Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-18-1994 Planning Packet1 ! } / PLANT nTNG commission meetesg TUESDAY, JANUARY 18, 1994, 7:00 P.M. 2780 KELLEY P.ARKWAY - COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESENTATFVE - J. Diann Goetten attendance SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING\PUBLIC LNFORMATION NHETLNG 1. 7:00 p.m. #1901 Wem Propertks. :645/3025 Watcnown Road - prolimioaty subdivision - public hearing. action ITEMS- Review of these items will commence prior to or between schedule p hearings. the Chairman. #1S93 Chriatine A. Freeman, 2240 Shadywood Road - variances ■ public hearing. 3. #1S94 Greg Triichinski. 1580 Fox Street - after-the-fact conditional use petmiPvariances public hearing. 4.#1896 Allan and Judith Klotche. 2760 Shadywood Road - variance - public hearing. 5.#1897 R. Hunt Greene and Jane E. Piccard. 865 Parienwood Road - vanances - public hearing. 6. 7. #1898 Paul and Rose Hauser. 2801 Casco Point Road - variances - public hearing. #1899 Carolyn and Donald Udell. 1210 Loma Lmda Avenue - variances - public hearing. 8.#1900 .Allan and Gayle Boyden. 1436 Baldut Park Road - variances - public heanng to be rescheduled. planning Commission Comments Planning Commission Representative to CouncU Meeting of December 13.9. Report by 1993. 10. Other issues for discuss;on. r 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - TUESDAY, JANUARY 18, 1994, 7:00 P.M. Additional Items 11. Planning Commission approval of minutes of the November 15, 1993 meeting. 12. Planning Commission to select a representative to attend the February 14, 1994 meeting '•A.^ z ■ z •* Countryside Manor Homeowners Association January 17, 19!M Orono City Planning Commission ATTN.; Jeanne A Mabusih Building 8l Zoning Administrator Orono City Office Old Crystal Bay Rd. Long Udce, MN Dear Orono City Planning Commission RE: Application #1901 Tandem Properties A ffr m.w’K rfiw-ussion it is the Strong desire of the members of Countryside Manor Homcoi^en . cui<te»c be connected to the ro«l coming from Old Crystal Bay as proposM in application #1901 Tandem Properties. Ross Naihanson 2420 Countryside Dr. /. Joan and Phil Miller 2435 Countryside Dr. Stephanie Grande and 2450 Countryside Dr. Lorraine Kretchman Barbara and Gene Hiie 2475 Countryside Dr. Kim and Keith Fritze 2515 Countryside Dr. r PLumiog Commission \ r ittnuary 17. 1994 l*a<e 2/2 V * t » . ' I < * » I I \^X. Toni *nd Sieve Schnebly 255S Counuyiide Dr.1 ' C ^ 7icjtccoc. c:. / ^tc*^ Catherine and Thomas Mich 2565 Countryside Dr. ■( Heather and John Kaitu rx ,A 2590 Cottftuysidc Dr. ^ ■> I \ — ■ Sue and ulv I I t?M4^ / J J-L, J i^A ^ i ve Pedrce 2615 Countryside Dr "hMjj.ubty/rt /:}-i ^/I 'O' / f / ;- Vivian and ICeith Bangert 130 Manor Circle Kim and Brian Billick 145 Manor Circle Sincerely, H. Eugene Hite Jr. Presid^t Countryside Manor Homeowners Association 2475 Countryside Dr. Long Lake, MN 55356 (612) 476-4654 r 1^^STATE Of PHdNC NO. [?€L^SSfS> ^DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Region 6 Trails & Waterways. 1200 Warner Road. St Paul. MN 55106 (612) 772-7935 Januar>’ 18. 1994 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Zoning Administrator City' of Orono P O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. NfN 55323-0066 Re: Dickey and Coffin Properties Dear Ms. Mabusth: I received some information last week with respect to the above mentioned proposed subdivision. Unfortunately I have not had sufficient time to review the information, let alone have our Engineer or Hydrologist look at it. Hopefully I will be able to accomplish that this week. I am sending this letter because of the Planning Commission meeting this evening. I would like them to know that the Department has some serious concerns regarding this proposed subdivision with respect to drainage and runoff, and what it might mean for long term mninteiiance of the Luce Line State Trail. If and when this proposed subdivision gets completed it will be adding a large amount of additional hardcover to the area. This will definitely increase drainage and runoff with respect to our trail Further East on our trail we are now starting to notice some serious problems with a situation such as this where subdivisions have added more and more hardcover to areas further back from the trail This has resulted in a lake being formed where there once was nothing, and our trail has subsequently turned into a dam. Needless to say the trail was not consiructed of material sufficient to function as a dam. I have noticed the proposed creation of a new' pond immediately adjacent to our trail on the Coffey property. I am concerned about that possibly creating the same type of situation I mentioned above This needs further research. Plans have identified some existing culverts th.at are currently in place on the Luce Line Trail to handle some of the additional runoff associated with this subdivision.. What should be mentioned here is th.it some of those culverts arc ones that were originally put in by the railroad, and have not been replaced to date. Some of them may be in a weakened, or deteriorated state, and not able to accommodate the additional water that this may add. or the rate nt which it will be coming. The culverts should all be evaluated as to size, condition, and layout with re.spect to the proposed drainage layout AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER I wanted to bring some of these initial concerns to light, and let you know that we are looking at this further. 1 would hope that no final decisions would be made with respect to this subdivision before the Department of Natural Resources has time to thoroughly review the plans, and hav'e our comments addressed with respect to the Luce Line Trail. Please make sure that the Planning Commission hears our initial concerns and knows that we are looking into this matter further Should you have any comments or questions please feel free to contact me. I would also ask that if any additional data, or information is available from either the City, or the consultant, that it please be provided to me so that I can do the most complete review possible. Thank you. Sinceicly, Area Trails and Waterways Supervisor cc. Dick Schmidt To: From: Date: Orono Planning Commission Members Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron McK^rse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator January 14. 1994 Subject: #1901 Tandem Properties. 2645/3025 Watenown Road - Public Heaj-ing List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant’s Addendum C - Property Owners List D - Plat Map E - Council Action Notice 10/28/93 F - Council Minutes 11/8/93 G - Planning Commission Minutes 10/18/93 H - Draft Park Commission Minutes 1/6/94 1 - Resolution No. 1408 Approving Countryside Manor Plat J ' Engineer ’s Report 1/7/94 K - Weckman Report 1/13/94 L - Designated Wetland Map M - Drainage Summarv N - Watershed Map O - Wetland Basins-Coffin Property P - Wetland Basins-Dickey Property Q - Preliminary Plat First Phase-Dickey Property R - Preliminary Plat First Phase-Coffin Property Brief Review of Application Applicant has filed a formal plat for 25 lots (15 Dickey property, 10 Coffin property) proposed as the first phase development of a total 46-lot subdivision. The second phase will be filed as soon as the necessary septic testing has been completed for the remaining 21 lots. The Planning Commission completed a sketch plan review of the comprehensive proposal at your October 18. 1993 meeting (review Exhibit G). The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1.Chapter 11 - All ordinances pertinent to Class III subdivisioas involving dedication of roads, drainage and utility easements and variances. Zoning File #1901 January 14. 1994 Pace 2 of 9 2. Section 10.55, Subdivision S - 26* setback must be maintained from designated wetlands by all structures and land alterations. Review Coffin parcel subdivision, note encroachment by cul-de-sac of plat road and retention^treatment pond within Lot 1. Block 1. 3. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - RR-IB lot standards. 4. Section 10.03, Subdivision 27 - Special standards for back lots. 5. 6 8. Section 10.55, Subdivision 3 - Definitions. Definition 10. Definition 14. Definition 15. Definition 16. Ordinary High Water Level (OHW’L) Wetlands or marshlands. Wetlands vegetation types. Wetlands soil types. Section 10.55, Subdivision 5 - Defines the protected areas of the Cit>’ and adopts the aerial overlay maps. Section 10.55. Subdivision 15 - Land development and platting. City to obtain drainage easements over designated conservation areas.w w Section 10.55, Subdivision 25 (A) - The necessaiy finding.** for granting variances to this section, specifically review finding 7. Pertinent Facts for First Stage Development Dickey Site (15 lots) Total area = 38.25 acres exclusive of road outlot. Wetland conservation areas were not designated by the City w ithin this propeny. Applicant proposes 1.96 acres of retention/treatment areas for surface water detention and treatment. Total dry = 36.29 acres. Coffin Site (10 lots) Total acreage = 26.79 acres exclusive of road. Total drv = 22.52 acres Designated wetland and retention areas = 4.27 acres Zoning File #1901 Januar>' 14. 1994 Page 3 of 9 Description of Subdivision Applicant proposes a first phase subdivision of the Dickey propenv at 15 lots and Coffin propeny at 10 lots. The proposed road outlot within Dickey parcel will link Countrvside Drive, a public road, to Old Crvstai Bay Road. Refer to Exhibits I and Q. At the time of the platting ol Countrxside Manor. Countryside Drive was designated a public road and the City was to take over maintenance at the time the n^ad was a through road. The road outlot on the Coffin propeny will be a private cul-de-sac road at approximately 1,250 lineal feet. Extension outlots have not been proposed to the west or north. Review Exhibit F. At the November 8. 1993 meeting of the Council. Council advised that Types 1. 2, 7 and 8 wetlands not designated on the City’s conservation area maps must be dealt with by other governing agencies before City would take official action on an application. The City would not amend its ordinances nor conservation area maps as a result of the new' classification of wetlands. If an application involved the filling of these undcsignated areas, that any matter of mitigation would be dealt with by other appropriate agencies. Per Council ’s directive, the undesignated wetland areas would not be shown as drainage easements and these areas would be c 'dited against dry' buildable. It was also decided that a 75 ’ setback would not be rei]uired toi .>epiic drainfields from a Type 1 wetland. The only areas to be designated with drainage easements would be the designated wetlands as show-n on Exhibit L and the retention areas required lor surface water control and treatment as shown on the preliminary' plans (not the mitigation areas). The Park Commission has reviewed this application at several meetings. Outside of the 3-acre park outlot shown on the Dickey property known as the Ancient Ones Park, the Commission is not asking for additional park lands. Some members have encouraged developer to designate interior park trails, but to keep them for private use and not for public use. Both Park Commission and City Engineer have asked that the City s Comprehensive Development Plan for bike trails along Old Crystal Bay Road be implemented by Tandem Properties installing bike trail along east side of Old Crystal Bay Road. The subdivision is revievved in more detail as follows: Lot Configuration All lots meet the required 2 acres of dry contiguous lands exclusive of designated w etlands and retention treatment ponds. All lots except for Lot 3. Block 1 on the Dickey property meet the required lot width at the front/street setback measuring approximately 190’. Lot lines can be easily adjusted to satisfy 200’ width requirement. Zoning File #1901 Januar>’ 14. 1994 Page 4 of 9 The tollowing are classitied as tlirough lois and conditional use permits would be required for any accessoiy structure installed at some future date; Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 and Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 1 all within the Dickey parcel. Two lots within the Coffin property achieve access via a 30’ private driveway outlot. Lots 6 and 7. Members should review the recent code amendment. Section 11.31. Subd. 5 (C) (1) entitled Applicability". Please review applicant's addendum (Fxhibit B) that addresses the need for the back lot configuration. Has developer supported the need for back lots? Section B of code specifically states that back lot configurations should not be used when dividing a large parcel into numerous lots and may not be used as a tool for the convenience of the developer. The question to ask the developer - can cul-de-sacs be extended further south? If you are satisfied with the presentation of facts and findings, then Planning Commission may wish to recommend approval of the back lot configuration. If back lots are approved, then surveyor must redesignate setback areas. The north/south lot line would be front yard and not side yard as shown. Front and rear yards would now be designated at 75 ’ and side yards at 45 ’. House location on Lot 7 would have to be moved 5 feet to the south. House site on Lot 6 would satisfy the 75 ’ setback. All future improvements shall be subject to special standards of this code section. The yard in Lot 5, adjacent to outlot, is already at 50’. Side yard of Lot 14 appears to be 50 ’ but the side yard adjacent to the outlot in Lot 15 would have to be expanded to 50 ’. This will not impact proposed house locations for Lot 15. Note lot areas of 6 and 7 meet the required 1505o area requirement but note the acres are not of contiguous dry buildable. In discussing this with Mike Gaffron, he noted that this was not an issue during the review of this ordinance amendment as there was a need to provide additional space for buffering and that the minimum area required for zoning district had to be satisfied. Does the Planninc Commission have anv comments concerning this issue? Any resolution approving the subdivision must include reference to the back lot section of the code as it may impact future development of Lots 6 and 7. Drainace/Grading/Wetlands Per Council’s directive, the applicant has filed the preliminary plans for pennit approval at both the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the local governmental unit responsible for implementing the National Wetlands Act, and on the federal level the Corps of Engineers. As of this writing the Citv has received no comment but staff will provide status report at the public hearing. In the first phase development for both properties, less than ‘/i acre of undesignated Type 1 wetlands shall be filled for required road improvements. As required, applicant has shown 2:1 replacement. The MCWD has confirmed that no filling of Type 1, 2, 7 or 8 wetlands will be allowed without permits. The only improvement iliat will be allowed without permit will be the maintenance of a lawn area. No structures will be allowed. Zoning File #1901 Januar>' 14, 1994 Page 5 of 9 The issue for staff has been how do we provide proper notice to a landowner who purchases a lot with these undesignated wetland types as they will not be shown as drainage easements. The final resolution will list the lots that have involvement but it will be necessaiy to create an instrument for the filing against the Chain of Title of each propeny that w ill include mapping and metes and bounds descriptions of the location of the various type wetlands with a disclaimer that betore any land alteratioic ..r structures are prc*posed within those protected areas, that they first obtain the necessary' app ; vals from the Corps and the MCWD. Tlie City is in receipt of the drainage study prepared for the surface water controls. The City Engineer has been given the information and staff will provide a report on his comments at our meeting along w ith the preliminary' comments of the Watershed District and Corps. In reviewing the first phase development of both parcels, there is very little involvement of the "undesignated" wetland types. The second phase of development will raise far more critical reviews in the development of a buildine site, specificallv review the Dickev second phase Lots 17 and 18. It would be helpful at our meeting if the surveyor would designate any mitigation areas not included within retention/treatinent ponds to be designated as drainage easements and excluded from lot areas. Types 1 and 2 mitigation areas will be included as dry buildable area. Review Exhibit II. The property is located within three major watersheds -Lake Classen. Maxwell Bay and French Creek. The majority of drainage from the property fiows to French Creek. Review preliminary plans, the majority of site drainage is routed through established drainagew'ays onto adjacent properties. Per the preliminary plans, developer proposes outlet drainage at the southwest comer ot the Coffin propeny and directing drainage along Luce Line to both the east and west. Major runoff areas will continue to flow at the southeast corner of Coffin property and southw'est corner of Dickey propeny. The City must review the impact of dow nstream drainage on the established drainage routes. The DNR will review the proposal on January 14. They are concerned w ith the impact of two drainage retention basins adjacent to Luce Line. It has been their experience that when this is allowed to happen, it results in the undermining of the trail bed. The high elevation of the Luce Line at the southwest comer is 984. The inven elevation is at 987, three feet above the trail. This should be reviewed. Staff will relay any concerns of the DNR at your meeting. It is my understanding that they are also concerned with the drainage that outlets via Lot 6, Block 1 in the Dickey parcel outletting at the Thompson fami property and eventually to the DNR park. All land alteration will necessitate the installation of erosion control and must remain installed and in place until groundcover is restored. As Engineer ’s report notes, the City code requires a 26* setback from designated wetlands for all land alterations. He notes that there are two locations on the Coffin property, specifically the required grading of the .southerly cul-de-sac shown at 7’ higher than the adjacent protected wetland. He notes the cul-de-sac can either be lowered or moved south to avoid the .setback encroachment. The other is in Lot 1, Block 1 at Zoning File ^1901 January 14. 1994 Page 6 of 9 the southeast comer ot the Coffin property where the reteotion/treatment pond is located risht at the edge of the wetland. Engineer notes that this would be a logical location for the pond which will function to protect the wetland tn>ni sediment deposition and would appear to satisfy some ot the necessary findings tor granting variances to encroachment of a wetland as follows: 1. Would proposal be consistent with the objectives cf encouraging land uses compatible with the preservation of the natural landfonns. vegetation and the marshes and wetlands.’ 2. Would proposal include development of land and water areas es.sential to continue the temporary withholding ot rapid runott of surface w'ater whi::h would create downstream flooding or pollution.’ The Planning Commission should make a recommendation concerning this encroachment. Review Exhibit J. The City Engineer ’s preliminary' report asks that all mitigation areas also be designated with drainage easements. This would not be consistent with Council ’s directive. Surveyor should be asked if this will have an impact on dry buildable of each let. Parks, Trails, Park Dedication Please review the Park Commission minutes of Thursday, January 6, 1994. Exhibit H. The Park Commission reviewed the most recent plan for the first stage of development of the Dickey/Coffin property. The developer advised they have been unable to find any conclusive evidence or supponive documentation that would identify the property as having historical significance. Mn/DOT has hired a consultant who is working closely with the Indian Council to determine if the site has some significance requiring preservation but the process will take a few months and may not be resolved until May of 1994. If it is found that there is no historical significance, the property will be developed as a single family lot. The park outlet is located within the first phase development and may have to be removed from the first phase if developer wishes to proceed with construction by June of ’94. The Park Commission did not seek any additional area for neighborhood parks and appeared to encourage the installation of private interior trails. Staff advised applicant that interior trails devoted to pedestrian or vehicular access would have to be excluded from dry' buildable area of lot. The City only allows credit for the trails adjacent to road right-of-ways that share the 10' drainage and utility easements that run along the sides of public roads. Both Park Commission and Engineer ask that developer define the location of trail along Old Crystal Bay Road and install as part of the site development. Staff will seek direction from Park Commission concerning park dedication fee. There will be no credit for lands used for Old Crystal Bay Trail. The issue of whether the interior trails will be public or private will have an impact on the area consideration for park dedication. Staff will have to get further direction from Park Commission concerning the cost to the developer for installing 'rail and if that would have any impact on park dedication fee. r Zoning File #1901 Januan.’ 14. 1994 Page 7 of 9 Septic Wecknian notes all 25 lots have heen found to have suitable area for primarv and alternate drainfield sites suitable for 5-bedroom home. Lots 2 and " Block 2 have been granted a variance for an 8^ slope for the alternate drainfield site. A condit ^n of subdivision approval must include request that an old well pit be propeny sealed on Lot 2. Block 2. In response to the Park Commission and Engineer ’s request for the installation of the bike trail along Old Crystal Bay Road. Weekman recommends that primary drainfield sites for Lots 2 and 3. BkKk 1 be moved 5’ east in order to allow .jdequate separation fn'm trail. Roads Review preliminary plans. Countryside Drive shall be extended to Old Cry stal Bay Road per the directives of the resolution. Once completed, the City will assume the maintenance of road when older portions have been reviewed and upgraded if necessary. Directives ol the resolution granting approval of Countryside Manor were repeated again in the tmdings and conditions of the resolution that granted approval of Countryside Second Addition. The developed properties within Countryside subdivision have been served by the public road but maintained by the private propeny owners. Developer has advised that the neighbors who attended information meeting held January* 12 voiced major concern with the fact that this road would be a through road. They plan to petition the City to allow cul-de-sac to remain w ith a cul-de-sac to the west and a future connection corridor platted as an oullot. It was always the full intent of the City to create a public road connecting Willow and Old Crystal Bay Road. The City Engineer asks if Manor Circle should be extended northward connecting with second phase cul-de-sac road to north. He also asks if there should be a north/south connection linking one of the plat roads to Watertown Road. The Engineer notes that continuation of these streets is necessarv for convenient movement of traffic, effectiveness of fire proieciiuii. piuiiipl access foi 0 emergency vehicles and efficient provision ot City services such as snow removal. As for the Coffin property, two cul-de-sac roads are shown at approximately 1300’ in length serving 9 lots each. The Engineer appears to concur that the location of the numerous wetlands on the property poses a problem locating a logical connection tor the street. These roadways would not meet the standards tor a public road. Review applicant s addendum. Exhibit B. He notes the following reasons why a loop road would have a major impact on this property: 1.Narrow land corridor between we.st property line and location of designated wetland. Roads would be located to the rear of Cygnet Place lots that are already limited in depth. r Zoning File #1901 Japuan- 14, 1S)94 Page 8 of 9 3. 4. Location of existing drainageway that drains to the west to Cygnet property. LiKation of major area ot trees providing screening for existing development to west and natural amenities for future development of properu'.^ 5.Road would also negate several septic test areas where property is severely limited by steep slopes and gentle sloped areas for the installation of mound. Options of .Action Any formal action of the Planmng Commission will be dependant upon the City Engineer s review comments on drainage plan, the conceptual approval of wetlands mitiualion plan bjf Corps ot Engineers and MCWD for first phase subdivision and preliminary approval by the Watershed District of the preliminary grading and drainage plan. It should also be noted that if the DNR disapproves ot the retention areas adjacent to the Luce Line on the Coffin property, that staff may have to call for the tabling ot the application until other retention areas are located on the site. Any condition of approval of this subdivision must include the following conditions: 1.Dedication of plat road within first phase of Dickey parcel subdivision as public road. Note 66 of Old Cr>’stal Bay Road has been dedicated on both sides. Dedications were completed for all roads adjacent to the Dickey parcei with the Country side option. Cul-de-sac road on Coffin property shall be a private road. City to obtain underlying road and utility easements. Dedication of drainage and utility easements 5 ’ along all interior lot lines and 10’ along the perimeter boundaries and adjacent to road right-of-wavs. 3.Prior to any site improvements, erosion control as shown on preliminary' grading and drainage plans must be installed and maintained until natural groundcover is restored. Prior to site grading improvements, all tested septic sites on the Coffin property must be fenced off The following lots in the first phase development of the Dickey propeny must be fenced off; Lots 1, 2. 3, 4, 5. 6, Block 1 and Lots 3. 4, 5. 6 and 7, Block 2. Note D^ts 13 and 14. Block 2 will be fenced off at the time of the approval of the second phase construction for the interior plat road. Drainfields to be moved 5 ’ to east within Lots 1 and 3. Block 1 to allow for adequate separation for bike trail. 1 Zoning File #1901 Januan" 14, 1994 Page 9 of 9 6. Well pit must be sealed within Lot 2. Block 2 of the Dickey property. 7. The following Ums have been found to contain effective wetland areas not designated on the City ’s conserv'ation area maps. Dickey parcel. Lot 2. Block 1 - Lots 3, 4. 5. 6. Block 2; Coffin propertv’ - Lots 1. 5. 6. and 10. Once again, designated wetlands of the Cit>’ shall be shown as drainage easements on the plat. There are no designated wetlands within the Dickey propertv' but within the first phase of the Coffin property. Ums 1 and 2, 7, 8 and 9 are involved with the designated wetland. Developer shall create covenants to be filed on the Chain of Title of these properties advising future owners of the limitations on the use of these areas and the need to first apply to the Corps of Engineers and the Watershed District if any improvements are proposed at some future date before obtaining the necessary permits from the City. 8 9 10. Developer to ip*:tall bike trail along Old Crvstal Bay Road. If no historical significance is found within area of the proposed park outlot, applicant may have the option to convert park land to residential lot. The Park Commission has not asked for a park dedication. In addition, if interior trails are to be developed, said trail areas must be excluded from dr>’ buildable of residential lots. Park dedication fee w ill be depiendent upon outcome of park land dedication and whether funds expended on bike trail will be credited against the park dedication fee. Readjustment of Lot 3, Block 1, Dickey parcel, so that 200’ is met to rear of 50' front street setback. Isv CITY‘op ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION n ii PROPERTY LOCATION , Site Address At VS______/'/.rxtL t 1 I I 4’*/ , / / 7-2^ -< /■ - Property Identification Nunber (P.I.D.) 4^ / ~ j>/7 - *J ~ ^A, ~ '7 ft Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application APPLICANT name Phone (hone) Phone (work) ^7/ Address . / 7/-JT CAfr^ /V. City: UyArijT^------- OWfER (if different than applicant)Phone (hone) Name Phone (work) Address :City:Zip: (attach list i£ more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Par'"iis Development Size ____'3 ± 7 f Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Totals all rTTv nr nr. r,kin will kPI UI\k/ITU CTA-.^jurr nrrrrrt ^itn*fc-u CM • iwc. 1350200000 01 CLH 2675.00 parcel j, 2 a75.0C Present Use (check)>c Residential; no. Other (specify)_ uh£tK JL z6 (5. vv , . , f<tCElP7-mHK YOUof ^ jn; ______________________f -> Present Zoning District PROPOSAL X. Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: rV. Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gi.oss Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Units per Acres iI 0 Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land X Residential Other (specify) ^NIHDM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain f Hennepin County Department of Finance A-6C3 Govt Center 4.As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified cf this application. Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is Zoning Official's Signature Date 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 1* Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat.3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Department that Final Plat Application is complete, zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date FEES _ _ _ Sketch Plan Review (class I, ll s m) - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - - - Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) — Preliminary Review (Class III & all non—residential) 7^ -.V a T So c _ _ _ Final Plat Review (Class III) *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) _ _ _ Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application _ _ _ Renewal of Final Subdivision Application $200.00 300.00 300.00 325.00 + 25.00/Lot 175.00 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay alil additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Date Owmer's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled utrice of this change prior to the meeting. r V TANDEM PROPERTIES Jimes L. O^tmson Richard A. Putnam BROKERS • FLASSFRS • m VEl OPERS To:City of Orono Mayor and City Council Planning Commission Members FronuTandem Properties and Peter Andrea Company Dick Putnam, Jim Ostenson and Jim Dcanovic Date:January 13, 1994 Subject: #1877 Coffin/Dickey Properties Proposed Subdivision Background . . , Tandem Properties and Peter Andrea Co. (Tandem) has entered in o a purchase agreement uith Mr. and Mrs. Coffin for their 62 +- acre parcel and with Mr. luid Mrs. Dickey for their 68+- acre parcel. Tandem began site planning in Sept/Oct of 1993 in order to submit a sketch plan for city review in Oct/Nov 1993. Tandem has prepared plans based upon numerous meetings with the city staff, adjacent owners, government agencies and technical experts. The City' Parks & PUuining Commissions reviewed the preliminary sketch plans iind visited the sites in order to give us suggestions on preparation of the final plans. The City^ Council also reviewed the sketch phm and tlie wetland classificaUon issues as they affect the city’s ordinances. The Council provided us witli direction for final plan submission. Tandem has discussed the traditional Native AXmerican historic site with many governmental agencies, city staff and commissions and Mrs. Pat Dickey. The final determination of tlie historic site's status is not completed at this time. We will review its status later in this memo. Issues The project proposes 2 acre or larger single family lots, a city park and trails plus public streets. It is our belief that these plans are consistent with Orono's Comprehensive Phm. 2765 Casco Point Road • Wayzjjta. Minnesota 55391 • OfTice Fax (612) 471-0573 7808 Creckridge Circle • Suite 310 • Bloomington, Minnesota 55439 • Office (612) 941-7805 • Fax (612) 941-7853 IF«.lit - t ' *.» l ^ * '• C"* i a£. ^ n- '" * «|L|i m-I ::. .(I r. •:rr.g3*• ;im3* • •__ * T,r , ---i .^//)^;2 » .« __A C»0€l ^ I Ulf' ii 4 ' //<» i-.^l ,12« ‘W ieK«iiH,a0C**H .r 1 / •. ' ■'/////.V//r »• •«»* y v/^: .v^-' T,^ 1 ''<1 ctt) 1 • r • • \ 1 ><«’x <1k i 1"--------^ »• ltl I • I 1 t- jJ/'-M » I'M L_^: v* . p • “■ ••Vl^'’' AT "I Tandem is aware of the proposed Highway 12 Corr.dor Mud> .md he designation of a portion of the Dickey parcel as a P;’'";"''' ‘ have discussed this with the City of Orono staff and ‘’ff'"';77^,L„ent representatives and representatives of the community . It is our l> Jsme that a selection of this site as a future Highway 12 alignment is unlikely. Our proposal incorporates park isues recommended by' tlie Orono Park 1) The presen ation of the traditional Native American sacred site west of the Dickev home soutli of Watertown Road. Tlie P'a'' proposes a 3 acre public park site. The Park Commission believes it should be a public park if it is established by authorities that Uie site is a sacred site. 2) Tandem proposes the city and/or private groups should have the opportunity to evaluate tlie buildings on tlie park site iuid the city should decide if they are suitable for preserv ation. 3) Tandem will dedicate an easement along the east side of Old ^ Ciy suil Bay Road sufficient to construct a bike hike trail to the citv ’s standards. The trail will use existing road right of wav and addition ­ al easements to work with the existing trees and future septic sites for lots 1. 2. 3 Block 1 of the Dickey parcel. Tandem will dedicate and construct the trail with acreage credit luid trail construction costs credited against the city park fees due on the Coffiiv Dickey sites. 4) The trail connections from outlot A (proposed park) on the Dickey site to die two streets within the drainage utility easmeiits lots 13 14, block 2 aiici lots 2 & 3 blo( k 1. Al.so the easements between lots 5 & 6 and the rear lot line of lot 0 block 1 connecting to the DNR woods shall be homeowners association responsibility and not credited to the public park requirement. The private trail easement on the Coffin site between lots 13 & 14, thru lot 8 adjacent to weUand and between lots 3 A- 4 will be the responsibility of the homeowners association. I PROPOSED SURO«VlSlON FOR TANDEM PROPERTIES Of OUTLOT A. COUWTUVSIOt MAMOA 2MO AOOITWM. I, TRACT A R. L S HO K)*» HENKEWH COUHTV HIMHESOTA \rwL ^ •nzAfd- L-"!*----- DICI^Y PARCEL • ■H’lR ••COIIIN ii C.KONBIRl. I\( PROPOSED SUBDIVISION FOR TANDEM PROPERTIES Of OUTLOT A. COUNTRYSIDE MANOR 2ND ADDITION. S TRACT A. R t-SNO 10S9 HENNEPIN COUN CB I cm I ^ / / / /{ /\I/I Ij -t \\c»v»m II .^., m. , f /■' t' ■ViSJS! V 'J y■; V jr-A \/ ■■ .1 —^ ’'i- \\v ' .r,.)!! pmoH>M ftuaowitKM Pom TANDEM PROPERTIES IN AUDITON S SUNOIVISIOM Ma 210 HCHNCPIN COUNTY. MINNtftOTA rpMATB ., >i.TVw| C(){FI\&GRO\BtR(,. I\( MM •••••<»• M» • I ••. •«> •• «•«»« m *tm 'Ji ■i.? *OCI COFFIN PARCEL PROPOSED SUBDIVISION POR TANDEM PROPERTIES IN AUDITOirS SUBDIVISION NO 230 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA >«IHI ••* Status of Native Americim Sacred Sites The 3 acre proposed park site is belics cd to bo a sacred site known to many Native Americans as the "seven flags area." Mans respected spiritual leaders and tribal elders including Joseph Brewer, Melvin Greybear, Pokey WTiite, Clyde Bellcourt. Arv ol Looking Horse. Richard Lagaard and Richard DuBois have identified the site as a gathering place of the seven nations and a sacred ceremonial site willi great historical significance. The site is not documented in any luiow historical studies nor has it been identified by the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council or the State Historical Society. Therefor, MNDOT as ptu't of tiie Highway 12 LIS has retained a consultant to research the history of the site, and to speak to those with first hand knowledge of the site to determine the sites authenticity. The MNDOT consultant will work with the Indian Affairs Council to reach a conclusion by April or May, 1994. Tandem has reviewed numerous letters and talked with Mr. and Mrs. Dickey about the site. VVe believe the site, shown as park, is of Native American historic and sacred value mid should be preserved. Site Plan Elements Wetlands/Natural Features/Streets F.j. Svoboda and Associates, a w'etland/environmental consultant, analyzed the sites and prepared a study {Wctlund Classifiaition. klcnUficdtion Hiid Delineation Oct 29, 1993). The study identified man\’ class 1 and 2 wetlands which are "highly disturbed basins which arc farmed under typical conditions." The challenge for us is to come up with a residcniial development that would respect the woods and wethmds, provide public improvements in a logical manner and create a desirable, marketable and attractive neighborhood. The wetlands have been preserv'ed where possible and if net, replaced with a better quality ’ wetland, one mitigations area on each site. The Coffin site has .55 acre of wetland lose 1.1 acre of wetkmd replacement adjacent to the Luce Line. The Dickey site has 1.0 acres of lose and a 2 acre wetland created in the southwest corner of the property on lots 3-7 block 1. We believe the replacement of small class 1 and 2 wetlands with the 2 mitigation areas is a permanent improvement to the area. ^ ' • .i* ■ A i\ • i-. The Coffin site has a mixed maple/basswood woods surrounding 3 weUands. The site plan provides a compromise between which respects the woods and wetlands, and the ^borhoods ^ west and north of the site. The nvo cul-de-sacs and which connects to Watertown Road are located to mimmi/e I- adjacent homes and not encroach into the wetlands. Looping Uie cul-de-sacs west of tlie pond would add an additional 1/d mile of street, reduce the privacy for the homes on Cygnet Place b>’ having he street within 100 feet of dieir lots, delete proposed lot / and eneircle me vveUand witli a public street. /\nother alternative would be to connect the cul-de-sacs between the wetlands through the woods. This seems inconsistent with the site's natural features. The cui-ue-sacs were located to provide two flag lots accessed from outlot A*to lot 6 and outlot B for lot 7. By using the outlets for dri\ eways ^e lots around the cul-de-sacs provide better home and septic locations on 14 and 15, reduce hard cover near die wetlands and create two desirable lots with the privacy desired in these neighborhoods. The concern for fire/public safety issues with longer driveways ma\- be addressed with a minimum driveway width and turn-around space b\ the homes. Lots 6 and 7 both e.xceed 3 acres and arc beautiful soudiei fv walkout view lots that will complement the adjacent homes of Routson and C Swan Like Additions. The Dickey site has an entirely different character tiian Coffin's open pasture and cropland with small, poorl\- drained class 1 and 2 wetlands scattered on the site. The site design connects Countrs side Drive with tlie proposed public street from Old Cr\ stal Bay Road. Discussions \dth the Countryside Manor residents indicate their desire to retain their cul-de-sc rather tlum connect tlie streets at this time. Tandem will build a temporarx' cul-de-sac yet plat a public street to connect to Countryside Drive. This solution should meet the city's desire fo: a future through street imd the neighbors' desire to retain their privacy. The proposed cul-de-sac which connects to Willow Drive does not connect to Manor Circle due to neig.hbors' concerns mid triiffic related reasons, nieven lots are ser\ ed off this street with the existing Dickey home driveway to Watertown Road. New septic sites arc required for the existing Dickey house restricting access to the new cul-de-sac. sac The site plan proposes a significant new wetland area in the southwest comer of the site. The plan provides about 2 acres of new wetlands, open ponds, plus class 1 and 2 fringe areas. The wetlands will ser\ e a dual purpx)se: storm water retention, improving the historical drainage pattern, and creation of wetlands from pasture kmd. VVe belies e the proposed improvement will benefit the community, tlie new lots and die environment. Homeowners Association and Other Items The tw’o sites will have separate homeowner associations for limited maintenance, architectural review and oUier legiil responsibilities. The private covenants for each site will provide the standards for each neighborhood. At our neighborhood meeting 1/11/94 we discovered that the Dickey property, except the existing home, wns part of Lite Countiy side Manor Covenants and Restrictions. VVe will be working with Countryside Manor's representatives to work out tlie best way to handle this question. As part of the development we will prepare a plan for landscaping, berming and entrance signage along Old Crystal Bay Road. Watertown Road and Willow Drive. We believe that this is best accomplished during construction so the trail along Old Crystal Bay Road is worked into landscaping, septic sites and berming. Likewise, Watertown Road and Willow have some trees and wetlands to work with. The entrance teatment at each street will identify the neighborhood and set a quality image. Conclusion Tandem Properties and Peter Andrea Company are pleased to submit our plans for the Coffin and Dickey properties. Wo hope tliat we will be as good stewards of tlie land as the Coffin and Dickey families have been these many years. The sites will certainly change from picturesque rural farm land to high quality single family neighborhoods, a change that we believe will benefit the City of Orono. t: f RUN DATE IL/OVWBATCH 00«RROR AOOR%CRtICR NAHEtaxpayer)(J ; NIHE/ADORfa ’PROP ADOt Olt«R NAME TAXPAYCR NAHE/ADOR .• > i} y PROP ADDR %; ONNER NATC TAXPAYER ' NAME/AOOR 4 ' '♦ » • » 'A- *' . . PROP AOOR OMCR NAHE < TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR r*PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER ■?r, . NAME/AOOR r>'; j ^ . V PROP AOOR . (RMER NAME * ■ TAXPAYER. NAME/AOORr\. r\y,-’H ( s r*-r • HE^»ffPlN COU»UV PROPERTY INTOBUTION SYSTEM PROPERTY ORCRS 1 1ST58 05-117-25 22 00050217S LONGVIEH CIR0 I S lOSTETTCRCARY 0 I SANDRA P LOSTETTER2575 LONGVIEH CIRCLELONG LAKE TM 5555658 05-117-25 22 002002575 OEVIN LA CAR CAROOENUTO CAR CAROOENUTO 2575 DEVIN LA LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 06-117-25 11 0005 02655 COUNTRYSIDE DR P A J HILLER PHILLIP C HILLER 2655 COUNTRYSIDE OR LONG LAKE m 55556 58 06-117-25 11 0008 00150 MANOR CIR K A V BAN6ERT KEITH A VIVIAN BANGERT 150 MANOR CIR LONG lake m 55556 58 06-117-25 11 0011 02565 COUNTRYSIDE DR T B MICH ACC MICH THOMAS B MICH 2565 COUNTRYSIDE DR LONG LAKE 55556 58 06-117-25 15 0001 00560 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO S RAP MIWICH ROONEY L MItMICH 560 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD LONG LAKE HN 55556 58 05-117-25 22 001000010 MIllOH OR $HULIAM S BOtRUN ET ALMM 5 BOHMAN A A B MCCCM»TC/0 JACK J RANDALLATM A MARQUETTE A5500 »•« CTRMPLS m 55676-206058 06-117-25 11 000502620 COUNTRYSIDE OR ROSS NATHANSON ROSS NATHANSON P O BOX 186 LONG LAKE MN 55556-0106 56 06-117-25 11 0006 02675 COUNTRYSIDE DR H E HITE JR A B A HITE H EUGENE A BARBARA A HITE JR 2675 COUNTRYSIDE DR LONG LAKE rOI 55556 58 06-117-25 11 0006 00165 MANOR CIR B H BILIICK A L K BILLICK B H BILLICK A L K BILLICK 165 MANOR CIR LONG LAKE TM 55556 58 06-117-25 12 0006 02615 COUNTRYSIDE DR DAS PEARCE OAVIO H A SUSAN M PEARCE 2615 COUNTRYSIDE DR LONG LAKE EM 55556 58 06-117-25 15 0006 00250 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO S DEEMIS 0 THOMPSON DEEMIS 0 TH0E1PS0N 12201 MINNETOEACA BLVD MINNETOETA MN 55565 REPORT NO. PX655601 PACE 1158 05-117-25 22 0015025B0 OEVIN LA DAL BLAUER DARRELL N BLAUER 25B0 OEVIN LA LONG LAKE HN 5555658 06-117-25 11 000602650 COUNTRYSIDE DR L A KRETCHMAN A S 0 GRAERIE L A KREKHMAN A S 0 GRANDE 2650 COUNTRYSIDE DR LOtC LAKE m 55556 58 06-117-25 11 0007 02515 COUNTRYSIDE DR K R FRITZE A K E FR1T2E KEITH R A KIMBERLY f FRITZE 2515 COUNTRYSIDE OR LOE« LAKE MN 55556 58 06-117-25 11 0010 02560 COUEfERYSIOC OR J K KALITA A H S KALITA JOHN K A HEATHER S KALITA 2560 COUNTRYSIDE OR LONG LAKE HN 55556 38 06-117-25 12 0007 02665 HATERTOEM RO PATRICIA C OICKEY PATRICIA C OICKEY 2665 NATERTOM RO LONG LAKE fM 55556 58 06-117-25 16 0005 00058 APORCSS UNASSIGNEO THE STATE OF MINNESOTA DNR-BUREAU OF REAL ESV HOT ATTN GHEN HALLACK 1201 E HHY 2 GRAND RAPIDS EM 55766 .6* ■• /r /• . ♦♦ %E4 *6 . - I V CC f > »\ • •/ i ‘--s . • • f ' hi# >)6/ r. '.vt// » i ;V• ’ * V. u ' ^ . • V. f:S • ;» J i • . 'ir * ‘ ‘‘o *V • r- J > mjN DATi \i/nwnm,tATCN 004 MCrWlN COUr4TY POOPIRTY iMTOOHiTICSN SYSTIH PtOPtRTV OtCRS LIST REPORT HD. PI4I5401 PAGE IZADOR CRfCR HAHE TAXPAYER HAHE/AOORi ' PROP ADOR ONNER NAH€ TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 30 04-117-n 14 000407S5S COUNTRYSIDE DR S i A SCHNEBLY S E i A L SCHNEBLY 2555 COUNTRYSIDE DR LONG LAR^E HN 55SS4SB 04-117-25 21 0004000B5 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S TMEO J HEYER ETAL THEO J KEYER B5 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 3B 04-117-23 21 0001 02405 NATERTONN RD HARGARET T TRONBRIDGE HARGARET T TRONBRIDGE 2405 HATERT0IB4 RD LONG LAKE HN 553543B 04-117-23 21 0005 00020 NEAR LA J A 0 HORTON JAMES B I DOROTHY A HORTON 20 NEAR LA LONG LAKE HN 5535b SB 04-117-23 21 0003 02B45 NATERTONN RD MICHAEL J FITZPATRICK ET AL HICMAEL/PATRICIA FITZPATRICK 2845 NATERTWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55354SB 04-117-23 21 0004 00050 NEAR LA D I J HILL DAVID H A JEANETTE P MILL 50 NEAR LA LONG LAKE HN 55354 r PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP AODR ONNER NAME TA>^AYER NAHE/ADDR r PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER HATC/ADDR SB 04-117-23 21 0007 OOOBO NEAR LA G A C DE SANTIS GARY A CHERYL DE SANTIS BO NEAR LA LONG LAKE MN 55354 SB 04-117-2S 22 0020 00140 CYGNET PL P A DEBERNAROI A J L OLSON J L OLSON A P A DE BERNAROI 140 CYGNET PL ORONO MN 55354 SB 04-117-2S 22 0023 00150 CYGNET PL MARGARET 0 ROSSING MARGARET 0 ROSSING 130 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE HN 55354 SB 04-117-2S 2S 0011 00185 CYGNET PL , CALVIN PRESBYTERIAN CH ORONO CALVIN PRESBYTERIAN GRAND AVE A GLENDALE LONG LAKE HN 55354 38 04-117-2S 22 0011 00135 CYGNET PL H R ANDERSSON A E E HORIARTY H R ANDERSSON A E E HORIARTY 135 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE HN 55354 36 04-117-23 22 0021 00140 CYGNET PL R A HOHRHAN A R A HOHRHAN RONALD A A ROBIN A HOHRHAN 140 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE m 55356 38 04-117-23 23 0014 00220 CYGNET PL R J PROVO SR A M M PROVO ROBERT J PROVO 220 CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE MN 55354 30 04-117-23 22 0012 00145 CYGNET PL A E BLOEMENOAAL ETAL ARTHUR E BIOCHENOAAL RT 1 BOX 501F LONG LAKE MN 55354 38 04-117-23 22 0022 00100 CYGNET PL VIL OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 44 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55354 38 04-117-23 23 0017 00248 CYGNET PL DEAN K nOLIN ETAL DEAN K MOLIN 248 CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE MN 55354 er, 38 04-117-23 22 0027 03065 HmTERT0I«4 RO 38 04-117-23 22 0028 03045 HATERT0lf4 RO _ _ NMEATON CONSTRUCTION INC STEVEN A MARGO HIRTJES BRUCE C A KATHRYN S HALL BRUCE C A KATHRYN S HALL •Qsr->^3085 NATERTONN RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 3045 NATERTONN RD ORONO MN 55354 A r r mu OATI ll/OVW- •-BATCH OMPROP ADOBONNEII NAHC TAXPAYm NAfC/IDORIRBOP ADOB OM€B NAME TAXPAYEB NAHE/ADOB BBOP ADOB OHNEB NAME TAXPAYEB HAME/ADOB /' * r PROP ADOB ONNEB NAME TAXPAYEB NAME/ADOB r • PROP ADOB OHNEB NAME TAXPAYEB HAME/AODR y r. r PROP AOOR »»IER NAME 1£XPAYER NAMC/AOOR r 5B OA-117-2S Zl DOeO 007AO CYGNET PL EUGENE C DETEBIING I NIFE EUGENE C DETEBLING 2AO CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE Hi 5SSS4 HE^BCPIN COUNTY PBOPfBTY INTOBMATION SYSTEM PBOPEBrY OltSBS LISTIB 04-117-25 25 0021 05160 BIOGEHOOO CIB iOBEN GROSS TRUSTEE LOBEH GROSS 16404 LYNDALE AVE S BLOOHINCTQN MN 5542056 04-117-25 25 0025 05100 RIOGENOOO CIB FRANK J A PATRICIA K BOUTSON FRANK J BOUTSON 5100 BIOGEHOOO CIR LONG LAKE MN 55554 56 04-117-25 24 0005 00555 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO MARY 0 BYERSE MARY 0 BYERSE 555 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO S LONG LAKE MN 55554 56 04-117-25 24 0004 00275 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO G R A B K COFFIN GORDON A BARBARA COFFIN 5025 NATEBTONN RO ORONO MN 55554 56 04-117-25 51 0012 00440 SUSSEX LA N H A 0 C NILDMAN NINA N A DONALD C NILDMAN 745 SPRING HILL RO NAYZATA MN 55591 56 04-117-25 42 0014 02790 NHITE OAK CIR PAM DOHERTY PATRICK J DOHERTY 2790 NHITE OAK CIRCLE LONG LAKE MN 55554 56 04-117-25 25 002700056 ADDRESS LJNASSIGNEDH N A S J LAUEHERMAN N A SHIRLEY J LAUE594 PARK LANE LONG LAKE MN 55554 56 04-117-25 24 0004 00405 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S LEON G HAPNER HARREN DALEN 40550 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD LONG LAKE MN 55559 56 04-117-25 24 0007 00595 SUSSEX LA N H A D C NILDMAN NINA W A D0F4ALD C NILDMAN 745 SPRING HILL RD NAYZATA MN 55591 56 04-117-25 52 0010 05050 SUSSEX RO N H A D C NILDMAN NINA N A DONALD C NILDMAN 745 SPRING HILL RD NAYZATA MN 55591 56 55-116-25 55 0001 05020 NATERTOHN RD R A STUBBS ETAL RENA M STUBBS 5020 NATERTOHN RD LONG LAKE MN 55554 REPORT NO. P1455401 PAGE 1556 04-117-25 25 002205150 BIDGEHOOD CIB JAMES D BRINDLEY JAMES 0 BRINDLEY 5150 BIOGEHOOO CIB LONG LAKE MN 5555458 04-117-25 24 000200225 OLD CRYSTAL BAY BO S PEARL DEftFY ET AL PEARL DENNY225 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S LONG LAKE MN 55554 56 04-117-25 24 0005 00056 ADDRESS UNASSK^O STATE OF Mirt4 STATE OF MINN IDNR) (LUCE LINE TRAIL I 58 04-117-25 51 0001 00<»25 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD S WAP LAWTON DR WILLIAM G LAWTON A25 SO OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 06-117-25 52 0011 00655 SUSSEX LA N H I 0 C HILDHAW NINA H A DONALD C HILDMAN 765 SPRING HILL RO HAV2ATA MN 55561 5B 55-118-25 56 0006 00055 WEAR LA N HEAR ENTERPRISES PARTNERSHIP WEAR ENTERPRISES PARTNERSHIP C/0 WILLIAM N HEAR PO BOX 506 LONG LAKE EM 55556 V. V J • ( V- a «JN OATS 11/0T/T5 lATCH 004i;* .r#* PHOP AOOt % ONNER NAHE TAXPAYIi r r. NAnE/ADDH< •'' * . • * I■ •••v'; • ' ■' *^ >•00 lOORM:' vf-OIOCR NAME ' i' TAXPAYER A *- NAME/AOOR - ■ - • *» - ^ v"’’ * t:< ,;PROP AOOR . H* J*' ONNER name Mij»:>JAXPAYER . 'J.NAME/AOORm)f ;'<-V PROP AOOR ONNER NAME , TAXPAYER i HAME/AOOR . V : f ‘ AOOR V ONNER NAME , ^j>rAXPAYER \,<>;‘NANE/AOOR rs PROP AOOR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER .>•; hahe/ador sa 55-lia-2S 5A OOOT0^045 NEAR CIRNEAR ENTERPRISES ^ARTTIERSMIPNEAR ENTERPRISES PARTNERSHIPC/0 NULIAM N NEARPO BOX 2ASLONG LAKE HN S555A56 55-11S-E5 A5 0001 0E7A0 NATERTOHN RO JOSEPH N ROSCN JOSEPH H ROSCN ATOA JANES AVE S RICHFIEIO HN 55A25 58 55-116-25 65 OOOf 00056 AOORESS UNASSIONED J F 1 H C P VOGT ET AL GVO HA 65 GOLOEN VIEN OR LONG LAKE NN 55554 56 55-118-25 44 0001 02540 NATERTOHN RO ROBERT F SUESS ETAL ROBERT F SUESS 2540 NATERTOm RO LONG LAKE HN 55554 56 55-118-25 44 0017 00055 HACKBERRY HILL R N NAGHAN ETAL RICHARO N NAGHAN 55 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55554 58 55-118-25 44 0025 00050 HACKBERRY HILL CHARLES B AUTRY ET AL CHARLES B AUTRY 50 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE m 55554 HE^•IEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWERS LIST58 55-118-25 54 001002455 NEAR CIRNEAR ENTERPRISES PARTNERSHIPNEAR ENTERPRISES PARTNERSHIPC/0 HILLIAM N NEARPO BOX 504LONG LAKE m 5555458 55-118-25 45 000402440 NATERT0I64 RO T P GORHAN I L T GORHAN T P I L T GORMAN 2440 NATERTOHN RO S LONG LAKE HN 55554 58 55-118-25 45 0010 00055 GOLDEN VIEN OR HAL CHORLEY MICHAEL E A LUCINDA CHORLEY ?5 GOLDEN VIEN OR LONG LAKE HN 55554 58 55-118-25 44 0002 025R0 NATERTOHN RO ROBERT F SUESS ETAL ROBERT F SUESS 2540 NATERTOm RO LONG LAKE m 55554 58 55-118-25 44 0018 00055 HACKBERRY HILL R N NAGHAN ETAL RICHARO N NAGHAN 55 HACKBERRY MILL LONG LAKE HN 55554 58 55-116-25 44 0026 00054 HACKBERRY HILL N N NEAR ETAL NILLIAH N »^AR BOX 504 LONG LAKE MN 55554 REPORT NO. PI«*55401 PAGE 1458 55-118-25 54 001100058 ADDRESS UNASSIGT^O NEAR ENTERPRISES PARTNERSHIP HEAR ENTERPRISES PARTNERSHIP C/0 NlLllAH N NEAR PO BOX 245 LONG LAKE MN 5555458 55-118-25 45 000500120 GOLDEN VIEN DRJOHN HALLSON JOHN T HALLSON P 0 BOX 171 LONG LAKE MN 55554 58 55-118-25 45 0011 00055 GOLOEN VIEN OR HIS SUPALLA HARK R SUPALLA 55 GOLOEN VIEN DR LONG LAKE MN 55554 58 55-118-25 44 0014 00051 HACKBERRY HILL J N MIELKE I R J HIELKE RICHARO J I JANEILE M MIELKE 51 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55554 58 55-1X8-25 44 0014 02480 NATERTOHN RO R N NAGHAN I J 8 NAGHAN RICHARD N I JUNE B NAGHAN 55 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55554 58 55-118-25 44 0027 00022 HACKBERRY HILL M J ERMIURT I T A ERNHART MICHAEL J ERNHART 22 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55554 • ^ » ’ I )C l O ^ - • .1* ’ ■ ■ > •i-». • t I- ‘ i ■ »‘r K t'fc j. « C : ' ■.' • - ‘ ^ * Ms i •V|i I*’! V I * •• V'.• T . *• * >iUN BATE ll/Of/« ■ BATCH BOAi ADOtCMIEfl NAMEr.<;--I/.TAXPAYERNAME/AOOfI•• V V.'V;-4«4f'PROP AOOfI r.' Olt€ll NAME ^ ^ TAXPAYER • NAME/AOOR i.// ■ - .1 i It.- r V WWB AOOII ; < f ONNill tttIC "iji>*‘'S,*HAHE/AOOII >v.1- ^ BROB AOOH ^ ,• OMNER NAME k? TAXPAYER . NAME/AOOR fie. ‘ a - .-1 Sa 55-11S-E5 AA 0020 02A40 HATERTOHN RO N t P EUIS HALTER T ELLIS EAAO NATERTOItl ROAD LONG LAKE MN S5S54sa ss-na-ES aa oosiOOOAl NILLON DR N T A SANONEI A L R SANDHEl THOMAS A I LINOA R SANDNCI A1 NILLON DR N LONG LAKE rtl 5S55A sa 5A-118-25 55 0055 0005a ADORESS UNASSI9€D GAVE RENOLEMAN NILLXAM MARTIN 25aO NATERTOHN RO LONG LAKE MN S55SA HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INfORMATION SYSUH PTOPERTT OHICRS LIST50 55-110-25 A4 002T02A20 NATERT0lt4 RO H J JOHNSON ETAL TIMOTHY JOHNSON 2^20 NATERTOm RO Lore LAKE MN S555A50 55-118-21 AA 005200051 NILLON OR N VIOLA T OINSOLUS VIOLA T OUNSOLUS 51 NILLON OR N LONG LAKE MN 5555A 50 5A-118-25 55 005A 022AS HATERTOm RO THOMAS J RYAN THOMAS J RYAN 22A5 NATERTOHN RO LONG LAKE MN 55554 TOTAL BATCH OOA 00001 ‘i •!V?' m') •^1 ‘ > .■/4;r ■- • * a ^ '• * \ » • ^y. J ♦ ' . V y ■ ‘ • ♦ I , 4t* REPORT NO. PIA55A01 PACE 15 u'"\ 4 i- 50 55-110-25 AA 005002A00 NATERTOHN RO JEFEREY MARTINEAU JCEFREY MARTINEAU 2<bOO HATERT0tO4 RO LONG LAKE MN 5555450 5A-110-25 55 OOOA02500 NATERTOHN RD HILLIAM E MARTIN NILLIAM MARTIN 2500 NATERTOItl RO LONG LAKE MN 55554 50 5A-110-25 55 0057 025A0 HATERTOHN RO NALTER R MC CARTHY HALTER R MCCARTHY 2540 NATERTOHN RO LONG LAKE MN 55554 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTEO ARE AN ACCURATE ANO TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN C0UT4TY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION» TOUCHE BEST OF KY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF. c aT * •*» r 'B . '*'• ' •» . \ . * ♦> » Y * • •••• p.i ^ X t p) • * * . • 4 p ■ -in[' .•"i- tf.• * • • % r---- - ^,. ^ - -------------------- 1K»-----^1 aum M5 ■ 1 ■■ «;] ■ kr •• “i!:'.•* '■ii ILX> >■ ;nV- • •.. .'• "1 , —..—4 •• **/mr fj-r .»v'^ —• v.««- ' r- * -•‘v'^I ✓ *•_•i * .']•'*- <“n-‘ )i- I a Ii!i'; ,u . ri-?vVAV ‘-1:1!l • X ♦ *• f V* I VF _ 1 '*•4 / //}’c'* k*»* J- X\" I •>».1!: U^tJT .1^1 ->• / I • •• oi •-J /y-//7'/5-//- '/v '-4^^ y I -t' . i-Xj I ^ I f • i H* 'P fyh• «*4» 1 A^rs^s, - -I \ . -L— 4«^ia ui *9srr •\—^1" t 1 M < :• m» M. t» C ItM Ifififllll : * • - i I % i ................. • #| i mfMT y -*T -----V — ---------'»---------1--------i '• , r-^-W '* '<ttiav-fii> ^»'‘•/ I ' «•«^rZ4l'7^72,^?. (• .T. I L« • I • \ m f i»«f CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO. 1877 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: 10/28/93 TO: Tandem Properties/Peter Aixlrca Co c;o Dick Putnam 2765 Casco Point Road Wayzaia, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Sketch Plan Review DATE OF MEETLNG: 10/25/93 COLTSCIL ACTION - MOTION: (No action required) Council considered the various issues and concerns raised by the developer and staff. While no specific vote was taken, general direction in a number of areas included: 1. General suppon for preservation of "Ancient Ones" site via an outlot or park lot dedicated to the public, with the following thoughts: Applicant and property owner to provide substantial written documentation from appropriate sources (Native American representatives. State • archeologist, etc.) that the site being preserved is the proper location, that this is an acceptable way to preserve it. etc. - Provide documentation of expected future uses. City likely will not provide funding for preservation and/or maintenance of bam or house, and feasibility of preserving same is questioned. 2. Trail system concept generally met with positive response. 3. MLxed reaction on the need for road connection corridor on Coffin property; connection corridor should be dedicated on Dickey property as shown; City intent to consider cul*de-sac as private roads until such time that connector links are actually built. 4. General agreement that no septic setback to Type I wetlands is needed. 5. Somewhat mixed reaction to the issue of dry-buildable credit for Type 1 wetlands, but no final decision was forthcoming. This issue will be placed on Council’s November 8th agenda for further discussion. 6. The question of future City sewer was raised. CITY COUNCn. MLNUTES CITY OF ORONO NOVEMBER S. 1993 FLAG LOTS - REVIEW PL^MNNING COM^OSSION RECOMMENDATION Assistant Planning «& Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron gave the staff report and reviewed the proposed new standards for flag lots in the City of Orono. He stated that staff and Planning Commission recommend that the access corridor be created as an outlet, and that ube Cit>' retain the ability to require a shared access between the two lots in instances where curb cuts are a concern. He noted that the outlets would be 30’ in w idth. He indicated the Planning Commission's intent is that the proposed standards apply only to fronCback lots after the ordinance is adopted. Mayer Callahan moved. Kelley seconded, to subscribe to the Planning Commission recommendation regarding flag lots and staff is hereby directed to draft an ordinance implementing these requirements. Ayes 3, Nays 0. Motion carried. Mayor Callahan moved. Goerten seconded, to e.xtend the moratorium on tlag lots until December 31, 1993. Ayes 3, Nays 0. Motion carried. T\TE 1 WETLAND BLTLDABILITY CREDT Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron reviewed the staff position on the current status of wetland regulations and potential issues w'hich need to be addressed by the City. He discussed the current wetland designations on the City maps and discussed the scope of wetland classification which had been enacted as part of the State Wetland Conservation Act and now requires that wetland alteration permits be issued for developments encroaching into wetland areas. Mayor Callahan commented that he felt the Citv'ordinances should not be changed and that development approvals be contingent upon approvals from the other agencies dealing with the preservation of wetlands and mitigation of impacts upon those w'etlands. City Administrator Ron .Moorse stated that as a proposed subdivision is developed it has to be done in conjunction wdth the other agencies and he believed that should be taken into account when a project is going through Orono ’s subdivision process. Discussion ensued regarding whether 'he City of Or ..o 'ould become involved in regulation ot wetland mitigation or leave that aspect of development to b. ;rr .lated by the other agencies. Mayor Callahan felt strongly that approval by the other agencies inrougnout the developmental process was sufficient to prevent lots being platted in unbuildable areas, and he did not believe the City should invest time and funds in something that was already being regulated. City Engineer Glenn Cook commented that most potential developers request subdivision approval from the City lirst and the approvals of these other agencies comes after tliat fact. Discussion ensued regarding the length of time for processing a subdivision application and the possibility of requiring that the approvals from other agencies come before the final approval by the City. Councilmember Goetten stated she felt that was necessary. Mayor Callahan stated he felt that the City should require developers to obtain agency approvals before City approval. He stated that he also believed that the Planning CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CITY OF ORONO NOVEMBER 8. 1993 Commission should not sttcrr.pt :o deal with wetland mitigation issues. He stated that the Council would not adopt a formal resolution regarding this issue that evening. MAVOR/COU’NCIL REPORT Mnvor Callahan stated that he would be unending a meeting with the Mayors of me cities of Long Lake. Sprine Pwk^d Minnetonka Beach thts week. He also suted that the City ot Orono signed a contract with the City of Long Lake for both Fire and Police protection. Counciltnember Kelley noted that he had read the Minutes of the LMCD meeting and they were accurate. Mayor Callahan stated that in an update from the Metropolitan Council they will now "'SOtiate with cSs on various operational issues os pari of any comprehem.ve plan amendment process. It will include things like sharing of govemmenal services and alfordable housmg. e- -.n I’m the Willow Drive Task Force and noted that the Mayor of Counctoem^r ^ restrictions. The Comm,nee decided not mg"o ahld with thi plan. Th.ey are urgmg that MnDOT conttnue its efforts to achieve completion ot the Willow and 12 safety improvements by the spnng ot 1995. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *15. EXTENSION OF PROSECUTION CONTR.ACT Counciimember Goetten moved. Kelley seconded, fot oi7'^'Av°er3‘'Na« Prosecution Services wtih the City of Minnetonka for 1994 m the amount ot SM.Ol 1. Ayes 3, Mays 0. Motion carried. 16. LONG LAKE ANNEXATION/SUBDIVISION RESOLLTIOwN #3357. Citv Administrator Ron Moorse gave the staff report and stated that the relied the Citv new resolution approved. Mayor Callahan ?n and it as presented.' of Orono of a burden. He felt the last paragraph should be left Mayor Callahan moved. Goetten seconded, to adopt agreement in the form as submitted by the City of Long Lake. Ay , y • 17. UNDERGROUND TANK REMOVAL UPDATE Mayor Callahan discussed the problem of removal of the associated with this project. He felt that they should proceed as rapt y P » r (5 N!INLTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 18, 1993 (#7) /j>1882 JOHN M. 0’SLT.LIVAN/0’SCLLIVAN’S - CONT. O’Sullivan asked if the municipality had the right to supersede Minnesota Fire Co tes. Schrocdcr stated that would require the City Attorney’s opinion. (#10) #1877 TANDEM PROPERTIES/PETER ANDREA COMPANY 3025 WATERTOWN ROAD AND 2645 WATERTOWN ROAD - SKETCH PLx\N REMEW FOR PROPOSED SUBDHTSION - NO .ACTION REQUIRED Dick Putnam (Tandem Properties). Jim Deanovic (Peter Andrea Company), Mark Gronberg (property owner) and Robert Hare (broker from Burnett Realty) were present. Gaffron explained this was a sketch plan review for development of 130 acres at Old Crystal Bay- Road and Watertown Road. Some concerns to be considered are access issues, wetlands, trails and the historic significance of the property. Putnam explained that on the west side of Old Crystal Bay Road is the Coffin property consisting of approximately 62 acres. The Dickey property, on the south side of Watertown Road, is about 68 acres and contains a large arena and the site of the "Ancient Ones". The Dickey property is basically farm land with the exception of the old homestead where there are trees and the arena. The Coffin property has a number of fields with some forests and a number of wetland areas. When the property was bought, the City did not show any wetlands on the map. Other agencies define these wetland areas ditferently. Putnam stated the plan connects the two properties by continuing the existing public road from Old Crystal Bay Road to Willow Drive. The developers have talked to the Orono Park Commission. There are two plans included in the Planning Commission packet, one designed before the Park Commission meeting and one after their on-site visit and comments. Approximately 3 1/2 acres have been identified as pair of the historic site including the bam, farm site and burial area. A public trail connecting the historic site to the DNR woods has been illustrated which is adjacent to the Luce Line, lhat property has been diniated by the Dickey s. A trail would also be considered along Old Crystal Bay in an easement over the right-of-way. On the Coffin property, two cul-de-sac roads are being considered because the wetlands and woods make it difficult to design a looped road. Two acre lots are being considered tor both sites which is the zoning requirement. 24 lots could be developed on the Coffin propeny and 26 lots on the Dickey property. 20 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLAN'NLNG COMMISSION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 18. 1993 (#10) #1877 TANDEM PROPER! lES/PETER .ANDREA COMPANY - CONT. The Park Commission felt it would make more sense to restore the existing home rather than the bam to use for an i iterpretive center because it would be less expensive. Gaffron commented on ti.e public vs. private road access issues. Putnam expressed his surprise when they met on site and Gaffron indicated that just because the road w as platted at a 60 ’ right- ot .' ay it would not be considered a public road. Putnam asked why Casco Point Road, where he lives, "-as plowed by the City' which was a cul-de-sac and the City wouldn’t maintain this type of road. The developers would propose that the streets be public and publicly maintained although thev have been told that is not the case. The roads would be constmeted to public standards but maintained as private. Topography, existing homes and proposed lots will determine where the roads will be constructed. Smith asked if there had been discussions with the Native .American community regarding sacred grounds. She wants to be assured that nothing w ill be disturbed that is considered sacred and there will be no repercussions in 50 years. She volunteered to be involved with any discussions. Deanovic explained that a medicine man must come to the site to determine where sacred grounds exist. Two medicine men. one from Montana and the other from Canada, have already been to the site and detemiined the vame area as sacred ground. Smith asked if members ot the local Native American Cvimmunity had been involved. Deanovic thought Pat Dickey would be able to confinn that this is the sacred ground as she has worked extensively w ith the Native Americans. Smith also wants confirmation directly from the Native .American community that no lands will be disturbed that are considered sacred. Putnam suggested a group, be formed who has an interest in this issue to work on the details. This group could include Smith, and representatives from the Council and Park Commission. State archaeologists have already been involved and confirmed the hillside as sacred. It is no longer legal to dig to determine the status of sacred ground. The Native Americans object to digg.ng but walking on it is acceptable. Smith asked about the possible consideration to maintain the horse barn as a stable and riding arena for the development. Putnam explained that has been dropped from the plan for two reasons: 1) They were unsure if the soils were useable in the pasture area. 2) They did not have enough infomiation when they first com:idered it. Feedback about having a riding arena at this location was not positive. Smith asked what the plans were for screening the lots that abut the Luce Line on the Collin property. Putnam explained that the existing tree lines would not be disturbed and there may be possible enhancements of the wetland area. Smith questioned the concept of an interpretive center and asked who would maintain it financially. The Park Commission has indicated there is not money available tor maintenance. 21 r MINXTES OF THE ORONO PLANMNO COMMISSION MFKTIN(; HKl.n tx TOBER 18, 1993 (#10) #1877 TANDEM PROPERTIES PETER ANDREA COMPANA - CONT. Dcanovic thoucht that it could be maintained pnvatcly after talking N^ith Pat Dickey. Although desirable .« use. .. would be more exr.-ns,ve Sm„h would hke .0 Uk see the bam kept at least in its present condition. I>utnam eommcnied ih.it there were other eonsiderations for the bam site Parking has been a problem for users of the Luee Line and this sue could be a posstbility to provide parking and some use of the bam. Smith asked if the DNR would be interested in working on the trail idea connecting to Line. Putnam stated that as a regional trail, this would mn meet the criteria but as an ottshoo for the municipality it would make a lot of sense. Smith asked if the desicnated trails were on outlots so they could be converted to roads if that was ever desired Putnam responded that discussions had taken place w ith agencies such as the Fish and Wildlife Department and Corps of Engineers to create a dra.nage system ot ^nlds that do not currently exist. The trail would be 25-30’ wide and publicly dedicated but not a road. vcmith -isked if the location where the sweat lodges are could be protected. Putnam responded Ltfhere is no significance to where they are placed, that was just the most convenient location. Putnam stated that as developers they would like to try to create a path so that everyone benetiB “city saw that paVh has to be subtracted from the 2-aere lot area. K "tay no. wlhw hUe, For '.he person owning a lot and seUntg. t. may be better no. to have the tratl. However, for the benefit of the whole area, a trail makes a lot of sense. Schrtteder asked the sums of the trail along Old Cry stal Bay Road Gaffron though, things had tome to a halt and did no. know how the agreements with the property owners along the trail h^d turned out. Money continues lo be a problem. Peterson asked what the feelings were about the possible choice of a southern eotridor for Highway 12 as it would greatly intpati their property. Putnam lell there was some risk but added that development could discourage this route as the final choice. Peterson stated that the proposal looks good but has a concern with the wetland win it be handled tf there is no septic site available on some of the lots and how w.ll the lots be designed since there are wetlands scattered throughout the property? r MLMTES OF TIIK ORONO PLANMNi; COMMISSION MKF/HM; HF.I I) OCTOBER 18. 1993 (#10) #1877 TiWDEM PROPERTIES PETER ANDREA COMPANY - CONT. Deanovic responded that a large group had visited the site including representatives of the Watershed District. Cit> staff. Army Corps of Engineers. BWSR and Steve Schirmers for septic sites. In the end. City ordinances will be a determining factor. Deanovic thought 1; I mitigation may be possible. The Watershed representative felt this was an opportunity for improvements. One of the main issues is that what was classified as wetlands in the past difters from current definitions. Most of the wetlands were classified as Type 1. Gaffron confirmed that under MFCA standards there are certain types of wetlands that meet the criteria for septic installation. Putnam felt their biggest problem will be dealing with the Onmo ordinances relative to the setbacks for septic systems and the dry buildable land. Putnam gave examples of how the wetland maps differ. According to the City map. there was 2.66 ac'^es of wetlands on the Coffin property but 12.15 acres have been identified by their consultant using current methods. Deanovic explained that City maps were done in 1974 and wetlands were identified under different standards on a black and white aerial photo. Although the Dickey property showed no wetlands on City maps, surveyors designated approximately 4 acres. Ihitnam explained that on the Coffin pn>perty of 62 acres, if the City maps were u.sed lot sizes would be 2.47 acres. If the wetlands were subtracted, lot sizes would be reduced to 2.08 acres. The Citv will have to decide how to deal with the wetland designations. Deanovic commented that they had discussed with other agencies how' they felt about changing some of the wetlands. They were agreeable since better wetlands wnuld be built rather than a "rut in a field" Putnam stated that acctirding to Orono’s code, it they created a NURP pond or wetland, that would have to be subtracted off of the two acres. At this time it is a 1:1 replacement but after January 1 it will be 2:1. The wav it stands now. if four acres of wetland were altered at this site, four acres of wetland would have to be replaced somewhere else. This could be done on site, within the Watershed District or within the Count) . If. tor example, a wetland were replaced in Medina, what benefit does that have for Orono even though it meets the State requirements.’ Putnam noted that staff had suggested to Putnam he not look at planned development since this property is not in a sewered area. Meeting a 2-acre requirement may create a problem on some of the lots with the wetlands considered and meeting the 75' setback from the wetlands tor septic systems. 23 MIMTKS OF THK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MKETING HELD OCTOBER IH, 1993 (#10) #1877 TANDEM PROPERTIES PETER ANDREA COMPANY - CONT. Deanovic pointed out that no matter how the lot sizes are calculated, they are over 2 acres. Problems in the FreiKh Creek development may have been caused by not having full discK>sure Gaffron explained there were designated septic sites in that plarmed development of 1-1.25 acre sites. However, when the sites were developed, there were different views of where the house should be placed, etc. so it was difficult to protect the septic sites. Peterson opined that it may be the best altematise to replace wetlands in Medina if the ultimate goal is to protect wetlands even though it would be a loss to Orono. .Schroeder fell the wetlands should be saved in Orono. Two people from UWSR. the governmental agency that enforces the technical wetland policies, did not favor mitigation in another area. Putnam stated at this time the ordinances don’t mesh between the State and municipalities, which causes many problems. Schroeder asked how important it was that the lots be two acres. He thought some five acre lots might solve some of the problems. Puirum thought it may be more difficult on the Dickey property because there is already a pattern established. Wetlands, ponds and trees actually increase the value of the property. Their view is that the Coffin property is more valuable and the homes will be higher priced. Not all people want to have large lots they have to mow. Hare commented that economics are involved but also aesthetics. The developer is proposing development that may be better for the City. High ground makes a parcel more valuable. A five acre site with only one acre of dry buildable may not be any more valuable than a two acre lot that is all dry buildable. People who are looking for lots in the Orono area are kxiking for space between their neighbors yet want to be part of a community. Schroeder asked w hat the expectations are of the price of the lots and homes. Deanovic thought the Dickey propeny would be $80,000 - SllO.tXX) per lot and the Coffin property would be higher, more comparable to Tuckborough in Medina. Hare thought t.hat enhancing the wetlands may make the propeny more valuable. Putnam stated they would probably relocate some of them. This is an opportunity to alter Type 1 wetlands but you wouldn’t want to alter Type 3 wetlands, nor would that be allowed. Nolan asked what other developments the developers have done. Some of the projects they did were Copperfield in Mendota Heights, several projects in Eden Prairie including Summer Oaks, and many sites for Centex Homes in Eden Prairie. Plymouth, and Mendota Heights. They have not done any projects with septic systems. 24 r MENXTES OF THE OKONO PLANNLNG COMMISSION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 18, 1993 (#10) #1877 TANDEM PROPERTIES/PETER ANDREA COMPANT - CONT. Nolan fell it desirable to take some of the Type 1 wetlands and integrate them through the neighborhood with a good plan. Some areas could be developed into more productive wetlands. Mitigation on the sue is preferable to looking m other areas A meeting with the dc\e!cper and Planning Commission members was scheduled for 9:00 a m. Samrday, October 23. The sketch plan will also be presented to Council at the October 25 meeting. (.#11) FLAG LOTS - FIN.ALIZE RECOMMENDATION TO COLNCIL .A motion was made by Schroeder. seconded by Berg, to table discussion of this item until Thursday mormng at the special Planmng Commission meeting. Ayes 6, nays 0. (#12) REPORT BY PLAN*MN ‘G COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE Lindquist and Peterson reported that in the Jundt application problem the Council did not approve a deck at the bottom of the stairway for storage in the 0-75 ’ setback zone. Council requested that adequate hardships be stated on the applications. Surveys need to be accurate. Council demed the Spinner application as the Plaruung Commission had recommended. Nolan commented that the Spinner survey was inaccurate and had been pointed out. (#13) OTHER ISSLES Smith mentioned the meeting with Long Lake and Orono with a mediator over the Highway 12 issue. This was the second meeting and Smith is attending them. A MnDOT renresentative is available as a technical advisor. Orono is represented by the entire Council. These meetmgs run parallel to the Policy Committee meetings which are MnDOT meetings. Two meetmg dates are set in November and agam in January. The meetings are open to the public and held at the Orono Council Chambers. Smith commented that .MnDOT stated the reason they are looking at Highway 12 upgrades is because the people from Wiimar want to get into the Cities. Schroeder reminded members further discussion needs to take place betore the end ot November regarding the B-2 zone and encouraged members to visit all of 'he marinas. Schroeder stated Mabusth had checked into insurance tor Planning Commission members. His question was whether they arc insured if they injure a dog, etc., not if one of the members is injured on an inspection. Gaffron will research further. 25 J r MINLTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 18. 1993 (#10) #1877 TANDEM PROPER! lES/PETER ANDREA COMPANY - CONT. Nolan felt it desirable to take some of the Type 1 wetlands and integrate them through the neighborhood with a good plan. Some areas could be developed into more productive wetlands. Mitigation on the site is preferable to looking in other areas. A meeting with the developer and Planning Commission members was scheduled for 9:00 a.m. Saturday. October 23. The sketch plan will also be presented to Council at the October 25 meeting. (#11) FL.AG LOTS - FINALIZE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL A motion was made by Schroeder, seconded by Berg, to table discussion of this item until Thursday morning at the special Planning Commission meeting. Ayes 6. nays 0. (#12) REPORT BY PLAN2SLNG COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE Lindquist and Peterson reponed that in the Jundt application problem the Council did not approve a deck at the bottom of the stairway for storage in the 0-75’ setback zone. Council requested that adequate hardships be stated on the applications. Surveys need to be accurate. Council denied the Spinner application as the Planning Commission had recommended. Nolan commented that the Spinner survey was inaccurate and had been pointed out. (#13) OTHER ISSUES Smith mentioned the meeting with Long Lake and Orono with a mediator over the Highway 12 issue. This was the second meeting and Smith is attending them. A MnDOT representative is available as a technical advisor. Orono is represented by the entire Council. These meetings run parallel to the Policy Committee meetings which are .MnDOT meetings. Two meeting dates are set in November and again in January. The meetings are open to the public and held at the Orono Council Chambers. Smith commented that MnDOT stated the reason they are looking at Highway 12 upgrades is because the people from Wilmar want to get into the Cities. Schroeder reminded members further discussion needs to take place before the end of November regarding the B-2 zone and encouraged members to visit all of the marinas. Schroeder stated Mabusth had checked into insurance for Planning Commission members. His question was whether they are insured if they injure a dog, etc., not if one of the members is injured on an inspection. Gaffron will research further. 25 L NDNUTES OF THE ORONO PARK COMAOSSION MEEIING THL RSD AV. JAM ARY 6, 1994 NEIGHBORS. REVIEW OF \L\P REQUESTED FROM CITV’ STAFF. .McMillan reviewed the draft letter regarding the public hearing on the Old Crvstal Bay-'' Site scheduled for the next Park Commission meeting. It was suggested that the time, date and place of the meeting be prominently displayed at the top of the notice. Otherwise, the Commission felt the letter was verv clear and well done. (#7) REVIE^V OF PRELIMINARY PLAT PLAN FOR DICKEY/COFnN DEVTLOP.ME.NT Dick Putnam was present and handed out a notice for a neighborhood meeting which included copies of the proposed plat. He showed aerial photographs of the sites, and reviewed the wetland issues. He discussed the potential for trail connections to the Luce Line Trail and parks. He reviewed the revised plat and discussed the changes from the earlier submittal. He noted they have been able to create a wetland area and a pond system to mitigate the wetland alterations that will need to be done to develop the property. He stated that the State Historical Society and the Slate do not have any records in existence which identify the site as an histoncal site. He commented that if the lot was designated as an historical site, the highway corridor mav not be located where it is presently proposed. He stated they have not been able to get any official designation from any government agency that will affirm that this is an historical site. MnDOT has hired a consultant to determine whether this is a Native American site requiring preservation. He commented that there are a number of Native American spiritual leaders who believe that this is a site of histoncal Mgnificance requiring preservation. Tlie process of affirming this will take some months yet. and he did not believe a determination would be made prior of .May of 1994. He noted that this determination would have to be made prior to construction of the highway corndor. If it is determined that this is not an historical site, then decisions will have to be made regarding whether it should be used as a park or developed as a single family lot. Tbe parcel is located in the area designated as the second phase of the development, and .Mr. Putnam did not feel the delay would cause any problems with the rest of the development. Discussion ensued regarding the location of the wetlands on the property and the mitigation requirements. .Mr. Putnam reviewed the proposed trail locations and the possible connections to the Luce Line trail through the Department of .Natural Resources property. Mr. Putnam commented that the old bam and farmhouse are worthless and would be tom down if not acquired as an interpretive center by some body. The consensus of the Park Commission was that the interior trail locations were acceptable as proposed until some determination was made regarding the historical significance of the site. Mr. J MINLTES OF TIIE ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING THURSDAY, JANUARY 6, 1994 Putnam stated they ^^*ouId be starting construction by June at the latest. He renewed the proposal for the Coffin propert>' and noted that there \wll be 20 lots. He reviewed the location of the trail, and commented that trails seem to enhance property value rather than decrease it. He stated that the subdivision does not lend itself to having a' neighborhood park because of the size of the lots. Discussion ensued regarding the type of neighborhood park the Commission had in mind, and it was concluded that the type of facilities and play structures were usually provided by individual families m their own back yards. Flint commented that this was one of the frustrations in not having a fully developed Park Plan in effect, and it was difficult to determine what the area needs were when developments such as the one they were discussing were considered. The Park Commission concluded that Park Dedication Funds were the best option in this instance for park dedication requirements for the Coffin property. These will be determined based on the appraised value of the land. The possibility of the historical site becoming ratified were discussed. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by I’se, seconded by McMillan, to adjourn the meeting of the Park Commission at 10:30 p.m. Ayes 6, nays 0. Richard N. Flint, Chair r i CITY I i OF loRONO City of OROiNO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 1408NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF COCNTRYSIOE .'•LANCR WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a mur.icipal corporation orGanirec ’WHEREAS, the Citv Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, eco.nox.ic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision plat by DiCon, A Minnesota Limited partnership, the subdivider,* and 'WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-IB zoning district and the Orono On-Site Septic Code finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its use as a single family residence to be located without the need of any setback variances; and — WHEREAS, Outlet A is not platted as part of this scheme but is intended for future development. The conceptual plan showing total development of the 93 acres has been reviewed only as far as it relates to the current 6 lot plat. All future developme.nt of Outlot A will be subject to all require.ments of current zoning and the CMP; and — WHE.REAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: I / 1) Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements. 2) Dedication o». the plat of rights of way for public streets and roads, shown as Old Crystal Bay Road South, Watertown Road, Willow Drive South and Countrysiae Dri—_ The subdivider has dedicated to the City a road and utility easement granting to the City temporary ccess, improvement and utility easement over that portion of the cul ae sac not included in the dedicated right of way of Countryside Drive —-- - 4) Dedication to the City of a Flowage and Conservation providing for li.mitations on the use of wetlands and/or drainageways described therein and shown on the plat as "drainage easements". Page 1 of 2 .zee CITY OF ORONO City of OROiVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 14QR The subdiv’ider has adopted a declaration of restrictive covenants adv’ising all future berefitting property owners or their share in the responsibility of the maintenance and repair Countrvside Drive until that time in the future when the subject road is a through road connected to Old Crystal Bay Road South. The covenants further advise that at the time of the City's acceptance of Cou.ntryside Drive that It will be the benefitting property owner's responsibility to bring that road upto current City standards. ^ 6) Execution of a Subdividers Agreement prov^idino ^^^stallation of permanent street improvements as a condition of subdivision approval. 7) Payment to the City of a Park Dedication Fee in the a.mount of $1, 200.00. 3) Pa>Tnent to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat and accompanying doettments in the amount of $75.00. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Citv of Orono hereby approves the plat of COUNTRYSIDE MANOR, Hennepin County,* Minnesota; subject to the following conditions: 1) Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Countryside .Manor and Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 2, Countryside Manor shall access via Countryside Drive There shall be no direct access permitted onto Willow Drive South. 2) The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono vv’ith the Hennepin County Recorder's Office on or before February 23, 1983, together with a original copy of this resolution and executed copies of the docum.ents noted above. Wao U The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat nf»r>#»<=c specified above. In that event, it will be review°^^ ° '-^le a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision ATTEST: Adopted by the City Council this ^3rd day of ZfJr'-r'&.P. / Albert^ M~ S^rom, ^tity (fler)p pace 2 of 2 <£un22i _ _ _ _ _ __ William 3. Van Nest^ Mayor mwM%uiu [iMir Rllil LtAHWDli itTunriai^ 155 smn 5HIF RTkI feint Sfs. Jeanne A. Mabusth City of Orono Page -2* Januurv 7, 1^94 will be on the Coffin Parcel, at two locations. The grading of th,* southerly cul-de-sac is shown 7 feet higher than the adjacent wetland. The cul-de-sac -hculd be either lowered or moved south to avoid the setback encroachment. The other encroachment is at the southeast comer of the Coffin Parcel where a detention pond is proposed. This appears to be a logical location for the pond which will function to protect the wetland from sediment deposition. All other wetlands that have been delineated are regulated at the State level by the Wetland Conservation Act These rules require the replacement of any filled wetlands at a 2:1 ratio based on area. This ratio applies for replacement with the same type (or a higher quality) of wetland that was filled. At the Federal level the wetlands are regulated by the U S. Army Corps of Engineers. The plan shows some of the wetland areas that will be filled as part of the site grading, as well as the wetland replacement mitigation area. The wetland alterations and 2:1 compensatory mitigation should be reviewed and approved by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (LGU) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The site drainage is routed through established drainage routes onto adjacent properties. These downstream properties should be inve.stigated for their capaciw to handle an increase in storm water runoff. Specifically, near Lot 7 and Lo» 5 on the Colfin Parcel and Lot 6. Block 1 and Lot 8 on the Dickey Parcel. Runoff and ponding calculations should be provided for our review. Drainage and utility easements will be required 5 feet wide along all lot lines . nd 10 feet wide along the roadway riglH-of-ways. Drainage easements should be provided ovei the ponding, wetland and ^tigarion areas^s Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours verv trulv, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. /' Shawn D. Gustafson. P.E. To: From; Date; Jeanne A Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Stephen Wcckman. On-Site Systems Manager Januarv 13. 1994 Subject: ^1901 Tandem Propenies - Septic Review I have reviewed the septic system testing and design information for phase 1 (25 lots) on the Coffin and Dickey properties and have the tollovving comments. All 10 of the first phase lots for the Coffin property have been tested and approved for primary and alternate drainlield sites suitable for a 5-bedroom home. These sites meet all soil, topography, drainage and setback requirements of the City of Orona and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Standards, Chapter 7080. The 15 lots in the first phase for the Dickey parce’ have tested and approved primary’and alternate drainfield sites suitable for a 5-bedroom home. Of these 15 lots, 13 have draintield sites that meet all soil, topography, drainage and setback requirements of the City of Orono and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Standards, Chapter 7080. Lot 2. Block 2 has been granted a variance for an 8% slope on the alternate draintield site and an old well pit must be properly sealed. Lot 7, Block 2 has been granted a variance for an 8% slope on the alternate site. A January 7, 1994 letter from Bonestroo and Associates indicates that an ouilot should be platted alore'the east side of Old Crystal Bay Road for a bicycle trail. Although no trail outlot is shown on the survey, the primary draintield sites tor Lot 2, Block 1 and Lot 3. Block I could be moved east by 5’ in order to allow a trail outlet to be included while still mamtaimng a 20’ setback to these draintield sites. The two parcels have been surveved bv Cotfin and Gronberg. Inc. dated January' 7. 1994 and include all property lines, drainage easements, draintield sites, and home sites used for this review. Based on the above information. I would recommend approval ot the subdivision. A g^/^^ff ^ A f TAA / Yg /A^ z Z cAj ^ gur - /. /y /O Y* /A^ r to r/er/^ o»»T t J. *f( <•-*“/ /»» TM (AJ r 20 Ot<r r 5. , < ’j»Sur^A^/f /g^A 3 CTUtAit* l) g/fAS \ juiA^iA / f JlAiAAfA z y ggfA f / /-X r /. / res^ cur ^ 7.0€ CfJ(siAgAAt^ 2) f0fg !*j -. 37.1 cf!^ a*Ats Zt. 2/ r^sy _ ffAsALf AOort tu: ((. 7 ffr^ o»tr- 2(-^> "y / rt. uj -j ^ ^ 4fzr(i / fffrt.'um 2acaj,‘ iYl />L/r to. t ffS^ O^f: YX to rt ,U r 3S.'*r^Y ^ OUT.-?/. € MA ti .- ^/.7 Cf!^ ffUTs2i.<7: /CO TA.u^T gf ^ i. A t rfi f ft !u: Y rfT /a Yt i Ji fff tCo yA oi, 2 £3 (Ai % K «5 A^fA 3 S UgAAfA 3 32.70 ACKfS A AAeTfM / YfA*. /VI 7 J) /yfti OA.T i s.£<f Cf7 /O /V r 3/.0 Off /art At o*.r 9 / 3, t7 cfS /oc yam yj,r9^, r rv r^/ it/4r(AfoccjAL/gOAO A^fA 3 (sag it (A i) t YA z / / rtf t rt : ts f^o; fOU : YCYAJ ' /at* » SfrAf /00>A- 9i r*j /oorAffCYtf. ^ OTAfiA tYAs/*/.SCAS itAr 13,5 I fo ft r €t. ? YfS tort 2<9.T^ /CO YA - ft 7.2 rfs i«o Y< ~t2%3 / to /oo A A rfA gc/u riA^^ / Yg z CPS TSC. /g rg - 7g cfSYsc. /ac 2a- 7it./5 egfYj/i p:ifu = Jyg.OZ y rfis 23 CAS •C? CAS _JuS*lfA I / r/ ottr - 0. /J cfS ta ya Oits z 0.65 CAS /OOYl our - /, og CAS /TAP z Cf^S /on - ^ CAS /Oorl: t?(fS Ifiiu s^cf itwf ret/L Sm£4AAa 3 rarjcs / YA ourz 0.6 CAT 1 2.73 CAS AS. S CAS CA/C/a^l. soy4 OUT: 3.33 CAS r /2,^g CAS gf. 2Z CAS '' /aoYA CUTS C.^£ CAS Z Z6.0*C CAS AS. yj CA7 S/ 'C ; . .i m -T1 H ri in•- c I i: lA X iJ ii y n ti I;. ii‘ ii ;i F< i. ia yM : • :.V ry,v.' - •>• ^ I »’#» \i ‘ '5 V ' ^/; • W '^ • * , »- - r 'V *4 ' ,';j; -'i; . •i/a » . v/ « .. V . i'^f ♦ •<*7* -V, iiiiri»:il^ 'U )M . 7 -'-V :■! I^ARlN .1 ! I Im . • .. li I*''* • . .. ‘‘i. ■ -»r> MUA. V- « r: T J|f (teii?# - ^»gw *>-1 ww^j .. * . *1 . \ • , » .!* ■ ' ^•■■', . > I A/ ' .' '' . • ■ ..‘•..'viM ’ * jtri'iSBi'i.v..''/•■'VaXi: ''..I •• ! pgifiiii iSfeiaa I 'IS ii;i•Tl t«iUncaH >r2f|§Sa yw?'ste|pR'l^P mmmimd »«< ‘rj t: ‘ 1 • I 4* Cnu o Q- rj 3 Q. CD fj VI 5vr 1/1 *T3 O5 o' O 73 O o a “D 72o *T5 m 73 f'n Ln IS WM.?im' ImP f>'1f‘•. r • / JT * •r I >'. • iCa4^‘ rh KiM m mm i«wfcfl|NSSks.’-w fdm *1^ ifi or D o X •< CO H > r- X > < X o >o rI L* |f'.‘ 4;^, i.5 . i-’iN*/*'' “ "■ • •"• OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD S "nI 5' C/l<ocro D. 9p >ininO O W LJo ir* z 'a -1o tJ O n p a» Q. P D Q. D i/k m K f-*- "T3 O 3-. o’ p, d go. Q Kto o op o!na 5i oa a 2- ac•-* oa oac 2 «o • . • m.9 ■' ‘i'f * ''’iMain.: r.i O 73 Oz >zo m "0 30 O m 73 m Ln . ‘ f.‘-'H<' n:-?-' :kw I < i|<T“;: ip^ij ............................... ■ ■■' - a; - V. .................................................^ .............. m '* * 'f^/^ ■ t ’-„■•'■■/ ,r ;J^ •■ • ' . ’ ‘' • •• ,‘i'h ;• V,••••. •< . '■: , VilluV'H ■• •.^* • *’ ' \*n y I'I'a < iV. .a:“i.*>' »■'•If*^ V I .rf C- '*,* V V .V ‘ ifel ^ dti: . S % . •< I v*' ^ «'*. • g.N^-siir. .• = ,• ;.v:. ' *' ^ » »jy .T t;*v;\. - i- ■'!i^h'isSfe*' f ■■ 2- ,v ? » ■ 1. k > < .1 ' % < WILLOW DRIVE S r * <• . \ • ■ * i » • .\ \ V ■■'■'■.1'.i;« • /• ■:i:. ;• vV X I V; r m Bonestroo Rosene Anderllk & Associates Fngtrreefj i Arthllects January 18, 1994 pt0>^ ^ )*» Hi »«-• / ♦ *• •*» • < •• >••«« f M «i 1 •' f • **ir • • t w« mrntm' * if-«>t A tmrn9g\ t H^M- M «Ar ^ »f v*< ; » I IN4«^ 41 . A m>*40 A • i rn%m^\ 1 f % • ^ 0 A • A ' ' i« .^< i *J ' I A>09^ •! m0^%^ P% kM 'V»« * «^< **f ^ r »i C tc«^ M .aryr% f tiMi« tr C Vje i »i Wnwe • ►! I t«N 99 HAW A M ,:»av Jk HfpA c«ir • n^w »>f \ W<nH M J Zj -^009 ^ •* r» ,t i rt Wyp><' ^•«-*«^ f% wm^ > %0 A 09 f 9 %••• It ■ •% • -%t. . » «Aa.M« < mrntm Af y ^ •• .» •*«4r '. • r I r»«M •■ • •« r^ »% I A l« A(» « 94 •%«■ • *rt^| Mj. Jeajioc A. MafaurJi, Building acd Zoning Acajinisrator City of Oroco Post Office Bex $6 Ciystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Tandem ?rcperats File No, 139-1501 Dear Jeanne, Wc have reviewed the runoff and ponding caJculaccns prepared by Coffin & Gronberg. Inc. for Tandem jPropertiea. The propertv is located south of Watertown Road, to the wTst of Old Crystal Bay Road cr. the Coffin Parcel and to the east of Old CtystaJ Bay Road on the Dickey Parcel, in the North Half of Sectsen 4, The calculattoiis are acceptable, however, more information is necessary to evaluate the imparts on the downstjeam properties. Wc expect that many of the septic systems for ibis development will be mound systems. Several of the septic sites are less Lhaa 3 feet above the high water levels of the deterttion ponds. These sites are on the following jots’ COmN PARCEL: Lot 11, primary & ahemate Lot 1, alternate DICKJEY PARCEL: Lot 5, alternate Lot 6, alternate These site locations should be modified to provide a 3 foot elevation above the high water level or the ponds should be modified. It appears that the ponds have been designed as *dry ponds'* with no pensantst standing water. This design should be reviewed by the .Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. A baffle weir detail should be pro'dded that shows hew it will function without standing '••'•ater. Also, each of the pond outlets cn the Dickey parcel consist of two cuberts at different elevations. No detail has been provided that shows the downstream end of the outlet. The elevated culvert will create a high potential for erosion and we recommend a drop manhole structure be added for control The drainage caJculaticns show in most cases that the future runoff will be less than the ^sting ninoff. However, the runoff will be concentrated through culverts to the property Jmes which may have an tnpact on the downstream properties. The pond outlet at Lot 5 on the Cornn Parcel is directed con to the Luce Line Tiail. An existing ditch runs easterly TUE Xt-:3^ EOMESTROO «, aSECiCI^^TEs Ms. Jeanne A. Mabu^ih Ci^ of Orcr.c Page -2* January 18, 1094 iJoag the no^ side of the traiJ to the wisiing box njh'ert shewn. The existmz ditch ard -■’NR Ue pond cnjtlet it the mest jocthtt ly lise of tbe Did*)- P«cd u dSrecteo to aa esfabHsied cu^ageway CD ‘±e Thcaspson parcej that ntas souiheasterJy ihiouth the DM< oark and then southerly to a cuhert croasag at the Luce Line Traa Hiia route shouJd be to determine the drainage capacity 3%‘ajlable. Please contact ae at this office ff you have any questions regaiding this matter. Yours very truly, 30NESTROO, ROSENEi ANTERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. (/ SJbawn D. Gusufson, ?,£, ' V' To:Orom> Planning Comniission Members Mavor Callahan and Orono Council members iT Ron Mrorse. Cit> Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator January 7, 1994 #1893 Christine Freeman. 2240 Shadywood Road - Variances - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10.25. Subdivision 6 (B) - Side yard setback variance. Required = 10’ E.xisting =* 16.7’ Proposed =6.7’ Variance = 3’ 3" or 33^ 2. Section 10.22. Subdivision 2 - Review of hardcover. 0-75’ setback area = 3,750 s.f. E.xisting =0% Proposed = 05c 75-250 ’ setback area = 11,094 s.f. Hardcover variance required. Allowed = 2,773.5 s.f. or 25% Existing = 3,106.4 s f. or 28%’^ Proposed = 3.352.4 s.f. or .30.2% (addition of 286 s.f. of structure, removal of 40 s.f. of paved walk area) Variance = 578.9 s.f. or 5.2% Hardcover increase = 246 s.f. or 2.2% * Steve Jensen, the architect for the applicant, has confirmed that none of the landscape areas are underlain with plastic or geo-technic fabric (791 s.f. or 7.5% of landscape area adjacent to residence, 1,265 s.f. or 12% of rock area adjacent to garage). 3. Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of lot coverage Total lot area = 14.844 s.f. Allowed = 2.226.6 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,836 s.f. or 12.35a Proposed = 2,122 s.f. or 14,3% No variance required. ■J Zoning File #1893 January 11. 1994 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum^Hardcover Statement C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List E - Hardcover Fact Sheet F - Elevations G - First Floor Plan H - Survey ^Description of Request Residence smicmre on ,hc lo, ,o ,ho westirl „ 1 " located approximately 6’ from the side lot line. There would be an apploliLtc p ^1/^ corridor for emergency vehicles if 10’ addition is approved. ^ There seems to be a dispute between the areas within thr* 7S i • is not u^rwithnsrA ’. mTs'ilme’V''''‘''''‘ ~“:r *■ ™" ;r„, i Issues for Consideration 1- Can addition be reduced in width to minimize impact on side vard? Lnncn'ea‘to°easn What is r Zoning File 4^1893 January 11, 1994 Page 3 3 Is this the only functional or reasonable option for an entiy addition to residence. Options of Action Any recommendation approval must include the disclaimer that if plastic or geo-technic fabric is found beneath landscape areas that the existence of such would be in violation oi' the condiuons of approval of the variance and will require the immediate removal. r pc CITY OF CRCNO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.&0 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION 2240 Shadywcod Road, Orono, rrrv rr nonanLi I » uMwttwf cr<^i y0jrc nccrrcI Aitnifwu ui I i ’*1* <V>t> A wWV«L. W'WV Site Address Property Identif. Number rp,T.n.^ 17-117-23 ^2 0001 __ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __— (month/year) I (^'<i^)(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ^ residential - - -other(specify) Zoning District:__________________________ A? rru aV A. 11 a I • V rUZrv T? i 7^ ^ iUc rrviiMynu rf'ni Oni Ti^ i A •A\// applicant Name Steve Jensen (Architect) Phone (home) 377 0335 Phone (wor)c) 377- o335 Address: lll6 S. Vincent. Ave.City:Zip: 55405 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Christine Arko Freeman Address: 2240 Shady.vood Road_ _ _ City: Orono Phone (home) 471- 7622 _ _ Phone fwork) ?622 _ _^Zip: 55391 description OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $_ _^• ^2 2. To Accomodate: .. . . A low i storv addition to an existingDescribe request in detail: a xuw j. —r—- - - - - - - 2 story house (U) 10* X 28■-6” for entry and study/dinin^^ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage X Setbaclc:Front ^ Side Rear _ _ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements.—, see attached r #18^3 (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted by th^ appi </sw deadline date in order for your application to be considered 1.___Completed Application Form 2*___Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150* (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). ___Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). -----Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8J5"xll" for reproduction), 5.-----Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll"). ___Sketches or plans of floor ft elevation views (provide 1 copy eJi^xll”). 7.-----As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. ___Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. remember that yoar vari^mce application is not complete if th' i-P^onaation has not been included. Please above APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ^kow>edges and agrees to this application and further autnorizes reason^:fcl-eentry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agentSf Commission members^ and Council members for purposes of investiga­ tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled meetings of the Planning Conmission 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 ft Zoning this change prior to the meeting. r A r crystal ,01 PC :34 4M) PVAH^i^E. /^ ^ 2 I? / / <^ y ■^^^/(t35)/ 4^// 3 • • *••DAKOTA ', ^• J(24f 50 5a 5TT*S" 3) » ' »_i 50 j 5b j b S rr''j*’S « FSTil^ 15 05)1 ISO (HO) » I 50 /. • W 50. i 1 uST p;»pj k^ii" 5T» I Iv K a STON 50 ' 50 » B" A'T:•4*1 S 50 ' 5 ('^)(*9) (%)] ?!(47 ’^(<6H<5) (40 -j^*'' t'l » 5^ • % • 2 II ^ -li ^ o ?'<69) ^ » ;fr 6n (b5)k64) 3;--«o - *0 « ,■1f L RUN DATE 10/lVn tATCH 001PROO AOOR OMCR NAHE TAXPAYER 'AOORPROP AOOR (PtCR NAME TA)9AYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR 0»tCR NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR » 17-U7-2S (kZ 0001 022R0 SHAOYHQOO RO CHRISTINE ARXO FREEMAN CHRISTINE ARRO FREEMAN 22A0 SHAOYHOOO RO NAYZATA »04 555T150 17-117-25 A2 OOOA 0221A SHAOYHOOO RO JAMES 6 C0THMAM4 ETAL JAMES 6 COTHMANN 221A SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA m 555T1 50 17-117-25 A5 0125 0225A SHAOYHOOO RO N H MEY JR A J R MET MIUIAH H MEY JR 2250 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA »04 S5591 ' HTNNEPXN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0»tCRS LIST50 17-117-25 A2 000202232 SHAOYNOOO RO RICHARD LEE ROKESH RICHARD L RORESH 2232 SHAOYHOOO RO NAYZATA m 553T130 17-117-23 A2 0005 02200 SHAOYNOOO RO 0 L OEMNETT A H E BENNETT BARRY I A MARY ELLEN BEMCTT 2200 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA MN 55391 30 17-117-25 A5 012A 022AO SHAOYNOOO RO OAR OMEN OAVIO S OMEN 22AO SHAOYHOOO RO NAYZATA MN 55391 REPOrr NO. P1A55A01 PAGE 130 17-117-23 A2 000302229 SHAOYNOOO RO MICHAEL PIRICH TRUSTEE MICHAEL PIRICH 2229 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA Ml 5539130 17-117-25 93 0129 02299 SHAOYNOOO RO EVELYN S TRUTNAU EVELYN S TRUTNAU 2299 SHAOYHOOO RO NAYZATA MN 55391 30 17-117-25 95 0127 02259 SHAOYHOOO RO M 0 SCHAFER ACE SCHAFER MICHAEL A CmtISTINA SCHAFER 2259 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA MN 55391 J. v; n. I ■ raop Aoon CMIER KAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR . f * * .. V': *. • V *.! • • ^ J • * > ••; f' , # >jL* • , ' L t-f' *» r « I ^ r. t• • .tv SS 17-117-25 A5 0120 022A5 SHAOYNOOO RO J C SATHER A K F SATHER JOm i RAfHLEEN SATHER 22A5 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA MN 55591 TOTAL BATCH 001 00012 I. I »# * ■U • ' ‘I- v-'’’ • *'■* . ! V « f' 30 17-117-Z3 93 0129 02237 SHAOYNOOO RO 0 L SCHUOER ASM SCHUDER DANIEL L A SUSAN H SCHUOER 1111 MAXNELL APT 237 BOULDER CO B0309 3B 17-117-23 93 0199 02229 SHAOYNOOO RO JAY PIEPER SUSAN A TOOO PIEPER 2229 SHAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA Ml 55391 #1 •■’ r... • 4 V.'*v-\' , t• * • • { # i i ‘. 1 * f - . » .•.***.' *» .. V fa V' ‘‘ ■■ L * . V • .. V . ^ • •«« , . i r hardcover calculation workshkt zc «e: (c .rclb cnb ) 0-75'c Z5^250 Existing Hardcover ^in _Zone 500-1000 •• M y -jg.A. House . ^^ " LENGTH S • F • WIDTH X 7. >S.F. s S.F. S.F. . X S.F B. Garage c. D riveway X _ S.F. S.F. S • F • D. Sidewalk X .. 4^ S.F. S.F. S.F E. Patio /D eck 7 S.F F.Landscape areas UNDE.RLA.IN BY plastic SHEETING X X S.F S.F S.F S.F 6. Other ^ Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property A rea in Zone S.F S.F S.F A i ^rj] X100 ' \X.JENSEN a COMPANYm« VOUtM WWC1»IY Mf »■>■«»■ aPpLIt WN tf«09• It • iTt •oi>« *wf» ■ ^ , ■— . v»,. Vil #189 3 - JENSEN ak COMPANY*««• 90un$ «MCt«|t M«rr.-w r jt?lFREEMAN HOUSE BMH; SHEET 1 - — r TO: s i FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator January 10, 1994 SUBJECT; #1894 Greg Truchinski. 1580 Fox Street - Mter-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.28. Subd. 3(A) - (Review 10.20. Subd. 3(K)|. Applicant must first obtain a conditional use permit before installing an independent tower/antenna structure. The strucmre was installed some time in the fall and was noted by staff during a building inspc TiLfi: lof an adjacent property in October of 1993 Structure must meet 85’ setback from all lot lines. Required = 85’ Proposed = 25’ Variance = 60 ’ or 70.5%. Section 10.75, Subds. 1 and 2. Although the above referenced .section would limit height to 65’, these code sections would allow increases of height above 65’ by applying for a conditional use permit. There would appear to be no limit on height as long as required setback is met. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum C - Property Qyvners List D - Plat Map E - Portion of MacMillan Addition Plat Approved by City in 1991 F - Site Plan G - Elevation of Tower/Anterma Structure H - Applicant’s Amateur Radio License I - Article Entitled "Antenna Height and Communications Effectiveness" J - Public Service Communications, American Radio Relay League Description of Request Applicant has installed an independent tower/antenna structure without the benefit of the building permit and the required conditional use permit. Suaicture was observed by an inspector I Zoning File #1894 January 10, 1994 Page 2 some time in October 1993. The applicant was advised of the need to apply for a conditional use permit. The City is also asked to approved a substandard setback of 25’. Tlie code would require an 85’ setback as tower plus three attached antennas total 85’ in height, review Exhibit G. Applicant has submitted a copy of his amateur radio license confirming that use is solely for private or hobby use and not for commercial. Applicant resides in residence on property as required by ordinance. The use is subordinate to or accessoiy to the principal residential use. The property is owned by Whitney MacMillan. Please note Mr. MacMillan has signed the application. The rights of the amateur radio operator are well defined under the regulations of the Federal Communications Commission. The courts allow local eovemmental units to create W- reasonable and safe guidelines for the installations of these strucmres but in no way can a governmental unit deny the individual the right to install an antenna structure if all pertinent standards of the regulations have been satisfied. Review Exhibits E and F, the survey submitted by applicant is not current. If applicant proceeds with application, he must provide an updated survey retlecting new north and west boundaries. Review Exhibit D, the property to the immediate east is owned by David MacMillan (structure is 25’ from east lot line). Other contiguous properties are not owned by Mr. MacMillan. The City cannot approve the 25’ setback based on the required setback set forth in the zoning code. This is not a question of a visual or aesthetic burden upon adjacent property owners but a matter of protection of private property. The setback is established so that if the structure was to collapse it would create no impact on an adjacent property as structure would fall within the defined boundaries of the property. If the City is to approve a conditional use pennit for applicant, the structure must be relocated so to meet the 85’ setback from all lot lines of the property. A subdivision of a lot line rearrangement between the David MacMillan and Whitney MacMillan properties may be a consideration. Applicant should be asked to determine how he wishes to proceed. Applicant’s options are as follows: 1.Table application to provide applicant time to submit an updated and amended survey relocating struemre within 2 acre rural property; or Table application so that a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement can be filed providing the additional area so that antenna structure conforms to the setback standards of the ordinance. Zoning File #1894 January 10, 1994 Page 3 Further Issues for Consideration Dealing with Conditional Use Permit for Antenna Structure 1.The City has received no information on the Installation of the strucnire. The City must be in receipt of the detail and specifications for tower and base strucnire for the review of the City Ei.j,. icer. It is difficult for staff to imagine any reliable installer completing the insta* -non of the antenna strucnire without a building permit. As the structure is owned and used by a nonowner of the property, it will be necessary to limit the conditional use permit to the specific user and require the removal of the base and tower strucnire when applicant no longer resides on the property. Are there other controls members may feel appropriate for use of the structure? L ' !l CITY C? CRONO - CRJJERAL LAND USE APPLICATION fF Ci-V' PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address j ^PfM S| T_ _ _ Property Identification Niinber (P.I.D.) Please attach legal description to application if not included APPLICANT Phone (heme) ^ ^ 3 1 Name GrK^G’ Trnr4)M5Cl Phone (work) 5* 1 Address )Foy ?:T. than applicant)Phone (home) H 7 3 •" 1uWNliK (if aiffexsnt Najn0 hJi /A /r M 1 t^L A hJ Phone Address POVE ZT C:. tv S^. ( Date Prooertv Acouired (month/year) I (do) (do not)also own the adjacent parcels of land. PEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application “• T TV nc runkinUA I I Ut uliUttU nccjrct xnhn%^Lm ui f iuL. 1350200000 01 QES 125.00 CHECK Ti 125.00 RECEIFT-THM YOU tf2BS4U0 cool f<0i T(^"0 in/“0/CA w <.w;/ / $175.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 Guest Eouse/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Ccmnercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more ^ - - Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of laxeshore FRD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Fee - $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS . , ^$200.00 Commercial Site Plan Revxew (+ consultant fees; ” $250.00 Vacation ■ $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision -- - - $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) $300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $100.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule ,PRESENT DSE OF PROPERTY < Present Zoning District • f Present Use of Property Residential 25.00 25.00 YOU T09:0 0/2S/9 Orher (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe recuest in detail: To <0 ^ ^ wfTH' 1P4hfo AhVF TF7 CAl^TA-k^e P4r>c ______________________ _____________ required submittals Xl. Completed Application Form. X2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtai this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governmer. Center 348-3271). 3»- -Plat • Map. ^4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF IJUIGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (11* X 17■ OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff;______________________________~ Date_________________ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge, OWNERS SIGNATURE ^ The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request Applicant's signature Date /O/OSh Owner's signature \Ki.j Date Cbcjy. ^3 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 3tai imer. r Oct 26, 1993 Greg Truchinski 1580 Fox St. VVavzata Mn. 55391 476-9631 H. unlisted 621-5185 Pager. ind :e. Dear Sirs: This is to let you know I wish to coopjerate with you fully on the matter of my existing antenna structure. I of course am hopeful that you will allow me to keep the system up as is. Included are photo’s from the neighbors house's. Plus photo's of other prominent antenna installations. As you can see in the photos, even with all the leaves fallen, my anteima installation is completely hidden from my neighbor’s. With leave's on, you have to drive in front of my house to see it. When I’ve climbed to the top and stood on the top rung of the support structure, you cannot see any man made buildings when leaves are on the trees, and only some outline of my two closest neighbors house’s with leafage gone. Both house’s are more than 350 ft. from my house. It is difficult for me to see it as a visual burden on anybody. Please, if you could, take a look at the document "Antenna Height and Communications Effectiveness" that I've included. Prepared by the American Radio Relay League. Also included is a drawing of the support structure, the three important antennas, and their heights. This is all I do, other than a little hunting. I work, and then talk to the world. I have a large sum of money tied up in this sophisticated antenna system. The antenna system is the heart of my hobby. You can’t talk to them if you can’t hear them. You can’t hear very well with less antenna. It would be pairrful to me if you took my hobby away from me. I hope we can work something out. Sincerely ''in-as-® c *d fv .' • ‘ •%.RUN DATE 10/2A/93 HCr#«PIN CCXJNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEMCMTCH 001 ** 8 • **•PRO>ERTY 0»«4ERS LIST«• ^ .18 02-117-21 21 0006 18 02-117-21 21 0007MOP AODR 00387 ORONO ORCHARD RD S 01580 FOX ST •. {w OWNER NAME 0 D A R M MACMILLAN HHITNEY MACMILLAN ♦TAXPAYER •DAVID D MACMILLAN FWIT»«Y MACMILLAN•NAME/AOOII ' PO BOX 9100 DEPT 28 •1580 FOX ST «-o\HPLS MN 55880‘i 11 •NAYZATA MN 555911 ‘f V 'is' 02-117-21 12 0001 18 02-117-23 12 0008 •Lr PROP AODR 00885 ORONO ORCHARD RO S 01580 FOX STI-'ONNCR KAMI EDWARD H HAFtt «s- *.WHITNEY HACMILLIAN i '>•TAXPAYER '' EDWARD HERSEY HAMM .1. * ’V ’HHITNEY MACHILLIAN # 1 1 KAHE/AODR < 408 ST PETER ST 8880 .V '\1580 FOX ST '•• i ^ ^ST PAUL HN 55102> * 9 • • '• • C ^ 8 .NAYZATA MN 55191 1 -1 9 ♦ 1 V. «'•; , »■ 1• • c 1 •18 02-117-21 12 0008 8 18 01-117-23 18 0001 V #PROP AODR 00018 ADDRESS UNASSIOCD •00018 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO • OHNER NAME WHITNEY MACMILLAN CARGILL HAC HILLAN JR ETAL L.TAXPAYER HHITNEY MACMILLAN LONGRIDGE ASSOCIATkS « NAME/ADOR 1580 FOX ST P 0 BOX 9100 DEPT 28 t ^ * e • •NAYZATA MN 55191 MPLS MN 55880 r • • • • • ^PROP AODR • 1 OHNER NAHE •t • 1 TAXPAYER iTOTAL BATCH 001 00009 • REPORT NO. PI4S»0IPAGf •t' ~ “ -•M5»01A,.«¥ . -’i' 4 . 'vwrl*.' iiaiiLft.58 02-117-23 21 000800058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO < t%LONCRIDCE ASSOC LONGRIDGE ASSOC C/0 ROBERT J THEILER P O BOX 45000EPT 28 MPLS MN S5<M0 'Jl.-'■■■‘A' !#• •■ >A \r:A718 02-117-tl 12 000701570 FOX ST S H REYNOLDS ADO REYNOLDS S H REYNOLDS ADO REYNOLDS 1570 rox ST NAYZATA MN 55191 38 01-117-21 18 0002 01A80 FOX ST SUSAN V NORTON NORNEST BANK TRUST REAL ESTATE 6TH A HARGUETTE HPLS MN 55879-0088 I';, »>.v. '■• :M|m ' ♦ (J / • »» 5 NAME/AODR • .* V -It '■’V '■ ■ >i>'* A-X' V:-. N . .fi > M H r ■. -''r »^: I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEFtttPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. >i, ^ /]»/!-»mSM : J WT.'FT-J. ^ ' < * • 8 li C> ' '■ •' •* r -A.<1 '.r S V ’ ‘‘ P. N, p • v.-* • /fii'fiv r ■ ■■ v.V ■ A- * ' •/ V L- y s’- • » ■ tH • :• ■* i-'-Vv. • • *v • r 1 «■; • «'•» • • • • V ’ *’* ^*'*>«* • *« • u. ' - • .«• % . « * ' ^ . - •- -'-• • ' * • • • •• ' ' '. ---------------------------—-------------------------------- „ . t / *•* **'■* "• •.’ .*‘i’ V V * >*■ ‘/i» -. * ^* %* • - • ^ . V .• - . • \I_ • «“•• •* * ,* ' - » s . _ • ^ . . • ^.e V ♦.*.• , V. •« * .* ■* J't ■, —. •• :••■ ‘.w.*- V-.V :‘ .. .• '^* • ••• ,*' • ».* - "*'* * • • • * •■•• •»-•• .^..V . - i. •>*•. ••' .••*. - .. *.• . *“ * • m • • •• *.• • ■* <**.■■**.*»»» •,• * *«' *'*»*"»^“** * • • ;/• - -. • ■ .UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AMATEUR RADIO LICENSE NV0P •••» *. » . • •* •• • GREG J TRUCHINSKI 1580 FOX ST WAYZATA MN 55391 Special Conditions -t'* >, " v-^«..vA . r; »• • * . •.• , / *• ••*•• * - * ■> -.' ’• ^ r ■ • *:■ '• • • ' ^ ■ •'' r • •• Effective Date Expiration Date 10/05/93 10/05/03 Station Privileges PRIMARY THIS LICENSE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF GRANT ON THE REVERSE SICE NOT TRANSFERABLE (LICENSEE'S SIGNATURE) . 4T * ♦ , ^ ^ _* , • t. • • •• ■ ^4 • • • ^*^4# *t • M. f /• J t • V.. ;• I'V f 4 » Antenna Height and Communications Effectiveness By Gerald L. Hall. KITO Associate Technical Editor Copyright J 1987 The Americari Radio Relay League, Inc. 225 Main Street Newington, CT 06111 • % **‘EXECUTIVE SUMMARY*** Amateur Radio communications between two distant points on the earth rely on signals propagating through the ionosphere. Acting as somewhat of a mirror at heights in the order of 150 miles, the ionosphere returns signals to the earth a thousand or more miles away The vertical angle of radiation is the Key factor in determining effective communications distances beyond line of sight. For the greatest possible communications distance, the energy from the transmitter must be radiated at angles close to the horizon. For th.s to take place, a horizontal antenna must be placed high above the ground in terms of wavelengths The length of a radio wave IS inversely related to its frequency. A beam type of antenna at a height of 70 feet or more will provide greatly superior performance over the same antenna at 35 feet, all other factors being equal. To a distant receiving station, a transmitting antenna at 70 feet will provide the effect of approximately 3 to 4 times more transmitter power than the same antenna at 35 feet. Depending on the level of noise and interference, this performance disparity is often enough to mean the difference between making distant radio contact with fairly reliable sig.nals. and being unable to make distant contact at all. Thus, the antenna at 35 feet is un­ satisfactory. while the same antenna at 70 feet is quite satisfactory. The 70-foot height is used only for the purpose of illustration, however, and should not be construed as the optimum height for antennas Heights above 100 feet will give significantly better performance than at 70 feet. If an amateur operator is restricted to the use of low antennas, it is reasonable to assume he will obtain more powerful transmitting equipment to compensate for the loss of antenna effectiveness. For example, he might increase his transmitter power from 500 watts to 1.5 kilowatts, to compensate for a three-fold loss in antenna effectiveness because of height limitations. This increase in power, in turn, increases the possibilities for his signal to overload nearby television and radio receivers, creating interference for viewers and listeners. A high amateur antenna provides a greater degree of immunity from television interference than does a low antenna. The sole source of radiated RF energy from the Amateur Radio station is its antenna. Raising that antenna to an increased height, well above the level of existing antennas for television reception, will reduce the possibility of interference to television reception from fundamental overload. Antenna Height and Communications Effectiveness B> GeralcJ L Hall. KlTD Associate Technical Editor The purpose of this paper is to p»'0\ije general information aoout communications effectiveness as related to the physical height of antennas The performance of honzontaf antennas at heights of 35 a^a 70 feet IS examined m oetail Venicai arrays are not considered here oecause at shcr-wa^e frequencies, over average terrain ana at lew raa.aticn angles they are less effective than are horizontal antennas. ionospheric Propagation Frequencies oerween 3 anc 30 megahertz (ab ­ breviated MHz) are often called tne short-wave ’' bancs In engineering terms this range of frequencies is cefined as the high-freauency or HF poHion cf the radio spectrum. HF radio communicaticns between two points that are separated by distances of more than aocut 15 to 25 miles depend almost solely upon propagation of radio signals through the ionosphere. The ionosphere IS a region of the earth ’s upper atmosphere which is ionized by ultraviolet rays received from the sun. The ionosphere has the property that it wnl refract or ..end radio waves which pass through it. However, the ionosphere is not one single ‘'blanket ” of ionization. Instead, for reasons not fully understood, a few discrete layers are formed at different heights above the earth. From the standpoint of radio propagation, each ionized layer has distinctive characteristics, related primarily to different amounts of ionization in the various layers The ionized layer which is most useful for HF racio com- munications is callec the F layer. The F layer exists at heights varying from approxi ­ mately 130 to 260 miles above the earth s surface Both the layer height and the amount of ionization depend upon the latitude from the ecuatcr the time of day the season of the year, ano upon the level of sunspot activity Sunspot activity varies generally m cycles that are approximately 11 years in duration although short-term bursts of activity may create changes in propagation conditions that last for less than an rour The ionosphere IS not hcmiogeneous. and is undergoing continual change The F layer disappears at night in periods of low and medium solar activity, as tne ultraviolet energy required to sustain ionization is no Icnge" received from the sun. The amount of bending tnat will be imparted to a passing radio wave is related directly to the intensity of ionization in this layer, and to the frequency of the radio wave. A triangle may thus be used to portray the cross- sectional path of ionospheric radio-wave travel, as shown in Fig 1. The base of the triangle is the surface of the » i N V • * .' 6 •C.'lutf I Fig 1 —A simplified cross-sectional representation of ionospheric propagation. Typically the F layer exists at a height of 150 miles above the earth at mid-latitudes. The distance between the transmitter and the receiver may range from a few miles to 2500 miles under normal conditions. earth between two distant points, and the apex of tne triangle is the point wihich represents refraction in the ionosphere. If all the necessary conditions are met. the radio wave will travel from the first point on the earth s surface to the ionosphere, wnere it will be bent suf­ ficiently to travel to the second point on the earth, many hundreds cf miles away Of course the earth's surface is not a flat plane, but instead is curved. High-frequency radio waves behave in essentially the same manner as light waves —they tend to travel in straight lines, but with a slignt amount of downward bending caused by refraction in the air For tnis reason it is not possible to communicate by a direct path over distances greater than aPout 15 to 25 miles in this freouency range The curvature of the eartn causes the surface to "fall away" from the path of tne radio wave witn greater distances Therefore, it is the ionosphere that permits HF radio communication to be made between points separated Py thousands of miles. The range of frequencies from 3 to 30 MHz is unique in this respect, as ionospheric propagation is not consistently supported for any frequencies outside this range. One of the necessary- conditions tor lonospneric communications is that the radio wave must encounter the ionosphere at the correct angle. This is illustrated in Fig 2. Radio waves which leave the earth at high angles above the horizon may receive only very slight bending, and are then lost to outer space. For the same fixed frequency of operation, as the radiation angle is lowered toward the horizon, a point is reached where the bending of the wave is sufficient to return the wave ■ -------------------- •-.A i '-fj i ' to the earin. At -uccessrvely lower angles, the wave returns to the earth at increasing distances. If the radio wave leaves the earth at a radiation angle of zero degrees, just toward the horizon (or just tangent to the earth's surface), the maximum distance that may be reached under usual ionospheric conditions is approximately 2500 rules (4000 kilometers). However, the earth itself acts as a reflector of radio waves Quite often a radio signal will be reflected from the reception point on the earth into the ionosphere again, reaching the earth a second time at a still more distant point. As in the case of light waves, the angle of reflection IS the same as the angle of incidence, so a wave striking the surface of the earth at an angle of, say, 15* is reflected upward from the surface at the same angle. Thus, the distance to the second point of reception will be approximately twice the distance of the first This effect IS also illustrated in Fig 2, where the signal travels from the transmitter at the left of the drawing via the ionosphere to Point A, in the center of the drawing From Point A the signal travels via the ionosphere again to Point B, at the right. Signal travel from the earth through the ionosphere and back to the earth is called a hop. Under some conditions it is possible for as many as four or five signal hops to occur over a rad'o path, but no more than two or three hops is the nonr. In this way. HF communications can be conducted over thousands of miles. With regard to signal hoppirij, two important points should be recognized. First, a s.gmficant loss of s.gnal occurs with each hop. Lower layers of the ionosphere absorb energy from the signa s as they pass through, and the ionosphere tends to scatter the radio energy in various directions, rather than confining it in a tight bundle. The earth also scatters the energy at a reflection point. Thus, only a small fraction of the transmitted energy reaches a distant receiving point. Again refer to Fig 2. Two radio paths (heavy lines) are shown from the transmitter to Point B. a 1-hop path and a 2-hop path. Measuremen.s indicate that although there can be great variation in the ratio of the two signal stiengths in a situation such as this, the signal power received at Point B will generally be from five to ten times greater for the 1-hop wave than for the 2-hop wave. (The terrain at the mid-path reflection point for the 2-hop wave, the angle at which the wave is reflected from the earth, and the condition of the ionosphere in the vicinity of all the retraction points are the primary factors in determining the signal-strength ratio.) Signal levels are generally compared in decibels, abbreviated dB The decibel is a logarithmic unit. Three decibels difference in signal strengths is equivalent to a power ratio of 2:1; a difference of 10 dB equates to a power ratio of 10:1. Thus, the signal loss for an additional hop is about 7 to 10 dB. The additional loss per hop becomes significant at greater distances. For a simplified example, a distance of 400d miles can be covered in 2 hops of 2000 miles each or in four hops of 1000 miles each. For illustration, assume the loss for additional hops is 10 dB. or a 1/10 power ratio. Under such conditions, the 4-hop signal will be received with only 1/100 the power or 20 dB below that received in two hops. The reason for this is that only 1/10 of the 2-hop signal is received for the first additional (3rd) hop. and only 1/10 of that 1/10 for the second additional (4th) hop. It is for this reason that no more than four or five propagation hops are useful; the received signal becomes too weak to be heard. '} r li y > ’ ic* • Fig 3 —Distance plottea against wave angle (one-hop trans.nission) for the nominal range of virtual heights for the E and F2 layers, and for the F1 layer. The second important point to be recognized in mult'hop propagation is that the tngcnometry of the first hop generally establishes the tfgonometrv for all succeeding hops. Ano't is the raoiation angle at the transmitter which sets up the trigonometry for the first hop. Solving a propagation triangle is simplified with the aid of the graph in Fig 3 ’ In this graph the radiation angle in degrees is given on the left, and the smqie-hop distance for the effective layer height along the bottom. Table 1 shows the optimum propagation distance for various radiat'on angles. The data for this taoie was read from the graph of Fig 3, based on an assumed F-layer height of I3i miles From Table 1, if the radiation angle from a given transmitting antenna is concentrated at 30®. the first and succeeding heps m radio propagation will span about 650 miles each With a usaoie mdAimurr, limit of f ve hops under the best of conditions, one can pr-jiect ina« the greatest distance for ootimum communications for a 30® wave angle is five times 650 miles, or 3250 miles. For effective communications ove' greater distances, it wduld be necessary to lower the radiation angle at the transmirer antenna site As will be oiscussec shoniy, this can be done only py increasing the height of the hori­ zontal transmitting antenna. Although the discussion m the preceding para ­ graphs has been m terms of a transmitting antenna, the same principles apply when the antenna is used for reception A high antenna will receive low-angle signals more effectively than will a low antenna The point of these several paragraphs may be summarized briefly; The vertical angle of radiation is the key factor in d®termining effective communications distances beyond line of sight. Table 1—Propagation Distance versus Radiation Angle (Data extracted from Fig 3) RaAation Ootimum Ang‘6.f'ooagaior Degrees Distance, \t-ies 2 2250 i 2100 3 1650 10 1500 15 1200 20 1000 30 650 40 450 Scientists and engineers recognize that modes other than signal hoppmg account for the prcpagafior of radio waves over fhousanas of miles However studies of actual radio propagation m which the write' has participated have displayed signals with as many as 5 hops, so the hopping mode is one distinct possibility * Whatever the propagation mode, there is unanimous agreement that the most effective communications at HF most often accompany the lowest radiation angle. Horizontal Antennas A simple antenna that is commonly used for HF communications is the horizontal half-wave dipole. The dipole IS a straight length of wire (or tubing) into which radio-frequency energy is fed at the center Because of Its simplicity, the dipole may be easily subjected to theoretical performance analyses Furtherjhe results of prooer analyses are borne out in practice. For these reasons, the half-wave dipole becomes a convenient performance standard against which other antenna systems can be compared. The dipole antenna, when viewed from one end. radiates an equal amount of power in all directions. Because the earth acts as a reflector for HF radio waves, the directive properties of any antenna are modified considerably by the ea.ih underneath it If a dipole antenna is placed horizontally above the earth, most of the energy rad ateo downward from the dipole IS reflected upward The reflected waves combine with the di.'ect waves (those raaiated at angles above the horizomari m various ways, depending on the height of the antenna, tne frequency, and the electrical character­ istics of the ground under and around the antenna At some vertical angles above the horizon, the direct and reflected waves may be exactly in phase —that is. the maximum signal or field strengths of both waves are reached at the same instant at some distant point. In this 'From The ARRL Antenna Boox. 1-itned tion. Cnaoter 1. Fig 12. -HF backscaner studies by Rayineon (Company under contract with Rome Air Development Center. Gritfiss AFB. NY. A part of this study was done at Raylheon s South Dartmouth, Mass, field site. Jan-Jun, i960. 1 Fig 4-Elevation-piane pattern for a hori2ontal dipole at a height of wavelength (solid line) and in free space (broken Irne). *: - -1 T'k pattern for a horizontal dipole at (brown line) space case the resultant field strength is equal to the sum of the two components. At other vertical angles the two waves may be completely out of phase at some distant point that IS. the fielas are maximum at the same instant but the phase directions are opposite The resultant field strength in this case is the difference between the two At still other angles the resultant field will have intermediate values Thus, the effect of the ground IS to increase the intensity of radiation at some venical angles and to decrease it at others The elevation angles at which the maxima and minima occur depond primarily on the antenna height above ground (The ehe^ctT' ground have some slight If the eadh is considered to be a perfect reflector straightforward trigonometric calculations can be made to determine the relative amount of radiation intensity at any vertical angle for any dipole height. Graphs from such calculations may be plotted as circular or polar diagrams, called radiation patterns Fig 4 shows the ^ antenna positioned one-half wavelength above the ground, viewed from one end. and Fig 5 for a height of one wavelength The radi^ation from the dipole if in free space is shown by the broken lines, and appear as semi-circles In the plots of Figs 4 and 5. the radiation angle Wlow 3oShV™" Band. Frequency 18 WHz 3 5 70 10 1 14 0 18 1 21 0 24 9 23 0 35 -eet pnys'cal height 0 06 waveiencth 0 12 0 25 0 36 0 50 0 64 0 75 0 89 1 00 70 ver Dhysca: 0 13 waveienoth 0 25 0 50 0 72 1 00 1 29 1 49 1I / r 1 99 above the honcon is represented m the same fashion that angles are measured on a protractor. The concentric Circles are calibrated to represent ratios of fieid strengths, referenced to the strength represented by the outer circle. The circles are calibrated m decibels Diminishing strengths arc plotted toward the center ’ Antenna heights are usually discussed in terms of wavelengths. The reason for this is that the length of a radio wave is inversely proportional to its frequency Therefore a fixed physical height will represent different electrical heights at different radio frequencies For example, a height of 70 feet represents one wavelength at a frequency of 14 MHz, But the same 70-foot height represents only wavelength for a frequency of 7 MHz. For physical antenna heights of 35 and 70 feet. Table 2 shows the electrical heights .n wavelengths for all the amateur bands below 30 MHz. The lobes and nulls of the pattern of Figs 4 and 5 illustrate what was described earher. that the effect of—. ucoi,iiueu earner, mat the effect of the earth beneath the antenna is to increase the intensity o radiation at some vertical angles and to decrease it at others At a hamht 1/. ____ .. .at others At a height of ’^2 wavelength (Fig 4), the radiated energy is strongest at a radiation angle of 30® an angle which was determined earlier to provide a ma^mum effective communications distance of about 3250 miles under the conditions assumed The pattern of Fig 4 represents the radiation from a dipole for 14 MHz at a height of 35 feet As the horizontal antenna is raised to even greater heights, additional lobes are formed, and those that exist move closer to the horizon. But yet the maximum amplitude of the existing lobes is not diminished As may be seen from Fig 5. for an antenna height of 1 wavelength, the energy in the lower lobes is strongest at 15° And Table 1 indicates that the optimum propagation distance per hop for 15° is 12C0 miles. Under the very same conditions as before. 5-hop propagation, one may see that the greatest distance for optimum communication now IS 5 x 1200 or 6000 miles. The pattern of Fig 5 represents a 14-MHz dipole at a height of 70 feet Thus, for the conditions assumed, the optimum communications distance has been extended from 3250 miles to 6000 miles, merely by raising the r antenna from 35 to 70 feet Even greater ne^ghts Aiouid provide still create' communications distances unoer the same conaitions The radiation angle of the lowest icoe tor a hori­ zontal antenna above tne grouno may be oete'mmed maLhematicaliy sm 0 25 where h the wave angle or radiation ar'gie the antenna he'ght above grouno m waveengttis (see Table 2i In short, the higher the horizontal antenna the lower IS the lowest (ooe of the pattern Therefc-e tne higher an HF antenna can be placed the fame' it wiii p'ovioe effective communications because of the resuitmc lowe' radiation angle This is true tor any honzcnta' antenna. Electrical Characteristics of HF Antennas As mentioned previously, a dipoie antenna when viewed from one end cf the conouctor. lac.aies an eoual amount of powe- m all directions The plotted rad ation pattern is a perfect circle If the dipole is ventica'. this circle represents tne azimuth coverage, with an equal amount of power radiated m every compass direction. For point-to-poinf communications, however it is bene ­ ficial to concentrate the radiated energy mto a beam which IS aimed toward a single distant point. An ariaiogy can be made by comparing the light emanating from a bare electric lamp to that from an automobile headlight. For illuminating a distant point, the headlight is ‘a' more effective. Antennas designed to concentrate the rad.ated energy into a beam are called beam antennas For a fixed amount of transmitter power fed to me transmitting antenna. Deam antennas provide increased signal strength at a distant receiver In racio communications, the use of a beam antenna is also benefic.ai curing reception, because tne antenna pattern fo- transmission IS the same as for reception A beam antenna hebs to reject signals from unvi/anted directions ana m effect boosts the strength of signals received from t.ne desired direction Tne increase in signal or field strength wmch a ream antenna offers is frecuentiy re'erencec to a dioole antenna by a term called gam Gam is comimonly expressed in oecibels One type of beam antenna is a Yagi named after one of its Japanese inventors. Diffe'ent varieties of Yagi antennas exist each having somewhat different characteristics. Manv antennas erected for television reception are a form of multi­ element Yagi beam Subsequent ciscussions m this paper refer to a 3-element Yagi array, one having a driven element, a parasitic director ano a parasitic reflector The parasitic elements are not fed any power oirecily; instead they are excited through mutual coupling to the driven element and in turn also radiate power Each parasitic element IS spaced 0.2 wavelength from the driven element, and Fig 6—Computer-calculated azimuth-plane radiation pattern lor a horizontal 3-element Yagi array (solid line), and for a comparison dipoic (broken line). Fig 7—Computer-calculated elevation-plane or vertical- profile pattern of a horizontal Yagi array, solid line, and for a comparison dipole, broken line. These patterns are those seen from the ends of the elements with the antennas in free space. the theoretical gam of this array, determined through computer analysis, is 7 2 dB over a dipole This means that for the same transmitte' power, the effective radiated power of the Yagi in its favored direction is 5.2 times that of the dipole m the same direction. The theoretical front- to-back ratio of the Yagi antenna is 12 dB, meaning the power radiated in its forward direction is 15.7 times that radiated in the opposite direction. Values for a practical antenna of this type are quite close to theoretical. Computer-calculated radiation patterns for the horizontal Yagi array are presented in Figs 6 and 7. Fig 6 shows the azimuth plane, the response m various J r compass directions a> a solid line The Sroken line in F g 6 shows the pattern of a haif-wavetength dipole, tor comparison F.g 7 shows the elevation plane or vertical- profile pattern This pattern is that seen from the ends of the elements, with the antenna in tree space Tne soiid line again represents the Yagi. and the brc>en ime the dipoie, that ‘‘perfect circle ” which was mentioned earlier Performance of most other Yagi-type arrays with three or tour elements will not Pe significantly dirfe’’en! from the patterns shown here Another often-used type of oec.m antenna is the quad array. Typically, a quad is constructed with two or more wire elements in the form of a scuare or a diamond The conouctmg wires are usually supported P> X-snaped frames of wood or fioergiass material For tne same number of elements and spacing, the pe'tormance of a quad tjeam is generally similar to that of a Yag' beam The vertical patterns of Figs ana 5 were calculated by assuming the earth is a perfect reflector an unrealistic situation. Actual earth does not 'efiect all of the raoio- frequency energ> strik.ng it; some absorption takes place. Over real earth, therefore, the patterns will be slightly different, cependmg upon the electrical con ­ ductivity and dielectric constant of the soil, ano upon the radio frequency Computer programs are available to take these factors into account, and reliable calculations of patterns over real earth may oe made Yagi patterns over real earth are shown in Figs 8 through 14. These patterns were calculated with an Apple lie personal computer ^ "Average ” so*l conditions were used for these plots, that is. a conductivity of 5 milhsiemens per meter and a dielectric constant of 15 ■* These patterns compare the performance of Yagi arrays at neights of 35 and 70 feet In Figs 6 througn 12. the broken line is the plot for a 35-foot height, and the solid line for 70 feet. For 24.9 and 26 MHz. Figs 13 and 14. if is helpful to present the 35- and 70-foot patterns in separate graphs, for clarity. Otherwise the multiple loPes become indis ­ tinguishable M commerciaiiy available sohAare p'ogi’am AfJNlE. was used to calculate all oatterns oresentea m th s baoer ^Sucn soil conditions may be considered typica' ‘or t.ne central oan of the United States, sucn as tne Onic ana Mississippi river val'evs [ 1 i -W-— -. Fig 8 —Verticai-profile pattern of a 7-MHz Yagi beam over average earth at a height of 70 feet (solid line) and at 35 feet (broken tine). Fig 9 —Vertical-profile pattern ol a 10.1 -MHz Yagi beam at 70 feet (solid Ime) and at 35 feet (broken line). «0 N . X Fig 10 —Vertical-profile pattern of a 14-MHz Yagi beam at 70 feet (solid Ime) and at 35 feet (broken line). Fig 11 -Vertical-profile pattern of an I8.I-MH2 Yagi beam at 70 feet (solid Ime) and at 35 feet (broken line). Fig 12 —Vertical-profile pattern of a 21-MHz Yagi beam at 70 feet (solid line) and at 35 feet (broken line). j r Table 3—Comparison of Yagi Beams at Heights of 35 and 70 Feet Fig 13 —At A. vertical-profile pattern of a 24.9-MH2 Yagi beam at 35 feet, and at B. 70 feet. «c •0 •s. •6 Fig 14 —At A. vertical-profile pattern of a 2B-MH2 Yagi beam at 35 feet, and at B. 70 feet. Fig 8 shows the vertical profile for 7-MHz Yagi beams. For a height of 35 feet, the energy is maximum at a vertical angle of 34“ above the horizon. At a height of 70 feet, maximum radiation occurs at an angle of 24®. Frequency (-At 35 Feet-) E>ev of ma* raaation (•At 70 Feet-) ang^e of rrax raaiation Perforrrance aifference at 5“ 70 34 degrees 24 degrees 5 7 decibels 10 1 29 18 5 7 140 24 14 56 ia 1 20 11 5 4 21 0 18 9 5 2 24 9 15 8 4 9 28 0 14 7 4 6 This IS 10“ lower than for the same antenna at 35 feet In addition, in tne 2- to I0-oegree elevation range, those angles that are necessary for communicating over thousands of miles, the performance of the low Yagi beam is nominally 5.6 dB below that of the high Yagi. At a wave angle of 5.0“, the response of the Yagi at 70 feet IS superior by 5.7 dB Similar data can be obtained from Figs 9 through 14 for the amateur frequencies from 10.1 through 28 MHz. The differences m performance for the amateur bands from 7 to 28 MHz are summarized in Table 3. As Table 3 indicates, a Yagi antenna at 70 feet provides far greater radiation at low angles for all frequencies than the same antenna at 35 feet. This translates to greater communications effectiveness at long d'Stances, and is especially true for the lower frequencies At a 5“ wave angle, the differences in field strengths range from 4 6 to 5.7 dB. This means that the power at a distant receiving antenna for most propa ­ gation conditions will be from 2.9 to 3.7 times stronger from a Yagi antenna at 70 feet, compared to the same Yagi at 35 feet. Heights greater than 70 feet will produce even higher power ratios. In summary, a high Yagi antenna provides superior performance over a low Yagi, all other factors being equal. Depending on the level of noise and interfef^ence, the performance differences related to height are often enough to mean the difference between making distant radio contact v/ith fairly reliable signals, and being unable to make contact at all Very High and Ultra High Frequencies Commonly used amateur frequencies higher than those discussed earlier are the very high frecuency portion of the spectrum, abbreviated VHF, and the ultra high frequencies, or UHF The VHF range covers 3C to 300 MHz. and the UHF range from 300 to 3000 MHz. In an earlier section it was mentioned that HF antennas must be large to be effective. To some degree, however, those considerations are not unique to that frequency range. They apply in general to VHF and UHF as well. A difference at VHF and UHF is that antennas may be physically small in order to realize optimum electrical lengths. However, a disadvantage of physically small antennas is that they present less surface area to passing radio waves, and are therefore less effective m picking up incoming signals. This effect is termed pickup efficiency Pickup efficiency is reciprocative; it applies, to transmitted signals as well as to received signals. To obtain higher pickup efficiency and therefore greater communications effectiveness, many antenna elements are required at VHP ana UHF. The elements are usually installed on multiple booms. Single, vertical radiators, even at elevated heights, are mettective for distances beyond a few miles at these frequency ranges This is true because of low pickup efficiency and because of the omnidirectional characteristic o' the radiator. StaCKed vertical radiators are sometimes used to obtain gam with omnidirectional coverage. Although ionospheric propagation does sometimes occur at the lower end of the VHF range, propagation at fOO MHz and above is almost always over a line-of- sight path Under usual conditions, signals at these frequencies encounter very little refraction in air There­ fore It behooves a person using these frequencies to place his antenna as high as possible, so it can see farther Certainly the antenna must be above sur ­ rounding objects, such as dense foliage and man-made structures Such objects absorb radio-frequency energy in this portion of the spectrum, and therefore tend to block the signal from propagating Objects such as hills, steel structures and many commercial or industrial buildings will block VHF signals to an even greater degree, creating ’‘shadows ” behind them. At VHF and UHF. the lowest lobes for Yagi arrays at 35 and 70 feet are only a few degrees above the horizontal. However, for line-of-sight communications, the radiation angle should be zero, if possible, unless one wishes to communicate with airplanes or objects in outer space Even more desirable are negative angles from high locations, so the antenna can “look down on” ♦he terrain At VHF and UHF the radiation angles for 35-foot heights are twice those occurring for the 70-foot heights Therefore at VHF it is also beneficial to place the antenna as high as possible, and in the clear from surrounding objects Amateur Radio operators wishing to contact other amateurs at great distances use a time-worn but true expression. "For the best results, put your antenna as high as you possibly can ” Many amateurs in various parts of the world put their big antennas atop 120-foot towers, and enjoy communications with amateurs in foreign countries when neighboring amateurs with much Icwer antennas cannot even hear the foreign signals. Conclusion The preceding information has dealt with antenna height and communications effectiveness It has been shown that for all amateur frequencies, high horizontal antennas will outperform low antennas Information has been developed to show a consistent power gam of the higher antennas over low ones, that is. at 70 feet and 35 feet. The 70-foot height was chosen only for the purpose of illustration, and is not intended to oe construed as the optimum height for antennas. Heights above 100 feet will give significantly better performance than at 70 feet. It IS reasonable to assume that if an amateur operator is restricted to the use of low antennas, he will obtain transmitting equipment w;ih a corresponding increase in power output to compensate for the loss of antenna effectiveness. For example, he might increase his transmitter power from 500 watts to 1.5 kilowatts to compensate tor a three-fold loss in antenna effectiveness because of height limitations. It should be realized that this increase in power, in turn, increases the possibilities for his stronger signal to overload nearby television and radio receivers, creating interference for viewers and listeners. There is one further consideration concerning amateur antenna height with regard to television and radio interference. In essence, the sole source of radiated RF energy from an Amateur Radio station is its antenna Raising that antenna to an increased height, far above the level of existing antennas for television reception, will reduce the possibility of interference to television reception from fundamental overload. r AMATEUR RADIO EMERGENCY SPONSORED BY TI£E AMERICAN RADIO RELAY LEAGUE ACSUSI HI7 • CALirCRIIA mi Hllllon-acr« Stanlalaua Nat­ ional Poraat Flra, ca«aad by ll^htnln^. 5.000 flraflshtara u^d - X Itlllad - IS hooaa and 24 outbuildinsa dtatrorad - goramor declarad a 21-co«nty aaargancy. Aaataura aannad l/.S. Foraat Saralca Kaadguartara, at Sonora, and aarlwa/laid locatlona. 44 haaa^uaad thalr own radio agulp- ««nt to aaaiat tb« 7.500 paopla Mho had to airacuata thalr hoaaa, Haalth and vallara aeaaagaa wara • ant tor tha 115 aaacuaaa in tha Itad Croaa ahaltara. Aaataur radio halpad coordl- nata food, clothing and ahaltar whan thay %*aran*t naadad for priority actlaitlaa. -Mlth tha Polk County aaargancy director and tha coaaand poat. A0C5ST Ulj - 0U60i fOUST flli Cranta Paaa, Or«9on - Tha Valkar Howntaln flra raaulta^ In aatabllahlns a Pad Croaa aaaewa- tlon cantar, at Marlin. Haaa llnkad tha canlar. Fad Croaa dlr- aetor and tha Joaaphlna Countf aaar^ancT coordinator. Twantf haaa donated Ma houro of aar- vice . lOTEIBM ISIT - iilW !IPL0SI0l Paapaa, Taxaa, butana axplo- alon killed three and Injured thlrtr~aa»«n. Haaa provided coaaunicatlona for Rad Croaa poata at Paapa, Chlldraaa, Raarlllo and wichlta Falla Into tha diaaatar area. lomizi HU - Auim iommo Tuicaloooa. AloboM - A tor­ nado d#Ptroy«d twoWo honeo and danaged 100 othara. All wtlli- tlaa failed. Ped Croaa aaked for aoateur radio aaalatanca with food acrvlce and ahalter taaaa. Coaounicat lone were eatabllah- ed between coaaand baaaa and the center of tha diaaatar area. Meaaagea ware aant relating to aedlclne. food, ahaltar. atatua of elctlaa and ralatlvaa and daa- aga eurvaya. lOVMHR 19U - TROPiai STORH IIII8 DICIIBSR 19S7 - mAISRS, KISS- ISSIPPI, miRSSlI TOMACOS Severe thunderatorae and tor- nadoa. with 200 HPH wlnde, killed alx people, injured 150 and left 1.500 hoaelaea. Anataur radio operatora aent 275 welfara aetaagaa and aaaiated flra ataIlona, tha Rad Croaa and tha Oaparteant of Eaergency Han- agaaant. BAT 1988 - CALa TAII CASS OmiURIIll Bakersfield. Callfcmia - Plv<* railroad tank cara overturnad and began leaking a volatile toxic aubatance. The High echool and a hospital wars evacuated. Hae radio operators were called for aaalgnnenta to varloua coarunica- tlon poets with the fire and pol­ ice departaente. Gulf Coast of Florida - Stora overturned a tractor-trailer rig carrying aethyl bro»ide gaa. Collier County ha«a wade radio contact with ‘Xhoatrac- for the fire chief. Che«trec ie a epec- ial eaergency center aatabliehed by the Chemical Tranaportere Aae- ociation. The haae ueed -auto­ patch" to allow the chief to • peak directly to Chentrec off- Iciale. (The neareet phone to the accident scene was three eilea away.) The accident ecattered 32 1,500 pound cylinders of the dangerous gas. A leak required area avacuatlon. The haaa set up radio contact between the eaer­ gency eperationa center and the school evacuation center, eatab- llahing another autopatch link. ROVEIEER 1968 - RICH. PLASTICS HFE JOLT 19;s - ICfA TPAIfS COLLIPE Altoona. Iowa - Two freight trains collid<fd. Two Killed. Care containing denatured alcohol overturned, creatine pceelblllty of large explosion. 1,500 tc ^ non w r n 4-rod Geneses, Michigan - Fire in a plaetlce «anufactur1ng plant. Burned labels prevented identifi­ cation. eOO local realdenta were evacuated. The radio aBateure operated at the fire hall, cen­ tral dispatch and the dlaaeter r r d 1 n "s t t on cprUor. departwenta. the Red Cross and tha Salvation Amy were provided radio coBaunicatlone by the haaa. 40 flra fightera and two aaateur radio operatora were treated for toxic fuaea and aeoka. The aaateure contacted a fel­ low haa. who ta a research chea- lat for Dow Cheaical Corporation, in Midland, who was abla to idan- tlfy the cheaicale end give ad­ vice about Responding. HARCH 1919 - CRKOH llllim LaGrande. Oregon - A rero- viaibliity billiard, with 60 MPM winds, etrended aotorlets. Haas provided coaaunicatlona for the eaergency aanageaent office, the Salvation Rmy. the eaergency op­ erations center, the church evac ­ uation site and the eearch-and- reacue teaaa aannlng the road cloeurea. SPRIlfi 1989 • PAMTA-BIIIKOTA FLOOD Fargo. Horth Dakota to Hoor- head. Minnesota - Rivar created 28-feet above flood stage (their worst flood of this centuryl. The aaateur radio operatora par­ ticipated in -Skywam”. for the Rational Weather Service. Banning the eaergency operatlooe center, the disaster eervlcea groups, the evacuation centar. the Amy Corps of Engineers. Red Croaa end the county eaergency coordinators along the flood route. The haae eleo eonitored leaky dikes and helped coordinate eand- bagging coaeunicationa for the Aray Corps of Engineers. Thirty haac participated in the three- day activity. JURE 1989 - LOOISIARA lORRAOO Orocee Teta, Louisiana - A violent tornado deatreyed one- third of the town, killing two and injuring aany. The haaa using the Rosedale repeater sounded the alara, notifying the State Patrol. Red Croaa and other dlsaeter groups. The Baton Rouge weather bureau had not detected the tornado prior to the ban radio alert. Within 30 alnutee the ha«a were tranaelttlng eoergency and welfare reaeages for tl.eir con- icunlly. Ap the tornAdo roved lo* * •» r- I'*.* ♦ report# directly to th# w#«th€r bur«»u. Wh«n th# fffitlontl Cunrd •rriv#d th# v#c* a«Wfd to th*«i tha law anforcrwant official#. About fO a»at#ur radio op^ralora halp- ad during tha dlaaatar. mr iw - cmci roiisr ri« Korthaaotorn Crayon - e^OCO acra -Suaalf flra. Tt\a national ________ _______ , Foraat Syataa radio uaa quickly yo^k City, and with tha Dapart- »ant of Dafanaa, In Vaahlnston, talk to tha Puarto Plcena about tha daaa^a aaaaaaaant raporta. £<pt. I7tb - Tlr^lo IsUsd: ainda in wjrcaaa of 210 hpfl. In St- Crol*. vlth sot of th* he»»« <J,«troys<l. B*- tv««n JO anO J5 haaa actl.aly orac*ta^ thara during tha atom. £<pt. 19-20 - Pstrto Rico ftaaa llnkad that araa with tha Unltad nation# atatlon. Ir Haw oaarloadad ulth coaaunlcatlona froa tha aany othar flraa In tha wal Icwa-khltaan national Foraat. Tha Foraat Saraica flra aana^ara uaed aaataur radio oparatora to raach tha baaa caapa In tha flra Colncldantally, tha Foraat Saralca had ^laan tha aaataura paraiaaion to put up thalr -Spout Sprlnga* rapaatar, at tha S,500- foot laaal In tha Blua Mountain#* D.C., to report on tha a*tant of clall dlaordar. St. Crol* uaa In a atata of anarchy, with Jail prlaonara looaa, aarchanta hold­ ing lootara at gun point and local pollca wara not raportlng for duty. Baaad upon thla haa-auppllad Inforaatlon, Praaldant Buah or- darad ragular Bray troopa and tha F.B.l. to St* Croix to raatora Thla rapaatar, capabla of thraa- ^^dar* Maa radio handled tha ra- atata ceaaraga, waa uaad for tha pQj.|g 4nd tha daclalona. Soaa flra coaaunlcatlona. Tha pra»- haaa wara includad In tha para- ioua yaar tha haaa halpad with Juap taaaa. Into tha dlaaa- tha Tapaa Butta flra. 1989 - HURRICANE HUGO I.aft a path of death and da- atructlon In tha Eaatarn Carlb- baan, Fuarto Rico and South Caro­ lina. Roaaa and na1 ghborhooda wara turnad Into rubbla. Tha haaa aaraad gnaarnaant and wal- fara aganclaa. Including Clall Dafanaa, tha Bad Croaa and tha national Cuard. tar iltaii to aatabllah addition­ al coaaunlcatlona. Haaa atatlona aboard tha USS Valdat, which waa at tha Puerto Blcan naval Baaa, handled 422 phone patchaa fop crawwan and local lalandara to thalr lovad onaa in tha Stataa. Ran radio waa thalr only link avallabla. 21it * Soatk CiroiloB Maaaiva daatruction, 135 HPH wind#, powar line# and tree# down and roofa collapalng. Tha haaa Bafora the atora hit, begin- bagao praparing for tha atora on nlng Saptaabar 16th, aaataur radio nata ware aat up*on 20 aatara and operated contlnuoualy for tha fie*t nine daya. Official govarnaant naafagaa, daaaga rt- porta, walfara Ingulrlaa and othar Inforaatlon waa handled for govarnaant and non-govamaant ra- liaf aganelaa and for dlploaatlc alcalona located In Vaahlngton, D.C. Haaa in Trinidad, St. Lucia, Saptaabar 18th, organizing aaa- bara and raaourcaa. They raaaln- 1989-CALIF0RN;rt QUAK The third largest ^arthguaki’ to hit tha continental uniiaa ftAtea thla century, on October I7th, 1^87, aaaauring 7,1 on tha Bichtar acala. hany dead, injur­ ed and hoaalaae. In Santa Cruz County, 60 ailaa acuth of San Franclaco, 572 hoaaa ware deatroyad^ 2067 auffarad heavy daaaga and 7210 alnor daa­ aga. 666 aobila hoaaa wara daa- troyad or racalvad aajor daaaga. 10.000 people were hcaalaaa, with 3.000 of thea reaalning hcaalaaa two aor^.ha after tha guaka. Tha guaka waa cantered at Santa Crux and the daaaga area aktandad froa tha Oakland/San Franclaco area, on the north and, to tha netsiatar/Salinaa area, on tha aouth. Tha guaka lasted 15 •aconda. Tha Santa Cruz araa axpar- lancad alldaa, dasagad brldgaa, cloaad roada and loaa of power and talaphonaa. Many radio coainunlcatlone circuits failed. On# Santa Crux hoapltal re­ quired evacuation of patient# to other hoapitala, due to atructur- al daaaga. Tha haaa coordinated aabulancaa and hallcoptara. Since tha hallcoptara did not have radio contact directly with tha hoapitala aaataur radio waa uaad to relay tha landing altaa. Ifaaa alao reported gaa leaks, broken water and aawer llnaa. Soaa wara aaalgnad to aaarch-and- raacua taaaa to help trapped vlc- tiaa In collapaed bulldinga. Of tha 370 aaataur radio voluntaara about half of thaa wara aaalgnad ad active for tha nakt 10 daya, ^.o duty with tha Bad Croaa during linking varloua aaargancy opera- eight-day period. Tha Oakland/San Franclaco areating cantara for tha Dapartaant of Eaargancy Praparadnaaa, tha Rad Croaa, Rational Vaathar Ser­ vice, hoapitala. Rational Cuard and tha local pollca atatlona iwhan power and phonaa ware down). With aoaa atatlona and antan- auffarad laaa daaaga than Santa Crux but It had tha graataat loaa of Ufa whan tha one alia atratch of tha Rlaltx Freeway collapaed on cara ualng tha lower laval. Part of the 1-00 Bay Bridge also collapaed. Twenty-two of Oak- Do.inlc, St. vine.nt .rnl other «*• destroyed, and with th. high ],nd*« lar9„t building* autt.r.d _ ^ ^ ^ ^ I ^ A ^ %% M ^ m A A a a a ^ ^ I I ^ ^« I r\ ^ A Alocation# aada contact with atataald# haaa who paaaad tha has 1 th-and-we1 fare aaeaagaa to ralctivaa and frlanda in tha U.S. Tha aaataur radio "Hurricane Watch" net obtained aataorologl- cal raporta froo haaa In the path of tha atora. Including on# haa whoaa boat anaaoaatar waa reading 120 HPH wind#. Theee report# w<?ra paeeed reculerly to the Nat­ ional Hurricane Center, In Hlaai, FlorIda . The Accrlccn Radio Relay League headquartere station, wiAW, tn Hew Inc ten, Connecticut. r 1 ch-6 pc a V 1 ng han^ to aanpowar drain on local haaa, volunteer haa oparatora case to South Carolina froa nearby atataa to aaelat. In addition to heavy aaargancy traffic, the haaa handled coaaunlcatlona coordina­ ting tha distribution of food, water, clothing and othar aaaen- tlal itaaa •bout JSO Pinioo <1olI*r* In d*.- age. Fifty haaa aaaietad tha aany eheltera operating In San Fran­ claco, with aany coaing froa aa far away aa Oregon and Ravada to help. Prepared by W7JCH, fro# In- foraatlon condaneed froa the acre detailed report# which appear aonthly. In the ‘Tublic Service” coluane of OST aacaxine, which If publlahed by the A«erlCJ^n F/*dlr Relay League./ TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Admmisirator DATE:Januaiy 10, 1994 SUBJECT: #1896 Allan and Judith Klotsche, 2760 Shadywood Road - Variances - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.03 Subd. 14 (C) - Review of lot coverage. Lot area = 29.014.1 s.f. (total lot area = 30.886.1 s.l. easement area) Allowed = 4,352.1 s.f. or 15^ Existing = 3,280.7 s.t. or 113% Proposed = 4.033.6 s.f. or 13.9% . 1,872 s.f. of driveway Section 10.22. Subd. 1(B) - Average lakeshore setback variance Existing = 8’ Proposed = 8’ . , v No ftirther encroachment of average lakeshore setback line Section 10.22. Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover A. 0-75’ setback area = 10,380.8 s.f. .Allowed = 0 Existing = 0 Proposed = 0 B.75-250’ setback area = 18,633.3 s.f. (total area = 20,505.3 s.f. - 1.872 s.f. of easement area) Allowed = 4.658.3 s.f. or 25% Existing = 5,799.3 s.f. or 31.1% Proposed = 6,017.3 s.t. or 32.2% Variance = 1,359 s.t. or 7.29% Hardcover increase = 218 s.f. or 1.1% (75,..8 s.f. propose addition. 534.8 s.f. of paved area and plastic underliner) Section 11.03 - Definition 24 - Lot area, minimum. Lot area cannot include vehicular or pedestrian easement areas. Zoning File #1896 Januar>- 10, 1994 Page 2 List of Exliibits A - Application B - Addendum - Hardcover Statement C - Property Ouners List D - Plat Map E - Surv'ey F - Neighboring Property Owners Acknowledgement Forms G - Elaine Pagonis Letter. Propert)' Owner to West H - 0-75’ Hardcover Inventory- 1(1-2) - 75-250’ Hardcover Inventory Sheet and Site Plan J - Floor Plan K - Elevation Description of Request Applicants propose a two story lakeside addition to the residence. A portion of the structure will encroach the average lakeshore setback by 8’ and will extend wo further than the existing structure, review Exhibit E. The neighbor to the west has submitted a letter approving the proposed two story addition. Exhibit G. Hardcover excesses exist on the property. Improvement results in an overall 1.1% increase of hardcover. Applicants propose 752.8 s.f. of structural improvements and the removal of 534.8 s.f. of nonstructural improvement. Lot coverage is proposed at 13.9%, review Exhibit I-l. Note deck areas designated as 5, 7, 8, 9 and 15 are included in structural coverage as deck structures are 6’ above exii.ing grade. The 75-250’ setback area has been adjusted by staff to e.xclude the area of the driveway- easement at 24’x78 ’. In review of the City’s files, it is not clear the year that the house was originally constructed. Staff would guess some tim*; iu ’he late ’50s. The former owner installed a 12’x21 ’ entry addition to existing residen • m? i973. All major construction was completed prior to current lakeshore development standards. Property is serv-ed by both municipal sewer and water. Statement of Hardship (Review Exhibit B) Applicants have presented a very complete hardship statement. In reviewing unusual property conditions, staff would add the following findings: Zoning File i?1896 Januan 10, 1994 Page 3 A. There is no hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area at 10,380.8 s.f. Total hardcover is at 20.7%. B. There is no additional contiguous lands available. Issues for Consideration 1.Structural coverage is not in e.xcess proposed at 13.9% (allowed 15%). 752.8 s.f. of structural hardcover is proposed where e,xcesses e.xist in the 75-250’ setback area. Should applicants be asked to consider additional structural hardcover removals? Review Exhibits 1(1 and 2). Please refer to Exhibit K, note elevation reveals an access door providing access to the grade level storage area. Applicants must be asked if additional hardcover improvements are required at entrance to door. The application submittals did not include a floor plan for the lower level so it is difficult to discern what type of use will be made of this portion of strucmre. Applicants should provide clarification. Options of Action Approval as proposed or amended. Approval recommendation must include the condition that hardcover removals scheduled for removal must be completed prior to the final inspection for new construction (during . inter months owners are allowed to complete the removal by final inspection rather than at the time of the footing inspection). OR Denial. Members are asked to refer to Section 10.08 for the necessary findings for denial. Jf, CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIOhT^ 1^* i J Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORKATION Site Address 2760 Shadwood Road. Ornnn. Minnoc;r.^q Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) 21-117-23-24-0040 Attach legal description to application if not included on reauired survev Tract A, Registered Land Survey 1196, Files of inciuaea on requxrea survey. Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin qq4-MarrhTmontn/year)Date Property Acquired ciosma in 1 994-March tmontn/year I l8B8l(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property; y residential ____other(specify) Zoning District; LR-lc___________________ APPLICANT Name Allan J. s. Judith A. Klotsche Phone (home) (612)471-0331 Phone (wor)c) (612) 333-3182 • 1/10 Shadywood Road OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Bernard F. Feltes Address: 321 N. Riverside Drive DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 70,000.00 (750 sq ft-ground floor) Describe request in detail ; Addition of approx. 1500 sci.ft-2 story addition to f^^tiijig^^^(^me-Addition of master suite/storage on living level and worluroom/storage on VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setbac)c;Front Side Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements; Please see attached addendum ____________ Orono , ccTQi City; ra=<i 1 i ng) Zip;____^ Phone (home) (305) 942-9989 Phone (worJc) City; Pompano Beach, FL Zip: 33062 Hardcover Lot Coverage Rear y Average Lakeshore ',onun•tiunU >ccTrc 11 vv r-'/C /V*W l;/V' vnu^tA I u‘i# T09: 12/1 V n to rage on Derty (attach additional sheets if necessary) RBQOIRED SUBMITTALS AiX of the following inforaation Must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered ccaplete; 1. ^ Completed Application Form 2. X Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. X Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%"xll'* for reproduction). Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes ~ in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8*j"xll"). 6. ^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8ij"xll'*). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application, 8._ _^Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not: complete if the above inforaation has not been included. * r NA• APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her )cnowledge. Applicant's Signature ^ Date ONNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby aclcowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga­ tion and verification of this reqi^esiux Owner' s Signature Date //- -w Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must: be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Conmiission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma)ce arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. Klotsche 2760 Shadywood Road Orono, Mn ; * • A- t \ • » 1* ^ ' 1 & hardcover vapuance pfoposal 1) The originalbuiIding is constructed with few options for deletion of existing hardcover priniarily because of driveway easement over which we have no ccxitrol 2) Making adjustments to the back yard portion of the property is ineffective due to the la>-out of the house and garage on the property, the easement on the east, the natural, treed hill on the west and the street on the south 3) All areas supported by retaining walls cannot be altered or it would undermine the driveway areas 4) The substantial front and side yards are well b<>yQnri the required side set­ backs and the 75' zone A setback and with the exception of the addition to the north, will not be altered in any way 5) The proposed addition is a logical, natural and unobtrusive use of dead space 6) We are willing to give up all areas underlain with plastic,444.8Sq.ft, at a considercible maintenance increase 7) We are willing to give up a 2' cement walkway at 90 sq. ft 8) With the deletion of the plastic underlayment areas and the cement walkway area, the hardcover will increase by a mere 1%, including the proposed addition AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK VARIANCE 1) Angie of the addition was chosen to mxnimize obstruction to the north 2) The large pine tree already obstrucr.s the northern neighbor's view and the proposed addition falls behind it 3) Neighbor to the south is not inpacted 4) Consideration has been given to keeping the integrity of the house and yard intact with as little disturbance to the current setting as possible RUN DATt ll/a/n MTCH 008 atfCPlH COUNTY RRORCRTY INTORfUTION STSTEM RROKRTY OWSRS LISTV raop AOOR OMCR NAHC TAXRAYiR NAME/AOOR M a-117-25 M 0009 PZ77S 8HA0YM000 RO J I H FUXSCmACKCR JOKFM F FUISCNNACRER AND ittimjcitm FLEiscmACKU E77S SNAOYNOOO RO tXCEtSIQR m S55SI; FROF AOOR jONHIR NAMETAKFAYIR NAHE/AOt M tl-117-71 24 0021 OOOM AOORESS UNASSXONEO JIN FLEXSCNHACRER JOSEFN F FLEXSCNHACRER 277S SNAOYNOOO RO EXCELSIOR m 55551 V FROF AOOR OHNER NAME , TAXFAYER C ; NAME/AODR 50 21-117-25 24 0042 02000 SNAOYNOOO RO REMCTN SEVERXNSON RENNETH SEVERXNSON 2000 SNAOYNOOO RO ENCELSXOR NN S5551 FROF AOOR ONNER NAME TAXFAYER NAME/AOOR 50 21-117-25 24 0042 00050 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED PAUL R NUTT PAUL R NUTT 1720 COMSTOCK LA PLYMOUTH MN 55447 # FR(X» ADDR OMCR NAME TAXFAYER NAME/AODR TOTAL BATCH 008 00012 V ■ » * • ^ c. ‘.I % • .1 • *\ • .8 • • -k.. >•v 1 '. > • - ■;/ ^ v‘ 58 21-U7-25 28 001800058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEDDAVID C COOKDAVID C COOK*00 M HILLSIDE ORHAVZATA HN SSSOlS8 El-117-25 28 0080 02780 SNAOYNOOO RD 8ERNAR0 F FELTES 8ERNAR0 F FELTES 1521 7TN ST S HOPRXNS rO( 5S585 50 21-117-25 28 0058 02705 SNAOYNOOO RD T J CASEY ISO CASEY THOHAS J CASEY 2765 SHADY NOOO RO EXCELSIOR Ml 55551 50 21-111-25 28 0085 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO JOHN P THIMMESH JOHN P I PATTI J THIMCSH 5850 FLORIDA AVE N MPLS Ml SS827 RtOOiT NO. FX85S801 PAGE 88 ‘ ' 1, .-rr »iT% ^50 21-117-25 28 002000050 ADDRESS UNI^GNEO THOMAS J CASEY ETAL THOMAS J CASEY 2785 SHAOYMOOO RO EXCELSIOR Ml 55551 J58 21-117-25 28 0081 02780 SNAOYNOOO RO N R NITTNIR A 8 R NITTNIR N R NITTMER ASK NXTTNER 2780 SHADYNOOO RO EXCELSIOR Ml 55551 10 21-117-25 28 0059 02771 SNAOYNOOO RO R 6 A H J OGLE RICHARD 6 I HARLYS J OGLE 2771 SNAOYNOOO RO EXCELSIOR Ml 65551 50 21-117-25 28 0085 02780 SNAOYNOOO RO ELAINE T PAGONIS ELAINE T FAOONIS 2780 SNAOYNOOO RO NAYZATA Ml 55591 * I ♦ A.4r>v < r ■r k* V^4 * : 1 *w. •»- ' if *» ' *»<■\^ V . <1 v’‘. • W'.* • i ■ ' Hi' -,r HUN OATi ll/lt/nmC HATCN 00«♦ 'v.. ■ . V. J • cc V- ’■- f)) ell- f^j?* i I »•' • * 4 JHCttCPIN COUNTY HHOP€HTY INTOKHATION SYSUH raVERTY C»MERS LIST KRORT NO. PIAS5A01RAGE AR I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INF(»MAT10N AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY RNONLEOCE AND BELIEF. _ i , : DATE • ^U ’J> t • V ‘ \ I V ! . .. V ,v % • i- * V.' # 4 •. >r« *■ .* • • 7 . 'i . • A' \ < • t . ' •» V**’ s'-' 'vv- f*-; i. A • 1 * • •* •r . V\ f ‘ * .‘A f .’A 7 ^ i * * ■ • ,v i v> ' I 'f t J, • ' A . ; • ' V 1 '7 '«K •» b >'> / s V c/'* #j. .. %r~'~~^ i /-• ^ '■ ** — V- . # 5— ' fl '' i«b— \ 1 Adjacent Property Owners' AcJcnowledgement Form (^e) £ L/,'r7/r^£_ _ _ _of ^7^-^ [print na=e(s)T [print address] P have reviewed the plans for the proposed iinprover.ent or proposed use of the property located at .77^0 tb. also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _• I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use roQuirBS Council approval. ^operty Owner Date Property Owner /;? A /? Date ^ I (we) [print nc*;T\3(s)](print address] Application No._ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acltnowledgement, I (««) am (are) not asked to declare-approval or disapproval of the but merely to confirm for the City Council the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor s project requires Council approval. ^ ^ .-'-.nJX Ti . .. w } \ ■:X) C Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assxst the this Land use Application, please submit your Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled mg . .^^ci — QAc^o^vns _ of ,j2xit2 ^'^-ii I (we) t.h <A)^—L-J^— ---------------(print address (print name(«)i ~ vr ?oi,-ri-‘:i'v-" ■• "••prop^xty located ,»t _ f< i - Application NO. ^_ul-- .cvnowladgation*' ^ , 1 te?tm’r-re?iwrro ** (are) not £„ the City Council that I (w » project or u»« but merely to «"V;™ that the propooed neighbor • pr the improvement p-«ns ^ require® council approval. , , , 'v /t. rroperty Owner «£c; /. / 4^f Date r Data Property Owner I (we) .... „.....rr. K|? "”• property located at —- - - -- ^Application l^Oe ....Y Tuia ) am : («el underot.nd that In « “»• (are) not aelced to ^ (we) an ‘"“’use iut merely to confirm proposed nelghbor’a project or us the improvemant plant and that tn I ^_1 &vMsrnvftl* (print address) Date Property Owner Date Wnr%«L‘r.\"4H'trda"y^ r ^lhntk :l :i-4or-?>:f-ao>i j an '.I, . -<J 1?:19 Uo .015 P.Ol & 'RD1 : ►O.OTSCHE. ALLAI'J t JijMTM PHO^S lO. : 612 471 0331 ;«*n. OS 1994 ll:33A! K!2 £’c(4/a'<£ 'T PA6oaji% MANE s^Ldcu^j fill ADDRESS £^.<i4CO REi KLOTSCHE VARIANCE #1896 2760 SHADYWOOD RDAlJ LOCATION TO: City of Orono Planning Conimisiion/Council HARDCOVER CAlOlUTKai JRaug REET nmcx zomi <ct^ out) T^JSO* 2SO-500' soo-lnm EitHTtHa HMDcdvtii tii Z oh^ ’ • t ' T otal KAJUcovn m Zoni - T otal Paoputy Ajiia im Zone A* nouoL .~ ....... X . «• • lsnetn ••nioth — loF^ • — • ------- X.• ••. • •• —X. • • • t 0 • • • Siri • A m m 0 • X . • m •• 6ARA6I ^ • »........II.n-, - X . f • 0iro • 0 • ■ ..... ••Po c. D aivehay .— X . • « • m- •■00M» 0tr• • • * - X _ • • S. 0.0 • D.. SlOEMAU «- X . •• • mm^m 0 • " • • S.lf- - X • « 1 r • • X ^ MHHI 0 t • I • S.P.E. 'ATio/D eck *• • ■MM 01 r • 5f • . % P*LAN8ECANt ^ • MM* 0 • r • StFiAACA9 UNOCXUINr • -r-- 5f • Mi^» 0 9 i Sa PiNUAETtC smsetzno •• • • B # « t • *m SiF*• • •• • • • * ^MV 0 • * V « i. Other ^ •• • - X _HP _■1^^ V 0 w » I.F. If 10,380.8 S • • • CO s • \ m io.3fin.fl :n 200 1.^. 0 t.r, E __fi HAitOCOVER CAUaUTIM .WffiXSHSET < / m m ^ ExisTXNa Hajiocovui in Z one A. ’ House —^6»2 * UENfiTH 33.20 • m KIBTH X 26.20 Pltlo/Deck • 28.53' 3 X. . 26.39 3t 25' •11 Avg. 8* 1. Gajugs — X » 24* Avg. • • X 6 Avg. w ■ 28.2 c. Dnivekay (Driveway 1n Easemen^_67* Avg Patlo/Dfck -15' 12 Avg. 1^* w D.. SlDEWAUC - 2 Patio/Oeck -lo ( 90 \ Patio/Deck c. E atio /. DECK 32.1 ■^?T 39.3 ' .• . 117.^ P.UUBSCAPf 4.5 ‘6.5*( 2<f.3 ) UNOeOAXN lY * . , PUSTXC 4' Avg.12' Avg.(48 ) SKIETIIIG jQ.30' Avg,r3QQ ) l.y • • 45*rs7.s ^ stairway Othbi *X J5*• 60 H. Ret. Wan 56*.' ‘ X I' Total KAiocavn m Z one .w/0rlvewax-1n Easoient Total Paonbity Anea 'in Zom 56 *.sjau. 8.603.3 30/175.3 Without 0/W In Easenent m m •• #• • '^250-500' ! • ;00-1CKIQ'IP-' •• • 1538.8 •• . S.F. • * (1) ■ • • 104.8 !!__S.F.(2) • .752.89 S.F.(18) Proposed • 75 mm m • • ___S.F. • jj5j_^dUion ^ m 264 A _ S.F.(16) • 48 _ S.F.(I?;- • 987 ^ S.F.(3) / . 1456 __S.F.(4) (804.0 )m •(4A)Not Included (5)4 (6) Delete w/Prop. Addition S.F. (7) -I S.F.(8). - S.F# (9) S»F. (10)Delete w/Prop. Addition S.F. (ll)Delete w/Prop Addtion SiFi (12)Delete w/Prop. ‘Addition S.F# (13)Delete w/'Prop. Addition |.F. (14) S.F. r-m (as.shown) 5799.3 20.505.3 X 100 » 8:f: 13 S.F. — S.F. S a/28.3 ✓b (Existing) • *.+752.89 S.F. for Proposed Addition -534.80 S.F. for areas 6, 10, 11, 12, 13 6017.39 S.F. r 20505.3 x 100 = 29.3S (Proposed) 1 # O/ o -t~LOO& (V\N- NlDr 'RJSCi^lS & w / Z50 w I / / Q. 0 2 SnT/f\J& / -arsa/ S . / p€.DROO(^ J / fj oS^) [3/vrH A?- /# •a:\ / ^ / / / » ■ / r-eX^6T7N><9- f IT •y V /W/f'C C/0?> !.» I • . ‘ •. « (• •\ KCi) Potl-lt^ brmd *M ^insmRlai merroT^O ^ BtiTPATiii TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusih. Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:Januarv 11. 1994 SUBJECT: #1897 R. Hunt Greene/Jane Piccard. 865 PartenwiHxl Road - Variances - Public Hearine Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.22. Subd. 1(A) - Lakeshore setback variance for proposed addition. A. Maxwell Bay Allowed = 0 Existing = 80’ Proposed = 60 ’ (Resolution #1562. 9/12/83, Approved 65 ’) B Channel Shoreline Allowed = 0 Existing = 46’ Proposed = 35’ (Resolution #1562. 9/12/83 Approved 39’) Section 10.22, Subd. 2 A. 0-75’ setback area = 46.000 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 4.497 s.f. or 9.8% (Resolution #2085 11/24/86, Approved 4,557 s.f. or 9.9%) Proposed = 4.927 s.f. or 10.7%. review E.xhibits F and G Proposed per staff review = 5,161 s.f. or 11.2%, review Exhibits F and hardcover increase = 664 s.f. or 1.44% (addition of 760 s.f. of new structure and 70 s.f. of new paved area and removal of 166 s.f. of existing pavement - 96 s.t. restored to grassed area and 70 s.f. occupied by new garage) List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum C - Property Owners List D - Plat Map E - Existing Hardcover Inventory 0-75’ F • Proposed Hardcover Inventory 0-75’ G - Applicants ’ Site Plan H - Staff’s Revised Plai. 1 V.. I. Zoning File #1897 January 11. 1994 Page 2 I - Floor Plan of Garage J - Elevation . K - Resolution #1562 - Application #774. I98e L - Elevation - Application #774 M . Floor Plan - Application #774 O - Resolution #2085 - Application #1089. P - Approved Site Plan for Application #1089 Description of Request S.2. i " - « r ~ propeny is currently served by an existing two stall attached garage. Applicants claim need to provide additional bedroom f bedroom expansion would take place tn the ^ compact size car'or lor basement area tor storage use. In 1983 the original owner received approval ol a hardcover ...iances for a pro^sed two staU garage wnh stora^ r:c«ro;aV ol a or a 192 s.f. located 42' from shoreline of Stubbs i„ only 40 s.f. of L^rdcr‘^t —:Ud applicant to remove some 800 s.f. ^f existing aravel driveway to the west side of the narrow driveway. The current applicanon and application proposes the retlecling new dimeii^ions for garage nor has adequate Applicants have not provided a site plan g p • nvj.ibii H staff has darkened in paved area been provided to serve a three removal at 96 s.f. the areas needed to serve me three “r gar g pp _ p^r inch scale survey made Overall hardcover, is approximated at 5.161 s.t. . Applicants should be given it verv difficult for statf to provide any accuracv • nrvev toreferablv 1”-30 ’) with accurate an opportunity to have their surv eyor locate garage on detail of paving to detennine act lal hardcover remova s an i • r Zoning File #1897 Januar> 11, Page 3 Hardship Statement Please review Exhibit B. Applicants have provided a ver>’ complete hardship statement indudine many of the lind.nes set forth in Resolutions »1562 and #2085, Exhibits K and O. Issues for Consideration 1.For years the applicants have been asked to maintain a gravel driveway. If there is no difference between a gravel or a bituminous drive for hardcover consideration, why are the owners required to maintain a gravel drive. Applicants should be asked to comment as to their preference. 2.Based on the directives of the new Shoreland Regulations, the Department of Natural Resources has been asked to review this application. As of this wr-ting. staff has received no initial comments but we will be able to report findings at our meeting. DNR regulations classify l^ke Minnetonka as a general development lake requiring a SO"’ setback for all new construction. The DNR has taken a very- restrictive stance concerning any new construction within the 50 ’ setback area. 3.Can garage be reduced in size or realigned in order to maintain 40 ’ setback from channel. 5.Are there other hardcover improvements that can be considered for removal. Drivewav is aircadv limited to a single ear width that extends 1.500' requtrtng a backout apron adjicent at garage. The remaining ^ “ single sidewalk, deck and principal structure, review h.xhibits E, I and H. Options of Action A. Approval of application as proposed; or Approved as amended providing limitation on new construction and require an upT“ed surtev locating'^ structur'al addition on surx.ey with exuct dtme^tons of _____ n.;,i n-avina fo he removed SO that hardcover can be updated, or B C. new paving and paving to be removed Denial of application as proposed. Please refer lo necessary ftndings in Section 10.08. ch r CITY OP OROHO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ^ ($50.00 per each additional variancer ^ Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION u V ■j'i 11 rrrv *^**“KfO r^rrrr 1 VC“. 4 W VV VV , >« 'TV ^ 'V't' a t^iT a I ^ • vv 17Z.00 liZCEJPT-JHm fOO w*./^/7v wvv'a I'va »a%/* f •/f 7/, a 4. / a » / Site Address r P/*fZr£^hruJ(; /ij Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) OS'-//-J~ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. / Date Property Acquired_ _ _ _ _ _ _ V/// (month/year) I (do)no^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present dse ot property; residential _ _ _other(specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Zoning District_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT Phone (home) Name ^ Phone (wor)c) 7VZ Address; City; Zip; ONN^ (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address;City;Zip: DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 1C>^.OUO- Describe request in detail; Cr^/(A^£- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width X Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback;Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION OP DNDSOAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventirig^^^c^^liance with Zoning Code requirements;_________ ice Cl r (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following inforaatiop Must be s^^Mtl^tted by the application deadline date in order for your appllcatl<» to be considered complete; CcsEipleted Application Form1.___ 2. _Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. _Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. _Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8‘i"xll" for reproduction). 5. _ _Topographic surv’ey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8*«"xll"). 6. _Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8'5"xll"). 7. _As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. _Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application Is not coaff>lete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature ^e • /. —-J3ate /z^Aj CI4NERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga­ tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature / ,V -Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council- If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 9 ? T . . . . . . .: . f \ / y V HARDSHIP/DESCRIFTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS This property has been an exception from the start. The lot is large, but it is a peninsula. 94% of the lot area is within the 0-75' zone. The lot is well hidden from all adjacent property owners and the proposed construction will be built into the side of a hill making it invisible to any adjacent property owners. The difficulties of this property have been recognized previously by the city and a copy of a 1966 variance is attached detailing many of them. In spite of the fact that the city has previously granted this variance when it required 5641 square feet of hardcover in the 0-75 zone, we have worked with the city to bring the current figure down to 4557 square feet. This variance request will raise the hardcover to only 4927 square feet by taking out driveway space. The original home and this proposed addition were both designed by the nationally recognized architect, John Howe, in the Prairie School. The addition will tie gracefully into the present home and landscape and create an important architectural site within Orono. The home is on one of the largest lots in its neighborhood yet is one of the smallest houses in terms of square footage. In addition, the house has no basement and thus has only limited storage area. The conversion of the two car garage to living space and addition of a 2 to 3 car garage will still leave the house small relative to its comparable neighbors. We believe the allowance of the use of our lot as a homesite originally recognized the lot’s peculiarity and the city's desire to allow some flexibility in its use due to the hardship imposed. We appreciate this effort by the city. Wrf- .. •. .. .. V;' RUN OATf lL^« U^MTCHOOt ', ,i RROR AOOR V ;' . OltCR NAHi' taxpayer, . NAME/AOOR St 05-117-25 A5 0001 00800 PARTENHOOO RD J E CRAY A C J CRAY jerry E a CYNTHIA J GRAY aOO PARTENHOOO RO LONC LARE HM 5555A HotcpiN 58 05-117-25 A5 0002008A5 PARTEt*«00 RO n H GREENE A J E PICCARO R H GREENE A J E PICCARO MS PARTEtMXJO RO 5 LONG LAKE W 5555*REPORT NO. PIA55401 VPAGE n " ‘58 05-1.7-25 45 0005 00815 PAR E18C00 RO E C 20r#« ARE ZONNE EMIL C A RATMLEEN E 20tt« 815 PARTENHOOO RO LONG LARE It! 5555*I •* •I ' 'W •' » PROP AOOR OltCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR .IV * ' • S8 05-117-25 *5 000405400 FOX STJAMES 0 FULLERTON III ETFU.LERT0N LUMBER COp 0 BON 50MPLS MM 55440 total batch 002 00004 u • y i 1... *••• rfs?* « ‘ •f V • ' -.uf m •» P « I CERTIFY THAT THE THI^ATE^ON T^RECORDSr;“S?N°Jojr'rpirTME^^ T^TION, to THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. date I * ^ • MM DATC liyio/n MCrtCPIN CCXJKTY PlWCATY INFOPHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OHNERS LIST MTCH 002 PROP AODR OPHER NAME TA>0’AYER NAHE/AOOR 50 OS-117-25 45 0001 00000 PARTEHHOOD RD J E GRAY t C J GRAY JERRY E A CYNTHIA J GRAY 060 PARTENNOOO RO LONG LAKE MN 555S6 C I >** ^ V»gr y 50 05-117-25 45 0004 ' PROP AOfm . 05400 FOX ST ONNER NAME JAMES 6 FULLERTON III ET AL TAXPAYER FULLERTON LUMBER CO NAME/AOOR P 0 BOX 50 MPLS MN 55440 c t ^ #•fc.- V.. - • '•>' ' X X 4^ \ v* » <«♦ • . ■= * ■''‘Y • .V • ^ ■■'II- /. $ : i 4;- X * * > • A V:: ^ .' * . «. \ « 4 •» r*'c f • '# * < > • M * >s * ■y • • • r , s J ■ • » , • % . 4 . . y.i, V I-. J . II y s ' # REPORT NO. PX4SS401 PAGE U 50 05-117-25 45 0002 00065 PARTENNOOO RO R H GREENE I J E PICCARD R H GREENE A J E PICCARD 065 PARTEIMXX) RD S LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 05-117-25 45 0005 0Q815 PARTENNOOO RO E C 20NNE ARE 20NNE EMIL C A KATHLEEN E 20NNE 615 PARTEM4000 RO LONG LAKE IM 55556 « A % * * V ♦ * T •• Y\V. ■ *; ■ :1 1 ♦ TOTAL MTCH 002 OOOOR I 9b \ » I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON TH'. RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. DATEi 3|iIm‘»5.v1^ U^ju) CLi r«w ’ • A . \ tm- » • ‘-■.'I*-''-’: V. ’ fc *: i - i , '■ .-y t:-..- -i• 1* ' ■.•: e.- *:* ‘ • r»' ‘' 4 . ^ ■> V i*< K> :y A < :'k *,• •■ f , -I? » , f . '-'A • ' '* C * . »■ ! V !*':« .• - • -V.J / ^1'! ■ W ^ * ■ *V ' .■ • ■ IKI 'T L . %•' . .- :*•■■.V*-T - ' • ■ • *1 ^ ^ , '».>•. l.-f-V ^ • . •- i V .“! •* ■ 14 . • ■ * • • 6*-'W<'<^T7o aJ (MRDC0VE3 aLC'JLATIQN HORKSHEHT ■ TONf! (CIRCLE CNE)<>^ 75-:E0' 250-500' 500-10C0' A. House . X ///•r R.F. LENGTH WIDTH - 1.-•' O' • :^N• • #/ ^4^3* Garage K ^ c. D riveway '»»v7 f D. Sidewalk E. Patio / Oeck F.Landscape areas UNDERLAIN BY I . PLAS IC SHEETiNG G. Other - X _ X X _ X •21 7.• P • ^^9 A- ^ 3 _ S.F. S.F. S.F. tlgoJt S.F. •2-6 zT S.F. ■7-T S . 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 ^ S.F. 0*^^ S.F. B j.[b] X 100 <i-s^__% HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SEJ3ACK ZONE: (CIRCLE cne) fo-Zw 75-250' 250-500' 50Q-1CC0' Af'TtA. ^- pY;eTt_M/i Hardcover in Zone At H ouse LENGTH 31 WIDTH X -?CO ^ *0^ S. F. . - i/ fhti ^ S.F. S.F. S.F. a. bARAGc c. D riveway D. Sidewalk /o 1-7 Avcc S.F. /l^O 92^ S.F. (S^ S.F. S.F. II- S.F. e. Patio / D eck VS"0 S.F. S.F. F.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY . , PLASTIC SHEETING S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone S.F. 7 S.F. V6/ OoO S.F.B 1*7 .i B ^(c^oo y 2Q0 s /o>;o/xo r p^iSi'T V_ - /1&3» /vpfJ-16*’^^ /3i7r^ £Jco<* a.^ '»J c>-’7S — e</ii-r:iB Ncrr/rcy^iz^ — j^e>^ 0'“}^csr. I h-rr^i.y .'-ortiry t.h;.'^ t*;:n is a tr*.-* nnd fcrroct rcpri?r:cntation of a . V i;i;:-'‘:y uf U. • ro'..ric.jriv*: of Lr.t. 1, ELcrk '•, Firtcr.yoc'J, the locoticn r!' .'iJLi o.Ij:tir.f* 'c;.ll..i::r;. Vinv.c.z.f nr.d t’.-.'i "ropoccfi Lcc-.itlcn of a pro- ':•:.? I'.;<r.;*. It •jo.'rr. i!t»t *o chcv otr'^r ir;pri vororta •--"vici.rxr.t-, ii or.y, .*..rK::t. jn •i>io*lrn. crlv !'--jy. !•• - 50' 7-7-;: > Iron nrarkor CORXK R. ccFFi:: cc.,i:;c. uor'.':;r. ?. Coffin hiark S. Crrnbur/; Lnr.d 'iLrvt.’yorc and Plar.n';rs Lon,; Iy:’<a, .'lir.necota AUG - 11983 --------------Hot. f.’o. our,4 Her. N3.12755 CITY OLORONO T«', ^ ” — g*<»T*»5 w»r »iT.___ ^ _ __ I h**r?i»y fortify thr.t thin Is a tr*<» and forroet roprcsontation af a - iiv'rr ’rs of U.? boumiarlvs of l^»t 1, Elenk ?•, P'srtcnwcd, the locotion ri' all cxintinr t,hox*'icr., ar.d tl:^ ^rn'iesct. __ . _ __ . ______, ___ . .. . .jcd Iccutlon of a pro- Jt ‘ifv'fr. lu/h *u***«iTt chcv oUnr iriprtvocentc i.T.cfvicfcrcr.*.r-, ii' cry, oxOi.-ti -jn iiylallnt, crlv‘!V!7, #774 SlEtelEliMEi h Seale: 1** * 50' Cute : 7-7-4:5 o . s Imn Barker conaK R. ccrn?.‘ cc.,r:c. uordonR. Coffin R«”£’. No. bUX Mark S. Sr?nburc Hut:* K‘3.12755 NJ6-IBB3 CITY OF ORONO Lnad Surveyors and Plarjiors Loni; Lake I 1‘ir.nesota . • •« if 4 Kesoi- ..v • « - /OiTTCi £^cn<» sA. H<- »i ©o. Csr.^o&^iS. I ?'-?r‘?l-y r-ortify t.;::.^ **rin is s tr"t" nns '•crrcct rsprrscr.saticn of a - si::".'':” ’ br.’.nc::r:'jr of Lot- L . HIcrk , ? ;rtcr.'»ccii, thsj locaticn r:' all cxintiar l-.i;:: s *v.':u:*'.c:., nr.c t'.:-: rrot.-osca Lcc-.iticn of a prc- :-:.iIsir.;'. I* if*.'?:. *o chcv ntr'’r ir:pr'.'/v,rs?r.as •T.?"0'i.si.rcr.*.,s, ii' ar.y, a.irw:;t. jn virLv:'-:y. #774 coRxit* H. ccrFiM cc.,i::c. Scale: Date : o : l'» = 50 ’ 7-7-^: 3 Iron .’sirker yPiic^J. I CITY OF PROW l©[10'i^ AUG - I JS83 L/ Coffin Set'. f.'o . ysirk £. Crrnbarc Her. f.';. 12755 Lnnd .%ur.*:;ysrs a.nd ?L-ir.r.r:rs Lon;; isiko , I'ian-sota :• . I 'i ' I- * ^ '*‘' '••■; •r‘. !•V’. i »-V •A •1 •• ' . , ■f. *% < j • 1 4 • * • . 1« r ■> ' * ’. 1. * • i \ *» - .•» #1897 e iowiyi <*i.i -i- * *' * iV-i.. > . ^ > CITY I OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^562_________ GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 34.201 AND 34.202 - PILE #774 WHEREAS, John Allenburg is the owner (hereinafter "owner") of property legally described as Lot 1, Block 2, Partenwcod (hereinafter "property"), located at 8*55 Partenwood Road located within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City"); and WHEREAS, the owner has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 34.201 to permit the construction of an attached two stall garage located 39 feet from the east/channel shoreline instead of the required 75 feet and 65 feet from the shoreline of Maxwell Bay instead of the required 75 feet and to Section 34.202 to allow an increase of 576 sf of hardcover within 75 feet of the lake over the existing 5,076 sf where no hardcover is permitted. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as zoning file #774. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 15, 1983, and recommended approval of the variances base*- upon the following findings; a) The lot is a peninsula and not wide enough to meet the required building setbacks from the lakeshore. b) The lot was approved as a building site in 1975 after the lakeshore protective standards were established by the City. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the owner and other interested persons, and the effect of the proposed variances on the halth, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it an do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district: that granting the variances would not adversely effect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the owner, but is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the owner; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning code and comprehensive plan of the City. cace 1 of 4 9 / 4 \ CITY i OF I ORONO City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 156 2 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Sections 34.201 and 34.202 to per.-nit construction of an attached two stall garage on the property legally described above to be located 39 feet from the east/lagoon shoreline and 65 feet from the shorel ine of Maxwell Bay instead of the required 75 feet and to allow an increase of 576 sf of hardcover within 75 feet of the lake where none is allowed subject to the following conditions: 1. No other variances are granted or permitted for this structure. 2. The City will approve no future variances for this property, 3. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property and not with the owner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 12, 1984). 4. 5. ATTEST: Violation of or noncompliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this reolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 12th day of September, 1983 . CITY OF ORONO Alberta M. Strom, City Clerk Ma r y Ovj lutler. Mayor page 2 of 4 H V>A.l K l. A V. Cl K.1 A K R A T 1 o M to 1. H il .fe. 1. H O U /. ! t * O 'C.K M . • •• • •• • 9 r T e; ..c t ;.’'Juwe I -'V--—■.,» 't r CITY OF ORONOD City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2085 ____ fir ft. ./ .V i T V IK . y /y 4 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 « 2, AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 FILE #1089 WHEREAS, R. Hunt Greene (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 865 Partenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 2, Partenwood, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 & 2 and 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit the construction of room additions totaling 292 s.f. of structural hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no structure or hardcover is normally allowed. NOW, THELEPORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1089. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 17, 1986, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A) Approximately 94% of the lot area is within the 0-75' setback zone due to lakeshore surrounding the property. Existing hardcover in the 0-75' zone is 5,065 s.f. or 11.0%, including house, gravel driveway, sidewalks, etc. B) The existing house is 48' from the lakeshore of Stubbs Bay. The existing deck is 39' from the lakeshore. the proposed bedroom/kitchen addition will be 42' from the lake- shore. The proposed sunroom will be 60' from the lakeshore. Variances to construct the existing house were granted in 1976. C) Dp to 800 s.f. of gravel parking area located 40' from the shoreline of Maxwell Bay is available for removal to compensate for the proposed hardcover. ^ORQI^ City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -085 allow a garage addition was granted in 1983 tor 5/6 net additiona1 square feet of hardcover above the 5,065 s.t. figure. The garage was never constructed. That garage was to be located 39' from the lakeshore. That variance has since expired, and the current applicant does not wish to renew the variance. E) The existing house site is relatively low, near the lake level. The house has no basement, hence interior space is limited. The layout of the house limits the expandability of the kitchen and bedroom areas within the existing wall boundaries. F) ^ The additions will have no effect on any lake views of neighboring property c ..^#^rs and will not be visually perceived as a wicening oi the house, when viewing from the lake. G) Hardships to the property include the lot configuration Proximity to lakeshore on 3 sides, and the fact that almost the entire house is less than 75' from the shoreline. 4. 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. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring 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. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 & 2 and 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit the construction of a kitchen/bedroom addition totaling 192 s.f. of structure and hard­ cover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone and located 42' from the lakeshore, and a sunroom addition totaling 100 s.f. of structure and hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone and located 60' from the lakeshore, subject to the following conditions: L ' v'.-< • City of OROiN O cmr ' * • OROfijCf r II RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2085 eilEtina ® 2-story, 192 s.f. ..ddition to theexiEtxng house and a 1-story sunroom of 100 s.f. only The #1562"rn granted per resolution fof ionstuctioST^^''™ -PP-°ved htbfck^zre"is"""£onowsf ‘he 0-75' lakeshore House Driveway Deck Sidewalks Additions 1,115 s.f. 2,625 s.f. 450 s.f. 75 s.f. 292 s.f.(this approval) s.f. Total Approved Hardcover 4,557/46,000 = 9.9% In order to meet this requirement, applicant shall remove 800 property! ® parking area near the west end of the because a portion would be over the existing delk hardco^r The structural footprint of the spa if constructed in the art;rnlte iake^hnr^®^t^ exceed 100 s.f. nor extend nearer to the addition! north wall line of the bedroom/kitchen 3. Applicant is advised that no future proposals that result in an increase in hardcover on the property will be approved; such L^T/nVLr^lo^%r^%o Tar!h^er°rVs Ifcrt^Ve! I' non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 1 t^! .•A-V.-'-* . . ' ' ■ I Wi**?':'';; City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2085_________ 6. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby * r:rees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title or :he property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of November, 1986. rATTEST: 'ni. % r. ^ ^ _____ Dorothy ^ Hallin, City Clerk / cc c . Mary C. Butler, Mayor /- -- L_Exoperty Owner(s) Page 4 of 5 t-pA ^ .^'riZ ’ _ pccK- <i4fSlT’ /\ if 2085 . • • i ‘.; J * • • IHIS ITEtWJ lEE* IKHOHUIEIi^ <lv Z'V' - /1&3» /3errO ^cnt* o.X. »^i oor' - e<^ir5(ts AJcrr /JTT,m.|-2u£: - <?-*7^^5^ S'OiC',X ?r'i'.y fortify th.'.t t* ir. i:; a tr’a* iind ‘crroct rcprrncr.tnticn of a - ' E.:-.'oy t-r U, • bo!.r.(j.yriv«r r.f Lot 1, flc"/. ,'•, ?;rt>rT.vccd , the locoticn : .iil o/.irtin:- c:.I l-.ir.r ;. t'.cr'.r.r , nr.d f .v -r^poccd Icr iticr. cf u pro- :-.i i ;rr.;'. It :<■•>■•: ii'.t *o rr cv otr''r ir:pn Vv.T.orto_fi!i ‘•nr-.-ictror.*, i: E.r.y, an •->/iatinj; crivavjy. *-i.r #774 GORXN h. CCFFi:.' cc.,i.*;c. Scale: 1'' = 50' Ddte ; 7-7-c> o : Iron narkor AUG- I 1983 CITY OF ORONO Oor'^or. Coffir. Ret. !*'o. Gv#.4 S. Orrnberc Re(;. to.12755 oTnd Sun-'eyorc and Plannorc Lon,'; 1,-i kc, ! li me so ta •• •nw ^ ^ - Av tr-r:v,r-: mvi.x i-aL-L. r P TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator January 11, 1994 SUBJECT: #1898 Paul and Rose Hauser. 2801 Casco Point Road - Variant Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B) - Average lakeshore setback for kitchen addition. Allowed = 0 Existing = 25’ Proposed with addition = 6 ’ Section 10.22. Subd. 2 - Hardcover review 0-75' setback area = 5,250 s.f. None exists and none is proposed. 75-250’ setback = 11.300 s.f. Allowed = 2.825 s.f. or 25% Existing per applicants ’ inventorv = 1.980 s.f. or 17.5% Existing per stafCs inventor}' = 2.182 s.f. or 19.3% (includes 202 s.f. of side deck and stairs, refer to Exhibit H) Proposed = 3,482 s.t. or 30.8% Variance = 657 s.t. or 5.8% 250-500’ setback area = 3.300 s.f. Allowed = 990 s.f. or 30% Existing per applicants ’ inventor}’ = 1.736 s.f. or 52.6% Existing per staff’s inventory = 1.880 s.f. or 56.9% (add 144 s.f. of paved walkways) Proposed = 990 s.f. or 30% No variance required Hardcover approved with Application #1362 (review Exhibits K. L, M and N) 75-500’ setback area Approved = 3,815 s.f. (2,825 s.f. or 25% within 75-250 + 990 s.f. or 30% within 250-500’ setback area) Existing — 4.062 s.f. (2,182 s.f. -t- 1,880 s.f.) Proposed = 4.472 s.f. (3,482 s.f. -t* 990 s.f.) r Zoning File #1898 January 11, 1994 Pace 2 Section 10.25. Subd. 6(B) - Side yard setback variance A. Proposed kitchen addition to south side of existing residence Required = 10’ Existing = 10’ Proposed = 4’ Variance = 6’ or 60% B.Side deck on north side, refer to Exhibits H and L Required = 10’ Existing = 7’ V'ariance = 3’ or 30% List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum C - Property Owners List D - Plat Map E - Neighbor's Acknowledgment Forms F - Existing Site Plan G - Proposed Site Plan H - Survey 1 - Floor Plan J - Elevations K - Resolution #2577 for Application #1362, 2/13/89 L - Approved Site Plan tor Application #1362 M - Staff Worksheet Building Permit N - Hardcover Reduction Plan for Driveway within 250-500’ Setback Area Description of Request Applicants propose the removal of the detached garage within the 250-500’ setback area and the installation of an attached two story garage addition at 32’x23’6". I^wer level wi consist of garage and mud entry. The upper level will consist of two bedrooms bath and smdy. Review E.xhibit J, structure will be at a maximum height of 25 consistent with height of existmg struemre. Review' Exhibit G. fhis structure is shown meeting the required 10 side setback, 30 street setback and will be entirely located to the rear of the average lakeshore setback line. Review Exhibit H, a proposed kitchen addition will be located 4’ from tlie south lot line. Noie deck insialled lo the north side of the existing residence is located T from the side lot line. Deck was constructed without a building permit and if it is to remarn. it will require an fact side setback variance. Staff has updated the hardcover calculations to include the .0. s.f. of deck and stairs, llaidcover within the 75-250’ setback area is raised 5.8% and hardcover r Zoning File #1898 January 11. 1994 Page 3 within the 250-500 ’ setback area is now reduced to 30%. In the 1980 review, hardcover was interpreted a little ditterenily than it is today. Hardcover allowances for both .setback areas were totaled at 3.815 s.t. llie City conditioned approval on some 417 s.f. of driveway hardcover being removed within the 250-500 ’ setback to maintain overall hardcover at 3.815 s.f. Today we would consider total hardcover on a property as follows: Total lot area = 19.850 s.f. E.xisting = 4,062 s.f. or 20.4% Proposed = 4.472 s.f. or 22.5% Upon your site inspection, you will note that the lakeside deck is not one continuous deck along the lakeside of house. A third of the deck along the south side is an upper level or second floor level deck. Applicants have not noted landscape areas underlain with plastic with hardcover inventory facts. If geotechnic fabric or plastic underliners are tound beneath landscape areas by the building inspector, they will be required to be removed. Once again, this must be noted as a special conditional of approval for variances granted during the winter months. Statement of Hardships Please refer to Exhibits A (Application form), B (Addendum) and K (Resolution #2577 that granted approval of the 1989 variances). Hardships and unique findings are still valid for this review. Issues for Consideration 1. What is your opinion regarding the 1989 method for review and consideration of overall hardcover on the property? W'hat of our current review practice of considering total hardcover on a propeny? Which one meets the intent of the hardcover regulations? Should we consider both during a hardcover variance review? 2 What of the deck constructed in the north side yard? Will you grant a side setback variance. Should it be removed? Will it be removed as a result of the proposed unprovement? 3 The south side addition approved in 1989 met the required 10 ’ side setback. Will you approve an encroachment of the side yard? Can the addition be installed to the east side of kitchen. Owners to south recently completed a remodeling with a side addition that was originally proposed with a substandard side setback but amended plans so that side setback variance would not be necessarv'. r Zoning File #1898 Januar> 11. 1994 Page 4 4. Hardcover excesses exist within the 75*250’ setback area. What improvements can be considered for removal? Review Exhibits F, G and H. r ClTy OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION fr 1 o>^:^:s fr Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) CITY OF ORixiO FI^A^E OFFICE 4<4 W«/V4. W VV V 01 CES CHECK 71 tW V'V175. 175.00 -jircTOT^ruM.ti; yrnI 11 innt\ « uw * ‘0 TT». •!» Ty*4 Ch ’\ 4 J / 4 * T.Tf*. / wfwU V UVV'l MV'A^ /y PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Z30\ C T*C>N \ Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) 20 ^ \\~7 ^ ''^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired PE-C '3~I_ _ _ _(month/year) cin OF cw ijAikinAm* AT rv«A»jrr rrrr.r.r J :r,V~Monll'I.A'irjilVi. w< > AW-W , - .'f »W V V V _n r rry .A I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential _ _ _other(specify) Zoning District:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ HECK'~K" wwa ^ ^ *.K Z. .*i? / :q /cia./ t APPLICANT Name Phone (home) V_ _ _ Phone (wor)c ) ^oZ~Z Address: City:Zip: MK/ ONNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (wor)c) Address:City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OP REQOEST Estimated Construction Cost $ C<T0 ~~ COC^ Describe request in detail: AT'T'ch nAci \ 'icld n ^ ^^^l. rirrr'>^ «- - - --- --- - -—-- - - - - - --— VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setbac)c:Front V Side Rear Average Lalceshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: \ b.-cAtvy»s —V^i 'p{. Ci it Pr *\ / u V r-fV ^ . (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS iiJLi__2f_______follow ing infomation must be 8uhmi»«-*x^ bv the _____a f __________ _ _ ^ . —:----------------------------------------------------- ' application order for yoor application to be considered c*~—pletes 1» ^-^ompleted Application Form 2. ^Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. _^Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include calculations as required (provide one reproductTonTrt:''V T»Vs» 5. reproductioirrrt 'iy cv\ ‘ copy 8>j xll for Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll"). 5*—~®^®fohes or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8*s"xll“). '•- -addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8»_ _Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above IPfonMtiop has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date 12-20*53 OffNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga ­ tion and verification —of this request. Owner's Signature Date \2z2C-53 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants oust be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Ccanmission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements ro have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. r December 21, 1993 ?:7 / / rrw p4 VI : .. # Dear Jean Mabust, We have enjoyed living on Casco Point for over six years. Our family is currently growing with the addition of our first baby of hopefully many to come. With this excitement comes the challenge of adding space to our home within the boundaries allowable by the city of Orono, so that we may remain on beautiful Casco Point. Our lot is extremely long and narrow, which limited our first addition to suit our modest needs four years ago. At the time we built only what we needed in accordance with the city. Today we are analyzing our situation and hope to achieve the following goals: 1) Minimize additional hardcover 2) Obtain additional bedrooms and eating area for children 3) Keep our beautiful lot on Casco Point To best achieve these goals, we are proposing to attach our garage, utilizing the space above for bedrooms and adding an eating area tot he existing kitchen. We realize this will involve set back and hard cover variances. Hopefully, you'll agree this request for a variance for the small increase in hardcover will best achieve our objectives and the city's. Upon completion of this project, the hard cover in 75-250' zone will be 4% over the allowable 25%. However, the 250-500' zone will be conforming at 30%, which is a 22% decrease in existing hard cover. The setback variance required for the kitchen eating area will request a 6' increase on the existing 10' property setback on the south side. The neighbor's existing garage runs 16-28' from the property line in the proposed area. Our neighbor's support and approval can be verified by the neighbor acknowledgement form^ which Carole and Roger Frommelt signed. Also we spoke with Mike Graffron today and he informed us our survey is on file with the city for your reference. Jean, we hope you will be able to favorable approve our requests on the basis they will serve in the best interests of both us and the city. Should we be of any assistance in this matter, please contact us at 471-8417 or 931-9527. Thank you in advance for your time. Sincerely Paul Hauser 4% ; lUN DATE 12/20/95 '*\: BATCH 001 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OPWERS LIST REPORT NO. PX4J5401 PAGE 1PROP AOOR. . ; OWER NAME V TAXPAYER ‘V NAME/ADDR• ^ -PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR ■f.'l ■ r ‘ .. it, *. PROP AOOR ONNER NAME - r^. TAXPAYER .iv . NAME/AOOR SB 20-117-25 25 OOIA 02797 CASCO POINT RO R J GRUNDEEN I J A GRUNDEEN RONALD J GRUNDEEN 2797 CASCO PT RO NAYZATA MN S559150 20-117-25 52 0015 02S11 CASCO POINT RO GHENOOLYN C ROSS GHEN L ROSS 2811 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA HN 55591 58 20-117-25 52 0015 02800 CASCO POINT RO THOMAS B KING THOMAS B KING 2800 CASCO POINT ROAD NAYZATA MN 55591 -4^ :'v- ; r j ‘ -t V PROP AOOR ; 0»MER NAME • TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR ' '' • * . ' . I V,; •t L.-/-. • #vr I • ' ■ • > . ' •, 'V i ■ ■ '' '■'■■V ‘-■••.p-’ »' 58 20-117-25 52 0020 02799 CASCO POINT RO KAREN H ORTENBLAO KAREN M ORTENBLAO 2799 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA m 55591 1 '• * . ■** I ■»• » • • » t ■'.i ’.. 58 20-117-25 25 001702795 CASCO POINT RO J 0 HURO/J L ZEMRINGER-HURO J 0 HURO/J L ZEHRINGER-HURO 2795 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA MN 5559158 20-117-25 52 0019 02807 CASCO POINT RD J M A P S DAILEY JOHN M A PATRICIA S BAILEY 2807 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA MN 55591 58 20-117-25 52 0018 02799 CASCO POINT RO MARY E JOHNSON MARY E J0W60N 2799 CASCO POirfT RO NAYZATA MN 55591 TOTAL BATCH 001 00010 58 20-117-25 52 001202815 CASCO POINT RO J L STERN J L STERN2815 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA MN 5539138 20-117-23 32 001502805 CASCO POINT RO ROGER H FROtYIELT A NIFE ROGER H FROMMELT 2805 CASCO PT RO NAYZATA MN 55391 58 20-117-23 32 0019 02801 CASCO POINT RO P J HAUSER A R MASON HAUSER P J HAUSER A R MASON HAUSER 2801 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA MN 5>:591 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TACTION* TO THE^JfEST OF MY KIKMLEOGE AND BELIEF. / / OATI • »’ f si/• % «4 • V‘7/ sit 9* «r ,, ■ --r r- ■ i r r Adjacent Property Owners* Aclcnowlodgement Form X I (we)w 4V . O d (print name(s )] of 3-7‘r<^ Pi gs (print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 2.SO[ T<!Vn)T RO also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this ac)cnowledgeinent, I (we) am (are) not as)ced to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's projec^^or use requires Council approval. ^ \ v \ ,-I# j ^ 1 . • » • \ J1 Property Owner Date Property Owner Date I (we) l-| Pvovvt/f >___________ of 7^^'^ (pi/int name(s)] ^ (print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at Ck^o 'PQIUT also referred to as Land Use Application No. _____. I (we) understand that in executing this ac)cnowledgement, I (we) am (are) not as)ced to declare-approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. 17 Propelfty'^ner l^-Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. LakeMinnetonka EXISTING HAUSER RESIDENCE 2801 CASCO POINT RD. *T A.4 :i \x '♦i * ) m ‘1l ’s 'v , o Range Area Hardcover %Proposed % 0-75 5,250 0 0 0 0 75-250 11,300 1,980 17.5 3,280 29.0 250-500 3,300 1,736 52.6 990 30.0 ay ,— 1, \hS'75-Z90HOf^E + :io0- ca.<i 5Af^A6G. S'^h PCIU£LJAY \,\>0 \73(z: Z^o - '>00 I i| '-I Q.L G )posh :d HAUSER RESIDENCE 2801 CASCO PT RD Tr “(1 ,. iV-A V..,. ] V...J' 7 P0S£O C fVcCu CATION) ^ Home V£Ck: STjtTS ' E“v'C G^c^'6e 1 j 7 50 Go IS'150 huPR06(V^ \7Q D Civie'-iA'/s 7:>ZC) 4-5.o7 <<3 ^6 lit/-.-! ^^ ‘ ?• DPiUc/'JA qno 2SO'5O0 fmps: o O tb 3CQ M OQ a r* fD p) n> 7T n fl> fA O - - Hosr*a H« Cb cr a (0 a ►I OQ cn IP (0 O n P)3: (P O ►1 (A I 2 ►a o ►-• p>a h-* a to ID ^ H Ln (A Ui O O M !2 O § §m So Mz:o a n HiSJn SH»u>n o O O IP O O H‘ H* oo cr Hi ho n iPH aa IP Lnoip*rtnrtP>an>hri rr IP •aa* a*aip ip:;i:a*P>ibH ciPs:<p(xrroiPO(paaipH IPH OHinH a.(xcr •d^iCAM^a nna o IP o?rt^rr a'H'i-'H^ ►ioip aooippitofon noHt-*H»-*n Hncr^O'iP Hh^H'IP rtf-* -•»-<n av: a IP n i-'a*'< o o n OIP IPr»3*N>(P H»acbH- CLH> IP 0> w H o t/3 a -• a 3*'d o H»o o o o h-* g c IP H H< «: o> fn a“a rr n o a* t/i IP n (bav: o ui pi o rr p> IP M (P no; o I a o> tt I SOOUJ 5- 00 o M'* - "I I s. y n n IDa* to T3 n o O IP H- n o a a* i-nrr D -n o P> H»H' a rt acr lA IP nOQ a* H IP a a I-* Ho a OCQ pj«. n H* rr • o a* IP o a n c n »-• r-» rr IP to'< a* r-* a H> H- in n CL‘< a *0 a* IP n IP rt H H- a* a* n a o tb m a*uQ TJ rr n o IP *a H> ri *xj O T3 IP a lA cb (P s: O' o n H* H*9*ono < fpB IPan lA o n IP IP pi CACq a ^ rt H- 0.rr IP a a* pi n a IP »-• M H‘ o'< a %a cw OOP pi »• n M rt rt O n a'a' a a* rr IP ID Cq IDn a M w a o p*'< O' a* IP o O IP a ►-••i z H^ ?r rr IP ro (X o IP lA H^ o IP H IP H rta* H* (A O H* H> lA IP Xn IPa (A a* pi IP (A (A H* CL r* p) IP pi TT rt O' O IP M IP H> C a c/1 IP r a- Pi O Pi ?r ri aIP IP o. w > o IP Z O c/i o n o IPo n n c aMl rt a* rt n O' IP a H‘ > - IP ti n> a < n a IP rt IP a a* IP O O IP o a Hiip a Ml o o pi n Mnoq n p) M IP a ?r mvj m OMPJ OIPX ^Pl p) MCA wn TJ rt o n pi Z M pi *0 aiDIPWMH*P*ripi a X n n too IP H' M IP O' a a lAVJ ti ID rr rt m a rr CA H-rtv< 0 o • a o cLa OQ pi a < O IPn a IP c IP n pi o Hn IP o ft n IP < pi o *d Pi n rr IP IP CA rr Ml (A C rt IP CL Cb pi a H p- n CLO 3 IP Ml IP ♦ti v<: H- n na IP a pi n aw clip IP M PI IP -a MM* CL rt O IP M Z IP pi piriiMiP o w a nM ri M< CL H* X* rr rrOQ O rtMH'piOOrtaarta aao rr rr o ip pi a PlPawrr rt pirrpio H* OQ O Mart W M*d IP ro IP a rt CLO CA X M*0' IP H* H> Pi M rr ta o aaMio(APipir»io OQncLa acApiri W W H* CL n w a O 73 M* a IP rt D piM»piOrtM*nipr| a n a ID rt M ncLapi- ncAV<;»-io iPM CA vjMiaao <OqMPllPIPM IPIPMi p. p. fv (0 o X M* M a CL waM rrrtap-O n Ma BH'iPipanH-n an-MiPoa IP api MaH‘Piawo M oiPOQacn MMiOiortna - ipc^co MiO'acAO a MMar^ -*ip c PiPirtiPn o V* oa H MO CLO'rtnO rtM*MiCL CL M o a a a pi O PlPlPl M IPWMM OH* rr rttOMartpiH* <a*a MaoNtoonaip IP onp'ip o'ipcclca n c/) H* H* a rr g *daoQipwopis:(pp nun a' a ipao an* ntjOnCLCAnM ipa«: dnan^n orioqapiaiPIPWiPOCA IP M a a n n Ml CA ►d r> oq H* o z pi M piaMaMioa^^aMi ri iPOQ no ipii*d X*M*W aniPpip.opi • w »dpia MM*gn npiTTiPooo n Mo n IP n Mio ^1 pi M OQ on M oa M n Pi o CL n o o ID n VJ CL M*a OQ a M IP IP I-' pin H*o a o Ml rta pin r o o f*o n CA a Ecr*IP o a naw o IP HiM *d MO po H-ron H am H OPi P> M Q a a o S n mc-,3 ^ to. -O' o - Z Ob M WC cn a T3 w a a n IP pdIP MU < w a w OOQ ^ n pi »d pi H X* =t1:: m CO § r r -:r r?v?n vn:-.( T » t ‘Jin 4i.>« \ *• * c ----------------- f-*< i: t«n = F H 1=1 U M >-1 H U ■w H •• : ^I V * ?: -» ■* J u f\ 1 i w u w Q li u ri f: u 1 n L. 1 I U N . V-4 L- * )0r. 1 f ‘ ‘Vf r ^ i *v>; \ *w' u f'i I \i ' Q n ! «‘J i ' i i--' •« »r „ • .. j tir^xr^Y^ ! J r 4(:tr . •) .■n: t ■ V, I ^ ' I r; 5l a^‘ ■■• • »V •*.' ' ■ % ■>’ ■■,’ r-^' V% 4 ,l»*1 r2ai»r«« «'l'^ .- ’:■* "Wr I. •■>Oty of OROIVOr^.:•*■-■■ I •,»;,•* /JK'7' ■ ■>!. ■'•■r;\ '' ■"-' V« •[■■'•■■■..'’ .I (>iu.>nc4L ^f;•« •niaOlUTtOM O^THICITV COUNCILNO. - 2S77 V-■ - #rsc :'9re?|' %% ♦ *•VVV^^’VJ!hV.fe"-1*5- :^'v Of 10.U» iOWXTZCXON 1 ■0. U02 If Oiol lat tar (haralaaftar *tha applicant*) la owoar of too pre^ooty loeatad at 1001 Caaoe Point load within tba City of Orono (baroiaaftor *Clty*) and lapally daaorlbad aa followai •. 'f-.-ii Bshiblt A* attaebad (boralnaftar *tha proparty*)r and |r“ [ka. V. )I . — applicant baa applied to the City for a Tarlaseo to Hnalelpal loalaf Coda iootloa 10.22, Oubdlwlaioa 1 a 2 to parnlt tba oeoatno^oo of addltloaa to tba axlatlop raaldaaoa whlob aaoroaeb paat tba }^^**^** aatbaok lino wboxa no oaoreaobaaat la neraally allowad, aM wbleb raaalt In a bardoovar aqnaro footaga on tba property in oaeoaa of tba aqnara footapa noraally allowad. a Nlnnaaotai ■ON, TlBUrou, BI IT ■■OOLVID by tbo City Council of Orono, 1. Thla application waa ravlawad aa toning Flla •1362. 2. Tba property la loeatad In tba LR-IC Slnpla Fanily Lakaahora laaldaatlal Zonlnp Olatrict. 3. Tba Orono Planning Conaiaalon ravlawad thla application on January 17# and r#coM«ni«d Apt^rcval of tht tYtrA^n la)c«thury ^otwAci ▼arlaooa and danlal of tha hardcover variance oaaad upon the following flndinpat m A) lo alpnlflcant lake viawa enjoyed by nalgbberinp prepartiaa vlll ba radocad or ancroacbod upon by tba propoaad additioaa. a»'- I) The bardeowor axcaaa on tha property due to tba propoaad cooatructlon la 417 a.f. The property owner can ranova 417 a./. ®‘ anlatlnf bardeovor In tba driveway area without caurin; trafflo aafoty or vabielo atorapa problana, ao that no bardeevar varlanoa will be necaaaary. •../ r: 'fe-.Papa 1 of 4 ** »*ia ■M ■ A r wfeli.- V'’ ^ ■g^VTXUV W4^tr •'yTiM City CMS«il liaa oonildarad thl» B(p.*.lo«tioa isolaiia# t^-jt £^^^^ Cia4iafS a»4 raosHMSdatioas o< tha f lanaiaf CoaaiaaloB# raporja Sc^^\^Cl%y staff* ae—aata by tba applleaat aaa tha affaet of tbo preyao 1oo tba baaltb* aafaty aad walfaxa of tba oeMaalty* - • ^ t, TbaClty Coaaoll flada that tha oooditloaa aslatiap oa tbls prapai^y paoallar to it aad do not___________ __ ________ __ apply paaarally to otbor ppopaity la tbla aoaiaf diatrloti that frantlng tha variaaoa ooald oot ^ ^adtaraaly affoot traffic eoaditioaa> llghtt air aor poaa a fira bataxd _ , ui^ar otbas daapar to aaighbo riaf propartjf would aot aaroly aor^ ao a, s j '' -ooawaaiaaoa to tbo applloaat* bat la aoeoaaary to allooiato dOMoatrablo bardabip or diffiealtyi la aooaaaacy to promo t . . Btaatial px oparty rifbt of tba applleaati aad mold bo ^ •’ i y<-l4-.'£<v‘ tjio oplrit aad latoat of tba loaiof Coda aad Oaavrobaaaiwo Plaa of ^bo. fj '^QBd^OSXOHB OB^Dini JfcHD ODB^BXITXOBi® ~ Oaaod opoa tba abowa fladiBga* tha Orooo City Coaaoll baroby^;^ ^r.V.yraots a warioaoo to Moalolpal tooiaf Coda factioa 19.22* fabdlTiJlM 1 M > r , posalt tbo oeaotnMtloa of aa additloa to tbo oaiatiaf roaldaaoo trill,/j,*, ’Soaoroaob poot too aworapo lakoaboro aotbaob liao wboro ao oaocoMbOMt. aocaally allowod*:oab2oct to tha fellowlap ooaditloaai • 1, Tbo proporty owaar aball raoov# 417 a.f. of axirtiag hardeovar oo , j'tbo proparty* tbaraby alialnaticg caa aaad for granting of a hardcover 2« total aguara footag# of hardcover on tha property ahall ba 3,IIS a.f.* aa abown oa attacnad aurvay* Exhibit B. Araae o' hardoovar ta ba raaovad la order to aaintain hardcover at or belcw ch i 3*I1S a.f. laval. ahall be rej*ovad prior to ieauanc* oi a Certificate of Oooapaaey for tha naw additioae. Tha proparty ewrer ar.all provide a diagrao of propoaad Ikardeovar raoovala for atalf revio# aad approval prior to laaaaaoo of e bolldiag perait for tha propoaad additieaa. 3. batborltlaa graatad by thia variaaea run with tha proparty nor wltb tba applicant* bat ara parmieaivo only and auat ba exaxoiaed by applloatloa for a boildiog parait witbla oao yaar of tba data of. Cooadll approval* or tbla variaaoo will ojq^irt oa that data (yabnary ' ..IJ* lift). . ’’WV*!'Tl*Xatloa*df or Bon-coapllanco with any of the terar 'and’ I; T'*; . \'f% 0M4itlOM of tbla variaaoa aball eonatituts a violatiea. of tba.aoaing -Mdo* aball aotOMtloally tocalaata any awtbority-fraatod boBaln*^ #ad ' >?.^sball>bo paalababla aa a aladoMaaer. ' ^ ,1 a *jr ;2rJ5Jrr*‘W. ‘ri,^ m -X***• m t r' >}* > ^ X ' - »-j Jt-1- »-■-V ?>Lr ** *A / ir ' «^ ■;- '* i ■:J^ : ORONO0^ THI CITY COUliak 2577 '\.‘^1'virfii0il of (bo City o< Osi»ad» fobfUAfy 15, li3» •L-v'^** Vi '\ • f y-v* ^• !• rf* • ’ H • * • . •^ >« r • ^ « -.tv vvMV -^..-* ■ '. ^vrV ■J' r,. .*40 • r»^>r .s> • • ■ •• ^0 €,4yL / ’’^ V •"k _•-;» ■' ■• • • ^ 4 j. Y--» • '• ; Iv f •••<. * - ' I *> I J ■* ’ * .r ••*• ^ X»- ♦ . , '; •J'-V ■ '. • . - ■• v-5v:^ »*.{ :tMs'' fko foc#90iof lostcuMiit vof aclinowlodood bofora m oo I4tll day of rabruTy .» ?9 t?y P^^aOTvaai «f« Coll^baa ood OofOthy N. Hallila. Xctloo Mayor City ' -dock Of tko City of 0coBO> a Minnaaota aoalclpal corpocatloo ano *y.kUklA looknaooot oaa asaoutad on b«b4«i of tba City* i:'« l-H . ^ v'i’k m .• --ij. J' "#v».rv ’ , r f X^ J y ^ X'* ■'•'■• * ^ •• ^ \ v • ir> *‘ ’ * hV>‘V*'/|^*.Vi-a*’ 4*. 1* • rj"* ^ _lai«k MiK «• ««Mir*a > jasr.£^ V •,ri- *'^A \< a • - •» : i *#■ •'■» *r V''• -*•I**' f \>' fagti 3 of 4 v;?^/::.*! v:^ :v L:>T. -r. A '•Tt' .il IV,-, ^ ' I • ^Lmid ’^«W!•o,ic. I kJ m A^/i. I )f- A Hu, ^ ^? "V ^*• rc' . 3J.9I tu. -c %v cr I ^gMOVfc f€Kl <7/7 s.*f* [5^20 l^N. r bif->U| i JflJL. -wC - r ’V • » ‘ f-.. •..*’>• ».% >.»- t ‘t|;-’-v * ^ V ' '• ' ' ' V--1^\41 ^Ik/.'-t*'*-' Tyxf- ■'f ■■■‘'<L-®-^ ;■ '>'1SI Im.1 ' •■ . ■ •• -■* m 5ITT^l»a1 •*]*:’V’^f<.v'4 ‘•im "* * ’ m^i: wii r /. TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator %FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusih, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:January 12, 1994 SUBJECT: #1899 Donald and Carolyn Udell. 1210 Loma Linda Avenue - Variances Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Hardcover inventor) . A. 0-75’ setback area = 4,480 s.f. Allowed = 0 . Existing = 168 s.f. or 3.7% (330 s.f. of rock rip rap area is not included within hardcover calculations) Proposed = 168 s.f. or 3.1%* •Section 10.56, Subd. 16(F-1) - Allows stairways at a maximum 4’ width where steep topographies require stair access B 75-250 ’ setback area = 13,640 s.f. Allowed = 3.410 s.f. or 25% ... • Existing = 4,792 s.f. oi 35.1% (adjusted by statf to include patio and retaining walls, Exhibii E-2) Proposed = 5,107 s.f. or 37.4%* Variance = 1,697.7 s.f. or 12.4% 250-500’ setback area = 14,080 s.f. Allowed = 4.224 s.f. or 30% Existing = 8.470 s.f. or 60% Proposed = 8.470 s.f. or 60% No changes proposed Section 10.03. Subd. 14(C) - Lot coverage ToUil area = 32,200 s.f. Allowed 4.830 s.f. or 15% Existing = 3.976 s.f. or 12.3% Proposed = 4,296 s.f. or 13.3% No variance required ____ ".S',' Zoning File ^1899 January 12. 1994 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Survey E - 1-3 Hardcover Fact Sheets F - First Floor Plan G - Basement Floor Plan H - 1-3 Elevations I - Proposed/Existing Roof Line J - 1-3 Photos of Residences K - Resolution <(^1156. Application 542. 6/30/80 L - Council Minutes 6/2/80 M - Buildine Permit for Two Story Garage 1982 Description of Request Applicants propose construction of a 8’x40’ two stor>' entiy addition (basement/first floor) that will meet the required 10’ setback from the south side property line and will be located behind the average lakeshore setback line. Applicants seek approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250’ setback area as e.xcesses already exist and additional 2.3% of hardcover is proposed. In 1980 the applicants applied for a rear setback variance for the 24’x22’ garage addition to the rear of the existing principal structure. At that time the Udells owned the property to the immediate north, refer to E.xhibit C. The properties consisted of three separate lots and contained three rental units, review Exhibits K and L. A condition of that approval required that Udell homestead lot be combined with the property to the immediate west. The variance involved side and rear setbacks from the rear lot line of Udell's homestead parcel. By combining the parcel to the west, the rear setback variance was eliminated and merely a side setback variance was required. Since 1980 the lot to the north has been sold. The Citv has had no problems with the rental units on the Udell propert>'. refer to Reso>ution ^1156. E.xhibit K. The City recognized the nonconformities on the property but gave no direction as to legal status of the rental unit once combination was realized. Applicants should be advised that any major structural alterations or improvements of the structure will require approval of the City before a building permit can be issued. Staff has made the necessaiy ’ adjustment to both existing and proposed hardcover calculations as addition results in only 248 s.f. or new hardcover. 6 ” of overhang has been included in hardcover calculations where hardcover did not exist beneath overhang. This totaled Zoning File #1899 January 12, 1994 Page 3 66.7 s.f. in area. Applicants should advise where surveyor ’s calculations would have included a 378 s.f. increase. The existing hardcover now includes patio and retaining wall area at 551 s.f. In 1982 the applicants were issued a building pennit for a 44’x22’ detached garage under the allowed 1,000 s.f. based on the fonner code requirements. If hardcover reviews were as sophisticated as they are today, this garage with additional paving would never have been allowed without the required hardcover variance. Statement of Hardship Please review applicants' hardship statement on tace ot application. Applicants note that the proposed addition will be placed over an existing paved cement area and patio. Stall does not remember a patio area. If this is the case, there may not be a increase in hardcover tor the proposed addition but merely an intensification of structural hardcover. Applicants have provided floor plans noting the unsafe condition of current use of e.xisting access and potential for falling down stairs to basement. Issues for Consideration 1. How shall we deal with the hardcover excesses? Applicants show no removals. In order to offset the additional structural hardcover, applicants should be asked to remove the two separate sheds at a minimum, review Exhibits E 2-3. Arc there other hardcover improvements that could be considered for removal? What about blacktop area? Can that be trimmed back? We must have a reduction m hardcover. 2. Section 10.60. Subd. 13 requires oversized boats in excess ot 20 ’ must be stored within a structure or offsite. As code only allows boats less than 20 ’ to be stored on a residential property. Based on the survey, it would appear that the large boat is stored within the City’s right-of-way. As the City has received no complaints on the storage of this boat, it may be helpful if boat could be relocated next winter to a less conspicuous location. 3. What are the applicants’ plans for the second residential rental unit on property.^ How long will the use continue? Remember the City required the legal combination and that prior to 1980 the house was on a separate lot. 4. Once again, what are we going to do about hardcover? Lot coverage is not an issue. r 2toning File #1899 Januar>' 12, 1994 Page 4 Options of Action 1. Approval as proposed: or 2. Approval as amended. Hardcover removals must be completed by the final inspjection for the two story addition; or 3. Denial of application as proposed. r ■f y Ci : CITY OF ORONO - VARIAKCB APPLICATIOH JJ. irr H i Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) rrrv nc nCfiAifi C 7 a* A ST “♦aTC 71* C V »i w>»» vv w Af rrv I i rr- i »a %‘wv^ V vv w r?rrc: ,v*a t w* • vv PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address /C rucr^ t.1 Lt CTC'T. trnfti.vk.ai I It trtitty > vw f *■ C* rTv A rrw*» i VA f T < ^ .ffa./wwv'v wvva Ava » a v* *f n . - n-i aa./ Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) *// Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired ^ ft^7 _ _ _(month/year) I jf3^(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land, 'futoi tiJU, /^ooLtimL^ - • -*-----------— ------>•-*—other (specify)Present use of property: Zoning District: ^^,---re s iden t ia 1 APPLICANT Phone (home) Name (y*t4dl^ ^ /L-Phone (work) Address:/p7/a ^OPttA ^dk Citv: hll. Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:Citv; Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ o2-J^, <we» Describe request in detail: 2'^*^ Y^ ~ ■/“ “iTL7 “ "ZZfi’-T'j ~~~J Jt • /! A. PjAMi^Zm aa ■ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area HardcoverLot Width Lot Coverage Setbac)c:Front Side Rear Average Lalceshore Other (specify) HARDSBIP/DBSCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoninq Code requirements:_ ------- OAjf^ ArV tf!. ' __ j y^. /C^f , T7^ ^-***^_ • —tZ—hM/i . ^'■ ^ 77777^ O^ UJk/u777777^77 ^4^ r (attach additional sheets if necessary) RBQOIRED SUBMITTALS following inforaation nuat be by deadllne_date in order for^your appjJ,cation to be considered appllcatl lete Al- 2. _Completed Application Form ^Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150* (you must obtain Hennepin County Department of Finance- A-603 Govt Center348**3271) • 3. X Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). -----Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 0ij"xll“ for reproduction). 5. --Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8>j"xll"). 6. -SJcetches or plan^ of floor t elevation views (provide 1 copy 8Jj-xll-). addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of 8. any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that yoor variance application la not comolete If th« information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or Administrator, agrees to pay additional f2es (staff incurredoriginal fee payment) and/or consultant expenses sunn^n^ i review of this agolication, and certifies that the inforaation supplied is true and correcOo the best of his/her knowl^Hoo. Applicant's Signature ^ //nui his/her )cnowledge. Date ■ SZ - OWNERS SIGNATURE Owner's Signature ^Date JZ. Zz submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the ird Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled ■eetlngs of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is auJhr,f-j ^ scheduled meeting, please malce arrangements to have an thorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. .4 * ^ vr/ 4 WN DATt It/lt/n •ATCH OOSAOOR ; OMCR NANI . -v , TAXRAYCII 3k ’M NAMI/AOMV V MOP um IM€K HAM < TAXPAYER * flAHE/ADOR <; * iHOR ADOR ONMER NANI -•.;/ TANRAVfll V ’ ' V .•! ..«■ NANI/AOM PROP AOOR r OMNER NAME TAMFAYER HAHE/ADDRf * * / :\u PROP AODR ^; otcp hahe ^ TAXPAYER A NAHE/AOOR ; • I.’-,'-'' ' ■ . • Ir \Vf V -, WWP AMIR ;■•<>'; 0»tCR MANE taxpayer ^ NANE/AOOR'tr ’ ' M 07-117-ES lA OOA7 OUM NORTN ARH DR 0 A NOWTHY i P E RSINERE GARY A NOVOTNY AND PATRICK E REXHEKE IIM NORTN ARH DR . ORQNO m 55SM Sa 07-117-ES 41 0007 v/^ OlEES LOHA LINDA AVI DIANE NIUXAMSON DIANE NILUAMON 1EE5 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN 55S44 SO 07-117-ES 41 0074w 01ES4 LOHA LINDA AVE R I J GANTNER RONALD i JANICE GANTNER 1E54 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN 55S44 / SO 00-117-ES ES OOOE 01100 LOHA LINDA AVE HATTNEN H BURNS HATTNEN H BURNS 1100 LOHA LINDA AVI HOUND HN 55S64 y • < • .'iy* •«. t • *4i. . « NEItCriN COUNTY RROPCRTY H^OMUriON SYSTEM RROKRTY OMCRS LIST ySO 07-117-ES 14 OOlS 0115S LOHA LINDA AVf EUGENE GEYEN ETAL EUGENE A GEYEN 1155 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND m 55S44 SO 07-117-ES 14 0040 0115S LOHA LINDA AVE D B i H J BANS DOUG i HARY SAM 4111 FRANCE AVE S EDINA m 55410 SO 07-117-ES 41 0000 DIETS LOHA LINDA AVE C 0 ANDERSON I A H ANDERSON CHARLES • AM ANDERSON 1ET5 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN 55S44 07-117-ES 4Vt)0ll OlElO-'^^vNORpri^^ DR H B HUEltwU^ R HUELLER JOSEPN/i HARY HUELLER 1E4VN0RTN ARH OR HN 55S44 SO 07-117-ES 4^07# 01E54^-..4i5M VBWA AVE JACK E HA)0ieOU(TAL RONALD A ^ICEGRiaNER 1E54 LQ^LINDA AVE HOUND JM 55344 SB 0B-117-ES ES OOOS OllTO LOHA LINDA AVE DAVIDCO REAL ES^ INC OAVIDCO REAL EST INC C/0 JEFFREY G LYNN 71 N HAIN ST CLARKSTON HI 46014 v/ REPORT ND. PI4S5401 PAGE 5 4 ♦ y HPLS HN 554S5 .V, SO 07-117-ES 41 0004 01E05 LOHA LINDA AVE K R NINRICNS ASH HINRICIO KEVIN R P SUZANNE H NINRICKS 1E05 LOHA LINDA OROND HN 55S44 SOs. 07-117-ES 41 OOOf 01E«KM0RTirjH<h DR P K NUNtSM(l^ K L HUNTSHAN PAUL K AyftRmiM L NUNT^IAN lE60>ldRTH ARH DR HOUND m 55S44 07-117-^ 41 OOIE 01El>NNpl(TN ARH DR R L DU«M h .^AL RICH^ L lEUr NO ARH DRIVE m 55S44 SO 07-117-ES 41 0087 OIEIO LOHA LINDA AVE DONALD R UDELL ET AL DONALD R A CAROLYN UDELL lElO LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN 55344 % %•.1 • * y• 'Jy*..V'v' •'' r* «V Vi . a V. .ft •• > «: 1 T • 1 •. • • 4 .r . .‘ > J / ^ •' y. >'r ‘ ■. ••y*. >/• V», ■ i.• • •. ‘v;' .■*» • » ' V . • • »i r# '•fk y ■. ‘a , V ^ • • • * / * t .. y . f V ••••■ •» • Af. . Ji'v * / •' V- * ***^ to » » u • ' • § * * • • 't \ X C • ' k f S' •V * *•. - ‘ ‘ ^ ■ ft •►y • J . ^ ' V ’ • • . 1.; * *•' ft'" •' ••r ■ ^ • • * f 4 “ 'j • V-‘ » rv' - V i * - M : • • / • > * . • •• r tg• . .t - C A* *i«.. to ^ V HUM MTf Xt/ttmT kf, % K •ATCN OOSv> map ADMiOMCK NM«^ TAKFAYCK •015 LINDA AVf 60LODED6 OMN^%v Aom .-•^f-OMCR N«« : ;f^' TAXPAYM -•! »;:V.'MW«/*OI» ; j* ’ .. { ‘». f ^ t ' *'l’ #.•<►•* r* • • i* • {*.y ^ • ■ 'V.-vsV ; r .- • t^'piwp Aom • •£'>;, OMCR NAHi - ‘i;; TAXPAYCR MAHK/AOOR •;!.•• fV'f. HPLS m MASSM M-117-AS S2 QlUO SPRUCt PL H NYATT NOt N MYATT me •U( SO RTM ST HPU m 55A0A SO M- 0H4^ EVAM T' SMRJCe EVAN EVAN A/MH^ UAO^tPRUCS PfcA( HOUND HN SBS4A S2 0012 RSON ETAL •' V V V, ^ A ll, : . V ’ . . . . • . ‘V. •/#■,• , , ■ • V v v .r •, i t. r ■ •• I'. . L'^ » •,* ■ r • '1^'' • •.•■’" {t«*■'rT' ^’'’^1 * •■'i' •.'it ♦ ;■ v *'v'. ..• - • s :ir\\* v v*'‘ V •/ w«‘•> ■ •, ;; HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATIQN SYSTEH PKJPERTY OtCRS LISTSR 0R-117-2S 2S 0027 01200 LOHA LINDA AVf EOHUND 6RIFFIN ET U DONALD R UDELL 1210 IONA LINDA AVE HOUND m MSAA /v/SO M-117-2S S2 0007 012A0 SPRUCE PL 0 A NALLNER I L J NALLNER DAVID A NALLNER 12A0 SPRUCE PL. HOUND m S5SAA SR 0R-117-2S S2 012WS. SPRUCE R H A E VvEUMSON REM4ETN A E£DND-CaiCKSaN 277S tkXa POINT RO MAVZATA^ 55S91 SR 0R-117-2S S2 OOOS 01220 LQNA LINDA AYE N HYATT HOE ETU M HVATT NOE R2S SO OTN ST HPLS m S54RRSR 0R-117-2S St OOOtk^ 012S0 SPRUCE PL N N NOLEE- ETAL H N NOLFE 1250 SPRUCE PLACE HOUND N4 55SA4 REPORT NO. PIASSAOlft * <1*•' C 4. I nV ..FAGC i *R. .. >MJ* .iiNr-A.» A .1 I*• r3‘ - - ‘ 's VT . -.'A;:,V..V; :V;S "S■ -V . L- r.‘‘ 4^. k>-^ V, TOTAL RATCH OOS 00020 ' f * , . .'.0 :n'f #. W’.D ^'h • •;io -s ) I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF W^KHONLE^ ANO*^LIEF^"^^ PHOPE^fY TAX|npHk TO THE REST DATE • 1 •; ■ FK ‘S ’ < • 1 .. Y ,1-1 ' •. ** :4> *» .f •-n ' : .<•’ . ■Sy.-'f-- CD ’i::: ■rJii, ■ ‘ '■ -u‘ Ml. • r.'i 7 . ; >’.r A.. ■; • ■• it-.V-'..••.•••J: .K:: V -*t. . .»V,^ ■ - i. ’ •; < V *’->V ^ •.0 •'I.'r> •• • *^5' *V ^ i ’C', MO' V ' V / \ 4*rt T3 5 • \ \ O^.W7- f55'- Tlf ? TF r'X’ i.:r*c o -3 .^5; • J ^ * * ^ 1 i ,s' 57' vr 2?51 1 i V 52 * * :s 23 •T - 5,55 * ^ Xm Sl 22 . j ^ 2 -♦ Z-* ■ f ?f ■*•’ i* ..rs :.J > ^5 4 S*^£5 ’^ 'll j;, bL bL ~ X h: -------- x: 29 v:*!' • , ' \ .K v_SL.il .joi: <x'i .-.•■»• • ■ !C 7*:-CVi .:v:- % % • 4 5^ ?? 4 \ t V ! '5^? \ S ' ** ’ ' • •« « ? • • O'. : ^ m . 5 '-1 3 J 9 ' '?!y !** M •■ ’ V / *'/ \ (52) :5 ««‘ ■“1 — r=5 V 2C ,« Xi.Zc rf ha6£4 i*: *-• r;5: >_ I*'JCj, :-we<‘ 'V« 3' r • • »- « 5) Lmopo 3 .^: ◄ • *kL* ^ :cc Nc !iu'o«: 1W .;\''»1 7 ▼« * % ^ ;6) ’•j <X JJ: 1" i\‘*^ ,r 7' '•1 g\3 ^ ^ i ' \ \ >*•-.*<v,><w ’5) .c< •» Iiir^ _ _ 5^'"' ’ *0 p:l£3 S 7 7 .♦> . •;tK^^-^-H-L_ J-e/.. ,7 , \ " ^ ;s9) *ft »> t »' / / / fco ?y ^ >*;' ,-/ ,t3> 'x? , "M'' ■' >v r*;;. 8 \ O •' ■ /'(nr'v ;525^ I) s 3< 4 08-U7-'2'S'^^ . ws^ (25) Cs*® V !:i ijg* ^ ? a a. 3(20^L(24) ^» ^ ^ r HARDCOVER CALCULAriOfI WORKSHEET 'riScTBAc;; ZONE: (circle one)^ Q-75. 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' Existing Hardcover in Zone A. House LENGTH width _ X B. Garage c. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk 4Z E. Patio/ Deck X X F.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY PLASTIC SHEETING X X X X X \ G, Other X TS • S.F. S.F. S.F.a:• , S.F. S.F.• S.F. mm S.F. ‘ :• s S.F. 1 i a S.F.•' 1 ■9 i/1m-n•s S.F. *» .S.F. •S.F. a S.F. - S.F. S.F. 330 S.F. /t.. .oJ Wk: Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone S.F. S.F.5 41S B 44M X 100 % MR A MRS DON UDilcL 1210 Loma Linda Av«l Mound MN 55364 • ............• J r HARDCOVER CALCULATIOM WORKSHEET SETBACK zoriE: (circle one) 0-75'^75-2E^ 250-500' 5Q0-1000 Existing Hardcover in Zone f. A. House B. Garage c. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/ Deck F.Landscape AREAS UNOERLAJ^ PLASTIC SHEETING G. Other LENGTH X X X X X X X X WIDTH Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 42^1 B /3&4V Mound, MN 55364 Ivr*^ • r • 7 S.F. S.F. ' ^ > i. S.F.C..) S.F.<r . S.F. MSO S.F. 304 S.F. S.F. T- ^ \ ft S.F M..F. S.F. 2o^S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ¥- S.F. •4241-4T? S.F. / 3.6»4^ S.F. B X 100 - ^ r HARDCOVER CALCUUriOfI WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE OflE) 0-75’ 75-250' ) 50Q-1000' 'E xisting Hardcover in Zone A. HoUiE __ X ^ _ 9S6 1 S.F LENGTH « • X WIDTH . c,4S S.F, X - /39 S,F. X S.F. X S.F. ■ B. Garage x S.F.• - '—— -- " - c. Driveway _ . x a ! 1 (e<^S.F. X = A^oo S.F.• f D. S idewalk x IIS.F. • X ss S.F, X s . S.F. E. ’ATIO/Deck X a S.F, p.Landscape x • S.F. AREAS UNDERLAIN BY . X 3 S.F. PLASTIC , SHEETING f •- X *S.F, X S.F. v^lctih G. Other x lio S.F. Total Hardcover in Zone &A10 S.F. Total P roperty A rea in Zone /4oBO S.F. k tA To 4 B '/4O0O X 100 = (pd ( MR A MRS DON UO£U- • ^210 Loma Linda Ava. ''ound, MN 55364 • • • ••• P• r # ■:Uj: B % n M •. • •» ^ -V J ■ n •• ■ ! ; 11 1 ! 1 1 i \, 1 1i 1 1 ; r u • ' ■*••/'.jJ “J ' i r, ‘-■- —f j O A-O i.,l\r-S i .r-v h•• •- ■' ^*. .* 1^ - ^ i./• - . -^V’' *> V^A. - r 1 / ..;^ '^•.li-, ' •' - '•'■ '/■ -* »-.. '.• 'City of €»RONO <*>A •^V..■itV■ .viU:pi •■RttoumoN Of THicmroouNCtt i , . - - .’.\ -V ‘ ■♦-( r, , '■ C;>rfTWO. lift* ■ '\, ;"-V■^.v^ ^RICXROXNO LOT COHFORKITT AKO VARIAJICX A7PS0VAL FOR DON UDELL, 1210 LOW. LIMOA AVBNUS . ♦ ' IfHElEAl, th« City of OroRO i« • mmiclp*! corporation organiaad and •xlstiag under the laws of ch<» state of Ninnasotaj and {-U<> Sri. ’.% ** . ** y ■* . V ;v^ «:t 4 i the City Council oi tha City of Orooo !uu adopcsd xoaing- . cngulationa for tha orderly, economic rnd safe davelopmant cf land witlkin.' .v^ ;tha City I and V' , WHSlUAf# the Planning Comnieaion and the City Cour.oll hare *ocneidered an application fron Don Udall, 1210 Loom Linda Aveaue, £cr ' approval of sooing variances to permit conatruction of a rmn attached .^ garage on aaid propertyi and ' •' ‘ WBtltAB, pursuant to review of this application, tha City Ooimcil makaa tha foliowing findings of fact: *■' - ^ >>*V /afT ► , .', • n-' I ■*'’r ? *«• *•; I. r1. Tha Odalla own or hava proparty intarast in fvo adjaceotiv . lota, four tax parcala, upon which ara located thaix. hcea, thraa aaparata rental dvallings, and a detached garage#: ^ ^r- [♦Pi ‘ * • :•■ . ^1*- J ’ ;• rt' P,‘- 5. », • VlJi >w A.. V. 2. The pr(H?NEty includes a portion of vecatad Portland Place within which is reserved a utilities ea#4uuent fot a natural' - gaa line. 3. Tha total area of the property la 1.26 «»crea. 4. Tha property la located in the LR-lB zoning district, which pemita only aingle-taaiiy detached dwellings on individual lots, and which requires at lea^r 1.0 acres for each separate dwelling and/cr lot. 5. Tha existing use density of the property is .111 clviillir.f,j par acre. 6. The existing properties arc non-conioming as regards permitted uees in the zoning district and are non*'Gon£orsung with required lot .area, width and setback pertorsuuwe atanUarda^. v ' ^ a »V I,*: A V “ i 1- r:'i s ‘i% Vv 7«i ■ The proposed'Iccation of the ^attached-garage * iB Che .only reaeoaahle looetien.ibecause of. theiConetraiatai^oi.'.tojMfaohy . ^ 5* end^lot configuration. , ■ ■ - ' m ^xiee^ -A V twrfl.^4’4. W^iesr; , »is, •-.I"'. A. i-f'Vwaa# # -I # % ^ t‘-v- /. . f >'k.'-. *V ' ■ >! 3»^i *\h ‘ ■ Jvs , ^Av.-ife?, •‘‘*P^ > . • ■ ' .• ••‘‘‘: • f;-/‘ ’/i A V= */ ■ f * :'^}\’ ... ‘ i ,y- w.• "» ** j • ?;' < ^ ->■-»i <i ii . fri?r>.V ri ;ii- f-? i.i .f :‘j. . V*- .-... i V'-'^;3i^r;-:a t-'^ih city of OBONOnnoixmom oi^TMectTvcoiMcit ^tia_ll?< ^ . S;,\\ ' ’ " V , ■ • ’ ’ \ ^ >^v — • A* *' ^ ^ i ; .' , ' - »; ^• . . - '■' - • i ^ . V- '•*. •" ’V A'vmKs&MM^^miA iV < '4.. ^.<*• <•. \ Hf' ^ .■i ^ 2 . ^<^;‘•'» r • ^ v*Vvf^/iJ!C?5- -1 ,;- : / ,•'■* " •' . n- ilir?JKS[®S!rM ®T?T** ***'*^ fe*»tr; *o I«iigaora tliMi cm# Awmlling #xi#t# on «#cb ®*®**^* •ill b* th« r—pcaaibl# party fnir ahtaiKunt -of' ‘ r << any and all loning coda or ouiaanoa which aay occur on aaid proparty, «»hatlMr^caaaad by ties. proparty ownar or by a rantar-oocnpant of ' tha oroOartw** and that fallura to correct auch vSlatloii^pS??S2^: notloa froa tha City ahall aubjaet Mid pcopa^ to proaacutioo for aaid vloUtloM, Incladliio panaltiaa of up to a ISOO.OO fiaa or 90 days in Jall^for^aeh' * v- occurranca tharaof« . u- nenOH 34.4S0t 8ida •-’ w ;?Wv. ^ii -'• •>< conatruction of an attachad garaga to 3*^of. tlia lOTiMirtyf^ -ll~ b.»M. Lot. 1 »4 a, Biock I, .09. BUf appurtenant aaaaaMnt. ensuring that ^ha propoaad'-"" ''■**•• *? ■ '^' construction will not encroach on said line or axuwftwjt, Y or aitamativaly. tha applicant shall at hla expanse . arrange with tha utility to relocate said gas line and •••♦■•nt to permit the construction to p^cceed. / b) Tha City Council in approval of this setback variance hereby finds that the applicant has demonstrate-i u hardship dua to topography and existing house location suCficiant to justify aaid variance, provided all conditions of tnls resolution are net prior to appLicat'.oa for a building permit. 3. The approval of these variances shall expire one y^ar after.,- Approval of this Raaolution if thr cofid;t:ion3 have nut boon not or tha building peraxt haa.not baan isswd^ but ?sr3Cft'"."T, ^ axpiratloQ shall not rsvoka tha agsaaomita ioade by ta« applicant in Sactlooa Ic and Id abovaa^.. T ; -v.-^ •; : 1% • ■> -> T I '■■■> . . *v ■% i*P? » ,r"' ^ ' C. i:xr f \ • V.r, :7v»T.■§m(fhm W--" iM Fr.Sf K . - -A* ' e •- - Us / *» <1^ -A* ' « ' .'NkA. & a- -A- i* • * . - . B ' >• • r.r^ « • . 1 •„ . V "-.T mmmm . ' <*r' '• 45 i:i;\y,V'< i; » 1 'Ute i Sirv'r'V.' *'f.v* m <:m^- jW jiL«r;^.?iiiiSfll^feiii^:.'y. .5 . ^ '•-'1city of OROlvd,:*•' ■•' • » . •; ■' .. ., ,5».. I ■' ii' iwii^ei \i^...j • i-•■ •.t fIftOU/TIOM Of THfCfTVO)WMClCrf -^MO.___IW •%. *&VV ■ 4^ '-•• • • r . '.--.V-\ * * ♦ ^. - .'> 7 < -'•'1 ■• ;•i ' r-** . *•-.! /•▼'•f . s^' •> •>• .. . ... th« propertyr wllloh persons shell miqn this Jbseol«tiQli;>o3<y.' before it shell be edopted by the City '' »'if« '• -.MiV 3F'«a*eif^'3^' K--*^' « • * \m vatereioned hereby agree to the ftateeente and ^1.. h.tSr*9»~ to 1.0V109 toi. ao^t ttl^ t» ty f. .V,; ,.• .; » .- t * - * .* *lf ?.-T;- Date ,«bk. :*rc' f, / 't5 ^m‘4 .V. , % ^■'•- ■• -'-r *V fcV-. 1% ■Sa' ' ■■'.*v> •- ■ ».....a Dac« . Co "'c3 o **'i5o •' *■’ ■/• ^. .. . , . . ., .; - r V,v,^pS ''=V w /> V.’.. Date i^y -Ci Date j -<fc) :■ ■ ' i Adopted this o£ the City Council u£ the City or Oi-uh; , 1930» by WUUaa B. Vad // / ____ _ I___yv-lest/ ii4ivcr - I' .•M: ,**.*. ro"»> -»v• iv:nw O c. o *3* 1^ •’ *•' . «" ... ‘VJ’'' > ■-■• •. Ac/itwy V- ^ • /» «,', ’• Atf ■ K f .f / ■^J. \ • r.- ■• rv ■ <y'} -'- .1 .■>.■'» v";'. :,-■. -y rv •■ * • • *y ■'•. * '» 1: \' ini»a% bsrii^ai locit*<t:i3fr*;fif^ •jtl»iiH^'.' K V. pro^rty lift*'i: .^^''.•i/ K?ric <l»dlc«tlon fM for Lot 2* of flOOiOO^•,'V ft* ‘ •“V T i* » OKv^lI stMtiag • Jwo a, IW®. . • * ''• ♦ ■ •*. •■ , •.-■?• '■ ilarr abvod;' Cutltr teco»4#a, ':to dlroct '•t4£C l», ptcrtr? •» r»*fol9tlen to Inelodi ttoff roeoa^ " 1. ■"^ j ** .#. * * . i Plovft"?»> •r.d conrsrvation Easoaont owr th« ‘ weti.’inds Dedication on the plat of right of way forth* follcvino '"M'J»i a) 4C* WoRt Branch .'lo.id b) 30’ llighview l^nc Variance * Setbacit of animal barn Hequircd: 150 ’ Proposed; 70* ~?15'Variance Noting change in variance under condition 13 r prepOMd 70*; variance 80* ■i'-. ':s,^'K-■'>■■’ ir Hardship finding*t location of existing "animal” fencing along east/veat property line animal barn was located 130* from exiating eatt property line . . • ■ ' *; > • - ■!' ’■•• . m\ 4. 5. Park dedication fee for Lot 2 of 9100.00 • ' • *4 .♦' ., .11. • . # * r: ^ Minnehaha Creek Waterahed District approval of culvert else . • - *.- *r • • ’*• vs. » V. ^ 6. Resolution to address 25* corridor. Motion. Ayes (4) > Nays (0). Jeanne Mabosth. Soning Administrator, prepared the following memo concerning a variance for Don Udell, 121U Lome Linda Avenue, dated Nay 39, 1910, ehioh statesf i/vAMMCl 1310 fS43 Ooa Oiall The Udeila propose construction of an attached 24* X 22* garage that will encroach 3* trcn the side (north) property line. The building inspector has confirmed that because of topography and location of isature trees, this is the only feasible'location to attach a garage. (CentiniM4) , '■ ’ *.••••>:,<' . / • * ✓ ■ • ■ • • ■ V, > • ‘1 #*y • W •- V f. •d ^ .F P ^ I ItnOLMI ■.y'f -.V - % fnO^OF TKI OKMIO COUMCXL* Jlffll 2^ 19SO > DttriM tlM r«vl««« th« Flaaning Coi«i»»ion q^«tlon*d tha thraa additiocuil rental unite on the Udell QTAB^jf^y, Die toning dletrlct celle for a nininun ^rrisi of one acre - one reaidential unit per acre, ijlio ooeeiieeion reoognitee that the existing etructuree wore there when the Udelle acquired the lottr reocMBMad the property be legally defined ae two )^i4ia4iiq aitae. f»yf# ^viewed the outetanding violations on the one rental oabin. The violations cover a period of ten years and involve the storage of unlicensed cars, the building inspector reports that the Oberg cottage is currently clear of any violatione. PXaaoe reviev the Planning Coeiiseion ninutas of nareh 17, toril 7, and May 9, 19i0 for background infomation and the Planning Contission recoaaendation. Planning Conjnieeion reconnendationi TO approve side yard varianoe setback of 7* for Don Udell batrl on the hardship of topography and nature trees subject to the following conditions i 1. Before a building permit is issued, the following must be ocsipletedt a) Owner contact gas company to determine exact location of utility easement . . , b) Lot 1 t 2, Block 2 and Lot 2, Block I must he legally oo^ined as one building site c) Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 4 (8-117-23-23-0004) met be legally ccstbined as one building site d) All outstanding violations on rental unit - must be removed specifically the oberg cottage and unlicensed car problem Council Meeting - J\me 2, 1980 Mr. a Mrs. Odell were present to discuss thaix application. -K VAmAMCB ■ ,0'}^n. * . X, > 1210 Loaw Linda- (Continued) ' - ' . f r *m ■ ■; '.S . •• V V: •• IVi ,;v • -- - - - - - - •*a.* • . . ntfyt; , . . P . a # ^-v . • , V ' - . . . • ■m ^. 1 . • • .. * ' •W.«e* V: ■ • Nsyoc Van Mestft in our long-range.planning, Orono wunts^to be assured that.the intent is-to eventually bring all properties ..into conf omaaoa.. - inVrthis. - .N •i. MUTiwo OF m'oioso oocmcxi# juvk 2 mo ftitlar aovatf* Mayor Van Matt MConUad, that a raaolutioo ba draftad for tha naxt aaatinf to iaclodat 1.a. 3. 4. s. s. 7. t. Caaiblaatioo as par axhlbit #3 All faa oanara to sign off on rasolntion Proparty ownars agraa to coatply to soning coda whloh dasignatas ona fajaily structura on aaoh buildabla lot Ownars to ba rasponaibls for all violations that algtit occur All ccodltlons to ba Incorporated In chain of titU Ownars to datamlna utility aasasMnt location Lots 142, Block 2 and Lot 2, Block 1 to ba legally oosBilnad as ona building aita Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 4 coaiblnad as ona legally lot. Notion, Ayas (4) - Nays (0). atMn Olson, City Plannar, antarad into tha record ttoa following concerning Gayle's Marina license application for 19S0, dated Nay 22. 1980, which atatast Gayle's Marina lloansa application is basically tha mm as last year aMspt for a ainor shift of thraa slips from the asst side of tha dock network and relocating thasi on the west side. Tha shift has not eraatad a setback problaa. tha applicant has nada application for nine service slips. Staff has bean advised by tha Lake Minnetonka Conservation District that they will approve of tha nine sarvico slips as they have for tha past eight years. Staff I SI nssisnls approval of Gayle's 1980 Marina I'cansa Halting tha operation at 134 wet slips a TV* denying the nine service slips as in tha 1979 license. Plaasa raviaw tha approving resolution and marina application. Council Naatittg > June 2, 1980 ’ PSGSMB f^ 7 5 M-«VAKZAOCB • • 1210 Lcms Liote>'5vi) (Cmtlotasdl m • ’ ^ 'i :»•% / w-\-‘ — f- V ................ GhXLB'B MMOm 19t0 Licansa-..^ ^ - \ f fa • ' r * ,a. ♦ --mm V. • a Paorus moved, Barr sacoodad. to table tha application for Gayle's Marina 1980 licansa until tha^uncil swating of June 30, 1980, lor further staff r«vlaw....^r.^-.N ^ Motion - CITYoT ORONO Buildine Permit AND AJPfUCATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUFANCV P.a SOX m. CRYSTAL BAY. MN 56323 473-7367 •ITI A00FISt_l2Jfl___L PERMIT N9 ^ 48541 DATE ISSUED ; j EXPIRES ZONING DISTRICT FIRE ZONE VAAOATf CONaUMOATl LOTAMA WIOTN DEPTH PROPOSED srrtACKS FRO^^ ASIDE REAR LSlOE3i^z LAKE WETLANDS ACCESS NEW EXISTING AGENCY-APPRO>‘. DATE CITY • • COUNTY state PR. EASEMENT .V > LEGALOIICRIPTION: PROP. 10. Q7 •* //7 lot____________________ILOCR_____________ >WNER (N«nt) X. OPeu> ARCHITCCT/ENQINEER - Mutt CtmN Muitl-Ptmuy, CommtrclR ll InduMfM Cpntvwtiten Pltnt EERT.NO. JUROiVII^ lAddrml 5ltHgi L • (FlrmT (AddrtM) (Firm) TYPE OF WORK AddHwn Atmodt* ^ ^Toe^ 4a <ux 4>€ iAddrtw) iPtwna) 5pti>ife PAgg COMT TVM niSiOINTIAl, MILL. UNIT! GAM ITAUJ ATT OfT. NON RISIO OCC. CLAM. STONtes ■LCX}. llZf t W « ii ITONIII 1 •DAIM/fLN •irric A^ DATI OOC«t FflOAOilDUSf COUNCIL AM OATC NiT. valuation n.ooo. j, PERMIT FEES ^ • LOO.HRMIT /A2-* STATE PEE M AEVIEWPLAN AEV oiNrigpr 4/. /o. PARK PEE SAC charge TOTAL DUE 3^ t. y REMARKS: ^ T)r i u Pva J A fr? L^^OA fnSl^. J-’'” %,Tcr /■ •t'r'i /loo L^'.i^A INSPECTION REQUIRED raOTtNO M«P« POME PAAMtNO t INSULATION NAtLftOAAO M«r# T^Nlf FMAt WORK REQUIRING SEPARATE PERMITS PUAMINO UtCHANiCAL WILL______ •CVONO OR WrTHOUr A Rg> , OUtAtO maPtCTKIN NH.L M tUR- JtCT TOPtNALTV. iMPfCnOM HOUR* 47>rwi ' CAU.P-ISAALtNtP. (•APAL ... CAU.t'.4 PALOMP.NEXT oat ' MPTIC, MWIR. fVATIR ORAOINO • PILLtWO Y ', •iJCRRiCAitrwAWiiif'l'i^.'trc:*, ACKNOWLEDOfMENT THI UNOIRitONIO HtRMVRIOUOTtPtRMliSIONTOMARt I mi RIAL IMPROVIMIMTt VtOPUB. ANO'tMl'XAREt.l;^ UNOW PENALTY OP LAW ACKNOWL^OPYW^ AaO>CCtt^.l^ ANCI OP ALL INPORMAT jON.. CawU-'ritJSS AU2 .MINT* RIPRMENTIO ON tHtE OeCA^eWT.' NONIO PURTMIR AORIll TO OOALL YWRKt W4 gHRICT 00*1^. fj . PUANCfl with all city OP OR<PR>aRO«tANmMlOSTAn^ 4F' _ _ _ _ ^ M A. AOP M*»NIIOTa EUiLOINO coot --V COTy WHIT1-#iLA OAflN-FMANCi CAHAjrt-^mncTcmTOW- OOtO^RtCflPT 4 PROPOSED SUBDIVISION FOR TANDEM PROPERTIES OF OUTLOT A. COUNTRYSIDE MANOR 2ND ADDITION. & TRACT A, R. L. S. NO. 1089 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA UlOtMWCMAU Otltlll 3fej : e>6 fa:res DICKEY PARCEL D AMAt W1NM t MCCKt tf 1IH COMHI ItOMOf GMAOWO - -Ty ’ • 4 COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC.PROPOSED SUBDIVISION FOR TANDEM PROPERTIES OF OUTLOT A, COUNTRYSIDE MANOR 2ND ADDITION. & TRACT A. R. L. S. NO. 1089 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA II •DM)