Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10-21-1996 Planning Packet
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1996, 7:00 P.M. 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY - COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE - JoEIlen Hurr 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 REVIEWS 1. 7:00 p.m. #2178 Nathalie Gray/Robert and Lorraine Roden, 460 and 480 Orchard Park Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement 2. 7:30 p.m. #2186 James Pfleider and Yvonne Cook, 509 and 511 North Ferndale Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement ACTION ITEMS - Review of these items will commence prior to or between scheduled public hearings. 3. #2175 Frank and Susan Koubsky, 4785 North Shore Drive - Variances - Public Hearing 4. #2176 Daniel S. Perkins, 55 Landmark Drive - Renewal of Annual Conditional Use P'.Miiii - Public Hearing 5. #2179 Theresa Norsted, 2811 Casco Point Road - Amended Variance - Public Hearing 6. #2180 Peggy and Frank Pichelman, 2920 Casco Point Road - Variances - Publi.' Hearing 7. #2181 James Nystrom, 1745 Concordia Street - Renewal Variance - Public Hearing 8. #2182 Herbert Terry Olson, 3640 Bayside Road - Conditional Use Permit/Variances - Public Hearing 9. #2183 Charles "Buck" Kramer, 2990 Somerset Lane - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing 10. #2184 Brian Carrington, 1920 Sixth Avenue North - Variances - Public Hearing 11. #2185 Richard and Mary Jo Kovacevich - 1580 Bohns Point Road - Variance - Public Hearing 3 riTiip^n —n -------rr-n —17-1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - MONDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1996, 7:0e P.M. 12.Zoning Amendment B-5/B-6 - Continuation of Public Hearing Planning Commission Comments 13.Report of Planning Commission representative attending Council meeting of S.ptember 23, 19% (Charles Schroeder). 14.Other issues for discussion. 15.Planning Commission approval of minutes of the September 16, 19% meeting. 16.Planning Commission to select representatives to attend the Council meetings of October 28, 19% and November 12, 19%. Adijoumment m Public Attendance Meetlng D ate C ouncil Planning C ommission Park C ommission Other Please fill out the information REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1. i /\ // tm-v 7 ^ y i ' '^'-7X0 P^^y,. fP- fL'a^Zii^ ‘P^M -7^iH6/, /yj “ ^ 3. [Al iviifl 01 J^v /■ 7 V ^'\\-X. kA/^^A fu/r. - J3//^ 4. ,^^-Ccvtd^^^a u 02 9/6* Ocijxcd 'cX/i’C'P ^\ 4^ Orc^^-P /7t^> 7.:^ 2 8. C" c.rr\ Lq\ i. _________ A'X> 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. UHo Cnr^lnarcl V^'K f\ im^ 15. 09I19S.4 --------.. s St* fa|o " o 3is Wtt|# i n !► Ilf i - I 5 I r P O V> S £ =»t K» OOUJ X 50 cr 8 a = w g. a i* < o’ vyi OO O ? 50 I < 103. oa «o in S’s- > o y, 0 i- 1 <w g 0 1I X3I ?cr R* X n 8 g- •*1 ^fa fto g ?>r 2T CJ 3n s r g I n 0a o*I. ? 1 I ?2 15 M 00F> 5 X 5? M a ocr hj •«» K« * s § ^9 S2 ^5 Ui £ 0 S’*< 1 9 & "o' S’ I Ia Z•<I jJ ?s 0as CO1 ?!i I. £= \ I ?cr fi X |- a g. 7I !P5* Ia t<j «o n §■ R f o H K z 0 1o. n o S’ a VO 0a 1 I o. I Xn =»kl^J -j On 11 y 27 njir •"c- rr D3.n 7 g N> -J Ui T1I w B. ing a vnI ■u OO Cft z 0 & 1/5 n D3. S 1 < <0 S' 'S g ? 50 01 i K oo u*o •a ?5 50 Sr2 Ia. 2 It i| 2,«: a < 8 ? I § ? & o' B S 7 2 X ft T3I s 0 g*? 8a « 1c a T3 Ccr R- ?•: 3 S •U 8 •o 3 - -joe ??i = 8 1 a Cl 1^ 2-? S'2 s, “•rr^1 CI1o o §o i I Ilf ^ iji*’ 5 sf >.o r 0 §5 1 s s s s :j5.5 s ^sS?s| 8.-ahim 1 . Ota 2 z 0 1 11 a a § 35(/» 0 1 .cr M •■«! o TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:October 4,1996 SUBJECT: #2178 Nathalie Gray and Robert and Lorraine E. Roden, 460/480 Orchard Park Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Zoning District: RR-IA Application: Applicants have filed a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement seeking the City's approval of a transfer of land between owners originally deeded in November, 1971. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1. Section 11.03 Definition 66(Al-3) - Subdivision may be completed as Class I division. 2. Section 11.10, Subdivision 10(A) - Class I subdivision requirements. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owner ’s List D - Chicago Title Insurance Company Letter 9/6/85 E - Staff Letter 9/27/96 F - 1971 Warranty Deed G - Current Mortgage Reflecting Legal Description for 480 Orchard Park Road H - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Review of Application Applicants have filed the subdivision application with the City in order to complete the process begun back in November, 1971. The subdivision code of 1971 would have required the filing of the subdivision application. The City obviously denied the division in 1971 and advised the County of the need for subdivision approval by City. Real estate ta.xes have never been adjusted to reflect the transfer of property nor does the Hennepin County plat maps reflect the division, refer to Exhibit B. The properties are located in the 5 acre minimum lot zone. Parcel A consists of 15,045 s.f. with the addition of the 15’ corridor the lot area is adjusted to 17,700 s.f. Parcel B at 4.44 acres is reduced to 4.38 acres. Review Exhibit B, note owner of Parcel B owns several contiguous parcels. Applicants should be encouraged to consider a future division that would provide Parcel A with additional area for septic upgrade. J Zoning File #2178 Ocotober4,1996 Page 2 Review Exhibit H, note proposed legal description for Parcel B should read, "except the northerly 100' of the westerly 177 thereof." Staff will correct the legal on the three original survey sheets signed by applicants. Staff Recommendation To s^prove the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for Nathalie Gray and Robert and Lorraine Roden involving the properties located at 460/480 Orchard Park Road with the condition that owner of Parcel A apply for the legal combination of the 15 ’ corridor with the homestead parcel at the City offices prior to the subdivision being sent to the County for filing. I ___— r -A.- # rr'Application 0 Date Received ^'} ■ m ^TL Amount Paid 5 <^r> *’• CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Orchard Park Road, Orono. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ P operty Idennficauon Number(Pl5y inT^:^3,ooo^ Please check one - Propert>'____abstract or x torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT/ OWNER Name Nathalie Gray Address 480 Orchard Park RnaH City Orono, Minnesota Phone (home) 449-6095 OWTS'ER (if different than applicant) Name Robert J. and Lorraine E. Roden Address 460 Orchard Park Ro ad City Orono, Minnesota Zip 55356 Phone (work) 992-3178 Phone (home) 473-7952 (attach list if more than one)Zip 55356 Phone (work) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Acres Diy Land Acres Wet Land Present use (check) _5 acre min. Acres Total, all parcels X _ Residential; no. of units Present Zoning District _ 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(che^k) Units per ___Acres Sq, Ft. Dr>- Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)________ I I ! *= MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR C^WLETTPoffi^tL^^ Payment of fees (refer to "application fees" listed below. Completed application form. PiUiiiiiiiai * piet information on Certificate of Sur\ey. —.»"t^ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin Countv Department of Finance A-605 Govt. Center 348-3271). ' 5. As M^ddendjum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 1 ______________________________________QatcZoning Official ’s Signature MINIMUM .MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETc' FINAL APPLICATION 1. Pay ment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning Official's Signature _____________________________________ I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: ___- Sketch Plan ^Leview (Class i, II & III) S250.00 t sf Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement S350.00 _____ Subdivision Application (Class i & li) S350.00 _____ Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 -*■ S25.00'lot (Class III & all non-residential) _____ Final Plat Application (Class 111) $200.00 _____ Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 _____Subdiv ision w easements and covenants min. $200.00 Totals ( _____ Park Fees (to be determined per Section 1 1.62) _____ Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) _____Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) _____ Renewal of Class III. Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) _____ Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from original application) B. Special Improvement Fees: _____ Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + $.50'lineal ft.;___ _____ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50'lineal ft.;___ . lin. ft. X .50 = $_ lin. ft. X .50 ■■ $ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/stub Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 On-Site System. Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00'per lot x_____new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees _____Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated w ith Subdivision $100.00 _____PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit The applicant hereby agrees to ftovide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City' Attorney, Planning Commission and Cout'.cil necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. . OvmerApplicant ’s Signature A/l t-<-4LLv,/ __________________ Dat e ^ ________________ Owner’s Signature ^ Owner's Siznature u.^ ■ Date 9- /O' /T Date g?- /X) - Q Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to anend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. i\ ^ 1. '....*- B X ' #''v; / V ■'x'-.-^^? F-^ix ^- /^ /-x "> 1 V ‘ I.' «iJ • ■ ^ f' ^ \ ^ rrilvl«vg^-----'* * » ____________—wn ^ *'^^t**— uj i«) m:i t .!•LUI4 •• J'i ''Xi^*xix I X>tX «4t>, +^x.\XsxXs;^' M ' ' ,4 ‘X i il' l«8 -2^-22. • ‘ iv I rySXi " J# v; itlsiiS# • •yyy.'« *Zm ...................................... •:-;i • • • «« #.* *•*.**.« • • . 1... ••••..«^. •••« x;. •.'AV'.N • •« *•*! * *t* * •*• t ':;;|;c:;:;x;:v:+V:-; • •'•*•*•«•••••«•• ?i:2MiS-23'23: JStl___ harr^ ^ ^ X. \ XJ^Jx -XX X^x*-^X V X x ' -^- ♦ X-*» ' x r ' \ ■te’jr:, V‘> *»..x t c5; K- ^ r '4z?Tj RUN DATE 09/0A/9A BATCH 507 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0»tCRS LIST 4PROP AODR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 50 31-118-2S lA 0002 00.~25 OtCHARO PARK RO R J NEESTRANO ET AL RANDALL J NEESTRAND 525 ORCHARD PARK RO LONG LAKE HN 55356 PROP AODR 0»tlER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 3B 32-118-23 21 0009 00038 ADDRESS PENDING STEPHEN DAVIS TQHLE STEPHEN DAVIS TONLE 5115 PINNACLE DR OLDSMAR FL 3A677 PROP AODR CPtCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 32-118-23 22 0006 00680 ORCHARD PARK RO 0 E NINTERS A D K LAMB DOUGLAS E WNTERS 6B0 ORCHARD PARK RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 PROP AODR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 32-118-23 23 0006 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STEPHEN 0 TOHLE STEPHEN 0 TOMIE V.' H^CLE DR Ui.i)SMAR FL 36677 PROP ADOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 32-118-23 32 0002 03980 NATERTOFN RO ORCHARD PARK FARM INC ORCHARD PARK FARM INC 3980 MATERTONN RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55559 " 38 32-118-23-23-0009 Prop Addr 480 Orchard Park Rd Owner Name Richfield Bk/Trst Co Trustee Taxpayer Dexter & Jennifer Andrews Name/Addr 480 Orchard Park Rd Long Lake MN 55356 REPORT NO. PI635601 PAGE 2338 31-118-23 16 000806100 HATERTOMN RO DEBORAH M SHOLL DEBORAH M SHOLL 6100 HATERT0M4 RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55559 38 31-118-23 61 0001 06060 MATERTONN RO P A A K P SMIEJA PATRICK A/KATHLEEN P StQEJA 6060 NATERTO»f< RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 22 0006 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ROBERT T MICKELSEN ETAL JIM NHALEN 16625 38TH AVE N PLYMOUTH MN 55666 38 32-118-23 22 0005 00660 ORCHARD PARK RO LORI E KMETZ ET AL LORI E KMETZ 660 ORCHARD PARK RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 23 0003 00500 ORCHARD PARK RD T F ADAMS A J L HEAVER THOMAS F ADAMS 500 ORCHARD PARK RD LONG LAKE M4 55556 38 32-118-23 23 0006 00580 ORCHARD PARK RD COICUELO L CARRUTHERS CONSUELO CARRUTHERS 580 ORCHARD PARK ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 C>J S8 52-118-23 24 0005 05480 NATERTO^fl RD ORCHARD PARK FARM INC ORCHARD PARK FARM INC 5980 NATERTOHN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 58 52-118-25 52 0001 05940 NATERTOHN RO JEFFREY V MELIN JEFFREY V MELIN 5940 MATERTONN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 •I* . . . .'itii• -- ajI a r 58 52-118-25 52 0005 05850 MATERTONN RO S M i C A HARRIS STEVEN M HARRIS 585 TURHAM RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55559 ■^3 TOTAL BATCH 507 00014 /r h 38 32-118-23-23-0010 460 Orchard Park Rd Robert J & Lorraine E Roden Robert J & Lorraine E Roden 460 Orchard Park Rd Long Lake MN 55356 RUN DATE 09/0A/M BATCH 507 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEN PROPERTY OM4ERS LIST REPORT NO. P1455A01 PAGE 2A i m 4\ t . r.€ ■ *m * " / V*. •- «y ♦1 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORNATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATIONp TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE ^ A CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 2740 WEST 80TH STREET, BLOONtINCTON, MINNESOTA 55431 (612) 885-2500 i? J V ^ l» ^ September 6, 1995 y a ij ■ .» City of Orono Administration 2710 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55323 RE: 480 Orchard Park Rd., Orono (32 118 23 23 0007) our file no.: 2453290 Dear Administrator: Enclosed are recorded deeds relating to 480 Orchard Park Rd. and the current tax descriptions of 480 & 46C Orchard Park Rd. As you can see the tax description for “480" indicates tha- it is an 85 foot wioe parcel. However, in 1971 deed document no. 1015730 (copy enclosed) conveyed an additional 15 feet to the then owners of "480", creating a 100 foot wide parcel. As the other enclosed recorded deeds show, "480" has been conveyed as a 100 foot wide parcel since 1971. The county auditor recently discovered that its tax description still describes it as an 85 foot wide parcel. Since the property has been conveyed and occupied as a 100 foot wide parcel for the past 24 years, and assuming that a lot split/combination was approved in 1971 or that no approval was needed, would you please direct the county auditor to correct its tax description to conform to the 24 year history of "480" being a 100 foot wide parcel? If you have questions or need more information, please let me know. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Nick Koester •7 - C.- V V '/o ' ^ X i CTf yrf *.’ *5 \ S»ki > •<#y ! t<a! 4 V CITYofORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orcno. MN 55356 MaiTinf Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 September 27, 1995 Chicago Title Insurance Company 2740 West 80th Street Bloomington, MN 55431 Ann: NickKoester Dear Mr. Koester: The City Administrator, Ron Moorse, has asked that I respond to your letter of September 6, 1995 concerning the properties at 460/480 Orchard Park Road. On Februar>- 13, 1995, the City of Orono sent a letter to both owners of 460 Orchard Park Road (Robert J. and Lorraine E. Roden) and 480 Orchard Park Road (De.xter and Jennifer Andrews) advising of the need to first receive the approval of the City of Orono before the division ^d combination can be recorded by the County. They were further advised in that letter that the division would be accepted under a Class I metes and bounds description division. Upon receipt of the letter, Mr. Roden contacted the Cit>' staff to advise that he had no knowledge of such a division and combination. The information in your packet suggests that such an exchange or transfer of land did occur between Rodens and the former owners of 480 Orchard Park Road in November of 1971. Please be advised that a lot split combination was not approved in 1971 and that the subdivision reeulations at that time would have required the filing of a subdivision application. The current regulations also require subdivision approval of the City. Telephone (612) 47^-7357 • FAX 4TM)5iO Chicago Title Insurance Company September 27,1995 Page 2 Please note the owners have been copied on this letter. It is my advice that you deal directly with the current owners in preparing for the necessary subdivision application. Please contact my office if you need more detailed information on the filing of the subdi\ision application with the City of Orono. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator JAMAsv cc:Robert J. and Lorraine E. Roden, 460 Orchard Park Road, Long Lake, MN 55356 Dexter and Jennifer Andrews, 480 Orchard Park Road, Long Lake, MN 55356 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Rolf Erickson, City Assessor > I §1 I P|li»/ao '■'•;■ *. '> ' • ** ^2 »./ brtir^rn 10:13730 ro«iNo.5.M lEin!( 9nbeiiturr,. .»«.«.»*<. , i«V ’- . .""H'f .. Kobort J. Uo(len ^uid I/>rr^»inp E, Rwon, hurlvino nml .’’ovoiBbcr wifb: •if tht Counii! uf . Ilcniinphi .............. ntui ^Utln nf WimirinU. nf the. first pnrt^timl Wq_Unr K^. Riulc «r»d. Ifcl(T** Vlf^v , p«r<A''’l .nenncpiii nml nf , Hinnp.'jotii , ........»ttf th^ C<NUily of partitM of the oecuni part. IBHncitfelf). T/int llte fttJd part the Arsi port, in eoniitlerafion of Ma aiim of __________ _____One .Dollor oiid other ynluablo_cnnaldoi*ntJon^ —-------—-——— DOLTJifiS !n WlOW /,f hnnd f»nh1 htf Ihr mi/rl portirM of the .if»Minrf port, the rrctlf^ whereof it herthy nd^nort't- rtifetl, tlo hrrrhff Cmntt llnrtfntn. Sell, nml Corti-rj/ unto the $nid pniiies of the seeond port ot joint trnyite nn$l nnf «• trnnnts in romnwn. their nsHUnst, the eurvUvr of $altl parties, nifd the hflrt and oMMifineof the imniror, Fmet'cr, oil tmrl or pmrel _ of land lyind nml brtnf in the County of ..... ..''Ponopin and Sit, »f Minnrsairt, drerrihetl ns fotloiVM, to-irit: The C<»utli 15 foot of the North 100 foeb of the Went 177 feet of I/it 10, Orchnnl P.’irk, Hennepin County, HJniionotn, eeconllnR to the duly recorded pint tliereof. State Deed Tnx duo hereon ^TE OP U 0 2. Z 0 g r9.i«i5 _____ 9o Jl^llC anb li Jbottf'* Toti^her tdlh oil the hereditament* end appurtenonse* there* nnlo briuofiin;! or in nnytrite upfiertaininfit to the raid partiei of the teeoml part^ their o*$ign*, Iba tur> viror of fold p>irl!e*. and the heirs oml atditnit of the *undvoi\ Forextr, the said partits of the second part taking It* joint tmant* nml not os tenonl* (n rt»»»wi»on. ^ . . . , . . * Robert J. floden nndLorrnino E. Redon, hijrbnnd and wifeAnd the snitl V Ih7fir,l U*«ielve»7 liielr ... ,^afra, executor* niid arFiiiiruVmfara do ........ eotxnnnt trith the mid portir* of the seeond part, their nMtfir,*, the turvivor of mUl fiortles, and (he keirs and asdilmi of (hr survivor, that .... ht/I Jirfsi’d In fee of the londe ami prf’rtiiMa aforesaid ond hn iood ri^ld to %f\t and runt»ey the stime in inunnrr nml form- fiforrsald, and thiif the same nr.i free from all Inrumhruut'r*, And the nhove t»orffutnrd and tfrunfe*' lumh tntd premises, hi fhe quiet and f/rureotde /kttfrssion of the ntld pitr/fn of the. nrenud fsiH, Ihetr itssIfitfM, the snrrtvnr of said parties, and the hrlrs and avddns of the sitndrur, a^niftsl itlf /Krvj/io hurfully tlalmlnd nr to chdiii the irfwh nr riw.v Iherteft ifibyaol to Inattiohruiirrs. If any, hrrt inhrfino lurnlhfurd, the said pari 1.®^ of the first ffurt will If'erronl and ftefemt. Jin tCfilhllOlip intirreof. rtm mid luirt ien nf the first imtl ha v« .Ar/iU4»/0Jft tholr.. ffiimt ti thr ihiy and year fird ahnre wriltrn. *0. C resell re of . j'-2r _ .•• \ l- 'u .'1C. . ■ . bt /•■ • •2, r • --'V P iwri'/jio ;p oi vt| •'<1 s;1' fttntc of iWimutfota, Vmt*ili;ef llcn!iciiin I ----------------■%»/. " no tory. .^bl {•:----- --- , u ithin .im/ for Mid Co«n/y, permmtUy abated . - . . Robert J. Roden. end L rrnine.P.,. Rpdon, husbeml nnci wi 1 e, la ma know:*- lo bo the pemotC__ _ (£f^ Kol»> ... . iholr ......... fret art and tlrftd 'iiii ni'hunmnl wiw WIUIAM r. S'»AU Of lU'** MINM N Ss ff 'j• • '4 deeerlhed ftt, and who rxeruted. Ihe /ore^oin(f insfrumenl, -----and ncknuwleddfd that ^hr.V ,:.cntlrd Ihe xume as (n*» i ^Wllllnnik. nrirUG .Vo/rtri/ Piiblir. Hennepin Coiuity, .Vinn. KOTC i TW bUnk U«fi ra*ilt«4 “S<f ffoU” lie l«r «it •k«« iht faiiltiimtiU li tx(«li4 by .Uj# rni»w»wV*f/m , f5.. lailtitntnl U tscrali^ \ it. »» . . •<« ' C» J. :• •. I ! i * t ■; r = A V' J o *: . J) 1 ■ V 5s fO ♦ • •>: t LA imr =** 5 ^ 5 b i’ IrSv • = Io| X CSJ s V. V. ii imi Ci S «n ti t 'I I I 4 ^ f1 i •! t § s l«* ??< »*f II! 1 .H I L< fa at ■9 . I I .V »• ’/ MM I All! It Af 1|H net UftiNTJi li TO OflCAT WrfSICMH MOMICAGt COATOIIATION r O 90% fl3M i— Artfi—. CA not I • ' • e ir r —. •, • • • J # • fr* • .* • a ^ .JaJK* r •J • * % 4' • ' / i •u • a STAC£ ABOVE TIIIS LINE rOfl BECOflOlHO DATA. MORTGAGE ^lUS MORTGAGE rSecutily li»itiu»nenf"| it givtn on Augutt 10, 199B tlic moflgagor it NATIIAUC GRAY, AN UNMARnfEO TtRSON Ti»t S€cuMty Inttfument it gTvtn fa GREAT WESTERN MORTGACi C0RT0RATW5N. A DELAWARE CORPORATION COUNTY CODE; 027 OmCE NUMBER: 37f LOAN NO.: 1 638914 2 r6orfo«ttr*|. wlMcIt it orgtfWfeii mv| e«ittn«g ftw? f.iwt i.f THE STATE OF DELAWARC . «ihJ Mliott Mlditst it 945f COtmiN AVENUE. NORfimtOGE. CA 91321 ("Ltltdef*1. 0o«iOW<C« OMrCS Lc*»tlrr» tl>« |H«nc*p<tl »«Hit of NINCIY NINE THOUSAND NINE HUNORFO AND 00/100 Df4l;irt fli S 199,900.00 ) lint flchi l« evtiirttced t>y Rotrowter s rmic Ualcd H»c tAme dale •§ tint Security CINole'l. winch r»ovHl<?$ Im mmilNy iiAymenlt. willi llie fuH debt, if ftol paid •trlM'f. due mvf puyatile on SepiembfH 1. 2025 mid lor inlcrctl at the yearly rate ol 7 900 percent Tint Security Inttnenent secure! lo leiMler: lal lire repayinent ol ll»e rfrhi cvidtiiied hy ll.e Mole, wilfi inlerctl. nod all icnewalt. CHlontiont and Miorlitictt'rHit of ll*r* Note. Pd ihe I'.^yMteoi ol nW oihrr <;<Hns. with iiiloresl. advanced laultN Paiayrafili 7 to protect ll»e teC’Mtty ol Hms Src*e»ty ti«slMiM«cnl. aimI (cl IIh» |ictliMmanca of Oo«rc>virer‘t covftrUMitt and aoreernenit under lliit SeciHity Insirtanefti and tli# Mole fot |lwt |NM|iose. Oorinwer do€t liercby mortgage, grant and convey to lender tli« loBowing detcrilted propefly located e» IIENNEriN Counly. MnNietola! THE NOnilltRLY 100 TEET OF THE WESTERLY 177 FEET OF LOT 10. ORCIIARO PARE. HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA. ACCORDITiG TO THE RECORDED PLAT THERE or. AND SITUATE IN HEFiFJEPtN COUNTY. MINNESOTA. riN/TAX lU: 32 110 23 23 0007 vvtycti ties U« address of 480 ORCHARD PARK ROAD OnONO Miiwwtota 65350 rProperty Addrats*): TOGETHER WITH aO itie Improven.enit rww or hefealler erected on (he properly. atHl all easeinenit. appixtenances. aiHf fi.iuios rovy or hereafter a part of lire tHofieily. All iridacementt and mldiliont thall also be covered by llus Secuiiiy btstaanciit All ol Ihe foregrMng is fclerred to ni Ihi. Secuuly Instruinent as the "I’ropcity.* normowER COVEMAMIS Ih.u Ooirowrr is lawfully tciscd of llm etialo hereby convoyed and has tlie rlylil to tncnij'vir yi.iMi ,‘vmI convry (he Prn|irily ntnf that llie Prr»pci|y if uneitruinlierefl, e«i ept for enCunilM.viret of record. D.wfowcr vy.sriaiils nml w.ll defenri oerrci.illy Iho UUe to the Propeity against all claims ainJ demands, tulriecl lo any anctMiiltrAirces ol record THIS SECUnilV IMSTnUMEMT con.lnnes undarm covenants lor national use anej norrunifotin covenants with Hrnitad variations by juiisdiclion to conslilule a uniform tccurity instrument covering real proptMy. UMirORM COVEHAMTS BoMower pihI LciMier covenant and agree us follows: 1 Payment of Piincipal aiul bilortst: Prepayment and Lata Cliatges. Oonnwer shall promptly pay when due (lie imncipal ol and M.ie.esi on llie debt eviilenced by Hks Mote ainl any prepaymcnl and lale diaigcs due larder (Ire Nole. 2. fuiMls for Taits and Insmance Suh(cct lo applicable law or to a written waiver by lender. Borrower shall pay to lei fer on Ihe iMy nmniUy p.iymcnfs are due iHiiler llie Note. iniIiI llto Mote Is paid in lull, a sum rFunds") for: |a) yearly t »«cs an.J as^estmculs whir l, may attain |>nonty over this Secuiiiy tnsiniment ns a Imm» on the Property; (h) yeaily leasehold paymenis or groun.1 rents on H.e Proppily. if any; (c| yearly ha/artI or piopcrly insurance picnment; (rl) yearly IIOWJ irtsurance prnn.u.ns. d any (e) yr.^iiy moritjage instaance premiums, if any; and Iff any sums payable by Borrower lo ciM er. in accordmee vvilh the provisions ol Parngiaph 8. in lieu of Ihe payment of mortgage insurance premiums. icte items are calierl Escrow lierni lender may. at any tune, colleci ainl liolJ runds in an amount no! to exceed Ihe maiimtjni amount a lender Irr a Icdeially related mortgage loan may requiie for Borrower's escrow account ui,der the f’‘»ccduies Act of t97«1 as nincmied horn time lo hmo. 12 U S C. I 2601 af sag 11 r ^ irmounl. II so. lender may. al any lime, collect and lo un# % in an amount not lo evreed Ihe lesser nmount Lendei may estimate tlie amotnil ol Funds due on Ihe basis of curren t a a e»v icasonaUe estimates of expenditures of future Escrow Items or otherwise in accordance wIlli applicable law. I.w/'i* I”’''' <'-P0»-U ».e insuifj Uv o le.tcial nurncy. ot enlily iKl^J.og lendci. H leiMjpf <s ,uct. or in any retloial Moina loon Oanl. lender tl.atl apply lira Furrdi to pa/ * ** * er nr.-*/ iinl r.luri^]. norrtrwcr Itir lioldrng araj applytrrp lire rnnrja, nitiiii.'rlly analy/lrrg Ilia escrow ' ^ ^"'0 I *e irrow Itrrrrrs. nirtcst lerMler p.ays Oorrowor Ititcre.l on llitr Trintls ■•rnd npiilicaltln l.iw portntls Ir... rr n .n.,lc .....I. a rl,.„u- llnwnvcr. Ir.Hlr-r rr.ay rorpriro Rlrrower lo ,..iy .. ...... nr, i..,|ppo.,.lrn| real es « 1.1. .c..o.r...y scrv.ee nse.l l.y lender ... cn....ect.on v,.,.. lie, loi„, ,,„le,s n|.|,l.c.s|.|.: I.sw provdes ollrerwise U..eii S.r riu.cc...enl rs ma.Io o. a|rpl.cal.le l.sw re.|.».cs inlc.csl lu i,c ..11,1. Icnrler slr.ill rml bo lerprrre.l lo pay Dorrower an/...lores o. *’'--l» xr. II." rn.,.l, n.|.rower «...)! C...I.., ...ay agree in w.ilir.o, l.owevc, llr.ll ir.lr.csl slr.sll Im p.slj or. 'nr .^*' 7 .* «■"«>'" clr-Koc. on armnal accniaili.H) of ll.e I .....I,. sl.nwiiro c.cJils a..d delrils ..... OlllfOPM IfISinuMtfU ronn 30Zi S/90 Cpap. / of vat,I 6 8XM1BIT D HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ''.i: .J e . iTu # n i'.4 p-i r<f^ I' ■ ' .V (u ? I /V' tst SOrzfE 6319S 177.01 f t fc------------/77 - .L.;—o ;s8 O •... KJ *5a S! 1^221 i I NSrZSW 17701 - • • # M’ N 89*23 V «230 EXISTINO LEGAL DESCRIPTIONSCORI^ENTLY APPROVED A. The Northerly 85 feet of the Westerly 177 feet of Lot 10, Orchard Park. B. Lot 10, Orchard Park, EXCEPT the northerly 85 feet of the Westerly 177 faet thereof. PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS FOR APPROVED LOT LINE RE-ARRANGEMENT A. ACCORDING TO THE CURRENT CERTIFICATE OF TITLE The Northerly 100 feet of the of the Westerly 177 feet of Lot 10, Orchard Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds In and for said County. B. Lot 10, Orchard Park, EXCEPT the northerly^Jfe^f the Westerly 177 feet thereof. . noetax T, ^ ClCi- LCKHh^S^C’ e, *iOdL^yJ #• .f*v Ji:, 5 § ^0 h: MAY«^ Of oA oa ^O o: denotes iron marker Bearings shown are based on an assumed bearing basis. Ct.(AK Of oAOMO ^4Tf 4ff *01/(0 TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator A FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE October 14, 1996 SUBJECT: #2186 James Pfleidernrvonne Cooke, 509/511 North Femdale Road Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hearing Pertioent Ordinance: Zoning District RR>IB Application: Applicants have filed a subdmsion of a lot line rearrangement realigning the east/west shared side lot line of the properties. The division will result in an exchange of equal areas at 2,645 s.f. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review; 1. Section 11.03 - Definition 66 (A 1-3). Subdivision may be completed as a Class I division. 2. Section 11.10, Subdivision 10 (A) - Class 1 subdivision requirements. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Septic Map Lot 4 Cooke Property E - Septic Map 511 North Femdale Pfleider Property F - Weckman Memo G - Survey of the Subdivision of Lot Line Rearrangement Description of Subdivision Applicants have agreed to rearrange the lot line to more closely conform to the areas maintained by each owner. The division line will also conform to landscape plantings installed by each owner that have crossed over current division line. A major issue for staff was the impact of the new division line on Lot 5's septic area. Mr. Weckman has completed an inspection and confirms that the septic tanks will be located 20' from the new division line at the southeast comer of Lot 5 (review Exhibit F). Staff Recommendation To approve the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for James Pfleider and Yvonne Cooke involving the properties located at 509/511 North Femdale Road with the conditions that owners of Lots 4 and 5 apply for the legal combination of the smaller parcels and adjacent homestead parcel at the City offices prior to the subdivision being sent to the County for filing. hr I ' • I Application #■a //C'' \ ■• >v7?"' CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION Date Received 9~ 3. 7 -'T Amount Paid • 1 . UO PROPERTY LOCATION Site address ^ S// A^, Propert>' Identification Number (PID) ..v- - : Please check one - Property____abstract or_____torrens? /< Attach legal description to application. /ff APPLICANT Name ^ 7>/x €S (/a €A Address S// JL/, ‘•f Phone (home) Cit> Lc/AfLATA Alf^Zip Phone (work) OWNER (if different than applicant) Name TA/>ifr ^ Cook Address JV/ aa. ^^AtAdALf City U/A r 2 AT A________ AJ.Phone (home^_ Zip Xri*?/ Fiione (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Ta.x Parcels Development Size 1. O Present use (check)X Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units___^ Other (specify)_________ Present Zoning District AA-/6 PROPOSAL X Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per Z. Acres ^7. /to Sq. Ft. Dr>' Buildable Land X Residential _______ Other (specify)_________ L 1 •1 MIiMmum material required for complete preliminary application 1 . Payment of fees (refer to ’’application fees" listed below. 2. Completed application form. 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. 4. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt. Center 3 48-3271). 5. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Zoning Officiafs Signature__________________________________ Date __________ ____ MIM.MUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR CO.MPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Pay ment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Surv ey or my lar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning Official’s Signature _______________________________________ Date______ X I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) S250.00 ’ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $350.00 Subdivision Application (Class I & II) $35000 Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 + $25.00'lot (Class III & all non-residentir.l) Final Plat Application (Class III) $200.00 Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 Subdivision w'easements and covenants min. $200.00 Totals _ Park Fees (to be determined per Section 1 1 .62) _ Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) Renewal of Class 1 and II Subdivision Application S200.00 (No change from original application) _ Renewal of Class III. Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from original application) B. Special Improvement Fees: _____ Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + $.50 lineal ft.; _____ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + S.50/Iineal ft.; _ lin. ft. X .50 ■ S. lin. ft. X .50 ® $ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/stub Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 On-Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00'per lot x_____new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees _____ Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated w ith Subdivision $100.00 _____ PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit The applicant hereby a^esTirprovide all inforrn^HOrTre^ired or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Comicil necessary^ proc^ this applica^n and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by “ ' Da.e /f ^4Applicant’s Signature Owner's Signatur y'C'Ci o-t,-/Date Pr>- Applicant must have'alfsubminals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to anend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. aUN MTE 09/2^/96 BATCH 507 . \;HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INfCRMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0I#CRS LIST REPORT NO. PUlSAOl PAGE 50PROP AMR CMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 58 55-118-25 15 0001 00058 AMRESS UI4ASSIGNE0 NORNEST BANK MPLS TRUSTEE NORNEST BK MPLS TRUSTEE TRUST DEPT 8TN I MARQUETTE AVE MPLS ftl 55A79 58 55-118-25 15 000200056 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB HAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB P 0 BOX 151 HAYZATA MN 55591 58 55-118-25 15 0005 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB HAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB P 0 BOX 151 HAYZATA MN 55591 PROP AMR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 58 55-118-25 15 0005 00505 FERNDALE RD N D A A P A SPENCER DALE A SPENCER 505 FERNDALE RO N HAYZATA MN 55591 58 56-118-25 15 0005 00505 FERNDALE RO N E J BIERNAN INK BIERMAN EmURD J I NANCY K BIERMAN 505 FERNDALE RO N HAYZATA MN 55591 58 55-118-25 15 0007 00507 FERNDALE RO N N SAJJADI I A D SAJJAOI NAMED I AZAR D SAOJAOI 507 FERNDALE RO N HAYZATA MN 55591 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 58 55-118-25 15 0008 00509 FERNDALE RO N YVONNE C COOKE MRS YVONNE C COOKE 155 HAYZATA BLVO H 8515 HAYZATA MN 55591 58 55-118-25 15 0009 00511 FERNDALE RO N J K PFLEIDEU I S G PFLEIOER JAMES K I SUSAN G PFLEIOER 511 NORTH FERNDALE RO HAYZATA MN 55591 58 55-118-25 15 0010 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED EDNARD L OELAHANTY I NIFE JAMES K PFLEIDER 511 N FERNDALE RD HAYZATA MN 55591 PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 58 55-118-25 52 0005 0M58 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB HAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB PO BOX 151 HAYZATA MN 55591 TOTAL BATCH 507 00010 iiJ oO / • I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF. * % // DATE 9-25% k "r>. %tei J?x:: * N ADDRESS CODE __ CITY OF ORO 40 Date Connected to SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY CARD Municip.1 S«wer ^eiQAji:>A L^ , D ;a A:\oB K Standard tranch ^ / □ Mound ^ aLM./ Syitem tvpa □ Other ----------------------------------------------- Leja, OMcriptioo /v4//CcOaY Permit No. ------------Date of permit ^ 7 - ?*7 Initaller /? V, Wy Pi-At^ .______ No. Bedrooms Building type AeS/P€AJg.£ or GPO 3 Uundry X Oithwather Garbage Disposal SEPTIC TANKS: Material CrsjJC^ Proper ouiftl and inlei__________Baffles .Capacity 1) j/2) y/ Liquid depth to RO level Height of tank bottom above water table Distance to nearest building DRAINFIELO: Total length of lines Number of lines Trench width Height of drain field above water tableTotal treatment area (sq. ft.) /OCO ^ J. il ^ Type of filter material > ' ^ f^OcX> Soil type SIL.r^ on XAA>Qy Distance from nearest bldg. Depth of fill over drainfield Tift liee Parc rate mln/ln .Depth of rock over tile .under tilt WELL DATA eo Eow » c 31 1 ^ « G Xr V 5 c •0«1( sscc ^ § i >.s « ffl i/i *cO f0» Ji % a S Eo 3 \A E(« 5 .5 \n 0 rs. JI 8M o S>I t .1a. n %u TJ Hu I y ;r V t k INSPECTION RECORD :• PUMPOUT RECORD / / ^ ( LOCATION ( DATE COMPLIANCE DATE GALLONS I I SKETCH / AJos^APAt-ii^fy ^cyr^t^i VtAttca A\rr ix>ca,t&^ i I S / -VI nie5Zr5 ________ r\Q'\ iofriflgclj n«to - nsf/S 9-/-^^ .7 a C-CONFORMING S - SUBSTANDARD N - NONCONFORMING Include: 1) Well location ”~2)*"bistance7fom'house to ^ ""scpTic tanks, dist. box, and drainfield 3) North arrow and road I F*•r 1 CITYOFORONO ADDRESS CODE ___ Oiti Connected to SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY CARD Municipal Address AJc/ZT^ /Cz> Property l o 3^V/^*'^3 /3 ^003- ^ Standard trench ”P 4 • / System type O Other _______________________________ Legal Description . r—f ■ Permit No, ^_____Date of permit ^ ^ _InstaUtf ----------------------------- ■..— Building type C No. Bedrooms or GPO 1/3K Laundry X Dishwsher Garbage Disposal SEPTIC TANKS: Material C^oaJC. Proper outlet and Inlet___________Baffles Capacity 1) Height of tank bottom above vvater table ter ' ■* Liquid depth to RO level ^_____ 5"o' tO "O 5 c 9 3o •-m £. I I I I 6 oc * Distance to nearest building ORAINFIEl.D: Total length of lints Total treatment area (sq. ft.) _____ Type of filter material _____________ Nurr.ber o* lines Trench width Height of drain field above water table Soil type Distance from nearest bldg. Depth of fill over drainfield Tile sire Perc rate minrin Depth of rock over tile under tile I rS i/y c \ t & «• Ms M 5 E 0w.1 8 o Vi E .5 O PV. &I •Dbu r: i Jf- a* LOCATION INSPECTION RECORD DATE compliance y-Jh&L. aJO ^i-tizpAciJoC, */ /VD ♦w».C/r^ciAj>p KiC-vST? (p 7 Oo ^Urfefirv^ nr^'^^trJI 3^ 2 <^/jyfr7C/f^ - P^|V~______3. 7-//~?5T r^P X C-CONFORMING S - SUBSTANDARD N - NONCONFORMING Incl joc: 1) Well location 2) Distance from house to septic tanks, dist. box. and drainfield 3) North arrow and road |r L. r- TO:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Planning and Zoning Administrator FROM:Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager DATE:October II, 1996 SUBJECT: Septic Review for Application #2186, James Pflieder and Yvonne Cook * Subdivision The proposed lot line rearrangement results in a new property line v ery near the existing septic tanks. In onder to meet’City standards the septic tanks must be at least twenty feet from the new property line. Based on the proposed lot comers as staked by Coffin & Gronberg, Inc., the nearest septic tank to the property line is twenty feet. As the setback is satisfactory, I recommend approval of the subdivision. .......- —- - ■ —■ I****"- 1C.', ■ >r. -: ^ TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, Citv Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:October 8, 19% SUBJECT: #2175 Frank and Susan Koubsky, 4784 North Shore Drive - Variance Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Lot area = 16,190 s.f. or .37 acres Application: Applicants seek approval of a street setback variance from the rear street lot line to allow construction of a 24’ deep by 30' wide garage addition at the northwest comer of the existing residence. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.24, Subd. 5(B) - Street setback variance. Required = 35' Proposed = 20' (24' to 27' from travelled drive) Variance = 15’ or 43% 2.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. A. 75-250' setback area = 4,550 s.f. Allowed = 1,137.5 s.f. or 25% Existing = 670 s.f. or 14.7% Proposed = *0 ♦Proposed hardcover. Exhibit E, has not been recorded. Applicants should clarify. B.250-500' setback area = 11,640 s.f. Allowed = 3,492 s.f. or 30% Existing = 2,471 s.f or 21.2% Proposed = *3,079 s.f. or 26.4% ♦This assumes the 490 s.f of driveway is to be removed although applicants have 413 s.f. of available hardcover improvement area within the 250-500' setback area. Applicants failed to complete proposed hardcover within 250- 500' setback area and must specify area of existing drive to remain. 3.Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Review of structural coverage. Total lot area = 16,190 s.f. Allowed = 2,428.5 s.f or 15% Proposed = ♦ 1,990 s.f or 12.2% ♦Does not include 421 s.f of deck area as deck does not have railing and is at grade level. No variance required. Zoning File #2175 October 8,1996 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property 0^\'ners List D - Neighbors Acknowledgment Form E - Hardcover Inventoiy 75-250' Setback Area F - Hardcover Inventory 250-500' Setback Area G - Survey - Applicants' Site Plan H - Staffs Site Plan 1(1-2) - Elevations of Garage Addition J - Access Map - Residences Using Unimproved Park Avenue K - Ownership Key Applicants propose the removal of the existing access at North Shore Drive and construction of a garage addition at the northwest comer of the existing residence. Access to the property will now be via unimproved Park Avenue at north lot line. As applicants' addendum information notes. Exhibit A, topography is steep at North Shore Drive making access during winter months a hazard for both applicants and the public who drive North Shore Drive. The garage addition will meet all required setbacks except for the street setback at the north lot line. No other variances will be required. Review Exhibit J, applicants' property is identified as No. 6 on the key map and is the next to the last property served by the private drive. Members may remember the property defined as No. 5 on the access map. The new owners of No. 5 has obtained a building permit for new residential construction and has been assigned a Tonkaview Lane address (4777). Koubskys have been advised their address will be changed to Tonkaview Lane with the relocation of the access to the property. The property will be assigned the address of 4779 Tonkaview Lane. Hardship Statement Refer to Exhibit A, applicants note the severe steep topography in the south yard creating problems during winter months. The existing garage will be expanded into living space. The travelled or developed drive is located to the north of the 30' right-of-way. Applicants will have adequate room to back out onto driveway. The pattern of development appears to be consistent with adjacent properties. Applicants' driveway is the next to the last driveway at the west end of the drive serving a total of six properties. Issues for Consideration 1.Review Exhibit H, note existing shed located in unimproved right-of-way. Should applicants' 7 l/2'x7 1/2' shed be removed from the Park Avenue right-of-w'ay? k Zoning File #2175 October 8, 1996 Page 3 2.Should the depth of the garage be reduced from 24' to 22'--21' to reduce the setback variance to the north lot line? Options of Action Deny as proposed. Planning Commission Members must make the necessary findings for denial, refer to Section 10.08; or Approval as proposed or amended. If approved statT would recommend that the following conditions be included in your recommendation: 1.Existing access at North Shore Drive shall be removed prior to the final inspection by the Orono building staff for the new construction. Applicants shall obtain a permit from Hennepin County DOT prior to the removal of the access drive. Applicants' new address is assigned as 4779 Tonkaview Lane. Applicants shdl be responsible for |m>viding appropriate signage at Tonkaview Lane and Paric Avenue entrance. 3.Applicants to provide clarification if portions of drive in south yard are to remain within 250- 500' setback area. Applicants have 413 s.f. of hardcover improvements available. 4. Should the shed be removed as a condition of this approval? CITY OF ORONO - VARLANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # 7^ / 7 ^ Date Received ir - Amount Paid f 'A PROPERTY INFORMATION SilcAddrcss 0'?9<^l Shcve tAiv/g____:_________ Propert>' Identification Number IP.l.D.) <'■ I:i ■ ' ~ 7* * Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Propertt^cquired /^f> / 9^/______________^_____________(month/year) I (do) ^do ndt> also own the adjacent parcels of land. PresentW^ property: residential ___^other (specify) Zoning District:________________________________________ Phone (home) QHri ~ I 0-APPLIC.^ Phone (work) B- Tt/'/kc/ Or ^ity: C^^cv7q Name Address: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _____________________ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address:Citv:Zip:. equest r f • It itr-1.----1----------------------«»>««. (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED 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 conditions preventing __ ^ ^ _ / — / / .mj—y 'l. ^ t ^ i ! t 1 (attach additional sheets if necessary) / \/ r \ REQUIRED SUB>nTTALS / I All of the following information must be submitted bv the appUcaHon deadline date ini order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. 2. j. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Propert>‘ Owners List of o%vners within 150’, labels and plat map (>’OU must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘/i" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade, are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘/i" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/j" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property'. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). .As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any oUicr persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The .Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vflui variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date ^ OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable cnuv’ onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation^d verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date ^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to anend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 ' A ‘ . ? 1 ; i I IS 0T-ii7 r, 12* i '■^ f~r-'^?}-!l .-'/ ■5 ‘^Wi, // '^ / < JO) "y/?./).-7 ’! ..•>• —*Vr'1 ■ ■*<v ■■■ ■ ■ j»' : .1— 2'/ . A ' J ' ' '/ / V^ ^ ^ f < 1.. • /y' ^ '.' - ' ^4j“ /“^ ?, * f X w V# .' ^N«< / W'l ' / f "••/•••' !■ .. / ; ^y>! ! ^7 iP)K:'A> 4'¥ L J'c[{1 '4 OID / ^ 9'' iWe.. "'<<7 ' /' ^ I j '/ ^ «o/, 4/ _ 4-^ .-A'A >■ ••-' » ■.' •- j,.;- X . .. • "P /^ (. . i* V \t X -• -' / ■'«^' .4<-‘ 't<'^fvr%><4, /{tO) / <v '^'/: <?«x ''' x'x\^ I I -K vd^-^ t '•'” ^ 07 V IN IJ ^ 7^ " / 1 »)'7 j v' -V,' \i-cb -I ':&%l„f, A r' ! S < 55) :ir% 'f -< -r/ ;$NJ ''■'ft‘■'Wf '■ a:««« J -»/4 § •*y 1^' • vvk'ik- p-< "* * c;; '. / N I*. ':. “ V \ \ '‘NO ^/X o'.V ^<1;^ ■^< "t >i' /■ ' , . VC / * mm DATE 07/EE/f4 BATCH 507 MEftcpiN ccrjrmr property imfowiation systemPROPERTY QHNERS LISTPROP AOOR OmER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AODR S4 12-117-24 41 0001 04M1 HINNEAPOLXS AVE C S THOMAS ACM TRADER C S THOMAS I E M TRADCR 4801 MINTCAPOLIS AVE HOUND MN 55364 PROP ADOR OmER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 07-117-23 32 0011 00038 ADDRESS UHASSIGNEO RICKARD D CLIFFORD RICHARD D CLIFFORD 10155 6REEN3RIER RO 8208 MINNETOliU MN 55305 PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 07-117-23 32 0021 04755 NORTH SHORE DR G R EVERSON P H E EVERSON GARRY I MARIE EVERSON 4755 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 PROP AOOR QMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 07-117-23 32 0057 04755 TONKAVIEH LA LELAND S MARTINEAU ET AL LELAND A PATRICIA MARTINEAU 4755 TONKAVIEN LANE HOUND m 55364 ' ^.. ■ t REPdlT N0« PI435401 PAGE 1938 07-117-23 23 0027 04765 TONKAVIEH LA D A A P E AFFELDT OHIGHT A PATRICIA AFFELDT 4765 TOrtUVIEN LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0010 04750 NORTH SNORE OR JAMES R THOMSON ETAL JAMES THOMSON 4750 HOUTH SHWE OR HOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0012 04784 NORTH SHME DR S A SCHAUER A F E ROUBSKY S A SCHAUER A F E KOUDSRY 4784 NORTH SHORE DR MOUID MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0013 04798 NORTH SHME DR OMEN M DUPONT GHEN M DUPONT 4796 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND m 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0022 04775 NORTH SHORE OR D E BOLL A S E BOLL DOUGLAS E A SANDRA E BOLL 4775 NOriTH SHORE DR hOUHD m 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0023 04795 NORTH SHORE DR HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO LAKE ACCESS LANES 6/19/70 ST DEED 136852 D3 r*' a TOTAL BATCH 507 00010 c-'. .0 ' i'j ( • ••V • "4 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 COUTTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY RHQ(TLED6E AND BELIEF. DATE r\ '( C‘ • ? \ I (we) Adjacent Propertj' Ovners ’ Acknowledgement Form V <L\;t>V ofWg SWt)r^r(»<vo [print name(s)]print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to contirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner \j Date [pnnt nami have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the propert}' located ____________________ also referred to as Land Use Application No.________ I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aw'ar? of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's projepf'^^use requires Council approv'd. Property Owner Date Property If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building 8c Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. % i M^ACK-ZO.vi; (L^CLE ONE) 0-75 CzS-25Qy 250-500 • t I I m • • M A Houve X m •X . .vv«f ‘n...m •m* • • •• X ■ X SS B. CorCiie X a C. Dn'jwav X . • a X a 1• D Side^^alk .........X • • • • • • • . » •X % a E Patio Deck. . • • X • • •• X A mm • • • • • * * *. F. Landscape f X • • las ' - Underlain X mm' .V *• 1 Bv Plastic X Or Fabric • ■ e • / . .. G. Other ’X =s ?r. • .-> ■ • . “ ■ * • . TOT \L HARDCOVER IN ZONE , • TOTAL'PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE /a-^. A C70 - B __HS^O _ Cz». t X 100 » PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONT: A. House % X • • • ‘ % r^» ..cnc»Ji X NVidLh • • •• • >X • * * ■ • ■ s • • • - • • • M • • * «1 X •a 1, - ^ ■'Y^ B. Garaee X a 1 » G-. Driveway __ _X a X # •=* • D. .Sidewalk . .X • a •X « E. Patio Deck X • •• 1 X * « • F. Lanuscaoe X *•••• •• Underlain X = ' Bv Plastic ■ ■X Or Fabric • • G. Oihor _ I j ‘i’7 • ^ r ■) • J ! ■ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTM- PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ■ ••• ••____ - B .X 100 - •* » 5oo-iO(j<r 4 «I *•• * S.F. •• •• • • •• a » S.F. S.F. S.F. • •• •a •• « S.F. €70 S.F. S'.F. •• • • 0 S.F. - •S.F. • ■ »% •S.F. S.F. 9 •• •S.F. *ST. •• " ' • ^*s:p.' S.F. €70 S.F.vrsc S.F. / V. 7 J % • i# • ♦• « S.F. • •• S.F. •S.F. ■ • M • S.F. • • S.F. -S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. * ( •1••S.F. S.F. •• •• • >sT. S.F. ■ S.F • f » •# ‘ « S.F o 7,S.F S.F •% • • • A B A B * tt »•••• • X X F. Landscape >c /A ^ f .Underlain______________ By Plastic______________ Or Fabric X X X C. Other I'* - > • 'TOT \L HARDCOVER I.N' ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA'IN ZONE A 2.^7/- B m /h X 100 PROPOSED HARDC OVER IN ZONE A.House X i •..cnjih X ••4 .•'i X • B.Oaraee ,1 ^ ■’X C.Dri ’cway 1 .■; 1 X X D.Sidc'-valk X • ‘ X * E.Patio Deck . « « • • • X X F. • Lanescape X WidJh •• • 4 4 • ^ A a S3 I » I 1 U- * Underlain ■ By Plastic . Or Fabric G. Other dJC, S ^o) TOT.AL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ■ ^ BA X 100 •k %. h k. yz/ s.F. S.F. 2 / <P »• s.F. S.F. S.F. 7 S.F. -2 S F //y s F CT#0 S.F S.F. S.F.^.*f: >% • !L7^s.F. 37 <r.'S.F. S.F. <^C\S.F. S.F. lL ^ i‘^cf. I S.F. S.F. S3 S3 X\ o S.F. S.F S.F •• m ... sj=. ? c. -1-rf ^js.?. ^ ^ '-’S.F. ------Zinj’I /I ^ % A B A B • • • • •* 5 EXISTING. SHED *, Une o1 auNO* s • or. Lot 9. ^ P^RK ^ X ^ \• r % / 'X ^ P A R C4 CNo CO rO s 5^04' 00" tb 8< --32 EXISTING HOUSE ^2 i ’• “»N/* . -* \K' • *• •* ■ - 'rf' ‘.V .>:' I I I I t I I I r-^ ; Deck ‘ Of, ;or. Lot 9.. ■. 5 P»,RK c 0 u 14 ••t: ^if >w»f r VI 335 N N 47*06’ 00" W 99.94 ^ y D_A <rV A CN4 ^ iO K CN Qi N UJ r- xf o K) "-2 fi;c J*' ' •* A______^ inr* • ly \inc of ^iCKLUNO* S .1 c’ \i wi^UND' S P^R*^ (''X ' ^ ' I eXlSUNG SHED*.V* ^ P A R avem^^ in cs o OD rO S 53»0A' 00 ” E - -T“i ---------------------------Ir ccnc. . *1 r1 ^J^Vv . !r-^- ■' i-f' •. -- .■• v;’'.■>"•• •i* '^• r.'sa^;-:'; v.V' EXISTIh^G HOUSE - - - - “33.5 -«*•--' « ,CK u UND' S PARf- ■,, C ot; J ». I I I h MX) CM ^'y-1^' f N N 47*06' 00 ” W r y 99.94 0 A n •I c ^ CM ^ CD K CM O N o «»2r# _J LEFT SIPE FRAMIN6 E 24'-0" WIDE 4/12 ROOF PITCH 16* O.C. I n I • ^12 ROOF PITCH lilTH OPTIONAL PCRSOMCL DOOR 2xd R\D&t 6* O.C.16* O.C. 2x4 <3ABLE 5TUI2S • 16* O.C.------------ 2x6 RAFTERS O 16* OXi.----- I N. I I Mr. and Mrs. David Stanley 4735 Tonkaview Lane Mound. Minnesota 55364 Mr. and Mrs. Larry'Greenhagen 4739 Tonkaview Lane Mound, Minnesota 55364 CITY of ORONO ^ Striit Addriss; 2750 Kelley Pirtway Qrono. MN 55356 Municipal Offices MaillRf Addntt: P.O. Box 66 Cnrstal Bay. MN 55323 0066 Mr. James R. Thompson 4750 North Shore Drive Mound, Minnesota 55364 Mr. and Mrs. Frank Koubsky 4784 North Shore Drive Mound, Minnesota 55364 Gwen Dupont 4798 North Shore Drive Mound, Minnesota 55364 10-21-1'??6 07:29*^ FPiDfl OtE STCE rinlL SHCiFPE 4730910 P.02 9. p aRK :3ARK - N > ‘ ' \ / £XiSTiJ^G SH£0 ••... P A R ^ y E H ^ 5 53*0*' 00" ^ 15.8' ;«! EXiSTir^ \ Deck ■rrrTr HOU^E 0«> ^...... « » i........ 1 I •!_\ C4 o OO fO .7,Kl0M0 ^c 0 u N N 47®06' 00" W 99.94 r Y o ^ '•••••:..... ..........33.5 \ yn K>* ( ' (»^ V.J m CM ^ "43 K csi ;:ir> N LJ «• •ro K) ^ % 0 V ; <r V 'U *'■ j d I iwas? ^Jr '1^ IttiT^slH Jili I'I\ ii] .^hy- '1iiiS!!!li9i! - r jr/j '!.'/ ■di 54. 4UtU if»i rn^mJ ;. r* rt> j,*' J' t> i>-<>'.■ j ■i ' ‘Ciii tfl 01foI—IK-•0•Da. • • • I I'j X: T| 3 Q ffl '£ 'll Tlm HC» % 'i o•T. &#CLO«-« l!:: f '•c- 9 / o . k* I f /% . , 411I d % tn a Biifiijlliii ilMd IS •» 1 'V, r.i^. 1^• '4 >_■ -^X •1c •-H ri • • B I ^4 r.j I O 01 fo•— I Ijl j___ • • --* » S*' ^ ^ r • • • \ ' ■ ^ - ^*, • * rrr i u •* 10-21 -199t. 07:3ml FPOt-1 aE STCIP MAIL SHQF'PE 4730310 P.O' k-•J n - J _ '2^53 _. J JL t • -•7rv- -b t » -> -w t** - f^T /V O f 3I i^V'. t _j —* • V --' c ■'■' I r-r \‘ -- .. ._l 1- ■!• V V • j fe ^ —-. -.1 •i t 9 • — .I «7?C/ / -i----1----- ';?. ..: !.-* i 3iy~o ~ J"00 ^r- 11 &\jJLct — 1**^ - CtflACt- 3</f JU ^ ^ A</-7/ -V M - 3 f 33.^j)4- /6.0 3 ^UJU, //c 'STHutYuAt./ Ov" ^ >r>C<i. — /6 j /fO 4^ AjMovjtA- S.t/3Lf>.^ tn. /S^ <$4lL*f\ Jti ~ ^ I *f ^ ^ ® ^ ^ //« l/«.<.*.4M<<Cg /o a*/ -S’ <8 ~ '^fJ^ Sc/i-stA( ^ /O \i d>U ^c « ^ l/dLV« 3lo / A7o cy/4/- /^4> (^^3 ^ /)UUK^ ^fo otw ffo-^ /**<U.,4iUL 3x1 ^ vA4«/y C#*-tl^ 300^k /VAk\K <l»«,t.’ ^I04i^ I^Vt\JiACtflfi (HU4-~ » _ i: .n^.^ .^ftlBilB TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Lindquist and Orono hianmng Commission Members Ron Mcorsc, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusih, Building & Zoning Administrator October 8,1996 SUBJECT: ^2176 Daniel S. Perkins, 55 Landmark Drive - Annual Renewal Conditional Permit A^ariance - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IA, 5 acre minimum, dry buildable land. Total area of property = 10.4 acres (7.2 dry and 3.2 wet). t In January of 1995 Council granted a conditional use permit and variance to permit applicant's contractor to excavate approximately 200 cubic yards of peat material from a designated wetland located within applicant's homestead property. Applicant had originally presented a comprehensive plan for the removal of approximately 2,(X)0 cubic yards of peat to be removed over a ten year period of time. Council refused to grant a conditional use permit for a ten year period and advised applicant to file an annual renewal conditional u.se permit. Applicant has filed the first renewal conditional use perm it/variance application to allow the mining of 200 cubic yards of peat for the 19%/97 winter season. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1. 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 19 - Conditional use permit required as land alterations involve more than the movement of 1(X) cubic yards of material. Applicant proposes the excavation of 200 cubic yards of peat during the 1996/1997 winter season. Section 10.55, Subd. 8 - Variance is required as dredging is proposed within a designated wetland where such alterations are prohibited by code. List of Exhibits A - Application Al-Applicant's Addendum from 1994 Review B - Plat Map C - Property Owrwrs List D - Plan for Land Alteration/Winter of 1996/1997 E - Planning Commission Minutes 11/21/94 F - Council Minutes 12/12/94 G - Resolution #3512 - Approval of CUP/Variances 1/9/95 H - Access to Site of Excavation I - Gustafson Letter 11/15/94 J - MCWD Letter 10/14/94 K - B. Wopat, Dept, of Army Letter, 10/14/94 L - Cross Section of Ponds M - Construction Plan Zoning File #2176 October 8, 1996 Page 2 Brief Review of Renewal Application Per directives set forth in aj^roval resolution of 1995. Exhibit G. applicant has filed the required annual renewal permit for the mining of 200 cubic yards of peat within the designated wetland on his property. Refer to Exhibits D, L and M, in 1994/95 winter season applicant excavated approximately 200 cubic yards of peat from the proposed southern poral located adjacent to applicant's driveway. Applicant’s contractor did not mine peat within the 1995/% winter season. The current permit will complete the southern pond at approximately 5,000 s.f. in area. The larger pond located to the northwest is proposed at approximately 25,000 s.f. 3.2 acres of wetland within applicant's property is part of a contiguous wetland system consisting of 150 acres. The wetland is not a DNR protected wetlaiKl, Both the DNR and Watershed District will not require permits and the proposed scope of the excavation will fall under the Army Corps of Engineers Nation-wide Permit (Refer to Exhibits J and K). Loren Butterfield, applicant's contractor, has been mining peat within another part of this wetland for over thirty years and received approval of a conditional use permit application in 1989 for the mining of 3(X) cubic yards of peat each year within his own property. Butterfield, a landscape contractor, now estimates that his business would use approximately 200 cubic yards of peat each season. Refer to Exhibit H, Butterfield’s property abuts the subject property at the northwest comer. Access to the site will be achieved via this corridor and not Bayside and Landmark Drive. All spoils will be stored in the upland areas on Butterfield's property for use during the spring and summer of 1997 as peat loses its physical value if not used within a short period ot time. Staff can report no problems with the first year’s excavation in the 1994/95 winter season. The City Engineer recot.unends that the same guidelines be followed as required in his report of 1994, Exhibit I. Since the original review, the wetland still remains an unprotected wetland by the DNR. The Watershed District w ill not requ* . a permit and the Corps of Engineers would permit the excavation under a nation-wide permit as in the earlier review. Issues for Consideration 1.Wildlife habitat would be enhanced, open water areas will provide a sediment trap, the variety of slopes to open water area would encourage more beneficial wetland/aquatic vegetation, retention of mnoff would be increased as a result of the excavation — Are there any issues that should be addressed in the current 1996/97 application? Options of Action To approve per the findings and conditions of the original resolution granting a conditional use permit and variance in the 1994/95 winter season; or Denial. If the application is to be denied for this current season, members should list necessary findings and may refer to Section 10.55, Subd. 12(D1-12) and Section 10.08, Subd. 3(A1-12). ch 1 « I ■fc" [ % s’4 Application # J ^7^ ’<4 Date Received V- i- VC Amount Paid ^ iSt.h-r / 4l jLi/f CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 5*5^ L- ^ D/Y>;k pr^>C Type of Application to be Filed ^oA>i P<T7^KiA-i-> Propcrt>' Identification Number (P.I.P.Bf^ OtJ ~~ 1) 1 2.^ 2-Z» CO JO APPLICANT! Name Ai^t tS~ Address ^ ,5~ C/Vror>/Vn>k Cit>’ O Phone (home) - ! 7 fS i Phone (work ) 4 OWNTR (if different than appHpant) Name ^ /^H'O Phone (home) Phone (work) Address City Zip. Date ProfCrts^Acquircd_____^ ^ I (do) Kdo not) ako owm the adjacent parcels of land, FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - (monih/year) $ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application $175.00 Residential Accessory Use $250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $200.00 Duple.x Credit/Bldg $300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75’ of lakeshore ____PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) ____After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS ______$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ______$300.00 Vacation ______$200.00 Easement Vacation ______$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ______S350.C0 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ______$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPEI^Y' ^ Present Zoning District P^ n " n Present Use of Property ^ Residential 6 Other (specify). J. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. t f'lk‘1^ Describe request in detail. ^^50L.*f77oA) ^ I ^ Certified Property Ov^-ners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you /Hi)*- must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center. 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed suneyor) - refer to handout for sur\*ey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (e.xisting and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the propern . This would include name(s) of applicant!s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SLTPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11* X 17” OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:___________________________Date____________ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entiy' onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investig^^n and .vchfication of this request. Owner's signature ^ ^ P*=AKiA^5 Applicant must have all submittals into the Cit^ offices 2'' days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission .Vleetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. PERKINS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, jnc. f Ih October 21. 1994 ? n H ’H’r z y • % • . • / .• • :v> CityofOrono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Dear City Planning Commission: I am filing an application to allow my neighbor, Loren Butterfield, to excavate peat on my property. My objective is to have two ponds on my property at 55 Landmark Drive. Loren has dug peat On his property, which adjoins mine, for a number of years under permit through the city. He is approved to do this; on his property, on an ongoing basis. I would simply like to allow him to do the same on my property over the next ten years. I have received letters of approval from the DNR and the Army Corp of Engineers. I have also received an oral approval from Andy Severson at the Minnetonka Watershed district. He assured me a written approval would be coming soon. I have inspected Loren's property, where he has dug in the past and he does an excellent job. He uses the peat that he digs in his greenhouse operation on Watertown Road. He has several ponds that are a haven for wildlife, waterfowl in particular. This is the objective for my own land. Currently, the land is a peat bog with very little open water. Open ponds would enhance the land both for wildlife and aesthetically. Enclosed is my completed application form, a copy of my certified survey (which shows the location of the proposed ponds), a certified 350 foot property owner's list and a topographic survey plus construction plan, both of which I completed for the project. I have not included grading and drainage plans since there will be no grading involved and the drainage will remain the same. Also, hardcover calculations do not seem to apply to this project. It is my feeling that this is a relatively simple Homeowner land improvement project that I am proposing. I hope that it can be approved by the city with minimal effort. Sincerely, Daniel S Perkins enclosure DSP;bvh 730 EAST LAKE STREET WAYZATA, 55391-1769 TELEPHONE (612) 473-0367 TELECOPIER (612) 473-4702 INI ESTMENT MANAGEMENT W Mfl •Aru MS irioH ftysrtR |TM MVSZM M tM IMI IM M M-ii^-ts ti mm^ •MM SMMl »T»Tf «P ntMl srArf M MMi iiM ((.UCI LXM M41LI M M-llf>tS tt MM tSVM MTSIM m 4 % mm • j • MM mm% • • jom • mm |7M MrtXM M LM IMt fW MIM / rMMvf« M fl Mlf #MM liSMiMR M jtms • MraiCIA TOM 4409% • MTOItlA MM !•• MMOH CS M oi-uT-n n om •STM ••rilVf M JOMI « M**T jANt OUMCf CMOIsriHf • 94m MLfUUO STM M*SXOC M M M-lir-tS tl MU 4009% • MMICXO TOM • ••TO|CI« TOM Uf MIOMI LA LM LMt m MtM OMO« MP TAMOSVfO M M-llT-tS tt •MS# 09909% •TATI Ot IfIMI •TATf M ntIM fMII ILUCt LXM nutti so tf-llT-XS tt •MSS AOOMU MCMML • TU MICMAtL TTLMIAMT S«M MTSXOf M MALI ALAIN m fStff SO tS-llT-tS tt OMT •SMO MTSIM M NICHAtl • riLMiMT NfCHAfL PUMAM? SMO OATSiat M MAU ALAIM m MlSf MOA 0099 9999 MM tamaati * S# 9%-ll7^n tt Ml« •OOM lammam M • S AfMXMS • A N AfMXM •ANIIL % • AAmm II AURIfil •• LAMMMK M 101 iSSfO M Ot-llT-tS tt MU MlTf lAMMM M L € MAAACM t J n Lfl C • JMLXt n ITS LANOMM M LONO lAKi lOl M-UT-tS tt MIS AOOOtM VAlASSIONf* • t AfA«tM SAN A«MtM •MIIL S • AATOlCt II MMlHi M LAMMM M A 9999 m MIM TAMAAVtO M of-tir-n tf Ml# MlOf LAMMM M • PSA AAVLt ■tCNAM P • AATOLMH a lYtt UNO TOiOlAM M LM LMf m mam s# •t-txr.n n ootA •MS# •■>•••# UNASSIOM# LAPM»AAA 09 9999999% ASSOC CM Uf C MMfW ITS LAPMMM •# LM# LAAl M MBS# 1# of-ttr«rs ts •#!▼ Mtst LAMMM M * MM L • BAHtM t CASlT MM L • AAMM t CASiT AStO r C|.« X 0M«» MP TAMAATIA MM/AM s# •s-iir-ts to At#t M«S# AOOAfSS UM##J MOtMVt#-#• UtM- B# ••-lir-tS tA •!•! •STTt OATSIOf M • At ■■••■lonr^ •1 S# AS-UT-tS lA •!•• •MS# AOOAfSS • It MWtK# • f I ^ SATSIM LAM m %TT% #AVSXSi M LOM LAAf m mam 1770 SATSIM m LM LAAl m waam vOipi i' -■ ."J 00m un i#/tt/M •ArCN MS ACMCAIN county AAOAfAnr r«tY noM srsTtN LIST (HAORT M. AXASSMl AAM It MIA MANS TAKAAltA MM/AOM S# •S*lIT-tS to SISS •OtS# AOOAfSS IMASSIMt S I I OtMUflts STII# SIMIIMT— srro SAvsiM M LM LAAl M SSSS4 SS St-llS-tS SB OOOt • STSS HArtATM AO JAMS 9 OAOCAS JAMS T SAOOAS STAS MATffroAt AOAO MALI ALAIN M SSSSf BS St-llS-tS BS tots •MSS AOOAfSS •JHASSIMS STATf OA Ntl#l STATI OA NtlOl fIMI ILUCI LXM TAAILI MIS MM TAMAATfA MM/ASOA M lf>US-tS SS •#•• •SSSS MTf ATM M CATNAAIM a csan CATNAAfM A CAAN STAO MATfATVAl M MALI ALAIN M SSSff SS SI lists IS •### OOASS AOOAfSS AfMINS L V • S T St/TTfAPXfLt L V • • P •UTYfAPtll* ITff MATIArOM AO MALI ALAIN M SSSSf SS ft-llt-tl SA Mit • STAS MTIATOM SO MS I surTtAriiLS Mt i •UTTfAPIfU STAS MTlArtM AS NAALt AtAXN M SSUf AAOA AOOA 9990 NAM TAXAAVII MM/ASM SS ft-SlS-tS SA MIS •STAS MTIATM SO L L COM • L N COM LAAAY L • LIMA N COM STAS MTEATOPOI M NAAll ALAIN M SSSSf TOTAL AATCN SOS ooots X ClAnPY THAT TNC PACTS SfAAfSfNTIO AAf AN ACtJAATf M TlUt •fPAtSlHTAriON or INP0SMTX94 AS XT AAAfAAS TNXS QATf gN TMf AfCOAOS OP TME MfMAXN COUNTY OEAAATMNT Of AAOAEATY TAWITX9I. TO TMt ttST Of NT AKJNLlOCt AM MLlEf. OATt », ftCi UHiLlA.' u ’ wWl • I’p:iv>\- • •• { 1 / /’ 1-V*' V *««• Sttrvfy ... C^»l''ucUof» • of Lot I. Olock 2, OATS IOC LANOinc llennepin Count/, Minnesota #1 / I c> o S'S luJLndi < 8 5 ? 2 y ClTYOFOnONO UAPPnovfowirHni^isioiis ^ ^u oiSAPPno»r -VfeoAfE—/£Hk:ib7. ■VJ I r» ) s • m \ % I#. - C!T',' OF 0110!!!'. •'If*. I'-AM__U!hni.'!tin;‘ii .! 5 ,'}'i'nij\T.i.i •M.yniovr.n V.'IVII |ti.v|.;i'i|ir; •M.r;AlTri'jV|i) • I'V_____ I.Ui'-._____ • •••«•# • Ml •i \ >^CKS. GCAV/AI.L3. HIPUAP UKESMOniE C. WETLAND i R E G U L A T I Q I\l 5 onoMCJ on'jfU’Ai'O; mrji Hom tKC.'.v.niON. Fii.ur;i:. GnADiW. unroijiMii. iRUF; rirriviOvVL on ; carjsrnuciiori op an 'v kimu .<>^wm i(r,' /D FT Ui: AfiV r.l fOMHUMH OP Al JY Wl; I I.AfJLVJ ^PcnMirt; a »ii: nGOLnGiioVQii UOCKS TbNtrJ P onJ^ ---------------------------------------------------------- sfjs-^/w J777T------^ V f ScaU t ! l‘Ji Loc.(\-X)^\^ op T OF P^PrT tZff\ vomvtht ^ op U«o'!locat{5!I^i!^aM*‘i-J-!r.i*..^KV® representation of A tiirunt/ rkf * • A i \3 MDsUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 21, 1994 (#4 - i#19Sl - Coumeya - Continued) AppUcara, Todd Coun-.cya, said Proposal A fits the land well. Smith asked about the square footage of the proposed house. The main level is about 1500 s,f. tvith 1000 s.f on the second story. There would be a full basement. A down- sizing of the proposed house was suggested. The ComjTtissioners present ail agreed that althOTgh a smeet over extending the proposed house into the bluff area, the building should fit within the parameters previously determined by the Council. Nei'^hbors had previously voiced their concern whether this lot was buildahle A member Lggested Coumeya get letters from the neighbors e.xpressmg their views on his amended proposeil to be presented at 2 l3.ter meeting. At the Applicant’s request. Lindquist moved. Peterson seconded, to table Application isl981 to the January meeting. Ayes 3. Nays 0. ##1982 DANIELS. PERKINS. 55 LANDMARK DRIVE- „ vi VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC IIEARLNG 8:00-8:25 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth reported the Application is for a conditional-use permit required for land alterations over 100 vubic yards of material A variance is required as dredging a oroposed within a ^'roteaed wetland area. The proposal involves the removal of Lbic yards of material (peat) over a ten-year period. Excavations will crate two ponda The smaller pond would be 5000 s f in area and take two years in time. The toger pond would be 25000 s f and be completed in eight years The e.xcavated peat wou d e to 200 cubic yards each year. Loren Bunerfield, who will be the contractor will use the peat in Iiis nursery business. Butterfield can only use approximately 200 cubic yards each year. Butterfield operates a nearby nurseiy and landscaping business. Butterfield vvi a ow access through his propertv' and create the ponds for the Applicant; and in turn, e wou receive the peat material for use in his business. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNOSSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 21. 1994 {U5 - #1982 - Perkins - Continued) Butterfield operates a nearby nursery and landscaping business. Butterfield will allow access ihrouah his property and create the ponds for the Applicant, and in turn, he would receive the peat material for use in his business. The method of removal would be with a 1/2 yard backhoe. or 3/4 yard in extreme conditions, and moved by thr^e dump trucks, one 10-yard and two five-yard. The holes would be 6’ deep and 50' in diameter. Butterfield would drive over the wetland ponds after it has frozen in the winter time, dig the material, and pile it on his prop>erty tor use in spring as potting material This method is presently being used on his adjoining property. The DNR has sent literature on construction of wildlife ponds and how to rid them of reed canary grass and obtain aquatic vegetation. No DNTl permit is required. Perkins said the ponds will have a slope of 5.1 at six foot depth. The ponds will be touched up after each digging A letter from neighbors, James and Patricia Todd, were entered into the record which gave their support of this plan. Letters from the MCWD and DNR state no need for permits from their agencies The U S. Army Corps of Engineers authorized the work under conditions stipulated in their letter \ia a nationwide permit. Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application #1982 for Daniel Perkins with conditions listed by City Staff and to include a yearly land alteration permit issued by Staff for excavation of peat. The excavation is not to exceed 200 cubic yaids each year and must be performed during vrinter. Mr. Perkins is responsible for any safety problems. Ayes 3, Nays 0. (#6) #1983 TOM AND MAUREEN PALM, 1685 CONCORDIA STREET - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:25-8:40 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants were present. Mabusth reported the Application is for a lal.eshore setback variance required for a second story add'tion, an average lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variances. The existing house and addition is 24x50 ’ located 39’ from the lakeshore where 75' setback is required The structure will erjcroach the average lakeshore setback by 10’. There will be no additional hardcover, but 28% exists in the 0-75 ’ setback where O’ is allowed, and 33% e.xists in the 75-250' setback where 25% is allowed The home is 20 ’ wide and meets the side setback requirement. . \ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 12,1994 (#8 - Item #1980 - A&T De-.clopment - Continued) Callahan gave the Applicant the option to have his application reheard in front of the full ’Manning Commission or to waive his right. It was clarified that the expense of improving the road would be that of the developer. The road would be at the width as it is now with a 31/ extension for the turnaround. Mr. Post found this to be acceptable and waived his right to a hearing in front of the Planning Commission. (#9) #1982 DANIEL S. PERKINS, 55 LANDMARK DRIVE - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARLNG OF NOVEMBER 21,1994, 7:47-8:08 P.M. Mr. Perkins was present. This appliution is for a condition-use penrrit required as land alterations involve the excavation of 2,000 cubic yards of peat over a ten-year period. A variance is required as dredging is proposed within a designated 150 acre wetland. The proposal irtcludes the creation of two ponds, one 5000 s.f. to be completed in a two-year span, and the other 25000 s f to be created over an eight-year period of time. Excavation will be limited to 200 cubic ^"ards yearly and will be developed at 6* depths with a 5:1 slope on the sides. Access will be through the Butterfield property located at the northwest comer of Perkins property. The properties are contiguous. Mr. Butterfield will perform the e.xcavations using either a 1/2 or 3/4 }'ard backhoe. The 200 cubic yards of peat material will be used m Mr. Butterfield's nursery operation and is the total amount he is able to use in a year period. Because of the length of time involved. Cook said some changes to the t x)-systent may occur and impact the wetland. Cook recommended a silt curtain be added to keep the material from running into the wetland in the spring after the winter excavation. The Plai ning Commission asked for annual review by Staff with the issuance of land alteration permit to evaluate the situation. The Staff also asked the Applicant to inform the City if access is varied in order to alert the neighbors. During discussion, Hurr voiced concern over the ten-year period of time involved and would like to see closer scrutiny occur. Kelley wanted to make the Applicant ?ware that ahhougb this land is not a protected DNR wetland, this could change at some point. Callahan asked the Applicant if be wishes to waive his rights to a public hearing of the Planning Commission. Mr. Perkins agreed. The o were no public comments. Council members recommended an annual review of this project. A discussion with City Attorney Barrett ensued over the legal implications when City approves a plan to be completed over a 10-year period of time. Barrett stated it would be difficult to stop such a project if h became necessary'. Council noted the need to create a mechanism that would allow the City to review a conditional use permit on an annual basis, thereby, reserving for the Council the right to stop the project if necessary. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 12,1994 (#9 - #1982 - Daniel S. Perkins - Continued) CaDahan moved, Kelley seconde.1, for approval of a condiuonal use permit to allow the mining up to 200 yards in 1994/95. and directed Staff to develop a recommendation regarding periodic reviews of the mining C.U.P. Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#10) #1983 TOM AND mUREEN PALM, 1685 CONCORDIA STREET - VARIANCE - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING OF NOVEMBER 21, 1994 - 8:08-8:15 P.M. - RESOLUTION #3507 Mr. & Mrs. Palm were present. Mabusth stated the Application is for variances for hardcover, lakeshore setback, and average lakeshore setback to construct a second story over a single story framed structure. Support from neighbors was noted. Mabusth said the Applicant was informed that the foundation was in good condition when the property was purchased. The Applicants gave their permission to waive their rights to a public hearing before the Planning Commission. Mayor Callahan opened the public hearing. Callahan said the Planning Commission asked that the shed be removed because of excess hardcover. Hurr asked if any restrictions were placed on roofing or screening of the upper and lower deck * fhe Applicant said the upper deck would be roofed and that he had no intention of roofing or enclosu^ the lower deck. Mabusth reported there had been no discussion of this at the Planmng Commission meeting. The Planning Commission was aware that a roof was to be installed over the upper deck based on the plans submitted with the application. There were no public comments. Mayor Callahan dosed the public hearing. Hurr moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution #3507 with the additional condition that the lower deck not be enclosed, screened, or roofed. Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#11) #1984 STEVEN NL ENGLUND, 3855 CHERRY AVENUE - RENEWAL VARIANCE - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING OF NOVEMBER 21, 1994,8:15-8:18 P.M. - RESOLUTION #3508 Mr. Englund was present. \ % -Ml & 6400057 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 5 ? A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SU-BDIV ISION 19 JL'AJUC^ \MIEREAS, Daniel S. Perkins (hereinafter "the applicant"; is the owner of the property located at 55 Landmark Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follow's: Lot 1, Block 2, Bayside Landing, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "propeny"); and WHERE.4S, per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 the applicant h.as made application to the City of Orono to permit the removal of 200 cubic yards of peat from a 5.2 acre wetland within the property. The wetland is a protected wetland of Lhe Citv of Orono. Per Section 10.55, Subdivision 8, the applicant has filed a variance application as the code would not permit the e.xcavation ol materials within a protected w'eiland. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVTD by the City Council of Orono. Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1982. The property is located in the RR-1.4, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring five acres of area. Two acres of which must be contiguous. The property consists of a total of 10.4 acres, 7.2 acres of dry and 3.^ acres of wet. *. » . * • • fcB 21 1993*Page 1 of 7 I i CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITi COUNCIL NO.O — > -r> O o . -V 3.Three members of the Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 21, 1994 and recommended approval of the proposed variance and conditional use permit based on the following findings: • • A. The excavation of tiie wetland on a scale limited lo 200 cubic 3 ard.^ v. ill have a ne^lieible affect on the 150 acre wetland. B. The excavation of open water areas will enhance wildlife habitat. C.Ponions of this wetland have already been excavated for the purposes of retrieving peat for the past thirty years without any negative impact on the wetland or the existing wildlife habitat. D. The excavation of ponding areas will improve wate-* storage and provid. a sediment trap. E. The regrading of banks adjacent to the open water areas will encourage more beneficial wetland/aquatic vegetation. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessaiy to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary' to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the annual excavation of 200 cubic yards of peat from the wetland during the winter months of 1995 will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neishborins properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding propertv \alues and that the proposed level of use of the property' w ill be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 7 rv«W65»i*0 I CITY of ORONO RESOLITION OF THE Cm* COUNCIL Q 1 c* NO. ^ * CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 and a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to permit the excavation of 200 cubic yards of peat material within a protected wclIanJ oi I’.tc City. Ihc curictu coiiditiOiial use pcnidl is ti-sued for the winter months (January 9, 1995 tiuough March 21, 1995) and shall be limited to 200 cubic yards. Approval of this conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions: 1.The City has reviewed a comprehensive land alteration project involving the creation of two open water areas within a designated wetland on the property to be completed within a ten year period as shown on pages 6 and 7 of this resolution. The applicant shall file an aiuiual conditional use permit for the removal of 200 cubic yards and shall be charged the fee for a renewal conditional use permit as set forth in the City’s fee schedule for the current year. The City shall also waive the requirement that applicant file for an annual land alteration permit upon Council’s approval of the annual conditional use permit. 2.The City has approved access to the site for construction vehicles and equipment to be at the notthwest corner of the property. If access is to be achieved via Landmark Drive, the City must be advised so that applicant can provide suitable notice to all land owners served by Landmark Drive. 3.Authorities granted by liiis resolution run with the property not with the applicant but are permissive only. 4.Violation of or nomcompliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, herebv agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 7 L... CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 ^ ^ Adopted by the Orono Cit>’ Council on this 9ih day of January. 1995 • loror^ M.yiwUn, City Clerk I^opcrty 0\vner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of January, 1995, bv Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of ^ Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behal o t e City. ’ CmSAIMSEMW I MnNIYMUC4MN|B0^ 8 Notary Public Page 4 of 7 hs »«»•»- CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE Cm’ COinS'CIL NO. ______ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) OUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. . - -7- 199.5* , before me a Notar>', nn thU ^/S.T^/7 •• day or _ l?>noar\/------------------------ in. n u. S" ..e as Ohc.) fr« ac. and d«d. CAROLE A HASEMAN N0URrnJBUC4aNNES01A iCaCFW COUNTY My Camteieii E«i« J». 31.2m0 HaNoian’ Publ•r STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) nihis __day of , 199 . before me a Notary Public acknowledeed that he (they) executed the same a^ his (tlieir) Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this __ ^ 199___. before me a Notary' Public within and for said County, personally appeared — executed the foresoina instrument, and known to me to be the person(s) dee“d. acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as hi. (the ) Notary Public Page 5 of 7 fmmrnhffO^ Bonestroo Rosene Anderlfk & Associates Engineers & Architects November 15, 1994 Bonefffoa fhsenc. Andetik sna Associates me is an AJfsmat. we Acoon/^ouat Opporunry £mpta^ Otto G SonesTTDo PE •coe^ W iosene P£ • Joseph C Anoe'ii* P£ MjrviO L SorvjU P£ E Tume* P£ G»e^ » Coc^. PE Thoera^ C Ncy^. ftoOer G Sc^ur<hL P£ Su«^ M EDr**n CPA •Se^o Co^witjnt Howr^ A S^nibid PE A Go^oon PE Pooe- P PV»<p^ PE a Posttf. PE 0«v<3 O LOSICOCJ. PC Poorr C Pyssek. a i a }e^j A Soii^^on. PE A wansc*^ P£ Vic'^ae " Saurr'.ann P£ P^3 PE Tn<y»as P At jenoei A i A Dc^'a - C B^'5a»« PE T^C"*a$ A Sy^ PE PTce c J Ste^c<yg PE iimae Va^^^a. PE Vfic^ae P tau PE A^nes M P ng A i C P r»^c'T^ai w Pnrjon pe M<nae C Lynch p£ James t Matand pe Jeny O Pemch PE Sc3r j Af5ane*j PE P AndfTcn PE V.ar% P Pc*t PE Va'‘* A Sen PE Ga^y W Vyen PE J Ga-''on A : A Zi^e J E jgrren. PE A Pxk Schmet. PE Ph»t»p J Cas^i PE Ma^ D VlfWPi PE M»»es 8 Jensen. PE L Phii^ G'avef PE Ksitn L W«men PE Ga<> O Krrstohez. PE itrtn ff vapo PE Douglas J 8eno*t P£ Shawn 0 Gusta^*- p£ Ceerfjo Obv»ef P£ Pau< G Heuet P£ Jonn P Goasr PE C**anes A E'c^sc'^ tec Pawe'sky Naran M Olson James P Engeiharc: Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Perkins Wildlife Ponds File No. 139-1982 r % 7 /> ’f Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the proposal to create two open water wildlife ponds within an existing Type 2 wetland. As the wetland is not a DNR wetland, the jurisdiction for wetland alterations is with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the Local Government Unit (LGU) for Orono. The LGU has already reviewed the alteration and will not require a permit to do the work. The proposed wildlife ponds are acceptable from an engineering standpoint. However, we request the following information be provided prior to construction: -Method and/or equipment proposed to complete the excavation and transport off site -Routes to be used for equipment access and transporting the material -Schedule describing which times of the year the work will take place -Location proposed for material storage Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. /,JL^ Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 VtWU MINNEHAHA CREEK WATEHSMCO tOlMAIIt WATERSHED DISTRICT 15500 Wayzata Boulevard 611 Twelve Oaks Center Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 offict: (612) 476-7970 fax; (612) 476-7973 BOARD OF MANAGERS: Thorr^s Mac«6 Jr. Pres. • C. Woodrow Love • John E Thomas OarHson unoiey • Thomas W. LaBounty • Martha S Hartfiei • Pamela G. Hot n UKf MINNCTOMU October 14, 1994 . V* Mr. Dan Perkins 55 Landmark Drive Long Lake, MN 55356 Re: Mining of peat from a wetland on your property in Orono, Minnesota Wenck File No. 0185-01-151 Dear Mr. Perkins: The Miimehaha Creek Watershed District understands that you wish to allow Loren Butterfield to mine peat from your property for use in his greenhouse business. The resulting excavation will create a wildlife pond within a much larger, approximately 150 acre, jurisdictional wetland. Only a small portion of the above wetland is on your property. Upon review of the 1991 Wetlands Conservation Act (District Rule L) and the District’s Wetland Alteration Rule (District Rule D),the proposed project does not appear to be addressed by either rule. Therefore, the District is not requiring a permit for the above referenced project. If you have any questions, please call me at 479-4224. Sincerely, WENCK ASSOCIAT ■\X\J Andrew E. Syverson, P.E. Environmental Engineer AES:jmm cc: Lyle Oman, City of Orono N;\0185\01-»34\ASIOI 134.lir DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMT ST PAUL OiSTPiCT. CO«PS OF ENGINEERS ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS CENTRE 190 FIFTH STREET EAST ST PAULMN5SI01-1S38 October 14^ 1994 P€»LT TO ATTf NTlON +,... ^ ti* r^~. ^ o.*i ss* s Construction-Operations Regulatory (93 “2043-NW-JJY) Loren V. Butterfield Greenhouses Mr. Loren V. Butterfield 3925 Watertown Road Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 1 I “tS wt'-^ , c row\c> .1 Dear Mr. Butterfield: We have reviewed information about your project to discharge dredged material incidential to the dredging of 0.4 acre of peat from an unnamed vetland. The project site is in the SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec. 32, T. 118N., R. 23W., Hennepin County, Minnesota. This work is eligible for authorization by a Department of the Army nationwide permit referenced below and described in the enclosures, provided the enclosed conditions are followed, including the disposal of unwanted dredged materials on an upland site. This determination covers only your project as described above. If the design, location, or purpose of the project is changed, you should contact us to make sure the work would not result in a violation of Federal law. It is your responsibility to ensure that the work complies with the terms of this letter and the enclosures. IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED STATE AND LOCAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS BEFORE YOU PROCEED WITH THE WORK. If you have any questions, contact Mr. Joe Yanta in our St. Paul office at (612) 290-5362. Sincerely, Enclosure(e) Determination: 33 CFR 330-Appendix A (26) wt S 4 1 i . w ^ Construction-Operations Regulatory (93-02043-NW-JJY) Enclosure B. Nationwide Pemit 26. Headwaters and Isolated Waters Discharges. Discharges of dredged or fill material into headwaters and isolated waters provided: a. The discharge does not cause the loss of more than 10 acres of waters of the United States; b. The permittee notifies the District Engineer if the discharge would cause the loss of waters of the United States greater than one acre in accordance with the "Notification" general condition. For discharges in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, the notification m.ust also include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, u.ncluding wetlands. (Also see 33 CFR 330.1(e)); ard c. The discharge. Including all attendant features, both temporary and permanent, is part of a single and complete project. For the purposes of this nationwide permit, the acreage of loss of waters of the United States includes the filled area plus waters of the United States that are adversely affected by flooding, excavation or drainage as a result of the project. The ten-acre and one-acre limits of NWP 26 are absolute, and cannot be increased by any mitigation plan offered by the applicant or required by the District Engineer. Subdivisions: For any real estate subdivision created or subdivided after October 5, 1984, a notification pursuant to subsection (b) of this nationwide permit is required for any discharge which would cause the aggregate total loss of waters of the United States for the entire subdivision to exceed one (1) acre. Any discharge in any real estate subdivision which would cause the aggregatt! total loss of waters of the United States in the subdivision to exceed ten (10) acres is not authorized by this nationwide permit; unless the District Engineer exempts a particular subdivision or parcel by making a written determination that: (1) the individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects would be minimal and the property owner had, after October 5, 1984, but prior to January 21, 1992, committed substantial resources in reliance on 26 with regard to a subdivision, in circumstances where it would be inequitable to frustrate his investment-backed expectations, or (2) that the individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects would be minimal, high quality wetlands would not be adversely affected, and there would be an overall benefit to the aquatic environment. Once the exemption is established for a subdivision, subsequent lot development by individual property owners may proceed using trw? 26. For purposes of NWP 26, the term "real estate subdivision" shall be interpreted tc Include circumstances where a landowner or developer divides a tract of land into smaller parcels for the purpose of selling, conveying, transferring, leasing, or developing said parcels. This would include the entire area of a residential, commercial or other real estate subdivision, including all parcels and parts thereof. (Section 404) i s'.. ► Regional conditions: 1. Projects which would cause a loss (as described in 26«c*# above) or more than three acres of waters of the O.S. are not authorized by this nationwide permit. 2. The notification reqpjirements outlined at C. 13. below apply if the project would cause the loss (as described in 26«c. above) or more than one-half acre of waters of the U.S. 3. This nationwide permit is not valid for any project that would cause a significantr adverse modification of more than 10,000 square feet of wetland adjacent to and within 1,000 feet of a la)ce or wetland that is greater than 10 acres in size, as designated by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources **Public V/atej*s/Wetlands Inventory’* maps. 4. This racionwide permit is not valid for any project which is located in waters, or in wetlands adjacent to and within 1,000 feet of waters, that are defined as any of the following: a. Outstanding Resource Value Waters in Minnesota Rules, Chapter 7050. b. Trout streams as designated in Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Commissioner's Order 2450 Part 6262.0400 subpart 5. c. Trout lakes as designated in Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Commissioner's Order 2450 Part 6262.0400 subpart 3. A list of the above waters is attached. 5. None of the nationwide permits are valid for regulated activities in, or in water or wetland areas which are within 1000 feet of a boundary of, a calcareous fen designated by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and listed in Minnesota Rule 7050. A list of those calcareous fens is attached. Section 401 conditions: 1. Projects which include dredging in contaminated or polluted areas or that will disturb known contaminated sediments or polluted substances as defined and as listed by MPCA are not authorized under Section 404 by any nationwide permit unless the applicant applies for, and is granted, a project-specific Section 401 certification from MPCA. 2. Projects which involve utilization of fill or bank stabilization material which is comprised of demolition debris are not authorized by any nationwide permit unless the applicant applies for, and is granted, a project-specific Section 401 certification from MPCA. Demolition debris is defined by Minnesota Rules Chapter 7035.0300 Subp. 30 as solid waste resulting from the demolition of buildings, roads, and other man-made structures including concrete, brick, bituminous concrete, untreated wood, masonry, glass, trees, rock, and plastic building parts. . rv C. Kationwido Permit Cnndilioo^ General Condittooc The follouini* general conditions must be followed in order for any authorization by a nationwide permit to be valid: 1 Navigation. No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse cffca on navigation. 2. Proper maintenance . Any structure or fill authorized shall be properly maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety. ?■ Erosion and filtation controls. Appropriate erosion and siltation controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills must be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. 4, Aguatic life movements . No activity may substantially disrupt the movement of those species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those spedes which normally migrate through the area, unless the aarvit/s primary purpose is to impound water. 5. Equir^ment Heavy equipment working in wetlands must be placed on mats or other measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance. 6. Regional and ra<g-hv.rase conditions. The aaKity must comply with any regional conditions which may have been added by the division engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and any case specific condiUons added the Corps. 7. Wild and Scenic Rivers . No aannty may occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River System; or in a river officially designated by Congress as a 'study river ’ for possible inclusion in the ^em, while the i^r is in an official study status. Information on Wild and Scenic RNers may be obtained from the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service. 8. Tribal rights. No activity or iu operation may Impair reserved tribal rights, including, but not limited to, reserved wgter rights and treaty fishing and hunting rights. 9. Water quality certification. In certain states, an individual state water quality certification must be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330.4(c)). 10, Coastal zone management . In certain states, an individual state coastal zone management consistency concurrence must be obtained or waived, (see 33 CFR 330.4(d)). It. Endangered Spedes. No aahity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered spedes or a spedes proposed for such designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Spedes Act, or which is likely to destroy or adversely modify the critical habiut of such spea^ ^ Non-federal permittees shall notify the distria engineer if any listed s.pcdes or critical habitat might be affected or is in the vidnity of the projea and shall not begin work on the activity until notified by the distria engineer that the requirements of the Endangered Spedes Aa have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. Information on the location of threatened and endangered spedes and their critical habitat can be obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service, (see 33 CFR 330.4(f)) 12. Historic properties. No aaivity which may affca Historic properties listed, or dibble for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places is authorized, until the DE has complied with the provisions of 33 CFR 325, Appendix C. The prospective permittee must notify the distria engineer if the authorized aaivity may affca any historic properties listed, determined to be eligible, or which the prospective permittee has reason to believe may be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, and shall not begin the activity until notified by the District Engineer that the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Aa have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. Information on the location and existence of historic resources can be obtained from the State Historic Preservation Office and the National Register of Historic Places (sec 33 CFR 3.30.4(g)). A Scctioo 404 Onty Condition : In addition to the General Conditions, the following conditions apply only to activiti^ that involve the discharge of dredged or fill material and must be followed in order for authorization by the nationwide permits to be valid: 1, Water supply intaVes . No discharge of dredged or fill material may occur in the praximiiy of a public water supply intake except where the discharge is for repair of the public water supply intake structures or adjacent bank stabilization. 2. Shellfish production . No discharge of dredged or fill material may occur in areas of concentrated shellfish production, unless the discharge b dircaly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by nationwide permit 4. 3. Suitable material . No discharge of dredged or fill material may consist of unsuitable material (e.g., trash, debris, car bodies, etc.) and material discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see section 307 of the Clean Water Aa). 4. Nfitigation. Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States must be minimized or avoided to the maximum extent praaicabic at the project site (Le. on-site), unless the DE has approved a compensation mitigation plan for the specific regulated activity. 5. Spawning areas . Discharges in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. 6. Obstruction of high flows . To the maximum extent practicable, discharges must not permanently restrict or Impede the passage of normal or expected high flows or cause the relocation of the water (unless the primary purpose of the fill is to impound waters). 7. Adverse impacts from impoundments . If the discharge creates an impoundment of water, adverse impacts on the aquatic system caused by the accelerated passage of water and'or the restriction of its flow shall be minimized to the maximum extent praaicable. 8. Waterfowl breeding areas . Discharges into breeding areas for migratory waterfowl must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. 9. Removal of temtx>rarv fills. Any temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affeaed areas returned to their preexisting elevation. i t • •—?—p u 11=- 7 r ■"i- 1 f\J cfCXl^ [:>0>^h l^A-c-v-\- COOT22»ai^ UIaJ ^fLo^ ^ ^ Q\a(^--S> b-«-\ o«^ O ON.TH- P oajD 6 /^o^5 ^ '^Ofe' ^!#-• ^ 'I ^ K V P- 3 ^ V 41^ i W 8 ^ 2C d ^ \, 5 \T\ J < V) VA D VJ Illsl\l s- ^ ^ •p lA HI 2- (2i f -fU^ <^A-r>P Pi.‘^'0 frP f <^-=^'f- ■thy^ ■ ^ •2-5'o' At^'S) L^-S2^ ^ c^'TT^ /2>0 poc^lb VATO <A U- *l!> 3B ^2:>' )< /oo^ Ar^l2>Pr^ PPvCi.'jii T7s7<^ V Pc / PERKINS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. October 11,1996 OCT 1 5 1996 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0006 Dear Jeanne: I am writing in regard to my renewal condition use permit application to dig peet on my property at 55 Landmark Drive (per resolution #3512). My original application requested a 10 year approval period. Although the Planning Commission recomtDended approval, the City Council was uncomfortable with the 10 year time period and decided to require reapproval annually each time we dig. I am glad to reapply annually, however, it occurred to me that if the Council would be comfortable with a somewhat shorter period, say 5 years, it would greatly simplify the process for everyone involved. If the project isn’t completed at the end of 5 years, then 1 could reapply for a renew^ permit at that point in time. I would like to suggest that the Planning Commission and City Council consider this as an alternative to annual renewals. Sincerely, Daniel S. Perkins DSPijap 730 EAST LAKE STREET WAYZATA. MN 55391-1769 TELEPHONE (612) 473-8367 TELECOPIER (612) 473-4702 INV^TMENT MANAGEMENT 1 JkJiL. To:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator October 9, 1996 Subject:#2179 Theresa Norsted, 2811 Casco Point Road - Amended Variance Application - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC Lot area * 13,747.5 s.f. i'' 4 ri %4 Application: The applicant ’s original variance application was tabled at the July 15th meeting at applicant's request. The original application involved a two story addition at the lake side of the residence involving a major encroachment of the average lakeshorc setback line. The neighbor to the east was in complete opposition to the improvement because of the impact upon the views from his view windows at the south and west. The applicant was advised of the hardcover and structural coverage limits for t!ie property and was further advised by Planning Commission to consider more comprehensive needs of the property as property lacked a garage. The applicant has filed an amended variance application requesting a detached garage, grade level patio at the lakeside and second level deck at the southwest comer of residence. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Structural coverage variance. Total area = 13,747.5 s.f. Allowed = 2,062.2 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,588.9 s.f. or 10.8% Proposed = 2,165.5 s.f. or 15.7%* Variance = 103.3 s.f. or 0.7% * House/porch 1,328.9 s.f., boathouse 160 s.f., second level deck 88 s.f., detached garage 576 s.f, upper level deck detached garage 12.25 s.f 2.Section 10.22, Subd. I (B) - Average lakeshore setback review. Refer to Exhibit E. The grade level patio that extends beyond the average lakeshore setback line is not considered an encroachment. There is no variance sought by applicant to the average lakeshore setback. 3.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. A. 0-75' setback area = 5,437.5 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 380 s.f or 6.9% No changes are proposed within the 0-75' setback area. f.,'" t •'" [ , Zoning File #2179 October 9, 1996 Page 2 4. List of Exhibits i B 75-250' setback area = 8.310 s.f. Allowed = 2,077.5 s.f. or 25% Existing = 1,448.9 s.f or 17.4% Proposed = 2,727 s.f or 32.8%* Variance = 649.5 s.f or 7.8% * 1,328.9 s.f house/rear porch, 88 s.f second floor deck over grade level patio, 340 s.f grade level patio, 576 s.f detached garage, 35.05 s.f garage deck/stairs, 360 s.f drive (18* x 20') Section 10.25, Subd. 6 (B) - Setback variances. A. Street setback/detached garage Required = 30' Proposed = 18' (traveled road 22') Variance = 12' or 40% B.Side setback/detached garage Required = 10' Proposed = 3' (structure is 3' but 1' overhang places total structure 2' from side lot line)* Variance = 8' or 80% * When structure meets required setback, an overhang up to 1 Vi is not considered an encroachment. C.Side setback variance/second floor house deck Required = 10' Existing = 16' Proposed = 8' Variance - 2' or 20% A - A-1 B - C - D - E - F - G - Application Applicant's Addendum Hardship Statement Plat Map Property Owners List Proposed Site Plan/Survey Hardcover 0-75' Setback Area Hardcover 75-250' Setback Area Zoning File #2179 October 9, 1996 Page 3 H - I - J - K - L - M - N - O - P - Q - Grade Level Patio/Upper Deck. Floor Plan Elevation of Second Floor Deck Cross Section Garage Street Elevation/Garage Side Elevation/Garage Grade Level Floor Plan/Garage Second Floor Plan/Garage 2813 Casco Point Road-Adjacent Property at East 2807 Casco Point Road-Adjacent Property’ at West Planning Commission Minutes 7/15/96 Description of Request Applicant ’s 24' x 24' detached garage is to be located 18* from the street lot line. The doors will face out onto street. Applicant advises this is the approximate location of former garage that existed on the property. Staff has no information on size or location of access doors on former garage. The two story garage will be located approximately 2’ to 3' from the west side lot line at closest location at the northwest comer of structure. The Building Inspector has reviewed the location of the garage on the west property and notes no need for special fire wall construction, even with the 1' extension of overhang. Review Exhibits 0 and P, note garages on both sides are located as close as 1' from both side lot lines of the property. Both garages have doors facing away from street. The actual traveled road of Casco Point is 3-4' beyond the north/street lot line of the property so there would be approximately 21-22' from the entrance doors of the garage. There is approximately 12-14' separation from proposed south side of garage to large mature tree in street yard. The stmcture could be moved another 2-3' to provide a backout area in street yard. Staff is concerned because of the location of the access to the property right at a curved section of Casco Point Road (refer to your plat map, Exhibit C). Applicant has located the two mature trees that she wishes to save on her site plan. Exhibit E. Note the access stair on the east side of the garage structure has not been located and will impact the tree. As there is an internal access to the upper level storage area, the access stair could be removed resulting in a reduction of 34.05 s.f or 0.4% hardcover within the 75-250’ setback area where excesses are proposed. The other phase of the improvement involves the grade level patio and an approximate 8' x IT second floor deck at the southwest comer of the residence. Note the property begins to narrow as one moves to the north, the deck w'ill require a side setback variance. The deck could be located closer to average lakeshore setback line in order to meet the required 10’ side yard setback. The grade level patio extends 8 ’ to the side lot line and wuuld not require a variance but does add to hardcover. i Zoning File #2179 October 9, 1996 Page 4 The proposed improvements result in a structural coverage excess of 103.3 s.f. or 0.7%. No hardcover changes are proposed within the 0-75 ’ and in the 75-250' there is a hardcover excess proposed at 649.5 s.f. or 7.8%. 17.4% exists. Improvements result in an increase of some 15.4% hardcover. Statement of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit B, hardships are reviewed as follows: Applicant notes there is no outdoor seating areas at lake side of residence, either at grade or upper level of residence. The property does not have a garage. The pattern of locating garages at substandard setbacks in street yards appears to be consistent with surrounding properties and immediately adjacent properties. The existence of two mature trees and plantings in yard. The garage is located in the approximate footprint of a former garage. Issues for Consideration 1.Staff has inspected the boathouse structure to determine structural stability as applicant has asked to repair surface of deck on top of boathouse with exposed aggregate concrete or brick. Staff can confirm that the boathouse is in excellent condition. The proposed improvement would not involve variance approval as it would be similar to the structure being re-roofed or painted. The boathouse is an integral part of the access stair to the lake. Stairs are in good condition. There is an old pump house at approximate 4’ height that serves as a retaining wall or structural support for the steep-sloped eroding lakeshore bank. There are signs of severe erosion throughout the entire lakeshore bank. Staff recommends that applicant consult with a landscape contractor to determine the best type of plantings, although staff suspects the need for retaining walls. If this bank is to remain stabilized, staff strongly recommends no removal of structure until applicant presents a future improvement plan for the lakeshore bank. 2.As already noted, there is no need to grant a side setback variance for the upper level deck at the southwest comer of the residence. The real issue is the intense hardcover variance sought by applicant in the 75-250' setback area. What structures can be reduced? Certainly the grade level patio can be reduced in area at 34' x 10 ’ along the front line and 8' x 11' or 12’ along the west comer of the residence. As already noted, if upper level deck is moved to the edge of the average lakeshore setback line, there would be no need to extend a patio along that side. Grade level patio can be trimmed back along the west side. Applicant's information has not specified the location of the 1 Zoning File #2179 October 9, 1996 Page 5 access stair from the upper level deck to the patio. The stairs could connect to grade level patio in front of residence and still be located behind the average lakeshore setback line. 3.The detached garage could be reduced in size. There is no need for the exterior staircase as there is an internal staircase providing access to the upper level. In fact, the exterior staircase will result in the loss of the tree in the northeast yard. Staff recognizes that if garage is moved further south and a turnaround or backout apron provided on property, this will result in an incre^ in hardcover. But where matters of safety are of concern such as in this case,(Jlie City recognizes the need for a variance. Should the garage be relocated so that doors face away from road as with adjacent properties? Garage could be moved closer to road along with access drive and backout apron. This could result in further reduction in hardcover. Members must be able to provide direction for applicant concerning reasonable reductions in hardcover improvements. What is a reasonable level of hardcover improvements for this property? Review the adjacent properties. Both have excesses over the allowed 25% in the 75-250’ setback area. In fact, while you are reviewing the lakeshore/shoreline access stairs (0- 75'), review the property to the immediate east. Applicant may consider some of the following recommendations of staff for reductions in hardcover improvements: A.Second floor deck could be reduced to 6' width resulting in a 22 s.f. reduction in upper level deck or 0.26%. B. C. Stairs and deck attached to garage at 34.05 s.f or 0.4% can be eliminated easily. The proposed garage with deck and stairs is 610.05 s.f. (576 s.f. + 34.05 s.f.) or 7.34%. If you eliminate the deck and stair, what further reductions can be made in the garage? If structure is reduced to 24' x 22', the area of the garage would be 528 s.f resulting in a reduction of 48 s.f or 0.57%. D.Total grade level patio is 428 s.f (348 s.f + 88 s.f) or 5.15%. The patio can be reduced in size resulting in major reductions of hardcover. E.The drive at 360 s.f (18' x 20’) can be slightly reduced if doors were not divided but accessed via one door minimizing the 20’ width of drive to possibly 18 ’. 4 i 1 Zoning File #2179 October 9, 1996 Page 6 F.What of the structural coverage excess of 103.3 s.f or 0.7%? This will be reduced if upper level deck of garage is eliminated and upper level deck of house is reduced - reduction in the footprint of the garage will also reduce the structural coverage. Staff Recommendation There is no valid reason to approve a side setback variance for additions to residence. The side setback for the upper level deck must be denied. Hardcover improvements must be reduced to a reasonable level. Staff will send this memo to the applicant and, hopefully, meet with her prior to the meeting to discuss modifications and reductions in proposed improvements. Application # Date Received Amount Paid '> -- 'J m • „ • V CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 (S 50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI20.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) *=*' i N / 0 '•I A J Propert>- Identification Number (P.I.D.). Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Pro perty- Acquired / ' ‘ ^______________________(month/'year) I (do) (^ noiT.also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use”of propertv ” residential ____^other (specify) Zoning District:_______________________________ APPlirANT X,. . ' Phone (Ttome ) V 7/" ^3. Name AtUAc/ . ______ Phone(work)_5 7/' ^ Address: A'^{ City.__Q'^(C^.U1 ------------------------// OWTs’ER (if differed than applicant) Name ______________________ Phone (home)_ Phone (work)_ Address:Citv:Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST _ Describe request in detail: ^ <T I Estimated Construction Cost $ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage 1 Setback:I'' ?Tontki^-4 Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DF.SCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or property conditions preventing ith Zoning Code requirements; ^ ------------------------------------—compliance w (attach additional sheets if necessary) 1 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the foUowing informaHon must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. 7 J. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Propert>' Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/z" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8 ‘/i" .\ 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/a" x H"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). .As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that yom variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all inlbrmation required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature_Al '7/O' 'i-'Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. s' Owners Signature Date 'A Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 da>s before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 " •'W * 1. .9^ '-i- . •''■■•' ■ . ■ • /. S '^/c/zC --/2///J d,/i/2rnc i /d7yX. dA'222i /^1 yAM^LirfCJ ac//^ MU'dJ'' /A/Ac^ >ddA dzi <iycj^ /A/2/^/a \-^ iA{At2c/16^^^(r7^V y^'/' <! fe { /// y ^ y a//d ykd/A. Vi/i (d^A //vz^cj ^ 'x-Az >^' _Jk/Ae ■Jm»-r«i<n>i it— iir«ii- S' o r.<?im M ^*v ' _ /ru . 1 I ..i/ C~AJ ^ - ^ ,JC/'Z <-o \il^\^k-yd^-} Me it ^ ^/o- J^^n-e •JA u-{^ ecu 'Phpf ^-'v— lep^. A y: J/a ^ Md/p-u^ yy^dy-( ,/zeJ!^ d'l ^?Ju-..jMcd.f^fZ-,/ ap4! c^^r-y knUj>M ry u/iddjppz^ /)M^-/7^^ ■1M(YvZpi^ ■7^^/ yCeue yy>/o^^ *2d> y4d ■r/M /dcZd c'( e^-p_ -MLf^AZe vjy ^7/ cdOK-^M .sZZeLy flUN DATE OA/10/9* BATCH 501 PAOP AOOR 0»tCII NAIC 'iAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SO 20-117-25 52 0010 02817 CASCO POINT RO NESLEY C BYRNE HESLEY C BYRNE 2617 CASCO POINT RO »UYZATA (M 55591 BElfCPlN COUNTY PROPERTY INfORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST 58 20-117-25 52 0011 02815 CASCO POINT RO C A C SCANLON GENE C CATHERINE SCANLON 2615 CASCO POINT ROAO HAYZATA rt4 55591 REPORT NO. PIA55A01 PACE 1 58 20-117-25 32 0012 02015 CASCO POINT RO J L STERN J L STERN 2815 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA m 55591 PROP AOOR 0>tCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OtCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 20-117-25 52 0015 02011 CASCO POINT RO THERESA A lAWSTEO THERESA A NORSTEO 2011 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA MN 55591 58 20-117-25 52 0016 O2B0O CASCO POINT RD THOMAS B KING THOMAS B KINO 2800 CASCO POINT ROAO NAYZATA MN 55591 58 20-117-25 52 0016 02607 CASCO POINT RO J M A P S BAILEY JOHN M A PATRICIA S BAILEY 2807 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA MN 55591 58 20-117-25 52 0017 02818 CASCO POINT RO TAItlY L HOOOIS TAMMY L HOOOIS 2618 CASCO POINT ROAO HAYZATA rt4 55591 58 20-117-25 32 0015 02005 CASCO POINT RO ROGER H FROmELT A HIFS ROGER H FROmELT 2805 CASCO PT RO HAYZATA m 55391 38 20-117-25 32 0019 02801 CASCO POINT RO P J HAUSER A R MASON HAUSER P J HAUSER A R MASON HAUSER 2601 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA MN 55591 PROP AOOR OFtCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 58 20-117-25 32 0020 02799 CASCO POINT RO TOOO J TIIEILMANN TOOD J THEILMANN 2799 CASCO POINT RD NAYZATA MN 55391 TO'^AL BATCH 501 00010 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTEO ARE AN ACCURATE ANO TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEFMEPIN CCXMTY DEPARTMENT OF PRO^RTY T^TION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE ANO BELIEF., DATE IC*'^ L7 ¥ ' L m DI3 PA./OhFI«hC:ELLE ORONO SETBACK ZONE; F3> : •?41-T030 9 6124^0510 HARDCOV'E Jun U 07:37 FO: 06/Ut'Ve lu; \c Lr SOO.IOOO .p EKlSTfwr. ARDCO^TOI |> gffyr A. K oum /J 4>cKr~ je >^-4X^54. X X X i^id# B Q«ri|e C. Driveway S P S P S P. D . X X S F S F X X / 9-r~ £• Pitio'Deek S.F. SF. X X P> Lxndwape Undtrlxin By Piascic Or FaVnc S F. S F X X X S.F. S F. SF. 0. Otfwr TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZO.NE total PROPERTY' AREA IN ZONE ^ B ^ S F. la^ .. X 100 • BIOPQSED HAimcoV|a 11^ A. H oum ^77. r S.F UrifOi X X X B. Oaxi|e C. Driveway S.F. S.F. S.F D. Sidewalk €. Patio/Deck F. Lx-idicapc Underliin By Plaatie Or Fabric X X X S.F. S.F. S.P. 0. Olher TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total property AREA IN ZONE ^ B S.P, A B X 100 S.P. S.F. « A B i • E€'v' EM3 F>1-^CAF:CihPELLE ORONO Fax : 94.1-T030 ^ lu HAROCOV’ER CALCtX SETBACK ZONEi (CDtCLE ONE) ^7§' Jun 14 *96 07:37 Fi93 £: A , Hou>e / ^Tc^t ORKSHEET 2SO-500’500-1 .Z L«t|*Witfili « 91 X B Gir«|6 C. Driveway /r X X £ D. S>dewa2i(X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. LjMlKape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric a X X O. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER in ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE '' * B Sj/o « 100 - H*»DCO\Tii iw T»wr LcofOi wida t X % B. pirate■ ^777:;- C. Driveway •7 u V' ’i ^' X X /.c^ > D. Sidewalk X X £. Patio/Deek ** * * t t mt Tv; •. V * • V s'X X /V • < F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X O. Other total hardcover in zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -J V., .)B T.- H I D X100 - S.F S.F. S.F. SF S.F S F S.F S.F. S F. S.F. S F S F SF SF S.F. SF. ^ / 7.^ % ^ -* ” • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. V-* S F. - n S.F S.F S.F. 4 ^S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. - » S.P. . ■ S.F. A B A B 3i.g-7« C. H. CflPP£NTEP./MICTORIfi Fax:612-443-2344 P. 01/06 T' ^%r4» cteme. C;.- ! V 6*c,^»>arr ( <^£C77cy/ L C. .) • ' PWlwmmTfL i^e££mdjcLL CLRCwPIHf tJMfcir * (6i2)4.i3»gaai r”* («1 2)4413-2344 SEP 16 ’96 14:43 612 4-13,2344 PA6E.O01. - . J \ -.-.r,,- ------------------------------------------- ,-... rJart-’ /^C> I «? ,'3 i / |T< m ivSPT' m3*€l»T(2l9) iee2-e> f (218) J*qw»ri i«iu« <li»0 H 0 ^r' roi 8 V8 o 3 1.^ (■ t;.'» ' 'i...... ■*1 fl CL bc// e^’sT<^Cs> Mouse. I Z-as «/n«/7eyp»y '/•* u> a? -//'Sf (. l^P£iS/6A^ Kccyyi ia/ ArfTc.e 'i>.. i^5C7 zjC» O poeAite^ ^£E:t-Mcc^ .^^(^ R/^rcu^Zy^ 9-*7*V.5*»,Z ^flOj. CKwC At.4.. i4cjltMZ./!» •. vca-/l: ^/^&•/ o 4^ V- Z.^ZO- } ujA 5^0':--------^-.^u------- Z^tO-l tjy I f-c:? I A> •/ p^^'Tog’ / r }1 C. H. CPRPO4TERA'ICT0RIfl Fax :612-443-2344 Sep 11 ’96 13:31 P. 02/02 . '' •V- ■' j. 7 - // " ’•* 1 1“ “1 HH0L,I 1 L J 1 ! A — A ^CCV>^ W /4t^. ^7 f-i:? '■ 3- ------------ ^^)'C> .-•CO •*j C |0**"2*^ . % i • • •• • •2.’^ 1 Sf.,. t?l2 J4f9 23JJ PAGE. 002 \*o\ • V Certificate of Survey for Leonard P. Bachkes of Lot 121, Spring Park Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of Lot 121 in Spring/Park and all the unplatted land, and that portion of Lake Shore Avenue vacated lying between lot 121 of Spring Park, and the side lines of said lot projected to Lake Minnetonka, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County,and of the loC' atlon of all buildings thereon. It does not purport to show other improvements or encroachments. GORDON R. COFFIN CO., INC. Mark S. Gronberg Reg. No. 12755 Gordon R. Coffin Reg. No. 6064 Engineers and Land Surveyors Long Lake, Minnesota Scale Date o 1 inch = 40 feet August 13, 1984 Iron raa. ker / MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 15. 1996 » ^ • (#5 - #2149 Theresa Norsted - Continued) Lindquist co’~.mented that he would be in favor of a second story deck if it did not encroach into the average lakeshore setback. Stem commented that he was strongly in favor of maintaining the average lakeshore setback. He did not wish to see a second story deck which he felt would obstruct his views. It was noted that trees would result in the same obstruction Stem replied that trees were within the rights of the applicant where a deck was not. Stern asked that the Commission uphold the ^ode. Peterson said, although he usually voted against encroachment into the average lakeshore setback, other members did not necessarily do so Mabusth added that the City does listen to the comments from neighbors Stoddard asked the Commission to give direction regarding the garage. Lindquist said he would be in favor of a garage no nearer than 1 -2' from the lot line which might require a fire wall. Lindquist said a side setback variance would probably gain approval. Stoddard said a registered survey should be conducted During public comments, Susie Swanson noted that there was a garage on the sitin recent times and questioned whether the felled garage could be grandfathered in. Peterson said the Commission does feel a property owner is entitled to a garage in this climate and wt>uld attempt to come to a resolve. Stem said he had no problem with a garage, only with obstmetion of the views. Peterson moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2149. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#6) #2150 KENT AND SUSAN SWANSON, 3229B CASCO CmCLE - VARIANCES - PUBUC HEARING 8:17-8:25 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing w ere noted. The applicants were present. 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CONLMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 15, 1996 (#5) #2149 THERESA NORSTED, 2811 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARUNCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:59-8:17 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicant was present Mabusth reported that the application requires a variance to the average lakeshorc setback for the construction of an enclosed screen porch to the lakeside of the property. The porch would wTap around the house to a bay addition and be located 11’ in front of the average lakeshore setback line. No other variances would be required During the review of the application, the applicant determined w hile speaking with neighbors that her plans for a detached garage may be impacted by her current imprpovement plan. The applicant asks for direction regarding the porch and the possibility of a 20'.\22', 2-stall, garage consisting of 440 s.f of hardcover. This would require the application be tabled to allow filing an amended application to include a garage The property is allowed 573 s.f of additional structural coverage and 628 s.f in the 75-250’ zone The applicant is asking the Commission what would be reasonable for the property. Peterson said, with the objection from the neighbors regarding any change to the average lakeshore setback, no 3 -season porch would be allowed if the applicant also desired a garage. Peterson suggested the possibility of a deck instead of a porch. Lindquist recommended staying within the average lakeshore setback Peterson said the neighbor would be able to see across a deck Mabusth noted that there was only T in which to work with before crossing the average lakeshore setback line. Construction at grade level was suggested. Norsted said the original screen porch was made into a room. She said she w'ould like to enjoy the lake and questioned whether a narrower porch with no wrap around was a possibility. She questioned whether a garage is possible with the hardcover and asked clarification on standards to determine if she should keep the property. She also questioned whether a deck would have to be at grade level or if it could be located on the second level. Schroeder asked if the neighbor, Mr. Stern, received a variance for his remodel. It was noted that he received a 9" variance from applicant’s side lot line but was within the average lakeshore setback. Stem and Norsted ’s lots are similar in size. The property on the other side is larger. Mabusth noted that the garages on the adjoining properties were probably built in the 1950’s with no record of building permits being issued, and they are located less than 1’ from Norsted's property lines. 1 NANUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 15. 1996 (#5 - #2149 Theresa Norsted - Continued) Lindquist commented that he would be in favor of a second story deck if it did not encroach into the average lakeshore setback. Stem commented that he was strongly in favor of maintaining the average lakeshore setback. He did not wish to see a second story deck which he felt would obstruct his views It was noted that trees would result in the same obstruction Stem replied that trees were within the rights of the applicant where a deck was not. Stern asked that the Commission uphold the code. Peterson said, although he usually voted agair.st encroachment into the average lakeshore setback, other members did not necessarily do so Mabusth added that the City does listen to the comments from neighbors Stoddard asked the Commission to give direction regarding the garage Lindquist sud he would be in favor of a garage no nearer than 1-2' from the lot line which might require a fire wall. Lindquist said a side setback variance would probably gain approval. Stoddard said a registered survey should be conducted During public comments, Susie Swanson noted that there was a garage on the site in recent times and questioned whether the felled garage could be grandfathered iii. Peterson said the Commission does feel a properly owner is entitled to a garage in this climate and w'ould attempt to come to a resolve Stem said he had no problem w ith a garage, only with obstmetion of the views Peterson moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2149. Vote. Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#6) #2150 KENT AND SUSAN SWANSON, 3229B CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:17-8:25 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicants were present. $ 02. OCT 16 ’96 10:45 FROM E'OI'IMTOUH PONT C H C^PENTER/'vilCTOPr^ FS/:612--a5-r3aa vut ---------- ---------------------- ---------- OfOnor Mn« P h'jE . 00 r. urv«Y • ••« 9 rt un'T'M ^ m 'mAV ^ ■ J(//V • ' scale si*** 30* o >mo«art iPCn.Kcm- Feun^ 1-ot Area*Kouae & Stoooss 1.3?o.f j«o.rt. S*Y* 0*1^** 130 nfr.f^. V»t. la 7* ■*tt.‘bacHt«,4l7.5 sc Bea% Ueusat 100 sc*£^« Vumi^ Houset ?9 Steps & WflX ^C Z»sHai 115 s<T.ft. ft*', /.•^4 tUrfr<9 •W'C/^4 J i «*^>/. '•^fkiei^ ^ ^ ^ -i • -si» Vac ^TSO 4^' »>• f» ■■‘- ;j «- nv-n’. W 5*1 ^^ yrr/f'fH uuTi , / )f .* V"*" w—- jLA k ^- v /v ^: TV av /f'A - ^>K « ♦ = qit^ . OCC.“* t »■■* ■* 1 O fJ**^ •' .-t |(n• oo. oUJ^■" >. IfopT^'iS^ SC/HK^- j VUdtJiif B^tsruo^ i-k>o^>£^ /_ ^ ft _ U. C' <r q: ^ u. C_) 1 klK^j P^SI^ yuJtfi 1 -2^2/t iXi ?* •• UJo h;: - ill . *■'/•-£>' ?g UD U oo nooLUOo:0. ‘^'sr-r-o- A a 3 l'/(c) A-/ CfiO. /h-*-*- - ^3, 7> ^ y o ^9. • ^ Y ^ *” /^ &4*' f Y ^ pYop**^A *■ SO.Ct Y U4«\tfC c'^t>4 ^ . 3.*2- StJU^ f\>C'eK ■ 5'3 /6 ^ A ^ ifl Sr'o /(mc4< •^JLoyiMjL - ^373* 4s^ cr^ ^■y Y«*7 ^ l^^-r -~Wf —1 -■ TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:October 15,19% SUBJECT: ^2180 Peggy and Frank Pichelman, 2920 Casco Point Road - Variances Public Hearing Zoning Dutrict: LR-IC Lot area = 14,383± s.f. Application: Applicants seek approval of a street setback, hardcover (75-250') and lot coverage variances to permit construction of a 24 ’x24' attached garage, three level addition with connecting deck at the lake side and second story over the existing single story frame structure. The existing residence meets ail required setbacks. The second floor addition will not require variance approval. TTie following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) Lot area = 14,383 s.f. Allowed = 2,157.5 j.f. or 15% Existing = 1,514 s.f. or 10.5% Proposed = 2,656 s.f. or 18.4% Variance = 498.5 s.f or 3.4% 2.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Hardcover variance. 75-250 ’ setback area = 7,708 s.f Allowed = 1,927 s.f. or 25% Existing = 2,577.5 s.f or 33.4% Proposed = 2,836 s.f or 36.7% Option 1 Proposed = 3,058 s.f. or 39.6% Option 2* Option 1 Variance = 909 s.f. or 11.7% Hardcover increase = 258.5 s.f or 3.3% Option 2 Variance = 1,131 s.f or 14.6% Hardcover increase = 480.5 s.f or 6.2% For specific hardcover information please refer to Exhibits E and FI-2 ^Applicants' consultant has not provided a site plan for Option 2 - garage doors facing to south or side with drive located in street yard. Zoning File #2180 October 15, 1996 Page 2 3.Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B) - Street setback variance for principal structure addition. Required = 30' Existing = 32’ Proposed = 8’ (traveled road 14-15' from street lot line) Variance = 22' or 73% Description of Request Applicants seek approval of multiple variances to permit construction of a 24'x24' garage addition to the street side.of the existing residence. The majority of garage structure will be placed over an existing 19’x32' bituminous/gravel drive. The structural improvements include a second story over the existing single stor>' walkout structure. Note existing structure meets all required setbacks of the LR-IC Zoning District. Appli ants also propose a three level 24'xl6' addition at the lake side of the residence with a connecting deck to the north at 13'xl4'. Note the lake side additions will also meet the average lake shore setback, and 75 ’ setback. Refer to Exhibit H, the additions result in an excess of structural coverage of 3.4%. Hardcover in the 75-250' setback area is increased by either 3.3% (Option 1) or 6.2% vOption 2). Applicants contractor in his report. Exhibits FI-2, notes two options for an access drive. Option 1 would have doors facing out to street with a drive at approximately 8'xl 8’ in width. Applicants' contractor failed to provide a site plan for Option 2 but Option 2 would involve doors facing south with a drive located within street yard. Review Exhibit G, note survey shows traveled road 14-15* from street lot line of property, fhe second level addition will provide expanded bedroom area. The main level of the lake side addition will provide a family room with raised or atrium ceiling extending to second level. Note upp^r level study railing area will look out over lower level family room Refer to Exhibit H, the retaining walls within lakeshore yard w ill be removed. The remainder of the existing drive will be removed along the north side of the proposed garage addition. Planter and concrete walk areas at the street side of the residence will be removed. Statement of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit D, applicants no’e lot is located on quiet cul-de-sac with no through trafiic. Actual traveled road is located 14-15' from street lot line. Applicants' Option 2 would use majority of street yard for backout purposes. Existing house is a small two bedroom rambler and growing family needs require additional bedroom area. The house currently has a single stall garage that shall be used as storage area. All other improvements will meet the required setbacks of the zoning district and no improvements existing or proposed are witliin the 0-75 ’ setback area. Applicants contend proposed additions will be consistent with pattern of development within their immediate neighborhood. p-'. Zoning File #2180 October 15,1996 Page 3 Issues for Considenition 1.What is the preference of the Planning Commission concerning Options 1 or 2? Should doors face towards street allovsing for 22-23' backout area or should garage doors face to the side requiring backout area within street yard of property. Staff obsei^ed no backout apron in street yard. Applicants back out onto cul-de-sac road \vith present use. Would you approve a hardcover increase of 6.2% for Option 2 dri\ e? 2.Note trees in street yard of property if Option 2 is recommended by the Planning Commission this will involve the 1 'ss of at least two mature trees within the street yard. Will members condition approval on a replanting schedule? If Option 1 is recommended, the existing row of hedges will have to be relocated providing adequate sighting of cars exiting property. 3.Applicants improvement will result in 3.4% excess of structural coverage. Can structural additions be reduced in footprint size to minimize intensity of variance? Can lake side additions be reduced? 4.Do you concur with applicants' finding that the proposed improvements will be consistent w ith the pattern of construction within the immediate neighborhood on Casco Cove? 5. Other issues raised by Planning Commission members. Options of Action To approve as proposed or amended. Any recommendation of approval must include a condition that all hardcover improvements scheduled for removal be completed prior to the footing inspection for new construction. Conditions should also include specific planting guidelines for use of drive with either Option 1 or 2. Application # X / Date Received Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) g^' .W nr . , f Variance for non-conforming structures $220. After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) 'i /•A 1 •y PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address_____2920 Casco Point Road. Wavzata. MN‘ 55391 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)_20-117-2331 0033 mm • • ^ • % VI _ _Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Pcpp«JI.Acquired. June 1993 ____________________(montli/yea-) I (doindo n^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. property: ^ residential ___^other (specify) Zoning District: ^ _____________________________ APPLICANT Name peggy anH Frank Pi rhf^liiLan Address: 2920 Casco Point Road Phone (home’) 471-9107 _____ Phorw (work ) 533-5324 Citv: Wavzata ________Zip: 55391 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _____________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 100.000.00 Describe request in detail: See arrar.hed ------------------------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width y Hardcover X Lot Coverage Setback: _y_ Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty' or unusual property ’ conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:______Sp.e Attached -------------------— (attach additional sheets if necessary) 4 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS J*-*I f All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete; 1. 2. j. 4. C 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Propert>‘ Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Heitnepin County Department of Finance. A-603, Go\t Center. 348-3271). Cenificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/a" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/a" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans jf floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/a" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the propertv'. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please anach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by Ciw staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true^and correct to the best of his/her know-ledge. Applicant's Signature X <,// y /' ^ ^ > ‘ <_______ Date ____ / OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property- by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature /* AO ^ ^ /' / Date O-OA - Applicant must have all submittals into the City- offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 oy/25,‘ic»JJLf ix, City of Orono Zoning Department Planning Commission and Council Orono. MN ij T We are requesting the Zoning Department to review our renunleling proposal to add a small addition, a deck, and a two car garage. We believe that a hardship can be demonstrated and that the hardship can be shown to run with the land. Our lot is located on a quiet cul-de-sac with no through traffic We have a verv ’ unusual lot line that doesn't go all the wa> to the street Howev er, we would be able to position the garage so we could drive in from the side and not back out directly onto the street This does altect hard cover and set back calculations but the cul-de-sac and lot lines were plotted before two and three car families Now in Minnesota, especially for working couples, not having at least a two car garage can be shown to be a hardship and can be a v ery difilcult and dangerous situation Our house is a very small two bedroom rambler built in the 1950*s. We need additional space ( vve now have a combined family of two adults and five children) and we are trying to gain as much square footage as possible by adding a second story but we also need a small addition to add a conservative amount of living and storage space. We currently have to store our equipment outside in the front and Wk vard which is an eyesore. The garage because of limited front yard is of minimum size and has no storage. The adC'tional space will let us clean up the yard and make it much more presentable The deck will be built on top of part of the new storage area so as not to use anv additional hardcover, f he new roof line will be designed to shed less water directly to the lake and more to the side lot. Our remodeling proposal includes making the house energy efficient and upgrading the house to be consistent with the neighborhood li\cn with the conservative addition the house will be more than 75ft from the lake and will set back more than the neighbors on either side so as not to block their viewf. We really love the area we are in and want to invest in it rather than move. We sincerely believe that we have shown that a need exists and request this variation to add a small addition, deck, and double car garage be granted. Thank you for your consideration. Peggy and Frank Pichelman ■1' i RUN DATE 08/09/9ABATCH 504PROP OfCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 20-117-23 31 0026 02910 CASCO POINT RO PHILLIP A BETTY NICCUH PHILLIP J NICCUM 2910 CASCO PT RO HAYZATA It4 55391 HErC'£PXN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OHNERS LIST50 20-117-25 31 005102914 CASCO POINT RO B I CLASSMAN ANA CLASSMAN BARRY I A NANCY A CLASSMAN 2919 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA m 55391 fS»SRT NO. PX43540I PACE 1436 20-117-23 31 003202914 CASCO POINT RO ROBERT H PONELL JR ETAL R09ERT H PONELL JR 2914 CASCO POINT ROAD HAYZATA W 55391 PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 20-117-23 51 0033 02920 CASCO P0IN1 RO PECCY R SMITH PEGGY R PICMELMAN 2920 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA MN 55391 36 20-117-23 31 0042 03400 CASCO AVE RICHARD J HAEFELE A HIFE RICHARD HAEFELE 3400 CASCO AVENUE HAYZATA m 55391 PROP AOOR a«CR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR TOTAL BATCH 504 00009 38 20-117-23 31 0034 02930 CASCO POINT RO M E HENTH A E E MENTH H E HENTH A E E MENTH 2930 CASCO POINT RD HAYZATA 55391 58 20-117-23 31 0072 02912 CASCO POINT RD H 0 BARRETT AON BARRETT MICHAEL D BARRETT 2912 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA FW 55391 58 20-117-23 31 'M)35 02940 CASCO POINT RO S C A L M HANSON SCOTT C A LYNETTE N HANSON 2940 CASCO POINT kO HAYZATA »M 55391 58 20-117-23 31 0073 02916 CASCO POINT RO JEFFREY L FAHBUSH ET AL JEFFREY L A RENAE T FAMBUSH 2918 CAS.0 POINT RD HAYZATA MN 55391 ^4'' ** .. ‘ r-f') 'I V / • li \.-ly i - 1 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCIRIATE AND TRltt REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF KY KN0MLEO6E AND BELIEF. O g//2/96i,YDATE FROM : S>O80RDLflNDSlF?JeYING FNIJE »0. : 61^^7^3221 ra^. 06 1996 09;5£fTli F32 hardcover calculation worksheet SETBACK twti (CmCLE ONQ »-7S* (j^) £ A. Howt zoim J4___I X I T Boe-iooo' Jb. Q»f.I« t T. C. Drtvr*ty V ' * \ ' t : \" $ ■I ar? V * c t 'S 1 D. SMewaiti E. Pwio/Dfck P. 4/inzfe V»4<C & X X X X X X 5^2. 6T 5.F. S.P. S.F. S.F. S.F. N S,F. ' 5.F. s.r. • £.?. s.r. S.F. S.F. SF. S 5-. /UO^-r^ total HARDCOVF.R in ' ZOKli £tX—- -N 20NE^ , ,0, y^S' s F—237------ Sr. 7. t2^, rnfiFffffrg P< 7-0^ A. H»um watt 3o__S.F. s fry SJ. , S.F /Ve<c' S.F. n H. Oo/a|< C. Driveway D. SiSevtlk 2A JLHi---- JJ^ ^^169 y..p. '• Cp .^ ^ ^ S.F• (f'iiXjury^ c S.T S.F B. Psito/Dtck d __ f. UadJOp* lM«Ui& ByPleidc C. Odwr r. S.F. S.F. S.F. total hardcover in 20NE TOTAL PROPERTY ARBA IN ZONE A • ♦ B X100 • _ _ _^S.F. o Si --V- ■ ® «(®57.-3 - - - - - -.’f 'dul a. ,00a C'&"V'X.^~'C^r)r-^LA,yhi^ . mg Dear Frank and Peggy,rr*V^ ‘1 ;7 ^ •*!•» V '. • • 9/22/96 i - *■ u y Enclosed please find the existing hardcover calcs for the city. Also a set of floorplans with one elevation. After conversations with the city of Orono and discussions with you we have agreed to reduce the size of the garage to 24’x24’. The new plans will reflect this . I hope to get the revised plan to the city before Friday. Further in this letter I will calculate your hardcover and you may use this letter to submit to the city for this purpose. I realize you purchased this property with the intention of adding on a garage. I hope the fact that your property line does not extend to the edge of the street is not a huge stumbling block for you with the city of Orono. I know the realization of this fact was a surprise to you. None of your variance requests are wildly unusual. My prior dealings with the council has been, for the most part, positive. There really is nowhere else to go with your garage and your family room/deck poses no setback problems at all. I feel you have been very reasonable in your acceptance of moderate sizes for the additions. You presently have 2577 sq. ft or 33% hardcover. We are deleting 1147 sq. ft of hardcover. We are adding: addition-360 sq. ft ((16x24)-24 sq. ft of 1’ cantilever for main level) garage-576 sq. ft (24x24) deck -182 sq. ft (13x14) total added before driveway=1118 sq. ft net savings in hardcover= 29 sq. ft or new total of 33% hardcover GENERAL CON7 RACTORS 4A10 SHORELINE DRIVE. '"'O BOX BAS • SPRING PARK. MN SSSSA (612) A71 -0532 • FAX (61 2) A71 -091 6 REMODELING MAGAZINE6 BIG SO COMPANIES FOR 1 9c* i i S I (^Iw ^^^an/fe^^om/um We have 8 ’ of space on your lot from end of garage. If we create an 8x18 drive there you add 144 sq. ft of hardcover. ( you still have about 20 ’ from your property line to the edge of the street plus the aforementioned 8 ’). We will have to Include a 6x6 *ront step also which equals 36 sq. ft. Your total hardcover comes to (2577-1147+1118+144+36) 2728 sq. ft or 35% hardcover. That is with the drive facing the street. There has been some consideration to turning the garage doors (as the plan shows) to the side. This would create an additional(366~s^ft of hardcover for a total of 3094 sq. ft or(40^hardcover. You have been very agreeable to either option and we will let planning decide for us. As you know there are plenty of garages on Casco Pt much closer to the road than this proposal. Th .. will be a great floor plan for you and your growing family. I know the neighbors will enjoy ail this inside storage as much as you will. Unfortunately, so will the tax assessorll I look forward to working with you this fall. V/ Sincerely, eff Danberry GENERAL CONTRACTORS AA10 SHORELINE DRIVE. PO BOX 2A5 • SPRING PARK. MN 553BA C61 2) A71 -0532 • FAX CB1 2) A71 -OBI F REMODELING MAGAZINES BIG 50 COMPANIES FOR 1S91 4 i SCHOBORG 1 hsreoy certify that this pian, survey, or report was. p'^epered by me or jnder my direct supervision and that i am a du.' v Registered Land Surveyor under the iaws of the State o«. Jnnesota. Mr Li^NO SURVEYING Book-Page 3^-22.A INC. Scale / =3^OT7 GOf. m. 13 se 0733321 OMM.MN 06328 nat«* /?7JQ^, /Z _ flA^iatratlon No. 14700 m rptw : ''OfTFfRi in :^ l«3D B7:5W r»5 J.____ Mk « 6* hi Kt{ ^ tA~ ie^c^ ? i>g^/3ng5p . ^ SCHOaORQ LAOTiUR^YING INC. »M» 1 Mreoy certify msi ffil» ‘pl*r, tunwy.cr report wet. prcpwvd ^ m« or under my #raot fluperviilon and that I am n duty na^latorad Land Suivayof wndor Oto Icwa of tho State of MInneaeta. Seale Ortr: ___rsplstrttloft Ko. 14700 | / "r 3^' T-*"•ywrr ifW»4lM 4?>< \ \ t '% •idi i i TTO”f|:B0 NOW 96-SC-d3S J SEP-2S-^6 WON ©3; 12 AM \zooP ______»v** . J «i :y livlf !»«• e to •2: •Jn. oc o ll po • t» 1 -y^ „« ■—- ... -------.. ...............................................................................................mm . t t ' I r- i i .!: i ' 1 1 • . ‘ 1 !( 1t 1 1 1 ! *» ! 1 I:^ 111 i i ■ 1 •, ; ;; 1 i i = 1 \yu J ! ! t ! M l i I ! 1 1 i M! ‘1 /i ' 1 jmjB I I t i ' I I ■" f i i rr I L 1 TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:October 10, 1996 SUBJECT: #2181 James Nystrom, 1745 Concordia Street - Renewal Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Total area = 20,020 s.f. or .46 acres Application: Applicant has filed a renewal variance seeking reapproval of average lakeshore setback, side setback, hardcover variances within the 75-250' and 250-500' setback areas that would permit construction of a new residence. The existing residence shall be raised. The original resolution approving the variances will expire on November 27, 1996. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B) A. Lot area variance Required = 21,780 s.f. or .5 acres Existing = 20,020 s.f or .46 acres Variance = 1,760 s.f or 4% B Lot width variance Required = 100' Existing at 75' setback and measured at a straight line at Shoreline = 75' Variance = 25* or 25% C.Side setback variance at both north and south lot lines Required =10' Proposed = 9.5' (overhang located 8.5' from side lot lines) Variance = .5' or 5% 2. 3. Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B) - Entire structure will encroach the average lakeshore setback line, Section 10.22, Subd. 2 [10.56, Subd. 16(L)] - Review of hardcover variances. A. 75-250' setback area = 13,140 s.f. Allowed = 3,285 s.f or 25% Approved in 1995 = 4,600 s.f. or 35% Variance = 1,315 s.f. or 10% .1 Zoning File #2181 October 10,1996 Page 2 B,250-500' setback area = 1,250 s.f. Allowed = 375 s.f. or 30% Appro^’ed in 1995 = 750 s.f or 60% Variance = 375 s.f or 30% List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Approved Site Plan E - Resolution #3643 Approving the Variances as Proposed F - Planning Commission Minutes 8/21/95 G - Council Minutes 9/11/95 H - Council Minutes 11/13/95 I - Council Minutes 11/27/95 Description of Request Applicant proposes the same plan for the redevelopment of the property seeking approval of setback and hardcover variances. The foundation or footprint of the structure will be located 9 1/2' from the side lot line with a T overhang extending to 8.5' from both north and south side lot lines. The new structure will be located out of the 0-75' setback area. The entire structure will encroach the average lakeshore setback line. Hardcover variances in the 75-250' setback area are 10% and in the 250-500' setback area 30%. Options of Action To approve the variances noted above subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the approval resolution of 1995, Resolution #3643, Exhibit E; or To deny, members must refer to the necessary findings for denial set forth in Section 10.08. Applicatioo ft Date Received /n C > t~C Amount Paid <* CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) t t Renewal Variance Fee SI 20.00 (no change from original application) i After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) 'A '■ 1 • V. >• s.i • •»V^ • n PROPERTY INTORMATION S ite Address_____________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.).n z'z. ooi^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required sur\’ey. Date Property- Acquired __________(month/year) I (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential ___^other (specify) Zoning District:___________________________________ applicant Phone (home) ^ZO‘ Z^^'l Name L __________ Phone (wnrk) feTZ» ------ Address: 12-1 T^^^itv: __Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _____________________ Phone (home). Phone (vvork)_ Address:Citv:Zip: DtSCRIPl ION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost S Describe request in detail: Or __ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED X Lot Area ___Lot Width X Setback:Front X Side X Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage K Average Lakeshore Other (specify-) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hsudship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:____________________________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) 7 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour applicarion to be considered complete: 1. 7 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Propert>- Owners List of owners within 150'. labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govi Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed sur\eyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/S" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/i" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy V/i” x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property'. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please anach a separate list of any other persons you w'ish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City' staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANTS SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true cprmct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature > ' * Date ^ OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknc'.vledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property- by City' staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purpcsesr^~mv;estigation and verification of this request. j 7 H / JLpOwner’s Signature__C Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled re>iew meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building «fe Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 RUN DATE 09/2A/94 BATCH 504PROR ADM OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NMC/AOOR PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR 0M4ER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OMTER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNTORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OMNERS tlSTSO 17-117-2S 22 0015 0102S CONCORDIA ST L F A S L GEH*.LARRY A SHARON 6EHL 1025 CONCORDIA ST HAYZATA MN 55391 30 17-117-25 22 0010 01755 CONCORDIA ST CERALO N KLECKI«R GERALD M KLECKNER 1755 CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA M4 55391 30 17-117-23 22 0021 01705 CONCORDIA ST JANET JACOBSON SACHS JANET SACHS 7545 17TH AV SO RICHFIELD m 55423 30 17-117-23 22 0024 01407 CONCORDIA ST J N 6EHRING/K REINKE GEHRIN6 JOHN A KRISTIN GEHRIN6 1407 CONCORDIA ST HAYZATA M4 55391 30 17-117-23 22 0027 01740 CONCORDIA ST M 0 NOLO A S L MOLD NINTON D NOLO 1740 CONCORDIA ST HAYZATA MN 55391 30 17-117-23 22 0030 01740 CONCORDIA ST D J OELAHSKI ADC BELAHSKI DAVID J A DATNA C BELAHSKI 1740 CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA MN 55391 30 17-117-23 22 0014 01705 CONCORDIA ST K T DULIN A B G DULIN KEVIN DULIN A BARBARA DULIN 17S5 CONCORDIA ST HAYZATA MN 55391 58 17-117-25 22 0019 01745 CONCORDIA ST JAMES T NYSTROM JAMES T NYSTROM 1701 MADISON ST N E MPLS MN 55413 30 17-117-23 22 0022 014S5 CONCORDIA ST T L PALM AHA PALM THOMAS L PALM 1485 CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0025 01800 CONCORDIA ST P D A K J HANSEN PAUL A KAREN HANSEN 1600 CONCORDIA ST HAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0028 01750 CONCORDIA ST PAUL J BOZONIE PAUL J BOZONIE 1755 FA6ERNESS POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0031 01495 CONCORDIA ST THOMAS A STOKES THOMAS A STONES 1495 CONCORDIA ST NAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI43S401 PAGE 23 • :38 17-117-23 22 0017 01741 CONCORDIA ST MARGARET L ANTOINE DAVID A MARGARET HOLSTE 1741 CONCORDIA ST HAYZATA m 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0020 01725 CONCORDIA ST CHARLES H OLSON CHARLES H OLSON 1725 CONCORDIA ST S HAYZATA MN 55391 30 17-117-23 22 0023 01495 CONCORDIA ST D J A 0 R BELAHSKI DONALD JOHN BELAHSKI 3019 COLORADO AVE H CRYSTAL MN E5«*22 ;.V J% ' . *-44 4.' \ » I 38 17-117-23 22 0024 *'”1^ ^ 01780 CONCORDIA ST THE VILLAGE OF ORONO .r THE VILLAGE OF ORONO r ^P 0 BOX 44 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 J' 38 17-117-23 22 0029 01755 EAGERNESS POINT PAUL J BOZONIE PAUL J BOZONIE 1755 FA6CRNESS POINT RD ORONO m 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0032 01480 CONCORDIA ST LAO SEBOK LINDA 0 SEBOK I08O CONCORDIA ST HAYZATA MN 55391 > mm OATC Of/M/fi COUNTY WIOPfRTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY QMNERS LISTftATCN 504PROP AMR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADM SS 17-117-23 22 0033 01S15 FAGERNESS POINT RD A A J RITCHIE ALAN J RITCHIE 1815 FAGERNESS POINT S HAYZATA MN 55391 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AMR TOTAL PATCH 504 00021 m. [1/% * r REKMT NO. PX45S401 PACE MS« 17-117-ZS 22 OOAO OlASS CONCORDIA ST HCMARO I ALTON XII HONARO R ALTON III 1AS5 CONCORDIA ST ORONO m S5391 Sa 17-117-2S 22 OOAS 01475 CONCORDIA ST HELEN K TRAINOR HELEN R TRAINOR 1475 CONCORDIA ST HAYZATA It! 55391 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATXON AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEM«P1N COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF NY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF nATE^t|^« » IV^^BY fCi . J 1 i J}l\. , >/ w • *-m 4J y=.z:::rJ^ i • A -r " r’ o Coi^y^-oa D *STT Page 7 of 7 o V7 Cj •J Mk I I. <7. «r»• I b.r i A», llil i Ii;i'p. ; 9-. i:i 5 » ‘- :;%-• ! ,V- :.-:-V ;■?■ r-&•#• t. ♦ • • % - •♦=f I'-V i jj- ;v- {■•... ! .■•• «'•"? ;•■ •? ; ur* # • r V • ‘‘f* «>r p.i; '-1: » 5*l. r .1; *'^5 K-'•f; *..•• •• • C:-4'-.-.ft fh & .^'♦i :'l m 1 CITYof ORONO I i RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. S 6 4 3 A RFSOLUf ION GRANTING V.\R1ANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B), SECTION 10.22, SUBDFVTSIONS 1 & 2, AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDFVTSION 16 (L) FILE #2057 WHEREAS, James Nystro.m (hereinafter "the applicant ”) is owner of the property located at 1745 Concordia Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; lx)t 13. Coffee's Addition to Shad>'wood, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and U ilEKEAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section iO.25. Subdivision 6 (B) to allow construction of a single family residence a»!d deLichcd garage on a lot 0.46 acre in area v/here 0.5 acre lot area is requited, ana 75 in width, where KK)’ is normally required, and said residence structure being 9.5' from the north and south .side lot lines where a 10’ side yard setback is normally required, and a variance to •Scciion 10.22. Subdivision 1 to allow said structure to be located less than the normally required 75 setback from the lakeshore and such location encroaching on the average lakeshore setback whete no encroachment is normally allowed, and a variance to Sections 10.22. Subdivision 2 and Subdivision 16 (L) to allow hardcover on the property in excess of the hardcover limitations imposed by the zoning code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RES0L\T:D by the City Council of Orono, Minne.sora: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2057. The property is located in the LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning Dist.’-ict. P.'ige 1 of? I i GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 6 4.^_____ j.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 21, 1995, and recommended approval of certain requested variances and denial of other requested variances based upon the following findings: B. The lot area and lot width variances should be granted since a residence already exists on the property and no additional land is available for purchase by the applicant to make the lot area and width more conforming. The proposed variance to allow construction of a deck in the 0-75 ’ lakeshore setback zone should be denied because no adequate hardship has been justified to support such a variance. The removal of the existing residence and deck area affords cver>' opportunity and ability to construct a residence and deck meeting the required 75' lakeshore setback, and the relative location and current use of the residence structure on the adjacent property do not provide sufficient hardship to Justify the granting of the requested lakeshore setback variance. The average lakeshore setback variance Ls Justified based on the location of the adjacent house to the north which is extremely distant from ihe lake and therefore creates an average setback line which would force applicant's proposed residence to be similarly distant from the lakeshore, resulting in not one but two residences out of character with the general residential development in the neighborhood. The applicant has proposed to remove the existing detached garage which is 0. r from the south side line and move that garage to a location meeting all setback requirements. The requested variances to allow a side setback of 9.5' on both the north and south side lot lines where a 10' side setback is nonnally required, are Justified by the elimination of the existing 1.6' south side setback by replacing that structure with a new structure meeting 95% of the required setback instead of the existing 16%, and said setback variances are further Justified by the negative impact on room sizes and house layout if the variances are not granted, and the improved location of the residence in relation to lot lines provides further overall Justification for the setback variances. 1 Page 2 of 7 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 6 4 3 4. 5. F. A hardcover variances in the 0-75' zone is not justified smce the removal of existing residence and deck allows for the replacement of a new house and deck meeting the 75’ lakeshore setback and therefore any hardcover in the 0-75’ zone can easily be avoided. Applicant has not shown adequate hardship to justify placement of hardcover in the 0-75’ zone. G'. Hardcover in the 75-250’ zone is proposed to increase from 24.6% existing to 31 % proposed by applicant. Moving the proposed house and deck out of the 0-75’ zone results in a final hardcover (accounting for reduced sidewalk length) of approximately 4,600 s.f. or 35.0% in the 75-250' zone. This percentage increase is justified by the hardcover elimination in the 0- 75’ zone. Further, hardcover in the 250-500’ zone will increase from the existing 22.8% to 60% proposed by the applicant where only 30% is normally allowed, how'ever, a hardship is the small size of the 250-500’ zone and the variance is justified by the concurrent removal of hardcover in the 0-75’ zone and general reconstruction of hardcover at locations further from the lake than currently exists. Overall hardcover on the propert)' is proposed to decrease from 5.715 s.f. (28.5%) to approximately 5.350 s.f. (26.7%), where the entire lot would normally be allowed 18.3% hardcover under normal hardcover limitations. The City Council finds that the negative impact on sizes and house layout and improved location of the residence in relation to lot lines as compared to the existing residence, is adequate justification for granting of the requested side setback variances for the new residence, but only in conjunction with a reduction of the side roof overhangs to a width of 1’, resulting in no overhang encroachment nearer than 8.5 ’ from the side lot lines." The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 3 of 7 o\ CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL \»o, 3 6 4 3 * 6. The Cit>' Council finds that the conditions existing on this propert>' are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other propen>‘ in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring propcrt)^ would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessaiy to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficult)'; is necessar)' to preserve a substantial propert)' right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above fmdings, the Orono Cit>' Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the removal of the existing residence, deck and detached garage and construction of a new residence, deck and detached garage on a lot of area 0.46 acre where a 0.50 lot area is normally required, and on a lot of width 75’ where a 100 ’ lot width is normally required; and grants a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to allow the new residence and deck to be constructed lakeward of the defined average setback line, and grants a variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2 and 10.56. Subdivision 16 (L) to allow 35.09c hardcover in the 75-250' zone where only 257c hardcover is normally allowed, and to allow 609c hardcover in the 250-500' zone where only 307c hardcover is normally allowed; and grants a variance to Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to allow the new residence structure and deck to be located 9.5 ’ from the north and south side lot lines where a 10’ side setback is normally required; subject to the following conditions: 1.The proposed new residence and deck shall not be located within the 0-75’ lakeshore setback zone, and no hardcover will be allowed in the 0-75 zone. Hardcover in the 75-250' zone shall be limited to 4,600 s.f. (35.0%) per the diagram and schedule attached as Exhibit A. Further, hardcover in the 250-500' zone shall be limited to 750 s.f. (60.0%) per the schedule and diagram attached in Exhibit A. .Applicant is advised that any future proposals to add hardcover to the property beyond the levels approved in this resolution will require an additional variance application, and might be approved only with concurrent removals of existinc hardcover to result in no net hardcover increase. Page 4 of 7 r. • . - O 0\\m CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 64 3 3.Roof overhang shall extend no closer than 8.5' to the vertical extension of the side lot lines. 4.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that 'date (November 27, 1996). 5.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authorit}' granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 27th day of November, 1995. A-mEST: , 'Dorothy illin. City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Propc'rty-Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 27th day of November, 1995, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City'. CAROLE A HASEMAN N01MYFWUC4iNNB0n KWWwCOUffY My Ccnwimon jw. y. ypo Notary ’ Public Page 5 of 7 . I ..t ^ CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 6 4 3 STATE OF NHNNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this ^^/-^ day of fiLJn , 199^ before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared __________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and wHo executed tlw foregoing instrument,and acknowledged.that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. tw/ _ r CAROLE A MSEMAN WwurMuc iwiciott MWW COUNTY My CMMiiiiuii Jr. 31.1W NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of , 199 before me a Notar}' Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same '*s his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this ____day of____, 199 before me a Notary' Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 6 of 7 ■SKLASatf;..-!!.'’-----J .-eSLU MTSXTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21, 1995 (#14 - #2056 Michael & Barbara Wigley - Continued) Hawn said if the boulder walls were wanted to hold soil before revegetation, a landscaper should be able to proMde plants that germinate quickly. Silt tencing was noted to be an option to prevem erosion into the lake w hile vegetation was germinating. Peterson moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application ?f2056 for redesigning and gaining of a MCWD permit. Ayes 6. Nays 0. Lindquist said the wails would more than likely be denied by the lake and is not in favor of go'uig ahead with this proposal. Schroeder s^d if erosion was clearly shown, then he would be willing to look at the proposal. Smith said she did not see the project to include boulder walls The applicant responded that her major concern for the project was the safety of her children. (#15) #2057 JAMES NYSTROM, 1745 CONCORDIA STREET - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 10:58-11:22 P..M. The Certificate of Mailing and Afhdaut of Publication were noted. Mr. Nystrom and his architect, Greg Frazee, were present. Gaffron reported that the application has been amended and is now propc ’sed as a residential tear down and replacement. The principal structure is presently located within . the 0-75’ zone and is proposed at the 75' line with a 10' wide deck encroaching the 0-75 zone. The detached garage will also be taken down and reconstructed to meet the setback requirements. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone would be significantly reduced with increases shown in the 75-250’ and significantly so in the 250-500' zone. The side setback is proposed at 9 5' where 10' is required. The average lakeshorc setback is also an issue to the house on the north. Lindquist asked if the deck and house could be moved back 10’, resulting in no hardcover in the 0-75' zone. Frazee said this could be done but preferred the proposed scenario. The house to the south extends into the 75' setback with a porch touching the side lot line. With the proposed house located at the 75' line, it allows the applicant to maintain the same view as the neighbor and the ability to look beyond the house. If the house is moved back 10’, the view of the lake would be limited. Lindquist said he had a problem wdth any structure in the 0-75'. F MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION IvinETING HELD ON AUGUST 21, 1995 (#15 - #2057 James Nystrom - Continued) Peterson said if a new house was built to the north, it also would be at the 75 line. Schroeder appreciated the tremendous improvements made in the proposal and saw no problem with the deck as there were hardships with the house. Hawn jsked why the 10' side setbacks could not be met. Frazee said he worked with the floor plan trying to ntinimize room sizes to meet the requirement. He found it would be necessary ’ to move rooms upstairs, and it was the intent of the applicant to maintain an understated and lower prodle. Peterson read into the minutes a lener received from the DNTl recommending denial of the appUcation due to structure within the 0-75' zone. The DNR determined a reasonable alternative would be to move the structure back 10'. Peterson informed the applicant that this is the only opportunity the City has to make properties meet current codes Schroeder noted lakeshore properties are a "Catch 22" proposition. Owners want to be on the lake, yet it is bad for the lake Gaflron noted that the average setback, lot area, and lot width problems are inherent to the propeny. The pertinent facts relating to the e.visting and proposed houses were reviewed. A major improvement with setbacks was proposed for the garage. Schroeder moved to approve .Application #2057 as proposed due to the obvious hardships of the property, the substandard lot, the considerable effort to meet regulations, in particular the 0-75' zone, to warrant the proposed exceptions. There was no second to the mouon. Peterson said the property had the amount of space needed to move the house back and set the standards where they would meet City requirements. The applicant said there was a privacy issue involved. The neighbor's screen porch being on the property line looks directly into the home. Lindquist said, although the reasons were valid, many other applications also have valid ^ reasons. He noted it was becoming more difficult to allow any encroachment into the 75' lakeshore area. Schroeder agreed. Gaffron said the City cannot predia what will happen with other homes in the area. Decisions cannot be made based on possible predictions. The applicant said the home to the south was in good condition. 1 1 F NIESUTES OF 1 HE ORONO PLANNING CONCvnSSION NEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21, 1995 (#15 - #2057 James Nystrom - Continued) Lindquist said there were three choices, to table the application, deny the proposal, or approve the proposal with an amendment moving ail structure out of the 75 area. e applicant suggested amending the application to move the structure and deck bac ' Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application ?2057 with the stipulation that all strucaire be moved back out of the 0-75’ setback zone. Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#16) #2058 RON RANTZ/AUTOGRAFS INC, 2525 SHABY^VOOD ROM)- COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN7VARLANCE - PUBLIC HE.ARESG 11:22-11:55 P.M The Cenificasc of Mailing and AfBdavit of Publication were noted. The applicant and contractors. Keith Waters and Blake Bichanich, were present. Mabusth reported that the proposal is for a commercial office building just south oft e intersections of CoRds 15 and 19. The property is made up of 3 vacant lots, two of which front CoRd 19 with a 250* frontage and zoned B-4 commercial. The other lot to the rear is zoned residential and would support a duple.x. The lots would be combined, and a sinole office building would be ereaed to house a national office center for Autografs, inc. The applicant proposes to reduce the amount of parking available to what actual usage is predicted and provide space for future expansion if needed. The goal is to maintain open space with plantings. It is the applicant’s desire to protect the wooded, treed area. Tnere is a provision for future parking with the current plans. The business is a prototvpe, and the applicant would like to know if there is an ability to expand the building and parking into the residential zoned area in the future if needed. Retaining ponds would be located on the property with drainage for the initial building and e.xpansion proposed to drain imo the pond. It would be conneaed with a 12" culvert Ml drainage will be direaed awav from KeUey Avenue and to the east under County Road 19. Ron Rantz relayed the background on the use. The building would be a corporate office and graphic design center using 3M technology. The company is creaung a marketplace for the technology. The computer work and production would be performed on the premises to include a printine area that would create the graphics thru computers that would 20 out to kiosks within car dealerships nauonwide. The location was chosen due to neames's to 3M and Rantz’ home. The number of employees would be limited. The technology requires a controlled environment of temperature and humidity for the prmting process Rantz reponed that there would be no chemical concerns as there is nothing toxic within the toners used. The produa is the same as that used in lazer toners. The process electrostatically feeds off of the humidity and air. People are able to remain m the room throughout the process with no personal harm. 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 11,1595 - =i2051 Michael Hi'.beUnk/John Vogt - Continued) Mahusth said there is an issue of »o drin oi tlets on the east side of ie ** Peterman Addition and duected along the lot line to Old Crystal Bay Road. The outlets sene no function and can be closed according to the Engineer. best served by an internal road, one reason of which to move around the forested area. Hurr asked about nvo alternate septic sites shown in a stand oees. Hilbelink said a recondarv site was in the stand of trees with the principal, half m and half out He noted toif a road were to be located to the east, it would be difBcult to 6no two alternate septic sites. ” corSfto Cookl'L'^^^ L't!^”s'on thi T'iranteSr ag?.inst the 8% park dedication**. Hurr moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution .i?3601. Ayes j. Nays 0. (#10) #2057 JAMES NYSTROM, 1745 CONCORDIA STREET - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3602 The applicant was represented by architect, Greg Frazee. Gaf&on noted that the appUcation is for a number of vanances. The was for an addition located 23' from the lake The Planmng Cotimussion was not m favor of the addition. An amended proposal was presented tor a new ” setback line with a 10' deck encroaching the 0-75' zone. The proposed new garage was proposed at a central location, which would meet setback requirements. Hardcover was Loosed at 10 1% in tne 0-75' zone, 31% in the 75.250' zone, and «,6^; “-5®- 500'zone The Planning Commission saw no jusnfication m encroaching the 0-75 zone frith a deck and asked for the house and deck to be side setback was to change from 1 O' to 9.6'. It was noted by the appbeant s architect that any change in the house width would adversely affect the room sizes. configuration of the driveway eliminates a large portion of blacktop. Hurr said she saw no hardship for a side setback variance. .1 L .. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CIT\' COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 51,1555 (U\0 - #2057 James Nystrom - Continued).*r Frazee said the home was designed as an understated cottage with an upper master bedroom and bath. With the narrowness of the lot, the applicant wanted a low prome. the house were to be made narrower, it would require a second story design. Frazee sai this would not be in keeping with the neighborhood. Hurr voiced concern with the house height changing'm the tliture if this proposal were approved. Hurr said she was concerned with the drip line from the proposed residence. The co e requires a 10' separation with a maKimum allowed 1-1/2' encroachment ot an overhang m the 10’ setback. The proposed residence shows a 9.5' setback and a.2 overhang whic would bring the roof drip line closer to the side setback line. It was noted that the neighbor's home to the south sits on the lot line as well as the 2aratze. It was said that a new home would be anticipated in the future on the lot to the north. Kelley said he astreed with the need to meet the side setback and maintain the house out of the 0-75’ zone. Kelley said this would require the house to be 1’ narrower on each side whh the overhang. Hurr said this design requires more land than the lot provides. Frazee said the owner took steps to make improvements on the lot by proposing a new house. Hurr noted the old residence "on average" met the 10’ side setback. Callahan questioned this conclusion, opining that it was better to move fanher in than 1.6' as presently located on one side. Hurr said it was her opinion that the side setback should be met as weU as no exceeding of the 1-1/2' overhang allowable. Callahan noted that the house was moved out of the 0- 75' zone. Gafrron asked if the footprint to the house were to change, if the Council would like to see the appUcaiion again. It was determined if the design met codes, met the side setbacks, met the 30' hardcover requirement, and was out of the 0-75' zone, the Council would approve the application. Hurr moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution #3602 with amendments as noted. Ayes 3, Nays 0. (#11) #2033 DONALD & ARLENE KIELLEY. 1670 SHADWVOOD ROAD VARLANCES - RESOLUTION #3603 Mr. Kielley and contractor, Jerry Roelofs, were present ^^mJTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 13,1 - John O’SnHivar!, Council DL'-?ction - Coctinued) Goetten inquired about a possible purchase of the rezonin*. informed her that he has an option to '’o'CuUivan said he would meet withFour potential site plans are currently beuig drawn. O . Ameetinawill City StafFonce the plans are done. Plans include reta.1 and office space. Ameenng also take place with neighbors of the property.also liKC yinuc V»iiaa ------- (.«) «022 R. MEL.AMED/R L.AUER. 920 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO.AD SOUTH - FINAL SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION ;?3629 Hum moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution «629. Vote: Ayes 5. Nays 0. - . ^ ^ « • (.#6) «03« BRUCE R. KELLY, 2340 FO.N STREET - PRELDONARY SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION #3630 Hurt moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution «630. Vote: Aves 5. Nays 0. (#7) #2057 JAMES NYSTROM, 1745 CONCORDLV STREET - VARIANCES - request for RECONSIDERAIION Mr. Nystrom and his architect. Greg Frazee, were present.ivir. iMy:>uuui ---------- - - Gaffion reported that the Council "jf 23 meeting. The e.'dstmg house ^ Commission review lead to applicant proottog^'^^ov“ and «^ln “rrritd^^^^ fof Lt"st mTtTh^roVffi"^ The applicant requests a variance for a lesser suie setoacK. F^azee commented that the appnc™o"^ed “ Commission to meet p,^^_ commission but rejected by the CouncU. recommended tor approv y e Commission saw the many positives that s,„t. c™..a, -. located 23' trom a^ore ^ o„ Uie lot Une. Frazee said Nystrom liked the line. The neig o g update and realized the problem with closeness to the lake but sa . jeview. t he proposal was then amended to hardcover dunng -5, ^ jbe garage, which is currently side loading with Stof'tJi^dr:^^^^ b‘r:en]^elon1h; lot with one parking stall off to the Se eliminating the majority of the hardcover. fr MEVUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 13,1995 ^^7 • .^2057 J^LTHCS Nystrcm • Ccntinii Frazee said the problem with meeting the side setback lies with the desire to keep a low profile, an understated cottace look, so as not to dominate the neiahborhood. To decrease the floor plan would cause the applicant to build a two-story to gain the needed space Frazee asked the Council to reconsider their decision, taking into account the benefits gained by the proposal, concessions and expenses made, especially the house being moved out of the 75' zone. Nystrom commented that the house and garage as they exist are contrary to the City comprehensive olan. He felt he was taking a proactive approach with his proposal. N\'Strom said he was only asking for 12" to miximize his space as he does not wish to have a two-story home. Callahan noted that the three Council members present at the prior application review were Kelley, Hurr, and himself Gaflron added that there was also the issue of the overhang. The code allows for a 1-1/2' overhang. The proposed overhang is 2.2' with the additional 6 variance resulting in a 7- 1/2' setback from the drip line to the lot line. With the additional variance. Gaffron said there is still a better setback from the south but closer on the north side. It was noted that one side of the residence is available for emergency vehicles to go around. Hurr said, because in replacement we consider this as a new lot, she saw no hardship to allow the house to not meet code. Even with the positive changes, Hurr felt it would set a bad precedent to allow the variances. Callahan noted that with the bad situation as is represented by the property now, the changes result in many positives. Frazee added that the applicant was also taking a perfectly good garage and rebuilding it to meet hardcover goals. Goetten questioned why the house cannot be redesigned as the overage is ody 6" on each side. Frazee said the interior would be affected bv 1’ and would result in too narrow a headroom in the master bedroom with the slanted walls. The master bedroom width was said to be 15’ with the slope beginmng at 4'6". Nystrom said he realized the Planning Commission and Council made exceptions in other cases and asked that it also be done here. A neighboring property was cited as an example but noted to have gained a variance due to a drainage problem. Hurr commented that a variance requires a condition under which there be a hardship, not self-created. Frazee reitereated the need to maintain a low profile and not overpower the neiahborhood. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 13,1995 (#7 - ?i2057 James Nystrom - Continued) Goctten asked Nystrom what his rationale was for the hardship. Nyst^m a caoe cod stvle home with the master bedroom on the second stor^. * r^ee modified shingle style. The design of the roof when reduced would result effective master bedroom. Nystrom said the tradeoffs of the propoi w r p that he did not feel the side setback variance should be denied. Kellev said he would reconsider the application. Kelley moved approve Application ^2057 for the 6- side setback vanance and a 26 overhang for a 8 vEri3HC6 End 3H overhEng cncroEcnmcnt of 1-2 . Gaf&on exclained the need for the secondary’ variance for the overhang, Hutr «ked what the hardshio was for the overhang. Fraaee said the main concern slope. He asked to have both variances granted but said the overhang cou J Callahan said he could recall 6.8 homes along this inroediate J?" variances. With the numerous positive changes ot this proposal, Callahan said he was inclined to grant the variances for this application. Jabbour said he had a problem with the eaves, noting the need for space for emergency vehicles, but saw the wisdom to grant the 6" variance. Vote: Ayes 2, Kelley. CaUahan; Nays 3, Goetten, Hum, Jabbour. Motion denied. Kelley moved. Callahan seconded, to approve the application for the 6” variance with the caves meeting code. Vote; Ayes 4. Nays 1. Hurt. (*#8) ^2061 ARNE W ASBERG. 3134 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE renewal - RESOLUTION #3631 Hum moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution #3631. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. M««5 MARFIELD/HILUTOLES, 2455/2425/2435 scotch pine lane . vIcATON ofs?OTCH PINE LANE - PRELESHNARY SUBDIVISION approval (RE-PLAT) - RESOLUTION #3632 Callahan excused himself from the discussion of this appUcation as it was his desire to abstain from voting since he lived in the neighborhood. Gaffion repomed that the application was for the vacation of Scotch Pme Lane.» pubhe Licated road, and the teplat of the Dicon addition, which was subdi vided m 1974 This siAdivision occumed prior to the 1975 code requirement of two acre lots The road meets current standards. .1 I r. k 11 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO MEETING HELD ON NONTIMBER 27,1995 PARK COi\LMISSION COMMENTS No representative of the Park Commission was present. PLANNING COM>nSS10N COMMENTS No representative of the Planning Commission was present. PUBUC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (.«,«057 JAMES M-STROM. 1745 CONCORDU STREET - VARIANCES - P^SOLUTION #3643 Hu. moved. KeUey seconded, .o .'li-'rf-TdfseVb let v.-idth, average lakeshore setbacev,owsa. wr Nvstrom at 1745 Concordia Street. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (-#6) #2079 RICK PERRY. 440 WILLOW DRIVE SOUTH - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3644 Hurt moved. Keiley seconded, to adopt Resolution #3644 for variances to Rick Petty. 440 Willow Drive South. Vote: Ayes 4. Nays 0. Mrs. Bouchard was present “ bring Jem ^em Luer ®?Ir^ty' dtdline. and the propeny being located in a "hot spot" neighborhood under consideration for municipal sewer. *■ • ••r • • • - . ‘.ii—- m . * • - V r.vr f • ••* •- V r-- V \mm\ . . • N • • /• rr:..* . • • • i/ r ) / TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, Citv Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Ntabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:October 15, 19% SUBJECT: #2182 Herbert Terr> Olson, 3640 Bayside Road - Conditional Use Permit/Variance Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA Lot area = 86,125 s.f. Application: Applicant wishes to reconstruct a 27.2'x25.9’ detached garage within the required street yard adjacent to County Road 84 or Bayside Road. The property would be defined as both a comer and tfuough lot. Applicant has filed the required conditional use permit to install the accessory stmeture on property. The garage must also meet the required street yard setback from Eileen Street and Stubbs Bay Road. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.02 A. Definition 35 - Lot comer. B. Definition 42 - Lot through. 2.Section 10.03, Subd. 10 - Conditional use permit required for all accessory stmetures on through lot. 3.Section 10.23, Subd. 6(B) - Street setback variance required for new detached garage. Required = 50’ Existing = 9' Proposed = 9' Variance = 41' or 82% 4.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review’of hardcover. 75-250’ setback area = 21,531.25 s.f. or 25% Existing = 5,946 s.f. or 13.8% Proposed = 5,946 s.f. or 13.8% No hardcover variance is required for this application. 5.Section 10.75, Subd. 4 - Required front/street setback is required from each street line of through lot. Zoning File #2182 October 15,1996 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property 0^vners List D - Hardcover Inventory E - Photograph of Propert>- from Lakeshore F - Sur\ey 10/14/96 G - Surv ey 9/13/76 H - Gustafson Report 10/16/96 Description of Request Applicant seeks approval of a conditional use permit and setback variance that would permit reconstruction of a similar sired detached garage within the street yard adjacent to Bayside Road. Applicant proposes moving the garage 6' further east. His plan is to reconstruct new foundation walls and to excavate around structure to allow installation of two tiers of retaining wall (refer to Exhibit A). The first tier of wall would be set back 4 ’ from the structure and a second tier to be set back an additional 4*. Applicant’s plan has not located walls adjacent to structure. The elevations adjacent to the garage do not reflect the cuts made into existing bank with construction of original garage. The walls of the existing garage serv e as retaining walls of the surrounding bank. Earthen walls are not pushing in and having a major impact on the stability of three walls of garage. Upon your site inspection, please note the steep bank to the immediate west of the backout drive as you back out onto Bayside Road. Members are also asked to review the driveway at Stubbs Bay Road that provides access to the second detached garage and direct access to parking area adjacent to residence. Applicant was granted a side setback variance from the west lot line in 1986 for an addition to the principal structure. Please review Exhibit F, upon staffs inspection of the site w*e noted a sewer clean out to the northeast of the existing garage. Applicant’s private sewer line e.xtends from Stubbs Bay Road to residence. Staff asked applicant's surveyor to locate sewer clean out to determine the approximate location of the priv ate sewer line that serves the residence. Review Exhibit H, Gustafson confirms that it is doubtful that applicant could install the retaining walls as planned based on the information provided in the most amended surv'ey. If the garage is to be approved in this location, the sewer line would have to be relocated further north. Gustafson also asks for more detail such as a specific wall cross section and that the walls be located on the survey. Applicant’s addendum information notes a rock wall. Gustafson notes that if a boulder wall is proposed the size of the boulders, wall batter and embedment dimensions must be specified. Zoning File #2182 October 15,1996 Page 3 Statement of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit A. applicant notes the following: Applicant claims existing landscaping, side walks, stairs, trees and bushes makes the proposed location a natural location. He notes the steep slope of the propert>- and placement of the garage elsewhere on propert)' would require extensive excavation and leave the lot less attractive. Issues for Consideration 1.Will you support if>plicant's request for a setback variance for a garage to be installed within the approximate location of the existing garage. 2.Should applicant be asked to consider another location for the detached garage in consideration of the location of the existing sewer line and the impact of the extensive excavations needed to install new garage with two tiers of retaining wall within steep bank area along Bayside? Review Exhibit G, can a detached garage be relocated adjacent to existing gravel drive entering from east side of property? There is an extensive gravel parking area adjacent to residence at the west end of this drive. 3. Other issues raised by Planning Commission members. Options of Action To approve conditional use permit for the installation for a new detached garage on the through lot that would meet all required street/front yard setbacks from three street lot lines; or To table application providing applicant additional time to provide an amended plan showing relocated sewer line and detail on two tiered retaining wall adjacent to garage placed within the required street yard setback adjacent to Bayside Road. So -Application #__3 r ^1 / f_____L^. » »Date Received _ Amount Paid *7 5>*^ ~ <TJ _;- CITY OF ORONO - VARLANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 if " (no change from original application) ’ Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) » •.- • c " 'r- •A* PROPERTY INFORMATION S ite Address_____3>LH0 P>Ays»P£. Property Identification Number (P.I.D.). Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_____1^*7^ Favx , ----------------------------- I ('do)lfdo nm^also own the adjacent parcels of land ^ V_______________ V .. (month/year) Present use ^propert>" ^__residential Zoning District: other (specify). applicant Name TfeevNy Address: 3C*to jipfi________ Phone (home ) fel X *♦"> 3 3L^ 31> _____ Phone futtrk^ 0 7. 7«fX -7V5t> Citv: U-g- Ziv‘ Si^3S^9 0\^'NER (if different than applicant) Name______________________ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address:Citv:Zip:. description OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: RePutgJB. frJ <£^flAC<£ ^ T)#.tv<*OAX- ^CT oF /•njcrgyy A.pcj;1 (attach additional sheets if necessary) OaO; YO <U6rrMi»J Jton^ C a /*K • VARIANCES REQUIRED 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 conditions preventing compliance \\iih Zoning Code requirements: rsTi^ b' --------- tS__TT/y^----r I r_P —t " ttt ■ - ■ ■ —------------------------------------------ ^ 4 op <^4£Afef. » cAr AtT^CXli^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) p. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadlipe date in order for vour applicarion to be considered co mplet<t 1. 2. Completed Application Form J. Certified Property Ovvners List of ovmers within labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of ^-Finance, A-603, Govi Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/j ” x 11' for 4. ^reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in e.xisting 5. 6. grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/i' x 11' for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8Vi” x 11"). 7. 8. List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that ysmz variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included^ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Sign. .. re ^ 0^4^—*Date 1-17- tJt OWTSER'S SIGNAT^ RE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entiy onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council mernbers for purpos^of invgs^i^tion and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 S m ! RUN DATE 09/IZ/n MTCH 501 i^ltCRrN COUNTY ►ROPCRTY XNFORHATION SYSTEH RRCX^ERTY QNNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIAS5A01 PAOE 1PROP AOOR OI#iER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP AOOR Olt«R NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR CPMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAWAYER NANE/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR IB 05-1I7-2S IZ OOOA 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF Mirtl STATE OF MINN fONR)(LUCE LINE TRAIL! 58 05-117-25 12 0012 00185 BEDERHOOO DR J SOUTER ADR ZICK JOHN SOUTER A DANIKA ZICK 185 BEDERHOOO OR LONG LAKE MN 5555A 58 05-117-25 15 0011 00220 BEDERHOOO DR G A J GUSTAFSON GERALD L GUSTAFSON 200 BEDERHOOO DRIVE LONG LAKE fN 55558 58 05-117-25 21 0011 056A0 DAYSIOE RO HERBERT T OLSON A NIFE HERBERT A JANE OLSON 5680 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 05-117-25 21 0018 05620 EILEEN ST SAL NHITMAN STEPHEN T HHITMAr4 5620 EILEEN ST MAPLE PLAIN MN 55559 58 05-117-25 21 0018 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HE!«IEPIN FORFEITED LAI^ CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55525 58 05-117-25 12 001003580 BAYSIDE RO V E NORTON ETAL VICTOR E NORTON 5580 BAYSIDE ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 05-117-25 12 0016 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF MINN STATE OF MINN (DNRI (LUCE UNE TRAIL) 58 05-117-25 15 0088 00058 ADDRESS UNASSK^D VICTOR E NORTON VICT'JR E NORTON 5580 BAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 05-117-25 21 0012 05625 EILEEN ST JOHN G PIDGEON A NIFE JOHN A MAGDALEN PIDGEON 10912 GLEN HILOING LANE BLOOMINGTON MN 55851 58 05-117-25 21 0016 05700 BAYSIDE RD J B MAUS A J E MAUS JAMES B A JOAN E MAUS 5700 BAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 58 05-117-25 28 0069 00058 ADDRESS UFUSSIC^O J B MAUS A J E MAUS JAMES B A JOAN E MAJS 5700 BAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 05-117-25 00165 BEDER GEORGE S TERP GEORGE S TERP 165 BEDERHOOO LONG LAKE MN DR55556 58 05-117-25 12 0018 05575 CHRISTINE DR M R SHIELDS A J K SHIEI S MICHAEL R SHIELDS 5575 CHRISTINE DR MAPLE PLAIN MN 5555^ 58 05-117-25 15 008^ 00222 BEDERFIOOO OR JEFFREY D MUELLER JEFFREY D MUELLER 222 BEDEmOOO DR LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 05-117-25 21 0015 05650 EILEEN ST D H ILSE A S L ELSE DAVID A SHEROKEE ILSE 5650 EILEEN ST MAPLE PLAIN MN 55559 58 05-117-25 21 0017 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF MINNESOTA STATE OF MINN (DNR) (LUCE LINE TRAIL) A ‘ V' 1 • . % • I V. 58 05-117-25 28 0070 00058 AODREjS UNASSIGNED J B MAUS A J E MAUS JAMES B A JOAN E MAl^ 5700 BAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE MN 55556 RUN DATE 09/12y^BATCH 501PROP AOOR OI^R NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 58 05-117-25 2^ 0117 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO imNh'EPXN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK8/13/79 ST DEED 1S6753 HEMCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFCmHATIQN SYSTEM PROPERTY 0W8ERS LIST58 05-117-25 28 011800058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK8/15/79 ST DEED 158755 REPORT NO. PI855801 PAGE 2TOTAL IATCH Sol 00020 -w* It ■w i •. ■■ I..I • « V « ' ^ • *, V .. % % X 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 OEPARHCNT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE 6EST OF NY KNONLEOGE AND BELIEF. DATE.9 3 i ^iopby ^'4/ (i < F. HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0.75’75.250’250.500’500.1000* J A.House Length *fO __La____ •/ B.Garage \ c.Dris’eway 21A»30 —___ D.Sidewalk __ilfi_____ #, E.Patio/Deck 'a —Ag—— 1 Landscape f ^in X X X Width X X Xo i3i », * X X X X By Plastic G. Other X X X 1% •o TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE L B 6fci2>5 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ____________X Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway Un X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B PROPl X 100 X 100 = »S.F. m U46 S.F. as S.F. *S.F. S.F. as 5^p S.F. ss S.F. n 190 S.F. «r S.F. as too S.F. *S.F. S.F. s S.F. ss S.F. WZB -•TlX _ i.f. 3>l*ffc F. -__ativs 5.F. ss <7*% S.F. ss S.F. as S.F. ss S.F. ss S.F. S3 S.F. SS S.F. S.F. ss S.F. S.F. ss S.F. S3 S.F. S3 S.F. ss S.F. as S.F. fZi S.F. -S.F. S3 __0.__% y A A B ■4 if ““Uy UKr ««-.St "uir* ^ *• The pumo«^ „r ‘ ®"‘* «”7vS ; - ' (5-s • > /-•>■ ' J t ?.' -I ■t"- ...^ •7- V / Jk^' - n/ .- ' * , X. hi •* •» ’ ■*m » •--:?s 1 f' •OiTI I Plat of for Korbort of tot 1, Block 1, Rlodol’t Stubba *^7 Addition Honnepln Count7, Mlnnotot* -r# 1 0 p, '^y f*O*0S^*> ■a I i > ^ / V*. §4 Cortifleoto of Surroj: Scalet 1" s 60* Dite I 9-13-76 o t Iron marker Gordon R. Coffin Ra land Suz^eyor and Planner tong Lake, Hlnneaota ti 4 ■ itkir .-. i ar^ Ak hi’ if i Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects October 16, 1996 Bof^ifroo ,9nct ^flOCMfei ^ f .«r* Aff.rm^teive 4chOn f(9U4^ pr^ctpttfs Otto Q Bonestroo • »oiepn C Ander'i* PE • M^rvtn i Sorv«t4 Pi • Bich^rd C Turner Pf • Gienn P Coofc PC • Tr»cr»»4i f No yes P| • Pohe»? G Schurvchf. PC • ierrjf A Bourdon PC • BoOer? « Bosene PE Sus.«n M CDerim C PA Senio' Consultants AssOiiMe Pr ni:ipAii Huwvar :! A Sanford P? • Aeitn A Go'don PE • BoDert ff Pfcf^erte P£ • B C''ard W i-oMK- P| • Dav J O Lovsoia P£ • ?oDert C Russek Al A • Mark A Hansors PC • Mtchaei T Rautmann, PC • Tlpd *t F.eid PE • Kenneth P Anderson PE • Mark 9 Botfi PE • Sidney P Williamson Pf L S • RoOert C Ro'sm»tn 0^^cel Sc P.^. Rochester Wi-n .f ar'O i: C^oud V\ • Mequo'' Ji s -Mj, Si its / * *,-/ ' B > Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Herbert Olson Residence File No. 139-2182 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the proposal to replace the existing gaiage and driveway at 3640 Bayside Road. The plan requires a two-tiered rock retaining wall. The topography provided with the application is missing a significant amount of detail at the location of the proposed work. In addition, no indication of the proposed elevations, contours or wall location has been provided. The plan shows the location of the existing sanita*y sewer service pipe. The pipe may need to be relocated if the retaining walls are proposed along the north side of the garage. More information must be provided to identify the specific wall cross section and location. The two walls must be placed at least as far apart as ^hey are tall (1:1) or a surcharge loading must be used. If a boulder wall is proposed, the size of the boulders, wall batter and embedment dimensions should be specified. 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 r,5i:.l*3898 ■ 612-636-4600 o TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator October 17, 1996 SUBJECT: #2183 Charles L. Kramer, 2990 Somerset Lane - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB Lot area = 2.43 acres (1/2+ acre of T>pe 7 wetland not classified as a designated wetland per wetland.miq>s of the City) Application: Applicant has filed a conditional use permit that would allow the dredging of open water areas within the two. Type 7 wetlands within his homestead parcel. Lot 4. The alteration of wetlands not protected by the City ordinances will not require variance approval. The following ordinance is pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.03, Subd. 19 - Conditional use permit is required for land alterations involving earth movement in excess of 100 cubic yards. The proposed land alteration involves the excavation and filling of over 500 cubic yards of material. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - MCWD Permit E - Gustafson Report F - Covenant of Dedication - Wetland Protection Involving Old Crystal Bay Road Addition and 2nd Addition G - Proposed Improvement Plan H - Preliminary Plan Locating Type 7 Wetland 1 - Filling and Mitigation Plan for Old Crystal Bay Road 2nd Addition J - DNR Wetland/Type 7 Description of Request Applicant proposes the dredging of two Type 7 wetlands on his homestead property and placing spoils within adjacent Lots 2 and 3 also owned by applicant. Review Exhibits G and H, filling within Lot 3 is being placed very close to the Type 11 wetland. The engineer has asked that prior to the placement of fill that applicant's surveyor stake the edges of wetland to ensure adequate distance is maintained from wetland area. Engineer's report recommends a 26' setback. This is a setback required for all land alterations adjacent to protected wetlands of the City. We recommend a TT rum ll Zoning File #2183 October 17,19i6 Page 2 minimum 20’ setback. Staff recommends that the protected wetland within the northern portions of Lot 2 be staked in the field to ensure a minimum 2u setback from proposed fill (review Exhibit G). Septic test sites on Lots 2, 3 and alternate on 4 must be staked prior to any earth movement. Staff found the wetland located in the northwest comer of the property to be severely degenerated and would not classify the wetland as a Type 7. Creation of open water area within the low retention area would create an upgraded wetland along with benefit to varied wildlife. The W’etland located within the street yard is of more concern for staff. The wetland appears to be a true Type 7 wetland. Review Exhibit J, the DNR information lists several species of wildlife that benefit from this type of wetland. John Smylhe, an aquatic specialist at Bonestroo. was asked to review the proposal. He advised that if this is a true Type 7 wetland and shows no sign of degeneration that these are rare and should be protected. The creation of an open w ater area w ould not raise the value of this wetland. Upon your inspection note the several mature trees within the wetland. Based on the design specs provided in the alteration plan. Exhibit G, it would appear that the majority of trees would be eliminated. Staff has discussed this concern with Mark Gronberg and he noted that it is applicant's intention to attempt to save the trees with the creation of an irregular pond for the purpose of encouraging other forms of wildlife. The creation of open water ponds seems to be the preference of many Orono land owners as we have an abundance of open water ponds at 4’ depths similar to applicant's proposal. Staff recommends that John Smythe of Bonestroo inspect this specific portion of the Type 7 wetland to determine the degree of degeneration if any. Based on his findings, staff w ill either recommend saving the Type 7 as it exists today or allow the dredging of the open water area. Staff will present Smyth's findings at your meeting on the 21st. Options of Action To approve as proposed or amended (pending final report of John Smythe). Any recommendation of approval must include the following conditions: 1.Prior to the placement of spoils on Lots 2 and 3, the Type 2 wetlands w ithin Lots 2 and 3 are to be staked in the field to ensure 20' setback is maintained. 2. Septic sites on Lots 2, 3 and alternate on 4 are to be fenced off prior to any earth movement. 3. All disturbed areas shall be protected with suitable erosion control until ground cover is restored. Zoning File #2183 October 17,1996 Page 3 4.Applicant to provide information on type of wetland plantings to be installed around wildlife ponds at a minimum 16 1/2' width around the edges ol pond. 5. Applicant to fulfill all conditions of MCWD Permit 96-183. 6. Others recommended by Planning Commission. 1 St V * r \ » tiu Application ft Date Received ^ u 1 Amount Paid }) CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 2 5^^ Type of Application to be Filed >, I'f Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) [J i ‘_llij----------------------- APPLICANT Name rZ/J/Uff L. Phone (liome) /)^^ ') Phone (work)_____________ Address ? ? f ^ /y? /w f=^ r<r City Zip_^££iilil ON\”NER (if different than applicant) Name S~A ryiC_____________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address Citv Zip. Date Propert>' Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application $175.00 Residential Accessory Use $250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ______$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ______$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use V $250.00 Land Alteration >< Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - lOl cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation $l00.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) $350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule v4 PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify). REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. j. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property 0\^‘ners List of o%%Tiers within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3'’71). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic surv'ey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the propertv' This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current ow'ner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGT DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner niust sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff;___________________________Date____________ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual e.\penses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Date__^ OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry' onto the propertv' by Citv staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council .members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s signature A—<V— Applicant must have all subminals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetL-igc of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of tnis change prior to the meeting. 1 «M DATE OVlVfi BATCH 505PROB AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAfC/AOOR AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR HEMC»>1N COUNTY PROPERTY INTORMATIOH SYSTEM PROPERTY OMNERS LIST50 00-117-25 21 0001 02T05 NATERTOMI RO MARGARET T TRONBRXOGE MARGARET T TROMBRIOGE 29B5 NATERTOMI RO LONG LAKE Ml 5535* SO OA-117-25 21 0007 00080 NEAR LA 6 A C OE SANTIS GARY A CHERYL OE SANTIS 00 NEAR LA LONG LAKE Ml 553SA 50 04-117-25 21 0011 02440 SOMERSET U C L A G C KRAMER CHARLES A GE0R6AYN KRAMER 2440 SOMERSET LA LONB LAKE Mi 55556 50 04-117-25 21 0016 00058 AOORESS UNASSIGNEO OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO ASSOC ROBERT HARE 1600 LONG LAKE 8LV0 ORONO Ml 55556 50 04-117-25 22 0012 00145 CYCrCT PL GOROON V JONES GOROON V JONES 145 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE Ml 55356 50 04-117-25 22 002? 00100 CYGNET PL VXL OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55359 REPORT NO. PZ455401 PACE 1058 04-117-25 21 0005 00020 ICAR LA JAB NORTONJAMES B A DOROTHY A MORTON 20 HEAR LALOro LAKE MN 55356 58 06-117-25 21 000600050 NEAR U 0 A J HILLOAVID M A .KANETTE P HILL50 HEAR LALONG LAKE Ml 55556 4 58 04-117 23 21 0008 00038 AOORESS UNASSIGNEO EST OF RUTH F I^AR CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY Ml 55354 58 04-117-25 21 0010 02945 NATERTOMN RO 6E0RGAYN C F.RAMER 6E0RGAYN C FRAMER 2990 SOMERSET LA LONG LAKE Ml 55556 .R * V'.. 58 04-117-25 21 0012 02920 SaCRSET LA STICKNEY A SCHHARZ BLORS INC STICKICY A SCHHARZ BLORS INC 315 LA.KE ST E HAYZATA Ml 55391 58 04-117-25 21 0015 02850 SOMERSET LA ORONO limited PARTNERSHIP ORONO lIMI’-ED PARTNERSHIP 7808 CREEKRIOGE CIR 8310 BLOOMINGTON Ml 5i459 38 04-117-23 21 0017 00038 AOORESS UNASSIOCO OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO ASSOC INC ROBERT HARE 1600 LONG LAKE BLVO ORONO MN 55356 /r ' 38 04-117-25 22 0011 00135 CYGNET PL H R ANOERSSQN A E E MmiARTY H R ANOERSSON A E E MORIARTY 135 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE Ml 55356 58 04-117-23 22 0020 00160 CYGNET PL P A OEBERNAROI A J L OLSON J L OLSON A P A OE BERNARDI 160 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE Ml 55356 38 04-117-23 22 0021 00190 CYGNET PL R A HOHRMAN a R a HOHRMAN RONALD A A ROBIN A HOHRMAN 140 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE Ml 55356 38 04-117-23 22 0025 00130 CYGNET PL MARGARET 0 ROSSING MARGARET 0 ROSSING 130 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 04-117-25 22 0028 05045 NATERTOMN RO BRUCE C A KATHRYN S HALL BRUCE C A KATHRYN S HALL 3045 HATERTOHN RO ORONO MN 55356 mJH DATE 09/19/HBATCH 503mop mm OIMB MAHE TA)(PAYEII NAHE/AOOR AODB QNNER NAME TAXPAYER HANE/AOOR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PmPERTY irH^ORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST36 06-117-23 22 0029 03010 SOMERSET LA N 6 A S J CARSON MALUCE 6 I SHARVL J CARSON 6060 CHESHIRE LA PLYMOUTH MN 55466 36 06-117-23 22 0033 03065 NATERTOHN RO EQUITY LENDING IfK EQUITY LENDING ATTN JUDY 6600 FRANCE AVE S 0190 EDIltA m 55635 36 06-117*23 23 0016 00220 CYGNET PL N 0 A L G PELLHAN NED A LINDA 6 PELLHAN 220 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE MN 5L356 36 06-117-23 26 00X9 02915 SOMERSET LA S DRESSEN/R ANTOINE-ORESSEN S ORESSEN/R ANTOINE-DRESSEN 725 OLIVE AVE N PLYMOUTH m 55667 36 33-116-23 36 0010 02935 NEAR CIR H HOFFMAN A S HOFFMAN HUGH A SUSAN HOFFMAN 6155 CHASEHOOD PKWY A3 MINNETONKA MN 55363 REPORT NO. PI635601 PAGE 1136 06-117-23 22 0030 03015 HATERT0I6I RO GEOIGAYN C KRAMER GEORGAYN C KRAMCR 2990 ^fCRSET LA LONG LAKE MN 55356 36 06-117-23 22 003203065 NATERTOI#l RO THOMAS R A CHRISTINA M SMIEJA THOMAS A CHRISTINA SMIEJA 3065 NATERTONN RO ORONO MN 55356 J 36 06-117-23 22 0036 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED THO^US R A CHRISTINA H SMIEJA THOMAS A CHRISTINA SMUJA 3005 NATERTOHN RO ORONO MN 55356 36 06-117-23 23 0011 00185 CYGNET PL CALVIN PRESBYTERIAN CH ORONO CALVIN PRESBYTERIAN GRAND AVE A GLENDALE LONG LAKE MN 55356 36 06-117-23 23 0031 03020 SOeCRSET LA R P HARE V A S R HARE ROBERT A BENTE HARE 5020 SOMERSET LA ORONO MN 55356 30 06-117-23 26 0016 02975 SOMERSET U COFFIN CORNERS PARTNERSHIP JOE A TERESA LAHTI 1160 PHILLIPS OR LONG LAKE MN 55356 V 36 33-116-23 33 0001 03020 NATERTOHN RD R M STUBBS ET AL H/L EST RENA M STUBBS 3020 NATERTOHN RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 3B 33-116-23 36 0006 00055 NEAR LA N COLSON CONSTRUCTION INC COLSON CONSTRUCTION INC 21670 EXCELSIOR BLVO EXCELSIOR m 55331 . V 36 33-116-23 36 0011 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO NEAR ENTERPRISES PARTNERSHIP NEAR ENIERPRISES PARTNERSHIP C/0 HILLIAM N NEAR PO BOX 265 LONG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 503 00032 ‘ ■ iV-tmkfik. UKUN DATE 09/19/94 OATCN SOS HENNEPIN COUNTY POOPEPTY ZK^ORNATION SYSTEM P80PERTY OmERS LIST REPORT NO. PZ9S5901 PACE 12 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF HY KNOHLEOCE AND BELIEF. DATE m %i A t /" '■■■ r / t t* r -t Gny FresiTwater Canter t^Mys. IS & 19, Navarre iybO; 2500 Studywood Road ExcetSior.MN 55331-9578 Phone; (612) 471-0590 Fix; (612) 471-0682 . Email; adminOmnwatirstied.o^ Web Site: www.mnwatershed.org loard of Managers: John E. Thomas President Pamela 6. Biixt Vice President Monica Gross Secretary Thomas W. UBounty Treasurer C. Woodrow Love Thon<as Maple, Jr. Malcolm Reid Oistrict Office: Eugene R. Strommen Oistrict Director Suzanne M. Weedman AssL Oistrict Director • • Minnehaha Creek Watershed District • • • 4 « Impmving Quality of Water, Quality of Life w.« « M • September 16,1996 Permit Application No. 96-183; Applicant: - > ,e • • • • Charles Kramer 2990 Somerset Lane . Long Lake, MN 55356 Location: Purpose: Dear Mr. Kramer: City of Long Lake, NW 14 4-117-23 Lots 3 & 4 Block., Excavation of two wetland areas to create wildlife ponds. • • * « • • t Prantd on rtcycMd paotf cooaimng aiitttf 30%peii - 1• • •• •«• •, » • At the regularly scheduled September 12,1996 meeting of the Board of Manag^, the subject permit application was reviewed along with tlie following exhibits: 1. Permit Application 96-183 received August 15, 1996. 2. Site plan received August 15, 1996. Due to the size and complexity of certain projects, the Board, by Rule J, requires that site inspections be conducted. In these cases, the applicant is required to pay to the District a fee equal to the actual costs of analysis of the project, field inspection, engineering services, legal services, and any subsequent monitoring of the work. These costs are referred to as Rule J fees. Action was taken approving your permit application pending receipt of Rule J fees in the amount of $78.05. *■ . With the special condition to on the permit: 1. The native vegetation placed around the wildlife pond is 16.5 feet or greater in width and activities including but not limited to mowing, yard waste disposal, and fertilizer application shall not occur within the wetland buffer zone. Please be advised that the project is not authorized until the above has been submitted and you have been notified of permit issuance. Sincerely, 4 % WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. Engineers for the District .Man A. Mackenthun Civil Engineer . , «••• • 4 *6 • • • • * 44 • • •• AAM/jrw cc:City of Long Lake Mr. Mark Grdnberg, Coffin and Gfonberg Minnehaha Creek Watershed District # ••• •t m « H:yC\V^O\AU\>^fOKO\iJCXn\6lLVT%•hMA•yi^ __M___________*4_______«i %• ^ m Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik£i Associates Engineers & Architects ggnesroo An«^rM ^r>cf tint ts an Af* Acf on fou«¥ Oo^x>rfuf»/r» frf^oy^r Prtnctfi^s Otto G tonestroo P£ • Jo^eph C An^rrliii Pf • M«rv*n i Sor%jil« Pf • t'Ch<»r<) I Turner Pf • G*enn » Coo* f*f • Tnom,!»s f Noyes Pf • PoOe^i G Schunicm PC • Je^fy P Sou^Oon Pf • PoOirrt A Pc-.ene PC -•rtci SwS^ M Cbe^lm C PA Senior Conyutf.^(. Ai>ot ..*fe P'<nv'p.^/s Hov\*^f<l A p£ • Re ‘r»' A Gordon PC • PoOe'! P Pfefferie PE • ff Mr ^oste» PC • D -vij O Lovnot.* • ‘’oOea C Pusve* A f A • Mi»rk A Hanson PC • WifhAel T P^tm.»nn Pf • Ted K f.euj Pf • Kenorrn ® Anoersor ®C • V vn P Ports Pf • Sidney P WiMi^son P| L S • Potoert C Rotsmife O^^cei St p.Kjj Pocneste* M ;:in» v si CK>ud M\ • Mequon #t A ♦ October 16, 1996 N mV. i nf»t < '' ■, <’i«r ♦ ♦ Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administritor City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crv'stal Bav. Minnesota 55.^23 1 6 1996 Kramer Ponds File No. 139-2183 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the proposal to create two ponds within existing wetlands at 2990 Somerset Lane, located on Lots 3 & 4, Block 3, Old Crystal Bay Road 2nd Addition. We have the following general comments in regards to excavating ponds within wetlands. The two ponds are shown at a depth of four feet with relatively flat side slopes which are desirable for wildlife ponds. We would expect that both of the ponds would have permanent open water w iih cattail growth around the perimeter. The wetland behind the house is isolated and fairly degraded. The wetland in front of the house is part of a larger wetland area which is mainly wooded. Excavating the pond in this area would require that nearly all of the trees be removed. There are several types of wooded wetlands which are desirable and should be protected. We would recommend that a wetland scientist be used to get an opinion as to the quality of this wooded wetland, and that no excavation be done in this area unless it is considered a degraded, low quality tyne of wetland. Due to the filling proposed near the w-etland on Lot 3, a delineation should be performed with the boundaries staked in the field. The spoils area should be no closer than H feet from the edge of the wetland boundary. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC, 4^. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113-3898 • 612-636-4600 i-i— ~tj I STATE OF MINTMESOTA ) COUNTY OF ) Tlie undersigned, Orono Limited Pannershio a Minn«nt, r • • j n Comn Corners Pannership, a Minneso.a n- stacemeni of facts; and the undersigned fimher aerees to i , foHo'ving realty described in Exhibit A to this document (hereinart,? r i!f ““ ‘‘l® accordance -.vith the terms and conditions set fonh herein. gIPULATinN.S OF Farr of Enunuineers permit number mv J jTif CrS"33o''’A "’V =cr C6) to develop wetland; and that^’h. tl^ 1numoer C6) to develop wetland; and that the U S Armv Corns P®™‘ regulato^jurtsdiction of said wetland pursuant to Section 404 ^offlTc^ & S Vendor of Lots 1 - 6^'inclufve *Blfck j*'"” ? '* '•'* Contract for Deed Bay Road Second Adto^cf:niy'“^ afd'S “'““A Pan.-ersmo is the owner in fee of the rest a j ™ undersigned Orono Limited and Lots 1 - 6 indus ve Block -- Old r™ , i'' ‘' '• County. .ND,- and is the CornffcArD^d pu^^efTfUu 1 Lots I - 4. inclusive. Block 4 Old Crystal Bay Road SecnnH ah5Mi\ ' ^ Second Addition, Hennepin County, J reguiaio.7 junsdiction ^of the St/pL7 District o a wdiand under the pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. ’ Engineers 4 That the undersig.ned applicant and the St. Paul District of the rr Arm,, per^Sht°ed toTvebp rfonTotrftl«'S “'’"'h’' ®PP'i<=“‘ ««' be of Corps of Engird.." Permit nu^b^r'rdlfd^^'^f T'‘'"f IrrttSsr in consideration for Ih. permittee to d'evtp t^; development by dedicating the easements as def redT.rfttacted use as a conservancv area in accordance wi,i: n , attached E,xhibit A for perpetual and the above mentioned permit. * conditions of this document i Page ; )fJ 5, Thai the above mentioned dedication shall consist of the execution of this document by all parties necessary to restrict the use and title of the easements as defined in the attached Exhibit A; and that this document shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder for Hennepin County, Minnesota. 6 That a permit to develop the wetland above described would not have been granted but for the dedication of the easements as contained on Exhibit A for use as conservancy area; and, that upon receipt of a certified copy of this document, as recorded in the Office of the County Recorder for Hennepin County, Minnesota, the District Engineer of the St. Paul District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will issue a validated permit, number 94-02434 NW JJY, 33 CFR 330 - App. \. Nationwide permit number (26). to the undersigned applicant; and that said permit shall be issued in consideration for the e.xecution of this Covenant 7. That the terms and conditions of this Covenant of Dedication shall, as of the date of execution of this document, bind the undersigned to the exient or their legal and'or equitable interest in the propeny described in Exhibit A; and that this Covenant shall run with the land and be binding on the undersigned and their heirs and assigns forever. 8 That the terms and conditions of this Covenant shall be both implicitly and explicitly included in any transfer, conveyance, or encumbrance of the property described in Exhibit .A or any part thereof, and that any instrument of transfer, conveyance or encumbrance affecting all or any part of the property described in Exhibit A shall set fonh the terms and conditions of this document either by reference to this document or set forth in mil text. DEED .AND USE RESTRICTIONS Tite j.ndersigned. Coffin Corners Partnership warrants that it is the Contract for Deed \'endor as recited above and Orono Limited Partnership hereby warrants that they are :he Owner in fee and Contract for Deed Vendees as recited above of the realty descnced as Exhibit .A; and that the easements recited in Exhibit A are hereby dedicated in pe.'petuity for use as a conservancy area. The undersigned Orono Limited Partnership and Coffin Comers Partnership hereby agree to restrict the use and title of the easement area as recited in E.xhibii A as follows; 1. No dredged of fill material will be placed in the casement area of E.xhibit A except as provided pursuant to permit number 94-02434 NW JJ\, 33 CFR 330 - App. A. Nationwide permit number (26). 2. No commercial, industrial, agricultural or residential ‘developments, structures or buildings shall be allowed or pe.Tniiied in the easement area of Exhibit .A. f)'.UC - 'I - 1 - . ~Ai m -tki. ■ ■ 3. No lumbering, mowing, drainage, burning, plowing or filling shall be allowed or conducted on the easement area of Exhibit A. No domestic cattle, horses, sheep or other livestock shall be kept or grazed on the easement area of Exhibit A. 4, No filling, dumping, burning, grading, excavation, direct introduction of untreated storm water, and mowing or other vegetation removal shall be allowed without written approval from the Corps of Engineers. 5 That any unauthorized prohibited activity in the conservation areas by the permittee, subsequent property owners, or other parties shall be considered a permit violation, and that the property owner and responsible parties may be the subject of administrative, civil or criminal action. 6. This Covenant of Dedication may be changed, modified or revoked only upon written approval of the District Engineer of the St. Paul District of the U S. Army Corps of Er.gineers To be effective sucl* approval must be witnessed, authenticated and recorded pursuant to the law of the State of Minnesota. 7. Tliis Covenant is made in perpetuity such that the present owner and its heirs and assigns forever shall be bound by the terms and conditions set forth herein. ORdiNO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP President of James Development Corporation, a Minnesota Corporation, a General Partner of Orono Limited Partfiership ST.ATE OF MTs-NESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENTs^PlN ) Tr.e foregoing instrument was acknovvledged before me this (Irtiday of CcXcrx-W , 1994, by JIW\ A ^President /jl'i;*. I'.i*"/. , a Minnesota Corporation, a General Partner of ORONO LIMITED PLARTNERSHIP, a Limited Pannersl>ip mder the laws of Minnesota, on behaif of :he Limited Partnership. notary ^ubuc - Minnesota "*°"ramsIy county D- 1 • or nt205iOtMt«stertyof nt on th« souttiMsteriy Btm of said Lot 6 distant 240.00 feet southwestsriy ofSie most easteily comer of said Lot 6. ALSO _ An easement for wetland purposes 0¥ir«ioso parts of Lots 4 and 5, Qodc 3. OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SECOND AIXST10N descnbed as feitows: Commencing at the southeast comer of said Lot4; tfanoa on an assumed bearing of North 69 degrees West along the southerly i» of said Lot 4 a distance of 58J21 feet to the point of beginning of the easement being described; thence North 30 degrees East a distance of 85.00 feet; thence South 75 degrees East a distanca of 30.00 feet; thence North 20 degrees Ea^a distance of65.00 feet; thence South 80 degrees East a distanca of 60.00 fed; thence North 53 degrees East a distance of 200.00 feet thence North 30 degree West a distanca of 45.00 feet; thence on a bearing of West a distanca of 90.00 ImI; thence South S3 degrees Westa distance of 100.00 feet; thence Soufli X degrees West a distanca of70.00 feet; thence South 70 degrees West a disfenee of 100.00 feet; thence South 35 degrees West a distance of 80.00 fed;ftanca South 20 degrees East to its intersection witti the southerly line of said Lot 4; thence easterly along said southerly line to the point of beginning. : :r' ■ ~ ALSO ----------- An easement for wetland purposes over those parts of Lots 2 3, and 4 Block 3 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SECOND ADDITION described as fbitews: Commencing at the most northeriy comer of said Lot 4; thence on an assumed beanng of South 69 degrees 21 minutes 30 seconds West along the easterly segment of tfie northwesterly line of said Lot 4 a distance of 185.00 feet to the point of beginning of the easemertl beir^ described; thence South 35 degrees West a distance of 140.00 feet; thence South 60 degrees West a distance of 140.00 feet; thence North 15 degrees Westa distance of 50.00 feet; thence Nort 25 degrees East a distance of 90.00 feet;thence North 68 degrees a distance cf 1 60.00 feet; thence southeasterly to the point of beginning. An ea«ment for wetland purposes over that part of Lot 3, Block 3, OLD CRYSIAL BAY ROAD SECOND ADDITK3N described as follows: Beginning at the northwest comer of said Lot 3; thence on an assumed bearing of ^uth 2 degrees 30 minutes East along the northerly segment of the westerly line of said Lot 3 a distance of 260.00 feet; thence South 40 degrees East a distance of 40.00 feet; thence North 63 degrees East a distanca of 190.00 feet; thence South 85 degrees East a distanca of 100.00 feet; thence North 25 degrees West a distanca of 130.00 feet; thence North 35 degrees East a distance of 70.00 feet; thence North 70 degrees West to its intersection with the northerfy line of said Lot 3; thenca westsity along said northerly line to the point of beginning. An easement for wetland purposes over that part of Lot 2, Block 3. OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SECOND ADDHTON which lies northeriy of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence on an assumed bearing of South along the noriherly segment of the easterly tine of said Lot 2 a distance of 267.06 feet to an angle point in said easteriy line; thence South 2 degrees 30 minutes East along said east^ line a distanca of 325.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described: thence on a bearing cf West a distsnco 40.00 feet; thence North 3 degrees West a distanca of 70.00 feet: thenco fiM<4 I L . • « * i ■» i It *1 < Lr I /M ;*t •I * •■ PROPOSEU POND DETAIL FOR — BUCK KRAMER OF LOT 3 & 4, BLOCK 3, OLD CRYSTAL. BAY. ROAD,.,2ND .ADD. HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA It \. > ComN & Gronberg, Inc. ■ I X C.''M..'fl-IV I '■ ijJluJ ''Itr-l’Ui r. Si.' -i"] I I'lllfTtk \\t»UU • I flic rti: 4'^ *UI I hereby certify that this survey was prvf^ueirBjTme or under my direct super vision, and that I am a duly n'^inlt^red Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of the Stale of Minnesota, •__________ Mark S. Gronberg Minnesota License Number 1^755 DATE e-\5-96 SCALE \"^60' jOBNO 96*59 WATERTOWN ROAD i;^p' z:sr^.”• 7 tiu».-.. ♦. .-- ■- • ^ ^ A^-*~i , y- r^-;./v :. :\^^> <i^r j.. tM I. ■?3a^ . ; t- ; ■>-• ■ ■;. :—.* I .i,; S:" 8 . *< . ? V V. •■ r.»S'' •■■. •*-. 'jSh! '5:“? . ' W'%-¥-'’iV''; • *' ' 'J.'' > 1 m ^ C''Z. f- V'-vS^. .-.•*v, :I.' -;r4:' ?'’• r/ V- . ^'^■■- ■v.i ; . " :'^:5.* -. •,. ♦•'• rr-. 1 I I >|K‘ 7. rimhiTfd sN^amps (Uiuland lonsts, ash swamps, cedar swamps). 1 he soil is w atcrli)eeod al Ic.isl u> wiihin a tow inches ol the surface during the growing ^ea'^on. In roer bottoms, it IS c>licn Ciwered with as much as 1 tiH)l ot water, \egelaiion includes tamarack, white cedar, black spruce, balsam tir. red maple, black ash. im^sses iind smartweeds. Animal use includes 11 species ot reptiles and amphibians, such as blue-spotted sala mander. redback salanuinder. chorus trog, wihkI trog, 1() s|vcies oi mammals, such as masked shrew. arctic shrev.. Keen s nu otis. red bat. hoars bat, snow shoe hare, red fox. Kilval.deer: and43 sfK*cies of birds, such as ereat blue lieron. hosKled merganser, osprey, great- homcil owl. yellow-K'llicd tlycatchcr. Louisiana wa- tcrtlmisli. i > |)c‘ S. Ho^s (open heath bojis, peatlands*. Soil is usually watciloegcd and supports a sponey c\>vcrinii (*l mosses. V eeeiation includes sphasinum moss, heath shrubs, seile.es. aiul may include scattered, olten stunted, tamarack and black spruce. Animal use includes (i s|vcies id rc'ptiles and amphibians, such as American toad, sprine |X‘c;K'r. green frog, leopard trog. wood frog; 11 s|vcies ot mammals, such as masked shiew. short-tailed shrew, star-nosed mole, meadow sole, coyote, long-tailed weasel; and species ot buds, such as red-tailed hawk, sandhill cratie. long- eared owl. rasen. palm warbler. Connecticut warbler. Lincoln s sp.irrow. 3 f'. TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:October 14,1996 SUBJECT: #2 184 Brian Carrington, 1920 6th Avenue North - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB Lot area = 3+ acres. Applicant seeks approval of a variance that would allow the former residence to be converted to a storage structure located in front of the front line of the proposed principal structure. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.03, Subd. 9(D) - Converted storage structure w ill be located approximately 150’ in front of the front line of the new principal structure. 2.Section 10.03, Subd. ^ - Allowed area of individual accessor>' structure. A. Allowed = 1,400 s.f. Proposed = 500 s.f. (20'x25’) B.Total area of accessory structure, Allowed = 2,800 s.f. Proposed = 500 s.f. No variance required. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant's Addendum C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List E - Floor Plan of Accessory Structure F - Survey Description of Request Applicant has obtained a building permit for construction of a new residence to be located to the rear of his 3+ acre parcel. The existing residence located approximately 115' from the road right-of-way and 150' in front of the principal structure is structurally sound. Applicant wishes to maintain structure for storage and work shop use. Modification of structure is shown on floor plan, Exhibit E. The storage structure will not be heated. All plumbing fixtures will be removed. Structure will not be used as a second residential unit. The 500 s.f. structure meets all other required setbacks for an accessory structure. f Zoning File #2184 October 14, 1996 Page 2 Statement of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit B. Hardships are reviewed as follows: 1. New residence structure will be located approximately 54' from the rear lot line of a lot that is 380'+ deep. 2. The ability to use a structure in good condition and one that has been regularly maintained. 3. The accessory structure is located 115' from the street right-of-way and is consistent with the setback-of other residential structures in area. 4. Structure has historical significance as former Wolsfeld home built in 1910. 5. Extensive tree coverage between accessory structure and proposed house will prevent persons from viewing second residence at rear of property. Issues for Consideration 1.All plumbing fixtures will be removed. The structure shall not be heated. Accessory structure will serve as storage and workshop. Are there any other limits that should be placed on structures, i.e. exterior finish, lighting?? 2. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Options for Action To deny. If denied, please refer to Section 10.08 for the necessary findings; or To approve as proposed or amended. Your approval recommendation should include the condition that structure can never be used for residential habitation. 1 Application # Date Received ■' f 9 C/ .-X7 Amount Paid ^Xli’ ■ f t CITY OF ORONO - VARLANCE-APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 . ^ (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee S12G.00 (no change from original application) ^ ^ . • Variance for non-conforming structures S220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) i ,m . * • \ N PROPERTY INFORMATION SiteAddress £>K'Vn' P;vJ g.i>va <? ,—J.rlT::------- Prcpetty laentification Number (P.I.D.). ~ ~0.^ ~H ~ Attach legal description to application if not included on required sun*ey. Date Property Acquired TTlArvA.(month/year) I (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. - or^e, a V pOvrC2.\ Present use of propert)^: y residential ___^other (specify)---------------- Zoning District:_________________________________________________ applicant Name R.r»rs r\ ( r r ■ r^c. Vc c\ Address: PO fi P.'^l______ Phone (home) SM Phone(woric) City: L nr^ .a i-Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ____________________ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address:Cit\':Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ Estimated Construcdim Cost S 0 rrvg rsv__________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage ^__Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore 1 I S i .• •••*#• -------i ^ —it—^-------------- ---------f—r 7/ 'K__Other (specify) . r ^ ^ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual pt^ert>' conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: c^l^o, eW prv,g^r^------------ (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour applicarion to be considered complete; 1. 2. j. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Propert>- Ovs-ners List of owners within 150’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Depanment of Finance. A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Sur\ey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/:" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'A" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/2" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This w’ould include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that jimr variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff lime not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant e-xpenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date ^/2JoJjlh. OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owmer hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council mernbers for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. ^ ni~,i ic-iOwner's Sisnature _______ Date-----' / ------- O Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Buildmg Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 September 26,1996 City ofOrono 2750 Kelly Parkway Orono, MN 55356 ) - • ■** Dear City Council: This application is for a variance to be able to keep a building that is located forward of a new home that we are building on our property at 1920 Sixth Avenue North. Currently, we are in the process of building a new home on our property in Orono. We decided to place our home on the back half of the lot in order to reduce the amount of road noise audible from the house. At the time the site determination was made, we believed that by removing the plumbing in the existing home the property would conform with city codes. However, the existing home does fall forward of the home we are building and therefore requires a variance. The hardship that we will experience without the variance is that the code will severely restrict the use of approximately three acres of land. We believe that this code was designed and is more applicable to maintaining aesthetics on city blocks. Our property is almost four acres in size. Our new home and the existing home are approximately 150 feet apart and can hardly be seen from each other because of the extensive tree cover on the property. From the road you will only be able to see the existing home. The structure that we would like to save is the Wolsfeld home that was build in 1910. The home is structurally sound and has had a cosmetic clean-up since we purchased the property in 1993. If the variance is granted, the home will continue to be restored. Our intentions are to maintain the structure in good repair and remove the bathroom and kitchen plumbing in the home. We would then use the home as an area to store and work on our growing collection of antique furniture. Even though the structure is small, it must also have some historical significance to the area. By granting the variance the City will not limit the usefulness of our property. As we believe that the City Council has granted similar variances in the past, we are hopeful that your approval will again be granted. Thank you for your time and consideration of our request. Sincerely, Brian & Beth Carrington *1 i mJN DATE 08/1A/9A MTCH 503 HEti^PXN coumr property information system PROPERTY 0I9CRS LIST REPORT NO. P14S5401 PAGE 5PROP ADDR 0HI€R NAME TA>0’AYER NAME/AODR 36 27-118-23 A2 000101860 SIXTH AVE N D 6 A a K CARRINGTON BRIAN G A BETH K CARRINGTON 1680 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE m 55356 36 27-116-23 62 0002U1920 SIXTH AVE Na G A 6 K CARRINGTONBRIAN 6 A BETH K CARRINGTON1830 6TH AVE NLONG LAKE MN 55356 36 27-118-23 62 000301960 SIXTH AVE N BRADLEY HANSEN BRADLEY HANSEN 1960 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 M B |1 I PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 36 27-118-23 62 0006 01980 SIXTH AVE N DANIEL A BERGERON DANIEL A BERGERON 1980 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE Hi 55356 38 27-118-23 62 0007 01960 LAKEVIEM TER EVELYN E ROSS EVELYN E VOLBY 1960 LAKEVIEH TER LONG LAKE m 55356 36 27-116-23 62 0008 01900 LAKEVIEN TER R J KC^IOLEK A 0 KOSCIOLEK R J KOSCIOLEK A D KOSCIOLEK 1900 LAKEVIEN TERRACE SO LONG LAKE MN 55356 ft PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 36 27-116-23 62 0022 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED P 6 A M H HERNANDEZ PHILIP G A MARY H HERNAr6)EZ 1670 CO RD NO 6 0 M4 55356 eo 27-118-2S 13 0001 00080 ADDRESS UNASSIGTED DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 1200 NARNER RO ST PAUL HZNN 55106 t- ',. I \\ /■ 'J . % f ■ #i ?rr- ‘ V TOTAL BATCH 503 00006 t'Q 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE ANO TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PRC^RTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KtJOHLEDGc ANO 8ELIEF. /• O } 8*/9*%rvDATE (•••• ' :> .1 1 -----f • I « * « n‘- .<r: ^ ^ r»' 0 vclL'^ riec) / j AV>\W0C»J ■........ 0 9 c )4-----4 iii- I ^ » .^. I w«i V C 9o ’(<’Vn ✓ 0 WO 4 *0 0 a U ;v\cWv% ^‘1 —1 I r I i.'wjWf, P.QO ri>. 4-------1 1 0.5 \n3 o \ S>Ct\ q \ V\ 0\rr.i^Bu.W \'\\0• • %• p\lAYT.V‘'^ i jr\jcpl tO b<2, reir>-Dved ICcVcV-« r\ fix?cl<ODr^\ lB<^*VV\ropirr\ (a)ov S'brAAe. r'^s'. \ ‘ • \- 1*0 Propoltd Top of Block 102.^12l Propotfd Gorogt Floor lOZ^Zo Propotod Lowttf Floor Type of Building - Foil {]^'^e>rf\eyrJ NEOEGAARD CONSTRUCTION HY-LAND SURVEYING LAND SURVEYORS 7845 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Park, Minnesofa 55445 560-1984 Bnrtitfsiira dftftfkite NOTE: INVOICE NO—S2ZI F. B. NO----- SCALE r s ^ o Denofte Iron MomNnent O Denotee Wood Hub Set For Eicorofion Only lOOO.O Denotes Etltflng Elevotion Denotes Proposed Elevotlon Denotes Surfoce Drolnoge Property located in part of Section Township_ _, Range_ _, That part of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 27, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, leoo.i Minnesota described as follows; Conunencing at a point on the north lino of said Southeast 1/4 distant 397 feet East from the northwest corner of said Southeast 1/4; thence East 376 feet along said north line; thence south parallel with the west line of said Southeast 1/4 to a point 103 feet ^ro*>^the center line of County Road No. 6; thence west at right angles 150.00 feet; thence south to said County Road; thence northwesterlj along same north line to the east line of the west 397 feet of said Southeast 1/4; thence north to the point of beginning. Boundaries from a survey by Gordon Coffin. TOTAL AREA - 142,751 Sq. Ft. Th« only easements shown are from plats of record or Information provided by client. I hereby certify that this survey wet prepared by sk or under my direct aupervlslon, and that I am a duly eealstered Land Surveyor mder the laws of the State of Minnesota Sun^yedbyutlMs. Rev. June 20. 1996 TO:Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A, Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:October 15,1996 SUBJECT: #2185 Richard and Mary Jo Kovacevich, 1580 Bohns Point Road - Variance Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Lot area =1+ acres. Application: Applicants seek approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250 ’ setback area to permit construction of a single story living room addition at the northeast comer and lake side of the existing residence. Hardcover in the 75-250' setback area is 27.18%. The improvement will not result in an increase in hardcover. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 75-250 ’ setback area = 39,800 s.f. Allowed = 9,950 s.f. or 25% Existing = 10,820 s.f. or 27.18% Proposed = *10,820 s.f. or 27.18% *400 s.f. of stracture will be placed over existing patio area. Some 75 s.f. of new structural hardcover will be matched with an equal removal of patio area along east side or lake side of residence. Variance = 870 s.f. or 2.18% 2.Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Review of stmctural coverage Total area = 64,687.5 s.f. Allowed = 9,703 s.f. or 15% Existing = 6,930 s.f. or 10.7% Proposed = 7,330 s.f. or 11.3% No variance required List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Existing Floor Level E - First Floor Plan F - Building Section G - Elevation/Lake Side H - Hardcover Facts 75-250 ’ Setback Area I - Survey J - Detailed Survey 75-250 ’/Location of Residence to South Zoning File #2185 October 15,1996 Page 2 Description of Request Applicants seek approval of 20'x20' addition to the existing residence to be placed at the northeast comer and lake side of residence. The majority of stmcture will be placed over an existing natio. Some 75 s.f. of the new stmcture hardcover will be matched with an equal removal of 75 s.f. of concrete walkway along lake side of residence. The addition will meet all required setbacks. Refer to Exhibit J, the lot to the north remains undeveloped, 'fhe original home was razed over three years ago The proposed addition will not encroach the lakeshore setback line of the residence to the south. The single story addition will provide an expansion of the existing first level living room. The addition will extend approximately 5' further in front of the existing lake side building line of t!ic principal stmcture. Description of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit A. In June of 1987, applicants applied for a permit for their swimming pool. The water retention area at 900 s.f. or 2.2% was not considered hardcover at that time. Hardcover is now shown with an excess of 2.18% hardcover as water retention area is included in hardcover facts. Another of the findings or hardships noted by applicants would be the location of the residence approximately 150' from the lake The actual retention area of the pool would accommodate up to a 9" rainfall event. No other variances are required fot this improvement. Issues for Consideration 1.Should additional hardcover removals be requested of applicants as a result of this improvement, refer to Exhibits H and J. 2, Other issues raised by Planning Commission members. Options of Action To approve as proposed or amended. Recommendation should include a condition that any hardcover improvements scheduled for removal must be completed prior to the footing inspection for a new constmction. cnV OF ORONO ^6124730510 09/12/96 07:20 0 :08/16 NO:321 AppUcmtlon # 7 / Date Received ^ C Amount Paid _■J -j C r CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 ^ (S50.00 per each additional variance) ^ Renewal Variance Fee SI20.00 ^ • • I ^ - _ /' •fit ' c*.-. • . ; .1V : I . «» (no change from original application) 7 Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 1580 Bo hns Point Road PmiX Idcntificato (P.nr[0OO33L00Qi^ ------- S.gtil«ap,ion .0 appUcion if no. included on rcMu.red sun,.y. Date Property Acquired January 1991 —^^----- I (do) (do not) also osvt , the adjacent parcels Present use of property: -----pother (spe ity). Zoning District:_Ri____________—--------------------------- Jmonth/ycar) applicant Jensen Homes, Inc. PhoiK (home)._!iiZi:i Phone fwoA) 475-0543 --------- --------- l akeshore ------ City:., Minnetonka Zip: 553QS OWNER (if different than applicant) Richard & Mary Jo Kovacevicn Phone fhome) 471-0195. Phone /work1 667-9167 1580 Bohns Point Rg^_______City:. Oro iio Zip: 55391 description of „ se an*^^io^'^nitre^s\VnTha" d^ Describe request in detail. ----E--------------— - not inrrpase the variances REQUIRED Lot Area Setback: Lot Width X Hardcover Lot Coverage Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore _ Other (specify) HARBSHIP/DESCRIPTION preventing tty swiwmnq pool area i^nimodate iin tn <)" of rflinfaU-before (attach additional sheets if necessary) ■p-26-96 THU 16:08 NORUEST EXEC ADMIN FAX NO. 612 667 2206 P.Ol Qooz CITY Of OftONO 9 6124730^|^‘ # 7^ 'V 09m/96 0?:2O 5* :Q9/16 ’ NoTwi 1 V. .-f.I \ f ■ \ > RBQUmZD SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 5. 4. 7. I. Completed A^icailon Foim Certified Pmpcfty CWners List of within 150'. Ubcls and pUt mep (you mint ebwio this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Depanment of Fiaaosc. A*603. Ge«t Center. 341*327)). CcftUkalB of Survey (stfiKd by a Ueeaicd swvcyw) aad iaclude botdeover talTTililiimt as required, la addition, provide ooo (1) copy tl4" * II" fet Topoflinhic survey (custlng lad pcepesad ckvatiora) if any ehaages in csisting pode ■« pmpoKd. In additiwt. pmvila on* (I) eop^ IH* a II* fcr lepioduetioo. ghatchas or plans of floor A elcveiion vievrs (peovidc ona (1) copy List of dM logal nmnes (include maiiial siaius) of all penoos whli an intcrasi in die property. TTus would include name(s) of appUeant($) if net eurreat owii*t(»>- As an addendum to this application, plaam attach a separate lift of any other pt*t**"* you udah notified of this appltcanon. itanu as may be roquested by City staff. Tte Applicant and Propany Owner must sign this application. Moase remembex thtfygit .Ut» if the «ba¥e ll * **“ *“* AWLICAICTS tlCNATURE ^ ^ « lanlriP* bcieby agrees to prowde all infonnauon required or raquesied by the Zoning Adm^ttnior. agma to pay additional lees (sUlTiiioe not covered by original foe ^^conaulianiWnies toeuitod in review of this application, and certifies that tho iaformatirm supplied is true qpd eoneci lo the>dirt of his/har knowledge. Applicant's Signatute - 9^ niamban for purposes of inflation anfl verificanon of this request. Owner's Date^ ^ Applicanl must have all subminaJs into the City offices 25 days b^om **^jf*^ C^niasion Meeting. Planning Commission Moetiags are held on iba third mesi b* praant at aU seh«lul«d review moctUigs of ib. ^l•“« Camalwlo?and CoueclL If an applicant is unable to aoend a “rSlT BtSdS ^ oirtniemaMS to have an auiborued agent attend in your place and to advise the Bwlding A Zoning Office of this change prior to ihc mating. i IC^O-TZt^-^t9 op euiieui €iS^-ZO 96-SZ-des RUN DATE 09/2A/H BATCH 506PROP ADDR Ov^MER NAH€ TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR PROP AODR (MCR NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 36 08-117-23 64 001601535 BOHNS POINT RO R G A K S OLSON RONALD G A KAYE S OLSON 1535 BOWS POINT RO NAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 33 0008 01580 BOHNS POINT RO RICHARD N KOVACEVICH ET AL RICHARD M KOVACEVICH NORHEST CENTER 6TH A MARQUETTE MPLS MN 55679-1062 PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 17-117-23 11 0006 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO DAS ANDERSON ET AL J L CONNER A G J PAULUCCI 1665 BONN POINT RO NAYZATA MN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0>t€RS LIST38 06-117-23 66 001501595 BOHNS POINT RO C J A S L HINSLON CLARK J A SHARON J NINSLOH 1595 BOHNS POINT RD NAYZATA m 55391 38 16-117-23 22 0001 01600 BOHNS POINT RD JOSEPH C THOMASON A HIFB COMUE R SHEEN 1600 BOHNS POINT RD NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 11 0013 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED G K NENMAN JR A M M C NENMAN GRAYDON K NENMAN JR MICHELLE M C NENMAN 1655 BOHNS POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 RlPORf NO. r1635601 PAGE 5636 09-117-23 33 0007 .01560 BOHNS POINT RD RALPH D BURGESS JR RALPH 0 BURGESS JR 2765 NIAGARA LA N PLYMOUTH MN 55667 38 17-117-23 11 0003 01625 BOHNS POINT RD THE BANK NAYZATA TRUSTEE NORNEST BANK MPLS TRUST REAL ESTATE 6TH A MARQUETTE MPLS MN 55679-0053 ■> TOTAL BATCH 506 00008 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TA)jATXON» TO THE BEST OF MY KNONLEDGE ANO BELIEF. DATE 9-27-% V -4 2W"i ^S'TSSST^SI jIT'v SS s ET^SSS ’^SS^SS^ Tv ♦ ‘ ‘.^ ■> y ^conp Bioc^ (^'CO^C B10C¥- WAU 1^'' coi^ oM> BijocK u«7<5|&am ei-A^ ^ pa^l e>i-Afc> /!»' FUn^lP-^Cfef <TVP fc:^\^e\i^ Fe4’’P ^<=T)|U- m jJPyu rA«-!atT]o»J Tly fe!OTIiJ<?! V/Hc)|v>^ 1 KB'kJpy BAR4(f^ o.c. /s . s V \ \ N A • ^ S k -e W ^'O yiiP»& |K^\crm v^An 1=%^ Me^ i CF^AVJU <fAclE A^cBC^ ' ^|CT!M6 uw^p. U&-V^[ ?. .:*r' 'tM'' 'Y.V 1 "• ^ J'i .A 1 ^ ‘l»l “f ft > I • * t>| .V Q iTi feo6riudi <A\\^\\AOi 2o'-o'' •%'U tW' \-----------2i'. ild |U|Mn f ©-_ r J (ii^^ V > \ ^1 l^'Use. Nwwppv/ jHir n^i Bris»Ti»J<2j _ UViKJii f^hCf^A.^ Mm h' MicP-oi>f.'. PJOF^ H«Sr^ -[p KaLrOf Af^^i riiv>r.t^ r 5 0 X w 4 ___ --< 1/ flA1 ^UKl -1 ^ a ui £r K '-■U' lf\ V '' fU V ■ N ^o:^' FifJii^ilEip T<:> HATPl J |6-"TJI fW aic m I \ Vittp MUX (5. -rop ^ P^.MiiT P^r'.l'fcO P'P.^P- BM STi r -~ ■sHAjis-Tc? BdsriMs t2^|t. ftAFpi^ FULU -tMiic. luaju P'-H pAi5>clA ^^isfpiTS •p h>.t4i ©(icnMc? d.-yg^" ^^FPir V mni> (2 0^-ve.c\ dm*«wiA 4 3; ■c tiocK S&’tfi'fF w? -4 MIU P^Y VAftMAPfjgi^ ^c» -$rvK.c?^mmrnTfy^ &uiupiM<&i wpAp pAce mcK (to eqqin^ 1 fjCfiBjj) PU!«:fcr ?AHpppocFiM^j 3 4K ^As 4)'' RTtP-TFOCE^O- >v ■• If MlU FbtY !^»"|^tPAva. Flu- VIN^ ADDlTlc:>N R^F- TH6-: CMCFN HOmPt IMf CAST ?B3.21 I*)©V/3Jb ^4 86 I OD f / 7f /• »r U00»*0mtA H- »j i« #r / / / / / / I-Se+bac<< ^2SO' Setback (.me 1 Mt .«»« mhf I t\ / / QClV'^^-'C or ir.tc Stopp r j ; 1 \ \ $ Um4 »f C^r't L*«<, ^«« ^ «7 Wl ST 266.12 I • -rrf SCALE DA* |-t 20*8- SHEET NO, r — n BOHN POINT ROAD uo* li'T wv OK t: •W 612A730510 09/12/96 07:20 C)i :14/16 NO:321 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’/75-2W \ ____________V 250-500' KXISTINC HAPnroVtR IN ZONE A. House X *7^ Cone at Pool Ltnfili Wlddi Walls - Total 3 - Slabs 'V B. Otfige ^ ' *^j7 C. Drivewiy A/C Slabs J Sidcwelkin back incl. patio Remaining 3 walks_____ ■.y,--..? E- P*tio/Deck Deck V‘'’% Stoop ______ A'l F. Laadseipe Underlain By Plutic Pool f ,? stepping Stones TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 10.820 B 39.800 X 100 PRQPQSKD HAPnrnVCT IN 70N1!: A. House X Lan|ib Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B X 100 7 • SbO-KKM* 4.480 S.F. 1.550 TTZ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 1,880 S.F. S.F. 787 720 S.F S.F 165 T7S S..B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 900 58 S.F. 10.820 39,800 7TTS 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 A B 4 la To;Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Membera Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator October 14. 1996 Subject:Zoning Code Amendment, Sections 10.40/10.44/10.45: B-1 Retail Sales Business District, B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District and B-6 Highway Commercial District - Continuation of Public Hearing List of Exhibits A - Revised Amendment per Work Session Discussions B - Memo and Selected Exhibits of September 11, 1996 Discussion This item was tabled at your September meeting pending a work session which was held September 27. At that work session. Planning Commission reached the following conclusions: 1.In the B-6 zone. Class I restaurants (sit-down re.staurants, no liquor or live entertainment) should become a conditional use rather than a permitted use, and Class I restaurants with a drive-thru should no longer be an allowed use in the B-6 zone. 2.Home and garden equipment rental .should be deleted as a conditional use in the B-5 district and added as a permitted use in the B-1 district. 3.All other suggested amendments to the B-5 zone should be reviewed in a more comprehensive manner at some future date, since the business owners need to be involved in the discussions and none of the previously suggested revisions is of critical importance at this time. Reasons offered in support of eliminating drive-thru restaurants in the B-6 included: The City’s intent for the B-6 zone is for a low-key, locally oriented commercial district, to provide for a limited range of commercial uses. A drive-thru restaurant may set a negative trend in the development of the Highway 12 corridor, especially if such a restaurant is the first use developed in the corridor. The continuous traffic from early morning to late evening, especially during mealtimes, is not the orientation intended for the limited range of commercial Zoning Code Amendrnenl October 14. 19% Page 2 uses contemplated in the B-6 district. Potential localized problems of trash, odors, and the potential to become a "hang-out" due to proximity to the Orono Schools, are all somewhat negative aspects of a drive-thru restaurant use. Elimination of drive-thru restaurants does not eliminate the possibility of sit- down restaurants, coffee shops, etc. which would serve both the general public and the other uses contemplated for the B-6 district. It should be noted that Class 11 restaurants were never allowed in the B-6 district. Class II restaurants are defined in the Zoning Code as "Fast food convenience, drive-in and liquor service restaurants. A restaurant where a majority of customers order and are served their food at a counter in packages prepared to leave the premises, or to be taken to a table, counter, automobile, or off the premises to be consumed; or a drive-in where most customers consume their food in an automobile regardless of how it is served; or restaurants which serve intoxicating liquor or have live entertainment." Staff Recommendation Based on the work session discussions, staff has drafted an ordinance reflecting the above noted changes. Planning Commission may recommend approval per the draft ordinance as attached. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval as drafted. 2. Recommend approval with revisions. 3.Table for further discussion. 4.Other. This item will be placed on the Council’s October 28 agenda for final action. ORDINANCE NO., SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 10.40, 10.44 AND 10.45 OF THE ORONO ZONING CODE BY ADDING, DELETING OR AMENDING CERTAIN PERMITTED OR CONDITIONAL USES WITHIN THE B-1 RETAIL SALES BUSINESS DISTRICT, THE B-5 LIMITED NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT AND THE B-6 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: Section 1. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.40, Subdivision 3(A) is hereby amended by adding the follow ing use to the list of permitted uses in the B-1 Retail Sales Business District: "32. Home and garden equipment rental." Section 2. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.44, Subdivision 4 (A) is hereby amended by deleting the follow ing use from the list of conditional uses allowed w ithin the B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District: "6. Home and garden equipment rental." Section 3. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.45, Subdivision 2 is hereby amended by deleting the following use from the list of permitted uses w ithin the B-6 Highway Commercial District: "E. Restaurants (Class I)." Section 4. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.45. Subdivision 4 is hereby deleted and the following language substituted in its place: "Subd. 4. Relationship with Chapter 10.53 Planned Unit Development. Other types of commercial uses and mixed use developments may be applied for through the planned unit development process. Applications that include commercial uses within the Highway 12 Corridor shall assume the B-6 District as the underlying zoning district. Subd. 4.1 Conditional Uses. A. Within any "B-6" Highway Business District, no structure or land shall be used for one of the following uses except by conditional use permit: 1. Restaurants (Class 1). 2.The following uses when such use includes a drive-thru condition: a. Offices (business and professional). b. Banks and financial institutions. c. Libraries. d. Motels and hotels." Section 5. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall be published in The Pioneer and The Laker newspapers and shall become effective immediately upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota on this 28th day of October, 1996 by a vote of___ayes and ___nays. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, Citv Administrator Michael P. GafTron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator September 11,1996 SUBJECT: Zoning Code Amendment - Sections 10.44, Subd. 3-5 and 10.45, Subd. 4: B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District and B-6 Highway Commercial District Public Hearing List of Exhibits A - Proppsed Amendment B - Existing B-5, B-6 Code Sections; 10.44, Subd. 3-4-5 and 10.45, Subd. 4 C - Section 10.61, Subds. 4-10: Parking Performance Standards D - Lord Fletchers/Navarre Parking Lot Agreement E - Map of existing B-5 zones and uses Summary of Proposed Amendment On August 26th the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 149,2nd Series, rezoning the Grace B2q>tist Church property from LR-IC residential to B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District. As part of Planning Commission's review prior to that rezoning. Planning Commission suggested that certain uses allowed in the B-5 District may no longer be appropriate. These included "tobacco shop" as a permitted use, and "home and garden equipment rental", "kennels", and "off street parking" as conditional uses. Council directed staff to proceed with such an amendment of the B-5 District, and also directed that the B-6 conditional uses should be amended at the same time, to eliminate " drive-thru restaurant" from the list of allowed conditional uses. B-5 Revisions The B-5 District is intended to "provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood, which businesses are not high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate amount of hardcover. . . Because of the location of the B-5 District as contemplated in the area known as Navarre in the City, the uses are limited in order to limit the hardcover in that area and to limit the future generation of traffic for that property in that use district since there is already a traffic problem in Navarre". The permitted uses in the B-5 District include both service and retail businesses, the majority of which are typically low traffic volume and typically nd 24 hour uses. Memo - Zoning Amendment September 11, 19% Page 2 The current list of conditional uses in B-5 includes some uses which may involve higher traffic volumes, or somewhat more intensive use than the permitted uses. For instance, a "candy, ice cream, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, soft drinks store" such as the Daily Queen, has a more intense use of the parking lot and drive-thru, and has perhaps more lighting than most of the permitted retail uses. Also in the list of B-5 conditional uses is "home and garden equipment rental" which has potential for needing fenced storage areas and may in\ ol\ e the operation of engines w ith the incidental noise and odor concerns. B-5 also lists "kennels" as a conditional use, which has the potential for disrupting a neighborhood due to noise levels and possibly odors. Planning Commission suggested that "tubano shop" be removed from the list of permitted uses, possibly due to the perception that such a business is no longer in vogue nor appropriate for a family setting. It can certainly be argued that^ tobacco shop would not inherently be a "bad neighbor". One could perhaps argue that a tobacco shop should fall into the same category and zoning district as a liquor store, and in fact both tobacco shops and liquor stores are permitted uses in B-1 and B-3. Planning Commission suggested that both "home and garden equipment rental" and "kennels" be eliminated from the B-5 District. Neither of these uses currently exist on property zoned B-5, hence no existing business would become nonconforming due to this amendment. Note that "kennels" are a conditional use in the B-4 district, so this use would not be entirely eliminated from Navarre. "Home and garden equipment rental", however, is only allowed in the B-5 zone, hence eliminating it would leave no place for this type of business to occur in the City. It is therefore noteworthy that we have two such businesses already operating in Navarre: Navarre True Value Hardware and Minnetonka A-1 Rental, both in B-1 zoning. The B-1 zone lists "hardware store" as a permitted use, but not "equipment rental". Minnetonka Rental has been at this location since prior to 1971, and that site has been zoned commercial since 1955. One can conclude that, since there is no record that Minnetonka Rental was ever advised to file for a "non-conforming use CUP", the City has long considered Minnetonka Rental as a conforming use in the B-1 district. Off-Street Parking Planning Commission also suggested that "off-street parking" be eliminated in the B-5 District. A concern was expressed by former Planning Commission Chairman Peterson that parking areas in downtown Navarre can be leased out for use by Lord Fletchers or other businesses not in the immediate area, which may or may not be a problem. In fact, during 1995 and 1996 Fletchers has had an agreement with Orono to use up to 60 spaces in the Navarre municipal parking lot which is zoned B-1 (See Exhibit D). i Memo - Zoning Amendment September 1 1,1996 Page 3 The current B-5 lists ofT-street parking as a conditional use, but specifically in reference to situations where the off-street parking in a R-5 District is serving a principal use on an adjacent lot which ha ppen*; to be a different "B” district. The current off street parking language in 10.44, Subd. 4(B) could be amended by making it clear that such parking shall only be allowed when it serves a permitted principal use which is on an abutting lot in another "B" or "1" District. All commercial uses normally require some oft-street parking, hence staff would suggest that rather than eliminating it, off-street parking should be added to the list of B-5 "accessory uses". This is not uncommon in municipal zoning codes. It could then be further limited by only allowing it when accessory to a permitted or conditional use located on the same lot or on an abutting commercial lot. The impact of these changes w ould be to prohibit parking on a B-5 property that ser% es a use other than: 1 ) the principal use on the same B-5 property as the parking, or 2) the principal use on an adjacent B-5 or B-1,2,3,4 or 6 or "1" property The changes would not impact the agreement with Fletcher's, since that lot is not zoned B-5. It would, however, prohibit such parking agreements on any property zoned B-5, and no variance could be granted since that would be a "use" variance which by state statute is not possible. B-6 Revision In reviewing the B-6 Highway Business District standards during the Highway 12 moratorium study. Council concluded that the existing B-6 Highway Business District permitted uses (offices, banks and financial institutions, libraries, motels and hotels, and Class 1 "sit-down" restaurants) are appropriate B-6 uses. The B-6 District also defines all of the above noted uses as conditional uses when they have a drive-thru operation. Council felt that drive-thru type restaurants would not be appropriate for the B-6 zone, hence the proposed amendment would list only offices, banks and financial institutions, libraries, motels and hotels as allowed conditional uses. This eliminates drive- thru restaurants from being established in the B-6 District. Issues for Consideration 1. Are the proposed zoning district use changes appropriate? What is the City’s motivation for making these changes? 2. Are there other uses which should be added or deleted within the B-5 and B-6 Districts? 3. Will any of the proposed changes have a negative impact on existing businesses or uses? 4.Could the goal of the proposed changes be accomplished by placing more restrictions on them as conditional uses in B-5. rather than eliminating them from B-5? Memo - Zoning Amendment September 11,1996 Page 4 Staff Recommendation It occurs to staff that this again is potentially a "piecemeal" review of our commercial zoning districts, and staff would urge that a more thorough review of existing land use and future commercial/residential needs be conducted as part of a more comprehensive study of zoning in the Navarre area. None of the proposed amendments result in a conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, and no Comprehensive Plan Amendment is necessary in order to adopt the proposed changes. Further, staff is unaw are of any existing uses in the B-5 or B-6 zones w hich w ould become non-conforming due to the proposed changes. Planning Commission should identify- the specific reason for each of the proposed use changes, and determine whether any negative impacts will result from the changes. This will not only provide a basis for a recommendation to Council, but w-ill assist staff in future interpretation Of the code when attempting to determine whether a specific use is similar in scope or character to one of the listed uses. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval per the attached draft ordinance. 2. Recommend approval with revisions or partial approval. 3.Table for further information or discussion. 4.Other. S 10.45 SECTION 10.45 HIGHWAY C RCIAL DISTRICT Subd. 1. . Purpose. The purpose of the B-6 Highway Commercial District is to provide a commercial district specifically tailored to accomplish the commercial development objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study Section of the Orono Comprehensive Plan. Subd. 2. Application. All applicants for a building permit in any "B-6" Highway Business District shall be reviewed by the Council and referred to the Planning Commission for review. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. Within any "B-6" Highway Business District, no structure or land shall be used except for one of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the Council. A. Offices (business and professional). B. Banks and financial institutions. C. Libraries. D. Motels, and hotels. E. Restaurants (Class j) 5 '^ tv r-* Subd. 4. Relationship with Chapter 10.53 Planned Unit Development. Other types of commercial uses and mixed use, developments mav be acclied for through the planned. unJ-t d«»veiQ pment crocess. App lica^i.o«^that include commercial uses within the Highway 12 Corridoi<shal^issume the B-6 District as the underlying zoning district. (______ ^^,4'^. ^/^^^'Conditional Use A. Within any "B-6" Highway Business District, no structure or land shall be used for one of the following uses except by conditional use permit; 1. Any business listed as a permitted use in the zone that includes a drive-thru condition. Subd. 5. Accessory Uses. Within any "B-6" Highway Business District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Any accessory use as regulated in the “B-l" Business District. ORONO CC 351-1 Ordinance 67, 2nd Series Adopted: 5-8-89 / S 10.43 E.\ Setback Requirements. No bu^'Iding shall be nearer than 35 fee^to any front lot line, 35 fe$t to any rear lot line, 15 feet to an\side lot line, 35 feet tp-^any side lot line adjacent to street; except when abutting or across the street from an "R" District, no building shall be less than 35 feet from such lot line./ m / F. Pencil^. Wherever a "3-4 ” Office and Professional Business District abuts an "R" District along the side or rear lot line, a fence or^ompact evergreen hedge not less than 50% opaque nor less than sixVeet^ln height (no less than three feet nor higher than four feet adjacent to street) shall be erected along the abutting lines except ^thin the required front yard. / • G. Building Desigr\and Construction. See Section 10.40, Subdivision 6, Subparagraph H. Drainage. No land ^all be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in war^r runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applDcant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans ^all be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the PlJmning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be retired to be properly channeled intO/^' natural water course, ponding T^ea, storm drain or other publicyfacilities. Any change in gra<^e affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherswise must be in compliancp-with the Surface Water Management Pi%m and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations ox City Code provisi^s and subject to the approval of other ag^cies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. \3uris<^' I. Height. No structure or building shall exceed st'^-ies or thirty feet in height except as provided in LIMITED NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT.SEC. 10.44. B-5 Subd. 1. Purpose. The "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District is intended to provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood, which businesses are not high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate^ amount of hardcover. The district may adjoin residential districts or other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The district shall have immediate access to adequate highways and public sanitary sewer. Because of the location of the "B-5" District as contemplated in the area known as Navarre in the City, the uses are limited in order to limit the hardcover in that area and to limit the future generation of traffic for that property in that use district since there is already a traffic problem in Navarre. ORONO CC 347 (4-1-84) I S 10.44 Subd. 2, Application. All applications for a building permit in any "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District shall be reviewed by the Council and referred to the Planning Commission for review. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. Within any "B-5" Business District, no structure or land shall be used except for one of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the Council: A. B. C. D. E. F. Municipal buildings. Offices. Clinics. Art and school supply store Book and magazine store. Office supply store. estate office. G. Banks, loan company, insurance company, real H. I. J. K. L. Barbership, beauty shop. Camera and photograph supply store. Locksmith. Hobby shop. Gift store. M. N. O. P. Q. R. Glassware and pottery. Antique store. Jewelry store. Watch repair. Library. Museum. s. T. U. V. W. Record shop. Music store. Tobacco shop. Galleries. Pet shop. Subd. 4. Conditional Use. A. Within any "B-5" Limited Business District structure or land shall be used for one of the following except by conditional use permit: , no uses 1. Candy, ice cream, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, soft drink store. 2. Drycleaning store. Tailor shop. Pressing and shoe shine shop. Laundry and cleaning pick-up stations. Home and garden equipment rental. Veterinary clinic. Kennels. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. ORONO CC 348 (4-1-84) *• S 10.44 B. Off-Street Parking. Off-street parking when the principal site of the off-street parking abuts on a lot which is in another "B* or "I" District and is in the same ownership as the land in the "3" or "I" District and subject to those conditions as set forth in Section 10.61, Subdivision 4 and other such conditions as found necessary by the Council. C. Public Service Structures. Including, but not limited to, electric transmission lines in buildings such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electric power substations. Subd. 5. Accessory Uses. Within any "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses; * A. Garages, Etc. Private garages, off-street parking and loading spaces, as regulated in this Chapter. B. Signs. Signs, as regulated in this Chapter. C. Temporary Buildings. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of construction on the premises for a period of not to exceed time necessary to complete said construction. D. Landscaping. Decorative landscaping features. E. Fences. Fences, as regulated in this Chapter. F. Incidentals. Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, provided that the incidental use shall not exceed 30% of the floor space of the principal building. G. Public Telephone Booths. Subd. 6. Area, Height, Lot Width, Setback Requirements and Design Requirements. square feet. feet. feet. A. Area. The minimum lot size shall be 20,000 B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be 100 C. Front Yards. The minimum front yard shall be 20 D. Rear Yards. The minimum rear yard shall be 30 feet; side yard adjacent to "R" District shall be 15 feet; side yard adjacent to street shall be 10 feet. E. Setback Requirements. No building shall be nearer than 35 feet to any front lot line, 35 feet from any lot line, 15 feet from any side lot line, 35 feet to side lot line adjacent to street; except abutting or across the street from an "R’’ District, no building shall be less than 35 feet from such lot line. ORONO CC 349 (4-1-84) ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MIMTES FOR SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present Chair Dale Lindquist. Charles Schroeder, Sandra Smith. Elizabeth Hawn. William Stoddard, Lili McMillan Janice Berg was absent The following represented the City Staff Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Zoning and Planning Administrator Michael Galfron, and Recorder Sherry Frost Mayor Callahan was in attendance Chair Lindquist called the meeting to order at 7 01 p m SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS/PUBLIC INFORMATION REVIEWS («l) «I70 LARRY H. NELSON, 3335 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - SUBDIVISION OF A LOt LINE REARRANGEMENT - PUBLIC HEARING 7:01-7:07 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing w ere noted Mabusth reported that the application is for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for property located on Cry stal Bay Road A 1980 deed transferred a oortion of the adjoining railroad property with applicant's homestead parcel but the subdivision was not approved by the City. The City would have denied the division informing the property owner to apply for a subdivision application The applicant has owned the property since 1992 and would like to clear up the title and has tiled the required Class I subdivision application. Applicant's homestead parcel consists of 5500 s f and the railroad proper!” will add 901 s.f Mabusth said the Staff'has no problem with the application '•re«'";nted. Larry Nelson was present, along with an attorney representing First Security Title. Mike Sabodi Nelson said he filed a quit claim deed with Hennepin County but it was rejected. There is 16.67 ’ in question with the application The document acquiring the property was completed by the past owner and the railroad. Mabusth added that she had spoken v. ith a representative of Rail America, who was told to contact the City if there w ere any problems or concerns from the railroad. No further contact was made There were no public comments Smith moved, Stoddard seconded, to approve the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for Larry H. Nelson involving the property located at 3335 Crystal Bay Road and the property originally owned by Burlington Northern and now Rail America, subject to the condition that applicant's surveyor provide an amended survey designating Lot 7, "Wallace’s Addition to the Village of Minnetonka Beach" as Parcel A and Parcel B providing the description of the portion to be div ided from the railroad property as described on the survey. Exhibit F. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 (#1 - #2170 Larry H Nelson - Continued) Schroeder inquired if the City should be concerned with the sheds located on the railroad right-of-way Mabusth said that was between the railroad and Nelson to resolve issue of shed and a portion of a retaining w all on the railroad property Nelson said the shed w as located there when he purchased the property, and the only question at this lime was the 16 67' Sabodi noted the railroad has deeded the 16 67' property to the previous owner, and this action has no affect on the structures in the richt-of-wav V'ote: Ayes 6, Nays 0, («) ZONING AMENDMENT - SECTION 10.44, SUBDIVISIONS 3 AND 4 AND SECTION. 10.45, SUBDIVISION 4 - B-5, LIMITED NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT AND B-6 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT - PUBLIC HEARING 8:05-8:40 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. GatTron reported that the proposed zoning amendment came from two directions, one being the rezoning for the Grace Baptist Church property from LR-IC to B-5, and the Hwy 12 Land Use Committee consisting of three Council members and tw o Planning Commissioners reviewing the B-6 zone The Planning Commission had suggested the removal of sev eral permitted or conditional uses that w ere not pertinent to today or the particular locations The Commission had briefly discussed eliminating the permitted use of "tobacco shops" and the conditional uses of "home and garden equipment rental" and "kennels" Gaft'ron said it was suggested that when the B-5 was reviewed, the B-6 area of Hwy 12 also be reviewed as it pertains to drive-thru restaurants, which is a conditional use under the B-6 zoning Gaffron reviewed the purpose of the B-5 which is to "provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood, which businesses are not high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate amount of hardcoverThe intent is to limit the hardcov er and curtail traffic problems GaftVon reviewed the areas of B-5 zoning in Navarre near CoRds 15 and 19 On the west end, there is the Shoreline Service Center, wh ch is an auto repair shop. Furniture Minnesota, and one residence Further east is the Navarre Dairy Queen, the Lake Minnetonka Animal Hospital, two properties owned by Lowells Auto Parts, a print shop and an office Across the street is a small professional office building. The other B-5 is the recent property rezoned from LR-IC. that being the Grace Baptist Church Stoddard asked what direction the Council eave GaftVon said the Council has not discussed the B-5 issue. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 (#2 - Zoning Amendment - Continued) Gatfron reported that the permitted uses are primarily service and retail and typically are not open 24 hours He re\ie\ved the current list noting the proposed removal of the tobacco shops Gaffron said a tobacco shop was not an inherent bad neighbor but suggested it might be a good lit in the same ?oning district as a liquor store, which is allowed in the B-1 and B3 zones There are no tobacco shops in the B-5 at the present time, and therefore, it would not deprive any current business ot that use The other possible changes in conditional uses were "home and garden equipment rental" and "kennels" There are no rental businesses in the B-5. but there are in the B-1, including Minnetonka A-1 Rental and possibly the hardware store Gaffron questioned whether kennels were appropriately placed in the B-5 zoning considering the noise involved adding that noise could also be a problem at rental centers with the sounds of engines starting early in the morning, etc. Gaffron reported that ofif-street parking was also suggested for elimination from the B-5 District Former Planning Commissioner Petersr)n had expressed concern with parking being provided for businesses at another property The Navarre municipal parking lot located in the B-1 District has been used for Lord Fletcher’s employees and possibly by others as well Gaffron reviewed possible language changes proposed It was noted the code as it relates to principle properties and related off-premise parking defies interpretation. Parking should be listed in all commercial districts as an accessory use Gaffron suggested the off-street parking be a permitted accessory use when accessory to and on the same lot as the principle use. Lindquist said he had a problem with looking at the zoning in a piece-meal fashion and preferred a more comprehensive study. Gaffron said it was Staff ’s recommendation that a more comprehensive review take place, especially in the B-5 District. Lindquist inquired about the B-6 zoning along Hwy 12. Gaffron said a study has been conducted of that area Schroeder asked if this would not also be piece meal Gaffron said the B-6 change suggested by the Committee was relatively straight forward Smith asked if this should be reviewed in a work session. Schroeirr asked what the driving force was behind the change to the B-6. Callahan responded that the Council was not particularly interested in changing or studying the B1-B5 zones, though were not necessarily opposed. He said the change to the B-6 was for a particular purpose. 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 (^2 - Zoning Amendment - Continued) Hawn noted that there was no particular danger lea\ing the zoning as it currently stands in that the issue of drive-thru restaurants was a conditional use and w ould require rev iew, while tobacco shops w ere a permitted use She noted that the oflf-street parking relates to all of the zones Callahan responded that the off-street parking for the most part required a business to be on the property He said he did not understand the need for the permitted use. citing off- premise parking being permitted at the Art Center for the nearby marina Gaffron said all of the parking code sections would be reviewed. Lindquist asked Gaffron to review the B-6 Gaffron indicated the B-b revision would affect one item only The B-6 includes office, banks, libraries, motels, and Class 1 restaurants (sit-down type) All drive-thru type uses are conditional uses. The committee suggested that a drive-thru bank would be acceptable but a drive-thru restaurant would lend itself to more options including fast food. The Committee suggested drive-thru restaurants be eliminated Schroeder questioned why this use should be eliminated and inquired if the level of traffic was a factor Gaffron said there were a number of reasons, one of which could be the lack of wanting a fast food restaurant along Hwy 12 Gaffron said it does not mean fast food restaurants are bad, but reasons should be defined as to why this conditional use would not be permitted Lindquist said the committee decided that eliminating the conditional use would eliminate future requests for such uses Schroeder was informed by Gaffron that the B-6 zoning along Hwy 12 only involves the Otten properties and potentially the Willow to Old Cry stal Bay Road area on the north Lindquist asked if there were any public comments John O'Sullivan asked if the reason behind the proposed change to the B-6 was fast-food restaurants or the drive-thru itself He noted another city eliminating fast food restaurants and the change precluded the use by businesses that might have been desirable O’Sullivan said there were certain types of dining that emphasized take out food, and the elimination of drive-thrus would hinder this application, citing examples of LeeAnn Chins, Culver's, and others O'Sullivan said if eliminati''g fast food restaurants was the goal, maybe the definition of fast food needs to be determined. Stoddard said O'Sullivan made a good point in that the Commission cannot change life styles Stoddard suggested retaining the conditional use as only two areas are affected and a reason of lack of accommodating the traffic could be a factor in future applications. Stoddard asked if the areas could not handle the traffic Gaffron said traffic was not necessarily an issue MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 (#2 - Zoning Amendment - Continued) Lindquist brought up the issue of drive-thru versus fast food. Hau n responded that she was not prepared to define what fast food is or is not Stoddard said he preferred the conditional use because of such problems with definitions Smith said there could be a concern with an applicant not understanding why such a conditional use could not be allowed and eliminating the use would eliminate the possibility ot such a future problem. l.indquist suggested Staff review what other cities have done in order to gain a better definition of fast food if the issue was indeed fast food versus drive-thru Lindquist suggested tabling the matter and scheduling a work session. Smith said she was also concerned with increased traific Gaffron noted that hours of operation and signage might also be issues of concern Callahan reminded the Commission that the moratorium on Hwy 12 was scheduled to end on October 28, and the committee would prefer to have an amendment adopted or action taken prior to that date Gaft'ron said a work session could be scheduled prior to the next Planning Commission meeting and lurther review could then be conducted at the October Planning Commission meeting. Schroeder asked to see a review of the issue of traffic versus uses Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to table review of the B-6 District. Vote; Ayes 6, Navs 0. Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to table the review of the B-5 District subject to a complete review of the B-1 thru B-5 Districts. A study could occur at a later date with further direction from the Council. Vote; Ayes 6, Nays 0. ACTION ITEMS (#3) f#2l69 MICHAEL RENARD, 1185 TONKAWA ROAD - RENEWAL VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 7:08-7:30 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted The Applicant was present, along with Builder, Tom Betz 5 NnNUTES OF THE ORONO PLAIsnSTNG COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16,1996 (#3 - ^2169 Michael Renard - Continued) Mabusth reported that the application was a renewal variance involving an average lakeshore setback variance for 4‘ and hardcover variance in the 75-250 ’ setback proposed at 26 7% based on the removal of a 168 s f shed as required by the City in 1990 An amended surve>- shows the 4’ encroachment which was shown in three previous reviews at 1.5 ’ but more accurate survey information confirms additions location There is no change in the footprint The new footprint at approximately 15 5x26 ’ is slightly smaller than original proposal The upper level extends over half of the lower level footprint of 15x26 ’ with the 2 ’ bay extension The improvement includes an expanded dining room, living room, and foyer on the lower level and a master bedroom at the upper lev el Renard asked the Planning Commission to consider the inclusion of the 12x14 ’ shed wliich he valued at approximately $ 12,000 He said the application was originally agreed upon with a previous owner who had no need for the shed He said he uses the shed for bikes, etc. Renard said he understands the concern for hardcover and the proximity to the lakeshore and would be willing to remove plastic across the front in the landscape area of about 300 s f He said this w ould allow relief from his hardship and add value to his property and still be in keeping with the spirit of removal of hardcov er close to the lakeside Hawn questioned the sight line of the neighbor noting no problem w ith one story but a concern with a two story home She noted the windows located on this side Renard said he spoke with his neighbors, the Smiths, who were shown the plans and signed the acknowledgment letter Mabusth said the letter was in the file She added that both neighbors on the north and south signed the letters and had no complaint with the application Renard also noted that the improvement proposed is smaller than that requested by the previous owner Haw n asked if Renard was willing to remove the concrete picnic area Renard said he would be w illing to do so if it meant he could keep the shed I MINUTES OF TOE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEP! EMBER 16, 1996 (#3 - #2169 Michael Renard - Continued) Lindquist asked what the hardcover facts were Mabusth asked for a breakdown of the hardcover calculations and whether it included the landscaping Betz showed the survey to Mabusth, w ho did not have a copy of this particular surv ey Discussion was had on the particulars of the hardcover It was determined that if the 130 s f of landscape rock in the 0-75 ’ was removed, along with 420 s.f in the 75-250' setback there would be no need tor a hardcover variance Schroeder said he was concerned with trading of plastic and rock as it should not have been there in the first place The plastic was installed by a previous owner Schroeder said the hardcover should be separated showing what does and does not count Mabusth said it would not be required if there was no hardcover variance required in the 75-250' setback and would only involve the average lakeshore setback. Schroeder questioned whether this was actually known Mabusth clarified that the hardcover total was originally 6142 s f or 26.7% where 5707 s.f is allowed. With the removal of the 420 s.f of landscape rock and plastic, the square footage of hardcover would be at 24.9% and not require a variance Smith asked why the shed was an issue in 1991 Mabusth said it was because the hardcover exceeded the allowed at 26 7“o. With the shed remov al, the hardcover would be at 25.5% There were no public comments Schroeder said he was reluctant to allow the shed since the Council in 1991 recommended its removal with the same basic numbers presented Lindquist noted that the structur* was proposed larger at that time. Mabusth said there was also more hardcover and the updated survey w'as not available. Mabusth said the removal of plastic and rock would result in a 1.8% reduction from 26 7% to 24 9% I.indquist moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2169 with the understanding that all plastic on the property would be remo\ cd along with the cement pad located in the 0-75 ’ setback The application would only involve a variance to the average lakeshore setback, and the shed would be allowed to remain. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#4) #2159 JAMES AND JOANN JUNDT, 1400 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:30-7:54 P.M. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that the application was tabled at the request of the applicant at the August 19 meeting of the Planning ('ommission. He noted that the application has been revised by the w ithdrawal of the boathouse from the application. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16,1996 (#4 - #2159 James and Joann Jundt - Continued) Mrs Jundt said the intent was non-structural in regards to the boathouse and repair only would be done due to a hole in the roof from a large tree branch that fell on it this past year Lindquist asked Mrs Jundt if she had a problem w ith the total removal of the boathouse Jundt said she would be reluctant to remove the boathouse due to its historical significance Gatfron said caution would need to be taken regarding a repair permit for the 1930's boathouse w ith the value versus the cost of repair Smith clarified that the boathouse would not be deleted from the application, and there were no plans to remove the boathouse from the property Gaflfron informed the Commission that the City would have to review the repairs proposed Jundt questioned why there was a concern when only repairs were planned She was informed that structural repairs cannot exceed 50® o of the value of the boathouse when ordinances made such structures nonconforming in 1975, Mabusth said she spoke with Jundt’s attorney, Tom Crosby, who noted the cement piers, which are part of its construction and were found to be in good condition He was informed that additional information w ould be required if the integrity of the foundation w as questioned. A window will be added but the roof slope would remain the same Jundt said she understood the concern when asked by Lindquist Lindquist clarified that if any repairs exceed 50®/o of the value, the code requires the boathouse to be removed It was determined that more information would be required before this issue could be resolved. Gaffron reported that the proposal includes improvements east of the main house to the underground grotto, a retaining wall, and repair of the stainvays One set of stairways has a gap which will be connected This stairway is located 5-10' from the shoreline. Another centrally located stairway will be repaired and restored The retaining wall will be repaired along with the grotto Gatfron said the existing 4 walkways extend 650' in distance and questioned whether there were more than enough stairways He noted the code allows for stairs to the lake but does not mention how many sets of stairs per property. The improv ements to the grotto will consist of cosmetic changes with the addition of a stucco interior wall and ceiling panels, addition of a decorative light, restoration of existing wood doors, and restoration of the existing stone retaining wall Gaffron noted that since the grotto was underground, it is not considered hardcover The hardcover calculations are at 0.7% in the 0-75' setback with the exclusion of the hardcover in the public right-of-way Additional hardcover of about l®o is proposed in the submitted calculations in the patio and deck area but no specifics are provided and will need clarification Mrs Jundt said restoration was only planned at this time, no additions. Smith asked if there were improv ements to the grotto. Gaffron said the changes were cosmetic only. 1 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16,1996 (#4 - #2159 James and Joann Jundt - Continued) McMillan asked if there would be changes to the vegetation. Jundt said the plans call for trimming only. Gafiron said the code normally asks for a staircase to come straight down in order to keep the hardcover to a minimum. The stairs now angle down across the slope and are partially hidden by vegetation Smith noted that the number of staircases was previously review ed It was determined that if the property was broken dow n into parcels that the number of stairw ays would be acceptd^le. Hawn commented on the uniqueness of the property and the fact that only restoration w as being performed, not new improvements Hawn said she spoke with the gardener who said he used the far stairways alot in his work and the restoration would increase the safety Hawn said she had no problem with the restoration Jundt said it was their intent to return the property to what it once was and not change it. She said she had questioned whether the boathouse should be restored and was informed that it should be as it has historically value She inlbrmed Mabusth when questioned that additional damage could occur if the repair was not made Mabusth said, although the cost of repair may exceed 50% of value, she would be inclined to allow the repair because of the uniqueness. Stoddard asked how the valuation was determined. Gaffron said the assessor's value was usually taken from 1975 records However, no value was established for this building in the records A value for a comparable building of its size could possibly be used. Lindquist asked whether the Commission was including the boathouse or not in this application. Mabusth said there was a need to allow the structural repair to the roof, but the applicant would have to come back with more information on the foundation. Lindquist said he would need more information before he could vote on the issue and asked for an estimate Mrs Jundt said she thought it would be okay to repair the structure. Gaffron said it was a matter or defining whether and to what extent structural repair actually is needed Gaffron said he would want the building inspector to look at the structure if the boathouse was included in the application Lindquist said the Commission would only look at the sidewalk, retaining walls, and grotto, and would not include the boathouse in this approval. There were no public comments. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 (#4 - #2159 James and Joann Jundt - Continued) Stoddard moved. Schroeder seconded, to approve the restoration and cosmetic remodel to the grotto, retaining walls, and sidewalks with the condition that the applicant work with Staff regarding the boathouse. Smith questioned whether the boathouse affects the retaining walls Gaffron said the grotto and retaining walls are together, and the boathouse is totally separate Vote; Ayes 6. Nays 0. (#5) #2168 TODD AND DONNA ROOKE, 4190 HIGHWOOD ROAD VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 7:54-8:04 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Mabusth reported the application was for a hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area for construction of a 12'xl6' deck on the w est side of the residence placed over the aggregate patio. A previous deck was placed in a larger footprint, and the replacement deck will be smaller in size. There will be no reduction in the existing hardcover within 75-250' setback area at 55%. The applicant said he began to repair the deck, and it fell down Mabusth said the applicant asked for direction regarding the possibility of a garage. Staff reviewed the situation and reported that there was no way to get beyond the residence with the topography to the rear of the property. Mabusth said there was 8' of the stoop and 17' to the right-of-way line Mabusth asked the size of the existing porch for possibly using part of the structure for the garage. Rooke said it was about 6' deep. Mabusth said there would only be room for a one-stall garage, and the right-of-way would continue to serve as back out area. Rooke said all of the neighbors in the area have 50' wide lots but depths of about 250', The homes are within the first 75' of the property. Rooke said he has spoken with his neighbors regarding gaining a private drive along the back to put garages to the rear where no hardcover issue would be involved. Stoddard suggested coming in from the west side where only an easement would be required. Mabusth said the topography of the area would probably eliminate that possibility. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEIMBER 16,1996 (#5 - #2168 Todd and Donna Rooke - Continued) Lindquist suggested the applicant work together with the neighbors and plat the driveway area Gaflfron inquired if there w as an alley, but Mabusth said no alle>' was platted. Rooke did note an al'ev named Highwood Lane linking Highwood Road with North Shore Drive to the east Rooke commented that a road would increase the property value for the five homes that would be affected He also noted that there would be a loss of about 6 trees Hawn remarked on the positive aspect of off-street parking if such a road was possible Mabusth said a comprehensive suAey would be required for a subdivision. She informed Rooke that it would be an easier solution with a garage in the rear yard and added that all of the hardcover could be located in 250'-500' setback area and not require variances, Rooke inquired about the cost and was informed that it would involve a subdivision fee. Lindquist told Rooke to call a surveyor Rooke asked where the road would be located in relation to the sewer Mabusth informed him that the survev would have to relay that information Mabusth informed the applicant and Commission that this application would be heard at the September 23 Council meeting if recommended for approval. There were no public comments Haw n moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2168 for a replacement deck with hardcover remaining at 55% in the 75-250' setback area Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#6) #2171 MINNEGASCO, A DIVISION OF NOR.AM ENERGY CORPORATION, 530 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING 8:05-8:48 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted The applicant was represented by Mr. Kahlstrom MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMML>S10N MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, I99t (#6 - #2171 Minneuasco - Continued) Mabusth reported that the request was for a renewal of a vonditional use permit to allow' Minnegasco to continue the use of a portable vaporizer at ^30 Old rr>stal Bay Road in the industrial zoning district The vaporizer was installed in 1992 In 1995 a ore-year extension was u^mte<3 by the Council, which expires October, 1990 Mabost-t said rvlinnegasco hau oped that the vaporizer would no longer be needed but deliys in improvements for CoRd 6 lines has hindered the upgrade plans Minnegasco believes the vaporizer will be phased out by spring of 1998 Maousth add“d that the police chief and fire department had little knowledge of the vaporizer Since the review in 1995, they were provided information on the vaporizer, and the police chief w atched the filling process involved He relayed good comments noting the use of adequate number of employees and care The police chief informed Staff that he sees no problem with granting the extension Mr Kahlstrom said the project was in place at their plant, but they did not have total control over matters involving CoRd t> He noted that the supply from the west serving Orono i.« ^ ot adequate to meet the needs of the area The supply is increasing with the installatiovr of the main project next summer. The vaporizer is needed for one more year for use in 1997-1998 Lindquist asked Kahlstrom if he saw any problem w ith the vaporizer being phased out by spring of 1998. Kahlstrom did not McMillan asked what was done with the excess at the end of the season. Kahlstrom said there is no excess as there is no on-site storage The gas is brought in by tanker and then driven away. ochroeder asked how many v aporizers were in use and if there w ere any problems Kahlstrom said this was the only one of its kind in the Midwest and it has presented no problems There is a liquid gas facility in Burnsville used by the tanker and for use as a portable pipe line The natural gas is shipped in Smith noted that the information says the vaporizer is only used three to four times a season McMillan and Mabusth reported that it was used 19 time- last year The colder temperatures were a factor Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to approve the renew al of the conditional use permit for an additional year with the vaporizer phased out by May 31, 1998, Vote; Ayes 6, Nays 0 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 (#7) #2172 GERALD AND NANCY BLOMS, 4195 FOREST LAKE DRIVE VARIANCF - PUBLIC HEARING S:4S-9;00 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present Mabusth reported that the applicant previously received an area variance for residential construction on what had been a vacant lot, and consistent with the surroundir .; lots. The applicant now seeks a lot coverage variance for the construction of a 12'xl4-l/2' deck resulting in a 1.1% increase Structural coverage is currently 15 7^4, where 15% is allowed Elevations w“re shown The deck addition is to the existing deck and maintains the 52' setback The 12' extension is towards the street side The foundation plan was showTi Smith asked if a wood patio was to be added since there is a concrete pad now The applicant said the concrete has cracked Mabusth said the grade level deck is acceptable and not included in the structural coverage. The upper level deck is included as it will have a railing and is at a 6' grade Nancy Bloms said she was surprised to find a zoning code for structural coverage. She said her property is consistent with those of the neighborhood. Bloms also asked that her application be presented at the September 23 Council meeting. Stoddard asked for clarification on the lower deck. Mabusth said the structure is included in the hardcover calculations, which presents no problem as the property allows 30% and is below that figure There were no public comments Hawn acknowledged that there would be no impact on the neighbors but noted that the coverage was over the limit Hawn said it was her inclination to ask that the records note no additional structure would be allowed on the property She also voiced concern that such notations are not passed along to future owners. Bloms said she would not want such a limit to be noted as it might limit the value of the property. Bloms felt a 15% structural coverage on 3/4 acre was minimal and unrealistic. Hawn responded that when limits are not set, the neighbors keep adding new structure. She noted the ordinance is there to help maintain space in keeping with .an open space philosophy Schroeder said Bloms remarks have some merit as coverage is less than some of the neighboring properties. He was concerned wnth noting on record a limitation as the Commission is unable to bind future bodies and was unenforceable. T-.jr, MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 (#7 - #2172 Gerald and Nancv Bloms - Continued) Smith said such notation puts property owners on notice, was not considered a penalty, and went with the property, not the indhidual. and was consistent with the code Smith said the Commission attempts to apply the code consistently and fairly, and the neighbors would receive the same treatment Smith said she was in support of noting on record a limit on future structural additions Hawn moved. Smith seconded, to approve the construction of an upper level deck extending the structural coverage to 16 8% with the additional language that it is the Planning Commission's opinion that the property has reached its maximum lot coverage and asks that any further request for structure be denied. Vote: Ayes 6. Nays 0. t (#8) #2173 BENNETT CHARLES DOWNEY, 2675 SHADYW OOD ROAD - AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCEA^ARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 9:01-9:13 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted The Applicant, Chuck Dowtiev’, was present along with new owner, Gary Hegenes. Gaffron reported that the previous owner, Rolla Martin, had applied for a variance for a tennis court but withdrew the application in 1985 A 1986 addition added 90 s.f for a total of 7890 s f, which included the driveway for the neighboring property. In 1990, Martin proposed an additional expansion of the house on the west side While in review. Staff found additional hardcover that had not previously been present and exceeded the 25% allowable in the 75-250' setback area Martin then withdrew his application. It was found that the ga^e^o vvas located 5' from the garage where 10' separation is required. The property was si »equently sold, and Staff put a notice in the property file that the hardcover overage and gazebo w ould have to be taken care of in the fliture. The property was then purchased by Downey and sold to Hegenes. The current application resulted from the notice in the file GalTron noted that there has been one change since 1990. The driveway serving the neighbor with an easement is now excluded from the calculations for both lot coverage and hardcover. The 5' separation of the gazebo from the garage still exists, but decks now connect the gazebo. There are no other variances required The applicant is proposing to remove rock and plastic near the driveway and fence Hegenes said the decking proposed \vill allow the deck to be squared off The existing stairway wrill be removed, the deck squared off, and new stairs installed. The deck coverage will be less than what now exists Hegenes noted that a landscaped area was penned in as a deck He also said some concrete will be removed. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 (#8 - #2173 Bennett Charles Downey - Continued) Gafiron said the hardcover will be under the 25% allowable at 24-24 5%. There are no other variances involved except for the garage and gazebo separation With the deck connection, the gazebo and garage have become an integral part of the system. There may be a need for a fire wall, however Gaflron said Staff recommends approval with the hardcover now under the 25® 'o in the 75- 250’ setback area with the removals as listed The gazebo application is after-the-fact and a building permit is required to ensure that the improvement is correctly built Gaffron said the after-the-fact fees should be waived as it was done by the previous owner. There were jio public comments Schroeder moved, Stoddard seconded, to approve Application #2173 subject to Staff recommendations requiring hardcover be less than 25%. Downey asked if rocks w ere considered hardcov er if there w as no plastic underneath Gaffron said it was not as long as the pebbles have not been driven on or underlain with plastic or fabric The size of the rock was not a factor As a side note, Gaftfon said rip rap is also not included in hardcover Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#9) #2177 BOB MELAMED, 2005 SUGARWOOD DRIVE - REQUEST TO WAIVE REQUIREMENT OF SUGAR WOODS COVENANT The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present, along with Landscape Architect, Kevin Norby. Mabusth reported that the application is the first for the current Planning Commission as it involves an issue with a driveway in the Sugar Woods Development. The City entered into the covenants in order to stand by the objectives that were set for the development. The purpose is to preserve trees, and the area in question is within a protected area. The covenant includes setback requirements, no removal of trees, no fill, and front access drives were not to exceed 20’ in width and were to be in a straight alignment The two adjoining property owners have been notified and no comments have been received. l.s MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16,1996 (#9 - #2177 Bob Melamed - Continued) Mabusth said the applicant has a somewhat difterent plan proposed than what is shown in the packet The original plan proposes to build within the protected area using retaining walls and a curv ed roadw ay The applicant's addendum notes the uniqueness of the site, the topography, and the narrow ness of the building envelope. The applicant proposes that approval be sought from the neighbor to the west, the Simonds, the property owners receiving the most impact. In reviewing the pattern of the subdivision, Mabusth said properties w ith side loading garage and side driveway have had to come belore the C’ly The Council approved an abbreviated review for these requests with the Planning Commission having the final say If the application were to be denied or a tie vote obtained, it would go before the Council. Hawn asked if there was a homeow ners association. Mabusth said the original developer, Sid Rebers, is part of the architectural review board He sent a letter, which is part of the packet, noting the effort required to sa- e trees, but asked that an agreement be reached with the neighbor to the west before approval given Mabusth said she has received no comment from that neighbor, the Simonds. Melamed advised that he felt they were out ot town Melamed advised the revised plan addresses the concerns of the Staff and results in an amended plan requiring no fill and a realignment of the house. Melamed said the trees were located on the plan after the site plan was completed. He commented that he is also the developer of French Creek, which was designed from the example of Sugar Woods to minimize the impact of construction on forested area Melamed said the number one factor in the design of the development is to minimize the vehicular e.xposure to the street and number two factor was saving the trees. The pl^n was amended after the trees were located All but one of the trees over 6" will be saved with the plan Melamed said with front loading garage, he would have to clear a whole swath of trees He said he has made an attempt to speak with the neighbors and asks that approval be given based on approval by the Simonds, who he also believes is currently out of town. Melamed also said he w ould add 8' Black Hill Spruce if additional screening is necessary. Norby said the original site plan required grading for retaining walls. Once the trees were located, the plan was amended to raise the house 2' to eliminate the retaining walls. There are now no retaining w alls on the driveway side but one located in front of the property, which will follow the grade and be consistent in height The height will vary from 1-1/2' to 4 ’ to 6‘ at the corner and may possibly be two walls 1 he retaining wall will be of field stone, which is similar to that used by the home to the north Norby noted that with the drive at a 14 ’ width, the grade has almost been reduced to zero MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPI EMBEK 16,1996 (#9 - #2177 Bob Melamed - Continued) Regard’mg the 25' side setback, Norby said it currently is planned at 27' and originally at: 32'. The turnaround was at a 90 degree angle but has been changed to save three additional trees There may possibly be additional deciduous trees planted in the area Norbv noted the extensive under«rov\th of smaller trees w hich adds to the denseness of the wooded property. When asked by Schroeder how close the neighboring house wus, Melamed said the neighboring house was located more to the east on their lot with the driveway to the west. Norby added that the neighboring lot was also quite wooded Mabusth said the setback would be up to negotiations with the neighbor, the Simonds Norby said the curved driveway was a result of tree placement A 20" basswood in front would be lost if the garage and driveway were to be turned more tow ards the front of the house Without the encroachment, the applicant said there w ould be a wide swath of trees cut out of original virgin forest The smaller growth of trees on the property are located to the east. It was then noted that the av erage setback is 13’ to the side of the lot w ith the closest at 6'. Stoddard asked how much would be gained if the back out w as removed. Melamed and Norby said a car could not get out of the garage in that scenario. Mabusth added that the apron could be moved more to the east Lindquist asked that Staff review the setback with the Simonds Mabusth also noted that she would like to have the City Engineer review the plan to see if the back out could be brought further east to pull it further away from the side lot line. Smith asked instead of a straight approach, front load, if a slight turn could be done to get around the tree vithout getting into the turn around area Norby said the 14' driveway with a front load of 30' narrows down to 20'. Mabusth commented that there would still be a need for a back-up aica. Norby noted that trees would still be lost Smith said that would not occur further up Melamed said the amended plan calls for removal of only one tree Smith agreed adding that it was also misleading in that many were lost with the driveway. Norby said although the solution would physically work, they were also attempting to eliminate the sight of vehicles and questioned if the covenants would be met. Smith noted that the covenant also asks for a straight drive Melamed commented that many of the houses in the development had curved driveways and is puzzled by the requirement of straight driveways. Schroeder responded that it was an attempt to limit impact on tree growth *n front yards. Melamed said the driveway across the street, as well as that of the Simonds, is curv ed. Schroeder said the 6’ is close but view s in support of the plan with Simonds approval as it is a better design. 1 i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 (#9 - #2177 Bob Melamed - Continued) Smith said, while some trees are saved, others are being lost, and the plan is somewhat misleading since the lost trees have not been plotted Melamed said there is less impact in this revision Lindquist said the design is better than having a 20-30 ’ opening on the street side. Melamed noted that he met with the original developer, Rebers, who was in favor of the curved driveway in order to save trees and with approv'al from the Simonds. Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application #2177 for a variance with respect to the driveway with the neighbor, Mr Simonds, approving the setback in writing The developer and Staff are to determine, along with the City Engineer, whether the 6' side setback can be improved upon Vote; Ayes 6, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#10) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 9,1996 Charles Schroeder attended the meeting He had no comments regarding the meeting. (#11) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Hawn inquired about what course of action can be taken towards a property owner who has disregarded conditions of a resolution. Mabusth reported that the individual in question has been warned of the violation, w hich involves a safety issue, the building inspector notified, and the City will issue a tag. Schroeder asked for a discussion of the issue of structural versus non-structural. Gaffron said he has studied the issue and wxitten a report. He agrees that revisions are probably needed to the code The Planning Commission will view ihe report once Staff has reviewed it. (#12) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 19,1996 MEETING Hawn moved. Smith seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of August 19, 1996. V'ote: Ayes 5, Nays 0, Abstain 1, McMillan, who was not in attendance. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 (#13) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND THE COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 23,1996 Stoddard will attend the Council Meeting of September 23, 1996. ADJOURNMENT Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to adjourn at 9:50 p m. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Dale Lindquist. Chair Person