Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-15-1993 Planning PacketMINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15. 1993 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present.Acting Planning Commission Chair Maureen Bellows, Charles Schroeder, Stephen Peterson and Ed Cohen. Cohen left the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Candace Rowlette and Jeff Johnson were absent. The following represented the City Staff: Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, and CI ty Recorder Terl Naab. Council members Edward Callahan, Gabriel Jabbour and J. Diann Goetten were present. Chair Bellows called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (§1) §1298 PETITION TO VACATE PORTIONS OF FOREST BLVO - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - 7:00 - 7:30 P.M. Richard Johnson and Gordon Nelson were present. Mabusth reported this is an amended vacation request for 7 of the original 10 property owners Involved with the application. In 1988 the application was tabled until access to the G. Nelson property and easements to City sewe' lines within a previously vacated road known as Oak Place are resolved. Richard Johnson, 120 Elmwood Avenue, reviewed that he initiated the second vacation .'plication upon the request by the City, and paid the Initial fae and hired the surveyor to provide the necessary lenai descriptions. He felt Mr. Nelson’s problem is separate fro th’s Issue and should not impede his ability to vacate his p tion of the road. Bellows indicated the City Is awaiting a legal opinion. Mabusth noted the City Is In receipt of that opinion and must now decide the method of acquisition of the necessary access and utility easements, which will happen in the near future. Johnson noted he was told by the City Attorney that the City did not Intend to spend a lot of money to resolve the issue. Bellows suggested he address his concerns before the Council. Mabfivth suggested Johnson contact the City Administrator. Joh»i5>jn asked if something should have been done in the past five years to resolve this Issue. Bellows concurred with Johnson, but reiterated the Planning Commission could do nothing to resolve the issue. 1 MINUTES OF THE ORCNO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15. 1993 ZONING FILE 91298 - CONT. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Peterson, to recommend approval of AppII cat ion 91298, a petition to vacate port ions of Forest Bivd, for seven of the ten properties owners invoived with the application, based on the findings presented. Ayes 4, nays 0. (92> ZONING AMENDMENT - SECTION 10.41, B-2 LAKE8H0RE BUSINESS DISTRICT - INFORMATION MEETING 8:25 - 9:05 P.M. Callahan stated the Council was not there to present their views but rather to hear the Input from the Commission. He noted the proposed ordinance assumes that current marina uses would be allowed to continue until a requested change in marina or use. He suggested they not consider attaching land use provisions to number of slips allowed. He added the ordinance was not sent to the Commission because of the need to amend, but merely to review and consider amendments. Gaffron reviewed that the City has licensed marinas since the 1960s. In 1985 the City considered the license ineffective and considered approval of a conditional use permit instead, which was not well received by marinas. In the past few years, It has become clear that the City must recognize activities and changes on marina propertIes. Gaffron reviewed the three types of uses (permitted, conditional, and accessory). He noted that the Comprehensive Plan suggests that B-2 property should not be used solely to sail boats. He stated It is hoped that over a period of time, the City will have the mechanics to bring existing marinas Into better conformance. He reviewed to the references to the LMCD code and that those references may be outdated. Callahan noted it is the Council’s Intent to remove any reference to the LMCD ordinance from the code. Jabbour noted that the LMCD has admitted they would have difficult enforcing their ordI nance on dry stacking. Callahan noted actiV1t1es. the LMCD does not have control over 1 and use Jabbour asked that his comments not be meant to sway the Commission’s recommendation, and explained the LMCD feels they have the right to control the lakeshore through ramp activities. He felt this to bo selective governing. I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING OJMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15, 1993 ZONING AMENDMENT * CONT. Cohen referred to Page 1 where it states a request may be •‘eviewed by the Planning Commission and/or a Special Lake Use Committas. Goetten explained the Lake Use Committee is an Ad Hoc Committee in place and dealing with lake Issues, Including marinas. Cohen felt It to be a double layer of bureaucracy. Jabbour reviewed former Councils wanted the language of the ordinance to be vague and to allow them the ability to make individual decisions. Thu current Council is attempting to bless the existing conditions and make reasonable, achievable expectations for future use of the properties. Callahan stated In the past it was assumed by Orono that the LMCO would supervise marinas, but that has been found to be untrue. He noted Orono hopes to establish the following: have reasonable control of the business; have reasonable control of the land use In relationship to tne business; and give staff the ability to enforce the ordinance. He stated the DNR is likely to remove two of the seven marinas in Orono. He indicated the Lake Use Committee has focussed on the business aspects of the marinas. Gaffron noted again that past licensing policies have proved ineffective. He said the code lacks provisions to bring these businesses into greater compliance with performance standards absent a request for a permit, conditional use permit or variance; yet this seems to be what a number of residents hoping for. Bellows explained the Lake Use Committee was directed to review that aspect. She felt the landscaping areas of the code were too stringent. She added the existing marinas do not come close to compliance in their current state. Gaffron noted they basically comply with past agreements and conditions attached to licenses issued by the City. He added none of them meet the required setback or hardcover limits. Bellows felt they should establish an ordinance more closely related to reality. Jabbour noted that a number of improvements to existing marinas were added without approval and after adoption of the current ordinance. He felt it unrealistic for the City to expect the B-2 zone to comply with existing setbacks. He stated in the near future the MPCA and EPA will mandate all marinas to submit a storm water management plan. HINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15. 1993 ZONING AMENDMENT - CONT. Peterson noted the lack of mention of milfoil in the ordinance, and suggested it be a requirement to provide an area for transients to clean off their boats and trailers. Bellows suggested that the ordinance have reasonabIeness. degree Saffron Indicated that the site-related requirements of the ordinance are normally not enforced or reviewed until a new application is presented, as is the case in virtual iy all other business and residential zones. Bellows asked that the Commission be presented with a comparison of tf<e existing marinas and how they comply with the current ord1 nance. Peterson asked that Page 8, Subsection 15 be explained. Saffron did so, and added many ■’non-»^onforming structures" which exist today have been allowed through past variance approval. Debbie Brenaman, North Shore Drive Marina, stated they have a large lot and are able to comply with most of what the City requires, but added they are in the process of trying to replace the existing buildings and she hopes that will be possible. She said that the City needs to decide who is to play "God" in these issues, and whether or not Orono is with the LMCD or not. She stressed the need fo' consistency, and pointed out their license was not issued because of the lack of plantings, which the City had removed In the past and never replaced adequately. Jim Rivers, Windward Marina, felt they need to establish minimum standards, and should not have a code no one can meet. He added Orono has never been happy with the marina operations over the past 20 years. Bellows noted in its effort to preserve the lake as a resource, the City may have overlooked the marinas needs. She felt they need reasonable standards. Callahan agreed that they need a land use ordinance that is related to real life. He noted many of the complaints received In the past 6 months have been addressed. Bellows suggested a work session prior to the public hearing on April 19th to review the ordinance. uatm MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15. 1993 ZONING AMENDMENT - CONT. Peterson asked whether it is possible to have minimum stanusrds for existing marinas and different, store stringent standards for new marinas. Jabbour stated the City cannot do that. Brenaman asked that the City telt them the perfect scenario. Jabbour stated he has worked since 1972 on abiding by the perfect standards, which has proved to be a very diluted concept. He noted there Is no way additional property would be rezoned to B-2, so they must adopt an ordinance existing B-2 properties can comply with. Gaffron noted that various marinas have tried to comply in good faith, but have found It Impossible. Gcetten noted the land area of most of the marinas is very limited. Peterson asked how many existing marinas have pumpout stations, and asked that be addressed in the ordinance. Rivers said residential property owners have stated the marinas down grade their properties, and asked the City to establish standards and enforce those so marinas will not be perceived this way. Brenaman stated the licensing procedure used to be simple and effective and felt they should return to that way. Bellows closed the public information portion of the meeting at 9:15 p. iT. Jabbour introduced Don Qermanson, former president of the LHLOA. (#3) *1804 MI^:;.^EL revier, 2691 ETHEL AVEKUE - VARIANCE - Pt'3LIC HEARING 7:30 - 8:10 P.M. The Affida/lt of Pub I I cat Ion and Certificate of Mailing were noteu. Gil Landsiedel represented the applicant. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15. 1993 ZONING FILE §1804 - CONT. Mabusth axplainad the applicant seeks an average lakeshore setback variance to construct a new residence on a property. The former single story residence has been removed. A one-story walkout is proposed. The adjacent property has a platted corridor to the lake, which the code classified as a lakeshore lot with view rights. The former residence was also in front of the average setback. Cohen asked If there would be any change in views of adjacent neighbors. Dave Runkei, 2684 Casco °oint Road, introduced his spokesperson, Dale Runkei. Dale Runkei reviewed that the former residence was set back further on the property, and was only a one story residence of 900-1,000 s.f., which is approximately one-third the size of what is proposed. He proposed the new residence would obscure the peripheral view of the Runkels. He also indicated the residence would be much higher on the property because of existing eIevatIons. Mabusth noted the former single story residence was constructed at the 956 elevation. She reiterated the applicant proposes a one- story walkout. Cohen asked the purpose of the ordinance. Mabusth stated it is for the protection of lake views. Bellows asked the use of the corner of the Runkei house closest to the property. Dale Runkei stated that area is currently used as garage space, but in the future may be added on to or remodeled. Cohen stated since there Is not a window from that corner, no view is Impeded. Bellows stated It is the City's Intent to maintain existing conditions, not to improve upon future view conditions. Mrs. Runkei noted they have a lakeside deck, and their peripheral view would be impacted with the proposed residence. Dave Runkei presented pictures and a comparable situation on Casco Point Road. 6 MINUTES OF THE ORCNO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15, 1993 ZONING FILE #1804 - CONT. Bellows noted that the comparable was suggested by Mabusth, who was referring to comparable view situations, not structure sizes. She noted it Is not their Intent to preserve a 180 degree view for all property owners. Dave Runkel submitted a letter and exhibits. He indicated because of the allowed height per code and the difference In elevations, the residence could be built at a 40’ difference from the Runkel’s. He proposed that the residence could meet the average lakeshore setback and *!i required setbacks, and noted to approve a variance the Planning Commission must have a unique situation with Justified hardships. He questioned the Impact of the additional hardcover on the property and the impact on drainage in the area. He stated they may have a problem with dock rights as the property only has 25’- 30’ of lakeshore. He added, in the past there has not been a dock for this property. Cohen felt the situation was created by adjacent lot with the platted corridor. the aberration of the Bellows stated the : i tuation exists because of the platted corridor to the lake, which the City would not allow to be platted by today’s standards. She reiterated that if the average lakeshore were taken from the Kauffman property instead this proposal would meet the setback. She added the owner has a hardship created by the lot configuration. She felt Runkel was asking for an Impossible situation by asking that future potential views be preserved In case of an addition to the Runkel home, and citing historical uses of the property. Dave Runkel said he made the current owner aware of the unusual situation prior to the property being sold. Mr. Amundson, 2697 Ethel Avenue, presented the Commission with a copy of his torrens property title which states applicant’s property shall have the right to use his dock. Landsledel explained the owner Is also a builder who Intends to preserve the natural setting of the property. He noted a dock Is not planned. He proposed that the higher elevations, natural vegetation and growth will screen the house from the Runkel property and felt the views will not be Impacted. He said the applicant is building the house for himself. L HINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COHMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15, 1993 ZONING FILE 91804 - CONT. Dick Kauffman, 2696 Ethel Avenue, stated he does not object to the proposed house but Is not happy about the split drive, of which one leg goes down toward the lake and very near his property line. He said he was worried that this area would become a parking area for veh ides. Landsiedel said It is the Intent to plant trees along that property line to screen the drive. Habusth noted a 5* setback from the drive roust be maintained, which does not allow room for tree plantings. Dave Runkel felt there is a compromisab Ie house location. Amundson stated he does not object to the proposal. Peterson questioned the ability to remove an existing structure and re-establish a new average setback line for adjacent properties. Mrs. Runkel felt the property Is buildabie, but at a different location. She noted the vegetation referred to by Mr. Landsiedel Is merely scrub brush and will probably be removed. Cohen said he supports the variance request and felt the purpose of the ordinance is to preserve the views and he felt that was done. Schroeder felt this irregular as the Amundson property was not considered prior to construction of the Kauffman residence. Mabusth explained the corridor may not have been platted but existed as an easement at that time. She noted in the past 5 years, the City has consistently considered lots with platted corridors to the lake as lakeshore property when computing average setback iines. Cohen said he would feel different i' the Runkel house had a room used as living space where the garage is located. He stated the Planning Commission is an ai'^visory board to the Council and could not make a binding decision. Peterson stated he is opposed and stated the view would be Impacted. Dale Runkel suggested the house be located further back on the property. 8 I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15. 1993 ZONING FILE 91S04 - CONT. BelloMs not«d a varianca Mould still ba radulrad If tha rasidanca wara proposad on tha forinar nouse site. Kauffman stated ha would prefer to sea tha housa located further back to reduce tha impact of tha drive. Dale Runkai asked that tha application ba tabled to allow the neighbors time to meat with the applicant. Landsiadal asked that tha Commission act on tha application and assured them that thv' applicant would not want to create bad feelings and would make an effort to address the concerns. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval of Application #1604 Michael Revier, 2691 Ethel Avenue, for an average lakeshore setback variance to construct a new residence, based on the following hardships: no other variance is necessary, the former residence was located in front of the average setback line, the extremely irreguIar situation of the Amundson lot creates the hardship, the existing use of adjacent properties will not be impacted, and no objection from Amundson. Ayes 3, nays 1. Peterson voted nay. Schroeder encouraged the applicant to consider the concerns of the nei{.;hbors addressed at the meeting. (§5) #1806 JON 4 SHIRLEY BILLIGMEIER, 2935 FARVIEW LANE - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING B:10 - B:25 P.M. The Af f I davl t of Pub I i cat Ion and Cer t i f i cate of Mailing were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Bllligmeler were present. Mr. Bllligmeler explained he has not heard of any objections from neighbors. He stated the tennis court is proposed to be placed in front of the principal structure and 30* from the required street setback. Any other area on the property would encroach mature trees and the alternate septic site. Mabusth noted the elevation of the property drops dramaticaliy further back on the property. Staff recotmnends either the court be reduced to 110’ to assure a 30’ street setback is maintained and a retaining wall be instailed to protect thealternate septic site. She suggested septic testing be done to find another alternate site. HINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15, 1993 ZONING FILE 91806 - CONT. BiIiigmeler stated they would I ike to have the full-stzed court and would like to begin construction as soon as possible. Cohen stated there were too many unknowns and suggested tabling the appiIcatIon. Bellows stated there would be too many contingencies with the application unless the applicant agreed to the reduced court size and the retaining wall. Gaffron stated it would be a month before testing could be done. Billigmeier questioned the need for the retaining wail. Mabusth stated It would deter any filling for slope purposes adjacent to the alternate septic site. Cohen noted the applicant has a better probability of a full-size court if another septic site is located on the property. Leslie Rebstock, 2943 Farvlew Lane, stated she is in favor of the proposal. She noted another tennis court located adjacent to their property and does not find that an annoyance. All members stated they would recommend approval of the request if another septic site could be located. It was moved by Schroeder, seconded by Peterson, to table Application 91806 for Jon and Shirley Billigmeier, 2935 Farvlew Lane, pending additional septic testing information. Ayes 4, nays 0. (99) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE Bellows reported Council approved the L'Allier application after much discussion. Callahan explained there was a tendency for the Council to want to eliminate the internal access, but it was pointed out that was needed for handicap accessibility, and the external access was needed for safety reasons. Conditional use permit approval was conditioned upon the parents living In the apartment. Goetten noted she voted against the application as she felt the restrictions were too stringent. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15. 1993 REPORT - CONT. Bellows reported the School District was granted a conditional use permit for the expansion of the day care facility for uses permitted under the State Statute. She stated the Woodhiil application was approved, but their recommendation was modified to include a parking apron and not requiring the road to be widened after the curve going northward. Jabbour suggested the Planning Commission begin to review the cul- de-sac design standards. Bellows noted that Jabbour has requested staff provide the Council with a status sheet and felt that may be helpful to the Planning Commission also. Goetten asked that the Council liaison provide them with a report similar to that provided by Bellows this evening. She reported they Intend to invite the DNR to their April 7th meeting to discuss the Maxwell Bay access issue. (•10) OTHER ISSUES Bellows reported a Committee of OBA members and citizens has been established to review possible sites for baseball fields. She has requested that a Commission member be appointed to that Committee. Peterson asked if a Park Commission member would also be asked to be on the Committee. Goetten noted the composition of the Committee is up to them, but she has suggested it encompass all within the Orono School District. Peterson noted the In-fightlng between the OBA Board and the Little League. Bellows stated regardless of such, she felt they ought to help facilitate a solution as the need will remain. Jabbour noted at the last Council meeting. Council encouraged ail parties work together toward a solution. Callahan stated the Park Commission has reviewed the problem and he felt that is as much official Input as is needed. He cautioned the members not to find their position in contrast to that of the Council. He suggested the until the Council requests participation on the Committee, the Planning Commission avoid the Committee meetings. NINUTES Of THE OROHO PLANNIHG COMMISSION MEETING HELD MARCH 15, 1993 OTHER ISSUES - CONT. Bellows asked Goetten’s opinion. Goetten said discussion of the fianning Convnlssion representative Mas not discussed at the iast Cormittee meeting. She suggested if Council went to the meetings, th«y may be as an observer. Bellows felt as an appointed members to the Planning Commission, they should try to help the City with planning needs, and she felt taking a pro-active status would be better than being reactive. She suggested a Joint Counci I/Planning Commission meeting to discuss the official position. Callahan noted he thought they should wait until a full Planning Commission were in place. Bellows stated she wanted the meeting as soon as possible. Callahan suggested the following Tuesday evening. Jabbour noted In the past he has felt a good working relationship with the Planning Commission. Bellows felt they ought to be seen working together publicly. She said she does not want the opinion that they are only a recommending body to continue as that implies their decisions do not matter. Callahan said that Is certainly her point of view. Jabbour suggested they review the ordinance establishing responsibilities of the two groups. Goetten hoped the Planning Commission was aware of their responsibilities, but suggested they may need to be defined or a change In roles. She invited the Planning Commission to the next Council meeting as the Council would be interviewing potential Planning Commission members. BeMows reported the Council has asked the Planning Coiranisslon members to submit a position statement or profile on each member providing background for new members of the Council. (•11) APPROVAL or MINUTES The Commission did not approve the minutes due to a lack of quorum. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGHELD MARCH IS, 1993(#12) REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COUNCIL MEETINGSchroeder voluntasred to attend the meetin9 April 12, 1993 Council meeting.ADJOURNMENTChair Bellows adjourned the regular Planning CommIssI on meet Ing at 9:50 p.m. fttUOSlA Maureen Bellows, Chair Person PLANNING CO.NLMISSION MEETING MONDAY. MARCH 15. 1993, 7;00 P.M. 2780 KELLEY P.ARKWAY - COL^CIL CFAMBERS COLNCIL REPRESENTAimT: - Gabriel Jabbo-ir ATTENDANCE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING\POLIC LNFOR.MATION MEETING 1. 7:00 p.m. #1298 Petition to Vacate Portions of Forest Blvd. - Continuation cf Public Kearinc 2. 8:C0 p.m. Zoning Amendment - Section 10.41, B-2 Lakeshore Business District ACTION ITE.MS - Review of diesc items will commence pnor to or betw’een scheduled public hearin2S. AppUcants presenting variance requests before the Commission arc asked to move to the podium at the front of the Chambers when their application is announced by the Chairman. 3. 4. #1804 Michael Revicr, 2691 Ethel Avenue - Variance - Public Hearing #1805 Robert Voronyak, 1407 Bay Ridge Road - v'ariances - Public Hearing to be continued at a later date 5. #1806 Jon and Shirley Billigmeier. 2935 Farview Lane - Variance - Public Hearing Planning Commission Comments 6. Report by Planning Commission Representative to Council Meeting of March 8, 1993 (Maureen Bellows). 7. Other issues for discussion. Additional Items 8. Planning Commission approval of minutes of the February 16, 1993 meeting 9. Planning Commission to select a representative to attend the April 12, 1993 meeting of the Council. Adjournment r- .! •1-H „: 1-5[ir rg^r h TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building Sc Zoning Administrator DATE:March 10. 1993 SUBJECT: #1298 V^acaiion of Forest Boulevard - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.12 - Vacation of Streets, alley aral public roads. The City has republished the vacation petition of seven of the property owners involved in Application #1298. (Refer to Exhibits B and C). The original vacation public hearing was held at the Planning Commission on June 20, 1988. List of Exhibits A - Original Application for #1298 B - Certificate of Mailing/List of Property Owners Receiving Written Notice C - Public Hearing Notice D - Plat Map Locating Areas to be Vacated E - Staff Letter to Seven Applicants F - Planning Commissioi Minutes 6/20/88 G - Surveyor’s Sketch of Forest Blvd. - Designation of OHWL of Forest Lake Discussion During the review of the recent application for Fred and Barbara Ryan (1798), staff also recommended that the City reconsider the request of seven of the ten other property owners involved in the second vacation application. The vacation of the remaining seven areas of Forest Blvd. will have no impact on Gordon Nelson ’s attempt to seek legal access to his property. Review Exhibit D. The original vacation application (#1251) approved by the City in March of 1988 had already declared that there was no longer any public interest or use in the dedicated road right-of-way of Forest Blvd. Review Exhibit G. The majority of the dedicated roadway specifically as it extends northward is located totally within the lake bed of Forest Lake. Staff Recommendation To approve the vacation application of the following residents: Mr. and Mrs. Thomas D. Regnier, 1205 Elmwood Avenue Mr. John Perkins, 1265 Elmwood Avenue Mr. and Mrs. Jerome Denzel. 1295 Elmwood Avenue Mr. Andrew and Allan Frieler, 1331 North Arm Drive Mr. and Mrs. Robert Howells, 1423 Park Drive Mr. and Mrs. Michael J. Kellem, 1435 Park Drive Mr. and Mrs. James B. Hodges, 1447 Park Drive This approval is based on the following findings: 1. The City has already approved the partial vacation of Forest Bhti. on March 28 1988. 3. 4. The vacation does not affect the access or use of adjoining properties. The City has not and does not intex^ lo develop, improve or use the dedicated! richt-of-wav of Forest Blvd. for road purposes. The City has not and does not intend to maintain or install utilities within the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Blvd. 5. The unimproved dedicated right-of-way as it exists serv-es no public purpose. UUIU ■MUMi J * • CITY OP OROMO - GENERAL LAND USE PROPERTY LOCATION PLICATION ' V, Q 8 ff Site Address ^ pOT^f^ Property Identification Nunber (P.I.D.) Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? (for Conditional Use Applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name J. n Phone (home) *^5^70 Phone (work) ^ Address City (y\o ^ Zip Phone (home)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ City _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ OHIIBR (if different than applicant) Name Address Zip Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land.r^Tv r.r W 1 f I w? C MCftl.* - CONDITIONAL OSE Renewal Fee -1/2 After-the-Fact Fee $100.00 a) $150.00 b) $150.00 c) $250.00 d) $200.00 f) ^ i V?*“riwu T 4 ^ ‘ '/ »♦»} X V V WV A f rr*/VI ei.*i "“A AA V • V'V rurrv 1^1 •CA .V •tu'V' • VV l<f^CEir>T~fHANK YOU it09vv90 COOl HOi UOi Institutional (church, school, etc.) 05/27.- Residential accessory Use Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore PPD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS _ _ _ _ $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation with Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning $100.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT DSE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: 2. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) Stamped, legaI ^ sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Certificate of survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). Plat Map. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 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. • i Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplie^-—is true and correct to the best of his/her )cnowledge . A/* y /Y7^^ ^ Applicant's signature^>-</f _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date ^ 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 m^m^bers, ajid Council members for purposes of investigation and ver^f^^^ation Owner's signature Date 15Z 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 Cotncil. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma>e arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RIW DATE 03/2^/SQi BATCH OOS PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OHr«CR NAME taxpayer NAtlE/AOOR 07-117-23 lA 0027 GAPy E BEITO ETAL GARY E BEITO 1169 NORTH ARM OR mound MN 55366 M 07-117-23 16 0030 01179 ELHMOOO AVE BRUCE garLOCK BRUCE GARLOCK 1179 ELMWOOO AVE mound MN 55366 HENNEPIJ} COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 16 0028 01153 ELIWOOO AVE RICHARD JAMES HEIT RICHARD JAMES HEIT 1153 ELMWOOO AVE MOUC MN 55366 38 07-117-23 16 0033 01180 ELMWOOO AVE J M LAMDRtCHT ET AL JON H LAMDRECMT 1160 ELMWOOO AVE mound MN 55364 REPORT NO. PI635601 PAGE 13 58 07-117-23 16 0029 01161 ELMWOOO AVE B E A R K GARLOCK BRUCE E GARLOCK 1179 ELMWOOO AV MOUNO MN 55366 38 07-117-23 16 0036 B E A R K GARLOCK BRUCE GARLOCK 1179 ELMWOOO AV HOWE) MN 55366 £ 1 PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OWNER NAME taxpayer NAME/ADOR 38 07-117-23 16 0037 01153 ELMWOOO AVE RICHARD JAMES HE7T RICHARD JAMES HEIT 1153 ELMWOOO AVE MOUNO MN 55366 38 07-117-23 16 0059 01199 ELMWOOO AVE J 8 E HARVEY J SCOT HARVEY 1199 ELMWOOO MOUNO MN 55366 38 07-117-23 61 0014 01245 NORTH ARM OR GEORGE HOVLAND GEORGE HOVLAFfl) 1265 NO ARM OR MOUND MN 55366 38 07-117-23 61 0017 01265 ELMWOOO AVE JOHN A PERKINS «R ETAL JOHN PERKINS 1265 ELMWOOO AV MOUND MN 55366 36 07-117-23 16 0052 01151 NORTH ARM DR R A KUTZ ETAL R A KUTZ 1151 NO ARM OR hound MN 55366 38 07-117-23 16 0060 01169 NORTH ARM OR GART E BEITO ETAL GARY « ROSALIE BEITO 1169 N ARM OR MOW® MN 55366 36 07-117-23 61 0015 01285 NORTH ARM OR GEORGE HOVLAfO GEORGE HOVLAND 1265 NORTH ARM DR MOUl® MN 55366 38 07-117-23 61 0016 01295 ELMWOOD AVE K J DEVANS « S M SCHMIDT KELLY BEVANS A SUSAN SCHMIDT 1295 ELMWOOO AVE MOU® MN 55366 38 07-117-23 16 0056 01179 NORTH ARM OR N • N ROCKVAM NORMAN A NANCY ROCKVAM 1179 NORTH ARM DRIVE MOU:® m S53«4 36 07-117-23 61 0013 01205 NORTH ARM DR PAUL R SKACERBERG PAUL R SKAGERBER6 1205 NORTH ARM OR HOUO MN 55366 38 07-117-23 61 0016 01205 ELMINXX) AVE H OVALL A E OVALL DONALD A JACQUELINE SHAH 1205 ELMWOOO AVE MOUND MN 5536*« 38 07-117-23 61 0021 01310 ELMWOOO AVE GORDON N NELSON ETAL GORDON N NELSON 1310 ELMWOOO MOUNO MIT 55366 r r i t RUN DATE 03/24/06 BATCH 005 HEttlEPIN CO»JNTY PROPERTY INFC»mATIW 5YSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LISTPROP AODR OWNER NAflC TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 30 07-117-23 41 002901301 NORTH ARM OR ELIZABETH L DRESSEL ERICK KALLERUP 1301 NORTH ARH DR NOUND NN 55364 PROP AODR OWNER NAN£ TAXPAYER NAhE/AOOR 30 07-117-23 41 0032 01317 NORTH ARM DR ANN L CARSON ANN L CARSON 1317 N ARM DR HOUND HN 55364 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 30 07-117-23 41 0061 01331 NORTH ARM DR A P FRIELER A A B FRIELER ALLEN P a ANDY B FRIELER 1331 NORTH ARM DR MOUND mn 55364 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 30 07-117-23 41 0060 01304 ELMWOOD AVE RICHARD J JOHNSON ET AL RICHARD J JOHNSON 1304 ELNMOOO HOUND MN 55364 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 1436 07-117-23 41 003001305 ELMWOOD AVE KEITH E SIHONS/PtRSONAL REP TIMOTHY PLAZIAK 130S ELMWOOD AV HOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 003101305 NORTH ARM DR ROBERT E ANDERSON '^^HEOOORE A ANDERSON 1405 NORTH ARM OR HOUND Mil 55364 36 07-117-23 41 0079 01375 PARK DR RICHARD H HATCH i WIFE RICHARD H HATCH 1375 PARK DR HOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0060 01365 PARK DR EDUARD 6 NEWTON A WIFE EDWARD G NEWTON 1365 PARK DR MOUND MN 55364 rl‘-: n 16 07-U7-?3 41 0062 01359 PARK DR PETER H LANPHER ET AL PETER A DIANE LANPHER J35V PARK DR HOUND HN 55364 36 07-117-23 41 0006 01345 NORTH ARH DR FRED S RYAN ET AL FRED S RYAN 1345 NORTH ARM DP HOUO) HN 55364 30 07-117-23 42 0030 01379 PARK OR C H FAIRDANK JR ET AL TRUSTEES C H FAl^eANK JR/P R FAIRBANK 1300 PARK OR S U HOUND MN '•'5364 c TOTAL BATCH 005 00029 ( %• - A I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF the HEf4NEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF HY KNQMLEOGE AtO BELIEF OATl -.'I 7. r% 4 1 ■i I I ■# • • 4’r I I I I 11 I 1 ■ml II *T. « 1 CITY OP ORONO - NOTICE The Planning Commission has scheduled a public hearing in the Council Chambers at 2780 Kelley Parkway on Monday, March 15, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. on the matter involving Application #1290, a petition to vacate portions of an unimproved dedicated road known as Forest Boulevard, Saga Kill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota (south half of Section 7, Township 117, Range 23). All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments are solicited. Exhibits are available for review in the City offices. City of Orono By: Planning Commission r I . Jeatjne A. Mabusth, Building &. Zoning Administrator To be published the week of March 1 and March 8, 1993. t //. /,■^o w 1 o'i March 1, 1993 Mr. and Mrs. Thomas D. Regnicr 1205 Elmwood Avenue .Mound, Minnesota 55364 Mr. John Perkins 1265 Elmwood Avenue Mound, Minnesota 55364 Mr. and Mrs. Jerome Denzel 1295 Elmwood Avenue Mound, Minnesota 55364 Mr. Andrew Fricler Mr. Allan Frieler 1331 North Arm Drive Mound, Minnesota 55364 CITYof ORONO MuAiCt|iy OAccs Post Office Box 66 Bay* Mjuwsou 5S323-0UH6 Mr. and Mrs. Robert Howells 1423 Park Drive Mound, Minnesota 55364 Mr and Mrs. James B. Hodges 1447 Park Drive Mound, Minnesou 55364 Mr. and Mrs. Michael J. Kellen 1435 Park Dnve Mound, Minnesota 55364 To Applicants Panicipating in Application #1298-The Vacation of Forest Blvd. Application #1298 was tabled by the Planning Commission on June 20, 1988 pendmg the resolve of tegal access to the Gordon Nelson property at 1310 Elmwood Avenue via portions of vacat^ Oak Place. If Forest Blvd. were to be vacated adjacent to the Richard Johnson property ai 1304 Elmwood Avenue, the Nelson property would be legally landlocked. The City Attorney has explored various options with adjacent property owners of vacated Oi^ Place but it ap^are tto fiiLl resolve of this maner will be through legal acuon either initiated by Mr. Nelson or the City. In the review of the recent vacation application of the Ryans (1345 North Arm SUIT The continuation of the vacation public hearing is scheduled betdre the Planning Comm^sion at the March 15, 1993 meeting at 7:00 p.m. The amended application will only consKler the vacation of Forest Blvd. adjacent to the properties of the owners listed above. A staff memo TEL£PH0NT - 4TJ-7357 • FA.X • 473-0510 1 Zoning F le #129S March 1, 1993 Page 2 iscues for the Planning Commission will be sent to you prior to the meeting. If picas* contact Jeanne Mabusth (473-7357) at the C.ty offices. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth BuUding & Zoning Administrator JAM/ch Mr. and Mrs. Richard Johnson 1304 Elmwood Avenue Mound, Minnesota 55364 Mr. and Mn. Gordon N. Nelson 1310 Elmwood Avenue Mound, Minnesota 55364 MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING BELD JUNE 20, 1988 •1298 l^CHARD JOHNSON XVACA^XOM CP PORTIONS OP POREST BOULEVARD SXCXBILL REVISED PUBLIC BEARING 8:42-8:47 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Richard Johnson was present for this matter. Mabusth explained the request to vacate the remaining portions of Forest Boulevard. She noted that prior to final vacation of Forest Blvd., legal access to the Nelson property must be obtained via the four property owners. Cohen and Hanson felt that the legal access should be resolved prior to recommending approval of this vacation application in order to avoid the chance of land locking the Nelson property. It was noted that Mr. Nelson is currently working on this legal access with his attorney. CounciImember Callahan felt Forest Boulevard must remain open until legal access tc the Nelson property is resolved. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Kelley, to table this matter pending resolve of legal easement access to the Nelson property. Motion, Ayes 7, Nays 0. •1299 NANCY BIGGINS 3017 NORTH SHORE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 8:50-8:52 , , The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Nancy Higgins was present for this matter Mabusth explained the request for a conditional use permit to recognize the existing caretaker unit and guest cabin that serve as accessory use to the principal residence. Applicant plans to remove the principal residence and construct a new residence. Kelley advised applicant to take into consideration the hatdcover ordinance when developing a site plan for the new residence. 8 4 it (h r To: From: Date: Subject: Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Mcxirse, Citv Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator March 10. 1993 Proposed Amendment to 21oning Code - Section 10.41, B-2 Lakeshore Business District List of Exhibits A - Draft Amendment B - Summary of Subdivision Headings C - Comprehensive Plan Excerpts regarding Lakeshore Commercial Uses Note: It was brought to staffs attention this week that the public hearing notice indicated March 22 rather than March 15. Because it was too late to make the correction, the March 15 meeting will become a public information meeting, and we are rescheduling the public hearing for your April 19 meeting. Note that the marina operators have been advised of the schedule change and have been invit^ to the March 15 meeting to provide their perspective. Marina Licensing Streamlined The Cit}' Council on March 8 revised the marina licensing code in Chapter 5 by removing from it all regulations and performance standards that are duplicated in Section 10.41. The Council ’s intent is to grant licenses to the marinas upon application, and then deal with land use issues through the Zoning Code. B-2 Code Structure Most of our zoning district code sections include a "purpose" statement, which defines the character and nauire of that zoning district. Next is a listing of permitted, conditional, and accessory uses. The standard code format then includes a section stating lot area, height, width, and yard requirements, and may then include specific performance standards for the district. Out B-2 code section has historically included relatively detailed (as opposed to other business district sections) performance standards for parking requirem.ents. landscaping, and use of the site. Additionally, provisions have long been in place regarding elimination of non- conforming docks; an allowance for a 4-year staged landscaping upgrade; and references to LMCD and other ordinances. Perhaps staffs greatest concern is that while some residents of the City might wish to see "sweeping changes" in the marinas, how they look, and how they are operated, the City has been reluctant in the recent past to force change to occur. This to some degree is due to the potentially high cost of litigation; in some cases the lack of any zoning application which would give the City an opportunity to "revamp" a site; a sensitivity to the issue of pre-existing non ­ conformities and past agreements or approvals that have resulted in today ’s marina sites being significantly better in many respects than they were 20 or 30 years ago; and a sensitivity' to the financial ability of marinas to upgrade during the drought years of the late 1980’s. It is also Proposed Zoning Amendment-Section 10.41 March 10, 1993 Pasc 2 of 2 clear that our current codes don't adequately address changes in the boating industry that have occurred in recent years - bigger boats, more services, and a variety of marketing strategies to appeal to a greater cross-section of the public. Some Thoughts on the B-2 Ordinance Draft Attached 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. This draft is a compilation of thoughts and discussion by the Lake Use Committee over the last year with some input by marina operators. However, please treat it as a draft that needs a thorough review, not as a finished pnxluct. During your review of the draft, consider whether more definitions are needed. Remember that we must have a permitted or conditional use on a property in order to have an accessory use. Are all tiic uses listed in the correct categories? For instance, should boat sales be considered as a primary (permitted or conditional) use. or should it be an accessory use? Our Comprehensive Plan (CMP 4-26) suggests that retail boat sales, which doesn't necessarily rely on having a UKation ne.xt to a lake, is not necessarily an appropriate use for the B-2 zone.... Take note of the additional performance standards for some of the uses not previously- listed. In general, only the conditional use section should incorporate minimum standards in order to be granted that use. Are the draft standards appropriate? Although the section providing a 4-year installation and planting period for landscaping has only met with limited success, should similar provisions be added for upgrading other activities on the site? Should the City attempt to have the marinas decrease the historic degree of hardcover on the site, restore the required yards to the widths required by code standard, or be given deadlines in which to provide stormwater runoff controls such as retention ponds, etc., absent a zoning application? Should there be a requirement for a regular site plan review and require upgrades even if no zoning applications are brought: forward? Since we would not generally do that in any other commercial zoning district, is the B-2 zone so unique that continuation of a business operation should depend on the required continuous upgrading of the site rather than continuation ot the status quo? To what degree should our ordinance reference LMCD ordinances? It is likely that the currently referenced 1970 and 1971 LMCD ordinances have been revised many times over the last 20 vears. Staff Recommendation Our existing B-2 code provides an ideal set of standards which would be relatively simple to apply to any new marinas being developed. However, since our B-2 zones are for the most part already developed, we need to structure this ordinance to deal more reaii.stically with the existing non-conformities, and add regulations that may be necvssarv' and appropriate to address the current types and 'evels of activity occurring at our marinas. SECTION 10.41 (DRAFT) - St^IMARY OF SI BDIVISION HEADINGS ■*< I 7 3 4 5 Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. Subd. 6 Subd. 7 Subd. 8 Subd. 9 Subd. 10 Subd. n Subd. 12 Subd. 13 Subd. 14 Subd. 15 Subd. 16 Subd. 17 Subd. 18 Subd. 19 Puipose. Definitions. License Required. Application. Permitted Uses. Accessory Uses. Conditional Uses. Parking Requirements. Yards. Landscaping Areas. Additional Performance Standard.,. Area, Height. Lot Width and Yard Requirements. Setback. Hardcover and Tree Removal Regulations. Drainage. Non-Conforming Use. Variances. Variances for Required Landscaping Areas. Regulations Relating to Location, Construction. Installation and Maintenance of Docks. Boat Mooring Areas and Other Fixed or Floating Structures and Objects on Lakes - Adoption by Reference. Reference to Ordinance. Proposed Amendment to Municipal Code SEC. 10.41. B-2 LAKESHORE BUSLNESS DISTRICT. Subd. i. Purpose. The "B 2" Lakeshore Business Comm efctal District was originally intended to provide areas where limited commercial businesses could be located to scr\ icc boats used for recreational purposes on Lake Minnetonka. However, many of the operators of the lakeshore commercial busLiesses have stripped the trees and vegetation from the shorelands and have expanded the operations so that now the "B-2" Lakeshore Business ConMw eroial Districts adversely affect the lake water quality and the real estate values of adjoining properties. Tlie purpose of this Chapter is to provide for additional reasonable regulations of these businesses in a manner that require-partial restoration t>f-the-shor eland v eg etation, that will serv e to avo id po lhHh)n of the lake water and to insure protection of adjacent residential properties w hich have previously suffered from the unregulated expansion of comntercial activities, while protecting and enhancing the quality of the lake and shoreland environment. Subd. 2. Definitions A. "Marina Business" means engaging in one or more of the permitted. accessory or conditional uses allowed within the B-2 Lakeshore Business District. Subd. 3. Licen.se Required. Each marina business within the ’’B-2" l.akeshore Business District shall obtain an annual marina business license per the provisions of the Orono Municipal Code. Subd.-^ Subd. 4. Application. All applications for a building pemiit in-any within the "B-2" Lakeshore Comm ercial Business District shall be reviewed by the Council and may be referred to the Planning Commission and/or a specially appointed Lake Use Committee for review. Subd. 3 -. Subd. 5. Permitted Uses. Within the "B-2" Lakeshore Business District, no land or struemre shail be used except for one or more of the following uses: A. Repairs.—Repoir -and servicing of boats. Rental of in-water boat slips. B. Storage .—Winter storag e of boats. Sales of boats and motors. C. Sales. Etc. Sale and rental of boot s. meteFs. fishing equipment and sol e of fuel, boots, boot supplies, bait and marine-related items ("ship’s store"). D. Repair and .servicing of boats. E. Summer and winter sioratie of boats. F. Marine fiiel sales. G. Bait and fishing tackle sales, Suhd 6 Accessory Uses. Within anv "B-2* Lakeshore Business District, the followin«\ uj^es shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Signs. Signs as reeulated in this chapter. B. Boat head punix^ut. C. Fishing tournaments. D. Sale of pre-packaged foods. E Dive shoos. F. Clubhouse lassemblv/lounge/kitchenene area for use by slit) rental or "boat club" customers only).. G. Lessons/teaching (sailing schools, etc.). H. Rental of boats. I. One caretaker dwelling unit. Subdr4r Subd. 7. Conditional Uses. Within any "B-2" Lakeshor* Business District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Sal e of cigarettes. Boat Clubs (time share). Applicant sha ll demonstrate that adequate parking is available on the site^ B. Sale of 3.2 beer or sal e of "set up»"; (Subject to licensing by CouBc iH Public bv>at launching. On-Demand (On-demand launching of boats stored on the business site fpr customers!. ApDlicant shall demonstrate that a dequate parking is available on the site, Approy^ shall be subject to LMCD permit for such use, hut City shall not be obliliated to approve such use if approved bv LMCD when narking is inadequate. C Sal e of prepackaged food or food from vending mochin es.-PfCpackag ed food includes only food which has been professionally prepar ed at a location other than on the premises and does not include ’’full course meals" or any food preparation oth er than warm ing-by use of an infra red or micre-wave o%'en. Sale of food from vending machin es is allow edr Pubhe Boat l-aunching. Transient. (Launching of tn^ats via a r?mp or other means tor or hy customers when such boats are not stored on the site). Applicant shall demonstrate that adequate car trailer parking is available on the site. Hours of operation shall he at Council discretion, D. Charter boat port of call. A charter tx ’iat port of call shall be defined as a kKation where a charter boat may pick up passengers other than the owner or operator or employees of the charter boat, whether or not the charter boat is normally berthed on the prooertw The City may place appropriate conditions on a charter boat port of call regarding minimum narking requirements, hours of operation, etc, as may be appropriate to protect public interest. E Lake/Lake Structure Maintenance Operations Base, (includes but not limited to dredging, weed cutting, zebra mussel control, dock and boat lift installation, rip-rapping and seawall construction). Council may limit the operation at its discretion. F. Restaurant. G. Sale of cigarettes (subject to Cirv^ license). H. Sale of 3.2 beer or sale of ’’set-ups" (subject to City licen.se) Subd. 5. Subd. 8. Parking Requirements Within the "B-2" Lakeshore Business District the off-street parking facilities shall be sufficient to eliminate any traffic or parking congestion likely to be caused by the business conducted. The parking areas may n^ed not be payed, but shall be provided with appropriate stormwater runoff quality/quantity controls as_m_ay be required in this chapter. The minimum parking requirements shall be as follows: A. Six parking spaces shall be provided for each ten boat slips on water or on land. B. At least eight off-street parking spaces, plus one additional space for each 800 square feet of floor area over 1,000 feet, including warehousing, and all outside sales and storage areas related to the sales and service functions. C. If the proposed use is to include the launching of boats owned by the public for the day from trailers ti e. Public Boat Launching. Transient), ten additional auto-trailer parking spaces shall be provided for each ramp. D. If the proposed use is to include a charter boat port of call, one additional parking space for each 3 seats of gross charter capacity shall be provided, or a plan tor offrsiie parking and shuttle service shall be provided to the City su bject to Council approval. Dr E The required parking spaces may not be separated by a public roadway from the dock, a storage space, mooring space, floor space, or ramp they are designed to serve. fcr Required off-street parking space may not be utilized for open storage of gtxxis or for the storage of lx>ats. except that from October ’ ? Ma y 1 liurine the winter storage season each year, the required off-streel parking may be used for winter storage of boats provided that 20% of the required parking spaces remain as a functional parking area. During the transition seasons (April 15 to Mav 31 and September 16 to November 15). adequate parking shall be maintained on the site, sufficient to eliminate traffic or parking congestion, but in no case shall p.qrlcinp be reduced to less than 20% of the required sp>.ces. Fr Gi Parking may not be allowed in any required yard or landscaping area. H. Employee narking sp.aces shall be in addition to the parkine space s required above. The number of employee narking snaces shall be designated on an official parking plan to be kept on file with the Citv. Subd. 6t 9^ Yards. The minimum required yard areas for the district shall K* landscaped and planted with evergreen and deciduous shrubs and trees in accordance with a detailed landscape plan. Storage of boats, vehicles, equipment and materials shall not be allowed w ithin any required yard. Subd. 10^ landscaping Areas. In addition to the landscaping required in the required yard areas for the district, the following landscaping areas shall be landscaped in accordance with the following provisions; A. The minimum landscaping areas shall be as follows: 1. The lakeshore landscaping area shall be an area that is parallel to the entire lakeshore adjacent to the licensed marina operation and equal to 10% of the average lot depth, but in no case shall it be less than 10 feet nor more than 75 feet. Breaks in the landscaping area for access to the lake shall not exceed an aggregate width of 30 feet for each marina operation. 2. Side yard landscaping area shall be an area that is parallel to the side lot line and not within the lakeshore landscaping area or front yard landscaping area and shall not be less than 10 feet deep. 3. Front yard landscaping area shall be an area that is parallel to the street or opposite the lakeshore landscaping area and shall not be less than 10 feet deep. Breaks in the landscaping area for access to the public road shall not exceed an aggregate width of 50 feet for each marina operation. B. The detailed landscape plan for each landscaping area shall provide for a natural woods area containing primarily evergreen and deciduous trees not less than six feet in height. Shrubs not less than two feet in height shall be interdispersed among the trees so as to eventually provide, at maturity, a natural screen that will not be less than 50% opaque during the summer months. No uses shall be allowed in the landscaping area except the required landscaping ■! I IIII nil ‘ and access roads. A privacy fence may be required in addition to the natural landscaping which has been planted to meet the requirements of this district. The use of any fencing shall not satisfy the requirements of providing natural landscaping and solid v isual screening. Any yard area requiring landscaping to meet the requirements of this district shall be planted with nurserv sttKk, balled and bagged trees and shrubs. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy growing condition. C. All the required improvements in the landscaping will be completed prior to the date of issuance of an occupancy certificate or as otherwise provided by this Chapter, whichever date occurs first. D. All landscape areas shall be sufficiently delineated bv bonning. curbing, or other acceptable physical barrier so as to eliminate the encroachment of vehicle parking, winter and summer boat storage, and other materials or equipment storage into the required landscape areas. E. All groundcover in the required landscaping areas shall be natural living materials, such as grass or other planted groundcover. Decorative rockf>eds. whether or not lined with plastic, fabric or other weed inhibitors, shall constitute no more than 10% of the required landscape areas. Subd. ^ IL Additional Performance Standards. Within the "B-2" Lakeshore Business District any land use must meet the following performance standards: A. Suitable sanitary facilities connected to public sanitary sewer or to a private on-site sev'age disposal system which complies with all applicable City Code provisions and other agency regulations shall be provided on the premises for men and women, and further, suitable facilities shall be provided for the disposal of wastes accumulated in boats docked or serviced at the marina. B. Insofar as practicable, all means of access to the operation from any street shall be so located and designed as to avoid the routing of vehicles from the property over streets that primarily serve abutting residential areas. All access roads from the operation to any public paved roadway shall be paved for a distance of at least thirty feet adjacent to the public roadway to minimize dust and noise conditions. All access roads from the operation to any unpaved public roadway shall be treated to minimize dust conditions at least to the e-\tent the unpaved public roadway is dust controlled. C. The M lighting on the premises shall be shielded so that no direct glare can be seen from adjoining residences, from the lake or from the roadway. D. Tlie hours for running engines or operating any boat engine for the purpose of charging batteries, running auxiliary equipment or testing shall be between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. E. The nuximum hour> of operation shall be 7:00 A.M. to I0;(X) P.M., tor retail sales and service functions, except as necessarx’ to support normal tishing aciiviu or private use of the boats stored on the premises, unless other pemiission is specifically granted by the Council. F. Persons in charge shall at all times keep the docks, sea walls, and premises in a neat ami orderly manner and free from trash, rubbish, repair parts, machinery, etjuipment and debris of all kinds. G. Persons in charge shall prohibit tiie dumping or throwing of garbage, paper, bottles, cans, refuse or debris into waterway. Persons in charge ot mooring area shall provide garbage cans of sutlicient size to hold garbage or re’use to be collected. H. No commercial dt>cks or boat buoys shall extend further into the waters of any lake than is reastmably necessary to accommodate the docking and mooring of such craft as shalfcustomarily and lawfully be used on the lake or so as to interfere with, obstruct, or tend to obstruct, or render dangerous for use or passage a body of water within the primary harbor limits of the City. The length of docks and location of buoys shall be regulated by the City Code. A.l such commercial docks and wharves shall be constructed and maintametl of such materials and ot such type of construction as will not render them unsafe or likely to endanger public enjoyment ot the waters. The use of non-eiKased exnanded-bead polystyrene foam as a dock flotation mat^yial has been prohibited elsewhere in the municipal code, Commercial docks shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times. I. If outside on-land boat slip (land) storage facilities are provided, the boats shall be stored in such manner that they do not create a fire hazard. Any outside »• "icmres tor purpose of storage of boats may not exceed 15 feet in height. On-land Dry boat siuiueC A.cas may not be located in the required yards or landscaping areas. Any gasoline offered for sale or stored on the premises shall be placed in-tanks or contuinerci us may be requiied by the Council, and ouch tanl;: or contoinerr shall .w Mit^h distance from the storage facilities so not to create- o danger to the- cH>mmunity: The premises shall at all times be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. J. Any gasoline offered foi sale or stored on the premises shall be placeiLiD tanks or containers a.s mav be required bv the Council, and as required in Municipal Code >ggUSD 9.34. Such tanks or containers shall be stored in such a manner and location so as not to creatg a danger to the community. K. On-land boat density. 1. Summer boat density. The number of boats stored on the oremises for any and all reasons shall not exceed that number which can be safelv stored in allQwqble liKations while maintaining annropriate ingress, egress and emergency acce.ss to the site._asja^ as maintaining the required number of acceptable narking spaces. Boats shall not be stored, in require^ auto parking spaces during the summer months (June I thru Scptenvvr 15). 2. Winter tx^at densitv/storaje. The aumbcr of N>ats stored on thu ipremi'^s for anv and all reasons during the winter season (November 16 thru April 14) shall not exceed that number which can be safelv stored in allowable locatiom while maintaining ingress. egress and emergency access to the site, as ^~ell as maintaining the required number of winter parking spaces. 3. A site plan designating the location of summer and winter boat storaee shall be submitted for Council approval no later than 1993 and shall require Council approval for anv future revisions. Subd.-9r 12^ Area. Height. Ia>1 Width and Yard Requirements. A. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height. B. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: 1. Lot Area - 2 acres. 2. Lot Width Parallel to l^ke - 200 feet. ... ......... 3. Lot Width Perpendicular to Lakeshore - 200 feet. 4. Lakeshcre Yard - 75 feet. 5. Side Yard - 10 feet. 6. Front Yard Along Street - 30 feet. Subd. 1^ Setback, Hardcover and Tree Removal Regulations. All property in ^he R-2 T^keshore Business District is subject to the requirements of Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.56. Shoreland Management. In addition, the following standards shall applv: A. Lakeshore Setback Regulations. The building setback from the shoreline shall be 75 feet. B. Setback to Residential. No operation or activities ex».ept for storage and parking may be conducted closer than 50 feet to the boundaty of an adjoining property line which property is used for residential purposes. C. Setback Along Streets. No operation or activities except for storage and parking may be conducted closer than 50 feet to the right-of-way of any existing street, road or highway. D. Liikeshore Hardcover Regulations. Within 75 feet of the shoreline there shall be no excavating, filling, hardcover, temporary or permanent struemres. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. Within 250 to 500 feet of the Lt shoreline there shall be no greater than 30^ hardcover. Within 500 to 1,000 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 35 hardcover. E. Tree Removal Regulations. No trees within 75 feel of the shoreline with tte diameter of six inches or more shall he rerroved without tirsl obtaining a p>ermit trom the Council Tree removal and other vegetation manatiement shall be in accordance w ith thejroyisions of Municipal Zoning Code Sectit>n 1Q.56, Subd. Hr i£. Drainage. No land shall be developed arel no use shall be pennitted that results in water runoff causing lloods. erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant anv time a new use is applied for^whethei through suhtlivision. variance, conditional use permit or building permit,__Suchjlans shall_bc provided in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council tor approval. Such stoi luwatgr runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Construction of facilities to manage the quantity and qua!it.Y._d~ stormwater runoff mav be required. Any change in grade at feeling water ninoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise, must be in compliance w ith the Surface Watc M?nagement Plan^ Shoreland Management Regulations. Flood Plain Management Regulations, tnd shall be consisten* with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions, and is further subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the ar.;a affected by the drainage. Subd. 15. Non-Conforming Use. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, any non-conforming use of land not involving a structure and any non-conforming use involving a structure with an assessor ’s fair market value on January 1, 1975, of $3,000.00 shall be allowed to continue as a non-conforming use subject to the provisions as set forth in Section 10.03. except that the provisions of this Chapter relating to the elimination of non-conforming use of boat slips, boat buoys, or overall length of docks, their location, construction, and maintenance and boat mooring areas, shall supersede any other non-conforming use provisions of the Cit>’ Code. A. Elimination of Non-Conforming Use of Boat Slips, Boat Buoys or Overall Length of Docks. Any marina operator who increases the number of boat slips, boat buoys or overall length of docks beyond w hat he was previously licensed for by the City, which increases are authorized by ordinances of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, shall first decrea.se an equivalent number of boat slips or boat buoys and eliminate an equivalent length of dock from that portion of his dock that is non-conforming under the terms of Ordinance No. 1 of the Lake Minnetonka Conseivation District until the dock conforms in length to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District’s Ordinances. Subd. Variances. Variances may be granted to the provisions of this Chapter in accordance with the provisions set torth in Section 10.08. Subd. 14r IT Variances For Required Landscaping Areas. I he Ci uncil may grant a variance allowing a four year installaion and planting period to meet the requirements of the 8 landscaping and planting provisions hereof, to any applicant uho; A. Othersfc ise meets all of the provisions of this Chapter. B. Submits a detailed landscape plan showing sufficient planting and landscaping in each of the four years in order to provide at the end of the four years a namral screen that will not be less than 50% opaque during the summer months. C. Submits four year planting atxi landscaping plan which shall provide that in each year of the plan, at least 25% of the necessaiy landscaping and planting (as determined by the Couik U as of April 15, 1975) lx; planned, bonded and completed for eac . required landscaping area according to the other provisions of this Chapter. The Council may vary this requircmer.t in order to allow a higher percentage of the landscaping and planting in any required landscaping area and credit the applicant for the landscaping and planting which otherwise would be required in other landscaping areas. Subd. Ifr 18^ Regulations Relating to LxK'ation, Construction, Installation and Maintenance of Docks, Boat Mooring Areas and Other Fixed or Floating Structures and Objects on Lakes - Adoption by Reference. The City hereby adopts by reference and makes a part of this Chapter as if fully set forth herein, the following: Ordinance No. I of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District as adopted on January 28, 1970; Amendment to Ordinance No. I as adopted on May 27. 1970 by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District; Amendment No. 2 to Ordinance No. 1 as adopted on April 28. 1971, by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. The City expressly reserves the right to deny any variance to the provisions of Ordinance No. 1 as amended, even though the same variance was granted by the I^e Minnetonka Conservation District. Subd. I6r 19^ RefereiKe to Other Ordinances. Sectioas 10.40 through 10.44 are expressly conditioned upon the effectiveness of the Ordinances of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation Department pertaining to manna regulatioas and if all or a portion of such Ordinances are declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, no marina shall have a longer dock, more boat slips or more boat buoys than what was permitted by the terms of that ordinance on the date it was declared invalid, or than was last approved by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, whichever is less. The City expressly reserves the power to be more restrictive in its regulation than the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Ordinances if the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Orono so requires. I I i 1 I I i © I 1 1 I I I ] I I f I 1_AND USE JUNE, 1980 2. LIMITED COMMERCIAL AREAS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE BUSINESSES. The primary function of Orono's commercial areas will be to provide those retail, commercial and service businesses which are directly necessary to serve Orono's urban and rural residents. Commercial development will be limited to areas where full urban services, including municipal sanitary sewer and adequate transportation are available. Commercial development of a regional nature which would duplicate existing services in the neighboring town centers will be discouraged. LAKESHORE COMMERCIAL AREAS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR PUBLIC ACCESS AND LIMITED LAKE-USER SERVICES. Orono's residents and other lake users require lake access, fishing supplies, boat service and boat repair facilities which are unique to our location on a recreational development lake. Orono's Land Use Plan will provide locations for such special-purpose businesses where appropriate from both the land use and the lakeside environmental standpoint. No use or location will be permitted to adversely affect the lake quality or the public's general usage of the lake. All lakeshore commercial is to be limited to areas where full urban services, including municipal sanitary sewer, and adequate transportation are available. 4. THE CITY WILL ENCOURAGE PRIVATE UNIFICATION AND COORDINATION OF THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL AREAS. Unplanned atrip commercial developments will be discouraged. Coordinated projects designed to aesthetically enhance, unify and identify the business areas will be encouraged. 5. FUTURE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE LIMITED TO THE AREA OF THE EXISTING INDUSTRIAL PARK. Ho other location in Orono combines the availability of transportation and public utilities with remoteness from sensitive environments features. In addition, this land use is entirely consistent with Long Lake's neighboring industrial development. I CMP 4-17 LAND USE JUNE, 1980 URBAN COMMERCIAL LAND USE i 1 is limited to two areas which are provided “""trair^hrieiessary urban services and facilities. The major commercial with all the "®‘=****^j; . ^o be the crossroads center of Navarre. ^h^raref irpri“dr"ufficient opportunity for neighborhood retail and JlvJnrunit. »; United .ulti-f.nlly development, -ill be con.ideted appropriate in or near the Navarre commercial area. ,n edditlonel limited ccmmerci.l ere. i. ::e!i:bi:%r::'t""iiy .nd -iU-provid. n.i,hborbocd .ervice. complimentary to those available in that City. LAKESHORE COMMERCIAL LAND USEz-^ T V *nd lake user service businesses are appropriate for aLake access and laae user seivA coecial performance i:i:5i?L'::nt:L:rt/:rir.o;e';^:t^:”oi-rtbriei^ envitLm..„t and protection of neighboring properties. The ptimery purpose is to P«P"j ‘ '^f'lctivities'such^et'bojt^launehirg, necessary to support supplies. Lakeshore commercial ?y"p^‘ir^e"?ai“^^”ctivities, including boat sales, -hich could be accomplished a-ay from the l«ke. Junctions such as parking, winter storage and caretaker facrlitres will be appropriate in the lakeshore commercial areas. One lakeshore commercial area is indicated on Sanitary Maxwell Bay where resorts and marinas have of the existing sewer is available for boat sanitation ® , neighborhoods, facilities is limited however by surrounding '®“^^‘"“*^i|;^3’i„eludlng a lack of public transportation, and environmen crowded bay. Therefore, only the one contiguous area is cons appropriate for dedication to this use* kdditional lakeshore commercial facilities do exist along "orth of Tanager Lake Bridge. This area has fewer transportation environmental problems than Maxwell Bay. but it services Plan for commercial use because municipal sewer and _ lakesho’-e sre not available. This area would be considered for commercial designation should sanitary sewer become available a p 3 in the CSPP Facilities Plan. r i CMP 4-26 To: From: Date: Subject: 5 Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator March 11. 1993 jJi'lSDt Michael Revier, 2691 Ethel Avenue - Variance - Public Hearinc Zoning District: LR-IC A. Required area = 21,780 s.f. Proposed = 33,140+ s.f. B.Required lot width = 100 ’ Proposed = 170 ’ Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback variance must be approved if residence is to be built in proposed location. Structure i» to be located completely in front of average setback line. Plea.se review Exhibits G and H. In Exhibit G. applicant has shown the average lakeshore setback line as being determined by the properties located at 2684 Casco Point Road and 2696 Ethel Avenue. Based on the lot lines reconfigured in the lot line rearrangement of RLS 115, Exhibit E, 26% Ethel Avenue is a lakeshore lot. The average lakeshore setback line must be drawn between 2684 Casco Point Road and 2697 Ethel Avenue. 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Lot coverage. Total area =* 33,140 s.f. Allowed = 4,971 s.f. or 15% Proposed = 3,106 s.f. or 9.37% No variance required. 3. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. (Review Exhibit D*) Area within 75-250 ’ setback zone = 28,911 s.f. Allowed = 7,228 s.f. or 25% Proposed = 6,982 s.f. or 24.1% No hardcover variance required. * Note deck areas were not itemized within hardcover inventory. Staff has added the stair areas, upper decks and has rechecked the driveway hardcover. Staff will accept applicant ’s inventory at 6,982 s.f. Zoning File #1804 March 11, 1993 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map List C - Propert>' Owners List D - Harticcver Inventor)' E • Lot Line Rearrangement of RLS 115 F - Survey of Former Residence G - Current Sur\ev7Site Plan H - Average Lakeshore Setback I - Elevations J - Lower Floor Plan K ♦ Upper Floor Plan L - Sections Description of Request Review Exhibits F and H. The fonner Kearns residence was razed. Applicant proposes construction of a new residence that will meet all required setbacks e.xcept for the average lakeshore setback. Hardcover will be maintained at 24.1^5^. The height of t! e structure at its most impact at the lakeshore walkout side is 28’ 6", measured to the mean height of the highest peak. Although based on the new height definition, height would be measured from the 959 elevation, the highest existing elevation which would be lower than the 960 elevation (950 + 10’). Note that the current survey. Exhibit G, dtxis not designate the 929,4 elevation. The structure does meet the 75’ setback from the 930 elevation. Review Exhibits E and H. 2697 Ethel Avenue has a platted corridor to the lakeshore. The average lakeshore setback line is shown on Exhibit H. Staff has met on the site with Mr. Amundson, the owner of 2697 Ethel Avenue. He suppons the current proposal but has asked that applicant stake the footprint of the house and to define the appropriate height in one of the adjacent trees. Based on what we assume is the footprint of the residence, we have reviewed the views of the lake from windows within his residence and find there will be little impact. The applicant has been asked to complete the staking betore tlie weekend so that Planning Commission members v>ill be given the oppoitunity to view the proposed building site. The owner at 2684 Casco Point Road has voiced major concern w ith the proposal and claims major impact upon his view of the lake with the proposed residence. In reviewing the area, staff noted there were no view windows along the side of the house. The higher elevations on the subject prof>erTy and the mature vegetation along the north side lot line would appear to minimize the impact of the proposed struchire. Planning Commission members are encouraged to review the lake views of the Runkle residence. There will be little impact on the view windows of the residence at 2696 Ethel Avenue and it is staff s understanding that they are in Zoning File #1S04 March 11. 1993 Pace 3 support of the application. Staff has sketched the former Kearns residence on the survey (Exhibit H). It was located to the rear o» the proposed residence and would have also been Uxaied in front of the average lakcshorc setback. The Kearns residence was a single story structure. The proposed residence viewed from the rear or southwest elevation will appear as a single story structure. Hardship Statement Review Exhibit A. Applicant claims the walkout design ts ideal for the proposed sloping topocraphic. The use of this site will minimize additional excavation and the need for retaining wall? The proposed location of the stracmre will not require the removal of the mature trees within the lakeshore yard. The propertv ’ exceeds the area and width requirements and requires no other variance except for the average lakeshore setback variance. The former residence was located in front of the average I?' shore setback line. If proposed house was moved behind average lakeshore setback line, major excavations and retaining walls would be required. Issues for Consideration 1. What view windows of a lakeshore structure are to be protected? Viewing windows from the lakeshore side of structure or other? 2. Will the proposed strucmre impact the lakeshore views of the residence at 2684 Casco Point Road? ■dUMiaa CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION 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 * J After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION \\ ^ fr I *1' f * m i 4 • ' i 4t t'y n Site Address Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) Z0H7 0(yf€ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Arquired^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __(month/year) I (do)(dc not) also own the adjacent parcels of land an ’ 5F C'.w f/.va-vle I V'V vvv 01 CtS 175. cm Jl i 7C* 0. I w* « Present use of property: Zoning District:_ _ _ _ _ residential other(specify)LCf C7ijT^tua ;v vti »•ftrtrA I L rnAi uni ~ APPLICANT Ncime L ^^[//L/2, Phone (home) ______ Phone (wor)c) m 7^0^/^ Address: GAlitIL City: Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (wor)c) Address: DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ lA/)fO00 Describe request in detail: VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback;Front Side Rear X Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements. At/€ LAtAi. ^ ^7!.^ •• 4 r^vj yv' 7, (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following infonaation must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete; 1. 2. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain 3. this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). _ _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*j"xll" for reproduction), 5. _ _Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll"). 6. _SJcetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll"). 7. _As an 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 your variance application is not cosg>lete if the above infoniation 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 7 ONNERS 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 thi^ request. Owner's Signature Date 7yhs/3Ji. 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 Conmlsslon 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. - CA5£ 66?4 *5% ^^COOi > ^X""' I*-/ y^*« ■ c>' V « 3 'V ' • ■4^ '■‘"f ^ N i m A / Xv. '3' >, \ i ^ ’9;k-^sgf;3<^ ’ A ^?6)3. iJ Vs'li • V w ER COVE ' 1 >«; *■ mM, sfo*7*‘w ' '4 I 32)4„ •. ?s :<Ir-?. 1 ^ % (1 -7 <3. 9 A 4 4 i 4C . / '6 A"^ ?c«?'*1 ’*»”' ?' . 4*c 5 X “ - "■ 3T’ ir 4^^ <i':: ii- 'siKSHip •$ suBOirisim Lort, snm PAitg2sm Dimimt • \.......7> 9/,///,^ (3 V { '\ U.^ tc-> /> r A- "/ ,4^ (“ ) A / / *^ss££s stm/ris^ Of SfMIMC PAn LOTS • 11 ‘ ' \i> N -^' ^ ■ •■ ■O ,* ‘ 5>.rv •»• 'A 15 e • / ?3 /">>^ ^.’ /r* / /!» ' *v I® /i?.- fo \ IC ^ > 10"^ 77 7\7(34)vOj »*r ‘ :*> ' i >b » wC (5) '4fc'(4 1)VIS' '—•*% *1 4 7-”7,7*<4/;/ /.rT%kM, V.2,% .V k (3;a 43 / GOVT LOT 4 *V mjN om io/oi/f2MICH 004rROf» ADDH OHN€R NAKC TAXPAYER lUHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OHI€R NATRE TAXPAYER naic/aolr PROP AOOR ONNER MHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR PROP ADDR Olt€R i:ahe TAXPAYER KAME/AODR r p 1 PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR r r p r ffiitCPKf cafmr property nircpmTiQH systemPROPERIY OHNERO IXSTSt 20-117-2S 24 OOCli 02404 CASCO POINT RO D I. PUNKLE i i F RUNRIE DAVID L RUriE 2444 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA m 55541 St 20-117-25 24 0004 02404 CASCO POINT RO 0 L RUMCIE Air RUFt.lE DAVID L RUNKIE 2(»04 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA m 55541 56 20-117-25 24 0021 02710 CASCO POINT RO C N I t J PALMER CURTIS N I DAROARA J PALMER 2710 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA rt4 SS541 56 20-117-25 24 0044 02444 ETHEL AVE JANET C KAUFfMArtI JANET C KAUfTMArPI 2644 ETHEL AVE NAYZATA MN 55541 TO^AL BATCH 004 00012 REPORT NO PI455^01 PAC4E 10S6 20-117-25 24 0002 02440 CASCO rOIMT ROl VAC BULIER VERNON J PULLER 2660 CASCO POir4T RO H-AYZATl MM 55541 56 20-117-25 24 000502464 CASCO POINT RO 0 L RUNKLE t L F RLftLE OAVTO L RUrPLE CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA m 55541 24 001558 26-117-23 02700 ETHEL AVE CURTIS R JEflSLN I tJIFE CliRTIS R JENSIN 2700 ETHEL AVE NAYZATA rt4 55541 36 20-117-23 24 0014 02705 (1HEL AVE LAimEICE 0 PILLAR IAI61|»AE 0 PUIAR 4027 CARCIfUL CO\*E OR MCH»>I0 rtti 55564 nV .xcir«A: ii 56 20-117-25 24 0022 02700 CASCO POINT RO D P BUESING I L R PltJTiTNG DANIEL DUESING/LINDA RUliillAS 2700 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA rt4 5S541 36 20-117-23 24 0024 02641 CAPOLINE AVE HARRY E PUiVER A IlirE HARRY E PULVER 2641 CAROLINE AVE NAYZATA m 55541 i'.) OP, N % / 56 20-117-23 24 0045 02647 ETHEL AVE C GOROON AmifJOSlYI ET AL C GOROOtl AMl4mS0N 2647 ETHEL AVE NAYZATA MN 55541 56 20-117-25 24 0046 02641 ETHEL AVE OOROIH/ L KEARNS MICHAEL 0 REVIER 552J OAKER RD MINNETONKA MN 55543 } RUN MU MTCH OM r ■:^A eL. J ('■) k. . « » HI»*€PtN C«)NTV PHOPIHTV INfORtUttOM SVSTCH PtOPCETY at«BS LIST REPOST MC. PI^?5«0LPAc< n I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS RO'RESENTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AflO TRUE REPRESEHTATIOH OF lUFORMATlON AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY UEPARTUENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST OF HY KNOULEDGE AT® BELIEF. DATE ’ ir! HARCCCVER CALCULATICN HORXSHE^ SETBACK ZCNE: (C!SCL£ cne ) 0-75' (75-250 EXISTING H a RCCCVE.^ !M ZcNE A1 Kcusc SC£.X S.F. length /-J'X WIDTH - * .•S.F.\ X y , V j V 7 3 9^S.F. / ■R X - O' 1 ! (j>0 / . s .f. X 9 S.F.•- 3. C. Garage X - ^ Ifj L)V5>.S.F. Driveway X . .^440 S.F. X .. S.F. Dt Sidewalk X S.F. X S.F. • — ' 1 A < » 5^ S«.X /;o 1 A' ^ -nr » 'y^o •4f- S.F. E.^ATIO/ Deck TT X H m ,S.F. F.Landscape - X . S.F. AREAS UNDERLAIN BY X S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING X ssr • S.F. X ,S.F. K- Othfr 5 J.'X !• - S.F. w 'm • Vs • Total Hardcover in Zone (t982 ' y'S.F.A Total P roperty A rea IN Zone 23,4'//S.F.B '} -A / sT 1 1 mi \ i ^pt<v/V B z9,7^/X 100 z4.1 •■% / ® Kfa ms ssg ‘•^"O SURVEY NO. 115 Ci.V_ r 7 7 / ^^0’>~ns o / / / / h / •v / I y 1/ 7 )/ / \ • fSOu •C" .• • f / f atlon of fl ^ ^['. vx a survejr of c. * # / •i’ f '■ Cth:,‘',L“?i KorthwellT.."?'".' """"“P'".' I niea or ^ corner ^ (Amundson) tii ^ ^^Klstriir of Titi - -ct -t . J,OY.veu.Y.. :;, "f ........................................ - ^E^hhlh.. / e. I wli: % \ » * I •’ -4 mo O /. ./ / / /si * " . /o \v / c ID 33 '•V ■■7C#'.i •f^ > ■;.Vfr 4 . . m .’ iv, , V \1'^ V^;i' !^'•' .v*,\ # r *. ^ ^ v^V.;.y, •V ^ , ^(A 'h^S f ^(T. r ■A « *■»•vt*^ \ * • *. %•« fiir 0 u 1^ o>a» • /*>. /. in m (O ly. i•.***: •' o -w ■•i ••• • •* - -f • ^ < : » /. «\;:': I.W. ; ,jvv«■ 4W v/-^ifP ;x! X £ ^/y.; / •; ; ./ / \ ^>jj • *5V>><! '•< < << /■^Vi » i ^- • V /7^\ j S';:"t« F K « s C 01 re re AM (O 3 ri u3FIT rr H- H* o W rr •—rr S' tn 0 nXoO >i-n ^ o 01n*O (9 0on rr H- m rr K- S' z 3 Hro 0 reVCl »n rr 1 W rr Ou h-cn rr S'*1 re•o t b Cl vS>n o < • M V)3 K rr nrer^ 0 n n C o ►-0 3 5 <T 3 *< O b M 0 §n J : ),41 J Ul NOTE Only copies which bear an embossed seal are ceriilied copies 0^ I Ux * «-j> 1 >i> i •MOTTm* , <0Po6RAPvV\C 1 ^Ite, ^0ME>{ 1 mamr aanw nur nai mjmc wowoitioii o* mmcm wa » mmjumv »rmm umbu my dmucy ■ IWip^Miail mAT M« A MV MO1ATBM0 if L^W« or rnt »r* n or h j> mOJXOTl i'R.AC'f C , R..LS. US - VM ■■BATB ‘ i ?r*., 12... MOtmunoM iKX / ^ HB mI i§ M 0 • •• M 4< > • Jj rrM n* 'n 0» M (n H* b n oj 0 M rr n C Q • rr rr ti C rr CL fD 0z:.D* H* O rr* >1 W O O rr rr 53coon ID D n taFIT rr r-*< (n rr *-* rr ui 0 nSD rt* D >rt* rt •A *2 <T> Cln*O D 0o►1 rr »-• rn rr H* 3- 2 3 H rt> O rt9D rr W rr 0< H*cn rr S’ D•O t 01 Cl n fO < • M W 3 K rr n (0 rt* O n ►I c o *- O 3 n *-< 5 rr 3 ^- • -fO ,. ,e<- 4 *' • •ri O rn § ■!4- 'i IT 1 NOTE; Only copies which bear an embossed seal are certified copies 1 27 1 ^ 3 vl> m ^ o» 3 VN I ■ tMOTTrO* MkOJCffD ■^RAC.'f C , I^.LS. Ue iM—t wr»' nuTn—»cMM»«nwniTyMoii —»OTWA>>—TMt —t—CTirr MRlCt THAT WUi A «ULV MMitTmAAO ri wto# na trArsof Ul OATl MRimiAnow 1*0 I;■i-i- ii; f-? IS il - W:- •‘ .y . '«tr , Ua . . *. . .liia' i I • •. . •■■■■..'• X ■■•• v.\ • ‘•••; ••'>•■M f • Jf - -<lr-v^~ ....... ■■'^ -• «*. , 5%t *1’ pi<ip4UA () Vx«M««iO r2A?f Ct^*0 (*•' tsi (f^#,»4Uf: . S4*^<c,tcc e irKT&o. £ uimi.i;> i»T *i^‘ ur-c::_ 5 (2/ , f^£AkUk*A I % 5-ffWvllt7 ,fs.t» • I « ■ C‘'* ■: y/'. '* . ‘ f ’ ^‘ ‘ ^ ’’* ' ^ «S % * • mm #w! f .: • |. : ^ * « ■> — ♦ • • «■»« *i»« . # • • • • • . • 1^- I • % 1 '; ^ '*■•• #■ I* ^ Ut»<|raJf c?. fiOjp. ~y % . . % K—i • j f . V • ' 1 ♦ * ••X) tN • •: .i } U . »-r:W*VtAl 'Co J5j'_O0 !■: I. . I • * • .' '* I’** .• ** h . V ;‘. V S'?■ ■' ■■', ,;.'■ ■ -■■• I' • f.'. . »•* . . ' • / *’ , ' ;,.^ S/t* CSi^^U. u 1 \ • i' •. ' I». r *"• * '• I » ‘ tr • • > . , • ♦ • M ...J V, • f ♦ -* ,. •••l** ! V; r* • .:‘;3 • . ^ »'. •• !' :n .■« fV 0 • •C-l ’EEB2£S?3!f^Lr.rx.-’ MtV;mmmm ■t>u. 1 ^H- r; ::.r .-m ^ • ■iii .A;- •; ;. V.V :i*/-., fi r . ■. 'I ' I-,, v.ji- : ■4- • ^ A.f •t •• • • ^ • 4^.-i J » 'j IS I 3:?| • i • *'• «l • • . -ai^%1 2* H ••; ••• • • • • • f • • • # t , ’.‘k-h C. _., ■ •*.• : • • ••# •• •• i t ■ . • • o \,'>CT, ffe>‘r»c. ■1 --I 'ti M • ,1c.-T»».r ;>-rtr i—iv. ■ i'-' . i.V ; • ' ;: •' !!>■ ■ i’' .t^ -‘rn % r # 1^ TO:PtaniQg C«xmnis&icn .Memhcn Rod .\fo£»se. Citt AJmimarnor 6. FROM:lift A. NUNt^ Buildinf & Zctm$ Admlirn'raior DATE:M»ch II. 1993 SUBJECT: flW6 Jem and Shirley BOliiSKtef. 2935 Farnew Ims • Varunca PuMic Hearing Pmlneiit Ordiiuaiccs &ct»fi 10.03. Suhd. 14 (D) * SefhntkM for uccetuity ameturs Tennis Coufi at 60'1 120 ’ u> be locat«fd within front yard and to be placed in from of the j^ncipel stracture. A Front setback variance Requtml ■■ 50 ’ ITofOsed • 30* Variance ■ 20' or 40% B. SmiclUfe is also bscaied 20' in front of the priiEipal structure requirmg variance approv'al. C. Side Ktback Required ■ 30’ Proposed • 30’ No variance required. D. Rear setback Required * 30’ Proposed “ 70’4* Section 10.03, Suhd. 14 (C) coverage is not applicable as property exceeds 1.99 acres in area. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 Review of hardcover within 500-1,000’ 500-1,000' setback area ■ 87.120 s.f. Allowed = 30.492 s.f. or 35% Existing = 12,179 s.f. or 14% Proposed * 19.379 s.f. or 22.2% No hardcover variance required Znaif« Ftk f I Min:h II. 1993 Pafc : Lhii of llihibits A ApflKauioo B • Pto Mjp C - Profcfty Oonm Lisi D - Hanlctncr Survey E • 1-2 H*nko\ef Mipi^Worksheet F - Topographic Mj^ Lot 9. Fan iev G - StmTcy/Propoied Sue Plan H Weekman Memo 1993 I - Aerial Map Dcscriptioa dT Reque^ Applicants {mipoie the uistallatioa of a 60’nl20* tennis court to he Uvated in the ruHthwest comer of the property Tlie sinjcture will he set 30 ’ from the street and west side lot lints and will also be pUKcd in froi* of the principal stmeture located at the required 50 ’ setback. The tennis court win have a 10’ high fence and an asphalt base with iKrylic surficinji. Rcviev^ Eahibi! I. The principal structure on Lot 8 to the unracdiate west is located to the very rear of the property. It is suff s understanding that the owners of Lot 8 have no pn>hieni with the projK'vcd location of the accessory structure. Staff tas not received any written comments from this | ropem owiicr The City has received no comments from the homeowners’ associatitm regarding this reepKst. From a comprcbcigive review of the aerial of the neighborhood, it would appear that this would be the first request for a nonrlakeshore lot owtkt or lakesbore lot owner to install an accessory structure \ ithin the street yard. The proposed improvement would ihh be consistent with the current patten: of dcvclopmcm within the Farview nctghb»vrho»xl The applicants were also advised to review the covenants for Farview to determine if the accessors struemre is allowed within a street yard. The City’s ordinance would require setback variances for the structure’s encroachment into the required front yard and for the placement in front of the front line of the principal structure UjH)n a site inspection of the property, it was difficult to detennine whether a tennis coun could be placed 30 ’ from the street lot line and m>t eiKfoach into the sloping topographies at the 970 elevation to the rear. Review Exhibit F. Appltcanis have been asked to stake the 60’x 120’ structure for Planning Commission's review and provide the On-Site Septic Manager e opportunity to confirm there w ill be no impact upon the protected alternate scptic area. Zomm ('ll* \Utth 11. 1993 Pafc 3 [lr«rnplioai uf Hartlships Review Exhfi»ii A. ApplicaBis mM thu stiucture musi be placed at 30* wrcei sctbacl. bi order lo take aiKai^e of the more gemte sloped lopofraptiy As >tiu imne furtlter south, there IS an tmrocdiaie drop al the 970 elesatioa If court was to be placed at the 50' setback, the mucture would not ooly encrtwch the teure altenute dramfieW «te but wtwld require excessive amounts of fUl to prosidc a stkbk base for the ciiun To place w the 50' reiback would require the remcsal of the more mature trees thM oo»' shield or bullcr proferty fn^m residence on Lot 8 le the tmsiediasr south Applicists also ask that Planninf OwmissHHi members upon visitutf the site, how the $f»uce trees enclo« the prop^wed Vvatkm of the tiWiU cam irmimuinf any impnet upon the surTou*fciing iwighbothood to ntmh. cast and west. rs for ConsiderHioit After reviewing the staked teimis ctwrt, if U is necessary to iiKnre structure closer to street kx l»ne. woukl Planung Commission recommend any reib»;k kss than 30* from the street kx line’ Applicants have noted that the existing mature spruces provide a natural butter minimizing impact of court in street yard. l^Tiat conditions in the use of court or de$i.^n features woild also minimize impact: hours of use no outskie lighting, use of sumhield ^covw on fencing cokre of fencing ocher. a. b c. d e. 3.Whiit impact H ill the placement of this accessory structure in a street yard have on the existing neighborhood? Consider plantings, topographies, curvature of road, placement of houses on adjacent lots. etc. If a recommendation of approval is proposed, staff recommends that one of the conditions of approval be that no outdoor lighting be allowed. i k;^ -i CITT OF msm - V&llMICB affuca S® ^ t ^pr Initial Application r«« $175.00 (ISO.OO per each additional variance) Keneval Variance Fee $100.00 (no change fron original application) Variance for non ccnfonaing use 1200.00 After-’the-Fact Fees (Double applicaticn fee) cut 05:Xf Fis^i (fflu ij5iL"-;owo Cl CD irs.c 0€J^ a U5.C i^£:uPT-r>m you C9c: nci rij C2/19 « ! FKomrr ivFomATioii Site Address Property Xdentif. Nu»ber (P.I.D.) ^9^ F jF^^ooy Attach legal description to application if not included cn required survey. Date Property Acquired_ _ _ _xT^ (aonth/year) I (do)^d^ not pa Iso cwn the a^acent parcels of land. Praaent uaa of orooartvi ✓^residential OtherPresent use of property: Zoning Districts other(specify) AFFLICAHT Phone < hOM) • Kaia ^ Phone (eork) ^ Address:City: (nans (if different than applicant)Phon© (hoot©) Kane Phone (work) Address:City:tip: DBSCRIPTIOH OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Coat $ VAKIAHCBS RBQOIRED S Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage *^Setback:✓'Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) BARDSBIP/DBSCRIPTIOil OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CCNIDITIOHS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual pr^erty conditions prevent: g compliance with Zoning Code requirements (attach additional sheets if necessary) , IMD SUBMITTALS All of the follouring infonsatioo ■ust be subadtted by tho applicatioa deadliasi date la order for TOog application to be copsldered coipletei 1._ _Completed Explication Torm 2^^_Certified Property Cwners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list free Hennepin County Department of Pinance A-603 Govt Center 34S-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>s*xll* for reproducti<»). 5. _ _Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8H*xll*). €._ _S)cetches or plans of floor i elevation views (provide 1 copy 8H"xll“). 7. As an addendxis to this appllcatimi. please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8, Additional iteais as eay be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner euat sign this application. Please reaenber that your variance application is not coaplete if the above inforaatioo has not been incloded. AFPLICABT'S SiaUiTUM The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zmiing Administratcr. agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this applicatijyusnd certifies that the information supplied is true and correct of his/her )cnowledge. Applicant's Signature Cate OWHEaS SIGHATURB The owner hereby acleovledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Coasaission msinhrrij and Council members for purposes of inveatiga** tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _Data J^j Applicant must have all submittals into tht City offices 25 days before the Planning Connission Meeting. Planning Conunission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning ConsLission and Council. If an applicant Is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangemei.ts to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the mee'^lng. oc r ( c r ( r r r r M UTI tATCH 90S cauHTV neMnrrr fwanmoM svsnnTAXAAVII MWV/AOM M W-1I7-M n lOtf »2«M rw STnam f omiutTssm tr ilmm • CASai tMBCM rm %T LOm iMi HN ssiu IStCI NWS TA)9Sri« MUC/An» o • » r n M-117-n M MIS S2*77 FASVirM LS ■ 6 S tSCISI INS sicet SICNMS ■ HASrinM S4CMSC X9Z7 rSSVICM LM iCSS IMI m SSSM MOMtTY CMCSS UJT StFQlT m. s:«3»%«l IZSB M-;i7.0 S*MMl rSMtCM lASSI KssieuSSST S S irsttr A KfSSTOrS tMi rsavuB LA LONS lAAt *« SSSS* M M-117-71 M SSS«szns rsavm uSMISII* J SllLICHilfS »<ItUF SILLIGWItS t«SS FASVIIM LAM IGNS LJ££ rW SSUA BS SS-n7-M 71 SSSl MS» OLS cststal bat n t J N t I J BATTOM JU0SON N SATTQH TC7 TOMS sum ISAS MLS m BBASZ TCTAL UTt9 f cciTirr TiaT tm tacts scsscsintio aw an accusatt anb tsui WSStSEMTATION OT INFOSnATlON AS IT ASKARS THIS OATf ON THE RECOSSS Of TM MtSCKN COUNTY OERARTT^MT^ OF M0RC%9r TAXATION, TO^^ BEST or m RNMLEOGC ato BELIEF. i H. B 4* r « 4^.S « V • m • •J ' 1 D A.C.0.c.r. Exifttin? L^cthora Setback rcsne Lat Ar«« Xa Z«na Exlstlagi lardcoTcr In Zone Percentage (B/AUlOO Final Pr ceased ■ardcoeer Tn Zone Bardcoeer Percaatage (D/AJ*100 Allowed Bardcoeer Percentage 0-7S* 75-250• 250-500* SOO-1000* »£ a£ • t mt 9t pjaaeoTgB limitatiobs % of %0 i sf %25 30 35 ■ARDCOVBB IBCXxOCBSt - Structures with roofs - Decks, ewen if slatted - Sidewalks - Driweways (pewed or grawell - Decoratiws landscaping areas onderl-iin b plastic sheetlag - Tepa of retaiaiag walls» rock walls - Any other serface that does not allow directi absorption of rainfall into the grodlldl ►i'RC7AO B, OTHCT LAKBSHOkg RgCOLATIOHS SBC. 10.22, BBOOIATIOBS POB PAMXLT X.AnS80KS BBSXDBBTXAX. DX»«XCT- ^ following regulations shall apply* •IJl-lC-1" OM Family Lakeshore Residential District the following i:-g Subd. 1. imkeshore Set Back H^l*tions. *^e set lakeshore lots shall be at least 75 feet and *". residence shoreline than the awer.ge distance froe the shoreline buildings on adjacent and nearby lota. Subd. 2. Lakeshor. Hard Cower .Vne'nrrtr^tu^^ shall be no escsTatlng, ^^ greater than 25% hard cower. Within 75 to 250 feet of the be no greater than 30% hard Within 250 to 500 feet of the J there shall^be no greater than 35%cower. Within 500 to 1,000 feet of the shoreline there shall oe no g hard cower. subd. 3. Tr.. M.OV.I R.sul.tlon.- No tr... -ithin 75 foot of th.^.bor.M^^ with th« dianelet of .lx (S) Incheo or nor. .n.ll b. tenOT.d wlthou a pemit from th« Council. ^ r' THIS Ufa HilS BfEH MiCHOFiUHfD Certificate of SurveyJ I hereby certify that this is a true _ — ^ ^^«*a cr encroachcantj . Scale: Cute : o s 1" = 60' 1-22-79 Iron CAT KB Land Sor/e/ors iind Planners Long Lake, yiruiesota 1 j| Ij^DCOVER CALCULA7I0K Hoatgiirr^ |<M«i Icirel* OMI #-n* Ti-2S0* Mr4«wr#r In • c • . itossc'jfj: iMifth X 9 %14th • .f. C« Qthe? 0 JC 31 9 . f . 9.f • total EXISTIHG nARDCOVER IN toHB fu.iM l*t &XM Wttkia toM s —------------ • •.!.»<MltloMi Nordcorvr to hm , - - a —-------- • - t.f. %------------- “ *.f. -----* -1CT8I. 4^ O • »w% m ------------ • «.f. CatAf#—xjL * i» Dt i v#My a • M i.r. TO 11 kbbm ^ittlBf ttoidcoifr to h* y#i>ov»4. If aiiyi ---------------------------teSll2i« » TOTAL i.r. i.r. t.r. 121 0 W 1 m 15) m TOTAL S.F, TO ii! llEMQVEfit Fln«l B«tdcov»r rtopoaait i.r. , R • f • . •.f. . ■.(. 13) (Lin* (IJ « (2j -Lin# JJ)) • r Fxlmn? To bo Added iTb. Ro«,vel ftoposed Hardcover t • X .f. (4) final - s.f. (1)Lino (4^ X loQ a Lino (1) • .f «.r.* 8 100 • % fi<'v.V 1 f V .n » » % iMlS' >v I « • » • • ■ ? • ♦\ •} d. • 'kt H H« i « ' ' «I I- ' - v| ^**• •'.f* »'mm^.\^4^7,7/^' U*Ml ^ : - ll \Z9 I • I . . # »» * - i\-*: .M‘- J i%*» |{ •• ‘ *• I I »\*» t ^ ♦# If- ;tSii. '4$Wim4a/ /. %V r -f /t •* « i • • (. I'» u4J' V. KtI w’•1^^i/i< i,IK ‘*4* • # L* » >7 J t iW-sflilIlia 1 I 4 NT* I f ^i if 5^®Uh <» I h ' : 1 \ 1 THIS il£» HAS BfEH liilC2)0F)U)£j) 7 4*/ •* ^ CertifleaU of Surveyi I horaby cartlfy ti\ot thl» i« * tni* and corract racraaantatlon of a survey of - -■ th. bouBcrUs »:• 9, Block l, r.rvi«. th. locuon of ,11 oxloun* t^olo,.^lf tlon of a proroaec builiin«. It Qo«9 nov puir^ifw canta or aneraachcents. Scale o 1 1 - rr 60» -22-79 ron Bar'xer -:^rdon ii. Coffin Bag. «*lTln ft. Rehder Rad* .**0.13*95 Land Sorve/ors arx: r^rr.ara Long Lake, Hlnaesota IQi A Matsualll.& A mOM: DATE:March 9. 1993 St'BJECT: AppUcatkai fl806» • IqIh Htnifiiirm. 2935 I anrWw Ijm, VinaaBe - Scpik Ro The applicaiil hts propoteA the lnitallJiKNi of a icma ooun oa Us property and the pitipa^ at 0US m lo Aotnam whether the propos ed >cmm co«n wil haw tn aihcne inipect no the c&Uui^ septic syuem or the ahemase drenfeU ftft Aho. tioLC the ipplicam't property b withta l.OUO' of the shorrlim of Lake Mioeeioeika. the rstviti^ ^ysiciii ommi he mspccieil s> assure ooofonnance with the cwmi City and Stale The soil iesia« and sysaem deiigai approved by the Coy in 1979 tnic^ that both primary and lUrramr (haiUieid are avaitaUe for tha pro peny . SiK tmpcctioa reveab that the icmm court aiuld be iratalka such as « would not adversely impnet the alicmnir drainfiey fite if the fcfinb court could be moved northward 10’. I»vinf a 20’ sethick from Farview Ijine This shcwld allow a 20't Kthack; from the tentus court to the secondary draiid ’ield site to the south. The erbtifqt septic systens wav aho tnspecicd to insure conformiiy to the State and City lefulatinat due to a propivscd intemificatioo w tihio the shorrUnd area of Lake Minnetotdta. The inspection revealed thtf the existii^ system ikxs meet the required v'crtical Kparation from the '■'= T —- w m scasofully high water table as defined by roottlini! and the required neii^ fn>ni the DNR protected shore land Based on the above findings, staff is confident that the proposed lennii court could be installai in sich a way avoid any adverse impief fo the existing and oltenuu dratnlleld sites. ch March 14 1993 Ofy olOorv PO tow Dysta- Bay. Mmnatota SS3I Atir) icanna A. MMusm k Raftftnca 91904 2091 Eth^ Akanua-Vananea Raquast Sotiftcahoo LttlarefMay 18,1992octoCityofOrohofromOtll Mama from JAM la C4y A^ daiadMarth ti. 1993 Cdy of Orono^ Thank you for sanAng ia t« tiraa paga ma rrio rafarancad aOova Unfortur^^ty onty racatvad tha mamo in tfia mail on Saturday Ma rch 1 3 9i and «i did not mcAjda fna pa ftmm kst of axr^Mts (A avough l ) Via! ara vary important ai raviavang tha rapuaat for variarKa Wa adi honma a r raapond to tha mamo tha baft that wa can antfiout tha banafi! of ravtavang tta M«tva (12> rjihiOiM bafora (ha pubic maabng tchadulid for March 15. 1993 are «a tf^teresti^ n ma above propotad naar ttruchjra and tha rttatad buacfcng t4a coda vananca 9»al a bamg propotad^ Wal, lat ut bagm wrth 9>a obviouf 2091 Ethel Avenua ts the* proparty that MhAs our proparty st 2004 Casco Point Road on our south sida In fact wa sfAra hvo proparty lot knas vnth tha parcel at 2091 Ethel hvaaftar rafairad to mi ttys tasar as tha proparty * Wa ara na«gh0ors Tha proparty ” has had an afdarastmg history io data as waf as soma rMher pta^<ar attnbutes Wa wcHjid Mca to stata what ara awaie of tor tha raoord* bacausa putontiaHy not aN c onc a mad parties hava a Similar base Ima of information Cartanty we do not claim to have ^ tha mformabon ratativa (o tha proparty " 1 Tha proparty*« rragularly shapad kA it has fiva (5) sidas which makes it a pentagcm (See marked up map attached for reference) We have assigned hr>#s "a", "b“. "cT. "d* and "e" lo define the tegs" of ^ pentagon 2. Two of the property hnes (hne "a ” and ime "d”) converge extremely dose to the lake shore of Carmans Bay (Lake Mir>natonka) This part of Carmens Bay (intersection of "a" and “d") is very shatow and “the property* has been "taka locked" numerous times dunng our 12 year rasidanca at 26W Casco Point Road I would speculate that it has always bean that way Ounr^ our tenure, tha previous owner of ^ property" rwver attempted to install a boat dock at the Site and probably no one reaver aver had My above referaiica latter prior to tha recent sale cf "the property" identified a LMCD regulation for lake property owners which has proparty lir>a set back provisions Property Hnes “a" and "d* do intersect at a point in the bay and they also help form the smallest leg of tha pentagon which is line "e" Line "e" was advertised to be approximately 26 feet of shore at *he 929 4 elevation level according to tha real estate sates descnptioh of "the property." I • • '•Ir • .77 .1 ■ '''s V"i ; :.......’■;' i ..;■ •:’;s#tl■^<^;^' : >, '- V' ;t .r. :-7;.;i j': • ''S I > ■•■ ^i7- t7Vi!'7vk'\l ' .. . . • •. '■ m: ■mi ite7l7r:-i| mw V'*t {>1 "'• 7iii7|l«:'k v te'.‘ ■.•:■■. rj-r-YV 'j'!mMA>- •. M mu Mli ™ 4i»• -.7 ■•'.4::j^«.|l>..^ fe® Mmk ■t.k'(t! I t „.'.a'^..j. ■■ _ .,;■ \_ j *r- »:-yV.. 11 ;'»J K Scs v'i:: s- ^ , 't u-^'i MiW., ‘fi“Ri:^ 11ill f;f . J'IE.3 1 !>[ «» V ,.w f ''''Cl*o v'l ! . J :i4r Fi'4il ■ 1 i?K«<ytl -wilH*^ ^im :4i.Sk.«59i :< :. .J--’. »v « *>-^ T^V ' *‘i. l«i "K.: ?ir^S .•• .» I»- >:fx^/V*k.i‘ •V.I -|. IIP*' - F® FY;J® ^ "4^J '^1 fi > • .' .V.-. >Jig^ IP V.-7.I. *w, Page 3! In addrton to *Vie arocsfiy t»ng i:^43at lata ioctad * proetTf *as at I a» access Avamja mfmn ElNM Avanut slogs Pbniptff s^o^ of trw gtopafty tost aooorgr«g Id if«y turvay ff4p I ttmt lha progeny* Ms had prawous vanaoea granSM lo iotoa 9m profttom but i am not awara of 9w spaoMcs of iMtrafnady TM praand (mrm of ina propaftyT had a modest s^ed house afsch has baan ra car ^y demotshad <tfi o# 900 sq ft) The 'tod* huM «ras sit«.{Md on 9!s isval pttosau of Iht proparty* approienaiofy r> 9ta Incabon shovn on 9ia attached map Tha'oaf house sat s&ghry forward (toward the tote) of our and tocaton The pmparV ’ atoo reits on a hd Tha hd drops approurfhafafy 35 fast frem BSs fnre to toa Mch (l^ tuda) Tha oviiour lirm$ of 9« new s;te survey try Ron Kfuaoaf d Asa ocia ia i a not cerract raia ta d to "a* oreoanv fcna AnaKurata atovabon and coraour map wd avantutofy be mqurad whan a new buSdaig Sita on *9to propany* has baan a pproved ft. TM property to tie south of Srto *c“ has loiia shore nghts eccorOng to the ownar (Gordy Amundson) This proparly (]%97 Elha< AvarHia) toan, would dafma tot hna tor an average take short proparty sat back undar my tnlarpratation of the city code Prasumebfy a *sma!i ’vartonce for an avtrase Itoie totora setbac^^ was praviousiy gnsmad for tha "oid” houaa on lha proparty ' Eftou^ of to# hi^ory, on toa hay poirds II was our wHont with toe May 18,1992 totter rafararKad ^>ova to be proactva n o new use of lha property * Wa ui intend to ba proa^va Howavar, wa era at a toss at to understand why tha planning department would not be as cocKemed as we are about toa impact to LaSa Minrtotonka toa new propoaad buadmg and bmidtog site prasants And with adequate notification, the new property owner »requestosg yet anotMr variance on tNs property Wa strongly oppose ar>otoar variance for th«s property Enough is enough" An property mvestor or speculator should not ba abto tr ' push tha tohtts" and biMd an out of code house A house praviousty sat on ’’toe proparty* and a new house calamfy can too but at an appropnata site lo^tion with an appropriate Size A propeny speculator knows that mere are n«ks to an irtvestm^rt and there are rules that must be foiowed. not planned to be breVan W'e believe that toe >ritent of the setback ordnance is to (1 ) protect Lake Minnetoma as much as possible from direct buikj ng runoff water and to (2 ) iocite lake shore i ^tsidencet at an ethesticaily pleasing average distance back from tha waters edge We therefore feel that tha present vanance request is blatantly "economic" to nature and far from "hardship statement" m toe March 1 1 . 1993 city memo In addition, the proposed new structure is intended to have a lootprinr of some 2600> sq ft We have estimated that toe "old" house that occupied Ihe prope'V had a "footprint" less than a third of toe new proposed "footprint" and potentia y would have ow tsmm 9m ivno vm 9m hous* W? also tai«»a fiat promised iprepany Suefi a nrudura wfl alae ws on fta tppro&irm^ 12«^ tael M M 4lfafarfta!as tie pyopartas Wahout quasaon fcich a proposed ttruciufa aai dafiiaiihf ThMro and ftna^ fta mm of paaaniai Mimaionfcai dodi utapa tar tia 2^i E9>a( ctafn«id boas Oort apt for a boat commansurata tarn to 9m housa OK so 9m LMCD hat coftaoi o«er 9m oort issMa. aa tt>^ taai 9m < is bas iy to oat tha mm out and urtoarsioed rww b^ora a«an anoihar potonoa? vananoa (ODCk)«raquattod tar tha proparty To ffyough tn *hot potato* Oocit tssua over toa ftnca to toa LMCO «rwi aOaquaia ianO uaa r >*nr«ng m our opaaon Tha Ororto pianrwig corhmosior) e tharafora raquas^d to oPtam an opaaon artow rulno from tha LMCO vt *toa profwny's* parbaa bafora biatdyig atould ba pam dranaoe aAcavabon, retaong mS s potomai aconcmc «npact to our propsfty ate itata aoonormes it location and corr took your adnea Joaorm. and shot soma peturas for 9m ptonmno maatino Wa wm toso thtonza bat tha 2684 Casco Poa« Road prtHJ arty and *lha propahy* oouM iOQl>i RoaK Hopafuiy our Orono Planning Cortmtssion sac our obvious concams »i thasa photographs Tha peturas show griphcaQy structurat 9iat ara out ol harmony with each Mhar and ttto affactad propany viaws (laitass of coursa you bva m tha tattar housa) Wa also taquast an adequata chance to review a 'uompie^ list of ejdabits (A -L)* after which, wa «wl ba in • much batter position to formaKy rasporto to bia tubjart f 1604 vananca raquast Regards, Davio 2. LuAnn Runkte 2684 Casco Point Road Wayzata. Minnesota 553VI cc LMCD DU03142m««« II, 1992 Edina Realty 14117 KWY 7 Minnetonka, ful S314S Attn: Ed Cinat»ach, Br Mgr Kef: Property listing at 2491 cthsl Avs, Mayaata PIR: 20117 21 24 0046 Dear Mr. Ginsbach It has COM to sy attention that your agency is listing the above referenced property vhich neighbors sine and it is being advertised as a "gorgeous irooded lot with approx. 25 ft. of shoreline in Carmans Bay. .. value is only in the land.. Property is sold as is with the house as a tear down..Beautiful building sits..etc,etc" along with the isplication that lake dockage is assured. You should be aware of the fact that this is a "5 sided-pie shaped" property and is certainly irregular in shape not to sention elevation. It presently docs not have a dock and for good reason. Furthermore, I do not believe that a dock ever existed at this property due to its very narrow and shallow lake shore site. 1 an sure that you are also aware that the bcnindary lines of this property converge approximately at the shoreline itself according to the plat map. Having stated this inforsation, 1 believe that it is your responsibility and that of your agency to represent the true facts of this lake shore or sore appropriately "Lake view" property to prospective buyers and avoid sisrepresentation regarding claims of certain dock usage or authorization. I would also suggest that you and/or your agent call the LMCO for a more official opinion regarding legal dock usage. The agency has established a regulation paper for "structures within the lake" and specifically define setbacks, length, navigation concerns etc. Rachel Thibault at the LKCD can advise you regarding these natters. Her phone number is 473-7033 in Wayzata. My attempt with this letter is to be proactive with any potential new usages of this property in our neighborhood and avoid possible future problems before rather than after the fact. Regards, Dave Runkle 2684 Casco Point Road Wayzata, Mn 55391 CC: LMCD CC: City Of Orono CC: Gary Hallberg,E.R. 1'^ mi llEMl4nBi i l,r I I V t*’ ‘f i-if ilBli^'t'' i n ^ r«SVs.\ te^.U ’A kU - Pac>\m^ Sdtxliv pr^r^ie^ JL^vvje t^PCV'f^SL \J\C^ (^j6AWX vvs IswivvVtUs \j rbr^ LoAil. S Iv&f <^“TU Pr»^'‘ •• __^ -./ ’ ▼ - *i .??/'^ u '■ -. V - • ■«. ,1^u;L. ' v/i-------^ " #J|1 >;.?: s. *-•' WA. fM^^m f. -*« U'i-rr A ,1* - . Ji'i if'7' ~r y ■’Bf-'AS^’ Sty [ N' \j\€vx) rcrvv\ OLA h^wAe- Sit ^WAAtl^* ?* tXplOUL- Pio^ ^ ViAu) •/r<>vv\ * Tk< 'f lA^X^t S>U^<<t>'M^ <Ma^ 'vxoTrce,^ V^ieK) '^^eIVv^ "'rtt?r»^i«;jll^‘' -^\fvt 1"oizaEi^ u«J25Lvt 5,te, .'Jl^AvAvtvvJi^irA ■" »^VVUv..Ju<^v\ 'v-.- ?•* ' U A'lroi I' w' ■ '^^mm ■:k<^ 4 tv"'’- • • , J7 ^ *‘r-* CTTK^; crv\ Cdt^do P-Vo ( ' P'5^»<;(bld- £lo>vvp®^</^^ Oj^ KeuA^. 5plS<f- PvtliAiil v^ieMJS vV^«^ 2. w /-i)r 3 VicuJ'^vtr^ C ^vsco PT f^oaS (7Ac C aa ^ '^0^^ \ VW^s«^ i j r =: V: V if- -V -->1 \ >■ # ■«*• ^ ,•;/ ■>) iL’. . - -I I >w • •• ^ Vv6^ -fr&^A \S>AoryW^Ag_ ^Uf«Aa- 3-^ 9w\ ^:i ;*'. - III p4=^ ■:■■ 5 -^'^~ -*: i-v -••^ ■ j -T- . ,. « ■ ■ •■Tv- ^ . -J ■ISSM^^tlCLi: H^. ^ r-^':•>:•..>■ :•5 :-V/ ■ ...^'. , *• ■ " r9h I ■ _ : ■ ••• i# J 4i ' ' Bjg ’ I'AWT ' ^i|. .,:=^A - j; ^--■:*'>■ r-*'M r'ii ■■ 3« _ -V"%r. ?-'. , 'iL ' y /i • \, v ■' il^vii: ^:» V- ":■:/■; I ■•■..