on the improvement plan that it was necessary for Hennepin Count>- to resolve the matter of which of the adjacent land owners is to benefit from the vacated right-of-way. Planning Commission specifically advised applicant that if entire area of alley is not to be acquired by applicant, the existing detached garage must be removed as part of any improvement plan. Planning Commission members also asked that a copy of the legal easement providing access to the property at the north property line be included to complete application information. Winfield Stephens, the applicant, has advised that he will not proceed with the variance application until the vacation is resolved by Hennepin County. Steve Gardiner, the owner of the property, has assumed full responsibility for the vacation phase oi the application. List of Exhibits A - Survey B - Plat of Ottoville Lake Minnetonka C - Plat Map D - Letter to Valerius, 3750 Bayside Road E - Easement in Favor of 3770 Bayside Road F - Utilities - Gopher I Request The propert>’ owners of Bayside Landing subdivision have been in con act with City staff and advise that they will have no claim on any portion of the vacated right-of-way as long as certain setbacks are maintained with the improvement of the property. Lee Harrin, the president of the homeowners association, advised that he would send a letter to each of the Planning Commission members advisi ig of the homeowners' decision. Staff has yet to receive a copy of that letter. It would be nelpftil if members of the Planning Commission could provide a copy of the letter at the meeting so that it may be included with the public record. Zoning File #2088 January 8, 1996 Page 2 In reviewing Exhibit B, it is not clear what claim the property owner at 3750 Bayside Road wxmld have if the underlying property was not part of the original Ottoville plat. Again this issue is resolved by Hennepin County once the City has determined no public use for the 30' allev. Mr. Gardiner has submitted a copy of the easement as requested by the Planning Commission that confirms the legal right of the owTier of 3770 Bayside to use 16 1/2' wide easement along the north property line of the property for access. The issue of utilities has not been resolved as of this writing (refer to Exhibit F). Utility companies will advise the City as soon as they have completed their inspection of the area. City staff cannot schedule the vacation application before the Council until the four utility companies have reported their findings. Staff Recommendation To approve the vacation for 30' alleys as originally dedicated in the plat of Ottoville Lake Minnetonka subject to the following conditions: 1.The vacation petition shall not be scheduled before the Council until the City has received a report from the utility companies confirming whether utilities are located within the unimproved oublic right-of-way. If utilities exist, applicrait to provide easements over all existing utilities. 2.Applicant's surveyor to provide a complete legal description for the vacation of the 30 ’ alley for the official resolution of the City. ------- —. . m • , CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PrtpOftd for 5 STPn/E AND CARMEN GARDINER O' o LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ✓ Lots 1,2,3 aii-J 4, OTTOVILLE LAKE MINNETONKA, MINNESCI’A, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the otfir«G of the Register of Deeds In and for said.County. Revised 2/21/90 to show hard surface area calculations. GENERAL NOTES; o Denotes iron monument Proposed top of foundatic: elev. ■ • MK Denotes cross chiseled in concrete Proposed basement flooi oiev. ■ *931.3 Denotes existing spet elevation Proposed garage floor ele^• > [ig Denotes Denotes proposed spot elevation surface drainage BENCHMARK: Dashed contour lines denote proposed features Solid contour lines denote existing features ALL-METRO LAND SURVEYORS 2340 Daniels Sheet Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 r*h: 475-1433 I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I §m a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Jlinnesota. /I. DATE /ohJee REG. NUMRER /7^^5 SCALE r*=3o* BOOK t(i PAGE 12 FILE NO. 86175 B . rii'VJ f■ v-C’ -. 11'^' -. * • . • ^». ’ *•.'. -. -A _i.li. xM r'.4:-.*^/;»'4::v.1i ■ i 'M ^ V t A: ' Y ‘ -^ \ ^ - ■ ■■i-^-.*-.— ^ ■—■ ■' ■ • - . U v-V *.. r- .f.ri,*.. .♦ -iliiisM ■";R-’' };«i^Ul •I I;'.- ,^>-;'r: * « ^-. • : ^ ;-« .., -v J99 \ V'iX •W . • •*’^ ; . X »^ .-.•.:-.’ r*::’i. ■ 1 I X X»■- T . • • •? i .s -, .• - . >-• •'*••- 5^X ^1 \ f>~ ■!« r . -. • • ^•>t^*.J • .• .! .• •7 i*- ► .* •;• ■•.^-. :• *;Vr * r*r • *' ’ . *X* ;J *■.*■':u» »?■••:• ^ » f* vi;*'v5‘ ' •■ V’: V‘l r l i** »•;% m *t •*,:■}.ii‘ V.kSry' ** .• V.* ■ - ■ • -■ X-X »-;v- •/;' •*:x.-. *• ;‘.i .• ♦. r t "^>‘1 1. »^‘. , ! .V ! —.. ♦• . •••'.. / —Vy U"-; ^ f' l**'i « • • i' *‘ ' ••.X' - ■- .- J-: '• • *V.iV . tvlr? •M* ?-‘ix A * m ixkJ !/. faT^;t5*.'<-. X-i?^;/' K>^^t <r:''- vn]• • j‘. • *1 : •:_•. *.• _.r i, i< . * * k V ,r/ r \ WAvVX.Y . .• » :p- ..vxtr* V .•••*:: •.'••--Xv:’vf;‘V-’ *hV•'?• “V . ‘V ^ ^*’ . ...v.7 ..- . • •*v rv r -•'» • li ‘ . . I76. :6 NSS*44*:6 ’t !4Q ■ . 3 fa KeS*44'6'W • ■ I4W ^ 3 Ft C wwww , r «t ** • - • at> »I ■ *^f a* •*« • j ', * j I50|l9 .oi 44 Na9*40*w 11 ?20 ^ f $ , 1 V S > J> .;^,nV,i »ro’.s> CJTLCT a|A^-\\ 21 -. OUTvCT a ^ Ik . ^ fnJM19) C (69>^ IZOJ OT a :z'j)S?^-. t ^ AT ^9*3rj4*« 15 /• (US) 1 /Z• ‘3/\ 3 , . /•? !•->•••. ; \ 11; v' • 10 9 0 7 H / (116) 14/ J .1 3) • 5T5.J ^ ?i -57 J ^11 "W \ S’ i;?1 r i 80 / 9* C6 / *9 CT 1 (14) r “ *!4 ?7 -; 1 Stl 98 1 (.5) 8 310. 48 •2 J •si 78 / (16) « tS.T _J-«a_/ (17) '8 4,49. 1 "■•4 / .pas; cf (III) (^\9e9 ✓... /\__L Steve Gardiner 21S Game Farm Rd N Maple Plain. MN 55359 December 13. 1995 Gary and Christine Valerius 3750 Bayside Rd Long Lake, MN 55356 Dear neighbors. Enclosed is a copy of the easement granting access to my house at 3770 Bayside Rd. I am surprised that a copy is not registered with your {m)peity. In my conversations with Gary I said I an easement to use the driveway and that you should check with the Burger fiunily to confirm ray claim. Please note it was registered with Hennepin County document number 4781988. The Burgers were kind eiKNigh to sell the easement to me for $1.00. I have a proposal for you to consider. I am trying to vacate the alley to the west of my bouse. The Landmark association were considerate enough to allow me to clai m the whole 30' alley in exchange move the garage 15' from the property line. This is most helpful. Your property mi^t have a claim to part of the alley also because it borders it on the north. I would appreciate it greatly if you would agree to give up any claim to gaining title to it In exchange, I would provide you with an easement to cross my property at the east point that the street This would provide easier access to your mailbox If you chose in the future to sell the west portion of your property as another building lot access across my property to it would be much easier. Please call me at 887-3191 (work) or 479-2095 (home). I realize the holidays are here but 1 would like a reply as soon as possible because all information must be give to the Orono Planning (Commission before 1/3/96. Steve (jardiner Sincerely, Cc: Orono Planning Commisiort Win Stephens Jnbenture. .February. “ttoiwa *ns/‘tss Mads amd ^lUmd UUo tW#.__________jC_____....day of I9..A1., by and bohomnIn Burger eod Kery Jane Burgar, ..!<.. , > , Nisband** and' 'Wi^a'i'"*............................^irantoi*.^..^ oio/d .......m v^.V.^R....^.e.,.,^.ftX.flinJnitSX!... dOifl. ..........Carm^.n...J.t......G ar di.ner#..^Jiushaiid...a nd.-tfifa...^ftd--3oint —tenants —....— granUe^., 9itnttf Ctijy ThcLt whsrtas said grantor U ths ownsr of tract.... of land in ths County of • ••«• •••»ae*«•«•••• ••« < !^{ I Block Ig Burger's Bayside t ! Ml I I and said grantee is the owner of th at . tract ... of land in the County of HENt^PXM State of Minnesota, vis.:• •«*4aae «aa«»*.■ Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, Ottoville on Lake Minnetonka which adjoins said land of said grantor^, on ths. and said grofUor^,. . and granUs S» have agreed upon ths eassmsni hereinafter dsseribed: a^Otalg SfjtrtfOrtt Ths mid graj^r^.., in consideration of......... •$lwO • •••••••••a • ••a«n* aaeena••••• • *#•» t. •««••••«« them B*^rt..........« e««*»a ««• a««*e »•«*»•*»• ae« ••• ••a««*a ••••••»•« #■•«••#«#•••a. ....One...J^ollar ... in hand paid hjj^jaid grantss ?— reoeipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and other good and valuable eanetderaUon, Hireby grant— to said grantee, — assigns, the easement of ..........JJigxeaA and...egxess ............................. (X)«Bcrib« Eab«b«m) their »«••««• M •«••••*«»«•••• a »*a •heirs and a# '.I V- r>•n in, over, and upon, that part of said land of said jraniarfi... described as follows:----------------------------- 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 HAITE AJfD TO HOLD SAID EASBMEMT unto said grantees...,- - - -thaix_ _ _ _..... heirs ^SSS^gfiS - ....... ■*..*.*..*.♦.*****•*.*** ^******* *************** ..a .............a.M.a...M.a............ . ...ai aa.aM i 1..........................^...^—. y .............a .................................................a..............................a....... wa>a........».........«*..a.****a*«*.*.M.*..*«»M***..****.*****.*—*a« ........................... .a-.a *■■.■■ . ......a a.... ...... as appurtenant •....«....*.*..“.**....*«*‘.**.**********************“**'^a>Mt landt. 3lt fflitnedi CDbtttof, Said grantor?.... haY.^.. .. hereunto set-----.tiielx--------Aaiu£...a . the day and year first above writteru .^^..♦***.a*»»****.*‘“*M’»^^^^^^.^*y^^^^"‘~^^^*.****...**.Maa.aa....»—la ii ...... noul Deed of A|ipurtenant Enscinent Office at County Recorder #l«tc tf iflinncfota IrmiNlif o/ / hereby rtriify ikal th** tnlliitf Deed : H^9 filed In thin vfiiee fnr ft^rord nn the j ^^f ** • ••• ^ lit.........Ill............. o*rtork .. •!/., mnd 9rm» duly reeunird in Hook of iHtdr^ page... .............. or ........... ^ Q Copied Q Microfilmed , ond W09 dniy recorded an innlru^nent Xo >•«««« •#♦»»«*. n ♦» •♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦eo Connty Recordcfa ......Depu ty. •Vo Dctingncnt Taxen ond Traurfer entered Ibis — ..doy of............... i9. ••*•♦♦»•••#♦•••••« •••••«o« >•♦»»••♦•♦• •••••>•••••••♦•*••.on** County ahuHiora ..................Deputy. Tax BtotemenlB for the real property deBcribed in thh InMtrumenf Mhoutd be Bent to: L_ •••••••••••«**«»4 «»»i«*e*»**»«* ••• «**e ••*••• »»»e««e4««enee4e«*»e«*e««««e*Mee • • *••«* •Vo me aid d res ^ 47M9S9 ;U3C-J3 19^0/ SI C05.C03I * • * M 1***• • •MpevnaMoMoa^«»« • *••• orncf orcowirYMmsfitHtwii pw count v.RUNT sou Cto::r«ui3i3.‘.noflf«PiClMHaiHk I983NAR30 PNI2:37 « Micu«rni 4781988 "^ <^rC.c:MieoMM HENNEPIN COUNTY MInT MAR SO B83 naecwiOiiiKuuijf ----------------------S^^EPUTY^a • •'•V tluvt nul rtlMt to IM Ip |tl« ^yciciH ffXdUJ; 'rrta. Gopher State OneCall 3 Ticket Ho! 765 Send To: CORONOOl Seq No! LORQ NON-EXCAV. 9 Map Ref: Transmit Date: Oriainal Call Date: Work to Besin Date: 1/03/96 1/03/96 1/05/96 Time! 10:40 aw Time: 8:27 am Time: 0: 30 am Dp: DLEL45 Op: DLEL45 Company : ClTV OF ORONO Contact Name: JEANNE MABUSTH Alt. Contact: JOHN G Phone: (612)473-7357 Type of Work: NON EXCAVATION LOCATE REQUEST Work Being Done For: STEVE GARDINER Explosives: N Duration! UNKNOWN - VACATING PUBLIC ALLEV R.O.W: N Place! ORONOState! MN County! HENNEPIN Address! 3770 Street: BAVSIDE RD Nearest Intersecting Street! STUBSBAV RD /vrxnnnmri Location of Work! MARK ENTIRE ALLEV LOCATED ON W LOT LINE OF ABOVE ADDRESS. Remarks! CALLER STATES THIS ALLEV IS ON E SIDE OF LANDMARK DR. T*#p! 117N Rng! 23W Twp! Rng! Legal Given! V CORONOOl NINGAS02 Sect-Qtr! 05SE Sect-Qtr! MNDCBLOl N0STPWD2 USWEST03 End Of Transmission — ■ • tnTrt■ Mlr■- — —-- - - - -—“ r I '» r • [' *ri I. I, . <~ TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Adminisfrator DATE:January 8, 1996 SUBJECT: #2095 Steven Englund, 3855 Cherry Avenue - Renewal Variance Public Hearing 1 1 Zoning District: LR-IC Application: Applicant proposes a second renewal variance for lot area originally granted in November of 1993. The most recent variance approval expired December 12, 1995. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B) Required area =1/2 acre or .5 acre Section 10.03, Subd. 6(A-1) - Lot of record ... may be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes without Council approval if area ... is within 80% of the requirement of the Zoning Chapter. Lot area required = 17,424 s.f. or .4 acres (80% of required area) Existing = 16,251 s.f. or .37 acres List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Development Plan E - Survey F - Planning Commission Minutes 11/21/94 G - Hardcover Facts 250-500' Setback Area H - Lot Areas of Surrounding Developed Properties I - Planning Commission Minutes 10/18/93 J - Council Minutes 11/8/93 K - Resolution #3356 Approving Application #1883 - Original Application L - Resolution #3508 Approving First Lot Area Renewal Application #1984 Brief Review of Application Applicant proposes no changes from the original variance application approved in 1993. Although applicant advised that it was his intention to construct in the spring of 1995, he now contends that construction will commence in 1996. -*»n 1 •«f - •^rr^L. j r ".r'" Zoning File #2095 January 8, 1996 Page 2 There have been no code amendments that would alter any of the pertinent findings of the original review. Applicant's development plans will be restricted to 30% allowed hardcover and structural/lot coverage will be limited to 2,438 s.f. or 15%. The building pad is located within a bowl area of the property and will require filling in preparation for the building pad. All conditions of the original variance approvals are still valid. Staff Recommcndatioii To recommend tq^proval of the second renewal lot area variance for Steven Englund involving the property located at 3855 Cherry Avenue subject to the findings and conditions set forth in Resolutions #3356 and #3508, Exhibits K and L. ►“fc. ' - 'F » • r' CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION ■ Initial Application Fee $200.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change hrom original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) 7^ S 0 9 iO PROPERTY I?^FORMATION Site Address ______________________________— Property Identification Number (P.l.D.y gg -//7-Z^7__----------------------------------- Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired ^________________________year) I (do) (Sonotialso own the adjacent parcels of land. Presentuse of propcrtyi residential other (specify)— Zoning District:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Name (a A u Address: ?yz.o /L-l <■» City: Phone (home) 72.y-»C^<^3 Phone(work) 7Zo Zip: <S'/(iL> OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone(home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: description of REQUEST Describe request in detail: Estimated Construction Cost $ /X. d j /*“ /^yg/r (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES required X Lot Area _Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) hardship /description of UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property condiuons preventmg compliance with Zoning Code requirements: (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following infonnatiop must be submitted bv the appUcatioo deadline m or^fiE for vour aDDlication 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 8V^ 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.^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8V^" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remeinber that yom: variance aPDlication is not complete if the above infoi ination has not been 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 of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and xorrect to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signamre Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authori2es reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and CouncU members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature Date Aoplicant 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. ADoUcants must be present at aU scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and CouncU If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Budding & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 , I u: rffy' Wv 4^ -r • . RUN RATI bl/OS/M BATCH BOlPROP AOOR OIMEfl NAME TAXPAYER . NANE/AOOR * # • . • . t . i f ' • * • MW AOM ONNill NAME TAXPAYCE NAHE/AODR * *'*f ♦ . ^ . W ^ ^PROP AOOR , , OMCR NAME ^ TAXPAYER O^-.; NANE/AOOR '^V.v- s # Q»v PROP AOOR OltCR NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR, NArK/MIPII -BIO . h* 1 «. 1 . *• • ^ • 30 0a>117-2S 33 0003 03030 CHERRY AVE ARTHUR C BRAMBXLLA TRUSTEE A C BRANBULA 3030 CHERRY AVE HOUND MN 55364 30 00-117-t3 S3 0000 03060 CHERRY AVE R R ENBLUNO ET AL TRUSTEES K N NEVERS 9700 PORTLAND AVE S 0324 BLOOHIN6TQN »tl 55420 30 00-117-23 33 0039 03033 CHERRY AVE HE»MEPXN.FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK VlS/79 ST DEED 156753 30 00-117-23 33 0044 00030 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED D H ENOLUND ETAL COL A MRS D N EN6LUN0 5101 SPRXNB ROCK CT FAIRFAX VA 22032 ,34. PROP AOOR CV J OHNER NAME , TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR r/ rv.PROP AOOR ONNER NAME ;t'f *i. TAXPAYER NAME/AODR '30 00-117-23 33 0049 00030 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED D H ENGLUND ETAL COL A MRS 0 H ENGLltfi) 5101 SPRING ROCK CT FAIRFAX VA 22032 30 08-117-23 33 0054 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HEtfCPXN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK , 4/13/79 ST DEED 156754 HCrMEPXN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST30 00-117-23 33 0006 00030 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED R R ENGLUND ET AL TRUSTEES K N NEVERS 9700 PORTLAND AVE S A324 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 30 00-117-23 S3 0009 00030 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED R R ENGLUND ET AL TRUSTEES K M NEVERS 9700 PORTLAND AVE S 9324 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 38 00-117-23 33 0040 03043 CHERRY AVE ROBERT J ANDERSON ROBERT J ANDERSON 3043 CHERRY AVE HOUND m 55364 38 00-117-23 S3 0045 03003 CHERRY AVE PAUL E A MARY J TAYLOR PAUL TAYLOR 3883 CHERRY AVE MOUND m 55364 38 08-117-23 33 0050 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED D M ENGLUND ETAL COL A MRS D M ENGLUND 5101 SPRXNB ROCK COURT . FAIRFAX VA 22032 38 08-117-23 33 0055 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK 4/13/79 ST DEED 156754 t REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 738 08-117-23 S3 0007. 00030 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED R R ENGLUND ET AL TRUSTEES K M NEVERS 9700 PORTLAND AVE S 9324 BLOOMINGTON Itl 55420 38 00-117-23 33 0030 03033 CHERRY AVE HEFMEPXN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK 4/13/79 ST DEED 156753 ‘ 30 00-117-23 S3 0043 03060 CHERRY AVE D M ENBLUNO ETAL . COL A NRS D N ENBLUA 5101 SPRIND ROCK CT FAIRFAX VA 22032 ■ i • • I /• V *•• V ..V u‘ • •r • / r * • '•f .2 ' J • .4 .. V « * f" \* *.• -r * ' ’•,* .^.1. /•. A, . • ^• * *• • *• . » . • • ••V 6 • .*» A I « i • > » . ti. * V ^ r.• Ki / • **6* , ' • . . V ‘ V» - ‘V?, r.-V’ r . I • tp' f O SO OB-117-h 33 0040 03098 NORTH SHORE OR ROGER 6RAM4ING A HIFE ROGER GRAFtllNB 3898 NORTH SHOR)T DR MOUND rt4 55364 •.‘V'H V'*..u; •' i : OR ■ ;rcc «. • • • » I 1 ■/ « ’ •' ■' ; • • • A •* ’ * . 38 00-117-23 si 0053 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK . 4/13/79 ST DEED 156754 •• . • ,v - ^ S-* ED' 38 00-117-23 S3 0080 03060 NORTH SHORE DR NANCY E KRAUSE 0 N HANDLIN JR A N E KRAUSE 3860 NORTH SHORE OR MOUND FM 55364 ■ • '.'■■ix J:, A.- .>,.* ._ RAUSE ■: v. ,■ ; i' • .-.1 . V .• »f.-- ^ L..;*. •; .■MM DATE Ol/OS/M A ,/. BATCH sox ‘ # V _■ • SMM 'ilMR r V^- . OHNEH HAW TAXPAYER -'V NAHE/AOm ■r ' ,• • . ; "•■.*•.: •::.■•■ • ■•N v ■ >•'■. ,.•■•• •■ ‘ s’ vj} vV." ^4. ' ‘«H» AOOR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER • ‘ NAME/ADDR>-. . ‘.V , f..* •Iv* so oa-117-Es ss oo»; OXOOA CHERRY AVE REMCTN C NEEKS KENNETH C NEEKS SOM CHERRY AVE HOUND M4 55SA4 SO 0e>U7-ES SS 0090 ooose ADDRESS PENDING SAM EN6LUND STEVEN A MARGARET ENGLUNO S420 MXrtCHAHA AVE S MPLS HN 5S40A • t • t. > i . J •*: I**.'. ► * \ • . 7 . \ • ft**' .V : ‘T- ‘‘.V V ^ j ■ ’ f, ' f \ ',o.- • • . / “»•. ' ' •• • ' ^ V • fc. ' ' * * ■ * ij i • * }-;V\V .,* ■ **• ^•'•* 7,;* vv' >v *1* ' * ' ’ . * ^ ' .'O*? ■/■I'-'r • v;'V., i -V ; -i.- V0: '■Km *-' -■ ■■ "< '■ -•-■ ■ t; t ■ •f 4 .,• "I CERTIFICATE OF SURVE STEVE ENGLUND OF LOTS 8 AND 9, BLOCK 7, CRYSTAL BAY VIEW HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA # J V* T) O 0 * ' 'v' y ^J) [il v'^yvv.r- o: denotes iron marker set •: denotes iron marker found (932B); denotes existing spot elevation All bearings are based upon an assumed datum. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISIS SURVEYED: Lots 8. and 9. Block 7. CRYSTAL BAY VIEW This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. - 0,37 i MC4€S Coffin & Gronberg, Inc. 1. .. r f .u Ml,I ,M/,( Nirr.riA'f - i’l.irrM, (. I hereby cerlify lhal this survey \v*is prepnrcd by me or under my direct super vision, and lhal I am a duly regislered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of Ihe Slate of Minnesota ‘•i: in nil Mark S. Cronberg Minnesota I icense Number 12755 DATii 9-21-93 scAii- I**z20*\1 loiiNo 93-208 iO0 I • I i 7 15 i^r. IfTMl iOiM«i«oe?jaf IliU «4rMAUP W«rF'#r/ITM» ti***^T Mi •WVWtV lu tm^rnl 0%r9ftr\ ir • ^k:■^,*1 A/«i It imi ><t tCMl.'*r. I • • minutes of the orono planning conmssion meeting held on NOVEMBER 21,1994 (#6 - #1983 - Palm - Continue^ Dave Schok of 1680 Concordia and nrigbbor. Helen Trainer, commented that they approved of the proposed plan. The AppUcam had met with Staff to discuss their options. If they would h^b^ m the backX home would block the common yard of the homes on ^ more hardcover The heiaht of the proposed addition is not a problem. Photos ^o^i^Xc^ssToners on whsi the home sviU look l^e. ^ App^Jso satd dtat the foundation had been checked and found to be in good condmon when they purchased the home. The shed located to the rear of the property was discussed as a means of reduang the total hardcover on the property. Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #198j variance and average lakeshore setback variance for a second-story addition. To r^c the amount of hardcover, the shed wiU be removed at the time of construction. Ayes j, Navs 0. (#7) #1984 STEVEN M. ENGLUTH), 3855 CHERRY AVENUE - RENEWAL VARLANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 8:40-8:43 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. This application is for a renewal of a lot is located on Chetry Avenue and is consistent with the developmem in the ar^ noted that filling is to be limited and discouraged m the w^d where a retention area exists and evenually drains under the netghbot ’s dnveway at the east. Th were no changes firora the original application- Smith moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #1984 for renewal variance for Steven Englund. Ayes 3, Nays 0. (#8) #1985 BRUCE BREN HOMES, 1000 COX FARaM ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING 8:43-8:48 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publicatiottwere noted, The Applicant was present. i G5 /2/5 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEni SETBACK zone : (CIRCLE CN£) 0-75' 75-250'(250-5G0j)500-1000' Existing Hardcover in Zone A. House ^ B. Garage W' -4a' ^u Driveway i D. Sidewalk E. Patio/ Deck F.Landscape areas UNDERLAIN BY PLASTIC SHEETING G. Other LENGTH 2 c 3 /2 X - X - X - X WIDTH 3 o So 2. O (o O Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone /6oo 72o ^ 0 o 2S^O 3rso /.T CSV( S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.c _ S.F. S.F. S.r. S.F. « % *N ? S.F. ^ V Q S.F. /SO O' S.F. _ S.F. _ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F._A I B X 100 22- •'% ^OM^TES OFTHE O^ONO % ^ScE - PUBLIC HEARING 9:13 P.M. - 9:35 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Steve Englund were present. Gaffron explained this was a relatives own neighboring 0.37 acre. The Zoning Code re^«s .^c.e. ^ oieets that standard. Some parcels, no additional land is available. . mstaUed in consultation with Linage improvements have been property. There are mamre trees tile Public Works Department on^e neighb^^^^^^ ^ on the property and it is not a desi^(^cov*r is allowed. The conceptual proposal would not 250-500- hardcover zone where » “^LeVLuid be proposed. The property has been be a problem on this lot. i o ^ would not be necessary assesL for sewer and a well t and this lot is not to vacate. 15% lot coverage is allowed. Lot siz ary inconsistent with the area. mt'suilttrlwdfbl^ Smitii asked how much fill would be required because of the steep bank from the sueet to the proposed home site. Hngiund suted he ho^d to r^y b “nec«sS^^ ” n1" red that fiU required would be approximately 5-6'm height. A neighbor questioned what w^ir^nr^dhig on the back of the lot. E“s 2 “ s -i. - - installation. Gaffron explained there would but likely none under the house. ^ all fill U brought in at the tune of house « in", prf the building permit. Vi» ;n rniild affect the drainage. Gaffron responded that a ^L'tSi wLd t retw any fiU was brought onto the property. MEWTES of the ORONO PLA xNNING c(w»iission meeting pFT n OCTOBER 18, 1993 iffS) STEVEN M. ENGLUND - CONT. Lindquist expressed dis concern over the drainage issue and cautioned the applicant as he proceeds with development of the property. Ayes 6, nays 0. S^’o^OR^™S^™E.FACT variance . PUBLIC HEARING 9:45 P.M - 10:12 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Orville Fisher was present. 1 • r htiH h<*en received from a resident that there had been some tree cunmg m the 0-75 zone. Upon m ^ ^ removed in the 0-75 ’ zone as well as been a number of trees, 6 m i » setback area is not allowed by City intensive vegetation cleanng. ree adopted about one year ago prohibit Code. In addition, Shoreland Regula i , violation tags have been issued and intensive vegetation cuttm^d cleamg m violations in the 0-75 ’ setback arc pending in the courts. ‘ . recommend denial of the after-the-fact variance and look area on previous property. it meets standards the City should require. property ax d.=re is a sewer cooneciou and remodeimg occurring which is separate from the tree cutung issue. Fisher apologized to the public^l^g c^ge ®mdent iork Stated it was not done mtentionally. P ^ to cut within the 0-75 ’ zone, while ±e Fishers were out of town “dgi^ ^g^stired from ±e shoreline. Fisher noted he Both ±e coUege smdent setSck line so they could determine the extent of the conucted a surveyor to venfy th wahusth to be®in steps for restoration and correcnoi^. datnage, and he also “uracred Je^ „tar will be He is not asking ^roval of an ^ the ^ ^idSeST^ - r" ure£ C^nuiercgly so more expensive trees will be replaced. ____.li CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CITY OF ORONO NOVEMBER 8, 1993 •7. *8.. *9. 10. ni. 12. rr .1 rn^ften sccondcd to table #1860 Conditional Use Permit for Zelma Avenue to allow staff to work out a parking soluuon. Ayes 3. Nays 0. Motion carried. „m CBAiuis SHMEV mi. JS« nnf hace . vAsuiCi, KsoumON oji!. R^olution #3352. Ayes 3. Nays 0. Motion earned. #1879 AI.LEN AND KATHLEEN BAKKE, 1127 LOMA LINDA AVENUE. VARIANCE, RESOLUTION #3353. Counciltnentber Goetten ntovetl. Kelley seconded. 1127 Loma Linda Avenue, after-*e-fact constructed/refurbished in 1985. and to adopt Resolution #3353. Ayes 3. Nays u. m #1880 THOMAS AND JANE REGNIER, 1205 ELMWOOD AVENUE, RENEWAL VARIANCE. resolution #3354. "^wal'^ofsTdeT™^^^ “ existing residence, and to adopt Resolution #3354. Ayes 3, Nays 0. otion carrie #1882 JOHN M. O’SULLIVAN/O'SULUVANS, 2420 SHADYWOOD ROAD, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN review approval for Council action at their next meeting. #1883. STEVEN M. ENGLUND, 3855 CHERRY AVENUE, VARIANCE, RESOLUTION #3355. Councilmember Goenen moved, Kelley seconded. rherrv Avenue, for approval of a lot area variance for constniction of a single lami y a37^cre parcel, and adopt Resolution #3355. Ayes 3. Nays 0. Motion carried. #1884, ORVILLE FISHER, 475 OXFORD ROAD, VARIANCE, RESOLUTION #3356 Councilmember Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, for ^ Aye^^^ays 0. for an after-the-fact variance and to adopt Resolution #3356 deny g Motion carried. 6288601 CITY of ORONO RESOLLTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL O o r; NO.lLl_j. MAY *0 199A INC0VNTVMWN. ^CEPUTf A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) file #1883 WHEREAS. SBven M. Englund (hereinafter "the appltant") has interest in the property located at 3855 Cherry Avenue within the Ctty of Otono (heretnafter tty ) legally described as follows: Lois 8 and 9, Block 7. Crystal Bay View. Hennepin County. Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance code Section 10.25, Subdivts.on 6 (B, - :cVtS'5^rrris^!i:780 an acre for single fa^tly detached dwelling purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: findlngs 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #188j. The property is located in the LR-IC. Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, requiring 0.5 acre in area for a building sue. 3.Municipal Code Section 10.03. Subdivision 6 (A-1) indicates that therefore requires Council approval. Page 1 of 5 H hmMOiaMftw ifT- r 1 ■ fn i«*tw I CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.o <•-> o K *■ s -S findings: A At iust over 16.000 s.f. in area, the combined lots contains substantial area for construction of single family residence without the requirement for any other variances to the zoning chapter. B. Municipal sewer is available and assessed to the property. C Developed lot sizes in the neighborhood range from 0.14 acre to 1.5 acres ofTry land, averaging about 0.55 acres. The combinatjon of Uu 8 9 at 0.37 acre yields a lot size that is not inconsistent with other lots m the neighborhood. Their is no other land available for purchase in order to make the lot size conforming. 5 The Citv Council has considered this application including the fmdings ^d SotSrenSions of the Planntng Commission, reports by C ty s.ff. co— by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 6 The Citv Council finds that the conditions existing on this to it and do not apply generally to other propeny m this zoning nistrict tot .ranting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would mere se“e as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary “ “ " demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve “prop right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. D. Page 2 of 5 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.n •* 1. 2 6. /. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a vari^ce to Municipal 'ols Code Section 2^^ X” Ig Lots 8 and 9 shall be legally combined prior to issuance of the building permit. A sewer connection charge of S225.00 plus the current sewer avaUable charge shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance. NO variances other than the lot area variance are The standard lot line setbacks, hardcover limitation of jOvo. lot co'^erage limitation of 15%, and all other requirements of the zoning chapter, shall be Lhered to. No ftmher variances will be granted for development of thi property. Property owner is advised that a complete grading and drainage plan must be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application.- Authorities «ranted bv this variance mn with the property not with the hut ar™peridssive onlv and must be esercised by application for a building ^“LTwS oL yL'of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (November 8. 1994). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and resolution shall constitute a violation of zonmg code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemea . The undersimed applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees “^ofution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the property. Page 3 of 5 Id CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 8th day of November, 1993 AT^ST: , /bV<Sy M..^in, City Clerk ^2^ Edward J. CallahaK. Jr., Mayor |00 a ^ Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me November, 1993, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Halim, Mayor & ^ City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was execu e of the City. (•rAV^.v.WiWrVV.a!; JA.M1E L BOSMA NOTAflY PUBUC-MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My Cwim. Excues 12-19-97 Notary^blic Page 4 of 5 rwmvm^i •9 ■ I W^f CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILo . - NO.■ 1- •. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) y of (jLkZ\^i^ . /»/> y . 199 ^ before me a Notary-On this ,-QD ______aay o. —--------------- -j- • ^ Public within and for said county. personaH\- appeared^T;^^^^ 7;?iTiDiic wiininan ^ the pe7son(s) deschiled in and who executed the foregoing immimem. anilcknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. itW HENNEPIN CCUMTY My Cwun. Effnc 12 ‘1^97 i NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of [99 ^ before me a Notary li/-Public withinand for said coumy . descrit/ed in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and~cknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. /n Tusm KiKMMSt JAMIE L BOSMA NOTARY PU6UC-MINNES0TA HENNS1N COUNTY My Comm. Expire 12-19-97 NOm^ PUBUC Page 5 of 5 \L .... ^ CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL N0._2-.Eil3 ____ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONPiG CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE j?1984 legally described as follows: Lots S and 9, Block 7. Crysml Bay View. Hennepin County. Minnesota (hereinafter "the property "); and Code Section 10.25. Subdivision 6 (B) p ^r 0 37 acre in area where the existing -nS' rr “f. '/r-0^‘ i^e ^r nt— iot area. NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 9 This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1984. wn. .rrv ic located in the LR-IC, Single Family L^eshore Residential K S; S ”o,5 acre nhnintutn area for a budding site. 3. • ' ■ .f jj within 80% of the requirements of the zoning chapter . m'37 «re. the property ’ contains only 74% of the .5 acre requirement, and therefore requires Council approval. Page 1 of 4 j CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL no._:1^_2____ 4. D. 6. The three member Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 21, 1994 and recommended approval of the variances as proposed, based upon the following findings: A. At just over 16.000 s.f. in area, the combined lots contain substantial area for construction of single family residence without the requirement of any variances to the zoning chapter. B. C. Municipal sewer is available and assessed to the property. Developed lot sizes in the neighborhood range from .14 acre to 1.5 acres of dry land, averaeing about 0.55 acres. The combination of Lots 8 and 9 at 0.37 acre yields a lot size that is not inconsistent with other lots in the neiehborhood D. There is no other land available for purchase in order to make the lot size coniormmg. The Cit>' Council fmds ±at the conditions e.xisting on this property ^ 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 lire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary' to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and mtent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comment by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 4 fwrnm^OK * • •»» fi V - 1 ---------rtf- - “ ,• • —-'.-t f——’-fc r tfn«lL------mrwmern CITY of ORONO RESOLLTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 5 0 8--------- CONCLUSIONS. ORDER AND CONDITIONS Bas=d upon one or more of the above findings the Orono C^ound^ere^ following condiiions: 1. A sewer connection charge of S225.00 plus the current Sewer Availability Charge shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance. o No variances other than the lot area variance are The standard lot line setbacks, hardcover limitation of 30 /o, lot coverage limitation of 155"c, and ail other requirements of the applicable zomng chapters, shall be adhered to. No further variances will be granted for development of this propert>'. Propem' owner is advised that a complete grading and drainage plan must be submittk in conjunction with the buUding permit application. Authorities «^ranted bv this variance run with the property not with the applicant, brl^^r^ per^Sve o'nlv and must be exercised by application for a budding permit t^^ithin one year of the date of CouncU approval, or this variance will expire on that date (December 12, 1995). Violation of or oon-comoiiance with any of the terms and conditions of to .Molution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically [emhiate any'authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor, f. The undersi«^ned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terns ^]^rresoi^non and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigm hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution m the cham of title of the property. 3. 4. 5. Page 3 of 5 fmrnim O.. ^>*- m^. CITY of ORONO !! '■mf RESOLLTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL m_3_i08___ Adopted by the Orono Cit>' Council on this 12th day of December, 1994. / ^Dorothv MfTIa ' Vj lin. City Clerk Edward J. Call Property Owner(s) (^2-^ fflCU<^^^ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. of the City. LINDA S. VEE notary PUBLIC-MINNESOTA N HENNEPIN COUNTY C My Commission £«'« Jan 31. 2C!0 \ - - Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this ~~day of /A /, 199 ^ before me a Notary Public ^ rwsv within and for said coimtv, personally appeared a' j- •>* - /■ . rowi:a:^r •“ IP rm msism LINDA S. VEE notary PUBLIC-MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY j; My Commission bctres Jan 31.2CC0 *, I i/yk/vA>r.A. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 5 f««MnOiik • • * A \\ CITY of ORONO W \\ RESOLUTION OF THE CTTY COUNCIL ? **' 0 sNO.--------- STATE OF NIINNESOT.\ ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of ^ 199 ___, before me a Notary Public to"mc rnd who executed ch. to«gom^;iiS5ument. and i^rh^-r-cu^d d.e same as h.s ,d.eie, free ac. and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this wi dav of ^ 199 ___, before me a Notary Public and acknowledged that he (they) e.xecuied the same as his (ineir) tree Notary Public state of MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of 199 , before me a Notary Public ^ — * within and for said iid who executed the foregoing instrumencTIHd ^S^dgeV^Jr(they) e.xecuted the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 5 of 5 r<r« VM 6^* /O TO;Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator DATE;January 8, 1996 SUBJECT: #2097 Patricia Guttormson, 3315 Crystal Bay Road - Variances Public Hearing 2^ning District: LR-IC Total area = 14,530 s.f. Adjusted area = 11.030 s.f. (3.500 s.f of Cr>stal Bay Road) Application: Applicant seeks approval of hardcover, lakeshore setback, average lakeshore setback and rear setback variances for structural/foundation improvements to an existing detached garage and to permit the rebuilding of an attached deck along the lake and west side of the existing residence. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review. Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Review of structural coverage. Adjusted lot area = 11,030 s.f. Allowed = 1,654.5 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,784 s.f. or 16.1% Proposed = 1,611.9 s.f. or 14.6% No variance required Section 10.22, Subd. 1(A) - Lakeshore setback variance A. Garage Required = 75' Existing = 38' Proposed = 38' Variance = 37' or 49.3% B.Attached deck Required = 75' Existing = 44' Proposed = 44* Variance = 31* or 41.3% k ' Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B) Allowed = 0 Existing = T Proposed = T - Average lakeshore setback variance. Zoning File #2097 January 8, 1996 Page 2 Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. A. 0-75’ setback area = 7.830 s.f. (adjusted for area of Crystal Bay Road) Allowed = 0 Existing = 2,692 s.f. or 34.4% Proposed = 2,519.9 s.f. or 32.2% Hardcover reduction of 172.1 s.f. or 2.19% B 75-250' setback area = 3,200 s.f. Allowed = 800 s.f. or 25% Existing = 841 s.f. or 26.28% Proposed = 711 s.f. or 22.2% Hardcover decrease = 130 s.f. or 4.06% No variance required Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B) - Rear setback variance for rebuilding of deck. Required = 30 ’ Existing = 9’ Proposed = 19' (new deck will be installed at same rear setback) Variance = 11* or 36.6% List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant’s Addendum C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List El-2 - Hardcover Fact Sheets F - Survey G - Improvement Plan Description of Request Applicant seeks approval of aRer-the-fact lakeshore setback and hardcover variances for major structural/foundation improvements to an existing detached garage to the lake side of the existing residence. Applicant’s contractor had obtained the necessary permits for minor repairs to the detached garage. Once the repairs were begun the contractor soon realized the need to replace block foundation and a new cement floor was poured. This type of structural improvement required variance approval as structure is located completely wdthin the 0-75’ setback area. Zoning File #2097 January 8, 1996 Page 3 The ^jplication also involves a request to rebuild an attached deck located to the lake and west sides of the residence. It exists at 540 s.f. and will be reduced to an area of 367.9 s.f. The deck will encroach no closer into the 0-75' setback nor will it extend any closer to the rear setback line or extend any fiirther beyond the average lakeshore setback line than the existing deck. Lot coverage exists now at 16.1% and would be reduced to 14.6%. The existing deck appears to have no impact upon the views of the adjacent residences. The applicant also proposes a reduction of some 130 s.f. of hardcover within the 75-250* setback area existing at 26.28% and proposed at 22.2%. Statement of Hardships Refer to Exhibit D, applicant's addendum notes the following hardships: 1.Applicant notes the age and deteriorating condition of structures specifically garage foundation and cement floor and were found to need complete replacement rather than a "patch up". 2.The garage and storage above are the only storage areas on the property that contains a small residence with two small closets and no basement area. 3.Deck is deteriorating and unsafe. The deck has been designed so that access can be provided at four doors that open out onto deck. The redesign results in a reduction of 172.1 s.f. of deck area. 4.There is a need to retain as much off-street parking on this property as there is no parking on Crystal Bay Road. 5.3,500 s.f. of a City road encroaches the property via a prescriptive easernent. T^e majority of the lot is located within the 0-75' setback area (7,830 s.f. in 0- 75', 3,200 in the 75-250'). Issues for Consideration 1. Should other hardcover removals be required? 2.Structural coverage is proposed at 14.6%. Should deck be further reduced? 3. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. 1 Zoning File #2097 January 8, 1996 Page 4 Options of Action To ^prove as proposed or amended. Any recommendation of approval must include the condition that hardcover improvements scheduled for removal must be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION 91 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 structures S200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) ^OQ7 PROPERTY INFORMATION ^ . Site Address r\0<xd. _. —rr—:—TT—% nz . I-N ^ iTProperty Identification Number (P.l.D.) —irU—0 V ^~1.-------------—— Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Pro^rty Acquired alq5T -------------------(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___other (specify) Zoning District: L. Q — / C------------------------ applicant Phone Ihome) Ml^ ^ ^ _ A Phone(woric) ritflfQ----- Arirtigss: (r r.j'.t. I fl.-. u L City: i-gno --------------Zip: Hi ta /_ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _________________ Phone(home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: _ _ ___ Estimated Construction Costs_________ Describe request in detail: vLLeVt- j —4Vmt '^Jri.n'lr^vxfe 4-f-v C.A-vCcy.__------------------------------------------------------------------------------— DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST ~ .. ------ail: Cj-|-\CcCg»- ______________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary ’) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _ Setback: ___Lot Width Front Side Lot CoverageHardcover ___ \/^Rear jxf^verage Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: r».Ht:t.cU_cL—KeeJu-------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) 1 « 1 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the aPDiicatioa deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete; __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). (3^ __Certificate of Sur\ y (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as reemired. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8 Vi x 11 for reproduction. 4 .... Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8Vi x 11 for reproduction.^ s —^Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8Vi" x 11"). (j6^ 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 ^ou wish notified of this application. 7. 8. you wish notified of this application. l/''’*Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this applicatio'i. Please remember that your variance aDPlication is not complete if the above information has not iiK;luded^ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE . The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by Uve Zonmg Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Aonlicani ’s Signature___Date _J}J------------------ OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signamre Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at aU 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 Budding & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 > ii-i ■ I >1 rir^“ 1 rii -r-i- !■ The City of Ofono -L/L / / ■X Ti #5 4 >i f '-**✓' December 19, 1995 RE: Property at: 3315 Crystal Bay Road I bought this home in March of 1995. It was in need of a few repairs, one being some of the blocks in the garage foundation were crumbling. I had a masonary man come in to repair them and he ended up replacing che all. Also the cement floor in the garage was cracked and crumbling so he replaced this. It was not my intention to do this much work, but it became necessary. This garage and storage above is the only storage I have. My home is a 1920's cabin and has 2 small closets and no basement. My deck on my house is deterioting and I would like to replace this. I have 4 doors opening onto this deck. I would reduce the hardcover by not rebuilding this deck as large as it was, but by making it smaller on the driveway side. I could also remove a patio in the rear of the house. I cannot reduce the driveway as there is very limited parking on the narrow road in front There is a 2 foot wall on the road to hold back the elevation, this is the original wall and also has steps in front needed to gain access to the road. The cjty road encroaches this property. The majority of my property is located in 0-75* } " UiXl-huua ol Patricia A Guttormson . —__ _ _ _ _ fc'- I y; .. ■MM DATI It/m/H HCWCPINVt’ MTCN 501*•' i>.V mp Aoofi .: CMCII MAMi TAXPAYERI •- NMC/AOOll i .V>r 4 % *MKM MNM ^ > OMCR HMC }/• TAMMVEIImm/m M ^■i 1.. ■.■■•1 :t- -‘v;/ . .., ■ fvr ■•■ ....• ' 'MUP Aom OIHER NAME TAWAYCR NAME/AOMl . I '- '.V* i • ‘. ** ,.*• n-. : V> ( > MMM AOOR« . f #f i __ __ ___.Xi' ' OMNER NAHE 1% TAXRAVER > ' HAME/ADOR ‘ -! :t 1 N j V :»•' • > • « » J ; RROR AOOR f OIMER NAt# , TAXRAVER NAME/AOORU’r , t ■\pillv3 -4, a; • .V* v.i ^ * % SR X7-lt7-2S 41 0004 OnOO KENNOOD NAY t R DllOaCK A R OXMQCK STAR A TRXSUNE EMR CREDIT UN 42S MRTIANO AVC PU m SS400 SO 17-117-ES 41 0007 OeOSR AOORESS UNASSIONIR CAL ROOD CLAIR ROOD MIS KENNOOD NAY NAYZATA Ml 55S91 SO 17-117-2S 41 0014 0SS09 CRYSTAL RAY RO V N NEIIN A K P HELlN V NXLLIAN A KATHLEEN P NELIN SSOO CRYSTAL RAY RO ORONO MN 55S91 SR 17-117-ES 41 0019 0SSE9 CRYSTAL RAY RO NICNAEL J FINLEY NXCNAEL J/PATRXCK N FINLEY SSE9 CRYSTAL RAY RO NAYZATA Ml S5S91 TOTAL RATCH 501 OOOIE I' •V r ^ * f .4.V )*.;• 'f.'V ■■ ' r '‘-y ' ^ I» COUMTY POOPfWTY INFOIMinON SY5TEH PPQPE5TY GMNEIIS LISTSO 17-117-ES 41 0005OOOSa A005ESS UNSSSXGNEOC S L MOOCLAIO MOO EE15 KEIOOlOO NAY NAYZATA HN 55ST1 30 17-117-ES 41 OOlS 0SE45 COYSTAL OAY RO HARK C ZA6AR1A MARK C ZAOARIA 15E4 EIST AVE N E ROCHESTER ftl 55904 SO 17-117-ES 41 0017 0SS15 CRYSTAL OAY RO PATRICIA A QUTTORHSQN PATRICIA A OUTTORHSQN SS15 CRYSTAL OAY RO NAYZATA MN 55S91 SO 17-117-ES 41 0020 0SSS5 CRYSTAL OAY RO LARRY N NELSON LARRY H NELSON SSS5 CRYSTAL OAY RD NAYZATA HN 55S91 lREPORT NO. PX4S540il PAGE 1SO 17-117-ES 41 0004 OOOSO AOORESS IflASSIGNEO CEL ROOO CLAIR ROOD EE15 REmOOO NAY NAYZATA MN S5S91 SO 17-117-ES 41 0015 0SE05 CRYSTAL OAY RD HEATHER H JOHNSTONE HEATHER N JOHNSTONE SE05 CRYSTAL OAY RD NAYZATA m 55S91 SO 17-117-ES 41 0010 0SSE5 CRYSTAL OAY RO 0 H STANTON A 0 L STANTON DENNIS N A OECKY L STANTON SSE5 CRYSTAL OAY RO NAYZATA HN 55S91 SO 17-117-ES 44 0104 0SE40 NAVARRE U CUXR T A LYYtl 0 ROOO CLAIR A LYNN ROOO EE15 KENNOOD NAY NAYZATA HN 55S91 :r• n f -\ i * 4 .*• I*. i '•i ’■ I*n • /• n n ‘ * * i .' •'f «■. I ' O 4 « I p • .4 • * > ' / . r ! ‘'v ». * I «'I . • y:; »<■ ! ’V .. H P 1 .*• 4^n ■‘i *• **) V>*A . Vi•n, • '•» »•*<> •’•A • . . t ^ *v* !I 9 i t y ‘ * t^ mm OATi 12/oi/fs: -S'MTCH Ml .•<»# ^\'. # • » - % • A: ^ * • • • -• ’ r ^ .\s f ‘f ♦ ' : f i .*A 1 \ ** . ‘K •A'- ' j • . '4'^ iV • f:v t;. « ' ♦ < f ■'' * / • ‘•', ‘V-: »% I !-• .<• ^IV n ‘‘v • \ *• -*i«■<y," * ' :i •/ ^*. j V A \ V.'f .•A -•'■ Si'. • ♦ *' ^ *1 • ... ' k i ' » ' *1 • * m '5 -■IV4 •’•' K.i ■'.•• •. j.-: * f.' . .‘. •. *.‘ • * } -V2 . ** ; • • M’ j.'.* t -' >t '.J,V. v’ ’*i/. . ! . • •Vi.. *••; is> '-V •>* • • ,, : ■ '• ' . • ■; ■'^•■< \.; •. b:i v;:*Q.fv ;(.'•■> •., 4;i::V? NCItCPXN COUNTY MOKRTV INrOVUnON 8YSTCN PIIOREIITY OMCRS LIST MRQIIT NO. n^SMOl RACI t \ , • , A * • ». •a 4’• '■{'■ . V * r ■r-> 'k- ' •-N :i V2 ! » # • s: I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORNAHON AS XT APPEARS THIS DATS ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEMCPXN COIMTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TANATXON* TO THE BEST OF NY RN0NLE06E AND BELIEF. “Q ^ •• k * y V; i. ii .;■• 'rtT' ’• • Ki: .• ‘ I !.V • '.'• i ( 4 • * • • J fc. * • t : » 4 « .JLm A . • • DATE !2llt^Vf .:<• >);♦ -o V-:, • . ,'Sivvv ,. - 0 •*• * • .V >f ^ i “ • *: J ■■ • * • .* ' ‘ I •* .• • .f I t • *• L\'T i • V*‘ .* •'<#' V. r s ..-f »'.' f.I* # «» • 1 \ \m^mm■V ■^ic'y?i v"'-.k,: ' « <«. * ♦V ( > (c < 4 ( / V* *li. \ \ \ m^m^ .'V (^^x-I \S' *^s > :*C''^\ \ \ mm ^ I t. -i;fei"'.' ;•'.- ’ '.v.s’: .1\- '■.; ^^■• ■'V. ,.^ )/. TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Michael P. Gaf&on, 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. Existing = 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’ Required front (street) setback = 30 ’ D.Existing northeast side setback =10’ Proposed = 8’ Required = 10’ E.Existing southwest side setback = 13’ Proposed = 6.8’-7.T Required = 10’ Zoning File #2098 January 8, 1996 Page 2 2.Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C): Lot coverage by structures limited to 15% or 1,500 s.f, whichever is greater. Existing 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. 16a): 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 direction 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. Exhibit 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 slope 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 1 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 comer of the proposed attached garage will be L. Zoning File #2098 January 8, 1996 Page 3 approximately 9* from the neighboring detached garage. The City has consistently attempted to maintain a minimum 10’ setback between 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 property 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 excess therefore is 295 s.f. or 3.5%. It can be argued that this is a variance created by attempting to coi.struct 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 eliminate the porch, deck, and another 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 significaiit concern to the City, because this property and the Seran property adjacent are the receivers of significant amounts of runoff from Highwood Road. One change which staff would suongly recommend is that the bottom of the swale to the northeast be centered on the lot line beuveen 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 storrn 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? 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.Does ihe 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^otal 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 stalT and engineer to review drainage. Recommend partial approval. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Table for further review (provide applicant direction). 5.Other. i A • CITY OF ORONO - VARIAxNCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $200.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming strucmre^" $'*00.00 After-the-Faci Fees (Double application fee) #; eOi V;V O PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Property Identificationiflcation Number (P.I D.) ?n^j3^¥0C/J_ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired I (do) dono^ also own the adjacent pafrcels of land.'^ Present use of property; residential ___other (specify)------------ Zoning District:___L— IB_______________—--------------------- APPLICANT Name K:ii^i P.rvf I Ren)pCf Ii Address: l(? 1^;, T \jy\,MCCt'^ l ^ Phone (home) ^^2 ^2^4 Phone(woric)____________ City: Pr/nVi(l OWNER (if^ifferer.t than applicant) Name Addre; Phondhome) Phone (work) Zip:_2£J511_ 314/ City:Zip:.i53kf4 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Replace I 4 Estimated Construction Cost $ ^ 15 00 0______ ^9 w i, d fqr-/MC dri)rC. 5 (attach additional sheefs'lf necessary) SorV<d^^ VARIANCES REQUTTJED A Lot Area X" Lot Width >' Hardcover X Lot Coverage X Setback: JC Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preven^g compliance with Zoning Code requirements: fdd (attach additional sheets if necessary) 1I M \ LL fli fr-' 4 i J >' *f ____^required submittals All of the following information must h? ig»h™tted bv the appU<;at^9n <jy^dlim »n fnr vour application to be considered complete: 1. 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. ■f Sed of owners within 150’. labels and plat map (you mmt Obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A- , Govt Cente 348-3271). j • t hairHrov^r ✓ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor and incl^ f" calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy / Top'^nphic'survey (existing and proposed elevationsj if any changes «> ~ are'^proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'A x , ✓ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 3/4 x 11 ). T “uiriegal names (include mariul status) of all persons with an mteret u. the ~ property. This would include name(s) of appliMnt(s) if _ L L addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of .my other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The ADOlicani and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remeinber dm ismE ■ infbnniiilbn has no» Dbtn intlwhd. herebv^M^M^ provide all information required or requested by the Zoning ISinSSr agre^ to pav additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) information supplied is ” , Z -Zof ^ Applicant's Signature ■ --------Date i? It JL ---------- OVVNER’S SICJNAT^ application and fuirher authorizes r^onable J^onto the propeiry bv cfty staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council meTerr^os^ of inveitigation and verification of this request. Cl„„.n,re£ .V [ i ~ ^ Applicant nmst have a„ — Mee^g. nresent at ail scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission this change prior to the meeting. 8 I* RUN.MTi It/ll/n mHLPlH COUNTY PROPERTY INromATlQH SYSTEH PROPERTY Olt€RS LISTt. MTCN nrTAXPAYER < NAHE/AOOR sa 07-lI7-n 44 0010 04074 NIGNNOOO RO JOHN T SAWORN ETAL J T SANOQON 4074 HIGHNOQO RO HOUND m S5S44 • / : V ^ PROP AODR OMCR NAME t TAXPAYER ; NAHE/AOOR M 07-117-ES 44 0011 04101 NI6HHOOO RO EVA TNEOOALO EVA A THEGOALD 4101 NIONNOOO HOUND m §5344 j: ; ■ A • • •» PROP AOOR ■ QMCR NAME ' i' t, TAXPAYER ' NAME/AOOR t ' 30 07-117-23 44 0031 04132 NIGNNOOO RO SCOTT 6 A CATHERINE ANDERSON SCOTT 0 A CATHERINE ANDERSON 4132 HimNOQO ROAD HOUND HN 55344 t« > V PROP AOOR O':V QMCR NAME TAXPAYER • NAME/AOOR 'V . \\« •• • I * . M 07-117-ES 4A 0004 04i04 NIOttlOOO RO OLEN • MVERLY SAUER OLEN A BEVERLY SAUER 4104 NIGNNOOO RO MOUND m 55344 Vl>‘. i * ** ■ 'f 0 « I t »• I •^4* ' Si- \ I* . # , iJl;A n. •4 4 X • « ‘4 • i r L r\. REPORT NO. PI435401 PA« 1730 07-117-23 44 0011 04041 NIGNHOOO RO F L JOHNSON A D L FOSS FREDERIC JOHNSON 4041 HIGHNOQO RD HOUND HN 55344 38 07-117-23 44 0012 04044 HIOMOOO RO 0 L A R NELSON ALONZO 8 SERAN III 4044 HIOHHOOO RO HOUND HN 55344 38 07-117-23 44 0014 04105 HIGHHOOO RO CHARLES E DA HART NILLIAH 0 8R1CICLEY 4105 HIGHHOOO HOUND HN 55344 38 07-117-23 44 0015 04104 HIGHHOOO RO GEORGE H APPLE8AUN GEORGE APPLE8AUH 4104 HIGHHOOO RD HOUND HN 55344 38 07-117-23 44 0033 04108 HIGHHOOO RO JASON H THEIS JASON THEIS 4108 HIGHHOOO RO HOUND HN 55344 38 07-117-23 44 04125 HIGHHOOO RO JOHN H A RQ8ERTA J HENRICH JOHN H A ROBERTA J HENRICH 4125 HIOHHOOO RO ORQNO HN 55344 38 07-117-23 44 0087 04114 HIGHHOOO RO PHILLIP H OTTO PHILLIP OTTO 14050 STRATFORD RD 8204 HINNETONKA HN 55345 TOTAL BATCH 507 00011 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENT^PIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATIONp TO THE BEST OF HY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. DATE * \ I • , « •>- \ ;. \ 4 : ■ • ■ # \ ■ *• * U| » • ;.p’. • • ' f V? ' 1 n • f * % • /1 * t • . ' i. • t J • ••M- ^T\ % li *f O HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS oroperry lacks adeq-aate off-street parking while being located on a narrow roadway lined with narrow lots resulting in exceptionally poor on-street parking capacity. of decay and structural failure, and fuuctiona oLolescenL. Some unsafe conditions are This building isn't a candidate for rehabilitation or expansion and should be replaced. "LprSve^eStl: d^^lU^g^Shich'Jho^lT'reas^nrbly ^yj_veway for added minimum ofi.-street parking. Aoolicant's proposed improvements call for a 25-foot front/street setback instead of 30 feet which (1) pei*mits a Steep grade, while still accommodating off-street parking for four vehicles (two garaged and two in drive). IetbaS"?ariIncei^seem ‘'mo«‘^than®offset^by the ‘ fao? that the proposal maintains ample sideyard separations from neighboring buildings. With relatively modest -footprint", the overall proposed il^EHI^ia^^y ovll^o^fn^ thi har^rh^ps^'^lhesriSpr^oeet-eat-s b- oideXi.df4 raSt^.:)s rSS home which meets the modem needs tor year-rouna permanent residency without disproportional "over-building or adverse impact on adjoining properties; and (2)• J^Y providing adeqviate off-street parking for four vehicles (two garaged, two in 25' driveway). rrM f '.f.-?* HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ^0-75^ 75-250* 250-500* EXISTINC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ___________ LengTh B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Pado/Deck F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic X X X G. Other X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 0____________* B . A. House WABnrovER IN ZONE LeDftii B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other X X X X X X X X X WkUh 3668.16 X 100 3668.16 Wittl • I 1511 I I S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total PROPERTY AMA IN ^ A _______ 36jg.16 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A B % SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75" HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 250-500’ NC, HARDCPVER IN ZONE A. Hou« ^0 Width X X X B. C. Driveway * (Gravel parallel parking area:J 0. Sidewalk X X E. Pado/Deck (Stoop) 3.5 X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plasuc X X X G. Other 2.5 CATCH BASIN TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PR||aTY AREA IN ZONE ^ A -------------------- -------- ’ PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House 24_________38.5’ Triangle at entry Leogtii 4' X 4 4' X X X widdi .5 B. Garage 22' C. Driveway 28.5* (ave.)X X D. Sidewalk 25.75*Raised along_ _ _ _garage X X E. Patio/Deck ^2.22'X X F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic X X X G. Other PORCH 12.67*10* TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 1 2551 .00 B ,A - X 100 4882.21 xlOO I 600 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.f V '\ S.F. 480 S.F. S.F.c;; 261 S.F. S.F.----------> r ■ S.F. S.F. < S.F. S.F. S.F. I-'./ 1 L>n 7.5 S.F. - *Nl • r Mippu IWiL- t -n Wc^ C. :} r • ■■ uribWTi -■ hm ir«/*)V^ 41J J V X _". ^XKyr^ r^-izr?' t TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator / FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:January 8, 1996 SUBJECT: #2100 Robert and Debra Edmunds, 1030 Tonkawa Road - Variances/ Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning Dutrict: LR-IB Lot area = 68,078 s.f. or 1.56 acres Application: Applicants seek approval of a lot width variance to permit construction of a new residence and a conditional use permit to permit the borrowing of approximately 600 cubic yards to create a walkout for a new residence to be constructed on property. The existing residence and all additional structures on property are to be removed. The borrowing of 600 cubic yards is not authorized under the scope of the building permit for the new construction. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.24, Subd. 5(B) - Lot width variance. Required = 140' OHWL = 101’ 75' setback =101' Variance = 39' or 27.8% Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Review of strucmral coverage. Total lot area = 68,078 s.f. or 1.56 acres Allowed = 10,212 s.f. Proposed = 3,926 s.f. or 5.7% No variance required Section 10.03, Subds. 20 and 21 - Conditional use permit has been required as applicant proposw .. borrowing of 600 cubic yards of fill to allow a walkout design. All excavations are located out of the 0-75' setback and wd. be located no closer than 125' from the lake. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicants' Addendum/Hardship Statement C - Plat M.*:' D - Property Owners List E - Existing Improvements/Survey F - Proposed Site Plan I Zoning File #2100 January 8, 1996 Page 2 Gl-4 - Hardcover Fact Sheet H - Engineer ’s Report 1/5/96 11-3 - Floor Plan Three Levels J - Elevations West and East - North and South elevations have not been submitted with application inlormation Description of Request Applicants propose the removal of all existing improvements and the construction of a nevv residence requiring a lot width variance as property measures 101' at both the OHWL and 75 setback. The code requires a 140' width. The structure will meet all required setbacks of the LR-IB zoning district. Based on the height definition, height shall be determined at the 962 elevation (962’ = highest elevation adjacent to residence, 952.5 + 10’ = 962.5’). At 1 1/2 acres the propertv has adequate area to support all proposed hardcover improvements as portions of the new structure wi'* located both in 75-250 and 250-500 setback areas. The newme new ^uuciuic; wr- ------------ structure will be locatea behind the average lakeshore setback line determined by the residence structures located to the north and south of the proposed residence. The former residence on this property (located closer to shoreline) sustained drainage/flooding problems over the years which former owner claimed were intensified with the new construction to the north. Filling of the building pad will also provide insurance from flooding of the proposed residence and will also provide the desired walkout design. Review Exhibit H, the engineer approves the proposed jading and drainage plan but is concerned that applicant proposes boulder walls where portions of the wall on both the north and south lot lines will exceed a 4' height. Where walls exceed 4’, the engineer asks that modular masomy- block walls be considered and that a structural design be provided for all wall sections over the 4’ height. Review Exhibit F, note the area on north side of the residence just to the east of the garage. Staff would ask why the area could not be filled and grades tie into a swale adjacent to lot line rather than installing a retaining wall and attempting to control drainage from house in the limited area between wall and house. Staff would also like more detail on the drainage along the south side to the east of the retaining wall at the 954’ to 952' elevation. WUl drainage flow onto adjacent property to south? How shall drainage be controlled along lot line to ensure that drainage does not flow to residence at north but is directed further east? Statement of Hardship Refer to Exhibit B. i Zoning File #2100 January 8, 1996 Page 3 Issues for Consideration 1.Applicants should respond to staffs question concerning installation of a boulder wall along the lot line rather than filling to create positive drainage away fiom residence and toward a swale that could be constructed along adjacent lot line. 2.How shall grading plan be amended to ensure that drainage along south lot line is directed along south lot line of property away from residence to south? 3.How shall applicants address engineer's concern regarding boulder walls vs. modular walls where walls will exceed 4' height? Will there be a combination? Options of Action To approve as proposed or amended. Any recommendation of approval must consider the following conditions. 1.Applicants to obtain a demolition permit for the removal of the existing residence and detached garage. Upon application for a building permit, applicants shall provide an updated surv'ev locating pro|X)sed residence and other site improvements. 3.Applicants to , /ide a detailed grading plan with building permit application for City Engir.^if's review addressing the following; A.. Walls in excess of 4' shall provide the following information: Cross section detail of walls with specifications. Method of providing drainage for walls. Method of tie back restraint for walls. Geotechnical evaluation of existing soils. Silt fence be shown on the plan along the eastern grading limits for erosion control. Amendments to plan addressing concerns of drainage at north and south lot lines. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. i CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $200.00-4“ P/t-L- ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original ’cation) Variance for non-conforming tires $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double :ation fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address \0-hO TgJMVlAUA. TZgAO. Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey Date Property Acquired ^4--------------------------(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential ___other (specify) Zoning District:_________________________________— APPLICANT Name Phone (home) ^ ^ ^________ _____ __ Phone(work) li.. City: BcgM PgAlme Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phonefhome) 601 - cnt^S Phone (work) ^TSl - Address: \eUs/l^C.^\VUL\^, City: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $_________________ Describe request in detail: lI IZgjg-i tTSS.yJT) ArL»------ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCIjS REQUIRED Lot Area X Lot Width ;» ■ I t . ••Hardcover-'Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore ^ Other (specify) ✓t/^KlPi-rioKlAl ^ /JfeE PSRMin!——FILL HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventmg compliance with Zoning Code requirements: -------------------------------------------------— -jr:, NlrTTE--------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) • • • •• •required submittals ? :‘ All of the following information must he submitted bv the application deadline date m ord ^ for voiir npplicntion to he considered complete: 1. 2. 3. Govt Center, 348-32JI),* v ' __ - « ______I u.. 1 4. 5. 6. Govt Center, .*h***\ mrinHp hardcover ^Ccrtincatc of Survey (signed by a calculations as required. In addition, provide one ( ) py ^o'p'ographic survey (existing andp^p^Ssel=vatiot«) if “y" are.proposed. In addition, provide one (I) copy 8/i ^ sa Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8 /S x 1 ). L^t of hriegal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interMt m the - p ope^ -S would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s)^ . , ‘7^.____u;____Ii.„i„„ niP.ise attach a separate, list.qf any other pi7< r t • ■ SnSde^t^T^ Ple-.a^acb ^.separjte, li^t. qf an,, other persons .* •• - w6u’*wish noUfied of tbtf appjicaiion. . % « .: .< 8. * X Additional items as may be requested by City ^taff. APPLICANT’S SIGNATUTIE information required or requested by the Zoning ThQ applicant hereby ;agrees fees-(staT‘time nolxovered by original fee payment) Administrator. certifies that theaXrtor:est°^f uj;w. Applicant’s Signature Dam - It*~3g• • OWNER’S SIGNATURE to nave an auuiv^wx-i----- this change prior to the meetmg. 8 / :i ti KEITH WATERS &ASSOCIATES.INC DESIGNERS & BUI LDERS 10340 Viking Drive Suite 110 Eden Pruiric Minnesota 55344 4 (612)942-1060 Pax 942-1058 License Number • 0001506 HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS FOR 1030 TONKAWA RD. This is an existing lot. comparable in size and configuration with typical lots in the section of Tonkawa Rd. This lot is a nonconforming lot only in lot width. No setback, lot size, or hardcover variances are requested. Current zoning requires 140' lot width. The lot was developed with residential construction prior to existing codes. The new home proposal is consistent with new construction and remodeling in this area. A Conditional Use Permit is required to fill on the entry side of the home to ensure proper drainage and access to garage. Care has been taken to ensure that no additional runofT enters the neigfibors lot. No cut or fill will occur closer than 125* from the lake. I .y: run date ltnV9S HCrtCPIN• • •• • • •BATCH 504A* Pf«H ADM / • ‘.-V* ♦ ONNEB HAMi ^ TAXPAYCR . NAME/AOMJ.*- jt/.. '. >. ‘ U. |J£., . . r. V'r i SB 08-117-21 12 0005 01000 TONKAMA RD R J HOfFNAH ETAL RAYHQNO J HOFFMAN 1000 TONKAHA RO LONG LAKE m 55354 V DROP ADM ; . OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOM v^r v/.tw • • • —-.-Vr* vv^ PROP AODR name TAXPAYER 18 M-117-21 11 0014 01020 TONKAHA RD DOUGLAS J NILLIAMS DOUGLAS J NILLIAMS 1020 TONKAHA RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 »r- f m NAHi/AOOR sa 06-117-2S 24 0002 * 01016 TONKAHA RO DANIEL C A RUTH N PARTEN DANIEL C • RUTH H PARTEN 1015 TQNKANA RD LONG LAKE NN 55354 rtr-. if; >•' . : PROP ADDR :• ONNER NAME ) ’ •' TAXPAYER TOTAL DATCH NMC/ADOR 504 00004 H'j • 'A •V* •i.vvi 'J *' -A*:..' ••• • D »>;'*«• 7 • •• * •/ . • ♦f '*1 .»■V ' . *'• %•: A’*' r V’ ^ 4 • i- -I. iJ'k i-, •-d.C, T -r • •*' \ ^ V.*i.)T ^ ** *,*'» % f- . •« .1 T' t i'ii- > •■ •• •: ''■ •• COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OMCRS LIST REPORT NO. PI435401.> PAGE 0 »;./ ■ ‘« w • I • Vs.•:i • \38 08-117-23 13 0001 01045 TONKAHA RO J R A C R GABRIELSON JOHN R GABRIELSON 1065 TONKAHA RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 38 08-117-23 13 0011 01040 TONKAHA RO RAJ BAUMAN ROBERT J A JOAN C BAUMAN 1040 TONKAHA ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55154 \ ’ p•.I. i » !♦ f;r- 18 08-117-21 11 0015 01030 TONKAHA RD R S EDMUNDS A D K EDMUNDS ROBERT S A DEBRA K EDMUNDS 8923 HIDDEN OAKS DR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 18 08-117-21 11 0019 01040 TONKAHA RD ALLAN K PRAY ALLAN K PRAY 1040 TONKAHA RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 • • * •».- - V : -‘v- ' « •*a • ■>.o 38 08-117-21 24 0004 01015 TONKAHA RO BARBARA A HIGLEY BARBARA A HIGLEY 1035 TONKAHA RO LONG LAKE MN 55154 38 08-117-23 24 0005 . 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO DANIEL i RUTH PARTEN . DANIEL A RUTH PARTEN . 1015 TONKAHA RD ORONO m 55154 o t'* 4 f • I ; • y .=fc •r.- :• • ’ r • •. ’ A I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECMOS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION» TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF \ t i c *’, * * ! » ■J •. -.'iI DATE 'Aitincni ur KKut'tNiT iAMiiuri> lu int Btsi •. j ^ • .» ; \ ' {^i • 4- ' V p ' - * ' 4 j' " ' * * .} %• , I n w . r;* . • Pl»t of Sunrojr for Mr«, Marjorie Geaeh of fraet C, Raglatered lond Survey No, 617 HeniMpln County, Minnesota * « % * N«tfic •i ■s • • • Certificate of Survey: I hereby certify that this la a true and correct repxesentatlon of a eurvey of the houndarlea of Tract C, Reglatered Land Survey Ko. 617, fllea of Registrar of Tltlea, County of Hennepin, and the location of ell existing buildings thereon. • • • • i • B'-I • . 1 e Scale Date o .1" 80* • :ll-?-76- • ‘Iron marker Gordon R. Coffin . R8(S^o. 606i4 Land. Gurvc;-;ir anil riunnoi' Long I^ke, Minnesota • r % •t • i .* •.* >* •. • » : HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETDACKZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ^0-75’75-250’250-500’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ________ Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Oilier TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ __ ^ B .X 100 ppnpr>5;F.n HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length Widih X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other total HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ » ■ X 100 - 500-1000’ 4 ; ^^1 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B A B 4 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X 75-250’250-500’SOB-1000’ S.F. Length Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X X X X TO S>^ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _ _ _ ^ B .X 100 PROPOSED hardcover IN ZONE A. House_________. Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck X X X X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE * A -?• B \lo9ynin .O x 100 « S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % J2Jt40jCL S.F, S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2,4S. Q S.F. S.F. S.F. '»jyo.n S.F. S.F. F. Landscape p ^ - 1Z^TArtlNj l Underlain pgTL4 V-i E. i <^r2-G>OK\n>---- B” Plastic - * --------------------- S.F. S.F. S.F. 0,0 S.F. % A B ^1^.2. S.F. A 1b,9i-Jto.D S.F. B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______________ ^ 75-250’250-50^500-1000’ Length Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X ^ Jvj f I -I ^ p go -------------— TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^ B X 100 S.F. S.F, S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % PROPOSED TTARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House______________ Length X X X X O.Q S.F. Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _ S.F. S.F. Q. O S.F. S.F. a.o S.F. S.F. pffizirngTgg- _________S.F. •as^Q.g S.F. S.F. G. Other S.F. total HARDCOVER IN ZONE total ^ B 2:lL^.D X 100 .n S.F 2.1. Q A B .'U' f ‘a — _ •4 V -4. x4ftl a S.F. A B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’75-250*250-500’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ,S.F. Length Width X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway S.F. X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Patio/Dcck X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X 'JS 89 S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER I.N ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE __S.F. B X 100 S.F 11.4.______» PROPOSED hardcover IN /ONE A. House______________ S.F. Lcngih Width X X X m a S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway S.F. X X Klo N.^1^S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Patio/Dcck X X S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other total HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _ __ _ ^ B X 100 = S.F. S.F. % A B - J A B 10.56-M r-.O*. 3a£3TPCC * 4-3:.? SI2 S3S 1311^' ** 1/ J Bonestroo Rosene vS Anderfik & I Associates Engineers & Architects X. Soncjtroo. A'*ce-<». Asioct«cs. re .s «n A.*f?r<f*«tivt Action't Ct?5 ^ ^ i ^1" *off£>n *r ^5* t. lerv^A. ^ f » cr^ro t • 8 C^tnn f. Coo« • 5 Thorrji 1 Vovei a $cf*^n CP", r f Sas^p M n. A • • Scr.sr CiT Janiurj' 5, 1995 A SiPfSrO. / t Ke«fn A corcon. .* P Poeer? <rhf^ w foster P L C'avto 0 LoskotJi Xoeerr C. tutsee. a.i>%. itny K Souroon. •M. w*f* A ^xnion. ? t ••*«<ree* T tewrr^jnn A 8. T«o K. re;d. ^£. <*>^•♦1 *' •o;»prr^a<k, eg r 5 g. '“vyrii A 5/0^3 A ^'eeferte i i:«pse?^g. ® «. •l/PJe* Mart pfI A £. v,cr^*'A A»u •? I'l VLcneei C LyncA. » fX'I J^mtt A. Maunti A I. it^y O Ae^jich A t ScotiJ. Arganee Aonnom A. Anoer ton. i Mart ff. fforn a e. Marti A Seip. A • Gary W. >4ortea AX Aaui X Gannon. A LA OAPi«l 1 Cdgcnon. AX A %ck Senm»Of A 5 3Jie A Grp^e ef. ♦•O i Cifwaii A* Mint 0 Waii.1 A« Vifet a . anten. AL L AA‘i»o Gffvai AH, <a/e*' L vVT*m»fi A f. Cary 0 vinofitr •£. A t a Oougiat j. Snawn O. Gusm Cacfifo oavitr. AC iCtnt j. wagntf. A c Aayl a Nautr. AX ionn A. Gopotr. A.f San 9 dovum. AX Jeffrey J. Chfen.pgef A C. JOfeon ff efyein. AI. Lee ^ Mann. AX Charres «v Prfciuon Leo Ml AswetjAy Hfftan M. Olson Agnpf .M. Aing .'am« A. £nge*nafOT / • Ms. Jeanne .A. Mabusth. Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Rc: Edmunds Residence File No. 139-2100 Dear Jeanne./030 We have reviewed the sire plan for the/proposed residential construction on the property owned by Robert and Debra Edmunds at 't’12j'i iCai iir.“CLitlu. The construction includes placing fill and installing regaining w.ills to cre.ite the walkout house pad. TTie grading plan appears acceptable from an engineering standpoint. The grades do not exceed 3 to I (horizontal to vertical) and the drainage is controlled on the property. Inspccnon and testing should be done during the filling operation.^ to verify that the soils and compaction arc adequate for structural support. More information is needed on the two retaining walls. Tiie nonh and south walls are shown up to 4 5 feet and 6 feet in height, respectively. We would recommend a modular masonry block wall be used and a structural de.sign oe done tor .any wall over 4 feet in height. There are manv manutactarers which provide an engineered wall svstem for almost any application. The wall should have a draintilc line installed to function properly in clay soils. \Vc do not recommend gravir/ type retaining walls, such as boulder walib. due to the dirnculty in determining their effectivenes.s or durability. The applicant should provide the following information: cross-sectional detail of wall with .spcdfication.s method of proxiding dr.ainagc for walls method of ne-back restraint for wall geotechnical evaluation of c.\i.sting soii.s Silt fence should be shown on the plan along the eastern grading limits for erosion control. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. 1 :/1 • • •- I i i % z \ I I • 11 «•» 1 • • : 1 I I L____ M-=H 1=^= \ - rr trr~*<rv*. I >•:•.•.•.•■ V;', U * . IC \ WATERS JOCIATES.INC 10340 Viking Dr., Suite 110 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Edmunds • IstM teta:aoIm: \\ \ (ERS& BUILDERS ib\Z)W‘\m fax 042-1058 Residence il Bay. Orono t.:ccntc NumI<r OOOIS08 (D C 5 < m r *s > >4^ 3 r > ' ■ • V •' '•;•>' X 4- \TERS ;IATES,ING 10340 Viking Dr., Suite 110 . Eden Prairie, MN 55344 & BUILDERS (612) 942-1060 fax 942-1058 Edmunds Residence Maxw«i Bay. Ofono l.iccnte NiifT»l»cr 0001 son s. To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:January 10, 1996 Subject:#2102 Howard and Lili McMillan, 1275 Lyman Avenue - Conditional Use PermitA^ariance - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB (Property is not located within a Shoreland Overlay District.) Lot area = Approximately 2 acres Application: Applicants seek approval of a conditional use permit and variance that would allow the excavation of. 12 acre of open water area within a desigi^ated wetland (Type 3). Spoils from the excavation will be used to create a graduated bank in place of the 1:1 bank that requires a retaining wall for stabilization. The Code does not allow land alterations within a designated wetland nor within 26’ of the wetland. Pertinent Ordinances 1.Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and 20 - Conditional use permit has been required as proposed land alterations cannot be authorized under a staff-issued land alteration permit. Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 - Prohibition. The Code does not allow land alterations within designated wetlands nor within 26' of a designated wetland. Applicant proposes the excavation of a .12 acre open water area and designated wetland of the City of Orono. Spoils are to be used in the filling of an adjacent bank. The filling activities will be located within the 26' setback. Required = 26’ Proposed = 10£ from Type 3 wetland Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 J, 5 (A-K) - Criteria to be used in conditional use permits or variances dealing with grading and filling permits. List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H-1- Application Applicant's Addendum Review of Project John C. Anderson Letter 1/3/96 Plat Map Property Owners' List Gronberg Survey 10/18/95 Construction Plan Zoning File #2102 January 10, 1996 Page 2 H-2- I-l - 1-2 - 1-3 J K L M N O P Q R S T U - Construction Plan - Revised 1/8/96 J. Anderson Wetland Delineation Report Map Wetland Determination Information Topographic Map 2' Contours Designated Wetland Map Oroi.o Orchard Highlands Plat Silt Fence Specs Seeding Information Excerpt "Principles of Landscaping for Wildlife" DNR/Wetland Map National Wetland Inventory Map U S. Soils Map/Soils Legend Septic Map DNR-Model for Good Basin Design Gustafson Report Description of Request The Orono Orchards Highland plat was approved by the City in December of 1975. Review Exhibits J, K and L, final plat shows a slight encroachment of a designated wetland at the southeast comer of the property. Staff has no record of a flowage and conservation easement being taken over the designated wetland. In reviewing the topographic map and wetlands map, it would appear that the original wetland was designated at the 958 elevation. Refer to Exhibit G, the new wetlands delineation information notes the existence of a Type 3 wetland to the west of the original 958 elevation. In the 1975 plat, the wetland was not defined in angles and bearings. Staff would suggest that the new wetland be redefined along the edge of the Type 3 wetland. Refer to Exhibits I-1, 2 and 3 for the location of the newly defined Type 1 and 3 wetland areas. To be consistent with the City’s policy, the Type 1 wetland may be protected with a private covenant. The City would ask for a consolation and flowage easement over the redefined designated wetland (area at or below 958 elevation and Type 3 wetland to west of 958 elevation). The wetland is contiguous with a 30 acre wetland system to the east and south. Applicant has provided photos of the wetland area confirming the predominant growth of Purple Loosestrife in the main areas of the wetland. The wetland area to be altered is in a transitional area. Refer to present situation in Exhibit C, vegetation consists of 40% Purple Loosestrife, 40% lake sedge and 20% cattail. Refer to Exhibit D, in John Anderson's comments he notes "Purple Loosestrife is a dominant species in the interior of the wetland. Reed Canary Grass is common along the margins of the wetland." Purple Loosestrife is an invasive aquatic weed that chokes out desirable native vegetation. It would be the same for the Canary Reed Grass that destroys the natural and native vegetation associated with a healthy, thriving wetland. Zoning File #2102 January 10, 1996 Page 3 Applicants propose the dredging of approximately 1,000 cubic yards of spoils to be used in the filling of the bank adjacent to the wetland. The slope of the restored bank will be at approximately 12-13%. Review Exhibits B and C, applicant has also provided photos of the area taken before the snows. Staff met with the applicants on site in mid-fkll to review the failing retaining wall. The wall has completely failed and erosion of the bank had begun. Applicant is concerned with the sharp 8' drop from gentle-sloped grassed yard area and is concerned with the issue of safety. The excavated material will be used in the filling of the slope. Applicants note, "It would be difficult to bring fiU to this area and by conducting the excavation activities in the winter with careful storage of spoils through spring until material is suitable for filling and grading." This will minimize any negative impact upon the wetland. Seeding would take place in early May or June. It is unfortunate that members of the Planning Commission could not have visited the site during the fall season. The upland area (adjacent to bank or wall) did not appear as a wetland. As one moved funher south. Purple Loosestrife in the main wetland area was very obvious, and there were signs of Umited cattail growth within transition area of the wetland. Applicants’ consultant confirms. Exhibit D, Prairie Restoration’s mix of native grasses will reduce the ability of Reed Canary Gr^s and Purple Loosestrife to colonize this area of the wetland again (Type 3 area closest to wetland). The upland area (Type 1) will be planted with native grasses in order to control any non-pomt source mnofffrom entering into the wetland. It will also increase the biological diversity and value of this non-wetland area. Review Exhibit P, the wetland is not a designated wetland of the DNR. Review Exhibits Q and R, the wetland is sho^ in the National Wetlands Inventory Map and U.S. Soils Delineation report has the wetland as a marsh (MA) The Corps of Engineers and Watershed District are also in the process of reviewing the proposal. Construction Plan Review Exhibits H and U. Note Gustafson finds that the creation of an open water area in this type of wetland to be beneficial and that ponds constructed in the transition or fringe area of the wetland will help reduce the Reed Canary Grass or Purple Loosestrife. He notes the Corps of Engineers has a general permit #18 for the excavation of wildlife ponds. The plan is currently proposed with 1.^1 slope and at a maximum depth of 8’. The pond would never be approved under this permit. He recommends that the City not approve the application unless the pond is revised to show more graduated slopes, specifically 8:1, and a depth not to exceed 3.5-1.5 ■ He te included a section of permit #18 guidelines for your review. He also notes that the Corps will not require additional mitigation if conducted under the guidelines of the permitting for wildlife ponds. Staff asks that you review Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 J. 5 (A-K). If pond is to be altered per the guidelines of the Corps of Engineers' permit and per City Engineer's report all pertinent standards of this section have either been met based on the information submitted with application and conditions or guidelines established for conducting the land alteration. Zoning FUe #2102 January 10, 1996 Page 4 Additional Information Needed to Complete Review 1. Method to be used to excavate spoils. 2.How shall spoil material be stored during the winter months until the spring? Spoils cannot be allowed to thaw and drain back into designated wetland area. 3.Review construction schedule set forth by applicant. Exhibit C. Do members feel construction schedule is realistic/feasible? Note sub-section G (Section 10.56, Subd. 16) "plans to place fill or excavated material on steep slopes must be reviewed by the City Engineer to insure continued slope stability and must not create finished slopes of 30% or greater". Gustafson has been asked to review the filling phase of the permit and to approve slope of bank. Staff will have his written comments at your meeting. An 8' rise in 65' to 70' appears to meet the slope limits. Issues for Consideration 1. 2. 3. What is unique or different about the alteration of this 30+ acre wetland? Will the environmental benefits outweigh the negatives? Consider the intent of the applicants. Have applicants convinced you of the merits of the application? 4. Has the information submitted with application supported representations of applicants? Options of Action To deny, approve or approve as amended. Any condition of approval must include the following: 1.Prior to scheduling the application before the Council, applicant's surveyor to provide an amended survey designating the following: a. Open water area or pond per amended construction plan by D. Nadeau, b. Proposed contour for restored banks. c. Locate Type 3 wetlands to west of 958 contour. d. Develop metes and bounds description for designed wetland. i I 1 Zoning FUe #2102 January 10, 1996 Page 5 2. 3 4. Applicant’s construction plan to be amended to follow guidelines of Corps of Engineers' permit #18 - irregular shoreline, refer to slopes of 8:1, maximum depth 3.5-45’. Erosion control to be in place once excavation of wetland commences. Applicant to grant a conservation easement over all areas below 958 elevation and to include newly tested areas defined now as Type 3 wetland. Approval of construction schedule as set forth by applicant and planting schedule for wetland and upland areas with Prairie Restoration mix of native grasses. aio L // ,••• • « • .••/»• I'Jv A" CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION *. 'A PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Z-Y/^?AM AU chu E---------------- Type of Application to be Filed CuP ifH—1 ypC Ol /\ppiicauuii lu uc i uuu. } — f > > t —r_—^ ' Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) - //1 - ^3— OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _________________ Phone (home). Phone (woric) mm Address City Zip, Date Property Acquired pr I ? 8?------------- I (do) (3on^also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application ^ $125.00 Residential Accessory Use $200.00 Instimtional (church, school, etc.) $175.00 Guest House.Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use “IT $200.00 Land Alteration « ^ • -------- Grading and filling - designated weUand or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore T^/PID - see Fee Schedule . • v " $100.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS , r \ $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $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 PIGESENT use of PROPERTY Present Zoning District KK - 1(1 Present Use of Property __Residential Other (specify) (month/year) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. required submittals ____Completed Application Fonn. S us. of cwncn Wioun 350'. ------must obQin tUs lUt. labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Fmance, 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 ____Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land al STK reg^n^^^^de marital sanrs) of all persons with an interne in the -------^peL ras would iiKlude name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). ------ As an addendL to this application, please anach a separate list of any other pers you wish notified of this application. js ssisi'’arr,? SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawmgs of all documents, p ans, submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. PleaM remember that your I^pltaaorin is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Und Use Application is complete._____ Initials of Clerical Staff:_________________________ :5s,? Sits- -supplied is true and correct to Uie^^ his/her knowle g . , ^ * r .•.rivnature>^^^^~^^^^____________DateApplicant s signature Date J t/?S Owner’s signature___ Applicant must have aU ^AppUcanJ must be present at aU scheduled Commission Meetings are held on me ^ councU. If an applicant is unable to unend a scheduled meeting, review meetings of 3^ authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zonmg Office of'this change prior to the meetmg. Tf <1 1 j 1275 Lyman Avenue VVavzata, Minnesota 55391 December 20,1995 Dear Members of the Planning Commission: Our CUP application is part of an overall landscape plan for the backyard portion of our property necessitated by the collapse of a broad retaining wail. This plan is designed to ameliorate the naturai value of the area bordering the wetland with minimal impact upon the property overall. It is our resolve to landscape for the benefit of wildlife and to restore native vegetation. The process of developing this plan has involved the additional on-site input and suggestions from the following professionals: John Anderson, wetlands consultant; Shawn Gustafson, engineer, Mike Hiltner, prairie restoration, and Dave Thill, Hennepin Soil & Water Conservation District. The included photographs are meant to be an aid for non-winter visualization of the project area. We encourage you to visit the site; please call 476-8626 with any questions you may have. Truly yours. Howard McMillan Uli McMillan 1 I M. A .^4 t / •• *# -^5- -w PROJECT REQUEST ■0 PRESENT SITUATION: During an August rainstorm, the taller portion of a 120' timber retaining wall collapsed. The wooden wall, constructed in 1982, sharply increases in height from one foot on the east end to eight feet on the west end. Further south from the wall, upland ends in type 1 & 3 wetland (see attached wetland data). Type 3 wetland is a plant mixture of 40% purple loosestrife, 40% lake sedge and 20% cattail. Wetland on this property is part of a 30 acre wetland comple.x. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT; Through consultation with individuals in the landscape and land restoration business, the following project was designed not only to solve the retaining wall problem but also to enhance the natural value of the property. The plan entails excavating a small pond within the current wetland and using the fill to create a more natural slope from the house. The slope would be seeded with a mixture of native grasses, wildflowers and shrubs with no increase in turf grass area. The creation of a natural slope from the house would eliminate the present hazard of the sudden 8' drop-off that now exists in the backyard. Exposing the water table adds more wildlife diversit>‘ to the area and helps to restore cattails and other native wetland plants at the expense of the non- indigenous, noxious purple loosestrife. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND DETAILS: Excavation and rough grading to be done in late February over frozen ground to facilitate moving heavy equipment. Final grading to be completed in April or May. Plant seeding to be done late May or early June. Seed mixture will contain little bluestem, Canada wild rye, side oats grama and Indian grass. Wildflower mix to include red milkweed, common ox-eye, black-eyed susan and purple coneflower. Silt fencing will be in place for erosion control after excavation. \ UltlLH(NU5 UHrH John C. Rnderson 5831 Cedar Lake Road Minneapolis, MN 55416 Office - (612) 544-1761 FRK -(612) 525-2021 Wednesday. January 3. 19^6 D Lili McMillan 1275 Lyman Avenue Wayzata. MN 55391 Dear Lili: I have reviewed your plans for wetland enhancement for your site at 1275 Lyman Avenue in Orono. It is my opinion that your efforts will result in improved wildlife habitat The .vetland also will not affect the area of wetland outside of your property. The wetland wildlife habitat will be improved through an increase in open water. A mix of open water and wetland vegetation provides cover and access to food, such as Duckweed, and is optimal waterfowl habitat. The design of the pond also lends to increased habitat diversity. The edge of the open water is irregularly shaped, as recommended by Department of Natural Resources guidelines. The undulating bottom also provides enhanced habitat for amphibious species. Your plan to eliminate exotic and invasive plant species will increase the habitate value of the entire wetland. Purple Loosestrife Is a dominant species In the interior of the wetland. Reed Canary Grass is common along the margins of the wetland. Prairie Restoration's, Inc. is. experienced in eliminating and controlling these species. Purple Loosestrife and Reed Canary Grass have out competed native species and reduced the quality of large portions of the wetland. Prairie Restoration's mix of native grasses will reduce the ability of Reed canary Grass to colonize this area of the wetland. In addition, restoration of native grasses in the adjacent upland, as planned, will control any non-point source run-off from entering into the wetland. It will also increase the biological diversity and value of this non-wetland area. Finally, the entire wetland is apprximately 30 acres in area. The excavation of .12 acres in a 30 acre wetland will have virtually no affect upon the hydrology of this area. Mapping Inventories Delineations Permits I would be pleased to answer any questions you or persons may have about the conslusions I have drawn. Thank you y continued interest in m wetlands consulting services. D Sincerely. John C. Anderson President E • .1 . • • - * ; t - ? oz-in-23-zi ' n>../" c. ^<\- r- ' 4P..i V.-" X'^ \ ^s" \/^\yp.Si( >■ . 5. -A m*> \ \t. * V V ' \ \ V-'v3\ ''' N - '^r . .....\ «' \ 8 \ ^ ^'. '‘v '* *X - ^ 4 is>. % : % \ . c»« AJL^iL-il .5^^ V /i6o.»f^»i* »t>* v\UV V IS'S'- \\^ Ves «. > •”’ v^'- '''S •'’ •> g- V. » i t-ov K.:Tj) '/*^o*•. ‘.•‘•X*M ‘M \ *' ■ ^\ \ \ \ \ ► 'X\ \ \ \ ^iS)\'i 'a\ ' t[.\S' \\i A X \ V__i« a 9 8 ; r* t«a . _.si!_. \ \', i '\^mmm^. .....'\:^ A- ; : riS : : T: \-' 2l L ___Li!i \ ^/^!->;*.A.*>l*.:.\^*.v.>^ V'<*' ’• 3^! ^v! X' "1 ,«H — ----m ;«!“ 7 e^.te! —!‘ aA«V‘»-‘^ S ._«?i_\’_______ V «s AJcJkl\ Ccndt'l oz-in-23- \Z . > u ■ -wit \ •' V.I DATI ' . V \tN B04 » * V \HUN MTCN NENNEHXN COUNTY PHOPEHTY IHFOHMATXQN SYSTEM PROPERTY QHNERS LIST PROP AOOR QNNER NiNE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SS OE-117-2S 12 0001 00200 NOOOHILL RO IXLL COUNTRY CLUB IXLL CNTRY CLUB 200 NOODHXLL RO NAYZATA HN 55591 : • • • MK» AOM OfCR NMC TAXRAVtII NAHE/AOOR BR 02-117>XS tl OOOS 00040 SHITN AVC VIOLET H 6LAHPE TRUSTEE VIOLET N 6LAHPE 40 8HXTM AVE NAYZATA m 55391 t ' * « 1.*‘ PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOII 50 02-117-25 21 0004 01255 LYMAN AVE C P PESER i R H PESEK C PAUL A RAE H PESEK 1255 LYMAN AVE S NAYZATA MN 55591 PROP AOOR OlfCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 50 02-117-25 21 0019 00145 SMITH AVE JULIANA MARY CARLSON BETH ANN CAMPBELL 145 SMITH AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 50 02-117-25 21 0020 00140 SMITH AVE THOMAS C HUNT mOMAS C HUNT 140 SMITH AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 50 55-110-25 54 0005 00050 AOORESS UNASSXGNEO 0 MARC NHITEHEAO ETAL 0 MARC NHITEHEAO 1220 LYMAN AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 50 02-117-25 21 0001 01290 LYMAN AVE MARGARET S FOX MARGARET S FOX 1290 LYMAN AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 50 02-117-25 21 0004 00000 SMITH AVE F 0 VOIGT ETAL GLADYS VOIGT 00 SMITH AVE NAYZATA HN 55591 50 02-117-25 21 0017 00125 SMITH AVE B J A P J HORNER BRADLEY J A PAMEU J HORNER 125 SMITH AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 50 02-117-25 21 0024 00110 SMITH AVE J A FXSK A J K FXSK JAMES A A JEttaFER K FISK 110 SMITH AVE NAYZATA m 55591 50 02-117-25 21 0029 00140 SMITH AVE M N A M K NICOLL MATTHEN N A MARY R NICOLL 160 SMITH AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 58 55-110-25 54 0004 01220 LYMAN AVE G MARC NHITEHEAO ETAL G MARC NHITEHEAO 1220 LYMAN AVE NAYZATA HN 55591 REPORT NO. PX45B401 PAGE 15 50 02-117-25 21 0002 00040 SMITH AVE P Y A A H ALNORTH PETER Y ALNORTH AMY H ALNORTH 40 SMITH AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 . <• X. ♦ • ; '•■14'' 4 .» 9.'ji'-. ls\ *V 50 02-117-25 21 0005 01255 LYMAN AVE C P PESEK ARM PESEK C PAUL A RAE H PBSEK 1255 LYMAN AVE S NAYZATA MN 55591 *: .i' ‘'siv 50 02-117-25 21 0010 00050 AOORESS UNAS8XGNED JULIANA M CARLSON BETH ANN CAMPBELL 145 SMITH AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 t ■ • I \ t 4 *• % rx , J]* v'Tw • *v f 58 0Z-117-Z3 £1 00£7 01£75 LVNm AVI H 1 A E T NCHILLAN NONARO 8 ELIZABETH m 1275 LYMAN AVE NAYZATA MN 5B391 :llan 50 02-117-25 21 0050 00050 AOORESS UNASSIGNEO MICHAEL 0 NOOO MICHAEL 0 NOOO 1250 NOOOHILL AVE NAYZATA MN 55591 :-rl*' - 7 * • I < -W . I ’ • / ' . *,ij .V'. . v|».” ■ ; ■ #>. • ' •; -X V 9 • TOTAL BATCH 504 00017 •V ’ *• i'? . ' > iV ■).V.-f*w .«i ‘ • ] • is" • ^ tf -t i f:-i Construction Plan 1275 Lyman Ave. Crono V 9 -I ‘-.—X • ' ^ * • *«> \ 1 }.•■••>'rLV' 12/15/^5 I wI Construction Plan 1275 Lyman Ave. Crono \ ^ m * //' Revised 1/S/^C L. 1 « * I V ^ '-f n •V WETLANDS DELINEATION DOCUMENTATION FOR LIU MCMILLAN. PROJECT IN ORONO. MN •vv John Anderson, WETLANDS DATA, Minneapoli^ M^neated wetlands boundaries on the subject property on Octol^ 2nd, 1995 at m request or I iii McMillan This report provides information as to the dominant wetland sacs at thrshe as result of the investigation. Detailed checksite information ^pSTeach demn report form as this informadon is redundam Please review documentation of these findings (referenc^ in re^it and site plan). A Sketch of the staked wetland boundaries is included in the report. location 1275 Lyman Avenue Oronon, Minnesota methodology WPtiands were identified and delineated using the Federal Manual for n«iinestino .iiirisdictional Wetlands (Interagency Task Forra on WeMai^ Delire^^^^^ lyuG i jiiU lliu 1007 Cnrnn nf Fnginf^^*-*" wotianris Delineation Myua_i(U S. roms of Enqineers 1987) Revisions to the former method have been profwsed y mXs InSen al P otection Agency and are currently !k ! .rSntinn of mese revisions the U.S. army Corps of Engineers is applying the 1987 ??,ffw!l?ianHs^neiirieation Manual. The wetland and/or deep water habitat were clarified according to the methodoi^ies set forth in Wetlands of ^^iiand? a!iS Circular 39 Shaw and Fredine. 1971) and Classification of We^ands jnd. nAft^ater Hahitats of the United State_s (FWS/OBS Publication 79/31 : Cowardin et. al.1979). CHARACTERISTICS OF WETLANDS INVESTIGATED TwSr^meThree (PEM1R wetland checksite. Dominant specie is Purple L^^strife J5b L) L^e Ldge (OBU Soils are Marsh, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is met. as site is in wetland drainage pattern. TWOq a Tvoe One (PEM1A) wetland checksite. Dominant species are Common Buckthorn (FACU) Climbing Nightshade (FAC), Tearthumb (OBL) . drainage pattern. Transect B.lll i i I This is an Upland checksite. Dominant species a™ Comnrion Bircktan (FACU), LIMITATIONS OF WETLAND ASSESSMENT be accurate and should be reinvestigated during the grovring season. I appreciate this opportunity to present this analysis. Sincerely, John C. Anderson T I 1 f 1 1 1 4 1 4 I I 1 4 1 I I i I 'I 'ixwrJ I DATA FORM WETLAND DETERMINATION (1909 Interagency Delineation ManuaO jject/Site; 1275 Lyman Avenue. Orono jplicant/Owner: UH McMilan ‘ itigator. John C. Anderson - WETLANDS DATAH^asi ) normal environmental conditions exist? yes the site significantly disturbed? no Hhe area a potential problem area? no EGETATION ^mirrant Plant S ^Eytfirum salacaria ^Carex lacusths Tyftha latitoliai (rcent ol Species that are OBL.FACW. and/or FAC: 100 amarks: Intermediate Comprehensive Date: 10/2/95 County: Hennepin State: MN Plan Community I.D.; Type 3 (PEM1F) Transect I.D.: A Plot I D. #:I stratum Indicator % Herb OBL 40 Herb OBL 40 Heib OBL 20 I.DROLOGY ecorded data(describe in remarks) • ■ Stream or Lake Gauge - ■ Aerial Photographs/sIkJes - Other - PEM/SSIC-NWI. Marsh-USGS l^kJ Observations/measurements: the ground surface Inundated? ^he ground saturated? ■marks: p Unit Name (Series and phase); Marsh conomy (Subgroup): not known nii^ Description: (Dth Horizon*Matrix Colorf moist) Dominant Plant Soecles 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Stratum Indicator % Oxidized root zcnes • living roots - Water marks • Drift Lines • Water-borne sediment deposits • Water-stained leaves - Surface scoured areas - Wetland drainage patterns • x Morphological plant adaptations' Hydric soil characteristics - x Surface water depth: Depth to saturation; Depth to free standing water in pit/soil probe hole: C: Drainage Class: very poor Confirm Mapped Type?: no Texture. Structure. MnniftColorsfmoist) MnttiA Ahundance/Contrast Congr^tignS: >t determined as investigator is not certified soils scientist. ■vdric Soil Indipatorg c„ifiriir material Aquic or Preaquic Moisture Regime: educing Conditions (Confirmed by Measurement). ^artefNot ^p?S. Hydric soil dominated by hydrophytic vegetation. ANDSCAPE POSITION: (See attached diagram showing location of sampling point on landscape.) Gleyed. Low Chroma, and Low-Chroma mottled Soils: lETLAND DETERMINATION drophytic Vegetation Present? yes Zetland Hydrology Present? yes ydric Soils Present? yes Smarks; All three parameters present. Is the sampling point within a wetland? yes DATA FORM WETLAND determination (1989 Interagency Delineation Manual) . rojectySite: 1275 Lyman Avenue. Orono Applicani/Owner; Lfi McMiBan P^nvestigator: John C. Anderson - WETLANDS DATA i Do normal environmental conditions e»st? yes ; _ js the site significantly disturbed? no HHs the area a pc^ential problem area? no ’ VEGETATION |^^v>minant Riant Specfes ■^KTlRhamnus cathartica I ^^"2. Solanum dulcarrars f 3. Polygonum ssgittBtum Rumex obtuselolius I ___lercent of Species that are OBL.FACW. and/or FAC: 75 I I Remarks: Routine x Intermediate Comprehensive Date: 10/2/95 County; Hennepin State: MN Rant Community I D.: Type 1 (PEM1 A) Transect I D.: A Ptot l.D. It. II stratum Indicator % Herb FACU 30 Herb FAC 30 Herb OBL 20 Herb FACW 20 6. li k nominant Plant Species Stratunri Indlp^tgr % 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. HYDROLOGY Recorded data(descrt)e in remarks) • Stream or Lake Gauge - ■■ Aerial Photo^aphs/slides • Other • PEM/SSIC-NW1. Marsh-USGS leid Observations/measurements: Oxidized root zones - living roots - Water marks • Drift Lines • Water-borne sediment deposits - water-stained leaves - Surface scoured areas - Wetland drainage patterns • x Morphological plant adaptations Hydric soil characteristics - x Is the ground surface Inundated? “—^s the ground saturated? fcmarks: SOILS lap Unit Name (Series and phase); Hamel/loam axonomy (Subgroup): Typic Argiaquolls Surface water depth: Depth to saturation: Depth to free standing water in pit/soil probe hole: n a exture. ftyfilft Description: Depth Horizon: 0 Matrix Colorf moist) 10YR3/1 Drainage Class: poor Confirm Mapped Type?: no Structure. Mntflw CQlorsfmoist) Mottle Abundance/Contr^ Conorgiiam N/A N/A loam • not determined as investigator is not certified soils scientist. fc^yririr Roil Indicators ^^^r^e^ic^oilsi Histic Epipedon.Sulfidic material: Aquic or Preaquic Moisture Regime: ,on or Manganese Concretions: _, W <= mottled Soils: x -•^educing Conditions (Confirmed by Measurement): ther (Explain in remarks): “Remarlcs: i H an W DSCAPE POSITION: (See attached diagram showing location of sampling point on landscape.) ETLAND DETERMINATION ydrophytic Vegetation Present? yes Wetland Hydrology Present? yes ,-lydric Soils Present? yes Remarks: All three parameters present. Is the sampling point within a wetland? yes I DATA FORM WETLAND determination (1989 Interagency Delineation Manual) Routing X Intermediate Comprehensive d>roject/Site: 1275 Lyman Avenue. Orono Appiicant/Owncr; Uli McMillan vestigator; John C. Anderson - WETLANDS DATA Date: 10/2/95 County: Hennepin State: MN ^v 4e)o rwmal environmental conditkms extet? yes Is the site significantly disturbed? no the area a potential problem area? rx> Pbnl ConvTXjnly ID: Upland Transect I D.: A Plot I.D. #: IIIc^/E u « 4 GETATION Dominant Plant Soecles . Rhamnus cathartica Solanuirt dulcamara 3. Polygonum sagittatum Pumaxobtusdolius RiAusideus Arctium minus J.QfSium arvense Stratum Shrub Herb Herb Herb Herb herb Herb tndicator FACU FAC OBL FACW FACU UPL FACU 100 33 33 33 10 1 1 Dominant Plant Species 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Stratum Irxjicator % •ercent of Species that are OBLFACW. and/or FAC: 75 marks: H ydrology Recorded data(descrt» in remarks) • Stream or Lake Gauge - |H Aerial Photographs/stides • ffi Other - PEM/SSIC-NWI. Marsh-USGS ^giel ^^tl J s ti W Oxidized root zones - living roots • Water marks • Drift Lines- Water-borne sediment deposits • Water-stained leaves - Surface scoured areas • Wetland drainage patterns - Morphological plant adaptations- Hydric soil characteristics - x [ield Observations/measurements: the ground surface inundated? s the ground saturated? ‘marks: Surface water depth: Depth to saturation: Depth to free standing water in pit/soil probe hole: SO^LS Unit Name (Series and phase): Hamel/loam PBaxcnomy (Subgroup); Typic Argiaquolls Drainage Class: poor Confirm Mapped Type?: no ^ texture. fc^r;>til^ Description [WleDth l^rizon! K Matrix Colorf moist) 10YR3/1 Mottle Coiors(moist) N/A Mottle Abundance/Contrast N/A Structure. Concretions loam ^ot determined as investigator is not certified soils scientist, wirir Soil Indicators—-------------- • rr • qiiifidic material- Aquic or Preaquic Moisture Regime: P or Manganese Concretions deducing Conditions (Confirmed by Measurement), ither (Explain in remarks): emarks: NDSCAPE position : (Se. anaphed diagram showing location ol sampling point on landscape.) VETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation V®® Is the sampling point within a wetland? no etiand Hydrology Present? no •lydric Soils Present? yes emarks; AH three parameters present. v.‘ ^ .V •PONCi ' A V \ -NX vi “5.t tj %, ^ c ’ ^-» 5c| ^5‘ ' u>^-* m~ ^ U‘^\ ^j f^~)^ ’4® vTA:-'':4t-U'4 r*>:,' '■'A .3 , -2^ :v^r '<C <■TO*Cfc -><«5>. yt >\-L^'' 1-' ,s\ 'X. • ^1 S.V Vi S-5.S' r^rv -V ^ ;•-?:rTQ ry °M -\ A v^. ■Xr '—-s ^«7'-'£^V. V' __ r >*•: ?* r^ r V- C . ^ ^ 1 :cx^.-<r7 r ■i >. >r:\ i fc <,^.hLtxi_ I rr-J- .'^» 4.'A V. ^ } Y *» f ^ ^_____ iiS^H % r^--^» ^ ._;7=rf-;X r f ili r ^<7-«'V -J-.'«-L. . - V OkCiNQ OdCLk\ , A fj I '^*-33 Or<k*rJt , I**- ;,,<3rcAWjr f39.0t 4 »/4* #*v • / ^;^v Xlv, 7?7- \ t« i • |0O t • y t .•••./, 5^1 173^ Fu I ^•7 -4 »••• ••••• ■>■" \ sH \ :> .<:\ I / \ / •••'• f \y •tr m-r l.and *~-/Of.ff0 li ; ’ t » • • • • * • a ** •••’•!’ .r ."‘ •" • .T *!T* *;*‘4’*•*•'•. -''•C .v^*’ *' * • ••■ • • • I ^ ’• . • ••. • * » * * “T *• ••* • • *. < • •. • • . • • • < •*•' * *' . <• . “ • .•••-.•.• ■•• . * • •*. .^' • % .• • *• % • - r -.••I.- •. - V>' •, -“T: >-'5 UjT: 6.3 SILT FENCE DESCRimON AND PURPOSE A silt fence is a temponiy sediment barrier consisting of a IQter fabric which is attached to supporting posts trenched into the ground. Sediment* laden runoff ponds uphill from the silt fence and runoff is filtered as it passes through the fabric. Silt fences are iruended to intercept and detain small amounts of sediment fimm distuit^ areas in order to prevent sediment from leaving the site. Siltfences can also prevent sheet erosion by decreasing the vdodiy of runoff. EFFECTIVENESS The effectiveness of silt fences for trapping sediment is mainly a function of the apparent opening size (AOS) of the fabric. The AOS relates opening sizes to those of stairdard sieves. As the AOS value (and sieve number) gets larger, the opeiung size decreases. The AOS of a fUter fabric should be large enough (opciungs small enough) to effectively trap sedtmcnL However, it should also be small enough to maintain an acceptable flow rate. For most soils, a fabric with an AOS of 70 will trap more than 90 percent of the sediment in runoff. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Silt fences should be used where: (I) the drainage area is less than 2 acres. (2) the maximum unoonoolled slope length above the silt fence is ISO feet, arrd (3) water reaches the silt fence as sheet flow. Silt fences usually should not be used in channels, waterways or other concentrated flow paths. Silt fences have a low pcnneabOiiy to enhance sediment trapping. This will create ponding behind the fence, so they should be not be located where ponding will cause property damage or a safety hazard. The expect^ life of silt fences is generally limited to 6 months. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Silt fences should be installed on the contour (vs. up and down a hill) and constructed so that flow cannot bypass the ends. > 2. If the sill fence is longer than 600 feet, it should be constructed in separate indqrendeni units, with each unit having a length less than 600 feet. 10/89 •••6.3-1 • %• •• ww 9 3. Silt fences may be oonstnictcd with or without suppoiting fences such as snow fences or wire mesh fences. If support fences are included, they should be strong enough to withstand the lo^ from ponded water and trapped sediment The suppon posts should be spaced at 10 feet or less, and should be driven at least 2 feet into the ground. Posts should be 4-inch diameter wood posts or standard steel fence posts weighing not less than 1.3 pounds per lineal foot with a minimum length of 30 inches plus burial depth. 5. The fobric should mett the following criteria: 4. When a silt fence is installed without a supporting fence, the posts should be spaced at 4 feet or less. Posts should be placed or driven at least 2 feet into the ground. Posts should be 2-inch square or heavier wood posts or standard T- or U-section steel posts weighing not less than 1.0 pound pi^ lineal foot with a minimum length of 30 inches plus burial depth. Property Test Method Reqaircmcol Gnb Strength*ASTM-D-1682 90 lbs. minimum Elongation*ASTM-D-1682 15% min. to 50% max. at 45 lb. Pennioivity ASTM-IM491 0.01 sec.** Apparent Opening Size a CW02215 (Qxpsof Eoginees) 30io80(coane soils)** 50 to 80 (fine soils)** Ultraviolet Resistance ASTM-D4355 70% minimum Width 36 inches minimum * 12* pa min ttnin nte ** Coarr'* widi less than 50 percent of the part^tes passing through a #200 sieve, Gne soils with gieatCT than SO percent of the panicles passing through a #200 sieve. 6.3-2 10/89 m m m 9 9 9 %« 9 6. For all insollarions. the fabric should be anchored in a aeodi dug on the upslope side of the posts. The trench should be at least 6 inches deep and 6 inches wide. The fabric is laid In the trench which Is then backfilled and compacted. Figure 6.3*2 provides a detail of fabric tnscallatioa 7. The filter fabric should be furnished in a continuous roll to avoid splices. When a splice cannot be avoided, it should be made atafenoeposL The ^ric should be oveAapped 6 inches, folded over and securely futened. MAINTENANCE Silt fences require maintenance to preserve thdr effectiveness. All silt fences should be inspected iaunediaccly after each runoff event and at least daily during prolonged ralnfalL Any required repairs should be made immediately. When sediment deposits reach approximately orte*half the height of the silt fence, the sediment should be removed or a second silt fertce installed. Wire mesh reinforcement (optlortal) 1 ^ Engineering fabric Metal or w< post or stake < Direction of runoff flow »• ------- , •• -• • ' • a • Natural soil * • • • Fabric anchorage trench baddin with tamped natural soil * 6 inch minimum • • * • 6 inch minimum Note: Depending upon conTiguralion. attach fabric to wire mesh with hog rings, steel posts with tie wires, or wood posts with staples. Figure 6.3-2: Typical Installation for silt fence «n/oA 0 1995 Stat«in«nt of rairie Restorations, Inc. is committed to producing the higliest quality nati\ e grass and wildflo^ er seed and plants. Our seed is grovs n inPproduction plots, not gathered from naairal stands. Tliis enables us to maintain punty, control quality, and improve production without impact on nati\ e remnants. Our plants are grown at our production center in Princeton. They are normally planted to supplement a base seeding, providing valuable diversity and authenticity to restoration projects of all r\ pes. 1995 PrairiQ Qrass S««d MixQs Short /dry grass mix H eight 1'-2.3' Idecd in sandy or gravelly sotls, or along unlku ays and immeUialely arouitdbuildings uljereshortertvgetation is desired. 25% Side oats grama. 31% Blue grama, and o Little blueMcm by PLS weights.3% June grass and l*!t) Kalin ’s brome by bulk tv eight. $1.25/ot, $15.75/n>. Z.MECED HEIGH t /mESIC GRASS MIX HEIGHT 2.5'-6* Suitableformostsuesandforaiarietyofsotls. vAlJr 35“^*’ ^'8 bluesiem. 9"-t> Side oats grama, 2.5% Canada tv ild r>e. 2.5% Stv itch grass. 23% Little bluestem. and 25% Indian grass by PLS tv eights, of 1% Kalm s brome bv bulk weight. $1.00/oZ m $10*^5/ ^ T aLL/wET GRASS MIX HEIGHT 5'-7' 1 C'L Fo^ttvtlatuiancinpananzoties. -i5% Big bluestem. 2(rt) Canada wild rve. 10"t> Switch grass, 15% Indian grass by PLS w eight. Cord grass and 6% Wool grass by bulk weight $1.50/oz., $l6. <5/Ib. CRP Tallgrass mix H eight 3'*6' Acceptable to the Soil Consenation Service for the Consen ation ResenvProgram. (CRP) 40% Big bluestem. 5% Canada wUd rye, 10% Sw itch grass. 10% Unie bluestem and 35% Indian grass by PLS weight. Sl.OO/oz., $8.T5/lb. 1995 WildflowQr S««d Mbcos Short /dry wildflom 'er mix H eight 1.5'-3’ 2"t '^'arrow, 5% t cadplant. 5% Butterfly weed, 1% Heath aster, 20^b .'Vzure aste*. Miky aster, 5% Stiff tickseed, 2% Bush clover, 5% Wliiteprai.ie clover, 2u"t) Purple pairie clover, 1% Prairie rose, 23*6 Black-eyc*d susan V i Gray goldenrod, 2% Upland goldenrod 1% Shotvv goldenrod and 2% Hoary vervain, all by bulk weights. $9/oz., $135/lb. Mixed height /.mesic wildfiomer .mdc H eight 2.5*-4* 2^^ Yarrow, 5% Giant hyssop, 2'!6 Leadplant, 5% Butterfly weed 12^6 Azure aster, 2% StilTtickseed. 2?Ii Northern bedstraw, 1% Prairie sunflower, 1% Stiff sunflow er, 6% Common ox-e> e. 4% Bush clover, 2*6 Tall blazingsur. 5% Wild Ixrnjamot, 8% White prairie clover, 12% Purple prairie clover. 1% Prairie rose, 13% Black-eyed susan, 2% Gray goldenrod. 1% Upland goldenrod 4% Stiff goldenrod. 2*6 Showy goldenrod, 4% Hoary vervain and 4% Golden alcxander. all bv' bulk weights. $9.50/ot, $142.50/11*. T au/wET WILDFIOWER .MIX HEIGHT 3'-4* l%Yanow, 4% Giant hyssop. 3% Swamp milkweed. 2%Panicled aster. 6% New England aster, 1% Red-stalked aster. 2% Canada tick trefoil, 8%Joe-pyc w eed, 5% Boneset. 2% Northern bedsuaw. 2% Sneezeweed, 1% Giant sunflower, 8% Common ox-ej ’c, 4% Greater St. John's won, 1% Wild Iris, 8% Tall blazing star, 2% White prairie clover. 4% Purple prairie clover. 2% Mountain mint, 5% Black-eyed susan. 4%Siiffgolderuod. 8% Blue vervain, 5%lronweed, 7% Culver's root. 5% Golden ale.xander, all by bulk weights. $11.50/ot,$172.50/H>. PLS (Pur« Liv« S«ed) A unit of measure used to define the amount of viable seed in a seed lot. A PLS p>ound of grass seed may often ha% e an actual bulk weight of 1.5 pounds or more because of the non-viable components of the individual seed lot (stems, chaff, immature seeds, etc.). Ordering Information We ship set^l LTS. We do not ship plants. We do not accept credit cards. Our shipping and handling rates arc as follows (figure roughly 1.5 bulk pounds per pound PLS): Seeding rates Grass seed • Broadcast) Grass seed t Drilled) Wildflowcr seed (Broadcast) IfeQonainended seeding dates Optimum Range 16-20 lbs. PLS 'ac-re 8-10 lbs. PLS/acre 1-5 Ibs-'acre .May 20 to June 20 Spnng thaw to August 10 September 20 to freeze up SI.50 .... less than 1 bulk lb. S3.00 .... 1-3 bulk lbs. $4.00 .... 3-5 bulk lbs. S5.00 . .. 5-10 bulk lbs. $6.00 ... 10-20 bulk lbs. $f 0 .... 20-i0 bulk lbs. We prefer to limit seed sales to within a 200 mile tadhis of Princeton. Pniirie sod flats (for “insunt" prairie) and native trees and shrubs are also available at our produciion center. Please inquire. Prairie Restorations, Inc. RO.Bo.x327 • Princeton,Minn. 55371 • 612/3894342 office • 6l2/389-5733greenhouse/slore o ■) 0 5. NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION. As explained above, your dugout should be near an ocisting shallow marsh for brood-rearing purposes. If you have ad equate space and funding, you can consider digging more than one dugout. In general, two closely-spaced small dugouts will receive more use than one larger dugout. If you construct more than one pond, space them about 100 to 300 feet apart. Ponds can be closer if tall vegetation screens the ponds from each other (breeding ducks are territorial and won’t tolerate oth ers of the same species if they can see them). 6. ISLANDS. Dugouts less than :wo acres are too small to include an island. As an alternative vou can use nest baskets, boxes or floating rafrs for nesting. A floating log, anchored in place, provides an excellent site for waterfowl and tunle loafing. See our brochure entitled “Artificial Structures for Waterfowl." 7. SPOIL. Excavating a pond means you end up with a lot of soil removed from the dugout; this is called “spoil.” Spoil must be carefully dealt with to optimize waterfowl use. In peat soils and cattail-choked wet lands, you should remove the spoil from the wetland if at all possible. Again, check with the appropriate agencies (see list at end) to determine if you need a permit. In mineral soils, the top 6"-17," will probably be black topsoil, high in organic matter. This should be saved separately for later spreading over the excavated bot tom. The underlying nonorganic soils (clays, sands, etc.) should be moved to an upland site and spread evenly. It is important that this material be removed from the wetland basin and not piled adjacent the dugout. The edge of the dugout should not have a discernible “rim”; that is, the slope should be continu ous below and above the water surface, as shown in the cross-section in figure 2. Finally, ail disturbed uplands and spread spoil should be seeded to native grasses for a minimum of 150 feet around the dugout. This will provide waterfowl cover, minimize weed growth, and prevent sedimentation within the basin. Providing 4 acres of upland nesting cover for each acre of wedand is best for duck produc tion. Do not plant trees near your dugout; these serve as predator perches and dens, and will reduce water- fowl use. Use nest boxes to anraa wood ducks. Remember to get any necessary permits before you Stan digging! 8. FINAL TREATMENT. The clav and sand under- 4 lying most mineral soils are very sterile and won’t suppon plant growth. In order to establish a food chain in your dugout, you must provide an organic base. This can be accomplished by spreading 4 "-6" of black topsoil over the entire excavated area. This can be the topsoil you originally removed (and stockpiled) from the site when you started digging. Another technique is to spread 2"-6" of clean upland hay over the excavated surface (wild hay can spread noxious weeds). Both can be used simultaneously. Once covered with water, either of these bases will quickly allow vegetation and insects to grow, providing the building blocks for a desirable marsh. Don’t worry about planting aquatic plants in your basin - they will establish themselves naturally in time, given a suitable site. Feet Feet Figure 2. Cross-sectiort of pond bottom showing smooth, shallowgradi at waterline, and undulating bottom contours. SOME OTHER CONSIDERATIONS additional assistance In general, a bulldozer or scraper is best capable of construaing ponds as they can be fairly precise in “sculpting” the landscape. A backhoe (power shovel) or excavator can do a good job, and a dragline can produce fiir results. The nature of your projea will likely determine to a large degree exactly which equipment is used. If you have a dry site, use a dozer, scraper, or backhoe. If it’s a wet site, a backhoe or dragline must be used. Minimize the disturbance to existing vegetation around your dug- out or you will encourage undesirable weed growth. Blasting with dynamite or ammonium nitrate gives unsatisfactory' results, is dangerous, and should not be used. Most resource agencies discourage the use of dug ponds for waterfowl because of their high cost. However, you may be able to get some further technical or financial assistance. Some county ASCS offices will cost-share construaion costs through the Agricultural Conserva tion Praaices (ACP) program. Local SCS or Soil and Water Conserv’ation District offices may be able to provide fiinher technical advice. The DNR Section of Wildlife can give general advice for your area, and should be checked for permit requirements. In forested areas of the state, your DNR forester may be able to provide cost sharing through the Forest Stewardship Program. Fi nally, local and statewide clubs may offer cost-share assistance; check with them for specifics. GENCIES WHICH REGULATE WETLANDS OR PROVIDE TECHNICAL OR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR WETIAND PROJECTS AGENCY FUNCTION PHONE NUMBER Agricultural Stabilization and Conserv'ation Service Regulatory & financial assistance (612) 290-3651 Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory'(612) 220-0375 DNR - Forestry Technical & financial assistance (612) 296-4491 DNR - Wildlife Technical assistance (612)296-3344 . DNR - Waters Regulatory (612) 296-4800 Crtll (Conservation Serv'ice Technical assistance (612) 290-3675 (D 1992, State of Minnesota, Department of Nanual Resources.Printed on recycled paper. I !)Excavated Ponds for Waterfowl Landowners frequently ask natural resource agencies how they can improve theJr land for waterfowl. Specifi cally, many people wonder if excavating ponds will help. This brochure will outline when and where dug ponds, or “dugouts”, can be beneficial, and provides construc tion guidelines for optimum waterfowl benefit. Refer to Ecology of Wedands ” brochure for more informa-our Waterfowl use dugouts primarily for coumhip and territorial sites, and must have other wetlands to fulfill feeding and brood-rearing needs. Small dug- outs (less than one-half acre) are used mostly in spring or fall migration, less so in summer. Larger dugouts will get more summer use, if they re the right depth (1.5-3 feet). tion. SHOULD YOU CONSIDER A DUGOUT FOR YOUR PROPERTY? Dugouts should be considered only where other wedand management opdons are not possible. Before you decide to excavate a pond, you should survey the site to ■ ' determirie if other options, such as ditch plugs, tile • breaks, or dikes.would work. Wedands restored by > reducing drainage are always preferable to dugouts. In general, dugouts should only be construaed if there are other open-water wetlands within one-half mile. You should not excavate a dugout in an existing wedand, especially one with open water. This can destroy the existing wedand by draining surface water off. Excavations should be outside the edge of the wetland, where the water table is sdll adequately high. Cattail-choked wedands are an exception to this rule, where vegeudon covers the entire surface of the wedand, and surface water is rarely present. In these cases, it may be acceptable to dig in the wedand basin, but you should still stay close to the edge. For these projects, you will need to observ'e permit requirements described below and should talk to the local DNR Wildlife Manager. i 1/1 Bonestroo Rosene v=5 Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects ■oneiiroo. Rosene. Anderflk and Associates. Incis an Affirmative Action/E^ Opportunity Employer Otto G. Bonestroo. P E. RoOea W Rosene. P E-* Josefsn C Andenik. P E. Marvin L Sorvaia. P E. RiCttard E- Turner. P E. Glenn R. Cook. FJE. Thomas E. Noyes. P E. RoOert G. Schunicht. P E. Susan M. Eberlin. CFA* * Seruor Consultant January 5,1995 Howard A. Sanford. P E. Ketth A. Gordon.. P E. RoOen R. Pfefferie. P.E. Richard W Foster. P E. Oavid O Loskota. P E. Rooert C Russek. A.I.A. Jerry A. Bourdon. P C. Mark A. Hanson. PI. Michael T. Rautmann. PE. Ted K. Field. PE. Thomas R. Andersoa A.l^ James R. Rosenmerkel. P.E. Donald C Burgardt. P E. TT.omas A. Syfko. PE. Frederic J. Stendorg. P J. Ismael Marttrscx. P E. Michael P Rau. F.E. Thomas W. Peterson. P E. Michael C LyrKh. P E. James R. Maiand. PX Jerry D. Pertisch. F.B. Scott J. Arganek. P.E. Kenr>eth P Anoerson. PE. Mark R. Rolfs. PE. Mark A. Selp. P E Gary W. Mortea PE. Paul X Gannon. AXA Daniel J. Edgerton. P E. A Rick Schmidt P E Dale A. Grove. PX Philip J. CasweN. PX Mark D. Wallis. P E Miles X Jensen. P E L PhUUp Gravel. PX Karen L Wiemert. PX Gary D. Krlstofltt P.E Brian K. Gage. P E F ^odd Foster. PX Keith R. Yapp. PX Douglas J. Benoit PX Shawn O Gustaf son. P.E. Cecilio ONvIer. P E Kent J Wagner. P E Paul G Heuer. PX Jonn P. Gorder . PX Dan D. Boyum. PX Jeffrey J. EMerlrsger. PE. Joseph E Rheia PX Lee M. Mann. PX Charles A. Erickson Leo M Pawdsky HarlanM.Olson Agnes M. Rlrsg James F. Ersgelhardt Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: McMillan Pond File No. 139-2086 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the proposal to create a pond within an existing Type 1 & 3 wetland at 1275 Lyman Avenue, located on Lot 2, Block 1, Orono Orchards Highlands. This wetland is protected by the City of Orono by ordinance, regulated by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 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. The wetland delineation, proposed erosion control and seeding is acceptable from an engineering standpoint. We have the following general comments in regards to excavating ponds within wetlands. It depends on the conditions of the wetland in question. If the wetland consists mainly of one type of plant such as reed canary grass or cattails, we prefer to see an increase in diversity by adding different types of habitat such as open water. For certain types of priority wetlands such as sedge meadows. Type 1 or 2 scrub-shrub, or wooded wetlands, we do not recommend excavation. We prefer that ponds are constructed near the wetland fi'inge to remove reed canary grass or purple loosestrife whenever possible. Tlie COE has a general permit No. 18 for excavation of a wildlife pond which should be followed. Mitigation of the excavated wetland area could be required by the City or COE, however excavation is not regulated by the WCA. If the pond is constructed In accordance with permit #18 the COE would probably not require mitigation. The proposed pond shown on Nadeau’s construction plan does not conform to permit #18 because the sideslopes are far too steep (1.5-foot H to 1-foot V) and the depth reaches 8 feet. If the plan is revised to show more gradual slopes with a depth of 3.5 to 4.5 feet as noted, we would recommend approval without mitigation. 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, MN 55113 ■ 612-636'4600 • ’S ' I I,* •••■Mjurisdictional threshold is low, in certain instances the redeposition ^'*soi,l^~ associated with these activities through the repeated use of these trails and/or ■ paths, could degrade or destroy waters of the United States by altering hydrology - t (e-g., drainage patterns) or adversely affecting habitat, values. For the activity to qualify for this, general- permit, the following conditions must be met:-. ••• » m • • • 1. The activity must take place on an existing trail or path. •• • 5 ey This general permit docs not authorize land clearing or discharge of fill material for constrijNStion of new trails or paths. - »* •Ib.-jWildlife Habitat Improvement Activities (Ponds. Level-Ditches- and Duoeu^ not regulated bv the Minnesota Department of Natural Resourcesb - Includes excavation activities whose primary purpose is to enhance or create wildlife habitat. Ponds must be constructed with irregular shorelines, shallow horizontal to vertical sideslopes (e.g. 8-foot H to 1-foot V), and a shallow water depth (2 feet to 3 feet) with a, maximum depth, of 5 feet over 25 percent of the pond surface. The permit area may not be harvested for agricultural purposes, grazed by domestic* livestock*,, used as a source of irrigation water, used as dumping area or outlet for draining other wetlands, drained, burned, filled, clipped or used in a manner that would destroy its I wetland character or wildlife value. The permit area may not be used as part of a cranberry operation. Level ditches may not have an inlet or outlet. The area of I wetland excavated may not exceed one acre in size. • e« • • 9 * • c. Road Maintenance Projects - Includes excavation associated with cleanout of roadway ditches and culverts. Roadway ditches may not be dredged, to a depth that exceeds the original (as built) depth. The invert elevation of culverts may not be lowered to 2m elevation lower than the original elevation. • . • • d. Stormwater Holding/Detention Pond — Excavation of stormwater holding/detention ponds in wetlands in conjunction with upland development projects is authorized under this general permit provided the pond is constructed in accordance with Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) design standards. N, TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:January 9. 1996 SUBJECT: #2104 B. Scott Ball, 1065 West Femdale Road - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA. Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 acres, sewered. Application: Remove existing home and replace with new residence conforming to 30' side setback, 75' lake setback and meeting hardcover regulations. Variances requested include lot area, lot width, and average lakeshore setback. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Survey E - Elevation Views F - Floor Plans G - Staff Hardcover Review Note At your November meeting. Planning Commission recommended approval of the new bay windows on the lake side of the existing house. However, appUcant has since reconsidered and now proposes to construct a totally new residence. Pertinent Code Sections 1.Section 10.23, Subd. 6(B): A. Minimum lot area Required = 2 acres E.xisting = 0.88 acres B.Minimum lot width Required = 200' Existing width = 180' at shoreline and 163' at 75' setback line C. Required side yard = 30' (no variance proposed) Zoning File #2104 January 9, 1996 Page 2 2.Section 10.22, Subd. 1: Average setback encroachment not allowed (existing encroachment =® 50’; proposed encroachment = house: 13, deck: 19). 3.Section 10.22, Subd. 2/Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L): Hardcover in 75-250' zone limited to 25% (no variance proposed). Discussion Applicant proposes to construct a new residence to replace the existing residence. The new house is proposed to meet the required 30’ side setbacks and the 75 lakeshore setback. The new house will be set back approximately 35' further inland than the existing house, and will include a 6’ deck also meeting the 75 ’ setback. The average setback line defined in applicant's previous application confirms the existing house encroaches approximately 50’ past the average setback. The new construction will encroach only 13’ with the new house, or 19’ total encroachment including the proposed 6' deck. The neighboring house to the east will be only minimally impacted by this encroachment, and due to existing vegetation will likely have virtually none of its lake views reduced by the proposed construction. The proposed construction includes an attached garage and a redesigned driveway. This may require some fill on the site, and therefore due to past concerns about drainage and its impact on the neighboring property to the east, it would be appropriate for the applicant to provide a grading and drainage plan for the City Engineer to review. Further, because no cutting of existing grades in the 0-75 ’ zone will be allowed to accommodate the proposed basement windows (existing foundation will have to be filled to match existing 0-75 ’ grades) the elevation of the basement floor is critical. That floor level must be at least 932.5’ to meet flood plain ordinance requirements, which would leave approximately 4-4.5' of fill above the basement floor on the lake side of the house, or even 5’ if the grade is established to drain away from the house. Again, these elevations and a complete grading plan are critical to the City's approval of this request. Hardcover Review In the previous application, staff defined that the 75-250 ’ zone contain 24,600 s.f., which would allow hardcover in the amount of 25% or 6,150 s.f. The site plan as submitted and reviewed by staff in Exhibit O includes as follows: to rt^ FRANK R. CARDARELLE (612)941-3031 Land Surveyor Eden Prairie. MN 55344 UttUitau ®t |5ttrt><v Survey For Scott t glaanor toll 1065 N«at r#rnaal« Ro«a Orene. NM rtwiMi 473-1450 Book 347 Page 4i RIe. Total Lot Araat 38,238.5 sa.ft.± Propoaod Oradinq Plan for Haw Houaa. This plan* fp^clficatlon or raport aaa praparad by wa or undar my diract auparvialoa and that X ait a ^aly Reoiatarad Land Survayor^^lT^a Stata^f Hinnaaota. Slgnad thla - ^ ^ day ^f - 1996. frank Jl^^^Cai'daralla Stata Rao. Ho. 6508 r- Zoning File #2104 January 9, 1996 Page 3 Decks - Driveway/sidewalk/tumaround House/garage - Total 322 s.f. 2.742 s.f. 3.380 s.f. 6,444 s.f. (26.2%) Minor adjustments to decks and driveway will be necessar>- to reduce by 300 s.f. to the 25% level. Items for Discussion 1. Does Planning Commission have any concepmal or specific problems with the requested lot area and width variances (which are inherent in this sewered property) or the average setback encroachment? 2. Does Planning Commission wish to review the grading and drainage plans once they are received? Is it necessary or appropriate to table the application until the drainage plans are submitted, or is Planning Commission comfortable with a recommendation of conceptual approval subject to those plans being submitted and accepted by staff prior to review of this application by the Citj' Council? 3. Does Planning Commission have any other issues regarding this proposal? Staff Recommendation If Planning Commission feels that the requested lot area, lot width arid average setback variances are justified and supported by adequate hardship, and if Planning Commission is comfortable conceptually with the hardcover plan subject to minor adjustments to meet Ae 25% limit, then a recommendation for approval would be appropriate, subject to staff review and approval of the final hardcover proposal and site grading plans, prior to final Council action. Options for Action 1 Approve as proposed, subject to staff review and approval of grading/drainage plan prior to final Council action. 2. Table pending receipt of grading/drainage plan. 3. Denial (specify reasons). 4.Other. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S200.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $1(X).00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforraing structures $2 After-ihe-Fact Fees (Double application fee) // 1 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)_____q7-ii~7Z.7^J/^u'L { ----------------------- Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired ------------------------------(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: h/ residential ___other (specify) Zoning District:_______________________—------------- APPLICANT Name B* >Sa€>'rr Phone (home) Phone(woric) - 9 ‘S’o - ^ Address: u/. City: hAvxsrit, Zip: OWNE? v»f different than applicant) Name________________ Phone(home) Phone (work)_ Address:City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST m • « Estimated Construction Cost $ ^oo,ot/o ^ /? ./ft >hj I gr_r <7 ni‘*Lxk< sei-L: • /-/ i L • ~ fc- - / i — -------------------------- ✓ * VARIAM-ES^QUIRED ___Hardcover ___Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear y/ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) hardship /description of UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing j compliance with Zoning Code requirements: Lofrr /irr<r »r tjS J, 7 r.iA: X ru lZ0^ \^r $ iLly fr*/\__Lj.^Cc (aliach additional shwts if necessary) Co Jir ,/o 0 ^3et rzcKu-CiAf^ t>cirJ o-'c^ .to o ^ .. ^■'ll /o(r . required submittals All of tht fnllnwin. infnrmatio.. n»t<t he submitted t)T tby qppB<atiW ip.pota for vou^ ^ppHcatinn to rnnadered coniplctct 1. 2. j. 4. 5. 6. Completed Application Form ~7 Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150*, labels and plat map Cvou must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Depamnent of Finance. A-603. ' Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and mclude hardcover "“calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy VhT x 11” for * Topo<^phic survey (existmg and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade — arc proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'^” x 11" for reproducuon Sketches or plans of floor elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8 /i x 11 ). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest m the aaa m # _\ ^ ^ I A ^ ^ ^ w ■ II Y 1P* I ^ I 7. List ot tne legal names iuoaiuai — r----------------- 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 ...K.. fhic leat, 8. you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. He Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember vsiffi ..nniienrinn is not co mplete if the above informatipn hpii npf bee" mbMblL information supplied is true antjf^on^ to ih/best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s SignanggH^Date - y- 9S C W a?=n“ “m" members for purposes of iqy^igation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature Date fhin change prior to the meeting. 8 BAY) (»5jo o2-;I7-23'43 •• • •• • ••• • • ^ ^» • • « • • ^••• m ^ ^4 1! n ____DATE' 10/24/98!> .-^ '-| .!'■» <’ i«-lI7-21 4!!4!n"PII09 AflllAt iTt HEMCPIN COlAirY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OMTERS LIST.1' *• " *1 0004*OORESS UNASSIGNiDMA«‘{.^« hTSS^Slrf bank mit/O TRUST hCAL ESTATE i MARQUETTE 65479-0046 j|}3«WP_AOOR.'f{!oibai‘ FE^Sa SOt-117-2S 41 0007 ,fI____RO H *****®*^* A j F sillEBLER ARPAYER 9{! HILLXAH N/JOAfM F'SIIIEBLER *“*^*0®« ,1^**0 BEACON ST BE 02116 * i* t Is 02-117-23 43 0023 nS/251L ‘ 2*®t* FERNOALB RO H »***«I.V • •y FOX p7liiw^!!nl '* ? ^ / MTIIERINE M foxW9| H FERNOALI RD hay^ata HN B6S91 if ir i'{i-. •V.':S':. ; .,•.1 •;. • • ■•;‘j> •'••*•• • . -V.■ -t •i/i y . ‘t. . i' I * , >-r-1 •'•{ . v.i<‘ ;,4 * '. / •; • ■ report no .PAGESB 02-117-23 43 D0050003B ADDRESS UUSSIGNEDHEIWY H SKARPHENRY H SKARP 1045 N FEWA aLE RO ' NAYZATA IM SS391 \SB 02-117-23 43 0006 0003S ADDRESS UNASSIGNEDLOUISE H LOHRY NORNEST SA»K IM TRUST REAL ESTATE 6TH A HARGUETTE MPLS HN 55479-0046 3B 02-117-23 43 0021 01065 FERMOALE RD H 0 S BALL A E A BALL B SCOTT BALL 1065 FERNDALE RO H NAYZATA Ml 56l91 SB 02-117-23 43 0022 01055 FERNOALE RO N GERALD T MCCOURTNEY ET AL GERALD T MCCOURTNEY 1055 N FERTEIALE ROAO NAYZATA Ml 55391 I • TOTAL BATCH 503 00007 FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND tmm *»<fO«“TION AS IT a SIa S m?{I?E W I!?REC0RDS DATE ____x»-. liiliiiiiiilll f?tti Hrmr'II III I II **• / 1.% . » .1 i/r • r r A ni f i HI• 1 1*1 1 1 I p 4 I f N (I* k 111 • I*. 41 : • I I • W 4 1 I va>0 t < f > i*'>^iMiWi V*. rTi rre V Ti nri Vi.'f * i«i f in i i * 41 r rp rii v^Tiiiai^c * '** * niw 11 * m i m ■ 1 > • >*i p .11 r * • 1 1 mi. I'vsj&niilS I'fpi 1 1 1 !• • I < 14 I'l l III I'.» • /h.iSN *1 4 Ml Ml' ii I ■'* ”* "* >*t‘ n.». I ti ^lalaiaiB I !<kn <ti t I yn*'i I || 1 m'i R ■ jl ^ Ig li r i tii • pi i t f-• • O' i ii. l m i j » f • i i ] ||| |I ll'|l|■M•l'll*'lll ‘Wl’ill'l^ *'ll 'liliiii' l•l•^l>'l^__ ®__ I’ll •‘III i| I'llllllH PP® VPlpif'l |l I »IM4 |l|8l-*l't.|IM‘»IOt>l .t / 4.I* I'l - »|PPPPP W^% I I I I M I III I M I HI • • I I HI I > I M i I I I HI I I I 8 I 'X I’I ■**«*" ‘ * . _ . ___ ________ • I I p Ml _ I > lit>lMl««>M,i.i.»MIM4l 'IkiMiilfx.•■•»••• «*illl^ III • •IIIIJIIIK |||(4 il.l- a.lllM.IIVIflliMIMllMlIilliltil’l III III III ill ;i III III III II II II II III III I I i|i I iTiin III III11 IIIIII11 iiiiiiii : . r. . ix S i - I l^lll ■' ■ I ill I'I I ■ ll ^ ^ ^ >x-II II ii;iliilMJHlilfai*Av:.;!i'''.n«Bi*pr?w I Ml * VII Ml 4 Ii* • Ml I I M .1 4 Ml I l" Ml I III I Ml • • J 1 1 i Hi • llfp I ' IM l>< • «l| • * • i • • • I P P' I Si _-.hJ — «M I III FTiiT V'.vi < V ; r?>TV“.a4 e »/«• • r-#* Minnetonka Design , inc. §9 9 fitK Si. fMfl« its (kmnkm»§»ts MH iSSif rtt (fit) SM4-f44S m (tit) 9S4~4S9t scorr 9 SltdMOM Mitt &(jC^ iiN nwNOMi no p STrCKNKY Jt SCHWARZ tiSTPliM cuts JL«lS 1 1 I'll t f' I •• > . ' • (• ) « »N • I *_ •• . V. U a 71 • ' f. • ’ •» ) *• ' •« f\ *j *‘-4^ u i ‘4 01/09/1996 10:54 6129344305 MItJNETCMCA DESIGN PAGE 02 t /«. C42 b r r'S '1 ^ i «.• O sT »'*- V N -J *v -^ * • »v Si / / -.- / / ^ «'.<• I ^ 2 ' , ,iv/o=f’--"^^*'i''! 'J.^. “ ^ - «»tjo h^fijo*^ ^ -7 2- S«>. O' A. X ^ r ,^os# , ,zX 6» ^ ti^: J ^ M?' ~) r i,^'1't'i *?■ '7S*JSo'^**^^ ' 2H,fco° ^•1 t/A/*.2t.2-/- (ajc^ to S'/ ^ Soo *?•') L>, /5 TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:January 11, 19% SUBJECT; #2103 Orono Hockey Association. 1025 Old Cry stal Bay Road North Request for Conceptual Review Zoning Dutrict: RR-IB Total area 4.4 acres exclusive of road rights-of-way. Application: The Orono Hockey Association proposes construction of approximate 160’x240’ enclosed ice arena. The Hockey Association will enter into a lease agreement vrith the Oroiio School District for use of Orono School District property. Planning Commission membere will be asked to consider conditional uses of the residential code at a 9:00 p.m. public hearing on January 16th. One phase of the amendment review will be to determine whether the current code would allow an ice arena use. If not, how shall the code be amended so that the ice arena can be recognized as an accessory use under the principal use, Orono Schools. Our task for the conceptual review shall be to provide a general review of existing code standards and to determine if variances will be required. The conceptual review will cover other issues as follows: 1.Agencies that will also require permit review: a) Hennepin Gounty/DOT b) MCWD c) Corps of Engineers 2. Information, specifications, drawings needed for filing of formal application, 3.Required improvements associated with site plan/conditional use permit: a) Landscaping b) Signage c) Lighting 4. Extension of municipal facilities. 5. 6. Sewer - use of holding tanks until Comp Plan is finalized by Met Council, Resolve of zoning amendment - impact on filing of formal application n. - Zoning File #2103 January 11, 1996 Page 2 Pertinent Ordinances (Staff has copied all pertinent ordinance for your packet They are specifically referenced below in list of exhibits under Exhibit L) List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant's Addendum C - Legal Notice - Zoning Amendment Public Hearing 9:00 p.m. Dl-8 - Option to Lease E - Site Plan F - Floor Plan G - Elevations H - Building Section 1 - Schematic Design Packet, Pages 1-13 J - Gustafson Report Kl-3 - Copy of Letter Sent to Neighboring Property Owners - Invitation to Information Meeting 1/24/96 7:30 p.m. at Orono Council Chambers L - Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10.20 - R-IA, conditional uses Section 10.28 - RRIB, IB standards Section 10.30 - Septic code Section 10.09 - Conditional uses - standards, etc. Section 10.60 - Performance standards for all districts Section 10.61 - Special provisions for all districts Suggested readings: Community Management Plan Chapter 2 - Goals Chapter 4 - Land Use specifically CMP 4-24 educational land use Chapter 8 - Parks and Open Space specifically CMP 8-10, [2 & 3] 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Review of Application General Site Plan Comments seeks approval of 50’ setback based on design and economics. As for design, applicant ^shes to take advantage of the higher elevations at west lot line and to place structure mto the M to minimize visual impact at residential lot line. Structure will be approximately 28 above Zoning File #2103 Januarj' 11, 1996 Page 3 finished grade, refer to Exhibit G. Applicant also notes the need for major soil correction when you move eastward. There are additional site constraints, i.e. retention ponds, parking. etc. Wetlands Review Exhibit I, specifically the last page of the design packet that locates the two wetland basins on the property. Note there are no Orono designated wetlands on this property. Applicant proposes the placing of a parking lot within basin 2 along the south lot line. As applicant's addendum information notes basin 2 is not a long-term wetland but umntentional. Earlier grading changes forced drainage to collect in the area. The two wetlands will be regulated by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and Corps of Engineers. All permit applications with both agencies should be filed prior to the filing of the formal application with the City. Applicant may be able to obtain a certificate of exemption from the Watershed District for the parking improvement. Sewer and Water Review Exhibit J, Gustafson ’s report and copy of as-builts, municipal water is 400’ to the south and sewer 1,100’. His report asks that the water main be extended to the northwest comer of Old Crystal Bay Road and County Road 6 for future connection to the City of Medina. Staff would not recommend passing this cost on to Hockey Association and would delay further extension for a request from the City of Medina. The engineer notes that because of the lower elevations of this site, it will be necessary to pump waste water from a grinder pumping station through a force main to the existing gravity sewer. Upon formal application, the ^plicmt will be expected to provide plans and specs for the sanitary sewer and water main extensions in addition to as-built drawings being provided to the City upon completion of the project. The property is not located within the Metropolitan Urban Sewer Area. The 4.4 acre parcel has been included in the current Comp Plan Amendment to be filed with the Met Council January 1996. Drainage/Stormwater Review Exhibit E, all drainage is directed to northeast into a proposed stormwater retention pond that would eventually drain to basin 1 wetland and eventually to the existing culvert at Old Crystal Bay Road. The engineer recommends that a skimmer structure be included at the pond outlet before entering basin 1 wetland. Drainage and ponding calculation shall be provided with formal application along with the detail of the outlet structure and pond elevations should be shown on the final grading plan. Engineer is also asking that the parking lot and entrance have storm sewer for proper drainage. , ■ < «1 ■■ t V 11 ■ Zoning File #2103 January 11, 1996 Page 4 Access/Parking The engineer approves the two access locations but note that the pi,< icing lot provides only a 130 spaces. Refer to Exhibit L-6, Section 10.61, page 386, the engineer is using subsection e. churches, auditoriums requiring at least 1 parking space for each 4 seats based on the design capacity of the main assembly hall. The ice arena seating capacity is proposed at 800. Planning Commission members may wish to review this section to determine if there is another use that may be more compatible such as an athletic field which would require 1 parking space for each 6 seats of design ctqjacity (133 stalls required). In any case, the ^plicant plans to share parking facilities with the School District. The engineer goes on to further suggest that if existing school parking is to be credited that a paved trail or drive be constructed from the school driveway to the arena parking lot. This may be difficult as the current open space area to the south of the parking lot is a heavy used practice football and soccer field area. The engineer recommends that the parking lot be paved with concrete curb and gutter. Driving lanes within the parking lot should have a 9 ton pavement section to be used by buses and delivery trucks. Easements Engineer's report requests easements along lot lines and over drainage facilities. As we are not dealing with a subdivision, the City has no authority to ask for standard drainage and utility easements along lot lines. The City shall ask for a drainage/protective easement over the retention pond. The engineer suggests that the County/DOT review the plan so the County can persuade applicant to grant easements along north lot line but applicant is seeking no access on to the County Road. Landscaping/T rails The engineer has raised the issue of installing a berm with additional screening along the west lot line where structure may impact existing residential. The owner of this property was fully aware that the site to the immediate east of their property was a potential site for an enclosed ice arena. In fact, plans were provided to the Veterans Administration, the agent in the sale of the property. Plans were made available to any potential buyer of the property. There is a row of mature evergreen trees along the west boundary that appear to be located within the residential property. Review CMP 8-10, Comp Plan recommends that the City consider trails or pathways for this type of use. The engineer ’s report notes that we already have the bike trail along the east side of Old Crystal Bay Road and the north side of County Road 6. Members should be aware that Mark Engebretson of the Orono Hockey Association is presenting the ice arena proposal to the Zoning FUe #2103 January 11, 1996 Page 5 Paric Commission at their February meeting. This matter may best be addressed by the Park Commission. The exterior finish of the structure will be very similar to the exterior finishes of the existing school structure. The lower portion of structure will be of exposea masonry veneer brick and upper levels of the strucnue will be of an exterior installation finish system similar to that of the Orono City facility. The roof will be metal much like the City buildings. Land Use Review Exhibit L-1 (R-IA code), note the various high impact/intense uses allowed within the residential districts via a conditional use permit. Staff does not believe there is a suitable or existing fit for the proposed use within the code. If the use is to be reclassified as an accessoiy use under the principal use, what happens when the property is no longer owned by the School District but is purchased b> the Hockey Association or another entity? Review Exhibits Dl-8, option to lease agreement states that lease may be written for a 35-55 year period but during that time it may be possible for the Hockey Association to purchase the property. How is the use to remain an accessory use when there is no formal connection to the School District? What is a reasonable setback for a 160’x240' proposed ice area from an adjacent residential lot line? The setback standards for existing conditional uses range from 50' to 150*. Note the school conditional use setback is 50'. No fiuther discussion on die use as this is to be resolved at your 9:00 p.m. public hearing. Need for Variances It is difficult to determine the exact number of variances when we have yet to determine an exact fit in our code for the proposed use but variances will be required per existing code sections. Review Exhibits G and H, we will be dealing with a height variance as the structure exceeds the allowed 30' of height. Topography along the west lot line will minimize the impact of the structure upon the residential property*. Review your west elevation, the structure is 28' above finish grade. Note the cuts into weste.m elevation in the southwest comer. Land alteration (unless drainage swale) must be located 10* from a lot line. The parking lot shown at a 20' setback from the street lot line would require a variance, refer to Exhibit L-6, top of page 384, "Open parking spaces on lots must have a location other than a required yard except that such parking may be located in a rear yard to within 10' of an 1 5 Zoning File #2103 January 11, 1996 Page 6 interior side lot line and within 10' of rear lot line". The remainder of the parking lot will meet setback requirements. The engineer has already noted a possible need for a parking stall variance. In reviewing the Comp Plan Amendment, you will note that the subject property is included as one of the properties considered for a sewer extension. Existing MUSA boundary goes through the High School cafeteria. It is not certain what kind of delays will take place with the Met Council's review but it is clearly the applicant's intention to proceed with construction this spring. They ask for the temporary use of holding tanks until the sewer extension is resolved. Review Exhibit L-3, Section 10.30, the use of a holding tank for new use would require a variance approval as the code would require a standard approved septic system for the use and the holding tank is considered an alternative system. Can we approve the use without confirmation that sewer wMl be available to this property? Gaffron and Weckman have confirmed there is no room for a septic system on this property. Should we ask for septic testing on adjacent school property before permit is issued for construction? Other Performance Standards Members are encouraged to review Exhibits L-5 and 6, performance standards for all zoning districts within the City. The standards will be included as additional information for applicants in addressing lighting needs, landscaping, excessive noise, hours of operation. Members may wish to further alert applicant on some of these code requirements. Cost/Funding Applicant's packet of information failed to provide information on the cost of the improvement, the option to lease document, specifically page 4, states that the Orono Hockey Association must accumulate an amount equal to 90% of the cost set forth in the approved development project and to demonstrate to the School District reasonable satisfaction the source's for any part of the 10% that remains to be funded. \VTiat is the status of the fund drive? How real is the construction start date of spring 199o based on the funding? Applicant should be asked to respond. Use of Facility Outside of hockey/skating, private skating times/inscruction how shall facility be used throughout the year? How v.ill Orono's schools or other schools use the facility? Will facility be used for something other than sports? Will facility be rented for other uses by the general public? Zoning File #2103 January 11, 1996 Page 7 Final Comments The Planning Commission is not required to act on the proposal but merely to provide general guidelines and direction to applicant. Planning Commission should provide guidance to applicant on the following matters: 1.Shall the City approve the use of holding tanks until the matter of extension of sewer is resolved by both Met Council and the City of Orono? If so, what should be required of applicant (re: testing, agreement, security)? Based on the guidelines set forth in proposed zoning amendment, how shall we deal with an accessory use versus the matter of ownership of the property? Can the School District be required to retain the ownership of the property? 3. Will you grant the necessary variances needed to allow proposed use? 4.Should applicant be responsible for providing a financial statement to the City each year once the ice arena is in operation? - - notification by School District if facility is sold? 5. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Summary Check Off List for Applicant's Use in Preparation for Filing of the Formal Application 1. Resolve of zoning/land use issue before application can be filed with City. 2.Status of sewer extension to property - applicant to fulfill all requirements of City during interim period. 3.Complete the filing of applications with the Watershed District and the Corps of Engineers for land alterations within wetland basin B. 4.Plans and specifications for sanitary sewer and water main exOmsions (as-builts provided to the City upon completion). 5.Drainage and ponding calculations to be submitted with application. Plans to include a skimmer structure at the pond outlet. Detail of the outlet structure and pond elevations to be shown on the grading and drainage plans. Plans to be amended to include storm sewer for parking lot and entrances. Zoning File #2103 January 11, 1996 Page 8 6.Resolve of final parking plan - If shared use of parking facilities is proposed with school, should there be a paved drive linking school parking lot with ice area parking lot? Plans for paiidng lot to reflect curb and gutter. Driving lanes in parking area to be at 9 ton capacity. 7. Detail on landscaping and planting schedules. 8. Lighting specs, etc. 9. Signage. ^ Z703. CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLI^XTIOfi fr I A -A yyjasi^ PROPERTY LOCATION • • ‘ . . I Site address d^ujs/a./ ^ Prnnertv Miimher (PrPV^ .,• ' '/ )’• ^ I CC.C.Property Identification Number (PID] Please check one - Property____abstract or €30 n-^ torrens? Attach le2al description to application. APPLICANT Name riS/L Address ------------------------- CitV Zw^Kgg. A^rvJ Phone (home) Zip 5 v»5^ Phone (work) 3>^- Cot^-TA>>£'r -*.«*■ j OWNER (if different than applicant) Name CP>__^ Address City 1-APC€: ,r/v//vi V' Phone (home) Zip-fsi^Phonc (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District ^ Acres Dry Land v«.T Acres ^Vet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes -------------- Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildlmg sues) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites --------------New Limts Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) ________ , [NIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELDONARY APPLICATION Payment of fees (refer to "application fees* listed below). Completed application form. Preliminary plat information on Cenificate jnust obtain this lUt. labels and map from Certified Property Owners Lost of owners within j50 . labels and piat Hennepin County Department of Fina^. A-603 . vou wish notified of this application. As an ad dendum to this application, please attach a separate list of y P _________________, Bing Official ’s Signature _______________________________________ Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. ________________________ lOing Official ’s Signature ------------------------------- application FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply) (Oas. 1.1. 4 nn S2M.OO -------- Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement JjW.00 Subdivision Application (ClaM ^ -25 00/lot (Class ID & all non-resideniial) --------Preliminary Subdivision AppU^on_S/^ 00 + 5^3.uu/iot Pinal Plat Application (Class IH) S175.00 ' ~ Legal Review and Filing: _ Subdivision only S75.00 «.,nn nn " Subdivision w/easements and covenants mm. 5.t00.uu ri»f^i-minsti oer Section 11.6 —) Totals Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) _ _ ______________A11 Imorovcinciit Fcts:lin. ft. X .50 lin. ft. X .50Proposed Public Roads swu.w -r RcqLt for City to Accept Existmg ■ oa-wfsy “em. RtieXplicnbl. .o subdivision uppUcusious) S50.00/new lot proposed for on-site x--------new ots w___ITmcC. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees -------- sSment^Vacation Associated with Subdivision S75.CW -------- PRD Application with Subdivision S30.00/D welling Umt ♦ 1 bv the Zoninz Adfliimstniior* City ity „iicjo. Tiey. Planmng Commis^^an^^ ^ lished by ordinance, ^ ^^e>. ^ --------------------- ____________ ns.,. AiA/yS'^ -------------- icant ’s Signature er’s Signature>r’s Signature /' ^ V, ---------------------------- . . _ „us. baveZIIXo^^ °r A^srr.Sp “i « Z aru beid on mLus*. piuusu muic. anbng.ibd.ts in have an auibon«d “^rad r‘yow7« ^“^^IviS. di. Building i Zoning Offle of diis dung, prior to th. m«img. fc ORONO HOCKEY BOOSTERS, INC. BOX 205 LONG LAKE. MN 55355 December 20, 1995 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth City of Orono Orono city Hall Old Crystal Bay Road & Hwy. 12 Orono, MN 55356 IV,O * ;•» ^’Ir Re: Orono Ice Arena Dear Jeanne: orono Hockey Boosters, Inc. is submitting to the City of Orono a package of materials for a review of its proposed ice arena development nor-h of th Orono High School. As part of that submission, we want in this letter to address the zoning of the site. The arena site is currently zoned R-IA, under Section 10.20 of the zoning code. A copy of that section is attached. An ice arena is not specifically mentioned as a use oualified for a conditional use permit under any of the provisions under Subdivision 3, although several of the provisions come very close or contemplate similar structures: the arena will be built on land leased for a long term from the School District and the school District will be heavily involved in the arena’s operation, which comes close to qualifying the arena under Subdivision 3(A). We understand from the City Attorney, though, that the private ownership of the arena building itself technically disqualifies the use from this category. subdivision 3(C) covers “country clubs, tennis clubs ... or private non-profit parks, playgrounds or other similar uses". This, Mark Engebretson President 475*3460 DEC-20-1995 15:35 DCl.2^ ENGE5??ETS0N 612 334 3332 P.03/135 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Decenber 20, 1995 Page 2 provision also comes close to the arena, our 38,000 square toot, low-slung building will resemble), but still does not specifically provide for our case. A Subdivision 3(E) provides for commercial greenhouses which, at least as far improvements go, would be expected to be of a size and scale similar to our arena projec In these circumstances, with school uses, private non-profit us.s and larger recreational and coiamercial uses accommodate clearly our arena project. How that expansion would be drafted is of course up to the City, but the concepts of ownership of the land by the school and private non-profit ownership of the improvements might be appropriate. ability to keep the building profile low and to keep soils correction costs down is greatly enhanced by t^e sin)cing of the building into the slope at the 50 foot setback line. We hope this letter is helpful, and look forward to the sketch plan review process. yQ\j have any questions, please call me Very truly yours Mark Engebretson ME/pkk 4412 t / 0 / # /CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone (612)473-7357 Fax 473-0510 yOTICE 1. 9:00 P.M.The Citv shall consider an amendment of Orono Municipal Zoning Code ine i-ity snau p and F) that 20verns uses permitted by conditional uses os to their potential impact “P°“ ^vi^ ^me'eonM u*s«TiervletTare tennis pools, greenhouses, ski slides, archery ranges, scout comps, YMCA YWCA camps, etc. The Plannino Commission will also consider code Section 10.^1. Subd, i S maT^mits schools as a conditional use. The amendment wouW ^pose the listing of accessory uses associated with a school use such as Ssrf and open ice amnas, gome fields, playgrounds, tennts courts etc and the need to develop reasonable setback standards, screetung requirements, location in proximity to principal use, etc. 9:30 P.M. u The Planning Commission will consider a proposed revision to Municip^ Zoninv Code Section .0.03, Subd. 9 (C) regarding reyilation of ““^o^ K Minac in excess of 1,000 s.f. footprint area (known as Oversize Accessory Structures). The proposed amendment wUl limitations on the allowed footprint area of such accessory buildmgs on properties of 10 acres or more in area. u K-nrrH u/ill aonear at the specified times. Written comments are proposed amendments. City of Orono gv; Planning Commission Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Admimstrator To be published the wee Ic of January 1, 1996 v*i«tTliSr i. r .vr- ••3wt. Iv.#V-~c^Tt#i*:' OPTION TO LEASE Peurties: Independent School District No. 278 ("ISD'') Orono Hockey Boosters, Inc. ("OHB”) L_. Property: Approx. 4 acres at the southwest corner of Old Crystal Bay Road and Hennepin County 6 [need complete legal description] (the "Land”) 1. Terms of Option. (a) Grant. ISD grants to OHB an option to lease the Land (the "Option"). Consideration for the Option is $1.00. (b) Exercise. OHB can exercise the Option at any time before December 31, 1996, but only if the Conditions to Exercise listed in Section 2 have been satisfied. (c) Events on Exercise. If OHB exercises the Option, then (i) ISD will sign the lease of the Land (the "Lease"). The form of the Lease will be attached to the Option to Lease; (ii) OHB will cause a separate non-profit entity affiliated with it (the "Arena Owner") to sign the Lease as tenant. [• the Arena Owner will most likely be a 509(a)(3) "supporting organization" under the Internal Revenue Code — 509(a)(3) organizations are used by 501(c)(3) organizations to conduct activities D (such as holding real estate) that owe incidental to and distinct from the 501(c)(3)'c primary activity;] (iii) ISD and Arena Owner will sign a memorandum of the Lease, in recordable form; (iv) the Arena Owner will make the rent payment required under the Lease, in the amount of $15,000; (v) ISD and the Arena Owner will sign an ice rental agreement, as described in Section 4(b). 2. Conditions to Exercise of Option. OHB will not be entitled to exercise the Option unless each of the following conditions has been met: (a) Schematic Design. ISD approves a Schematic Design Package for the indoor ice arena to be developed on the Land by Arena Owner (the "Arena”). (i) the "Schematic Design Package" will be a set of plans and specification for the Arena, showing the location on the Land of the Arena and all paving, curbing and related improvements, showing all utility connections and facilities on the Land, showing drainage directions and storm water collection and dispersal arrangements, showing Arena elevations, -2- D sections and floor plans, and showing the exterior appearance of the Arena and the materials to be incorporated therein; (ii) ISD will participate in the development of the Schematic Design Package, and will act promptly and reasonably in providing information and responses as such design progresses. ISD understands that this further Arena design will start with the design in the preliminary design book dated September 23, 1994, and that OHB will be attempting to keep the hard costs of the Arena project within the budgeted amounts set forth in that book. (b) Further Design. ISD approves all further design of the Arena and related improvements, through design development and construction drawiiio5. (i) ISD will receive copies of all design development and construction drawings. and will be entitled to participate in such further design to the extent that it requests. (ii) ISD will promptly approve in writing all design development and construction drawings, as long as they are consistent -3- ! ‘ a-■ with the Approved Schematic Design Package. (c) Project Budget. ISD approves the development budget for the Arena, including a $100,000 initial operating reserve. (d) Governmental Approvals. OHB obtains all city, state and federal governmental approvals reguired for the commencement of construction of the Arena on the LanJ. (e) Financing. OHB accumulates an amount equal to at least 90% of the costs set forth in the approved development budget, and demonstrates to ISD's reasonable satisfaction the sources for any part of the 10% that remains to be funded. (f) Operations. ISD approves a projected operating statement for the Arena for the first three years after opening. 3. Events Before Exercise. (a) Entry on Land. OHB will be entitled to enter on the Land before exercise of the Option for the purposes of conducting soils and other site surveys, evaluations and investigations. OHB will provide reasonable notice to ISD by telephone before any entry is to occur, and will repair or restore any disturbance of the Land that results from its activities. (b) Progress Toward Exercise. OHB will keep ISD informed of its progress toward development of the -4- 1 i Arena, including progress with respect to fundraising and required governmental approvals, and will keep ISD informed of OHB's projections for when the Option will be exercised and Arena construction will commence. 4 .Covenants. (a) Cooperation. ISD and OHB will cooperate with each other as OHB's work on development of the Arena and OHB's and ISO's work on the Schematic Design Package and other design of the Arena progresses, in order that each can move promptly and efficiently through the development and design process. All approvals provided for in this Option to Lease will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. (b) Ice Rental Agreement. ISD and OHB expect that ISO's varsity and junior varsity boys' and girls' teams will practice at the Arena, and at some point play their home games there. ISD will enter into an ice rental agreement with Arena Owner providing for such use of the Agreement, on or before such terms as ISD and OHB shall reasonably establish. (c) Expenses. Each of ISD and OHB will pay its own expenses in connection with their activities under this Option to Lease, except that OHB will pay ISO's reasonable attorney's fees incurred in connection with the negotiation of the Option to Lease and the Lease (^) Title to Land. ISD w:.ll promptly provide OHB with an abstract of title or a registered property -5- b -- -a . .. Fv •« L abstract covering the Land and certified to a current date. OHB will, at its expense, conduct all such title examinations and make such title insurance arrangement as it deems appropriate. * 5. Representations. (a) Bv ISP. ISO represents and warrants to OHB that (i) it has all necessary authority to enter into the Option to Lease and, upon exercise of the Option, the Lease; (ii) it has not stored or disposed of any pollutant, toxic or hazardous substance or waste on the Land. (b) Bv OHB. OHB represents and warrants to ISO that it has all necessary authority to enter ;the Option to Lease, and to cause Arena Owner to enter into the Lease. (c) As Is Sale. (Section 13 from the Original Option Agreement). 6. Miscellaneous. (Section 15 and 16 from the Original Option Agreement). -6- ■ li-L: LEASE Parties: Premises: Term: Extension options: Rent: Use: Independent School District No. 278 ("Landlord”) [Arena Owner] ("Tenant") Approx. 4 acres at the southwest corner of Old Crystal Bay Road and Hennepin County 6 [need complete legal description] 35 years 2 options to extend for 10 years each $15,000, due on the first day of the Term Indoor ice arena, with off-season use for sporting and other community programs and activities Tenant's Obligations: Net Lease: Assignment: Option to Purchase: all maintenance, repair, and replacement of improvements insurance taxes and assessments compliance with legal requirements annual operating budget and actual operating statemenc deliveries to Landlord Landlord has no obligations of any kind with respect to the Land or the improvements or their operation Sale of improvements and assignment of lease is permitted to affiliated entities Other sales ano assignments require a first offer to Landlord and Landlord's reasonable approval if landlord passes Tenant has an option to purchase the Land at the end of the initial term, for $50,000. At the closing of that purchase. Tenant will sign a restrictions and right of first offer agreement, which will limit use of the Land to the uses permitted under the Lease and provide for a right of first offer in favor of Landlord on subsequent sales of the project I f ' r Development Covenants:Tenant will cause the Arena and related improvements to be constructed on the Land within a specified time period, failing which the Lease will terminate and Tenant, at Landlord's request, will restore the Land to its original condition All construction by Tenant will be accomplished in accordance with the construction drawings approved by Landlord under the Option to Lease *TTT r “ m—1- -r- - J. I I I 1 I W ■ r^7 M 1 !i■ S ir : ! ill 11 l!ilIN'illi % yo■•s if' Ih I I Mil oo o w i 1^\ii* ilS I ‘I ,01? : p Gn G- G~ ©-- G- G- G- G~— 0-i_ >wo K::^w>l>UII o VO I %if , -i I O I ^ o w \ 4 i I I : ‘ « • k < k . • r« 4 a#iM« I I ao IM > COo ow M s ifew §» C/) ii fa I"'*';' r i''■ i| fi ' ir^. •■ ‘. I '! ti i' \if ;= .tf 4 ■ :fl ’’i'-! iii!|; i! rn ■' r F’r'rri* 1 ; •“ »T y ' - -V . ■’• 1 1 {..V..- i. Schematic Design ORONO ICE ARENA Orono, Minnesota TRA/HGA/KA December 22, 1995 I f iftf rtiiAi Orono Ice Arena Orono Hockey Booster Association Orono. Minnesota Schematic Design December 22,1995 TRA Ted Rozcboom Architects 2965 Casco Point Road Wayzata. Minnesota 55391 612-471-8780 HGA Hainmel Green and Abrahamson. Inc. 1201 Hannon Place Minneapolis. Minnesota 55403 612-337-4100 KA Kraus-Anderson Construcuon Company 8625 Rendova Street Circle Pines. Minnesota 55014 612-786-7711 iL r Orono Ice Arena 2 2 2-3 3 4-6 6 6-8 9-10 11 Table of Contents Project Summary Introduction Acknowledgements Project Goals and Design Area Summary Site Plan Building Floor Plan Building Sections Exterior Building Elevations Environmental and Technical Requirements Civil Engineering Structural Systems Mechanical Systems Electrical Systems Building Materials Interior Materials Exterior Materials Construction Cost Estimate '4 TRA/HSB/KA r.: r\.: -- i J This document represents the Schematic Design Phase of the design process for the new Ice Arena The preliminary concepts for organizing the program components into a building and site plan have been confirmed in this phase. The design process has been inclusive, with input gathered from a number of interested participants, t'sing the previously completed predesign document as a "target”, the design process explored many alternative relationships between program components, and two different design concepts for the exterior expression. The final schematic plans, as represented in this document, are the most succesful resolution of the project budget, functional requirements and aesthetic concerns. This report also includes updated engineering reports. The technical systems are desenbed to establish a quality baseline for the project in relation to the budget. The specifics of each engineering system and building material will be discussed and finalized during subsequent phases. The next phase of design will be Design Development. During that phase, we will refine the plans, make desisions about layouts within rooms, define materials and systems to be used for constructing the building, and do more precise cost estimates. The TR-VHGA/KA design team will continue to listen and work with building users, governing agencies, and the Orono Hockey Association throughout the remaining design phases. Our collabora tive efforts will ensure that the project goals will be achieved. Thanks to all the participants in this process who have given, their time and experience to this project: Kevin Armstrong Kevin Dulin Mark Engebretson Steve Fedie Jerry Kohl Bill Rosati Pat Wolfe INTRODUCTION ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PROJECT GOALS AND DESIGN TRA/HGA/KA 2.Orono Ice Arena AREA SUMMARY Ice Arena Olympic Ice Sheet Bleacher Seating (800) Mechanical 1 Mechanical 2 Ice Equipment Zamboni Storage Team Locker Rooms (4; Shared Toilet/Showen ’2> Referee Figure Skating Bcnch/Locker Area Electrical Support Areas Lobby Entry Vestiule Public Restrooms Janitor Tickets Concessions Storage Vending Administrative Office Multi-Purpose Room Skate RenUl/Sbarpening Total Net Usable SF Total Building Area 20.000 24.600 4.400 2.620 300 475 300 250 600 495 600 330 600 475 2.200 1.970 320 110 120 200 60 Program SF Schem: 2.000 1.995 220 850 450 40 25 300 195 150 170 300 80 1.000 1.025 150 33,750 36,355 38,810 37,895 the amount of net, usable area needed to house an Olympic ice sheet, support space for 800 spectators and a locker complex. ! Cioiio Ice Arena TRA/HSB/KA Techmcal Requirements CivO Engineering Site soil stratigraphy generally consists of surficial topsoil with organics overlaying silty and sandy clay till. The topsoil thickness ranges from O.T to 6' thick and is gener.\, quite soft The underlying till is soft to very stiff, with the softer soils tending to be more prevalent in the east and south halves of the site. Soil moisture content is generally high; four of the eight bonngs exhibit free groundwater, probably representing a perched groundwater Construction of the proposed ice arena will necessitate removal of all soft soils and soils containing organics ft-om the proposed building area, includ ing a perimeter oversize area. Building foundations shall penetrate to normal frost depth and bear on firm to stiff till, or on granular structural fill placed over the till and up to the underside of the building foundations. Building floor areas will be simularly supported, except the initial layers of fill may be compacted non-expansive clays from on-site, overlaid by compacted granular soils. Because the proposed parking lot area generally contains weak soil unable to provide adequate support for pavements, a procedure of subgrade correction will be required. While the weaker soils exist to depths of several feet, rather than replace these soils totally, we propose that correction of subgrade be limited to the upper 30" or so. and incorporate a geotextile fabric and imported granular fill layer over the weak soils. This appproach will provide reasonably competent subgradcs for pavement, but with higher than normal settlement over time, and associated maintenance requirements. The building location as presently depicted on the site plan honors a 50 setback fnim both the west and north property lines. This location was chosen for both design and economic reasons. In general, the better soils of the site are closer to proposed design elevations at this location, thus requir ing less subgrade correction for building foundation and floor support. Further, the existing topography between the west property line and building west face lends itself well to the design solution, resulung in less alteration of existing grade and providing the opportunity to use -.nplace soils for suppport of interior seating. . , u Other building location options that would honor a 100’ setback from the west property line would increase cost significanUy. primarily due to a much greater subgrade correction requirement. Further, because Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requires treatment of stormwater before discharge off-aite, a so-ategically place wet basin is required. Honoring a 100’ building seback from the west property line would likely result in a visually tortured soluuon to wet basin design. Storm sewerage in the site vicinity is limited to culverts and ditches, gener ally associated with rural roadway sections. However, because the site ;^ea is within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, we must respond to their criteria regarding discharge rate and storm water quality. Accordingly, management of storm water discharge rate will require temporary inundauon GEOTECHNICAL BUILDING LOCATION STORM se\vt :rage tra /hga /ka Orono Ice Arena of limited site area, while storm water treatment will require a small wet basin. Our solution will be to combine these two functions into a defined area that relates well to the drainage ditch adjacent to Old Crystal Bay Road. Connection to the ro?dway ditch will be by a culvert section that is sized to limit post development flow rate to the undeveloped condition for 1. lU and 100 year storms. Storm water treatment will settle out all particle greater than S micron size. Where access drives to the arena parking areas cross over the exisung ditch section, appropriately sized culverts will be installed to maintain the ditch drainage function. The site area is not presently sewered by municipal sanitary sewer; the nearest sewerage is located approximairly 1000’ south of the site near the high school. Because of relative ••levation difference between arena site and existing sanitary sewerage, a gravity connection is not possible. Accord ingly, a small lift station with force main connection to the municipal system would be possible and practical. However, because the site area is presently outside the Metro Urban Service Area (MUSA) limits, a connecUon to the municipal system cannot be made at this time. The City is expected to make application to the Met Council in Fanuary 1996 for an expansion of the MUSA limits that would include the arena site. If the City is unsuccessful in getting the arena site included in the MUS.\ limits at this time, the use of temporary sewage holding tanks would allow the project to go forward, but would require i variance for a new use. It seems likely that the MUSA line will be adjusted to include the arena site, either per Oronos January 1996 application or subsequent application. Based on data collected and site observauon b, C' IE Consultants, the area noted as basin #2 on the site drawing is a juris' .uonal wetland, i.e. Type I wetland per U S. Fish and Wildlife System. According to aerial photos, the area of basin #2 was extensively formed for many years up to at least 1990, and was sufficiently drained to allow farm machinery to traverse the basin and. therefore, was not a wetland dunng that peri* d. It appears that rela- uvely recent grading and drainage changes to the property south and adjacent to the arena property may have caused an increase of overland flow into the area of basin #2. unintenuonally creating wetland conditions. Exemption 10 per the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act of 1991. states that ditches in upland areas which take on wetland characteristics over time may be filled or drained if they were created or overseen by a public enuty on property where the purpose was not to create a weUand. and the wetland has not existed for more than 20 years. On the basis of the CME report, there appears to be ample evidence that basin #2 is not a long term wetland, and that a Certificate of Exemption should be pursued with the local unit of government, ie. the W'atershed District. sanitary sewerage WETLAND Orono Ice Arena TRA/HSB/KA Municipal water is located approximately 400’ south of the site within the west R/W of Old Crystal Bay Road. The water service consists of an 8 " line; static ptressure is approximately 70 psi at elevation 1020 (MSL). To meet the proposed arena ’s fire and domestic water needs, this line would be extended north within the road R/W to near the midpoint (N-S) of the arena property. A single 6" diameter water line would extend into the arena property to supply both domestic and fire needs. Fire hydrant location on site would be established after meeting with the Orono Fire Manhali. Structural Systems Exterior and interior foundation walls shall be concrete masonry reinforced as required. Weight of foundation walls shall be supported on continuous concrete fooungs located below frost depth on native soils or compacted engineered fill as needed for bearing capacity. Spread pad footings shall be used under piers at locations of high concentrated roof loads. Concrete slabs placed on grade, including seating risers in bleacher area. Exterior and interior bearing walls shall be rcinforceo concrete masonry. Reinforced masonry pilasters shall be used to support loads at ends of joist girders. Arena roof shall have steel joist girders with bowstnng top chord spaced 24"- 8" on center and galvanized steel roof deck. Lobby and support spaces shall have standard steel joists and galvanized steel roof deck spaced to support roof and superimposed loads. Mechanical Systems Work in this Division shall comply with all applicable provisions of Division 0 and Division 1. All work is to be performed by skilled craftsmen using only new materials and equipment. The contractor shall guarantee the enure instal lation for a period of one year after the final inspection’’ and acceptance of the work by the owner. Repair or replacement of faulty equipment or materials shall be provided by the conu-actor at no cost to the owner. All equipment, materials, and work shall be in accordance with all applicable local, state, and federal codes, and shall be approved by the local building official. The most important element in an ice arena is the quality ot the ice surface. The two major items required to provide a good quality ice surface is equately sized refrigeration system and a good dehumidification system. These two systems shall be sized to operate 12 months a year. Minimum outdoor air quanuties. as required by ASHRAE Standards shall be provided to maintain indoor air quality. All air delivery systems will te sized for full economizer cooling with outdoor air and mechanical cooling. Venula- tion air will be based on a seating capacity of 800 people plus players, game officials and a battery powered electric Zambom. 1 WATER SERVICE foundation walls AND FOOTINGS FLOORS WALLS ROOFS BASIC MECHANICAL REQUIREMENTS OLYMPIC ICE RINK VENTILATION tra /hga /ka Orono Ice Arena These areas will be heated and cooled by an all air system. A single zone forced air furnace located in the mechanical room will provide heating and cooling for these areas. Heated or cooled air will be supplied to the spaces from ceiling diffusers. A relief air fan connect to the return air duct will re move excess air from the space to control space pressurization. These areas will be heated and cooled by an all air system. A single zone forced air furnace with a modulating gas bemer located in the mechanical room will provide heating and cooling for this area. Heated or cooled air will be supplied to the spaces from ceiling diffusers. All air supplied to this area will be exhausted. Excess heat from the desiccant dryer will be used to heat the spectator seating arex Ventilation air for the room will be inttoduced to the space through this fan system. Excess heat from the chiller engine will be used to provide heat in lieu of the gas furnaces if a natural gas engine chiller is used for ice making. All electrical motors provided for mechanical equipment shall be high effi ciency motors to reduce operating costs. All mechanical equipment shall be mounted on vibration isolators to prevent the transmission of vibration and mechanically transmitted sound to the build ing structure. All cold, hot and recirculating hot water piping shall have fiberglass insulation. All outside air ducts, concealed supply air ducts and return air ductwork in unconditioned spaces shall be externally insulated. The building will be protected by a dry pipe automatic fire sprinkler system. All rooms with finished ceilings will have concealed type fire sprinkler heads. Rooms without a finished ceiling will have pendant type heads. A separate water service shall be provided for the fire protection system The fire protec tion system shall comply with NFPA requirements and meet all state and local codes. A 4" domestic water service wil be provided. Domestic water piping shall be type “K" copper with 95/5 soldered fittings. Below grade waste piping shall be standard weight cast iron pipe with hub and spigot or no hub fittings. Above grade waste and vent piping shall be standard, schedule 40 steel pipe with hub and spigot or no hub fittings. Floor drains shall be cast iron with chrome top finishes in the toilets. Floor drains with cast iron tops shall be provided in the mechanical room Lower level floor drains shall have backwater valves. LOBBY, MEETING ROOM AND OFTICE SYSTE.M LOCKER ROOMS, REFEREE and toilet rooms ARENA MOTORS VIBRATION ISOLATION INSULATION FIRE PROTECTION DO.MESTIC WATER PIPING WASTE AND VENT PIPING Orono Ice Arena TRA/HSB/KA Plumbing fixtures and trim shall be commercial quality. Water closets: wall hung vitreous china with flush valve Urinals: wall hung vitreous china with flush valve Lavatories: wall mounted vitreous china Misc. sinks: counter mounted stainless steel. Water coolers; wall hung stainless steel handicapped model Provide a domestic hot water circulating pump and a sewage ejector pump. A firm gas meter will be provided. Natural gas will be piped to the desiccant dryer, gas furnaces and water heaters. Natural gas piping material shall be schedule 40 black steel pipe with welded or threaded fittings as required. Furnace, water heater and desiccant dryer breeching shall be single wall galvanized metal and the vertical stack will be double wall class "B" vent. Gas Engine Chiller Option: Electric Chiller Option: Piping: Supply and return fluid headers for both the low temperature glycol and defrost water shall be located in a covered trench at the north end of the Olympic size rink. The ice rink shall have I" pipes on 4" centers The defrosting mat shall have ’* pipe on centers. Belt drive unlity sets shall provide e.xhausl air for toilets. Air filters shall be commercial grade, class 1. 30% efficient to filter all the outside and return air in the air handling unit. Ductwork shall be G90 galvanized steel. All expo.ced ductwork will be round spiral duct. Ductwork in concealed spaces may be rectangular. Provide manual dampers where required for air balancing. Provide fire dampers at all duct penetrations in fire rated building elements. Provioe flexible duct connectors for all fan powered equipment. Provide commercial quality ceiling diffusers, exhaust registers and return grilles. Provide an electric/electronic temperature control system with the following Modulating low leakage outside air and return air dampers for lobby Air handling system to maintain an adjustable mi.xed air tempera ture set point when the space is occupied. Provide modulating space thermostats to maintain space temperture setpoints. . Provide a digital time clock to control occupied-unoccupied con ditions. Controls shall reset space temperature and close outside air damper*, when unoccupied Testing, adjusting and balancing shall be provided by an AABC certified contractor. PLUMBING FDtTURES PLUMBING PUMPS NATURAL GAS PIPING CHLNLNEYS AND BREECHING REFRIGERATION SYSTE.M EXHAUST AIR nLTERS METAL DUCTWORK AND ACCESSORIES AUTONUTIC CONTROL SYSTEM TESTING AND BALANCING Orono Ice Arena TRA/HGA/KA All electrical installations will comply with the 1993 National Electrical Code, the Life Safety Code, the Minnesotal State Building Code, and all applicable local codes. All materieals will be new and will comply with standards where such have been established. All materials will be UL listed where applicable. All interior conduits will be EMT with steel set screw fitting. Exterior conduits will be schedule 40 PVC below grade, or rigid galvanized steel above grade. Conduits in corrosive envirorunents will be PVC coated. Seal- tite flex will be used in damp or wet locations. Boxes will match conduit. All conductors will be THHN/THWN stranded copper, color coded per NEC requirements. MC cable will be permitted for branch circuiting in stud walls and above accessible ceilings. All devices will be specification grade. Device plates will be type 302 stainless steel. GFI receptacles will be used outdoors and in restrooms. Hubbel or equal. The building's electrical service will be 480 volt. 3-phasc. 4-wires. 60 hertz. The main disuibution panel will be 800 amp. Lighting, HVAC. and ice mechanical equipment will be served at 277/480 volt. Receptacles and concession equipment will be fed at 120/208 volt. Panelboards will be bolt-on circuit breaker type with aluminum bussing. General Electnc or equal. The 100 amp panels will be 30 poles. 225 amp panels will be 42 poles. Dry type transformers will be used to step down from 480 volt to 120/208 volt. The estimated load summary is as follows: Lighting Receptacles Concessions HVAC Equipment Ice Mechanical Equip. Zamboni Charging Equip. 10 KVA Scoreboards 30 KVA Miscellaneous 20 KVA Total 530 KVA 155 KVA 10 KVA 30 KVA 125 KVA 150 KVA ELECTRICAL GENERAL Lighting in the office, toilets. lobby, storage and equipment rooms will be T-8 fluorescent with energy saving ballasts, specification grade. Columbia or equal Lighting in the multipurpose room will be a combination of fluores cent fixtures and dimmer controlled incandescent downlights. Lighting over the ice sheet will be metal halide. E.xit signs and emergency egress lighung will be battery powered. Lighting throughout the facility will be locally switched. Lighting in the playing area will be controlled through lighUng contractors. Exterior lighting will be photocell controlled. Orono Ice Arena BASIC MATERIALS POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM LIGHTING SYSTEM TRA/HSB/KA Vestibule Lobby Concessions Toilets Storage Office Multi-Purpose Room Mechanical Seating Ice Sheet Locker Rooms Toilcls/showers Zamboni Ice Mechanical Figure Skaters Area Referee's Room Site Lighting PL fluorescent downlights 2x4 3-lamp fluorescent troffers, PL downlights 2x4 3-lamp fluorescent troffers 2x4 2-lamp fluorescent wraparounds 4’ fluorescent strips 2x4 3-lamp fluoresenet troffers 2x4 3-lamp fluorescent parabolic, downlights 4’ fluorescent strips Metal halide floodlights, battery fluorescent strips Metal halide floodlights, battery fluorescent 1 x4 fluorescent wraparound 1x4 fluorescent wraparound 4* fluorescent strips 4' fluoresenet strips PL fluorescent downlights 1x4 fluorescent wraparound 400W metal halide shoeboxes on 25 foot poles LIGHTING TYPE SU>LMARY BY AREA A sound reinforcement system consisting of power amplifiers, preamplifier/ mixer, graphic equalizer, cassette deck, compact disk player, turn table broadcast quality microphones. Ioudspe.ikers and accessories will be pro vided. Power amplifier will be sized to handle speaker load with 20% spare capacity. Approximate output will be 400 watts. Feedback supppression will be included. Speakers will be suspended from the roof structure in the arena. Recessed ceiling speakers will be specified in finished areas. Hand held, lavaliere and desk top microphones will be included for varied functions. Head end quipment will be rack mounted in a steel enclosure and located in a secured closet adjacent to the administrative office to restrict tampering. Cabling will be routed in conduit raceway in exposed areas. Conduit will not be required above ceilings. Minimum cable size will be 16 AWG copper. SOUND REINFORCEMENT SYSTEM tra/hga /ka Orono Ice Arena The interior p^atgrials used in the arena should be durable and easily main tainable. while contributing light reflectance and color necessary to create a welcoming environment for patrons and spectators. The following are conceptual assumptions selected to balance the design goals with the project budget. Final material selections will be made during the Design Develop ment Phase. Sb8££ Hafir Lobby Vinyl Vestibule Concrete Public Toilets Vinyl Concessions Vinyl Storage • Vinyl Admin. Office Vinyl Multi-Purpose Vinyl Team Rooms Concrete Toilets/Showers Concrete Referee's Room Concrete Mechanical Rms. Concrete Arena Concrete Arena Storage Concrete Ceiling Mtl. Decking Plaster Plaster Acoustic Tile Mtl. decking Acoustic Tile Acoustic Tile Mtl. Decking Plaster Mtl. Decking Mtl. Decking Mtl. Decking Mtl. Decking Walls Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Painted CMU Like the building interior, the extenor materials should be durable and low maintenance while projecting the welcoming image of a community center and reflecting the vernacular established by the Orono Public Schools campus. Masonry r vity wall construction will likely be used f^' all of the building to approximately 15' above grade. This would include an exposed masonp' veneer of brick with a cavity, rigid insulation and a back-up structure of concrete block. Above 15'. and on the arena enclosure, will be be an extenor insulation finish system (EIFS) with concrete block or metal stud back-up. Flat roofs use a single-ply. mechanically-fastened Ethylene PropyUne Diene Terpolymer Membrane (EPDMl roofing system. The sloping roof over the arena will incorporate prefinished metal standing seam. .All roofing maten- als/systems will carry a manufacturer s warranty for up to 20 yea.'S. Windows in the lobby and east face of the arena will be fi.xed. aluminum thermally -broken swith high efficiency gLss. Exterior entry door and window frames will be anodi^^ed aluminum. Building Materials INTERIOR EXTERIOR tra/hsb/ka Orono Ice Arena rionstruction Cost Estimate H t, tra/hga/ka i:it»Hi» JdUSx 1*^24 1 i COLS:i < WOAtj t . -•••• TOP OPrtLL PROPOSt D O' ARFNA. DO^ B-C5 ? ARO_«. H-0S-S W0P05LD PAWK>JG area « «#• PROPeiTY l.f£ PROPOSLD PARKrwG ARtA TH-6* BASt'J 2 - -* T-j r Tf-VJPL T^-5 ..... : lH-2 ■••. . • \ 94-1 2R $ ^ %•«« —'.^T^.TP'5 _J legf>o_. • BOR^jOS OftLLCD T»-*> REPORT ^ nnu.Di f’RrvKX/j rlfvjhi. ^>^>l # W^^LANO TEST P(TS ___K C3ME CONSULTANTS. INC KFVAll-O SCHOa. ACIIVIIV PtLD o fX > < CO ■i u © AP9«0]<fiATE SCALE ■' »- HOTt- Wft ILAM) 60L»CAPY LOCATlCy^ ARE APPftOXrATfc t«000 aii« ^'****^•■•. MiMae*« 95447 (0121 5S»4450 EmB:m APPROXn\TE IKETLAK) BOUCARES PROPOSED CE ARENA ORONO. P*#fc80TA Kpe TFM DEC 95 GrC Pro>cl No- 4667-B IVim V '-.• Vi r..,, Ji 12/19/95 15:11 TX/RX NO.0488 P.006 j -03-1 90S I ; 2£?*1 ■ FP.CM DC^-£■STPCC -SSCC 612 616 1311 1/1 Bonestroo m JM Rosene I5B Anderlik & ^ 1 Associates Engineers & Architects January 5. 1993 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crvstal Bav. Minnesota 55323 Re: Orono Ice Arena FUe No. 139-2103 Anetfi« *"« Anoc«€T -c. 't Af flrmwv* Aolor, CM Opporturwtv _ _ . ________ « I . m • BaA if ^------ 0 e Ctto a Soneicroo. too^ w. jOYCon C. ill. ^ S. M|ifvtf« W Sorv»i«. P t Vten«r« t. Turf*9^. ^ 5 A. Cooit. f J c. Nvrvt. p 1. to8«n <L tucan M. CPA* • Senioe CofifuKM A Sjr«ford. P I Ke^thA tO0«rt It P^tfftr*#. PX tienara W Poittf. PI 0«^d O. LOfPOf^ PX Cooen C Puuei- ala j0rryA»aurooAPt M«A( A Hinson. PX MicniK T iiiitmifwv P X T#« It P»t*A P.X Tho"«if X AnoeHon. A IA. A sick ScrwfMOi. P.t Jimts X PosefWPV. P f. Orovc. PS PoniHO c furgirot. P 1 P^«lp X CatwcO. P S Micnift C LyncA P X inin C Gi9*. P X j»r«i X Mumo. P X X TaOd Fotrcr PX j0ffy 0> Piviucn. PX Kiiei X YlPA P X Scott J. Argmox p X OouflOi X Bmoit. P X Konntm P Aivfcrian. PX thauwn O OuRifaani PX Mark X Seif t. P X Mere A. Saip. PX 0iry W. Slontn. PX Paul j. gaewon. A f A. Oanial X Cdgcften. PX Tnomas A fyfko, PX preOerU j Ste^iOO^ P • iti*iaa« Martiae#. P f Micnaai P Sm«. P S Tbomaf W Pacarion. PX MarkO. Wam&.Pf MIfat X Jan«#f% P X t PHilUo Craval. P X Karen L Wteinen. P X airyO Kr.ctonci. f X CecMo ONvtef. PX Kant 1 wanner. PX Paul & Miuae. PX j^P ConOar. PX Dan O. toyum. PX Jeff rey X SMer infer. P X lofcpn X Snem. P C. Lee :a Uann. P S CharteiA Prtcluon Lao M Pav^aHky MiHjnM Often Agnes M. Seig James P Engemaroi Dear Jeanne. We have reviewed the schematic design for the proposed Orono Ice Arena located west of Old Ctvstal Bav Road and south of CSAH 6 in the southwest quarter of S««ion 28, ^lere are several issues that need to be addressed relative to engineering matters, and added to the plan set. Both sanitarv sewer and water main will need to be emended north along Old Ciystal Bay Road for sendee, assuming that the City ’s Comprehensive Plan amendment » by the Metropolitan Council. Due to the elevation of the site, wastewater should be pumpe from a grinder pumping station through forcemain to the easting gravity sewer. An 8.inch D^rmr main sh^ld be extended from the existing water main to the noi^west comer of the site for a future connection to the City of Medina ’s water system. A d-mch service line and hvdrant should be extended svithin the site. We do not recommend 4-inch “PP" for the domestic water piping due to the high cost Plans and specifications sbo Jd be prepared for the sanitary sewer and water main extensions, with as-bmlt plans ° tiie'^Citv upon completion. The exisring sanitaiy sewer "''^3,, approximately 400 and 1100 feet south of the property, respectively (see Record Plan A13-). There are two wetlands on the site which have been delineated. -Hie wedands are bv "he Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) at the Sute Im^l as pari of the Vo2 nd Conservation Act (WCAX and under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Ary Co^* Fnaineers fCOE) at the Federal level. It appears that both wetland areas may meet the fequir^ents to a WCA exemption. The applicant should obtain such e«yuons or peTOits that may be necessaiy from the MCWD and COE for filling or draining the wetland areas. The proposed drainage on t’ e site is directed northeasterly through a propy d existin. culvert. This concent is acceptable. Drainage and ponding calcuUtions Cm be prided to our review. We recommend that some type of sk mmer spucture be included at the pond outlet. A detail of the outlet structure and pond elevations should • « « «» • ♦• • • • • t-08.1992 : :2SPM rPCM BCXE3i«C0 " -SSijo 61^ 636 1311 P. 2 January 5, 1995 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth City of Orono Page -2- be shown on the plan. We recommend that the parking lot and entrance have storm sewer for proper drainage. The proposed access locations appear ““'’*®*’’®' .^fo^p^pl'°plus°^ayers and game which will not be adequate based on a seating to every 4 people, unless officials. Recommended parking for “ .^ ^ existing school parking lots are shared parking or on-street /J/bTcorntructed from the school available for use on game night. p ^ adequate to on-street driveway to the arena parking lot. Old Ci^ta y concrete Mcrion stould “n“udVgeSrfabric. a foot of granular material and dramtile. There should be some consideration to a landscaped berm/screen benveen the ice arena and adjacent residential property. Drainage and utility easemen. f ponding are. Hennepin Counfr may Tscrib^d as a pe^^l^al easement for utility, public roadway and trail purposes. The site plan should be sent to the County for their review and comments. additional planning issues to consider. When the olans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the ^ tapro«ren« to determine’^the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding thfe matter. Yovrv vc: y truly, BONESTROO. ROSE.VE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. ydL.^1 Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. Ji3N-w9-199“. 12:-:'ENGEBSET'EiIt:612 334 P. 02-04 a January 9, 1996 Ro; Proposed Orono Ice Arena Dear orono Hockey Boosters, Inc. is riavaion an indoor ice arena north of Orono Hxgh School, at While we are Tnorivated to pursue this project because of the tremendous growth in our '"thr^"' (fueled mainly by the success of our girls p j-j.,,-.- project is aimed at meeting the much larger need for indoor icQ coTiiinunity “"Wid.d • Progress on development of the project has reached the point that we are commencing the process of obtaining Til SLessary City approvals. At the very l^l^l^t^Tnlarby nrocess, though, we want to make sure that all of the nearoy Residents who might have an interest in what is being proposed have a chance to be involved in it. things: ore, 'by this letter we want to do two invite you to an information meeting about the project for neighboring residents on Wednesday, Janua^ 24, at 7:30 p.m. at the orono city council chambers — the project architect and I will make a brief presentation about the project, and then answer questions and take ccmments from you. remind you of a public hearing on Tuesday, January 16, 1996, at 9:00 p.m. at the orono I2s-i5 DGUi.'^'S’f’ E.*'<u£zSw 1 612 33a 3332 P.03-C- city council Chambers, regarding the scope of uses currently permitted under conditional use permits in residential zoning districts. a copy of the formal notice from the City* of that hearina is enclosed for your convenience. while the zoning amendments r< e generally to Issues under the zoning code, the contem, ited amendments include specific reference to our proposed indoor ice arena use, and will relate to the rear setback that applies to our project. we will be requesting that the project be built with a 50 foot rear setback (along the west property line of the proposed site), as currently contemplated under Section 10.20, Subd. 3(A). Whether that setback makes sense for all school-related uses, or only for some, is part of what the City wishes to evaluate. We look forward to seeing you at these meetings. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please feel free to call me during the day at 334-5688, or at home at 475- 3460. vary truly yours, Mark Engebretson ME/pkb Enclosure 4443 i I :r 11 .ail , ■in%f ■■. KWfl .*.» 1 , i‘j.’ 1( !Q'®' •A**f* * if* o ■»« 60 «P/t 5w(#0d «11»-|^;-----„ — p. 0r. (£?'cJP —:-l23Si2i “•« • — —«* "• ^ w^vAn \ ’''iJfTs — ’ •■ «i»« *• — — ■• ■■! II. ». ^1!r-'.f v5^' Sfj.i > 0# \ X io«t\ im w r« 14 „$|MJ • • m % DEC-20-1995 15:35 DOI-IMEY ENiIiESFETSCN 612 334 3332 P.04,'05 § 10.20 SEC. 10.20. R-IA OSB PAMILX RBSIDHITUU. DISTRIC* Subd. 1. Purfcse. The l2oi “aSubd. 1. Purpose. TJie ^Yiich will allow a District is intended to i %,velopaent and limitedccebination of low density reaiaen^ inmediate access to highways and puolic sanita./ sewer a. ___ ^ « il Subd. 2. Permitted Oses. t« U^ed^ejfcept for Residential District, no structure or xana shall be usea one or more o£ the following uses: 1: ?ubliroiLf parhf an^play^^ • C. Municipal buildings. subd. 3. conditional Uses, "’i i”’‘b.^*'se “forthe Residential District, no following uses except by condxtxonal use p A. schools. 1 to a'public school private schools which ® *^ifcated within fifty fear of any lot provided no building \^ District and^that a fence be T „ ^4 an j»h«ttxncr lot xn an R ^ whAre theprovx<-»oi.» *»w —------- w e a. j« sn "w" Diatrict ano taai- a — line of an abutting lot xn ^ g^reet lot lines where the ®* th^®«m.?iV.'which ”«e“l^^^ p*art^Sf J^rfh^rrh V/opV/. n^o'Vufld/ng^Vb/r fhan rielilenorsfa\T b°e" to'caUrwithin" fifty feet of any lot line of t„”butting lot in an ”R- District. r Clubs, Camps, etc. Golf courses, country clubs, tennis Carnes*, ^urch'^ c^ps,^or''private non- structuie for any ot cne a District, and accessory S?rSctJ?es shal^Sra'^Sinimun of fifty feet from any lot line. ORONO CC 279 (4-1-84) I .»■ t. DEC-20-19S5 15:36 DOUNE t' E^:GEHPETSCN 612 334 3332 P.05^05 S 10.20 provided no building shall be located w. granting such of an abutting lot in an "S" i-oVuMl design of service permit it shall be found tnat -ne * “I ..ood ^ n which it is to be structures is compatible to tne Public service located and thus will promote “*‘® a'*c^oved by the City at structures as defined above pro^ shall not required public hearings for “such structures shall be require a conditional use standards set forth in this subject to all other involving design and/or section; amendments to recuire written notice by the placement of these struCs-ures ^r-ior to the adoption City to all affected property owners 14 days p..o- of the amended plana by the Council. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted: 2-23 “87 E. Greenhouses. Connercial S-'^-^ouses provided .11 outside storage is fenced .»“=\ed"f?"%he p^hJ^c HHet or stored material from view structures shall not be adjoining lot. Comnetciax g ■ subject further to thelocated in a required yard area, and are subjec. r general toning code requirements pertaining structures. Source: Ordinance 72, 2nd Series Adopted: 8-14-89 V Recreation Areas. Private gun clubs, ^archery is fenced and no patu of the from any lot line. Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 G. Guest Houses fi Non-rental Guest Apartments. 1) Guest Houses. A separate A r>n an exis*”infT undivided lot for the sole use constructed on an ex - ? buildings, including their domestic guests." ah regular lot requirements shill be met by the guest house. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 ivatB gun clubs# arcnerj «ng.B Bbi alld«,';r=rio>d-bhe Vraa ia feuc.d and no part of the prinoVpal use is less than ISO feet from an • \ ORONO CC 280 (4-1-84) ««« • % § 10.27 Subd, 4. Accessory Uses. Within any "RR-IA" One Family Rural Residential District, the following uses shall be a permitted accessory use: A. Any accessory use as regulated in the "R-IA" District and "Animals" as regulated in Section 10.20, Subdivision 3, Subparagraphs M and M. Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 Subd. 5. Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements. A, Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. be observed: B. Lots. The following minimum requirements shall Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street Rear Yard 5 acres 300 feet 100 feet 50 feet 100 feet 100 feet SBC. 10.28. RR-IB ONE FAMILY RURAL RBSIDBMTIAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "RR-IB" One Family Rural Residential District is intended to provide a district which will allow a combination of low density residential development and limited agricultural activity. Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within any "RR-IB" One Family Rural Residential District, no land or structures shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: District. A. Any permitted use as regulated in the "R-lA" Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "RR-IB" One Family Rural Residential District, no structure or land shall oe used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Uses. Any conditional use as regulated in the "R-IA" District except for "Duplex Credit" and "Animals". B. Farms (Stock). Provided that the area is ten or more acres. C. Hospitals, Etc. Hospitals for human care, sanitariums, rest homes, nursing homes, provided that all buildings are located 100 feet or more from the lot line of any abutting lot in an "R" District. The site shall contain not less than 600 square feet of lot area for each person to be accommodated. ORONO CC 288 Source: Ordinance No. 185 Effective Date: 6-14-76 (4-1-84) § 10.28 D. Libraries. Non-profit libraries provided that all buildings are located 50 feet or more from the lot line of any abutting lot in an "R" District. Screening and signage requirements shall be determined with each individual conditional use permit. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. Within any "RR-IB" One Family Rural Residential District, the following uses shall be a permitte accessory use: A. Any accessory use as regulated in the "R—lA District and "Animals" as regulated in Section 10.20, Subdivision 3, Subparagraphs M and N. « , _ ,Source: Ordinance 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 Subd. 5. Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements. A. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. v ,,B. Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed:Side Yard Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street 50 feet Rear Yard 50 feet2 acres 200 feet 50 feet 30 feet SBC. 10.29. RR-lB-1 ONE FAMILY RURAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT. Subd. 1. Permitted Uses, Conditional Uses, Accessory Uses. Any use as regulated in the "RR-IB" District. Subd. 2. Additional Permitted Use. Study and research centers owned or operated by one or more non-profit charitable, scientific or educational organizations, provided that no building other than a residence shall be located within 100 feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District. Subd. 3. Open Space. Not more than 15% of land devoted to use as a study and research center shall be occupied by structures or buildings without a conditional use permit allowing a greater percentage of such land use. Any application for zoning of land as an "RR-lB-1" One Family Rural Residential Subdistrict shall be accompanied by a map or plan showing the portion of land within the district that may be occupied by structures or buildings shall become a part of the conditions upon which such zoning is approved, and no structure or building may be located outside of such portion without a conditional use permit allowing the same. ORONO CC 289 (4-1-84) r 12.30 3 j "Construction" - Any action which in any way 4. consul: - „„ or existing system, affects the physical ^extension, alteration orincluding construction, installation, repair, not to include pumping- Contractor" - A person licensed under the provisions of tke Ci% CodV°to engage in the business of systes. construction and pumping. 6 -Disposal" - The evaporation or absorption of purified liquids after treatment of the raw sewage. 7 "Holding Tank" - A water tight tank for storage a. -inspection ,">’«„:“^=ing In^offtcia"? Srle“rs“to°iepa!r"r «place n^n-«nfor«ing systems. ° "MPCA Regulations Chapter 7080" - Pollution control Agency Individual Sewage Treatment Standards Chapter 7080. !^°‘-t "°svstem"f*-*A%evic?'Tr se^ries of*’intercon- ;iJle^*";oSp%nln\7^dVsi/ned inst^^^^^^^^^^^ pose of safely treating and J thereof, ^he^Ver s°uch syTte^ is" not part of a central sewer system. (a) System Design Definitions: i. "Standard System" - An sewage treatment system employing ® building^sewer,_^^sewage SSi^h" ^e^coLrr^t^l-^oSal'soil whiJ. has a percolation rate equal to or faster th^l20 minutes ^pe^r^i^^ -.V'^^oulttin systems include modiVTed ®«"""syt«"m%‘Tae^“%"drained systems) reduced area syste ' svstems); advanced toilet waste and !®olation lat^^ than 120 mpi, collection systems, j holding tanks, treatment ® ^ ^ ^ ® %,,Jhibited Systems" - Cesspools, dry wells, leaching or seepage pits, and prxvies. ORONO CC 490 (2-10-92) •J •r’ L 12.30 Subd. 4. General Provisions. A. Treatment Required. All sewage generated within the City shall be disposed of by connection to the City sewer system or shall be treated and disposed of in an on—site system according to the provisions of this Section. B. Jurisdiction. The provisions of this Section shall apply to the method of sewage disposal from every building within the City intended for human use or habitation, whether such use is permanent, temporary or seasonal, regardless of the date of original construction or use. 1. The owners of all buildings where City sewer is available or becomes available, shall connect the buildings to the City sewer within 16 months of the availability of the sewer according to the provisions of the City Code. 2. At the time connection to city sewer is completed all existing septic tanks no longer in use shall be pumped out and filled with native soil. 3. The owners of those buildings which have been completely connected to City sewer shall be exempt from the maintenance and inspection provisions of this Section. Surface Discharge. Unless specifically permitted by HPCA and the City of Orono, sewage, sewage tank effluent, or seepage from a soil treatment system shall not be discharged to the ground surface, abandoned wells, or bodies of surface water, or into any rock or soil formation the structure of which is not conducive to purification of water by filtration, or into any well or other excavation in the ground. All new or existing systems which discharge to surface waters or the ground surface must obtain either a National Pollutant Discharge Elj.mination System (NPJES) or State Disposal System Permit from MPCA and shall comply with all federal, state, and City requirements pertaining thereto. D. Standard System Required. In areas not served by City sewer systems, sufficient open land of suitable soil characteristics shall be provided for each new or existing building __ ... ^ m ^ __ __to allow for the design, construction and use of a "standard on site system within the property or on which such building is located. Standard systems are the only new systems permitted by this Section without a variance thereto. ^^1. "Alternative systems" shall not be permitted except by variance. 2. "Prohibited Systems" shall not be installed or used except as permitted elsewhere in this code. ORONO CC 493 (2-10-92) N, o § 10.08 Subd. 8. Variances; Expiration. Variances shall expire one year after the date of Council approval if not used. Any change in use of the property shall require a new variance. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 Subd. 9. A certified copy of every variance granted under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.358 and 462.359 shall be filed with the Hennepin County Recorder. Variances filed with the County Recorder pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.36, Subd. 1, do not constitute encumbrances on real property. The order issued by the City shall include the legal description of the property involved. Failure to file a variance shall not affect its validity or enforceability. SBC. 10.09. CONDITIONAL USES. Subd. 1. Conditional Uses: Purpose. In order to give the district use regulation the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of the Zoning Chapter, in certain districts, conditional uses are permitted, subject to the granting of a use permit. Conditional uses include those uses generally not suitable in a particular zoning district, but which may under some circumstances be suitable. When such circumstances exist, a conditional use permit may be granted. Conditions may be applied to issuance of the permit and a periodic review of the permit may be required. The permit shall be issued for a particular use and not for a particular person or firm. Because of their unusual characteristics, conditional uses require consideration so they may be located properly with respect to the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the Comprehensive Municipal Plan and with respect to their effects on surrounding properties. In order to achieve these purposes, the Council is empowered to grant and to deny applications for conditional use permits and to impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of these permits. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 Subd. 2. Conditional Uses: Reference t> Planning Commission. Before the Council may grant conditional use permits for such conditional uses as prescribed in the district regulations of the Zoning Chapter, the request therefor shall be referred to the Planning Commission for study concerning the effect of the proposed use on the ordinance and on the character and development of the neighborhood and for recommendation in regard to granting such conditional use and the conditions thereof, if any, or for the denial of such conditional use. The Council may by unanimous action waive reference to the Planning Commission. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 I .5 ORONO CC 267 (4-1-84) S 10.09 Subd. 3, Conditional Uses: Application. Whenever this Zoning Chapter requires a conditional use permit, an application therefor in writing may be filed with the Zoning Administrator together with such filing fee as may be established by the Council and shall be accompanied by a site plan and such information and showing as may be necessary or desirable, including, but not limited to, the following: A. setbacks noted. B. footage. Site plan drawn at scale dimensions with Location of all buildings, heights, and square C. D. Curb cuts, driveways, parking sptes. Off-street loading areas. by shift. E. Drainag«t> plan. F. Type of b;siness, proposed number of employees G. Proposed floor plan with use indicated and building elevations. H. Sanitary sewer and water plan with estimated use per day. I. A lighting plan showing the lighting of parking area, walks, security lighting and driveway entrance light. ORONO CC 268 (4-1-04) I 1 S 10.09plantings.J. A landscape plan with a schedule of the K. An abstractor's certified property certificate showing the property owners within 350 feet of the outer boundaries of the property in question. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 Subd. 4. Conditional Uses: Failure of Planning Commission to Act. If no recommendation is transmitted by the Planning Commission within sixty (60) days after referral of the application for conditional use to the Commission, the Council may take action without further awaiting such recommendation. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 Subd. 5. Conditional Uses: Hearings and Notice. The Planning Commission or Council may hold a public hearing or hearings on each application for a conditional use permit. Notice of the public hearing shall be given not less than ten (10) days or more than thirty (30) days prior to the date of the hearing by publication in the official newspaper for the City. Such notice shall contain the description of the land and the proposed conditional use and the time and place of the hearing. At least ten (10) days before the hearing, the City Clerk shall mail an identical notice to the owner and to each of the property owners within 350 feet of the outside boundaries of the land in question. For the purpose of giving mailed notice, the person responsible for mailing the notice may use any appropriate records to determine the names and addresses of owners. A copy of the notice and a list of the owners and addresses to which the notice was sent shall be attested to by the responsible person and shall be made a part of the records of the proceedings. The failure to give mailed notice to individual property owners, or defects in the notice shall not invalidate the proceedings, provided a bona fide attempt to comply with this Subdivision has been made. At the public hearing the Planning Commission or Council shall review the application and the statements and drawings submitted therewith and shall receive pertinent evidence concerning the proposed use and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained. Any party may appear at the hearing in person or by agent or attorney. Subject to such limitations as may be imposed by the Council, the Planning Commission or Council may adopt rules for the conduct of proceedings before it. Such rules may include provisions for the giving of oaths to witnesses and the filing of written briefs by the parties. The City shall provide for a record of the proceedings which shall include the minutes of the meetings, the findings, and the action taken on each matter heard including the final action. ORONO CC 269 (4-1-84) S 10.09 Subd. 6. Conditional Uses: Granting of Permit. A. The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a conditional use permit as^ the use permit was applied for or in modified form^ if on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted^ the City makes the following findings: 1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan; 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public healthf safety or welfare^ or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and. 3. comply with each of Chapter. That the proposed conditional use will the applicable provisions of the Zoning B. A conditional use permit may be revokable, may be granted for a limited time, or may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. C. A conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions agreed upon are observed, but nothing^ in this Section shall prevent the City from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. D. A certified copy of any conditional use permit shall be filed with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles of the county or counties in which the City is located for record. The conditional use permit shall include the legal description of the property included. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 Subd. 7. Conditional Uses: Denial of Permit. The Council shall set forth contemporaneously in writing and in detail all the reasons for the denial of the conditional use permit appli cation. No application for a conditional use permit which has been denied wholly or in part shall be resubmitted for a period of six months from the date of said denial, except on grounds of evidence or proof of changes of conditions found to be valid by the Planning Commission. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 270 (4-1-84) S 10.09 Subd. 8. Conditional Uses: Lapse of Permit. A conditional use permit shall lapse one year following the date on which it became effective, unless prior to that time a building permit is issued by the Building Inspector and construction is commenced and pursued toward completion on the site subject of the conditional use permit application. A conditional use permit may be renewed for an additional period of one year provided that the request be filed the expiration of one year from the date when the use permit is filed with the Zoning Administrator. The Council may grant or deny an application fo renewal of a conditional use permit. Subd. 9. Conditional Uses: Lapse of Use. Should a conditional use permit lapse or cease for ® months, future use shall be in conformance with the terms of the Zoning Chapter unless such lapse or cessation is determined to be due to illness, natural disaster or acts of war. Source: Municipal Code L’f^'ective Date: 9-14-67 Subd. 10. Conditional Use Permits for Non-Conforming Uses. All non-conforming uses actually and legally December 1, 1974, shall be issued a conditional use Per^iit upon application therefor not later than January 1, ^uch conditional use permit shall allow the continuation the non conforming use to the same extent and degree as then ° December 1, 1974. Such permits shall be granted without application fee and the Council snail be limited in such permits to the full and accurate statements of the conditions the existing uses. Such permits shall not be subject to periodic review. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 Subd. 11. Conditional Uses: Review Upon Neighbors’ Petition. Conditional use permits shall not be subject P®“°J^i;^ Council review for the purpose of change or revocation, unless sucn a review is one of the conditions of the original permit, or, unless the actual land use is determined to be in violation of the terras of the permit, provided that, upon petition of 75% ™°^® ^ the adjacent property owners (defined here as those whose P^°P ^ within l%00 feet of the property subject to the conditional use oermit) the Council shall hold a publ/c ^®®^ p continuation of the permit. The Council s^iall determine, af^-r sue’ Dublic hearing, whether the continuation of the use in question is consistent with the health, safety, JSch welfare of the residents of the City. The Council may, pliition and hearing, continue the conditional ^®®. unchanged, approve a new permit with such additional __ may be necessary to protect health, safety or general wel » ORONO CC 271 (4-1-84) S 10.09 terminate the existing conditional use permit. a conditional use oermit, the Council may allow the former conditional use permit to continue move o^" otherwiseone year as may be required to provide time to move or otherwise relocate in a zone where such use is permitted. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 Subd. 12. • Unlawful Act. It is unlawful to violate any condition of a conditional use permit. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-B4 SBC 10 10 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS. At any time after the adoptfon'o °se pla. tor the City,. the Planning Commission for the purpose of carrying out the policies and goals of the land use olL may preoare a proposed zoning ordinance and submit it to the Council with ‘its recommendations for 5i^°P^^®2*don\^^a^nd \mend a requirements of this Chapter, the Council may adopt and amend a zoning ordinance by a two-thirds vote of all its members. Subd. 1. Public Hearings. No zoning ® amendment thereto shall be adopted until a public held thereon by the Planning Commission or by the Council A notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing shall be published in the official newspaper of the City ^he (10) days nor more than thirty (30) days heLing.^ When an amendment includes changes affecting an area of five acres or less, a mailed not less than ten (10) days nor more ^ Q„g®tv prior to the day of the hearing to each owner of ^he and property situated wholly or partly within 350 ^„® property to which the amendment relates. For the mav mailed notice, the person responsible for mailing - q£ use anv aooropriate records to determine the names and owners. A cocy of the notice and a list of the . addresses to which the notice was sent shall the responsible person and shall be made a part of the .j ^ prlceedings.^ The failure to give mailed notice individual pioperty owners, or defects in the notice shall this proceedings, provided a bona fide attempt to comply with th Subdivision has been made. Subd. 2. Initiation of Amendments to the Zoning Chapter. An amendment to the Zoning Chapter may be o* the Council; (2) a recommendation of the Planning Commissi , (S, ly petuion of the owner(s) of their or adjoining ^he zoning of which is proposed to be changed An initiated by the Planning Commission shall be upon Planning Commission for study and report and may not be ac P ORONO CC 272 (4-1-84) S 10.60 SEC. 10.60. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. Subd. 1. Standards For All Districts. The guiding of rural and suburban development so as to develop a compatible relationshio of uses to achieve the purposes and guiding principles established' by this Chapter depends upon certain standards being maintained. Uses permitted in the various districts, conditional and accessory uses, and any use authorized by special variance, the application of any credit, formula, or special planning procedure" such as P.R.D.'s or P.I.D. s or ot er provisi of this Chapter shall conform to the following standards. .hese standards shall apply in all districts. Subd. 2. Density. Permitted uses or application of the various provisions of this Chapter or other laws including provisions relating to conditional and ^ authorizu'd by special permit, variance, the application of any credit, formula, or special planning procedure, whether ^ in combination, shall not result in a density greater than four dwelling units per acre of dry buildable land or air space used for construction in any zoning district. Source: Ordinance No. 133 Effective Date: 12-27-71 Subd. 3. Noise. Any use established shall ^e so operated that no noise resulting from said use is perceptible beyond the boundaries of that plat line of the site on which such use is located. This standard shall not apply to incidental traffic, parking, loading, construction or maintenance operations. Subd. 4. Smoke, Etc. Any use established, enlarged or remodeled after September 14 , 1967 shall be so ^P®^®^®° control the emission of smoke or particulate matter that it is not detrimental to or shall endanger the public heaitn, safety, comfort or general welfare of the public. grading the density of smoke, the Ringelmann Chart published and used by the United States Bureau of Mines shall be employee. The emission of smoke shall not be of a density greater than No. 2 on the Ringelmann Chart. Subd. 5. Toxic or Noxious Matter. Any use established shall be so operated as not to discharge across the boundaries or the lot or through percolation into the subsoil beyond c. _ boundaries of the lot wherein such use is located, toxic or noxious matter in such concentration as to be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or welfare or cause injury or damage to property or business. Subd. 6. Odors, Etc. Any use established, enlarged or remodeled shall be so operated as to prevent the emission or ORONO CC 377 (4-1-84) s S 10.60 odorous or solid matter of such quality and quantity as to be readily detectable at any point beyond the lot line of the site on which the use is located. Subd. 7. Vibration. Any use creating periodic earth- shaking vibrations, such as may be created from^ a drop forge shall be prohibited if such vibrations are perceptible beyond the lot line of the site on which the use is located. The standard shall not apply to vibrations created during the process of construction. Subd. 8. Glare or Heat. Any use requiring an operation producing an intense heat or light transmission shall be p^formed with the necessary shielding to prevent such heat or light from being detectable at the lot line of the site on which the use is located. Lighting in all instances shall be diffused or directed away from "R" Districts and public streets. Subd. 9. Explosives. Any use requiring the storage, utilization or manufacturing of products which could decompose ^by detonation shall be located not less than 400 feet from any R District line. Subd. 10. Screening Required. Screening shall be required in residential zones where: A. Any off-street parking area which contains more than four parking spaces and is within 30 feet of an adjoining residential lot line, and, B. Where the driveway to a parking area of more than six parking spaces is within 15 feet of an adjoining residential lot line. Subd. 11. Screening, Type of. The screening required herein shall consist of a solid fence or wall at least 50% oP®”' not less than four feet nor more than five feet in height but shall not extend within 15 feet of any street or driveway opening onto a street. The screening shall be placed along the property lines or in case of screening along a street, 15 feet from the street right- of-way with landscaping (trees, shrubs, grass and other planting) between the screening and the pavement. A louvered fence shall oe considered solid if it blocks direct vision. Planting of a type approved by the Planning Commission may also be required in addition to, or in lieu of, fencing. Subd. 12. Maintenance. In all districts, structures, required landscaping and fences shall be maintained so as not to be unsightly or present harmful health or safety conditions . Subd. 13. Exterior Storage in "R" Districts. In all "R" Districts, all mobile materials and equipment shall be stored ORONO CC 378 (4-1-84) s 10.60 within a building or fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties^ except boats and unoccupied trailers 1^^^ than 20 feet in length, which are not stored for commercial purposes, if stored to the rear of the house and a distance of 1 feet or more from any property line. Source: Ordinance no. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 Subd. 14. Waste Materials. Waste material shall not be washed into the public storm sewer system nor the sanitary sewer system without first having received a permit to do so City. If said permit is not granted, a method of disposal shall be devised which will not require continuous land requisition for permanent operation and will not cause a detrimental effec- adjacent land. Should the waste be of solid form fluid, the storage area shall be so located and fenced as to be removed from public view. In all districts, all waste material, debris, refuse, garbage, materials not currently in use^ construction or otherwise regulated herein shall be kept an enclosed building or properly contained in a closed container tor such Durposes. The owner of vacant land shall be responsible tot keeping such vacant land free of waste material and noxious weeds. Subd. 15. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff clausing flooding, or erosion on adjacent properties. Such runoff shall be properly channeled into a storm drain, water course, ponding area or other suitable facility. Subd. 16. Traffic Control. The traffic generated by any use shall be channelized and controlled in a manner that will avoid congestion on public streets, safety hazards, or excessive traffic through residential streets. Vehicles backing from a parking space shall not back into the public street. No access drive to any lot shall be located within 20 feet of any two intersecting street right-of-way lines. Subd. 17. Radiation, Etc. No activities shall be permitted that emit dangerous radio activity beyond There shall be no electrical disturbance adversely affecting the operation of any point of any equipment including but not lim^ea to radio and television reception other than that of the creator or the disturbance. SBC. 10.61. SPECIAL PROVISIONS. Subd. 1. Signs .as Acc.e^ory fTsfH----6 igns-ace...^ permitted accessory uj^—i-n——dTTE^icts —siib_ie£t to the following regul^ll" ORONO CC 379 (4-1-84) s 10.61 A. on Right-of-way. Private signs are within the public fi5ht-of-way « easements excep^ deco/ations may grant a conditional use permit to locate sign on^'or within the ri^ht-of-way under therr 3“““jntSSaruse specified ti\e not « by the Council if a permit for si^h a sign shall oe i v-d been issued inconditional usApermit or temporary sign permit had been issued in the previous 24 months to that property- ' Source: Ordinance 55y^nd Series Adooted: 7-25-88 B. Flashing. Illuminated flashing be permitted in any district. igns shall not c Bea^ Illuminated signs orVdevices giving off I? - c*:;f:rTti;n “oV^r^^^^ o^f^f ^hTirn^V/m^n^^n^-? district. \ D. Sales Si'gns. For purpo^ of selling, leasing property, ® front vlird of such property to be surface may ha 11 not/^e less than fifteen feet sold or leased* Such sign n^t: the structure. For from the right-of-way line a/residenliafprijicrol kx orthe purpose of selling or yraside^^^^^^ ^ L%%a%\”mV'be”°erVct?d%pr^^^^ remain after 90% of the project /s developed. E Existing Signs, \igns existing on September 14, 1967 which do not conform to/the reflations are a non-conforming use. F. Traffi/ Interferen^. No sign may be signal. / \ G. Bu/lding Wall Signs. Signs shall not b® “■.•.I.!."- ’.rL”*, Source: Ordinance 97, 2nd Series Adopted; 8-26-91 ORONO CC 380 (4-1-84) f S 10.61 - There shall be no more bhan H. Temporary year, and for a 4 temporary business signs ^^sa P duration of the period of not more than 10 thichever is/iess. The sign event promoted by the sign mes g # supports, portable stand (includes banners or the^end of^we period. Total shall be removed from public sauare >feet per surface (6 4area of the sign shall not exceed 3 2 s|nar^e P ^ Advertising s.f. total signage but must meet all balloons are not s^b^^ct to are^a r ^shall be no more applicable Federal and St recuired/yard area and if separate than one temporary 5otal/^rea of the signs shall notmultiple signs are propi^sed, the tota^area o ^ require a building exceed 32 square feet. shal 1 be issued by the City permit from the City. N<^ ^^^ection lo! 61, Subdivision 2if a conditional use permit "nde^Section temporary (A)(3) has been issued to< a permitted as sign shall be allowed i , subdivision. Multi-tenant election or sale undej^ th s^ s property for purposes of this'^pSllgraRh^, tV^al 1 ^b^^the^responsibiYi^^^^^ all applications for sigiypermits. t-he* sion and the owner of the property The owner or for^he oroper location, maintenance, shall be equally resp^sible ^^^m^rarrv signs shall be located on and removal of the s^n. imoede safety by obstructing visiona nrooerty so that they do not impede sarecy uy If^pedestrians or mc/tor vehicle operators. Source: Ordinance 97, 2nd Series Adc^ted; 8-26-91 i- “T/d°isfrf/‘- pt^ovIS^rs^inirns rr?il‘m*cve“S ORONO CC 380-1 (4-1-84) — rT- r»..an«..W« io S 10.61 Sabd. 2. Signs in "R” Districts. Within "R" Districts, the following signs are permitted: A. Nameplates. 1. One nameplate sign for each dwelling and such sign shall not exceed two square feet in area no sign shall be so constructed as to have more than 2. One nameplate sign for each dwelling group of six or more units, and such sign shall not exceed feet in area per surface and no sign shall be so constructe _ have more than two surfaces.3. One nameplate sign for each permitted use or use by conditional permit other than residential and such sign shall not exceed twelve square feet in area per surface. B. Illumination. Symbols, statues, sculptures and integrated architectural features on non-residentlal be illuminated by flood lights provided the direct is not visible from the public right-of-way or ad3acent residential district. Setbacks, Etc. Any sign over one-half square foot shall be set back at least five feet from any level! Signs may be illuminated but such lighting shall be diffused or indirect. Subd. 3. Signs in ;*3- and -"I" Districts, and "I" Districts nameplate signs and business subject to th\ following regulations: sign W^hin the "B" re permitted Source: Mpiiicipal Code Ef fective^ate: 9-14-67 A, ''B-2" and "3-^*^ Size. Within the "3-1'’, "B-2" and '’B-4” *Dist\icts, the aggre^g^te square footage of sign space per lot shall n\ exceed the s]xm of one square ®®^2 front foot of building, \lus one sq^re foot for each front foot of lot not occupied by a building. /No individual sign shall exce.d fifty square feet. /Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date; 1-1-75 B. "B-3":/Size\ Within the "3-3" District, the aqqr-»gate square’footage*'of sigrN^pace per lot shall not sum of four square feet'per frontN^oot of building, plus one squar foot per front foot,of property rVot occupied by a building, individual sign surface shall exceed\100 square feet. C. ' "I": Size. W i t ni^ any "I" District, the aggregate square footage of sign space lot shall not excee e ORONO CC 381 43-1-34) 1 "B-l" S 10.61 sum of foux square feet per front foot of building, plus^ one square foot per fVq^nt foot of property not occupied by^^ building. No individual si^c^ surface shall exceed 100 square,,..^tfet. SourM^ Municipal Code Ef,£tf^ive Date: 9-14-67 D. "B-1"'V '*B-2>^'^d "B-4": Height. Within the , "B-2" and ”3-4" DisVci^s, no sign shall extend in height more than two feet above tjreivighest outside wall or parapet of any principal building nor ^al^ll an5*vsi9*^ located closer than ten feet from any proper;*^ line excepbv^at any sign over ten square feet may project^-t^^ feet into any r^exjuired yard area from the principal buil^Jirrtg Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 E. NIB-3" and "I": Height. Within any "B-3"_ or "p District, no sign slva.^1 ex tend in height mocr than | ■ p-r height above the hir|hrif~^^iTTiTri ii7, ............ any principal building. No sign «=;hai i l<3UjiLeJ ^^al Qser than ten feet from any property line excejjUfc^*'irSat^ any sign exceed'iTig—ten^square feet may project only_twer"f^t into the yard area from any building. Subd. 4. Purpose of Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements. Regulation of off-street parking and loading spaces in this Chapter is to alleviate or prevent congestion of the public right-of-way and so to promote the safety and general welfare of the public by establishing minimum requirements for off-street parking, loading and unloading from motor vehicles in accordance with the utilization of various parcels of land and structures. All applications for an occupancy certificate in all districts shall be accomoanied by a site plan drawn to scale and dimensioned indicating the‘location of off-street parking and loading spaces in compliance with the following requirements: Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 A. Apolication of Parking Rules All Districts. In addition to the regulations and requirements set forth elsewhere in this Chapter, the following regulations and requirements regarding off-street parking shall apply to the required and non-requiced off-street parking facilities in all use districts: Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 B. Parking Requirements Waived for Building Under Construction on September 14, 1967. Structure or uses for which a building permit has been issued prior to September 14, 1967, but ORONO CC 382 (4-1-34) S 10.61 for which work has not bean completed shall be exempt from the hereinafter stated parking requirements if the structure is started within six months after September 16, 1967, and continues to completion. C. Existing Parking Not to be Reduced. Off-street parking spaces and loading spaces existing on September 14, 1967, shall not be reduced in number unless said number exceeds the requirements set forth herein for a similar new use. D. Floor Area. The term "floor area" for the purpose of calculating the number of off-street parking spaces shall be the net usable floor area of the various floors, devoted to retail sales, services, office spaces, processing and fabrication exclusive of hallways, utility space, storage areas other than warehousing. E. Seat. tn stadiums, churches and other places of public assembly in which patrons or spectators occupy benches, pews or other similar seating facilities, each 22 inches of such seating facility shall be counted as one seat for the purpose of determining required parking. F. Size of Parking Spaces. Each parking space shall be not less than nine feet wide and twenty feet in length and each space shall be served adequately by access drives. For purposes of calculating parking space requirements, one parking space for one vehicle shall equal 300 square feet of storage and maneuvering area including access drives. G. Commercial Vehicle Parking. Off-street parking facilities accessory to residential use shall be utilized solely for the parking of passenger automobiles. No motor vehicle over 7,000 pounds gross capacity and no commercially licensed trailer shall be parked or stored in a residential district except when loading, unloading or rendering a service, except that one such vehicle may be parked at the residence of the owner or operator of said vehicle. Under no circumstances shall parking facilities accessory to residential structures be used for open area storage of commercial vehicles nor for open air parking for business purposes of automobiles belonging to the employees, owner, tenant or customers of business or manufacturing establishments other than the home occupation permitted for that property. H. Location of Parking. Required off-street parking in the "R" Districts shall be on the same lot as the principal building. Subd. 5. Setbacks for Parking. Required off-street parking in all districts shall meet the following setback requirements: ORONO CC 383 (4-1-84) U- s 10.61 A "R" Districts. Within dll Districts sXX vehicles normally owned or kept by the occupants must have a garage stall or open parking space on the same lot as ?he principal usi served. Garage stalls structures may be located anywhere on ^^® te^yard area except that such garages may be located feet of an interior side lot line and to within ten feet of a rear ift line sublet to Section 10.03. ^ ^inration Other than__a _cequ 1 red yard ,w.ept, that::iitfih in -a rear ya^rd side lot line alTd to within ten £e_et or a rear lot line. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 B "B" Districts. Within the "3-^ District allowed in any required yard^^ert landscaping - parking spaces"B-3" and "B-V* Dist^- . ^ and/or garages shall be^cated in areas ® except that parking may located in a yard ' feet of tha ceac or side Inline unles;5^he rear or oide lot^line is in common with an "R‘ OisWet; thih the setOack distance oha be the same as required for the\|^^xl5istrict. iource: Ordinance No. 172 E^^ective Date: 1-1-75 C "l"^M^ricts. Witirn^^”!" Districts, off-street parking spaces shallxST not less than tw>^ feet ^ right-of-way lin^^r less than five feet^^m any interior s lot line or rear^ot line, except when a sidX^r rear lot abutting an District. Then, off-street park.ing shall be not less than ten feet from said lot lines. serving twlt^■»- u^sU"\n"?he^^-"B^' 1"nrmh\TsK%;j.ft'^ l'^i's%^ tTan^’kV 7epa%ate requirements for e^sii use and provided A. The^^roposed >j^int parking space is within thirty feet of the use itS<lll s^ve. B. The ap^iea^t(s) shall show that th®je is no substantial conflict in^fe^ f ^c?rPAt^oarkingmore buildings or us^^Eor whiclT^oint use of off-street pa 9 facilities is ara«nVal instrament app.toved by the City Attorn^, executed by the parHes concerned for oroff-streeX perking facilities shalK^e filed with the City Clerk. Sai<3 instrument may be a three orsjnore party agreem including the City. ORONO CC 384 (4-1-84) § 10.61 Subd. 7. Control of Parking Facilities. When required accessory off-street parking facilities are provided elsewhere than on the lot on which the principal use served is located, written authority for using such property for off-street parking shall be filed with the City so as to maintain the required number of off- street parking spaces during the existence of said principal ^se. No such parking facilities at its closest point shall be located more than 100 feet from the premises nor more than 300 feet from the principal use or building served. Subd. 8. Storage Prohibited. Required off-street parking space in all districts shall not be utilized storage of goods or for the storage of vehicles which are inoperable, for lease, rent or sale. Subd. 9. Design and Maintenance of Parking Areas. A. Access. Parking areas shall be designed so as to provide an adequate means of access to a public alley or street. Said driveway access shall not exceed thirty feet in width at the public walk center line and shall be so located as to cause the least interference with traffic movement. All off-street parking spaces shall have access off driveways and not directly off of a public street. B. Fractional Spaces. When the determining of the number of required off-street parking spaces results in a fraction, each fraction of one-half or more shall constitute another space. C. Signs. Signs located in any parking area necessary for orderly operation of traffic movement shall be in addition to accessory signs otherwise permitted. D. Surfacing. All of the area intended to be utilized for parking space and driveways for four or more vehicles shall be surfaced with material to control dust and drainage. E. Lighting. If lighting is provided it shall be accomplished in such a manner as to have no direct source of light visible from the public right-of-way or adjacent land. F. Curbing. All open off-street parking areas designed to have head-in parking along any lot line shall tire bumper or curb of adequate height and properly located t ensure that no part of any car will project beyond the required setbacks. Subd. 10. Required Off-Street Parking. Where the principal use of the structure served is as listed, the miniraura parking facilities (open or enclosed) shall be as shown. A. Single Family Dwelling. Two per dwelling unit. B. Multiple Dwelling. Two per dwelling unit. ORONO CC 385 (4-1-84) S 10.61 C. Motelr Motor Hotel, Motor Court or Hotel. Four spaces plus at least one parking space for each guest room provided in the design of the building, D. School, High School Through College. At least one parking space for each seven students based on design capacity plus one for each three classrooms. r"'^ E. Churches, Auditoriums, Undertaking / Establishments. At least one parking space for each four seats / based on the design capacity of the main assembly hall. F. Theater, Athletic Field. At least one parking space for each six seats of design capacity. G. Community Center, Post Office, YMCA, YWCA, Physical Cultural Studio, Pool Halls, Libraries, Private Clubs, Lodges, Museums. Ten soaces plus one for each 300 square feet of floor area in excess of 2,000 square feet of floor space in the principal structure. H. Hospital. At least one parking space for each three hospital beds. I. Golf Courses, Country Clubs, Tennis Club, Public Swimming Pools. Twenty spaces plus one for each 300 square feet in excess of 1,000 square feet of floor space in the principal structure. J. Day Nurseries. • Four plus one for each 500 square feet in excess of 1,000 square feet of floor space in the principal structure. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 K. Office Buildings and Professional Offices, Banks, Savings Institutions. At least one parking space for each 200 square feet of floor area. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 L. Drive-In Establishments. At least one parking space for each fifteen square feet of floor area in the building. M. Bowling Alley. At least six parking spaces for each alley. N. Motor Service Stations. At least three off- street parking spaces plus two additional off-street parking spaces for each service stall. O. Retail Sales and Service Establishments. At least one off-street parking space for each 150 square feet of net floor area. ORONO CC 386 (3-1-84) $ 10.61 P. Restaurants, Cafes, Bars, Taverns, Night Clubs. At least one for* each 80 square feet of fQ. Furniture Store, Appliance Store, (Warehouse Under 15,000 Square Feet of Floor Area, Auto Sales, Grainhouses, Kennels and Studios. At least one parking space for each 500 square feet in excess of the first 500 square feet of floor area in the principal structure. R. Auto Repair-Major, Bus Terminals, Taxi TecminaXs, Boat and Marine Sales and Service, Companies, Shop for Trade (employing six people or less), Carden Supply stores Building Materials Sales. At least eight off-street Diking spaces, plus one additional space for each 800 square feet If floor nu over 1,000 feet, including warehousing and all lutsidrsales and storage area related to the sales and service functions. Auction House, ®and®SimilIr''Reo\%'at^^onal^O^^^^^^ sp\«^®fo“ elcr 300 off-street parking spaces, plus one additional space for each 3oa square feet of floor area over 1,000 square feet. T. Manufacturing, Fabrication or Processing of a Product or Material. At least four off-street Parking spap®®' one additional space for each 800 square feet of building. One additional off-street parking space shall be ^side 2,500 square feet or fraction thereof of land devoted to outside storage. The legul/rns ^^nd lSl^iitU^^n^°sU%he*'’di^%%^c\t "TfV'^n;'tl^ of these requirements, a fractional number is obtained, one loa g space shall be provided for a fraction of one-half or loading space shall be required for a fraction of le half. Subd. 12. Location of Loading Berths. All bertns shall be 25 feet or more from the intersection of two ^t - right-of-way lines. Loading berths shall not occupy any yard requirement bordering a street. specified the"^fir^^t beVtr requUe^d"^Vhall^not^be less ^han 12 feet length, all loading berths shall maintain a height of 14 more. Subd. 14. Access to Loading Berths. Each shall be located with appropriate means of access ^o public or alley in a manner which will least interfere with traffic. ORONO CC 387 (4-1-34) 4 S 10.61 Sabd. 15. Surfacing of Loading Berths. All loading berths and accessways shall be improved with a durable material. Subd. 16. Storage Prohibited. Any area allocated as a required loading berth or access drive so as to comply with the terms hereof^ shall not be used £or the storage of goods, inoperable vehicles nor be included as a part of the area necessary to meet the off-streec parking area. Subd. 17. Required Loading Berths. Where the principal use of the structure served is as listed, the minimum number of loading berths shall be as shown. A. Auditoriums, Convention Hall, Public Building, Hosoital School, Hotel, Sports Arena. At least one loading berth B. Retail Sales and Service Stored, Offices. At least oneXloading berth 25 feet in length for building having 6.000 squa^ feet of floor area or more plus one/additional loading berth 50 fe^ in length for buildings over 25,QOO square feet up to 100.000 squar^feet. Manufacturing, Fabrication, Processing and Warehousing. At \east one loading berth ^5 feet in length each 50,000 square fe^of floor area over the first 100,000 square feet of floor area. TSe operator/of the business shall have the option to declare the l^gth of the berths required for buildings above 100,000 square fee^of floor area, except that one-hait or more of the total number <»f berths required shall be 50 neet in length. D. Other. Tl\re shall be provided adequate street loading space in connection with all structures which require receipt or distributionxof materials by vehicles. Subd. 18. Gas Stations. Motor fuel stations in all districts shall be subject to the ‘following performance standards: A. Fencing. A fehce, wall or landscaping of acceptable design not over six feek in height or less feet'shall Le constructed along the'property line when said use abuts prooerty residentially used or \n an "R" District, and said fence shall be adequately maintairted. Application of tnis orovision shall not require a fence within the required front yatprovision snaix nor require or within fifteen feet of any street rig!\t-of-way line ORONO CC 388 (4-1-84) 1 S 10.61 /3. Surfacing. The entire site' other than that taken up by a structure or planting shall be surfaced with a material to control dust and drainage. / C. Drainage. A drainage system subject to approval of the City Engineer shall be installed. ,D. Curbs. A box curb ^t less than six inches above grade shall separate the public Mght**of*“way from the motor vehicle service ^reas, except at apprc^ed entrances and exits. E. \Lighting. The lighting shall be accomplished in such a way as to have no objectighable direct source of light visible from the \public right^of-way or adjacent land in residential use. \ / , . j jF. Pumps. Pump Aslands shall be installed ana conform to yard requirements. j G. Driveways. No driveway at a property line shall be less than thirty feet from tne intersection of two street right- of-way lines. \ / H. Signs. \Each motor fuel station may have one pedestal type sign not in excess of 48 square feet nor more than 22 feet in height, erected within any yard except that no part of the sign shall be less than six feet from a property line. No part of the sign surface shall be yless\ than 16 feet vertical distance from the grade of the nearest dtivew^y or parking areas. I. Sales/prohib^ed. No sales of motor vehicles shall be permitted, exce^)t as an integral part of a new car agency. J. Nui»^er Liraitedi Two stations only will be permitted at the same'^ intersection. Two such stations shall be permitted within each/district without Council approval. Subd. 19. / Drive-Ins. Dri\e-in establishments in all districts shall be ^bject to the folloying performance standards: A. iF . height nor less .than four feet, which\ is at least 50% opaque encing A screening\fence not over six feet in throughout its height shall be constructed^ along the property or a planting strip not less than fifteenV feet in width reserved and planted alond the property line shall b^developed according to a submitted planting plan that meets the approval of the Planning Commission. / \ ...... i-i j,B. Lighting. The outside ligiating, if installed, shall be in accordance with a plan approved by \he Council. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date:\ 9-14-67 (Sectio/s 10.62 through 10.69, inclusive, reserved for future expansion.) ORONO CC 389 (4-1-84) i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 20,1995 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Stephen Peterson. Sandra Smith, Dale Lindquist. Janice Berg, and Elizabeth Hawn. Charles Schroeder and Candace Rowlette were absent The following represented the City Staff; Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Councilmember JoEUen Hurt was present. Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARIxNGS/PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING (#1) #2082 RICHARD STARK, 575 OXFORD ROAD - AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITA'ARIANCE AND VACATION - 7:00-7:26 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and .Affidavit of Publication were noted The Applicant was present. Mabusth reported that the application was in response to a violation for tree removal and vegetation clearing within the 0-75' zone also involving a violation ot a conservation and flowage easement filed against the chain of title of the property. The property is located within the Stielow addition and the City's wetland maps classifying the wetland as marsh wetland type. The applicants are asking for approval of a plan with a new delineation, referred to as area "A". Trees removed in the area "A" were 10 in number and 12 in area "B", the remaining area included under conservation and flowage easement. Mabusth said the City Engineer has reviewed the soil delineation report and concurs with the findings and recommends redefining the area. The City Staff has recommended filing a vacation of the original conservation and flowage easement and to be conditioned on the granting of a new easement. Mabusth review ed the issues and considerations set forth by applicant for the Planning Commission to consider including the applicant's lack of knowledge of the conservation area and Stark's agreement to replant evergreen and fruit trees in the 0-75' zone. Applicant Stark said he purchased the property in June of 1995 and was not notified of the easement. Stark said he made changes that he felt were appropriate. Selected trees were removed, and it was his intent to replant evergreen trees. The City asked the applicant for a current survey locating the 75' zone and new wetland delineation area along with the legal description. Mabusth said the applicant cooperated with the erosion control efforts. 1 i 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#l - #2082 Richard Stark - Continued) Peterson asked if there were any problems with soil erosion Mabusth said there were no problems. Peterson asked if the plan to restore trees and vegetation was appropnate with Staff. Mabusth said the plan was to replant lO trees in the 0-75' zone Stark said his plan was to plant the trees on the sides of the property and noted there were no evergreens on the propeiTv at this time and that he did not propose replantings in areas A or B. Hawn inquired about the use of MnA)OT 250 grass and asked if it was appropriate to "weed-vvack" these natural grasses. Stark had told Hawn that sod would give better control. Mabusth asked Stark if it was his intent to cut the grass in the wetland area, and Stark said it was his intent to do so Stark said he asked an expert regarding long grass or natural grass’ effort and was told there was no difference Stark said "weed-wacking allows for competition of grasses and a fuller growth ot the root structure He note a disadvantaue of lone urass was its breeding environment for insects who carr> diseases such as LyJnes Disease Mabusth said the DNR and MCWD would be able to provide answers to these issues Stark addeded that he did not believe there was any reiplatory force concerning grass cutting Mabusth reminded Stark of the City ’s conservation easements which limits such activity. Peterson commented that the City has always encouraged long natural grass in wetland areas and that "weed-wacking" has never been discussed. Smith questioned the planting of fruit trees versus native trees. She did not feel that this tv-pe of tree was in keeping with a wetland area. Smith would like to see trees plantings that are consistent with wetland areas Stark responded that the landscape consultant had suggested the type of trees to be planted in view of the large population ot deer. Peterson said^he Planning Commission has not stipulated in the past what type of trees should be planted but looked more at the mitigation issue. Mabusth commented that ever^eens are probably not consistent with wetland areas either Smith agreed that it was probably a personal preference issue. Smith asked about another home nearby which had clear cut some trees. Gaffron s^d that 15-20 trees were replanted in the 3 ’’-5" size. The trees were of different varieties. The trees were replaced one for one but not inch for inch. Smith asked if any fine was involved for that application. Gafffon said any fine would have been so small as money would be spent to replace the trees. Lindquist noted that only cenain type of trees would grow in wetland areas Stark said it was his plan to place the trees along the sides of the property and not m the wetland area. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#1 - #2082 Richard Stark - Continued) Mabusth asked the Commissioners if the trees were replaced in the 0-75’ zone and not in the areas described as "A" or "B". Lindquist was told 10 trees would be planted in 0-75' setback area. Lindquist saw no problem with area "B" but felt area 'A should have replacement of tree for tree. Peterson said that would be consistent with other applications. Stark questioned tree replacement under the agreement for the easement. Mabusth said there was no direction in the code and has been based on the judgment of Staff. Tree removal in 0-75' requires permits issued by Staff. Mabusth told Stark if he objected to Planninu Commission recommendations to present his position before the Council. As far as the easement. Mabusth said the agreement stipulates that no trees can be removed without City approval. There were no public comments. Smith said she agreed with Lindquist in his request for tree replacement. Lindquist said he felt particularly strong about tree replacement in area "A" Stark said he strongly object*^ to placine trees in this area Stark said there are alot of trees on the property. It is not his intent to gain a view of the lake At the time, the property was not open to use of the lake. Stark noted that the house, itself, was not in view. Mabusth asked Stark how many trees were already dead that were removed. Of the 10 trees removed. Stark said probably half of them were dead. Hawn commented that a buckthorn was removed, and she was glad to see that particular tree removed. Stark said an oak tree was choking it out. Peterson received confirmation that the reroofing project completed without a permit was satisfied. Lindquist asked Stark if he would agree to the replacement of 5 trees in area "A". Stark said he would if they could be planted to the side. Mabusth commented that tree placement was not an issue as long as plantings were achieved in specified areas. Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2082 with 5 trees being replaced in area "A" of similar size, 10 trees replaced in the 0-75' zone, and ___________ Ti,» traa ror<iiai'pmpnt k to hc comoleted bv Julv 15. 1996. trees oeing repiaccu m aica rt v.. ••— -r------- - , ^ granting of a new easement. The tree replacement is to be completed by July 15, 1996. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#2) #2090 RON RANTZ/AUTOGRAFS INC., 2525 SHADY\VOOD ROAD - VACATION OF EASEMENTS - P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Blake Bichanich represented the applicant. Mabusth reported that the property is located in the Leach Addition and consists of Lots 1 2, and 3, which are being developed by Autografs. A condition of the preliminary approval was that the applicant proceed with vacation of the drainage and utility easement within the building envelope. There were no public comments Peterson moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2090 with the 2 Staff recommendations. V'ote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#3) #2092 DENNIS PLATTETER, 809 NORTH BROWN ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - 7:28-7:39 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth reponed that during the sketch plan review the Planning Commission advised the applicant that they could not recommend the 3 lot subdivision due to ^ arw being inadequate. The code for lakeshore back/front lots require a 200 width at both the lakeshore and 150* setback. The east lot is inadequate in width at street setback into North Brown resulting in the need for a shared driveway. There is now an issue of setback variances as the backlot configuration requires 150% standard. A 45 setback is required from the side lot lines. The existing residence is within the required side setback and encroaches 45* into the front setback at 75*. The front lot’s building envelope is defined at a 50’ setback from the south, west and east lot lines. The accessory structure on east lot will be removed bv the applicant. The house on the property will probably be moved elsewhere. The pool will be removed when the lots are sold. Mabusth said a deadline would have to be set as the code does not allow an accessory structure on lots without a principal structure. An average deadline is one year. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NO\^MBER 2C, 1995 (#3 - #2092 Dennis Platteter - Continued) Peterson commented that the Planning Commission was split in their opinion of the subdivision. Based on the pre!iminar>' subdivision meeting, Peterson noted that the applicant has addressed some of the issues He did not wish any changes to be made until the accessory structure was removed. Hawn received confirmation from Mabusth that there was adequate lot size in which to build. There were no public comments. Smith commented on the letter from the DNR regarding future views of structures trom the lake. Mabusth said the letter outlined standard practices and requirements or DNR. Steve Schroll of 2006 Sugar Woods asked if a joint road would be used for the two lots via access to the back part of the subdivision Mabusth said a shared driveway would be used but there were no requirements to upgrade. The driveway must be at least 10 from the south lot line of outlet. Schroll was informed that there was no standard or requirement of driveway improvement. Connie Gray, 819 Brown Road, asked where the two new homes would be built. Mabusth show ed on a map the lot outlines and of building envelopes The City does not stipulate where a house should be located, other than meeting required setbacks of code. Mabusth noted that the home on east lot would be at least 30' from the side lot line with the Gray property. Peterson commented that the location of the septic systems usually drives where most homes are situated on the lot. Scholl asked and was shown on the map where the septic system ‘nr these homes would be placed and the likely home locations. tKsvquist moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application .#2092 with a I deadline from the date of final approval of plat for removal of the accessory structure on east lot along with Staff recommendations 1-4. Vote. Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 » (#4) #2085 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 3390 NORTH SHORE DRIVE COMMERCL\L SITE PL.\N REVfFW - piJRUC INFORMATION MEETLNG - 8:11-9:06 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted The Applicant was represented by Larry' Killien and Stan Linnell. GafFfon reported that the application is for a commercial site plan review for construction of a public water access w hich has been in the planning stage for the past three years. The property is zoned B-2 and previously was the site of Cry’stal Bay ScA'ice and Gayle's Marina at the intersection ofTonkawa and CoRd 5i (North Sh re Drive). The DNR is exempt from meeting local zoning codes but has worked with City Staff and the Lake Use Committee in developing the site plan. Gaffron related a brief history of the project. In October of 1992, the DNR obtained the option to purchase the Straley property east of Lakeside Marina. Much resistance was given to this purchase by the neighborhood and City Public hearings w'ere held in January of 1992. Concerns were with the property zoned residential and what was considered poor traffic access. By mutual agreement, the purchase was put on hold. The DNR then acquired the Gayle's Marina property and Crystal Bay Service properties along with the Dunn Property and the Sprague property. The property is west of Lakeside Marina. The DNR then met with the Lake Use Committee holding three meetings as well as meeting with the Ma-xwell Bay Residents Committee. The DN*R removed the buildings on the property and have dealt with the fuel contamination, which has been resolved. Monitoring wells are currently in place. Gaffron reported that the DNR is now prepared to begin constructing the lake access and are at this meeting to discuss the design, and he noted that Staff has reviewed how the proposal fits into the context of the B-2 zone. It is not strictly a commercial use but might be considered an institutional or recreational use, and the B-2 code does not address "public access" specifically. The overall hardcover existed at 68% and will be reduced to 52%. The B-2 l^eshore code calls for a 75' setback and is proposed at 40'. The code calls for a 75' buffer. It was noted that Gayle's Marina had hardcover right up to the shoreline. The landscaping plan includes tree planting as well as the saving of a number of trees on the property. The DNR was asked to plant something larger than their standard r caliper trees and are planting l-l/2"-2". Drainage will flow through filter strips before entering the lake. In regards to the site access issue, traffic will be brought in from the west end at Tonkawa with no traffic accessing from North Shore Drive. A counterclockwise flow of traffic will occur within the site. Peterson said the Lake Use Committee has had more meetings on this public access than any other issue. It has involved the public, the Council and the DNR. Peterson said he was comfortable with what was being introduced and saw it as a viable plan. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CONLMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOV'EMBER 20. 1995 (#4 . ^2085 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Continued) Stan Linnell, a DNR landscape architect, reviewed the site plan He reported that in addition to Gavies and the Crv stal Bay Service properties, the DNR acCfUired two residential properties, where the homes have been removed w l;i the option to purchase a third property which abuts Lakeside Marina. The DNR hus been working with the County on developing a right turn lane on County Road 51 to flow to the main access To avoid a back up on Co Rd 51 a counterclockwise flow has been developed in the site. Another traffic lane has been established eastbound for a by-pass lane so as to not be blocked by cars with trailers Linnell continued to describe the access as having three concrete plank ramps with docks plus a remote dock. The remote dock would be used by those people idling or stopping for short periods This will enable those boats entering or exiting the lake to do so without interference There will be 80 car-trailer parking stalls and car only parking of 15 stalls An access trail will also be constructed to the fishing pier. This trail is near the roadway and will be built as a sidewalk adjacent to Tonkawa Road. It vvas noted that children would need to be closely watched in this and all of the area. Linnell said the drainage for the parking lot splits it in the middle Drainage will flow to a grassed swale, thru two skimmers, to a catch basin, and onto a culvert to Crystal Bay. The other side will have a swale, two skimmers, with a possible sheet flow, and then a berm. Linnell reported that there will be 4 handicap parking spots with two "car only”. At least two docks and a pier will be handicap accessible. There will be no curb or gutter along the lake side. The access will be asphalt or bituminous. The turn lane and islands will have concrete gutters and boulders to control the traffic. A sign near the entrance will direct car/trailer while still allowing cars to pull away from the launch ramp. Linnell said it was the DNR’s intent to preserve the existing trees. One tree in particular intended to be saved is a 28" oak. New native trees will be planted and existing evergreen trees and 10-15 deciduous trees will be transplanted. A wildflower and grass vegetation buffer strip will be planted along the shoreline to provide better filtration from runoff from the parking lot. There will be some screening, but they did not want to block the view in from the road. 165 shrubs and 37 new trees will be planted. Killien added that two parking spaces were eliminated to save a hackberry tree on the property. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#4 - #2085 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Continued) Killien presented some history on the property. The DNR has conducted clean up of all the contaminated soils from the service station and marina. Observation wells were installed, which will be monitored in 30 days. The DNR should know in 90 da\s what effect has been had on the ground water on the upper level. Another set of tanks were recently discovered and removed. Small amount of soil was on the tanks but no contaminated soil was left. This area was backfilled Lead and asbestos testing was conducted on the building prior to demolition Killien said the last parcel should close before the end of the year, and the building should come down within 90 days. He also reported that wetland delineation of the area w here the trail will be confirmed this is only a ditch area. The plans have been submitted to the MCVVD, the LMCD, and the DNR Waters Division. Gafffon asked if the cyclone fence would be removed and guard rails installed between the path and road for protection. Linncll said they had observed the area earlier and wer^, considering curb and gutter between the road and path, which he said would perform the same as a boardwalk Peterson asked how far back this would occur. Linnell said there was one stretch where the lake came close to the edge and then separated for the pathway which was a high risk area. Peterson said the pubf< i*«s been kept informed about the plan and asked for any concerns from those in attendance. Dick Engebretson, his wife Jean, 1180 Tonkawa, were present. Engebretson asked if there would be c »p sign at the exit of the access to keep cars from rolling out onto Tonkawa without s- .pping and was told there would be. He further inquired if the residents would be notified if the monitoring wells indicated further contamination. He was told the DNR was w orking with the MPCA and would notify the residents if any problems were found. Engebretson asked how big the access was in scale to that of North Arm public access. He was informed that there is parking for 65 car/trailers at North Arm, and there would be parking for 80 car/trailcrs at this location. Killien noted that this access provided a better layout and traffic flow. He noted that the DNR is working with Hennepin County on redesigning North Arm. It is the DNR's intent to fix the fishing and shore area, paint the no parking areas, adda raised island in the lot, and create buffer strips to deal with stormwater. Engebretson asked whether DNR plans to repair the Boy Scout bridge. Peterson said this has not been before the Lake Use Committee. Killien said this was not part of the DNR plan. 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#4 - #2085 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Continued) Jerry Gray asked if the right turn lane would be for parking access only and w as told it was not for the exclusive use of the access but a continuation of a right lane Gray telt the traffic flow would result in a circus. Peterson said the traffic has been discussed in great detail including the right turn lane Gray asked if the plans could be changed if they found this plan does not work. Lin. -*11 suggested staying in the driving lane and turning directly onto Tonkawa. It was said a car can turn right from the center lane but Gray question^ whether the County would consider this to be legal or not. Hurt said there would in effect be two lanes of traffic onto Tonkaw a. There w ould be 300-400' of stacking area in the turn lane. No parking signs have been installed. Gray was concerned that the no parking would not be enforced. Linnell noted that the three ramps would aid in the traffic flow also. Barry Knight, 425 Tonkawa, was concerned with traffic flow at peak times. He asked about the normal traffic for a ramp and was told 25 spaces per ramp is standard ^ Knight was concerned with left turns coming out at dusk He felt it there was parking tor 80 cars, and with the traffic conliguration pattern, it would want to head both north and south on Tonkawa. He saw this as a potential problem during "rush hours". Peterson commented that a boat launch creates less traffic than a marina and less turnover. It was noted that Gavle's Marina originally had 140 slips With a boat ramp, boaters come early and leave late. If Gayle's had no problem with traffic, Peterson said he saw even less here. Gray asked if a traffic count was done at Gav le's but that was unknown. Knight said he was less convinced than the Planning Commission on the amount ot traffic considered to come out of the access area. Linnell said Gayle's Marina also had 2 double access, launch ramps. Knight asked about hardcover and was told the access was designed to standards. Knight asked what enforcement would be done of the access traffic and local traffic on Tonkawa in o.der to maintain the 30-35 mph limit and how this would be dealt with in the residential area. Peterson said if speed became a problem, the police department would have to enforce the law. Killien said the DNR had made suggestions to the City regarding overflow parking suggesting no parking signs and an ordinance to uphold that. He felt the DNR was dealing with this issue up front Killien felt education right trom the start was important. Killien said he would not recommend cars towing boats to travel on Tonkawa with the snake-like hills. He felt that Tonkawa as a route from the north probably would be used mainly during peak times. He said he would check with the County on this. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#4 . #2085 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Continued) Dan Wigen, 3410 North Shore Drive (2nd house west of the access), asked if there were plans for an access to Crystal Bay and was told no. He asked if people would somehow be discouraged from doing so. He was told there would be no improvement at that area and traffic will limit people going across to that area. Wigen said people are now parking in the landing and using his dock for fishing. He would like enforcement and education such as signs stipulating private and not public property along that area. He also had a concern with traffic and use of private driveways He was also concerned with snowmobilers using the ramp by crossing from Crystal Bay. Peterson said neither had been discussed but felt the steep banks would discourage snowmobilers and landscaping could also slow them down Killien said the area could be posted for no parking in the winter as the landing would be closed during that time. No other barriers would be installed, however. Ken Rolland, 4119 Oak Street, was concerned with traffic and asked if there was a possibility for a traffic stoplight Peterson said this had not been discussed and was a County issue Rolland said he was concerned with eastbound cars with boats making a left turn onto Tonkawa. Gaffron thought there was room for perhaps three cars to stack. Killien said there would be room for 4 cars with trailers Killien asked Rolland if his concern was with CoRd 51 or Tonkawa. Rolland said he was just asking in general. Linnell said the County never brought up the issue of a stoplight, and south bound Tonkawa was considered for just two lanes. He said it could be explored if necessary. Gray asked if (he landing was closed in winter if fish houses would be allowed to use the ramp. Killien said the ramp would be posted as dosed but not physicaii^ barred due to liability. He said the fish houses would need to be dealt with if they became a problem, and DNR has a 48 hour notification process before illegally "parked" fish houses could be removed. There would also be no winter maintenance. Cars would probably need to be 4*wheel drive to use the ramp. A DNR access is normally open 365 days a year but not in this case. If there are problems, the DNR will look at options available. He noted that there are only two DNR accesses with gates, both with unusual circumstances Hun- noted that there would be access at North Arm during the winter. Smith said she liked the idea of an information board rather than signs at different locations. Smith also liked the landscaping plan and would like to see one at North Arm. She asked if the lights would be left on or off or on a timer. Killien said the lights were angled and box shaped directed downward and on at all times. There will be three lights on the site. Regarding the lack of proposed garbage cans, DNR believes in the less- containers, less-trash line of thought. 19 MINUTES OF THF QRQNO PI ANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOV’EMBER 20. 1995 (.^4 - f?20S5 Depanmem ofXaiurai Resources - Coniinued) Gaffron inquired about the construction schedule Linnell said it would next go to the Council in December. If no maior changes were neccssar\’. the final clans would be drafted in January and February with bidding for early spring. Construction would begin in Mav and comcleted durinu the summer. No formal action was required at this meeting. VVigen asked if a motion could be made on signage regarding trespassing. He was told these concerns would be addressed by Stalf. 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 PUBLIC ROAD - 9:06-9:35 P..M, The Certificate of Mailing and Aftidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth reported that the application was for the vacation of a 30' alley and setback variances for maior additions to existine residence The nronenv is made un of 4 separate parcels and involves an improvement plan. Existing on the property is a 1-1/2 story home w ith a garage that is located totally within the 30’ alley The improvement consists of two options, option #I involves an addition to the south side and option #2, an addition to the east The Staff memo was said to discuss the setbacks and hardcover for the property. Peterson said there would appear to be no major concern as long as the applicant was able to acquire the alley. Mabusth advised from calls she received, it appeared that the adjacent owners may make claim to the alley. Mabusth said she had spoken with Dennis Hill 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 Hill again after calls had been received from the neighbors, and he advised that the matter may have to be further studied Hill informed Mabusth if the neighbors pressed for a piece of the alley, these claims may be raised during a required legal proceeding. Peterson asked if the application was not one step ahead of itself He asked if Staff was awaiting information on utilities. The City Engineer reported there were no sewer lines encroaching the alley, and there are no power poles. 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 Stephens, were present. Stephens said the vacation was suggested to minimize impact of variances with the proposed improvements. The vacation had also been recommended by Staff He said 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 still wished to proceed, and Stephens advised he did wish to proceed regardless of the outcome of the alley. Peterson said the .ipplicant could not proceed without the 30* alle>‘ as both development plans show garage remaining in alley. 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 maples. The old owner said the oak trees were beautiful. He noted that one of the trees 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 wnth limited building envelope. Lindquist said he had a problem with 3-1/2 ’ on the nonh 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 imagine doubling the area. The applicant and owner said they had a notarized copy of the easement that provided access along the north lot line. I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#5 - #2088 Winfield Stephens - Continued) Christine Valerius reported that she owns the property they were referring to and noted that the Wicklands use the driveway but that there was no easement in favor of this property She said she looked when she purchased the property and found no easement. Stephens reported on the attorneys who had searched the title and showed Valerius a copy of the easer/^nt. Peterson said there were other concerns with the garage encroachment and clean up ot area to the w'esi. Gardiner said a boat had been there and rubbish left by previous owner of Landmark property. Lindquist asked if any improvements in\ olved the tearing down of the garage located on the alle\'way. Stephens said he had no plans to do so. Lindquist said he could not approve any improv ements w ith the garage in that location if the vacation was not approved. Berg said it was important to make sure the easement exists She added that she did not feel the Commission could proceed to approve any improvement without the alley 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) commented on the alley. Mabusth 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 anv tlirther encroachment of the west side yard. Smith commented that the addition was very aggressis e and could not take a position without a decision on the alle>'way. There were no public comments. Gardiner remarked that the connection charge to City sewer was $13,000 and would be a very 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 Winfield Stephens - Continued) Mabusth asked for Planning Commission’s view if the vacation was not part of the application. Lindquist said he was of the position that the garage should come ’ '*• 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 S2,000 to consider the vacation but had received no reply. Gardiner asked if the Commission would consider option #1. Berg asked w here 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 DRIVE - PRELLMINARY SUBDIVISION - 9:35-10:02 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The applicant was represented by Neveaux. Mabusth said the application w as for a lot line rearrangement and replat of two lots. The original subdivision application was filed in 1994 had also included applicant’s homestead parcel. The current application 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 applicant seeks approval of lakeshore setback vanances tor lot 1 involving a 6’ encroachment of lakeshore setback line. The structure will be located 10' fi-om street lot line and existing detached garage is 6' into the right-of-way. Both structures would meet the 10' side setback. A timber retaining wall is located in lot 2, and the applicant is willing to remove the wall if able to gain the variances for lot 1. There are no lakeshore decks proposed with new construction plans. •14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNUSSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#6 - #1958 Louis Oberhauser - Continued) Hardcover excesses do exist, though greatly improved. Lot 1 in the 75-250 zone exists at 59.047% and is proposed at 36.03%. Lot 2 hardcover in the 75-250’ zone exists at 36.7®i and is proposed at 33.23%. There is a structural coverage variance required on lot 1 at 15 6®/o where 15®/o is allowed Lot 2 is under the allowed amount at 10 6*?"o There were no public comments. Neveaux said the hardcover on Lot 2 was unnecessary. Peterson noted a petition signed by 31 neighbors voicing their concern tor the need for demolition and removal ot structures. The petition was dated October 6, 1995 and read into the minutes Mabusth said the petition was sent out by the adjacent new homeowner and came to Staffs attention on this date. Mabusth said the applicant, Oberhauser, was to have removed the structure by September ot 1995. She had intormed the new homeowner that this was a private matter that needed to be resolved with Oberhauser. Mabusth said Neveaux w as made aware of the hazardous conditions of the structure and its lack ot maintenance. The structure is open and able to be accessed. Peterson noted the neighbors' unhappiness with the applicant. Mabusth asked if there was a schedule for the remov al of the structure. Neveaux said there was no definite schedule but tied to the process. He was not aware of the scope of danger. He had thought the structures were boarded up and would pass on the intbrmation to the applicant. Smith asked if there has been any inspection of the property by the applicant or his representative and whether the problem was incidental or anecdotal. Neveaux said the applicant had lived there until July of 1995. Smith questioned if the property had been inspected by applicant seen since July or the condition reported to the applicant. Berg said the structure was still there and was surprised that the City would allow it to be there. Mabusth said if the structure is boarded and safe, it can be allowed to remain. The goal, in this case, was to remove the structure. Mabusth asked the representative if the applicant wanted to gain approval on the subdivision, if he would be willing to remove all structures including the rental unit. Smith asked if this could be done within 60 days. Neveaux said he did not know. Smith asked if this could be done before it is sold. Neveaux did not think it was contingent with the buyer being in place. NONUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#6 - #1958 Louis Oberhauser - Continued) Hawn said she saw the structures as clearly being in violation and hideous. Hawn said any improvement would be a benefit but was concerned with tw'o substandard lots requiring haidcover and structural variances. She said she was willing to look at the application only because of the hideous condition of the structures. Hawn said she was very concerned with this being adequate grounds for approval and had a serious problem with It. Neveaux said the City and the property owner want the improvement. He noted that other proposals have been turned away and considered this a last ditch effort. Neveau.\ said in site of the numerous variances that exists on the property, the outcome would be beneficial. He felt the past should be put behind and move forward. Neveau.\ said the wedge of land of Casco/Spring Park was a transitional group of lots. He noted that one lot was not economically feasible and out of character with the lot and area. He felt the proposal blends in with the neighborhood. Peterson said that was not a concern. He did want the structure to come down and did want the subdivision. He felt if there was to be a replat, he recommended 2 lots. Mabusth suggested a possible redesign questioning puting a large house within the smaller envelope. She saw' no reason to grant a setback variance to lakeshore setback for Lot 1 as the building area could be rearranged to meet the setback. Mabusth said the proposal has merit but again was concerned with setbacks and the lack of any real site planning. Peterson asked why a larger house on a smaller lot. Neveaux said it was only a general plan. He said the site and access availability was limited and looked at the aesthetics. It was the applicant ’s intent to eliminate the setback variance required on lot 1 but limit the other. Mabusth noted the sewer easement along the west line and the utility easement on the line. A shared access was recommended from CoRd 15. The County was in favor of the shared access also. The County saw the Dunwoody access as dangerous. Neveaux said this was fine with Oberhauser. He was asked if he was aware of the utility easement. Neveaux said he was but not necessarily to the placement of the easement. Lindquist said he did not conceptually disagree but did not want to see any hardcover in the 0-75’ zone. He did not w’ish to see any new construction in this area. He would not approve any structural lot coverage variance or hardcover variance in the 0-75’ zone but would consider a hardcover variance. i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#6 - #1958 Louis Oberhauser - Continued) Peterson said the plan should come back with less variances. Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to agree with the plat and road change eliminating access from Dunwoody Avenue. The new structure requires a revised plan out of the 0- 75' zone and realigned to show the shared access. No hardcover will be allowed in the 0- 75* zone nor staictural coverage exceeding 15% The hardcover on Lot 1 at .16% and Lot 2 at 33% were considered reasonable and the street setback to the garage. Mabusth noted that the amended site plan would be required prior to the Council's formal action on final approval variances Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. ACTION ITEMS (#7) #2059 MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT, 1485 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - VARUNCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT- CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - 7:39-8:11 P.M. Manager, Thomas LaBounty, of the MCWD was present. LaBounty reported that they have reached an agreement with the Pearces, who are out of town, and plan on signing the agreement the following evening. Gatfron reported that the application was tabled at the last meeting pending additional review. The stormwater pond would be constructed on the Pearce property, south of County Road 6 and East of Dakota Avenue. The site is within the creek from Wolsfeld and Holy Name Lakes which flow into Long Lake. The pond is to be a 2-cell pond whose purpose is to catch sediment and hold back phosphorus. Regular maintenance would be required to keep the pond functioning. The site now exists as a flat, wooded, wetland area. Mature trees will be removed and replaced with vegetation around the new ponds. The MCWD provided "before" and "after" photo representations of the area at the request of the Planning Commission. Gaflfron said the City's main concerns are with the construction process. Peterson added there is a concern with hauling of the fill. Gaffron said thousands of yards of fill will be leaving the site to an off-site location to be determined by the contractor. The access road would be on CoRd 6, east of Tanglewood The excavation and hauling would be done in mid-wdnter. The sight distance is good at the access location but there is concern about impacting traffic on CoRd 6. Close monitoring of the road conditions would be required along with signage and flagmen during construction. It was noted that for security reasons, a gate with a combination lock would be provided permanently at the access drive. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#7 - #2059 MCVVD - Continued) Peterson asked if the City's approval would need to spell out the hours of operation during construction. LaBounty was asked if this was spelled out in their contracts. LaBounty said hours have not been set. He relayed the example of another project where the City set the approved hours. LaBounty said there would be daily, or even hourly, scraping and sweeping of the roadway. All trucks would use sealed boxes. A procedure would also be used to remove dirt from the tires when the tmcks leave the property Flag personnel will also be used during operation. The constru-iior? is scheduled to start in January of 1998 and last 30-45 days. Revegetation would occur in the spring using bare root stock to save money. No final landscape plans have been developed with the Pearces as of yet. The Pearces will be included in the landscape plan process. Peterson asked LaBounty where the MCWD was with the Medina and Long Lake pond projects. LaBountv said the Long Lake pond agreements have been signed, and the project has been ordered to proceed. Ground breaking is to occur on November 27 with revegetation to occur in the spring of 1996 A verbal agreement has been reached with the property owner in Medina, and all issues are expected to be resolved by December 15. The MCWD is planning for construction to begin on December 15, 1995. Peterson commented and LaBounty confirmed that all three cities' approval for sediment ponds is required in order that the alum treatment of Long Lake be effective. Smith asked if no agreement was reached in Medina if the MCWD would revert back to the plans for a 5 acre pond. LaBounty said that was a possibility at one time but an agreement has been reached with the Pearces only for a 2.5 acre pond. He noted that the MCWD is working hard on reaching a negotiated settlement on the Medina pond. Smith reiterated that this meant there would be no change in scope or scale if no agreement was reached in Medina. LaBounty said no changes would be made as the signed agreement is in effect. LaBounty reviewed the photo depictions of the site. He added that the pond requiring the most sediment removal is the pond nearest to CoRd 6 as it collects the most sands. The second pond will collect finer sediments. There were no public comments. Smith asked if all the points have been addressed to the Staffs satisfaction. Gaffron sa:d this was correct He added that before the application goes before the Council, a compilation or "punch list" of all the requirements and conditions would be drafted. Peterson emphasized the need to stipulate operating times, the use of flag people, and the total time of construction. LaBounty said he was in agreement with these requirements. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLAi>fNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20. 1995 (U7 - #2059 MC\VD - Continued) Peterson asked if a drag line would be used LaBounty said the work would be done by backhoe. Because of winter construction, smaller equipment can be used. Haw n asked if it was impossible to control the point source of the pollution from the upstream feedlots LaBounty said the majority of pollution comes from non-point source over a long period rf time The MCWD is working with Medina and Orono on a cooperative agreement w hich will use include of "best management practices" Stormwater management plans, when thjy are developvw .y each city, will contain the best management practices. Hawn asked what are the time lines for the cities' stormwater plans. LaBounty said th^ stormwater plans should have been in by this time as the two year time allounent has expired. The MCVVD is working with Long Lake on their stormwater plan at this time and hopes to do the same with Medina and Orono. Hawn said she was concerned if the lake was cleaned of the existing phosphorus, it would be reintroduced creating the same problems. LaBounty said 60® o would be removed and would result in less internal loading, adding that the alum treatment would aid in alleviating the problem Smith asked if the City could stipulate that the ap* tication come back before the Planning Commission if the project does not go forward as proposed It was noted that the normal time frame of reviewing an application is one year while the project is not set tor another 3 years Gaffron said if Planning Commission wishes to extend the approval time frame, some type of trigger could be placed in the permit to allow the application to be revisited. LaBounty requested that the permit be issued for a longer time period as long as there are no changes. Mabusth said that the approval conditions could specify guidelines as to what changes w ould prompt it to be back for review. LaBounty asked that the permit use any changes to the Deerhill Pond as a trigger to come back before the Planning Commission. H noted that the agreement with Pear^'e has some leeway for the size of the pond. LaBounty asked if the permit should be ' cld until a time closer to the actual construction, as long as there is an understanding at the construction will go forward. He noted the completion date is about 2-1/2 years out. Smith felt it could be completed now and only come back if there were major changes in the plans. Lindquist agreed. It was noted that both judges on the Medina suit have prontised a conclusion by December 15. Since it would be appropriate for Orono’s Council to know the Medina outcome before acting, Gaffron will draft a resolution to present before the Council in January. LaBounty concurred with this schedule. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#7 - #2059 MCWD - Continued) Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2059 with the provision that the punch list be addressed by MCWD with Staff and to Staff s satisfaaion, and any special changes to the size or scope (specifically, the Medina and Pearce projects) wou require future reconsideration by the Planning Commission. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#8) #2078 JENSEN HOMES INC., 405 TONICWVA ROAD - PRELLMINARY SUBDIVISION - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - 10:02-10:15 P.M. The Applicant was present. Mabusth reported that the 30' >‘asement along the south property line has been located. The easement has been deducted form the total lot area and is now at 3 07 acres. The property is to be developed with rural standards due to the septic. There is a backlot configuration but the west lot is not a back lot. there is access to the public road to the south. Mabusth said the County will not approve any new curb cuts and will require a shared driveway for lot 2, and lot I may continue to use existing access The applicant had no comment. Peterson asked if the applicant was aware that the third curb cut would not be allowed and received a reply to the affirmative. Lindquist inquired if there was to be any park or trail acquisition. Mabusth said the Park Commission has not reviewed the application but will at their December 4 meeting. During public comments, Barry' Knight, 425 Tonkawa, said he had no problem with the subdivision. He did, however, have a concern with the Staff recommendation for condition # 1 He noted that since his property is not a back lot, but under back lot standards, item #1 would relate to his property and should not be included. He was told that item #1, which refers to no more than two residences on one driveway, is a City ordinance and must be part of the conditions. Knight said the deeded access is not exclusive and would benefit the division of other lots. If he were to subdivide in the future, w hich he said he has the right to do, this would affect him and he should be part of that code. Knight was informed that it he should subdivide in the future, the code would need to be applied. The parcels in question are not in the MUSA, while Knight's property is within the MUSA. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NO VOIDER 20, 1995 (#8 - #2078 Jensen Homes - Continued) Lindquist said he saw Knight's concern with losing his right to subdivide in the future aa the ordinance under item #1 would afffect his ability to be served by this easement road. Knight agreed that this would adversely affea his property. Lindquist added that even though this was true. Staff cannot violate the code now in order to not affect a possible future application. It w as noted that the ordinance would still be in efffect even if it was not listed in the resolution. Mabusth suggested that Knight bring this concern betore the Council. Lindquist moved, Haw n seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2078 with Staff recommendations 1, 2. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8. Vote Ayes 5, Navs 0. (#9) #2083 BERNICE M. ZUMBI SCH, 1535 LONG LAKE BLVT>. - VARLANCJIS - PUBLIC HEARING - 10:18-10:27 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and .AfEdavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth reported that the application was for hardcover variance to replace a lakeshore deck with stairs. There would be no changes in hardcover in the 0-75’ zone at 16.29®'o or in the 75-250' zone at 87.35®/o Structural coverage would remain the same at 20%. There are no setback variances required Karen Hessian, the applicant’s daughter, said there were areas where plastic is located under the landscaping which could be removed Mabusth said this would result in reductions of 2.8%, or 131 s.f, in the 0-75’ zone, and 3.5»/o, or 162 s.f. m the 75-250 s.t. Lindquist asked if not all of th. plastic could be removed or if some were needed on the steep hill. Hessian said the plastic on the hill was probably for erosion control, but on top of the hill and by the house, the plastic could be removed. Peterson asked what Staff would recommend regarding removal of plastic from the hill area. Mabusth said she would need to consult with the City Engineer. He did note there were timbers in the area. Peterson asked Mark Gronberg, who was in attendance, if the plastic in that area could be removed Gronberg said it was i possibility Hessian was asked for a time frame. She said the plan was to reconstruct the deck in the spring. Lindquist said this would allow the Engineer to review and make a recommendation. Hessian noted that her mother was out of town now but would be home to attend the December meeting. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#9 - #2083 Bernice Zumbusch - Continued) Peterson said the decking needs to be redone. He noted the goal was to get a reduction in hardcover, especially in the 0-75’ zone but the City Engineer's recommendation would be required. Mabusth remarked that the plastic removal would result in a 5% reduction in the 0-75’ setback area There were no public comments. Smith moved, Berg seconded, to approve application #2083 for the replacement ot the deck with the plastic as previously described be removed and by the City Engineers inspection on the west side be removed in the 0-75' zone if recommended by the Engineer. Vote Ayes 5, Nays 0 (#10) #2084 THOMAS R. MCCUNE, 1473 BAY RIDGE ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 10:27-10:32 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that the property under review is located on Bay Ridge Road where 100 lot widths are typical. The lot is 115* as measured parallel to the lake. The property is located in the 2 acre zoning, but the average lot size in this neighborhood is I acre. This property is 84 acre. The proposal is for two additions requiring variances for the side setback and hardcover. The applicants plan to replace the existing deck with a sunroom. 30' is required for this side setback, and the existing deck and proposed sunroom are at 27* Sunroom location is constrained by a window is located to the north. It is possible to na-^’row the sunroom to meet the side setback of 30'. The room addition and attached garage to the north side requires a 30’ setback and is proposed at 1C The e.xisting house is at M’ The existing driveway would be relocated The e.xisting garage and apron would be removed. The garage addition will be over the existing septic system; hence, this project must wait untii sewer is brought to the neighborhood. GalTfon reported that the hardcover existing in the 75-250' zone would increase from 23.9% to 26.7% for a 1.7®/o variance where 25% is allowed. The hardcover in ihe 250- 500' zone is under the 30% allowable. The only hardcover existing in the 0-75’ is a stairway located in the Co Rd 51 right-ot-way. McCune said it was originally their thought to have a sunroom continuing along the south line of the house about 14’ from the lot line, but it was slid to the north because of the setback. Because of the lake views and the way the houses in the area sit on the lots, McCune placed the sunroom where proposed. McCune said by placing the garage addition as proposed to the west, it minimizes the hardcover in the 75-250’ zone. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CONLMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#12 - #2084 Thomas McCune - Continued) Lindquist received confirmation to his question that the septic system is located under the proposed garage. McCune noted that all 8 homeowners in the area signed up for sewer which is hoped will occur next year. The plan is to wait to do the improvements until the sew er is completed. This is part of the whole plan. Hawn moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2084 with the reservation that the project not proceed with the garage construction until municipal sewer is available. There were no public comments. V'ote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#11) #2086 ROBERT AND JANICE CALUAN. 2915 SOMERSET LANE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITA’ARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 10:32-10:59 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth reported that the application was for a conditional use permit and variance to create a 6000 s f open water area in a designated wetland of 1 acre size. The property would have over 2 acres of dry contiguous buildable land Mabusth noted that the City has a conservation and tlowage easement over the area. Mabusth reviewed the codes, specifically 10 55 where amendments would be needed, and 10.56 which lists the functional entities that all wetlands provide and should retain. Of the 6 functional qualities listed, Mabusth said there would be no impact on #5, regarding shoreline or bank stabilization, but had no information on #3, regarding fish and wildlife habitat. Mabusth said the issue is that the code discourages having any prohibition in code 10.55. Mabusth said the City Engineer and DNR had no problem with the proposal as long as certain standards w'ere met. Replacement would be asked for base and bank levels (2.25 acres). The type 2 wetlands should be replaced for wildlife habitat. Mabusth said she saw a problem with other residents of the 7 residential lots in the area asking for the same type of pond. The application w as being reviewed by the DNR and MCWD. Mark Gronberg said he checked with Kristen George, who is awaiting City's decision. Georue was said to have no problem with the excavation in the wetland. He noted that the Corp of Engineers still needed to approve the application. He also noted that the wetland has become larger after losing the farming in the area. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#11- #2086 Roben and Janice Callan - Continued) Lindquist questioned if the Planning Commission could ask for mitigatio.i Callan said the area was low wetland He was asking tor approval to gain open water for aesthetic reasons as well as enhancing a water fowl area. Callan saw the size and scope as having no significant impact on the existing bird or wildlife He saw three areas of Cr>'stal Bay Farms participate in wetland ownership This particular parcel is 1/2 ot the ^ea. He noted the other 2 have been built on and are located on a higher elevation. He did not believe any of these homeowners would ask for any change trom the original wetland designation as they are high in elevation and have no view ot the area. Callan asked for approval without mitigation. There were no public comments Smith said she w as of the opinion that others would make similar requests Lindquist said he preferred to keep the area as it now is but questioned whether the application could be denied Peterson said he does not like to make changes to wetland areas He did not see the proposal as bad but telt waterfowl would not stay on a small pond area. George Stickney, the current owner, the lot is 380' in width and is a maple forest, he said with the draintile and transitional growth, the area could be opened to maintain the cunrent wetland area. Gronberg commented that agencies are encouraging type 1 and 2 wetlands. He saw no reason not to build more type 3 wetlands. He saw benefits to maintain sediment storage. Lindquist moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2086 for 1; 1 mitigation equal to the open water area, with condition #3, with the use ot the scoop method Callan asked if the Planning Commission would consider type 1 mitigation. Lindquist said the mitigation must be type 2. Callan asked for a 8:1 grade on the back side but said would create a substandard grade to the front. He said he would consider a 4:1 on the front half o fthe open water for visibility. Peterson said the City Engineer said a 4; 1 slope was too steep adding that the City Engineer and DNR would make the decision on the slope. Pcicrson said if the City Engineer was in favor of varying amounts of slope, it could be done. Vote; Ayes 2, Hawn, Lindquist; Nays 3, Smith, Berg, Peterson. Motion fails. MINXITES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#11 - #2086 Robert and Janice Callan - Continued) Peterson moved. Smith seconded, to deny approval for application #2086 as it was his opinion to deny all wetland applications. Smith said she saw no compeling benefit to taking this step and saw the true advantage in keeping the wetland as it now exists Berg agreed. Vote; Ayes 3, Peterson, Smith, Berg; Nays 2, HawTi, Lindquist. Motion passed for denial. Smith said she saw the drainage benefits as comparing apples to oranges. Berg said she saw the application as being for aesthetical rather than environmental reasons. George Stickney commented that the Planning Commission has approved a skating pond elsewhere and here Peterson responded that this area is a designated wetland. Mabusth said the pond Stickney was referring to was a type 1 wetland. (#12) #2087 MINNEGASCO, 530 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - RENEWAL CONDITIONAL LSE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING - 11:00-11:07 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present. Representing Minnegasco were Rick Pilon and Jerry Kallstrom. Peterson asked the applicants why a permanent fix could not occur. Pilon said Hennepin County postponed the CoRd 6 project and asked the gas company to do the same. It is possible that a permanent solution could be scheduled for next year but has asked for renew al of 5 year permit instead of asking for a 2-year extension. Pilon said the e.xisting feeder is west of Tow nline Road, and the low pressure system is east of Townline. The purpose to to bring gas from the high to the low area to stabilize and present an independent leg. Lindquist asked if this w ould eliminate the need for the facility. Pilon said it would and needed one year to verify that. Pilon said the CoRd 84 project was postponed. It fed Painters Creek with a high pressure feed toward Rockford. Pilon said gas cannot be taken out of this feeder to enforce the area. He said the project is an insurance plan to ensure gas outages do not occur. Smith asked how often this vaporizer is used. Pilon said it was used 3 times in 1992- 1993, 4 times in 1993-1994, and 3 times in 1994-1995 with 3 standbys. Smith asked if there has been any complaints or concerns. Mabusth said there has been none. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CONLMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#12 - #2087 Minnegasco - Continued) There were no public comments Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2087 as submitted condition that if the lease if not renewed, the vaporizer could not remain. Pilon noted that the lease with the landowner is being renewed on a year-by-year basis Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#13) #2089 RICHARD MILLER, 4520 WATERTOWN ROAD - VARIANCES- PUBLIC HEARING - 11:07-11:15 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidas it of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present Gaffron reponed that the application is for lot area and width variances for the existing lot located in the 5 acre zone. The property consists of 3 6 acre dry and 2.9 acre wetl^d for a total of 6.5 acres A 28® o lot area variances would be required. The width parallel to the front lot width is 4% short at 287' where 300’ is required. Gatfron noted the 5 acre zoning was created in 1975 when a majority of the residents indicated they preferred 5 acre zoning to maintain the large lot sizes. Gaffron said there are very few small vacant lots in this zone. The property in question of 3-1/2 acres is unique according to Gaffron It has not been built on. Miller has owned the property since 1972. The buildable envelope requires a 100' front setback, a 50' side setback, and 26' setback from any wetlands. The dnveway would come from CoRd 6. Septic testing has been done, and a site is available for a 5 bedroom home. Gaffron pointed out the likely building site. Gaffron questioned if the City does not grant the variances, does the owner have any reasonable use of the property. He noted that the assessor has given the property a lower value compared to buildable lots. Miller has paid $5,000 in ta.\es over 20 years Gaffron asked if constaicting a residence on this 3-1/2 acres dry buildable (6.5 a.re to,al) lot would change the character of the neighborhood. Gaffron commented that when the owner bought the property, the property conformed to the code of 1 acre zomng Miller noted he is considering building on or selling the lot, and when the vanance is approved, may cause the taxes to increase. Peterson commented that the codes do change but noted the uniqueness of this property. Miller said the homes and lots going towards CoRd 6 and Hwy 12 from his property are smaller. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#13 - #2089 Richard Miller - Continued) There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2089 with the hardships listed and with noting the zoning at the time of purchase. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#14) #2091 BURTON SCOTT BALL, 1065 FERNDALE ROAD WEST- VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 11:15-11:25 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Gafffon reported that the existing residence is mainly located within the 75' zone with a deck on the lakeside. There is also a 4’ overhang on the house. Gaffion said the request is for a bay window above the deck and under the overhang but within the 4' of the overhang at 3' This application would involve the expansion of one bay window and the addition of two more. Gaffion commented that the hardcover is significant on this property. The proposal could increase the encroachment to the lakeside by 3'. The west end is 47' from the lake. At midpoint, the residence is 51.5’ from the lake On the east end, the residence is 45’ from the lake. Hardcover exists in the 0-75' zone at 36 8%, 414% in the 75-250' zone, and conforms in the 250-500' zone at 13.6%. The overall hardcover exists at 36.\%. The DNR recommends hardcover for an entire property at 25%. Gaffion noted that the tennis court located in the driveway has appeared since 1991. In comparison with a survey submitted by the previous owner for a previous application, the driveway and court have expanded. Me noted the rock and plastic along the house but commented that it is narrower in width than the 4' overhang but still considered hardcover. Gaffion brought two questic::s before the Planning Commissioneis for their consideration. Should the bay windows be approved allowing a further encroachment of 3' and should approval be tied to the hardcover. Peterson commented that there w as the perception of more encroachment but was not really closer when considering the overhang Gaflron suggested that the bulk of the house was getting closer to the lake, and the proposal did add more structure in the 0-75' zone. While the overhang was more of an encroachment, the addition to the bulk requires for need for the variances. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#14 - #2091 Burton Scott Ball - Continued) Ball said he moved in to the property in August of 1995. He said the home is a mce rambler, and he is trying to make it the best it can be He said he had no need tor the tennis court and would remove it. Ball said he would also remove a portion ot the driveway as well as the 6' fence. Ball said the bay window in the kitchen area already exists. The two additional b^s are to be located at the same distance in the living room and side areas to add balance. There will be no foundation under the bay windows as they will be cantilevered out from the structure. Lindquist asked how much driveway or court could be eliminated. Mrs. Ball said she would be willing for all of the asphalt to be remov ed except for that for a ^ access to the house. It is her desire to eliminate as much as it as possible Mr. Ball said ne would also remove any plastic. Galfron indicated two triangular areas of the court area which could be removed. Lindquist said he saw no problem with the bay windows with their location under the overhang. Smith said she looks for mitigation and would be in favor of the suggestions given by the Balls There were no public comments. Smith moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2091 to install 3 bay windows with the asphalt removed as suggested Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#15) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13,1995 Charles Schroeder was not present. (#16) OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION PLAN - SURVEY RESULTS - PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS There were no comments on this Item. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 (#17) APPROVAL OF 1996 CALENDAR Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval ot the proposed 1996 schedule. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#18) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Mabusth asked Peterson to remind applicants that Planning Commission votes are recommendations only. Applications then proceed to the Council for approval Smith commented that the New Horizon Day Care on Hw-y 12 has kept their exterior lights on past the time alloted in the resolution. It was noted that the strong bult in the lights along the roof are also not in keeping with the resolution. Staff was asked to look into this matter. Berg reported having had attended a meeting regarding wetland mitigation. It was said at the meeting that people request dredging for ponds with the idea of having waterfowl use the ponds. With the destruction of the grasses and mosquito zones, it destroys the feeding habitat and waterfowl do not remain. Peterson said this shows the need for all types ot wetlands. Berg said the meeting made her aware of the viewpoint expressed m past applications by Peterson and the need to look at all ecosystems Smith said she would appreciate receiving feedback from applicant's response on the decisions made bv the Planning Commission. Mabusth n<'»fetl that the response has been positive ADDITIONAL ITEMS (#19) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 16,1995 MEETING Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of October 16, 1995. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#20) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND THE DECEMBER II, 1995 MEETING OF THE COUNCIL Charles Schroeder was selected to attend the December 1 1995, meeting of the Council • * «. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, 1995 ADJOURNMENT Peterson moved, Berg seconded, to adjourn at 11:35 p.m. Stephen Peterson, Chair Person PMOPOSCD ROAD VACATION ANC PNOPOSCD SUBDIVISION FOB JEFFREY A BRENDA BOWEN. CHARLES A ANN HOMMEYEa AND KENNETH A KAREN HOLLAND IN BLOCKS 3.4. AND S. MINNCTONKA SUMIMT PARK MtNNCPIN COUNTY. MNNCSOTA iC, U» t. t. 9. M 4. Ml S. M UK 1. 3. M 4. BMI4. M UM1.1 Sk«. ft ft 4M 7. BMl ft HPMTONKA aUMMn PWMK. Tlat PM If W4K* fww knam « M Una) 4i«taM » •» puMM M ft* pM •« M9MT0NKA (UlMtT MNK «Nd< IM foxvwt^ <« tw «mM% iiimMn <41« IM «r La ■dcP S.. MNNETONKA SUMMTT MMK MftO M a aiaa nna 44 iatfcMM I* fl« puMt n »■ pM a MNCTONKA aUMWI MftO Thapa«aCHiap«laal •UMTI>M(R«4iia>aa4l a a »4 puMp a ftp pta a MNNETOPKA 4 9m pPHtaiip •aanapnp POMP PPM oa •anaatMppaMwaLaP.iMaii. HNNtropWAiuMMrrMMPKpnPtM PPPMilp Ina a la 7 IMpP 9. M9MTOMM SUMflT PMK p<a oMai Ppp RpMtpHp a p Inp apan ppiala MM pnp 10 tat naMhaMp a. RMPPunP a it|H anplaa M. 9m naMMap IPa a MacP 7. MMNE TONKA tUMrr PMW anP ■ ^aii% ...................................................................................................ft »MaLa7.BpaiS DKArtS HI Ki V ISk i\UAll UhSLkii'lit »s i'4 . m' ■1 .» r«» rh»A pi^n J K« mt anirt ri\ Junl ■•upr* T«I9» an>l But 1-an 4 Juh aiUiirtiw* dfai I^mJ Sunrvi*iMMlftf H7SK.NKD B> MM >> (.f.ailNrf ihrM ( t)lll\ iS: CiKONHl iUi, IV PROPOSED ROAD VACATION AND PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IN BLOCKS 3.4. AND 5. MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA M \i I ('•JO' Dvri 9 // -M KW SO PP>»7 Lnuiri^ '#^0^ i?l mi. ^...- ' ■■-f ■■Miu SSf4e‘30V '^ft.» ■khSftHte-OtSe^ HUH. S€C.X 9CA«'#' A •ntlvdm^ read Ufen fearran^tme/r^ •***•■ r eamilntfX».mu $ti.az- .f Srnfthimo^S£'U NriHt s*c S^ ,-M 8 .-A PROPOSED LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT FOR RICHARD SCHMIDT & KEVIN HOLMES IN THE SE 1/4, NW 1/4, SECTION 32-118-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA IVWCgLA Th« tailttMl Qu Mh o( Ih* Ni N«ft. Rngt 23 WM of tt» 3» F fOurtwof Soclion32.T<MnoNp 118 pai Mwtdtan. accopl tM Souh 2fl0 FM of •« E«l 310 M fMCMf. atoo oaeopt M pat twraof dMcrIM M Mom: BaainiifeiB at tw Nei«Ma« oomar of aaPf SouPiaaal Ouailar of Bw NofUnnal Quailv; •lanoa oautti aleng •» Eaal Ina of Mid Soulhaaal Quanv of«» Nortiwoaf Quartor a dMaica of 320 laat: *Mnca waalorly. doAooang iigM 103 dagraaa 20 nlmdM a dMraa of 3S5IM; 8<anca nolhtfly. dollacfM riM 78 ililwiUDfaNBdhlnaefaaldSouPiiaafQuartatoftiaNoiimwoiOuaotw- lliafica oaat alonp oak) Nof«i Ina to »>a poM of tMgtnrana. PAWCEI a Tliaf part of Vw Soudiaaat Quaitor of Pia noittiwaal Ouaftor of Sacaon 32 ToanaNp 118 North. Rangt 23 Waal of tw SIh Prmclpal Uandtoi. daaertbad as totoato: Baglnnine al 8m Northaaal ooniaf of aaM Soudiaaat Quartir of toa Ftorthaiaal Ouamr tianca aoidh atong lha Eaal Una of aaW SoUhaart Quartar of toaNorttianto Quartar a dhlanoa of 320 toot. 8wnM aBaaoriy. dafladlng right 103 dagiaM 20 mlnutoa a diatonea of 388 Faat tiaoea northarty, dattortng rtghi 79 dagiaaa to lha Marti tna of aaW Sougwaat Quartar of lha Northaaat Quartao tMfioa aaal atong aaM North bia to t« peka of taginning. IPMCeLATgPAWCgLB Thai part of tw 8ar«iaaal Quartar of tw Northaiaat Qu^ of SacHen 33. Toaitohgilig North. Ranga 23 Waal of #» S» Fhinotoai» ------------yoftiatoitoatngdaaortbadInaCo ing al 8w Northaaal cornar I Ouartor twnoa aouto aiong tia EaalofaaHSoutiaaatQutoMroftiaF ____________ _______ toto of aaid SoMhaaal Quartar of tia Northaiaal QuiiW a iatofiM of OeiaN to North iino of aaW Sotdhaaal Quartat of tw Northwaol OiMtor diatani 730.04 toot tiaiaandhg, EXCei»T toal part of aaid Soutiaaal QuatM of lha Northaaal Quanar W tia Narthwaal Quartan fianoa aouti aloiai tM Eaal tow of aaid ■ordhaaM Quartar of t» NtWaoMI Ouartar a dM^ af W toS t^ awalarty. daMng .«hl 188 gagwM » ounutoo a dtolanaa aW toat twnoa northorty. dortaoUng dghl 79 dogiaaa to tw North tow of aoM Sautwaol Quortar of tw Northaaal Quortar; twnoa OMI along aoU No* towtotw poM of bagkinii«. ttw fatoalng doaertbad tow: ComaanelnB al tw Nortwaal comae of aoid Soidhaaal (hiirtar of tw Northaaal Quortar twnco aouti Wong tw Eoat llna of iaidSootwafl Quortar of tw Northaaal Quartor 0 dtotonea of 426 tool to tw poM Id boginning oftw tow baIngdoacmwittwncaaaalorty. dartactotortoW 103 rtagrm 20 rnimrtH a dManca of 860 tool; twnca northarty to a pebd in tw No* tow of a« Soutwaal Quartar of tw Northaool Quartai dialani 730.04 Fwl aaal of aald Northaaal eomar M owaauead atong aaid No* tow. and aald tow toofo andbig. ToaaiaMp118No*.Ranoa23Waoloftw8tiPrtncipalMortdton.ahlchliM ’ nortwaatorty (d tw htoalnB daaertbad tow: ConmwncinB al tw Northaaal cornar af aaid SoidhaaBl Qiiartar of «w Nortwwal Quartar: twnca aoudi along tw Eaal tow of aoM toidhaaal Quartar of tw Northwaal Quartar a dialanco of 428 foal to 8w 1^ of baginnirio of tw tow boing dooertbod: twnca wottorty. daltocling rigM .\”.*‘y**?”"**^*‘*****»=*°*”°>-t**nc«'»>rthartytoapoinlintw No* tow of aaid Soutwaal Quartar of tw Northwaal Quartar dtolwd 73'04 tool awal of taid Northaaal eoowr aa nwaaurod along loM No* tow. and aaW towtwro ending DESICNED BY REVISION DAFE DESCKIITION JiH- U»*r« ift th»' SU(r VfifUR-hOU ---------- -. Mirk S Ci.to\brrn Minne«i>(4 Uffnv Numbrr 12“W Coffin & gronberg. Inc.PROPOSED LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT FOR RICHARD SCHMIDT & KEVIN HOLMES IN THE SE 1/4, NW 1/4, SECTION 32-118-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA hC Al.b /*.*»■ UAIh //-/-03 lOB NO. 9e*3e