Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-17-1995 Planning PacketORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 17,1995 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Acting Chair Candid Rowlette, Sandra Smith, Dale Lindquist, and Janice Berg. Steve Peterson and Charles Schroeder were absem. The following represented the City Staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth and Recorder Sherry Frost. Mayor Callahan and Council Member Jabbour were present. Acting Chair Rowlette called the meeting to order at 7 00 p m PUBLIC HEARING/PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING (#1) #2025 MICHAEL PLANK, 4115/4145 WATERTOWN ROAD - VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT, 7:00-7:03 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Plank was not in attendance. Mabusth reported that the rq)plication is for the vacation of the drainage and utility easement located on either side of the division lines of Lots 2 and 3 originaliy platted in 1986 as part of the Maple Place subdi vision. As part of this current application, lot lines have been redrawn, and the easement serves no public purpose in its current configuration. New drainage and utility easements will be designated along the newly defined shared lot line. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2025 per Staff recommendations. Ayes 4, Nays 0. ACTION ITEMS (#2) #2026 NEW HORIZON CHILD CARE, S75 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:03-7:13 P.M. Sharon Bergen represented New Horizon Child Care. This application had been tabled from the last meeting to allow applicant time to look at back the size of the signs and to speak with Mn/DOT concerning the entrance/exit Ift was discovered that Mn/EK)T has no specific signage applicable for a daycare use but volunteered to assist in locating the right-of-way upon the installation of the sign. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17. 19Q5 (#2 - ^2026 Nnv Horizon Child Care - Continued) Mabusih said the applicant has presented two options for the main signage. One option is a 4-1/2x4-1/2 ’ single sided sign to be attached to the facility The other alternative is a fiee-standing sign, 4-1 /2x4-1 !2\ smaller than originally proposed, but located in the same place at a lower height The entrance pylon is also reduced in size to 4'x4 ’ at a height of I3'8 ’’. The sign contractor has provided the electrical specifications as required. New Horizon will install timers on the sians and turn the lights off at a prescribed time if recommended as the facility is in a residential area Smith asked if this was at the request of the City or a company policy Beigeii said tireie was no set company [K)licy Such determinations were made by the neighborhood within the City the child care center is located If the center is in a commercial setting. New Horizon generally does not put timers on their illuminated signs The child care center in Wayzata was noted as being in a commercial zone with similar lighting and brightness of illumination. Lindquist recommended the entrance sign include the verbage, "entrance". Smith and Rowlette agreed as the entrance is difficult to detect. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application #2026 for one sign on the building, option #1, an entry sign with additional verbage to indicate the entrance, and an illuminated apron, both apron and building sign's illumination to be controlled by timers. Appropriate hours of illumination will be worked out with Staff. Smith noted people using the Luce Line do not wish to see lighted signs Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#3) #2032 MICHAEL AND LYNNE GERHLICHEIL 1375 REST POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 7:13-7:2* P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr Gerhlicher was present. Mabusth reported that the application is for height and rear/street lot line setback for fencing exceeding the 3-1/2' height requirement. The fencing will replace a former privacy fence. The height of the fence averages 6 to 6-1/2' in height with T at center posts and 5' at the mid section. The fencing is located out of the 75* setback area and will be reinstalled on the side lot line. The average lakeshore setback is met, and the fence will have no visual impact on the seasonal cabin next door. Lindquist asked if the 1977 survey is the latest survey available. Mabusth said it was and noted that the lot lines have not changed MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17, 1995 (#3 - #2032 Michael & Lyme Gerhlichcr - Continued) The applicant presented photographs of the oM and new fencing to the Commission nMnd)ers. The new fencing is the same type as used on a property across the ^reet fix>m subject property. Rowictte read into the minutes a letter with 15 si^iatures from neighbors approving the fence. Smith voiced concern with allowing fencing that does not meet City code and possibly creating alleyways of fencing. Lindquist said these concerns arc valid but noted that the fenang was a replacement A recent application approval for a fence in the Narrows area was cited, which Smith noted she did not vote in favor of Smith questioned whether members would approve a new fence that was not within the 42" standard. Mabusth asked if Commissionen would like to review the statement of hardship Smith said she was aware of the staternem and noted the good quality of the fencing being used, but her concern was with where the fencing issue was going in the future. Rowlette asked how many homes (6) were beyond the applicant's due to poor sight !in«. The applicant added that being on top of a hill created the problem of car headlights shining into their home Mr Gerhlicher said he was out of town alot, and the fence would help create a sense of security for his home. Rowlette added that the fence did fit the scheme of the property. She asked if bushes could be cleared to improve the sight lines. The applicam said this could be done. Smith asked if more space could be left on cither side of the drive. The applicant said this was pos«ble, but the posts were already in place, as this area is not where a variance is required. There were no public comments. Rowlette moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2032 for required setback and height variance with the condition that the applicant work with Staff on improving sight lines at the entrance through clearing of vegetation. Ayes 3, Nays 1, Smith Nay. Smith said fencing should be lower and was concerned with creating aUeyways of fencing. (#4) #2033 DONALD AND ARLENE KIELLEY, 1670 SHADYWOOD ROAD • VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 7;2S-7:5I P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Kielley and his contractor, Mr. Roelofs, were present. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17, 1995 (#4 - #2033 - Donald & Arlene Kielley - Continued) Mabusth rep«jrted that an application was approved in 1982 for a variance for a detached garage Excess hardcover was found over the amount approved in 1982 An expansion of paved area was found adjacent to the garage This was not installed b> the current applicant A detached shed had been removed, but a connecting walkway between both structures was to have been removed and had not been 166 s f of hardcover was added in a rock area underlined with plastic Hardcover calculations have been adiusted. The current application is for a 10- l/2'x42-l/2' addition to the street side of the residence. The floor plan w as reviewed and calls for an expansion of a family room, a formal entrance, and a covered deck area With the addition, lot coverage would increase by 510 s f or 3 5®o 15®^ lot coverage is aMtJwed 1 .ot coverage exists at 15 6®/o W'ith the proposed addition, lot coverage would be at 19 l^^b, 4 l®/b over the allowed amount A hardcover reduction of 4 8® o in the 0-75’ setback zone was noted Hardcover in the 75- 250' zone exists at 51 6% and is proposed at 52 8? « Total hardcover increase would be 113 s f or 0.8®/o A side setback variance of 4' would also be required. The structure is presently at 8" and the addition is proposed at 6*. Smith suggested the triangle area of rock and concrete area between the two garages be removed Smith noted that part of the new hardcover will be placed over non-structural hardcover Lindquist agreed with the suggested removal Lindquist asked what material would be used for the new walkway It will be of a concrete-type material as it is now. Mabusth said elimination of these two areas would result in reductions of 126 s.f, or I 3®''o, in the 75-250’ zone for the plastic underlaymcnt and 98 s.f of concrete, or l®/o, for the area between the garages, for a total of 2.3®/o. Other removal consists of 540 s.f of plastic, or 5.5%, but is also non-structural. Mabusth asked if there were drainage concerns on the property noting erosion on the north side. The applicant said a small basement under the north comer does get damp. It was found that no gutters arc planned Roelof said the problem lies with the gabled ends being on a down slope but is not a critical problem Kielley said he was concerned with removing the rock on the north side because of the drainage Lindquist said the concrete and plastic would have to be removed but gravel was okay Smith and Rowlette said they both preferred to see this area green Smith said she would be okav with gravel if drainage was a problem Lindquist asked that the applicant work with Staff on this issue. Berg suggested regrading of the area. There were no public comments. The hardcover removal as planned and suggested would result in a decrease of about Rowlette said the resolution should state for the record a hold on any future structural improvements unless existing structure is removed to offset any new structure. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17. 1995 («4 . Donald & Arlene Kielley - Continued) Rowlette said a side variance presented no problem in her view as the next residence over was a fair distance away Lindqui^ nx)ved. Rowlette seconded, to approve Application #2033 with the condition that all plastic areas be removed as well as the coiKrete and giavel areas The removal of the rock on the north side w ill be dependent on Staff findings concerning drainage It shall be further noted that this wxmld be the maximum amount of structural coverage allowed on this property in the hiture without removal ot'existing structure Ayes 4, Nays 0 (#5) #2034 MARY AND GENE ZULK, 1400 CHERRY PLACE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 7;5I-S:0I P.M. The Certificate of Mailing arkl Affidavit of Publication were noted Mr. Zulk was present This application is for a 10x26’ covered deck addition on the street side. A structural coverage variance is required Structural coverage exists at l7.6^^o, allowed at 15%, and is proposed at 19 9%, for an increase of 263 s f, or 2 3% Mabusth reported that hardcover can be reduced in the 75-250' zone with the removal of a rock patio at northeast side of residence of 175 s f Hardcover exists at 49 2%, proposed at 51.8%, for an additional 213 s f, or 2.64% No side setback variance is required. Mabusth asked the applicant if there was any existing hardcover areas that could be removed to offset the hardcover amount. Zulk said he had no drainage problems and suggested removal of the stone patio on the northeast side. Lindquist asked about the walkway on the north side of the property. This was found to be used to access the lower level There are stairs to access this level, and Zulk said the sidewalk underneath could be removed, but decking will be placed over this area. Lindquist said, although he was unhappy with additional hardcover, he saw no area where removal could be done to offset the new Mabusth noted with the removal of the 175 s.f or 2 2®/q of patio hardcover, there would be an overall reduction in hardcover. This results in less hardcover than originally existed. There were no public comments. Commission asked that a disclaimer be added to the resolution allowing no more structural improvements on this property in the future without removal of existing structures 5 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COM^USSION MEETING HELD ON JLl-Y 17. 1995 (#5 - #2034 Mary & Gene Zulk - Continued) Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2034 for a cov^ed deck addition to the street side vwith removal of the stone patio on the northeast, t\ith the disclaimer of allowing no additional structural improvements on the property in the ^ture without the removal of existing structure. Ayes 4, Nays 0. <#6) #2036 ROBERT J. GOUTANIS, 1098 tOMA LINDA AVENUE • VARIANCES - PUBUC HEARING 8:01-8:37 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Goutanis was present. Mabusth reported that the original resideiKe was built in 1934. The garage encroaches 6" imo the public right-of-way, which is a lakeshore access used year around with a swimming dock. Structural failings have been found within the existing foundation. The applicam proposes 3x8' rounding off of the structure at the southeast and northeast comers The applicant has proposed three options by which to proceed and is asking for a recommendation fiom the Planning Commission as to which option they would approve. Case # 1 would involve partial foundation repairs at the lakeside with an renovation of the first floor only. The condition of the remaining foundation would not enable any expansion of the second floor. Case #2 involves a complete replacement of the foundation Both cases 1 and 2 would require the house to be raised In this case, improvements would also be made to the secoiKl floor level, all within the same footprint There would be a slight encroachment of the lakeshore yard hy tlie steps and sti>op of 4* The detached garage would stay the same at 24x22', as in case #1, w ith side relocation of the garage door. The 6" encroachment would remain. Hardcover statistics reflect the increase in hardcover. A side setback variance is needed in this case. Case #3 would relocate the home further away from the lake with the same footprint It would improve the left side setback to 10’, where house is 6-1/2* from lot line The garag«^ would be the same but would now be attached and still encroach 6". The upper level improvements would now include a deck to the lakeside This would not involve any encroachment of the average lakeshore setback line as it would not extend beyond the given footprint located further away from lake Lindquist asked if the Commission could approve an application that encroaches on the (Hiblic right-of-way. Mabusth replied that she would lio()e tltis would not occur. I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17. 1995 (#6 - #2036 Robert Goutanis - Contimied) The aipplicant said if the Commission would ^>prove a two-car garage, he would be willing to locate it wherever necessary to remove the 6" encroachment. The 24' garage dimension was set arbitrarily by the applicant as GcHintanis said roost municipalities require 528 s f minimum garige size today. If Staff or Planning Commission recommended a reductum in size, the applicam said a 22x22' garage would be satisfictory. Rowlette adced if the side setback required is 10*. Mabusth said that is true, but the setb«:k to the lake is also an issue If the garage were to be moved 10' with side loading doors, there would be no room for a car to back up, enter, or exit. Rowlette commented moving the foundation makes this application new construction. It was further noted that some kind of variarKe would be nee^ on this property for any building changes at all as m^rity of lot is located within lakediore protected area. Gountanis said it was his attempt to minimize hardcover in the lakeshore area and away from the neighbors Lirnlquist asked Gountanis what his preference was in relation to the three options. Gourrtanis said case #1 was the simpliest. Case #2 provided for more space but still presented problems with the foundation. Case #3 would be most cost effective to start over again and replace in the best area for the property. Gountanis agrees that the garage should be moved at least 6" and would be easier accomplished by building a new garage Case #3 is his preference, but said it would come down to the money approved by his lender on whether his choice would be case I or 3. Smith inquired about the history of the property. The previous owner. Mr. Herman, had used it as his secondary residence. It had been homesteaded in 1974-81. It has not been occupied for several years. Bill Bachman. 1090 Loma Linda, whose property lies north of the subject property, said he would like to see the property restored. He has no reservations on the proposals presented. Gountanis said he had spoken with Bachman concerning improvements. Bachman had said he improved his own property in 1990 with tunneling under and pouring the foundation to save the re^dence. Mabusth commented that this residence is not located in the 0-75' zone Rowlette said case #1 would have a bandaid-type affect. It was her recommendation to keep structural coverage at 1500 s.f. maximum and would only approve case #3, providing the garage be moved allowing safe egress and ingress. Rowlette further noted that leaving the property as seasonal would not solve any problems and remain an eyesore. It was commented that there would be no average lakeshore issue or any visual impact on the neighbors. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17, 1995 (#6 - U20i6 Robert Goutanis - Continued) Lindquist commented that with the 1000 s f house, it would leave less than 500 s.f for tile garage The applicant proposes the house at 980 s f with a 22x22' garage for a total of 1492 s f Rowlettc recommended moving the garage 3' at the most. Mayor Callahan suggested moving the garage back parallel with the house and changing the curb cut. Gountanis responded that the lot was only 48' wide, and the turning radius from the garage area wiHiid he alfected if the gaiage wet e to be imived that far noiih It was explained that this would allow the applicant to enter the garage from the public access side Gountanis asked if this improvement would be paid by the City Mabusth said it would be at the expense of the applicant to make the upgrade Rowlette and Lindquist said the blacktopping would not add any major cost to repairs already projected Tim Osgood, 1045 Loma Linda, said the public right-of-way is a fire lane If blacktop were to be installed, it would create a problem with attracting more people into using the right-of-way as a landing The public use this access to park at since the parking along North Shore Drive was prohibited Ann Stevens, co-owner with Gountanis, said the blacktopping would make the road more accessible and would not favor this option. Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application #2036 for Case #3 as outlined with maximum structural coverage of 1500 s.f. The garage may no longer encroach imo the public landing area and must be set back a minimum of 3' from the lot line. Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#7) #2037 WAYZATA LEARNING CENTER, 850 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING TO BE CONTINUED AT A FUTURE MEETING Application #2037 will be continued at a future meeting. (#8) #2038 DICK HEIT, 1153 ELMWOOD AVENUE - VARUNCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8 42-9:00 P.M. The Certihcaie of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Heit and his contractor w ere present. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17, 1995 (#8 - #2038 Dick Hcit - Continued) Mabusth reported that the application is for a 10x28* two-story addition to the lakeside of the residence The present lower level screened porch will be replaced with another screened porch and open deck The upper level will include an extension of the dining room, instead of an enclosed porch as originally proposed, and a deck Hardcover improvements exist as they were in the l980*-» review, no new improvements have been installed. A City turnaround was probably not included in the prior calculations Hardcover calculations now include areas of both lots. The property is made up of two lots Rowlette asked if there was a drainage problem on the north side of the lot The applicant said there had been but was in the process of solving the problem through drain tiling Heit has dug a ditch to install the drain tile It was suggested that the rock area not be driven over to prevent erosion Mabust* reported that there is a vacant lot adjacent to the property. An average lakeshore setback variance is required but opined that the proposed additional cncroachmem of 2' would not impact adjacent properties, noting the vacant unbuildable lot to north »de. one residence to south on higher elevations located 90'+ from shared lot line. Lindquist asked if part of the garage encroached onto Elmwood. It was found that the road was not in the platted right of way but located in applicant's eastern lot. Applicant's garage and driveway are located in street right of way.. There were no public comments. The hardcover in the 0-75' zone is not structural but a stairway. The large amount of hardcover in the 75-250* /one included the large turnaround installed by the City. Mabusth asked the applicant to combine the two lots as part of the application. It was noted that two lots that do not abut each other can be combined as long as the City approves. The additional 2" proposed into the side yard setback is caused by the angle of the addition. This setback is to the vacant lot side of the property. The applicant noted that he was informed that the owner of the 50* lot cannot build on a lot that narrow. Mabusth confirmed this from an earlier variance application. Berg moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application #2038 for side yard setback, average lakeshore setback, and hardcover variances to include the legal combination of Lots 8 and 19, and the removal of the landscape areas as shown. Staff has been asked to have the City Engineer look at the erosion problem on the north side and make any determinations necessary. Ayes 4, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 1 lELD ON JULY 17, 1995 (#9) #2040 DOUG OLSON, 2601 WEST LAFAYETTE ROAD - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 9:00-9:16 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Jim Smith represented the applicam. Mabusth reported that the application is to remove and replace existing concrete patio around the (x>ol area in the 0-75' 2one with interlocking pavers in a sand bed TIte City considers this hardcover, while the DNR considers it softcover 170 s.f of patio and 65 s f of stepping pads will be restored to grass. The applicant has provided an updated survey locating the pool and patio in relation to the shoreline. The closest portion of the patio to the lake is at 24' The proposed hardcover shows a reduction of 0.76% or 235 s.f Mabusth said the property has over 800' of shoreline There is an existing walkway to the dock area Considerable hardcover has already been reduced with the removal of the 15x15' boathouse foundation and the walkway around the peninsula area. The property is a seasonal residence for the applicant Future goals are a new entry and a bedroom addition over the garage It is the pr.nticant's intention to convert residence to their primary residence it was purct;„ «eC m i994 and has seen major cleaning up of the property since that time. The shoreline has been riprapped. A hillside along the lake has been planted Plastic underlayment has been removed and replanting has occurred. J. Smith said the applicant has spent $120,000 in clean up. J. Smith said the concrete patio under consideration has cracked and the replacement is part of the clean up project. This patio area is the closest hardcover surface by the po<^ and has been reduced in size. J Smith noted that the driveway serves three homes and also as a turnaround. The owners would like to change this. The new entry will eliminate the driveway turnaround. Updated hardcover calculations and survey will be done when more improvements are made. Rowlette recommended the removal of the stepping stones to the dock area. J. Smith said the stones to the dock make logical sense, where the other stones did not. J.Smith fiirther noted that 300' have already been taken out in stepping stones and about 2000 s.f in total hardcover removal throughout the clean-up process. The applicant's willingness to remove hardcover and clean up the property was noted. J. Smith asked for clarification on the approach to the pool area. Other than through the side lawn area, the patio is the main approach to the pool area. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17, 1995 (#9 - #2040 Doug Olson - Continued) Mabusth noted that the peninsula shape of the lot places major portions of property within the 0-75 ’ zone. Lindquist said an>- consideration by the applicant to remove the stepping stones to the dock would be appreciated. Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2040 for the removal and replacement of the corwrete pad around tire jxxM with the removal of 65 s.f of stones and 170 s.f of patio concrete to be replaced with grass Ayes 3, Nays I. Rowlette Nay. Rowlette's recommendation is for all the stepping stones to be removed. Smith said he will make that recommendation to the Olson's and amend the application if approval is given. (#10) #2041 PHIL AND DARCY OTTO, 4116 H1GHWOOD ROAD - AFTER- THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBUC HEARING 9:16-9:43 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. & Mrs. Otto were present. Mabusth reported that grading plans had been approved with the building permit. Through the process in working within the steep banks in front of residence, additional cuts were made which will require additional and higher retaining walls. The area was excavated fuilher than originally proposed when the structure was erected and well installed The Engineer has reviewed the specifications for retaining walls and accepted them. Drainage tiles to rear of wall were noted and drained to the rear of the property. A second curb cut was created with an island for safety reasons. Gerhardson approved the curb cut. Smith asked if the direction of the wall was changed and taken by the initiative of the applicant. Otto said he had thought the well people had contact^ the City. Mabusth said the City has no authority to issue permits for wells. This was the responsibility of the applicant Rowlette noted that the applicant had commented to her when she visited the property that the house was not placed in the envelope as originally specified. The house placement was skewered by the guidelines of the setback. The original placement made the entry imo the garage difficult and the exit impossible. Lindquist commented that the two curb cuts seemed to make sense. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17, 1995 (#10 - #2041 Phil & Darcy Otto • Continued) Mabusth said additional fill from the excavation was placed in the rear yard. The Otto's are attemptii^ to provided a gentler slope to the rear yard. The problem at the ead side has been imensificd. The problem now is how to deal with the finished elevations at the east yard at 15' width and nuuntain 2; 1 slope, and also allow walking access to rear yard. Mabusth said it would be necessary to contact the prq^erty owner to the east to gain approval of any encroachment. The property is possibly in the in the process of going tax forfeit. Mabusth said detail on elevations, catch basins, anu ^nal grades are needed Planning Commission is unable to make any further recommer>*«tions until the criteria established engineer is addressed. Mabusth asked the Commissior if they prefer to revisit the application prior to going to the Council. The landscaping plan would be done at that poim. 'Hie CommisMon had no problem with the application going fi^rward if it met the criteria of the Engineer. It was recommended that the landscape architect work with the City Engineer. Glen Sauer of 4104 Highwood reported his concern with drainage fix>m this lot exceeding the capacity of the ditch and retaining pond on his property. Sauer does not want this property to further impact his yard. Pictures from heavy rains in 1978 and 1987 were shown to emphasize the problems. Sauer said he was concerned with the filling in the Otto's back yard and the change in the slope in tint area. It is Sauer’s opinion that how fast the drainage flows does not matter. Sauer says it all will eventually go through the 20' culvert with 8" tiles. He does not want any fill to hamper any of the retention areas. It was noted that the gentler slope may aid in water seeping down into the ground of the Otto property. Mabusth said the fill and sod should decrease the velocity of the flow Sauer said there is no more storage capacity available. Mabusth said she would have Glenn Cook review the drainage issue with Shawn Gustafson. Cook is familiar with the drainage history of the area. The Planning CommisMoners said this further information will need to be studied. Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to table Application #2041 for further engineering review by City Engineer Cook. Planning Commission would like to receive confirmation on what will occur to the retention areas further do wnstream. Ayes 4, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PL/VNNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17. 1995 SKETCH PLAN REVIEWS (#11) #2035 MICHAEL HILBELINK, 2760 WATERTOWN ROAD • SKETCH PLAN^t'BDIVTSION/CONCEPTUAL REVIEW Mabusth rqx>rted that the plan is for a 4-lot subdivision of the former Rosch property at the northeast quadrant of Old Crystal Bay Road and Watertown Road The parcel is 9- 1/2 acres in size Access for three lots is proposed via a private road and cul-de-sac. The applicant is asking for lot 4 to be accessed from an existing driveway on Watertown Road. Mabusth noted that during the review of the Peterman Addition to the immediate east, the City did not seek access to this property Access to this property would be resolved with future division The proposal recommends a cul-de-sac with a private road and a single curb cut for lot 4 from the south Additional concern is also for the bike trail on the west side of the property Conceptual plans are for the septic to be located in this area. The Applicant met with Gerhardson and Cook, who said the trail would run 500-600* down the length of the property with a 15’ easement and cutting back to the road side of the trees Mabusth said this should not impact the septic site but noted the need for a 20’ separation. Mabusth commented on the design of road with a 60' wide road and 120’ cul-de-sac. The code asks for 50’ wide road aiwl 100' cul-de-sac Mabusth a^ed the Planning Commission for their views on additional curb cut. The drainage is.sues need to be addressed al.so A berm funnels water along Watertown Road. A c vert built in 1987 was installed beneath e.xisting access drive to lot 4. The applicant commented that two old drain tiles were found on Lots 1 and 2 draining from Goldenview to the east. Mabusth said this should be investigated further with the review of this subdivision Lindquist commented that the access for Lot 4 seemed to be the logical choice but did recommend the private road to be 50' wide with a 100' cul-de-sac. It was noted that there is no problem with sight lines and distance for the 40 mph Watertown Road. Mabusth said no action is required at this time and recommended the applicant proceed with filing preliminary plans and need for complete septic testing and soil delineation requirements. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17, 1995 (#11- #2035 Michad Hilbclink - Continued) Council Member Jabbour commented that with any sketch plan, the Park Commission should receive the application between the sketch plan and preliminary plat for their review Mabusth said Flint has been coordinating these efforts The Park Commission will review these plans at their August 7 meeting prior to the application coming to the Planning Commission for further review Rowlette asked that the Park Commission recommendation be part of the packet The minutes of the Park Commission meeting will suffice It was recommended that a Park Commission member be present at the Planning Commission meeting to review boili sketch and preliminary plans and subdivision applications PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#12) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 10, 1995 (SANDY SMITH) Smith reported on the approval of the Sailors World and James Bruce applications. Smith said the Council had similar problems with application issues but voted for approval. The Plank application was approved Smith reported that the Planning Commission will be asked to review the driveway/private road guidelines. A workshop will be scheduled Smith reported Jabbour as saying, "all driveways are not created equal", and Callahan as saying, "the cunent ordinance has worked well for the last 25 years " A two-month moratorium was placed on subdivisions addressing this issue It was noted that another moratorium was approved for a six month period on any development north of Hwy 12 in order to allow time to study the Hwy 12 comprehensive plan amendment. (#13) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION It was suggested that a member of the Park Commission be present at the Planning Commission meetings when an agenda item is a sketch plan that would be of interest to the Park Commission Representatives will be scheduled to attend Park Commission meetings. The Park Commission meeting agenda will be reviewed by the representative, who will attend the meeting if there are any items on the agenda requiring the attention of the Planning Commission. Rowlettte will attend the Park Commission meeting on August 7, 1995. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNflSSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17, 1995 ADDITIONAL ITEMS (#14) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE JUNE 19, 1995 MEETING Lindquist moved. Berg seconded, to approv'e the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 19, 1995 Ayes 4, NaysO (#15) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND THE AUGUST 14,1995 MEETING OF THE COUNCIL Dale Lindquist wilt attend the Council Meeting of August 14, 1995 ADJOURNMENT Lindquist moved, Rowlette seconded, to adjourn at 10:10 p m. Candace Roiwr lette, Acting Chair Person 15 PLANNLNG COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, July 17, 1995, 7:00 P.M. 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY - COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESE>rrATIVE • Gabriel Jabbour ATTENDANCE Applicants presenting proposals before the Commission arc ask^ to mote to the table at the front of the Chambers when their application is announced bv the Chairman. m SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS/PUBLIC INTORMATION MEETING 1. 7:00 p.m.#2025 Michael Plank. 4115/4145 Waienown Road - Vacation of Drainage and Utility Easement ACTION ITEMS - Review of these items will commence prior to or between scheduled public bearings. 2026 New Horizon Child Care, 875 Wayzata Boulevard - Variances • Continuation of Public Hearing 3. 4. #2032 Michael and Lynne Gerhlicher, 1375 Rest Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing #2033 Donald and Arlene Kielley, 1670 Shadywood Road - Variances - Public Hearing 5. 6. 7. #2034 Mary and Gene Zulk, 1400 Cherry Place - Variances - Public Hearing #2036 Roben J. Gountanis. 1098 Loma Linda Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing #2037 Wayzata Learning Center. 850 Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional Use Permit Public Hearing to be Continued at a Funire Meeting 8.#2038 Dick Heit. 1153 Elmwood Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing 9. 10. #2040 Doug Olson. 2601 West Lafayette Road - Variance - Public Hearing #2041 Phil and Darcy Otto, 4116 Highwood Road - After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Sketch Plan Reviews 11. #2035 Michael Hilbelink, 2760 Watertown Road - Sketch Plan/Subdivision/Conceptual Review 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - July 17, 1995 Planning Commission Comments 12. Report by Planning Commission Representative attending Council meeting of July 10, 1995 (Sandy Smith). 13. Other issues for discussion. Additional Items 14. Planning Commission approval of minutes of the June 19, 1995 meeting. 15. Planning Commission to select a representative to attend the August 14, 1995 meeting of the Council. Adjournment t*'. — -J PLAHNING COMMISSION COUNCIL PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER ^WSc -) hc.»c«v 2U UipL MS I 4 v/K ^ .i / \ K i kjnii ZC'rt K,,vvtV?<i2*o Chlicl^atj 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. - <ya^- »!■■■ ’I ■%.’ ■I fc.| All Ii m I StafB III! UI3 ~*I>K llll III mi 8dK2$g(oaa>«*>jR o)s a< O ? - ? & s; R 1-4 s' *• 3o*: 3 50o t/»r* 0 n 3* "01 COcs <• t/l o' 5, Oo S •3 V3r* Sn 3- •V f 50 r» fi’ 51w« p ^Ui 4*1 W IJ 2 "0 *3 a »• H C- 2o Doc <jq "I o ?o 0r • -- Wo 1-° V-9 U »i»4 •04 1 50 > 3*qI T1 n 01 o' I. G K 0 S 3 t J 2 r%a U p* S 50 8o. <s. 1 ? O' R- G i 3 <IQ tJ Ou>oo D n' Xn u<w m 3 j: ><a 3cc» ? Xa I s S’ ^ s*^ O Csc 2 r §■ D tr> 3 C ^ ? n 0 3 3? 1 00 |o i ^ s" t • O 01 o' B GK S’ B►j* S»t O 1*1 0\ ? y 3 Ooc 2 00 >< f» a I ?a o* X ?5 S<u HU p *3 p g. Or» NcF § 3f i < p3. p a I ?5o pi Pi Oo B S p 8. > n B g? •< 5o 1I 50 i O* Ko 5. HR 0 Pi 1 p R r S o* O'q Pi C/i *3 O 5- ? R• < p i‘n 0 1 VQ » Jo »Jo 3X. ^ 2 ^ " * I 5- ■Ht3 CX ns 00 CJ p ■g S’ En< < P3. p a no 3.o'c pg- 3 •x> n § • 50o< o o • ♦» & 2 f^* so no o Bo T3 3.q O ?2 8 3 « O'a O. Ca •occr -j 8 ■a 3 p :it Rl^ G« tlH3 3 3| U p a 3o it 3 50 O pa. < p p 3 O a 3 «i0n S ii» r*' ^ /. TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:Julv 10. 1995 SUBJECT: #2025 Michael Plank, 4115/4145 Watertown Road - Vacation of Drainage Utility Easement - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IA Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.12 - Vacation of public easement. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Certificate of Mailing/Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Maple Place Plat . w E - SuMivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Currently under Consideration by City F - Legal Notice of Vacation Description of Request The applicant has decided to vacate the drainage and utility casement that intei^ts newly defined Lot 1 of the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement. The drainage and utility easement in its current configuration serves no public purpose. In the replat of the lot line rearrat^enwnt new drainage and utility easements will be designated along the newly defined shared lot line. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the vacation application of Michael Plank involving the vacation of drainage and utility easements originally dedicated in the plat of Maple Place involvmg the properties located at 4115 and 4145 Watenown Road. This approval is condiuoned on app leant granting drainage and utility easements along the newly defined division line with the plat of Maple Place Second Addition. ch iSITf o6<Fo - sCbd A tsTon application ^ ^r» (■'i * r: PROPERTY LOCATION Site address <*f Prcperr:.- Kssui'c^ucji Nun«r g^^^;r;;7‘37;SiSas?’> st‘ 11 Please check one * P:cpert>’ Arach legal description to application. APPLIC.ANT , Name . , Address rfs^Na,^^ _LLLu Phnre(hQme) •^'7 Zip53fi2^ Phone (work) 0\^’NER (if different than applicant) Name Address City _____________ (anach list if more than one.) existing LAM) LSE Number of Tax Parcels Development Siie Phone (home) Phone (work) % ^ Present use (check) Present Zoning Dismet Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Torn!, all parcels Resident!^; no. of units Other-(spccify) _______ wj - .. i ••" j. w*• Qjzrv w •yJfV-rr .* 17;.wa - • * •ucrT-'~ -.-'n- ynu l % Imm mt ^ . »..• .>.»• . .j ^ - •* :\Ai Ti nJJi---- - •■•-- '•‘■- ________— . >.•/ t*- rx - V- PROPOSAL y Lol lS <“ (f- Subdivision for New Building Sites Number oFBuMing Sites ------^o 77 Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per___Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)_________ CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. ) CITY OF ORONO ) I, Jamie Bosma, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, list of property owners. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 29th day of June, 1995. Jamie ^^sma iff iUN BATE QS/17/95 ;) BATCH 502 ■i v\ fm§mPm COUMTT PBOBWTY'XNrOBHATIOM JSYSTEH PROPERTY QNKEtS LIST : J PROP ADDR* CMCR NAME . .. TAXPAYER NAME/AOOll —.:. : . j * i' / V SB si-iia-n AS 0014 OOliS CRISTOFORI CIR N F A C KNAPP HIUXAH F A EVELYN KNAPP 4500 BAYSIOE RO NAPLE PLAIN m 55359 * • »• I • M • I . % . ■. I • k PROP ADOR . .. 0»tCR NAME TAXPAYER . ; • NAHE/ABDR 35 31-118-23 44 0002 00058 ADDRESS UNASSICNEO STATE OF HIM4 STATE OF HINN (ONRI fLUCE LINE TRAIL) • • ?• % ‘ •» *v 11 1 , - ^^PROP ADOR ONNER NANI ^TAXPAYER • • t* NAHE/ADOR TOTAL BATCH • ^ 502 00024 p. * •.. •,» I •* .i; j.*v\f-'L * ‘ i. ‘.. t r .>>• vV ' *>•. i. ^ ■•••'•■ V-’.: • I vi r. . « 0 1« rS-j.'. .• :'.;V ► » r » « •, .• ■ ■ • I X*. • •• • . fr . 1 ** ■» :t t • '(*/ •' ■ • • ••• f' .rjl ‘I i; H -.i. i • • rx-.. , .‘vv.. i ' .* . //w 'M-i* ’ yiV V •• J v** '• • » Vr M it.. i- , • • ■ f ' 'Z' . » V»’ •* . • • ‘ REPORT NO. PAGE PI4I54015 *' I ^38 31-118-23 43 0015 K 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIQCD H F A E KNAPP HILLIAH F-A EVELYN KNAPP . ♦ * \¥ -P\ **: 4300 BAYSXDE:RO HAPLE PLAIN HN 55354 38 31-118-23 44 0001 00038 AOORESS UTUSSIGT^EO STATE OF HINN STATE OF HINT4 (DNR) fLUCE LINE TRAIL) ^1; ■•.?(% • ♦58 31-118-23 44 0003 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HEMCPIN FORFEITED LAND.; HErMEPIN FORFEITED LAND ‘i' FOR SALE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY ;(»tCR ONLY 'i-. r I ■ ■ '■ s- I'j • • V'-V; V-’>V 38 31-118-23 44 0004 00050 CRISTOFORI CIR KENDRICK 8 HELROSE KENDRICK 8 HELROSE 50 CRISTOFORI CIR HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 1 f*•1 ■1' -H 4IX '••I S *•’ • t %■% ■ • A .>11 r’r. . I• .'I- $ I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF XNFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COIMTY OEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST OF HY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. DATE ^ BY (h • 9 w 9 r^W 9T9 9 M WV V ^ « W SI -ffJ f ■ ’I ti.•“If • 1^T*‘ i .V 1^* i ILiT* 4' 'y-^r •i • j > .1 iOaUWUBiSUUIfai RUN DATE 0S/17/9S HCItCPINRATCN fOtRROP AOOR 0»MER NAHE TAXPAYER ' NANF/ADDR SR Sl-116-ES IS 0012 04220 HAnRT(M4 RO R AND J HYATT ROBERT J HYATT 4220 HATERT0»f4 ROAD HAPLE PLAIN N4 SSSSf PROP AOOR OMCR NAHE TAXPAYER NAIC/AOOR SB S1>11B-2S 41 0001 04040 HATERTCPtI RO T R A C N SMIEJA THOHAS RA;HRISTirC H SMIEJA 4040 HATERT0H4 RO MAPLE PUIN m S5S59 •• •• PRO^ AOOR ' 0»tCR NAME .TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR » S8 S1-1I8-23 41 0005 04065 ' NATERTONN RD C F DALE A 6 L PAULSON CHRISTOPHER F DALE 6ERI L PAULSON 4085 NATERT0Nr4 RD HAPLE PLAIN MN 5S554 • . i.i. • • •* I PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER . NAME/AOOR < SR Sl-llS-23 42 0001 0424S, CHIPPEHA LA R L SORENSEN ETAL ROBERT L SORENSEN 4245 CHIPPEHA LANE MAPLE PLAIN S5359 R I '*' mA j * I ♦ .*1 • V •' ' PROP AOOR ' SB Sl-llR-23 42 0005 ■ OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSICNEO ' :: ONCR NAME TAXPAYER '.'S NAME/AOOR • . • .. M NINNIFRED H BRYANT NINNXFRED H BRYANT C/0 MERLE STILES IBOl LAKEVIEH TER LQN8 LAKE m 5S356 I • PROP ADDR r OHNER NAHE •TAXPAYER ^ NAME/ADDR • • • . . t 38 31-11B-23 42 0015 04360 CHIPPEHA LA L E MARTINEAU/J H HARTINEAU LARRY El JEAN H HARTINEAU 4340 CHIPPEHA LA MAPLE PLAIN HN • t 55359 • I f \e •.. J! i* * • .> .‘ V.. . i •• *. • ■ > ' I .COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY (M€RS LIST38 31-118-23 13 0015 04225 NATERTONN RO JAMES R PAOOON^jjo€s R paddqn ; 4225 NATERTOtl RD MAPLE PLAINS9 55359 f: f # I • Iv t.J. • V r38 31-118-23 41 0003 04045 NATERTONN RD 0 S I 6 S RELLENBERGER \ DANA I GREGORY RELLENBERGER 4045 HATERTTMI RD MAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 * ••*. 1. I 9 ' I:« • 38 31-118-23.41 0008 04145 HATERTOW RO M R I H E PLAMC SALLY PLAMC {. 327 NORTH CARRINGTON BUFFALO VIY , 82834 v; •1.i- •;** • ,v.h 7.. 31-118-23'42 0002 *r REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 438 31-118-23 14 ODo?04100 NATERTOItl RD FRANK KOKESH ET AL FRANK KOKESH 4100 NATERTONN RO HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 41 0004 04105 NATERTONN RO 0 61GUERE I A GIGUERE PAHHALEE HARIE SAHCHUK 4105 NATERTOItl RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 41 0011 04115 NATERTONN RD MICHAEL R I MARY E PLAIK MICHAEL PLANK 327 NORTH CARRINGTON BUFFALO^ 82834 38 31-118-23 42 0003 { 04265 CHIPPEHA LA 04355 CHIPPEHA LA T J I K L MCCAFFREY .FREDERICK E SHEHANEK JR THOHAS J MCCAFFREY f ‘FRED E SHEHANEK 4265 CHIPPEHA U ♦RT 2 BOX 16 HAPLE PLAIN H^ 55359 •HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 •• 4-^» . .19 •* . ‘• • • 38 31-118-23 42 0006 9 ■ • •»4*S 38 31-118-23 42 0012 00038. ADDRESS UNASSI^D 04220 CHIPPEHA LA STATE OF MINN ;^ STATE OF Him IDNR) i. •PAMELA GAIL ANDERSON.1*.PAMELA G ANDERSON ILUCE LINE TRAIL 1 4220 CHIPPEHA LANE »'• ’ •,.» • ■ '.r HAPLE PLAINS HN 55359 V-.» %• 38 31-118-23 43 0002 38 31-118-23 43 0011 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 00145 TURNHAM RD STATE OF MINN - *DEAL SAVINGS BANC STATE OF MINN fONR)■ it >DAVID A DETERS (LUCE LINE TRAIL)145 TURNHAH RO Vt' :i\:HAPLE PUIN HN 55359 * t• . :i- 4.y • : W:t '; 1 1.: • ii' •• 1 . • • • • h!.‘'5 V ■ < m «4 I MAPLE PLACE m ' Wi'h p OU H I «» Vl »»•(••« mm Um0 *t C*M l«l« •f I—«•>»>« «•••»•« If M • ••• l«.4 «.4 ml. /• ---- I hi J /'ru'5s;."aCKru«;- //?/ \ 1 I >\\l K‘ I "h.7/ 1 -••'-it MAPLE PLACE SECOND ADDITON PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MICHAEL PLANK IN LOTS 2 & 3. BLOCK 1. & OUTIDT A, MAPLE PLACE HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOA <C rS:0 IfJ < a.. Cx.a 1 X •v.)X i—• da <•< LiJ a 1?.a.0u UJ LO aUPHEV.A V.ANE otstCNtniv INtAHN It RIVISAIS DATI HCMTKWnHiM COITIN & GRONBERG. INC. CtviyKltiux [ii\;tinvrs. IjuuI Snn\wrs, Site P/nnncrs 482 Tanuw<L Avtnue • Lon^ Lake, MN 55356 612-473-4141 I Ufiln ii-flili ihji IhiN MjiAo M|Ml'|Ull^l In mr »i un«Kf nu vlir«I »u|nf jrvl Ihji I jm jiluli u')CiNli*ml tml Fn>;io*vi4n*J |jindSur\ini«» under iIm- Liw* i4 iIm' ‘'Ule iil Minrn''*'lji M41L *• Mihih-miIj I NuniUr I’rN' St All 1'. lOO' util |.\3^3 KW SI* 5^ CITY OF ORONO - NOTICE Tl« Planning Co^ission wU. hdd a P^ic hearing m ease^m involving U.e properties located a. 4115 and 4145 Watertown Road and legally desenbed as follows: The drainage and utiliiy easements as dedicated in the plat ^ Ivine 5 feet”on each side of the common lot line between Lots 2 and 3, Block 1. MAPLE PLACE which bears Nonh 62 degrees 24 mmutes West for ^ dist^ce of at 99 feet, EXCEPT for that part lying within 5 feet on each side of the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, said Block . All persons w ishing to be heard will appear a, dus » ““ are available in the City offices for review, by appointment. City of Orono By: Planning Commission ^ . 7^/a/ujudj:ibL CXcA ______ Jea^e ^Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator To be published the weeks of July 3 and July 10, 1995. Posted at: City Hall Crystal Bay Post Office Long Lake Post Office Navarre Post Office ,• TO: DATE: AA Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanitt A. Mabusih, Building «& Zoning Administrator July 10, 1995 SUBJECT: #2026 New Horizon Child Care, 875 Wayzata Blvd. - Variances Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning Dirtrict: RR-IB Total area = 7+ acres Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.61, Subd. 2 (A-3) - Signage area variance Allowed = 12 s.f. Original Proposal = 104 s.f. Option I = 50 s.f. Option II = 68 s.f. Section 10.61, Subd. 2 (C) - Height/setback A. Setback Required = 5’ Entry pylon = 10’ Option 1 = 50’ + Option II = 37’ B Height 1. 2. Entry pylon Original entry pylon 17’8" Amended proposal 13’8" Building signage Option I signage installed on building Option II original proposal 15’6" Option II proposed = 12’ List of Exhibits A - Planning Commission Action Notice B - Entry Pylon C - Option II Signage at Building D - Option I Signage at Building El-2 - Illuminated Entrance Apron F - Letter of Signage Contractor Concerning Illuminated Entrance Apron G - Request to Appear Before Council at 7/24/95 Meeting Zoning File f^2026 July lb, 1995 Pace 2 The applicant has consulted with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for sp>ecial signage that would alert oncoming traffic of secluded entrance to daycare facility. Mn/DOT has advised the applicant that if special signage is to be considered at entrance that the City must deal directly with Mn/DOT on such a request and that the propeny owner cannot request special sienace. In a recent "drive by observation", staff noted that the entrance way to the daycare has been cleared of encroaching plantings. Applicant claims that difficulties arise for vehicular traffic approaching from east with the curve in the roadway. Clear vision of entrance is not apparent and becomes a safety issue because of the speed of the traffic. The 4 x4 pylon sign at entrance at approximately 5'^’ above grade of road is applicant’s attempt to address that need. Applicant also stated at a recent meeting that signage is not necessarily provided tor daily visitors to the daycare center but would provide adequate warning and safer use of access for visitors who do not visit this site on a regular basis. Applicant has provided two alternatives for signage adjacent to the building. Option I. Exhibit D, proposes a 4 ’2‘^"x4 ’2'^" illuminated sign at 18 s.f. to be attached to the north side of the building. Option U, proposes an independent pylon sign, two sided, at the same dimensions tor a total of 36 s.f. In both plans, the building signage would be illuminated. The entry sign will not be illuminated. The entry pylon is now sWn at a total height of 13 ’8". The sign was originally proposed at 17’8" for a total reduction of 5’. The pylon sign adjacent to the facility with Option II is shown at a maximum height of 12’. The original proposal showed a 15’6" height for a total reduction of 3 ‘A’ in height. Review Exhibit F, applicant’s sign contractor has provided additional information on the illuminated apron above the entrance door. Both applicant and contractor have advised that in residential areas timers control the lighting so that signs only need to be illuminated when daycare is in operation. Staff has talked with Bill Warden of the Minnesota Department of Transportation concerning special signage along the road right of-way. Mr. Warden advised that the only signage that he was aware of was signage advising of school crossings, etc. There is nothing for special uses like a daycare facility. He noted that he would be very happy to meet with the sign contractor to stake the edge of the right-of-way and noted the need for signage at the entrance because of the location of the driveway in relation to the facility. He also understood applicant’s concerns for the need to alert oncoming cars from the east of the approaching entrance. A sign announcing entrance to daycare facilities would be helpful for persons unfamUiar with the site. Zoning File #2026 July lb, 1995 Page 3 Issues for Consideration 1.If illuminated apron is controlled by timer, do members have other concerns concerning the entrance apron? Which of the alternatives for building signage is preferred? Option I, Option II or other? 3.Entry sign would be approximately 5'/^’ to 6’ above the grade of roadway. Should entrance signage function as an advertising sign or directional sign noting entrance to child care facility??? Options of Action To deny, approve or amend the current signage plan proposed by New Horizon Child Care for the property located at 875 Wayzata Blvd. crrv OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Cr\stal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2026 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 21. 1995 TO: Sharon Bergen New Horizon Child Care 3650 Annapt^lis Lane Plymouth, MN 55447 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances DATE OF MEETING: 06/19/95 VOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST a. b. The Planning Commission recommended tabling application providing applicant additional time to amend signage plan. The Planning Commission provided the following directives to applicant concerning alteration of proposed signage: Entrance signage - applicant is encouraged to contact Minnesota Department of Transportation for advice as to typical signage or markings that alert oncoming traffic of entrance to day care facility. Discourage height variance for pylon sign adjacent to facility because of impact of illuminated signage close to Luce Line. Members also discouraged the 36 s.f. for a two-sided sign advising of need to trim back on signage area. Applic^t was also asked to provide specs on lighting of signage for review by both City Engiiieer and members of Commission. Some members were concerned with the lighting of the apron over doomay. Applicant should address the concerns v/hich appear to be ot the majority of Planning Commission members. The Planning Commission advised that although the facility is located on busy Wayzata Boulevard that it is located within a residential zone surrounded by the Luce Line to the west and a cemetery to the east. Excessive advertising signage is discouraged in residential zones. Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of the additional information by Monday, July 10, 1995 in order to meet the agenda of the July 17. 1995 Planning Commission meeting or August iQ. 1995 for the August 21, 1995 Planning Commission meeting. Please contc Jeanne .vlabusth at the City offices if you have any questions pertaining to the review of your application. c. ► JrOVJ JH' ^>/e i_ r> » > r> ! T\u f 'r f /\ I, e:fy A/ / ! •if __ » 9 I y f IJ-C^ - I> cr * O/JoPV \ \ • 0 ^. ^Qjl_ \ ^^6 -/1/uivv. - »-i-ii*#»^»«>*-»'\7*^ •Tar'irr^ IL C ) /6 liii jEi iBWi: liuiTli^iat«3BlirKaBaamTlia Bi ..'.VJ. :: pip f , *1 4- -'.* *. i*i lip :|pii::I- p: =i.-a:;Ui |:a: Pil '1j p::!;:': l:tt: 1:.it 3) ISi-IHl.Wilt'** •* — •'• ill; l;8:|r;ir^t g!K; ll ai!8 !ipjyn:Mi ;; l V i It i;s! ;ii:^ lisiiaiiisMLiiiH Ji • • 4 mi ♦ •••»• • i I t t«4S • - r=^I^OK)T Of£-vO From : SIC3NS LN-IMITED (612) 47&-2034FRX/ OFF 478-9460 QuiJity Interior ft Ewtcrlor :\) > (612) 478-9460 22400 Hwy. SS Hamel, Miimreots 55340 FAX 612-478-2034 Mirharl J« Dvorci^eli PQ2 July 6.1995 City ofOrono Ms. Jeanne Mabusth ?.0. Box 66 Crysiftl Bay, MN 55323 Dear Jcaiuie: In Kspome to U« concetr.5 of U« Planning Conmii^lo.., I New Horizon's «gn, and cauopks .re mtcw,,lly illuo|in,t.d cncU»ut.^ ftbrlcaled to meet Undetwtitet labotatorles Clf) TTte Jigns and canopies contain cold sveathet baltasb and draw 7 anj.p5 of power. % e have installed tJ.is identical application In many residential areas for New tloriron and have IHTCU suv^cssfiil in controlling them using timers. , r* If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Mictiael Pvoracek MD:as , •• • • ■ aaa* •• ■ • a NEWm HORIZON It Child Care•r Julv6, 1995 City of Orono Ms. Jeanne Mabusth P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Jeanne: New Horizon would like to be placed on the agenda for the next City Council meeting set for July 24, 1995, in consideration of our signage variance. Please let know if you need any fiirther information prior to the July 17, 1995, Planning ConunH^i."m « .eting. Please contact myself or Monika Helmen, Regional Manager, at 577-9224 if you have ftirther questions. Sincerely, Ai Sharon Bergen Director of Support Services SB:as (912) 557-1111 3650 Annapolis Lane North Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 N«sw Honny' EnteronsM. Inc To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator Julv 5. 1995 #2032 Michael and Lynne Gerlicher, 1375 Rest Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing 3 Zoning District: LR-IB Approximate lot area = 30,634 s.f. or .70 acres Pertinent Ordinances 1. 2. 3. Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C) - Non-encroachment - aIlo\\*ed height. Allowed = 3 ’ 6" (fences at 3'/i' or lower are considered non-cncroadmients and may be placed along any lot line) Proposed ^ 7’ (posts are 7’, average height of fence 6* to 6'/^’, 5*/i’ at center of section) Average height = 6-6 Va rianc e = 3V4 ’ or 100% Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) - Required setback for structures from rear/street lot line. Required = 30 ’ Proposed = 0’ Variance = 30 ’ or 100% Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (D) - "... No fence or wall over 42" but not in excess of 72" in height above original grade may be located closer to the shoreline than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots and shall not be constructed within 75’ of the shoreline." Review Exhibits D and F. The 6 ’ fence recently reinstalled on side lot line does not encroach 75’ setback nor does it impact lakeshore views of the residence to immediate south. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners’ List D - Survey E - Elevation of Fencing F - Staff Sketch-Average Lakeshore Setback G - Topographic Map Zoning File #2032 July 5" 1995 Pace 2 Description of Request Applicant seeks approval of a height and setback variance tor a 6 + privacy fence located at the street lot line and in the rear yard of a lakeshore lot that docs not abut a major thorouchfare. Rest Point Road is not a County road nor an MSA funded road. As fence exceeds the allowed 3'/2* height, the Code will require that it meet the structural setback of 30’. Review Exhibit D. Applicant has designated the areas requiring variance approval, an 80’ section along the street lot line and 30’ along the south side lot line. Posts have already been installed. The Inspector asked the applicant to cease all work until the necessary variance approvals were received. The existing sections along the street and rear yard along alley arc at the allowed 42" height. Applicant'^has reinstalled'" fencing along the side lot line where a previous fence had existed for some 18 years. Applicant chose not to repair sections but to replace with better quality fencing. This type of fencing is similar to the fencing installed at the residence across the street on Rest Point Road. Note reference to Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (D) - tencii^ along side lot line on a lakeshore lot cannot exceed 72" or 6’ height. As average height of this fence is 6’ + , applicant must also seek variance for portion of fence installed along side lot li^. If fence is to exceed 6’ in height, the Code asks that the fence be reinstaUed 10’ from the side lot line. Statement of Hardship Refer to Exhibit A. They are as follows: 1. Original privacy fencing had existed on property for over 18 years. Applicant’s desire for privacy due to location of the residence to roadway at south and public alley to the east. 3.Sloping topography adjacent to Rest Point Road places both road and house at the same elevation. 4. Need to minimize car lights, etc. from nearby driveways and roadway Issues for Consideration 1. Are applicant’s hardships valid or acceptable? 2. Does the unique layout of this neighborhood require special screening needs year-round? 3. Does the fence visually impact any adjacent property' 4. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. MUM Zoning File #2032 July 5~ 1995 Page 3 Options of Action To either approve, amend or deny the height and setback variance application for privacy fencin'^ within the rear vard and at the street lot line of the property located at 1375 Rest Point Road. Any recommendation of approval must include the condition that applicant obtam a building permit for construction of privacy fencing within street and side yard. UBBttMaauiaatiuuflii Jr 2 A cm' OF ORONO - V.\RL\NCE APPLICATION X • » Initial Application Fee S200.00 ($50.00 per each additional variarii Renewal Variance Fee SI00 00 (no change from original application) ^ Variance for non-conforming structures S-CK'.OO After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) •* » f riry Of nmCE OFFICE 12E0200000 01 CDi 200,1 ChECK . TL 200,. txtcnpT-'ffm YOU H333010 cool ROl T1 06/1 PROPERTY'INFORMATIpN_. ^ /KJ Site Address /■?,7.f PropertN- Identification Number (P.I.D.)—C f //I Z\\ —-iZ ^ ' *• **— *«':iudedAnach legal description to applicationJf n<n me Date Property A.-qnir>»H /9.r^ on required survey. (monih/year) UaiC riUpCJlV i-VV.V|WHiVW______r,^ ■>—^ Zoning ni«;iTict: —--------------- applicant ^ / Name — . Addres^lA^ Ph>->ne (home) ^7^ *4-^7^ Phone(w'ork)___ Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address:_____________________ Phone(homc) Phone (work)_ _ City:Zip: description of request • i A * ^ ^ Estimated Construction Cost $, _ ^ /____.r-. ,,\.e L/ a Describe request in detail: if ^ 1^0 C/i VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify)___uincr ______________—— ------------------------------ compliance with Zoning Code requirement?;wA5compliance wimz.oning '-uuc ------- —.U.’/ ^ uJ C.c ■U Py.>s-r.w4- fVw.tc.,^r«^c4_ (V|S4 \cO. ri rsit^ m tci »~4- oHHitinnai chpets if necessan ,ti i5 Cfl L I J I P ^ I II—" £ [Uj) ^,a /c 4_ » ^ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All ,h. fnlln'vHn^ must Ik s..hniW fd bv the appllwtipn deadline dat^.in orto; for vour application to be con sidered complete 1 3. 6. 7. 8. 9. /Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). . • u Certificate of Survey (signed by a "“calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8A x 11 for Top^ra'phic 'surv ev (e.xisting and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade "^re^proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy x '' /^ketches or plans of fioor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8/4 x 11 ). — Iht oTthe legal names (include martol slams) of all persons wid. an inieres in the “ property TOs would include tiame(s) of applicant(s) if not current ownet(s). _ ^ anTddendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons vou wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City statf. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please ^ber that jam unnlirntinn is not cbmnifte if the alwvf information hag mX hwn MltlwIeiL ThTtoplS hereS^aereM*ro provide all information required or requested by the Zomng WsS aa^s » pay additional fees (staff time not coveted by original fee paymem) Admimstrator >St«s » Py aonlication. and certifies that theand/or consultant expenses incu™r~m review of this appUcation. and certifies that the information supplied is true, and Street Applicant’s Signature^ :st 9f his/her knowledge. Date owner hereby acknowledges andagrees to this application and further entry onto the property by City;^ff, consultants, apnts, Commission members, and Coun members for purposes of inves^atioman^e^caj^n of this request. ^ ^ Date r Z' ■ z'Owner ’s Signature i ' Anolicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Co^ission Meeting Plannina Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each ^ ' ADDlicLits must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Plaimmg Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please m^e - m have m authorized^^ anend in your place and to advise the Budding & Zomng Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 sa 07>117>2S sz 0002 01S40 REST POINT LA J M MOUTNAN • K J HOUTNAN J N NOUTHAN I K J HOUTMAN ISOO REST POINT LA HOUND M4 S53A4 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAJ9AVER NAHE/AOOR M 07-117-25 52 0050 01575 REST POINT RO R E ANDERSON A A K KRAMER KIRK ANDERSON 1575 REST POINT RD HOUND m 555A4 50 07-117-25 52 0041 PROP ADOR 01571 REST POINT LA OMCR NAME KEIOCTN N A RENEE 0 EOGERT TAXPAYER KEMCTN N A RENEE G EOGERT NAME/ADDR 1571 REST POINT U . ’ HOUND m SS544 PROP ADDR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER ’NAME/ADDR 0 4^. • k 50 07-117-25 53 0007 01500 REST POINT RO H A V RRARE JR HALTER P A VAUGHN 0 KRAKE 1500 REST POINT RO HOUND (04 55544 AODR OWCR.NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR SO 07-117-25 33 0011 01505 ' REST POINT RO SUZANNE R AUSTIN SUZANNE AUSTIN 229 OAKNOOO RO HOPKINS Itl 55345 «’ r ... < - *4 . - * • - *.» . • • 4» *<• .>» . ■;. i' ' . y. *. 4 if » iV .!.♦ ' •■i- . •V 4 . m p * • r•* r iV ’ .• >•/ HEPWEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY QIOCRS UST V .•» M 07-117-25 52 0054 01545 REST POINT RO R N SZGAFOOS ETAL RALPH A CORA SIGAFOOS 1345 REST POINT RO MOUND HN 55544 :> I 50 07-117-25 52 0059 01550 REST POINT RO LAS MAOILL LARRY A SHARON GRAOILL 1550 REST POINT RO HOUND (01 55544 * SO 07-117-25 55 0005 015M REST POINT RO PAN NALSN PATRICK J NALSH 1390 REST POINT RO HOUND HN 55544 .1 %» » 4*N V 50 07-117-25 55 0009 01395 REST POINT RO ROOERT 0 DREOESON ROOERT 0 DREOESON 15 E ST ALBANS RO HOPKINS (04 55505 « so 07-117-25 55 0012 01574 REST POINT RO 0 R BLOOM A T A BLOOM GEORGE R A THERESA A BLOOM 1574 REST P0K4T RO HOUND (04 553M 1 . ¥ J' ’ i-.-T 4• -i-J »• •! * *. '* .4-, % • v41 ' 4-' REPORT NO. PA«PI455401450 07-117-25 52 0057 01575 REST POINT RD H B A L K GERLICHER MICHAEL B A LYI04E GERLICHER 1575 REST POINT M HOUND (04 55544 50 07-117-25 52 0040 01544 REST POINT RB LANRENCE E A HELEN LANGHANS LANRErCE E A HELEN LANGNA(4S 1544 REST POINT RO N0U440 (04 55544 50 07-117-25 55 0004 01304 REST POINT RO TERRY C SMITH ETAL TERRY C SMITH 1504 REST P0K4T RO HOUND (04 55544 ’ 50 07-117-25 55 0010 01405 REST POINT RO HENOY H OLSON HE(4DY H OLSON 1405 REST POINT RO hound (04 55544 N • total batch 604 00014 I ‘ I n .•>4^ I 1N t ^ x' Plat of Sumr»y for Jaa*« A. In SubdiTlaioa of I^t 14| r.ast POi-i-t cbtic Hannapic County, Kirxeaota TiilS IJE a r? 4 , ^ r ^ ^a- -, I Cartlflcata of Snrray: X harobgr cortify that this i» « trua and corract rapradantatlon of a sunray of tha bovindarlea of? All of Lota 15, 22, and 23, and all that part of Lots 16, 17, ana 21 which He Sou^h of a llx» drawn from , the Southwest comer of said Uit 21 to a point in the .— -------- and which point is situate 1 foot South from the Northeast * tocether with any aacatad alley which Ues between the lota her^ described, ^^rSing In the^^SubdiTislon of Lot U, Re.t Point ?»rt, Uke Mi^tonto, Sained County, Minnesota, EXCBP? the foHowlng-dewrl^ LotH aU the? ^rt of Lots 15 and 22 and adjacent race ted alley, Reet Point Park, Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota, f ??rfSS3l^^i*crlbed line, Beginning at a point on the Southeasterly ^^ of s^d Lot 15 distant 75 feet Northeasterly fron Southeaat^^ SriS* thence Lot 23; thence North^weterly to the Southeaatarxy comer of a^d , Northwesterly on a line foratng an.angle of 74 55' with the Easterly li .. said^t 22, to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and thare ending, and of ^exlsiing buildings thereon, ard the proposed location of a proposed addi­ tion It does not purport to show other laprovenents or encroachments. ?;r gooses of tSTsumey an imn marker on the Northerly line of ^t 22 distant U2.3 foot Westerly from the Northeeeterly comer of eeid Lot ^ n« SefCJSLd^ be "the Southwest comer of said Lo^- nsntion^in cr 1-. in - 50» GoxSr^T2fflA^ * BOg^« 10-l7% U=d su^yor o : Iron marker • lon% Lake, Minneeota . M . • P --A.. •> ilW t HI m /(J: !!ll ll'l dk 11 /rH;.4llj III >! 111: t t ^iiii i’ll lilt! aiilttI isnnini* ourriKY I^TATE /^OU[ ( • • \ - • •• r. •* V" > #j* • • ' . . • V • •■■•’*../' V*. ‘.V ** • : <>'* • • *. f .'.• • !*. \ •* • , * # * ■» • •t* •*•% ^ .••■ •• •' •« .« - • • \ • V •> -■ VV» •* ♦• * •*. f Plat of SuTT«7 fcr aizer C. Barber .c*,part .of ’SubdlTiricn of Lot 141 Hast Polrt pBTk H_- •’ Et»nnr^T)i!: Ccuaty, Mlanesota 21 # Certificate of Surreyt I hereby certify that this Is a truo and eonreet rerresentntion of a surrey of the bour.daries of: ^ Lot 23, and. all t>iat port of Lots ' • 15 and 22, adjacent raeated alley, ^‘ilabu^alon cf Let 14, H«st Point Fork, Lake Mnnetonka, lying Southerly of the foUowi^- ’^deaerlbed line: B^rinnlnr at a rolnt on the Southeasterly llr.“ cf said Lot 15, distant 75 rr*''r th'» f;cuthearterly co~r.er of said Lot 23; thence Korthwesterly to ^ the'Southeast e»*lr ccrr*»r cf eaid Lot 22; th^r.c" Kcrth^.'^sterlv cn & line forning an angle A of 74*55* with the ’-V3:*t**rl:* lir." of ?-aid Lot 22, to th*' ehcre of Lake Wiaietonka, and thera "andlng; 8/ All of Lots 15, 2:2. r.nJ 23, .-ind all that part cf Lets 16, 17, £J-.d 21, which llae 'South of a lire drawn fror the Southwest corner of said Lot 21 to a pclnt In the Bast line of said Let 16, wMrh roJnt is situated one foot Couth of .the 2«rtheast corner of aald Lot ^ln;Khdli^elcn e** Ic*. Fnrrt^en (1/.) Rent Point Park, I^ke ^Snnetonka, exeort that part ^'tharoof lylnr Souther ly of th® follovlrp-descrlbed line: Beglr.njrp et a point on the South- ]v‘^yaaterly lln® of said Lot 15, distort 75 f®et t«ortheasterly hrrn the Sotttheanterly eornar ^■^cf said Lot 23; th«nr® horT.hver.teT»]y to the Scuthaasterly corner of said Lot 22; thence «Korthwesterly on a lin® forr.lnp an nr.ple of 74°55’ with the Easterly line of said Lot 22, ' to the shore "of L^sk® I'lnr.e*onka, and there ending. ■ It dees not purport to show improvements or encroachments, if any. It is understood land agreed no ncnum®nts have been placed by us fcr the purpose of eey^blishinp^lot lines • or bounder)' corners. ’*• Vr*** ? -r .. •• • Seale *________ fiate I ^ch 8, 1961 o IF : *? . . Vifir., S, Kelley firuce R. Kelley Gordon R. Coffin ox es^ciisnxn^xow xao« TiJr 4^orms1342 Reg. iio. 5713 Reg. Ko. 6064 &on marker fetmd », . . T ’* * • KELLET & ICSLLET, Ehglneers & SuTTeyora . .. Long Lake, Minnesota ■ * v«^» .>- ,,,_ i -• j ' • 1 *3^-\ '4f j: r^ ' ¥.!■! ri-vorr D i fJUL i. Ijo 1996 r-7-fj z' .» / --4. « I-! 'i<4«k i, --------— ---------4* /■ <3 •''T^ lApt ! AJt^Ct /r^-^ y^ti^ o/d. 7^ un de^ • // y'firf* /y€( ^X^:2Sl />^/i^ '45’J'W /^7 />- c/ /^-M> ddf^T^Tpd/^ ^ JT U^tr^ cd "ydc^ * ^ffydjy^CP 4re l^J^e ~C^a</ ^/ex/- t/^/CP /t^ 45^*^ J~7^ 7^/ x^'/4^ _ 'JS^_C/'-7^ h^yCC^. w/1 c^ ^'-^s/ i^yJt ^ <=fo y — Ac^ ^ry\ ' /^ J^/y\ 1 \4si^ ^ C-/^ ^ / }/r^^^7%^ ^ ______ii I! Ii i.i • * -------------------------♦tf !I| •/^ iryo . / /-7^ J>>t ^ rr^i^ 7^ 2^ /XaciX*^ “ZJ" ^/t^ >6w ^ /t lrf^~Z-------- J^<^^r^.JcY —ir€^j^^-L^^arx cc^Le^ 'I^ i'irrvxic/ ot t' - . y/<<» (ji>^/fC <»v^_^.t-^^v*«C ’^./ y^ftt \. y ^ ltt I'l / X- ^#Vv» /w TO: DATE: Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabtxsih, Building & Zoning Administrator Julv 10. 1995 SUBJECT: #2033 Donald and Arlene Kielle>% 1670 Shadywood Road - Variances - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.03. Subd. 14 (C) - Review of structural coverage. Total lot area = 14.500 s.f. Allowed = 2,175 s.f. or 15% Existing = 2,263 s.f. or 15.6% Proposed = 2,773.5 s.f. or 19.1% Increase in structural coverage = 510.5 s.f. or 3.5% Lot coverage variance = 598 s.f. or 4.1% Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. A. 0-75’ setback area = 4,680 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 383 s.f. or 8.18% Proposed = 158 s.f. or 3.38% Variance = 225 s.f. or 4.8% B. 75-250’ setback area = 9,820 s.f. Allowed = 2,455 s.f. or 25% Existing = 4,907 166 s.f. (rock with plastic not credited in hardcover Inventory) = 5,073 s.f. or 51.6%, refer to Exhibit L Proposed = 5,184.5 s.f. or 52.8% Hardcover increase = 111.5 s.f. or 1.14% Variance = 2,729.5 s.f. or 27.8% (existing variance = 2,618 s.f. or 26.7%) Section 10.25, Subd. 6 (B) - Side yard setback Required = 10’ Existing = 8 inches Proposed = 6’ Variance for addition = 4’ or 40% (existing = 9’4 inches or 94%) Zoning File #2033 July 10, 1995 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application Al- Addendum B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Hardship Statement E - Street Elevation F - Hardcover Inventory 0-75 ’ Setback Area G - Hardcover Inventory 75-250 ’ Setback Area H - Floor Plan 11-4 - 1982 Variance Review J - Approved Site Plan for 1982 Review Kl-3 - Request by Applicants to Amend Approved Hardcover Plan of 1982 L • Current Survey Plus Hardcover Plan Review of 1982 Variance Application In 1982 the former owner received approval of a setback and hardcover variances to allow construction of the second 20’x24 ’ detached garage on the property. The approval included the allowance for an expansion of a paved area to the east side of an existing concrete slab approximately 14’x24 ’. In order to minimize hardcover increases resulting from the improvements, applicant was to remove a 16’x3 ’x8.3 ’ storage shed in the street yard and a section of the onginal paved walkway that linked the older garage to the residence that would be located between the existing and proposed garage, refer to Exhibits 11-4 and J, the approved site plan. In 1985 the applicant sought to amend the original approved hardcover plan asking for both the shed and concrete pavement between garage structures in lieu of not installing 14’x24 ’ expanded turnaround area. Applicant was advised to file a new variance application, review Exhibits Kl- 3. The applicant never filed a variance application to amend the hardcover improvements on the property. Review of Current Hardcover Refer to Exhibit L, note the shed has been removed. Instead of installing an expanded turnaround area, applicant has maintained the concrete walkway between the two detached structures. Note a 126 s.f. of rock with plastic has been added to this area in addition to a triangular shaped rock with plastic area at 40 s.f. just to the east of the new garage. A 13’x23 ’ blacktop area has been added to the south of the existing concrete slab resulting in 299 s.f. of additional hardcover. As already noted above, staff has adjusted hardcover facts to reflect the 166 s.f. of additional hardcover. Hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback area exists at 5,073 s.f. or 51.6%. 2^ning File #2033 July lb. 1995 Page 3 Description of Current Request Applicant proposes an approximate I0.5’x42.5 ’ addition to the street side of the existing residence. Refer to Exhibit L, the structure will be located approximately 6’ from the north side lot line. There is no encroachment of an average lakeshore setback. The structure is completely located in the 75-250’ setback area where excesses of hardcover exist. There will an increase of 111.5 s.f. or 1.14% hardcover in the 75-250’ setback area. The new addition will result in a more intense lot coverage variance. Structural coverage exists at 15.6% now proposed at 19.1% resulting in an increase of structural coverage of 3.5%. Applicant proposes the removal of landscape areas underlain with plastic in the 0-75 ’ setback area and within the 75 ’-250’ setback area the removal of paved walkways and railroad ties as shown on Exhibit L. Statement of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit D, applicant notes the following: 1. Limitations on the area and width of lot cannot be remedied because there is no adjacent undeveloped lands available for combination. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Location of home on adjacent property will minimize any impact of the substandard side setback. Majority of the lot except for the last 20’ adjacent to shoreline are flat. There m extensive grass areas to allow for drainage to run over lawn areas before entering lake. Some 510 s.f. of new structure is offset by being placed over 189.5 s.f. of existing nonstructural hardcover. Residence structure has no basement. Accessory structures are used for residential storage. The proposed improvements will result in a total hardcover reduction on the property of 113.5 s.f. or 0.8%. Zoning File #2033 July 10, 1995 Page 4 Issues for Consideration 1.Hardcover in the 75-250’ setback area is proposed at 5.184.5 s.f. or 52.8%. What other hardcover improvements can be or should be removed? a) 13’x23' blacktopp^ area to south of concrete pad at 299 s.f. or 3.04%? b) 126 s.f. or 1.3% of plastic underliner beneath crushed rock between detached garage. c) 93 s.f. or 1.0% concrete pavement between detached garages. d) 540 s.f. ± or 5.5% of plastic liner beneath landscape areas/crushed rock areas. Will members approve a 3.5% increase in structural coverage . . .4.1% final variance? 3. Hardcover in the 0-75’ setback area has been decreased by 225 s.f. or 4.8%. Total hardcover on the property has been reduced 113.5 s.f. or 0.08%. 4. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Options of Action To deny, approve or amend variance application seeking approval of structural coverage, hardcover excesses within the 75-250’ setback area and side setback variances for property located at 1670 Shady wood Road. Any recommendatior of approval must include the condition that hardcover improvements scheduled for removal must be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new approved construction. c>C CITY OF ORONO - VAR1-\NCE .APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S200.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) ^ Variance for non-conforming stnicrures 5200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY ENFORNL\TION / Site Address </> r m r ‘L- o'”) • *A * % Pfrv rr W.A I I wi TW LT^^^kiTC reerre i A«vfv*tc4» i 7T*A *.VWWV\ A W'WVV .4^ Ql CEH Ik V • CHECK 7L •kwk't fC C rZT O Tmm T 'UMJv V “i 1 1 t !f % 1 k ‘W i>Vv*4k 1 iOl n n», y' A Property Identification Number (P.I.DS-----^— r^nnirM sur\-ev Attach legal descnption to ^PPjjjanon if not included on q Date Propertv- Acquired /r7 ----------—— ----------------------- I (©) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels ot land. Present use of property^^^5^'^“^ ----------------------------------- Zoning District: (T _ (monthAear) APPLICANT Phone (home) ^ <^0 !!.<;/,_____ Phonc(work):^ X* /S4. ----- Phone(home)OWTSER (if different than applicant) Name ----: Address" Cit^_^^ DESCRIPTIO.N of request EatotrfConsmicoonCosiS---- Describe request in detail:_____—amSJiAsA.—Sn r o ^ •<^9/ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _ Setback: Lot Width Front Side Hardcover Rear ___Lot Coverage Average Lakeshorc Other (specify) “^cn^undue^h^S^OT^ ™“sual property conditions preventing compiionce with Zoning Code re^enrenj^^^^. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All „r fniio'vin^ h, .»hmittedj.v ,hf wpljwti»n deadline dat^. Korto for vour application to be considered of owners w itto 1 <_0' (you must f list from Hennepin County Department ol Finance. A-60a. Com Center. a43-a.71). '^lat Map (obtaineu with property owners list). . . , , ■p^Cenifreate of Sutwey (signed by a licensed surveyor and include h«dcover ~ calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8/: x 11 for T'oCraphic suney (e.xisting and proposed elevations)Jf any changes in existing grade Tn Tr?r!iTi(yn nrovide one (1) copy 8‘/^ X 11 tor reproduction. 1. *) 4. ^sSS'plam ifSi^l-urvlew^rpm^ld: o ‘nl\;r;oj'’8‘;t-1 lU — List of the legal names (include marital status) ol all persons with an interest in the oropetTv This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if no» current owner(s). __ As Tn addendum to this application, please attach a separate list ot any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please ^ember that vfiUE wnnliratinn is not complete if thV information ItM hftt iKen IPcMtuL ThiTappfc^ Lfe'by^agre«^ provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Hms am! agrees to pay additional fees (suff time not covered by ongmal fee payment) "^,:suU^exp:nsL^ncurred in review of -Ms application and certtfes dmt the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. ^ Date ?i^feSv acknowledges and agrees to this applicauon and further auAorizes rea»^ entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, apnts. Commission members, and Cot ncil members for purpos^vof investigation aM verification of this request. . j I /g.llV-) h^LljJxLj __Date _ b I H AoDlicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Coi^ission Meeting Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each mo^ Applicants must be present at aU scheduled review meetings of the Planning Co"^ton aild CouncU. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meetmg, please m^e arrangement to have an authorized agent anend in your place and to advise the Building «fe Zomng Offic this change prior to the meeting. Owner’s Signature 8 R ? V Jj PROJECT SUMMARY - - 1670 SHADYWOOO ROAD SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is located on the west shore of Crystal Bay. The lot is long and narrow and generally flat from the street to a point approximately 20’ from the shoreline where it falls rapidly to the water. The lot area is 14,500 SF, small by any standards except in the core city. The existing house was probably built as a cabin in the 20’s or 30's Though it has been remodeled and upgraded several times throughout the years, it remains small. Without a basement, all mechanical services (HVAC, laundry, etc.) are located on the main flow ^rther limiting space for living. Existing garages are located near the street. The walk to the front door is something over 70', a distance that seems longer while carrying groceries in the rain or snow. PROPOSAL: The homeowners desire increased family living space. The proposal is for the addition of of approximately 273 SF of enclosed space combined with interior revisions to accomodate a Family Room, Laundry and Half Bath while providir^ a contemporary Kitchen and much needed storage space. An additional 232 SF of covered Deck is also proposed to provide shelter at the front door and a modest area for outdoor enjoyment. The covered Deck gives architectural interest and enhances the "cottage charm." The proposed space is to be built streetside, encroaching no closer to the lake. The proposal requires the granting M two vanances: one, a sideyard setback variance to acknowledge an existing condition of the house too close to the North property line and a second for hardcover in the 75'-250* zone. GOVT LOT 2 *0 'm ✓... 'O *«9 •0 *2^JO '•4 1 «0 ‘ ?\ 3n V i rs----------\ IMi DATE OA/Oi/95 BATCH 50A MOD AOOH 0«CR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AODR (»tCR NAME TAXPAYER NAfC/AOOR ». ■ PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR > . PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR *• 1 I ' > ■< ■' • IttWCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATIDN SYSTEM PROPERTY 0H«RS LIST SO 17-117-2i 21 OOOA 01A7S SHAOYHOOO RO RICHARO 0 NORUM A MXPE RICHARO NORUH BOX 408 NAYZATA Ml SS341 38 17-U7-2S 21 5014 01650 SHAOYNOOO RO K H ROELOFS ETAL K N ROELOFS 1650 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA m 55391 58 17-117-25 21 0017 01690 SHAOYNOOO RO JACK F RHODE JACK F RHODE 1690 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 506 00009 • .V ; * C ' I" $ . X > - • * r v-;- I ’ ;■ T • ■ V • s" „i- * j > i _ m / • V: . • ^ ♦ /A 38 17-117-23 21 0005 01719 FA6ERNESS POINT LAUREEN E 0ARLXN8 lAUREEN E flARLXNO 1719 FA6ERNESS POINT RO NAYZATA MN 55391 4 38 17-117-23 21 0015 01670 SHAOYNOOO RO DONALD R KXELLEY DONALD R KXELLEY 1670 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA MN 55391 4V t 4 58 17-117-25 21 0018 01710 SHAOYMDOO RO JOHN P FITZPATRICK JOHN P FITZPATRICK 1710 SHAOYHOOO RO NAYZATA m 55391 ■i*- \ •i;H, •1 ,rI'T •^4 V*;-. \ «*,V. i» I V 4C4 \r* t REPORT NO. PX435401 PAGE 22 38 17-117-23 21 0013 01L40 SHAOYNOOO RO 6 T FIMI ETAL GERALD T FINN 1640 SHAOYHOOO RO NAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 21 0016 C1680 SHAOYNOOO RO JOllN 0 DOLEHAN ETAL JOHN e DOLEHAN 1680 SHAOYNOOO ROAD NAYZATA m 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0013 01645 SHAOYNOOO RO RALPH HARVEY ETAL RALPH HARVEY 1645 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA MN 55391 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTAnON OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST OF MY KNQNLEDGE AND BELIEF. i-7-55 i DATE 4/ I • . V' T.' _ T*r .V ' -'S #•li • 0 . I • f \*« %•€ ,* ‘ .. *»•* • ;. • ■ {« t ; •\ HARDSHIP: The hardship to justify the granting of these variances comes from the small size of this lot that is located on the lake and thereby affected by the more stringent requirements for setbacks and hardcover. The current proposal is an attempt to address those concerns. The proposal adds approximately 505 SF floorspace but because much of it is built over existing hardcover, the net increase in hardcover is only 247 SF. Revision of the existing sidewalk to serve the new entry location and removal of the unused portions results in a decrease of 104 SF. Additionally, the homeowner is willing to eliminate the landscape hardcover (rock and poly) in the 0'-75' zone on the lakeside of the home for a further reduction in hardcover of 225 SF. The result of this proposal is a net decrease in total hardcover of 114 SF. The hardships caused by extremely small sites in close proximity to the water are an ongoing problem in this community. We believe this proposal serves the concerns of everyone, providing additional space, comfort and value for the homeowner that yields a net decrease in hardcover to the environment and the City of Orono. sf- O A o, o ’i r ' /t i A B lO Dl A B / / SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75* HARDCOVEK CALCULATION WORKSHEET^- (t T z S^ 25-SOO»50(MOOO' % \ EXISTING hardcov er IN ZONE A. House ^ ./O UngUi yz /J.S X X X WUift 2*/. 7 72 y* 5-. y5_____ /. s s B. Cur3ge 2 y- ^2f-Z zy. 2 C. Driveway CPtu c . f f aT i/’ r3f 20.1 • f 'ii i X X D. Sidewalk X X • • • • E. Patio/Deck It tc X X A.A. rt(T F. LaoUscape _ Underlain _ By Plasiic _ X X X G. Oiber TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PRC^ey Y AREA IN ZONE ^ ^ Jd?2.s.f7V S.F. 7V S.F. 7 S.fJ S.F.y9J Byc' cT V __S.F. S.F. V9^S.F. S.F.• S.F. f S.F. Z 3 1 S.F. ' y/0/^S.F. S.F. •S.F. « ^*^0-7 • ••• S.F. 9PZO S.F. A B X 100 PROPOSED HAl^nrnvgR IN ZONE A. House ------- 30Z. Un|ih VZ /J >' B. Garage y-i- X X X Widdi zv.*) — - 5‘V'*" • S.F. S.F. *> y____ - S.F■ # ■"* ■?_____ S.F./ /0‘^ 26 •<> Z*. 3» C. Driveway ZV-*- 4. S..ATh 20* /— / 96 C'" Z >3 S.F. X X 3T6V. r>3 S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk " X • S.F. S.F. E. Paiio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain _____ By Plastic _____ X X 23Z, S.F. S.F». X X X — O " Sjoo S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other total hardcover IN ZONE . . . • TOTAL PRO^JY 0 S’OifT X 100 - ^trio _ S.F. S.F. % A B hu..- TO:PROMsDATE; SUBJECT: Dick Benson, City AdministratorJeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Adainistrator Septcober I, 1982 ti,t - s«.npa . i„o sh.dyvood lta,d - Variancef Zoning District - LR-lc Area - 14,625 sf Application - side setback and hardcover vari-n,. construction of n Jo- X a) Side Setback required 10* proposed 3.5* variance 6.5* or 65t b) Hardcover Variance - 75*-250* Ex Ex Ex Ex; Ex, Exl area 9,975 #f allowed hardcover 2,494 sf or 35s proposed additional hardcover *516 sf of 5% •Breakdown of additional hardcover 20* X 24* 4to «#♦ ^ Si#? ,-.v‘^,24*4X >labTeq«ir.d*^orffa li ' ? . -i'*' •!* V •: * • a 4 •-» * e* » -■ ^ I ' t ' t . -r'4 ‘ . • * J ». •« .,a^se. *: * V'T /XT^constructttd oa 135 «f reduce 16.3• x ■ • . . -w- ^'V i ^v< v^jt' * ‘.. ii-.- . f v T.-. -'lA ;i^ 1.4 '•'%-4 V- ;*r i' t ^ % 5Thoaas Sarenpa 1670 Shadywood Boad September 8, 1982 Page 2Review of Application* proposal involved .. request to attach a 20* X 24•two-stcr garage to the east of the existing garage that an™!.**:!7 into woui.ty Road #19*8 right of way. Sarenpa was^JiUd bJ Jhil Planning Comaission at their first review meeting that request as it involved’aajor strictural TOdification of a non-conforming structure. At the^prelininarv application meeting with Sarenpa, the applicant was advisad^J^ete## of more acceptable alternatives available to him. After that^flree* Planning Commission nesting, Sarenpa agreed to modify his Srigi^l proposal. Current *. ilicat^on proposal is for a detached single-story gccage 20* X 24* located 30* off right of way of County Road il9. The sll! i J. 5,.?. 4.k property line has been designated for the new leleJ setback will also allow use of the existing concrete sUb S bTuswr^ as turnaround area, staff will require fi?e wall construction a«rf« window openings foi the north side of the garage. •"<* *«> Srtirerr^SIdirirrrs!*”*^"* * non-conforming structure subject to all Planning Connission Regawn^ndations i'< Rotback of '•.5' and hardcover variance apolioatL^ rermit construction of a 20* x 24* detached^ sSglell.^* I story garagw. t r f ■ jk-. 1 r- The existing garage that encroaches Counti^SSaSmfvr^^ . le„l non-co„£or-i„, .tructure and .ubJ^SjSSSiSC^* I lA^ordinances V removal of shed and makes adjustment for concrete walxw^ replaced by new garage and concrete walkway between new and old garagea. * • .t e‘* • I < •: . n/'> •'-r,a rv*.#. » • < ‘ f. #**;. - h ’ 1 • 8 « . : rt.! I e tor THE OFONO COU.C1I.. SEPTEiflER 13. 1982 PACE -2- '2> *r ■;-ami mt COWXSSXOH COPWEMTS Dutle*- noved. Hurt s«cond«d, to approv* tho Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 23. 1982. Motion, Ayes (5) - Mays (0). Ko coraaents froa the Park Coaaisston. t.M.C.O.-REPORT No cosiT.'^nts for the Lake Minnetonka Conservi District. PLAniHC COHHISSIOll COMMENTS ' ' Ho coaaents froa the Planning Cooalsslon. .PuiniSRS RlPORTi^fcf,,'^r^:.. •RfsourrxoM .vv-'r *f* 9 r. • 4 ■ F -4 ^ 0 •* •». J ' ‘"•i j’■.r.’.-c' - •Vr'’‘*. f •.». ^ ^ • •.. * . 'If ''V 5. " % 4 */• V \ . —• * * L _*_____^ I ftttara Street - Location Pleas?Xn .‘TbeiSeparre^Aree • '‘^1 - L .> U 4 . A^'^Huff ®ovedf ButXcf Mcond^df to odopt Rosoli 11412 regarding Future Street Location Plai V • The Navarre Area. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays derifieetien%^£*1ietiends Seseaenta Resou?.tion''fl413 :v> Butler noved, Praha seconded, to e<>op( Resolution 11413 as anended regarding Clar cation of Wetlands Easement Lot 1, Sloci Pazcndln Forest Addition. Motion, Ayes ( Nays (0). - < POBLXC COMMINTS £ No coiaaents froa the Public.V ». 0(1669 TmnCA LAKE PROPERTIES 1340 Seldut Park Road Prelialnary Snbdipiaion 4* ’ C • , 4 *. .** # .•1*\ • Van Nest moved, Butler seconded, to wnceptoj to table action on his original 4 unit I _ ^ m.a,_ _ _— a AS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ •694 TR0NA8 8ARBSPA 1670 varlaaea * r:-i; ' •••• V.. ’*'* i"** • Zoning Adalnlstrator. *5L Council the Varlince App:ieatUn:of Hr. ; V. * . I i l-n.' ♦ MMim' i', V -•'’if] i.•ai.f./i-r, I tl • : • , 4. : . • • • • ' *>>• ■•r.* V* •■ . ' ■' * V / 2Sf Bolland«r Road Prellainary Sobdlvislon ioninq Adainlstrator Habusth raviawad for tha Council tha Prellninory Subdivision application of Mrs. Hildur Hollander. Mrs. Hollandar was present. Van Nest ooved, Hurr seconded, to approve tha praliainary subdivision per Planninq Coaais- Sion'S reconaondatlons subject to staffs inspactinq the possibility of a private driveway easeaent through lot 3 and 4 to serve lot council is concerned with direct access to County Road 6 off lot 5. Motion, Ayes (5) •« Nays (0) • HARVXtt 8BXBOLO 1699 North Faro Road Variance t.V 5m Mr. Marvin Selbold and his attorney Mr. Bob Mitchell was present for this application. Councllaenber Tio Adaas wanted it stated in the record that he was a partner in tha fsro that Mr. Selbold purchased and he did not feel ha had a yconflict of interest. If anyona^on^tha council ^felt he did, he would step down.ACbuncil aav no »o|mi. - - - - -_-.eoptabla)foc4' -councllnenber Adaas to •tay^saat4^^^^t^ttncil ^ V >• van Nest aovedf Butler seeendaSifIdilipp Makeshore width variance forlott^blWsubjaet.to^^^ 'the filing of an anended floNa9o'‘and CohMrvation easeaent peralttlnq construction of a joint or W, . single residential dock per L.M.C*Oaiatondards.<:^>^' Applicant is to work with staff1n^oeavainlng'tho>?i^&^’ best aethod of reaching shorelinoNitJilllaitad use of hardcover. Dockage Halted towao slips. Motion, Ayes (4) • Nays (0). Councilaanbor Adaas abstained, (l). #699 WILLIAM WEAR 216# Wayxata Blvd. Variance Hr. Kevin Conyea representing 0 Petrolaua was present. Zoning Adainlstrator Mabusth reviewed the /arlance application with the council. t #— 1* ■ W .r ^ ** * ' • -rPI. ' .* » ' ^r •*' _ • . • . ‘ 4•%»rr jf 1 * ; - a^i <4^ • ••A • • <•<•- • <«»»*' <«*%I.Ceriil i - t- r! :.-.rv">r?r "*•''■ • T-. r. *r« r'. Ml In LoU ■; n-*. ':, ',* •*K«».'.»'*''l?' '’' '*' *} I V■ nr !::r li 0 • . t .. • • • . » 0% ‘ r;- •’ '■vW f 'Vjrrect ; :.•’ / - 'K •.It- t-firUt 8, Jhisv ..r rir rc upKai®'’-* t if. *r/» •' • %• k - ’ ,i • • Sr^'-’ V ••••*%; *• ' ■ ' • ■ -.:.-; f :• • •? r- •// • ' - ■H' _ . 1 I- !; •:5i ur r. t V' ‘f •• h'. -I A iCfun. J jfU^jOiit^£~ti- -A(6s<*^ OL^/^ A<-ruiA£^ l,MtMuA»p {t^ ~tifi aa^7<^^ '6i^ JLn, /ieuyucU^-^ // V a/,1^ J>'(ii^tZpt^ >((J<?-h<si2^ j£c£^vJ, ^ (^7H4u4i4rK. SI#r//^ V'*’ •:;:.v V ,^ .i. -ir". •'*J cii \S| , ? ■ I a. .t; I *• * /Of^ • •.».,»’• • .’•'X - i ,•■;<■> •iv-w* •.». t~» « « ,. V’ ** i y V,/. •: iI \id s :J r,f >,* ^1 i’J »‘‘j VosProat Subjects Orono Council KenbersMichael P. Caffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator August 8( 1985 Thomas Sarenpa, 1670 Shadywood Raod - Follow-up to File #694 - H6^uc5t to Amend Original Variance Approval List of Bshlbits Exhibit A - Letter of Request Exhibit B - Survey Exhibit C * Suflsraary of 1982 Action Mr Sarci.pa, in 1982, was granted a side setback variance and hardcoVer variance to allow construction of a new ’‘“J* 20^x24* and driveway apron 14*x24*. The conditions of that he remove a 16.3'x8.3' storage shed and remove between the n«w and old garages. The total of the addition was 816 s.f. and the total to be removed was 300 s.f. J®*” f jJ 516 s.f. of hardcover. Now, Mr. Sarenpa requests that he to leave the shed and slabs because he never constructed the apron (?36 s.f.). However* he has addedt a) 40 lineal feet of 3*6- wide sidewalk - 140 s.f. ! » b) A triangular rock‘bad underlain with plastic ciioxt^ojt^ naif .................................................--* f • ?4;^ ^ »* *. ►. am m :■ • V ,: e) A .‘canvas covered •pipe storage xj questionable whether It is hardcover, but direct rainfall Infiltration and comprises w.sm >. Herce* the total hardcover added or unaccounted^for prevloualy appears to bei ■! *v V . J. 4 140+60+140^300*«-96 • 736 s.f.. .. v • ^ * ■ '■,* ■ r* ♦ that Council will have benefit of the Planning Commlaslon^MView. ll 'i :? •v> - s>P^city:- '!,ir OF^PONO ClTYof OROXOfM Urn North Short o/ Lakt Mmnatamka Thonas Sarcnpa 1670 Shadyvood toad Mayzata, Htl 5S39I Bo: Raquaat to not reoova shod and conerote slabs (Application #694) Doar He. Saronpa: On August 12« 1915 tho City Council briefly r roquost to amend the original variance approval whici construction of a second garage and slab subject t certain items of ezisting hardcover, ftaff review on August 8^ 1985 indicated that certain addition >items not previously approved had been added* i.e. gravel landscape beds underlain by plastic sheeting. Council directed that your request* if pursue the form of a new variance application* hence X hai copy of the variance application. Please contact m ,.«y . m- *^w- 2, f'•s ♦• s A ZONIMC - 47MH7 AIMmmiKATION a nNANCI - 4n-Tl«f ■ruMJCwoan - eypnw;^ err WH':. 1 TO;Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. Ciiv Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusih. Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:Julv lO. 1995 SUBJECT; #2034 Mar>- and Gene Zulk. I400 Cherr>- Place - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC Total lot area = 11,404 s.f. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Review of structural coverage. Total area = 11.404 s.f. Allowed = 1,711 s.f. or 15^ Existing = 2,012 s.f. or 17.6% Proposed = 2,275 s.f. or 19.9% Increase = 263 s.f, or 2.3% Variance = 564 s.f. or 4.9% (e,\isting variance = 301 s.f. or 2.6%) Section 10.22. Subd. 2 - Hardcover variance within 75-250 ’ setback area 750-250’ setback area = 8,059 s.f. (note area has been adjusted, applicants ’ surveyor show'ed 2,015 s.f. total lot area at 11,404 s.f.) Allowed = 215 s.f. or 25% Existing = 3,787 s.f. -f- *175 s.f. = 3,962 s.f. or 49.2% Proposed = 4,175 s.f. or 51.8% Hardcover increase = 213 s.f. or 2.64% Variance = 2,160 s.f. or 26.8% (existing variance = 1,947 s.f. or 24.2%) *175 s.f. of nonstructural hardcover has been added to existing hardcover improvements, review E.xhibit J. Note rock patio area to northeast side of residence. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicants ’ Addendum C - Request for Review by Council at July 24th Meeting D - Plat Map E - Property Owners’ List F - Hardship Statement G - Neighbors’ Acknowledgment Forms HI-2 - Letters from Adjacent Neighbors in Support of Application Zoning File #2034 July lb, 1995 Page 2 I - Hardcover Inventor}’ 75-250’ Setback Area Jl-2 - Sur\ey/Site Plan K - Floor Plan L - Elevation Description of Request Applicants propose a 10’x26.3’ covered deck addition to the street side of the residence. The proposed structure will require no setback variances nor is there an encroachmcn* of an average lakeshore setback line. The proposed addition will involve 263 s.f. or 2.3/t increase in structural coverage where 17.6% exists and only 15% is allowed. The improvements result in a 213 s.f. or 2.64% increase in hardcover within the 75-250’ setback area existing at 49.2% and proposed now at 51.8%. Statement of Hardships Refer to Exhibit F. applicants note the following: Refer to Exhibit D, applicants note that lots on either side of property are double in area. Proposed structural improvement would have no impact on the adjacent residential properties. Review Exhibits HI-2, adjacent property owners have submitted letters in support of improvement plan. There is no adjacent land available to acquire. The property is smaller in area than the surrounding lakeshore lots on Cherry Place. Once again refer to Exhibit D. note the majority of surrounding parcels are made up of two lots that are legally combined as a building site. Existing access to residence is inadequate and unsafe. An older member of the applicants ’ extended family requires a safer and easier method to access structure than what exists today. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Issues for Consideration 1.Are there existing or proposed improvements that can be reduced in size? Cm stone patio area at northeast side of residence be either removed or reduced in area, existing at 175 s.f. or 2.2%? What other improvements can be considered for removal or reduction? 1 Zoning File #2034 July lb. 1995 Page 3 2, Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Options of Action To deny, approve or amend the current variance proposed, seek approval of lot coverage and hardcover variances within 75-250*. Any recommendation of approval must include the condition that hardcover improvements scheduled for removal must be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. A cm' OF ORONO - VARL\NCE APPUC^TIO^ Initial Application Fee S200.00 " ($50.00 per each additional varian^y Renewal Variance Fee S1(X).(X3 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming sinicmres $200.00 After-ihe-Fact Fees (Double application tee) 3 ^ ■.\ r A .>■^ . 1 Ts-.A A .... . .. PROPERTY INFOR>L\TION Site Address Z/gQ d/t<.PiSite ZygO —r --------— Propertv Identification Number (P.I.D.).,QP — 11.2----^ —-——^ Liryr/.v4vcr CffIC£ ** t W“\i > V'VW*rrvV 4. tfWit Tf“fT.A(f w»ni. k./ i4»un TLCrr W< ruw M.vrr-TDT.ruAjyV y>-[# 11 trUkts I w’W «w ‘w'W'^w'V WVV4 tv<4 v>,^ m’ 4.VV • * til • ICO A / U • <=>o / 7_ Atuch legal description m application if not included on required survey. Date Pmperw Acquired ^ \*^SS----------- I (do) (dp n^) also own the adjacent parcels ot land. Present use of propcrt>': ^-Residential -----other (speciiv) Zoning District:_______ ~—---------------------- (month/year) t Doi I#- A VT rhome) V 7 / - 6 oo / _ V /yj^ Phonetwork) V 7 2- ^ O S feo— Name ^--------rhW^^ci Zio:Address. zVoo ^ • Z*'/^<y.S----------- »'-------- OWNER (if different than applicant) --------------------------- Name _______________________ Phone (work). Address:City: description of request Describe request in detail:___^ Estimated Conscruction Cost $ Zip: ~7P^OCi (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Other (specify) ,ot Coverage Average Lakeshore compliance with Zoning Code requiren^nts.E~r3~ (attach additional sheets if necessary) ^ 1. ■ jh 2. "f 3. ^4. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the follo>%ino infnrmation must be submitted bv the applicaUon deadline date jn.Qrder for vour application to be considered complete; Completed Application Form . Cenified Property Owners List of owners within 150’ (you must obtam this list from Hennepin Count>' Depanment of Finance. A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Plat Map (obtained with properu' owners list). ^ ^ ~ Certificate of Survev (sisned by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover — Sculltmns as required. ' In addition, provide one (1) copy 81A" x lU for Tcmo^mpS^ (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade ~ are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8>^" x lU for reproduction Sketches or plans of tloor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8/2 x ll ). ----List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the — property- This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a^separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. -7^ 6. 7. <*^8. ^9 Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remeinber ±at xsttE variance is not complpte if the above information ha$ nqf be^n mcluded^ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE u 7 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zomng Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signamre Date ^ OWNER’S SIGNATURE . The owner herebv acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, apnts. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signamre Date 6 ADDlicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each inorith. ApplicMts must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office ol this change prior to the meeting. 8 u <* %; I 3^ T'.r j i .:y m _ S • . • ■ . • i. :n-V\j^n ’ * .y DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST We wish to add an open porch to the road side (main entrance side), of our house. The porch will provide a covered (with a roof), safe entrance to our house and will also to allow us to safely use the side entrance to our house. The side entrance is not safely usable at this time. The porch will run the width of our house and extend around the nortti side to connect to the existing landing of the side entrance to our house. Please see attached plan/drawing for specific details. 1 t i 9 June 18,1995 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth, As a follow-up to our telephone conversation and your su99^^^i^*i I Qtn requesting to have our variance and permit application reviewed at the July 17 and July 24 meetinos. As we discussed in May. I am a high school principal, and my window of opportunity to do the porch closes the 2nd week of August. Your willingness to consider our applications in July is sincerely appreciated. Thank you. Sincerely. Gene Zulk «V-7»59dl __________.f t.** * — • ‘ ••*••• *k . < I . . -». afc.-ir —^■/* . ‘V* '■i . *?\ • ■ • •. V^‘ S • J J V i- • •••/•*. ••:•• • • • • ••* % *• :G74. 7 Rts 3%JS&k/fi-MiaU -a- 71!^0‘4‘.»JAT. lu.d’j *T iUO ^ ^00 o* Z '*»0 N 6 ?00 : o» M* 7 *00 8 north arm ^ sni » M **) HICtOBV - j «o <J* ->4 t o»j D i *>5 *0 MINNIE AVE (CO__RD N* .\ NO 151) ion • ^ W Q»S' : I A> u* ~_ ^ I ■ ^ i*^ Oi »v/ C4 »V» ^ »v» (» w cherry 5PIJ_^ — Oi I4fl Q1 ® »»0'.3 a)•>)*JQ U):o 8 V/- ?i5 y S-— 04 -§6 a-,0 -4 55 N / / 1 177 5 / /^ 8 8 o 8 8 8 S 8 ^c*- o./,^ A‘a ‘^j !«*0 *0 7?IT! S / •’/r JOO —u* . :oo MAPLE _ TiST N m\ 0*»e:RKY 50 k)56 ““jL^M rKj •v» a*»v/ 8 vn 3- • •> <»U* 'T 1‘ -a.-a._a_ja.-2- - 30 \ i\« n ' fan DATE 04/12/9S BATOI 504PW» AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP AOOR (MCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OltCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR ■ ihHEMCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFQRHATiaN SYSTEM PROPERTY CMCRS LIST > VSO 00*U7>2S IZ 0001 01S05 CHERRY PL T R JAMES AHA JAMES THOMi^ R A MAR6ARET A JAMES ISOS CHERRY PL MOUND m ' 55364 SO 00-117-23 32 002S 01390 CHERRY PL TAG OLOUNT TERRY J OLOUNT 1390 CHERRY PL ORGNO MN 55364 SO 00-117-23 33 0021 01415 CHERRY PL E A SCHMIDT A C A SCHMIDT E ALLEN SCHMIDT 1415 CHERRY PL S MOUND m 55364 SO 00-117-2S S3 0001 01410 CHERRY PL T 0 HILDUR A A T HILBUR THOMAS 0 A ANNE T NILBUR 1410 CHERRY PL MOUND m 55364 ^ ...f -SO 00-1I7-2S S2 0002 00030 ADDRESS UNASS16NED HEMCPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO EXTENTION OF STREET 9/0/00 ST OEEO 150924 •v. ’ .*4 »-9 SO 00-117-23 33 0012 01400 CHERRY PL 0 A 2ULK AMT ZULK GENE A A MARY T ZULK 1400 CHERRY PL MOUND m 55364 SO 00-117-23 SS 0022 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED E ALLEN AND CAROL A SCHMIDT E ALLEN AND CAROL A SCHMIDT 1415 CHERRY PL 8 MOUND »t4 55364 f TOTAL BATCH 5M 00010 .t 4f REPORT NO. PAGE PI4S54Q1 .12 ■ ' *• i t ■ f'- ri'.* ISO 00-117-2S S2 0022 01S70 CHERRY PL T 0 NAFSTAD ETAL T 0 C H NAFSTAD 1370 CHERRY PLACE HOUND IM 55364 30 00-117-23 SS 0015 01430 CHERRY PL J R MARTIN OBJ MARTIN JAMES R A BETST J MARTIN 1430 CHERRY PL MOUND »M 55364 SO 00-117-2S SS 002S 014S5 CHERRY PL EVANS JOHNSON ETAL EVANS JOHNSON 1435 CHERRY PLACE HOUND W 55364 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEMCPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNO»«.EDa AND BELIEF. (p DATE i ■|f • * . e I V ‘ J « II ■.‘♦t %• -J- ^ ( t ' . • 0 t * • 15. * 4 • -J. I V AM « • * s- *'K'. >. •:: t( V < ‘ *6 »>■!i‘> T' , r » • .'v ^ V*» « .«*• «N* ‘ I’J * t' '■' - /I;* t .,. r * - ••f; I •V . •• • ' t V i -J-':'• 'v J- ^ ; • • V* J w • . * ■ > \ ii. • : .4* . . I ^. 9,0 • ' i: I *. / * ' •’ '’ vt/ I I . ■ ... I. . If V ' • >!■.. • Irf - - i' 1 4 • I HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Safety concerns: we currently have a very small concrete steps and landing to the main entrance of our house. Neither the steps or the land has a railing. The steps are very steep with little depth (only two 9 inch steps to the landing). The new porch would have 4 steps to the landing The current landing is small (38 inches by 58 inches) and allows little room for entering the house especially with grocery bags or other items. The^^e is no place to set anything down while you open the outside door and unlock the inside door. My wife’s father. A.B. (BUD) TYLER JR., who is 84 years old lives with us the year around, and has difficulty with the stairs. We leave early in the morning for work, and worry about him leaving and returning from the house on his own to go to senior citizens. We really worry about his getting the door unlocked and maneuvering into the house in the winter (landing is not covered and there is only 12 inches between the door and the edge of the landing). 2. We are unable to safely use the side entrance to our house. The steps leading to the side entrance landing, the railing and the side entrance landing itself would not meet safety code requirements. We simply don’t use it. The new porch would extend around the north comer of the house and connect to the current side entrance landing, and would meet code standards. This would provide us with another safe entrance to our house. 3. Unfortunately, our house Is on a smaller lot. We have no chance of purchasing more property on either side of our home. Fortunately, both of our adjacent neighbors have larger lots. 4. Both adjacent neighbors (Terry and Gretchen Blount, Tom and Ann Wilbur) are aware of our request to add a porch, the porch plans/drawing, and the reasons why we want to add the porch. Please see attached letters from Mr. and Mrs. Blount and Mr. and Mrs. Wilbur. ^ ) y I . t •• * ;ki Adjacent Property Oiraers’ Acknowledgement Form , ~Tff5^0.1'J.Lpoi^— of 'aiO Ct'feteh t>l [print namets)][print address] of the property located CfWV^ I ,we) undersind that in executing this acknowledgement. I we) am (are) not asked m declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to conltxm for the C.^ Suncil tot I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and tot the proposed neighbor s project or use requires G^cil approval. Propeny Owner Date Property Owner ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................* I (we) 0 of I Chervu Plac^ [print address]'[print name(s)] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at P)/>cvalso referred to as Und Use Application No.------------• I (we) underst^d that in executing this acknowledgement. I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor project or use requires Council approval. / / LL<-> Property O^r if- DateProperty Owner If vou have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Und Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building <& Zoning Office at least 10 days pri to the scheduled meeting date. If o '- <. ' • ■ i 1rtJL JUNE 17. 1995 Orono City Council: We currently reside at 1390 Cherry Place, and are neightxjrs to Mary and Gene Zulk. We are aware of the Zulk's request to add a covered porch to their home at 1400 Cherry Place. The Zuiks have shown us the porch plans and we would support their request for a variance Mary ’s father, Bud, lives with the Zuiks and we know that they are concerned about his getting into and out of the house safely. Again we would support their request for an variance. Sincerely. u , 7 7 • • /JUNE 17. 1995 Orono City Council: Gene and Mary Zulk have informed us of their plans to add a porch to their house. They have shown us the plans and we would approve of their request for a variance. Sincerely. Tom and Ann Wilbur 1410 Cherry Place Mound. MN. 55364 A SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-7S’ EXISTTNO hardcover IN ZQNT A. House 57. ^ * 250-500* WMltfl I % \ B. Cange C. Dnveway Z2.3 2 2- Jb X D. Sidewalk PeAUkf'O^ E. Patio/Dcck % X £L F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 37S£-B // 4c*t- X l(X) - PBOPOSED hardcover C A. House y. IN ZONE gy /Vt~/a /^ j i(k£oj ^JJ£_ Width B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ A ^(^0 + B // X 100 /^Z/ <f/S.F. S.F. S.F. 2^S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 37^7 S.F.A- n^4 B n ^^3 S.F. S.F.c:- V •. . . f' a-:- .* S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ; S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 0 S.F. _S.F. % A i B ■3^ • i < « ------------2//'. o - --------- Alt' .I U 1 ff7t V ^______^ O //< 1 ^ /.AK£ MTKA , (yUae;;*'AA’/^) ____/< --------T4 3/ i- - - -'--o ''3/M l^T / , B/oc/c A , ^>e yma^. y ✓/ie’<^ loT fif-.t/^ - //.‘JO 4 SO' '• - SCHOBOSG ND SURVEYING INC. 972-3221 8997 Qy. M. 13 SE D»Imo. MN 5S328 I hereoy certify that this plan, survey or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. JOB# ‘iS'/Z Book - Pagi Qate- 2T?ja J^ Registration No. 14700 /♦ ^^0 | /Vi/6' SCHOELL Cl MADSON, ist./ILUIAM O. SCHOELL. 3»«Tf WCO CIVIC CNOINff rf// CARLISLE MACSCN mttmm *»« xi«« 99. 9A« 799 «M«. MO. CCI7« rvoatOA MO. tiTf MO. 0AM. saj oomt mar ENGINEERS S SURVEYORS lo NIIMTN AVtNUt SOUTH mihmcsota ^HOHC. 933.7601 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR,A7;g ' 7£/?jPy G o B£L ts. 4 LAk:£ Si4 MTk'A .■'tA/OeTH Ae/^) ~ICS.3S-- ' J.Z'iis.ii —n o • • □ - - Dano^es iron monum^nf" found • Dsno/es iron monummn^ S€f Qsnoies wood efake THIS iTEPs H a S bELl MlSneFIlMSB MO' HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF A SURVEY OF THE 90UNDARIES OF: LOT /> Block: /, ‘CRy^'^AL BAy l//SiV HcNKCPiN CouKTT, Mi/vks:sot-a ..^ ^^ ....r- • OP At I at lit mKioe ip aajv y ^pdpoaj a a ■^NO OF THE LOCATION OF ALL BUILDINGS. IF ANY. THEREON. AND ALI. VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS. IF INY. FROM OR ON SAID LAND. CThf iS SURVEYED BY ME THIS------------------2--------XJAY OF, T y^CSO SHOWS TUS LOCAr/O/V ^/r STAJOGS AS S£T /ro/e A PSOfiVSSO 'rAJZASS: er OWH£l2.ncoisTcnco lano sumvcyow MtNU, Rss. A/o. 8414 T I* O O CN I • (A O r ^V- J6- o vq;t# r - IT r; rp' 2 J'Dxcrs Pr <4'Vc (ai mc KJ < uwt f>n»« r ‘A t. • » « » 4 U„ l0‘-0‘ V >' •^• -V >■ • ^<1 '.■' ;• -'^ •ff f. > , ■ **v ■■ .a ? i Jf f . J To: Date: Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Julv 7. 1995 Subject: <^2036 Robcn Gountanis. 1098 Loma Linda Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Toul lot area = 6,812 s.f. Pertinent Ordinances 1. 3. 4. Section 10.03. Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of structural coverage, Allowed = 1,500 s.f. Existing = 1,284.8 s.f. or 18.9% Case 1 proposed = 1,541.5 s.f. or 22.6% Case 2 proposed = 1.541.5 s.f. or 22.6% Case 3 proposed = 1,541.5 s.f. or 22.6% Variance = 41.5 s.f. Section 10.22. Subdivision 1 (A) - Lakeshore setback. Required = 75’ Existing steps = 37 ’ Principal structure = 23 ’ Garage = 60 ’ Cases 1 & 2 proposed: Steps = 27’ Principal structure = 21.5’ Garage = 60 ’ Case 3 proposed: Steps = 33’ Principal structure = 30 ’ Garage = 60 ’ Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback. Allowed = 0 Existing = 8 ’ Cases 1 «& 2 proposed = 8 ’ Case 3 proposed = 0 Section 10.22, Subdivision 5 (B) . A. Side setbacks. Left side: Required = 10’ Existing = 6’ 5" Cases 1 & 2 proposed = 6’ 5" Case 3 proposed = 10’ Zoning File #2036 July 1, 1995 Page 2 Right side: Required = 10’ (adjacent to public access) Existing = -0.58’ or 6"encroachment into public access Proposed Cases 1, 2 & 3 — -0.5S’ or 6" B. Street setback. Required = 30’ Existing = 5’ 4" Cases r. 2 & 3 proposed = 5 ’ 4" 5. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Review of hardcover. 0-75’ setback area = 5,348 s.f. 75-250’ setback area = 1,464 s.f. Allowed 0 366 s.f. or 25% Existing 1,338.15 s.f. or 25%158.25 s.f. or 11% Cases 1 & 2 proposed 1,366.7 s.f. or 25.59^760.8 s.f. or 52% Case 3 proposed 1,201.7 s.f. or 22%913.7 s.f. or 62% List of Exhibits A - Application Bl-2 Applicant’s Addendum C - Plat Map D - Propeny Owners’ List El-2 Hardship Statement F - Survey G - Case 1 «& 2 Hardcover Facts, 0-75’ Setback Area H - Case 1 & 2 Hardcover Facts, 75-250’ Setback Area I - Case 1 & 2 Hardcover Site Plan J - Case 1 Floor Plan K - Case 1 Elevations L - Case 2 First Floor Plan M - Case 2 Second Floor Plan N - Case 2 Elevations O - Case 3 Hardcover Facts, 0-75’ Setback Area P - Case 3 Hardcover Facts, 75-250’ Setback Area Q - Case 3 Hardcover Site Plan R - Case 3 First Floor Plan S - Case 3 Second Floor Plan T - Case 3 Elevations Zoning File #2036 July l\ 1995 Page 3 Description of Request Applicant has presented three alternatives tor the redevelopment of this severelv substandard parcel. Review Exhibit B-2, applicant’s description of those three options. Case 1 Review Exhibits G, H. I. J and K. This improvement plan involves an 8 ’ x 3’ expansion of the footprint at the northeast and southeast comer to the lakeside ot the residence. Review Exhibit J, existing foundation would be approved along the designated line. The darkened area shows the 3’ x 8 ’ new foundation section. The remainder of the structure is not adequate to support expansion or improvement of the second level. Structure will remain as shown with only a first fl(X)r living area. Review Exhibit 1. Applicant proptises an addition to the existing garage, major portions of which will be located out of the 0-75’ setback area. Garage doors will le relocated to the north side of structure. The existing garage has doors opening out onto Loma Linda. The existing single stall garage is of questionable structural condition. It is doubtful whether this structure can be expanded upon. It is also doubtful whether the City would approve of the improvement of a structure that encroaches 6" into a year-round public access. Case 2 Review Exhibits G. L, M and N. There is no difference in the footprint/site plan for either Case 1 or 2. This improvement plan calls for me rounding off of the 3’ x 8 ’ comers on the north and south side of the structure at lakeside. In this case, the entire foundation would be replaced allowing for an expansion of the second stor>' Review Exhibits M and N, note this is not a complete second story addition. The only portion of structure that will extend beyo^ the existing footprint are the steps and front stoop that will encroach another 4’ into the lakeshore yard. Note hardcover improvements are the same for both Cases 1 and 2. The issues for the detached garage remain the same as it was in Case 1. Case 3 Review Exhibits O. P, Q, R, S and T. In this option of improvement, applicant proposes the relocation of the same footprint further away from lake and the garage would now te attached to the structure but at the same approximate location from the street and right side yar The structure would now be located 10’ from the left side lot line. Compare the setback results and the factual findings for setbacks noted above. Hardcover for this improvement plan is reduced to 22% in the 0-75’ setback area and increased to 62% in the 75-250’ setback area. Review Exhibits R. S and T. floor plans suggest only a second floor expansion over the principal stmeture footprint. Note in the elevations. Exhibit T, that applicant shows a second floor above the attached garage area. The proposed upper level expansions with this option will not encroach beyond the average lakeshore setback line of the residence to the immediate north. Zoning File #2036 July 7, 1995 Page 4 History of Property Lot 10 of the Loma Linda plat was created in 1912. Based on the Assessor s record, the structure was built in 1934 prior to any standards tor residential construction within the township at that time. The properts' was not zoned until November 20. 1950 at which tirne it became part of the Forest Lake district requiring a 75* mininium tronta : and 15,000 s.f. minimum lot area. In 1967, the area was rezoned to an R-IC district requiring one acre. In 1975, it was rezoned to LR-IB requiring also one acre in area and included more restrictive standard tor lakeshore development. Tax records back to 1974 indicate that the former owner received homestead credit from 1974 to 1981. The property has been non-homesteaded to the current time. From 1974 to 1995. the former owner ’s address was listed to a Minneapolis address. Statement of Hardship Review E.xhibits El-2, applicant’s hardship statement Issues for Consideration .....WTiat levels of improvement are reasonable for this property? 1.Will you allow structural improvements to the existing structure? What degree of stnicniral improvement is acceptable? Even if only partial foundation repair is to be completed, existing structure must be raised. Would you allow only replacement of the existing foundation or will you allow the 3’ x 8’ expansions to the northeast and southeast side of residence? 2.Would you allow a new garage to be located within the footprint of the 14’ x 22’ existing garage? If not, how far should structure be relocated from right side lot line and provide adequate area for driveway and turnaround at north side of garage structure? ... 3’? 5’? Why can’t garage be reduced to a 20’ north/south dimension rather than the 24 ’ proposed? 3.Will you approve a structural coverage variance for these improvement plans? Applicant shows an excess of 41.5 s.f. over the allowed 1,500 s.f. 4.Would you allow the expansion of the roof structure within the 8’ average lakeshore setback foi Cases 1 and 2? The roof expansion involves merely an alteration in the roof line. 5.If you are to provide direction to the applicant, the following points must be addressed in your recommendation: 1 Zoning File #2036 July 7, 1995 Page 5 A.Proposed garage. What is a reasonable size for the detached garage and will you approve the existing 5.4' street setback as long as doors face away from street.> .... What is a reasonable right side setback from the public access and still allow enough room \'ot a side door loading garage? Note the majority of the structural improvements would be located within the 0-75* setback area. Should garage be relocated to the nonhwest side vard.^ B. What level of structural improvements would you approve? • Replacement of partial foundation, complete foundation or total rebuild. C. If foundation is replaced or structure relocated, would you limit second story expansions above principal structure? D. Would you allow a second story expansion above the garage if attached to residence? Options of Action 1. 2. 3. Approval. If members feel applicant has provided enough information so that a plan can be amended per Planning Commission ’s direction for Council ’s review, then you may act on this application; or Table. Planning Commission may wish to review the amended proposal before passing it onto Council for formal action; or Denial. Members should refer to Section 10.08, Subdivision 3 (A) (1-12) for necessary findings to be addressed if a variance application is to be recommended for denial. Members may find the unique history of this property and the way property has been used in recent years that the property can no longer be upgraded to a year-round residence but can continue to serve for seasonal recreational use. /' C’o ^m crn’ OF ORONO - v .\rl \nce .application Initial Application Fee S200.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SIOO.OO (no change from original application) ^ V’ariance for non-coniorming strucmres S- After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fe-) I / PROPERTY CSTORNLATION ^ jLiiJ Site Address f/!> J^rtA nAL Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)_^ prrv r.c f\zr\hi WA f ♦ W*? WMC’MU*£*’a * •'*?'**r “crT:*r 4 'rr.\A s CvvL. - u- . ."i/ T-.- MU. ■ -ivv* /H-'v i' ;;V.Property Identiiication > umoer < r. on required sur%-ey. IT ,.Vn/.. -------------w^iWirSilS „,«w. Zoning ni-;mct: /. //?--------------------------------- Name Phone (home) dj.f'/' 7d/_ __ Phone(worlc)_____ rnonet wui --------------— City; Zipr.^’^X^ "TrsESsSl^ rSH. £P~zw£^i^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width Lot Coverage ^ Setback:Front XSide X Hardcover _ ^ Rear Average Lakeshore 7^ Other (specify) 7M.£j. ■SSSSiSSSs^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) WEQtTRED SL'BMITTALS .in- infn.mn,.»n mufl bt submitted h. the nppliwtion d^j^dlint dale In Pldg for vour application to be con5^^;^p^ed complete: 1.■7 List of owners " ‘“n 150’ (you raust obum to list from Hennepin Counrv' Depanment of Finance. A-60a. Govt Center. 348-3^71). 3 / Plat Map (obtained with propem- owners list). , • , ^ 4. T Certificate of Surrey (signed by a '"3“^ ----calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 3/4 *11 for 5 VA ?o'’^maphic surv-ev (e.sistim. and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade ^ Im'^roTosed. In Addition, provide one (1) copy 3'A- x 11 for mP^ucnon. fi / Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8/4 x 11 ). 1 ~V List of the ksal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the ----propenv This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). 8. As ^ addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 9 J Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please r^ember tlwt ymiE anplic^tinn not complet e if the ithovf informatlpn ha^ mt m<?lud£sL The**^plk^ provide all information required or requested by the Zonmg JSmtaistrator, agrees to pay additional fees Utaff time not '=7'7‘ and/or consultant expenses incurred m review of to application and certifies that information supplied is true and co^ to the bcsyif his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date S^J^Jfer^herl^y acto^edges and agrees to this application and further entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, an members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. DateOwner’s Signature -------------------------------------------- A r onr mn« have all submittals into the Citv offices 25 days before the Planning Commission M^lto Meetings are held on the tod Monday of eac^^^ ADoUcLts must be present at aU scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission H an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements “Save an attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zonmg Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 f/\ *Ac crc'/>v J/V ^ A a '^ ^ u ^a /^a 9 , T/a ^ A^y /s /yf/f ^'f lifufS //“^/*?/*M/t^ Ff/e A^, //4yYA^^ASf^ A9df^Ai&Y^ A AS Aeje^ Si9A'A£> Ai A \a ^'^^7 A d/fsJA^^ / > ^Yec/A^p 77 ^e- A A/ Ass A/A W 7 A' ^r^^f^0A^c-^/77A. /s At^AP/ 7^ / Air St^/^A A^ /X>^ d'r/y /j //> fp'p Ayy AAcj^/^A ^c— / ^^ ^^'A' ^a*# 6 J J A z'lS ■■ o a•) S /) P^TCA /sr 2.jA A^A/'A^P /iASSp^A(^aAA<PS- 71, A 21^TA^A Gaaa -^e - ' 2 2-V /^b ^^^p A apc A^A^iP f /^c- c.'/^c/A Ar 77£» c.'i"e A- 7^^ A C/7 - S^A/7 a rl /\y^'cAuJ^'ir- A .7A /e 77&o^s e-^ ^aJ'o'A & 2 ^: '^k y^P' as uj u^y / 77 iT <•• /' r^A. G- jf S G 7a:p/*~c7 cj *s> ^ ^ f- P /~ yJ. ,f / C" a £i C /.' £ 7-^ > yy,^' p Ac PfOTP CT ^ /^Xc4. S.?• P S'i£■ Arp7S /nAMKPP Ca -s^ -V. Ac’f v^ 7>-,yj^*yy y///y AS P/SA y^ry}f-'Xj^7'^AySA^o ,As> A'a/^' A SSCcyup PjA: OsA'APPj A/iA/^ 1^2^ f ^ f y __7.-t/$ /S e Cy c A/s A/lPci ^ SA/^P^ 27 /(/S' /A —^ ^ ^ ^ ^ /C^77^C/^S^ / S / At ^ — ^ / I ^ AA A /V >/TV^ ^ AAApS S4HP A J C/-SG *^A _ ./ # ___- / i y^/ui> O-re ^ V /A^PSJS /f yfuA^Ar/Ai P/ip" /A-J< P yf S /H 4/SSAA/^ A O C//S A//1/HS A/ 77t^ S/O^ SA^Aa^7(_^ aa/P iieAli Se^A()4^k. 7^/V C ASe- /^ S<^a/A.S TA£^ ie^A^ A/{/-J g /? ffs tA/ Aie^BA'f/i/^ sAC(A^ CAc//S C*y^SfPC'^AAy^r AL^ pAQ^ ■ t)( /S jA/a /a S/A7 c/(//fSS A a /P T'A^J a pky$ UA / /<» C4A7A/S. SsA A^ A v^ WTf/irs, O A A-^KJ ^ (I)irsI6i (55) (I) ..L?’ (20 f;;.A(25)^ (FOWfRwT LOT$ !.? j.3r.33; 54.35 d PA«T OF VaC.ST^ET) , ?00 \ 5 LOMA LINDA AVE 08 ,in-23'2?“t IVU 5 (6) T 1 ft " 6 (7) 2»5 ft « V*•• T (6)r"!ft $ :9) 2C3 ft - ./ 8 ( 10) 'IP ''y ■•SV*f */ i/* \ \ •. \ \ ' \ CO V'.* • /•• CQ\ \ \ >0' I# \ LOMA LINDA AVE \ 1(57)2 y • 154 7 1 190 H ? >165 135 »o < /" 3 (5) * nuD GOVT LOT 4 RUN DATE 04/14/H BATPI Mf PROP ADOR 0»«CR NAME TA)(PAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP ADOR ONNiR NAME TAXPAYER NAtC/AOOR PROP ADOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR P\HEtMEPlN COIMTY PROPERTY INFORNRTION SYSTEMIS OR-117*2S 2J 0007 0104* LOHA LINDA AVE R F RA0UN2 • C N RAOUNZ ROBERT F RAOUNZ S50B RIVER BLUFF CIR BLOOHINOTON HN &MS7 SB OS-117-21 25 0010 OlOOO LONA LIWA AVE N H B0CKHAM4 • N L BOCKttUM NILLIAH H ROCKMANN 1090 LOHA LINDA AVE hound MN S5344 SB 0B-117-2S 2S OOlS 01140 LOHA LINDA AVE 040 HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP 040 HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP C/O LUELLA GOLDBERG 7019 niPA OR EDINA MN S5439 PROPERTY OMCRS LIST SB 0B-I17-2S 25 OOOB 01074 LOHA LIMIA AVE HARCAMT E MATTSON HARCARET E MATTSON 1074 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN SS544 SB OB-117-2S 25 0011 0109B LOHA LINDA AVE LOUIS HCmAN LOUIS NERHAN 5140 CHONEN AVt SO BIOS HPLS m 55414 r.t 50 08-117-23 23 0021 01119 LOHA LINDA AVE N J 4 C J POLLARD *! r^TLLIAM J A CAROL J POLURO ‘ 1119 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUNO MN 55344 f 4 R P .A MPMl NO. FI4Si40i rAQi IS • r,.., SB 0B-117-2S 2S 0009 010B2 LOHA LINDA AVE K H 4 F OAIVARI RNOSRON 4 FATEHEH DAIVARI 2554 CNERRVHDOD RD HUMCTONU HN 55505 SB 0B-117-2S tS 0012 01150 LOHA LINDA AVf H H BOCKHAtBI ET AL NA. 1ST NILLIAH A BOCKHANN 1150 LOHA LINDA AV HOUND MN 55544 SB OB-117'tS tS 0022 0104S LOHA LINDA AVE T 6 OSTERBERO/K J OSTERBERO TIMOTHY GARISTI J OSTERBERO 1045 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN 55544 v-t? iV.' •'i ••■•'■Vi, PROP ADOR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR TOTAL BATCH 505 00009 • , . J ■i - J ^ 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEFtCPlN COLMTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. DATE nt k.' • *» 1 '/y ^^f ^ ^j" y^/jf/y'/i^<^= /> , . y4- fe? ^4-ok / 7^ if^i^SG- y^f^4P /H f f TX~P^ f£^P/^AcJC /l^d^ c>/AQ/^^/\.'7' Tj(£r/y^P- fh/ie. /S a/A C^ 6P A /F<5 ul(?0. T^d^A^Z/Ary^A^J tZ(<^A7e T:*’ /y-f/hi^^'<^ Z'^Y^a '^y £^>^TiA At/A//A^L'r^ e> f 'B'ef>^/Z7 A^'P 7c /y^<6='/’ 77^ /{*^f fX^ /<^ f^'DT^A, fj[e CuAAf/^/y^^'fp CJ^X tySr/^> tX^ S^'/Xy}~cXy ^f- y^T/AtiF - T/ec/'fiUX^y VX j^^\'P^ Sp77^4Zix'. t(f Za AA^6^ i^AX l>cyi/P ^P hy X t ^YXe/y^Z ^ J. //\/^AyyP >f'F/KPA\ T7£^A^AA* 7^^ y^/t//)>//v^ /A/S' /'t^t-y^y^'^ x>' A(r^ty/A/y^^ /^X-^Ap^C>/y^ J / ^ f'Ji^ f€?iJ^AYcf A-Xr^ yY ^ A*'' 7~X^ Sc•.• 77P'yX j7 cc> A A/^/K^ A/yP ^4-7/yiy^ 7A ^ 7 y X p Cc>/iA^A /'77^<^<X^. 77yy yP>c> c^yfA^X S~Yfy^ A T^&*!<^ c ^AA flACXP~ •- 7^ ^es-f'yi^^d-^ tx^xe AG(pOfA^Ai^A.'/j' CJ<Xy^cJe/L ^ SirXiyt'ckZ) TFas ^ ^-X /j r*^7?AH 7X/yZy o u/^.y r* // f /1 C/fs^ A ja J/ fPy^P XX t- CcyAA^yyr -fifc^A^c/A-r/iiz 7^ iy lj/77 74^ Zy/77 A^^iy/^ ■ffiA AcoT/iY^X ■*■ SC a F^A/tf/a ^^AA^^yy^^ t7^ f^yy T(f7. tCt^ /fffusc-^ 7~JU-/cyAcL f ^ //^<^-^/^ fAy'ftP 77/ //x /a^ y t^ rXrC r^y c r 777^ Xyxcys e- T~7^ S'cy AP c^a X s F-cy^ 7l77/Ag^^7 A-A^ Y/^'^C^ry/ ^AA^/d^P uy/f^F, XXl d c^r A^d/-c<y'tX 7c^’^Z/4Zp^'7'^ Yijs £-7Z^^7>c'P /X //T^d^ppp 7h 77Z dyfA^ pf^ AP p7y 7^a I^Z^AA »Y7, 74 p dcYAApA-^/ ^ /tfi.4o e i^l<,UCi‘^ Z V V .?Xv^ p. e-p Ye> , y <;c//*f/)<’<5a4 ‘-;^ Ti^£> 7~4./s Xf zt/')czY. ta /z 75 y Cpjs-e-y^^cMs <-"c'fy tLp /’/{e-seA^'y ycyl-yja>o fjXp.js'eyf-A^$?// ■p /y// / yy y • ^ . f'^^/pCl^' lO/i d>OA y<^AAirA^y^ C ^ J TCh CASB^ /^xT^ S'A^'^e-0-J“^ //i TV'i^- /fcJtr// /~r^ y^ jfA ^ ^ A'c)f A . k^c^.se, A fecc>y^j) T ■h'/iy ^x/'J^'^s Atxs /~ >^f / 4^#* #^ / U' J ^C >■ T:<ifAy > ^ ^></ 4y> / / X / yu? / >t ^ 'y' AL/*' / r £-X/}'k/AA^ ^ f fr^' f / £^J> ^jX “Xkzr Xtc/f^ y^AZ/yf-cA y>" y'/^'r^Z Ay^lu'S* J fkUD/rXSP^ Cc'^SX"^}) / AiXX/^i/^^/ty^'<//yf ^ c^/ fL XA A- X, *Ay. y/ /' /*/^ SyAyn& At ZXfT^XSe- X^/^ yr^LC-X/XH. / j ^1 y A B / fx^ f // Tc XX e kXyS(r yBCc^yAX fx^'^ xk^i- - ^ / XSS'/ kkxAfl^P H^<yf XA<~ X/PB yyf/ A/fcMx v Ab XA ba Z^ SpyfA^'P ^/^yi^X- y^S , r k^ rx/^e xj y/^ a X^sf xAx ^xxxt^^x^ Zy yfZAfcZ^'p Ax XA b Zi^xs^. TiZ/ yryJB j-7j^/riXZB/fX/ipy^XXM jA/ //^ A-/r' y^i^y^ k ^y/y'^^yZA/e- X a / xkA cyfsej ificpv'6 /f ZAx^yx'f ^xs Zee Ay y^xJe- Zh A^,<kiPce XA b /Zxppx^ Xex /a ^ XZ b yy-7J^''y^yy-Z&j^yy C(f^yrcJe/i/^y XA^x^C^- XX rJ ZyZ Z ^ ^ //<y BXse ^xXi^y^/pf /^‘ Zes.Z At Be / XX<z XXex xeZZx^k X^/XeA^'iey' z^~y» •b A: ■ ■ xkkp^Jersey' > cO •>^ r-’ w S/II//2J CK)IJTANIS. nonADVAISa: SVRVEYING & ENGINEERIF^G CO.JJOOS ll»> No 101 Mmurtonka. MN PIhiik (».U) ■«74 7«*t.4 fax (M7) 4 74 *2<.7■suRviiY 1 OR BOR GOUIAISISSURVEYLD May 19. 1995iceAuniscRirrjQbL 10.1-OMA UND/\, lIcnncpmCouniy. Miimcsiita pHAMI I) May 24. IW RFVI5LD June 1,1995 REVISE Juttt? 8,1395. I IMII ATIONS Wc have suivcyed l!ic above described properly which ihc client claims to own or appears to own from various government records We nwke no rcpiescntaium that tlic cliciil dtics in fact own lire properly iK>f that a scaicii of the records has been made to determine the extent aiul nature of his holdings If there is any doubt coiKerning tlie accuiacy of llie legal dcsciiption. competent legal CiHinscI sIkhiU be retained to |>erfoiin a title search and issue a title opiiuon fm our use in piepaiing tire suivev We show only those easements which the client informs us of or which we haptx*n to liccome awaic r>f ihicHigh otlicr sources The survey shows only those improvements which aie visible and which we deem important SI ANDAKI) SYMIK)I S A CONVI NiKlNS "o* Denotes 1/2'' ID pipe with plastic plug hearing Slate I icensc Numhc'i 023'. set, if “o* is filled in, llicn denotes fouiul iron monument CrRIIlirAIION. I hereby certify tliat this survey was picpared by me or und^i my dnccl supervision and that I am 4 Professional I'ngirtcer^ttTal^Trtc^IJi^nal Surveyor under the I awsoftlic Slate o( MinnestMa Jan^ll Parker P I. APS No 9235 ,^^1.1: ONI IN('II IQUAI.S 20 H;KI EXISTING HARDCOVER TABULATION 0 . 75 HOUSE 9G4 GARAGE 300 DF.CKS & STOOPS 54 RIP RAP 222 0 - 75 TOTAL *r 1540 75 - 250 -------------------- GAIMGE 20 DECKS & STOOPS 4 GIWVEL DRIVE 100 75-250 TOTAL 124 s HARDCONTR CALCULATION WORKSHEET RCLEONE) -75-250’ 250-500* EXISTING HARDCOVTR IN a OVE A. House 30 ‘S^2^. Z. Lc*!£ih s.o B. Garage Z 2.Z C. Driveway A S. V D. Sidewalk J5VT?//E. J*aiio»Dcc1c Stccf F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic G. Other % % X / \ X X X X X X X X Width W rZ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A /T3A./r * B X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE CAS£^ ± CAS^ ^ T/f. .5^ * _A. House Length Z6,Z Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. 7Ar Sffff/ F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Z2.Z^/y.^ y JJl X X X X X X X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE * A 7 - B 57_y<g___* 100 aXHOOO’ 7??.J S.F. s.F. J7/J^ S.F. S.F. 32^s.F. — 3/>2S' s*>^7A4 c./. 27 S.F. S S.F. s S.F. =:S.F. 32 S.F. -2 2.2 S.F. S.F. s S.F. a S.F. S.F. /33i3./j's.?.A S.F.B %• J6>0^.7 S.F. S.F.ili 3T\ ( / S S.F.vV 1'>r V-/ S S.F. «3Z^S.F.f-V ■> S.F.Id Uy 8 S.F. S.F. fr^ ' \ 'k .7 I s-S.F. ZS'S.F.f - ss y _S.F.\j % #S.F. -S.F. S S.F. • S.F. , J7^i.7 S.F.A .<3^8 S.F. % B ? ~ ' t. . » ^ HARDCOVTR CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0 75’250-500’500-1000’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ____ ii Lencth Width X X X B. Garage/^:r~ ^2 C. Dnvewav^jry GWi-L /X. D. SIdewaik /z. rZ X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A /r,e,2j' * B /HiH-X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE C/fSS’ ^ Cj-S£^2 A. House ______________ ^--------------------- Length Width X X X B. c. Garage uesj Driveway Z2.2- LZ, 2. 2 7r^ X /f X X 2 V Z.O D. Sidewalk X X X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A - B X 100 *S.F. St S.F. ss S.F. =S.F. 3J.ZS'S.F. Z7.S.F. /2> C S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. a S.F. S.F. S.F. sc S.F. ■B S.F. /ss.zf S.F.A S.F.B----- SB //%n S.F.• *. S.F. SS S.F. ss S.F.r> J"f2.S S.F. ^3 zy S.F.//- •• . SS S.F. S.F. . • ■ s S.F.: * •«!( S.F. ss S.F. ss s f S.F. S3 S.F. ss S.F. • S.F. S.F.A S.F.B SB >Tf-%n , lake MINNETONKA north arm ) \ \ Of(O';b .1 ii ■■ V. I cAf£Z __________^it !1iij^^ f' /■ >"-^’ f C. .) ’. . A b r=^OfVT y>.. .<. HARDCOV'ER CALCLXATION WORKSHEET J!) SETBACK ZONX: (CIRCLE ONE) FXISTTNC. HARDCOAXR EN ZONE 75-250*250-500’ House SOO-IOOO S.F. ' 0 Lcn«th Wkidl X X X B. Garage C. Dnvr^ay D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic X X X X X X X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE * B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F S.F. S F. S.F. S F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. \ 100 % Ppnpn«;Fn HARDCOVER IN ZONE C^S£ 3 A. House 3£^>r Z6,z /coS. 7 S.F. Length f8 X X Width /7 - /J'J B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk STf^ E. 'Puiioi'Drric F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic 22.Z X X X X X X X X X 3 2. G. Other S.F. S.F. S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - A 7 - B S3 A B X 100 = / ^ S.F. A S.F. B 22. % 'T- U ( ^ .i r hardcovt :r calcli .ation worksheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-"5’ -_0-.00 EXISTING HARDCQATR IN ZONT _ A. House______________ * ---- 50(Vlii»T S.F. Lencth B. Garaec C. Dnvcway D. Sidewalk E. Paiio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic % X X X X X % X \ G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A - ^ ® S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. X 100 rO ronPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE 3 A. House Length /7 /jrj Widdi X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By P'aslic Z2,Z- Z7.^ 7 S.F. X X X X X X X X X 2.0 G. Other S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A /7/ 7 - B /76 H_X 100 » 9 /^. 7 S.F. — S.F. % P A B ' '< f -t J ‘•N - I .■f % rs. A B r -' ^L. ^ C4:>^ 3 ys' sbti^ack J^J^^Ar / A S//£^ji(A’ SPe Ctf. PiA T...............MINNETONKA^aacajja/(^ I j/y i^ (NORTH ARM) 2.VJ7 FlOO/\ fm I I CITYof ORONO Municipal Oftlces Street Address: 2750 Keiley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Meilinz Address: P.O. H ot 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0065 Notice to all property owners notified of Application #2037 involving the Wayzata Learning Center located at 850 Wayzata Boulevard: The applicant has asked to be rescheduled before the Planning Commission at a future meeting. Property owners will receive written notification when application is rescheduled before the Planning Commission. d.. -P7 /je^e A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Telephone (6U) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 (?• 1 To:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusih, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:Julv 6, 1995 Subject: #2038 Richard Heit, 1153 Elmwood Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Total lot area = 16,772 s.f. Pertinent Ordinances 1. 3. 4. Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of strucmral coverage. Allowed = 2,516 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,840 s.f. or 10.9% Proposed = 1,897 s.f. or 11.3% No variaiKes required. 2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Review of hardcover. A.0-75’ setback area = 4,036 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 121 s.f. or 3% Proposed = 121 s.f. or 3% (3% approved in 1988 variance review) B.75-250’ setback area = 8,137 s.f. (in 1988 review, 8,325 s.f. area was recorded) Allowed = 2,034 s.f. or 25% Existing = 4,213 s.f. or 52% (1988-45.5% based on adjusted area) Proposed = 4,120 s.f. or 51% Variance = 2,086 s.f. or 25.6% (existing variance = 2,179 s.f. or 26.7%) Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) - Side yard setback. Required = 10’ Existing = 9’ 6" Proposed = 9’ 4" Variance = 6" or 5% Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback. Allowed = 0 Existing = 30 ’ Proposed = 32 ’ Zoning File #2038 July 6^^ 1995 Page 2 List of Exhibits A B C D E Application Plat Map Prof>eny Owners’ List Hardcover Inventory 75-250’ Setback Area Lakeside Elevation F-1-2 Floor Plans for Two-Stor>’ Addition G - Location Map (will assist members in locating rather secluded property) H-1-7 Resolution Plus Exhibits for Application #1272 Approved by City 6/13/88 I - New Survey/Site Plan Description of Request Applicant proposes a two-story 10’ x 28.3’ addition to the lakeside of the existing residence. The structure will replace an existing grade-level screened porch and upper level deck at 8’ x 28.3’. The new addition will extend 2’ closer to the lake but will be located out of the 75’ setback area. There already exists a 30’ encroachment of the average lakeshore setback line. The proposed addition would now extend 2’ beyond. Review Exhibits B and I, the property to the immediate north is a vacant lot. The average lakeshore setback has been determined from the residence structure on the second lot to the north. Hardcover exists at 52%. To offset the 2’ x 28.3’ expansion, applicant proposes the removal of 153 s.f. of plastic liner beneath landscape area to the north side of the residence. Refer to Exhibit I. The addition will also extend 2" further into the substandard north side yard proposed at 9’ 4". Review Exhibit H-1-7. In 1988, the City granted hardcover and side setback variances for a partial second story expansion. A condition of that approval held that hardcover must be maintained at 44.5%. This percentage has been adjusted to account for the reduction in area within the 75-250’ setback area (now at 45.5%). Review individual hardcover improvements - those noted in the 1988 review. Exhibit H-3, and improvements set forth in the current hardcover inventory. Exhibit D. In 1988 bimminous paving was recorded at 840 s.f. The current application shows it at 1,049 s.f. There is no new bituminous paving on this property since 1988. Staff will provide a copy of the 1988 survey for comparison at the meeting. The landscape areas underlain with plastic in 1988 were recorded at 413 s.f. In 1995 it exists at 722 s.f. Review the specific areas on the property, staff found no new landscaping nor bituminous paving. Staff would suggest that the current recorded hardcover inventory is in greater detail than the 1988 review. Review Exhibit I, the gravel area shown to the north of the garage was specifically noted in 1988 as non-hardcover because it was not driven over. Members will observe that there is an informal access drive to the undeveloped lot to the immediate north, probably used by owner who lives to the east side of Elmwood seeking access to his lakeshore lot. Refer to Exhibit G, Mr. Beito’s property is located on the staff map. You may find this exhibit useful in locating the property as roadway locations become very confusing in this area of the City. Zoning File #2038 Julv 6^ 1995 Page 3 Statement of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit A. Staff would add the following: 1 . Steep topographies to the south and east of the property and the existing mature vegetation minimize any visual impact upon the lakeviews of the residence to the immediate south 2. 3. There is no residence on the vacant lot to the north. The residence on second lot to north has no bearing on average lakeshore setback determination. The steep elevations of this property create special needs for residential users. The steep topographies also pose drainage and erosion problems. Issues for Consideration 1. 2. Applicant proposes 153 s.f. or 1% reduction in hardcover within the 75-250 setback area. Are there other improvements on this property that can be removed without creating additional erosion problems? Members should review the north side of the residence and the erosion that is taking place on both this property and the property to the north. The northwest comer of the existing structure is located 9 ’ 6" from the side lot line. Should the new addition be constructed so to meet the 10 ’ required setback? The best way to view the lakeshore of this property is to approach the residence from the north side rather than the south side as staff was soon to discover. Options of Action To deny, approve or amend the current proposed variance application for the property located at 1153 Elmwood Avenue. Any recommendation of approval must include the following conditions: 1.All existing hardcover improvements required for removal must be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. Applicant to apply for the legal combination of Lots 8 and 19 as approvals for hardcover excesses were based on the additional area provided in the 75-250’ setback area located within Lot 19. CITY OF ORONO - VARLANCE APPLICATI^^' /rr Initial Application Fee S200.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Jjf i Renewal Variance Fee SIOO.OO (no change from original application) ^ Variance for non-conforming structures S-00.0 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION ^ ^ ^Sitc Address t>l-hl^OC U Prooertv' Identmcation Number (P.I.D.). ^ ____ • ; Propert\' Identmcation >umoer included on required surv’ev.Attach legal description to application if not included on require Date Propertv Acquired__-------------------j---—— ------- Zoning District; (mon^ycar)J£V CMUWM • W - - - - . you -----!\01 Ti. ■ /•.* VV*/ fc. . 4 I >< APPLICANT Name T/^ I ~ <lcr' -hf ,c.l\ Ait A ^ _ Address: ' ^ ^ ^ uJjt> OWNTR (if different than applicant) Name_____^ A'-^ ________ Phone rSome) — Phone (work) O----- ritv: du _Zip: —S $ <rjf Address;City; Phone(home) Phone (work)_ Zip: - ' — -rve^ (attach additional sheets if necessary! VARIANCES required Lot Area _ Setback: ___Lot Width Front J[_ Side Lot CoverageX Hardcover _ Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) ^ . xy J , TV. Xu <( (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITT.\LS for vour application to he considered complete! 1. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. O^rrs Ust of owners wirhin 150’ (you must otam^s list from Hennepin Couniv Department of Finance. A-603, Govt Center, j 48-3-71). s" x “colculations as requited. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8-^ x 11 ?o'’p'^raphic survey (existine and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade Ir?;ro7osS in Addition, provide one (1) copy 8-V x ‘V, ™ Tu-) Sketches or nlans of fl or & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8 . ^ St or the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the oroperty This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As LTddendum 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 Aonlicant and Propetty Owner must sign this application. Please remember ^ iSBH =-^con,nie.e if the aUe informctloq not information supplied is true^^coiT^^e _be^ of hisflier knowWge. ^ ^ Applicant’s Signature Date The owmr herebv acknowledges and agrees to this applicancm and further autho^s^M^^ entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, apnLs (Tomnussion members, a members for purposes of inv^a^onan^v^rifica^ of this request. ^ DateOwner’s Signature m tave aSttho^^^^^^ in your place and to advise the Budding 4 Zonmg Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 i I lb?h ^» k V / (POi) PART Cf laC 75 •01. 5 (66) •0? ??PT or LOT (?It ^ A 1 ; \ PT G*'VC^ •I o7-;n-23-/v <#.04. 40', *0 SI. 5 •le 2 «c r-1«.4« I*CE»I )2 t"*- (»5) 7— A' l(? T I I ./'v '■ *’vwt,V.“ *. ‘u iJitj ■ k, l«n “1 ^ VA i W 7 ^ -j . p i (?3M W~ 11 ^^r \ ^ ?• j^3e5 ^ 5 2nL „„ lt)j; >:^kJ 1^------------- ?0? bl (27|r^^ t^i J 1 . iCI \ »(29)'*'TY-i* >s^ - ^1 ‘.^ '0 (30) □—- \ n \ • • V 4 ( 16) '’■^ '^(59). J n ■ '*‘1 n f— IS - V J I--------- 734 ^ # * ' • •, '* « » I i65) i « (I) 35 >; '55^ T r >vr cy i«< f i. I \ix 9 Jjil JO (W) ( r LOMA I 15 33,33 ; Rn (58) S«*04-iyi «<r^ I *4 4 »W.S 1S,V-...... ooc NO: A il 8' 8 RUN DATI Oi/21/95 RATCH 504 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP AODR OltCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFOWATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OHNERS LIST10 07-117-21 11 0215 00016 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO FLOOD CONTROL fUNDER HATER) 2/5/02 ST DEED §161148 10 07-117-21 14 0Q24 01117 ELMHOOO AVE NANS 0 HEILER ETAL EMILIE E HEILER 1115 NORTH ARM DR HOUND MN 55164 10 07-117-21 14 0029 01141 ELMHOOO AVE B E I R R CARLOCK BRUCE E OARLOCK 1179 ELMHOOO AV HOUND MN 55164 18 07-117-21 14 0014 00010 ADDRESS UMSSIGNED HErOCPlN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO CONVEYED 2/8/82 ST DEED 161147 18 07-117-21 14 0052 01151 NORTH ARM DR R A KUTZ ETAL MARTHA KUTZ 14111 6LENRI06E RO MINNETONKA MN 55345 18 07-117-21 14 0060 01149 NORTH ARM DR TOOD M VAN DEN EINDE ET AL TODD H VAN DEN EINDE 1169 N ARM DR HOUND MN 55164 18 07-117-21 14 0014 00018 ADDRESS UN/^SIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF OMNO PO BOX 44 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55159 38 07-117-21 14 0027 00018 ADDRESS UNASSIOCD GARY E BEITO ETAL TODD VAN DEN EINDE 1169 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55164 10 07-117-21 14 0010 01179 ELMKOOD AVE B E GARLOCK IRK CARLOCK BRUCE GARLOCK 1179 ELhtKX)0 AVE HOUND HN 55144 18 07-117-23 14 0014 00018 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED B E I R K GARLOCK BRUCE GARLOCK 1179 ELMHOOO AV' HOUND MN 55144 18 07-117-21 14 0054 01179 NORTH ARM DR SCOTT L CHRISTIANSON SCOTT L CHRISTIANSON DAMN M CHRISTIANSON 1179 NORTH ARM DR HOUND MN 55164 18 07-117-21 14 0041 01121 ELMHOOO AVE JAMES DESPLINTER JAMES DESPLINTER 1121 ELMHOOO AVE MOUND MN 55144 4: V, T. Nr : ET AL I • '» *4 1 -4 . • •• , • »•i' ,\4 * 4 - * ^ . '• • »* ' 1 •«1 . ‘ •4 i '• K i •• • V y.f .<• REPORT NO. PMSMOl PACE 17 • f-\ 'I • • V.*,' '5.sa 07-117-ZS M DOES 01X01 EUWOOO AVE HILLIAH R HIBBS »aUIAM R HZBBS 1101 EUMIOO AVE ORONO MN E5SA4 M 07-117-ZS 14 OOZR 0115S EUMJOO AVE RICHARD JAMES NilT RICHARD JAMES NEXT 115S ELMHOOD AVE MOUND tM 55X44 ID 07-117-XX 14 DOSS OllSO ELHMOOO AVE J M LAMDRECNT ET AL JON N LAMDRECNT iieo ELmooo avs HOUND m 55X44 XO 07-117*25 14 00X7 0115X ELMNOOD AVE RICHARD JAMES NEIT RICHARD JAMES NEXT 115X ELMNOOD AVE MOUND m 55X44 XS 07-117-ES 14 0059 01199 EUt«)00 AVS J A E NARVEY J SCOT HARVEY 1199 ELMHOOO HOUND MN 55X44 X8 07-117-XX 14 0044 011X5 NORTH APH DR • E E HEILER IRS HEERKXNS EMILIE E HEILER . 11X5 NORTH ARM OR MOUND rt4 55X44 • C’..' O■.. i. *, ■ r ■ * ’• . I . • .!> I*4 • . > V ■ ■ : V-' ‘ f. * u • .‘i 1A -f» J 1 ' ’ i '• • . v: ’• •I -•■V' ■’ • ’r V . * • f * « • ^4 V •V V •* 1• V. M I ' ’ . ..*• • . . • • • * I . ..« I. •> ; » I* ; „* • I yi »•• hardcover calculation worksheet D SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75 EXISTING HARDCPyTR IN ZONE A. House ____________ * Lccgib X X X B. Garage C. Dnveway D. Sidewalk E. Paiio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCc V'Lk ZONE total property area in zone A________— " ® - proposed hardcove r in zone A. House______________^ Length B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck X X X F. Landscape Underlain X X X X X X X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total property area in zone A ______________ ^ ® - 250-500’ Wid* X 100 Width s t=s X 100 53’i- tClHl <3.X 10 ai37 nS^ 5^ 522 7iP- 500-1000’ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. "s.F. ~ % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. I N~3 S.F. lo S.F. I W /! •'•n 'i </ \ f •• */ - ^ B S.F. S.F. % A B ■■•.V ii^fe^;|l A# kill if^K^SSStf Ip .■f, frr i'^l» I tT.Sr fill IM .^. .y.v^ •»■ "^ $ tus it' 0 t; ■■*• /IX ^ i! ^'‘ *' • ii f j \ . -7 ‘•.fc* > ■■ ..-v^ M \^\ •r. » / :>^y. a 4W 2056 CSMT ____- r - -‘t * m Dh* • SLAB 13*4 13’4 LIVING AREA 1207 sq n BASEMENT 6*0 X 6*8" Slider «=>ecs ■ ~*~yr. y- r '.^i , • v> />• ■tLi ■U s ' ■ y ;■ >v: r IS £ £ PORCH T3 C €)s 4W 2056 CSMT T I ' I \ 6'0 SPA / / ^.r r5-'1 kr-rf^ i . :.. 5*5 : ~ —14'8 .1 •:i ) -I >1 I murphy BROS. Io> CD iO toin LIVING 2W 2448 CSMT 4W 2056CSMT i. ---r I I ar •‘ I 4’8 6t>XffBseifngdoor DECK 4 ’2 13'4 1 4 ’6 ___1. * 6*0 X 6*8 French dooi PORCH v\\ I ' i I. 4W20S6 CSMT B.rr.'s:i 5'1 ------4*2 .-ov—- 3W20S - 5*5 • — . :u liOibit - * s • — • —■14*8 - 28* n I s ‘V CiMT I I \ r ' \ . V . • * ■< if X 1 LIVING AREA 1073 sq ft MURPHY BROS. Building & Remodeling Co. 25/9 Eestmen Orhm NEW BRIGHTON, MN 55112 (612) 780-3262 1\ I m t \: f V*: i / --• • . «L {<•''■-■'■•’I I . ^ ^ • 4 • V------ . j*— ■—‘ r •(»<■ 4 ‘-‘.i-iJ • 4.1 • •% I • f- ^ . • I- * 4 » % «• » s s * .V* •J.^ / • f- r• • • '- • • • t .f-i **•• T* %*•'••' *7^'# . * ' ^ . M* 4 ' .'/•.’ •*/■»■ '<*’i'1 ■‘'^■*'tfV' ' ■-^ .»' T » ' " . * • - " *1 ^ r, ;:: ..."^‘ ■ • * *.. • •!.v;‘» •*.. 'f- •* •• . : *• '• ' • . '■• ^*» <" ,- •'*** !r^w* / • • • • •#. c • ... * .' '* U ' *^ * ’• V . ' - •« .- . • • ^ V ; •• I •. • . f. icirv I o.^ 1ORONC^i City of OROO«t*otuTio«i o^TMiciTYcogi^a wa ?<«>In *tIA anoumoaA VAAIAACB TOizcxmi. unao«»». ss:;;!:^ ;,r.rUM #1272 _____# *i!5***^' Aleh»rd J. lalt (hereinafter ‘the eeplleeAt*! la of orene (here*liSf?t?/-CitJ-T^e^ 1V9V1 fiuie**“ tlndfwlete rerahlll, aecerdlne to Mlnneeate,"®**' ■■ " MnotWEB by the City Ceenell ef Orene, Fzmxacs 1. Thli applieatien wee reviewed ee 2enlaf rile fl272« LidSS.Si'^ai* DiSJiS.** “• “-“ »»«»• '““r uhM».;.5^t k,y «• SS* Vi’"” «»i~irvh\. »» e-V*V •*•4 . A*<, '• • Hrf-V V7v,i^^rr^v • . • 1!I ' . y ... • *.4. • • , • * - * d 4o}?V ----wVe. -n>'- JirSiTrSTUV .Vi.’S'i'V.Vs.t" *■“ ............. f««e 1 of » v:Xyi?? ;. m //■'• I' / / %'' V. . . *t *.City of OROIVO ./.V '’V**• ^cirvr.;NESOLUTIOM Uf TMS CiTV COUfWCII. NO., ^ ti . ^ '•-V: *>^-V''/.v: >4 ■*» •ORONOi * j," V is;c) Th« propoMd cMtllavarad •dditlM wl'l b« lee«t«4 •.•' froa th« «ld« let line with • 2* ever henf« bat will be no eleeer to that let line then the aniatinp covered weikwey etruetare attached to the houee> end will have no lapse! on the nelgnbering residence which la acre then SO* sway. !. ,#« -- - ^ _ % 4. The City Ceunell haa cenaldered thla applleetioB iaeladisf the flsdlnya end racoaaendetiene of the riannlny Ceaaleslen. reporta oy City ataff, eeaa. tnta by the applicant end the effect of the propeaed variance on the health, aafaty and welfare ef the eoaaunlty. S. The City Ceunell finds that the eendltleno eilstinT ea this property are peculiar to it ead do net apply «enerally to ether property ia this teninp dlatrlett that eraatlnp the varieace would not adversely affect traffic eendltiens, ll^ht, air nor pose e fire haxard or ether danper to nelphberlnp propertyt would not aerely serve as e convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to sllsvists a deaenstrsbls hardship or dlfflcultyi is necessary te preserve a substsatisl property rleht ef the appllcsntf and would be ia keepinp with tbs apirit sad iateat ef the teninf Cede sad Ceaprsheasive Plaa ef the City. •mon ■seed upea the abeve fiadlaps, the Oreae City Ceuaeil hereby fraats a variance to the Msnicipel Soaisf Cede fectieaa 10.22, Subdivision 2 sad 10.24, Sabdiviaioa 5(B) to perait the eeaatruetiea*^i4^^ ef a second story addition te be located 0.0* froa the aide lot lias with everhanf located 0.0* froa the side let line, where a 10* aids ^-1 V 4 # >1 yard setback ia aeraally required, sad yraata a variance te allow 44.S0 hardcover in the 75*230* setbaek soae where ealy 2St hardoowop ia noraally allowed, aubject te the fellewiaq cenditioaai 1. hardcover ea the property is allowed only aa fellows i « '-Va a a 0*-73» tenet (Area • 3,575 a.f.) Saistlaq steppinq atonss Caapflre rinq/plaatlc underlay TOTAt ALLOWBO 20 a.f. Hi'alfl (2.m ^ r tape 2 ef 3 '-i ,' ■/i ► . -» * 'K• « *■*!- • o r V* ‘( i^.ORONO City of ORONO - 5-. ♦' **- vVa-I ■*, ^« #• - • t.ncsoLirrtoN o'Thi city councilNO.7S-2S8* tewi (AxM • §$323 i.f.) Kxl»tln« hottM Cxistioy d«ck BjU«cln« «h«4lieelibNds/plastlc bIom «Mt wall of hottM* with 3* cMtllavar ab*** Cavarad valkway with caatilavar abeva portion taiatlny yaraya latalnlny walla/plaatie Craval/plaatie nast to walkway by yaraya Pertioo of preparty la tlaweed riyht-a(*«ay that la Mintaiaatf by Applicant aa hla drlYaway TOTAL ALLOWBO 1,2S422«sa113a.f. a.f. a.f. a.f.I ' ** #*.•.*• V.- • • ^ f k% ^ Irij;7.>&vr 31i a.f. 9ia 200 100 a.f. a.f. a.f. •40 a.f. T7TW a.f. (44.9%) i. V. • - Applicant la haraby advlaad that no additional hardeevar will bo apprevad far thla property« and any future prepoaal to Ineraaaa bordeavar on the property weald not be approved* bat aiyht be approved only In eenjanetlen with raaoval of an a^lvalant aran of oslatlny hardeevar* raoaltlny In no net hardeevar Ineraaae M the property. 2. faparata klteban faeilitlaa ahall net ha eenatraetad te ■aha thla n aaparata yaaat aparteant withaat eondltlenal nao parsit approval by the City Connell. The haaaa and addition aball eentlnaa te fanetlon aa a alnylo dwalliny anlt. r.t' ' aw k * '•*ms t .1. 3. Aatberitiao yranted by thla wariaaea ran with the »repettyy.¥;:>»^ net with the applicant* bat ora paralaolva only and ■aat.be^Ji^ aaarelaad by application for n balldiny paralt within one yaar’of ****^ the data of Ceanell approval* or thla variance will oapire an that data (Jana 13* 19I0). ^ *>1 ^ V - 4. Vlelatlen of or nen>ceapllaaeo with nay of the tarae and cenditlena of thla variance ahall eenatltnta a violation of the tenlny coda* ahall aatoaotleally tarainata any authority yraatad heroin* and ahall be paalahabla aa a aladaaaaner. 9, The andoralynad applicant baa rand* andaratood and haraby •oraaa te the taraa of thla raaolatlon and on behalf of hlaoalf* hia haira* aueeaaaera and aaoiyna* haraby ayraaa to the rocordlny of thla raaolatlon in the chain of title of the property. Paya 3 of 9 VH-*' V'.l w-' H i. I t — *V; * 1 . • I w a .» .* . V N ..4 . / ••b • ^ **■ V .1.- »o • a vd- .*- • a.- . •• •• , • r*' - •; 4*. -■■■'** Ate ' . j (•/ A .. V*/ wv."-;<*• •a ^ •At a ••• . I . I • • *. #9l CiTrr^vo*^I OROWTT City of OROISO ■u-4NfSOLUTlOKI or THI city COUNCIL NO. - ***^________•/*,<■/. r.* ' • • n* V"--r-tA4«pt«4 toy tha Oxeas City Caaaell aa this lita day of IMS. JaMa a. OrabaW-, nyor Edvard J. Callahan, Jr., Actlif^ Mayer rreparty OvaarTa) * •.■ •^ •►a ^Jt\ .1J/4 * *• V ^ •%. %-a* V mki . • X %• • %• V ♦ijv :* i* » » *' * * ‘‘'^ ' * V ■vv'*; ' . c -- ^ .v^.-r r- • ■•' -vt^ ► V, Papa 4 of S h % * ^ < .•■Vv. .• ^ * • •- • •' • # ; • a ^a * -- . a *. . *■* ♦ 'j?*' V.r l.tv-il a.‘ ^ • /A ^ • '•. •• : ..:• . .. a <• • a > -• •'«•*. ■• *'•., •* . ^ '• *• , * * * *• -‘'•I.*** ••/,'**•• * . ** • -T *’ * , ^ V ‘ ■ • ■ * • * •• •.» r r • ■7-/-.*v • .a * ' I • .' .I ! \ V** A-'f,-,l.:,\.’-C.'“-^\’- .••*A '• .'rt • il A .. •»• I-* •. *" jLI I ••• • , * ♦/J • I ^ ^ I • , *' vi ' ^ 0 ' *4l f • i wm ■ * M >? !•; I m ^ ’ 0 m m 9 - i TOH s . /II 1 m m \ <1* H‘ \ **• <*•; ■\ ,-. « •*■. • ^>>'. . *i\ jl 4 ‘ ■"n,. ,vV-J ^■*4. r •* r \* *f A 9- .< rk. "•V, 'v)I % ,% . » ■ ■ I ■ , , , ,*• •. •. •..:••• :•V.;••• V .,y. A?** • .V. -••• w A • • •. *.%:.• • ••■ ■■■: ;■•■ ■• •• : * 4. •• • • ;• • •' *. ^ *• ‘^ ^ _ _L X' * >\ X > ■ r i‘ - t . •; ; • -‘-Kr^ir ^ v- •% .' > 1 .. V- ^ I 1 » . ‘ 4 V\ ■*> v* ‘i ,V .1 ;r:> ^*’• - V''' r. ' V,.. . .. :/,? • V . :• »% •••* \.%•ratjir ,* .x .%il~^i *^j{{w.•Atw—oE^^ziEiHsicmiric^rrniij^J^^iciiiiirzzjssiESSs^sd^ ■ « % ^ mm m % ft • • ViV* ■* « « • • j^oi-r^'v'_7. / ^ T • • •• ,.• • • i «> t 1^ P--;m ►vr, i . •«:-;V . “ '•?>*-* y- •••.*., • • V • *• 7 • .• % • * » • «r -' - • •% '7 j * ♦ % \ * r ^ *. t • • ^ —I J *> I -'i'; i »w> »•-•' • mm mm /7 X ro.i .-• 1 ^ a. »f'7 •;•*»♦ • ’^W S'- *tv • % . •' ••.•*•*.* ^ wfcV .rvm • •• -■• From: Date: Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusih, Building & Zoning Administrator July 7, 1995 Subject: #2040 Doug Olson, 2601 West Lafayette Road - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Total lot area = 60,000+. Pertinent Ordinances A. Section 10.22. Subdivision 1 (A) - Lakeshore setback. Required = 75' Existing = 24’ Proposed = 24’ B. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Review of hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area. 0-75’ setback area = 33,750 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 2.992.69 s.f. or 8.86% Proposed = 2,757.69 s.f. or 8.1% (-170 s.f. patio, -65 s.f. concrete pads) List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners’ List D - Neighbor’s Acknowledgement Form E - Hardcover Inventory F - Hardcover Map G - Topographic Map H - Lakeshore Protected Area I - Survey Description of Request Applicant seeks approval of a lakeshore setback and hardcover variances for replacement of a concrete patio that surrounds a pool located within the 0-75’ setback area. Applicant proposes to replace concrete paving with interlocking pavers placed within a sand bed. ^ applicant ’s information notes. Exhibit A, the DNR classifies the interlocking pavers placed within sand beds to be "soft cover". The application involves modest reductions in existing hardcover improvements. Refer to Exhibit F. the patio area shall be reduced by 170 s.f. and 65 s.f. of concrete pads shall be removed at lakeside. Zoning File #2040 July 7, 1995 Page 2 Members may remember an earlier application in 1994 involving the same property. In that application, applicant sought to install new improvements involving replacement of the retaining walls and a hot tub adjacent to the pool area. This application was never completed. Review E.xhibit I, staff has asked that applicant provide an amended survey confirming location of patio area to lakeshore. The patio at its closest projection to lake is 24 from lake. Statement of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit A. Staff would add the following; 1. Over 50% of the area of this property is located within the 0-75’ setback area Refer to Exhibit J. 2. The house and improvements were constructed prior to current standards for lakeshore development. 3. Review Exhibit J, the property has over 800 lineal feet of shoreline. Issues for Consideration 1.Hardcover has beeu reduced to 8.1% in the 0-75’ setback area. Will members approve the improvement within the 0-75’ setback area without additional removals? 2.Other issues. Options for Action 1. To either approve as proposed, or 2. To approve as amended. ^- w.--sO/Si CITY OF ORONO - VARL4NCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S200.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee 5100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $200.00 Afier-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) #2 '■J I i;J 7f ^ i ----- . PROPERTY INTOR.MATION ^ ^ Site Address .3t.ol Co.*^»<)||Vrg«- V X ».’wi.V -V V • ,-Lrri-____-i. - V • to ' •; » * VU not included on rec,u,red survey. Date Property Acquired -----:— ------------------------- I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels ot land. Present use of property: ^ residential -----other (specify)-------------- Zoning District: '*■ --------------------------—----------------- \ ’j M ’ (month/year) 4DDI ir^AVX Phone (home) _ - Phooe(worlc) ->So-.^1 Address: SV _ City: T)0a Zip: OWNER (i^ifferent than applicant) Name Phonethome) *Jll» lyso Phone (work) 9to ~>VTT Ciiy:__Q^vafia._________Zip: description of request Describe request in detail: c L/tT ja ^IkAI VARIANCES required Lot Area _ Setback: ___Lot Width Front __Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify)n - IS* CtmcjiMAt. Jia/moO^ ^ *^cribfprope^ wndi^m compliance with Zoning Code requuements: fO<UxyV<«V/wv^---------------------7;;;^----- CS^27/$5 ]1iZ4 T5-E CITY OP ORONC SlS -*73-7337 i- 4 eai REQUIRED SUBMITTAI^ All of thtt foliowlnf infon mtitt hft «ubmi^^f«l l»v th« lauiklu 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. . Completed AppUcition Fonn _ Certified Property Owners List of cwusrs within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Dcpetimcnt of Pliumce, A <103, Qovt Center, 348-3271). ^ Plit Mip (obtained wiih property owners list). _ Certificsu: of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculetions es retjuired. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8V4* x 11" for reproduction. _ Topographic survey (existing and p repo sad elavatlons) if 4ny chongas in existing grade ore proposed. In addition, provide ons (1) copy 8Vi'* x ll" for reproduction. ^ Sketchee or plans of floor A elevation views (provide one (1) c<^ 8'/i” k 11"). List of the legal names (include morltsl status) of all periona with an interest in die property. Th^s would include naine(s) of appllcant(a) if not cuuciii owiwi(s). , As an addendum to this application, pb^se attach a oepateie list of any other peteona , you wish aoUfied of Uils applioaiiun. ^ Additional items os itiay be requested by City ateif. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign itiis appllcetiun. Ploese latuember tlixt vour YttrllBW ** P**t comnleta if the above InlbriwMtli APPLICANT'S SICNATURB The applicaiu Iiereby agrees lo provide all infbrmatlon required or requested by the Zoning Adiuiiiiitrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not coversll by original fee payment) and/or consulUnit expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information lupplicd is Uuc^egid correct to the bt si uf his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature OWNER'S SIGNATURE Tlie owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and fuiiher authorises laasooable entry onto the property by City staff, cousultonta, agents, Coimiiiision members, otkI Council mcinbcrs for puiposes uf inveadgatlun and verlfluaiion of this request. Owner's Signature )IL^9±> Applicant must have all submituls Into die City offices 25 daye bcfOc^Jihe Planning Commlssiuit Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants mutt be present at all scheduled rsrlcw meethip of Che Planning Cummltslou and Council, If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make atrangements lo have »n auUtorirsd agent snend in your place and to advise the Building A Zoning Offloe of Uiis ciuuige prior to tlie meeting. L mm OATi 04/27/W MTCN SOS L MOP ASM OmEP KAME TAXPAYER NAm/AOOR L PROP AOOR OHNiR NAHi TAXPAYER HAME/AOM u PROP AOM OtlER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR s. NEHtCPlN sa 2W17-2S 21 0001 02404 NEST UFAYETTE RO LAURA C PIOSRE LAURA C PIOSICE 2404 NEST LAFAYETTE RO EXCELSIOR HN SSSSl 10 21-117-2S 21 0007 02405 NEST LAFAYETTE RO iRAOFORO L OLANKENSHIP ORAOFORD A DESRA OLANKEI^IP 2405 NEST LAFAYETTE RO . EXCELSIOR MN 55SS1 TOTAL OATCH SOS 00004 • A t-COUNTT MKVCRTV tUFttMlTlaN tYSTBi raOKRTY OWCRS LIST • j » ♦- ?;il.rr NO. fXASMOi PAH fr SO 21-117-2S 21 0002 ! 02400 NEST LAFAYETTE RO ANN NATTHENS ANN NATTHENS 2400 NEST LAFAYETTE RO EXCELSIOR MN 55SS1 ^ i f4 > SO 21-117-2S 24 004S 02410 NEST UFAYETTE RO CYNTHIA N ENOOUXST CYNTHIA N ENOOUIST 2410 LAFAYETTE RO N EXCELSIOR HN ‘ 55SS1 I 4 M ti-117-ts n oees 02M1 MEST LAFAYETTI RSI 0 J OLSON R S J MNiRS OOUCLAS J OLSON TMl HiST LAFAYETTI RB EXCELSIOR »M SSSSl i . i Y : • ■ iV- t. 1 . 'Is. . A : • » ‘u ^ f . •4 SS tl-117-n » «M9 OE*U NEST LAFAYETTI RO VICTORIA L CASNR VICTORIA L OAONi E.1S LAFAYETTI RO N EXCELSIOR IM SSSSl .i*»1 . • ’ . I - •' « ‘.‘•a • ■ ♦ -• ^ •.I #- -«. if >' • . ■* . ; . • -ff l / ■ V-.; ; • ?•4J ■ 1 *y. «••t • *1 •.»'A.. —!.. • •I ‘ • • il' ■':'V. iV 4 •• •• i. » • t. ■ n-.-'t-. • • ■ '* . . ft . 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HE^MEPIN COUNTY OEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEOGE AND RELIEF. > ^ ir !;■ OATI ■* ■■s c . > r: /. • !’• *. • ' f ,S'-''H- *. f'/i . -I [i : ;v f «* • ; 9' i/. . • • . 'V.' I/; . '-‘th Vi V \ 'S I • , • I • . . 1 •< • • - \* *•, V ■ •“ A 1*f •* t • « - tvet kf -a J [print name(s)] f^W/O rOAri4 [print address] T\ gr^A) fQRrHEyJ^ Ct)&<T “Doocc have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use ot the property locate / at ace, vj. taFa-remaalso referred to as Land Use Application^o^ClUcg. I (we) understand that in executing this actaiowledgement. I (we) am (to) toi declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to conftrm for ^ City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neigh project or use requires Council approval. •^operty Owner Date AppUcarn,'^leas“™b"fco— to the scheduled meeting date. IL^ setback ZONE: (CIRCLE ONT) EXISTING RARDCOVTR IN ZON^ 75-250'250-500’ A. House Lenflll Widm X % X B. Garage C. Drivcwav X X D. Sidewalk '[■.£,//OUL V -‘X X Toot. E. Patio/Deck X X F. Laadscape ‘ Uodertain J__ Bw-P!astic X X X 'G. Other y*" TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ - B X 100 -n ^ /7 * ^ proposed HARDCOVER IN ZONX A. House _____________ I - Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X ?..y E. Paiio/Deck ^4,0 I vtu X X F. D^^sc^|;)c ^jj UmkOTin ____ By Pl^ic ____ X X X G. Other f- TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A - B X 100 13 « SHFlOMr S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.r '' S.F. S.F. - A • K . S.F.•• •< . , '5* S.F. S.F. . s / -‘ 4 f ,o -• S.F. ; - \ \o "-VS.F. S.F. S.F. <S.F. 6** S.F. S.F. % A B •n ^S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ,0 S.F. S.F. iu> S.F. S.F. //)y\ 'r! S.F. S.F. ■ S.F. )X /S.F. gfe: S.F. S.F. % A B '7 L. .—--------- --n -..t ■ i 1~^} -0 -Q ! >’ *■vll iiiuiiiutiu i , HARDSURFACe- 'ERFORF -A ^ 1000 e 00^ 6iCB^4r /S/, 500 ft fSf. OOO M •"i Wa:”' '?»«'^'w ^^rj^2g:5i?r55 wv£.5 “ ■ i\nmi n^ s ii I? 0 e 1 **“ o o ? O -a #% s r.i s a 1 11 1? ii ! 5 ?. n - S' •^1 ^ o • t I ? IIm ••. s* s* mn } r ** •* I• -% s z 2 m 0 1I 0 a •% : 9 ft 1«% i ? f 0 a 1*« n ?? J i u • n 'k II • \l is i I ? • '<t. I' <5 V)c> 0 I 1 &2 0) I Vis 1 6^ Jd % I X s*i/ TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. Citv Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:Julv 12, 1995 SUBJECT: #2041 Phillip Otto, 4116 Highwood Road - Cond Jonal Use Permit/Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.03, Subd. 19 - Conditional use permit has been filed for land alterations not authorized under building permit issued for new residential construction nor variance Application #1920 approved by City in May of 1994. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - 75-250’ setback area = 1,500 s.f. Allowed = 375 s.f. or 25% Existing = 325 s.f. or 21.67% 250-500’ setback area = 15,388 s.f. Allowed = 4,616.4 s.f. or 30% Existing = 1,788 s.f. or 11.55% List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant’s Addendum C - Plat D - Property Owners List E - Hardship Statement F - Sketch of Applicant’s Approved Grading Plan with Building Permit G - Sketch of Current Grading Installed at Property H - Specifications for Wall I - Applicant’s Amended Grading Plan J - Resolution Approving Application #1920 K - Gustafson Report 7/7/95 L - Elevations M - Grading Plan/Survey Approved with Building Permit I Zo ’iing File #2041 July 12, 1995 Page 2 Description of Request In Mav 1994 the City approved lot width, street and side setback variances to permit construction of the new residence on propeny. Review Exhibit J, the conditions of that approval required that applicant provide detailed grading plans to ensure that there would be no impact on adjacent residential propenies. At the time of the issuance of a building pemit, detail was also required for retaining walls that were to be installed along the west side where ci^ in the steeper elevations would be called for to allow for the access drive. Review Exhibits F and L, in the building permit review the applicant or contractor was advised of the need to provide specifications for any wall section that would exceed a 4‘ height. The more intense excavation in the street yard beyond what was approved with the building permit requires special consideration because the additional fill has been placed along the c^t ^de yard and to the north rear yard. The current or alternate elevations along the east yard lot line present problems of severe erosion impacting both the subject property and property to east. restoration of 2:1 slopes and replaming of trees that will obviously be lost ^ a result of thew excavations. Applicant will replant with evergreens. The engineer has reviewed the specifications for the retaining wall and has approved the wall. There is also discussion of a need to install a catch basin within the driveway as garage clevauon is at the same elevation of drive. The engineer requests detail as to the final location of that catch basin and the outlet. Because of the narrowness of this lot and the steepness of the elevations adjacent to the house, the engineer also recommends gutters and downspouts for the residence. Downspouts should be located on a final grading plan. John Gerhardson. our Public Works Director, has reviewed the property and approved the second curb cut recognizing the need for safety on the severely limited roadway. Please refer to Exhibit E. Applicant has provided a hardship statement as to the need to proceed with the more extensive land alteration in the street yard and need for the second curb. 1 Zoning File ^2041 July 12, 1995 Pace 3 Applicant should also denote type of seed because of the need to maintain ground cover. He also noted the grading encroachments into east property and recommends obtaining \vritten permission from owner if City is to approve plan. Applicant may also consider other options noted in Gustafson's report of July 7th that offers other methods such as slope stabilization (use of geogrid) or retaining walls. Gustafson asks for a more detailed to scale drawing of the final grading plans. Staff has listed the detail and information need on a revised grading and drainage plan: 1. A to scale drawing showing existing and proposed elevation, Locate catch basin in driveway and outlet (elevation) 3.In recent amended grading plan. Engineer opted for alternative "B". Applicant to provide detail on 2:1 slopes of island area and number and type of evergreen plantings to be installed and their location. 4.In areas along east side where slopes are greater than 3:1, provide cither a slope stabilization plan, retaining walls or seed blankets. Anplicant should provide detail on type of seed to be used and potential for maipx»-.’nce 5.If grading is to extend into eastern property, the City must receive written permission for the authorization of this grading activity. 6. Location of all downspouts on residence. 7. Drainage plan should also specify with arrows flow of drainage from property. Staff would add as a reminder to the applicant that boats on trailers are not to be stored within the street yard at least not at the second curb cut that is supposed to be providing safe ingress and egress from property and not as an additional parking stall for the boat. Options of Action _____:i. rv^ndino confirmation bv Planning Commission that applicant has hilfilled allCouncil; or table pending confirmation by Planning Commission requirements of City Engineer m m A ’1 ’ • ■■ ■, ■ CITY OF ORON^ GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION ^ u. t^d Site Address ^ -3-------—^---T7y^7~*I7frjZ^ Type of Application to be Filed __------^ ->~T Propertv’ Identification Number (P.I.D.) _0 7' ^ ^ ^ — t// f Ptone iTiome) ' ^T> *4 ^ APPLIC.ANT p u Q y {xyozV)ZlZKZ3M^ OWTSER (if different than applicant) Name_____________________ ___ Address Citv .Zip. Date Property Acquired / U> > ^ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels ot land. ^ES - CO>-BmON^^USE $125.00 Residential Accessory Use ^ $200.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $175.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ■ ^$250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration « i •- -------- Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain n C Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more ■-Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore P*RD7PID - see Fee Schedule $100.00 Renewal Fee (no change from oiigiMl application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current .\pplication 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) S300.00 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) Cll'r ff fimCE OFFICE i:i5u200000 A i *ry\/ X CUi T •vv- .•TOtii CHECK ihtlK HFCEif'f-TH^n t’i Kl'iCSOO cool ROl 7 • 1 R. .•vw/ REQUIRED SL’BMITTALS _ - ^ . * • / • 1. . 2. • 3. j 5. T- /s- 10. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. . .. Certified Propertv Owners List of owners within 350’ (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County' Department of Finance, A-603. Government Center, 348-3271). CenificTte of Sur%ey (signed by a licensed sur%eyor) - refer to handout tor survey information. ... • j Attach lecal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve chances in elevation (grades). . List if the leaal names (include marital satus) of all peBons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current^iwr(s). . r , J ' Construction plan, if applicable (see suff for requirements).- er- .*-[(«• As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons vou wish notified ot this application. vnii ARF RFOUIRED TO SUTPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMEN^ SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Pl^ tetnember 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;^_________________________Datc_------------- The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or request^ by the Zoi^g Admiihstrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by onginal 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 members for purposejLofvinvestigatio^nd verification of this request. Owner’s signature /cre Date Applicam mus. have all aubmiual. into U.e City offices 25 days before the Plapniug Comnussioa Me^. rnmmission Meetings arc held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present in- review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a schc “ * office please arrangements to have an authorized agent anend in your place and advise the Building & o g of this change prior to the meeting. r) Prep £ t- 'e'.-1/ '/// . - r 6 f/-C /// r/ ^ ■ OLUfitrs: PhJ/'P - UO / Ppp!'CCL-fP.r, Tf ^ , ^ pcr^<-sy- -• /7 L^ c^/ ^ tPaPcLp/ S/opeP hU<iPc/ai-ci o. ^rJC-LCPf^D 3ei>ft^ 4 'crO^ f OSti> - C Pirpr^'-'i ^ pu r. i'cy ^ d£ ser/pr?a ^J ^loc-costbftOC-OOStU <-'‘-“- ^ (TOpo erA-rf^'(s scl^^sYS'iclcs • 'y.Moyt J A fltJppM<=- rpypifPWe A OoPrU^&u'i L-Ti-ff-P pl^^-OM p/ZcPtieri-l L trli^ Ar pfrt lOP. ^LOLvtf^ mf< IS y-4-p-r ^/zoon / ;ajS. CF'<^ '^‘^^ - .^iTTA^/A/C- iAACu Ar SMJ CciOAJt^ iOA^s A coNAAjurrno/p or pyisnAJb — P/Ptr^cM> 7~/£. ovALL ■ __ P/zcFiP 3Per.Pne AaJ o paaaJ'jAA Poc-P eoAPt- iisEd o^P loAil- ~niC- be 0 f' bh€^ ■ h 0-S CL. k30^ reicb icC:. LlP j^e r ir^r ha S CL rct^ai/ icS . c- i,c'/na LyUfcr c rt V? ^ I 0 Sc cLPS. /L./±' C6yff^Y^ S- Or-a hu^c- S'4<i^ yAcd . Yhc &-A^u^u. See PS I'V/tL. p/tci/ios &PA-VUPC. AL lla J opp re S lp^'^iP M.BA /A/ RAak LCT- pfiip,. y^Tid. -fU CfrfV/k/6-. UoAL e (DP6p) r •• ■ ^ -•- " -,iv.rf.“^ -; ^ KO p«n or WA Hiu(27)M-^ (zap'^ OOIMN (26) if-«"') ' / / ” .y (i •.*' OVr LOT 4 (I) /% 4? ^■"’y .-*• liwIS Im a»M«Jii__i:» V*“ (73)« ' ?oo ------ . B N • f ^ 100 -___ ‘ R ; >..OJ_____1 1no P« ^si ?oo H •* (70) Am -4 1 N Bj f no 1 ^ » »J"fe 00(67) J lOl(l) -r.. 724.26 RES 91.06 RES •' * GOV I LOT 5 • I ) «< /- 399.67 RES GOVT LOT 5 ............. WM DATE 04/21/9S NEM^PIH COUHTY raOKRTY XmmATIQN SYSTEH PROPERTY ONNERS LISTBATCH 507 PROP AOOR ONNER HAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 58 07-117-25 44 0004 04075 HIGHMOOU RO R S PmCHNOH I S B PmCHKQN ROBERT S I SARAH B PROCKNON 4075 KXGHHOOO RO HOUND MN 55544 PROP Aom OMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR ^ I 58 07-117-25 44 04044 HIGHHOOO 0 L A R NELSON ALONZO B SERAN 111 4044 H16HN000 RO HOUND MN 55544 0012 RD PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 58 07-117-25 44 0015 04104 HIGHHOOO RO GEORGE N APPLEBAUH GEORGE APPLEBAUH 4104 HIGHHOOO RO HOUND HN 55544 % PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 58 07-117-25 44 0020 04147 HIGHHOOO RO MERLIN L HALVERSON MERLIN L HALVERSON 4175 HIGHHOOO RO HOUND MN 55544 f PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 58 07-117-25 44 04174 HIGHHOOO H B OEVAAN ALE 0 0 OEVAAN A J T 4174 HIGHHOOO RO HOUNO HN 55564 0024 RO OEVAAN THACKER PROP AOOR 58 07-117-25 44 0024 04148 HIGHHOOO RO 58 07-117-25 44 0010 04074 NIGHHOOD RD JOHN T SANBORN ETAL J T SANBORN 4074 NIGHHOOD RD HOUND HN 55544 58 07-117-25 44 0011 04101 NIGHHOOD RO EVA THEOBALD EVA A THEOBALD * 4101 HIGHHOOO HOUND MN 55544 58 07-117-25 44 0018 04144 NIGHHOOD RO LARRY H RARKEU LARRY N RARKELA 4144 NlCmOOO Rif HOUND HN 55544 58 07-117-25 44 0021 04175 NIGHHOOD RO MERLIN L HALVERSON rSRLIN L HALVEUQN 4175 HIGHHOOO RD HOUNO Ifl 55544 58 07-117-25 44 0027 04144 NIGHHOOD RO HAL OEVAAN HERBERT A LORETTA OEVAAN 17605 SUSAN DR MINNETONKA HN .55545 58 07-117-25 44 0050 04140 HIGHHOOO RO i I. ^ 4i- OHNER NAME JANET L EIOE J 0 CUSACK A C H GRACE TAXPAYER JANET L EIDE C GRACE A J CUSACK NAHE/ADDR 4140 HIGHHOOO RD 4140 HIGHHOOO RO V'. HOUNO MN 55364 MOUND m 55544 >, K •. 4 ■% -• - « •% • •V4 # • • f , •f I !. • », KRMT NO. ri45f<«0l PAM ItS8 07-U7-2S 0011 OOOtl NXGHNOQO Mt F L JOmsm « 0 L FOSS FREOCilC JOHNSON OOtl NIOMOOO m HOUNO MN ttSOO % /’f' V-5 ' JO 58 07-117-25 44 8014^ 04105 NIGHHOOD RO CHARLES E DA HART NILLIAH 0 BRICKLEY 4105 HIGHHOOO HOUND HN 55544 1 > 58 07-117-25 44 0019 04154 HIGNNDOO RD FRANCES N HILSQN JOHN F TESAR 4154 HIGHHOOO RD R 1 HOUND til 55544 ' i ‘J'W I ■ f’ 4 I• <•’ A ' • • J • .. #»I -i * *• • 4 f. Cf.. ' f * r** .* V*-’* >• ■ • • wv, > V. .n so 07-117-ZS 04 pots 041tS NXOMNOOO RO H A FXItCV t t J FINNEY HARK A SARA FXMCY . 41tS HX6HNOOO RO HOUNO HN BSS44 ' SO 07-117-XS 44 OOtO 04150 HXCHNOOO RO TONX 0 6RAN0STRAN0 TONX 0 CRANOSTRANO 4150 HI6HN0Q0 RO ORONO M4 55S44 •’S’V'r'- J ■>. 4 . . ^1* A.4 tV-.f » *. *: 58 07-117-25 44 0051 04152 HIGHHOOO ftO SCOTT 0 A CATHERINE ANDERSON SCOTT 0 A CATHERINE ANDERSON 4152 HIGHHOOO ROAD MOUND m 55544 .i*L* ^*1 «*. J < • i'n.'', 'M'.r * 4" /• • I ... V-* ^ » V ^ * '* • , a t .i! i ■ , , ’ • W»a* I'l , ** V ’. - t: i • % • * . 1 i ''‘1 f Vi*.RUN DAT! 04/21/f5MTCN 507PROP ADOR CNNCR NAME TAXPAYER HAHE/AODR PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP ADOR CWER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADOR OHNER NAME taxpayer NAHE/AODR PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR T.LWEPIH COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM, PROPERTY OMCRS LISTSO 07-117-25 44 0055 04100 HIGtOCOO RO DAD OAXTER DAVID C I OEBRA J OAXTER 4100 NIGNHOOO ROAD HOUND MN 55544 50 07-117-25 44 0054 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO JAMES M CLEARY JAMES CLEARY 4104 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND m 55544 50 07-117-25 44 0055 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK A RECREATIOtl 5/25/80 STATE DEED8164542 50 07-117-25 44 0054 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAT4D CITY OF ORONO PARK 4/X5/74 ST DEED 156755 50 07-117-25 44 0054 00050 ADDRESS UMSSIGNEO HErtlEPlN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK A RECREATION 5/25/86 STATE 0EEDA149542 50 07-117-25 44 0074 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGr4ED VZL OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 44 CRYSTAL DAY MN 55559 M 07-117-ZS 0037OOOSa AOORCSS UNASSIGNEO JAHES M CLEAKY JANES CLEARY A109 NORTH SHORE OR NOUNO NN 55SA4 *» 4 r 5« 07-117-23 AA OOBl 00038 AOORESS UNASSIGNEO JANES X TOUYE JUNE TOUVE 17216 RETERBORQ RO EDEN PRAIRIE ' S53A4 >: 38 07-117-23 44 0054 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO ,/ HENNEPIN FORPEITEO LAND CITY OF mCNO PARK a RECREATION ) 3/25/88 STATE DEE?81A4S42 ' • tt. ;i \ % 50 07-117-25 44 0057 T 00058 AOORESS UNASSIGNED STATE OF HIFfCSOTA STATE OF MINN y'*u \ * • • .*• 38 07-117-23 44 004£ 04056 NORTH SHORE OR NARUYN J RENO NARILYN J RENO 4056 NORTH SHORE OR NOUIO NN 55364 I i** • 0 38 07-117-23 44 0076 04051 HIGHHOOO RO E A V0N6RIES ET AL TRUSTEES ALEXANDER A EDITH VONGRlES 4051 HIGHHOOO RO NOUNO NN 55364 ,^E J •JU • w t • ■ REPORT NO. PAGE : k J’PZ45I401 I • V M ••»#;* ' ■ .4-.<38 07-117-23 44 0038 04104 NORTH SHORE OR JANES N. CLEARY JANES CLEARY 4104 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND M4 55364 f • *.. < •J* • "i . 38 07-117-23 44 0052 04140 NORTH SHORE DR RANDY H AL8RECHT RANDY AL8RECHT 4140 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND HN 5SS64 a • . . I • . .,•1 •\, ; •T \. 50 07-117-15 44 OOIi 00050 ADDRESS UHASUIQNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK A RECREATION 5/21/00 STATE DEED 0144541 • •... . K . ^ A» , / ' • . • I * *i. a » • .; v i’H*• V; 5 . *• ) . 50 07-117-25 44 0050 00050 ADDRESS UN/^IGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PARK 10/17/00 ST.DEED 1541401 K)V '•/••-..j-v \\ W ■*—** ■' t i • f Sa 07-117-23 44 0063 04044 NORTH SNORE OR GREGORY N PRICE GREGORY N PRICE 4040 NORTH SHORE OR NAYZATA rt« 55341 . , . V I . 38 07-117-23 44 0077 04041 NORTH SHORE DR D 5 S NCCUROY DALE J NCCUROY 4041 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND m S5364 • .t* • • • •.•.•'■-‘'■‘i n't ♦ * • 8^ • ♦k':-’v*ir- .A- ■ .•' V, '♦ . J- ■ ■ 5'^r i * •. I *• V> r i nUN DATE OA/El/M BATCH 607 HEftCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY ZNFORHAnON SYSTEH A. *•V:PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR Sa 07-117-2S 44 0083 01535 HIGHHOOO LA ERICK G A LAURIE ERICK 6 A LAURIE 1535 HIGHHOOO LA HOUND MN 553A4 S CELMS S CELMS 36 07-117-23 44 0084 04104 HIGHNOOO RD GLEN A 6EVERLY SAUER GLEN A BEVERLY SAUER 4104 HIGHNOOO RO MOUND NN 55344 PROPERTY ONNERS LIST REPORT NO. PX43546I PAGE a38 07-117-23 44 0084 04125 HIGHNOOO RO JOHN N A mOERTA J HENRICH JOHN N A ROBERTA J HENRICH 4125 HIGHHOOO RO ORGNO MN 55344 38 07-117-23 44 0085 04044 NORTH SHORE DR DAVDX H JONES DAVXO N JONES 4044 NORTH SHORE OR * HOUND MN 55344 ■ ^ 38 07-117-23 44 0087 04114 HIGHHOOO RO PHILLIP M OTTO PHILLIP OTTO 14050 STRATFORD RD 8204 MINNETONKA MN 55345 TOTAL BATCH 507 00041 i » . *4 .•I ■ r "A V If f . A I • • "f- I (• f I ^ i- t t'V • • ■J-tf r I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST ‘•i V* \ A r'-f ^ ‘ft i • ' *. »•> .“'t • ■ *« • k F •J *. /^ ’ * V.t4! iK ^ f •i-> J k" • .. *4*9:■iw;* \•• t - ^•: :l''* V ** «* * t •.•'» A*'' . = u. *•1 * • . J '-M . V •• * \ •• ’-t. ■ •■ *, 1 . • »V*v' ‘. * l-i * ; •, ■ ^' t 9 . 1 r i : • i ? F V V I »« T • V 'Vf ' •V • • *. * i I ' * ‘.if '* V♦ ••V-.; y ;• ' , V • j? ■ •'Vl-'i •f.I •V '■tv • I. •* r.I * «fV * • • > ^ vf , ■ *. ^• I •>*; ■ .*:%*• ’ • ' F ‘l- . •' -.V i-." ••• ' * V j * • - * . % V • • - n .< ^ ^ \ f-^,~'^j'^' CoTKLjZ/^fjLC^'l Ci^'/6->^A'- ^d/iA dr>y^}:U. * "•ym 1 .. -. ir^yJV >Lf . / • -> !• Sy^F^ n/ — T^T L'1-F£ L>i FFf I ...vJ ^ 7~£) 5££ 4-^Cu^'.-^ -/^£ ^ ^ ■ /' N ^ ^ ., ,/ —7-y - /^y^A-V LF Ftlt /rLLCl^'USbCf V€^ ivA^U. ^^ ^. . . / ^r> A .• X A / A-a! O DCf VFl^'^y ' ^'--------------- _ fO FiiF^I .at^ c L'C/\^ (D /K~aJ D /'f^F'U^ C: iLl" rCF. i' I'/T /:! u OF^ ^ / ( T it FFi ^ ^ ' \;ArA^ir. co^CL ; V r-vA^ 3-^2 A-C.C 7 -----------------J:pp,-CLC<-r r-o V^'-r^ Aprcuisr^ <r^-*e'rc^ /W _ ivt fflcr’ose^ TO A'S ON w £'isr ft^e- Tl.pp^.fK~T> AfDuct.- ' 1 I pCSSuSLi- nwi TnP PAODCN^SN T6 j Te r r«i 1 rr- ■ «t ^r t ■ TV \ •««»<<.' «Mit^atA % •% * \. • ✓ -V \ I. • • 'X • ^ /'/ . •• 0/i /- •/ •"; • •; >\« V 1 NSTALLATION & esign manual ’• 4 HOCHUtOOO Ooddic The one-piece easy to use system T>“ T A " V 7 L u > • > ^I PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS PART 1 GENERAL 1.1 CONTRACTORS RESPCNSiltUTICS A. Worn inciLKles fjrnistiir.g and irstalHng mcduiar fc^ccK retair4fig wall w«ts to tf;# iir.es a.-d {.'■aces ces grea on the constojcticn drawings and as spec;f;e<J rero.n B. Work incudes precanng foundation sc;l. leve^-rs pad. unit fKl, and hackfill to the lines and grades designated on the construction drawings. C> Furnishing and Instaiiirtg at] related ntateriA's required for construction of the fetdln.ng well as shown on tfie constrjcton drawings. 1.2 .PPLICABLe SECTIONS OF RELATED WORK A. Section; Geogrid Specificatvns 1.3 REFERENCE STANDARDS A. American Socety for Testing and Materials (ASTM) ASTM C.90‘90 Ho!!ow Load-Bearing Masonry Units ASTM C-140-75 Sampilng and Testing Concrete Masonry Units ASTM C-1 45-85 Sa'id Load-Beartng Concrete Masonry Units 1.4 DELIVERY, STORAGE. AND HANDLING A. Contractor shad check the materials upon delivery to assure that proper material has been received. B. Contractor shall prevent excessive mud. wet cement, epoxy, and like materiala which may affix themselves, from coming in contact with the materials. C. Contractor shall protect the materials from damage. Damaged material shall rot be incorporated into me retaining wall system. Damaged units shall be eva.>uated for usage in the wan according to ASTM: C-90-75 (1981 Rev.) 1.9 DEFINITIONS A. Concrete retaining wall units are as detailed cn the drawings and are specified under Section; Modu'ar Retaining Wall Units. B. Base Material • the leveling pad which can consist of sand, gravel or unreinforced concrete. Base Material design depends upon soil conditions at the site. C. Unit f‘<l • a free draining granular material used within and around the concrete units and 12 ’ behind the wa.1. 0. Reinforced fill * the soil which is used as fill behind the wail units and within the reinforced soil mass if applicable. E. Backfill - compacted original situ or In situ soil located behind the .-elnfcic^d soil mass. 1.8 SUBMITTALS A. Samples cf aH products used in th.s secten B. Latest edit^cn of manufacturers specifications on prcocsed material, method of instalation and yst of mate.'ial prepesad fer use. 1.7 QU4UTY ASSURANCE A. Soil testing end inspection se.'vice for quality ccrtrol testing during earth work operafions wil be supniied by the owner. PART 2 ROCKWOOO CUSSIC WALL SYSTEM 2.1 MATERIALS A. Cono’ete Units 1. Concrete wa'I units shaH have a minimum 28 day compressive strength of 3000 psi (a) m accordance with ASTM C*140-90. The concrete shall have adequate froeze/thaw protection with maximum water absorption requirements in accordance with C-1 40-90. 2. Exterior dimensions may vary in accordance with ASTM C-90-85. Units ere required to have one square foot of face area each. 3. Retaining wa9 um'ta SheB provide a minimum of 100 pounds per equare foot of wan face area. 4. Exterior face shal be textured. 5. Units shall be positively interlocked. 1. The units have an Anchor Bar In the middle of the unit on the bottom side. (Figure 1) The Anchor Bar positively locks into the two units below. (Figure 2) b. The unit has NO pine. The ANCHOR BAR System le much stronger in shear then a pin system. The ANCHOR BAR creates an eutomatio setback of % inch per course. (Figure 3i (Figure 3) Anchor bar Classic unit Figure 1 • Anchor bar location. . i •» i 1 ^ ^V W * W w w %• • I I i . m m mm W«* 0 Unit n^crTT’ar'.on: a. ^'ei9 ‘“.t: €0 ibs. (acrrcx.) b. Face anea; ’<4 aqua'# foct c. Unit size; 6*H. la-^V. 12*0 C. Cdors; 1. Factory ccic's 2. CListcn colors: Special Order ». Face Patterns: 1. Beveled spit face 2. Strai^.t sent face Figure 2 • Upper unite ‘lock" into lower units. V setback wtin ar>cnor bar system c.- •S ’.11 f . I j * I V—? Rgure 3 * Anchor bar system creates an automatie W setback per course of unita. ,* .*1.. . J • • • • ^ •. I ‘ 7. Units have angled sides capable of concave radius of 3.5 ft end convex radius of 2.5 ft B. Coneratf Cap Units 1. One type of cap for straight wails and Insida and outside curves. 2. Cap Unit Information: a. Weight: 45 Ibs. (approx.) b. Face area: V) sg. ft. c. Unit size: 4*H. 18*W, 12'D d. Colors: 1. Factory colors 2. Custom Coiors: Specisl orders a. Face Patterns: 1. Beveled split face 2. Straight split fact 3. Qependtrig on the project. Other capping aiternativea may be available. Discuaa the options v^th your dealer. C. Acceptable Material 1. ROCKWOOD CLASSIC Wall System PART 3 EXCAVATION 3.1 FOUNDATION INSTALLATION A Contractor shall excavate to the lines and grades shown on the construction drawings. Over-excavation L wv sna;i rot &e caiO fcr a “d rec ace~ent ai*J^ ccr'pac'.fid fi arfl/cr Vk-a.1 systerr. ccmocr#rts w‘fl £♦ requires at ccr.tractcr experse. Cont'ac:cr sra.i caretj rc; tc Cisturp •.Ttankment nra:er,a;$ Cevcro ;,nes sncrAn. B. pQURdation Sott Preparation 1. Fcunpat 5n sc!i snail t# excavated as required fo' 'ooting s;mensicr$ shcv.n cn ina ccrsrucrcn C'ff.vrgs, cr as e rected £y Te £rg “cer. 2. Peurdaten $c.l snail be examined by ina Er^g'ieer to assu'e tnat tna actual fcurdaticn seJ strenqtn meets cr exceeds assumed cesi^'t strer*stn Sd s not meeting required strengtn sraii ce rem.ovsd and replaced with acceptable material. 3. Over-excavated areas snail te Mied wth co-pactec cacxf I! ratenal. C. Base Footing 1. Foot.rg snail be oldCed as shdAn cn ihe ccnstpjction drawings w.th a .Tin.‘mum thickness of 9 Irenes. 2. Fcicting materials sha.l be insta'ied upon undisturbed native so.is. 3. Material snail be compacted so as to provide a le'-ei hard surface on which to place tre first course of units. Compaeden wJi be with mecnarucaj plate compacters to 95 percent of standa.'c proctor. 4. Footing snail be prepared to insure cor-piete contact of retaining wall unit with base. Gaos shad net be allowed. 5. Footing meterlals shall be to the depths end widths shewn. Contractor may opt for usir.g reduced depth of sands ar.d gravel and use 1* to 2* corc.'ete topping Conaete Shan be lean and unreinforced. D. Base Material t. .Mater al for footing shall consist of compacted sands, gravel and/or concrete as shewn on tne COnSTJCton drawings. A minimum of 6 inches of compacted base is required. 2. Sieve Size Percent Passing 1* ICO No. 4 .. .....................................................35*80 No. 11 . .................. 20*65 No. 40.........................................................10*35 No. 200 ..................................................... 0-10 E. Unit Fill 1. Fill for units shall be free draining crusned store cr caurse gravel, W to Gradation, of the fill snail be approved by the Engineer. a. Sieve Size Percent Passing r ................................................. 75*100 r .....................................................35*100 No. 4 10-40 No. 10 ............................................... 5*25 No. 40 ...................................................... 10 No. 200 ...........................................................8 2. Pta.*ficH IS ret reccrame.ne4cl 3. A rmomum cf 12 irc-es of un4 fia must extend behind the wall. F. Rehforced Fill 1. Mate'ial snail be nat.ve mete.'ial unless othenivse sb8C.fied in the drawings. Unsuitable soils fer backfill shall rot be used witn.n the remfcrceo soil mais A-en us ng jeog.'id for reunfcrcement. 2. VVhi-e additic.ral fill Is required, contractor shall s-bmit semcies and sbecifications to the Engineer to cete.mn.'ne if accectabie. G. Backfill 1. Ccmpacted or in sibj soil located benind the reinforced scii mass. 3.2 PeTA,NING WALL INSTALLATION A. Unit Installation 1. .^irst cou.'^e of concrett waa lu'ts Shan be placed cn the focti.ng. The units shall be checked for level and ai.gnment. The first course is the most important to vvsure accurate and acceptable resuits. 2. Insure that units are in full ccntaci with base. 3. Un.ts a'e placed side by side so they are touching for full length of wall alignment. Alignment may be Cone by means of a string lira or offset from base line Proper care shall be taken to develop straight lines and smooth curvea on base course as per wa'I layout. (Figure 6) 4. The units should be checked for level aide to side and front to back. (Figure 6) Figure 6 • First course placement 1$ crucial. 5. All cavities arcund each unit and 12* behind an units. Shall be filled with 'unit fOT and compacted. Check again for level and alignmenL Sweep all excess material from top of units and Install next course. (Figure 7) J J A pESIGN #1 For usQ wh^n BrcB behind wbII is level with no losd —S' iV r \ NOTES ' FAC'ORCFSAftT'r'Fa^SJD- SG ’ S : »ACTGH CF SAFE*’' foa Cvea-n.BS NG 2 3 3 G..CBAI. S’ABwrv -AS •vC" B£ES C-ECHEG * rO'.-Z'N A»»V.CA8l-l »»CV!. E'CNS OF SPECiFiCA'.CNS FCa "Kt PaCPEB “.STALLA- TCS CP P’’-5 POC f'.vCCO C'wASS.C RE ’a s sg wal - S>'STE*A A‘;D CEOOa 3 5 AaC'.VASLE BEA.a.SG PftES- Sk -pb . 3c::psf e. CCWPACT ON 95*» STA.SCAPO PBCCTOP 7. WA 1 FT CPA.NAGC »’U- 6E'<'NO wall • PP.OVCE LATERAL CPATiACt 8. FOLLOW APPUCABLf BU'LC- :N9 COOES 10. WEIGHT CP SOIL • *23 ^CF Excavated area Geogrid lavers 6' rr n mum base material for foundation LEGEND CCVFACTEC 3AC’<*'LL |PEiNFQPCE0 F UN T ATV. G.PiO long T6RM allowable DES ON STPENOTM rvp£lb pep foot A 500 a 1200 I c 2200 1 to*al •exposed WALL I WALL MEGhT HE.GhT DtP^BELOW GHACB TOTAL # OF type OF length ! OF OUPSES CfOGP O!GECGP’0 c,sT«9!?.?5'PcIfe»S.^c!l'®S;« -» tctal GEOGPiD LAYERS tXPC^PO WALL HE oHT DFPTH esLcr^ GRADS TCTAw 0 CF COJRSSS GSCGHiD length QECGR D 1 cisTANcf ??F§o*M*FOu^bmS^^Vl^iI^« P*o -.OTAU OSCGPiO LAYEflS EXPOSED WALL height DEPTH ee.c-w gpace CCU'PSES OECOPiD length OF CEOGPIO C!STANi=?PF§OM'®UN^S^*R SvBUNO PAD TOTAL GeCGAiO layers c M • w « «« i •\m4 t 5. Lay u? eacn ccursa maK.'ng $yr« t^at the ANC h CR BAR cf re unit is ciaces against re tacKsica c( r» faces of r# creceSing course. Pcsiticn ;co ur.t ha'-hvay on r« two urits ta ’c.v. Pul unit fcrv-Ts-c as far as cjossSie. Again t;n an cavities w;tr» 'unit (iH* ar.d compact. Unit fill shcj'd be used 12 Inches Ceeo tjehind the units. (Fgura 8) Pusn tco -jnts as far fonva'd as poss'C'e ♦ ♦ 1 8t cCwfSe 2r,{j cours# i Ancr.at ftjrAnchor Par placed agai.'ist the been faces of precedl-ng course Center toe un.t over fAfl lower units Figure 8 • Additional courses. 7. For a vericai wan or a sharp concave curve, chip outer end of backside of face unit. Chip between two score marks provided. The depth of the chip wHl determine the change in the setback. (Fgure 9) Score mam Figure 9 « Chipping units. 0. Where the wall changes e'evatlcn. units can be stepped with grade or turned Into the embankment. Provide compacted base foofng in area of convex return end. (Fgure 10) . . i« • 1 TLfn#d Vito f^^arterr^ot tuna .Srep:^ g*act *■ *. - 9^ ---^1:21 -5 • -I Figure 10 • Elevation cha.ngc along teail run. 8. Geogn'd 1 . If geogrid is to be Installed as a reinforcement, fciicw the additional reqiarementa of Sect Oeegrid Specificatior^. C. Cap Installation (Figure 11) 1. Place CLASSIC caps halfway on the two units below. The cap can be set back, have a 0* set- bi'‘k, or you can move the cap forward 1* to 2* to givv the wan a ledge look. 2. Provide the cap with permanent connection to wall units with corsthjctlon adhesive. Apply adhesive to top surface of units below cap and place cap unit into position. BackfW and cornpaol to finlah grade. Figure 11 > Capping the wall. PART 4 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT 4.1 MEASUREMENT A, Measurement of retaining wall is on a square foot basis computed on the total area of wad shown ori the construction drawings. Area Is taken from the footing to the top of wan, times the appllcabte length of sectioo. 4.2 PAYMENT A. Payme.nt for the wa3 will be made on a square foot basis at the contract unit price bid. B. Payment Shan be considered full compensation for alt latxx, materials, and equipment to instaB units, drainage fill. backfIN, footings, and dean up. 1 /o CITY of ORONO k m,RESOLUTION OF 'ni^CJTY COLTiCDL NO. A RESOLUTION GR/\NTING VARIANCES TO ML^ICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE NO. 1920 WHEREAS, Phillip M. Otto (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 41 16 Highwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the City ) an legally described as tollovvs: w ^ refer to Exhibit A. attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10,25, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the will be placed 14' from the street lot line where a 35 setback is required and ^ side lot Une where a 10' setback is required on a property that measures 80 m width **'er w^tJi L required and where the area of the lot is 16.888 s.f. where 43.560 s,f. is required. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1.This application was reviewed as Zoning File ^1920. 2.mTuiring one a«lT«.56o"’sT.^fn !ifea^^t°p'opLy consists of 16.888 s.f. or .39 acres. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 18 1 W and recommended unanimous approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A. The property is served with sewer. Page 1 of 4 1 ( r CITY of ORONO RESOLLTIOiN OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO S4 3 1 4. 5. B. C. A residence had existed on the property for over 40 years until it was destroyed in a fire in 1989. The size and width of the lot is consistent with other properties within the Highwood Road neighborhood. D. The original residence was located 13’ from the street lot line and 3’ from the w’cst side lot line. E.The new principal structure will be located 23’ from the street lot line and a deck 14’ from the street lot line and 3’ from the west side lot line. The Citv Council finds tha' the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district, »hat I granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a new residence requiring a lot area variance of 26,6*^2 s.f. or 61%, a ot width variance of 60' or 43%, a street setback variance of 21’ or 60% and a side setback variance of 7 ’ or 70%, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 4 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITl' COU'NCIL NO. 8 4 31 ____ 1.Lots 39 and 43. Highwood Lake Minneionka shall be legally combined prior to the City issuing a building permit for the new consmicticn. \DDlicant to provide detaUed grading and drainage plans with application for buiidina F'niui to ensure drainage follows existing panem and to address stabilization of all disturbed higher elevations within street >atd. 3. 4. Ail improvements of this property shall be limited to 30f. hardcover. Authorities »tanted bv this resolution run with the property not with the apphe^ butTe permissive onlv and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 23, 1995). Vinlation Of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically [eminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees ><> ^ “r«ofution Sd on behalf of himself, his hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution m the Cham of Tide ot property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of May. 1994. lin. City Clerk Edvi^rd J. Callaha Property fawner (s) Page 3 of 4 1 i CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITi' COUNCIL NO. SAAl------- STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )on tliis 9th day of May 1994 by Edward J. Ca.lahan, instrument was executed on behalf of the Orono, a Minnesota muiuctpa! corporation ana saio Cit>’. CAROLE A. HASE»^ MOT/MV PUKXi Mti<tSOT» hemhewn coukiy MV Notary Public state of MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )h ----. before me a Notary Public within On this day ot------u ................................................ and for said county. personally ^ toregomg msLimnent.and sz's « “<s" “ “ <“> “ " CAROLE A. HASEMAN NOT/MV rUMJC-MtMCSOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY MV CCMUiSSON EXPWC9 MM* G not .-\ry public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On thi day of ^ 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said c^unry. personaUy t ^ *no executed the foregoing instrument.and known to me to be the persons) described tn and ^ Xowledg Jd that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. notary public Page 4 of 4 r—i B431 Exhibit A That part of Lot 38. Highwood, Lake Minnetonka, described as follows: Commencing at the Northeasterly corner of said Lot; thence SouthwesterIy along the SoutheastcrIy line of said lot a distdtice of 98 feet to the point of beginning o. the property Deing described; thence deflecting right 69 deyrees a distance of 6.2 teet; thence deflecting left 90 degrees,to said SouthedsterIy Ji':e; thence Northeasterly to the point of beginning, accordi/ig to the plot thereof on file or of record in the office of tne Registrar of Titles in diio for Sdi«1 County. That part Of Lot 40. Hignwood. Lake Minnetonka, lying SouLhwester Iy of the line drawn from a point on the North­ westerly line of said lot. distant 22 feet Northeasterly from the Southwest corner of said lot, to a point on the most Southeaster Iy line of said lot, distant 12 reet North­ easterly from said Southwest corner, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in dntl for said County. ALSO , , Lot 39. Highwood. Lake Minnetonka, according to the plat thereof on rile or of record in the office or the Registrar of Titles in and for said County. ALSO Lot 43. Highwood Lake Minnetonka. ► ^ I Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik& |\J| Associates Engineers & Architects .? t-.' ' W‘ \ “ r>: r cr^ iauA C>pcj'r:^r :v C tc .»• tf r* 'o I ‘ ;iene 'S ‘ ' '5 —* i »nfr-3 P£ • ». rr A ■*£ '■'.we*! ^ '**e**e > ®£ *'J A - . v‘ - if * 6 Vre' *€ :-n7 “E f 't T.^ce'f Q ic^uT c»“ “E *.♦ tLe- r C ’ A • ^c'* cit ^ July 7, 1995 C IcsKot^ *E ^coe^: C "-ur^e* a . a yef'v A Sc.i'j.::n f»£ M.4'« a H«i»rv, *r r£ V '"e ” ’’.•ur'T^'rn PE Tea A t r-j r.£ .? Af'Oe'ior. At.A C j C B jfo.vat PE A S;*»0 *E “ : ; ^i!r»*ccfc '’E .T.^e) V4i»T re; •‘'E ^ ■£ C i.''rn ?£ .,**re5 7 VA:-<fH3 PE ,'r". C ^E :. •; . ; **"r» : ^er»nem P Ar.ae'son j v.*'fc R .tc T- •’E V^rfc A Se 0 P£ Gi^ry A’ Vt?' er» P£ J Cjrr jn A f A C'f^n-ei J Eager ron P£ A R«c» Strm;at. P£ p*^ii»o ; Cc»».veu PE *A.vt O s p£ ’.* es 9 'er.en P£ . p^'.ii^o O'Avet. PE ^ .»*en L ' V e'*»eri PE G.*fv D .-£ 0? ivV» K G,\;e Ae R yQC ®E D -u.: .»5 j g ‘.'r-:>! -E Cec.iio 0 *vre'. PE Q ►^eue' PS jc-rn P GcuTe'. P£ D.*n C SC)um •"£ -‘e^f'ey .* Er?ef rqer >3sepn R She n P£ lee M -Mann. »£ A E'.ckion Lee M P.'Ae'sny H,v..»n V C.ion Agr»e! V S»ng Jerries F £'*ge*r »*ar f/<r n ^'r Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Otto Residence File No. 139-2041 Dear Jeanne, We have inspected the retaining wall and grading done at 4116 Highwood Road on the property owned by Phillip Otto. The grading has not been completed and presently has slopes that are too steep. An updated grading plan should be submitted showing how the grading will be completed with slopes no greater than 3 to 1. Any slopes greater than 3 to 1 would require approved slope stabilization or retaining walls. The grading should not extend into the adjacent lot unless written permission is obtained. Gutters and downspouts should be installed to control drainage within the property. The Public Works Director should review the double access onto Highwood Road. Retaining wall specifications should be provided for our review. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 I ./I -ft j •' ■ > it!y' i • '■■■ ■■ :P" •’M'A'liji’m •j. .^ 1 m *1 riZQaaEajiit.^wt/ifep RU UT EUmiOtt i *. f V • •• fi.'rifri.i..— . .'i4 . —.1’ •■ fxm . • .'i “ 'j ;:■ f. - .•■fc*".»i c. ..J-. r»;. zTlka A^.. 1 Bead uo. IS . \.V-6^'- ” „♦ to'- I t" vrl«ie»'-'"’r>. •' , to''”''; W^Vof ’*JJ-Vi vr\viv.“. *rv.‘“' in <»"*^ _, i.ot V.n.n * \.ot *0„. rA-'^ U•- wo-*^ , iy or ,tto^'' r vv ^*.4 IP or ^ «<»^''“ot '>'* -^v. 3 ’- rr- ”■' i.-'";\<"''»’« *■"* ’“' “.UV 3 to'. ^ bor^'^^ ro'j^*r^^ \”U.'»«" ':', «r C" • ml*onto"'-, vroo <«»’ n • w Bcur".''^ C,.>f'*f To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. Cit>- Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator July 7, 1995 #2035 Mike Hilbelink, 2760 Watertown Road - Subdivision/Sketch Plan Review Zoning District: RR-IB. Single Family Rural Residential Total area = 9.5 acres Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 11.10, Subdivisions 6, 7 and 8. 2. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - RR-IB lot standards. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant ’s Addendum C-1-2 Location Maps D - Sketch Plan E - Preliminary Comments of On-Site Septic Consultant/S-P Testing, Inc. F - Deed/Legal Description of Property G - Gustafson Report 7/7/95 H - Wetlands Map 1 - Topographic Map J - Gaffron Sketch of Septic Locations Description of Application Applicant proposes a four lot subdivision of the Rosch property located at the northeast quadrant of the intersections of Watertown Road and Old Crystal Bay Road. The existing farm house and outer buildings will be removed. The fa*m has not been occupied for the past few years. The property is being offered for sale by the Rosch family. The subdivision consists of four lots of 2-1- acres. Refer to Exhibit D, Lots 1. 2 and 3 will be served bv a private road and cul-de-sac and Lot 4 by the existing driveway that served the former residence off Watertown Road. A preliminary site evaluation by the on-site septic consultant confirms that there will be suitable area to support five-bedroom mound systems. The report also notes that the areas shown on Exhibit J are the only suitable sites on the property, based on topographic limitations and elevation of seasonal water table. The City’s bike ^il will be installed along the west boundary of the property adjacent to Old Crystal Bay Road, ^e trail will be located out of the road right-of-way. It is not clear from the current information Zoning File #2035 Julv 7’ 1995 Paee 2 as to where the trail will be finally placed. There are specific topographic limitations along the northern portions of this property and approximately 300 lineal feet of plantings are located at the northwest comer. This subdivision is reviewed in more detail below. Lot Configurations All lots will meet the two acre dry contiguous minimum lot size. Review Exhibit H. there are no designated wetlands. Applicant will be responsible for having the property reviewed by a soils analyst to determine if Type 1 and 2 wetlands exist. As in our earliei subdivision reviews, it is not the policy of the City to exclude Type 1 and 2 wetlands from the dry contiguous area of a property. The City will only require special covenants to be filed on the Chain of Title alerting future property owners of their existence and the need to comply with both Federal and State regulations. Each lot meets the required width to the rear of the 50’ street setback. Septic Gaffron has reviewed the preliminary septic information and notes that the drainfield sites on Lots 1. 2 and 3 would appear to meet the required standards of the septic code but notes septic sites on Lots 1 and 3 along the west boundary may be impacted by a future bike trail. Prior to filing the preliminary plat, it will be necessary to determine the exact location of the trail and make any necessary alteration in the sighting of septic drainfields. It is preferred that septic sites be located at least 20’ from the trail. Septic sites on Lot 4 may not be feasible as shown because of the lack of area needed to support two 5-bedroom mound systems. Gaffron suggests that in reviewing the topographic map that there may be suitable area at the northeast comer of Lot 4 for a second site but this would involve the loss of trees. Praina2e Staff is very aware of drainage problems along the north side of Watertown Road to the west of Golden View. This historic drainage problem will have to be addressed with the proposed four lot subdivision. Access During the review of the Golden View subdivision, the issue of extending access from Golden View Drive to the 9^h acre parcel to the west was discussed. It was determined by the City at that time that only a fumre extension would be taken to the north and that accep for this 9*/i acre parcel would be resolved with the future division. Revirw Exhibit B, applicant asks Zoning File #2035 July 7, 1995 Page 3 that the City allow Lot 4 to continue to be ser\ed by an existing driveway off Watertown Road and that all new development be scrv ’ed by a private road with cul-de-sac. The applicant s sketch shows a 120’ diameter cul-de-sac with 60 wide road. The current code only rec^uires a 100’ diameter cul-de-sac and 50 ’ wide road. Applicant's addendum notes the following reasons for seeking the current proposed access plan: 1. Desire to preserve the only stand of trees along the east lot line which would be lost if internal road was to be designated along the east lot line. Steeper topographies requiring major cuts causing greater disturbance of existing area. 3.Need to retain septic sites on east side within Lots 1, 2 and 4 because of the topographv and the only availability of suitable soils for on-site septic treatment. 4.The existing drive has served the former residence for many years without any report of accidents. Review Exhibit G, the Engineer notes no problems with the proposed location of the private road meeting the sighting distance of a 40 m.p.h. roadway and approves the existing access to continue serving a residence on Lot 4. Planning Commission Action There is no formal action required of the Planning Commission. Members are merely asked to provide applicant with conceptual direction prior to applicant preparing the formal preliminary plan. Staff will list the following issues that should be addressed: 1.Access plan. This access plan is similar to the access plan approved for the James Bruce three lot subdivision. Members may remember that two of the lots were to be served by the private road and the existing access that served a former residence would continue to serve the new lot. Do members feel this access plan is consistent with previous recommendations of the Planning Commission? 2.Possible need to relocate septic sites on Lots 1 and 3 because of bike trail alignment. 3.Need to address historic drainage problem at south lot line along Watertown Road. Grading and drainage plans should address this issue. J o .n o CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIMSION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site address ^ 74? ^ P^L'^dLuil^uon Hi OOp_. Please check one - Property _4__ abstract or-------torrens. Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name /7^/ir/JilSC lyf^ -Address _______ City ^ ) R.Qf^O /n Phone (.home) Zip$^J£5^Phone (work, S1L3^ OWNER (if different, than applicant) Name yj)SgPH ------jr ^rlrlr-T ~ri^e K /h.< S.Phone (home) ’S^fj City f?ic H -ft Zip iTVll^hone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size / 5^Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present use (check) y jT X _ Residential; no. of umts ~ Other (specify)______ f Present Zoning District ~EM.CITY if QROs'O Hf^YiNCE OFFICE PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites £____E.xisting Units ___New Units Total Units i3502iyj000 ni rCJJ\/x cut?rum* v 200.OC -nA Number of Building Sites C V'V • virv'rro*?'.-7 uax /a * vnu»Tu LLii I 11 <niVA I vu U 7^:04 An rnni O^j *i/Wl IWA »v/* nA /Ov Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per Acres Aute. Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land ^ Residential Other (specify)_________ .a -h'' it of Finance material reqlt ^h 1. Payment of fees (reier to acphcatton f^-s 2. Completed application form. Sur.ey. . r^_ Henncoin Councv Denartmeni3. Preliminary plat mformanoQ on -o* (you must obtain this list from He.m . $"rcS:c?^r32n‘) 7!^'^ .««« m. d p.nons you wUh uciHod of .his spplicsiioh.5. AS an addendum to this application, please attach a se? ________ ------------------------------------------ Zoning Official ’s Signature _____---------------------------- ynM>a^i >uTEf^ 1. Payment or rets (reier to ?... ^ ^ ^Pavccnt 01 rets ucicr lu ——. . Sighed C=r.i.-c=.e of Sur.e;, or =ylsr cop.es o. .otnsi p.- ,, Title opinion. ,. Easements, covenants, etc. i. Developers Agreement and Utter ot C..-t. foning Official's Signature Date ------------------- ■! —---------------------- ^u^if rxi those which apply)^opLIC.^TIOV FFES (Zoning .Administrator to c-eck [X] tn *"sre"VlX (Cess I. I. dc ■>" f OO.M SubdivisioD of e Lot Line^ReerTMge--“t^^J^ ^ ___^ Subdivision Application (Class 1 ^ S25.00/lot (Class HI & all non-residential) -------- Preliminary Subdivision Applic^ • -------- Final Plat Application (Class HI) Sl/5.00 Legal Review and Filing; ^ -------- Subdivision only S75.00 S2CO.OO Subdivision w/easemeats and cove^w nuu . _ n^r Section Totals Subdivision wfcuatuev----------- P^riTFees (to be determined per Section 11.6^ - Legal and Engineering Review Fees jjjq .OO (No change from original applica Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision pp A_oi:cation S150.00 (No change from ongmal w. p Reocal of Ctess 111. SIOO.OO (No cheugo from origihel eppUceuon) ---------- Renewal of Class l anu n ............... 7.. • A„nlirntioa S150.0U (ISO cnangc — d fS cts 5100.00 (NO cheugo from origihel eppUceuoh) '-50 - 5 — — — & s'eSSr” of 535fm.h _ = Sys°.™ S "Oh eppliceuooe, -------- — —— <50 .00/new lot proposed for on-site x----- C. Flexible AppHcaUon Fees/Misc. Fees ^ Z J___ Variance S200.00 Subdivision S75.00 ----------—ss^sr.iS.~*. »•»— «* e„ jplicani ’s Signature Bvner’s ^ K.f«r. ,he Plan PI-ningCo.^r“Citv om^25 days before the Planning Commission the Planni^ mn^ston t^^visc the Buildmg & Zoning Office of this change pm .aw H —--------fcr prior to the meeting. /; LV . t' I . \JT Mike Hilbelink 85 Golden View Drive Orono, MN. 55356 Re; Development of Joe Rosch property Dear Members of the Planning Commission; 1 would like for you to consider the following items when reviewing this site for development and road location. 1. The available sites for the septic fields arc very limited as indicated in the letter dated November 10,1994 and revised June 20,1995 by S-P Testing . The sites located along the eastern border have little if any flexibility because of the elevations and drainage. A proposed road along this area would destroy the available area needed to provide the septic fields for the 4 proposed lots. 2. Much of the natural beauty of the land is in the row of trees that run along the east border of this property. We would like to keep this area in its natural state as much as possible with the exception of possible septic sites and potential house location. 3. The existing drive way has been there for years and appears to meet the required site line distance, so we would ask to continue its use to access one of the four proposed lots. I hope you will consider these items and propose an accosts) that will minimally impact the existing trees and potential septic site locations. Thank you for your time. Respectfully, an mm tamKi •BiRia mmm nsmnt m $1/2 $SC. S3 7.11§ S.2S i ‘ . :jt/\jcrr TO SClA<Vi^- 41 f?. I Q K11 O •*JMO± * 3- O' I eNo±\'^ ^■sne: \\\ VA V4ou<^ / \ ^ • / 1i Wcu«<r • i j rO l'' I gous-c. 'suClL /I k ' J • ’ f 3f^3i f-hCbHT ♦ m* JUi i ! 3 I © Pera XSoil I 9 Bene Note: 1 th( Ch Che S-P TESTING, INC.Steven B. Schirmers — MPCA Cen No 627 951 Katydid Lane NE • St Michael, MN 55376 • (612) 497*3566 November 10, 1994 Mike Hillbelink Joe Rosch Property 2760 Watertown Rd. Orono, Henn. Co., MN N, HU*' h Preliminary Site Evaluation was completed on this proposed Sub' Division for On-Site Sewaqe Treatment Syst*^ma. )5Qil Probinq indicates the soils are suitable for Standard Pressurised Mound Systems. Mottled soils (seasonally saturated) were found at IR" to 30" below the ground surface. The Site Plan attached shows possible septic areas & house locations. To support areas for 5 bedroom homes required by the City of Orono, 50’ x 100* is needed for the primary site & 50' x 100' is needed for the future expansion site. There is some flexibility in the locations identified but these sites arc th^* only arcu.; available on each lot. Once a Preliminary plat is laid out, each lot will need a complete Site Evaluation 6 Design for City approval. June 20, 1995 - These sites are limited for space available for an On-Site Sewage Treatment System. The site along the east side of the proposed Sub-Dlvlsion are on 6% slopes. The remaining areas on the east side either have slopes greater than 6’. or drainage patterns. Steven b; Schirmers SBS/ds •I • iEijifi 3nti£nture. .u../, r/,.. Grace L. Rosch, a widow C9 eO'HSOi ! .^ll/ ../• October . in 92 •• \V ( . y..T* /• f -4 31 <uf Lhn VuuKiy uf Hcnnepin «»• y «/ fiftt Hart. iiHii Joseph Ii« Rosch ^ \ ^ . . .i ..r- , •')O t Minnesota of the County of licnnopin /jcifi y uf thr %t roit*i , stniv uf Minnesota > \ Ulllrt(SSCtt), That the said pilfl V »f thr ;ir\t part, in rt,n\idrraln>n •>[ thr »M»t fi/* One Dollar and Other Good and Valuable Consideration to......her noLuns, ............IN fitiuti paid by the said part nf the xecofid port, thf eewipt trhrrvuf is hiirrbtj acknowledged, do eS htrrhy Crant. ISarfain, Qtut vloim, und Conrey unto Ihr \ttid /Htrf of the neeond port, his heirs and asttgnt, f orever, all the tract or parcel of land lyinf and betng in the County of . . Hcnnepin and :itate of MinnrMoiii, di-^i rt ht d a* iullou'n, la^tat: \ 1 Corunencing at the southwest corner of the southeast quarter of section thirty-three (33), township one hundred eighteen (118) north, range twenty-three (23) west of the 5th Principal Meridian; thence north along the west line of said southeast quarter fifty-eight and thirty-six one hundredths (53.36) rods; thence uast at right angles to said west line ’twenty-eight and seventy-eight one hundredth (28.78) rods; thence south 'parallel with said west line to the south line of said section tliirty- '.three (33); thence west along said south line to place of beginning. 'State Deed Stamps Duo Hereon: $ I.5^ * Tax statements for the real property described in this instrument should be sent to: Joseph H. Rcsch bS)U6 James Avenue South Richfield, fttl 55423 10 PRIOR TAXES PAID ben. V PRonKTY rui • public rccobos TRANSFER ENTERED V. HI ED □ fiDT REQ.^ UKD 5 W93 HEHPCPIN (BJNt*/ PROPER?.' T»5 0£? HN DEED to;: paid 03/05/93 12 J 04PM PAID DEPUIT Su S^illlC mib to S/oUl ibc Antic, roftiner nmn an tne heretutameniM anti nppurtenanccM thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, to the Haiti part y of the steond part, his.-.......... •• heirs and assigns. Forever. 3n ®€fttmonp Itlbcrcof, The .said party of the/Irsf part ha 8 hereunto se^. hftr hand.jy the day and year /inti above written. DA.WNtJlRTCM MOTAifruuc^MCtorA WjjrJ HENNEPIN COUNTY 3 ATT OCitlR3S43Pi CtP^r4S &M8 OCtoi^ S', ••eaeaat - ----------- J Bonestroo i^:jg Rosene ^1^ Anderlik& iVll Associates Engineers & Architects .•r»r ^ i July 7, 1995 •,* ■ • A •• •• T " ^».3C •*» f*»#, ^ ‘-I* ' I »£ 8^ J - .. *k . C *€ *. «. 'c • . "••e*'* '■ Ar'je*'c!T'. ■ "t •, * * -•••c ^ • ^ A.. A r •'■ e* J EJae'ton -. A 4 “tfc Pf I *? * .*• “? •• ^ < c J •*€ V,«'* C A.«u < •/ a jt r>srr '»f .. ..iO'sVtve- P£ • •'e*' i A e»^-' •’€ , . r ’ * •: •€ ^r-rf’ ? • foo .? \ior» , . ie- • '« ■ lA'* '., .'4 • •’ , e' ‘ ^ % r* ‘i 4 ■u* * ’f . »W. ^ »£ r«m c '! >e*^*ey i e' ^3-^eon ? '♦«♦« '£ lee V MAnn »C ei A £• Y*\ « V " ‘ .ver.* ^ »-♦» AT V C V *■ oq t^'^e ••» 3* Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building and Zoning Administrator City of Oiono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 ;V- r- ijL. Re: Rosch Site Plan File No. 139-2035 1.0 ICCs* Dear Jeanne, We have rev iewed the preliminary sketch plan submitted by Mike Hilbelink for the property owned by Joseph Rosch. The property is located at the northeast comer of Old Crystal Bay Road and Watertown Road. The proposed access location meets the site distance guidelines for a 40 mph speed limit. The existing driveway location on Watertown Road is not a problem. The site plan appears to be acceptable from an engineering standpoint. 4 Preliminary plans should be prepared that show the grading, drainage, wetlands, erosion control and street design. The preliminary plat should show easements over the drainage features, wetlands and along lot lines. We will prepare a cost estimate for the letter of credit when the plans are provided. We are presently in the process of laying out the trail alignment along the east side of Old Crystal Bay Road in this area. A permanent easement will be needed to built the trail as it will be outside the right-of-way. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612*636-4600 I • »!• iP;f i M ^*®SiJii3 #a #r» A • . . ^•iL.« f . . i—. -^T- -.TMWrtBW^ CM71 -. Wc iii iM in > *? i^'-l^iFi s«^ii mm *S»f;i i }:| Sl'ii 'tS'^ 5^ r -h <. I '•* IS 3 HI 111 :af J^M 4hfi.‘'^'■'‘i • i?v^.-.' :il, tJi;:.'' , -.-?; .*. ' . I mf'^MK ~ -w ct:-. • lii Wa!fi . i fc iii !,» I 1? U* i -w • iiT. • ’*IPgfe KhXJcry^ wvLiiW: V 'Wv4 i iJI's!®?af<»'s I --/oo ORONO PLANNING COMiMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 19, 1995 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Stephen Peterson, Charles Schroedcr, Sandra Smith, Dale Lindquist, Candace Rowlette, Charles Nolan, Jr , and Janice Berg. The following represented the City Staff; Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth and Recorder Sherry Frost Council Member Goetten and Mayor Callahan were present. Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 7 00 p m. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS/PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING (#1) #2025 MICHAEL PLANK, 4115/4145 WATERTOWN ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - 7:00-7:0* P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Plank was represented by his surveyor, Mark Gronberg. The sketch plan was reviewed at the last Planning Commission meeting. The applicant followed the recommendations for the preliminary subdiviaon. The road outlot has been platted. There is no back lot reconfiguration. Lot 2 does not have to meet 150% of area and width standards. A width variance will be required for Lot 2 adjacem to cul-de-sac. Septic testing rev'ealed adequate soils for on-site ^emate site location. The applicant was informed that if Lot 1 was subdivided in the future that the northern lot would no longer be able to access from Watertown Road. An upgraded road was asked for if the three lot subdivision were to be done. The applicant's representative inquired if the current standards at the time of future subdivision do not ask for an upgrade, if the applicant could go to what the standards say at that time. The loss of trees were discussed. Mabusth said this would be looked at when Lot 1 was further subdivided. Smith asked what the future desire for the property is according to the applicant. His representative said Plank would like to subdivide the remaining property into two lots at some future date. Plank was reported to say he has no objection to the requirements but wants it open to what the standards are at that time. During public comments, Mark Jones, a Realtor with Burnet Realty, said the 6 acres with the house has been sold contingent upon approval of the subdivision. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 19, 1995 ijf} - ?.lichiiw! Plnnk - Ccntinu^) Commissioners agreed that changes to the plans were made as asked. Mabusth noted a newly defined designated wetland on the property. Mabusth commented that a vacation of the utUity and drainage easement on the old shared lot line would be asked for when further division occurs. Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to approve Application #2025 with the Staff recommendations 1-4, and with the understandinu that if Lot 1 is subdivided, it will be subject to the standards and ordinances at that time. Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#2) #2029 WILLIAM F. SMITH, 2580 FOX STREET - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - 7:50-8:30 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Smith was present. At the last meeting of the commission. Smith was asked to gain acce^ to the newly created lot from Fox Run. Four property owners have sent letters voicing their opposition to the use of this access. The applicant's subdivision proposal requests the use of the existing easement driveway to serve all three lots. It was not^ that there is 2+ acres of dry contiguous land to the west of the driveway. Mabusth said another alternative suggested at the sketch plan review would be to allow a second curb cut to serve the new lot, but that would conflict with the City's comprdiensive management plan for rural areas. An earlier subdivision stipulated a disclaimer that if an additional lot was created, a private road would be needed to serve 3 lots. To satis^ the current code, a 24' wide paved road would be needed with a cul-de-sac within the only area available, a derignated wetland. Mabusth said if division was considered a back lot/front lot configuration, an ouflot at 30 width could be installed along the east lot line. Lot 2 would have to continue using the existing drive. There would be minimal encroachment of the designated wetland. The applicant would like the Commission to recommend using the existing driveway for the lot. Smith has added 4" of new gravel, which has already conformed to the ruts. The applicant will bring in a blade to cut the drive to make it uniform and then crown it for orooer drainage. Smith said this would be done to all of the driveway and the turnaround areas. Mabusth noted that the on-site septic tests confirm suitable area for septic treatment on Lot 2. There would be contiguous 2-acre of dry land to west of easement drive that intersects Lot 2. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 19, 1995 (#2 - #2029 William Smith - Continued) Lindquist was informed that Lot I cannot be further subdivided due to the wetlands. Lindquist said this would mean that there would be a maximum of three lots served by the driveway if approved The Applicant asked the Commission to consider the similarities with the Stron^old subdivision, where a 30' outlot roadwav was aooroved. which abuts the McMillan property. This roadway would also extend no further. The m^ority of the driveway serves two existing residences; the new drive would turn off imn^diately. Mabusth said this is a narrow grave! easement drive. The Stronghold property is served by a paved platted outlot. There is a 14' desiwuted easement; but the actual driveway is 10' in its present state. Mabusth said there is a need to retain the 26' setback from the wetlands. It was noted that there is a loop or turnaround adjacent to the home that could meet the needs of the fire department if necessary. Smith said if the application is ^proved, the bam will be relocated. A larger turnaround could be created where a large vehicle could drive in. back up and drive out. Smith plans on creating additional parking for the approach to the house. Peterson said the City is looking at the driveway issue in general. The fire and police departments would like larger turnarounds. No changes have been made to the ordinance as yet. Peterson recommended maintaining the drive without paving. Smith said if an immediate cut were made, it would affect large trees and is also where the septic enters the property. So as to not disturb the topography of the site, Smith asked for a cut from the driveway further to the north. Lindquist would like to sec the driveway easement be wider than 14'. Mabusth said this mav create a problem in getting 2 acres dry contiguous. Smith said the original cut was 14' and vegetation has encroached into the 14'. Mabusth asked Lindquist if he fislt the outlot or easement should extend all the way to Lot 3. It was noted that the middle lot is owned by another person, and the City has no authority to include advising this property as to the need to now create a driveway outlot. Smith a^ed that the first portion, 50'- 75',of the drive extending to the first turn off be wider and base the width on the space available rather than the 15' outlot. It was noted that changes to the middle lot could trigger pulling the scenario all together. This lot is not large enough for subdivision. Mabusth Questioned whv the applicant would join in the subdivision? Smith said the owner of the lots informed him the turnaround was available for emergency vehicles. Smith said he is willing to do what is necessary to allow rigs to emer the upper lot. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 19, 1995 (#2 - #2029 William Smith - Continued) Beth Casody, owner of Lot 2, said expanding the width of the drive defeats the purpose c maintaining the aesthetics of the area. An expansion would encroach on the trees Tw area is well populated by wildlife Casody said she would be happy to maintain the circle for emergency vehicles Lindquist said the initial wider road up to the first driveway would be preferred for safety reasons Gordon Buhrer. owner of property to the west, said he appreciates the narrowness of^ existing road. If the road had to be widened, Buhrer felt it would encourage more traffic; and did not see any reason to widen it if the neighbors each preferred to keep it narro^ Commission members did not believe the the amount of upgrade being discussed would affect either the privacy or the aesthetics Maintenance would be required, however. In discussing how wide the driveway should be, Mabusth noted there are no standards in the code for dnveways Schroeder commented, if we now were to have three homes on the driveway, it would technically be a road, so the Commission is able to discu» the width. Rowlettc commented on the inability to pass on the road. Nolan said the 4" of gravel for the driveway is insufficient. Smith said there was also a 6" underlavment. Casodv reported on a moving van’s ability to manuever and make a complete circle on the turnaround in Lot 2 Casody also noted that meeting another car on the drive only r^uired a 15* b&cking up movcnicnt of & vehicle. Smith cautioned about setting a precedent, citing the Stronghold property being paved with a cul-de-sac. Mabusth said the paving was completed aft^ the fact and noted the Council had dealt with the same issues on the Melamed subdivision. Rowlette moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2029 for variances to the subdivision regulations with the stipulation that additional property be available on the first lot to remain at 2 acres to allow widening and upgrading of the driveway to the location of the new curb cut off the driveway. The 10’ existing driveway wiU be widened to at least 18' with gravel. The remainder of the driveway acccessing the other two lots will be widened to a 12' width. An outlot will be designated through Lot 2. The applicant asked what would happen if the wetland rules were relaxed in the future. Mabusth said the proposals all would be subiect to current code. Ayes 7, Nays 0. k.- MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 19, 1995 <#3) #3031 BRUCE R. KELLY AND IRMA J. KELLY, 2340 FOX STREET PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - S:30-*:45 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr & Mrs Kelly were present The property in <^estion is located at the intersection ot Fox Street utd Willow Drive in a RRl B zone requiring 2 acre minimum lot size and 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land The applicants propose a shared access at the existing curb cut, which has been approved by the Engineer. Mabusth cautioned the owner that the driveway casement would have an impact on division of Lot 1 in the future. The area of the vehicular must be excluded from dry land area. It was noted that the top of the hill at the cast «dc of the new lot w as an acceptable location. Mabusth said there was a problem with U» septic testing. The existing septic syston serving residence is located on Lot 2 and would not meet current septic standards. Mabusth noted there appears to be no problem with the septic sites on the new lot, but Staff is unable to locate the sites because the septic diagrams are not to scale They need to be redrawn to scale. Mabusth said new septic testing needs to be completed for developed lot and a preliminary survey. An additional 5’ is needed to have 200 of lot width to the rrar of the 50* street setback. The Applicant said both lots were over 200' wide. Kelly did not understand that the easement area is deducted from the dry buildable. The reason for the subdivision is to build a retirement-type home on the other lot. Kelly said the lot line was not necessarily fixed, but he only wanted to make it easy and ample. Kelly understands that two new septics arc needed and cited a report saying there is adequate space on both lots for mound systems He does not understand the need for tabling the application. Rowlette commented that the survey identifies the property. Kelly had thought the survey was certified. Rowlette said she could not approve the application without 200* on Fox Street for the new lot. Mabusth said structures need to be located in the field and setbacks confirmed from a fixed lot line, and the locating of structures through topograpical mapping docs not satisfy requirements of a preliminary plat. Schroeder said, although the Commission can not act on the application, direction can be given. Schroder noted that the septic seems to meet the requirements. Rowlette said caution was needed so as not to destroy a future subdivision. Peterson moved, Nolan seconded, to table Application #2031 for City review of the septic sites and for a survey pinpointing structures and wells. Ayes 7, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON RINE 19, J995 ACTION ITEMS (#4) #2005 SAILORS WORLD MARINA & BOAT CLUB, 1955 SHORELINE DRIVE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - 8:45-9:25 P.M. Mr. DeSantis was present. Mabusth noted that this application invoK'CS the first marina to apply for a conditional use permit for boat club use. Two requirements of the code are confirmation ot an approved lanscaping plan and adequate parking The marina has an approved landscape plan, and the City holds a Develope’^s Agreernem and letter of credit to ensure completion. Mabusth noted a recent variance application for ntarina approval was conditioned on additional off-site parking. 46 stalls are required and 41 are available. There are 66 rental slips available. Desantis said 4 stalls are not usable and 9 are rnaimained for the boat club. There is an accessory struc*urc located in one stall. The Applicant provided an in-depth memo on the impact and comparison of parking needs for boat club use and slip rentals. Examples were given for the different scenarios of 60, 80, and 100 boat club members. It was fiirther broken down into pre, peak, and late season levels. DeSantis voiced his fhistration with the process. It is his opinion that he is getting approval for a business he has already been doing for three years. The club members numbered 24 in the first year and 50 members the last two years. DeSantis uses the current formula of 7 people per 1 stall for rental use for boat club members at 60 user level The i^plicant maxiniires his buMness via the boat club use. He looks at the levels of usage to pinpoint his growth. When the boat chib is using more parking space than is available, DeSantis will leave a slip open to compensate. His maximum use is projected at 46 stalls on the July 4th weekend. DeSantis emphasized his ability to control the parking by adjusting from chib and rental uses. DeSantis uses several methods to limit the parking. He asks people to drive together to control the over use of the parking stalls. Parking passes are placed on the vehicles to regulate the parking. Towing can be done for violators. 12 stalls may be used at the Art Center for overflow if needed. Peterson recommended this relationship be maintained for future overflow parking use. DeSantis noted the difficulty in working with the MPCA over the soil contaminations. A probe is being done to see where the contamination comes fi’om. The landscaping plan needs to be worked around this pollution problem. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNflSSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 19, 1995 (#4 - #2005 Sailors World - Continued) The retail operation was questioned. 8 stalls are reserved for this operation. DeSantis said he no longer seUs or wholesales boats. The general public does frequent the retail operation pan of the year Rowictte noted that 2 staUs were probably sufficient for this use. There were no public comments Lindquist asked about the request for 60 memberships and the growth potential Petewn was concerned with overgrowth, noting the parking spaces at the Art Center. DeSantis said his operation would be maximized at 100 club members. Peterson asked how the Art Center parking was handled. DeSantis said the patrons are followed there. ThcmembCT is responsible for his party and allows only 1 car per party This is monitored. DeSantis said his facts were compiled from his records. Peterson asked how mnay members DeSantis was asking approval for. DeSantis would like a ceiling of 100. Schroeder asked how often the Art Center is being used. DeSantis said his need is during prime season only, 6/15-8/15, with 10-12 stalls. At this time, he has been able to park 10- 12 at the nearby gas station. Mabusth said if a number of memberships were iqiproved and the number was to change, DeSantis would have to reapply for the CUP. Mayor Callahan commented that if the Goncm was over parking, the approval could be conditional on the number of stalls. Callahan noted that once the CUP is completed, it is difficult to measure the membmhip. Schroeder said this would be incumbent on the good relationship with the Art Cemer, and the number of off-she spaces allowed would become the issue. Lindquist recommended approval be based on a maximum on the number of off-site parking stalls provided. Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2005 for a conditional use permit to provide 25 off-she parking stalls for a maximum of 100 boat club members. The final installation of the landscaping plan cannot be completed until the EPA issue has been settled. Once this is resolved, the i^pKcant has 60 days in which to fulfill the landscaping plan, or by 6/15/96 if resolution occurs during the winter months. Yearly certification of the parking arrangement for the 25 off-site stalls shall be submitted with the annual commercial marina license application. Ayes 7, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNflSSION MEETING HELD ON JUNT 19, 1995 (#5) #2020 JAMES BRUCE, 565 LEAF STREET - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - CONTINUATION OF PUBUC HEARING 7:00-7:49 P.M. Mr. Bruce was present. The application was tabled at the last Planning Commission meeting sut^ect to applicant submitting an amendment of the cov enants of the Stielow Addition. The application is for a three-lot subdivision with a lot line rearrangement. The lot line rearrangement will provide the additional area needed to fiilfill area requirements for 3 lot division. Lots 1 and 2 will be accessed from Oxford Road, which is a private road, with Lot 3 served by public road The accessory structure on Lot 3 will be removed prior to final plat application. The Engineer has asked for a 15’ sewer utility easement aloi^ north lot line of Lot I to serve the church property to the east. There had been public concern over tree removal with the house pad location on Lot 1 Bruce said he has not changed the property's house pad location. Bruce did meet with the neighbors to the north, who have a swimming pool located 50-60* from the property line. Bruce said the neighbor was concerned over impact on the users of the swimming pool. A neighborhood meeting was held regarding the covenant bylaws It was found that tte property owner to the north’s only desire was not to be able to see a house from their property, but gained no support from others, as they felt this was unreasonable. As far as the tree removal issue is concerned, Bruce said he would agree to plant pine trees. The Nelson's, the neighbors to the north, were not convinced that this solved the issue, but did agree, according to Bruce, that the buildup pad fits into the normal setback. Peterson clarified with Mabusth that the covenant amendment was signed and meets the required issues for this property’s subdivision. Bruce said the covenant was established in 1978, and this would be the third time the covenant has been amended. Mabusth said a width variance is required for Lot 3 due to narrowness of land at 199.98 feet rather than the 200 feet required. The appticam is asking for a vacation of the existing easement over the drainageway in Lot 1. The Engineer has reviewed this request and noted it can be redesignated to 20', where 40* had been dedicated in the originai plat. Mabusth said this was an ambitious designation and is not needed. Mabusth advised that applicant proposes no change in drainageway. 8 _____ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNUSSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 19, 1995 (#5 - #2020 James Bruce - Continued) Limiquist asked of the utility easement. Mabusth asked for Planning Commission s opinion and noted that the Engineer did recommend an casement be granted for future sewer extension to east. The property is not within MUSA, and the Engineer said that this would be the time to gain the easement. A sewer line is located on Oxtord Street. Cook had recommended the 15' easement along the north lot line. The applicant had no problem with this, except for the issue of trees. All agreed that this w ould be the time to gain the easement but had reserxations as to the location and the impact on tree removal. Smith asked what the worst case scenario would be regarding the easement and trec^ removal. Mabusth said based on the cle\ations, the excavations would be deep, calling for wider cisement areas. This would result in a major loss of trees if installed at north lot line. The Planning Commission recommended an easement and discussed its location. Nolan noted that an easement would normally be placed to the outskirts of the property line to eliminate interference with building pads In this case, though, the easement could be in the middle where the drainage casement is located as no construction can occur at tWs location. Lindquist recommended the City Engineer review ai^ determine the location for less impact on tree removal. The 15’ minimum easement location determined by the Engineer will be reviewed with the applicant. Rowlette would like to see the house located on the other side of the drainageway. Mabusth said the City lacks the control to stipulate the house location. The building pad location was determined by Bruce's judgment of the aesthetics. Bruce felt the customer would choose this particulate site for a home. Bruce also said the value of the lot would be restricted if he could not build on 50% of the lot. He again reiterated that he is sensitive to the trees on the lot. Nolan asked about restrictive covenants to save trees. Bruce replied that he had previously agreed at meeting with neighborhood not to cut trees from the setback area to the north and trees west of the proposed house. Rowlette asked why Bruce wanted to keep two existing driveways on Lot 3. Bruce said the driveway to the north would serve a tuckundcr garage. What exists now is a driveway 9-10' wide, and Bruce feels it is not causing any impact on the property. Bruce would like to leave options open as alternative ways to ^proach a building. The driveway between Lots 2 and 3 would also remain where the existing house is occupied. Construction vehicles would be using this driveway. The Planning Commissioners had no problem with this usage. There was no concern with church activities. If problems arose in the future, they would be addressed at that time. MESfUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON AEME 19, 1995 (#5 - #2020 James Baice - Continued) Lindquitt moved, Schroeder seconded, to tq>prove Application #2020 for a preliininary sjbdivisioo. The City Engineer wculd detemtine, thru a meetii^ with Bruce, the location of the easement, whether along the northern 15' of the lot or along the drainageway A lot width variaiKe is recommerxled for approval as well as the access layout for Lots 1 and 2 served by Oxford Road and Lot 3 from Leaf Street. The guest house on Lot 2 cannot flmction as an independent residential unit, only as a part of a resideiKe. An addhioiud 5' is required along with the IC dedication of the utility/sewer easement. The driveway to serve the house on Lot 2 is allowed temporary use while tlw residence is in use or until devdoped. This would be removed prior to final inspection of home. Ayes 7. Nays 0. (#6) #2021 JAMES HALE/JAMES BRUCE, 57$ OXFORD ROAD AND 505 LEAF STREET - SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - 7:49-7:50 P.M. Mr. Bruce was present. LiiKlquist nooved, Schroed^ seconded, to approve Application #2021 for a lot line rearrangement as presented with Staff recommendations. Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#7) #2023 BETTY SUMNER, 3131 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCE - PUBUC HEARING 9:25-9:32 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing aiKl Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mrs. Sumner was present. Mabusth reported that the appiicati(Mi is for paving inq)rovements within the lakeshore yard. Undc^ying plastic is being removed and replaced with ccMicrete pavement under a second story deck as well as concrete pavernem by the garage door. Hvdcover exists at 42.9%, and there are no changes to this figure. 7S0 s.f, or 4.2%, of permanent, non- structural hardcover is btmg added. The pavement would not extend beyond the deck. There is crushed rock on the shoreline where eqx>sed earth is located on a slope. There is no underliner but bits and pieces of old plastic only. This is not rip-rap. Mabusth noted that she did not think this would solve the erosioa problem. Mabusth asked the Commissioners if this ai^dication should have been required to come before the Commission for approval. Rowlette said yes, noting that in some applications reductions in hardcover could be made. There are none for this {q>plication. Hardcover improvements were reviewed. There is a drive, house with deck and limited walk providing access to resid KONUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON RJNT 19, 1995 (#7 - #2023 Betty Sumner - Continued) Nolan moved, Schroeder seconded, to approv'C Application #2023 for hardcovo” variance to install permanent, concrete pavement. Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#S> #2024 JAMES WILSON, 2565 LYDIARD AVENUE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING 9:36-9:53 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Wilson was present. The Application if for a conditional use permit to allow the continued rwidential use of the property as a non-conforming use in B-4 zoning. This use has existed since 1959. A fabric shop was located in the residence structure up to the mid I980's The B-4 office professional use would allow the applicant to operate a CPA btuinen with 2 full and 1 part-time employees four months out of the year. A second office is being proposed. There is no expansion. The property is within 1000* of the lake. The m^ority of the paving improvements and structure are outside of this area. No hardcover variance is being ask^ for or required. The Engineer has reviewed the site plan improvement for the property. There wiD be 3 ofT-strect parking stalls on the south side of the existing drive. It was desired to close off access to the north, but it would not be safe to do so. The bushes ue in need of trunming at north curb cut. Applicant must contact County to work within right of way. Wilson should also contact Clair Rood for permission to cut trees if necessary. Lindquist asked where patrons of the accounting firm would park during tax season. The applicant sAjd only one client would be there fit one time. Schroder believed this to be a good use of the property and inquired about a sign. Wilson said he would be using a 4'x8* sheeted plywood sign. There was found to be no problem with this sign. Nolan asked if the use was grandfathered in. Mabusth said the code would allow the continued non-conforming use as the resident use exists to current time. Nolan aiso asked if this was two primary uses on the same site, and if this is a problem. Mabusth said there was nothing in the code to address the mixed use. Planning Commission noted the commercial part of the property faces Shadywood Road and the residential faces Lydiard. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 19, 1995 (#8 - 2024 James Wilson - Continued) There were no public comments Mabusth said neighbors called in support of this application. Berg moved, Rowlette seconded, to approve Application #2024 for a conditional use permit with conditions 1 and 2 as noted. The number of employees is limited to 4. Any further expansions would need to be reviewed Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#9) #2026 NEW HORIZON CHILD CARE, 875 WAYZATA BLVD. - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 9:53-10:10 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted New Horizon was represented by Sharon Bergen. The Application is for a height and signage area variance. The child care &ciU^ is in a residential zone but use permitted through a conditional use permit. Surrounding uses of property were reviewed The signage is limited to 12 s.f. and would not be easily seen. New Horizon is asking for additional signage. The topographical coitions require that travelers be alerted to the child care center’s location. The «rtrance is to the east and the facility is to the west. There is a drop in elevation adjacent to road. The nearest residence is 400 ’+ away. The property is adjacent to the Luce Line. The Applicant is asking for a illuminined 6x6' New Horizon sign located near the facility. An entrance pylon would not be lit but would be 4x4* in size and 17.8' high. These signs are both two-sided. Mabusth said she was not aware that the signage was two-sided. The Applicant said this could be changed if needed. Nolan commented that the height of the signs was an issue. The need to know who is there and how to get there is needed but these dimensions seemed too high. The Applicant said the grade of the area required the height variance. At present, parents of the children are finding it diflScult to see the entrance. Commissioners discussed the height and from where the grade level needs to be estidilished. Schroeder was concerned over the need for a sign for safety reasons and then the reason of advertising only. He suggested the Applicam speak with the highway department about a "blind spot" or "watch for children" sign if they were concerned with safety. Peterson said his children had gone to this center. It was his opinion that the sign and driveway were terrible. Peterson was not in favor of a big commercial lit sign next to the natural Luce Line trail. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUN'E 19, 1995 (#9 - #2026 New Horizon Child Care - Continued) Lindcjuist was concerned with granting a variance for a ugn without first addresang the safety of the entrance. A sign would not solve the safety issue. Schroeder questioned whether a lit sign would accomplish a safe entry Nolan noted the lighting intensity would also be a fartor in considering safety. The Applicant said the entrance sign would not be lit in order to be sensith'e to the natural area. The other lights are on timers and would be lit only during the daytime hours or when the center is being used. Mabusth said this is a residential area, and lighting of signage was not necessary when facility is closed. Peterson said the regulations should be adheied to in this case. Nolan did not necessarily agree. He commented that the 12 s.f. sign allowance would probably not be adequate. The canopy over the doorway was said by the Applicant to provide shelter for the parents and for security. It would be lit when children are coming and going. The issue of how this was lit was discussed. Peterson asked for electrical detailing on the canopy. Nolan was concerned that this again was an advertising sign. Schroeder asked the Applicant to speak with the Dept of Transportation for assistance in making the entry safer. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2026 to gain further feedback. Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#10) #2027 RICHARD LEE KAIL, 3753 CASCO AVENUE - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 10:10-10:15 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Kail was present. Kail lives in the residence O"' the property. The Applicant is asking for an area vwance for a new residence which wai lueet the setbacks. There is a designated wetland in the comer of the property. As the property is sewered, the AppUcant receive credit for this wetland. There are City owned parcels located to the south which functions as a retention area. There would be no impact on any other property from drainage from the new construction. The alley is platted but serves no purpose. A suggestion was made as to the vacation of this alley. Smith commented that this would be the time to clean up the property. There were no public comments. Il___a.-* -i' MINUTES OF £ ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETl NGHELDON JUNE 19. 1995 (#10 - #2027 Richard Kail - Continued) Rowlette moved. Berg seconded, to approve Application #2027 for a lot area variance with conditions M as listed. The Applicant would have 30 days after receiving the occupancy permit to comply with condition #4. The property b also to be cleared of outside debris and cleaned up. Ayes 7, Nays 0. Kail inquired ^XHit the vacation of the alley. Kail was informed this would be a separate process and would require a puUic hearii^. He was further informed to contact John Gerhardson. (#11) #2030 RICHARD LAVERE, 995 WILDHURST TRAIL - VARIANCES- PUBUC HEARING 10:15>10:30 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. LaVere was present. The Application is for an average lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variance ft>r an upper level deck at the lakeside of the residence. A 1992 variance for a 20*x31* garage stall addition made by a past owner required removal of 210* of landscape plastic and removal of a garage. This has been complied with. Hardcover is now at 4900 s.f or 35.41%. The deck would be 8' wide and expand to 14' maximum depth for 10* length. A small concrete patio exists beneath proposed deck. There is also a sidewalk beneath the deck offsetting an additional 90 s.f The drawing is not to scale and shows S082 s.f of hardcover, wherein, the survey shows 4991 s.f. The plans provide no detail on area under the deck. The Planning Commissioners said they had no problem with the average lakeshore setbadc variance. Lindquist was concerned with the driveway and requested hardcover nundiers be verified. Rowlette asked that no application be reviewed in the future without forms beii^ completely filled out. She also asked that the hardcover stay at the amount h presently is or be reduced. Rowlette noted in speaking with the owner at the property, a canopy would be removed and recommended to them that the deck did not extend beyond the windows. It was also recommended that the patio underneath the deck be removed. The present deck is planned to extend the whole length of the house. Commission asked that the worksheet be completed prior to this application going before the Council and hardcover be no more than 35.41%. Sichroeder moved, Nolan seconded, to ^prove Application #2030 subject to hardcover supported by worksheet at 4900 s.f or 35.41%. Ayes 7, Nays 0. MINX^TES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNX 19, 1995 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#12) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVX ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 12, 1995 - STEVE PETERSON Peterson informed the members of the results of the Council meeting of June 12, 1995, Discussion of these results followed (#13) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION No additional issues were discussed. (#14) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MAY IS, 1995 MEETING Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 15, 1995. Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#15) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND THE JULY 10,1995 MEETING OF THE COUNCIL Sandra Smith will attend the July 10 meeting of the Council. ADJOURNMENT Rowlette moved, Berg seconded, to adjourn at IO;35 p.m. Ayes 7, Nays 0, Stephen Peterson, Chair Person