Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-15-1995 Planning Packet
f ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 15, 1995 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members presem; Chair Stephen Peterson, Sandra Smrth, Dale Lindquist, Charles Nolan, Jr., and Janice Berg Charles Schroeder and Candace Rowlette were absent. The following represented the City Staff Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator MirhapI G»ffron, and Recorder Sherry Frost Council member J Diann Goetten was present Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 7 00 pm. (#1) SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING/PUSLIC INFORMATION MEETING - #2020 JAMES BRUCE - 565 LEAF STREET - 7:00-7:30 P.M. A.VACATION OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT B.PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted Mr. Bruce wa« present The property will be served with sewer from Oxford Road The City will ask for a 20' easement, 10' on either side of lots I and 2 for the sewer line to serve lot 3. Detailed grading and construction plans for future sewer connection must be submitted with buildmg plans for new construction on lot 3. There is a concern with any impact the future sewer work would have on Oxford Road. An accessory structure located on lot 3 will be given one year from the final plat approval date for removal if a building permit for new construction has not been issued. The existing residence on lot 2 may stay as part of the principal residence as detached additional living space but not as an independent living space. Covenants will need to be placed on the property to alert future owners that this structure may not be used as an independent structure. The applicant met with members of the commission regarding tree removal on the property. 32 trees were noted to remain in the area immediately surrounding the proposed building envelope. Five mature trees will be removed. 1‘lolan asked if the building enveloped noted on the plans was exact. The applicant said it was approximate and allowed a 75 ’x75' area to build the house I ut may deviate somewhat. An existing culvert may also be affected. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#1 - #>2020 James Bruce - Continued) Nolan asked if any covenants will be put in place Nolan's concern was with a future owner clear cutting the property to obtain lake views. The applicant noted that the open space around the proposed house will be more to the east than west and with primary views to the south Bruce is willing to file a covertant to place tree removal restrictions west of the house, between Oxford Road and the house, and within the area to the north Mabusth commented on the cul-de-sac issue Bruce had wanted to keep the cul-de-sac due to landscaping features but Staff advised of potential problems. The cul-de-sac, in its present location, will nevo' serve as a turnaround area The sewer line that will run through that area, and the approximate 50'diameter paved cul-de-sac is inadequate to serve as a turnaround The applicant said he could understand the City's view on this but would like to try to save the mature tree in the area. The Planning Commission agreed that the surface of the drive could remain until building was completed on lot 3. During the public comments. Sue Nelson, who owns the property to the north of proposed lot 2, commented that her swimming pool is located only 30-40' from the shared lot tine. The Nelson home is farther away. The closeness of the pool to the proposed building site could become a nuisance according to Nelson. She said she would prefer the open area to the south used for residential development and limit tree removal along the north. Peterson commented that the setbacks are being met Nelson responded that Oxford Road is a private street, and the covenants state that property cannot be subdivided without the owner receiving approval of property owners to allow an amendment of the covenants Mabusth confirmed that the City docs not enforce private covenants. The applicant should be advised to commence the process of amending the covenants. Staff cannot schedule the subdivision and vacation applications before the Commission until this is finalized. Don George of 495 Oxford Road, lives across the street from the proposed development. George reported being aware of the covenants and is concerned with the new development Peterson asked Bruce how he was not aware of the covenants. Bruce said he was notified this past week afier an attorney's title opinion was completed. The seller had not informed Bruce of the covenant. 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#1 - #2020 James Bruce - Continued) Mark Randow, a member of the church located to the no'th and east of the property, said the church is surrounded by the property under discussion. The church has an outdoor chapel and its use would be overshadowed by any building done on the weekends. Randow said the church h:^ oeen long standing and would like to see building construction curtailed on the weekends as well as around-the-clock type construction Concern was also voiced on the increased drainaged from the property noting the drainage easement on the east ade Peterson noted a concern also for any new property owners because of the outdoor weddings being conducted Randow noted a need for screenirtg or landscaping as a barrier between the properties Sue Nelson recalled past problems with their septic system prior to hook-up to sewer noting the need for these future lots to be connected to sewer. Peterson said he had no problems with the vacation of the easement within Staff recommendations but was concerned now having learned cf the existing covenant. Peterson felt it would be necessary to table this issue until the matter of amending the covenants is resolved. The sketch review noted that the property is subdividabie, and if the civision falls within covenant rules, would be subdivided Other issues of sewer and drainage will be addressed as part of the normal subdivision review. Lindquist agreed with this summation and the need to table the application. Applicant Bruce reported that the seller informed him that the covenant has been amended in the same fashion before, and there is an amendment process within the covenant, which the owner is now undertaking for this application Bruce asked the Planning Commission for an indication of approval, subject to the covenant amendment, and an idea of the time frame. Peterson said the missing information could result in stopping this process but does show good improvements made from last meeting. Smith asked for clarification on the use of the existing unit on lot 2. Mabusth responded that the application is similar to the recent Kipler/Sargent application, where a covenant was executed to limit future use of an independent accessory structure as a guesthouse. The structure would have to be connected to sewer to serve a bathroom, but it was noted that no kitchen would be allowed. Peterson moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2020 until more information is received on the existing covenants and their effect on the application. Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 <»2) SCHEDULED PUBUC HEARING/PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING > #2021 JAMES HALE AND JAMES BRUCE - 575 OXFORD ROAD AND 565 LEAF STREET - SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - 7:30- 7:31 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr Bruce was present. This Application is a follow up to the sketch review. There is a purchase agreement in process for the purchase of 0.10 acre from James Hale to satisfy the lot size requirement. There are no setback problems. The lot line rearrangement requires approval of the covenant homeowners, which have given approval in the past. Mabusth noted that the Staf has no concern with the division of the lot lines as proposed. Peterson said the application was good, except for the problem with the covenant described in Item # I Peterson suggested the need to satisfy the requirements of the covenants prior to approval of the application. Peterson moved. Smith seconded, to table Application #2021, to review covenants. Ayes 5, Nays 0 (#3) SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING/PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING- #2622 ROBERT MELAMED - 920 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SOUTH - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION 8:30-9:27 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Melamed was present. The Applicant updated the Planning Commissioners on the preliminary subdivision. The property is 15 acres located on Old Crystal Bay Road across from the Carpenter residence. The proposal is for a 4-lot subdivision with septic systems. Wetland areas have been delineated. An existing driveway will be removed. Applicant is asking for a variaiKe to the code to use the City driveway rather than going to an internal road. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#3 - #2022 Robert Melamed - Continued) The Applicant is desiring to keep a^vay trom the wetland areas which would require removal of650’ trees and excesrive filling within wetlands A permit is automatically' gramed by the MCWD if the wetland filling does not exceed 400*. The MCWD will review grading plans No mitigation is needed but Applicant does plan to dredge wetlands in the future Melamed would like to create a ponding area and deepen another pond He advised that he received positive feedback on this from the MCWD Mabusth said that this would be considered a major application invoking a conditional use permK and variance Mabusth asked Applicant the purpose of the alteration Melamed said this would increase the wildlife areas and general aesthetic purposes, and to replace what has been destroyed in the past It was noted that this is part of the general plan and not a part of the current review The Applicant reported that after discussions with the Council, Park Commission, and Planning Commissicfu a 15' outlot is requested at the west lot line adjacent to county road for a bike trail and would be part of the park dedication Melamed noted that the Park Commission was concerned with buffering the City preserve area on the east side from this property A decision is needed on whether this should be dedicated on fee title as park dedication land or protected on private covenants Melamed noted the Park Commission preferred a park dedication, while the Council was in favor of a buffer zone as it was felt that better control was affoided if City owned land rather than o f "'Hed as in covenants The driveway on the south side needs to be decided If no internal road is built, then two- shared driveways are currently proposed, one off county road and one off City driveway. The question of whether the City desires to grant itsdf a variance or upgrade the drive to a City road needs to be decided upon The upgrade would require a cul-de-sac, which Melamed said the neighbors do not want. Melamed said the Park Commission felt the area would not be enhanced by an upgrade. The Council is uncomfortable with granting a variance and is possibly looking at amending the code on the number of residences allowed to be served by a driveway. The Applicant prefers that a variance be given. Peterson read into the record a letter from Frances Graham and Robert Gumnit voicing their desire that the City grant itself a variance. Graham and Gumnit also asked that the developer not be allowed to use the word "preserve" in its name as they felt it was confusing and potentially misleading. They asked that trees and wetlands be maintained. During public comments, Mike Ellis, who lives next door to the property on the south, voiced his disapproval of bike trails on the property. Ellis asked how the creek would be crossed serving lot 4, and Melamed replied that a concrete culvert would be installed. Ellis objected strongly to the proposed Willow Drive to Brown Road trail. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#3 - #2022 Robert Melamed - Continued) Duke Hust, who lives two lots north of the proposed development, reported that the bike trail would come very close to his home. Hust's house is built close to the road and would lose his front yard He does not object to the plan except for the proposed trail. Bridget Hust, 820 Old Crystal Bay Road, voiced concern o\-cr loss of tall trees where the trail is proposed Hust noted that the trail would come within 10' of her home. It was noted that the Park Commission had voted against a trail on the west side, 3/2, but the Council was in favor of the trail at this location Nolan asked if the concern was that trail connections might not be made if built on the east side of this proposed development, which Mabusth contirmed Melamed noted that no connection would be made to the north unless Hust or Ellis should subdivide their property or it was acquired by the City. Hust agreed that this was a concern Flint said that this was a matter of two decisions, w hether to take an easement now or build the trail now There is no plan to build now but it was the appropriate time to gain an easement The possibility of having a trail on the east side and being unable to connect to the east was a concern as well as being obtrusive with the park. Peterson said decisions made at this meeting would not affect the trail issue as it will be resolved by the final decision of the Council. Goetten responded that it was not the intention of the Council to extend the trail to North Shore Drive At this time, the trail is not yet able to reach the Luce Line In regards to this specific application, Goetten said that nothing has been absolutely decided upon, and it will come up before the Council at a later date The Council asked the Park Commission to look at a trail on the west. Goetten noted that the Council has never condemned a property for the trail The Council will look further into this issue. Peterson asked for any further public comments. Hust commented that he agreed with the letter noted above. Ellis inquired about the size of the City-owned driveway. Melamed commented that it was his goal that the development would look like it was not even there from the road. Melamed does not wish to disturb the wooded landscape. Nolan asked if restrictive covenants would be placed on tree removal. Melamed said this would be accomplished through covenants or conservation easements. The restricted areas would correspond to the building setbacks. The purpose is to create a border on each lot that eliminates any tree removal. 6 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANT^ING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, IW5 (#3 - <^2022 Robert Melamed - Continued) Smith inquired of the size of the borders Melamed said he has drawn in buffer zones along the exterior lot lines of the property at a SO* width that is only encroached by septic areas Staff has recommended a 30' w ide buffer along shared interior lot lines. Nolan asked that where driveways extend along shared lot lines, that 30’ wide buffer m)t include area of drive, but to extend buffer width to mainttun 30' buffer. Peterson personally felt a variance should be granted to the ordinance, and no change be made to the ordinance Peterson would like the City Attorney s ruling on whether a City can grant itself a variance It w as later noted by Gafiron that this had been done with the post office parking lot Mabusth noted that the Applicant has submitted a letter stating he will follow the path decided upon by the City in regards to access roads. Melamed had thought that the drive would have to be upgraded to a road. The Planning Commissioners replied that another alternative for access would be decided upon but no upgrade of City drive would be recommended Goetten said the problem is that there are already two homes there, and does the City grant a variance for two more. The Council does not look favorably on other developers doing so, then, why should the City allow themselves to gain from granting a variance Goetten said the Council was also not in favor of an internal road. Nolan asked Goetten if the Council preferred two shared access drives off Old Crystal Bay Road. Goetten replied in the negative. Melamed's partner, Ron Lauer, asked if it was possible for the City to make the road a public road. Mabusth said the roadway is already public. By code, if a third house is built, then the driveway must be upgraded to a road. Applicant asked if the City were to find no legal problems with granting itself a variance, as it does with others, would the City look hard at granting this request. Goetten said the Council needs to look at the big picture and noted conflicts with several ordinances at this tune. Lindquist voiced his favor of the bike easement along Old Crystal Bay Road. Lindquist also said he understood where the Council was on the issue of the drive; and even though it may be the best solution, the possibility of coming off of Old Crystal Bay Road was there Mabusth said the Engineer recommended grading of the bike trail along with the developer’s grading. The Engineer advised that it would be difficult for the City to do filling in the future. The filling of wetland areas was an issue as the City would be required to find mitigation areas. It is easier for developers to accomplish before residential development. J MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#3 - #2022 Robert Melamed - Continued) Hust spoke for Art F.llis Ellis said a dike was formed when the existing drive at Old Crystal Bay Road was built It had been dry prior to that time Melamed reported that the Engineer had said the tow land had to drain to the north Hust conunented that Ellis said the land used to drain to the southeast Peterson said drainage was an issue in all applications and would look at ensuring that no further problems occurred. Smith asked for clarification on driveways being the personal decision of a homeowner. Mabusth said the curb cuts require approval, but where the drive comes off the curb cut is decided by the homeowner Lindquist moved, Nolan seconded, to approve the preliminary subdivision for Melamed/Lauer w ith the understanding that a variance be granted off the City driveway to allow two units served tfom the City drive with four lots in the total subdivision. Application must meet the 9 conditions stated in Staff memo in addition to conditions as follows 10) create buffered zoning for driveway zones, 11) report received from City Attorney prior to going before the Council on the City's legal right to change the ordinance or allow a variance granted to the City, and 12) encourage developer to change the subdivision name from the "preserve" name The Applicant asked for clarification if Park Dedication, a buffer zone, or an outlot would be done on the east side of the property Mabusth said the City usually does not take wetlands as part of Park Dedication Nolan asked if the purpose was to only provide a buffer zone. Flint said that other wildlife concerns have been noted, such as a north-south pathway for wildlife. Flint said granting a fee would be preferred but would like to see a buffer for the wildlife pathway. Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#4) #1999 DAVID AND VICKI VICKERMAN, 2475 DUNWOODY AVENUE - VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - 7:32-7:42 P.M. Mr. & Mrs. Vickerman were present Mabusth reported that the application was originally filed for a deck structure within the 0-75' zone. The Planning Commission denied the application at the March meeting, but confirmed the need for a new staircase along with the removal of the boat house. The City Engineer will need to confirm whether an existing retaining wall will be needed once the boathouse is removed. The area where the boathouse sits will be restored with natural landscaping. Mabusth commented that a demolition permit will be needed and noted that 18 cubic yards of fill will be placed in low areas and to provide adequate soil base to allow pUuiting of ground cover. Landscaping will minimize the fill. There is also the option of stones or chips but no geogrid material is to be used. 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#4 - #1999 David & Vicki Mckerman - Continued) Nolan was concerned with the stabilization of the slope. It was noted that once the boathouse is removed, timing is critical. Nolan did not want the application to have to go through the Planning Commission process prior to stabilization once the boathouse was removed. The Applicant responded that Bill Niccum of Minnetonka Portable Dredging will demolish the boathouse and fill with a clay/dirt combination with dirt on top and attempt completion within a day Mabusth noted that the City Engineer would need to be there when this was done to see that guidelines were followed. Mabusth asked the applicant to inform Staff of the date and time for the demolition. Nolan asked if the slope could be stabilized without a retaining wall. Mabusth said the Engineer thought this was possible as the rest of the ground appears to be stable, and loose earth and debris appear to have been swept to rear of boathouse giving the appearance of severe erosion Mabusth also said that the area where the boathouse is now located is level. Both Peterson and Berg said the Planning Commission would rely on the expertise of the City Engineer. The Applicant commented that they proposed to use crown vetch in the lutdscaping. There were no public comments. Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #1999 with Staff recommeiKlations, and specifically, that the City Engineer be on site when the boathouse is removed. The Applicant is to work with the Engineer on steps taken to stabilize the slope. Plans must be acceptable to the Engineer. Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#5) #2005 SAILORS WORLD MARINA AND BOAT CLUB, 1955 SHORELINE DRIVE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Application #2005 was tabled at the request of the applicant. (#6) #2007 TONY EIDEN COMPANY, 2800 COUNTRYSIDE DRIVE WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:42-7:54 P.M. Ross Lineham represented the company. 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#6 - #2007 Tony Eiden Company - Continued) Uneham reported that the purpose of the berm on the north lot boundary, which continues to the west, is a result of an effort to make lot I more saleable. A void was filled in between two berms to create a new berm. Work was done on an existing berm on the west and at existing grade on the east. There were no deviations. Mabusth said that the berm was partially completed Mabusth said that the primary and alternate septic sites force drainage to immediate rear of residence It was noted that the ground was wet in the back yard. The Engineer recommended construction of a swale to the rear by the house that would carry drainage from east to west. The applicant said there was enough elevation for proper drainage via the swale. Mabusth asked the applicant if he thought about a swale between the lots, draining to the south and direct drainage out to Countryside The applicant agreed saying the the hill carries major drainage from higher elevations at east. Mabusth reported that the septic is a mound system, and there is a need to direct drainage away from the toes of the mou; ds, Peterson asked how the berm by the City trail along Watertown Road impacts the drainage The Applicant said the berm would have no impact on trail. Mabusth said the berm presents problems for the septic system sites and concentrates drainage via lot 1 to the immediate rear of residetKe. LiiKlquist asked if the plan would meet the 20' septic setback. The Applicant replied that it would when amended. Lineham also said that he was working with Steve Weeknran, who approved the mound system, and asked to see Weekman on the site rather than through additional paper work. Mabusth said that the issue was of such great importaiKe that it cannot be worked out on site only. Smith responded that it was needed to be on paper first. Peterson said he had no problem with the berm as long as it did not affect the drainage system to which Mabusth agreed. Peterson saw the issue as one of engineering and grading being worked out with the developer and Weekman. Mabusth said the Engineer has recommended that a swale be develop^ to rear of residence and/or along shared lot lines of I and 2 or a combination of both. Nolan noted the importance of maintaining a 20' septic separation with site drainage on the shared lines or directing away from it. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, (#6 - <#2007 Tony Eiden Company - Continued) Nolan moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application #2007 for the installation of an L- shaped berm on lots I and 2, block 2 subject to the berm maintaining a 20' setback separation from the drainfields The Applicant must provide site drainage plans satisfactory to the City Engineer along with an integrated drainage plan along the shared property lines and between the residence and drainfield for lot I with an easement accompanying agreed swale Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#7) #2013 FRESHWATER FOlINDATION, 2500 SHADYWOOD ROAD • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - 7:54^:12 P.M. Boyd Burton, Vice Chair of the Freshwater Foundation, and Board of Director members, Robert Searles and JoEllen Hurr, were present. Mr. Burton relayed the groundwork on the history of the institute, which was formed by Dick Gray in 1968 to do research on preservation of fre»h water, and who then built the institute An agreement was made with the University of Minnesota in 1974 and was given over to the university in 1976 as a research institute and named the Gray Freshwater Biological Institute Burton said the university has concluded, that due to budget restraints, they are unable to continue to afford operating the foundation Two options were available; one, to put the foundation on stand-by, or two, give the foundation back. The intent is to not change the purpose but to be more of an educational organization inroiuiir.g the pubi c on fresh water issues. The original construction cost paid by private contributions was 4 million dollars. Since then, another 3-1/2 million has been spent on research. The building sits on five acres, with an additional 2-1/2 acres south of the building, as well as two outlots. It was found that no conditional use permit 'a as ever issued to either the foundation or the university. The foundation's application is to correct that mistake at this time. Peterson reported his pleasure in seeing the institute back in the community and would like to see school tours of the institute. Peterson is in favor of the CUP and asked Burton if he was aware of Staffs recommendation for the CUP. Peterson is concerned that no CUP be issued without written documentation that the university has removed all hazardous wastes, and that any hazardous waste be taken care of and disposed of in a proper manner. The Applicant said the formal decommissioning will take place by the end of July. Smith asked who the regulatory agencies involved were and if they concur with these decisions. The PC A is the agency involved. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, \9Q5 (#7 - #2013 Freshwater Foundation - Continued) There were no public comments Lindquist inquired of tin ADA requirements for the building. Burton said an inspection has occurred Only snail differences were found and few modifications needed The plan is to comply but no time schedule has been decided There are two levels to the building. The elevator is not ADA approved at this time but would only be necessary if the public were to be exposed to the lower floor in the future Smith asked that a time frame be part of the recommendation Mabusth said the institute acts as a poUir> place and could work out the details with the City on compliance. Appropriate Braille signage on bathroom doors were needed as soon as possible. Hurr asked when next election use would occur. Mabusth advised in ftdl of 19%. Berg asked about parking and any plans for paving or expansion of the parking lot. The Applicant says there are no plans to expand, and the occasional wet conditions of the lot are the only complaints received Hurr replied that any additional parking would require a CUP Nolan asked if any conferences were held that would incur problems with parking. It was found that there were no guidelines in place for this situation, and Mabusth said no problems have been reported. Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2013 for a CUP for continued use as a research facility as the Freshwater Institute. The Applicant will bring the building up to ADA codes within a year of their receiving the property, July, 1996. Proper certification will be needed from the MPCA. Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#8) #2015 MARK HARRINGTON, 4080 BAYSIDE ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 9:43-9:54 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. John Amot represented the applicant Mabusth reported that the application is for a 35'x44', 3-story addition, which will double the size of the existing structure. A variance setback was granted for a detached garage in 1984. The detached garage will be removed when the attached garage, which is part of the application, is built. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSlOf MEETING HELD ON MAY 15. 1995 (#8 - #2015 - Mark Harrington - Continued) A height variance is necessary. Measurements were taken at the garage level. '-1/2' of fill will be added to gain positive drainage from the garage area There will be a tra» sition space from the old and new construction in an attempt to stay above the septic I* vd. A conditional use permit will be required for a guest apartment on the upper level of the addition This will be non-rental and serve as a mother-in-law type apartment Access from the principal structure will be via a hallway There will be three entrances. One entrance from the outside will be by the mudroom Another entrance will be off the garage, with travd through the garage and up the fuJlway to the apartment. Another entrance will be at the lower level basement. The basement will be accessed by a stairwell but will not be finished at this time. Mabusth informed the commissioners that future plan call for removal and replacement of the original structure The application is the first step in the improvement process Another addition will be placed in line with this proposed structure. Nolan asked about the pine trees in front of the residence. Amot said trees have already been moved, and the trees there now will remain. Amot said the county has given their approval for the driveway. There were no public comments. Peterson said, while the Planning Commission normally takes a strong stance on grant height variances, this is not an issue here. Berg moved, Nolan seconded, to approve Application #2015 with the four Staff recommendations and additional conditions as follows; 5) receipt of County perimt for new driveway; 6) closing off the old driveway; and 7) obtaining demolition permit fiw the removal of the garage. Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#9) #2016 MARK DUPONT, 227S WEBBER HILLS ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING The Application was tabled at the request of the applicant. (#10) #2017 WILLIAM HIBBS, 1905 EAGERNESS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:13-0:20 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Hibbs was present. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#10 - #2017 William Hibbs - Continued) Mabusth reported that the applicant was before the Planning Commission a few years ago for a proposed enpansion of the residence The application was denied by the Planning Commission due to the excessive amount of hardcover. The hardcover issue involved structural and non-structural hardcover. The current proposal involves the removal of the 25’x44.3\ 1 story, west side of the residence and replace with a 23 5'x44.3’, 2-1/2 story addition The driveway would be relocated off of Fageraiess Road. Two accessory structures will be removed, and a new driveway will be installed. The new access has been approved by the Engineer. Mabusth explained how side setbacks work on comer lots; 15' setback is required off Webb Street, and 33' is proposed 30* is required for a front street setback. There will be 23' setback from Fagemess Point Road Mabusth noted that if the structure was to be moved to the north to meet required 30’ setback, more excavation would be required. All inq>rovements result in hardcover reductions. Lindquist asked how close the deck is to the road. Mabusth said the deck is located about 15'-20'. In reviewing the information, the structural coverage is reduced by 3% and is proposed at 23%. The hardcover reduction is 18%; reducing it to 31.97% in the 75-250' setback area. Setbacks are improved. Peterson commented that the proposal is a nu^r improvement to the lot and the structure. There were no public comments. Nolan asked if the shed on the property would be removed and received ait affirmative reply Smith asked that the yard be cleaned up and stuff removed. The applicant said it would be done after construction is completed as there was no place to store anything now. Mabusth reported that applicant advised that there will be no retaining wall to the west adjacent to garage but graduated landscaping. Mabusth asked applicant if he considered moving the structure to meet the 30' setback. Hibbs responded that this would require removal of a large Hackberry tree and would not want to lose the tree. KfINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#10 - #2017 William Hibbs - Continued) Nolan acknowledged the need for an apron on the drive but asked tlutt area limitatioAS be set Mabusth said the back-up are was included in the hardcover pr<^)osals The detailed site plan will be subtnitted prior to the application going beftM’e the Council. Nolan moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2017 for variances to hardcover, structural coverage, side and street setbacks subject to apron dimensions being established before going to the Council meeting. Ayes 5, Nays 0 (#11) #201S RICHARD BORN, 1991 EAGERNESS POINT ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING - 9:33-9:37 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted Mr. Bom was present. Mabusth reported that the application is for a CUP to install a permanent dock. The dock is existing but the applicant is asking to expand it. There are no setback problems The DNR has issued a permit, which StatThas received a copy The applicant will need to review his proposal with the LMCD. The applicaitt responded that he has begun this application process Mabusth commented that the visiting Planning Commissioners remarked on the construction oftherailirtg on the upper deck. A permit was issued for a new rail. The original rail was of solid construction. The new railing will be more open Approval was given in 1991 for this construction Nolan commented on the landscaping on the lakeshore portion of the lot, which has plastic underlaymem. The Applicant responded that this was installed when he bought the property. Peterson informed the Applicant that the plastic is considered hardcover and would be desirable if removed. Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2018, subject to LMCD approval. Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#12) #2019 LEISEL COX, 3445 SHORELINE DRIVE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING 9:37-9:43 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Leisel Cox was present. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#12 - #2019 Leisel Cox - Continued) Mabusth informed the members that the application was for a conditional use permit for a Class 1 restaurant in the Overson Building The Keaveny property is to the immediate east of this property Mr Keaveny w as present and still ow ns that building. Mabusth showed the survey of the building and the parking, which has 28 stalls. Mr. Keaveny confirmed that there was no shared docking or parking areas Cook said the parking will still be workable after improvements on CoRd 15 is completed Nolan questioned if it was appropriate to ask for a certain number of parking stalls. Mabusth did not believe this was necessary, noting there was never a parking problem at this property. The site plans call for a coftee shop type restaurant serving espressos, sarulwiches, and soups Peterson said the CUP application is consistent with the use. Smith moved, Nolan seconded, to approve Application #2019 for a conditional use permit to include the three recommendations. Ayes 5, Nays 0. Mabusth added a third condition to the application There is now one bathroom Separate bathrooms must be provided for men and women (#13) SKETCH PLAN REVIEW - #1800 MICHAEL PLANK, 4115 WATERTOWN ROAD - REQUEST FOR CONCEPTUAL DIRECTION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION Michael Plank was present Gaftron reported that approval had been originally given in February of 1993; but through an apparent miscommunication, final exhibits were never submitted by the applicant. Consequently, the applicant never went before the Council and expired in February of 1994 The backlot ordinance was adopted since the original approval, and any new subdivisions after January of 1994 need to meet the current standards. An example of how that affects this application is the requirement for 150% of the lot area and width. Gaftron stated that at this time, this is a sketch plan review and requires no formal vote. In way of background, prior to 1988 this property was a 25 acre parcel. In 1988, it was subdivided into three lots and a 30' width access outlot. Approval was given for the shared use of the driveway outlot for the new house on Lot 3 and a second lot which might be split from it in the future. In 1993, preliminary approval was given to rearrange the boundary between Lots 2 and 3, leaving 6.2 acres with the house on Lot 3 and 13.6 acres with the house on Lot 2. Plank then would have the ability to sell the house on Lot 3 but maintain control of the outlot and enough acreage for a possible split in the future. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#13 - #1800 Michael Plank - Continued) On Exhibit C, proposed Lot B will consist of 6.2 acres. Gaflron noted that in Staffs opinion, new lots are created if this lot line rearrangement occurs If Planning Commission concurs, then Lot Bwould need to meet the 7.5 acre requirement Neither Lot B proposed now or Lot C proposed for the future would meet the 300* width standard at the front line where they would abut the outlet To avoid the backlot acreage issue, a 6 2 acre lot that abuts a platted 50’ road with a 100 ’ cul-de-sac would not be considered a backlot and would not have to meet the 150% width and area requirement There would still be the need for lot width variances on the cul-de- sac. Gaffron noted that with the Highway 12 studies underway, there could be changes in the status and character of Watertown Road in the future Also, Planning commission is reviewing the current status of driveways in regards to the threshold number of driveways required for upgrading to road status Gaffron also asked the following questions; Does the road have to be built if it’s platted’’ If, in the future, a third driveway (from the old house on Lot 2) becomes the third driveway using the outlot, will it have to be upgraded to road status? How will expanding the outlot to a platted road and cul-de-sac width affect the acrejqje needed for splitting off an additional lot? Plank said he bought the original 25 acres in 1976. He indicated the intent at that time was 4 total lots. One lot was divided off in 1977 and remained the same for the next 11 years. In 1986, he noted there were 20 acres along with the old house. There were 3 potential lots lefr at that time The house that is now on Lot 3 was moved in, and since timing was of the essence, a lot line was drawn rather quickly. Plank would now like to keep Lot 2 with the additional land but would like to swing the lot line downward. Nolan asked if Plank does not plan to subdivide further, why he would not keep the lot at 7+ acres instead of 6+ acres. Plank responded that he did not believe it would be wise to give up a possible lot, and the wetlands need to be considered in the calculations. Lindquist explained what he perceived the situation to be. The Applicant is looking for 3 total lots, but is not now at the point of creating the third lot. There are now two houses on a potential 3 lot property, but the 3rd lot would need a variance to make it a 3rd lot. These lots are not platted. There is current a backlot (Lot 3), which conforms to the 7-1^ acre requirement. If it were reduced to 6.2 acres, it then would not conform. Lindquist asked if the road could be platted without actually putting the road in, or is the commission willing to grant a variance when the land is in the 5-acre zone. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#13 • #1800 Michael Plank - Continued) Plank asked if approvaU could be given under the 1993 tAandards Lindquist said the standards of today need to be upheld Peterson asked for Plank's opinion on a road with a cul-de-sac Peterson said the Planning Commisaon would probably look favorably on giving a width vviance in this circumstance Plank said a road would take more space and questioned what would happen if changes were to be made to Watertown Road. Nolan said the approval could stipulate what would trigger a change if the drive were to come off of Watertown Road. Referring to Exhibit D-6, Peterson said if lot Y (the future 3rd lot) has a home with it, then a road would be needed Prior to this, the road would only be dedicated Plank would maintain ctmtrol of lots X and Y and road postponed. If X or Y were to be built on, the road would be constructed. Lot X might n^ access off a cul-de-sac if Watertown Road were improved or its status upgraded to a level where limiting individufU driveway access onto it is critical. Gaflron questioned whether the City could require the Applicant to close their drive from Watertown Road under the current lot line rearrangement application. Plank ask why he would want to do this Commissioners responded that when applicant's desire a change in their properties, this is the time for ieveriq^e in gaining solutions to future "what-iC questions. Lindquist said an easement covenant would be required as a deed restriction on the sale of lot X and development of lot Y. The width variance would be a non-issue. Other commissioners agreed. Lindquist asked if the City could require Lot X to access off a cul-de-sac in the future. Gaffron said if Lot I (X/Y) were divided, the City could then change the access to a road, and the road could be built for a level of 3 users. Plank asked if this issue could be addressed at that future time. The commissioners informed him that it was being addressed now and was consistent with a 3-lot division. Gaffron said the 1988 resolution which allowed lot line to happen, included a statement that the developer could use the outlot to serve lot 3 and a future lot split from it (Y and Z) Lindquist and Berg said yes, but the code has changed, and that split never occurred. Plank was reminded that if lot 2 were sold now, there would likely not be enough land to have another lot. Nolan commented that future commissions and councils might view the property differently and Watertown Road might not be upgraded. Any future changes would be decided on at time of future applications, but, the time to gain the easement is now. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 mi - #1800 Michael Plank - Continued) Plank reiterated that it was necessary for him to sell the home on lot Z now He was informed that any other changes would be reevaluated and cautioned as to what was done with lot Z as it could affect lots X and Y. Gaffron informed Plank of the time schedule for preliminary approvals Peterson n that a for sale sign could be installed now. A sale can be contingent on application approval Peterson suggested Plank work out details with Staff irted PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#14) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY t, 1995 • JANICE BERG Berg reported that the Council approved the zoning apphcations. It was noted that the Palm application was amended. The 50' lakeshore setback is to be met including any structure or deck. The findii^ on the gradii^ md drainage pattern was removed. The Lira application findings on drainage remained. (#15) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Gafiron was notified that there would possibly be no quorum for the May 18 public information meeting If necessary, any vote would be contimied to the next meeting. The Planning Commission members discussed the conceptual change in code in regards to the shehCT proposal but not specifically tied to the shelter. South conunented that she hoped public opposition to a commercial code would not hurt the possibility of the project. The Planning Commission also discussed the code regarding the number of drives coming off of a public driveway which is an issue in the proposed Melamed development. Smith said it was her understanding that the Council were against granting the City a variance. Gafiron noted that the City granted itself a variance for the post office parking lot. ADDITIONAL ITEMS (#16) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1995 MEETING Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of April 17, 1995. Ayes 5, Nays 0. : i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#17) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND THE JUNE 12,1995 MEETING OF THE COUNCIL Peterson wll attend the June 12, 1995 Council meeting. Lirnlquist is the alternate. ADJOURNMENT Lindquist moved, Peterson seconded, to adjourn at 10:48 p m. Ayes 5, Nays 0. Stephen Peterson, Chair Person PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 15, 1995. 7:00 P.M. 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY - COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE - J. Diann Goetten ATTENDANCE Applicants presenting proposals before the Commission are asked to move to the table at the front of the Chambers when their application is announced bv the Chairman. «r SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS/PUTILIC INFORMATION MEETING 7:00 p.m. 7:30 p.m. flQlQ James Bruce - 565 Leaf Street A. Vacation of Drainage Easement B. Preliminary Subdivision #2021 James Hale and James Bruce - 575 Oxford Road and 565 Leaf Street - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement 3. a 8:30 p.m. #2022 Roben Melamed - 920 Old Crystal Bay Road South - Preliminary Subdivision ACTION ITEMS - Review of these items will commence prior to or between scheduled public hearings. 4. #1999 David and Vicki Vickerman, 2475 Dunwoody Avenue - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing 5. #2005 Sailors World Marina and Boat Club, 1955 Shoreline Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Continuation of Public Hearing 6. 7. 8. #2007 Tony Eiden Company, 2800 Countryside Drive West - Conditional Use Permit Continuation of Public Hearing #2013 Freshwater Foundation, 2500 Shady wood Road - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing #2015 Mark Harrington, 4080 Bayside Road - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Public Hearing #2016 Mark Dupont. 2275 Webber Hills Road - Variances - Public Hearing #2017 William Hibbs, 1905 Fagemess Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing PLANNES'G COMMISSION MEETING - MONDAY, MAY 15, 1995, 7:00 P.M 11. #2018 Richard Bom, 1991 Fagemess Point Road - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing 12. #2019 Leisel Cox, 3445 Shoreline Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Sketch Plan Review 13. #1800 Michael Plank. 4115 Watertown Road - Request for Conceptual Direction from Planning Commission Hanning Commission Conunents 14. Report by Planning Commission Representative attending Council Meeting of May 8, 1995 (Jan Berg). 15. Other issues for discussion. Additional Items 16. Planning Commission approval of minutes of dw April 17, 1995 meeting 17. Planning Commission to select a representative to attend the June 12, 1995 meeting of the Council. Adjournment b - f Is !t I 3imp MIS •5.S.8I' Silt •SIS Ilii lii I s I ® > &^ S ^ ^ r? S' ? ^|l I£n n I § oS I 6 « 3 3 a i5 >-oa& S I i p K ^ M tA M s. 3* I If s B.? I 5?3 B S-o no I?- I CI 2. 1? 1 I i ig o 3 (/» 7T S _ c/> u O 8 ^ S 90 n 5 5 o o o o 3. C" X „III H III S g» c.' 2B C f« sRBwo O01 rT 3 «Q O c i; no -32 o M3 o 3 »4.aa I I u I t? W4sa M 3» & w I R5 0 1 nn i? i 3 i njjj a ■S5 U» X X *n 2^g R I X ij lA ? ! X 90 < sa yiX H X•> f n&I 0 1 n K •t)I r -1 5 Kn y S'. 0 3 1 i 8 I ? f ;; y I §•3 i| x,« ft UJg 8 •« n & D 3 n I 9 g I c K ’TJI ♦l § • to O g. i§I" 3 ^ o i:" a or « nr. b Rfl «M O c:' a CM toRa S' o3 (i O0 Rn 5 B r: tJ1 I I?Ks. It -1 < Kr:- I^ CA >< < S c II <«i< o I?E •u 3o 8 t) IaI uio TJ 3 to «4 UJ 5 wo o => g- 3 V iv §oa. O S 5 09 I f ?f <<■ O ■o a to <«, is § ? 8 tJ 3 Ro :? <111 *1?to O , tii ill3 U ^ K CO «y> O a 3ClH Q - |S8 ■Vsn ns =e 8 nm d sco § 5Pg y. V- R «» a 3*1 S| "1 &3 f» Jf 5* 3 $ & or n B n &gH I ® e.^ l! n 0 5n P 1 I !<«i Ih ’4: n ^PO • •‘"S 85- 2^0 n P* y. Pi's 2^ g-sa PI 5 ^ I. To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From; Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusih, Building & Zoning Administrator May 3, 1995 #2020 James Bnice. 565 Leaf Street - Vacation of Easement/Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E-1 E-2 F - G - H • 1-1-2 J - Application Applicant’s Addendum Plat Map Property Owners’ List Gustafson Report 4/28/95 Gustafson Report 5/3/95 M. Braman Report 4/21/95. Senior Environmental Specialist, Schoell & Madson, Inc. Resolution No. 939-Final Plat Approval. Stielow Addition .Access Location Plan Tree Survey, Tree Location Map Preliminary Plan A. VACATION OF DIL’.INAGE EASEMENT Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.12 - Vacation of drainage easement located in the plat of Stielow Addition. The applicant has filed the vacation petition and has advised that he will not relocate drainageway. The applicant merely asks that the current ambitious designation of the drainage way be readjusted to more clearly define the actual drainage way. Review Exhibit E, Gustafson notes no problem with the redesignation and states that a 20 ’ wide drainage easement would be adequate to define and safeguard the drainage path. Refer to preliminary plat. Exhibit J, that locates the redefined 20 ’ drainage easement. Staff Recommendation To vacate the drainage easement within Lot 6, Block 1, Stielow Addition, subject to the condition that applicant rededicate a 20 ’ drainage easement over the existing drainageway as shown on preliminary plat of Fox Hollow dated April 20, 1995. •Arif—ri'i ■■ Zoning File #2020 May 3, 1995 Page 2 B. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION OF THREE IOTS, CLASS III Pertinent Ordinances 1.Section 10.23. Subdivision 6 (B) - Lot standards for LR-IA zoning district. Lot width variance - Lot 3 „ . ^ • j t. Required = 200’ (Refer to Section 10.02. Definition 43 (A) - Required lot width for non-lakeshorc lots. Width is measured to the rear of the 50’ street yard setback.) Existing = 199.98’ Variance = .02’ or .25" 2. Section 11.10. Subdivision 10 (C) - Class III Subdivision - Preliminaiy. 3. Section 11.10. Subdivision 21 (C). 4. Section 11.33. Subdivision 4 - Typical section for a three lot plat. Review of Preliminary Subdivision All three lots meet the required lot area. Lot 1 can credit area of 20’ wide ^inage easement as propeity is served with sewer. Lot 3 does not meet the required lot width shown at 199 98’ It lacks a quarter of an inch of lot width to the rear of the 50’ street yard sett^k. The applicant has been unable to acquire additional area from either the nort or south of the oroperty. The additional area has been acquired from the property to the unmediatc west ot proposed Lot 2 and will be included as part of the area of Lot 2. The Purchase Agiwnicnt for the 0.10 acre has been included in your packets for the lot line rearrangement (Apphcation #2021). All lots shall be served by sewer from Oxford Road. As already noted in the earlier sketch plan review, the lot has been assessed for one sewer unit. Two additional sewer umte at a cost of $24,225 each must be paid prior to fmal plat approval. There is adequate capacity in the sewer lines in Oxford Road to allow hook-ups for two additional units. Note on your preliminary plan. Exhibit J. the ftiture sewer line will be located within an easement area along the shared lot lines of Lots 1 and 2. Easements along this interior shared lot line shouid be shown at 10’ from the center line rather than the normal 5’ on either side of the sha^ lot Iii^ Upon application for a building permit for the development of Lot 3. the owner/bu^er wiU reSonsible for providing a detailed plan of the connection and service extension. The plans to be in accordance with attached plates submitted by Gustafson with cleanouts spaced a a minimum of 100’ apart. Zoning File #2020 May 3. 1995 Page 3w Area. The Engineer is asking the City to consider future needs. Lot 3^^The existine residence on Lot 2 may either be a ftimre part of the P"“'P“' or mav remain as an accessory structure with expanded living space but with no kttchen. The sttucnite can never ftmction as a separate residential unit because the propeity lacks the area r^relnt foT a non-rental guest house use. The owner will be asked to execute a covenant [f the structure remains as a separate accessory structure to alert all future owners that the Structure could never serve as an independent residential unit. Review Exhibit F. the Environmental Specialist with Schoell a^ Madson has that theVrare no Type I or 2 wetlands within the property. The only wet a«a would be the dniiiiBgcway that intersects Lot 1. During the sketch plan review. Planning Commission members dtsmsed Uie remwa of the existing cul-de-sac and driveway. Note applicant has asked to keep the cul-de-s« oTuX^l^sc^ fcatums. The cul-de-sac is located within both Dits 1 and 2 and wtll receive major impact when the sewer line is installed. It is questionable whether applt^nt wOTid really want to retain the cul-de-sac once the property is offered for development. In fact, it nw prove to be a problem for the future owners of Lots 1 and 2. Because of its propetty, it would never serve as a turnaround for either of the properties. Applicant should be questioned on this point. The Planning Commission was concerned with the issue of tree removal wto the nmnosed location of the future residence building on Lot 1. Please refer to Exhibits B l^^tl?3T?arge mature trees, only 5 would be removed. Applicant wajiB to re^s^ pfaLng Commission that this would not be a matter of clear cutting and that the value of the property is based on the existence of those trees not their removal. The issue of an internal road is not an issue for staff in this review as two of the lots w ____. hv a nrivL road and meet the required lot width along that pnvate road. I tave reposed a copy of the final resolution thatapproved the Stielow Addition pl^ ^TcurC^t i^the resolution that stated the existing driveway to Lot 6 was to be closed off. A curb Ml exists with no record of any safety issues involving the use of that rMdway when ere residence on the property. The driveway will still only serve one suggest that there would be more of a negative impact by r^uiimg tumround on this property when adequate and safe access is already ptovid . Zoning File #2020 May 3 “ 1995 Page 4 The Park Commission reviewed the three-lot subdivision at their May meeting and recommended pavment of cash in lieu ol the acquisition of park lands or irailways. The pvk dedication fee would be based on only two of the three lots because a residence already exists on Lot 2. Staff Rec L Ml !»:•ndation To approve the three-lot preliminary subdivision application of James Bruce gran^g a lot width variance of .25" and the approval of two sewer units to serve two new lots within the Metropolitan Urban Ser. ice Area, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Applicant to execute an amendment to the original maintenance agreement for the Stielow Addition dealing with the obligation of Lots 1 and 2 to share in the maintenance and upkeep of Oxford Road, a private road of the City. Pavment of $48,450 for two sewer units prior to final plat approval. Dedication on the plat of Fox Hollow of a 20 wide drainage easement over the drainageway that intersects Lot 1. Drainage and utility easements to be designated 10’ along the boundaries of each of the three lots and 5’ within internal lot lines except for the shared lot lines of Lots 1 and 2 where a 10’ wide easement on each side of the shared lot line is required for the extension of sewer to Lot 3 and a 15 easement along north side lot line of Lot 1. Final resolve of the removal of the western portion of the northern driveway that extends from Lot 3 through to Lots 1 and 2 and developer to resolve issue of cul- de-sac as to whether it is to remain as a responsibility or shared improvement for Lots 1 and 2. Future owner/builder of future residence on Lot 3 to provide engineering plans and specs for the extension of municipal sewer to Lot 3. Plan shall address tte connection to the municipal sewer line and repair of Oxford Road per Engineer s report of May 3, 1995. Oxford Road will sustain damage during the period of installation. Upon Council’s approval of the preliminary plat, the City Assessor shall be asked to determine the fair market value of the undeveloped land so that a park dedication fee can be determined for four acres of the total six-acre plat. The park dedication fee must be paid as a condition of final plat approval. \ Zoning File #2020 May 3, 1995 Page 5 8.The accessory simcture on proposed Lot 3 shall be allowed to remain for oik vear. The strucmre shall be removed if a building permit has not been issued by that deadline date. The existing residence structure on Lot 2 may never be used ^ a secoirf residential unit or ^est house as property does not meet area requirements of LR-IA zoning district. 03^07/95 • 1 . m • w I !►€ cm- or CRoro 612-4':012 .< d ir CITY Of ORONO - SUBDIVISION a PFUCAT10^l/X ^ Tt - ;t» PROPERTY LOCATION Site address 565 Leaf street Properly Idenuficaiion Number (PID) __ 05117 23410014— ^ ' absiraci or ____torrens?Please check one • Property AUiCU legal <tescripiion to appliciwion-- Legal - Lot 6, Bik I, Stieiow Addition applicant Name James Bruce_ City f?23 PhoiK(homc) 474-1059 Wayzata» Mn»Zip5^391 Phone (work) 475-2622 OWNER (if tliffereni than applicant) Name Mr. h John Mc C qy Address City 5525 Hillside Circle Phoneniomei 941-6920 Edina, Mn. (attach list if more than one) Zip5543_9Phone (work) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels BesiUcntial; no. of units Other (specify)______; •• *si i W .4 f » w* W.MW Present Zoning District T.R-IA . ■ , fLf •- t i k* ^7 A- f T* .1 .11(.t ’ .■/} J. t. w' . C. V V V'W PROPOSAL ^ ^ Division for Tax Purposes ------------- Lot Line Rearrangement Only (iw> new buildling sites) -----Z------ Subdivision for New Building Sites N^sferoTBuildin* SUM 1 ExUtin* Uniu 2_____New Units ' 3 Total Units - wiM___ •- rr'^ im W A ? L / W* • . ' w' ) Hi I ■ i* . ‘ • -* .*“Mn f w'W mrvOl i A •S <7 5' i Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per 2 Acres 87,120 sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential OUicr (specify) - X ofFo /aymeot of feer. (refer lo ‘applicafioo fees* Jittcd belo^' Cooipieted jpplication form. Prclim»i«ry plM mfoTMlioo on CertificalC Heaneri" County De|M«i . Ccnified Property Owoen L!si of owtm» wiOuu 350 <ymi owitn i / r- A-603 Gov: Center 348-3271). i,»t of try otJiw perions you wish oot.r.ed of this •pplicMion.3. A> lit Kldcndun to ibis application. p*cise mach a Kpu^e ns c y ► Zoning OfficiaJ's Signiture ----- ------- minimum material REgtlKLD FOR COMPLETE FINAL Al*l*LICATION I. Piyment of fees (refer to Preliminiry Subdiviron Appcvv^l .esotuUon and paxlt fees i f appicable). % 9 m 9 T •••%» • Im m m 0 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal pl« 3. Title opinion. 4. Eaeements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Ciedit Zooiog OfTicial’s Sigaature Dm I. AFPIJCATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check fXl those which apply) A. AppUuitivti B um Fees: Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) $200 00 Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangemeui S300 00 — »roo ” oo.™ ,am... *«. Final Plat Application (CIiss MI) $175 00 _____ Legal Review and Filing: Subdivision only $75.(X) Subdivision w/ea.scmcnti and covenants min. $200.00 Totals Park Pees (to be determined per Section 1 1 62) ------ ^S!l'rI>m«$Tmd*irs!Mtv«^^^ ilSO.OO (NO change from original Renewal of Clast Ul. PrelBniPary Subdivision Application $150 00 (No change from or«l' PP -------- Senew.nl of Lai Oats III Subdivision Appllcailon $100.00 (No change from original application) O. Special Impreveoient F<«: «/» « Proposed Pnvaie Roads $600 00 $.50/llneal ft.;_____Im-Ji- * -------- ' Proposed Public R«>ads $900.00 S.30/lineal ft.; lin ft- * -3^ * *--------- Request for City to Accept Esitiing Private Road $900.00 Proposed Saoitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 -*■ $25/stub pioposed Waietmain Eatensioo $230.00 $23/snib Proposed Storm Sewer System (eacluding culveiu) $200.00 On-Stte System. Sue Evalu.ation Review (applicable to rural subdivision uppltcaitons) $50.00/ncw lot proposed for on-sitc a new lols C. Pealble Application Fees/Misc. Fees Variance $200.(X1 Easeoicm Vacation Associated wiiU Subdivision $75.00 PRD Application with Subdivision $30.(X)/Dwelliog Unit T1.C wHc». <» p™’"« •>' '7 ssss sAlloiMy. Planni»» CominiMj»ir.»«l Counci, nccesiaiy to proem inn ,pp.icaiion anJ (unber »(.«J P y ^ «ubli*«d by ordinwe. Applicant’s Signature Owner’t .Signature o« Date Aonlicuit must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning meellnes nre bold on the ibird Monday of each month. Appitcanw must bt pmen. at all scheduled revi Mihnrited SSlOT »d Cmmell. Ifm. spplteant a unable to ...end . sehcdulml meettni. plea., make arrantemems '« have an autbnn “ yoVr pL and to ” the Bulldbt dt Zontn, Offlee uf Uu. cltb... prior ro <bo ma..-,. a V.. . J A M K S UBruce f J r— M if f •7 •> ^ 1 ■ • " •!•irl DATE; TO; Aoril 21, 1995 lieMbvrs oT the Planning Commission City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P O Box 66 Crystal Bay, lin. 55323 FROM; James W. Bruce Homes RE;Preliminary Plat Application for 565 Leaf Street (P.I.D. # 05117234 10014) PROPOSAL «> COMMENTS; 1. 3 lots of 2 acres each. We have an agreement to purchase I/IO of an acre from the adjoining property to the west to meet the 2 acre per lot requirement. We will provide city with copy of contract confirming our purchase of that property prior to May I5th. Our intent is to complete this lot line rearrangement by simple metes and bounds division. 2. We request a lot width variance for lot 3. The width is fraction of one inch less than the required 200 ft. 3. Lots I and 2 will have driveway access from Oxford Road; lot 3 will have access on existing drive from Leaf St. We would request that removal of the asphalt surface east and west of line between lots 2 and 3 be done when first home is built on either lot 2 or lot 3. This will provide us with access to existing house until that time. Surface in cul-de-sac would be removed at same time. 4. We request vacation of existing drainage easement running east to west on lot 1, to be replaced by proposed drainage easement shown on Preliminary Plat. This change does not change physical location of existing drainage ditch; it only redefines easement to 10' on each side of existing drainage way. Proposed pad locations for future homes are shown on the Preliminary Plat. Alternate sites exist on each lot, which may be the preference of our customers when purchasing lots. 1053 E. Wavzata Blvd., Suite 223, Wayzaia. Minnesota 55391 (612) 475-2622 FAX (612) 475-3026 . —< •.^Tw ^ u r ~ insi^ ■■ • JJ^ I understand and agree with the concerns*e)«pressed'by'oemOers of# the Planning Co««ission regarding mature trees located id the^***^' proposed pad on lot 1. I am interested in not removing a major portion of trees on the site. 0-f the 25-30 large mature trees on lot 1, 1 have identified only S-7 that mould be removed. I mould hope to meet mith any concerned Planning Commission members on the site before the next meeting at their convenience. 1 mill also prepare a tree survey prior to that meeting. 6. The proposed semer service connection to lot 3 is shomn on the Preliminary Plat. 7. Schoel 1 Si liadson, our engineering consultant, conducted a site visit to locate metlands. According to the attached letter, no metlands exist on the site. Their understanding is that permits from U. S. Corp of Engineers and the liCWD mould be applicable only if metlands exist on '>ite. Please advise. Respectfully Submitted, Enclosures:2S copies of Preliminary Plat and reduced copy and mylar Certified list of property omners mithin 3S0' and self addressed 1abels Application and Fees Letter from Schoel 1 Si liadson Environmental Specialist Lt* - 1 sei$/:5^i '-'*^1**! . 4C-0 — 6AY540E ** r-F " Till* [3CI97 -V ^ ^ ^ p w s Stjjl-^—I r '^SNO . ADD. ♦40 B4)—r it -’ 2:5 2^0 VO **'*'• •»!. > *00 54 4/>'»/ »*• /•i«' KLITZKEV'>^ . p<> liV T1 I ^f?^l ---------- 2 {15] addition t / iV ^ ^YTjyoTlv ♦ -- -1" 5/£>:» 6 I .<*» pel I 354 Jl ^ N ... J—Airos •* "—T'*|-i J «l r*l .^•‘ »* I k* 5*7 ~<lit: *4 MM 0AH 04/li/fS BATCN 514ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNCR NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP ADOR OHI4ER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP ADOR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP ADOR OltiER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OIRIER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR HEf#€PXN COUNTY PROPERTY INfO^nON SYmN PROPERTY CAtCRS IISTU 04-117-ES BE 0012 01175 SUSSEX RO N H I 0 C HILONAN NINA H I DONALD C NILDHAN 745 SPRING HILL RO HAYZATA m 55171 BO 05-117-21 41 0010 00475 OXFORD RO 0 E FISHER JR I A G FISHER ORVILLE E A ALEXANDRA FISHER 475 OXFORD RO LONG LAKE MN 55B54 SO 0S-117-2B 41 0015 00500 OXFORD RO A J A S R NELSON ALOIN J A SUSAN K NELSON 500 OXFORD RO ORONO HN 55154 BO 05-117-2B 41 0024 00555 GKFORO RO CORNELIA 0 KLITZKE COmELIA 0 KLIT2XE 555 OXFORD RO LONG LAKE m 55154 BO 05-117-21 44 OOOB 01100 FOX ST H L TRUBECK A J N TRUBECK NILLIAH L A JUDITH H TRUOEK SlOO FOX ST LONG LAKE HN 55154 TOTAL BATCH 514 00015 10 04-117-21 S2 OOIB00575 SUSSEX CIR N H A 0 C HILOHAN GERALD R A NARY JO ARNESQN 100 SPUR CIR HEOINA m 55171 BO 05-117-2S 41 0011 00475 OXFOm RO D A H ama DONALD E GEORGE 475 OXFORD RO LONG LAKE HN 55154 BO 05-117-21 41 0017 00445 LEAF ST HAG KORONKIEHICZ JR NALTER J KORQNKIENICZ 445 LEAF ST LONG LAKE MN 55154 BO 05-117-21 41 0025 00575 OXFORD RO J T HALE ASS HALE JAMES T HALE A SHARON S HALE 575 OXFORD RO LONG LAKE HN 55154 0004BO 05-117-2B 44 01250 FOX ST DONNA LUKIS DONNA LUKIS 1250 FOX ST LONG LAKE HN 55B54 REPORT N6. PlRliOOi PAGE 55 \BO 04-117-21 SB 0010 0B175 FOX ST DAVID A NAASS DAVID A HAASS P 0 OOK 172 LONG LAKE m 55154 U 10 05-117-21 41 0014 00545 LEAF ST J i C HC COY JOHN L i CHARLlNi H NC COY 5525 NXLLSIOE CIR EDINA m 55417 •> * •• ' ♦o sa M-117-XS 41 OQM 00S2S LIAF ST JONATHAN CPAFIL JONATHAN CHAKL A CHURCH OF RfLXeZOUS SCICNCC 521 LIAF LONO LARI MN SSSS4 M of-nr>u AS 0004 0S400 FON ST JANES 0 FULLUTON IXX IT AL FVLLIRTON LUHMIl CO F 0 tOK SO NFLS HN # i * 4 *«' « I 4 J so 0S*117>2S 44 OOOS OS400 FON ST JANES 0 FULLERTON IIX IT AL FULURTON LUMBER CO F 0 ION SO MFLS m 1S440 i < RUN DATE 04/U/9S MTCN 514 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INPONHATION SYStCH PROPERTY OMCRS LIST REPORT NO. PlRSiMlli PACE I« I l/]l Bonestroo Rosene Andernk& Ivil Associates Engineers & Architects •jc*' • •*''7 4*" ke 4rr ,*guw c'hc .ve- April 28, 1995 3 2-^^roc ^-•cwa'C A :,arro*4 ’f NAcnae* C P£iriar. A Gaoe A C»ct Oo*'te*'*' 9 pf 0 Pe»:nc** Pf OougiAK J Pf “ Af c **':jrr* . A »E !h,»\v''r p? - • — ..* •. : 0 1 : V ?• ■j-'T'**** - Pf 7 . ^ :L : ’ ' ‘ .i ?» *T — S 35 2 -e-c* * ■ *. . r *-r ' t .t”_. A Sou Ocn *•£A ie o PS . jtyn 3 3oT2e' *S '3 A HJ*nv.“n »£2arv w SACf -er^ PS D.wi 0 S?v’-pT» ^ V -n Z »A V ’ «4^u'»T'arT^ P€p Ait J 3annon A 1 A jeft'ey i E^je'-nge' P£ ’ Of >G «t f etd '£3arbe» i cJge»rcn *£,cveo^9 9he^r! P£ P Anoe* >ori .A i a A ?<t Scnmiot. Pf Le« M Marvs Pf C .?na*d C Scirgarat ■»€p^hfiO J Caswell ®S Charjes A Sfictson McVii 0 Waii.s PS Leo M P.»we»5ly : . l!e^c"3 P6 B PE M O'ton •,T»ae< Mart L P^uho G'avet PS Agrees M 9»ng V c**ae* ^Aaren l pE jamei f £r>gesnarat •-T'n.'s =?'e*icr ®f Garv D Ansrof'tr Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Fox Hollow File No. 139-2020 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the proposal to vacate an existing drainage easement within the preliminary plat of Fox Hollow. The easement is needed over a drainage channel that meanders westerly from Leaf Street to Stubbs Bay. We feel that the proposed 20-foot wide easement is adequate for the drainage area it serves. The vacation of the existing easement is acceptable from an engineering standpoint. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. I). Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. • % may i 0 2335 -Vest Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612*636*4600 ^ i Bonestroo Rosene AnderlikSt IvJ I Associates Engineers & Architects 4 • ♦ 4. • ^ '» T’o j a^T •€ ce** A ^5 ' *ses"C Af«e*,4 »E »• yr _ M. » - - £ • */-•»> 4 ^ J'=3 ”? .^**1 A ^3»?€' *•? ~ . • ' ' . - • ' f •n-^ *.T •{jmyQ 0 •^•nc^ *f V •'V ': • 4' •• ?• *f • e ^ *«o *E :^cua^M i •ev'O'f »f Z f .'r : . •• •» •«. *e. » j »? , *" Vi t?e- .« C e'* : I.- -. Mav 3, 1995 ^ s *£ •.•i*/* A Hsrvi »f •Acnje* »<!iwfn^4jnn >f V:« f ee -5 Z C B;-»-^3r ^ A S%»»o •-eee* f . 1***^ '9 — *e ’€ •-* *“ *r'D -*•* A ’•Te**r*' **1 - .t e *! ;ii»» A Vr>r e-* *? * ^u. . Serrxjn A . A r ^-e* J i *r A 7 c» Vw*^ 'J* •£ o * l,«iAe •€ VarA 0 Aaif.i ^ v. e* 9 e^'.en •« . ^ i o G'»ve- *E . A Gar^ G a- :*:• *2 *f r.»»* ' §\hn#w »t .efi'ev i £•'*»' nge* »f .*2»er*'^ *f .ee M *« C**a' ev A t' ft wtO V P»)Ar« )•% •Aar «n V C von *grei vl »ng i |«« *- Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal. Minnesota 55323 (AM 5 ;'f; Fox Hollow File No. 139-2020 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the sewer service for Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Fox Hollow subdivision. Lots 1 and 2 can be served by the existing service connections at the east right-of-way line of Oxford Road. Service to Lot 3 will require a connection to the main sewer line under Oxford Road. The service extension will follow the lot line between Lots 1 and 2. The connection and service extension should be in accordance with the three attached plates, with cleanouts spaced at a minimum of 100 feet apart. A 10 foot utility easement should be provided on each side of the service to Lot 3. An additional 15 foot utility easement should be provided on the north line of Lot 1 to provide future sewer service to the church property. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. lOMnn 1/0crP7 Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612*636-4600 m NOTE; Cleanout cap shall be Minneapolis stondord. NOTE: Enclose long sweep bend or combination wye in concrete as shown. >1 * I 1 CISP Cleanout Riser with threoded brass plug USP ^22 or equal. FUQ OF LINE CLEANOUT CLEANOUT ) Bones (roo Rosene II Anderlik 4 Associates Enolfi#«r« 4 AreMt#ct0 St. Pant. MInMaota <^TANDARD DETAILS SERVICE LINE CLEANOUTS Last Revision: Nov, 1988 fBRA Plolo No 3-09 City Plots No SER-4 .ASULs.fi F’RI i=t Z t X #2020 R . O i /m "tr• •* SCHOEI.L 6* MADSON, INC gN.jT^M gga g • SUB\/EYCPS • PlANffJERS Sai. TsSriKS • £W«CNN ’£NT4L SERVICES ic-ec '/.'AYrA-A bcju Ivapb • 9u^e * • Ml^-^i^rc^4i<A. mn «»3C9-‘«9 m (9*121 »4B*7601 • PAX B4B-9068 Apra 21. 1995 Mr. James Bruce James Bruce Homes 1055 E. Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Mr. Bruce: On Acril 19 1995 we conducted a site visit to determine if any wetlands existed 0^*1“ idemified aj’stielows Addition, Lot«. Bioclt 1, Orono, Minnesou. Based on our fleW observauons no weUinds are present on the site. There is a wetland located on the adjoining property to the north. This wetland does not extend onto the site. Very Truly Yours, Schoell k. Madson, Inc. Marshal Braman Senior Environmental Specialist * •••I wsourrioH mo. 521 FfL£ CO^^S€M, 4-3-c Z Pdt¥. €m^.'SA HESOLUTIOM ArPAOVlMC THt PLAT OP STIPLOWS ADDITIONuii*ii£As t)M City of Orooo lo • •wlclpol corporotloo or,.nU.<l SSr th. low. of th. Scot, of Minn..otoi o»iWHMEAS. tho City Council of the City of Oroiio hoo odopcodth. .rd.rlr. .con-cof land within tho City; «nd UHEiteAS tho City Council hoo conoldorod tho oppllMtloo ,or . .ub h%r,» StUlo. h,™ ^ru«, «,<. S.rlh«. and tho Now Thought Center, Inc., the oubdlv.der; end •- .* -Dedlcotlon on tho plot of righto of woy for public itrooto si.:siVfT^o:%s;s2 tho pi.t.. SJti thl croatlon of thl. prlvato "‘J;, hao dodlcated to tho City • Road end Utllltloa Uoenont (Exhibit A) granting to tho City l^ovownt Sd utility oooo^to ovor ^Ivldor hao eroatod non-oxcluolvo Ingrooo, •trooo, dralnaco ond utility oooeoenta (Exhibit B) over ooW SutSJ In fovor of oil abuttteg ond/or and tho Subdlvldor hoo erootod eortoln eovononto (oloo Exhibit »> ^o2^U^ - a«i/or nrr^voco rood. # •Dodleocloa to tho Citf '.fsi ond/or drniao iwwy ^ . ,-Exocntlon of • Sobttvld-^^--*---- for Inotollotlon of^or ■,% •> -i. ^j aubdlvUlon opprovnl o » It to tho City of> ,336.00. .:i V i-v \ ' *1 p ■''' '•X. Mselttclen »>. 939Pag* 2 NOW, THCREFOU, BE IT BESOLVEO, that th« City Council of th* City of Orono hereby approve* chc plac of SclaloM Addlclon, Hexnapln County, Mlnnaaota; aubjacc to th* following condition*:1. Th* aforciald plac ahall b* filed wlch ch* Hennepin County Recorder'* Office on or before Harch 13, 1979, together with * certified original copy of thi* Raaolution, and executed copies of Exhibits A, 9, 4 C a* noted above. 2. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 4 5 ar« riparian Co Lake Minnetonka. Lots 6, 7, B, 9, 10, 11 4 12 are not riparian tc Lake Minnetonka and shall have no lake access rights serosa th* riparian lots. 3. Lota 1 and 8 shall have no direct access froa County Road 84 but all access shall be froa the private road, Oicloc B. 4. Outlet A shall be legally cosiblned for tax purposes with Lot 4 or Lot 9. 5. Thla approval provides no coanictaMnt as to isitiure approval or disappr «1 of redlvlsien of any of the lots created herein. Any such future division oust be by separate application and oust ncet all rcqulroMies then current. The approval granted by this loaolutlon shall expire If cho plac has not beei filed by th* date specified above. In that event, it will bo necessary to file a new application with Che City of Orono for subdivision review. j , . .il'r. Adopted by,the City Co«cll' of the Cttr offOrenofatTnolr-adMdn noetlng on thla 13ch day oCgspcartar, . » ATTEST: Alberta Scroa, Oeputy Clerk/Adolnlatrac^ Preliminary Plat of: FOX HOLLOW JAMES BRUCE HOMES -L^fcJkrtoMS ■■ !^1 11 ; .'- fA. • 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. LOT I, rox HOLLOW, ORONO TREES OVER 12“ IN DIAMETER (LOCATION SHOWN ON LOT DRAWING) 30" 24“ 15" 36" 14“ 18“ 24" 24“ 14“ 24 " 15“ Oak r»• • Oak Mapl e Maple Oak • Oak Oak Oak 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 15" 12" 22“ 20" 18“ 18“ 16" 20" 12" 20" 18" Oak Oak Oak Oak Oak O ? Oak Oak Oak Oak 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. /■■ t 18" 15" 16“ 20" 20" 24" 30" 15 • 18" 18" Oak Oak Oak Oak Oak Oak Oak 7 Oak Oak p^Rneo PiAT OEZfc'f-^ uoLoyo «»->8 VtM070?L^ 5* v/(c/e QocL tr €/ \ \V\ To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Peterson ana Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building Zoning Administrator May 1. 1995 #2021 James Bnice/Jim Hale. 575 Oxford Road/565 Leaf Street - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA Required = 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres Proposed Lot 2, Block 1, Klitzke Addition = 132,700 s.f. or 3.0464 acres Proposed Lot 6, Block 1, Stielow Addition = 261,384 s.f. or 6.0006 acres Pertinent Ordinances 1. 3. Section 11.03, Definition 65 (C) - Subdivision of a lot line rearrangement. The City shall allow a Class I subdivision. We will request drainage ami utility easement along newly defined lot line of Lot 2, Block 1, Klitzke Addition. Section 11.03. Definition 28 • Lot width. The shortest dimension between opposite lot lines measured at all of those points is required by the Zoning Chapter of the City Code and this Chapter. Section 10.02, Definition 43 - Lot width. The horizontal distance between side lot lines measured at the following locations: A. For lots which do not abut a lake or tributary, at the rear of the required front yard, measured parallel to the front lot line. B. For lots which abut a lake or tributary, at the shoreline measured in a straight line between the points at which the side lot lines intersect the OHWL, and at the required struemre setback from the OHWL, measured in a straight line between the points of intersection of the side lot lines with the structure setback line. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners’ List C - Plat Map D - Purchase Agreement E - Survey of Lot Line Rearrangement Zoning File ^^2021 May 1. 1995 Page 2 Discussioo The applicant has filed the necessary lot line rearrangement with an adjacent property owner in order to acquire 0.10 acre needed to file the three-lot division of Lot 6, Block 1, Steilow Addition. Applicant was unable to acquire land from the Church parcel to the northeast and has entered into a Purchase Agreement with James Hale, the owner of the property located at 575 Oxford Road, refer to Exhibit D. The shed will be located 43.5’ (required 10’) and the principal structure 72’ (required 30 ’) from the newly defined side lot line. The Steilow Addition was approved by the City on September 13, 1978. At that time, lot width for Lot 2 of the Klitzke Addition would have required 200’ to the rear of the 50’ street yard. Per the new Shoreland Regulations approved by the City in 1992, lot width for a lakeshore lot is no longer measured to the rear of the street setback but at the lakeshore and at the structural setback. The lot line rearrangement will not impact the width requirements for the lakeshore lot. Parcel B will be combined with Lot 6, Block 1 of the Steilow Addition. The metes and bounds division will be immediately filed with the County so that the area of Parcel B can be included as part of the two-acre platted lot. Drainage and utility easements exist along the former shared lot line. The developer of the three-lot plat may be advised to vacate the easements as the City will ask for the dedication of a 5’ drainage and utility easement along the newly defined lot line with the formal three-lot plat. Mr. Hale will be asked to dedicate a 5’ drainage and utility easement along his side of the newly defmed lot line as a condition of this subdivision approval. Staff Recommendation To approve the lot line rearrangement as proposed for the properties located at 575 Oxford Road and 565 Leaf Street, subject to the following conditions: 1. Owner of Lot 2, Block 1, Klitzke Addition to grant 5’ drainage and utiluy easement along the west side of the newly defined lot line. City to ask for the dedication of drainage and utility easements along the east side of the newly defined lot line with the formal plat of the three lots. 2. Prior to scheduling the lot line rearrangement before the City Couik :!!, applicant’s surveyor shall provide a survey with signature lines for the Mayor of Orono, the City Clerk, all property owners with an interest and a line for the approval date of the City Council. The City shall also ask that the survey be amended to include Parcel C to be described as Lot 6, Block 1, Stielow Addition. 03 07^95 Th£ city CF uPOtO 612-473-7357 'J 3^1 CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION — r*. j / Property Idcniificaiion Number (PID) v/ -r Z3 CS Please check one - Property __ abstract or------torrens^ AuacU legal description to application. applicant Name ■ -------BmJL. I Address SD City /^drN/) t^hL _____ Phone (horned ■* t^iiy r^iLcNf) Mm________—------------------- • - --------------— OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address City (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Devclopm''ni Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District __Zip Phone (home) Phone (work) Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)_______ PROPOSAL ^ Division for Tax Purposes ----Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) “* Subdivision for New Building Sites _________Existing Units ________New Units Toul Units Number of Building Sites Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per ___ Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) __________ f MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUREH FOR COMFLETE PRELIMINARV .VFFLICATION 1. Payment of fcei (refer to *appIiciiiOQ fe«‘ Jilted below 2. Completed application form. 3. Prclifninao pla* infortnatioo on Certificate of Survey. » , 4. certined l^opc-ty Owtien List of ow^m -.Utm 350* ryo« tnual ohtam th., l.« from Hcaoeptn County Depertmeot of Fui«cc 3. Sendu^n" to^ tfits application, please attach a Kpwate list of any other persons you wish aoufted of thu applieatien. Zoning Official-s Signature __ ---------------------------------------------- MINIMUM MATERIAL REgClKLP FOR COMPLETE FINAL Ari*LICAT!ON 1. Payment of fees (refer to Ptelimmary Subdiviiton Approval lesolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal pisr. 3. Title opuuon. 4. EaMments, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Lcncr of Credit. Zoning Official’s Signanire _______. Date - --- I. APfl-ICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check fXl those which apply) A. AppIiutUwn Base Fea; ^^keteft Plan Review (Class I. II A III) $2CX>00 Subdivision of a Lot Line RcarrangenKUt $30i) <X) Subdivision /.pplicatlon (Class I & II) $300.00 -------- Preliminary Subdivision Appiica-ior >3V5 00 $23.00/loi (Class III A all non residential) _____ Final Flat Application (Class MI) $175 00 _____ Legal Review ano Filing Subdivision only $75.(X) Subdivision w.'ea.scnKnt$ and covenants mm. $20000 XcLali Park Fees (to be detemuned per Section 11.62) Ugal ?iid Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision Application $150.(X) (No change from original application) Renewal of Class Ml. Preliminary Subdivision Application $150 00 (No change from original application) RenewiU of Final Class III Subdivision AppUcailon $100.00 (No change froui original application) D. Special Improvciscitt Fees: Proposed Private Roads $600 00 + $.30/llneal ft.; Proposed Public Roads $900.(X) + $.50/Iineal ft.; Hn. ft. » .50 = $. lin. ft. k 50 • $_ m • WVIIW - - ----------------------------------------- AMHV— Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 Proposed $aoitary Sewer Main Extension $230.00 $25/snib Proposed Watermain Esiensioo $2.30.00 $25/stub Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culveits) $200.00 On-Site System. Sue Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/ncw lot proposed for on-iitc x_____new lots C. Flesible Application Fees/Miic. Fees Variance $200.00 ” Eosemcm Vacailon Ajfociaicd wiib Subdivision $75.00 PRD ApplicaiiOO wUll Subdivision $30.00/Dwdliag Unit The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Adminiatraior, City 9^ Attorney. Planning C^pmmiMion^^fKTSoMncA necessai^o process Ihis application and further agrees to pay Owner's .Signature Date 2.2--9-C AppHciu mu.1 MV. Ill imo >hc oty Ofllve 25 d.v. before tire igent attend in your place and to advise ihe Building & Zoning Office of diis change prior to the meeting. 1 10 tei •‘•M*! 4C0 WO. - - BAY5<0E “WO vf /-< ** ^---------. •" ,-r; -1 ^ ‘ ^ I NO e^V iUN DATE Q4/Ii/ MTCff 514 mmdLPlH COUNTY PMTf KTY IWTOWI4TIOM SYSTtN PWOPtKn OMtn LIST mWT HO. n4U4QI PPM ii moo Aoofi (MCA NAME TAXOAYEA NAHE/AOOA St 04-117-11 12 0012 0117i SUSSEX to N If t 0 C MXLOHAH MIH* I OONALO C MILOHAN 745 HILL to MAYZAIa Itl 55141 AOOt (M€t HANi TAXOAYEt KAHE/AOOt It Oi-117-21 41 0010 00475 OXFOtO RO 0 i rzsNEt Jt I A G riSNit QtVlLLC E A ALLrJHDtA FISHER 475 OKFOtO to LONG LAU m 55154 ADOt QHNEt NAHE TAXOAYEt NAME/AOOR It 05-117-21 41 0015 00500 OKFOtO to A J A S R NELSON ALtIN J A SUSAN K NELSON 500 OKFOtO to OtONO m 55154 ttOt AOOt ONNEt NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOt It 05-117-21 41 0024 00555 OXFORD RO CORNELIA 0 laXTZXE CORNELIA 0 RLITZKE 555 OXFORD RO LONG LAKE Hi 55154 0001 PROP ADOt ONNEt NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR It 05-117-21 44 01100 FOX ST N L TRUBECK A J N TRUBECK NILLXAM L A JUDITH H TtUBEK 1100 FOX ST LONG LAKE HN 55154 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TA)0>AYER NAME/ADOt TOTAL BATCH 514 00015 JIt 04-117-21 12 0011 00575 SUSSEX CIt N H A 0 C MILONAN GERALD t A NARY JO AMESON ISO SPUR CIt MEDINA MN 55141 St 04-117-21 11 0010 01175 FOX ST OAVIO A NAASS DAVID A NAASS P O iOK 142 LONG LAKE m 55154 It 05-117-21 41 0011 00445 OXFORD RO DIN GEORGE DONALD E GEORGE 445 OXFORD RD LONG LAKE MN 55154 IS QS-117-2S 41 0014 0GS45 LEAP ST J t C NC COY JOHN L i CHARLENE N NC COY 5525 NXLLSIOi CXR EOINA MN 50414 St 05-117-21 41 00X4 00445 LEAF ST HAG R0R0NKIEHIC2 JR HALTER J lUXIQItClEHICZ 445 LEAF ST LONG LAM m 55154 It 05-117-21 41 0020 00525 LEAF ST JONATHAN CHAPEL JONATHAN CHAPEL A CHUKH OP RELIGIOUS SCIENCE 525 LEAP LONG LAKE m 55154 It 05-117-21 41 0025 00575 OXrORO RO J T HALE ASS HALE JANES T HALE A SHARON S 575 OXFORD RO LONG LAKE MN 55154 HALE It 05-117-21 41 0004 01400 FOX ST JAMES G FULURTON III ET AL FULLERTON LIMER CO P 0 SOX 10 MPLS m 55440 000410 05-117-21 44 01250 FOX ST DONNA LUKIS DONNA LUKIS 5250 FOX ST LONG LAKE Iff 55154 SO 05-117-21 44 0005 01400 FOX ST JAMES G FULLERTON III ET AL FULLERTON LUmER CO P O iOX 10 MPLS HN 55440 MM DATE OA/U/W •ATCH SIA (CfIM COUNTY PtOPCATY XWDimATiaN SYSTEM PAOPfRTY QMCRS LIST SPORT NS. PX^^lPAU 14 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPSESCNTEO AM 4N AOSMATI AND TRUE REPRESENTATiaN OP INFORNAnON AS XT APPEARS TMIS MTE ON THE MCOROS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY KPARTNENT OP PROPERTY TAMATXON* TO TNE REST OF HY KN0HLE06E AND BELIEF. <p DATE •• • U I < * \ ■ • I ( • ^ I BlkM'! aReCBVEOOF PURCHASE AQREEMENT P This loim ippiwd by the Minowota AsMciRMon^ REAUOR8*. mNch dtocWmt any tabiMy iq^oiMaor misuMoMNtlorm. ^ AP£/t, 2.^ . ^ Pay 1 cl 1. Oala RiQn & ttm sum of a aa f'-K'C. V ~~~ PnaM^a 1—) an or ftApMfiiMl Is not ft Sipsol Mdrsss: iftOlyof_____ by ftsbsr. Said earnest money is part paymsnl tor tie piediaoa of tie piop^ tocfttod H: /'£^Nn , 11. Legally deecribed as: 12. - .. Courty of lat H.b l&i Iftc Thai pait of Lot 2. Block .1. KLITZKE ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, which lies easterly of the fojiowing described line: 17. f Iftf 1ft i ftfti 21. 22. Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 2: thence on an assumed bearing of North 89 degrees 41 minutes 21 seconds West along the south line of said Lot 2 a distance of 55.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described, thence North 19 degrees 02 minutes 10 seconds East a distance of 155 00 feet and said line there terminating aid tog to liar rK 2a al of iwhich property Seier has Ms day agreed to jel to Buyer lor sum of: (> -fr. 2& which Buyer agrees to pay in the toSowtog manner. Came< money of 2ft and $_______________________________cash Zr. Ihs beanos of$_____________O_________________ 2ft Convamional FNA Asaumpllon Contract for Dsed I - r I «««.• --------- f ----.toa dato of ctoatog. and Itoanctog to aecowiarwa wiii toa aaachad addwdum; Otfiar:__________________________________ 2ft This Purchase Agreemenl(^ B HCff sut^ to a conMngency addendum. (If ansiMr is IS, saa eltadiad addandum.) aa This Purchaas Agraemeni A /n^pflubjecl to cancaiaSon of a pravtoutoy wrlben Purcbaaa Agreamard datod ___ ai. This Purchase Agreement IS /W#0^W)|eci to an toapeciion Addendum. (2 anawer is IS, aaa awachad addandum.) 32. Attached are ottier addenda which are made a part of this Purchase Agreement (Eriar p^a or pagaa on Ins 2) aa DCBOMAIKEIftBLC TITLE: Upon poftormwioe by Buyer. Solar ahtol deftrer a 31. jotoad to by epouaa. 2 any. oonuaytog maritabto Mia, aubfeoi kK fttonwdy Dead aa(A) Buldtog and aontog bare. otdtoanoaa.aMto and fodarbiregulQiiona:(p) iriaMfictionawtMtog to uaa or impmuamant of 2ia properly wiboul 3ft eftodtoa failMure provtatona: (Q Raaanfaltonof any mtooraIrfghtobyfiaStolaofMtonaoobKiP) UMtyanddretoagaaaaamanMwWcbdanoi 37. tolBrtoie wNh awtoltoQ bnorcwamonlB: IE) MaMa of tananla aa tattowa (untoM mcllBd. ml aubtocl to lanancioMc_____________ 3ft___________________________________________________________________________________________ 3ft (F) Others (Must be apediad to wrtttog): 4Q SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ahal be paid aa tolowM 41. BUYER AND SELLER SMALL PftORAlE AS OP THE IMJE OF CUMttiC CSELLEN SHAUI^ - - -. -- 42. of apeciil aaoaoamenia cartifiad lor paymoni with the real taNBtdua diid payable to tie year of ctoatog. 43 BUYER 8HAU ASSUME /(feiw SHALL RKY 44- ■UVBfSHAaASSUIIg/S^LEHWAlA.WlOWDeFOHWIlfMEMTflP/jpeelilMMWWWHMndfcMitotSwdHielWnawwiiniter 46 toipim«roenM2iaihswe been ordered by diaClyOouncI or oiheraaaeaatogau2iortltoa(S6ler*aproyiaion for payment Ml be by paymaMtoto 4ft aacraw of 2 times 2ie eaSmatod amount of ttia asaasamenb, or leaa aa required by Buyer's landac) 47 BUYm SHAU. ASSUyj(»lJER SMALL |WY^-dato^TtoMng*any dafoned real aabia taMsa (La Groan Acroa sic.) or apaoW 4ft aasasamenta payment of which is reqMredaa a toouil erf the c'oaing ol 2iia aala Buyer ahal pay toM aalMa barea due and payabla in 2ia 4ft year Icrftowtog dosing and 2iereailer and any unpaid apeciai asawemenB payabla therowMh and tiaraeilw; tie payment of which ia not 50 othentose provided. 51. As<4Si.d«d«*HrMnM.S*rH|>MMS0lar »«• /. note d m tor • piS^ 52. protect from any govemmental asaasstogisudiority. 2ie costs of which protect may be aaaeaaad agatoB tie property 2 a notfea of pandtog 53 soedal muMniiMiiii is is8ued'>aftor 2ia data of 2iia aoreement and on or baforo the dMa of ctoainiL nunar ahal aaauma oavmant of 54. ALL / I^O^/'OTHEW:_______________________of any MKh apadai aMaaamanto, and Said ahaS piotMa tor paymatS on 55 date d ctoaing( ALL/>K)NE / OnCR:erf anv such aoactol Rsaessmenta 2 such twofiirf S& assessmenli or escrow amounts tor said spedai assessments as required by Buyer's lender shal eiceed $. 57. Purchase Agreement shM be nuH and roid at Seler's option; parties agree to sign canoelayon of Purchase Agreement and al earnest Sa money paid hereunder shaN be refunded to Buyer, unless one or both of the partlin agrees to writing on or before the date of ctoatog. to 59. assume, pay, or provide tor the paymenl of such eicess. 60 Soler and Buyer Initial: Seier(s) ^ 6t. lyMRA-1 (W93I IMUItlMt m'Hl V \i* -y cx^/..1/ l ;• r ! Dale_______Boyeita)Dale.. i^f PURCHASE AOnEEMENT { \^2021 O loa RIM. amn tun nwi b* pM « ibiom lor Biiywiwpi^ jRoeooi!BO!|o«OLaM!|i9t.,^ito^ i«8iirRi<iw woR«»TOPRyoRagg^i!^fr>ii>.#|Lh^ 108. dotino dMi It chmgid. Hit mMs imm ptid iM, If piMM. bt KjuUKf to tht nm$ eMng dtfii Mr wrrMi iwtt Put rxj m WM In M ytr cMIfIcrion. It prt r nor>4i^^ in. 8iflr tgrtii to pty Buyr r clotinQ 8_____________^ ______________________toMVd ton — -------- 114 mottaiON: Stltor tM Mvr poteiiilon of th# preprty not Itor toon no ^irM M^of dothiaSI^ 0« «nd K chugn ter oNy wtor oNy WNiiE oteolrldty^ and ntourto 1 1191 hriin noted: 128 121. MCIAL 1MMVIANTK8: 122. SELLER WWWTTS THAT THE PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY OONNECTEO TO: CITY SEWBIDVaisAO CITY MTERDYESQM 12a «aigWIYg180f«ESTOPROVg6MrB1(XiMJTYTE8TRESUtJ8ite«fORSC^ 124. <XIVEIteimQ AUTIKIRITY ANIMOR LENDBt SELLER VWVRRATRS TH4J AU APPUAfCEa HEA^ AIR CONDITIONINQ. WIRINQ 12a AND PLUMGINQ SYSTEMS USED AND LOCATED ON SAID PROPERTY WILL BE IN WORKINQ ORDER ON THE DATE OF CLOSINQ. 12a EXCEPT AS NOTED ON ATTACHED ADDENDUM. BUYER HAS THE RIGHT TO BSPECT PROPERTY PRIOR ID ClOSINa 127. OTHER: 12a _____AA 129l buyer a ; m IN basement , or damage caused 131. solelv in \that regard on the p LEDGES THAT NO ORAL REPRESENTATIONS HM/E BEEN MADE REQARDVIQ POSSIBLE PROBlfMS OF WKTER yLBY WATER OR ICE BUIUMJ LOWING SWEMENT BY ON THE ROOF CF THE PROPERTY ANoluYER R&n SaLER: / \ 132. SELLER 1^/HAS NOT HAD A WET B^MENT, AND HAS/HAS W HAOROO^, WALLORC -KJNQ DAMAGE OU iED BY WAT 133 OR ICE BUICp^JP BUYER HM /1^^ RECEIVED A REAL 134. BUYER HAS (KCBVEO THE TRUTH M HOUSING M8PECTKM 13& UUVER HAS RECEIVED THE WEU DI^CIDSURE STATEMENT laaSUVERE MTIAL: Buy«(t)___N. V.SMhiM. TRANSFER DISCLOSURE jiUlIEMENT. HUNiaRAUTV. BTARJTEtSEC WIA«<M0Wnp0ETHAritWEHECBVE0AWDHADTHE0m)BrUIBTT1DHEWPWTHEAI»miAIWN0BCU»UWEAWD mRESOENTIAUWALmOKIITV ARBlTIUrKIN AGREEMENT. / ' \ \ miaxEnm HatfaxBnm ByvEnm AivEnm r 7 141. ' '• 142 /^ /O„ • , \ ./'r -4-. / 141 y MM _/ \ / R—^/c» ^ MM 144. THIS NOnce DOCS NOT SA1NPY MMNESOm fwnnofw AiQCNCY mcuftum m I. ffw OMnr or ma praparty. aooepi this tgrmmmt and autoria 14a llto rifling brakr to wMidrawr lald proptfty from tha mrlott. MT.'Unlaaa Mructod odirwM In writing. ' ,~T V VsWS^WSSa r-————— /Un^- I igma ii ptaonata via pmpany mr wia pn terma and. oondWona ttl forth aboua /IBiSrMSSi (MW1| PMM Nm ^/7>> t//|. %\o <> . y PMiSMut) r '.4 \ (Dm) ^ US!(Socw Bmu % X 152. 15a t -b PiWNM (tuyvnarawte (Mr-B MM N vrs I I ! n u (Ml iBeuRlf jjf C i- 2 ^ / (RMI8EMI (■U|V1 MM N«na (9oM iBWly NtfiM) 154. FINAL ACCEFIANCE DATE 15a Isa MN (tan TNte It A LIQALLY WNOINO CONTRACT SCTWEEN SUYiRS AND SCLLERa r YOU DC8IRB LIIML OR TAX AOYICa COiaua AN APPBOPMATE PBOFfSSIONAL BURNET FSG21 WCMIT LAND ADDENDUM This town ippiwed by MinneaoUi Awoclrton ol fy wNcfi dbcWms any iDbily Jz. «5,iu8D or misuie of this term. 1.DaiB _ APtlL i P»9« A bli ^a AMmi Aoti to PwctaM Agncffleni tetawm pmIm <MmI . 4. and sale <K the propedy at------------fjiyr-rCI7 ^ P/)/^o a^a/ • pertaining to the ptiirhaaa n^ and void and aleainaat money shal be letunded to the BuyecBuyaw and Selew agree to sign a cancelrtlonoUtePundiaaeAgeementa (SelMjiipippriM options »h) ^ ° ■*“* piovido a certHicale ot awvey oC the prapert SOJUn eRpanaai not Mer than .. 19 12. □ (b) Buyat obtaining approval ot cHylliwinahlp ot proposed buidtoQ plans and apecIBcallons at SUim / SBUA eapense. Boyer obtaining appnral d ciMm^ aubdMstonjdevelopment plain ai Bl"3l / an IFR »<prtitft 14. D (d) Buyer obtaining apprcwal ol dtyltownahip tor mzoning or use permHs at BUYER / SEUUBI aapansai * 1& n <e) Buyer obtaining at BUV» / SOifR eKpense. percolation tests vrhich m» aooaptoble to Buyec 2tt n (h) OTHER: _______________________ 21. a. Seltor's expenses for these contingencies (if any) shal not exceed $ ~~ “ 2a Seler grants permission of access to the property lor testing and swveying puipoewL ~ ' ^.SPECIAL WARRANTIES: Seller mnartt that the propsity descdbed In this Purchase AtpMmsnl ooneMe d “------BEET and is cunanlly anad {?r^(/)rAiTi^^ 2ft Seber nanants t«at the property IS(b NQT In the deslonaiBd 100 yew flood pUn «aa. 3ft Seflsr wanants that the property DOES rscelva piafetanlial lax Itsalmenl (Lai, Qrasn Itotasi sic.). 31. OTHER: VTtf>5 pu(icf/>lSf?.D lont4 Pf2crrPTi To tv/^ 6'uy^c jO P^'cr'fZ.a Pit^- (r/Jc^rt^rPA^T PA,'Ti£G‘ faCoi^i^PO P/ICc T//4?r i>hLt~ PF-^ Cc-ttOe. I^c(ie~p/K'<^- OF- /9'A/v CTf/e>'^ tt 'Pi' 'e,^/T AN TtiP PapcMA'e'^ 1/> :(* 32. t,i cvvi. _______________ iSSSr^ r ^ ------------------------------------- K eOVEIW AND SCUERS. aa MN VLA (Sn3) Ml Hi liit.'t tF YOU DESIRE LEGAL OR TAX ADVICE. CONSULT AN APPROPRIATE PROFESSIONAL ib4 ' 3. To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, Citv Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:Mav 11. 1995 Subject:#2022 Melamed/Lauer Partners, 920 Old Crystal Bay - Preliminary Subdivision Public Hearing Zoning Di^rict:RR-IB, Two Acre Minimum Diy Contiguous. Portions of property are located within Shorcland areas and subject to hardcover controls. Pertinent Ordinances u u ui i . k-1 Section 11 03 Subdivision 24 - Minimum lot area. Dry buildablc land must be contiguous and not divided by a wetland. Dry buildablc areas within Lot 4 can be credited against contiguous dry buildable as designated wetland is merely a drainageway for the majority of the wetland. This is con-istcni with previous actions of the City. Note shared drivewav located within Lot 3. The easement area granted m favor of Lot 4 must be e.xcluded from Lot 3’s dry buildable area. Applicant s surveyor shall confirm adjusted area. Applicant has placed driveway in order to protect alternate septic site on Lot 4. Section 11.33. Subdivision 42 - Typical section. Three to six units require upgrade to a private/public road. The City is currenUy reviewing standards for classification of driveway and roads within the City. The current layout will require a variance to this section of the Code as City driveway would now serve four residential units with three residential curb cuts. Review Exhibit H-1-3, Council concurred that they would prefer amending the Code rather than granting variances to standards for driveways owned by City. Refer to Exhibit B, applicant has filed the application based on the conceptual directives of the Council. Applicant will make any improvement to the public driveway deemed necessary by either the current Code or an amended Code. We should also note applicant is being granted a variance to this section because the Code would call for an internal road at the four lot density. 3. Chapter 11, Class III Subdivision. 4.Section 11.02, Subdivision 10 (A) (1-7) - Necessary findings for the granting of variances. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant’s Addendum C - Plat Map D - Property Owners’ List Zoning File #2022 Mav 11 1995 Page 2 E - Gustafson Report 5/3 95 F - Weckman Report 5/4/95 G - McMillan Letter 4/21/95 H-1-3 Council Minutes 4/10/95 1-1-5 Portion of Wetland Delineation Report J - Current Access Plan K-1-4 Septic Site Plans L - Preliminar>' Plans Status of Application The Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan proposal for the subdivision of this property at their March meeting. The Planning Commission concurred ^t based on the umquc physical features of this land that it would be best to grant a vanance for the four-lot plat ^ not require an internal road. The Planning Commission encouraged the use of the City s driveway to the south of the property for a single curb cut to serve two lots^ At t^ April 10th meeting of the Council, members reviewed applicant’s request to increase the residen^l use o the Citv’s driveway now serving two residential units. Council chose to amend the Code ra^r than g^nt itself variances also recognizing the City’s intent to keep the roadway a low profile/rural-type road in an attempt to maintain the preserve park atmosphere to tlw east. M Lady noted above, the applicant has agreed to make any ‘*«P*?'^emen« to the ^ on wlutever Code is in effect at the time of final approval of the plat (^bit B). Applw^t should be advised at this point that if the Code is not amended and *** allow an additional residential user on this driveway that applicant will be required to provide an internal road to serve all four properties - not a popular option. An internal road would require a more intense and lengthy review by both the Watershed District and other agencies of the State because of the major fill of wetlands, to proposal, the applicant proposes to fill less than 400 s.f. of the weUand areas District (LGU for City) will not require a permit. Staff has been advised by the Watershed th« the only information they will seek from this applicant with the current propowl is to review tte acmal driveway construction as it encroaches the wetland areas. The ^ . review the same grading plan. Members should also be aware that if the 400 s.f. is n exceeded that mitigation is not required. Septic Please review Weekman’s memo. Exhibit F. He advises that all septic sites are approved and meet the necessary setback from all wetlands and lot lines. He asks that the existing wel on Lot 1 be properly abandoned before the septic system is installed. Staff would the well be abandoned prior to final plat approval, to reviewing the septic site plans. Ei^bite K-1-4 the site plan for Lot 4 (K-4) shows the septic test area close to the east boundary of Zoning File .^2022 May 11 1995 Paee 3 W property. Ouilot B has not been designated as Outloi A has been shown on all the other site plans. The primary septic site on preliminary plan shows the septic site at least 20’ from the west side of the outlot. Applicant should explain. In the development of final site plans for the development of each lot, developer/contractor must ensure that drainage be directed away from and around the mound system. Access Please review again Exhibit E. Ousufson asks for mote detail on the driveway grades for the northerly shared access to Lots 1 and 2. He notes the driveway wilt be veiy st^ and asks for a 20’ landing with 2% grades at the intersection with Old Crystal Bay Road. He also asks that the large oak tree in the right-of-way be removed because it blocks the sight distance to and from the driveway. Hennepin County shall be responsible for issuing the access permits for this curb cut. The City will also ask for detailed grading plans for the encroachment of the designated wetland (drainageway) by the private driveway serving future residence on Lot 4. Once the access issue is resolved by the City and CouncU grants approval of a four-lot residential plat, the applicant will be asked to provide detailed grading/drainage/erosion plans for the construction of the private driveways. Parks/Trails At the April 10, 1995 meeting of the Council. Members also considered the recommendation of the Park Commission. Council advised the applicant that the City will ^ for a 15’ trail to be designated along the west side adjacent to Old Crystal Bay Road (defuiM as Outlot A). The applicant has also shown an open space outlot, Outlot B, along the east side of the property. Note the ouilot continues through a designated wetland area. The City does not accept wetland areas within dedicated park lands. Park lands are usually taken oyer dry land areas. Some members of the Council preferred receiving the remainder of the park dedication in cash rather than fee title of land and only requested the 15’ bike trail ouUot. The City Engineer asks that the bike trail be graded by the developer prior to residential development. He asks that a 10’ wide graded trail be installed immediately as » condition of the subdivision approval and if a wetland area is to be filled that applicant provide the mitigation area on the site as it would be very difficult for City to obtain additional mitigation ^ ftiture from ftimre property owners. He also notes that any portion of the mill that Ym toje constructed outside of the road right-of-way or the outlot be granted to the City zs an adddioM easement area. In any case, the area of the 15’ trail will be deducted from the 1.2 acres (8%) of the undeveloped land. The City may either ask for an open space outlot or cash in lieu oi the land. Zoning File #:022 May 11 1995 Page 4 Wetland/Drainage The City will ask that ihe designafed wetland be shown as drainage easements on the plat. As in an earlier subdivision application, the Types 1 and 2 weUands not already designat^ on the City's Wetlands Maps shall be protected with private covenants similar to the ones deve oped for the* Old Crystal Bay Road Addition. This wUl involve Lots 1, 2 and 3. The City will ask for 10’ wide drainage and utility easements along the perimeters of the property and 5 along the shared lot lines.'^The designation of utilities may be omitted where wetlands arc adjacent to the lot lines. Other Issues If the City is asked to grant variances so that this fcu-lot plat may be developed without segments reduced because of the location of tested septic areas. In these areas be removed or stnicmres installed. Suff would ask that Members conside. expanding the buffer area to include the 30 ’ side setbacks. Staff docs not want the City to enter into such covei^ with the developer as this proved to be a major problem for the City with the covenants of the Sugar Woods subdivision. The value of this property and the uniqueness of this property results from this mamre-forested area being retained. Clearcutting of trees would devalue the property. Applicant’s covenants must encourage maintaining the trees and restricting removal. Covenants must define under what conditions a tree may be removed within the buffer area. Recommendation of Approval Any recommendation of approval of this four-lot subdivision would have to be based on the final resolve of access to this property. If the Council does not amend tlK C^ and refuses to grant itself variances for an additional residential curb cut on the City dnveway, then applicant must file a new plat with the City providing an internal road. If an internal road is required, then the City can no longer ask for special buffer areas as a condmon of ^rovmg the variance. The City has no ordinances that restrict the removal of trees except for those areas within the 0-75 ’ setback of the shoreline of a lake or on steep slopes. The followmg conditions would apply to the current four-lot piop-^sal: 1. Dedication of 33 ’ of ught-of-way for the County road. 2.Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10’ wi^ along the perimeter boundaries of the property and 5’ along the shared lot lines. Zoning File #2022 May 11 1995 Page 5 3. Designation of a 15’ bike trail along the east side of the County right-of-way and the grading of that trail to a 10’ width. Preliminary grading plans are to reflect the mitigation areas if wetlands are to be filled. Council to determine if the remaining park dedication is to be taken in fee title or in cash. The City will not take wetlands as part of the land contribution. 4. The well on Lot 1 to be properly abandoned before final plat approval. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Covenants to be created for Lots 1, 2 and 3, where Type 1 and 2 wetlands are located. Covenants shall advise future owners of the need to protect the wetlands and to contact appropriate agencies if they are to be filled or altered. Applicant to confirm setback of septic system from east lot line of Lot 4. Preliminary grading plan to provide grading details on shared driveway to Lots 1 and 2 and single drive that encroaches designated wetland within Lot 4. In lieu of granting variances to subdivision regulations that would require an internal road to serve the four-lot plat, applicant shall create spwial buffer areas that would allow no tree removal c»- land alterations. A 50’ buffer shall be created around the exterior or pc,imeter of property and shall allow the encroachment of septic systems as shown on the preliminary plan. Applicant shall also grant 30’ wide buffer areas at internal lot lines??? Upon filing the current four-lot plat, applicant agrees to make any improvement to the City driveway located at the south side of the property darned necess^ by the City Council either through its ordinances or as a condition of granting variances to subdivision regulations by not requiring an internal road to serve the four lots. /r cm*OF ORONOC l^^trSorVlSION APPLICA1 lU^s PROPERTY LOCATION * Prop^^enoilcaiion Number (PIP) Q9i 1723120003 PleaiC check one - Property abstract or torrens? Trw^P«cs Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name MELAMED LAUER PARTNERS Address 1212 E. WAYZATA BLV~ Cir/ WAYZATA. MN_______ Phone (home) ZipPhone (work) a73-?sft« OWNTR (if different than applicant) Name LEONARD G CARPENTER City I . y-i, ----- (attach list if more than one) ________Phone (home) ZipssaiL (work) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Txx Parcels Development Size Ciry (Jf Present use (check) Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ FI.VA«£ CFFIlTF Of ££^ 425.0 01 lt£fl ,i.w. V 1J50200000 ----- 01 CCi 200.i cm 71 S25 ^ liCCElFT-TiiftHK ^ H333620 cool Rvl 111 04/2: Division for Tax Purposes . j/nc r/ T nt T in»» Pearranffement Onlv (no new buildling sites) ¥ a • Number of Building Sites Subdivision for New Building Sites Existing Units New Units Total Units GsyJiuuS) . . c g-^co ' Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (checir) 2.1 Units per 3 3/nAcres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential c ” Other (specify) rvrYi —VI ¥v* - MINEVIUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATKW 1. Payment of fees (refer to "^plication fees* listel below. 2. Completed application form. 4. must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt. Center 348-3271). . , c j r u* i* 5. As an addendum to this appUcattOD. please anaeb a separate list of any otHer peis^ you wish notified of this appltcauon. Zoning Official’s Signature ----------------------------------------------------— ------------------------------------------- MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION . ki h 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning Official’s Signature ^ I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [XI those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: Sketch Plan Review (Class I. II & III) S200.(X) Subdivision of a Lot Lin? Rearrangement S3(X).00 Subdivision Application (Class I & II) S300.00 -------- Preliminary Subdivision Application $325.00 + S25.00/lot (Qass III & aU non-residential) _____ Final Plat Application (Class III) $175.00 _____ Legal Review and Filing: Subdivision only $75.00 Subdivision w/easeinenu and covenanu min. $200.00 Totals Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) Leeal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) -------- Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from onginal application) Renewal of Class III. Preliminary Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change ^m original plication) -------- Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $100.00 (No change from onginal application) B. Special Improvement Fees: « Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + $.50/lineal ft.;_____Im. ft. a .X •%--------- Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50/lineal ft.; lin. ft. a .50 - $-------- Request for City to Accept Eaisting Private Road $900^<W Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Eatension $250.00 -f $25/smb Proposed Watermain Eatension $250.(X) + $25/stub Proposed Storm Sewer System (eacluding culverts) $200.00 On-Site System. Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) S50.00/new lot proposed for on-site a_____new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees Variance $2(X).00W I• mm wm Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $75.00 PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit he epplican. hereby agrees .0 provide ail mformarioo requir«l or guested SS f« ttto^e Planning Commis^ and CouncU Mcessy to process thi^plication and further Mrees to pay stablished by ordinance. c/ Ss/ Date Applicant’s Signamre )wner’s Signamre Date ADolicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. IStings are held on the third aMonday of each month. Applicants must be present at aU scheduled authorizJ Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to ha. ient attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meetmg. L.J ROBERT L MELAMED 1212 East Wayzata Boulavard Wayzata, Minnasota 55391 (612) 473-2588 May 9,1995 Mambers of the City Council and Planning Commission Cityof Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Ladies and Gerrtlemen: I am writing this letter prior to the public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting on May 15,1995 concerning our application for subdivision of the property on Old Crystal Bay Road currently owned by the Leonard Carpenter Trust. One of the variances that we have requested is the variance to your ordinance that requires the upgrading of a private driveway to city road standards whenever rrx)re than two residential units are to use that driveway. At the last City Councfl meeting where there was an in-dep^ sketch plan review. I was told that inasmuch as the City is the owner of this driveway, it would residential units that may share a driveway prior to its needing upgrade. I plan to attend the work session on Wednesday morning of this week to work on the code revision since naturally I am interested In its outcome. In any event my filing of the preliminary plat and your holding a public hearira in that regard ^iiouid not be hampered by the driveway matter. In the event that the code is not revised prior to the filing of the final plat and if you are unable or unwilling to grant a variance to the existing ordinance, 1 will agree to upgrade the driveway as required. If anyone has any questions or wants to discuss any of this with me further, please dont hesitate to get in touch. I can be reached at my office at 473-2588 or at home at 476-1212. Thank you. >reiy yours, tobert L Melamed Melamed Lauer Partners RLM/tlw iMd:orono.doc5/9/96 IWi DAT! M/19/ff Wntll Ml nmmpxH tauNnr Mowimr iNFcmuTiaN systch raoKimr cmcrs list S8 09-117-n 11 0007 OOOM Aoooess UNASSXONiO COtCII NAMB TAXOAYBB NAM/AOM cm OP ORONO cm OP ISS MOM M CirrSTM. MY sna PROP AMM fNCR N*NC TAMPAYCR NANC/AOeil M 0P>117-CS It 0001 OOOM AODAESS IMASSXQNED 0 0 0 MUST OlOliei A HUST •to OLO CRYSTAL RAY Ml NAYZATA »M SSStl WOP ADOO IMCK MAM TAKPAYBO . NAM/AOOII 09-117-n It OOOA OCD COYSTAL SAY 00 t MTOO NASTt CQMTOOi COM MTOO MAST! CQNTOOL COM SM MTOO SOUAOi OLOO ST PAUL MN 55101 POOP AOOO OMMO NAM TAOPAYBO NAM/AOOO M 09-117-tS tl 0001 OOOtl OLD COYSTAL SAY OD S J H A B J DAYTON JUOSQN H DAYTON TC7 TOMO 0060 MPLS MN 5560t • ^ • • # POOP AOOO ^ QNMO NAM TAXPAYfO TOTAL OATCN 501 OOOlt • ^ ; •NAM/AOOO l • H . M Of-117-tS 11 0008 00900 OLO COYSTAL DAY 00 S OOWOT i BLXZA8ITH MLAMD 0O8B0T 1 iLIXAMTN MLAMD 1000 OLD COYSTAL SAY 00 S NAYZATA m 55191 SO 09-117-tl It OOOt 00860 OLO COYSTAL SAY H S A J iLLXS A J ILLXS 860 COYSTAL 8AY 00 NAYZATA m 55191 18 09-117-tS 11 0006 OlOtO OLD COYSTAL DAY 00 S OINDALL ILLXS RINOALL ILLXS lOtO OLD COYSTAL DAY 00 8 NAYZATA m 55191 SO 09-117-tl tl 0006 00905 OLD COYSTAL DAY OD L 0 CAOPINTIO IT AL LIQNAOD 6 CAOPINTIO 15500 NAYZATA 8LV0 OlOtO NAYZATA m 55191 MPCOIT NO. PX615601 PAM 1SO 09-117-tS 11 0009 01000 OLO COYSTAL SAY 00 0 OQOIOT A ILXZA8ITN MLAMD 008C0T A ILXZAOITN MLAMD 1000 OLD COYSTAL DAY 00 S NAYZATA MN 55191 »* • SO 09-117-tS It 0001 00018 * AOOOISS UNASSXOMD L 8 CAOPINTIO ITAL LIONAOO 0 CAOPINTIO 15500 NAYZATA 8LV0 OlOtO NAYZATA m 55191 10 09-117*tl 16 8001 01100 OLO COYSTAL 8AY 00 S 0 J OUmXT A P N OOANAN OQOIOT QUHNXT/FOANCIS MANAII 1100 <H.O COYSTAL DAY 00 S NAYZATA MN 55191 10 09-117-tl t6 0001 0t065 NOOTN SHOOI DO NINN CO PAOK OISIOVI OXST MNN CO PAOK OISIOVI DXST OTI 1 OOK t96 HAPLI PLAIN MN 55159 A3 ‘ ? . n / . * nm OATi ovitmMTCN Mlt ! ■ * % * . \ . . I .*•. 'r ••t- • • V * . * * ' . ‘.1 CA- * • ^ . • •* ■ </•: •■.: ■ . ’•■ • •,1 . • • * •? * V . • ■ • .*• • I • t ■ :k% • ••• . • • n* i'f ■ n .V. n. , ' . . • • • .• • * f»iCFn CaUNTT wopiity xnfockatxon systthMOPCKTY OHNCRS UST NO. miMOI OAGf t .* 1 . V X ccmnrv mr me facts iwraescNTio ars an accurati ans rnue RCRRESeNTATXON OF INFORNATION AS IT ARREARS THIS OATS ON THE RECORDS OF THE NENNERXN COUNTY OERARTMENT OF RRORERTY TAXATION* TO THE MST or NY kNONLeoce and selxef DATE 4^/IIiom, kkMi/) f f. * t ^ I Bonestroo Rosene AnCerlikct |\J| Associates Engineers & Archicects May 8. 1995 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Ciystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: French Preserve File No. 139-2022 \¥ • / • •. ••-4 • . • . . ... ••• • - * • • • •• • , **• . • V V . » . « * • •• •»! ’ a--«. - • •* t«S* V A • A , • y A Mr -— • • .* * -'•r. % A * •• • . I»:.! - I. - irr^. n • * '..Ifc.v- ; • «• ’*• *.• ‘' . • rt . • .t *f »y». I • ----- .V.v- > * ^ n *• »»• . • •• •«k -• * ‘V.4- r* • * * i'*«y <••• 4 / » —I ^ . -- ^ V M.—« f • • • A . V ........... ■ V •, . V - - . > • Dear Jeanne, for M.I«,ed.U«r P.r«c,s wedand midgaden^ 71.* nddgadpn J^ho^kThTsh^*'!," 4*' K drainage appears adequate. Drainage must be directed awav W a :i. *! idtersecdon with Old C™a!tav lc7d -?hT “^*7*“ ”* *e ZTd're^X drivi~'?,t'et'‘"‘’"“ “n^ ** °ty five feet wide easements should be provided over the wtiMd “eas"* »*'»»«« Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTHOO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC jLv. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 'ern 2335 West Hiahwav 36 • oa.,i r>«m CC . # « TO: FROM: DATE: Jeanne Mabusih. Building and Zoning Administration Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager May 4, 1995 SUBJECT: Subdivision application #2022, Robert Melamed - Septic Review P The applicant proposes a four lot subdivision requiring the use of on-site septic systems. Soil testing has been provided by S-P Testing for primary and alternate sites on each lot. Review of the soil testing has been completed and meets all City and State Codes. The City will require a 26 ’ septic system setback from several Type II wetlands identified during the subdivision. A 75' septic system setback is required from Type III, IV, and V wetlands (weUands with standing water). Also, a well noted on lot 1 must be properly abandoned before the septic system may be installed. Based on the soil testing alone. I would recommend approval of the application. B^ii/ildL p^^-' P/2^ S'pJ-djL Pj^/n/ST^yh 3-^jjp^ P^ /^■7^'^a/ /}uPd^ i^LL^ /7a^ ..p^y^MyutJ^ •^^tPU-^ /jj-^ puPy?-P^ U>~PP^ /? y*rp. "PyyS£y^^" iir\ X /dr/Py^ ^Puy^P^p/r^yy^P deyj^Ppp^. J- ■£yt-ih/:y‘~£y- Qy~u.y'-£-y-Z^ yPjL-PotL. Pt^-C. uyi^ yhy-ypPp. fy(_ ^/'-£y£y~if-£ ' ypyyyKi /ly-£iy^ £Pji—iy£P-£p/fl£p^ J'c ^^y-rji-P /h ^‘Pp£i\_ Janet A. McMillan i'.r'c'p='rs?icH rcwss'C*. i2T< T«ai*ooo P'«ce LC»^5 La»e MN 5S356 9-9i ici2 ‘ <i'3 «733 |H) (c12 •»:2 '**9 -0-. - Sn^iiicr “ Coni.A.UwO) •G ri rh<. rLiuncil that the promise of state funding has beenintative notified the __n- .. rv-« u»echnri7 renorted“S:~ “ s“;t "" trame for the protea. * rs;:s .^“5 S.r i— spccifidily to look at B-4 code. c—" ” the public heanng would be held ootion and would like to hear the opinion The public hearing wiU be scheduled for May. m USE OF CITY DWVEWAY FOR ACCESS TO PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT (MELAMED) Mr. Melamed was present. The issue before the CouncU was to determine if this proposed deveiopmwt AoUd be L^wed access via use of the City driveway. The prop^ in “ ** ^ *"' Carpenter propertv to the east of Old Crystal Bay Road and on me “orih side °f'•>« enhance to FrCTch Creek preserve The sketch plan presented two opnons. ::tt"n1heltrSX"“^^^ trees. The anolicant has reviewed option two with Hennepin County DOT, who has approy^ C^^ts, and the other to serve lot 3; lot 4 shaU achieve access via the use of the City driveway. Mabusth said that the issue is the code requirements if City drive r^Sal curb cut. The City's desire to keep the drive pnvate wodd be unpaaed^d would bring more traffic into the park area. Council is first asked if they approve an additional curb cut and what upgrades of dnve would be requested. /r«/ ^a^^JTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO AaXUTES held on APRIL 10.1995 (#S - Cir.- Dnve'Aay - Continued) CaUaha.nas.ed wha. svere ,he Sr a “rb Mabusih reponed that the ° ^ reported that he preferred that lot 4 cut for a shared drive'.vay semng lots ^ v-ildlife area and avoid not be developed. This would eamina ' He would like to see Park problems with entering the oevelopmen ^ request was outside the Dedication fees be usea to purcnase lot property' is to be developed, parameters of the Park Co^is->ion to v,ere on the use of Park Callahan asked Flint if lot 4 were to P choice would be to land from Dedication, whether to ask .or land or mo go., f the land, .is-™ ‘ no, due to the wooded area. 1 that the Citv should maintain a higher standard than asked of theJabbour strongly opmea th^ the Uty s Melamed’s current use of the pubUc by adherence to the C>ty =^e Jabtoi^^ hardship for the use of the City drive. ~ development was a good^ the one curb cut would not negatively impact rh«SS=2teTa^ r« be receive. Znste^I of .and as the Ltem border could be buffered by landscaping. -r :srg adSet LTJS off ofoid Crys^Bay Ro«l would result in the loss of the forested look, which the preferred option would mainiam. r-,„,h,n said the purpose of the 3-house limitation on a private -I;”? “ l’^t°of fhe r^ TOs lindtSon does not take into account the use ah^dy m e^ as a result Ihe MCWW pump station and the park. These uses do not violate the code. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COL^'CIL MEETtSG HELD ON .\PRIL 10,1995 (=S - Cir,- Dnveway - Coniirxed) comprehensive pUn. Barren responded that the orr .nance controls the ccmprehc pian. ?r the^-de-MC. She fei. if this was solved by amending the code, then she would be open to that idea. The aoolicanfs goal was to get a sense from the Council on whether an element off the Cty dnlewav cLd he accomplished, whether through an Mdamed also asked for the opinion on whether a covenant would be nc^ed to prcs^e Ihe woods on the east side as a buffer zone instead of either deeding the or a Park Dedication fee. He noted that an altemam ^ found meeting the 20* requirement from property line if land t^en m fee. If conservation, the septic could be located against the property line. Council asked Flint about the b.kehike trad along Old Crystal Bay Road. Hmt i^onri that the commissioners were split on the location. The vote to '»ke 'e« land .» *e e»t side of the property to provide land for the trail on the west was defeated 3/2 at the Park Commission meeting. Two options were then available; one to blacktop the should^ or two to bring the trail to the back of the property. Flint and WUson felt it take the money as enforcing an easement was difficult. A vote of JO was made m fiivo of this option at the last meeting of the Park Commission. CouncU also voiced their preference in going forward with a trail along Old Orysti^ay Road and reported their consensus for the bike path on the west cjHe of this property to Flint and Wilson. Callahan said the Council would look at amending the code. The majority was of th« opinion of keeping the entrance as suggested. Jabbour did not want to sec any of the City drive; therefore, concurred with changing the code. Council recommend^ park dedication of land on the west side of the property and covenants or deeding ot lana on the east side to create a buffer. (4 I I I I i i i I i i I 1 I i I I I WEHANDS DATA John C. Anderson 5831 Cedar Lake Road Minneapolis, MN 55416 Office - (612) 525-2003 Fax-(612) 525-2015 C a % WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT FOR: ROBERT MELAMED IN ORONO, MN WCnANDS MAPPme • ON«irE DEUNEATION • CIUN6EANALV I I \4 1 ■ I 1 i m M 3 • • "3 Transect ^ #111 This is an upiand chGCk sits Dominant spGCiss ar© R©d Pin© (FACU) and Smooth Brome (UPL). Soils ar© Lester, an upiand soil. Surface hydrology evidence is not met. Site is not flooded, ponoed or in a wetland drainage pattern. Transect B #1 This IS a Type Three (PEMiC) wetland checksite. Dominant specie is Reed Canary Grass (FACW-**). Soils are Hamel, an upland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is met Site is in wetland drainage pattern. Transect B.#ll This is a Type One (PEM1A) wetland check site. Dominant species are Red Pine (FACU). Black Cherry (FACU). Reed Canary Grass (FACW+) and Moss (FAC to OBL). Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology is met Site is in wetland drainage pattern. Transect B.#lll This is an upland check site. Dominant species are Red Pine (FACUt American Elm (FACW-). Black Cherry (FACU). Kentucky Bluegrass (FAC-). Smooth Brome (UPL) and Reed Canary Grass (FACW+). Soils are Lester, an upland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is not met. Site is site is not flooded, ponded, saturated or In wetland drainage pattern. Transect C.#l This IS a Type Three (PEM1F) wetland check site. Dominant species are Cattails (OBL) and Reed Canary Grass (FACW+). Soils are Glencoe, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology is met. Site is ponded. Tr3ns0ct C This is a Type Three (PEM1C) site. Dominant species are Green Ash (FACW). Reed Canary Grass (FACW+) and Northern Blue Violet (FACU) . Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is met. Site is in saturated and in wetland drainage pattern. Transect C.#l 11 This is a Type Seven (PF01B) site. Dominant species are Green Ash (FACW), Swamp Fly Honeysuckle (OBL) and Northern Blue Violet (FACU). Soils are Hamel, wetland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is met. Site is saturated. Trees shoe physiological adaptations to prolonged saturation Transect C.#IV This is a Type Seven (PF01B) site. Dominant species are Green Ash (FACW), Swamp Fly Honeysuckle (OBL) and Northern Blue Violet (FACU). Soils are Hamel, wetland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is met. Site is saturated and in wetland drainage pattern. Trees show physiological adaptations to prolonged saturation. I Transect C #V This IS 2L Upland check site. Dominant species are Green Ash (FACW), and Northern Blue Violet (FACU). Soils are Hamel, wetland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is met. Site is saturated. However, this situation is likely due to recent rainfall events. Site is not in wetland drainage pattern and trees do not have physiological adaptations to prolonged saturation. Check site D This is a upland checksite. Dominant specie is Reed Canary Grass (FACW+). Soils are Lester, an upland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is not met. as soil is not flooded, saturated or ponded in wetland drainage pattern. Transect E.<fl This is a Type Two (PEM1B) wetland checksite. Dominant specie is Reed Canary Grass (FACW+). Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is met. Site is in wetland drainage pattern. Transect E.#ll This IS a Type Two (PEM1B) wetland check site. Dominant specie is Reed Canary Grass (FACW+). Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology is met. Site is in wetland drainage pattern. Transect E,#lll This is a upland check site. Dominant specie Red Pine (FACU), Soils are Lester, an upland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is not met. Site is not flooded, ponded, saturated or in wetland drainage pattern. Transect F.#l This is a Two (PEMiBd) wetland checksite. Dominant species are Red Pine (FACU), Red Ozier Dogwood (FACW) and Reed Canary Grass (FAW+). Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is met. Site is in wetland drainage pattern. Transect F. #11 This is a Type Three (PEMiCx) wetland check site. Site is located in excavated drainage ditch. Dominant specie is Reed Canary Grass (FACW+). Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology is met. Site is flooded. Transect F.#lll This is a Type Two (PEM1 Bd) site. Dominant species are Red Pine (FACU), Red Ozier Dogwood (FACW), Pussy Willow (OBL) and Reed Canary Grass (FACW+). Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is met. Site is in wetland drainage pattern. i 1 r4 1 I 1 Transect F-yiV This IS 3 upisnd checksiie. Dominant specie is Red Fine (FACU). Soils ere Lester, an upland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is not met. as soil is not flooded, ponded, saturated or m wetland drainage pattern. T*r3ns0Ct G This is a upland checksite. Dominant species are Red Pine (FACU) and Reed Canary Grass (FACW+). Most of the ground surface is covered with Pine needles. Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is not met. as soil is not flooded, ponded, saturated or in wetland drainage pattern. Transect G .#11 This is a Type One (PEM1 A) site. Dominant specie is Reed Canary Grass (FACW+). Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology is met. Site is in wetland drainage pattern. Transect G #111 This is a Type Three (PEMiC) wetland checksite. Dominant specie is Reed Canary Grass (FACW-i-). Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is met. Site is in wetland drainage pattern. Transect G.#1V This is a Type One (PEM1 A) site. Dominant specie is Reed Canary Grass (FACW+). Soils are Hamel, a wetland soil. Surface hydrology is met. Site is in wetland drainage pattern. Transect G.#V This is an upland check site. Dominant species are Red Pine (FACU) and Smooth Brome (UPL). Soils are Lester, an upland soil. Surface hydrology evidence is not met. Site is not flooded, ponded or in a wetland drainage pattern. t i 1 1 I h f/s i^s lotfUkJ b I 50 oO m 3! m = 33 Z Q O&> z c 005 mm 5 o * w z >zzmz (/> (/> o ?2i S'’ 10 II 00 -4 Io o O Gl % I >h t O) m z ni S Imm2 ^ m o 25 o > f” d ^ rn ^ ^ t-^ N:I.V/.ii.:; N • llflM h3M'-."SliS . it.j _________ "A . J ■ :y i ■ r*1 f’ T 4 ; y'■^'^31 ;• Y , I Frances H. graham Robert j. gumnit THE FEN ueo OLD CftYSTAC 0AV road WAYZATA. MINNKSC A BS301 (•tS) A7R^909 Mav 15, 1995 f0 SENT BY FAX TO 473-0510 Members of the Citx’ Council and Planning Commission City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crsytal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Attention: City Council. Planning Commission, and Jeanne Mabusth RE: 920 Old Crystal Bay Prellmlnaiy Subdivision Public Hearing Dear Members of the City Council and Planning Commission: We are writing to comment upon the proposed subdivision at 920 Old Crystal Bay Road. We viewed the maps at City Hall and want to comment about two specific matters: First, we the city to grant itself a variance rather than changing all the city's ordinances. What better reason Is there to grant a variance than because of the specific circumstances of this case: French Cirek Preserve Is a special rustic place that should not be despoiled with a big roadway. All efforts should be taken to preserve the quality of the Preserve, Tliat Includes maintaining the special character of the the roadway consistent with the area. It would be even more desirable If the land- owners could give some additional land to the city for the park and maintain more open space, but in the absence of such willingness, please do grant the city a variance and maintain the character of the roadway. Second, the developer should not use the word "Preserve” for the development. It is confusing and potentially misleading. We would vjge that all reasonable efforts be made to maintain the trees and wetlands on the properties. We had hoped to see the acreage become parkland connecting the Preserve and Noerenberg Park. If that Is not to be the case we urge that the land be used In such a way to preserve the character as much as possible. Hennepin County is changing and the character of Orono. If sensitively maintained at least In some areas could constitute a great and ongoing legacy for the entire county. Or Orono could become Just another group of houses (albeit expensive) . I wish each of you could visit Canberra. Australia and see the sheep and other farms that are a permanent part of the city separating developed areas. This planning assures that people do not lose the sl^t and sound of the countryside. There are so many communities In the United States that lose all character and become just another part of the suburbs. We hope this will not be the case for Orono. Sincerely, FjFiynces H. Grah Sincereh?: yA To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc. City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Adminisiraior May 8. 1995 #1999 David and Vicki Vickerman. 2475 Dunwoody Avenue - Variances Continuation of Public Hearing Status of Application ., . At the March 20 1995 meeting of the Planning Commission, the application was tabled at applicanfs request providing the Vicketmans additional time to address the needs for a comprehensive improvement of their lakeshore yard. Plans were to address the met^ of removal of the boamcuse. restoration pian for dismrbed area and soil stabtltzatton plan for alterations within the steeply sloped areas. Additional Exhibits J - Elevation of Access Stairs/Finished Grades K - Landscape Estimate L - Work/Detail Plan M - Gustafson Report May 8, 1995 Review of Current Proposal The City Engineer and staff met with applicants at the site to review the information submitted with ameiided proposal. As the Engineer’s repon notes, it will be ^possible to determine the feasibility of filling over retaining walls within boathouse until the boathouse structure is removed. Originally applicant ’s plans showed the installation of new retaining wall Exhibit L. In further discussions with their contractor, it was recommended that ,he old retaining walls be maintained to provide stability of the bank and to cover them with a layer of ground cover with an underliner of an erosion control fabric to be planted with crown vetch. Upon our inspection, the Engineer advised of the need to repair certain sections of the boulder wall. As the Engineer’s report advises, it is impossible to determine the best way to restore the lakeshore yard until the boathouse is removed. The structure is in a serious state of disrepair and members are cautioned to not attempt to go inside the boathouse. The Engmeer has confirmed that there is a retaining wall to the rear of the boathouse and Oiat it wiH stabilize the bank. As of this point, we cannot recommend that the retaming wall be cover with fill or allowed to remain exposed once the boathouse structure is removed. The applicant ’s contractor does note that 18+ cubic yards of fill will be required to HU in depressions and provide suitable ground cover to allow planting of nawral giouiKl c^er. The applicant ’s contractor has recommended the planting of crown vetch which as successfully in other ureas of our City. Zonins File #1999 May 8, 1995 Paee 2 The proposed access stair will be constructed to meet the standards of Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (F). The stairs are limited to a 4 ’ width with landings at 4 x 8 . Issues for Consideration , As it is difficult for both the landscape contractor and City Enguieer to present a final Dlan for Ihe restoration of the disturbed areas, members may have problems presenting a recommendation of approval. Your approval can set forth limitations on the testo.-auon plan such as: 1. No further expansions in retaining walls, only repairs to ensure stabUization of bank. If filling is proposed, applicant’s contractor shall provide an erosion control plan for Engineer ’s review. 3.Hardcover will be reduced in the 0-75’ atea as only the stair structure ^ retaining walls will remain. Will additional plamings be required to buffet existing 3’ retaining walls within lakeshore yard? 4 Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. ** To either denv, approve or amend applicant’s plan for the restoration of the lakeshofe yard. Any recommendation of approval must include the following conditions: 1.Applicant to apply for a demolition permit for the removal of the boathouse. It shall be applicant’s responsibility to immediately contact the City EngmcCT to inspect the area to determine most practical method for stobilizaiion of lakeshore banks and ground cover. 2.Any filling within the lakeshore yard shall be limited to those filling activities needed to provide more gentle, flatter slopes within the area of the boath^. No other areas in the lakeshore yard will be filled for tlw purpose of providmg flaner landscape areas. Filling in those areas will be limited to the necessary ground cover to provide consistent/suitable ground cover. 3.Applicant may wish to place gravel or wood chips in restored area once occupied by boathouse. No plastic underliner or geo-technic fabric will be allowed beneath the surface of either the rock or wood chip fill. * « csasr.i j .1JK MAILING ADDRESS 10.000 Great Plains Blvd. Chaska. Minnesota 55318 100 Acre Growing Range • 3 miles So. of Hwy. 5 on Hwy. 101, Chanhassen, MN Prepared For V'CjCl {/ ,( ,/ V W '7 ^ r "r Ctv .. r ^ ^__________Zip find* Landscape Estimate 445-6555 Date V -y .Ci- :-v ■u Plan No___ Tel. No.Ji1L21JM Presented Cait Back Checked _ Landscape Consultant ( it i'K U v>:Bus. Tel. No.Proj. Mgr AN.MATERIALS SIZE KEY NO. NOT PlANTEOi EACH 1 NOT PLANTED total PLANTED H PLANTED EACH U TOTAL /.e ^ C -Cu>\.'y^ .5o.t_ ^ ’’A A *' • f- r . jr\! - 1 ■ii< f >r>''v/ /(S“c /- z r" j ♦ ' ' i ¥ i 1 I —4 /^'7^l• f-t CTTIJOV A.E /") jA'-t : ^ . ! '{.O'-- ‘ 1 ^;d,vc / » foXSl<K05.'OM C0tS,I^L-&'i V' fs t, >. f 1 p ' l"*'**. 'n' ‘ < .‘ ,--■U !3oo - D \'fy, Ck. u.‘J 9^ e' % —..-ZZ6 — i S\A\e'[^Mj uJiiLi.tJeeD-t a &h,f '7-v‘--r V07"/A ccuC e ------------i—^ ^-------**■.......... Ui>AUy S 60r7 KlhJX^ To tk TC > 101 'it V/-.AJL-■ V1^ HOl 'V Ai lP6 Ar.'biUNJ Ti^\ATfZoiX cir rf’O '^r uu bu'i :/j L'k! '/?.-C ^(Xi/L-i^/\/ ”7, r e /. 1q j- / fy 1 rre-^iiPcS lo,-1 ^/'rn.Nn FajAa rcc • /$ 1/lUA tL^ Ihi ArtJ-KCihiG IS 3r A f'hJt ■-5c ct M ^<, /I rX 1./ P1( L / /1 r:« -,\01 'T'SrAtSn -ize^> f :5 5;<r / L- /'w C—» iJJt {. f. ^ n >^/\/ r O ^ ij '' / (T iT SlAt'----------- * - ’ m T — .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. #/5$i)- \ \» //£ "THe PLACE TO CO ‘OR PLANTS THAT GROW” 'i, YOUR "NATIONAL LANDSCAPE AWARD" WINNING NURSERY FOR OESIGiilNaJi-PtANTING Um a^ADE TREES • EVERGREENS - FLOWERING CRABS • FRUIT TREES • FLOWERING SHRUBS - HEDGING • GROUND COVERS - FERTIUZERS IN6ECTICI0ES • LAWN SEEDS ■ PRUNING LARGE TREE MOVING i ((\/lt/^MA^ f\^Accex> lwAt^^5f»C7S l:)<^leJt6^Jeol^o 6f \ jf*y.va T: \ss< * \A-oVcJ OiA^ bW^*Are^ ^ i Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik& f\jf Associates Engineers & Architects Mav 3, 1995 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administf.itof City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323 Re: Vickerman Boathouse File No. 139-1999 If- » »»/ ^ e 'r.. ... . . . ...e # . ^ V . * A . .. . *. . • >•«. • - %«.»• 'A m . • . • ■ f * • »Jl .. A - . . .* .*• V - • • V. c ' »t • •* X •-« H I r. .n ; ; * • A . • * ■ • /1-.. , •• f •• .V • V.. • *e .J . * • . A *. J i/ » «i 4 %. A r*A» • * ’ ^ A % V N** f •• » -» .* ‘ ' * • • •* V • \ •’ .• ».i*r 4f.ft ■ • • ^ •* * a •• ^ V T *t** * ■ . A • , •t:'* t ^ • V r» . AV V • •, .. . . , -, .. Dear Jeanne, We have inspected the property at 2473 Dunwoody Avenue owned by David and Vicki Vickerman. The proposal to tear down the existing boathouse and stairway appears feasible from an engineering standpoint The existing boulder retaining walls need to be repaired m several locations. The plans call for subilizing the slopes with crown vetch and erosion contf ol fabnc which is appropriate. A portion of the wall continues beneath the boathouse. Lntil the boathouse has been removed it will be difficult to determine the most practical way to restore the slopes and retaining walls. The applicant should conuct me at this office to arrange for an inspection once the structure has been removed. Please conuct 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'55II3 • 612*636*4600 dt-^- TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: JeaniK A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:May 2, 1995 SUBJECT: #2005 Sailors World Marina, 1955 Shoreline Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Continuation of Public Hearing Tlw Planning Commission tabled the conditional use permit application for Sailors World at applicant’s request. The applicant has asked to be rescheduled before your May I5th meetmg. The original packet has not been recopied for the May packets. If you require a second copy, please advise staff prior to the final Friday delivery date. May 12, 1995. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2005 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: April 20. 1995 TO:Mr. Gary and Cheryl DeSantis 80 Wear Lane South Long Lake. MN 55356 COPIES: Sailors World Marina & Boat ChA) P.O. Box 176 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 04/17/95 VCyiE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST The Planning Commission recommended tabling your application at your request. TTie application will be rescheduled before the Planning Commission at their May 15, 1995 meeting per your request. If you find you are unable to attend the May 15th meeting, you may choose to have an authorized representative attend in your place. If so, please advise tlw staff of the naine of your representative prior to the meeting. If you have any further questions, please contact Jeanne Mabusth at the City offices (473-7357) TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, Ciiv Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building «& Zoning Administrator DATE:May 4, 1995 SUBJECT: #2007 Tony Eiden Company, 2800 Countryside Drive West - Conditional Use Permit - Coniimiation of Public Hearing The application was tabled by the Planning Commission at their April meeting because either the applicant or representative of the applicant was not present. An agent of the Eiden Company has called to advise that he will attend the May 15th meeting. Staff has not recopied the original agenda packet. You are asked to advise if you wish to be recopied on this application no later then May 11, 1995. TO: FROM: DATE: I / Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator John R. Gerhardson. Public Works Director Mav 11, 1995 SUBJECT: #2013 Freshwater Foundation. 2500 Shadywood Road - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.43, Subd. 4 (C) - Conditional use permit required for research cemer. Section 10.61. Subd. 10 - Members are asked to review various uses listed under required parking. There appears to be no other similar use listed except "schools". Existing = 46 stalls (44 regular stalls, 2 handicap). List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List E - Listing of Officers and Board Members of Freshwater Foundation F - Floor Plan - Upper Level G - Floor Plan - Lower Level H - Gustafson Report I - ADA Requirements for Public Use of Facility J - Survey Review of Application The institute was founded by the Freshwater Foundation in 1974 and on December 9, 1976 the institute was gifted to the University of Minnesota. The City has no record of ever issuing a conditional use permit to either the Freshwater Foundation or the University of Minnesota for the research center. The foundation has willingly agreed to file a conditional use permit to allow the continued operation of the institute to be soon under the authority and management of the Freshwater Foundation. The structure will once again house the offices of the Freshwater Foundation. The institute will continue to provide conferencing facilities, laboratories and office space. Please review the applicant’s addendum. Exhibit B. The foundation wants to maintain and encourage positive interaction with the local community. The institute will continue to provide a polling place for the Navarre residents. The foundation’s outreach programs will now operate from the institute. Conference facilities will be available for the general public use and pre-college and college level summer programs will continue to be offered. Zoning File #2013 May fl, 1995 Page 2 The code provides no speciHc standards for a research center use. There are no specific parking standards For this review, staff has taken the position that this institute has operated lor over twenty vears without any parking problems. The 46 toul sails would appear to provide adequate parkine. The applicant has advised that they plan no signage changes or ligh»n? changes Although applicant would be allowed over 500 s.f. of signage based on the standards of the signage code for the B-4 district. No single sign can exceed 50 s.f. Please review Gustafson ’s report of May 5. 1995. He advises that there is no change in use or a more intense use proposed. The existing paved access and gravel parking lot is acceptable. Applicant’s addendum notes possible himre plans to pave the area^ Upon your insprction y^ may have noted that the parking stalls have not been designated. Designation of stalls may be best addressed at the time of paving of the parking lot. It should also be noted tat the applicara does own the parcel (Lot 8. the Marsh at Ufayette) to the imniedtaie ^uth. This area may^ used to serve future parking needs. The staff has not asked for the legal combination of ta parcels as the minimu^ lot size for the B-4 district is 20.000 s.f. and the subject property ctear^ meets the area requirement. There are no existmg accessory improvements to support the principal use on the adjacent parcel. Review Exhibit I, the staff has enclosed a portion of a survey done by a private consultant for Freshwater Institute. They are listed as follows: 1.Provide a van accessible parking stall within the parking lot. It is encouraged that the pedestrian crossing be crosshatched to warn motorists of the pedestrian crossing. 2. To etLsi tc *Jiat a curb cut/ramp be provided leading to the sidewalk, 3. Reduce if.L tension of the main entrance and vestibule doors, 4. 5. Bevel the abrupt rise at the main entrance doors. It is encouraged that the toilet rooms in close proximity to the polling area be upgraded. 6.It is encouraged that lower coat hooks be provided in close proximity to the polling area. 7.It is encouraged that an assessable drinking foundation be provided in close proximity to the polling area. 8.An improvement classified as a short terra improvement asks that fully compliant raised and Braille signage be provided within the building. Zoning File #2013 May 1 1, 1995 Page 3 The applicant should be asked to comment on this request, Staff Recommendation To approve the conditional use permit for the Freshwater Foundation to allow the continued use of the facility as a research center known as the Freshwater Institute located at 2500 hadywood Road finding all pertinent standards of the zoning code have been satisfied and no new uses or more intense use is proposed by tte FreshNvater Foundation and further finds that no improvements will be required at this time but that the City will reserve its right to recall or reconsider the conditional use permit as it relates to additional parking needs or paving improvements. The applicant is also encouraged to work with the City to bring the facility into conformance with required guidelines ot the Americans with Disabilities Act. ■ ■ I « 1 t Mr rVIA'A a — . Stlr - crn' OF ORONO - general land use .application PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 2500 Shad\T.-ood Road Navarre Type of Appiicauoa to be Filed s-4 conditional _Us_e Property Idennncaaon Number (P.I.D.) 20-117-23-110026 .applicant Name Freshwater Foundation Phone 0 ) Phone (work) 449-0092 Address 725 Countv '^oad CieV Tvavzata. Zip 55391 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name__________________ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address Citv - Date Property .Acauired on or about Jyilv U I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parceis oi land. (month/year) fees - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - S 50.(DO For each variance reciuest with CUP application ' S125.00 Residential .Accessory Use 5200.00 InsticuuonaJ (church, school, etc.) 5175.00 Guest House.'Guest .Apartments 5150.00 Duplex CrediPBldg Y S250.(D0 Commercial/Industrial Use S200.00 Land Altcrauon Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more - • • • I . - a V -• t V .. *. ..it — • w •• w* J‘ * X a' • V V a T w' a Grading, seawall, retaining wails within 75 ’ of lakeshore .‘Vi/ . • PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule SI00.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OlHER APPLIC.ATIONS 5200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (-i- consultant fees) 5250.00 Vacation 5175.00 Easement Vacation S 75.(D0 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ' S300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer :o fee schedule) ” S3(X).00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 5100.00 .Appeals ” Other - see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District B-4 Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) School/OCflce ? V- REQUIRED SUBMrrr.\LS 1. X Completed Appiication ronn. Describe request in detail. J.Certified Property Owners Ust of owners within 350’ (you can obtain to list Hennepin County Department of Finance. A-603, Government Center. 348-32/1). 4. 5. .X Plat Mao. . , . — Certiilcate of Survey (signed by a licensed sun-’eyor) - rerer to handout ror survey 6. 7. 8. iniortnauon. . .Attach legal description :o appiication if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (e-tisting and proposed contour's) if land alterations involve changes in eievauon (grades). X List of die legal (include marital sacus) of aU persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of ipplicant(s) if not curreiu owncr(s). 9. 10. n7a Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requiremerus). nTT As an addendum to to application, please attach a separate list of any other persons vou wish noaried of to application. ^p“SI^0N °,ir™ SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Propert>* Owner must sign to application. Please remember that your appiication is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certificauon by Clencai Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: ___________________________---------------------- APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE ^ u u -r The aoplicant hcrebv agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zonmg Administrator, agrew 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 infotmauon supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Imowledge. Applicant’s signature OWNER’S SIGNATURE . The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to to application and fti^r authorized reasonaoie entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of to request. /L Owner's signature A Date Tr Appucam must have aU submioals into tlic City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission .Meeting. Commission .Meetmgs are heid on the third Monday of each month. AppUcanu must be present at all schcduiea .-eview meetmgs ot M I’lannmg Commissioa and Council. If an applicant is unable to auend a scheduled mMrag, piease arrangements to have an aumonzed agent mend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Omce of this caangc pnor to the meenng. M ^ « • 4 ^ £ ADDENDUM To:Citv of Orono From:Freshwater Foundation Subject:APPLICATION FOR A "CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE GRAY FRESHWATER BIOLOGICAL INSTITUTE Brief History of the Freshwater Foundation and the Gray Freshwater Biolo^cal Institute Alarmed by the deteriorating water quality outside his doorstep, as well as reports of freshwater problems around the world. Lake Minnetonka resident Richard Gray, along with Hib Hill and Carroll Crawford, mobilized the resources of Minnesota corporations, foundations and citizens to establish the Freshwater Foundation in 1968. The Foundation’s first major undertaking was to establish a premier $4 million research and teaching facility on the lake devoted to the study of freshwater availability and management. At a ceremony on December 9, 1976, two years after its doors were opened, the Gray Freshwater Biological Institute was gifted to the University of Minnesota to operate as a department in the College of Biological Sciences. Since that time, the Freshwater Foundation has supported research at the GFBI and has completed many other programs to encourage the public to understand how to protect and rationally manage freshwater. The Freshwater Foundation scope includes a resourceful combination of educational programs, workshops, seminars, publications, research, and public events. After 20 productive research years, the University of Minnesota has concluded budgetary constraints necessitate shutting down the Gray Freshwater Biological Institute. Even though the College views the Institute as one of its premier laboratory facilities, it is also one of the more expensive. As a result, the University has offered to return the Institute to the Foundation at the end of this academic year. How the Freshwater Foundation will manage the Gray Freshwater Biological Institute Return of the facility to the Foundation offers the opportunity to maintain and expand upon the original objective of the founding of the Institute, to establish and maintain an internationally preeminent center of freshwater research. While budgetary constraints have prevented the University from fully staffing the Institute, the Foundation is free to search elsewhere for scientists in the field who can make use of these excellent research facilities. With the wide range of physical capabilities of the Institute, the Foundation will have the opportunity to adopt a more enterprising program philosophy than heretofore possible, Foundation will move its offices into the Institute and manage the conferencing facilities, laboratories and office space, while continuing its current programs and publications. Return of the Institute to the Foundation also offers the opportunity of making the facility more accessible for local public activities needing such accommodations. For example: • Tbe Institute can continue to be the current Navarre Polling Place. • Freshwater Foundation outreach programs, such as Breakfast Talk on Aquascaping on April 27, will have a permanent point of origin. • Conference facilities contained in the Institute will continue to be available for more general public use. • Precollege and college level summer programs will continue. While the Foundation already owns the 2.5 acre lot (PID # 20-117-23-11-0038) on the immediate south border of the Institute lot (PID # 20-117-23-11-0034), it has no plans m alter either lot at this time. The Foundation is also aware that the parldng lot is not paved, and options for either paving or marking the existing area for parking wall need to be examined. Pre«;ent Status of the Property Transfer The discussions with the University are well underway and are quite cordial. Needs and expectations have been exchanged between the two parties and a tentative agreement is expected well before the planned July 1, 1995, closing date. The proposal has been submitted to the Facilities Committee of the University Board of Regents for consideration April 6 and will be submitted to the Freshwater Foundation Board of Directors after final Board of Regents action. In summary, the Gray Freshwater Biological Institute has been an important asset for the City of Orono for 2*6 years. The Freshwater Foundation now has the opportumty to continue and build upon its value to the City while furthering the interest and dedication of our citizens to protect and manage fresh water, one of our most indispensable resources. 3/24/95 I Bfrartf. . « .1 iriav mi 1 RUN DATE OS/21/fS BATCH 504 (-' )NEIMEBIN COUNTY BROBCRTY INTORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0»«CRS LIST REPORT NO. PXAS5A01 PACE S PROP AOOR 0»MER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 17-117-2S 44 BOBS 05S40 SHORELINE DR VOYACEUR SERVICE CENTERS INC V0YA6EUR SERVICE CENTERS INC P 0 BOX 45 NAVARRE Ml 55392 SB I7-117-2S 44 0044 00038 AOORESS UNASSIGNEB HENNEPIN PORFEITEO LAND HEMCPIN FORFEITED LAND 3B 20-117-23 11 0002 02420 SNAOYNOOD RO VOYACEUR SERVICE CENTERS VOYACEUR SERVICE CENTERS CO RO 15 A 14 NAVARRE Ml 55392 J J PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 20-117-23 11 0007 02540 KELLY AVE KIRK K NELSON KIRK K NELSON 2540 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR Ml 55331 3B 20-117-2S 11 0015 02445 SHAOYNOOO RO 1ST NATL BAM( OF NAVARRE 1ST NATL BAML OF NAVARRE CO ROAD IS < CO ROAD 19 NAVARRE Ml 55392 SB 20-117-23 11 0017 02455 SHAOYNOOO RO JARI80 INC JARIBO INC PO BON 95 NAVARRE Ml 55392 J PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 20-117-2S 11 OOIB 02455 SHAOYNOOO RO PAUL H ENGLUNO ETAL PAUL N « JEAttC M ENGLUNO PO BOX 95 NAVARRE MN 55392 38 20-117-23 11 0021 02545 LVOIARO AVE V H ELLIOTT TRUSTEE VALERIA M ELLIOTT 2545 LYOIARO AVE NAVARRE MN 55392 SB 20-117-2S 11 0024 0SS33 SHORELINE OR MCT COMPANY SUPER VALU STORES INC CORPORATE TAX OEPT PO BOX 990 MPLS Ml 55440 PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 20-117-2S 11 0027 02477 SHAOYNOOO RO OUANE N HALL DUANE N HALL 17B05 CRESTLINE HUMBLE TX 77394 SB 20-117-23 11 002B 02535 SHAOYNOOO RO DEANNA M LEACH CLAIR ROOD 2215 KENHOOO HAY HAYZATA MN 55391 SB 20-117-2S 11 0029 02545 SHAOYNOOO RO DEAMtt N LEACH CLAIR ROOD 2215 KEMKXW NAY NAYZATA MN 55S91 .J PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR SB 20-117-23 11 0030 02525 SHAOYNOOO RO OEAMIA M LEACH CLAIR ROOD 2215 KEIMOOO NAY NAYZATA MN 55391 SB 20-117-23 11 0031 02445 SHAOYNOOO RO 1ST NATL BK OF NAVARRE 1ST NATL BK OF NAVARRE P 0 BOX 123 NAVARRE MN 55392 SB 20-117-2S 11 00S2' OOOSB AOORESS UNASSIGNEO 1ST NATL BAMC OF NAVARRE 1ST NATL BAMC OF NAVARRE P 0 BOX 12S NAVARRE MN 55392 P PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 20-117-23 11 0034 02500 SHAOYNOOO RO UNIVERSITY OF MIMIESOTA REGENTS U OF M/REAL EST OFF SHOPS BUILDING* SUITE 101 319 15TH AVE S E MPLS Ml 55455-0199 SB 20-117-23 11 0038 02520 SHAOYNOOO RO FRESHHATER FOUNDATION FRESMUTER FOUNDATION 725 CO RO 4 HAYZATA MN 55391 SB 20-117-23 11 0QS9 OOOSB AOORESS UNASSIGNEO FRESHHATER FOUNDATION FRESHHATER FOUNDATION 725 CO RO 4 HAYZATA MN 55391 mm DATE n/zi/fsBATCH 5M PBOB AOm ONNER NAH6 TAXPAYCR MAME/AOm IB tl-117-Zl ZZ 0017 07055 OtO KACIf RO L LUKDQUlSr i 0 LUNDQUIST lARRY I DONNA MAC LUNDQUlSr 2455 OLD OCACH RD MAYZATA MN 55541 NCNNCRIN COUNTY RRORCRTY INrORMATION SYSTEM raOPCRTV OMCRS LIST 56 21-117-25 22 0016 02505 OLD KACN RD K D SNCRHAN I J 0 SHERMAN RIRR D/JAC9UELINE D SlWOiW 2505 OLD 0€ACN RO MAYZATA HN 55541 REPORT NO. PX415401 PACE 4 56 21-117-25 22 0014 02555 OLD 6EACR RO T H t A A COOUTE THOMAS N i ALICIA A COOUTl 2555 OLD 6EACN RO MAYZATA m 56541 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 62 14-117-25 55 0050 00062 ADDRESS UMASSIGNED FRESNHATER FOUNDATION FRESHHATER FOUNDATION 725 CO RO 4 MAYZATA MN 55541 TOTAL BATCH 504 00022 h )IT9R X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUITY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE SEST OF HY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. DATE freshwater fovsdatios BOARD OF DIRECTORS ASD AFFILIATIONS OFFICERS OF THE BOARD GRAY, James Chairman, Freshwater Foundation President, Kwik File, Inc. Fridley, Minnesota Residence: Edina, Minnesota BURTON, M. Boyd, Jr., Ph.D. Vice-Chairman, Freshwater Foundation Retired President and CEO, BioTrol, Inc. Eden Prairie, .Minnesota Residence: Tonka Bay, Minnesota TAYLOR, Lucienne J. Secretary, Freshwater Foundation Director, Twin City Institute for Talented Youth Macalester College, St. Paul, Minnesota Residence: Long Lake, Minnesota BRADBURY, Gregory E. Treasurer, Freshwater Foundation President. Bradbury Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota Residence: Edina, Minnesota PACKARD, John Assistant Treasurer, Freshwater Foundation President, Culligan Soft Water Co. Minnetonka, Mirmesota Residence: Excelsior, Minnesota BOARD OF DIRE< ANDERSEN. Howard A.. M.D. Retired Physician Emeritus Staff Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota Residence: Rochester, Minnesota BAKER, Betsy Associate Dean of Law University of Minnesota St. Paul, Minnesota Residence: Minneapolis, Minnesota BILUa Reid Midwest Management Services Residence: Minneapolis, Minnesota BLOUNT, Harry Rauscher Pierce Dallas, Texas Residence: Dallas, Texas BRAUER, Donald G. Consultant-Land Use Planning Residence: Edina, Minnesota CALDECOTT, Richard S„ PtuD Professor Emeritus University of Minnesota Residence: Stillwater, Mmnesota EINCK Stacy Tuneheim Santrizos Public Relations Minneapolis, Minnesota Residence' Stillwater, Minnesota GRAY, Richard G.. D.Sc. Founder Freshwater Foundation Retired President, Investors Group of Companies Minneapolis, Minnesota Residence: JVaconia, Minnesota II A IMaa I rTMTVM.sAArBk'i GRIFFITH, Clark C Attorney Popltam. Hoik, Scimobridu eu oL Minneapoiis, Minnesota Residence: Minneapolis, Minnesota HURR. Jo Ellen L\fCD Board/Past Chair. Member-Citizen Advisory Committee to Le^lanve Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) Residence: Long Lake, Minnesota. UNDEAY. Daniel T. Executive Vice President Jacobs Management Corporation Residence: Wayzata, .Minnesota LING, Joseph T. Reti^ Vice President Environmental Engineering dfc Pollution Control 3'M Company Residence: Saint Paul Minnesota MOOS, Charles M. Attorney Minneapolis, .Minnesota Residence: Wavzata. Minnesota OGDEN, Elinor K. Board Member COMPAS; Minnesota Orchestra Residence: Plymouth, Mirmesota ROSZELL, Stephen W. Vice President IDS Advisory Group, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota Residence: Golden Valley, Minnesota SCHADOW, Bruce Schadow Agency, Inc. Residence: Minnetonka, .Minnesota SPATE, D. Dean President & CEO Osmonics, Inc. Minnetonka, Minnesota Residence: Excelsior, Mirmesota THRON, Raymond W., FH.D Consultant Robert S. Banks Associazes, Inc. Residence: Minneapolis, Minnesota WHEATON. Mrs. Warde F., (Dode) Past V.P. di Treat. The Book Case Wa^rzata. Mirutesota Residence: Wayzata, Minnesota FRESHWATER FOUNDATION ADVISORY BOARD ARTHUR, Lindsay G. Jr. BAKER, Roger L BLACK Raymond D. BUSCHEK Mrs. Herbert W. DOERR, Henry HETLAND, James Jr. IRVINE, Mrs, John O. MCCARTHY, Donald MOSIMAN, Earl H, PHILLIPS, Mrs. William G. REISNER,Marc SEARLES, Robert L WARNER, Thomas L February 1995 r. r > r UPPER LEVEL LAKE FRESHWATER BIOLOGICAL INSTITUTE MAIN ENTRANCE f !; 3 «• « j; • t J J > * t • • V LOWER LEVEl 24a 1 :2B ' 32 1 3t ,34b "cn I/I Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects ^ - 4 •• J • A 4 * 1 . ^ 4f - ' • •••t m *.• " r “*• ■.*.«. ^ ^ • • v» » ; • = r 2 n * •• 4* »« » 4l^p» • * A ’I • s.<r . ... »• . 4 rr Mav 5. 1995 - *5 * A *1 T A '.' ?*■ • *w .■ J * * ' ^ e !; •• * . w "< . ; V ** ’.*^« A*-.«* *1 ■ v\ 9 .'• v'-' I >*' ^ 'i . m 9f : ■•?*•. * e •*• V •’*** ? .ec V •*.\e • -.<•» «r V Ms. Jeanne A. MabusiH Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal MN 55323 Re: Freshwater Biological Institute File No. 139-2013 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the Conditional Use Permit for the Freshwater Biological Institute. As we do not expect that the use of the property will be intensified, the existing paved access and gravel parking lot is acceptable. We would recommend approval from an engineering standpoint Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC /iLu^ i). Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. MAY 8 H'iS 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612-636-4600 f I • Ensure the TDD number appears in iocanons where depanmem telephone numbers are advenised ♦ Identin- if aadjtional TDD’s are needed for placement in individual departments which receive hich public contaa or depanm.enis which are not located :n Cit> Hall Possible locations may include thf Police Decanmenp etc ♦ Inlorm statf as to how^thev- should respond to evacuating persons with disabilities in the event of an emergency Identin- if equipment is necessary to ev acuate persons with disabilities ♦ If maps are provided to the public, indicate the iocction of accessible features on maps provided to the public, i e parking, toilet rooms, paths of travel, ramped entrances if different from the main entrance, etc In acditioa as parks are modified, descnbe accessibility features that are provided within the parks in park brochures Sl.M.MAR^ : FACTLITTFS F\ AH ATIOV ♦ Ensure all projects which involve new constniaion. repair, replacement or remodeiina are ftillv accessible ♦ The following briefiy describes the proactive and shon term issues from the facilities repons See the facilities binder for more derailed information and Ions ranae issues Citv Hall Proactive ♦ Conven one of the existing designated accessible parking ,i ,.is to a "\'an .Accessible" parking staU. ♦ Reduce the tension of the main entrance and vestibule doors at the three main entrance doors ♦ Insulate the drain pipes below the lavatones within the toilet rooms Short Term ♦ Provide a fully compliant handrail where missing at the ramp to the council seating area ♦ Provide fully compliant raised and Braille signage throughout the building ♦ Provide an adjustable height lectern within the Council Chambers Old Crystal Bav Post OfTTce Proactive ♦ Provide fully compliant parking stalls within the new parkins lot, ♦ Reduce the tension of the main entrance door ♦ Provide a low tx post office box at the request of a customer Orono Golf Course Proactive ♦ Provide fully compliant accessible parking within the parkins lot ^ a I I • f I ^ ^ ^ ^ * t • •••• m 4 — ^ mm m * v 4 ^ J ^4 44 ^ 4 | ♦ Provide a fuUy compliant entrance into the buildins ♦ Once an accessible entrance is created, provide sisnase directins persons to the accessible entrance. jqp. inc. ElT- -I*- •—.••iLi.* . —-I. ? Summan Cm ofOroro . U-pgrace .he .oUet rooms .0 be fcily accessible or upgrade one and create a umseN accessible .c.iet '.cne to be located in an accessible location, lowered and tncorpcra:room ♦ Upgrade ihc public pay telephone an amoIifiCation device. A i W Short Term. Pros-id-ftailv compUant raised and Braille signage ihrouchoui the building e !i IS -encouraged" t.hat -.endii-.c machines be prosidec in an accessible locaiion ana that senc.ng machines be orosaded *.srih loss er coin slots • i j. « Ensure accessibility features be presided at the golf course Features include • OronoGolfCourseProside some accessible golf cans . If ponable loiiet facilities are presided, ensure that :nes are mils accessiole . Ensure that an accessible path of trasel is presided leading to loilei rooms, snack bars, teemg uround at each hole, etc if a path is presided airoughoui the goi. course one Public Works . Conven ihe accessible parking stall to a "Van .AccessTDle" parking stall ♦ Reduce the tension of the main entrance door ♦ Insulate the dram pipes at the lavatones within the toilet rooms f Trlid^fully compliant raised and Braille signage throughout the building Minnetonka renter for the Art. ^Tolling Location) rcons'n one of .he «osung accessible parking stalls lo a "Van Accessible" ^|ang ^ . Eiimnate the pro.mdmg hazard assooa.ed svithin the sersing counter ,n the path of trasel leading ♦ “ls'encou°a«“- that the toilet rooms in close proxmdty to the polling area be upgraded ,o . pay telephone be upgraded .0 inco^orate an amp.incatton device rT is "CTcouraged" that fuUy compUant raised and Braille signage be presided ssiihin the building r.inv Freshwater Biological Institute (Polling LoCantion) rpros^de a "Van .tkccesstble" parking stall ssi.hin the parking lot li is -encouraged" that the pedestnan crossing be cross-hatched to warn motonsts ot the pedestnan crossing ♦ Ensure that a curb cut / ramp be provided leading to the sidewalk. ♦ Reduce the tension of the main entrance and vestibule doors. « Bevel the abrupt rise at the main entrance doors. ♦ It is "encouraaed" that the toilet rooms in close proximirv' to the polling area be upgra ♦ It is "encouraged" that lower coat hooks be provided in close proximitv- to the polling area. jqp. me. ( Fxecutnt Summary Cm ofOrono ♦ I: is "er.courag arei 22ed" thi! an accessible drinking fountain be prosided in dose proxarats' to tbe oollina -r Short Term ♦ It IS "encouragaecd" that ?aUy compliant raised and Braiiie signage be proMded within the building. f Golfof Orono ^Polling Locntion) r°Provide an accessible parking stall un dose proximir>- to the ramp leading to the polling site. « Pr: nde accessible door hardware at the mam entrance door ♦ I, ,s -encouraned- that accesstb.itn features be proctded u.tthm the tvomen s totleyoom and ,his totiet room be convened to a unisex toUet room ot provide an alternate accessible unisex toile. room ♦ Provide handrails at the ramp leading to the toilet rooms Short Term ♦ Provide fully compliant raised and Braille signage v^ithin the building. Bederwood Park Proactive . . , i ♦ Provide appropriate accessible parking within the parking lot. ♦ Provide an accessible path oftravelconneaing park activities , , , ♦ Upgrade 10«/o of the picnic tables to mcorporate an accessible path ot travel, locatea on a firm surface and provide approonate extensions u u-. ♦ Provide an accessible path of travel to the play equipment, and an accessible entrance to the play • Upmde 50% of the benches to be located on an accessible path of travel and provide a finii ♦ Prowd^M ball field and a firm surface adjacent to the spectator a Sr“:;To?^r th. ponable roller facilities and provide an access,ble portable toilet facilitv’. ♦ Bevel the abrupt rise at the concrete path in front of the concession stand, ♦ ^Provide a resilient surface at the playground leading from the entrance to the high impact areas ♦ Upgrade the bail field to incorporate a 32** wide entrance. 32" wide^ntrance to the dug outs and bevel the step to the dug outs to ensure no abrupt rise greater than 1/- Hackberrv Park Proactive u u i- ♦ Provide an accessible path of travel conneaing the aaivity areas within the park. . accessible path of travel, located on a hrm♦ Uperade 10% of the picnic tables to incorporate an surface and provide appropriate extensions. ♦ Provide an accessible path of travel to the play equipment ♦ Provide an accessible path of travel to the ball fields. jqp. inc. 1 r ■f TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusih. Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:Mav 4, 1995 #2015 Mark Harrington, 4080 Bayside Road * Conditional Use Permit/Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-1A - Minimum 5 acre requirement. Total area = 5+ acres. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.27. Subd. 3 (A) 110.20. Subd. 3 (G-2)l - Condiiioi.al use pemit for guest apaittnem within upper level of addition. Section 10.27, Subd. 5 (A) - Height variance. Required = 30’ Proposed = 32.6 ’ Variance = 2.6 ’ or 8.6% Section 10.27, Subd. 5 (B) • Street setback variance. Required = iOO’ Existing = 50.1’ Proposed = 64.9 ’ Variance * 45.1’ or 45.1% List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owner’s List D - Applicant’s Addendum El-5 - Elevations FI-3 - Floor Plans G - Detailed Site Plan H - Hennepin County Driveway Permit I - Topographic Information Jl-2 - Weekman Report/Septic Site Plan K - Survey Zoning File #2015 May 4, 1995 Page 2 DescriptioB of Request The applicant proposes an approxu-naie 35'x44' addiuon at the noithwesi of the existing existing structure was built in 1947 pnor to setback standards for residential construction and prior to the 5 acre zoning standards adopted by the Citv’ in 1975. In 1984 the City granted a street setback variance for the detached garage located to the immediate southeast of the residence. It is the intention of the applicant to construct the larger addition and eventually raise the older portion of the structure a^d reconstruct the residence immediately adjacent to the Either away from the street lot line. Review Exhibu it is difficult to place structure furth north to meet the 100’ setback because of the severe sloping topography. In order to provide positive drainage from the garage elevation and create I«smve ^gc to the northwest of the new addition, it will be necessary to place approximately 3 1/2 of beneath the garage. Based on the height definition, the vertical height will ^ determined at ^ garaee level. 3 1/2’ of fill and the vaulted ceiling design impact the final determination of the legaf height now shown at 32 1/2’, refer to Exhibit E-1. AoDlicant has been asked to file a conditional use permit as the upper level of the three st^ Addition will contain an apartment area for applicant’s mother-in-law. Review the ^ui^ standards for such use. Review Exhibit F-2, note the upper level apartment is con^t^ from a hallway that leads from the mud room and kitchen addition. A secondary gra^ level acwM door extends through the garage that eventually coimecK ® ^ Review Exhibit E-2. the rear elevation shows a lower level pauo door leadmg to the rear y^^ S^fTrouid suggest the primary access to the apartment would be from the access door leadmg from the mud room. An existing septic system was installed in 1987 and was designed to serve a three bedrtwm home Review Exhibits J-1 & 2, septic testing confirmed there is adequate area to sew a ft e tedroom residence. The existing system will be upgraded to serve the additional two bedrooms in the addition. There is adequate parking on this 5+ acre site to serve parking needs for the additional guest house unit. Zoning File ?2015 Mav 4. 1995 Paee 3 Issues for Consideration 1.Is there adequate hardships K) approve a height variance for the new construction? Can simple design modifications be made to modify or remove need for height variance? 3.The steep topographies to the north and the need to provide a feasible connection to the existing residence prevent applicant constructing an addition that would conform to the required street setback. Do you agree? 4. Have the standards of the guest apartment use been satisfied? Options of Action To either approve or deny the conditional use permit and variances as proposed with the current application. If members approve the application, the following conditions should be considered in your motion: Existing septic system to be upgraded from a three bedroom to five bedroom mound system prior to occupancy of new addition. 2.Apartment may never be used for rental purposes but shall serve members of applicant ’s family, domestic employees or non-paying guests. 3.Utilities to addition shall continue to be metered through the utilities or meter serving principal residence. \ 4. A separate address shall not be assigned for the occupants of the guest apartment. i I ft #2015 Cl • mm . i. V CITY OF ORONO - GENER-YL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION ^ ^ ' V' m • h Site Address r - * ) f./Z L--■ —',rv Vs '',■’7 Tv-pc of Application to be Filed -i.i -J Property Idcnuficaiion Number (P.I.D.) ^(7 — f) T ~~ —Hzi—00 1}L.. APPLIC.ANT Name a *• jr A tr Phone (home) 7 •'r - ’ Phone (work)‘#7’ - Address City r/- - /•'Zip r" ••V7 OVV'NER (if different than applicant) Name __________ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address City Zip DatePropert\’ Acquired I IL (month/year) I (do) (do noiralso own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES * CO.NDmONAL USE PERMITS - S 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application 51 25.00 Residential Accessory Use 5200.00 Instimiional (church, school, etc.) 51 75.00 Guest HousA(^st Apartments 51 50.00 Duple.x CreditTBWg- 5250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use 5200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $100.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) /^fter-ihe-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $175.00 Easement Vacation " $ 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ” $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ~ $300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ” $100.00 Appeals If. V' Other - see Fee Schedule "Sc-/ (3 ha'- k^ ^ ,1 wwj h i^'U,t PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District______ Present Use of Property X Residential Other (specify) . .. L. . .• REQUIRED SUBMTTT.ALS ___Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350’ (you can obtam this list from Hennepin Countv Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348*3271). Plat Map. ___Cenificate of Survey (signed by a licensed rorveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topog •jphic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital satus) of all persons with an interest in the propertv. This would include namets) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see statf 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 REQLTRED TO SLTPLY’ 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SL’BMITTED. (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 inl'ormation has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff __________________________^Date__----------------------------—— 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE . ^ u ^ The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zomng Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or 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 ,. ..1,1* The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized icasonaoie entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s signamre Date Applicant must have all subminals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commiss'cn Meeting. Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. AppUcants must be pn-sent at .-rll scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please rraif** arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. X \ *i \44 I- tiTiOl A ?56.6? ?6 » * \ ^70*7*3 6f 3« ?9? O 4 J*. (22) (25) (4) r «T or lOI » % 5ir. u m*y n or 101 5 (N) ' P4f| P* 10* r > ..i» ? •« '> ! ' ^»'V :• I : s ‘"t^i ’'I t itm P » 3 ^ — ■V (22) ----------------------- 69 —*■ W.l 1 : 557.01 !1 R i sn« I ? R J !^ 291 529.43! 5 R 5?^ M 4 f •• RUN DATE 03/10/95 BATCH 501 PROP AOOR OKNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 05-117-23 22 0007 039A0 BAYSlOE RO MICHAEL 6 FILBRANOT MICHAEL FILBRANOT 3960 BAYSlOE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 HENNEPIN COUNTY »>ROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROrERTY OHNERS LIST 36 05-117-23 23 0009 03965 BAYSlOE RO FRED BLANCH JR FRED BLANCH JR 3965 BAYSlOE RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 REPORT no: PI435901 PAGE 1 36 05-117-23 23 0020 00036 AOORESS UNASSIGNED GREGG S A BETTE J PERL GREGG S A BETTE J PERL 309 N LAKE ST. LONG LAKE MN 55356 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 36 05-117-23 23 0033 00036 AOORESS UNASSIGNEO MICHAEL 6 FILBRANOT MICHAEL FILBRANOT 3960 BAYSlOE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 36 06-117-23 11 0006 09010 BAYSlOE RD CURTIS A ELIZABETH LEVANG CURTIS A ELIZABETH LEVANG 9010 BAYSlOE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 19 0022 09095 BAYSlOE RO HAL BOON HENRICUS C A CORNELIA A BOON 9095 BAYSlOE RD ORONO MN 55359 38 06-117-23 11 0003 09296 BAYSlOE RD VCI CAPITAL INC VCI CAPITAL INC PO BOX 375 LONG LAKE MN 55356 36 06-117-23 19 0019 09080 BAYSlOE k. M J A M M HARRINGTON MARK A MONICA HARRINGTON 9060 BAYSlOE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 06-117-23 19 0023 09105 BAYSlOE RO 0 L COHEN A J L LAMB* DEBRA L COHEN 1992 HUMBOLDT AVE S MPLS MN 55903 38 06-117-23 11 09050 BAYSlOE GAM CONNELL GARY 0 CONNELL 9050 BAYSlOE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 0009 RO 55359 36 06-117-23 19 0021 00315 TONKANA RO F B BENNETT A M M BENNETT F B BENNETT A M M BENNETT 315 TONKANA RD % ORONO MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 501 00011 ) I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESEHTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION^ TO THE BEST OF MY KN0MLED6E AND BELIEF. DATE 3/^3/^ BY !i; ' 0 KS *» /i "1 :i D *:*^.,r'-.= 4. . Li- Ij Kj Ar?y-u^Ti!0^ CD»mCffM!L USS Fi^OT The addition is necessary because our family has doubled in size in the past year from 3 to 6. My mother-in-law has moved in and we had twins. Why a garage with a second floor and basement? We now have four vehicles and need the extra garage space. We located the garage to the north of the house for several reasons: ♦ The present detached double garage is on the south side of the house and blocks the southern winter sun. ♦ The addition is located on the only logical building pad. The lot slopes steeply to the north and east and is heavily wooded with mature trees. ♦ The present house was built in 1947 on 25 acres before the advent of the 100 foot setback requirement and 5 acre zoning requirements, ♦ Desire to have on attached garage. ^ The long range plan includes saving the garage and addition and demolishing the present house to build a new house on the site. ♦ The present detached garage will be given to a friend and moved off the site. The present driveway will be obliterated as per county permit. iHlSiiGIHnr > Building height as proposed is 29' 4". >• Variance request arises because garage floor cannot be built at present grade. >• Present location of house dictates location of addition. > Site slopes from front to back, grade at the front of site is approximately 30 ” below front yard. > Building code requires the garage floor to be at least one foot above lowest point of driveway. > Since the front yard is level, logic dictates that the garage floor be one foot above the front yard. This places the garage floor about 42" above the present grade. However, it will only be 12" above the front yard and at the same level as the present house when the project is completed. This makes the building height 32’ 9". I believe the intent of code is to prevent building a house on top of a mound of soil to get around the building height rules. This is clearly not the case here. > Present mature Oak trees prevent excavating the front yard to make a swale for proper drainage for the driveway. > Mature Oak and Spruce trees will hide the peak of the roof from most of the frontage. .w..,..-.,. ----------1--------- Scale .5/16"=I U\ M3 nI . 1 \ Sf? '~ fjrjijUGLino ii (1 »•« niinurn:! Ii! Li III v/ .=! ' <• " ji liJiJDiJiJrj ------; I ^ ■ /i "'I ( > ^ i )1 ., ! / y 1 y 1 y / \!<l_^ I -1 □ o D □ n n o D - o lirsrr.rJ ■^Mt ...J . J IL^ lUJ□ 1 C .00' — i 18 O.OO" □ODDDDDD DDamDDn OClLiGDOlJ UDOUUUOO 11'0.00" I I : 1 19’O.OO" If I ji. <EAR Scole I I 00 •> 0,'«( 1 r 6.: II i 3/16" = ~w-— K I a eievat ion Sea I e 3/16" = ■A k mud room Vlud room e I evat ion ^ ^ / A \ \bca I e 3/ 16 =00 ^uaaaaut^sitasatsssasasaai vv 84 SQ . FT . ( inc I ud ing sto i rs) i 8 0* 7 i B’O* ? > xa' 2J 6- VZ' 6 '0 I I I 16 siee pte «— 32 0" 23 r- f Sea I e 3/16" =00 44 ‘O’ I riLlTY 13 9 9-3/4 f S-l ock Wo ! 14 (T* Stoirb7.5'yi0.5 ’ teei DOS yo' 12 6-V2* Storciae ? %-9' ’I 'll 4 # y 20 3 ’ » 0*-- D 7-. 9*6 CLOSET FLOOR 1288 SO. FT. Siu’rs/.5''/'D.b' 2/ !) ^ 3 GRLA i ROCiV' t* \ U/9 ^2 8' 17 5‘ BEDiROOii/1 ! »1/ >r I1 ! I /I $/1/#11 2 3* 8 0" Gcbi:i 3iO(> :>► A I_____! O CV; 1 •0 3 c 2 3 m V___> WET BAR i •0 7- •j 6- BEDROOM 35 5- • - i ■ SCO I e V11^'^ 4 /'i- a Housf County y HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBUC WOAKS 320 Waatiinglon Avwnm South HopMnt. MlnWMOf 55343 DRIVEWAY OR STREET ENTRANCE PERMIT AND SPECIAL PROVISIONS Poftnit No.3873 FieM inspocted by _ Location_____#86 4QftO DAVE ZETTERSTROM Spaadzona Naarest Cross Straat (if nirai)TONKAWA Sight distanca; Actual-Left.440 + Minimum - LafI 440 Curb to ba ramovad to: □ Construction Joint □ Sawad Joint Racommandad drairtaga: □ Surtaca Q Culvan Culvart tangth 1. CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS (Within Righl-of-Way) SURFACE CURB Typa CR ROCK Typa____ h A” .Mint— BASE Typa . Daptti Dasign 24’ SIPBfVALK Typa------- Daplh 3-iBAFFisiatirr.qgL,.g.6flv<BSM6MT§ plate 12 or #3 as needed . Data 4/10/95 AD.T. 520 Right Right 350 + 35Q Culvart diamalar 15'' applicant to call for delivery SHOULDER Typa-------- Oaplh BLVD . DITCH TaminU X Dapth___21 & seed or sod 3. SPECIAL PROVISIONS ONE 14’ MINIMUM, 22* MAXIMUM WIDTH PRIVATE DRIVEWAY RELOCATION PERMITTED AS SKETCHED. APPROACH TO HAVE 5* FLARES AND PROFILE SIMILAR TO DIAGRAM B BELOW. EXISTING DRIVEWAY TO BE OBLITERATED AND THE DITCH RESTORED. DO NOT PLACE CONCRETE ON COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, CALL 930-2848. PIbm cutvart In txiitifii ^tcfi Final inspection date. Driveway was found to be □ Satisfactory □ Unsatisfactory ^spected by_________________________ APPROVE HENNEPIN Date. J it DO NOT FILE THIS PERMIT - READ ITJ A PEftMlT MUST BE IN POSSESSION OF THE' CCNTF.AC70R PERFORMING THE WORK. RcC'JlF.i; TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNING SKAL EE ON JOS SITE AND PROPERLY PLACED PRiO TO START OF JOE. A DO NOT ALLOW MUD AND DESRIS TO ACCUMU late on roadway . A E.XISTING DRAINAGE all times. SHALL EE MAINTAINED A A RESTORATION TO BE CONTINUOUS WITH JOE PRO Gn ES £, FvpiREs iiih>/ U «w ikuJ Cum«PL£TED. L CALL PERMIT OFFICE 530--f»l ro PRIOR TO STARTING CONSTRlirTinM «MO FOR i 3; f r*tf fU *f J>4>/apf? - *•’ *"'" I Lcflyj^RONO TCKJC.'UfKIC SURVS; £?. CLIRON C. B£RC DC :X)RrKE^ 1/4 OF SECTIOII 6-U7-23 \ I i^cAln 1" 50* 5-21-74 am l«ivcl ^ - pACf)Ci,iri caroCfJL. x t c?6 w I A ^ Oarbc^CK, fn A S’A^e / : Vc 90 P/a#A /77/I/ iT5ir59 # CITY OF ORONO SEFnC SYSTEM APPROVAL CITYof ORONO CrytlilBayiMinMiaa 4080 Bayside Rd. Mark Harrington LOCATION: OWNER: GENERAL CONTRACTOR:___---------- SITE PVATIJATOR: Testing . Approved The City of Orono has SEPTIC CONTRACTOR:, report r>ATP.! November 19, 1994 your on-ritt s)«<«n d«ign « of . February 21. IJ? S ^ (date) '"'st^V:‘a:d^raTc7d,s■ X.e futurT^i^ers n.ost state and Local Codes. (approvcd-disapprovcd) Expansion area for the existing systeni meets all but a variance has been granted for a system on 7% to 9« slopes (6X less reouired) ■ The residence may be enlarged to a maximun. five bedrooms “dTa co-ctf ? enclosed. notice to installers : Any cl»n,« .. d.. .ppro*«l p.», sp«» ™»t l»va prior spp™«l the Inspector (473-7357). Call for inspections 24 hours in advance. has ,“m”d Ihar primal and alternar. sites are «tequatdy proKCttd. F j *thin20^ NO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC OF ANY KIND (c«s. intclts. exth -aevtoi «y‘f r^ them A site copy will be available at the City Offices for the sepUc contractor. CITY OF^ONO Stephen Wftkinan telephone -473-TJS7 • FAX-473-OS10 .. . -- .'------ a fQ ^3>3 JS|3 5 ps 2 C IS• lx U)5:^ \>1 1 tvu» t- (J» CT» !• rC n»o 5 tr n D*n>o 75* 5 ® xC)t 01 H-* H-* c a IB ^^ vQ Oc pa u. ^ - "If ? a. Rjr IS o CO i O o2 - ^ C. tt«* 5 7 § VI0 n (/>oo S’ Ar? *— c rf»-• ft»-• Q U) ►-<■ 3 0; 3 O Jk ___ •*cx o 3 di so r. s nNnNOia* CjaAwmn CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR MARK HARRINGTON OF LOT 1. BLOCK 1, POPOV ADDITION HENNEPM COUNTY, MINNESOTA #2015 LCGAL DESCRIPIION OF CRLHISES: lot t. BlocR I. POROV ADDitlON* IRIS survey intends to sIiom the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an ealsting house theron. and the proposed location of a proposed addi tion. It dees not purport to show any other iNproveNents or ciaroeLiiaeiits. 0 Iron aerket Bearinys shown are bwsi*d upon a» ussuaed datua. MWKU*lun laUKTIRU COIIIN (.NOMil K(.. I\C I hnifn i«tlih llu( «h»« Minr» p»«-|Mrr»l b* aw»« wnJrf *»» dwnl Mijwt jntllKilIJMiAJwh f*iP-lrmUnai«|pnrrtMtlLandSwrmwMnilrf llw bw« «a thi* M.»h la Mnw«*«4 j \Urt V l.tivdviK Slmitt'NtO I NiwRm I27SS lull AUMI WS9 r- TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:May 4, 1995 SUBJECT: #2016 Marie A. Dupom, 2275 Webber Hills Rd. - Variances - Public Hearing, Piertiiient Ordinance Section 10.27, Subd. 5 (B) - A.Street yard Required Existing - Proposed Variance 50’ 27 ’ > 33 ’ 17’ or 34% B Street yard Required = 30 ’ Existing = 35* Proposed = 20’ Variance = 10’ or 33.3%. List of Exhibits A “ Application B - Propert)' Owners List C - Plat Map D - Survey E - Septic Map F * Topographic Map Description of Request Applicant proposes construction of a third staU to the existing attached garage. The additional stall measures 12’x24.5’ and will require street and side yard setback variances. The plat of Webber Hills was filed in June of 1964 and at that time was zoned for law minimum lot densities. In March of 1970 when the residence was constructed, setback standards for 1 acre zoning districts were as follows: 35’ front, 30 ’ rear, and 10’ sides. have been required. The proposed addition will extend no closer than the existmg garage located approximately 33 ’ from the street lot line. 11 iiiJiXMi—f ------—------ ~J Zoning File #2016 May 4, 1995 Page 2 Note principal structure to the immediate north is 35’ from the street line, review Exhibits D and F. There is a total of 70’ between both residences. There will now be 58’ with the proposed addition. The City has received no negative comments from the owners to the imnwHtiatf. north. Rcview Exhibit E, the addition wUl have no impact on the existing septic nor on potential septic expansion area within the south rear yard. The existing septic system is conforming. Statement of Hardships A. Severe sloping topographies to rear yard make placement of a detached garage wi&in thei rear yard impractical. B. Installation of an access drive to rear yard would have a major impact on exist ’mg elevations and possible adjacent properties. C. Location of house on property and attached garage to existing residence. D. The lot was created in 1964 prior to current 2 acre zoning stand^ and house constructed in 1970 subject to setback standards of 1 acre zoning district. Issues for Consideration 1. Are the hardships valid? 2. Other issues raised by commission members. Options of Action To either approve or deny applicant’s improvement project seeking variances to required setbacks. Any recommendation for approval must include the condition that applicant must submit a detailed grading plan providing detail on need for extension of retaining wall and maintenance of positive drainage along shared lot line of property to immediate north. xf ^ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION TT fia.’ Initial Application Fee S200.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SlOO.OO (no change from original application) Variance fo' -■^a-conforming structures S200.(X) After-the-F«w. Fees (Double application fee) • • >3 A- r I i ^ D W A - - •* b . V w V V* w * A PROPERTY INFORMATION , ■ , / o Site Address ^ U)gAk4/__H;I|s jj - . V • • • «» • • t • " V • Site Address 7 *1 L/7<».Wk4/—ng --——r— iJ Property Identification Number rPT n;> ;•> • Jl*7 - - 33 CCQ T. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. __ ^ % § m h mDate Pr I (do Propei;tv A Xtdo not^ Acquired 4/|3ii------------;—j-r-r-Iso own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) Present use of property: X residential Zoning District: R U ~ I ^ other (specify). APPLICANT ^ ^ Name k 0. ::3>‘^’7<rU)cV%\rnAr U:lh.Ci Phone (home) t/-?4 /.C) 7 Phon!(wodc) Zip:^££ail OWNER (if different than applicant) Name rtWit/a------ Address:____________________ tji - (home) (work)__ City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST EstimaiedConstructipnC^S. Describe request in detail: 7% A C^r —rt ri AT I IQ. (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front JLSide Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) compliance with Zoning Code requirements: TKaf^ ^ ---- A.a» To' ki ll 'Th^'F u^f>olrX ' fjrxK'Jh.I ^ # g 1 (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SL'BMITTALS All of the following information imm ^ submitted bv th^ 4wdlm^ W Qrdtf for vour application to be considered comP^^tl 1. —w j. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Snifirt Pi^nTowne^ of owners within 150' (you must obuin this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). ^ u .i “T Cenificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor and melur^e hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'A x 11 for uM Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any c^ges inexistmg grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8*>6- x 11 for rcpi^mn V Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8 A x 11 ). I/AList of the lesal names (include marital status) of all persons with an mtercst m the ^property This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). ^ M 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 raember ^ XfiBC v^rion^ anniicatinn is not comDl*>t^ if the above information hM information supplied is true aiM correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signature n/Kld. Dae Sw owner hereby acknowleclges and agrees to this application and further auihorues tenable entry onto the property by City saff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and councu members for purposes of investittion and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature rApplicant must have all submittfcis uuu me wiiivwj a../ -m/.* ------------ Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of ^h Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commissio and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meetii^, please make arra^^oo to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Omce o this change prior to the meeting. 8 f........... IMi DATE 0A/A4/W iATCM SOf !v^MP AOOA ONNER MAMi TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR PROP AOOR (AMR MAKE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR PW AOOR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNTORNATXON SYSftN PROPERTY OMNERS USTM 0S-117*ES SS 0002 02S2S POX ST ALVXN K LANOtERG ETAt ALVIN N LANOOERO JR tlZB POX ST HAYZATA HN 55S91 n 0S-117-2S SS 0005 OlEAi NEMER HILLS RO SnVEN A PERSONIUS ET AL STEVEN A PERSONIUS 2245 MESSER HILLS RO NAYZATA HN 55SYI SS 0S-1X7*2S S4 OOOS 021S0 MESSER HILLS RO EDNri M k^.'^HIE JR t MIFE EDPIN M RITt. IE JR 2U0 MESSER HILL RO MAYZATA MN 55SY1 SS 0S-I17-2S SS OOOS 022S5 MESSER HILLS RO OIK PEDERSON DENNIS 6 i KAREN L PEDERSON 22S5 MESSER HILLS ROAO MAYZATA HN 55SS1 SS 0S*117-21 55 0007 004S0 MILLQM OR S NORHAN H THEISTE ETAL NORMAN H THEISTE 4S0 S MILLOM DR MAYZATA HN 55ST1 TOTAL SATCH SOS 00007 SS 05*117*25 S4 0002 021S5 MSSSIR HILU RO RICHANO J NCPARUND A NIPt RICHARD J NCPARLANO 2105 MESSER HILLS RO MAYZATA HN 55SS1 to 4 • • > • •( t.5- • ■ •* .V:i tH • • • # 0)% =tfs t « • •• ■ f X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATl AND TIM ' REPRESENTATJON OF XNFORNATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORU OP THE HEIMCPXN COUNTY OEPARTNENT OP PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE REST OF NY RN0NLED6E AND BELIEF. t* • \ ' DATE H-17 n.. % 4 4 A • « . • •• • i-f. •P !■ .r ^I f •4 > D • \ ; /• 4 >‘ * I . ■ I * • •f .. I So << U^ o r S3li ar w* so ^ •|55 5 iiVi 70 — cn 2r *s « s n:3 1 S' ,s» a VP » 0 1 vi\ I Oa > ;d t: ::do X > TJ JOm JOm D ■n O JO O c "D O H •i$i Iv~> 5*? 2f r: 3fc ■Cn rw- r^n .'•VT> ■i><^' K |iS b ? ? ? S? ? oliglii 0 (0 <P O (l> (0 Q 0> 0 VI 0 V) llifi ? if a I^ a Q. A o> c o S (0 7 ^ dli»’:s <u <h 'V (h v>W fll CDmzo 5 ? o o T? D8 °0 (D <0 Cl a O 0 ^ -- V\ g S SI ^I? IS. til O' ^ C3 Ch Vi Cv Jb Ci (X !) To: Datte; Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabustb. Building & Zoning AdminisGrator May 10, 1995 Subject: #2017 William Hibbs, 1905 Fagemess Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing Pertineat Ordinances 1. Section 10.03. Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of structural coverage. Total lot area 10,020 s.f. Allowed =» 1,503 s.f. or 15% Existing = 2,651 s.f. or 26.45% Proposed * 2,308 s.f. or 23% var iance * 805 S.f. or 8.03% (Existing “ 1,148 s.f. or 11.45%) Structural decrease * 343 s.f. or 3.45% 2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover inventory. 0-75’ setback area = 520 s.f. Existing * 0% 75-250’ setback area = 9,500 s.f. Allowed = 2,375 s.f. or 25% Existing = 4,738 s.f. or 49.87% Proposed *“ 3,037 s.f. or 31.97% Variance » 662 s.f. or 6.97% Hardcover decrease « 1,701 s.f. or 18% 3. Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) - Setback variances. A. B Street setback Required = 30* Existing * 23 ’ (at Fagemess Point Road) 20’ (at Webb Street) Proposed = 23 ’ (at Fagemess Point Road) 33 ’ (at Webb Street) Variance = 7* or 23.3 ’ Side setback Required - 10’ Existing = 7 ’ Proposed = 8’ 4" Variance = 1’ 6" or 16% Zoning File #2017 May 10. 1995 Page 2 C. Side street setback - refer to Definition 39 below Required =» 15’ Existing =» 20’ Proposed = 33’ No variance required. 4 Section 10.02, Definition 39 - Lot Line Front.... in the case of a corner lot it should be the shortest dimension on a public street. Fagemess Point Road - 140’ (front lot line) Webb Street - 157’ List of Exhibits A B C D E Af^lication Plat Map ■ Property Owners’ List Front Elevation Rear Elevation F-1-2 Hardcover Inventory G - Gustafson Report 5/8/95 H - Former Survey Designating Elevation I - Current Survey J - Proposed Site Plan Description of Request Lenitive landscape^k with plastic underiiner. Refer to Bthibit E. ^ determined from the highest elevation at 949 at the northwest corner of the re$idei«^ rae structure will not ret^ a height variance. The property is not subject to an average lakeshore setback standard as it is not a lakeshore lot. neighbors notified of the variance application. - -V —a<r r‘i rtWJWli Zoning File #2017 May 10. 1995 Page 3 Refer to Exhibit G. the Engineer finds the proposal to be feasible and the new curb cut at Eagerness Point Road that has been approved. Gustafson asks for specific detail with the grading and drainage plans to be submitted with the new construction plan as follows: 1.Applicant to show how drainage from Webb Street is to be directed away from the property and along the road right-of-way - curbing, benning?? 2.Upon your inspection, review the topography/elevations along the west side lot line where new garage will be installed. If there is to be a cut in that area, a 2-3 ’ retaining wall will be required to the west side of the drive. If applicant is able to obuin western property owner ’s permission, grading can be more gradually sloped at west side lot line not requiring reuining wall. 3.Applicant’s grading plan to reflect existing elevations, garage floor elevations and driveway grade. Descriptioo of Unusual Finding or Hardships Review Exhibit A. Applicant notes the following: 1 The unusual triangular shape of the lot that is surrounded by roadway on two sides ard the topography place ^lecial restrictions on construction. 2. 3. The house was constructed prior to current setback standards Major hardcover decreases are proposed within the 75-250’ setback and a smicroral coverage decrease will also be realized. 4^ The new addition will result in improved side setbacks Issues for Consideranon 1. 2. Are the physical hardships valid? Is the proposal too ambitious for the site ... in consideration of the existing improvements? 3.In the LR-IC zoning district the side street setback is 15’, should the stnicture be moved 7’ to the northwest in order to meet the 30 ’ street setback at Eagerness Poiiu Road? What of the impact on the higher elevations? 4. Other issues raised by Planning Commission members, -----------. r: Zoning File #2017 May 10. 1995 Page 4 Opti<Nis of Action 1. To either deny, approve or amend the impfovcment plan. Any condition of approval must include the following conditions: All hardcover improvements scheduled for removal must be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. Applicant may be allowed to reuin blacktop area at the northwest comer of property for construction vehicles entering site during construction. Blacktop area must be removed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new construction or applicant will not be able to reside in residence durir^ the reconstruction. 2. Applicant’s grading/drainage plan submitted with building permit application must address the issues raised in the Engineer’s report dated May 8, 1995 k1 • JJoy'l CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIO Initial Application Fee S200.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SIOO.OO (no change from original application) Variance for non-confonning structures S^.00.00 After-tte-Fact Fees (Double application fee) #2 f*TTv -r ,*• W4 I ) Wl reerrv f Vt • A W'WVV "Vva. ww* •r,*V cw v»* V' « te* V* • V -'w; k. r ww PROPERTY INFORMATION Site ^^-11 i ir—------^----------------Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)_____a \^n^2.Q.QJS.------------- Attach legal description to applicatioiuf ^ included on tequned survey. Dale Property Acquired--------------7’^f ,, -r---------------------------- I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels ot land. '___________ V r*.ciMMtiai other wwa Mva , \ V - ■ *«.»*•/ ^ a Present use of property: residential Zoning Distria: other (specify). APPLICANT Name___^^----------------------^^ Address: /y-iV - City:. Phone (home) Phooe(wofk)_ o t MZiLilllZ Zio: <S‘ J *>/ OWNER Name ^ Address: (if different than applic^)Phone(home) Phone (work)_ City:Zip:, EstimatedCDESCRIPTION OF REQUE^ Describe request indetail: Costs /€>,Ceo VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _ Setback: ___Lot Width Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) hardship /description of unusual property CONOmONS ■ Describe undue hardship or practical difflcul^ or comoliance with Zoning Code requirements: Ar'f (attach additional sheets if necessary) ---- ■J #/ A /•W REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the followiny informati for vour aPDlkation to be CQ ^ihmittcd hv the applicatioii deadlioe dateiaj i complete: •li'H 1. 2. 3. 4. ^ Ust of owners within 150 ’ (you must obtain this list ftom ^ Hel^ Co^nw Dep«nnem of Finance. A-<.03. <3ovt Cemer, 348-3271). XPlat Map (obuincd with property owners list) - . , . u ■f Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor and incl^ calculations as requited. In addition, provide one (1) copy »'A x 11 for 5. 6. 7.5 - 8. 9. List of the legal names ^mciuuc luainai ^ oropertv. mis would include naniefs) of applicam(s) if not currem own^s). As M ildendum 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 Applicam and Property Owner must sign this application. Please ^ ^ varianre annlifation is iMt comnlete If the above infonmtlM hag not Iwcn ilidudctl. ^jn^licant hereby agrees to provide all infottnauon requited m tequesl^ by the AdmiiStrator. agrees to pay additional fees (staff tiiM not covertri by and/or consultam expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and com^ to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signature « Date _ members for purposes of in^estigafUi^and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature this change prior to the meeting. 8 z* • # M <\i 0:11 •tf ^—m ‘■'4 ♦« / .•* ^ H..-* :. :• # • i/> yjac 8 8 O lO tnrr> m:(>A ii / '© \ '9 I' \ ft >v^\s {I6) ^ ^ mm OATf os/ii/fsMTCN SOS mm ADOS OM€R HAHC TAXPAYIK NAHf/AOM Pmm ADDS OlOCA NAME TAXPAYEA NAHE/ADOA PRV ADDA CHNEA NAME TAXPAYCA NAK/ADOA PAOP AOOA CXNEA KAFS TAXPAYEA KAME/ADDA HENNEPIN eOUNTY PAOPf ATY INTOANATim SYSTIH PAOPEATY OHNEAS tXST KPOAT NO. PXASSAOl PAM f SO I7-117-XS tS OOOS eOOSS ADDRESS UNASSXGNED 0 P i P J AADENACNEA DONALD t PATTI RADENACHEA 18S7 7AOEANESS AT AO NAYZATA fti 55S9I SO 17-117-7S ES 0007 ODOSS ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO LLOYD N DRAPER LLOYD H DRAPER A0I5 GIRARD AVE SO HPLS MN 55A19 SO 17-117-ES IS 0000 01908 EAGERNESS POINT AD NILLIAH A NIDDS MILLIAH A NXDSS 1908 FAGEANESS POINT RDi MAYZATA HN 85S91 J \ SS 17-117-21 21 0007 eini FA6ERNSSS POINT KO • I LACK « S L LACK •RIAN t t sheila' a lack 1711 FA6ERNESS POINT RO MAYZATA MN 55171 18 17-117-21 21 0010 01721 FA5ERNESS POINT RO 0 L PETERSON SEN PETERSON DARRYL L PETERSON 1721 FA5ERNESS POINT RO S MAYZATA KN 55171 58 17-117-tS 21 OOU 0172A FA6SRNESS POINT RO 0 M MALSN 8 M S MALSN 8RE60RY M E HICNELLE S NAUM 172* EAGERNESS POINT RO MAYZATA MN 55171 18 17-117-21 21 0020 01817 EAGERNESS POINT RO DONALD P RAOEMACHER ET AL DONALD I PATTI RAOEMACHER 1817 EAGERNESS POINT RO MAYZATA m 55171 18 17-117-21 » 0021 018*7 EAGERNESS POINT RO T N SHUMAN • S L SHUMAN THOMAS N A STACY L SXUMAN 18*7 EAGERNESS POINT RO MAVrATA MN 55171 18 17-117-21 21 0022 01878 CONCORDIA ST ROGER COOK ETAL CAROL COCK 1870 CONCORDIA ST MAYZATA MN 55171 ■'» » 18 17-117-21 21 0011 01720 EAGERNESS POINT RO ORUCE S CAMILLE CURTISS •RUCE t CAMILLE CURTISS 1720 EAGERNESS POINT RO MAYZATA KN 55171 i TOTAL 8ATCH 501 00010 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESEMfTS ME AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AJ AP/EARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTECr * OP I'ROPERTY TAXATXONt TO THE REST OF MY RN0MLE06E ANO 8ELIEF. . . DATE OPERTY TAXAnmi - .-tj ■ • *f • • ^ .\ -|U s)I • rvi •. ■ ■ [ 4 nn i •JJ *• a A • • ■ ■ -r**laviHiiiHiii^anuiii -R 4^'il^ ^•5 i> tH ■OJ: =»fe • «• *i« I . .• • •I,:-?.. A /•f^^'.-y. A* __ >• _ f 11 ■ — • i.. • • ^>4 , :.• •• M-r^ • •' 'f . *rs •.. •»*%. f * %•• ?•••, •’• '.-tv -■ • . ........................... • •* * t. • V* <V- • •* •• • I • ‘ * /%S ^ I t •;i* ;^'VU:^;».. r ' ». ': -‘S' . ■’ •• .-.(•'( ' -i.> * %• •*< ^ in '' • : ’ • ■i^' t r V ‘ '•’ ■Ij'.'i' • ••' i I h;♦ •# •♦ »• t** ^ *.*• » 7*.• • •». •* ^ /7f/;57'/>*«r /4uif ' I. . r '■•/ . • -- ■.. rT7.. V'’* >!.i>-D I •f•1It * V '• •fi-r t; I^.6 Ki .'• .•« v,*:^ t •. '• .'• i ~ • / f • • r. #•I ^ fell’ L»** ! V .i bgV hi-Wv .<- • S m SOT iiilii r • ■ t-X. •'• .1 4: \ * ’•li V • i * 0-m 9* - *■ - ../■•C.-v^t.r:^.. ---------V: • ’. -,-:.v /* V r ; '‘‘i'i 4 wf' -^a fep- 'riv S1‘^> •<■ ■ ^ •>■ h'ifJ/Wilfj *• .• ; i-*,; i»a^^• ;. f ii 5r’i ]4 i.-4V. K'>rVi iv>! ♦.rW fe’";:;.,¥if::,.v.’§ft!ij' •- - . *• «. • I ' f* I .it. CO r' ‘ IL\Kl)COVEit4?*U<^^'LAllUiN \VUKlvi»«±.t. i SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 7S-2S(i 25-5oa 5U0-10«»0’r- ENTSTTNC TT \^^)CO^'T•Tt TN ZONE A. House _____ — Length X X X B. Garage C. Dnvc’Aay X X D. Sidewalk X X r- A1 E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape X Underlain X •1*By Plastic Or Fabric • X > •f 4*!G. Other X ► i » TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE e A ^ B r PRGPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE •A. House X \ Lcnfth X 9 9 X m X * *B. Garage C. Driveway X • • . a XrX • D. Sidewalk X ■;?X E. Patio/Deck X .t • •• X F. Landscape X *•Underlain X By Plas'ic Or Fabcie X •• r G. Other X )• 1 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE •t Otal 'propej ^'^y area in zone A * ® Wuiih s V. . S.F. S.F. S.F! S.F |Sn S F. , SFr.iL-.__' S 1- S F D S.F. SJdi S.F. A n X 100 *.♦1 .S F. WhJUl 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. 4 S.F. S.F. X 100 - S.F. % A D •f. ' 14 • • r# I I k Xi A li i .*.4nu>irtaS Kcl ____ "CO H'&-> HARDCUVtK SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLt ONE) 0-75’ . I J’ F VTSTTNG HARDCQVTn TN ZONT A. Hou*« ^*±2l1_______ * Length \ ^ X X T*f *^mULZ ------- S^BO ----------- Z^'vi i</(? T/e ‘^Acc----------- WiJuhi • 6^ n j. •I. \ ;i; .- M 1 B. Garaje C. Driveway \ X iCoHCHfTB O. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck •> fVOt^ ^ \ X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^738 _ - “.9S‘oo__X 100 PROPOSF-D hardcover in zone A. House ______________ Length Wklih X X X B. Garafie C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk E. Paiio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other total HARDCOVER IN ZONE total PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 3cS7_______ ■” “ - X 100 - , •• • •• 14 sotMuutr ZO/Z s.i*. 60 _ s.n. ___s !•. AO • S.F. 151 S.F. 1463 .S V S.P s r s F S F. 4^0 .S.I-. S F. s.r. S.F. -f / < •- fs_s o3_. SI*. S.F. 4?. a •y. /<^9 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 7/7 ..__S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ■ S F‘. S.F. S.F. S.F. \0 S.F. 7M S.F. S.F. •r* A It A IV ^ i Bonestroo rS ITosene Anderlik& |\J| Associates Engineers 4 Architects Mav 8, 1993 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Cr%iial Bav, Minnesota .55323 Re: William Hibbs Residence File No. 139-2017 • . r -4. k * ^ m , • • N»- •. ^ •• M f* , • • e «••• •• • • .V • • •• • 4. • .' ' • y a g-- , ■ #. r. ts* , •• »»*t • • ' . V » * . . * H. . V.- •.. . V » *••'I'r • A . •« 4 %. • • A*. .» • • ' • . t • ir*\ V.-4 A er M*^^*** ,e • • V. ' • * A s. »• c . r*:.T- ■ •' *1 * A * i C« ^ •* “ 4 • %.>•%*! ^ • r »• • •«, V . d ..-ef • •• « . <•%* ^ •* A'.^i • • •• * -t •* • A . 4 , » •I •. .. •# 3 ••• rt . *• “ I. 5 •• • ? Ai f .H ;f« •/ • ’. ar* •• I V C * “ H V ./ r „•••. . * * , .*« Dear Jeanne. We have inspected the property at 1905 Ftgerneas PoitU Road owned by William Hibbs. The proposal to rebuild the existiog structure, remove the rear driveway and add a new driveway from Fagemess Point Road appears featibla from an engioaering standpoint There are several details which will need to be resolved during constniction such as the following: * How will the drainage from Webb Street be directed away from the property? Will the grading along the westerly lot line bknd into the existing slopes without a retaining wall? * What will the new driveway grade be to meet the gtrtga floor (elevation unkwowti}? Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this mattar. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK A ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson. P.E. 2335 West Hlohwav 36 • St. Paul MM • Ai9.A5/...;/.An 4 4 • -imm •• • L - 515 "_ _ _ _ _ _ - —/9ZOO .. WEBEt„?T. ^ LEGAL DESCRIPTION That part of Lot 17, Fagernes^ described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest comer of Lot 17: thence East on th* North line of said Lot 17, distant 93.0 f.it for II pl«2 of b«Innlne- thence angle right 55 distant 147*4 feet Intersectins a nolnt on tha* Southeasterly line of said Lot 17 distant 26.8 feet Northeasterly from the Southeasterly corner of said Lot 17, thence NorthJIstIJlJ Sn thi distant 129.2 feet mSm Sr l«s tS. West on the North line ofsAid Lot 17, distant 157.0 feet to the place of beginning. o o X 000.0 (000.0) Otnotts iron monumont OonotM oNMt suk« Otnotct txitting titv. 0«notM Proposed elev. Denotes surfece drsinege Proposed garsge floor elev.* Proposed lowest floor elev. ■ Proposed top of foundetion elev. BENCH MARK: »*#**P«# •WI# •• m * ^9»e *far«s««« I fTtle iS 0 • r-'V m J ..W.!-'.'** ri—itlCi.- ”*.'i ll .f r ■s Xmzzmu z oo Cz H m CO O ;! 'O ? \ \ \ t"> nn i\\ K} N 0 Q> t^:| ~;WA. ^? I ( ir 7 1^'•' I- ■■^' iii^j! a . ? 3 S' \ \ \ \ \ X r // TO:Chair Peterson aral Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building A Zonii^ Administrator DATE:May 4. 1995 SUBJECT: #2018 Richard Bom, 1991 Fagemess Point Road • Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance: Section 10.55, Subd. 9 (B-3) • All permanent boat docks require conditional use permits, Ll^ of Exhibits A - Application B • Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - DNR Request for Review and Comment E - DNR Permit Application F - Former Permanent Dock G - Current Dock/Proposed Dock H - Photos of Former Dock I - Survey/Location of Proposed Dock Description of Request A permanent dock was installed on this property prior to 1970. Basic ^ ^ can be viewed on Exhibit F. In January of 1979 the City adopted the FloodpUin and WeU^ Management Ordinance. The ordinance classified permanent docks as a condition^ use. current owner has reconstructed the original dock to its present configuration, review Exhimt G. Mr. Bora now proposes the installation of additional dock sections as shown on the proposed construction plan (Exhibit G). Section 10.55, Subd. 11 (A). Standards for floodway and flood fringe conditio^ ^rmits states, "No struemre (temporary or permanent) allowed as conditional use pe^ts which acting alone or in combination with existing or reasonably anticipated future adver«ly affect tM capacity of the floodway or increases flood height." This structure will have no impact on the floodway of Lake Minnetonka nor will it increase the flood height of the lake. Review Exhibit 1, the 40’ + length dock will meet the required side setback side lot line into the lake shown at 40’. In reviewing the distribution list of the DNR permit, it appears that the LMCD has not been notified. Staff has recommended to the applicam that he rab^t his information to the LMCD to determine if a permit is necessary. As w A..v,na «,irh a oermanent dock, it may be necessary to certify the setback to the extended side 1 Zoning File #2018 May 4. 1995 Page 2 lot line. The setback matter is not an issue for the City of Orono. The City need only lave confirmation that both the DNR and the LMCD will approve the permanent dock as proposed. Staff Rec I M I To approve the conditional use permit for Richard A. Bom to allow the installation of additional permanent dock sections at the property located at 1991 F^emess Point Road, subject to applicant providing confirmation of the issuance of a DNR permit and approval or permit from the LMCD for the expansion of the permanent dock. ^ "‘S *1 1 CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATIOs- c- / r : pr Type of Application to be Filed_________________________ Property Identificatioa Number (P.I.D.)------------------— APPUCAXT Name --------- Address I PI P!I tit - City <o<z.o>w (home) ^^2. "-il (work)^/2- VS'*? _____Zip_SSXll_ O^'NER (if different than applicant) Name . • ! • -)Phone (I Phone (work) Address City Zip. DateProperty Acquired i I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - y S 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application 7/ $125.(X) Residential Accessory Use S200.(X) Institutional (church, school, etc.) 51 75.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments 5150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg 5250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use 5200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplam Grading and filling - lOl cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - sec Fee Schedule $1(X).00 Renewal Fee (no change from origi^ application) Aftcr-thc-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $175.00 Easement Vacation S 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fet schedule) $300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District_____ Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify). (month/year) w * I • ^ ^ ^ - ■ r rZ / : fc. - ‘ ^ 01 -j:: ; ' — - I I fMirriii I r ii li m pminm^ OcjO / REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. © Completed Application Form. \/ Describe request in detail. • ••f > _______ . . Hennepin County Departmeni of Finance, A-603, Gov Plat Map. Cenificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survej information. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. m mm ^ \/ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. __Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital satus) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applkant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUTPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUTVIENTS 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--------------- APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE u ^ 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 peymeM) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the infonnauon supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s signamre Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this a{^lication and further authorized reasonaoic entry onto the propetjjt-^ Ci^^ staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purpd^^/i^j^ig^ti^ ification of this request. Date ______Owner’s sigMturc^^ Applicant have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planni^ Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicams must be present at all schedmed review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled loM^, please arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building Sl Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. i P. r. niMIfecrtiwv A vmasv. 4 « r ! i*.U %nUiCr .f" Ir i»c %n -> » •(^•^nrrT nnUMOARY HENNEPIN COUNir. Mlf»«WTA-.... r*’i Tc service ■i !. -, . < ■i..- MM MTI 0S/0«/9SMTCM SM iswcnN ceuMH raomrr mronuTiaN systcm:rtv omcio listOMCt NMC TAWAVEi NMC/AOm M 19-117-ES lA 0002 OIMO rACEMCSS Mtl HARV H NCOOVEiN MAAY H MCGOVERN 1900 EAGERNESS ET RO NAYZATA 104 SSS91 IT HO RROE AOOR OM«R NANI TAREAYER NAHi/ABOR SO U-117-2S M 01901 EAGERNESS EOXNr RD CHARLES N CNRISTXANSCN ET AL CNARUS A EOITN CNRXSTUN5EN 1901 EAGERNESS RODfr RO NAYZATA m 5SS91 ‘ • •• i / iiPaiT NO. RtASIAOimet. 10so 10-117-2S 14 OOOS 01907 EAGERNESS ROINT RO LAE SANOERSON LEE 0 A EUNXCS N SANDERSON 1907 EAGERNESS ROINT RO NAYZATA 104 5SS91 SO 10-117-2S 14 0190S EAGERNESS ROINT RO A 1 ORNEIN A N V ORNEXN ALAN I ORNEXN 190S EAGERNESS ROINT RO NAYZATA m SSS91 SO 10-117*tS 41 0-01 01991 EAGERNESS ROXNY » RXCNARO A OORN RXCNARO 00M4 1991 EAGERNESS ROINT RO NAYZATA NN B5S91 TOTAL OATCN X CERTIEY THAT THE FACTS RERRESENTED ARC AN ACCURATE AND TRUE RERRCSENTATION OE XNFORHATXON AS XT ARREARS TNXS DATE ON TNC RCOOROS OR THE HENNERIN COUNTY OERARTNENT OE RRORCRTY TAXATION* TO TNI BEST OE NY ICNONLEDGC AND BELIEF. DATE s/s/y$„ gLl ^ r- / 1 * ? e-.* jtf D mquest for rbvibw ^nd comments MINi>SSOTA 0NB PERMTT APPLICATION NUMBER: ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ DATE or REQUEST: 'Zl (Noir. ^--------^ ^ .1^ «>■ Put 3i daw fiw fwifnfcig ■<>«»«» Return Commcals to: DNR Div^ of Wattn, Metro Region, 120t Warner Road, Sl Ptal, MN 551«.) ^ * Ay~*r^PHONE: (612) 772-7910 1895 TO: a City a □ □ c □ a □ ^ J WMmhid Authority Com. District (SWCD) CoqM of Eofinecn DNR Wildlife DNRFiikcnee DNR Eco. Sovica L'i'V^ OO PROPOSAL INFORMATION Applicant: l/V\ > "~Tc-c SU—^ J ^ «Lv^Ke%^ C3-*nr-^ .fciu.DNR ID#: 133-1 County: (4^^nr^y-— Projoct Doscription COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL Comnionta on ProjMrt by Reviewer (attach separate sheet H needed): Name of Reviewer:Tide:Date: I ftquttt • copy of tho rocofnm«ndooon of tho Afo« Hydrologist: YES NO NA-02622-05 rr -T R«v.12«1 ■^^MMITMINT OP MATUIAl IlSOUtCfi - J « I rarfryiHKnw I rwifCTI#WIBB M •ETliM ^l0fTTI I?-0^»CE use ONLY PP JIO w ► Pteas« f*^ad instructions before attemoting to complete tfns application □swco ntc Owo Gu*x:o€ m. Appi(C»it$ Mamc (Last. First. Ml) Ao<kK> 0 M^ess (Street. W A. ess (Street. hFO. Boi Nuin^. City. State, 2ip Authorir«3 Agent (it apo'icaDte)Telepftone KlumOerAafeacoap ^2. ) v?/«f y 77 C® sa.^S39l LOCATION PRO^SgD PROJECT (BdSURE TO INCLUDE SKETCH SHOWING HOW TQGET TO THE SITE) Government Lot(s)Ojarter Section(s)Section(s) Mo Fire No. Box No or Protect Addr /94/ IX No or Profoct Addrm TYPE OF WORK PROPOSED (CHECK ONE} To«nsliip(s) No County Aangc(S)No.Lot. Bk)cii. Subdivision 19. TYPE OF PROJECT (Ch€CK ONE) P’^OfCCt Mtiii attect^l^aM Qwettand or □ Wac«fCour$* ry\ .v... ^ □ excavate □ fill □ dram □ construct □ mstaH □ repair □ remove a abandon lCother (specify) □ Shoreline □ shore-protection □ channei □ harbor □ sand blanket ^permanent dock □ riprap □ «vharf □ obstruction □ bridge □ cutvm □ dam □ other ispecM ESraMIB RMJKT CMT $H LENGTH OF SHORELINE AFFECTED (IN FEET)XO W. m. VOLUME OF MATERIAL FILLED OR EXCAVATED (IN CUBIC YARDS) BRIEF EXPLANATION OF PROJECT: (EXPLAIN WHAT PROJECT CCM^ISTS OF AMO HQW WORK WILL BE DONE) '+■ -R-.-'v 3a.' ■Jm MP' rKU>c4».^K'» u.u» *i*Ll H ^ PURPOSE OF PROJECT: (Explam why th« proiect is neede^ "TV*- OwolL urwkf X t-rwr r-ift h BNMOMKNTIL MMCT (Anticipated changes to the water and related land resources, including unavoidable but detrimental effects) BlfMTIwn (Other alternatives to the action proposed) Sevt »Vwc /{)e%£jC iV g,lAfe.u^V\^^c. I h*mby m*ka appSeiiior pursuant B Minn**oii SiaiJtM Chaper 103G.245 and M »ppor*i9 fult* tor I pwmit X) vwk « Of ilhct hi ib«e MmedprehCBd Miw(s) in accordwtcawsi al supponin) mapt, plans, a-sd Mhtr nbrniaion submilM«f) M appSeaixv Tlw Mormafon tubmiOidand staWiMMaiMM oonearnins tiB applcatnn ara true and conact to n« bast of myjunWadga. STATE Of COUNTY Of Labsaibad and Distribution; White: ONR Blue: SW(» . Green: Watershed District Cjoldenrod: City or County Pink: Army Corps of Engineers Carwy: Applicant mVi^ u m 4.u o V ^ 1 b ^ O A In --------------------------- --------------------------------- e It' - c o O’ C r ^•p*wU t iw ^ o 1■h ».,4- -, V V' • '•::* - - ‘ • - ;'*- • V A ’"IxtI-2. ^ u*»■ • • :Z7^ ^ '* • • t '• ------- Ir: -" — — 'Ci - u. • •. s . -2^ QS.'ji:Li. ‘ r» — - -.J^'-'s mi 0 Oin f Certifleate0f Survey for Chip FIsher in Lots 1 and 26. FAGERNESS Hennepin County, Minnesota . .-V. • / / Soviigrif line ^ of U* Z V.o /^A.^DC0t/£A *tr frSttm ./iw/.f tff frr^itttA Of yv^»r»v » 21400 f Jf.^y AUr,4c»¥ft * S793 t ,Af t / //,./>• r 2/, 4t 7» t f** ^ t I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the following described property: Lot 26, EAGERNESS, except that part thereof described as follows: Commencing at a point In the Southerly line of Lot 2, EAGERNESS, extended Southeasterly which point is 50 feet from tl»e most Southerly corner of said Lot 2; thence angle right 65 degrees 46 minutes a distance of 77.66 feet;*' thence angle right 90 degrees In a straight line a distance of 69.6 feet to the point of inter' ctlon with the Southwesterly line of said Lot 1, which point Is the actual point of beginning; thence continuing on said same straight lino Lo the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence Northerly along said shore to its intersection with the Southerly line of Lot t, EAGERNESS; thence Southeasterly along the SouLhorly line of Lot I to the point of beginning. Also, that part of Lot 1. FAGERHESS, described as follows: Commencing at a point In the Southerly line of Lot 2 extended Sontheaslerly which point is 50 feet from the most SouLhorly corner of said LoL 2; Ihence angle right 65 degrees 46 minutes a distance of 77.66 feet Lo the actual point of beginning, said 77.66 foot line being hereinafter called lino A; thence angle right 90 degrees a distance of 69.6 feel to the point of intersection with the Southwesterly line of said Lot 1; thence Southeasterly along said Southwesterly line a distance of 100.28 feet, more or less, to the shore line of Lake Minnetonka; thence Northerly along said shore line to a line drawn at right angles to line A from the point of beginning; thence Westerly 25 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning, and of the location of all buildings, .if any. thereon. It does not purport to show any oilier improvements or encroachments. Scale Date o 1 Inch = 40 feet March 19. 1985 Iron marker ■'“''■'’y'' rtf. .‘v-.f ft COFFIN i GUONIIEIiG, INC. MarlT”5. Grbnberg Reg. Mo. 127S5' Gordon R. Coffin Reg. Mo. 6064 Engineers and Land Surveyors Long Lake. Minnesota Phone: 473-4141 w I L TO:Chair Pcicrson and Orono Planning Commission Membcfs Ron Moorse. City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE;Mav 10, 1995 SUBJECT: #2019 Lciscl Cox. 3445 Shoreline Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Pertinciit Ordinancci Section 10.40, Subd. .4(0- Conditional use permit required in B-1 zone for Claur I re^umtt use. Section 10.61. Subd. 10 (P) - Parking requirements for Class I restaurant. 1 stall for each 80 s.f. of public floor area. Total area = 1,071 s.f. Exclude bathroom I0’x4 ’ = 40 s.f. Kitchen area 10’x34 ’ » 340 s.f. Toul = 380 s.f. Adjusted area » 691 s.f. - 80 s.f. « 8.63 or 9 stalls Existing = 28 sulls (16 upper level. 12 lower level), refer to Exhibit O. 67 spaces (20 ___n leven. refer to Exhibits I and J within shared parking area. Section 10.61, Subd. 3 (A) - Allowed signage in B-1 zoning district Allowed * 185 s.f. . ^ - Proposed * 36 s.f. (outer signage 16 s.f., interior window 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum C - Property Owner’s List D - Plat Map E - Floor Plan F - Front Elevation G - Survey of Property 5/4/95 ^____ Hl-2 -1/14/76 Survey of Subject Property and Property to East - Both Proper Parking and Loading Facilities I - Glenn Cook Report 12/5/85 J - Parking Plan K - Gustafson Report 5/5/95 Share ■ . .m. . ^ .A ^ k-a Zoning File #2019 Mav 10. 1995 Page 2 Review Applicatum The applicant has filed a conditional use permit to allow a Class I restaurant use at 3445 Shoreline Drive. The property is located within the B-1 zoning district. The proposed restaurant will be located in a multi-use commercial building that conuins a craft shop at the upper level and packaging and mailing operation in the lower level. At the second upper level there are apartments. The reuil/restaurant space was occupied by Champion Auto that has now moved to the former Keaveny Drug site. The area to be occupied by the restaurant use served as additional storage area for Champion Auto located in the now vacant larger area at the northeast comer of the structure. The restaurant will provide approximately 30 seats. The menu provides expresso drinks, coffee, sandwiches and desserts. Ms. Cox notes that the hours of operation would vary between 6:30 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. depending on the season and the day of the week. The City ei^ineer has reviewed the site and finds the parking and access to the property to be acceptable. He finds the proposed use will have no greater demand on parking than the forrocr Champion Auto retail use. Multi-use buildings at both the former Keaveny property and the subject property share parking facilities and loading facilities. There is no record of parking problems on the subject property. Total signage for the restaurant is proposed at 36 s.f. The entire multi-use building b allowed a 185 s.f. of signage area. There appears to be no signage problems nor do there appear to be excesses of signage on this property. The City has no knowledge as to a future user of the former site occupied by Champion Auto. Ms. Cox is a resident of the Navarre area residing at Ivy Place on Casco Point. Staff Recommendation To approve the conditional use permit for a Class I restaurant at the property located at 3445 Shoreline Drive to be known as a Minnetonka Mud Coffee and Cafe finding there b adequate parking at the subject property and within shared parking area on the Keaveny property to the immediate east, approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Owner of the multi-use commercial structure. Alex Overson, shall be responsible for obtaining the signage permits for the applicant proposed at a total 36 s.f. Multi-use building is allowed a total of 185 s.f. Applicant is also advised that temporary signage used to advertised the new restaurant use must also be obtained under the authorization of the owners of the building. ....M 1 n Ml r r Zoning File #2019 May fo. 1995 Page 3 2.Applicant to obtain a building permit for any alterations or remodeling. Applicant to present plans for the review of the building official. In addition applicant shall provide information on status of licensing with the Hennepin County Environment Health Department. n i ’ 1 t ^ ♦ CITV OF ORONO - GENERAL L.\NT) USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION > Site Address ShcnfV.ng- IV- Kkvocvrre.— TypcofApplicationtobcFUcd r«rv4.^rrw > zO - M 7 - 25 \ 2. QO^A_____________________ APPLICANT Name Le.tis«*l Co/ PI P* OGIE (hooie) Hll-felWaH • t I- Address Tuv (week) City iitvy^CvVcy mw’ wz-ru C2iiL OWNER (if different than applicant) Address ------ PI Pt none (home) (work) City Date Property Acquired -------------------------------------- I (do) (uo not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 50.CX) For each variance request with CUP application S125.(X) Residential Accessory Use 5200.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) 51 75.00 Guest House/Gucst Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ^ S250.00 Coramcrcial/Industrial Use * $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule 5100.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original ^plication) ^ After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee (month/ycar) "W V vv V4, ......................... ; i -■ <‘r. -r • - •• • r " vr? t .-••••■A fiTt •7- w vv .fc OTHER APPLICATIONS $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant tecs) $250.00 Vacation $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) $300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ' $100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule ».* • PRESEOT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District 1 Present Use of Property Residential ^ Other (specify)______\/o.r(xnT_ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. £ 6. 8. 9. 10. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350 ’ (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Plat Map. 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. Topogr^hic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital sanis) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would Include nainc(s) of ai^licant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements) As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11” X 17” OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submined.) 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 b complete. Initiab of Clerical Staff: _________________ Date__________ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all infoitnanon 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 thb application, and certifies that the information supplied b true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s signamre 0 Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to thb application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commi‘'sion members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of thb "quest. Owner’s signam Applicant must have all subininals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicant* *nust be present at all scheduled review meetings of the i’lanning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agem attend in your place and advise the Building A Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 1 MN DATE 04/0S/9S MTCN SOS raop AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER HAME/AODA M 1 0S502 SHORELINE OR LOMELL R ZXTZLOFF LONEU R ZITZLOFF SIT BARRY AVE $ BSOO NAYZATA MN 5SS91 HEtRCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY (RMERS LIST SB 17-117-ZS AS 01A2 0SA40 SHORELINE DR H A E MUELLER RICHARD N BLoonquisr SA40 SHORELINE OR NAYZATA »M 55ST1 REPORT NO. PI4SSA01 PACE a SB EO-117-ZS 12 0027 02474 CARMAN ST HARD E EONAROS NAim E EONARDS 2474 CARMAN ST NAYZATA MN SSSTl PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OWCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 20-117-2S 12 0028 024B0 CARMAN ST RXCHAm A EONAROS RICHARD A EONARDS 24B0 CARMAN ST NAYZATA MN SSSTl SB 20-117-2S 12 0046 02S05 KELLY AVE PETER CHON NARY MANACMENT PO 2S5 CHANHASSEN MN 5S317 SB 20-117-2S 12 0051 02497 KELLY AVE A H EVANS A 0 EVANS AUSTIN A DIANE EVANS 2497 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55SS1 SB 20-I17-2S 12 0054 02503 KELLY AVE DANIEL T LINDSAY DANIEL T LINDSAY 100 5TH ST S SUITE 2500 MPLS MN 55402 SB 20-117>2S 12 OOSS 0S445 SHORELINE OR A A I OVERSON A OVERSON C/O J B OVERSON OVERSON FINANCIAL SERVICES 4940 VIKING OR SUITE SSO EDINA MN 554S5 SB 20-117-2S 12 0047 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO NAVARRE COVE HOMEONNERS ASSC NAVARRE COVE HOME HOMERS 2499 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR 194 55SS1 SB 20-117-2S 12 0052 02499 KELLY AVE R V DAHL AMS OAHL SYLVIA A BERTAGNOLI 2499 KELLY AVE EXCELLSIOR MN 55SS1 SB 20-117-2S 12 0055 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO KELLY COVE HMONNRS ASNAMONO KELLY COVE HMONNRS ASN/ORONO C/O KIM GOEBEL 100 S 5TH ST SUITE 2500 MPLS MN 55402 SO 20-117-2S 12 00S4 0S42S SHORELINE OR RICHARD N KEAVENY ETAL RICHARD N KEAVENY P 0 BOX 59 NAVARRE MN 55392 SB 20-117-2S 12 004B OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO BON *4 CRYSTAL BAY MN S5S2S SB 20-117*23 12 0053 02501 KELLY AVE DANIEL T LINDSAY DANIEL T LINDSAY 100 BTH ST S SUITE 2500 MPLS ftl 55402 SB 20-117-2S 12 0057 02414 CARMAN ST E T A 8 A LEHMAN EONARO T LEHMAN 2414 CARMAN ST NAYZATA m 5SS91 05 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TA>CPAYER NANE/AOOR 36 20-117-23 12 0058 02^0 CARMAN ST ANTHONY F LASELLE ET AL ANTHONY F LASELLE A CHARLOTTE AOOISON-l^ASELLE 2440 CARMAN ST ORONO MN 55391 36 20-117-23 12 0059 02450 CARMAN ST R C KUNCIO A S E RALEIGH R C KUNCIO A $ E RALEIGH 2450 CARMAN ST NAYZATA MN 55391 36 20-117-23 12 0041 00036 ADDRESS UN/^IGNEO CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO P 0 SON 44 CRYSTAL SAY MN 55323 1 4 HUN DATE M/OS/95 BATCH 503 PnOB AOCNI OMNEII NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR SB 17-117-23 43 0083 OOOSa ADDRESS UKASSIGNED HENNEPIN rORFEXTED LAND CITY Of ORONO PARR 4/13/7P ST DEED 154754 i«NNEPIN COUNTY PIIOPCIITY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0»*CRS LIST Se 17-117-ZS AS OOSA OOOSa ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO CONVEYED Z/8/82 ST DEED 1A11A7 Report no. piassaoi PA« 7 SD 17-117-ES AS PODS OOOSS ADDRESS UNASSIONEO HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARKINB LOT DUFFER S-ZZ-AI ST DEED NO 17A998 PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR SD 17-I17-2S AS OODi OSAAS LYRIC AVE N e A 0 M TIERNEY NILLIAN 6 A DELORES TICRNEY SAA5 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA H4 55S91 SD I7-117-2S AS D0D7 0SA7S LYRIC AVE T C A J N FLYM4 TOM C A JULIE M FLYfM SA7S LYRIC ST NAYZATA MN 55S91 SD I7-X17-2S AS DODD 0SA77 LYRIC AVE L C SCOTT A J E SCOTT LYLE C A JOYCE E SCOTT A50D SANTAS POINT U NlfDCTONKA Ml 55S91 PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR SD I7>117-2S AS 00D9 OOOSD ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO L C SCOTT A J E SCOTT LYLE C A JOYCE E SCOTT 2S0D SANTAS POINT LA NIIDCTONKA MN 55S91 SD I7-117-2S AS 0090 0SA99 LYRIC AVE GARY N NOLFSTELLER GARY N NOLFSTELLER 215A CARDINAL LA MOUND m 55SAA SD 17>117-2S AS OOn OSAH SHORELINE OR DAVID CHARLES DIE THOMAS H FRAHN 2520 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA rtl 55S91 B PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 50 17-117-2S AS 0092 0SA9A SHORELINE OR DAVID CHARLES DIE THOMAS H FRAHN 2520 CASCO POINT RD NAYZATA MN 55391 SO 17-II7-2S AS 0095 03AA0 SHORELINE DR L DENZEL A 0 DENZEL TRSTE SANDRA HOLMAN SA6D SHORELINE OR NAYZATA Ml 55391 SD 17-117-25 AS 0095 OSADO SHORELINE OR L C SCOTT A J E SCOTT LYLE C A JOYCE E SCOTT 2500 SANTAS POINT LA MINNETONKA MN 55391 SD 17-117-25 AS 009D OSAIA SHORELINE OR GERM-TOM PARTNERSHIP GERM-TOM PARTNERSHIP CA3 COURT MACFARLANE P 0 SOX lAll MIMCTONKA Ml 553AS SD 17-117-25 AS 009A 0SA72 SHORELINE OR L C SCOTT I J E SCOTT LYLE C A JOYCE E SCOTT 2500 SANTAS POINT LA NIMCTOMCA Ml 55S91 SD 17-117-25 AS 0099 OSAOO SHORELINE DR DALE 8 JOHNSON NAVARRE HARONARE C/O DALE JOHNSON SAOO SHORELINE DR PO DON AO NAVARRE m B5S92 PROP ADOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 3D 17-117-2S AS 0100 0S50S LYRIC AVE RUBY L LINOBLAO RUBY L LINOBLAO 3505 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA MN 55S91 38 17-117-23 A3 0101 0351S LYRIC AVE N F BOLDER ETAL Ml F BOLDER 3515 LYRIC AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 SO 17-117-23 AS Oils 035A2 SHORELINE OR DAVID S PETERSON LONELL R ZITZLOFF C/O L N R PROPERTIES S19 BARRY AVE S tSOl NAYZATA Ml 55391 RUN DATE 0«/0S/«B BATCH 503 AOOR CMCR NAHE TAHRAVER NAME/AMW HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INPORIMTION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWCRS LIST REPORT NO. PI4SS401 PAGE T SB EB-117-2S 12 00«E OOOSB AOORESS UNASSIGNEO EONARS T A GLORIA A LEHMAN EONARO T A GLORIA A LEHMAN 2A70 CARMEN ST ^YZATA m 55391 TOTAL BATCH 503 00037 Q CQ «“J25.SS; S'.2*S5.?'.SrST22^ 2 S'.SSSS? C7 EARS THIS DATE ON THE REU 3P||ip TAX^HON, TO THE Bl . _ . A bn As*. Qo _______________ r^' rouD coftsS ”. 3-VU5 _Q^*____________ N <^V .j'O V > 5 5 53_2-_______ -• N£Zr^ 1 ouOG6_A i^€>^^. _. .Cson-H^ ot^j3ooj><___ „ AvISA.. O- TAS’wS ... C’Tt^'jK^ LAr/o^ - . S‘u3“ct t^___ ___C HAn ^.c _ c; . fvao'ToOE /^Y^!Lf^€L£. e!S^ ■ u«* ^ LeseHD j -______ S-_5t^A..___________ C-CnAii^........................... _ ........................................ cr-cou/OT^,....... L,' SToou I .nj lOipeiD^oy: P -. ___________ A..®! ^Appfl.oy/»\AT\=cy'^____ 55^^.:_541=_E-'9.____ (!) SiVBa^ CertJ ftutB : L^fsel Cox Tract h, R.L.S. No. 1422, except highway right of way per Doc. No. 1946165, City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota. SHORELINE DR. ( NCSAN NO 15) A PROPOSED ELEVATIONS Top of Foundation Garage Floor Basenent Floor Aprox. SeHer Service Elev. Proposed Elev.Existing Elev. Drainage Directions Denotes offset Stake C3>N BENCHMARK, MIN. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS SCM.E : I Inch • 30 Feet Front - House SidRear - Garage SI e - de - Plinning Engfnggring Surv$ylng «MI rail llettlnitM rrM*«| MiMtMla f|4}0 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY AS SURVEYED BY ME OR UNOER MY OIRECT SUPERVISION AND DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW IMPROVEMENTS OR ENCROACHMENTS. EXCEPT AS SI Date IS SWHN. IREN. LAHOWVEYORLIND6REN. OTA LICENSE NUMBER 14376 JOB no : book :JAGE: CAOO file:)HG. CHK. I hereby nijrl!fy Ihjl thin r-.i.i /t-y, report %'UH pn-pured by mo or uodor dlroct lOipoi V iolun and l!ial I bj* a Regiaterod Land Survt*y()r ij^fdXr Idiu luwo of ^"fTieXState o^UUinan^ifl^ ,^1 ///^/^JUi«. «a. OATt » /•'4 /*7fc NCVISKMS C. E. COULTER S ASSOCIATES, INC. PROFESSIONAL REGISTERED SURVEYORS REG. IN MINN, a WlSC. 3300 LYNOALE AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55406 TELEPHONE « 6l2 - 824 - 0370 SCALf r* i ao' JOI NO. 3L4ZO •K./PO. 34s/4« + FN.E NO. 10 • Z5 SHEET i •1 OF I m.4I. *. ',•. • '- t- ' .. . «f f 1 .y; > >,. •'.• , '•; • ^ i !•s m. i ILK t*SV A BJL Jim i s n. A ax JXIAIIES LOIMQE ----------------------------------------- gitirr-^-T-t I \ilrtT-r E I* PARKINA LAiC } ...... -“-i »> I »• jr Li- l-S'BR. A&K. »----------------- l|S I . ^11^:i. |i I iJ UOUOfI STOIC r j |»&X| 1|FX.>tcf^i »4 feS4 <1 •i«|<«i|«>|r« ■ A # J *■ ! « / I/I Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik£i |\| Associates Engineers ^ Architects 3 • '*r t f A--* rj'rfv t-no A ’i^e^e ■£ *•' !** * i »»■ • • . -«• c ? ’ • » »« * c H>C “f t M.e- •: ■ r?e" J - •*-*" •? j '* : ’ A '.e"c C -***‘i - r ' - V” - • f" - £-'^'3.*- '* *e ' ■; 3g Zr ^G VT T?.* - l\-«o ■■ f ; '•erxr-'- j -5 ►i* 4 .• j rg A ‘Arr e" J “€ May 5, 1995 •r •••• •.' '• «■ ' -I - .».' 3 -'*" .' - " ck icr-".c:T *•£ j ;^sAe« *€ Z A> » -®f Vi ei 3 ^ '*•* ^ j » . A» -f • ,-'<•»> 4 A 'r'Tie'' ’£ .J . * * ;* Je* 3 &c.un* '5 ?•• f. - :• e' '■je* J::^',ecr P n -sf LC? V V.'r^ >£ Ch^.es A £' Ckion leo V ®4».ve * . V C '^cn V ’-.-5 •r^i r £->q^ »* •• -■ Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal MN 55323 Re: Leisel Cox File No. 139-2019 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the Conditional Use Permit for the Minnetonka Mud Coffee Cafe. As we do not expect that the use of the property will be intensified, the existing access and parking lot is acceptable. We would recommend approval from an engineering standpoint. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. t). Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. e K 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612-636-4600 U t O90>C€% COl.O«AOO TCk 303 •9J I100 Miami . ^l9*<Oa Tec 309 9 90 0090 WASMIliQTOM, O C Tcu 202 92 4 9000 P O P H A M H A I K SCNNOOftiCH & K aufman . Ltd I««CWW0<**9 ^*»e FBAC^'Ci 0* MASON. rSHWlCK ft LAW^CNCl, tSTASUIlMlO t8ft1 Suite 3300 222 South N inth Stbeet Minneapolis . Minnesota 55402*3336 Tel SI2-333-4SOO • Fax 612-334-ftSSS TM0«4AS J. ftAfUIETT. CSQ. DinccT Dial (ill.) aS4*li7ft • *4ici AT(ON« 9tlJ«N9. C miha 01 1991 SI3929 I LtlAltO. Ot»MAN« Til Ol I4 9 94I 49I942 9 S^wrraAAr. Ockmanv TtL 01 149*71 1*22399 April 20, 1995 Cortlen G. Cloutier. Esq. Cloutier & Cloutier, P.A. 1800 Midwest Plaza West 801 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Re: City of Orono • Application for Building Permit: Lot 1, Tlllson ’s Villa Carman Addition APR 2 1 1995 Dear Mr. Cloutier Thank you for your letter of April 12, 1995; I have discussed it with Jeanne Mabusth at the Orono City offices, and I wanted to offer you this reply. Your son has made application for a Building Permit on Lot 1, Tillson ’s Villa Carman Addition and the City has responded that a precondition to the permit is a Type I subdivision which would allow you to treat Lot 1 as a freestanding lot The City is willing to allow you to subdivide the area described as Lot 1, but it has raised the cautionary note that if you do so without attention to the remaining areas, which you call Lots 3, 4 and Outlot 1, that you will find it difficult to further subdivide that area. It is the City’s recommendation that you consider the entire area of Lots 1.3,4 and Outlot 1 for subdivision at this time. Your response is a legal argument which is essentially this: the effect of the lot combination which you requested on Lots 1, 3, 4 and Outlot 1, and which the City approved, left the lots subdivided for zoning and planning purposes and therefore able to be independently developed without further subdivision. The City’s position is that a legal lot combination has the effect of ending the separate legal status of any lots so combined, and that separate development of the lots requires subdivision under its code. I have reviewed the language of Orono ’s zoning code ‘ 10.25, subd. (6)(b) and subd. (6)(a)(l). 1 believe that the language speaks to an existing lot of record, and our 012/220794114/20/95 Corilen G. Qoutier. Esq. April 20, 1995 Page -2- disagreement is whether or not Lot 1 is an existing lot of record. It is the City’s position that it is not. since the effect of combination (on any of the other lots combined) has been to create one large lot where several previously existed. It seems likely that the assessor must hold that view as well, since I suspect that the tax impact of holding three lots, two of which are not homesteaded, would be different from holding only one homesteaded lot. Further, the City’s previous authorization of a boathouse on the combined property would be inconsistent with its zoning regulations as to accessory sUiictures if the former lots were u^ated as individual parcels for zoning purposes. Indeed, that is the meaning of the language "combined for tax purposes" in Sec. 11.03(2)(66)(a)(2). The language assumes that simple subdivision will be allowed if the combination had only the effect of combining for tax purposes, and not the further and complicating effect of subsequent development which relied for zoning compliance on the area and characteristics of the combined parcel as a single lot Please let me know if you have further questions. cc:an.ne Mabusth 012/22079411 4/2Q/9S m ti iBwaniimmaii M mm it*'**^^*# .• •* —-----------^ - - — .A i- CFFI.--- CLOUTIER & CLOUTIER »!iC'?£.'3:cs\L Aisoc'.Ar.oN ATTOXNETS AT !*CC MIC'JVtST PLAZA VVEST 'C; .nICCUETMaLL MivvtArO'.i?. viinnesota 55*02 tX-’ALASr.ST.xNTi COAtVI** O CtCu^'l« r. XA§»*- * cicuTu* N mUiCHTl '21E?H0 v’£ 612^ M7.*lC0 toll i sco-aJs.hn fa«:;^!vi'.lc '>t2» M4-U20 jCiiAi t Ck.:sM*d thomaj.. TKissm Aoril 12, HANnnFLlVTRgP Thomas J. Barrett. Esu FOPHaM. H.\JK. SCI-rNOBRlCH & KAUFMAN. LTD. 3300 Piper Jai'fray Tower 222 South Ninth Street Minneapolis. MN 55402 RE; City of Orono Application for Building Permit: Lot 1, Tillsnn's Villa Caiman Addition Dear Mr. Burrett: I appreciate the opponunity to express my view to you regarding the application for a buildmg permit for Lot 1 Tillson's Villa Carman .Addition. Pursuant to the concerns I expressed in our earlier discussion, 1 have reviewed the applicable City Ordinances and performed extensive rescMch as to the legal aspects of what I understand to be the issues involved. HISTORY Tillson's Villa Carman .Addition was subdivided into five lots and an outlet in 1962. All lots were approved and recorded as meeting the proper area requirements for buildable lots under the Citv’s 1955 Zoning Ordinance. A copy of the Plat is attached. In 1965 I purchased Lots 1,4 and Outlet 1. In 19661 purchased Lots 2 and 3. That same year Lot 2 WQ3 sold leaving me with my ownership inrere.st in Lots 1, 3, 4 and Outlet 1. In January 1995,1 conveyed Lot 1 to my son. In February 1995, my son requested a permit to build a sincle family dwelling on Lot 1. The City refti*;ed to issue a building permit to him, for Lot 1, desp^ite the fact that Lot 1 meets all current area requiremtats under Municipal Zomng Ordinance 5cc. 10.25 (1984). I Tftomas J. Barret;. Esq .\oril 12. 1W5 Pace Tv.o Tlic Cin>' has required rr.c to apply for re-suodivision ot Lots I. 3, and Outlet 1, betore it nni II consider issuing a building pc.’mit to my son. Tlie City has required me to present a current Mir\ry of Lots 1. 3. and Outlot 1, s.hov^ing hardcover, square feet and dimensions. In an effon to avoid the delay and cost of litigation. I have tried to comply with the Citj's demand for re- subdivision of Lot I. pursuant to the City's interpretation of its 1^84 Zoning Ordinance. All of the City ofticials, who ha\ e examined the survey ot Lot 1 agree that it is in full compliance (as presently platted.) uitli the requirements ot the 1984 Zoning Ordinance. Tlie application lor re* subdivision of Lot 1. which 1 'vas compelled to present to the City, was tabled at the last Planning Commission meeting in order to give me time to evaluate the appropriateness of applying for re-subdivision ot Lot 3 and Outlot 1. I was advised at the meeting, that if I did noi^ ^ apply for rc-subdivision of Lot 3 at the same time as Lot I, I would never be able to do so later, nor could Lot 3 ever be legally eligible for a building permit. appropriatf ordinance and APPL1C.\BLE law The applicable ordinance governing area requirements for building on this type of propeny is Miinicipfll Zoning Ordinance sec. 10.25 subd.(6)(b)(1984). It designates a minimum lot area requirement of 1/2 acre. The City of Orono has a "grandfather provision" in its Zoning Ordinance. It provides that "If an e,xisting "Lot of Record", in an "R" District, serviced by a sanitary sewer does not meet this and the other minimum requirements, the lot may be utilized for single family dwelling purposes without council approv al if the area measurements and width are within eighty percent (80%) of the Zoning Chapter requirements". Municipal Zoning Ordinance sec. 10.03 subd.(6)(a)(l). This type of language is meaningless unless construed to "Grandfather" in previously recorded lots that meet the requiremeni.s. Day v. Wright County. 391 N.W.2d 32 at 34 (Minn. App. 1986). If the party seeking the permit meets all the standards prescribed in the ordinance, the council has no di.scretion to deny the permit. Its refusal to gram the permit in such circumstances is arbitrary a.s a matter of law and mandamus will lie to compel the council to grant the permit. liL, 34. Zoning Ordinances are in derogation of the common law and should be construed strictly against the City and in favor of the property owner. LLi at 35. In Day v Wright Coumv . a property owner petitioned the Court to compel the Wright County Board of Adjiusiments tn declare his property' a "buildable lot" and grant him a building permit for it. Tlie property owner argued that the Wright Coimty Ordinance on Zoning had a grandfather clause, deeming his property buildable by law. The Court found that the property owner was in full compliance with (he ordinance under a grandfather clause and when these btandards are met the City Council has no discretion to deny the permit. Thomas J 3arrett. Esq. April' . Pa^e three force me to re-sundivide m or^cr .0 ^orr • . According to the Zoning within 100% of the ‘7 „rmoori^ Lot 3 is a "Lot of Record", within an ^ Ordinance. thi.s action is 80% of the current area requirement. Lot 3. "R" District, serviceu o\ a sanitary sc '?5% of the current area in fact meei.s the current ‘ ,u^ grandfather provision, sec. lar^guWe of this provision^f I ^ would allow me to do it. Thcrelore. * reauirements for new subdivisions, is clearly a previously subdivided ^ - j rc-subdivision demand even “ t “cH I ;m seeing a permit already is within I OO't^o of the current reuuncmeins. • • ■ - rpfniir-ment that I re*subdivide leads me to believe that they ^ not The planning commissionrequir.me of Record" but as one unplatted parcel. They ^ view Lots 1, 3.4 and Outlot 1 as separate Lots R ^ have memioned the phrase nowhere in the Zoning Ordinanee or the “A dass I Subdivision shall he exempt from plattmg by the C.t> . and shall be peimittcd subdivision by metes and bounds 00^^^ torSescrihed by a Registered Land Surveyor >1 .t meets one or more of the following criteria: ....The subdivision is a division of property previously combined lor tax purposes. A careful reading of this provisiom in context. *‘‘‘ * .. . f _ I believe the City Administration viewa must would require subdivision for further butldtng. Assessors office. L. Thomas J. Bx'rer.. Eiq. April 11. 1095 Paie Four one P.I.D. number for tn.x purposes. This was done as an administrative benefit so the tax department would cnlv need to send out one tax statement lor all propertx owned instead ot multiple statements. Dy no means w'as this intended to change each lots designation as a lot of record- or ■‘buildable lot". Proof of this lies in how each lot is considered by ^he Tax Assessor. Each Lot is listed as a separate buiIJable lot and is taxed according to its value as a "buildahle- Lot, V^Tien they are combined, there is no change in ta.\ consequences. Thc County Assessors office supports my claim that its practice of billing four individually platted lots on one txx statement, since 1967, has no legal crtect on the lots designation as a "buildable lot". No formal petition or procedure was involved in the four lots being combine d and taxed together on one billing statement. " ^ ^ ^ TrrzL ^ Finally, an issue of equity arises since there surely was never any intent to lose my "lot of ' record" designation, which essentially amounts to my future interest to build. It appears our impasse is the result ot a misinterpretation and application ot the Subdivision Ordinance. I believe you will agree that the proper requirements governing my request to build are not found in the Municipal Subdivision Ordinance, Chapter 11, but rather in the Municipal Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 10. I hope my analysis has been helpful for your con.sideration of this situation. We would welcome an opportiuuty for lurther discussion to expedite this process of securing a building pemiit for Lot 1. CGC/tkf L To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:May 12, 1995 Subject:Public Hearing - Domestic Abuse Shelter Ordinance Amendment - Thursday, May 18, 199S' 7:00 p.m. List of Exhibits A - Council Minutes 4/10/95 B - Draft R-IA Conditional Use Permit C - Draft B-4 Conditional Use Permit D - Legal Aspects of Conditional Use Permit: Stamte - Excerpts from Malkerson Training Materials Zoning Code Section 10.09 On April 10 the City Council directed Planning Commission to hold a public hearing for a proposed amendment to the Zoning Code to allow domestic abuse shelters. CouKtl directed suff to draft two options, to amend either the residential zoning distncts or the M district. Council noted that the Hessbergs would have to request a rezoning to conmiercal (requiring a 4/5 majority vote) if the shelter use is placed in the B-4 district rather than the R- lA. Exhibits B and C are nearly identical draft ordinances for making domestic abuse shelters a conditional use in the R-IA or B-4 zoning districts. Please remember that ^ residentiala conuiuuiiai uac ui uu- ax-ar, - V -------o----------- . . _ Ii-I zoning districts refer back to the R-IA conditional use standards, includmg the LR-IC district. The required CUP conditions as drafted would functionally limit the shelter use to a very few areas of the City, which staff wiU have mapped for the public heanng. These drafts reflect an amalgamation of bits and pieces of regulation drawn from codes, resolutions etc. used in other cities, and many of these requirements have been discus^ at our work sessions. City Attorney Tom Barrett suggests two specific concerns with the drafts: We should articulate in the ordinance our rationale for many of the specific iwttfiSB and «;ite/huilding requirements ... i.e. why within 1,000 ’ of a bus line... The onerations section is precariously close to acting as a licensmg function as opposed to a zoning function, and the City may be ill-equipped to deal with the potential issues with licensing such a facility. Perhaps we need to limit our regulation to the impacts of it on the neighborhood, rather than on how it operates ... You may see revised drafts by May 18... Public Hearing - Domestic Abuse Shelter Ordinance Amendment May 12, 1995~ Page 2 Also attached are various documents regarding the legal aspects of conditional use permits. In general. State statute indicates that standards and criteria for a given use should appear in the ordinance. The case law presented by former City Attorney Bruce Malkerson at a recent workshop suggests that if all ordinance standards are met by an applicant, the courts will not uphold a denial. Therefore, the standards and minimum requirements in the Code must be adequate to limit the use to what is acceptable to the City. Finally, a copy of the Zoning Code conditional use section is attached for your reference. Staff^ Rec(Mnmendation This public hearing is intended to consider amendment of the Zoning Code to allow domestic abuse shelters in general. The intent is not to review the specifics of the Hesstarg request. Planning Commission should consider whether the proposed standards for an or B-4 conditional use are appropriate and adequate for the shelter use. Also note that the public hearing notice in addition to being published has been sent to the expanded property owners’ list (350 ’+) in addition to all owners of property zoned B-4 in the City (this includes the proi^rties along both sides of Shady wood between Lydiard Avenue and Shoreline Drive, plus the C^o Run office building further west on County Road 15). Staff will make a brief presentation, followed by public input and consideration by the Planning Commission. MINUTXS OF THE REGOljUl ORONO CITY CODNCIL '“^ meeting held on APRH. 10.1995 /i .\BUSE “? s ;;r,se.-ic-s lOr * „ a ^—;p;s"nitor Mabusth were commended ior tne:r d«c:S;”'h^ proposed'^oco.ion was good wa,h i.s proxan..y to ametattes aad various means of transportation. Applicant. Dan Hessburg_ repo^d receding a SIO.OOO grant from the McKnight Foundation to go towards the shelter. lahhour commented th. ^TaSn-satr of the present h«™g was to aLt prc'^m L the area be reaoned commercial. A shelter repres«,mnv. for darinctuion to connnn what was Callahan's optraom Hum voiced that she prefeired residential zoning a ttot^UP St”"or*e Council, was willing to look at the issue in more detail. labbour conc^ed with C^>^- »n di^^g rabC^"w “«rp"^^^^^ site beig commercial if the shelter did not transpire.liww la »**•» Hum voiced roncem with the lack of a CUP m "^^^onal office so!c1 isT permitted use in' the B-c, but is open to other uses such as rettrement and nursing homes, with a conditional use permit. acfciasaafca<wyTe^»niwHnri«>t M' nwtf / / {HI - Sheiter - Ccniinued) A sheltCT °Dan Hessbur| reponed exiendsd to August. Theproj - - r.i.g of the oroperrv'. Shelter concCT on the amendment would not hinder their time representatives were iniorme- tnat trane for the proiect.^ • MM I « Mabusth reooned that a oiie option L'TmeVdmenroTrSenTai code and -Jte other with a zoning chtmge to commerctaL ioecincaily to look at B-4 code — ■— m Callahan poUed the Counctl on their « mt,u.temen. of ^ CtT Hum w. ^0. «PP^ a vote. Mabusth teponed that llTpubU^ hearing would be opinion rfthe 0«^^^rnT The public hearing will be scheduled for .May.The puDiic neanng wm uv .aw---------- - ^ ,«S, USE OF cm- DRIVEWAY FOR ACCESS TO PRIVATE MVELOPMENT (aMELAMED) Mr. Melamed was presenl / / / ■■j.rjssir“'*■2S:.7Sc.2' —f "■■ trees The appUcant has two curb-cuts, one shared an use of the City driveway. Mabusth said that too .he Vark area. Council is first ^if they approve an additional cut^ and what upgrades of dnve would be request^^ . vh*iwi|jdb«Bum»is*XCLJ4Mat. .<li PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE #. 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE REGLXATING DOMESTIC ABUSE SHELTERS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, R-IA One Family Residential District, Subdivision 3, Conditional Uses" is hereby amended by adding Subdivision 3 (Q) which shall read as follows: -Q. Domestic Abuse Shelters. The use of a strucmre for providing housing and other services for victims of domestic abuse. Any such use shall meet all the following requirements: I.Location. 1. Strucmre shall be served by and be connected to municipal sewer. 2. The site shall access directly to an arterial or collector roadway and shall not gain access via a local neighborhood street. 3. 4. 5. 6. The site shall be within 1,000 feet of a public bus line. The site shall be within 1,000 feet of a retail shopping area. The sii shall be within 500 feet of one of the following commercial zoning districts: B-1, B-3, B-4, B-5, B-6. The site shall not be within one-half (V4) mile of another domestic abuse shelter. II. Site/Buildings. 1. 2. 3. Buildings and additions to existing buildings shall be consistent with the character and scale of the neighboiiiood. Exterior materials shall be compatible with surrounding properties. An appropriate transition to neighboring properties shall be provided via landscaping and site design consistent with City ordinances and policies. The use shall be subject to applicable regulations regarding signs, parking, and other zoning district performance standards. 1 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. The site shall provide a minimum of 3,000 s.f. of loi area per overnight resident based on pn^)osed capacity. The structure shall provide a minimum of 300 square feet of floor area per overnight resident based on proposed capacity. The applicant shall provide detailed analysis of expected traffic generation. To avoid unreasonable traffic impacts on adjacent residential neighborhoods, the following limitations shall be met: a. b. c. Shelter use will not be permitted on properties gaining access via private road or shared driveway. Shelter use shall not be permitted on properties which would require regular access via local streets. The amount of traffic generated onto arterial or collector roadways shall not significantly impact local streets. On-street parking shall not be allowed. Adequate off-street parking based on aitticipated uses shall be provided. On-site circulation will be required to avoid backing onto streets. Driveways and emergency vehicle access shall be maintained at all times. A privacy fence or other suitable screening may be required at the discretion of the City Council. Shelter facilities shall conform to Minnesota State Building Code and Fire Code requirements. A formal site and building plan review by the Planning Commission and Council shall be required. III. Operations. 1.The applicant shall comply with all applicable codes and regulations ami shall have current and in e^ect the appropriate State or other licenses. Any conditional use permit granted pursuant to this ordinance shall become invalid if State or other licenses become invalid. 2.The applicant shall submit detailed program information including goals, policies, activities schedule, staffmg patterns and targeted capacity which may result in the imposition of reasonable conditions to limit the off-site impacts. 3. The facUity shall be overseen by a Board of Directors. The applicant shall submit bylaws of the Board of Dirccton, resumes of members of the Board of Directors and Articles of Incorporation to the City. 4. A committee shall be esublished consisting of the Orono Police Chief, an Orono City Councilmember, a neighborhood fgpresentative, a representative of the applicant organization, atxl a fifth member to be agreed upon by the City and the applicant. The committee’s purpose shall be to review the operations and complaints, if any, associated with the Shelter, and upon an annual basis, to report its findings to the Orono City Council for determination as to compliance with the terms of the conditional use permit as well as other State and local ordinances, statutes aiKl regulations. 5. In the event that upon such a review by the Committee, the Orono City Council finds that the terms of the conditional use permit are not being substantially complied with or that State and local ordinances, statutes or regulations are being violated, the conditional use permit shall be revoked. 6. A background investigation shall be performed to verify the qualification of the Director/Administrator and the responsible operation of the program, such investigation to be paid for by the applicant. 7. Per City ordinance requirement, the conditional use permit if granted will be issued for the shelter use for a specific site and not to a specific applicant, however, any material change in t^ operations or purpose of facility shall be cause for the City Council to review the conditional use permit. IV. Additional conditions may be required by the City in order to address the specific impacts of a proposed shelter." 2. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall be published in THE PIONEER and THE U^R newspapers and shall become effective immediately upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota on this , 1995 by a vote of___ayes and____nays. day of ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin. City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor C PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE #, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE REGULATING DOMESTIC ABUSE SHELTERS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE B-4 OFFICE AND PROFESSIONAL BUSINESS DISTRICT The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.43. Subdivision 4, Conditional Uses, is hereby amended by addii^ Subdivision 4 (K) which shall read as follows: "K. Domestic Abuse Shelters. The use of a stnicture for providing housing and other services for victims of domestic abuse. Any such use shall meet all the following requirements: 1.Location. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Structure shall be served by and be connected to municipal sewer. The site shall access directly to an arterial or collector roadway and shall not gain access via a local iKighborhood street. The site shall be within 1,000 feet of a public bus line. The site shall be within 1,000 feet of a retail shopping area. The site shall not be within one-half (V4) mile of another domestic abuse shelter. II. Site/Buildings. 1. 2. 3. 4. Buildings and additions to existing buildings shall be consistent with the character and scale of the neighborhood. Exterior materials shall be compatible with surrounding properties. An appropriate transition to neighboring properties shall be provided via landscaping and site design consistent with City ordinances and policies. The use shall be subject to applicable regulations regarding signs, parking, and other zoning district performance standards. The site shall provide a minimum of 3,000 s.f. of lot area per overnight resident based on proposed capacity. 1 3. 7. 8. 9. The siructure shall provide a minimum of 300 square feet of floor 3rea per overnight resident based on proposed capacity. The applicant shall provide detailed analysis of expected traffic generation. To avoid unreasonable traffic impacts on adjacent residential neighborhoods, the following limitations shall be met: a. Shelter use will not be permitted on properties gaining access via private road or shared driveway. b. Shelter use shall not be permitted on properties which would require regular access via local streets. c. The amount of traffic generated onto arterial or collector roadways shall not significantly impact local streets. On-street parking shall not be allowed. Adequate off-street parking based on anticipated uses shall be provided. On-site circulation will be required to avoid backing onto streets. Driveways and emergency vehicle access shall be maintained at all times. A privacy fence or other suitable screening may be required at the discretion of the City Council. Shelter facilities shall conform to Minnesota Slate Building Code and Fire Code requirements. A formal site and building plan review by the City Planning Commission and Council shall be required. III. Operations. 1. 2. 3. The applicant shall comply with all applicable codes ^ regulations and shall have current and in effect the appropriate State or other licenses. Any conditional use permit granted pursuant to this ordinance shall become invalid if State or other licenses become invalid. The applicant shall submit detailed program information including goals, policies, activities schedule, staffing patterns and targeted capacity which may result in the imposition of reasonable conditions to limit the off-site impacts. The facility shall be overseen by a Board of Directors. The applicant shall submit bylaws of the Board of Directors, resumes of members of the Board of Directors and Articles of Incorporation to the City. 4. A committee shall be established consisting of the Orono Police Chief, an O toto City Councilmember. a neighborhood representative, a representative of the applicant organization, and a fifth member to be agreed upon by the Citv and the applicant. The committee’s purpose shall be to review the operations and complaints, if any, associated with the Shelter, and upon an annual basis, to report its findings to the Orono City Council for determination as to compliance with the terms of the conditional use permit as well as other State and local ordinances, statutes and regulations. 5 . In tte event that upon such a review by the Committee, the Orono City Council finds that the terms of tte conditional use permit are not being substantially complied with or that Sute and local ordinances, stamtes or regulations are being violated, tte conditional use permit shall be revoked. 6. A background investigation shall be performed to verify the qualification of tte Director/Administrator and tte responsible operation of tte program, such investigation to be paid for by tte applicant. 7. Per City ordinance requirement, tte conditional use permit if granted will be issued for tte shelter use for a specific site and not to a specific applicant, however, any material change in tte operations or purpose of facility shall be cause for the City Council to review the conditional use permit. IV. Additional conditions may be required by tte City in order to address tte specific impacts of a proposed shelter." SECTION 2. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall be published in Tlffi PIONEER and THE LAKER newspapers and shall become effective immediately upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota on this , 1995 by a vote of___ayes and____nays. day of ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor ^ -1 i*4 ICIAL NL\PS. . future street purposes frequently diverted to without hardship or f land may be denied tse of dislocating the .0 of land needed for A Tiers to ad iust their ire made which will a major thoroughfare •jTying out the policies .•pare and recommend re municipality or any :iic hearing, adopt and ;ace and purpose oi the ;paaiy at least ten days ■e prepared in sulficient 'ines on the ground. In been made prior to the •'the future acquisition 1 land surveyor. At ter V of the adopting ordi- id in seaions 462.351 aled. the issuance of sions of this section, lew street is opened, ae municipality, it is cture placed without of the mapped street on the existing street ion of an official map i identified for public : the municipality to i or structures erected of a permit. 5 is denied, the board d with It by the owner ISC in which the board lat the entire propeny s forms a part cannot nted. and (b) that bal- ofthe official map and ncr of the property m ■ant of such permit is the notice oi hearing iblished in the official f the board of appeals ig bodv or other board le date of the decision jrest therein, and if no It and other details is granted. HOI SING. MDESTLOPME.NT. W_\.NMNG. ZONING j«'j595 CONDITIO.N.AL USE PERMITS. Vubdivision 1. Authority. The governing body may by ordinance designate certain uces of developments, including planned unit developments, and certain land devel- ,--ent activities as conditional uses under zoning regulations. Conditional uses may Vipnroved bv the governing body or other designated authonty by a showing by the '^cicant that the standards and entena stated m the ordinance will be satisfied. The ‘--dards and criteria shall include both general requirements for all conditional uses, Vnj‘Insofar as practicable, requirements specific to each designated conditional use. Subd. 2. Public hearings. Public hernngs on the granting of conditional use per- T.its snail be held in the manner provided in section 462.357, subdivision 3. Subc. 3. Duration. A conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions agreed upon are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the Municipality from enacting or amending official controls to change the sutus of condi tional uses. Subd 4 Filing of permit. A certified copy of any conditional use permit shall be nled with the county recorder or registrar of titles of the county or counties in which the municipality is located for record. The conditional use permit shall include the legal \ dz'.cnption of the propeny included. V Histon: I9S2 c S0~ s 25 402J597 INTERI.M USES. Subdivision 1 Definition. An “interim use" is a temporary use of property until J pamcular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. Subd. 2. Authority . Zoning regulations may permit the governing body to allow •nterim uses. The regulations may set conditions on intenm uses. The governing body mav grant permission for an interim use ot property if; (1) the use conforms to the zoning regulations: (2) the date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty, (3) permission of the use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is nec essary for the public to take the property in the future; and (4) the user agrees to any conditions that the governing body deems appropriate for permission of the use. Any interim use may be terminated by a change in zoning regulations. Subd. 3. Public hearings. Public hearing on the granting of interim use permits shall be held in the manner provided in section 462.357, subdivision 3. History: I9S9 c 200 s 2 462J6 CERTIFIED COPIES FILED >VTTH COUNTY RECORDER. Subdivision I. Required documents. A certified copy of every ordinance, resolution, map. or regulation adopted under the provisions of sections 462.358. 462.359. and 462.3595 shall be filed with the county recorder of the county or counties in which the municipalitv adopting it is located. certified copy of every variance to abstract or le istered property granted under section 462.358 shall be filed with the county recorder or the registrar of titles of the county or counties in which the municipality ^nting It IS located; except that the requirement to file a variance is satisfied if a certified copy of the resolution citing the existence of the variance is filed identifying the IjKation where the variance documents are available for inspection. Ordinances, resolutions, maps, regulations or variances filed pursuant to this subdivision do not constitute encumbrances on real property. The order issued by the governing body or boara ot appeals and adjustments as the case may be. shall include the legal desenpuon of the property involved. Failure to file an ordinance, resolution, map, regulation, variance, or order shall not affect its validity or enforceability. Subd. 2. Filing with contiguous planning authorities. A copy of a comprehensive .1.. BEYOND THE BASICS: LAND USE REGULATIONS; FINDINGS OF FACT AND GENERAL CONCEPTS RELATING TO HOW THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSION, GOVERNING BODY, AND DEVELOPER SHOULD INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER IN LAND USE MATTERS AND HOW TO MAKE SURE THE RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING IS ADEQUATE FOR SUBSEQUENT JUDICIAL REVIEW by Bruce D. Malkerson, Attorney Popham, Haik, Schnobrich & Kaufman. Ltd. 3300 Piper Jaffray Tower 222 South Ninth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota (612) 333-4800 April 6 and 29.199S Sponsored by: Government Training Service r c. The afcovT findinss should be sufficient to justify a denial. Findings that are not supported by so much expert testimony may also sometimes be sufficient. However, if the applicant introduces expert testimony and the City, and/or the objecting neighbors do not rebut that e^'idence with enough cre^ble expert testimony, then even well-drafted findings of fact will not be^ufficient in order to prevail. However, the City needhoi convince the coun that every finding is sufficiently supported by the facts in order to prevail. If legal.^e finding supported adequately by the facts in th^ record may be sufficient. Broadcasting. Inc, v. City of A^n. 323 N.W.2d^757 (Minn. 1982). \ ./ )ful to identify iIn addition to the above, it is helpfuTlo itjehtify in the findings, by reference to exhibit numbers in the record, all key pEms and documents submitted by the applicant and others so there will bc.no confusion or debate before the court on appeal as to what plans and documents were Vtually in the record and which were the final plans that actually were voted up^ by the planning commission and counciL Additional findings shouUl^be added as appropriate under>^ach of the above ordinance standards if t^ere is any ration^ basis to include them. However, in each instance, state conclusion and referrence the evidenc^ which supports that conclusion. E^h conclusion must be relevant to the standards^in the ordinance. Remember, the court should not substimte its judgment for that of the City if^cre is a rational basis for the decision. The decision need^qt be empiricalfy right The decision only needs to be rationaL Qt lilt,Finding Qt Fhct-Guidelines for Dctenninifig the A(^ The following guidelines relitqto conditional use permits whi^. if denied, are the most difficult to uphold onlppe aL They are also usefiii><mdelines to use in denial of ttzonings and variances where the city’s burden is much easier to meet 1. 2. The reviewing court will assess the legal sufficiency of the reasons given by the dty and determine whether, if legally sufficient they had a factual basis in the record. C.R. Investments. Inc, v. Village of Shoreview. 304 N.W.2d 320 (Minn. 1981). Denial of a special use permit is arbitrary if it is established that all standards spedfied by the ordinance as a condition of granting the y|\ permit have been met Hav v. Township of Grow. 206 N.W.2d 19 (1973). Zvlka v. City of CrvstaL 167 N.W.2d 45 (Minn. 1969). 015/220777664095 Page 100-------^ 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 015722077766^/95 I . - 1 -- «-rT«ir mav be denied in some circumstmces on ihe A contoonal«« p„hensive pto. Haibffi! basis that it is 323 N.W.2d 757 (Minn. 1982); BDUtKOTint. Ma^wrod. 467 N.W.2d 631 (Minn. App.Klffi^SSSS^Ialm ». NWI. m (Minn. 1978). lygiaai Sr^sTSSSiSSad-. 504 N.W.2d 66 (Minn. App. 1993). Neighborhood denial.^ ChanhaSSSa g Br£S»aiS7MT;7;r m.. um. »■ ™ 865 (Minn. 1979). Knn-d.Toert ooinions regarding the effect of a proposed use on the value revieTtte'niSd! TSTis espi^Tme if the appUcant has submitted expert testimony to the contrary. special not relevant. Wgstiing OlY 9) la? N W 2d 571 (Mhm. 1969): » v»'»“ "f St. BBL 1« (Minn. 1966). A mere list of Ihe sources of information to support a (tenial is not 558 (Minn. 1972). Aesthetic considetalions which adversely affect value of 320 (Minn. 1981). Page 101 11.In A s!B^ coniniunity, city officials hiivc the experience, conipetcncs, and capacity to measure the impact of a permit on property values and to weigh and assess similar issues without relying on expert wimesscs to determine whether or not the use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan. Whitp Bear Parking and Storage. Inc, v. Citv of White Bear Lake. 324 m mm w ^ ^ ^ M ^ 1 AO^\N.W.2d 174 (Minn. 1982). 12.As to conflicting expert evidence on an issue, the coun is not to weigh the evidence. The court should review the record to determine whether there was legal evidence to suppon the zoning authority’s decision. Barton Contracting. Inc, v. Citv of Afton . 268 N.W.2d 712 (Minn. 1978). XL CONCLUSION Land law and the procedures which should be followed to persuade the government to ^prove the developer’s or conversely to justify a denial of an application (or convince the Court to sustain your position) have become very complex. If you hire experienced experts at the beginning of the application process and create the appropriate record, your chances of success will be improved dramatically and your overall cost in time and money should be less. 0ISn20777664/SM Page 102 1 i CfUct^O 2.<7A/,'VC> § 10.08 Subd. variances: Variance>..e«all e.xfire ^ 'rfTirncil Lf'-^ot used. Any c..e /ea- a-w_._ ’ X >.^re--v shall require a..<rew var-ance. chance in use cr -ne ->0^- So»ip<r6: Ordinance No. 172 'fective Date: l-i-75 j — V of every variance qranted under rbe r/=tlsl=ns^^:e^ota Yi\td>^ rnc^fb-rc^s on real pror^. «%°he orocerty iLoTved."^ to file a ia%’*aL^S Vot" affeft%L^°v'aUa^ity or enforceabirJV SEC. 10.09. COHDITIONAL OSES. subd. 1. conditional «--,J^f?°“;,,|Sary"?o "achllv^ t.*ie district use regulation the ' ^ certain districts,the obiectiv.s of thejoning - --the objectives of tne sub*ieVt to the granting of a use conditional uses are generally not suitable permit. Co^d^.^onal us ,,,-«4-rict. but which may ' circumstances be suitabl . . conditions may be appl.'*Slrcum'stances be suitable. "^" "ucn conditional use permit ”»/ ^e review of the permit may to issuance of the permit ®"f,® f*r a particular use and be required. The permit *2'®^^^®.- Because of their unusual not for a particular person or deration so they maySot fir a J!”r"oses require conVideraticn so they may characteristics, to the objectives of the Zoning be located properly J^^nicipal Plan and with respect to ^"e°m%"oleVed \”o° crfnt° and'%"o d'en? |p|l^°c«iSns'for ^nSfJional use permits and to impose reasonable clnditfonrupon the granting of these permits. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-94 lub... 2. conditional "»®® = «*/*”ronal’'us“p%"^^^^ Conunissioi. Ijefore the Council district regulations forsuch conditional uses as or shal 1 be referre to oftL zoning Chapter, ^he request th «^ ^^e the Planning *°g in the character and development proposed use on the ordi ^/^^niTn^ndation in regard to grantingthe neighborhood and for reconunenda ^ anv or for the irnlaT’’o1‘“ c“in*d??fora\ =u%1!‘^ire Co'uncil may by unanimou. action waive reference to the Planning Commission. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 ORONO CC 267 (4-1-84) § i0.09 Zoning t ^ 0 togeth r with such filing J"n“lnTsuch'in£ormation and and Shall be acconpanied by a /“"^le, including, but notShowing as may be necessary or aesitai^x , limited to» the followings A. setbacks noted. 3. Site plan drawn at scale dimensions with Location of ail buildings, heights, and square footage. C. D. Curb cuts, driveways, parking spaces. Off-street loading areas. by shift. I; Ty*i"orbusin ’ess, proposed number o£ employees G. building elevations. proposed floor plan with use indicated and H. Sanitary sewer and water plan with astimated use I. A lighting plan showing the lighting of parlcing area, walks, security lighting and driveway entrance light. ORONO CC 268 (4-1-84) i S 10.09 j. A landscape plan with a schedule of the olantincs . z An abstractor’s certified property certificate Showing the pro;«ty owners within 350 feet of the outer boundaries of the property in question. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 cnKr? i Conditional Uses: Failure of Planning * If no recommendation is transmitted by the Commission to Act. ™ (60) days after referral of thePlanning ComTniSsion Within sixty ( ) Council may ?ike"=tion wUhruf firthei awaiting such recommendation. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 Subd 5 Conditional Uses: Hearings and Notice. The /■. nr Council may hold a public hearing or Planning Po- , conditional use oermit. Notice conditional use and the time and place sh\*ll ^mail an t^^ach ^^f'th%^%r%^perty owners within 350 feet of the outside boundaries of the land in ?or the purpose of giving mailed notice, the the mailing ?he°notice Ly use any appropriate records to ^e^ermine^the names and addresses of owners. A copy of the «hall be th^owners and addresses to which the ^otic^^as sent 3h^ be attested to by the responsible person and shall be f .PJ^ticeth^records ol the proceedings, ^^e failure to give mailed „otl« to individual property owners, cr to complyInvalidate the proceedings, provided a bona tide attempt to ^ j with this Subdivision has been made. At the pub a.4rin and the Planning Commission or Council shall review 'h®itttements and drawings submitted therewith and shall receive pertinent evidence concerning the proposed use P^ ^ Any conditions under which it would be operated or party may appear at the hearing in person or council the Subject to such limitations as may be ^^^®.g°cSnduit o^ Planning Commission or Council may adopt rules ^ , g fo^ the proceedings before it. Such rules may by giving of oaths to witnesses and the EUin, of ““"eVorl of %he the parties. The City shall provide for a recora p?oceldings which shall include the «inute® t”® ".-Vluding the findings, and the action taken on each matter heard inc final action. ORONO CC 269 (4-1-84) S 10.09 Subd. 6. Conditicnal Uses: Gran-ing of Permit. A. The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council mav grant a conditional use permit as the use permit was applied for or in modified form, if on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the City makes the following findings: 1 That the orooosed location ot the conditional use is in acsscd with Che objectives o£ the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the si.e is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan, 2 That the orooosed location of the conditional use and the proposedoperated or maintained would not be detrimental to the publiw hHlth, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and, 3 That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. 3. A conditional use permit may be revokable, may be granted for a limited time, or may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. C A conditional use permit shall remain in e..ecw as long as the conditions agreed upon are observed, this Section shall prevent the City from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. D. A certified copy of any conditional use permit shall be filed with the County Recorder or ^^^istrar of Titles o ?he county or counties in which the City is located f^r record. The conditional use permit shall include the legal description of rhe property included. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 Subd. 7. Conditional Uses: Denial of council shall set forth eontempocaneously in writing and in oeta a?l ?ie Reasons for the denial of the conditional use cation. No application for a conditional use permit which h denied wholly i" Pa“ shall be resubmitted for a Pe“°<* °/ months from the date of said denial, except on "he evidence or proof of changes of conditions found to be valid y Planning Commission. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 270 (4-1-84) s 10.09 , Uses: Laos* of Perniit. A 5a = d. 3. one vear following the date cn conditional use ,j^iess prio'r to that ti.-ne a building which it became - -^ i’‘dinc Insoector and construction is oermit is issued by the on the site which was the Commenced and P^i^ued .toward c application. _A conditional f • • «» 1 ri <a • of Us0« Should s .“%• Siu-H'-cU-ss's.;-“ ”due to illness, natural aisas-e. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 S.bd. 10. conditional US. Per.us^io^ uses.. All o^-r^shirrie'usued a co'n'ditional use per:sit upon roru = a%'io; -3- irttniatVon^’f^-he "n^n- conforming use to the same granted without apoUcation^fee^lnd*the Council shall ^®^^JJ^J^^®tions^''p« toit .t.ru-.. review. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 Subd. 11. conditional to*pfr?olfc o-tition. Conditional use P^^mits shal- ^^^Q^ation, unless such Council review the purpose of^c^ 9^ original permit, or, a review is one of the c ^ fn he in violation of unless the actual land use is determine . . 75% or more of ter*s of the per.it, provided ‘h/V “/°he/e as ?hose Hose property the adjacent property owners . subject to the conditionalUes within 1,000 feet of the property s^^b^ectj ^ use permit) the Council sha council shall determine, ^.^tet continuation of the permit. The Co ... conditional such Dublic hearing, whether the cont.nuat p and general ^sfir; question ^3 consistent with the ^^Ith, ja£ety^_a^^ welfare of the residents of the City. conditional use permitoltition and hearing, continue the conditiona as SnohaVged, approve a may be necessary to protect health, sarecy ot y (4-1-84) ORONO CC 271 s 10.:? • js® csriniw. wpon wsr!nxri3i<.icn o —terninace rhe exi3ti..g Cwna^iw* Council may allow the former a conditionax “antTnue for such period not in excess of conditional use ^ to orovide time to move or otherwise one year as may is permitted,relocate in a zone wnere sucn u f Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 Subd. 12. unlawJal Act. , It Is anlawful tb violat* sny condition o£ » conditional ose petoit. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-34 10 in rkNERAL requirements. At any tim^ after the SBC. 10.10. —Ian ‘’he Citv, the Planning^^ommission,adoption of a land use^plan .or .. go^ls of the land for the purpose ra^I'^oroDOsed "zoning ordinance/i'nd submit it to use olan, may prepare a pr p for adootio/i Subject to the the Council with 1^'!=°””®"“’ 'ne Council Lj/a’dopt and amend a requirements of of all Lt^ members,zoning ordinance by aN^o-.niras vote v suhd ’ ?^ic Hearings. ^ zoning Suba. until/a oublic hearing has be^n amendment thereto shal_ _fggy^ or by the Council. Aheld thereon by the Commis^on^or^ notice of the ti.me, place ^ P. ritv not less than ten published in the prior to the day of the (10^ cays nor more tnan district boundarieshearinq."' When an amendment inolWs changes^in. affecting an area of five a=«a^< shitty (30) days mailed not less J ]^to\ach owner of affected property prior to the day of the within 350 feet of the and property situated For the purpose of giving crooerty to which the amendment maiiina the notice may ■mailed notice, the ^ao^cesponsible ^ use any appropriate record l\ist Tf the owners andowners. A copy of th,e notice and a V^t oc ^ne addresses to which the/notice was sent aha^ h* a“*® of the ;rore"/rg%.^“lhe to%P® L°va\"^fa^rh^ rr«VedV9“aT”ro/^dtd'\''L^^ fide attempt ^comply with this Subdivision has been made. \t Subd./ 2. initiation of Amendments ^^°”^'’^i)‘^’’aJ’tion An amendmentyko the Zoning Chapter may e ini commission; of the Coun/il; (2) a te=°"'"'e"<^ation of the Pianni (3) by petition of the owner (s) of their °a a93°‘"V'9 „ot aoning o^ which is proposed to be Changed. J'" to the initiated by the Planning Commission shall be r .^ted upon pjannlng commission for study and report and may not be acte^ (4-1-84) ORONO CC 272 MINUTES Orono Hockcv Boosters. Inc BOARD OF DIRECTOR’S MEETING Date: April 12. 1995 Location: Orono City Hall Board !Present IXV Level Representatives: X Mark Engebretson, President X Jack Neveaux, Vice President X Peter Sawicki, Secretary X Ann Fleming, Treasurer X Sue Whitney X Janet Dynan X. Tom Hitch X Bess Bouley X George Stickney Pat Wolfe, M _Cindy Bigham, S X Jim Sisson, B X Mary Lou Lutz, P Russ McGintv, IM TM Members Present (X)Coaches ’ Board Representatives: X Mark Johnson (Gaming Manager) X Karen Nelson X Jim Bigham _Kevin Dulin, Chairman _Larry Sorenson _Keith RadlofT _Scott Smith _Scott Standa __ John Shannon _Tom Fleming Mark Engebretson called the meeting to order. The minutes from the previous meeting were approved. The ballot vote from the Annual Membership Meeting was as follows: Peter Sawicki, George Stickney and Sue Whitney were elected to the Board of Directors, each for a term of three years (until March 1998). The following Amendment to the Articles were also approved by the membership with additions in underlining and deletions struck through as follows; Hockey Boosters, Inc Board of Director's Vfeeting Page 2 MU£L£J1 This corporation shall be organized and operated exclusively for charitable and educational purposes The general purposes of this corporation shall be to promote, sponsor, de\elop, provide facilities for, and conduct a supervised program of ice hockey training and competition for boys and girls in the Orono School Distriet thereby aiding them in their physical and mental development and making them better citizens and sportsmen ARTICLE X The government of this corporation shall be vested in a Board of Directors, who shall be members of this corporation, and such officers and committees as the said Board of Directors may appoint in conformity with the Articles and By-Laws of this corporation The Board of Directors shall consist of no more than twenty (20> ten <IO) members who shall be nominated and elected in the manner prescribed in the By-Laws. ARTICLE Xn These Articles of Incorporation may be amended by a majority vote of the meeting call^ for that purpose, provided that such proposed amendments shall be plainly stated in the call for the meeting at which they are to be considered. Pete Sawicki, George Stickney and Jack Neveaux will provide a slate of Committee Chairs and other openings to the Board for the May meeting. Ann Fleming, the Treasurer, gave her report which was approved and is attached to these minutes. A discussion was held on what to do with the cash surplus from the past fiscal year. A vote on the cash surplus was tabled for the next meeting. Bess Bouley gave her report on the Hockey Festival. Volunteerism and the need for new cash boxes were discussed. It was generally decided that blanket and hat sales would best be done at registration and not at the Hockey Festival. The net income from the Hockey Festival was $12,209.78 minus expenses of $5,903.45 for a profit of $6,306.33 (a copy of Bess Bouley ’s report is attached to the minutes). Mary Lou Lutz provided a report from MGWHA, and will be going to the next meeting. Tom Hitch, the Equipment Manager, recommended that the Hockey Boosters keep providing breezers at least for the upcoming season. ■ —t i.t.- ..A-'i -I - Hockey Boosters, Inc. Board of Director ’s Meeting Page 3 Kathy Sawicki, the ex-Ice Time Coordin^r provided an analysis of the 1995/1996 ice time requirements (a copy of her report is attached) Buying ice from Blake Arena for the 1995/1996 winter season was also discussed Jack Neveaux provided the financial stauements for the six months ending Febrtiary 28, 1995 of the Delano area sports arena. Mark Engebretson gave an update on the effort for the new Orono Arena. Submitted, Z. Peter Sawicki Secretary ZPSsak MINUTES Orono Hockey Boostere. Inc. BOARD OF DIRECTOR’S MEETING Date: April 12. 1995 Location: Orono City Hall Board Members Present IX)Level Representatives: X Mark Engebretson, President X Jack Neveaux, Vice President X Peter Sawicki, Secretary X Ann Fleming, Treasurer X Sue Whitney X Janet Dynan X Tom Hitch X Bess Bouley X George Stickney _ Pat Wolfe, M _Cindy Bigham, S X Jim Sisson, B X Mary Lou Lutz, P _Russ McGinty, IM TM Members Present (X)Coaches’ Board Representatives: X Mark Johnson (Gaming Manager) X Karen Nelson X Jim Bigham Kevin Dulin, Chairman Larry Sorenson Keith RadlofT Scott Smith Scott Standa John Shannon __Tom Fleming Mark Engebretson called the meeting to order. The minutes from the previous meeting were approved The ballot vote from the Annual Membership Meeting was as follows: Peter Sawicki, George Stickney and Sue Whitney were elected to the Board of Directors, each for a term of three years (until March 1998). The following Amendment to the Articles were also approved by the membership with additions in underlining and deletions struck through as follows; Hockey Boosters, Inc. Board of Director ’s Meeting Page 2 ARTICLE 11 This corporation shall be organized and operated exclusively for charitable and educational purposes The ge net a' purposes of this corporation shall be to promote, sponsor, develop, provide facilities for, and conduct a supervised program of ice hockey training and competition for boys and girls in theOro no School Distriet thereby aiding them tn their physical and mental development and making them better citizens and sponsmen .ARTICLE X The government of this corporation shall be vested in a Board of Directors, who shall be members of this corporation, and such officers and committees as the said Board of Directors may appoint in conformity with the Articles and By-Laws of this corporation The Board of Directors shall consist of no more than twenty t20) tew (10) members who shall be nominated and elected in the manner prescribed in the By-Laws. ARTICLE Xn These Articles of Incorporation may be amended by a majority vote of the members in good standing in attendance at any regular meeting, or at any special meeting called for that purpose, provided that such proposed amendments shall be plainly stated in the call for the meeting at which they are to be considered. Pete Sawicki, George Stickney and Jack Neveaux will provide a slate of Committee Chairs and other openings to the Board for the May meeting. Ann Fleming, the Treasurer, gave her report which was approved and is attached to these minutes. A discussion was held on what to do with the cash surplus from the past fiscal year. A vote on the cash surplus was tabled for the next meeting. Bess Bouley gave her report on the Hockey Festival. Volunteerism and the need for new cash boxes were discussed. It was generally decided that blanket and hat sales would best be done at registration and not at the Hockey Festival. The net income from the Hockey Festival was $12,209.78 minus expenses of $5,903.45 for a profit of $6,306.33 (a copy of Bess Bouley ’s report is attached to the minutes). Mary Lou Lutz provided a report from MGWHA, and will be going to the next meeting. Tom Hitch, the Equipment Manager, recommended that the Hockey Boosters keep providing breezers at least for the upcoming season. Hockey Boosters, Inc. Board of Director's Meeting Page 3 Kathy Sawicki, the ex-Ice Time Coordinator provided an analysis of the 1995/1996 ice time requirements (a copy of her report is attached) Buying ice from Blake Arena for the 1995/1996 winter season was also discussed Jack Neveaux provided the financial statements for the six months ending February 28, 1995 of the Delano area sports arena. Mark Engebretson gave an update on the effort for the new Orono Arena. Submitted, Z Peter Sawicki Secretary ZPSsak i.ta-irai 10 TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:Mav 8. 1995 SUBJECT: #1800 Michael Plank, 4115 - 4145 Watertown Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Sketch Plan List of Exhibits A - 4/23/95 Letter from AR)licant B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 4/5/95 C - Memo and Exhibits of 3/15/95 Mr. Plank is planning to attend the May 15th meeting. Please carefully review his letter of April 23rd. The applicant requests approval of his lot line rearrangement as approved in Febmary 1993, per Exhibit A of the March 15th memo. That memo requests Planning Commission direction on a number of issues affecting this proposal. Staff Recommendation The Planning Commission is requested to review and give direction to staff on the issues discussed in the March 15th memo. 1 — »r Md Ofonc PUinning Commib^on Mcmbc.b*. Hello Chairman hcnrocder ana uro.iu 4/23.95 up. uy ■ ,us back in Orono ai things ha%e happened tb.at ma> ^ ‘ a cmisidtrolton ot a pnvatc bemg n new ordinnnee “"==""^'vLk end 1 lia.« oddrcMCd my ntualion os dr.VC serving 4 homes insteud of ._. . , i,kc lo reapply my nrigmal concerns these new factors, and "^X.-eview is tc get your ,»pot«to 10, line reerrangemcnL 11,e pu^SC “■it” "zr"zrzrs'rr.”sr:.z “;: “xerz .. e.,.™.—« meet lot size, or creau: a road 10 that was mrt specincoUy 2 ) am 1. within a 5 acre zone. ^ ^ ^ ^ tiina consuming and drafted for 5 acres? My both Orono and myself.xsi"zr„” rs Ae sine docs aUow more lloxib.lity In mwms, a 2 .ere or smaller lot. well, house site and access arc not as f . ,. backlats in M/u .raseac Orriinaficc 4\22 wos wnttcn to increase lot size oy ?o ,q iw u« ,pec]S^,o3oi ;^;c rcXImreIC "f '>‘>”“”tJtw«n us l^rcl Whereas Mtke. .Mark and I l.ve •’ addressing a host of possibilities, the true issue remains - svhat is tnc appt %r;“"“.rxsx: s:x'a“sr without varinnccs. it seems lo me I stm surrendefing acreage, ere b h t> ^ COblS foClHg tlfHC deliiV>, ClCaUi'ii to be served by a private dnve in an oullo* r.:===2H^r.=^»lle>ia« » o. fuim. 1 hu l»< show^ » Ml d«vdocni«u poicniid of . hom.s usingine The whMifs Wha. . „„^h lc„ bum ■ nod Otono W...U 10 access so .ri:::.« — •>-' ^ ■“ dnvewav. therefore needing to bocome ft „w point at this rcvicxv it A 4 home dmewny d it again with ,hul what was done =*“'^ were it not for bad mail m the first :::rsr.rs-b^d:X^^^^ ‘-n.ai.y ...0 „c a card rhu. «vs: ^ ..,„ ^gement •’/Ifs'd t has been reconsidered and it is the tceomiwn^tion **'*” 5^1^93 approval, wrth the 3 adiustmems. be submitted to Cou.w.1 for tmnl appmval Thank you for your consaUuiaH'on, m a-rr'1-ka Mia CITY OF ORONO P.O. Bo\ 66 Cr\3tal Bav. MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #1800 NOTICE OFPLA-NNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: Apnl 5, 1995 TO:Michael Plank P.O. Bo.x 777 Buffalo. WY 82S34 COPIES:Mark Gronberg Coffin & Gronberg, Inc. 4S2 Tamarack Avenue Long Lake. MX 5535b TYPE OF .APPLICATION* Subdivision (Sketch Plan) D.ATE OF MEETING: 03/20/95 VOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST NOTES ANT> SPECIAL CONDITIO.NS: The Planning Commission did not discuss this application. However, their posWon on a pnor applicatS;; at the same meeting appears to provide some ot the dtreetton we were looking for. Specifically , in the case of previously combined lots proposed to be uncombincd to create the orieiLl individual lots. Planning Commission agreed that the resuitent to the "back lot" standards. The similarity to your lot line rearrangemeni is that both are metes “ni Ln^ ibdi “siL subjec. to subdivision requirements. It ctm be argued .hauhe pr« ss Of subdivision automatically creates a new lot subject to all new lot standards even when merclv a lot line reamingciiieiit. In vour case, it appears that the rearrangement of the lot line between Lots 2 and 3 creates two new lots and dhe portion of Lot 3 containing the existing house is considered a back m ^“7 5 ^res gross'area m the 5 acre zone. Jeanne and I agr« |hat U« way to avojd the back lot issue is to plat a road/cul-de-sac outlot now. Per Mark s future plat sketch. Parcel B is created as a separate 6.16 acre lot that needs a width variance, leaving Parcel A as I platted lot which might be divided in the fumre (requiring a future lot width variance measured at the 1(X)’ setback from the cul-de-sac). Because we don't know how Highway 12 planning wUI ultimately affect Watertown Road if in the future you do spiit Parcel A. at that time the City would determine whether ^ old farmstead will have to relocate its driveway to the toad outlot. If so, you could ■ expect to have to build a road and a cul-de-sac in the road outlot. If not. you could at that t me propose to use merely a shared driveway for the two back lots. Expanding the existing 30’ outlot will require that this subdivision be formatted as ajM rather than as a lot line rearrangement. My recommendation therefore is that “ [ plat, and if you m'eet the Apnl 21 deadline for the May 15 Planmng Commission meeting, we may be able to get it completed by imd-sumraer. Please call Mike Gaffron at 473-7357 if you have questions on any of the above. .u-.rrt .‘if. V .\'i! m IDTS 2 & 3. BLOCK L A OUTLOT A. MAKE PLACE HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINhESQA lATt-oT A LLQALDt^CJLlEIlUM orruriiRr^ ] a4 I. MMk I. ml A. MATUt fLACE, rattuam llualulsoui - ntaa r*t«iA • MM A. t <« t. ..4 #.« r*« •» J. Bt«fc I. MATU njkCf, akMk H m «r 1'« ttia» «h I it* ^ mot if •miILmI «»«c * WiM—f »«»iH»«WOTilw^tiipii^it»iM< tll4 LK ) I tiitfm* if I It M iotA iaiMMAali Iot ^ (>•«•••)« e( ibi Iot b«a| *mm Siaft 41 4>«m II hb OT* WOTa4(itaM it W»«iAOTH«iimMM.tMOTMM*Mlali li • taut m *i OTAsly Iot «f ot4 Ul I IUJ«fMOTit«»r 4*i c («OT if Mtf I it t, aiOTiia »il tiwg i«4 iMa I iL>i«rl li MtMMMti&i iki>*««r pm|otm*ot OT40«i*< A tutlQ n«(paia(ta« I, DI mIi I. MAII r flVVcr. »birk liM tl««rf »i4 iM Vmnmmm* fmmm if aii L013; .ii •«aiK t e(l 10 at fe«T to M i< WfMBiH vC t»« hm Utff% i*»MilU-i ^mm9 S<m* 41 m II ■iiin i V«4 • «l ITtH If ft; SfM* 5 »C ISt M It e« ^ hm tl MlJ Let I 111 )t TmI ^ MiMi W Midlxol l.aiM»«Mtdtl«M|0ti4M^l7 hm,m94mi4tim$m9 im A i%^w^ |wr—•• et«i Oititi A, m»4 MAfU FLACX r>4»oif« if &4i«Mtif' lUti if«t« tltowt m • (•■■•d «t^ *>4tfun& Tins— 1 1,14 jJUflT fwaiffblpf »f \r«»*l»Alf f^«4. •innwv ttlN fc-CtUONBERG. iN'Cv T. I •' 'ri; I .' ">1 i. . ■■ '1. ' ,s‘ i C .. i> • I. • t -I.- M'. I K» H h\ fI iliH IK|% 'W»»*»*' r» r*»»» ** »•* * *’*' '***•'* •Ii.lthvl.imidirn frtiMmiHi*aintmrft*iHlUiH|Vimr%«iHi4rf Uh Un\ %4 Ihr Mitr id Mwmh v'lJ ________________ M«il A l.iimUtl kimiirf »l I iMH'r Nwiwlfl l.'.'U 1 i.» . HAit I * . 100* HA II l-ll *93 fl-945 2-Mj «T/|FF f2^CoAilHeNl>AT"/OP>» fTJVT /AU>|CAn?6 /A^ (E€I^ J To: From: Date: Subject: NOTE: Chainnan Schroeder and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. Cit> Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Admi.iistratcr March 15. 1995 #1800 Michael Plank. 4115-4145 Watertown Road - Subdivision - Sketch Plan Reconsideration Planning Commission originally approved a lot line rearrangement tor this property in February 1993 Pending submittal ot final survey work, that recommendation was never brought forward to Council and the approval expired in February 1994. Due to recent code changes affecting "back lots", and anticipating their effect on future subdivision of the remaining property, staff has recommended and applicant has agreed to bring this back to you as a sketch plan. List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - Discussion Lot Line Rearrangements Approved 2/16/93 Staff Memo 9/12/94 Survey. Potential Futtire Arrangement with Platted Road Staff Sketches (D-1 thru D-6) Resolution No. 2267 Ordinance No. 122, Second Series Planning Commission is requested to consider how the "back lot" ordinance should be interpreted in regards to the currently proposed lot line rearrangement, as well as a fumre division of the thirteen acre remaining parcel. In order to follow the history of this property, staff has provided a scries of sketches. Exhibits D-1 thru D-6. • D-1 shows the applicant’s total property as it existed prior to 1988. • D-2 shows how the property was divided into three lots in 1988. Note that Resolution No. 2267 which approved this subdivision, allowed the old house on Lot 2 to continue accessing directly to Watertown Road, allowed a new driveway on a narrow ouiloi to serve Lot 3, and allowed this new driveway to be shared with a second lot which might be created from Lot 3 in the future. • D-3 shows that in 1993, rather than merely splitting Lot 3 to create a fourth lot, applicant chose to rearrange the line between Lots 2 and 3, mcreasing Lot 2 to 13.6 acres and reducing Lot 3 to 6.2 acres. Zoniriii File ^ISOO March 15. 1995 Pace 2 Note that applicant chose to combine the driveway outlot with Lot 2, so that he could sell the existing house on the easterly portion of Lot 3. yet maintain lull control of the outlot for future use as access to the westerly portion of Lot 3 it it is subdivided off of enlarged Lot 2 some day. Questioa #1: Does the transition from Sketch D-2 to Sketch D-3 constitute creation of a new back lot per Ordinance No. 122, Subdivision 27? Or is it merely reshaping an existing back lot? If the easterly portion of Lot 3 is considered a new back lot, then it must meet the 150^ acreage requirement, or 7.5 acres. Question #2: With Lot 3 being divided and its west half being combined with Lot 2, is the "shared drivewav" approval of Resolution No. 2267 still applicable? Question #3: D-5 shows a possible future split of enlarged Lot 2 to create an 8.2 acre second back lot. Inherent in this layout is the need for a lot width variance. Is this shared driveway outlot what Planning Commission intended to allow in Subdivbion 27 (C-4) (Page 2 of Ordinance .No. 122)? That section says "no more than two residences mav be served bv a driveway located within an access outlot.' Sketch D-6 is applicant’s aliemaiive proposal incorporating a future outlot isM rather than the narrow driveway corridor. (For clarity, the parcels have now been labeled X, Y and Z). Question #4: Although new Lot Y would still require a width variance, neither Y nor Z would be considered back lots because now they front on a private road. Does that road have to be built to eliminate the back lot status of Y and Z? Or is nwrely a shared driveway for Y and Z within the platted road, still acceptable? And, is there any need to build a road to serve just two lots, Y and Z, If X will still access Watertown Road directly? I.e., does any of this impact the 1988 approval for a shared driveway to serve the two lots in the south half of this property? Applicant’s Perspective The applicant in the past has indicated he would prefer not to relocate the old houw s Watertown Road driveway eastward to the outlot due to distance and topographical considerations. It can be assumed he would also prefer to construct a shared driveway rather than a road within a platted road outlot, to serve just the two southerly lots. _____________ Zoning File ^^1800 March 15, 1995 Page 3 Assuming Ihc Cit> honors its 1988 "shared driveway" allowance, applicant and staff need direction regarding iiuerpretation of the ordinances, and how^ Planning Commission wishes applicant to do his initial lot line rearrangement without creating problems for a fiinire split of the combined Lot 2/west pan of Lot 3. Staff Recommendation Allowing a shared driveway in the current 30’ outlet corridor would not currently pose a problem. However, if Highway 12 planning ultimately leads to expanded traffic levels on Watenown Road, the City may ultimately want the old house to relocate its Watenown Road driveway to the outlot. A fumre subdivision of this parcel would then have three homes using one access, and tlw standards then indicate the use of a private road. While the layout as approved in 1993 doesn ’t increase the one-house level of traffic currently using the corridor, a future division would. If the east pan of Lot 3 is determined to not be a "newly created back lot", then there may be no real need to plat a private road outlot now. If the applicant in the fumre wishes to do the fumre split, at that time it would make sense to re-examine traffic situations and then determine whether an outlot road should be platted/built and whether the old house should access to it also. V / TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator • •• FROM:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:September 12. 1994 SUBJECT: #1800 Michael Plank, 4115/4145 Watertown Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Renewal of 1/16/93 Approval - Request for Continuation to October 17th Meeting The original Planning Commission recommendation for approval for this lot line rearrangement expired on February 16. 1994. A rev iew of the file suggests that the "front/back lot" ordinance (flag lots) adopted in December 1993 may have an impact on the viability of this and any future subdivision of the property. Applicant’s surveyor has indicated and staff concurs that this public hearing be continued to the October 17lh meeting to give applicant time to further review the proposal with staff. Staff Recommendation It would be appropriate for Planning Commission to tabic this request, continue the public hearing to October 17th and accept no public comment at the September 19th meeting. H-C> <ab::Ci Li < h. 5 a Li ' X d {■j << ot« ** lAi o •a., 4... X * % IJ bj •J} s.W\PK cv.fi V AMC PROPOSED UOT LINE REARRANGEMENT FOR MICHAEL PLANK IN LOTS 2 A 3. BLOCK 1. & OUTLOT A. MAPLE PLACE HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOA IO>*>.lllO.aivnoiN IMII |i|*4 »44*t»«\ 1 l«AnN 01 I 04» i «td 1. niuch I. ind A. MATUC PLACE t*Ri>PnsKn t FHAi np^raipjioM^ iMctlA A. Ut 2. and tfM pat •( Lot J. Utack I. MAPl£ PLACE. »ftick Iim WMlaly of ^ **" CaOTnMc«|«d»MibMrtcanwaf .a.J Lot I . diilaK. ofl 10 00 fc«i (• » hrv-uni of *• lin. baim daacnU< *mc« S«* 41 d.,o«o J3 amtot WmI a diriaMa oi27IMfr*l. <»«oS«afcJdi^W»«.diaaK«ofJ50 00fca:0Nneaiaai».aaarl. to a pond on *a ••aialy li» of Mid Ul 1 dinao 122 50 |;m I* rfOa „^lMal co«a of oaid Lot J. aa aoaMrod alo^i aaid oowdMlp lav. mJ md |mo «Mto oodba. »i*jo<«loano»raiHOfcr*ivo»qppwpoaMOv«ranidO«lo«A tanLB ttnl part ofXal J. filoch UAfCS fU<^ iVo. of^ lUbwa« d«ofTib#dlM»»liiataMaioM Cn«MiKiaid Aoaoidaart.onarnfaindLal J.danw on ■ aa«aMd ktarim of Wool alom a aa^ad of drt aartialy lino of a«d Lai 1 a ckrtaKo ofl 10 00 fral la M ang}a poMl w mkI northorly Ito. «al dw paifli orMMiM of iht Ink hoHii daocnbait danca Son* 41 dopaoo 25 minidM Waal a diMa af 271M i*rt; *ancT SaiA 5 ^paoa Waal a diialaneo or J50 00 irtoct oondMoMly la l paad oadiaaMalM«lyliaoarBa»dL«l4alM! 17} <0 foal waaudy oldwao^MUoanar of •aid Lot J. aa maaa«ad alMi aa»d oaiahorly lino, anl aaid liM dMia aadii% lotadMc a»i« on •aowimn U ik •••way pupaoM o»cf Oialol A. aaid MAPLE PLACE o . Dtaoiea tfonoiartiM noanmf* ahoMa «a tiaaod m aaaianad drtion iltst i"! f j.Mif >a V., M • t I M'. •1. « i'iill I IhiiIn Milt ilut lh«>-.lilt« M I*..I'.Ni>1 In >iir iiihk • on tlHf^l M.|^ jnJ iIlii I j<H J Jul« iii:>«hii>l( nail J<vl IMwl'nif\.nio vmJ.1 Uk U.«« tO III. Vl.li .4 MllWk'n-tJ , ___________ Mills i£ S1attikiM4d I ho NtfptkKr '2 - SV3 •* All • too* IMIl k«v«> ai 545 I •'ir nM V o' # i PROPOSED LOT UNE REARRANGEMENT FOR MICHAEL PLANK IN LOTS 2 & 3. BLOCK 1. & OUTLOT A. MAPLE PLACE HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOA 1 MXMmn ■CVfWX IMH tRxamuN OLAWfn ^•jrrj /=‘urctA€ /^lAr ’ LEQALDF-StTlIPnnN iiFPBPMt^PY a Midi.Blodi I.MdOulol A.MAPLEPIACX. PROPovn 1 rrtAi nP-V^imniiK PnlA b«»a«ii| AfAi liB. Imbi S«^ 41 U • a IZm o» 171 M 8*^ 3 dipwt ■ dhl»* ifm •• fctt corwr oftMd Lm J.» U hl ^ C moIA If K tMC« S«A S iiVM* V«M • .cm Of laateMlMi • Mitf - ^ ll« LM J 4IMW Itl» fcM Mwd M«My li». ad i^ Ite ^ Itpte « MMMH hr papHM «m OMlM A. aid MAPU PIACZ. • DaM U««riBp diowi W9 b«Md I9M m "70r9r CQFFJN & CRONBERG. L\C.Ilimft iitttit iKiilhi*Mir<it inri<t u«iJrf «it <lwnllM|Vl' ti*«in fnd iHil IUM j duK rrtnl>trd( itil|t»C)i>m «nJ|jnJS«fnr»(w«««drt Ihf U«» >4 Ikr SUIr t4 Alir>firw4j MjA S r^«i|*«|( LlMir^O iMrmr Kut»>bn |jr>' VLAL» r. 100* iMtn. lUBMU fl»45 r: 0 'V - ) 0.^ pii'Vt Q vi'l I ^ ^ -pD •^1 (jrry et' ^fM-r "j^c»r “=: P€V2 5 9'3 I)-M I V s. .<ry > f City of 0R0>0 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ A RESOLUTION GRANTINC APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MICHAEL PLANK APPLICATION NO. 1194 WHEREAS, Michael Plank (hereinafter "the applicant") on August 14, 1987 filed a Class III subdivision application with the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") for approval of a three-lot plat of described on Exhibit A attached to this resolution and hereinafter referred to as the property; and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of boning ana Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on L%^Vr"n^%SVis^ VpVu?«ro ‘’/ and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held cn September 28, Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of Michael Plan , noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-IA Single Family *'*’^*^ c”itt?ltVdrV”bu?ldltlV'\«^ conViglous land. 2. The property consists of 24.9 acres. Lot 1 contains 5 acres of dry lands with 2.7 contiguous dry acres; Lot 2 contains 5 acres of dry lands; and Lot 3 contains 11.7 acres of dry lands. 3. Lot 1 shall achieve access via a future curb cut off Watertown Road; Lot 2 shall continue to use existing approved a®®®** shall be served by an approved driveway, recently constructed, at northeast edge of property._ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4. The existing access within Lot 3 shall serve as a shared driv^ when Lot 3 is divided in the future. ^ 5. A single family residence can be constructed on Lot 1 without the need for future variances. HOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon aether one of the findings noted above, the City Council of approves the preliminary plat of Michael Plank P®*^ and ;Sd Cronberg, Inc. dated July 15, 1987 revised Se^mber 2, further orants a variance to the standard that %rould re<5uire ^ ^ a public road with tho creation of th. drive../ outlet aerving tot 3, subject to the following conditions: Page 1 of 3 t9mm City of OROiVO crnr OF , ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2267_______ 1. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for nrv residence on Lot applicant must relocate drainage ditch adjacent to Watertown Roadr approximately 27 feet from centerline of Watertown Road. 2. Owner of Lot 2 to grant access and utility easement over 10 feet drainage and utility easement along east lot line in favor of Lot 3. 3. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled meeting on the second and fourth Mondays cf the month: A. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1”«200*. Drawing to include: a} Lot lines platted per preliminary survey. b) Dedication of right-of-way for Watertown Road. c) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements'* 10* wide along all perimeter property lines and S' each side of internal property lines. d) Designate 30 feet wide corridor of Lot 3 as an outlot. e) Designate drainage easements in angles and bearings as shown on preliminary plat - drainageway to be designated at a IS feet width. B. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: a) Title opinion addressed to the City. owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b) The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Deed access and utility easement in favor of Lot 3 over 10 feet drainage and utility easement adjacent to east lot line of Lot 2. C. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due S400.00 a) Park dedication fee per current schedule* calculated as follows: Lot 3 at $100.00. Page 2 of 3 vi.fkir'.irmr itrkrrsT 1 i I I* f * I J__. City of OROiNO RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL NO.267 bj Pinal plat fro - Sib* 00 c) Filing fee fc -jItz an-l .'xssociated docxusents - $150.r'... Applicant is further adv.. .. that upon final approval of t;u' three lot plat by the Council, the City will refund $2,000.00 deposits r. with the City as security to issue that this subdivision application woul«’. be filed and completed by applicant. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held September 28, 1987. \'■71 / Hi ij ATTEST:James R. Graoeh,--'Mayor Page 3 of 3 r ORDINANCE NO 122 , SECOND SERIES an ordinance CODE AND a ND USE OF LOTS raE cnv COUNCIL of orono ordains as foixows : • n 10 02 and Municipal Subdivision SECTION 1. Mu^cipd Zo^g tlie folio Code Section U.O j. Suodivisicn-or ..........h„ another lot andaction 11.03. Snbd.v.a.cn-are - ,ot and -Lot-BaCC - A lot tjTicttUy “5>an ‘'t!'te“ ad°vTa a narrow corridor. Snch a teoaiated gaina acceaa to ia platted as - outlot A :»• J:-r£ ss£ k—- tiie corridor is merely an "easement back lot".an -easement bac. .o . ^ platted for access to a back lot.for access to a -7 • rode Section 10.03 is amended by addingSECTION 2. Municipal Zonmg Cone Section Subdivision 27 which shall read as follows. :”:s:darda lor Ba. Lo. "“IvSd a.S» which were created aa ,he foUowing re,u^ .Secdon U.3I. Snhdiviaton 5 of the Orono Subdivision Code. A. 1 LPl—TT B- i-Pd, of tte required s«=: yard or ftont yard shall be 150f. Il^th^roQin* disnicr front yard lequncment. 4. UL ^ i£i" %r.r: ^»« disttic: lakeshorc yard requiresic::ts. e - fi-nnr int5 A ftoot lot Created as part of a adiacenc to me acw.ss uu reauL-ecieat for that zoning distaaC.. A C, Access requirements. 1. Kioii i0’ e"tntrrmm width, and shall be wide “"ccorctSe drainage, snow removal and screening wimo’ut encroaching on neighboring propemes. J. .p approving fron^h iot toth J^^^„“VdeKrtnines that ert^adng an additional rr e‘LSr-« wtU be a potential safety hazard. Driveways within a banic lot shall be located at least lO’ from the side or rear lot lines of adjacent lots. — ........ ■ -- No mote than two residences may be served by a drivesvay located within an access outlot. ------------------^ 5.No access ouUot may be planed exceot when me intent is to combine me two access o Sn of a public or private to«l meeting Cry smndards. Screening requirements. 1.Driveways constructed m ° discretion of me City, at screened by fencing or vegetanon aU points to me rear of me side or rear as to eliminate intrusion of vehicle headbgh yard of adjacent lots. of adjacent lots. E. Ac-'-ssorv strjcnires shall adhere to 'cod'. reauirements: «/ cmicrures within a bade lot shaU be allowed no closer ^ • to lO’^o a Qeigbbonns property's side or resr yard. 2. UJAU AW ^ shaU aot be aUowed within the required street to of r Wthtn the required rear yard of a front lot Which abuts the street yard or a bade lot. J. --------- section 3 Oroho Municipal Code Section 11.31. Subdivision 3 is hereby .elated and the « « substttuted in its place: Wuica auuuj wfcAw --------- No accessory structure shall be allowed within an access ouUot. IHQ LUC ^ •*' s. •— '»■ ““ ■ “ “ “ • St A. I 1 1 1 If I 1 1. V_J X " » Double frontage p"jt!de'S^aiT “^^ tomato aerials or to overcome speciftc disadvantages of topography and orientation. B. -,i madwav L og shall not, in general, deriveAccess from any arxenal ^ . Where driveway access from access e.«lusivelyftomana™r^^y^«^ ,ye any anerial roadway may be . combined access dnve Council may require that such loc ^adway Where possible, torder to iLit possible driveways shall be designed and artang^ so as to avoia q to bade into traffic on any arterial roadway. C. sss private toad. Such outlet shaU not^ t^JIT^dlvisiotis shaU adhere to either the back; or ftont lots. Ftontrtjack lot subdivisio the following standards; 1. Applicabiiicy a. w”out r^uiring an am ™e when the area or the outlet access comdor is excluded. b. Prnnt/bac'c lot divisions may be used for individual "lot Front^ac^ 10 ^ subdividing a large splits , rn^rous lots if ctcatioa of a back lot is merely STonvem>nee to the developer rather than supported by unique site factors. c. a fr^nt/hack lot division shaU not be aUowed when any A fton j neighboring property abutting the “ored"udot i^^^ neLer i. atfected side lot fie than a dUtance equivalent to the zoning dumet required front yard depth. Dimensional standards tot back lots shrJl ou as follows: a. b. Lot area shall be 150% of the zoning district requirement. the tear of the front yard nirement. back lot. shall meet the zomng a The street yard or front yard for any back lot wm ^ starting where the narrow access ^ lotLglns. Ukeshore ^3^^“ “^semS! width smndaid at the shotelme. at the lakesnotc Une and at the street yard setback line. c.The depth of the requited street 150% of the zoning distnet front yard qu d.The required side y^ and sfaaU be 150% of the zomng district req The required lakeshore yard of a lalcesh . meet the zoning district lakeshore yard require I <an J. 5. 6. Ac: a. ‘•3S rctjuircdwiits. I « chail be 30’ width, and shall be •^'dT-acf h“ a^o^odate daiBa*,. sbow rcoov^.^d cncroachini oa aeigbbormg prop.m«. b. '^.ha ac “ S ouclo. if Council dcteiaincs due creating ::;‘SSto.^Vcc«s » .he coiatmg street wUl be a potential safety hazard. c.Driveways within a bade lot the side or rear lot lines of adjacent lots. d. No more than two residences may be served by a driveway located within an access outlet. e.No access outlet may be “/jccMroudo^^ standBrcls. Screening requirements ^ that Froct/back lot subdiv«.ons s^ ™Ts^cture standoida of sidorZilubSn 27 can be met. The teouirements and stand^ of to pl« Lse froni/back lot divisions which receive pr approval after January 1, 1994. --------- SECTION a. Adoption ^ upon pubUcation. Pioneer and the Laker newspapers and shall become eii i ctm December ^ K ,^e City Council of Orono. MimBsoti on to Adopted by tte C ty ^ gays. . 1993, by a vote o: *7^ —^ 13 day of ilorotby M. cir' Ceric , V, ^ n Leke'/P’oneer nawspapere the week of 12/27/93. P\j[^ 12-sh0<i in L3.K0-/ I 60067-026 209 31 ' V, h;f %; '.................................. -"‘j '^r. \ PRELIMINARY PLAT OF: FOX HOLLOW I Oo^ic '^Swtn«l :’k.^/ f /SSfSaffisJilsfJ ( V'feas2r*»JLi-^ tgfC^UJ -J >^'\' 1 ■TlW*wPi*‘W---a^’ .......-!- / / j ' ,. -. j ’>• “ / V ;.( /,/. O •. .'■• PREPARED FOR: JAMES BRUCE HOMES PREPARED BY: r SCHOELL & MADSOM, INC. \ 1 wV I SIlUOWSAODtnON |rh fc:>1 <M> -n hT4 citterly ol Ihe bkiWd^ dmcKbnJ li tf" -cfOM 1t«?fx«* MDrth vj C2 nwnjfc\ TO »«or>d» fc.nl n O-trir'f* I'jt' .0 r<.«-l IIA3 MAi hr» irtmnjtoi OIN t-RAI notcr - l>*noIi.« «i-i rlWYiwnb <r| *o,^nj 1 M-:.k1 jfKt 'i.>:k cruinn«! *’■ noo 1 :lN.-roAT%ouThf-.V'-.., o. u«4T not> 1 SlttlO-.‘/5>AOOmON '.«4n 4n<rri-d tH'-b-iq r.l Nf*tt^ • * .J.•yr»'^ 41 «^fiutf» ;i U-Zor^* k*#i?*T I'.'I t 0: 1.: ,i;...i,. le^t U, r W>C-:1 j:»« E iiHSHiS ---Sftt---------(W..fc«.M»^tc,bX*ihn. 4-. tJcniJrt ^o 1 v,r,,j A ;0 ‘r>o» ifcA»r 3=*ru»a# cerilrtc^J 0« ror* lo 4crDn let I ^ Will of .3-itimi fmbnj «A ■■*?w if'E; I f/ ,r UlSUNODLKIUPfJON I niT^NEAUMIKM Mcof«w« 10«wfaewMpMIt OeNeSAL.NgTF& t BuO*ngloe»)no)om)wMivi(iml HVOMA 1U r0« lOuw* <»«(• m or IWOViOuwoWti ] 0464 acie%l U09r2 K<04 1 1436 *c«Mt «weQ8tD.DtsauH»o«* rieakA I KiiimAoonmN «<>44<kiiiir>owi«H..iTiMfpMTK«| .J U4 ! Bhxk 1 KlII/KC AODflMlN «<>44<ki|| lr> Ow irHiXTlMf pU («w<pu4 kM ol iho toAoNXO kno #ir| 4« •*4i>r'«inrH C<i*««*nr«Ng at Vw MwDVMt c«rw ef ««i41 at K tWHc* rjn m oiouawl 6»«r<VolHo>in 4t mnuiM t* Wk>« atnng tw mmV* IM i4 MX 1 oi 2 • ikctarK* u« &» CM3 M to IA« (-oH »> tX6*r»w«d u> lx M W M twK* Nur» 16 <M«iwt ot nx>wt«« 10 tMtixfi Uil ■ ilitianco r> 1>' W tMt and • iHiwata^ P^CUS • P**" tAoth^^ay ka«>«X (4 Norm M doy—a 41 mnulM t* ••('Mil e« MX IX 2 a (Mlanc* ol SS 00 I0*Mb <M liMinl •! l>»'>M»na txnc* North IB dagraM Ol rn»MM 10 M.4MN t lit A) iMi arx MX kna Owa tartnnaOrio unanaHufwd aaaX »x wAlt kna wtq nl ma kna la Iw 'aXadaUncaof ci:RiirirA!u)N eraparad i^uM* T>f vupar*xw^On-1 that i am a Kaaaad Le>x Vavapw tmdar IM Xaa ol IM SIXa o< «*Moaaat« scHoea k MAOSON. inc. ISLaam • suartum • r\x#«a» SM tfVaC • IHMUMANIki <il*rt(lri tVMO aat/au KxjtitiMD. ban • AcuFm JAMES BRUCE HOMES ORONO, MINNESOTA S.M.I. PROJECT NO. 60067-026