Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-21-1993 Planning PacketC
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present:Chair Charles Schroeder, Stephen Peterson, Candace Rowlette, Sandra Smith, Charies Nolan, Jr., Janice Berg, and Dale Lindquist. Charles Schroeder left the meeting at 9:20 p.m. The following represented the City Staff: Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Septic Manager Stephen Weckman and Recorder Teri Naab. Edward Callahan and J. Diann Goetten were present. Chair Schroeder called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (#1) #1821 MARGO & STEVE WIRTJES, 3085 WATERTOWN ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:02 - 7:25 P.M. John Ploetz, attorney for the applicants, was present. Mabusth explained this is a two lot subdivision in a 2 acre zoning district, of which both lots meet the area requirement. Lot 2 does not meet the required lot width at the 50’ setback. Both lots were shown meeting the iot wjtn standards with The original application. Septic information has been provided for both lots. She explained, a permit was issued by the State for the well for the existing residence, however, the well was approved at a 50’ setback opposed to a 75’ setback as required by Orono, for which a variance was granted. It has now been determined that the well is only 40’ from the alternate septic site, and if the alternate site is ever used, a new well would be required. It will be Imperative to make this known to future owners of the property. Drainage through the property has been rerouted along the west lot line to southern lot line. The applicant has agreed to reduce the size of the oversized accessory structure on the property, which currently exceeds 750 s.f. and requires a 15’ side setback. The applicants have agreed to develop the drive to the west of the outlet to provide a greater setback from trie lot line. She noted the City does not have setback requirements for private driveways and this may be included as a condition of subdivision approval. Ploetz noted the oroposed lot lines conform more closely with the current drainage pattern on the property. He reported the applicant has no problem with constructing the drive to the west of the out V r reducing the size of the accessory structure. Chair Senroeder inquired about the ownership of the property. % MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1821 - CONT. Ploetz replied the Wirtjes are the occupants of the existing residence, but the fee holder of the property is the Wheaton Company, of which Margo and Steve Wirtjes ere sole owners. Lindquist inquired if it is important to stipulate that the well be moved prior to final subdivision approval. Mabusth felt it very important to establish a means to convey to any future owner of the lot the condition that the well be moved In the event that the alternate septic site is used. Weckman added until the alternate site is used, the well Is not a hinderance. He noted in the event the alternate site were to be used, the City would be made aware through the permitting process. Rowlette asked if the procedures for well permits has changed recent Iy. Mabusth explained that approximately 3 years ago the State Health Department has assumed control over the permitting and inspection of wells, and since they are a separate entity, are not required to review or consent with the City on well locations. Chair Schroeder noted it is not typical practice to make move a well prior to final subdivision approval. someone Mabusth stated she had no problem with waiting to require the well to be relocated until the alternate site is used, especially considering the City has granted a setback variance for the well to the existing septic system. She noted that the applicant was aware of the City’s requirements for a 75’ setback prior to development of the lot. Ploetz stated the applicants prefer to wait to move the well due to the additional cost. He rer-orted, to date, the applicants intend to retain one of the lots for their residence. Chair Schroeder asked if the applicants run their business out of their home. Ploetz replied the business is established in Wheaton Minnesota, but they may use their home for some administrative work. The applicants were originally from Wheaton. 'li ■■hLi I*. i -k:! MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 r ZONING FILE #1821 - CONT. It was moved by Lindquist, seconded by Chair Schroeder, to recommend approvai of Application #1821 for Margo and Steve Wirtjes, 3085 *«iatertown Road, approving a preliminary subdivision, subject to the staff’s recommended conditions, and with the added requirements that the road be located to the west of the out lot, and the well be moved prior to final subdivision approval. Ayes 5, nays 1. Smith abstained. Rowlette voted nay because she felt it was an extra expense to make the applicants move the well prior to the alternate site being needed. Motion carried. (#2) #1830 RICHARD F. OORLOG, 1058 LOMA LINDA AVENUE - PUBLIC HEARING 7:25 - 7:45 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. Oorlog was present. Mabusth commented on the accuracy of the applicant’s survey. She explained the applicant proposed the removal of an upper deck to be replaced with a enclosed dining area and upper deck, and the replacement of the lower deck. The property has 92.9* existing hardcover, proposed 61.4%, which is a reduction of 1.965 s.f. Chair Schroeder asked for hardships to be presented. Oorlog replied they have a small kitchen and dining area. Also they are hoping for some privacy from the adjacent neighbor, as expansion of the neighbors’ deck recently does not allow for such. Smith asked -f a natural walkway to the lake could serve as well as the steps oroposed. Oorlog agreiic to that proposal. Mabusth noted the applicant proposes the removal of the plastic and gravel to the rear and side of the house. She pointed out the hardcover caIci. I ations were done by staff and not presented by the appIicant. Oorlog clar fied that he only proposes the removal of the plastic as this woud be consistent with what his neighbor was required to remove. Rowlette pointed out one of the rear areas is used for boat parking, ar>d once gravel Is driven on, it remains hardcover. :i- -:. .S kL. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1830 - CONT. Mabusth noted that area where the boat is stored could be reduced by half of the amount calculated to be removed. Smith asked if the applicant has considered plantings or sod in place of the rock area. Oorlog said it does not flow with the neighbors’ property as well and would require added maintenance. He noted that since the Plastic was removed from the neighboring property, the owners just use chemicals to kill the weeds, which flow into the Lake. Chair Schroeder explained their goal is to get something to help the Lake. Peterson questioned the condition of the rip-rap. Mabusth stated it was in good condition. She noted the plastic under rock in the 0-75’ setback area. Rowlette clarified that the Iower deck to be rep Iaced will be under the addition. Mabusth concurred, and added one-third of the lower deck is in the 0-75’ zone. Rowlette said she would look more favorably on the lower deck if the plastic were to be removed in the 0-75’ zone. Lindquist asked the applicant if he would be agreeable to that conditIon. Oorlog stated if he has to remove it to gain approval. Mabusth noted this condition is consistent with that placed on the neighboring property. Oorlog stated the plastic was not removed in the 0-75’ zone on his neighbors’ property. He said he was wi I I ing to remove the hardcover because he understood the purpose. ?■< MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1830 - CONT, It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Rowlette, to recommend approval of Application #1830 for Richard F. Oorlog, 1058 Lorna Linda Avenue, for Iakeshore setback variance, average lakeshore setback variance and fiardcove** variances to permit the construction of an addition to the existing residence, subject to all plastic on the property being removed, and steps to the lake being relocated out of the 0-75’ setback area. Ayes 7, nays 0. (#3) #1831 EDWARD ENGLER, 3450 BIRCH LANE VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 7:47 - 8:05 P.M. The Affidavit of PubIicatlon and Certificate of Mai Iing were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Engler were present. Mabusth explained the applicants propose a family room addition over an existing patio area, 16x20’, completely located in front of the average setback. She noted minimal impact on neighbors’ property by the encroachment into the average setback area. They propose the removal of plastic under the landscape patio area, reducing the hardcover in both the O-'^S’ and 75-250’ zones. Most of the excess hardcover in the 75-250’ zone is due to the bituminous area, which serves as a turn-around for Birch Lane and Is also used by the City to store snow. Nolan asked how they plan to address drainage. He expressed concern about trapping the drainage on tr^e rear of the property. The applicants’ builder stated they intend to solve drainage problems one of two ways by either allowing the drainage to flow In its natural pattern or by installing a retaining wall adajcent to the addition on the west side. Nolan felt it would be appropriate for the applicants to submit a drainage plan. Rowlette clarified that there will not be a walk around the house. Engler stated that was correct. Nolan asked if it would be appropriate to require an easement over the Dituminous area to ensure the City’s use in the future. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1831 - CONT. Engler stated he would like to ask his attorney prior to conir.ii tt i ng to an easement. He noted the area has been used by the City for many years witnout problems. He added they would prefer to remove a portion of the bituminous instead of the plastic, howev3r, they realized the need to allow it to remain for City use. Nolan asked if they would consider the easement if the legal ramifications could be worked out. Mrs. Engler stated they have worked well with the City in the past and would prefer to leave things as they are. Mr. Engler added They would prefer not to encumber the property with an easement. Chair Schroeder asked If It would be possible to reduce the proposal so a lot coverage variance would not be necessary. Mrs. Engler stated they have already reduced the addition. It was moved by Rowlette, seconc.ed by Lindquist, to recommend approval of Application #1831 for Edward Engler, 3450 Birch Lane, for variances to construct an addition to his existing residence, subject to all the hardcover removed as shown on the plan and with the added condition that a drainage plan be submitted with the building permit application. Ayes 7, nays 0. (#4) #1832 SCOTT A. MABUSTH, 740 NORTH BROWN ROAD - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 8:05 - 8:10 P.M. The AffidavIt of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Scott Ma.'usth was present. Weckman ex|. ained the applicant seeks a variance to construct a 10x16’ shed in the front of his principal residence. An existing shed will be removed. The shed will be set back 146’ from the street lot line. The hardship is the topography to the rear of the residence, and the only flat area is used for the septic system. Phil Nelson, surveyor, added the net increase is 32 square feet, no mature trees will be disturbed and very little grading will be requI red. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1832 - CONT. It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Smith, to recommend approval of Application #1832 for Scott M6v->usth, 740 Brown Road North, for a variance to construct a shed in front of the principal residence. Ayes 7, nays 0. (#5) #1833 LAURENCE ELSEN, 2879 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:10 - 8:40 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. Elsen and Bob Seuss, his builder, were present. Mabusth explained the applicant proposes a 26x44’ garage addition which does meet the required street setback, and a secona story enclosed addition of which a port ion will r epI ace an existing screened porcii. The enclosed addition will extend 2’ beyond the existing building envelope. Seuss clarified the room addition Is replacing a screened porch. Mabusth reviewed the hardcover calculations, and noted lot coverage is over by 1%. Chair Schroeder asked if the new drive h=^s been approved by the City. Seuss replied the proposed drive is ideal fcr both the City and the owner as it provides a safe turn-around for the owner and a turn around for the public using the beach. Peterson said he would think the applicant would like to be screened from the public beach. Elsen said he prefers the proposed plan. Chair Schroeder asked If hardcover could be removed in any other area, such as the storage shed near the lake or downsize the garage. Seuss said the reason the garage is oversized is because of the entry Into the house from the garage. He noted the applicant purchased the nome in 1988 and the storage shed was already there at that time and Is screened from the neighbors with existing vegetatI on. \ ■1 4 III ..........................................fVtTTTliif"" MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1833 - CONT. Rowlette clarified that they are hoping to reduce hardcover within the 0-75’ zone. Seuss said the shed Is currently used to house equipment. Rowlette suggested the removal of existing block. Elsen said that is proposed to be changed to grass. Rowlette inquired about the wood shed. Mabusth clarified the wood shed was not taken Into consideration for the lot coverage, but would reduce the hardcover calculations. Elsen said he would remove the wood shed. Mabusth said that leaves him with a .04% lot coverage overage. She asked if there is any landscape plastic that could be removed. Elsen noted there Is plastic under the deck that could be removed. It was moved by Lindquist, seconded by Berg, to recommend approval of Application #1833 for Laurence Elsen, 2879 Casco Point Road, for variances to construct an attached garage and additions to the existing residence, subject to the removal of the shed, concrete, 151 s.f. plastic landscape area, and the asphalt to the rear of the garage, and subject to the driveway kept to a minimum and the relocation of trees. Ayes 7. na/s 0. (#6) #1834 MARY K. MCCARTY, 245 TONKA AVENUE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:40 - 8:55 P.M. The Affidavit of PubIication and Certificate of Mai Iing were noted. Mary McCarty was present. Mabusth explained the applicant seeks a lot area and lot width variance to construct a new home on vacant property recently assessed fo»* sewer. A condition of her purchase agreement is approval of the variances. It is hoped that she will have the opporturnty to acquire additional property to the north of this lot through the sale of tax forfeit property. Even with the additional land, a new residence would need approval of a setback variance to cor'.struct i on a new residence because of the limited depth. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1834 - CONT. Rowlette clarified that the tax forfeit property has never been assessed for sewer. Mabusth concurred. McCarty stated the property would be 26,000 s.f. If the proposed lots and the tax forfeit lots were combined. Rowlette stated if the property was assessed for sewer, obviously It was considered a buildable lot. Mabusth noted it is important for the applicant to close on the property prior to the sale of the tax forfeit sale so she is notified of the public sale. Chair Schroeder questioned what will happen if the applicant Is unable to purchase the additional property. Mabusth stated she would then return requesting approval of setback var'ances. McCarty stressed the lot Is still considered a buildable lot without the tax forfeit property as it was assessed for sewer. Rowlette noted the lot size of the proposed lot is similar to that developed In the neighborhood. It was moved by Berg, seconded by Rowlette, to recommend approval of Application #1834 for Mary K. McCarty, 245 Tonka Avenue, for lot area and lot width variances for a substandard property. Ayes 7, nays 0. t#7) #1835 DAVID & ELLEN PHELPS 1950 FOX RIDGE ROAD - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 8:55 - 9:02 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mai ling were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Phelps were present. Mabusth explained the applicants propose the expansion of the existing residence to the street side at the side of the existing garage. Lindquist inquired as to the proposed footage. m 4 l-r , MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1093 ZONING FILE #1835 - CONT. Mabusth replied it will be 13x22’ and will extend closer to tne road, from a 35.5’ setback to a 24.4’ setback . Phelps said the neighbors are not opposed to the project, and submitted three letters expressing approval. Chair Schroeder read the letters into the record foI lowing: 6/21/93 David Kirkman, 1945 Fox Ridge Road 6/21/93 Ann Cosgrove, 189 Fox Ridge Road 6/19/93 Ray 4 Bonnie Hack from the Peterson asked if the Engineer has reviewed the plans to determine if it is necessary to connect on the drive. Mabusth stated that is not necessary as it is at the end of the cul-de-sac and a loop road would require removal of natural plant!ngs. It was moved by Nolan, seconded by Smith, to recommend approval of Application #1835 for David and Ellen Phelps, 1950 Fox Ridge Road, for variances to construct an addition to the nartheast/street side of the existing residence. Ayes 7, nays 0. («8) #1836 RONALD D. LAUER, 1180 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 9:02 - 9:15 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Lauer were present. Mabusth explained the applicant proposes a second story on the existing structure which was built in approximately 1955. The majority of the resioence is located in the 0-75’ setback zone and In front of the average lakeshore setback. The applicant also proposes a 3x16’ second story deck, which will be located over existing hardcover, but is considered an intensification in the lakeshore protected area. Lindquist asked the applicant if he has decided to use the building plans presented, and asked if he is the ouilder or future owner. Lauer stated he has decided to use the plans submitted, and he is the builder and possibly a future resident. Smith brougnt up the cement patio and the fact that during a recent conversation with the applicant, he seemed willing to reduce the size of the oatio. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1836 - CONT. Lauer stated he could live without some of the patio. He noted he does plan to level the patio area. Chair Schroeder suggested he remove the entire patio area. Lauer stated he would like to retain a portion for a picnic table, but would be willing to reduce it by 50%. Mabusth noted they have not heard from any of the neighbors. Lindquis*^ questioned the impact of the addition on the adjacent residences. Mabusth noted that only one of the adjacent homes is in line with the property, and that residence a'co encroaches the average setback area, and the other adjacent residence has a hugh privacy fence along the boundary line so is unaffected. Nolan asked the intent for the gravel bed. Lauer said he would be sodding the area. Nolan asked If the extensive overhang would be decreased with the addition. Lauer stated that Is his intent. Nolan noted there is not a front entryway. Lauer stated it is Intended to be located over the front stoop, which is existing hardcover. It was moved by Smith, seconded by Nolan, to recormenc approval of Application #1836 for Ronald Lauer, 1’80 Tonkawa Road, for variances to construct a second story addition, subject to the patio area reduced hy 50% and the gravel bed removed. Ayes 7, nays 0. Chair Schroeder recessed the meeting at 9:15 to 9:20 p.m. He left at this time. Peterson took over the meeting as Acting Chair. 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 (#9) #1837 CINDY FREDRICKSON, 1516 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 9:25 - 9:40 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication anc Certificate of Mai ling were noted. Cindy Fredrickson and Vince Lang were present. Mabusth noted a shed located to the rear of the property which was constructed without the benefit of a permit, which the applicant proposes to remove. She explained the applicant proposes a 24x32’ detached garage to be located 2’ from the side lot, and 6’ from the rear. The garage and house cannot meet the 10’ required separation. She reviewed the hardcover calculations presented. Peterson asked about the removal of the concrete pad. Lange presented a new proposal which would allow for a 3’ rear setback and an 8’ separation. This wouId still allow for a firewaI I in the garage. He noted they propose the removal of the step/sidewalk system and reduce the driveway from 16’ to 13’ or 468 s.f. He stated they would like to leave the concrete patio area to the rear of the residence. Peterson Inquired about the retaining wall on the east. Lange proposed that It would be replaced within a year, and added the neighbors have no objections to the plans. Llnoquist asked how far away the residence Is located on the property to the north. Lange replied approximately 300*. Peterson noted an outhouse to the rear of the existing garage, and asked about removal procedures. Lange stated it has not been used for 40 years and will be covered over by the new garage. Smith Inquired the use of the largo garage. Lange replied it will be used for storage of vehicles, maintenance equipment and snowmobiles and will contain a work area. Mabusth stated It would be helpful to see a site plan showing the proposed removals. 4 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1837 - CONT. It was moved by Lindquist, seconded by Berg, to recommend approval of Application #1837 tor Cindy Fredrickson, 1516 Long Lake Boulevard, for variances to construct a detached garage, subject to the recommended hardcover removals and staff confirming those removals prior the tinai inspection. Ayes 4, nays 2. Smith and Nolan voted nay as they felt the garage was too large for the property. (#10) #1838 ROBERT H. OWENS, 1700 BOHN’S POINT ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 9:40 - 9:54 P.M. The Affioavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Robert and Tom Owens were present. Mabusth explained the appiicant proposes the installation of a two- tiered block wall on the bank of his lakeshore home which has sustained serious damage from ail the rain. He is requesting a conditional use permit to allow repairs. Robert Owens reoorted another crack. Imminent danger of collapse. He stated the bank is Mabusth said this is an emergency situation and should be acted upon with urgency. Owens stated he is aware that the Council must approve any application, but was not sure that the bank would last until the next meeting, and if it did not, it would dump hundreds of yards of dirt into the lake and double the cost of repair. Nolan asked if appropriate siltation methods would be used. He pointed out the exposed concrete natio wall, and questioned v^hether it would be possible to screen with vines or some other sort of vegetatI on. Owens replied there are vines on the structure to the south. The wall in question was replaced after the storm in 1987, and he suspected that they could encourage vines to grow along this wail also. Nolan suggested they include this structure in the landscape plan. '^eterson noted there are no plantings on the repairs after the damage in i9G7. 1 3 ■>;, 1 r 4 ■ ■ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE t1838 - CONT. Owens noted specified plantings were installed but they did not work. Smith asked if the concrete block patto is stable. Owens reported it Is very stable. Rowlette noted the planter is to be removed. Owens agreed. It was moved by Lindquist, seconded by Nolan, to recommend expeditious approval of AppIication #1838 for Robert H. Owens, 1700 Bohn’s Point Road, for a conditional use permit to ailow repairs of the lakeshore bank, subject to the planter being removed and screening be included in the landscape plan for the terrace wall. Ayes 7, nays 0. Tom Owens asked If it would be possible to get approval from the City Council prior to their next meeting. Goetten suggested he contact the City Administrator the next morning and they wouId make every effort to facilitate the project. (ill) #1839 ROBERT H. OWENS, 1700 BOHN’S POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 9:55 - 10:00 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Robert and Tom Owens were present. Mabusth reported the applicant proposes the addition of a dining area, a third stall to the existing garage, and a step leading from the new main level patio doors. All the improvements are outside the 0-75’ setback and the applicant proposes removals of hardcover in excess of that added with the additions. Peterson inquired about the manhole located in the driveway. Owens explained that is part of a tiling system that feeds Into a 6" plastic pipe which drains to the back yard. Lindoulst asked how close to the lake the water Is being deposited. i I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1SS3 ZONING FILE #1839 - CONT. Owens stated the pipe is perforated once it gets past the house and is below grade about 3’. Most of the water is gone by the time it outlets into the lawn area but the piping does end 30 to 40' from the lake. It was moved by Smith, seconded by Berg, to recommend approval of Application #1839 for Robert H. Owens, 1700 Bohn’s Point Road, for variances to construct additions to his existing residence, subject to hardcover removals as shown on the plan, and subject to staff reviewing the drainage system off the driveway. Ayes 5, nays 1. Rowlette voted nay because she felt the applicant could have reduced hardcover further in the 75-250’ zone. Owens stated there is an additional 4’ plastic area to be removed which is not shown on the plans. (#12) #1823 MARGE ROSSING, 130 CYGNET PLACE - VARIANCE - REQUEST TO REVIEW AMENDED PROPOSAL Marge Rossing was present. Mabusth explained the applicant proposes amendment of her original request to include a 4x12’ wide dock on the northeast side of the addition. She reported in lieu of landscaping to screen the existing detached garage, the applicant proposes a privacy fence. She added the applicant has almost compioted work on the existing garage. She noted the applicant has not shown how she plans to control parking on the property. Rossing added she proposes a garages. split rail fence between the two Mabusth stated that is to eliminate the undefined parking ar^sa and use of grassed lawn areas for parking. Peterson clarified the purpose of the new garage was to allow storage of vehicles Inside. He expressed concern that the privacy fence would only encourage the storage of items outside. Lindquist questioned the gravel area around the garage and asked if that is intended for parking. Rossing stated they intend to use the gravel area for the storage of their boats. She noted because of the existing tree line along the street property line, the privacv fence was the best alternative for screening. AUMi MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1823 - CONT. Peterson reported they just approved a subdivision for the Wirtjes property to the rear of the Rossing home, and stressed that outside storage would become a problem when that lot is developed. Rowiette understood there would not be large commercial vehicles located on the property. Rossing clarified she Is allowed one per the ordinance, and one- ton vans do not count as a commercial vehicle. Berg asked how many people live in the home and how many vehicles are on the property. Rossing replied there are currently 4 adults in the home, but soon to be 6, and they will have 5 to 6 vehicles. Mabusth asked about the number of boats and the size. Rossing replied typically it is only one boat - a 15’ runabout. Nolan asked about the storage of construction material outside. Rossing reported her son is in the construction business, but typically only parks his truck on tne property and construction material is stored off site. Mabusth indicated the business would require approval of a Home Occupation License. Rowiette expressed concern that there is not enough parking on the property for 6 vehicles, and the need to appease the neighbors’ concerns about the aopearance of the property. Lindquist stated he is not comfortable having any outside storage hidden behind a privacy f^^ce. Mabusth reiterated the Issue here Is not the variance for the deck addition, but rather the matter of a violation of allowed exterior storage in a residential yard. The applicant does not need a variance for construction of a second accessory structure and installation of the fence. Lindquist stated he has no problem witit tne deck addition. He asked their options regarding tne storage. I fp ^SkMUIgl^ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1823 - CONT. Mabusth replied staff wou•d look to the ordinance that governs exterior storage. She added i commercial operation must not show outward signs of existence, and the 15’ boat storec outside is not a problem as long as it meets the required setbacks. Nolan asked If the City would police if they received complaints. Mabusth responded affirmatively and reported the City has not received complaints about the property in the last few years. It was moved by Lindquist, to recommend approval of Application #1823 for Marge Rossing, 130 Cygnet Place, for a request to amend her original va'“iance approval to include a deck, and the balance of the Commission’s concerns are addressed under the original cipprovaI . Mabusth noted a landscape plan original approval, but stated a falls within the right-of-way. was required as a part of the berm will not be possible as it Possing stated that is why she proposes a privacy fence, and trees are already planted to the front of where the fence will be located. Smith suggested she provide more mature evergreens to provide the year-round screening they hoped for. There was no second to the motion and Lindquist withdrew his motion. It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Lindquist, to recommend approval of Application #1823 for Marge Rossing, 130 Cygnet Place, for a request to amend her original variance approval to include a deck, subject to all conditions of previous approval, and the applicant work with staff to determine an adequate landscape plan and implement the plan based on staff’s recommendation. Ayes 2, nays 4. Smith, Nolan, Rowlette and Berg voted nay. Motion failed. It was moved by Nolan, seconded by Rowlette, to recommend denial of Application #1823 for Marge Rossing, 130 Cygnet Place, for a request to amend her original variance approval to include a deck. Ayes 4, nays 2. Peterson and Lindquist voted nay. Rossing asked the Commission members why they voted to deny the deck. 1 7 4 i f MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 ZONING FILE #1823 - CONT. Nolan voted nay because he "“elt they were creating a situation encouraging further abuse. Rowlette voted nay because she felt the deck should have been Included in the original review. (#13) KENNETH FIGGE, 2004 SUGARWO-DD DRIVE - REQUEST TO VARY FROM COVENANTS Kenneth Figge, Robert Mitchell, Mark Larames, L. Kramer and Sid Rebers were present. Mabusth explained this request includes interpretation of the covenants with respect to the curved drive, the pedestrian walkway and filling in a protected/non-cIustered area. Larames, the landscape architect, explained the drive is proposed at 12’ width to meander to the autoport, all within the all owed 20’ access corridor. Mitchell pointed out the intent of the covenant with respect to drives was to prevent drives from crossing the entire front yard. Mark stated the sidewalk was designed assuming walks were permitted. He stated there is a natural opening which meanders to the front door and would facilitate on-street parking. He telt It made sense to have a walk to the front door. Lindquist noted all other properties in the development use the drive to gain access to the front door. Mitchell pointed out on-street parking is allowed in the development. He added the covenants are specific in what they prohibit and sidewalks were not prohibited. Nolan stated they may not prohibit sidewalks, but does prohibit grading in the front yard. Mabusth pointed out the covenant does state that only a 20’ wide access corridor is allowed within the front street yard. Mitchell added the covenants allow for landscape structures within the 60’ setback. [ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1yS3 KENNETH FIGGE, 2004 SUGARWOOD DR - CONT. Rowlette stated the intent of the covenant was to maintain as mucfi vegetation as possible in the front yards. She noted all other residences in this development have provided a sidewalk to the driveway. She felt that says something about the intent. Sid Rebers, developer of the property, said he never considered adding verbiage regarding sidewalks as he felt sidewalks should be based on Individual preference. He stated, as head of the architectural committee for the development, he would approve the walk and felt this home will be an asset to the development and Orono. Peterson asked if the lighting and horseshoe area are located on rIght-of-way. Mabusth noted it is located in the road right-of-way and that road is a private road over which the City has taken an access and utI I Ity easement. Mitchell noted the curu does have a curb to which the structure would extend to, and it is hoped that maintenance equipment would not go beyond the curb. He understood if the walk were installed as proposed, and later reculred to be moved. It would be at the homeowner’s expense. Nolan asked if there were any legal concerns they must address in setting a precedent as such. Mabusth felt they would be setting a precedent, but did not feel there would be any legal ramifications. Rowlette referred to a letter by MitchelI which states the walk is necessary to preserve the privacy to the property. She questioned that statement. Mitchell stated they hope to screen the utility portion of the property wh'ch is the driveway area, but create an invitation to the front door. Larames stated as for the need to tiI I in the rear protected area, there originally was a fence through the back yard which created a tree line, including a very large ash which has created a dam affect to the rear of the property and a 10" depression. They request permission to fill the depression and to allow drainage to the east. m A 1 i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 KENNETH FIGGE, 2004 SUGARWOOD DR - CONT. Peterson stated this rriay help water move faster to the Gill residence to the east. Nolan felt if the filling were allowed, it may help to creating ponding on the property to the west. Mark stated the area to be filled is a pothole. Nolan stated he would be more interested in a permanent solution. Mark answered to make a gully through the trees to get to the swale area, they need to fill this pothole. Lindquist stated he is not comfortable with anything but a permanent solution. Mabusth noted the property owners/developers have indicated they intend to seek approval of a conditional use permit in the near future to implement a more comprehensive plan to solve the drainage concerns. Peterson polled the Commission and all were interested in a long~ term solution. Rowlette referred to the handout explaining the covenants to builders. Condition #3 iefers to ‘‘landscaping structures", and she stated they must define this term. She noted major discussion during the PUD process in developing the covenants. Mitchell stated no one dreamed that sidewalks would be prohibited as the covenant is largely negative and it does not prohibit sidewalks. He added most residences nave sidewalks to their front door. Nolan asked the builder if he would consider the removal of the half circle shaped structure at the end of the sidewalk. He agreed there is natural opening for the sidewalk and there appears to be a need to provide a walk to the front door. Mark stated the half circle structure was only provided for aesthetics and ties in with the other development on the property. He felt the walk fits in with the style of the home. It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Rowlette, to recommend approval of the request from Kenneth Figge, 2004 Sugarwood Drive, to install a 12’ wide curved arive. Ayes 6, nays 0. f [ #• MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 KENNETH FIGGE, 2004 SUGARWOOD DR - CONT. It was moved by Berg, seconded by Rowlette, to recommend approval of the request from Kenneth Figge, 2004 Sugarwocd Drive, to allow filling in the rear yard, subject to a conditional use permit applied for w'thin 60 days from approval for a comprehensive solution to the problem. Ayes 6, nays 0. It was moved by Lindquist, seconded by Smith, to recommend denial of the request from Kenneth Figge, 2004 Sugarwood Drive, of the installation of a sldewa'k to the front door from the street. Ayes 4, nays 2. Nolan and Peterson voted nay. Rowlette stated she would be willing to approve the sidewalk If it were presented in a more natural fashion and toned down. All agreed. Mabusth stated fne is net convinced that the Public Works Department would approve the portion of the structure located within the right-of-way. Nolan asked the builder if he would be willing to eliminate the half circle portion of the walk. Kramer stated if that is the only way to gain approval, he would agree. He said he did not design the walkway but was told it fits with the look of the improvements on the property. It was moved by Nolan, seconded by Rowlette, to recommend approval of the request from Kenneth Figge, 2004 Sugarwood Drive, to install a sidewalk from the street to the front door of the residence in a straight configuration, based on the clear opening through the front yard, the existing grade is suitable to the installation, and excessive grading will not be necessary, and the access drive is 12’ opposed to the allowable 20’. Lindquist suggested in the future sidewalks be on the original plans to be approved with the building permit. Vote: Ayes 6, nays 0. (#14) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE Nolan reported on Council action on i t«ms presented to them at their last meet Ing. (#15) OTHER ISSUES None lui MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 21, 1993 (#16) APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Lindquist, seconded by Berg, to aoprove the minutes of the May 17, 1993 Planning Commission meeting, suDject to the amended that Smith abstained from the vote on the Wirtjes application. Ayes 6, nays 0. (#17; REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COUNCIL MEETING Peterson ana Rowlette volunteered to attend the meeting July 12, 1993 Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT Acting Chair Peterson adjourned the regular Planning Commission meeting at 11:26 p.m. Char Ies Schroeder, Chairperson ^ I r.ina CcrOTissicn Council PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONU MEETING DATS ^/ ^^3 PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, JUNE 21, 1993, 7:00 P.M. 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY - COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE - Mayor Edward Callahan ATTENDANCE ACTION ITEMS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Applicants presenting variance requests before the Commission are asked to move to the podium at the front of the Chambers when their application is announced by the Chairman. #1821 Margo and Steve Wirtjes, 3085 Watertown Road - Preliminary Subdivision Continuation of Public Hearing #1830 Richard F. Oorlog, 1058 Loma Linda Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing #1831 Edward Engler, 3450 Birch Lane - Variance - Public Hearing #1832 Scott A. Mabusth, 740 North Brown Road - Variance - Public Hearing #1833 Laurence Elsen, 2879 Casco Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing #1834 Mary K. McCarty, 245 Tonka Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing #1835 David and Ellen Phelps, 1950 Fox Ridge Road - Variance - Public Hearing #1836 Ronald D. Lauer, 1180 Tonkawa Road - Variances - Public Hearing #1837 Cindy Fredrickson, 1516 Long Lake Boulevard - Variances - Public Hearing #1838 Robert H. Owens, 1700 Bohn’s Point Road - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing #1839 Robert H. Owens, 1700 Bohn’s Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing #1823 Marge Rossing, 130 Cygnet Place - Variance - Request to Review Amended Proposal Kenneth Figge, 2004 Sugarwood Dr. - Request to vary from Covenants I ■ n 11 I \Mt\ I ■rtflUttfiiTi ■ t PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - MONDAY, JUNE 21, 1993, 7:00 P.M Planning Commission Comments 14 Report by Planning Commission Representative to Council Meeting of June 14, 1993 15. Other issues for discussion. Additional Items 16. Planning Commission approval of minutes of the May 17, 1993 meeting 17. Planning Commission to select a representative to attend the July 12, 1993 meeting of the Council. Adjournment 1 -ar O 'O ? 5.an n ic 5 I! >% It « I 2 i 5 n tt iJX I X I 8 ?I? ir if' I i 4 I i Ifr.u: I S I '♦1 i 00ut O 8‘ fe' 5 s i‘ir/ ? -•O'CA <k 1*1 1 j M H «t H *—•M H ««>1 2 ou Ul UJ 00Ul IJ s 1 i f It 1 ,*:i i’Scoc -.i 1 P sII t ^11 " ^ 1li f 1 4t rn §f I •Tt 1 - z i li I 4 J r> 1 t fj s rt :: ri 1 i «. Tf\o *«1 t' 2 3 ii /;ii r*u- > > e 3 V, Er i i X rf X I p; fe In ('I 4 a fc >» rl '■ ? I g'* t i i !i 3 if a K F C - « / :r -- - 2 -r f A *< « r* -3 i ✓ * ^ i • ;' <: iU’f' /, TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator June 14, 1993 SUBJECT: #1821 Steve and Margo Wirtjes, 3085 Watertown Read - Preliminary Subdivision - Continuation of Public Hearing The applicants have advised that they will be unable to attend the meeting but their attorney, John Plouetz, will attend in their place. If members have misplaced their original packet, please advise the staff at the City offices so that a second packet can be recopied for inclusion with the delivery of the final packets on Friday, June 18th. ^42 k ■ TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:May 10, 1993 SUBJECT: #1821 Steve and Margo Wirtjes, 3085 Watertown Road Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing The application involves a 2-lot subdivision within a rural residential zoning district, RR- IB requiring 2 acres in area and a 200 ’ lot width. Applicants had originally filed a subdivision application in March of 1990 that was withdrawn when applicants pursued construction of new residence as shown on proposed Lot 1, review Exhibit J. The following sections ot the subdivision and zoning codes are pertinent for the current review: 1. Definition Section 11.03, 66 (C) - Class III Subdivision 2. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) 3. 4. A.Lot area Required = 2 acres of dry buildable Lot 1 proposed = 2.36 dry Lot 2 proposed = 2.52 dry B Lot width Required at 50’ front/street setback Lot 1 = 300 ’ Lot 2 = 172’ Variance = 28’ or 14% = 200 ’ Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (B) - Setback for accessory strucnire on proposed Lot 1 Required setback = 15’ Proposed 5’ Variance = 10’ or 75% variance Total structure area = 997.5 s.f. Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F) , • _ m* Required setback for accessory structures less than 750 s.f. m area - lU 5. Section 10.02 - Definition 34 - Lot area Drainage way that has been created along west lot line must be designated at a minimum 20’ width and excluded from total of dry buildable lot area V a Zoning File #1821 May 10, 1993 Page 2 6.Section 11.08 - Definition 24 - Lot area - minimum. All lots must contain a minimum of 2 acres of dry contiguous buildable land e.xclusive of wetlands, public and private lights-of-way, vehicular or pedestrian easements, surface areas below the ordinary high water mark of any surface water or areas at or below the flood plain elevation for a specific property. In cases where rural lots are encroached by drainage easements, areas of drainage ways are excluded from diy buildable but areas on either side of drainage way are considered inc'usive within contiguous dry buildable inventory. Per the definition, lands divided oy wetlands, floodplains or lake areas cannot be credited. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Plan of Drainage Improvements Along West Lot Line E - Topographic Map of Area F - Map of Surrounding Area G - Original Plat for 1990 Review H - Engineer ’s Report I - Septic Report J - Current Preliminary Plan Description of Current Application Review Exhibits G ;*.nd J, the original application proposed .. - a straight line division line further south. The current proposal shows the proposed division line to the center line of the existing drainage way that drains from east to west through the property . The drainage way defines the actual physical barriers to both properties. Both rural lots maintain the required 2 acres of dry contiguous land. The division line along the drainage way creates a need for a lot width variance of 28’ at the 50’ front setback line for proposed Lot 2. The City has app.»x)ved lot width variances with the creation of new lots when it can be found that the lots could be configured to meet the lot widtl; requirement. The acmal boundaries of the properties are now defined by a physical barrier of the drainage way and would reflect the actual usage of each lot. Access to the property is via a shared private driveway outlot shown at a 30’ width along the east side of the property. Current driveway is located outside of the outlot and it is recommended that the shared drive be reinstalled within the driveway outlot. The City will ask for a dedication of the 33’ of right-of-way of Watertown Road. Note property line runs to the center of the roadway. I i k Zoninii File #1821 May 10, 1993 Page 3 The original application was withdrawn when applicants pursued the building permit for the new construction and you should be aware that once a subdivision has been commenced, building permits cannot be issued for any new construction until the subdivision has been approved. The former residence on the property (Lot 1) has been demolished. Access As already noted, the access shall be shared via the private driveway outlot. Note acces.sory structure is only 5 ’ from lot line. Private driveway outlot can be reduced to 25 m width. The City has no required standards for driveway outlot widths. Applicants have advised that 14 ’ X 26.4 ’ addition to the bam can easily be removed and is in a serious :»tate of disrepa^. This would reduce the accessory structure to 627.9 s.f. requiring only a 10’ setback. By reducing outlot width to 25 ’, stmcture will meet required 10’ setback. Owners to immediate east had voiced concern that a driveway could be placed so close to a property line. The City has no standards for setbacks for private driveways to adjacent lot lines. In order to provide adequate distance from adjacent property, outlot may remam at a 30 width along the portion that abuts the residence structure to the east and then reduced to a 25 width as it approaches the accessory strucmre. Please review Exhibit H, the Engineer has recommended that the size of the culvert to be placed under the drive that extends southward be designed by an engmeer m order to assure that upstream storage is not increased. Access and utility easements wUl be taken at a 10 width along all perimeter property lines. Drainage Issues Review Ediibits D and E, drainage was the major concern during ^ earlier review. SpeciPcally, the area along the northwest lot line site was to be u^, the drainage improvements had to be completed. r'«»“ge consisted of the plugging of the 12" culvert, the installation of an underground tile^ drau^e swale redirecting drainage to tributary to the south along the proposed shared lot line ^e toimgTway must be maintained if the proposed septic areas are to renaam confor^^g • be necessary to take a 20’ drainage easement over the drainage way along the west lot line. Zoning File #1821 May 10. 1993 Page 4 Septic Please review Exhibit I, the on-site evaluator who completed the septic testing for the original 1990 subdivision review clearly noted that a future well must be located to the south in order to meet 75 ’ required separation setback from drainfield to well. Unfortunately, both applicants and well inspector from the Suite Health Department failed to heed the City’s separation requirements. The well has been located to meet the State’s 50 ’ separation setback from the principal septic system. Review Exhibit J. the alternate septic drainfield has been negated as it is located 40’ from the well and would not meet even the State’s separation setback requirement. The future owner of Lot 1 must be placed on notice that if the alternate site is to be utilized at some future date that a new well would have to be also installed meeting the 75 ’ separation setback. The on-site septic evaluator must also provide confirmation that Lot 2 will support a 5-bedroom septic system. It is also recommended that prior to any driveway construction or land alterations associated with the development of Lot 2 that the on-site septic test areas be staked and protected before land alterations take place. StaflT Recommendation To approve the 2-lot Class III subdivision application of Steve and Mango Wirtjes for the property located at 3085 Watertown Road finding that all standards of the on-site septic code and RR-IB, Rural Residential zoning standards have been met except for the substandard lot width of proposed Lot 2. Approval of lot width variance is based on the following findings and hardships: A. Lots can be platted so that required lot width can be met, B. Shared lot line has been defined along the meandering drainage way that intersects property from east to west. C. Lot lines reflect functional usage area for each lot. Approval of the 2-lot subdivision is based on the following conditions: 1.Future Lot 1 is placed on notice that if alternate septic site is to be utilized that a new well must be installed on property to meet required 75 ’ separation setback. Applicants shall remove 14 ’ x 26.4 ’ addition to south side of accessory structure on proposed Lot 1. Remaining structure at 18.2 x 34.5 shall remain at a total 627.9 s.f. area. Removal of the addition must be completed prior to final plat approval. ------- Zoning File ^1821 May 10, 1993 Page 5 Private driveway outlet can be reduced in width to 25’ as it approaches accessory structure on Lot 1. Private driveway shall be reinstalled within driveway outlet and special care should be given to minimize impact upon existing development to east. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 10’ wide drainage and utility easement shall be required along all perimeter property lines except for the west lot line where drainage way must be shown as a 20’ wide drainage easement. As drainage easement extends south and east through Lot 1, the 10’ width drainage and utility easement shall continue along the perimeter of the west lot line. Upon Council approval of preliminary plat, the plat shall be referred to the City Assessor for the determination of the fair market value of the property so that a park dedication fee can be determined at 8% of the fair market value. Dedication of 33’ of right-of-way for Watertown Road. Prior to any land alterations for development of proposed Lot 2, applicants shall be responsible for staking principal and alternate septic test sites. Applicants’ engineer shall provide the necessary hydraulic information to support sizing of culvert. j I.J I arrfininrB A i V •' * TIOl ■N •'.1 CITY OP ORONO - SUBDIVISION AFPU( ^ PROPERTY LOCATION T# ■ - J 3oF6~' Li )4r<^rat8 ‘^j \ : ^ r * 4 •• rirv rr nznun 1. J » I Cl Wl^CITC FifiAt^Ct OFFICE i w w'C*^V*C wv site Address OJ ££.V 330. OCrurrr 7i •'T/'j t)': Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^ ^^<i.__~Iiin*tl\ LOOmO3S0 cool FOl 714: Please check one — Property y abstract or ____ torrens? 04/21/ Attach legal description to application APPLICANT ‘ Name LJ />t T^c Phone (home) Phono (work)_______ Address: /D/iyg/*r^oxO City; 0*XCwCs Zip; «ry5ir<^ ONNER (if different than applicant) Name uLtMn^u > Phone (home) Phone (work) 7 Address; LJ'tr<»^rtXMiM /L^ City; (attach list it more than one) Zip:_££2^ m EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels / Development Size iT. I Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)Residential; no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ __ Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Site«i;Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density; Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Units per Acres Sq Feet Cry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION Lc: Completed Application Form 2\ Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 4. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, Covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III)$200.00 Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) Preliminary Review (Class III & all non-residential) 300.00 300.00-)^ 325.00 + 25.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 175.00 Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Application 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Date 7 Owner's Signature Date / .-Xa> <93 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please m£dce arrangejnents to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building s Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. i z - * • » L* I RUT4 DATE 10/18/09DATCII 003PROP ADDR cmtR r<AML TAXPAYER rMME/AOOR PROP ADDR 0I9IER NAItE TAXPAYER riAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OtffrER flAUE TAXPAYER riAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OIIMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/APDR PROP ADDR OtiNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OIIMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR liEN IEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0I4NERS LIST30 O^f-117-23 21 000102905 I4ATERT0MN RO DONALD T TROMDRIDGE ET AL DONALD A MARGARET TROKORIDGE 2905 S liATERTONN RD L0I:G lake MN 55356 30 0^-117-23 22 0010 00105 CYGNET PL 6 J EHALT ETAL GREGORY J EIIALT 105 CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE I IN 55356 30 06-117-23 22 0016 00060 CYGNET PL RTttwmr J buHLAP t a M:AII MUmn VoAOia, turner' 60 CYGJIET PLACE LOMG LAKE IITJ 55356 30 0<i-i:7-23 22 0021 00190 CYGNET PL HARQUETTE DWAL OF NPLS N A RONALD A A ROOIN A IIOHRMAt4 190 CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE I IN 55356 30 OA-117-23 22 002A 00020 CYGNET PL H J « M H PAIAiSKA HAROLD J/flARGARET M PANUSKA 20 CYGNET PL L0t4G LAKE MN 55356 3985 30 04-117-23 24 0006 BARBARA K COrFIN BARBARA K COFFIN 3025 MATCRTOIM RO LO.X LAKE MN 55356 mmg:. 30 04-117-23 22 0008 00065 CYGNET PL DIANE L KOEPKE DIANE L KOEPKE 65 CYGNET PLACE LOt46 LAKE LM 55356 38 04-117-23 22 0011 00135 CYGNET PL tt g-OECKERP A K & ULLKrm) HOUTC e-WeWBRO £i, f / 135 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE tt4 55356 * 3ft 04-117-23 22 0017 00000 CYGtlET PL P A A VITKO PAUL A A ANI L VITKO 00 CYGrJET PLACE LOrTG LAKE 424 55356 38 04-117-23 22 0022 00100 CYGNET PL VIL OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO 38 04-117-23 22 0027 03005 HATERTOSIN RO S P MIRTJES A M H HIRTJES SIC if. A MARGO M MIRTJES >"« ff AT^RT044N RO LO. MN 55356 38 33-110-23 32 0001 03140 HATERTOM44 RO DORSET DEVELOPMENT II4C DORSET OEVELOPMEI4T INC 5125 FOX ST LOI4G LAKE MN 55356 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 530 04-117-25 22 000900085 CYGNET PL G J EPALT ETAL GREGOR'’ J EIIALT 105 CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 04-117-23 ?2 0012 00145 CYGNET PL A E BLOEtlENOAAL ETAL ARTHUR E DLOENENOAAL . Rf i HUH L UU / V PI LONG LAKE MN BLlBbfff o 38 04-117-23 22 0020 00160 LVGt4ET PL JAICO M eAt»WM» JAME9 M CAHPIOM 160 CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE 4»4 55356 errt tH 38 04-i 17-23 22 0023 ;jOnO CYGflET PL PAriaCIA A HARDEN TURGARET 0 ROSSING 130 CYGNET PL LOt46 LAKE 404 55356 % 38 04-117-23 22 0028 03045 41ATERT0IIN RD BRUCE C A KATHRYN S HALL BRUCE C A KATHRYN S HALL 3045 HArERT0ta4 RO ORONO 4«4 55356 38 33-116-23 33 0001 03020 I4ATERTOI94 RO R A STUmS ETAL R A STU::BS 3020 HA F.RTONN RD LONG LAl.E 104 55356 4- OJA .. . . . . . . .aA RUN DATE 10/1. /89 -Q OATCH 005 HEKNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORItATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHt«RS LIST REPORT NO. PI455A01 PAGE 6 PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR ■ 1H• V.. \i ■ y.., f ■ ■■■■ ■ ■■ ■■ ■J - j 1 ■ -:Ji 38 33-118-23 34 0006 00055 NEAR LA N NEAR ENTERPRISES PARTNERSHIP NEAR EtUERPRISES PARTNERSHIP C/0 NILLIAH N NEAR P 0 COX 245 LONG LAKE MN 55356 r:1 TOTAL BATCH 003 00019 I.:-* i * V .*• % •• I CERTIFY THAT, THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEUIEPIN COUtITY OEPARTMENT^OF PROPERTY JA.XATION, TO IHtf BEST OF HY KNONLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATI 17 9 * • .-.-ziiLv: rzrrrjnirn ******! *»^'** 1 hoo.iv y 3 -i 3? Rosene AnderllkA |\| Associates Engineers A Architects Oro G Pi feDf'T W tCMPf • JCitdn c An-f. < p» V|/v,n SCMe i Tu'n*.', Pi c t%-> i Cock, pi E Neyti f f S. 5t*‘urc'-l ?f, Si^UA M {DtmA. C •2#njo^ CoAiwimc n;v^'3 a JCf T ^ C-C's;p. »r w F=i«* C) icccfi fcr-eA C tuiwe. A •rry A louoon, Pf Mja a .'<inior. PE. Vic»‘j?* T Ejcftn'inh. Pf ’Setf « Pf 7’p;-aiP P^se»!cr. A iA Oo**#«o C Ai.'jj'ci P! Tncmtt I. An^^i pp VjT'^Pt Pf H P P£. Fr ’3 J Py'*? ^5 A;^fl V «r; A /C # ;t/. >:•'!;«, p£ McrtwC '^r*c^. P£ .*a-#i f Vianc Pi »rry o Pr-jic*' P?. Kr-pfci P Ar-f.j*«^ »r Va.1[ t EcP|. P£. V*'H A. 5ea P£ 3J/V VU .Mor PA Pf Carp* i £^;prcA p£ PCK icr.*-«. Pf. J Pf O Warj. Pf V fs ft .E^'ier. Pf : P^^'PQ’4,^ V. CiTn L. ’A't.^en. P5 Cp7 C fi r Sea A5«ff. F| iCPth E PE JI J Itv.L PS SM<^ a GuKa'san PI. C#c*c Oatp* pf Crirfi A. E^njcn Leo V Pawt«icy ^*anan M, Coon ;a»ne» F Srg«ihj/t9c May 7, 1993 Ms. Jeanne A. Natousth Building and Zoning AdministratorCity of Orono Poet office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minneaota S5323 Re: Wirtjea Lot Division File No. 139-1821 Dear Jeanne, Me ^pve reviewed the proposed property division for Steve Wirtjes in the Northwest Quarter of section 4, located on the south side of Hate^own Road, The division is acceptable from an engineering standpoint. Drainage and utility easements should be provided 10 feet wide along the right-of-way for Watertown Road, 5 feet wide along the easterly and westerly property lines for each lot, and 5 feet wide along the south line of Lot 2. The existing driveway should be relocated within outlet A, as it is proposed to function as a common access for both lots. The extension <iJ^iveway to serve Lot 2 will require a culvert crossing at the existing drainage ditch. The size of the culvert should be designed by an engineer based on the tributary area, so that the upstream storage is not increased. Rlaase contact me at this office if you have any questions, fours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. I !> 7 To: From: Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Stephen WecKman, On-Site Systems Manager May 11, 1993 Subdivision <1^1821, Steven Wirtjes - Septic Review Soil testing and system design was submitted for this two-lot subdivision in 1989. Lot 1 contains a home which is connected to a conforming septic system with an alternate site available for a 5-bedroom home. Lot 2 has approved soil testing and system design for a 4- bedroom home. The site evaluator, Steven Schirmers, will be reviewing the site to verify that the sites are suitable for a 5-bedroom home. Although Lot 1 has suitable existing and alternate drainfield sites, the poor placement of the well has resulted in sites which do not meet the City’s required 75 ’ well setback. The existing drainfield site is 50 ’ from the well with the alternate site encroaching within 35 ’ of the well. As the State of Minnesota requires that a minimum 50 ’ setback be maintained from the well to a drainfield, staff will allow well in its current location. However, at the time the alternate drainfield site is required for use, the well must be abandoned and located at least 75 ’ from the septic system. Staff will recommend approval of the septic system siting as proposed, provided the above condition is met. Also, both primary and alternate drainfield sites on Lot 2 must be fenced prior to construction. 4 I i TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator June 14, 1993 SUBJECT: /^1830 Richard Oorlog, 1058 Loma Linda Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing The applicant proposes the reconstruction of a lower 16’x26’ and the replacement of an open upper level deck at the lakeside with an enclosed dining room expansion of the kitchen at lU/i’x9’ and the remainder an open deck at 9’xl4Vi’. The new construction will involve encroachment of the lower deck within the 0-75’ setback area. An average lakeshore setback variance is needed as second story construction and lower level deck will encroach setback line. Applicant has not provided hardcover facts but the detailed survey staff confirmed at site inspection fmds extreme excesses within the 75-250 ’ setback zone and hardcover within the 0- 75 ’. The following ordinances are pertinent for the review of this application: Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Lot coverage. Total area = 9,980 s.f. Allowed = 1,497 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,896.6 s.f. or 19% Proposed = 1,896.6 s.f. or 19% No change proposed. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback, refer to Exhibit J A.Principal structure - for enclosed dining room addition, refer to average lakeshore setback of principal structures Allowed = 0 Proposed = 16’ 1.Deck replacement based on average lakeshore setback of decks on adjacent properties Allowed = 0 Existing = 10’ Proposed = 10’ B Lakeshore setback Allowed = 0 Existing = 70’ Proposed = 70’ Variance = 5 ’ or 6.6% i4'' Zoning File #1830 June 14, 1993 Page 2 C.Hardcover inventory 0-75’ setback area = 3,750 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 423 s.f. or 11.2% Proposed = 433 s.f. or 11.5% (addition of grade level stairs at 10 s.f.) 75-250’ setback area = 6,230 s.f. Allowed = 1,557.5 s.f. or 25% Existing = 5,792 s.f. or 92.9% Proposed = 5,792 s.f. or 92.9% No change proposed List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners Li:t C - Plat Map D - Adjacent Property Owners Acknowledgment Forms E - Survey F - Floor Plan G - Elevation H - Elevation from 1971 Building Permit I - Site Plan Approved with 1971 Building Permit J - Staff Sketch K - Survey of Hardcover Removals for Property Owner to West, 3/90 Variance Review Description of Request In November of 1971, a building permit was issued for the existing residence. The former owner had obtained a lot area and lot width variance in October of that year. The owner had originally applied for a setback variance for a detached garage within the street yard but withdrew the application. The existing garage structure was to meet the required 10’ side setback. In the current application, the applicant proposet' the replacement of the upper and lower decks on the lakeside of the residence. The upper level deck shall be replaced with a 9 xll'A enclosed dining room area and a 9 ’xl4«A ’ upper deck. The lower deck shall be rebuilt in its present configuration at 16 ’x26 ’ with new grade level stairs at approximately in width located in the 0-75’ setback area. A -k-ir-iiiMr-iBim-11 i Zoning File #1830 June 14, 1993 Page 3 A third of the lower deck is located within the 0-75’ setback area, review Exhibit I. According to the site plan approved with the building permit, the principal structure was located 68 ’ from the shoreline. Review Exhibit H, at that time the upper and lower decks were approved 10’ beyond the principal structure. The code did not require a 75’ setback. In fact, there was no specific lakeshore setback merely rear and front setbacks. The front and rear setback was 35’ for this specific zoning district in 1971. The majority of the replacement strucnire is located in front of the average lakeshore setback line. Staff has shown two setback lines, one for accessory structures and the other for principal structure. Review Exhibit D, note adjacent property owners have reviewed the plans and staff has received no comments or questions from adjacent neighbors. The enclosed dining room addition will have an impact on the residence to the west side. The upper and lower deck replacements will not change from the current strucmre. The applicant has not submitted a hardcover inventory although it was not very difficult for staff to determine the non-hardcover areas within the 75-250’ setback zone. The applicant may have assumed since he was not proposing any changes to hardcover that there was no need to provide a hardcover inventory. Staff has been in contact with the applicant and plans to meet with him prior to the meeting so that we may discuss possible removal of existing hardcover on the property. Mr. Oorlog will certainly remember his neighbor ’s after-the-fact variance review in 1990. Staff has enclosed a copy of the hardcover removals site plan developed during the review of that application, Exhibit K. In the case of the neighbor, he proceeded without a building permit to complete the construction of a replacement deck within the lakeshore yard and had increased the lakeward extension considerably. Staff has advised the applicant that we could not recommend any action on the application in its present form. At the time of your meeting, applicant will have developed a schedule for hardcover removals and final hardcover facts will be presented at your meeting or with your final packet submittals on the 18th. Additional Comments The access stairs located within the lakeshore protected area can easily be relocated within the 75-250’ setback area. This can be donw by relocating access stairs to west side of lower deck. Note the walkway that provides access to lakeshore yard is a shared access between the property owner to the west. The setback for the shoreline has been determined at the rip rap area. Upon your inspection of the property, Planmng Commission members are encouraged to review existing landscape improvements to determine what hardcover improvements are nonessential and could be removed with minimal impact on property. The gravel areas adjacent to the detached garage have no landscaping. The gravel area along the west side of the residence has extensive landscaping. Clearly the goal of the Planmng Commission shall be to reduce hardcover on this .229 acre parcel. III Ha Hi II ^ \#1 r.• •• •? *. 4^* :*• •ft CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION 'V V; i‘.> i \ •> 4/ Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) —, mm W mm • m mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm PROPERTY INFORMATION rrrv nc r,or,un i>r4 f * U‘l ficcrrc I jiitnitcu I iwi* i 4 • I I >* a V.'V Efi 175. C\ 175.Ci l<tCEiPT-7}ii^K YOU WOTvuV.t |W)< cr,f 7JT, fTta. I iU # V t\\/2, lac* nK/iO k.'W/ 1 L// . *> 1 i - in.1 ("Lm' TJ WlfUVI^ > Site Address_1058 Loma Linda Ave. Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) Lot 5. Loma Lin^------- Attach legal description to application if not included on required .survey. Date Property Acquired^_____________________^(month/year) I (do)(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential _ _ _other(specify) Zoning District:_ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ APPLICANT Ncune Phone (home) 612/472-6026 Richard F. Oorlog Phone (work) 612/936-2520 Address: 1058 Loma Linda Ave.City: Orono Zip:55364 OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Same Phone (work) Zip:Address:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ __ Clty:^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 20,000 Describe request in detail: Replace existing d€Ck - same size and shape VARIANCES REQUIRED ___ Lot Area ___ Setback: X Front Add enclosed space 9'x11.6' from existing deck to prdVfflA --------------------------------------------------------- Lot Width Hardcover ___^Lot Coverage Side Rear ___ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS * Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and .musual propert; i^s\)^te'r^ll:ed siSeone gets hurt. Upper deck space to beccme part of ki tchen/dinino roam so that ran seat, neonle viipn vip have rnriviPv,— fjQ additicnal hardcover required in this neoue<:t No nrivarv rtiia tn nairrtv*- to $ajth who rif1ripd-a------ Ij? 91 * f (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS , . All of the folloving information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete; 1, Completed Application Form 2^ Certified Property Owne.rs List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3^ Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4^ Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include ' hardcover calculations as required (prov: • one (1) co-' ' P'5"xll" for reoroducticn). ^ 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%'’xll"). 6. Sketches or plans of floor s elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%”xir*). 7. As an addendum to this application/ please attach a separate list of fixiy otn03T p02Tsons you wish notxfx0d of ^hxs sppXic3.txon» 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete ——the—above information has not been included* APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all inforI»^tion 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 cornet to the best^of his/her knowledge. DateApplicant's Signature ONHERS SIGNATURE , . , . a.4The owner hereby ackowledgas and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by i.ity staff/ consultants/ agents/ Commission members/ and Council members tot purposes of investiga tion and verificatiorv-gf this req^st Owner's Signature Date / ? Office of this change prior to the meeting. . * ^ -t- - RW DATE 05/1S/9Sbatch om 1 ‘-r 0^ ••■; S«HH PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 5$ 00-117-23 23 0005 01056 UMA LINOA AVE OONAID 0 EKEBEP6 A NIFE DONALD D EKEDER6 1056 LOHA LINOA AVE report no. P1435401 PACE 9 ■f. 38 08-117-23 23 0006 01058 LOMA LINOA AVE R F OORLOG I K J OORLOG , RICHARD F A KAREN J OORLOG 1058 LOMA LINOA AVE « • 38 08-117-23 23 0007 01066 LOMA LINOA AVE R F RAOIRJZ ACM RAOUNZ R08ERT F RAOUNZ 5505 UVER BLUFF CIR BLOOMINGTON HN 55437 PROP AODR Oi««R NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AODR 38 08-117-23 23 0008 01074 LOMA LINOA AVE R K MA1TS0N ETAL ROGER K MATTSON 1074 LOMA LINOA AVE NOiMO rtl. 55364 *• »♦. I*f I •I * 38 08-117-23 23 0009 01082 LOMA LINOA AVE J A H LASCHUK •lOHN LASCHUK 1082 LOMA LINOA AV hound MN 55364 PROP AOOR OK Cn NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR •// 38 08-117-23 23 0010 01090 LOMA LINOA AVE H H BOCKMANN A N L BOCKMANN HILLIAM H B0CKNAM4 1090 LOMA LINOA AVE hound MN 55364 : •4s -* k- PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 08-117-23 23 0021 ‘ ' 01119 LOMA LINOA AVE ■ H J A C J POLLARD HILLIAM J A CAROL J POLLARO 1119 LOMA LINDA AVE . i HOW® W 55364 . *• ^ _ _ _ _ ■ tyi'p ^ 38 08-117-23 23 0022 01045 LOMA LINOA AVE T 6 0STERBER6/K J OSTERBERG TIMOTHY 6/KRlSTI J OSTERBERG 1045 LOMA LINOA AVE HOUNO m 55364 .1 38 08-117-23 23 0024 01038 LOMA LINOA AVE R N SANDLER ETAL R H SANDLER 1038 LOMA LINOA LANE HOW® MN 55364 r 08-117-23 23 0025 : ♦ 004 00010 • • < •. I • , V ■ - ; ^ » f • 1 .iSah S 'STap "!.,*? OF THE HEMCPIN COUNTY OEPARI wSt OF PTOPERTY JLKIL OF. MY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF P^^J^^TION» TO BEST DAT •EPARTMENT / MW/fi . ■ 'iA:: • Mv ' • .'i!;• :•* n A .h.H. . I 4; /. r *. ^ ' ' ^ ►* V •. V ♦ ^ «,;...V • ' i : • . r \s ? •* " \7/ \ •) O \ r *. . . “. ••. . . *• • *.. •\ -»s»-'- ‘?'j r;wx^.n?»>r..--.-Y.''^iiii • "■ ** •*.\ . • • V •-'. r:->V-- ; \ \ .A * * »;t //.V/** ^ f. . - ‘ • \ •* \ \ \ >••••••< T/’v v^’ ^ • . •»>•! n *4 *"■•.•'; •*-'••'. J. * rr *• •*»'•..'T,* -•• ■ '• * • *.'> '-•^f y' r ' -• s U" ■ •“*••'-. •* • •* ..'V.* • “V .•• • X •.« ..X .-f “ V- •>•.; %' ■ •••,*' ■•. :•» ,, • 4 , > > !*• ♦—-af • f * 14*^v w* .*4' ^4/ 4 ••• • V J < 9 LOMA M OOC NO _\\0' I* ^ •Adjacent Property Owners- Acknowledgement Form 0 I (we)('.r /iU' >-/r / /" /)■ ' V ^ [print name(s)][print address] ^ (-he olans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the reviewed the plans f also referred to as Land Use jrty located at // . / (/<■ ; -ave roper pplication No. ^ 4-hn4- -in ovecutinq this acknowledgement, I (we) am / ‘r®’.ked W dTclar^^approval or disapproval of the property or use are) not asked " City Council that I (we) am (are) aware o. ":”:“oLrent°;\“ns'a°nd\^^^^^^^ P-posed neighhor-s project or use aquires Council approval. / ' ?Xoperty Owner <■/ I w i ^ ' Date I roperty Owner Date ^ii**************** I (we) / }■ ^ Ad/'g. [print n2une(s)] of //l [print address] ave reviewed the plans ^r the P"P°J®‘^ Use roperty located at pplication No 1 (we) understand that in executing this^ackno«l|d|-^^^^^^^^^^ ire) not asked to declare “approval or -P^that I (we) am (are) aware of squires Council approval. « -Mi ‘■’roperty Owner Date / nit’-is -jT.'l roperty Owner Jf jL Date % ^ ‘,*V JJ . r*■? fc.V in th0 irsviGW of If you have any information that may assis ^ the Building & ,is Land use Application, Please submit your c=-e"“^^ ining Office at least 10 days prior to the .checuxe i Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we)Li-^c.La. (print name{s)][print address] ^ for the proposed imorovenent or proposed use of the •opertVTocated at -s.--.:., referred to as Land Use (plication No T understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am r.l norisk^rto declare approval or disapproval of the property or use ^ , . confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware Oi. : “:rrovemVi°^ that tL proposed neighbor's project or use (]uires Council appro^^l. (we) 'Tiy [print n2une(s)][print address] i'- v'of the nd Use undetaiand that in executing this eetao«1^9*~«^ vetSentlfeians. and that the proposed neighbor s proje “ "jSSa^pioval. ■ i: -Vs-j cL . m i • (C 4V » 'A' 1^i ' * perty"^ner A /g- f-3 Date 7 »^\L 3 U ■ '* ^ ..V »i i '■WJiL perty Owner Date * ♦•Ho c 1 tv in the review of If you have any information that may assis . the Building s ,s Land use Application, please submit counts t^he S ing Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting 1 jV*V* nV*.T • * % » *^ •Adjacent Property Owners* Acknowledgesient Form I (we) ll^chirl" I ‘ . [ print name (s) ] . • -> 6 1 (print address] . ^ r.lans for the prooosed improvement or proposed use of the ^^Ipe^ryTocafed referred to as Laod Use Application No T f„»l understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am I nit isked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use tS:i:rr=veren; plans tL proposed neighbor's proieot or use requires Council approval. ;Prbperty Owner / Date I (we) (print name (s) ][print address] V-^-' . , «ians for the proposed improvement or proposed use of tne et“ »1®° referred to as Land Use CTl Mo^ " • ^ I, . iil i. ' . • ii.'"«j -fr. <a-if«aeiitina this acknowledgement, I (we) am'“I (we) understand that in executing ^ ^ ,jse I *w.) am (a«) aware of “• ',T"' ““r--,"”S' “ - p *kL % - .0 •pi «•, » '. . fc.. Property Owner • a. +*v in the review of If you have any information that may . to the Building & s Land ose Application, please submxt “““"^“"etinrdate. ing Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting y- L eftAftiil.. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY # 1 ,e oOO <ftrr £»itr WHir LZGAL PESCHiPVOH LOT X, LOMjt UHPA, HeMMiTriAf C«Vt)X(, mtA>A/0f0T^, kKKA t^totsu. rr r'=ZQ o l/fi// pivfjp \ \ KIM A. REAUME REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR 6I2- 542-9559 4I3 HOPKINS CROSSROAD MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA SS343 BOOK 16 PAGE 7 PROJECT NO.SHEET REVISIONS ; HEHF.Hi CEPTiFY Tll.^T rn!." . PL\M, OR REPORT WAS PREi.ARF.O BY ')E OB UNDER .‘•lY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I A.M A DUUY RECISTERE!) '.AND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. DATE PEG. NO. 19522 vr u-„. :'|»'(V ;-?«4V.«-;>^j!'- • « A*if ,** .<^■ l4M\n & -•%-5£.(t..r.,.]l“ '.^'' z iBIKMM 3d‘ r.Mi In-.• * • •i •.'..':■ j-‘'’*v^'•:. f.■ <■*■ -U^' •• 4 »- •/?srA«fW o«>/*jf ■ * • * • • .* % t ^ ^ S«.c.<V'ON '^’.iuo uoA f ;(i'6+;'<^ * .' • • 1 : ; I » ! I i M 1 I • * i ! >; i i I I I’! I ! ' 1 ! ' 1 •• • I ‘ ‘I » ! I ’I ! i .i &«rr ! i i » ; I I •Ml 1 , . ! : i i • I I ! I ■ ■' ■ i * !l!i!! I ^tii izrsf: 4«^4 i ! I I ! » : ; I • . :‘-| ! I « I:I i.i 4 4 I I ; i I • » • • ! I I • j J , ; i • I I ! i f i I ^ ‘ i 1 : : I • i ! ! • ; I * I • I1 • I i ’ i !i • I ! I * M MlI I ‘ ; • i I I I *I I . I ! I i •1(1 ‘ ! 1.I I I • » f : IfI Mil - » • : ^ * • . . ..-.v.^^.si.-^r *1• • ^-*:■ ■•■P%• *' ;% \D V — .i__ 5 i:*v- • 3 ✓' I » « 1, ' '. i I • ! ^ i I t • . . ,f ! f ; ® i • 1 ! 1 * ( i 1 •i 1 1 •4 \ • 1*« ■i,il 1 • • • -•• ► •• «>• i . i • • • ' ! i . 1• • • >— :•• • * ••• • «•• •*■“• jC jIi ........ * i! rsiiniinifa^’u L—./IIMIII II I ■;'i s ■ vl >. ► * * y ^ X.** , ▼ ^ • f 7^* ^ 2> ^ I 4 ^ sn BAU zone n* . 250• HARO COVER IN ZOfll 3458 sq. ft. TOTAL PROPERTI IN ZONE 69% sq. ft. TH S PROPOSPn CHANGE 49.47X (AS PICTURED BELOW) PRESENT COHDITION SET BACK ZONE 75* - ?50* HARO COVER IN ZONE 4065 sq. ft. total PROPERTY IN ZONE 69% sq. ft. 69.6X SET BACK ZCNE 0-75* HARD COVIR IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONE TmS PROPOSED CHANGE (AS riCIURED BELOW) SET BACK ZONE 0-75* H*on COVER IN ZONE TUIA l rROPERTY IN ZONE S.: 42 i; 3750 sq; 1.121 248 sq. ft 3750 sq. ft 6.611 CFRTIfICATE or SURVEY FOR fiOniR! f. R«r»UHZ 3 TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabiisth. Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:June 14, 1993 SUBJECT: Edward Engler, 3450 Birch Lane - Variance - Public Hearing The applicant proposes a 12’x20’ addition to the lakeside of the existing residence to be placed over an existing concrete patio area and a 16’x24* addition to the side meeting the required side setback of 10’. The lakeside addition will be located in front of the average lakeshore setback line as well as a small portion of the proposed side addition. The applicant proposes removal of existing nonstructural improvements to offset strucmral expansions. The improvements result in an excess of .06% strucmral coverage. Hardcover excesses exist within the 75-250 ’ setback and 4.68% hardcover exists within the 0-75 ’ setback area. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Strucmral coverage Total lot area = 21,630 s.f. Allowed = 3.244.5 s.f. or 15% Existing = 2,748 s.f. or 12.7% Proposed - 3,383 s.f. or 15.6% Variance = .06% Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback, review Exhibit L Staff has located the approximate locations of the residences on adjacent properties. The lakeside addition is located completely in front of an average lakeshore setl ack line and a small portion of the side addition encroaches the averace lakeshore setback. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Review of hardcover A.0-75 ’ setback area = 7,540 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 353 s.f. or 4.68% Proposed = 221 s.f. or 2.93% B.75-250 ’ setback area = 14,090 s.f. Allowed = 3,522.5 s.f. or 25% Existing = 6,185 s.f. or 43.89% Proposed — 6.119 s.f. or 43.43% Zoning File »?1831 June 14. 1993 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant ’s Addendum C - Propert> Owners List D - Plat Map E - Neighbor’s Acknowledgment Form F - Lakeside Elevation G - Proposed Floor Plan H - Existing Floor Plan I - Survey J - Hardcover Fact Sheets K - Olson Letter 9/6/81 L - Staff Sketch Description of Request Applicant proposes the installation of a 12’x20’ lakeside addition to be placed over an existing patio. Portions of the existing patio are located within the 0-75 ’ setback and shall be removed. Some 72 s.f. of existing landscape area underlain with plastic shall be removed. The entire addition shall be located in front of the average lakeshore setback line. The house to the immediate west receives no impact because the existing residence is located in front of the proposed addition. The house on the east side is shielded by year around arborvitae/evergreen plantings providing a solid screening from adjacent residence structures. The 16 x20 side addition shall be 16 ’ from the east side lot line easily meeting the 10 ’ side setback. Applicant has proposed removal of 701 s.f. of nonsmictural hardcover and the addition of 635 s.f. of structural hardcover. There is an increase of 2.9% structural coverage on the property. The total coverage at 15.6% requires approval of a .06% variance. The original structure was built prior to 1956. A building permit was issued for the 40 ’x24’ garage in 1981. Based on 1981 reviews, the City did not require hardcover inventory and structure’s conformity was reaffirmed in a letter to an adjacent resident advising that the detached struemre met all required zoning regulations. Review Exhibit K. Statement of Hardship Applicant notes the following hardship: need to expand the existing single story structure for growing family. It is doubrfiil that a struemre of that age could support a second story. Applicant also notes that extensive driveway area in front of garage serves as a mrnaround for City snow plows. Members will remember limitations of Birch Lane from the Liljequist review 9 ii. 3 1% Zoning File n<1831 June 14, 1993 Paee 3 of last month. The pa' cd area at end of roadway is not loca . in road rightist-way but on applicant's propeny. Review the plat map. Exhibit D. Note tl. road right-of-way ends right at the west lot line of applicant’s property. The City snow plows turnaround and store snow on applicant 5 property. Review Exhibit I and the plat map. please note that the car parked in front of aarage is not parked at applicant's propeny but at propeny owner ’s to immediate south. Issues for Consideration 1. Should stnicmral impro'einents be reduced so that 15% lot coverage i.s not e.xcceded? 3. Some 600 s.f. of landscape area underlain with plastic exists within the 75-250 ’ setback, refer to Exhibit L. Should additional areas be removed? Applicant ha.s shown a reduction over existing. Does the fact that the applicant’.s property provides a turnaround and storage area for snow removal have an impact on your determinations and fmal recommendat ion? CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION r* g 3 Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50,00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (nc change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) rt o o rrrv nz-nkin I I k.*i nczrrc i * Vf ‘ A CWVi* VV VV'V ,>f “TV PROPERTY INFORMATION 1 TT ,• X » • V site Address ~5 0 /o / /<? c l-J Ar 'J Property Identif, Number (P.I.D.) H27^150 CCCl Poi T^'H‘ 05/24/ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired .~'c-/>Jcr (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property; residential _ _ _other(specify) Zoning District:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT Phone (home) Name _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (vor)c) 3 V > ~ "7 S 9-^ Address: 0 / .>/ . f/ t~_ _ City; y 2-aT Zip: *5 ^ ^ OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (wor)c) Address:City;Zip; DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail; VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setbaclc;Front Side Rear Average LaJceshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements;_ _ _ _ _ (attac^ additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SDBMITTA1*S All of the following infonnaticn must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for your application to t>e considered complete; 1._ _Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3, _P3at Map (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include4. C hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8Js'*xll" for reproduction). Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes ^in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll"). 6, S)cetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll"). 7, _As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8, __Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this applica^on, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct /to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature^Date ONMERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowieuges 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 tftLs—truest. / Owner's Signature v-/Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Cc.mm^ssion Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all echtd:iled ]^ctview meetings of the Planning Commission and Counci l. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE OS/lUn HENNtPlN COUNTY PftOPIRrY PJOTHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWERS LISTBATCH 008PROP AOOR »MER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SO 00-117-25 A2 0005 05450 NORTH SHORE OR LUCILLE H OFTERHAN TRUSTEE LUCILLE M OFFERMAN TRUSTEE Ib44 NORTH FARM RO LONG LAKE m 55554 PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 50 00-117-25 45 0012 0S<»70 NORTH SHORE DR HAROLD J BROUELLETTE HAROLU J BROUELLETTE 5470 NORTH SHORE OR NAYZATA MN 55591 PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 50 00-117-25 45 0020 05442 NORTH SHORE DR CERALO J RAY ETAL GERALD J RAY 5442 NORTH SHORE DR HAYZATA Tt4 55591 PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 50 00-117-25 *45 0025 05450 BIRCH LA E R EN6IER A B ENGLER EOHARO R A TOfATlF ENGLER 5450 BIRCH LA HAYZATA MN 55591 PROP AOOR OM«R NAME TAW»AYER NAHE/AOOR 50 00-117-25 45 0024 05440 440RTH SHORE DR JOHN G iELSON ETAL JOHN NELSON 5440 NO SHORE OR HAYZATA HN 55591 . . ♦ • t « . » A i ‘ * I 50 00-117-25 45 000105470 wIRCH LA REX EUGENE BOLLINGER JR REX EUGENE BOLLINGER JR 5470 BIRCH LA HAYZATA HN 55591 50 00-117-25 45 0015 05400 NORTH SHORE OR BRUCE A NUSBAtJH BRUCE A NUSOAUt 5400 NORTH SHORE DR HAYZATA m 55591 50 00-117-25 45 0021 05450 NORTH SHORE OR HILLIAH C OODEN HILLIAH C OODEN 5450 NO SHORE DR HAYZATA 55591 50 00-117-25 45 0024 05<*40 NORTH SHORE DR JAM ERLER JAMES A MARY ERLER 5440 NORTH SHORE DR HAYZATA MN 55591 58 00-117-25 45 0027 05440 BIRCH LA R HILLIAH TOITARO ETAL R HILLIAH TOHARO 5460 BIRCH LA HAYZATA HN 55591 «' ff51i;1’ *!• V i* r. 4 r REPORT NO. P1455401 PACE 2158 08-117-25 45 0002 05490 BIRCH LA E LILJEQUIST I S LILJEQUIST ERIC J A SMELLY R LILJEQUIST 5490 BIRCH LA NAY^\TA Ft4 55591 50 08-117-25 45 0019 05440 NORTH SHORE DR DAVID J LINDBERG DAVID J LINOBERG 5440 NORTH SWIRE OR NAYZATA HN 55591 50 Oe-117-25 45 0022 05444 NORTH SHORE DR HILLIAH D ROBINSON • N 0 ROBINSON 5444 NORTH SHORE OR HAYZATA HN 55591 \ 58 08-117-25 45 0025 05450 NORTH SHORE OR P E BOMUN ABO BLAOER PAUL B0F41AN/BARBARA D BLADER 5458 NORTH SHORE OR NAYZATA m 55391 ) / * TOTAL BATCH 006 000 W JI j * •• i w ‘ ;.v'v A ;* i ! L*/r* . • v.i' f « ‘%. i4f 4 r - t • 4* • J) 3 O’ 1 » ». • . ♦ RUN DATE 05/ll/n BATCH 008 ‘4 I I• # « I'’5i'- MENNCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OFt^RS LIST • • •‘i U»REPORT NO. PIASS^OX Pt^ ZZf. Vn‘*# '• C ' v:‘ •' "t'f •' ^ % I »' •V u ^ . •' < •> T if w • ' f . if’-M.v?-» ; . • •. . .. • I • * »■ •I ' i* f 4 <.: V- V' * • * i 'A ,' - *,•^1 4 * ■ 'i . .. . • < ;• •^ '• It: n ■ ■■!' . t *t , ^ • i .» •• • * % • * 1 » # • • t «* ♦*' . f • • « • \t •V • . i • i k-- I CERnr^ THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE *N0 TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIa DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNONLED6E AND BELIEF., DATE 9 K • •V- • \ I ■I •. i ■ f‘ j I *• p '• ‘ s .“i 4.•K.. * ■ • V ■ ■!.1» Q w I' r. I I tj Adjacent Property Owners* Acknowledgement Form [print address]I (we) [print name(s)] have reviewed the plats for the proposed improver,ent or proposed use of the ^ ^ ^ A\AcH ( also referred to as Land Useproperty located at 07J u rt—— --------- Application No I (we) understar.d that in executing this (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval o- the prop . y ^ (are) no ritv Council that I (we) am (are) aware Oi.but merelv to confirm for the Cit/ council ' om-iect or use the ifprovecent plans and that the proposed neighbor s project requires Council approval. I (we) *f /) ^ ^ '•/ of syy-t l~ir,r,,-tyh? [print address][print name(s)]/ - r^^Ans for the crocosed imorovement or proposed use of thehave revieweo the plans for the pr p . referred to as Land Use property located at V <C* ,/?^ ^ M- - Application No I (we) understand that in executing this (are) n^ asked tc declare-apprcval cr te) of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor s project requires Council approval. Slxf9^ Date If you have any information that may assist the ff -'i i «! ' ‘ M- ■ s u i »j r * I .:i- ''^ i'l f '4 • \^X n rii 'r >\ / lO' ROUGH SAlilK CEDAR LAP SIDING, IT^P) LAKE SIDE ELEVATION */« 4 - ui ,n —I in OUlu! iu< y-rcX zUrf • 0^2 ! Q>- o5r<tlJ(<>3 r O O i_ 5> tti?f _i UJ lus: UJ _ y <>-< u< J U)X SHEET 1 •--v: ; V r. .V TO LAKE Q 3 il'-\ C r"i *^4 ’I 8 Vv #wti'- o o i I CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY i^OR ED ENGLER IN LOT 18. LYOIARD'S PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA '■ -T. ’ Lake Minnetonka ^*-'5 * ExUtlnq L mto I Doacriptloft ■hovn on tlM plat pf Mid "LvdlaM«ii **"•. •£“« SiSS oi Iron Mfkor Bearings shown sr# bss#d on an assaaMd 4%Em • B«ie Insuf iW« plftf LyJtarJ% firk” V/ y IVSK.SIM** I «AMS m *y V. RlVIMli^luir iTMaii ik*i (s)S’/t fi ‘.... t»». ■ *. ’ , t,t • 1^' C> ?“Corr:i.\ k Gronberg , l\c I . . s.. V,. . ,•. I ,1. . I. I ■ n li I hi i« I't .ttliU ih iMhr» Mmi I h.-' ptipjiiilhi ifn-if uihKi mi iImiiI vupf w«*«. <nj IhjI I «midulv frjiKlrfrKnil tngh-ytf jivJ LinJSui>r\ur unJrt iSf UwA i4 Ihr SlJlr id MinnrvO KUik h (mfiN fs MmnmiU I arnM* Nwmhn <AU !-• Id ruTf 3-»9-‘»S AO Nil 97 BS .i k n > HP.RDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SE-3ACK zone: (CIRCLE ONE) (o^TSj) 75-250' 250-500' 5GQ-1CC0' Existing Haroccver in Zone A. H ouse ZZ.b X 5.0 \ - //V S.F. LENGTH• •• WIDTH « X ^ « • • • S.F# % ♦• A'^z/w A /icuj^ 5».X 5.7 1 1u11• i S.F. ••1X••• S.F. • X » ■• • • •• • a S.F. * • *. • 3. Garage • _ X •• a S.F. • • • t r* • • c. D riveway _ X • •a S.F. ' - X a •• • • S.F.• * % • .# • D. Sidewalk •_ X •• • a» • mm w 9 i 9 S.F. _ X • B S.F, •• • • • • 20. /_ X y. o =S.F. E. ^ATIO/ . .. D eck • • •. • . X • • • • m ••• • • • »S.F. F.Landscape ;■ 2V '. X 3. o • • = • 7^S.F. areas underlain 3Y . X •a S.Fi PLASTIC-------------- • • SHEETING ' ’ •' . X • • 10 W V • V • . • .. S.Fi fttcn u.yu, //. V ;v X o. €7- '2 . » ' 53 . S.F. Q. O ther ‘•4 r Of) « 5vO C ! • Cv ^BEZSajL S.F. S.F.Total H ardcover in Zone - ____________ Totai . PROfeRTY Area m ZoNt • ~7 S VO ± %,p 7S Vo X 100 -3 S3 :4-L3 % co*^i^ t T"r 2) /T«(K / ^cAT'-.C ~ 72 OjAyC. A/r,a X 3S3-/SZ - 22/ -r 7SVO • 2.?3 mm •* f /JZ i 1 -k. V ^ I ■ I irf l"~*r "■ I— KfT *1 lii> I ti -k. k. I. y^m'4 d -^iiw^n rt««lM»'k ■■ a.* M *k *1^ ^.kM iiiTf [ ■! ■■4itln i l*~ii i >i >■ 'h rtill'll !■ I hM ii / .0 u HARDCOVE R CALCULI!ION 1 K-RKSHEET s £t:ack zcne : (circle one ) 0- Existing 'Hardcover in Zone -75' (75-2501) 250-500' 500- A,■ House 5'/. o X 7 “ -73 «• • LENGTH ^.3 X WIDTH A3 «• ■ . • /o,/X . y. ? •' Z?.€X • • /9,95 • • V9/ • - X • ca • • •• • 3. • •• Garage ?C> \ € • X a 99/ C. • * Driveway • •X •• • C4jUC. 440 X m 7 • 0.. • \ • Sidewalk • -• •% X •7y2- • . X ’ • • m • • . • « • • • X • a • • E.>TI0/ Deck • • •• • • • X •• • • F.Landscape • -• •X • •?so AREAS UNDERLAIN BY • .X • • •• m 1 PLASTIC-------- SHEETING /</<■«. cwcti m * • • «t *9 • « • X • • • • < • • X • . • 5• A~£^CTr4uyi: G. Other •X •a < S.F. S.F. S.F S. F» S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. • • • S.F. J /S’? 7 t I i C-> \K I S‘//FS S.F.Total H ardcover in Zone - ____ Totau Property A rea m Zone - 9.:? »,p, B ri_/^l£i£— X 100 - <y ^ - %SjLSS-^'^ • ^ -m* • ••• • • 4^0 A<U - .2 V/ ~ 377 .•• . (.Mji .V'AA = ZCO' ^i5 -7^/.= ^,f/v,^i/r' -27/v/ .r 7S.73'7a ------------------------------------------------------------- f /J5 /J.^v.-7(7/ t ■ ■“" (i 7 . May 24, 1993 V :i ij f• •y y JiL The City of Orono Orono, MN RE:Variance for Mr. & Mrs. Ed Engler 3450 Birch Lane Wayzata, MN 55391 To Whom It May Concern; We are requesting this variance for the following reasons: We are growing out of the house. We need the additional space because of the increase in size of our feunily. We have looked at going up, but it is financially prohibitive. In addition, we are not sur^ the existing structure could support it. We also feel, that because the City snowplows need our drivewe.y to turn around in and use it to store snow in, that we shou'd be granted this variance. We feel that it is unfair to isk us to give up hardcover, when our family needs it, in frder to provide a turnaround for the public. -——“^~ *'*1- .- >-» v^v . .i-»r^^« ; ^-Uv«-’ it4*ur^a -7 : ■' ^ -iCITY of OROX( I l•••l tillH.> lfc.» 11^, V.ui*M.m..^| , «... »tn thr \„nh Sh„^ „f Ukr Minntlunkm Sopteaber 16, 1981 Mr. Konton Carlson 3498 North Shore Drive Wsyzata, MN 55391 Moi 3450 Birch Lane — Conplaint Ooar Mr. Carlsoni e»Pl«int iMUc sL-^ireSjyM'ySs ?:f2: r.22nix XJxir* •“• th. zoning cod.. I siv. irsii! r.gul.tlon. of 2:':.2r“ i2*}.roJ"S“i“L*r““ SS?22i‘2"if Sir,2;ir322? '•pi««~»t'of*si 2Ji'h5* “?rSS2r* J S';X2?hi2 “5l2'JoS*;i.‘‘J*5 ‘~’'“'' “ooo^hf ood .I«.. nmoff.•ff.eti!?Xi;jbo?i? SX.2J iss.j: '"^? »“*•"*»»" 4IIii»y i«proM»2. bScSirofl 24SSoSSo5!w!SrnSiX.‘'*'** ••4> • . 4\»* . s «• !*• auuirw: s/uwMi. 4m Ml 4kUIM^i AIMIMSTRATIO^ S nNAMCt - 411-llM rttuciKMas - 4mu« K«nton CArlion Pago 2 ity riannor •,v:--i. .... . ;'-.r.:x?.,: , > -.. .4 Mr. Carlson* at X said to you yottorday* ycur solution is to requott and initiate a stom-sowor/drainaqo i;iprovea«nt project Only in this way can the City help you solve the neighborhood flooding. A proper engineering review is required* followed by any necessary physical construction or alteration. The cost of this iaprovenent would be assessed to all the properties contributing to the runoff* not just those affected by the flooding. Please understand* this is not a way for ma or the City to dodge any responsibility. A formal Improveoent project is the only aechanisa we have for he.lplng to correct the probi know if and when you wish to get thi* underway. Walter R. Benson Jolm R. Gerhardson City Council Paul Xeapf . t --•it . e ^ ^ * » 4 •0^ yU X t-J 6 _________i_ 1 1 t1 1 1 ! •r 1 */I ■■■■. 4 u TO:Planning Commission Mt*mbers Ron Moorsc. City Adn'inisirator FROM:Michael P. Gaffron. Asst. Planning St Zoning Administrator DATE:June 16, 1993 SUB.IECT: #1832, Scott A. Mabusth, 740 North Brown Road - Variance - Public Hearing List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Survey E - Statement of Hardships F - Sketch of Proposed Shed Location G - Topiagraphic Map H - Picture of Shed to be Moved In Pertinent Code Section Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D). No . . . accessory building shall be located nearer the front or street lot line than the principal building on that lot . . . Pertinent Facts • Setback from street to existing house: 162.1’ • Setback from street to«existing shed; 148’ • Setback from street to proposed shed; 146’ Discussion The applicant proposes to replace an existing 8’xl6’ shed with a 10 xl6 shed. The location slightly nearer the street than die residence requires a variance. Please review the applicant ’s statement of hardships. Applicant indicates that topography to the rear of the residence is steep. The obvious flat area just north of the house which would meet code requirements is occupied by a wild flower garden. Moving the location further east would place it in the drainageway that drains the drivewey area. No trees need to be removed by replacing the shed in its current location. Your site inspection will confirm that the property is heavily wooded. The natural woods and added plantings through the decades make this a very seclud'*d site. The shed wili be screened trom the road by existing evergreens so as to be not obtrusive and virtually invisible in all seasons. I iMtrr ri' L Zoning File #1832 June 16. 1993 Page 2 Applicant also notes that this shed legation is the most appropriate location to serse its function, i.e. storage of property maintenance equipment.In reviewing this application. Planning Commission should keep in mind the intent of the ordinance. In a typical higher density' neighborhoixl. storage sheds in the front yard between the street and the residence certainly have a negative visual impact, providing a cluttered effect. V^isual impact is probably the only reason for this ordinance. It would appear that for this property, the proposed location will have virtually no visual impact from outside the property'. Note that portions of the property are within the Shoreland Zone. Virtually all of the existing hardcover is outside the Shoreland Zone. Overall hardcover on the property is 7.7%. Staff Recommendation A recommendation for variance approval would be appropriate if Planning Commission finds that a hardship has been demonstrated. Planning Commission’s options include; 1. Approval. 2. Conditional approval. 3. Denial. 4.Table for more information 5.Other. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIONy5175.00Eerl!a; ^<5ditionai variance)Ken^A?al variance Fee $100.00Var^anca^"®® °'i5inal application)A«ter --h '^“"forming cse S200.00application fee) property information ^C-CCt7 . pj ')JCITY OF ORO^Ooffice1350000000ChECR'01 275.Oi■ 175.0j^LEiPT-rnm YQij 9^,0c00 0001 ROl TOT. r)r/.-5r '■'W# ' V Property Identif. Number (Pin) Date Property Acquired 9- / - -fh /_ I W^(do not) also owiTTh^ - - - -(mont.Vyear) Present use of property: ^ parcels of land. Zoning District: /.jg. ential __ _.other(specify) applicant Plione Olome) 4-~l6> OHNBR (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Address"; Phone (worJc) description op request City:1- - - - - - - - - -Zip: -— mmmm i VARI^CES REQUIRED • , • _ _ Lot Area Estimated Construction Cost $ Lot Width Setbac.c: _ _ Front # Hardcover _ _Lot Coverage Side Hear Average Lakeshore </, =— (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete; 1. _Conpleted Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. _Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (proyide one' (1) copy 8h"xll" for reproduction). 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8i|i"xll"). 6. Slcetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8*i’*xll"). 7. _As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. • % The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that . yonr variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Jcnowledge. Signature^^^^-^^> i? Date <3. V -■» ^3 6)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 inyestiga- tion and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature Q dl y7Y\ Date S" f3 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 2md Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma)ce arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ;«< vor-r ■ r.U'll -r- -n r-.i irr*iiiii rrinTT . Building and Zoning Dept Afln: Michael Gallron Stephen \V’eckni“n I understand that my land use application to be reviewed by the Planning Commission on June 21st will be scheduled betore the Commission at their JuK meeting. 11 the application proves to be non-controversial, I would appreciate being scheduled bctorc the Counsil at their June 2Sih meeting although I understand your ultimate decision must be based on stall’s work load. 1 have asked tor special consideration as 1 will have volunteers to assist in demolition and preparation tor the foundation during the 4 th of July weekend. Philip Nelson, my survcvvir will represent the application at N)th the Planning Commission and Counsil meetings. Please send copies of stall' memos and action notices to Mr. Kelson at 125 Ilackberry Hill, Orono 55356. Scott Mabusth 740 North Brown Rd. Orono, MN 55356 Pk 476-0578 r I ! ♦_ / „L A 7.. - 3 „ 5 ^ ^ ^ ---------/^Jt^»jL.—L^_ 6 . • t Lat^UL“T t • 2^^ - //|P* - ?3 O OO 9 ^ /7^-K— ^ • ^ • -1^ U ^ O— a/ _ f .^. # *V V A K^ • . * '**' I ■f I.'V- U Ulj=_Z/L£_r. i2__t .3 (LOU fL (^Lju^.A^cjL^ -7-lav - LM. - tr l« i. ft S' “ 3_.._ / 3u. _ c? o »— ^ >?. __ “l*f ^ /\f rt^XT J^-M-w-n — ^</__ ^ , .rx^ _^5"3 5*<i a.7 - //F- -as 4 ^ OO /S'— S':: / f* f" f___ 3 V- 0 3v^-//f--a3 ya- t>o0 2 «*. /YI^a-a^ /} ■ G-' 1^ (i A/^/jC A/ A jt-j* •Jt.f'J?« ' jc 44 * - •• r** x:j_r_/Z€:_^2j___-hi__0, <? t?_6.----^ ..b4 ^1l!V_iLZ27U.«-«_./^-»'t/».*_fLj2*,7CiJZ* Jrj>J__z2y«rt-zzr fi<i jcA’sjrci____ II .^2 I~aaU^ -nir - ?3 A/ 00 0 3 ^-c-cX«^ 6r . eX O O ^ vS i^/t- /nrv. 5'5^35-c; ><M^ ♦ • • •••.*, • •’ J * * *. ^ ' •».»•,• ■••• /.L^ - — «iiti / r //rfL-r.3 3_za - <5oo >;.— ./C^ . 3*/ - //{-- a.3 ^*r' W. ‘ f ' ■ ’• •’•Vir -••• f'v ; ' 1 OO /a r V-..-> •>^'_ irt - • --------- , A f_ . vS7"Ij3l.c^____ ______7.j{/_ /6r<^V/ru __ ..- A I » yTPi/r^ - ^ ^ !Sa Cm I t »• 4 • « .. /hex. ^CoJL^-y ^ 3 s Dx ___ A<rxj^ SSSSo . . .. /I :.3f- // V- - ^3 ij OO 0? -- i^Go/ -S ijLc4^rf^ Ayi, , a-n L'T'-v.' Z.Oi». -SS-SS-C • ^ J«» » • ■ “ '• •<•» ^ s* r.. t.. ^.Ki-VL''n . 1 oo vs SutyfL 1275 ^ or r«)»ort ct $uptr«isiof> id Surveyor etoto. urzy nozs ALL-METRO LAND SURVEYORS / . ' ' —'■■■■' ' ■ . —,i i' • 'fc r 125 Hockberry Hill, Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Ph: 473- 2853 i CERTIFICATE OF SUl 5-:. , Addendum to Application ^ 1832 Statement of I lardships The proposed 10' x 16^ storage shed requires a setback variance as it shall be placed 25 feet in front of the front line of the residence structure. Yhc existing storage shed is 23 feet (refer to attached exhibit A). 'Hie following hard.ship andor findings arc unique to the propertN" 1. Refer to the attached topographic exhibit B. Note the topography drops severely as you mow to rear or east of the residence structure. 2. The nvire gentle sloped area to the immediate north side of the residence is occupied by a wildflower garden originalh' designed and planted b>' Edmund Phelps. 3. ITic proposed shed shall be placed within the footprint of the existing shed and will not require the remove of e.xisting mature trees. 4. The street setback for the ?oning district is 50 Icct. The residence is located 162 feet from the .street lot line and the proposed structure will be placed 146 feet 5. The existing and proposed sheds are places in a strategic or fimctional location - adjacent to the work yvd and gravel driveway. 6. llic mature plantings on the property, specifically evergreen, provide; ycjff rotaid screening from adjacent properties. 7. ITie placement of the shed is consistent with the pattern of development of the older established properties adjacent to North Brown Road. l-v,) ' \ .1 • ■« •LR-IA rsfiKfe —ix P^~‘Vr i '■p. -•:vxv_.' ~ *• l£vo\^y^^ / / Wi \ i ^.w “l{ A I / |/^r. V' L y / fl 'M \ \ 'y I f// (.// - !}P^ -/Jmr' K \ \ »*r*-CITY OF LONG LAKE I i Iv ^ . % ■ • - kr: ; « '•■'I?*--;. ■ • '^r ' ■.■'-• • ■* W? i i. '. V‘llO* ••'•, . •* f «. • X • • » •' *•. ►iS9 i.•s * « « * 4 ^ ■ # -•I <• I.f i4>fIr{ V . r. •< •. ••• I 4 ‘4 IV* r'tvi ■i?:V •• :n u% vr- t • •V.i f Vyv* ♦ia X. H / Vi:r i-\ Cr'. 'A '^; .!■■ I- <■ » To; From: Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Mcx)rse. City Adminisirator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building (fc Zoning Administrator Date:June 15, 1993 Subject: #1833 Uurence FIsen. 2879 Casco Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing 2Loniiiu District:I.R-1C, I.akeshore Residential Total area = 23,942 s.f. or .54 acres. The axle requires 21,780 s.f. in area or .5 acres. The applicant proposes a three-car single story garage addition to the street side of the existing residence and the reconstruction of the southeast half of lower deck and main level sun porch into a two-story enclosed addition. A new upper and lower deck will oe constructed ot the other half. Ihe former attached garage will now be used for storage, mud room and additional bath area. The new enclosed addition at the lakeside will extend 2 closer to the lake. The house is set approximately 130’ from the lakeshore. Mr. Elsen recently received approval for an additional curb cut/driveway access to Casco Point Road in an attempt to improve the level of safety’ for access to and from properly and to save mature plantings in street yard. Excess hardcover exists within the 0-75' and 75-250’ setback area. The new driveway will re.suit in 585 s.f. of paved area within the 75-250* zone. The following ordinances are pertinent to the review: 1. Section 10.22. Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. 0-7S’ setback area = 6.740 s.f. Allowed = 0 s.f. Existing =* 184 s.f. or 2.7% Proposed =184 s.f. or 2.7% No changes proposed. 75-250’ setback area = 14.219 s.f. Allowed =■ 3,554.7 s.f. or 25% Existing = 5,186 s.f. or 36.4% Proposed = 5,646 s.f. or 39.7% Additional hardcover = 460 s.f. or 3.3% Hardcover variance = 2,091.25 s.f. or 14.7% 250-500’ setback area = 2.973 s.L Allowed = 891.9 s.f. or 30% Existing = 0 s.f. Proposed = 371 s.f. or 12.4% Zoning File #1833 June f5, 1993 Face 2 Review of rotal Hardcover Total lot area = 23.942 s.f. Existing = 5.370 s.f. or 22.4^ Proposed = 6.201 s.f. or 25.9*^^ Section 10.03. Subd. 14 ( C) - Review of 1 m Coverage Allowed = 3.591.3 s.f. or 15% Existing = 2.746 s.f. or 11.4% Proposed = 3.834 s.f. or 16% Variance = 242.7 s.f. or 1% List of Exhibits A B C D E F G H I Application Propert>' Owners List Plat Map - Property Owners Acknowledgement Forms (Total of 9) Survey Elevations Sections - Drainage Plan Existing/Proposed Floor Plans J-1-4 Existing Hardcover Inventory/Site Plan K-l-5 Proposed Hardcover Inventory/Site Plan Review of Application The proposed ihree-.stall garage shall be placed over existing p.ived hardcover. Applicant has marked garage addition on the ex^isting pavement and shown the access to the new driveway. 16’s 2r: of the existing upper and lower level decks shall now be encloi*.» as part of the two- stor" il.:.aon to the lakeside. The lower level addition will consist of two bedrooms and the upper level a master bedroom and entertainment room. The increase in hardcover within the 75-250’ setback area results from the expanded drive and new backout area for three-stall garage. Tlie enclosed two-story lakeside addition will extend 2 closer to the lakeside. The existing second floor three-season porch is enclosed on southeast side. It will be necessary to grant an average lakeshore setback for the enclosed two-story lakeside addition that will extena 16’ in front of the adjacent residence structure. The residence on west side is separated by unimproved right-of-way of Carman Avenue. Upon your site inspection you will note the residence to west constructed sometime in 1984 is located closer to lakeshore but has minimal impact on views of subject property and property to east. Zoning File #1833 June 15, 1993 Page 3 As applicant’s information notes, the Ihiblic Works Department has approved a new curb cut for the property. The Public Works Director has advised that this will provide safer access to and from property, ingress at the northeast curb cut and egress at the northwest curb cut. Applicant also notes that this will minimize tree removal although it would appear that the majority of the lawn area with trees is located in an unimproved right-of-way of Casco Point Road and adjacent Carman Avenue. If curb cut was not approved, expansion of paved area for backout apron and drive would require the removal of trees both on property and in right-of-way. Members should be advised that the City does not require permits for the installation of new drive areas, expanded drives or blacktopping of existing gravel drives. If hardcover excesses result from proposed driveway improvements, the excesses would be addressed at the time of the issuance of a building permit application or review of a land use application. It would be impossible for City staff to police and enforce every driveway improvement within the hardcover areas of the City which now include 1,000 ’ from the rural lakes. If permits were required, such permits would require surseys and hardcover inventories for the entire property. Description of Hardships Please refer to Exhibit A. Applicant’s hardships are reviewed as follows; In noting the interpretation of hardcover ordinance, staff would assume that applicant is referring to total hardcover facts which would find existing hardcover at 22.4% hardcover and proposed at 6,201 s.f. or 25.9%. The three-stall garage addition at approximately 33’ x 44’ shall be installed over existing hardcover. Note total stnicniral coverage now will be 1 % over the allowed 15%. The looped driveway layout will not require the removal of the mature trees located within the street yard and unapproved right-of-ways. Applicant claims the loop drive has caused an incre'se in hardcover. Hardcover has been increased in the 75-250 ’ setback area to accomodate needs of new three-stall garage. There is no hardcover e.xcess in 250-500 ’ setback area. Issues for Consideration 1.There was limited storage capacity in tlie e.xisting residence that lacked an unfinished basement. Now with the”additional storage areas provided in the former garage area and in the 9’ x 20 ’ surplus storage area in the garage, can the 8 x 20 storage shed in the lakeshore yard be removed? This would reduce lot coverage by .06% and reduce hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback zone. \r\ rj I Zoning File n^l833 June 15. 1993 Page 4 What other hardcover improvements within the 75-250 ’ setback area can be removed? Refer to Exhibit J-1, Item 5 - concrete pad at 294 s.f. (2.06%), Item 6 - landscape area underlain with plastic at 151 s.f. (1.06%). - Other areas 3. Can the garage addition be reduced? A standard three-stall garage width is approximately 32 ’ to 33’. Total proposed width of addition is 44 ’. vl I- .n*i—-I r .-f « k ‘ r« . vi*.-'—r i r ' i imI I T Ii'>^ i 7 CITY OP ORCNO - VARIANCE APPLICATION •-I. ■ V ~ ^A, (' Initial Applicatit->n Fee $175. CO ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change frcm original application) Variance for non ccnfor:ning use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) *}T v i z r z k 4 f f k'f k ’» vwitk* L V n# • -I* * f" £T«r T *k> r Attr*fVkk k*' t AkW A V'VV'V* VA A I w‘• VV /* Ti i - fir k i fkk*' A »«.*«VV LzrcfOT^'v^ki' von f'tm^^AI i tl ■' k‘k‘ s *'*’T* kV-i •/*," i Vf* i T<r»#ik f J > Ov kvV'A i\v.A lac* '1^ / v^ / Vw*' k.*^/ PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address P^^'79 - - -—— Propertv identif . Nvmber (P.I.D.)_<^0 II 2- -^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _(nonth/year) I (do) (do rot) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present u a of property: Zoning District_ _ _ __ residential other(specify) applicant NcLtie 7/^.w'’ Address 1- - - - - - - - - -- C.f^rc City; Phone (home) ^7/-C Phone (wor)c) _ _ _ Zip: r537/__ ONNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (worlc) Address: _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _— City:.Zip s DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $, Describe request ia detail: ZZTfJctiics ~vV^Y VARIANCES required _ _ Lot Area _ _ Lot Width _^^Hardcover - - Side Rear ___ Average LaJceshore Lot Coverage Setback:Front Other (specify) TfAPnfiHT?/description OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property t • p K ~j j :‘: V,. «..v-^ (attach additional" sheets if necessary) thf^r.flowina information must be submitted by the applAcajfion "Lhi?L Lte rn order for your noolication -to be consrdereo ^olete^ 1. 2.Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must Cer.i.iea p p Deportment of Finance A-603 Govt CenterCer this list from 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed 8%"xll- fo- hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8H xll fo.. reproduction ) 4. 5.ToTocraphTc survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes -----in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll-). 6. Slcetches or plans of floor s elevation vie«s^<Ptovide^l^copy^8%^xll ). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8 • ^ any ounex jrwu* ------------------------- .. Additional items as nay be requested by City staff The Applicant and Property Owner must ^ign this^application^^ Please remember that voor variance application is no t information has not been included. ccmolete above "ri^Ilcsnt“^^by agrees to provide all recuested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant incurred irreview of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to thfi^best^of tiis/her knowledge. Applicant's SignatuTff Date r- ? .3 ?rfwn«°!f^y acKowledges and agrees to this application -d further luthorrses reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this reqpeafcw-x ^-----L , 2 ____ • DateOwner's Sionarllf AppUclnt’mus7hI7eTlY submittals into the City offices 25Applicant musu Planning Commission Meetings are held on thePlanning Commission Meeting. scheduled third Monday of each month. Applicants must be review"ret7ngs%f tL Council. If r7ho\*itYd YgenY aVe7dn “7'/ourp\Yc^; a^vYse'the"Sng 8 Icning Office of this change prior to the meeting. i mr—t r-i (.A. - dJ- L i : ‘I • 'RUN BATt OS/ll/n BArCN DOS 1 t-'» V. ‘BUfCRlN COUNTY property INPORHATION SVSTGN .. ‘ *tlWr NO. PXASSAOiI *BT ^ . RACK •I •» ♦ PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR S« 20-117-25 51 0020 0207<» CASCO POINT RO T H KNAPPCR IDG LYON TOOO RNAPPER A OEOORAM LYON 1 2e7«» CASCO POINT RO : HAYZATA MM 555Y1 ' PROP AOOR OltlER NA1« TAXPAYER NAHE/AOPR 58 20-117-25 51 0051 02915 CASCO POINT RO R C RAIL A C L'RAIL RICHARO C KAIL A CAROL RAIL 2915 CASCO POINT ROAD HAYZATA Itl 55591 •* PROP AOOR c»t€R rum TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 20-117-23 51 005A 02879 CASCO POINT RO LOIRE ELSEN LANRErCE D I KATHERINE EISEN 2879 CASCO POINT ROAD HAY2ATA MN 55591 PROP AOOR (MMFn NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 20-117-25 31 0067 02866 CASCO POINT RO CHARLES F tlELSON I HIFE CHARLES I LUCY NELSON 2660 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA HN 55391 PROPIRTY ONNERS LIST 9 ..* <.1 PAGEit;u t\ 58 20-117-25 51 0025 00058 ADDRESS UNASS19^D T H RNAPPER IDG LYON TOOO RNAPPER I DEBORAH LYON 2879 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA m 55591 • 50 20-117-25 51 0024 •i • * 02900 CASCO POINT RO *1“ ; 0 SIGAFOOS ETAL f * ;■ OONALO SIGAFOOS I . I , 2900 CASCO PT RO 'f I' HAYZATA HN 55591 1, 58 ■ 20-117-25 51 0052 02905 CASCO POINT RO JAMES RENNETH BONERS JAMES R BOI«RS 2905 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA MN 55591 *•> •■*'< I - •■7. 'tp- * 'I • ::. ^ SB 20-117-25 51 0055 02B9S CASCO POINT RO RICHARO 6 HEISTRQH ETAL RICHARO G HELSTROM 2895 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA TM 55591 < A 9 t •1) 58 20-117-25 51 0055 02917 CASCO POINT RO H N HAXHELL JR ETAL HAYNE HAXHELL JR 2917 CASCO POINT RO NAYZATA HN 55591 .-'*r % * . 58 20-117-25 51 0054 02871 CASCO POINT RO J P A R NOLFE ^ , J PATRICR HOLFE . ^ is .J 2871 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA HN 55591^ 4 4 < * * ■:' TOTAL BATCH 003 OOOlO 1''' 'iK ^ • •» . Jj' V. •se . • ■ h ^ ■ if i ■ • • V ■ < 4 i) fj I 4» A " 'a •.f : A 'l>. t • ■ ■' •( •• » . t \ ' . ’ ' J • [ V .» • V* • »> «.*1 • T. ’4'. I ■■ 4 ? 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESIMTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFOPtlATION AS IT APPEARS THIS OA'^E ON THE RECOROS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST JF MY KNOHLECGE AND BELIEF. f ’ ■ ■■ F. j'- ‘ • L * t DATE \ • I • A - .♦ •* ' i . A. • • *. 0 ^1 i f -«•w\i'VY'* ,”i7 • * ‘ j;* f • ••• P A * » r . ‘•'a'A- '■Y 1 :-.»r ■ •h • • c iV' •. . •f • . % r / ■ 1.- • ■■if, iK'-'''; » *U ••• ; If-'.’ J « ♦ O* •< > f t 9. • » % I V • I (we) Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgenen^rm D\ t) [print name(s)] [print address] ^ — - - - - rr^oel^^Tolafe: ^ ^ Application Nocation p*<^‘ —— y ,w., nnaerstand '«’-e (are) not asked to declare app council that X (we) am but merely to ^:„Vthaf the proposed neighbor’s project the improvement plans requires Council approval. Date Propenty ywffer Property Date I (we)[print name(s)] [print address] ^ ^ ^ ^ • W • - - • ^ have reviewed the plans for the proposed Os. property located at ~ Application Nocation NO. - - -. I (we) understand that in **®®'J^^^|33pprovtl"t£^the property “** ^“t*’me»\y1: confirm f'L'^o^oternU^bo^s project or «s. requires Council approval. ^^ \ Date Property Owner , review of zoning Office at least 10 days prior to tne Adjacent property Oners' Ac)cno«ledge=ent ^na of FoL I ____Cj'rin Ii.'-.r,-' (print r.ane(s)l ry ~ — ■ — [print address) ^ 1-h*. n-onosed i?ipj-pvement or proposed use of the have rev:.ewed the /^>^also referred to as Land Use property located at ( / i, r / r - « % ^ .A. ^Application No,.ca^x-uii ■—----- a u ♦. i n Avecu^inq this acknowledgement, I (we) am I (we) understand ^ „ disapproval of the property or use (are) not aslced ^e City Council that I (we) am (are) aware o th: rpie^^eren't PiZn" bnd that the proposed neighbor's project requires Council approval. 5 propert'^'^wne Date / -/g Date Property Owner I (we) [print name(s)] [print address) have reviewed the plans for the proposed as “”ani ^se property located at — ------------~ ^ Application No* I (we) understand that in ^thr“ro^^^^^^ or use (are) not asJeed r^ty council that I (we) am 41^ Q, Q,Q ' iX__ - Property Owner Date Property Owner Date zoning Office at least 10 days prior to tne .1 *ir.'UJMCnuiL«r.dM I (we) Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Fora.D f -------■ f ---------------- [print nanie{s)J (print address] the oroposed improvement or proposed use or the have reviewed the V i-OV VT xO also referred to as Land Use property located at , I -------------- Application llocation , ——• w a. this acknowledgenent, I (we) am I (we) understand or* disapproval of the property or use (are) not asked ^^e City Council that I (we) am but merely to that the proposed neighbor's projec. or use the improvement plans an requires Council approval. 5 Date Date Property Cwner I (we) [print name(s)] (print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed «“*Lanl ^s. property located at ----------------- ’ Application Nocation NO. _____ I (we) understand that in ^thrpr\"pVrtV° “*« (are) not asked Council that I (we) am "th^ rmrtolerent°pl “n” ‘a^dthat tL proposed neighbor's progect requires Council approval. « j ^ \ ^ Tr i u..i *_____X Property Owner Date Property Owner Date loning office at least 10 days prior to the sche r ■ ' ;,djacent Property Owners* Acknowledgement Port. iT _ * __ mm ^ I C 1 I [print address) [print name(s)] j ,• fnn-nvement or proposed use of tha have reviewed the 7 also referred to as Land Use pj-operty located at . ------ J Application No. ---------. . Appl-oation vecu'-'ng this acknowledgement, I (we) an I (we) understand that in «*"“-'"?3”:®oval of the property or us. (are) not asked to declare Council that I (we) am but merely to confirm or " proposed neighbor's proje the improvement plans and that tn p requires Council approval. IS-- ZA Date Date Property Owner X (we)__ [print name(s)l [print address) ii"-***“------------------------- . have reviewed the plans for the proposed as““and 0». property located at = ——— Application Nocation wo. _____.• X ,we, understand that in (are) not asked to declare-appto^ 1 Council'^that 1 (we) am but merely to confirm proposed neighbor's project or use the improvement plans and that tne p requires council approval. 1 3 <»' -JL “ property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information^at may „=^3’^^to "the "Bu^rd^ngi ^L^fng^"f^r “ a\^^^a?t^traa^ys%“rorto" th/ scheduled meeting date. L f T) Adjacent property ^ers- Acknowledgement Form —T \(U<^ oi ------ _£r —-i—1 ^ t ^ [print address](print narelsJJ ^Pe^r-afe: ^^^ Application No. ------- I u^understand that in oi the property or use (A^ ^nofasked aware of but merely « tLt'tL proposed neighbor's project the iraproveirient plans an requires Council approval. ^ Date Propj^rty Owner Data Property Owner *•* I (we)(print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed To* as““anl Ose property located at , " —-----^ Application Nocarxon «w. 1 (we) understand that in *pp®ovaTof^the property or use (are) not as)ced « deelare-upptoval or ^ ‘“®’ “■'“•„se =h: rm^to^eTenTpTaTsTnd^that The proposed neighbor's project requires Council approval. ^ ^ ^ ■C3 O c3) Property Owner Property Owner Date . fcKo citv in the revxew of Zoning Office at least 10 days prior b Adjacent Property Owners' Ackncwled<3eraent Form I (we) (2/^jC.^/ /. [print narr.e(s)](print address) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of tlu:- property located at pA^-Ct also referred to as Land Use Application Mo. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement^ I (woj au (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. <5^ Data Property Owner Date I (we) (print name(s)I (print address) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare “approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and thaj; jth^^roposed ijeighboj*‘'‘3^pro ject requires Council approval. l| or us Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Buildinq u r.oning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. L.. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowlodgeratint Form I (we) \.//]VNe a/./^AX:W£Lt. of ^‘jiy Cft&co p- [print name(.s}J [?<?AD [print addrossj have reviewed the plans for the proposed inprove:uent or proposed use oc tlio property located at Si ^'7^ cAs>^^ PT. ^Pt0 also referred to as Land Use Application iJo. » I (we) understand that in executing this acknow 1 odgemont/ I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or us«> but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of Che improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. •# . • "7c ^ y?]. Property (^wner Date 3/P Property Owner Date m .»**** fr***************** ###***#**#«##« I (we) [print name{s)][print address) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at _ _ _ _ _ _^l^so referred to as Land Use Application Uo. ______. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare “approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) .i (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval.# 18 3 Property Owner Date Property Owner Data If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building u Honing Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. Adj.icent Property Owners' Ackncwledge.'Ti.^nt Kor^i I (we) _Yy‘ ^ y _ of C ^ T (*ry_^ (print nn.T.*!*(s)J (print address] have reviewed the plans fer property located at Applicaticn *Io. | the proposed ir.provtrner.t or proposed c- C^<~'also referred to of the oand Use I (we) understand that in executing this aokr.cw lodgement, I (•„ (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval cf the property o but merely to confirm for the City Council th..t I (we) an (arej awa • • . _ . __ ^ A_ 1 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ A ^ W W* «V •* M 1 * . «« I W ^ ^ ^ ve; an or uuo A^ mm W All -■ Am ^ L. M m •»• •• ■ • '«• ^ ^ ^ 'w• ■>— — - m l — -w # ^ «« «. -m § 2^ €* ^ the inprovenent plans and that the procosed neighbor ’s project or use requires Council approval. ____c y r>r 15o^ Property Owner Date Property Owner Date ♦ ♦ 1#* * I (we) C,Vy^ v( <^.5T \ l.%r >- Ua isoo of •:;) €' C o>. S _j \ d (print name(s;] (print address) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use cf the property located at -7 9 c r ^ V-f also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) an (are) not asked to declare “approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ^ jf - - y : J f V P roper t yawner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of t.his 'and Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building 6 Dor.ing Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. J.. i SURVEY FORMR. LARRY ELSENr " -/ *•t • •»• • it CASCO tVtNi •'••lit* ROAD 0T<, Th*i >««l *1 161 IM». If 6» tM »» ^ «•• *616*464 6»4 •• W»I»W M<6 <6*H»tf. I•*6••^•^• AU.I inf lf«». »n6 IHr 6i»t l» <// 6 l®l *00. »•*! 1*4 ina ’aH Una U*<»t Ui.»a« 16* %nif6nA%f l*«6 6# I AAA M*0»t *1T~IHT |4A# tflnnalfnA a AnA 6«>anaA4 9* f6# Soal^AAft hf tnn ^iMf66A«* Mn# 6* aA*A 6i.« |iia»%f At • f W? »• in* *<*#. AafrnffaA <•* lAA» HinntfonlA AnA 6onn4AA 06 <6* 66»t6*#Al ftf fin WatffAAAt *»«»» •» »A*«A6 ••♦•a*, ASA iadaitnf • a<aIaA ^ativfi a» lilr %*♦»* A,fn«a U‘6f A4|K»«t l6 >ff»* •!! In fk|tt inf A*»A, A»<6fAinf I f «•# fAtft*#A4 flAt fnvf^'t. AaA %iUal« la IWIWn »a IMti. •*nna\tlA HV |«r«r6f t At I iff tfcAl 16* A »% A f»wA aM fOrrfCl rr»*r Ani«l inn ••# A lattAA »! »6* IK waA#f <#« 6» ONI lanA AHr«A 4rAft»6AA tM 6» <6# lot AOna 6f Oa«a« t6U 7a4 Aif ol t*r»mA>#t , M«* .. ^ a. rA-tiii 6. r,andr. • l ^. Irf No. Ml? O ItrtMilfA lion fAtm-^nl • lion Nrm^nnf I Oa* ManmnIm aANMil AMr^r^lMS tat lAtOAM AA Oa\n« • a* • t i Hf • • r^ j / ■'V Z ^ T? • ♦ if- ^ .• V,T-CS «««.•« wf»f^ lN<!OKr* • ,M v«4 tvfW'**., ^fTu rM fc ev^Ttofvj «Az: g! Itf Sf85t z;o 1 I 3-Q Q Q) W C ^ t T .o 4*^^ i • I c.»- «4A«e ♦ »% • • •» 1 (A Zo 5! S|oth ou I m 1 I I . 9 •V!)*O( ii rs^4 »*^T iTriirt/rr-— ^^^LO&SL t P¥'9t,%f% • ft f ^ ------ « «^ <4*4^ 4iw.v< •* I p •.■**•»•• ^ 44 •«» “ •-i*"'# #4. ^ • -•«-' ■iMK JJ s vX. RxJ-*^' *'- “ ^------- •»» V C3t ^^g."T o»o 4*«i>4.e •tP>‘' •* /'■ «S£L-Ar?« •'iZ. •K■ • V.- — r*^ lii5?^ 4-^* 4*^ irx* • i’ f ’ Vfi.l<> » 4r..r4> ♦^>•04 » >»•« c II Sr* ••* 1. , ,* rjf »*u*r% 4 * 4 * • t •*vrtw^ >, > <L.'r-»> 1 •..,-1- a l*_U 40^4 * •*•«»€> •A1 ----------- ^ <-> «rf <«OuaHlb. i'4 r jtfUf . .># •» fc ' l>*. »»-*4VW 4 .-•f ft »V sfcJWU # illtn 2:o gth n\ o u 1 € 1 • •'4-t O ^4 ■1=^ ;^K a fXlCTTlA-u. ^»*TfL vc*^ t |- • t«i e* Lt<^CKtp >^w •<■■■ t..t v*'»«r^j^ 4 |A4€ jir| I mI 1 1 \ auEssitffiiiaiia mem JAi /f* t'K A •e. .A- /’■ I • '' ••O •• ^(• w^TCtt- u»-c gKi^tlfJt* M-*»Ik J L#v*W. I Ot^K TO W€»A< i |AV< H»K»»^itorJK^ fA^< tw^ ^jUj^ j j f.ifW If (\q&^ AOO lOtJ 4tCT»e ROCM. P.U. towgM. C^vC l. « t-V«»4»J HoutC <*^p'>^TlO^^J 5<CTio»-> op g|t<CT. Pt^ < •y.X^grJ F>»<*-*M TO ^f§, pgr-vNto Pu^^xkj ; i''*>.o«o» <^oo- c?" “f~ DttXfT€^ |HCN> MOn»UM<NT N«>^T^ ; ^ t 4MT. oPn ftfiK P<K(g.rijiu^ llPtAit«<»4i5 •viTt. FSJsiJ ^4o^aL•n^m^J fgor^iT Mr-^iTS \ i le 4- HARDCOVER CALCULATIQHJjOR!GHEHT s£T3Ac:< ZONE: (circle 75-250' Existing Hardcover in Zone A.*7.0 LENGTH X WIDTH 250-500' 500-1000' S.F. S.F. t- I 3i Garage c. Driveway 0.. Sidewalk E. Patio/ Deck F.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY PLASTIC SHEETING G. Other _ X _ X X_ _ T otal iiAsocavER in Z one - S.F. S.F. F.F. S. f*. s. = . S.F. a \ I ■22SEH.8 ^ It !.yu S.F. — S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. . S.F Total P roperty Area in Zone S.F A B iM 5 6»T$0 X 100 2.1__:% ,*2.^ 4 I!I • Z:* ^Xt‘5T'(NJ<b (Ot ► t J'H y-T •.. .*?- • ij S^T _________________16 r-"2'50 j2?"7^ O 5,^ s.? s,r. • Cco€sSl\____ 5.1S0 \ ^ •• ^ • r- :S,^30. S.F. . • • • p^%* •• ^ ^ - • I .-» i »- ----.*. '*^S**-% ^ ">' •» - r- 7".?^ • *v ^ # ••^. • • V . •*-• ifc** • t . » i**-«!;-•rvV'*- '\'':i's:iW'fe2r*ii:' I> ‘j'a *“ >•/“.* •, *' *-^?* V %v»- ^ «•• *' .:^4 • - —»ff>|^ ^^■sr^<30e, "Aa£A ■ 3 • •.■■••■'- '■■■■V. • ■#-^5^:' ^#-1 ^ fUX - S^tA* '-• ^ VV*. j ] 3>87 _13.7.00 to<5 ■= . l<..‘i% - •«. ^ T» “f ) •/V-C.") 0 C h (?r^=6:r A''■:52a •<'* • ^•* »• • <^4«% M f' \^Lp\y2J:i?cS^ PA 12T/ A 5 .!■1 i I i jiHu/uBVAi -l$lO% r U»l|?'‘ ,1 /i t. <;• ,.-) ... 0 «0"eigg^--^i fA. J5lilc f 'jy>gg«£tVfei,icai: d»«#C> fA^«c 1||'| 1^Sfi-i Vi'ifP 'NO^a I .^5LST'»i*»_l:2±i^ /iiVjO I I In '»«^K. -to wei:;^ e>»^tnjy~s .51 L#v 6v - W~ ^.^7i»si<p ftCgK, >,> <u> 11^ 4 i d it"'p.c. U>wtWL <.<vCU < MAJisJ tivCu tWotC. <NO«?tTtONJ 77 / AIjk f.L. 5i«T»«*-> gf Hii'cr. oCcM- a F»(«-*M TO <>C 1tCt-g>iCo io Pu/^Ki : r*>»c>*o‘ <f<—^ f PttbPOSfet> K>^v-/^* 600’-0" -f' o€^J OTC.» tffON) hcis K jmCn T irftcr^iT MK^as r •, IkJ ^r- U Mkbfl i 'piPC'Pcr tMj SAnfz': .//*^< rrr ^» ‘=r-r'^ - /y ' \ .y !j f\'C^Nj^r/S- l&H ....J¥Ll. oo_ «___J2/7 5^0.... • * S "1S> •'1^0 ,*.•,■ >• __________ll ..-* y .. i .m —?XvvT/iJ<^ - # - - , ^ ■ • « * • • ••*•»*:■• • l'*l«..*** • -• • *^* *»*,«.•. «■*’ .1.» ■-*• . «. ^/4.i »^AI - i . • ^4 --_V. ^ l_ • v***’* ■ \ . . v>if *"••' iS^U @! ■ •#.. i • “W** * .♦ * f^-* •%-w*'V. •» • . ..* • • 5 o &» I •, ■» ,4 5KE?«nK> s :;r >v.^'-K • Y:v* 51;^ k;.V • irv.;-:.- T Vrr* (Jr:>;^ • r * :• ■i.•^-V\vWJy^V-'. • • ] M^\/u App-P^ ^ v:*^ ^ .•^y'^v^v> ^'.. .... T •_ _".-.' "■_ i>__________*______________ <?r-_U^W_ \W(^ 'g.Ovf^(2- -Ttg ?.s°/.> ______^ - *->•: ;vj .'v^^ V »'•-< . .•. i,?* i ♦ '• • "■ fs ’ • V . j - -2.KJ ^ J ( I, « 0\ ^• « . HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHE.i ScT3ACK ICNE: (CIRCLE oNc.) Q-75' 75-250^ 25j-::G0'J 500-1000 Existing Hardcover in Zone A. House lengt;-?WIDTH B. Garage c. Driveway _ D.. SiDEWALX e. Patio/ Deck f.Lanescaps AREAS UNOERLdMN BY •. . PLASTIC SHEETING s. Other X X - X . X - X X X Total Hardcover in Zoke • Total Property Area in Zone 31A S3 •Z.e>o III S.F • • • S. r S.F S.F S.F S.F. S.F S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F S.F S.F. S.F. S.F S.F # _ S.F '2-,^nSs.f '<y tb « • # V ^-5 V t 1 , ■ £ E X 100 i-z.H •% I! jrzc*3^s : <)•r^5 =. _ -2.S& - <SOo ':z^±rk . ■s. F- U ✓ — WABDceverR._L__5 u&jy__s.f- ^CoHU> '?20r3.0P_f. t” - '■^.* *•• •’^1 ^ ^li ^ • V • ♦ .• s". ’ V..* •• ••• ,r» c'. "♦ '•• * -i' <>* ToT;^t__A5^*s. V.V.^. .-‘ -v' ;-:3^ • *»<*. <g>;2.at » ir*u- '«*V. ** '.'^•V I V * ;;■ , # ‘ '-'1 I * * 'f’*S • * lirti—.ir.*i«JC:-''»-" r «;?3/ . •, '••1 . • . •■i • 5r*-C^' ♦. -’ iVc x;fOW •- Vi. •; V*- • ^---------------j -------^ •* *i • ■- - k w , ’ ^ .:3S;i*--L.*SS«S~t2. .* - .’ — v^. A-.tJ-or- 4- .r. ,^*** •* ir tJT’ ■^-•*>11 T«> u. To:Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, Citv Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:June 16. 1993 Subject: #1834 Mary McCarty, 245 Tonka Avenue/Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA, Lakeshore Residential Applicant has applied for a lot area and lot width variance for a substandard property located in the Stubbs Bay sewer district. Two commonly owned substandard lots located to the immediate north are soon to be placed on the tax forfeit list and will be available for sale to the public. Substandarc lots that appear on tax forfeit rolls are required by the City to be available to sale only to adjacent property owners. It is the purpose of the applicant to receive variance approvals so that the sale of the property can be completed. Mrs. McCarty has been advised by the County that when parcels are released for sale if she is not the current owner that she will not receive written notice of their availability. The current application does not involve setback variances as it is really applicant's desire to wait until parcels to the north are combined with subject property before designing a future residence. The following ordmances are pertinent to the review: 1. Section 10.23, Subd. 6 ,.B). A.Area variance Required = 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres Existing = 12,500 s.f. or .286 acres Variance = 31,060 s.f. or .71 acres B.Lot width Required = Existing = Variance = 200 100 ’ 100 ’ or 50% List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - Application Property Owners List Plat Map Survev Lot Inventory of Bayside Addition to Lakeside Minnetonka Lots Resolution No. 3lb6 Resolution No. 3167 Zoning File #1834 June 16. 1993 Page 2 Review of Application Refer to Exliibits D, F and G. Resolutions 3166 and 31b7 were approved by the City on Aucust 10, 1992. Lots 3 and 4 to the immediate north of the subject property were not approved for sewer as it was the intent of the property owner to continue not paying real estate taxes and to aMow them to go tax forfeit. Upon tax forfeiture, the lots would be released to adjacent property owners. Per Resolution No. 3167, it would appear the intent of the City was to allow the future developer of Lots 5 and 6 to acquire the parcels in order to increase lot area and bring lot width into conformance. The applicant has advised that the property owner to the immediate north of Lots 3 and 4 is not interested in acquiring the properties. The only other property owner that may have a right to purchase the properties would be the property owner to the immediate west. Review Exhibit D. 125’ of lot depth and the 100 ’ total setback area (50 ’ front and rear) limits the depth of the building envelope to 25’. No matter how much additional area the applicant acquires, it may be necessary tor applicant io apply for a front or street setback variance. Mrs. McCarty has to proceed with the current application in order to meet the conditions of the purchase agreement and to ensure that she receives official notice from the County when the tax forfeiture properties are availat'’"' for sale. Review Exhibit E. Staff has completed an area and width inventory of sewered properties within the Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka plat. Of the 29 parcels, 10 or 34% are 50 ’ or less in width, 8 or 29% are 5T-100 ’ similar to subject lot, and 11 or 38% are at 101 ’-2(X)+’. As for lot area, 10 or 34.4% are les; than 12,500 s.f., 9 or 31% are equal to the subject property and 10 or 34.^1% are greater than 12,500 s.f. but less than 32,000 s.i. Hardship Statement Refer to Exhibit .. The lot is 12,500 s.f. and subject to 2 acre zoning standards. The lot was platted prior to present zoning standards. Applicant must apply for variance application as a condition of sale and prior to final resolve of the tax forfeimre properties to the immediate north Development of the lot would be consistent with the pattern of development within the immediate neiehborhood. Staff would also suggest that the findings set forth in Resolution No. 3167 are aiso^appropriate in consideration of the area and width variance. The substandard parcel is now sewered. Issues for Consideration 1 Although not required to have a conceptual development plan tor the property, what concerr.3 should be raised for applicant if it is necessary to resubmit for a setback variance with the final development stages of the property? L Zoning File #1834 June 16, 1993 Page 3 If a setback variance is needed, what setback variance is preferable - front or rear? Note heavy buffer of natural screening fo rear of property. Any condition of approval must include the condition that applicant must apply for an access permit from the Public Works Department to approve access location on Tonka Avenue. Applicant is located within the 500-1,000’ setback area from Lake Minnetonka and will be allowed 35% hardcover. I I i ■ - - - * - .Li ' I # w( * * ’ • \ CITY OP ORONO — VARIANCE APPLICATION ^ ^ \ Initial Application Fee $175.00 ^ ($50.00 pel* each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $r00.00 - (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After—the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) rrTv* f-r rujr'VxCiLI ‘ t U*l •-•MU'fTU'f PROPERTY INFORMATION 245 Tonka Ave. £ f fCu Tf w* a»trfMufc- I i i •*.*■ f f' ’♦ r*» f*a w w vi;. vv'vv'v ni rz>J i y:r r V.4 a I w'* V ,L A I tvruTri‘ u-l IUUI\ Site Address YOU ^274000 cool ROl 709 Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) 05-117-23-13-0026/0027 vt.'/ .. > Attach legal description to application if not Date Property Acquired^ pending ^ (month/year) I (do) (do* not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use“bf property: Zoning District: residential other(specify)vacant APPLICANT Ncune Mary K. McCarty Phone (home) 477-5532 479-4343 6250 Highway 12 W. Address:______________________________ciry. Phone (worlc) Maole Plain 55359 Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Esther M. Addison Phone (home) 473-7190 Name Phone (work) Orono3382 Bayside Rd rltv Address:_______________________________^tZl-____________________ DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $. Zip: 55356 ^ p^v’miccinn for home construction on existing lotDescribe request in detail: renmaa iun —w------------------------------ smaller than 2 acres VARIANCES REQUIRED _^ Lot Area Setback: Lot Width Front ___ Hardcover ____Lot Coverage Side Rear ____ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and ““1 ofPe"!?o?i^"‘iot''iia't w«"ph?:te° present fonin, LfriT "bo'L s 1 Zti (ind r6Quc6 prob lems in iri06ting S0t r6QUir6rrents^----- (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS , . ^. jjXX of the following inforTnatiw?n must be submitited by the __applxcatxon deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete^^ 1. Completed Application Form 2. i^Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. “cf .-tificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required It rovide one (1) copy 8*i"xll" for reproduction), ve t 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll"). 6. Sketches or plans of floor S elevation views (provide 1 copy 8Jj"xll") 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. ..J-^ttional items as may be requested by City staff. Th*' ’‘pplicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if__the—above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (stafr time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE . ^ 4.w The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff- consultants, agents, Ccmmissic.: members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of uhis request. Owner's Signature _________________________________________Date --------------—_____- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days -before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on tne third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Connnission and Couxicilm If an app-^*xcant xs unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building - Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. y«<* ».V RUN DATE 05/25/9S .batch 001 I »rU - ^HE1R4EP1N COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST REPORT r«. PI955<«0I PAGE 1•» ’ '>PROP ADDR Ot«lER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 58 05-117-25 15 001205420 BAYSXDE RD RAN ANDERSON ROBERT F A HENDY S ANDERSON 5420 DAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE HN 55554 • ;• • Al.*t • * #. .1*.i» •.r"'• k. •* .li •> i 58 05-117-25 15 001505440 DAYSIDE RD T M ZIESMER A :i T ZIESHER TOOD M A MARIE T ZIESMER 5440 BAYSIOE RD LONG LAKE HN 55556 58 05-11/-25 15 002500225 TONK;, AVE CAROLE J WALSH CAROLE J WALSH 225 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55556 ’ * > .* ■A 58 05-117-25 15 0024 PROP AODR 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OHNER NAME STATE LAND DEPT . *“•. TAXPAYER STATE LAND OEPT , !k • L ' .t • » 8^... • ( *r* Vi'.k •* ^NAME/ADOR ADJ ONNERS SALE PENDING ;CITY RES NO 5232 .• / •< . f . \ . . .58 05-117-25 15 0025 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED . .ESTATE LAND DEPT V rl STATE LAND DEPT " AOJ ONNERS SALE PENDING •■ > CITY RES NO 5252 58 05-117-25 15 0026 00265 TONKA AVE ESTHER H ADDISON ESTHER M ADDISON 5382 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 1 J PROP AOOR OWIER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR 58 05-117-25 15 0027 I' ! / •!’ i 05-117-25 15 0028 00265 TONKA AVE ‘ • 00295 TWKA AVE ESTHER M ADDISON ESTHER H ADDISON 5582 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE m 55556. ^- .1 ^ \ V f ■ ' !1e!!r; f WsIe SCHMITZ ■'■ ■‘’Vi X' -’V'l’2’5 TONKA AVE >Vx. 38 05-117-25 15 0029 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ESTHER M ADDISON ESTHER M ADDISON 5382 BAYSIOE RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 * i ‘F * ^ • ^*^^ * -117-25 16 0026 • . ! •* 'i ': • 38 05-117- *• i I PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 58 05-117-25 16 0026 00280 10NKA AVE P A K SKOOG PHILIP A t KAREN S SKOOO 280 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE MN 55556 • , - . -a " . 1_ _ __ . • * •A* 9 • ‘ '■ } 'J 58 05-117-25 14 0027 . 00280 TONKA AVE P A K SKOOG PHILIP A A KAREN S SKOOG 280 TONKA. AVE 55556 ' % . .. ^ V . Vi A f » k ‘ ,*—;'i . LONG LAKE W i M * V. »■* VI-1 Viy \ a PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR SB 15- , 00250 117-25 16 0029 v V ^ ^ 16 0062 , fOkiCA AVE . • .. -ll' ' " 00300 TONKA AVE FULKERSON A MIFE JAMES L PATRIN c JAMES K JAMES K FULKERSON 250 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE MN 55556 58 05-117-25 16 0028 00250 TONKA AVE GERALD L BRIGGS GERALD L BRIGGS 250 TONKA AV LONG LAKE MN 55556 I r S f • t • . J ■ • . t . . S A ■ • • •• "‘.4? JAMES L PATRIN i:;^ST,PAUL 194 55107 TOTAL BATCH 001 00016 J r . Q ♦ 1. ^ 1 G * • U • i V .1 ' r< • *. . ‘ • .. ■ 1. ii*. ' I » < . • *\ .L,,* r> ■& ' s « i. i ' -i .4. c> REPORT no. PI‘»35<i01 PAGE 2 *ij*3 f \ V '** i'^' f s'j •. ^'/t) c •*^ yw-\... « !' %.\ ' *<•. \ A-:-’'i- ■ • "' • a’ • ■ •,'4 '•• ■ • ‘ •: . . r.4 • , t ■J! .i'* • ■; * i • •. •«*%\ • • \*• * I' ’ ’ »• 1 ■ ! ' ■• » V. •••• ^.V V F W •. i * ■* t 9 1 1 .-*•. 0 •* 1 V 10^1^ «JA (II) wZb( 10) V P3I '4 ; I 100 ^3:?, &o.^4) «e> i.’o » * 7} 3f ?5 '65. / '^(U) \r ^ \' \ C 161 .1?/ Of ^ t / /^ 4r->p* »69. 5 V ki -- r. / (I?) / -64 (?4)S? ^ 5 (25)Is ^ (2611^ 2 (28);r ? . e •. V *hih4| ”■^(29) M ' 5 ? iU. ^;25.<'5-. »(??)? .»?5 ?* ,i-fv“-»DEV£LO^t:Oi ;2S2S ^ • J S‘'l 5^3 i s M * • c (55)- • S (17) P p \ p •:5.?5 / / / ll? \7 Hi a iS „ S le S(0 1 V a (42) ^■•(W " 3 >6 Q (4.) •JS ’ 3 'A «!>•< * . c • (40) U):^ S cjaiS? --------- M ’ 3 13 S 1 6 F ?. I ? (O) wu , •-^ Q A^ ( 5^) • f ^ OUTLOt 8\i\i.X/^'34')^(^ ^ \ . %‘ » ; 50 ; 50 ; 5c :(??):C5a);(40):(36) * . 8. \»'•: \ iS; '60,t '’Xa^X .•S' 6 .S^ K ^ (^) a ' 5 _!1S?5 A>C |« M 1 @AVS1DE (50) 1!3I90DS I •« 4 < y \ 75 4.'4 ■?l I j:.AycTAC..,.on._,x:;;ry'n, lnr\ i • •. 1A * . I " , kin • •#. • • * » .• 'i. * •• •^•V:«ft«-. ':;y.s.. -.rX • I.;- • • V‘* "W • i 'k'v. !•, • I i* ;?*A ' /*■' •■«'*■ *;Ri .\‘'• • >•• •• •i'i!'{(mIv!-’ •*: i ^ ‘.* ' ■/ ••1: ?••;• •/• * ^ • ’»»'*» • * . I mOE^% ^ .• - * % ti ^ ' • • • • • • ■V: :v’.' -■'■ / : '.J:;. ■ !;• ^VsA^:f:{«';■;^■:^:,;■;;;. < I fX^ ^ ‘’* ftr ;r* •«' -> r* V‘ ’A .• * • • • ‘ •( k :•# f v.^ '!. •• •-• ■■ '.*■*:! i I S4il7S N r. % ig. CertificatG of Survey for Mary McCarty of Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, "Dayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka” Hennepin County, Minnesota M9f*4C ’uy /2S,2S / o I 5C‘;i V K**' » I I /2S.25 Legal Description Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, "Baysido Addition to Lake Minnetonka” This survey shows the location of the boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to show any improvements or encroachments. o: Iron marker Bearings shown are based on an assumed datum. y Coffin & Gronbfrg, Inc.I hereby certify ll\al this survey was prepared by me or under my direct super vision, and that I am a dulv registered Civil Engineer and Lanci Surveyor under tlie laws of the Stale of Minnesotn Mnrl S Crnnhf're Minne^nt.1 Vumber 127"^ DATE J- fS SCALE Sc ' lOBNO 9J-2SO 4 i — K 0 Ctf m CA ■ ■' "; 1 _ t4 d»..-'' 1 - / ^ Ul 1:3) SPRING ST ! ^ ^n:i %> ^ fc PARK 2 P.Lcrt> :? 5 _ S U»i-( t ^|i : •k 0 •*#> OAK 51 5»fJ 1st 5 w'®3'‘ =««>^ ?i ? I » A !' .‘ *4v ■ ' .ii\ \ :^6t6W 101 I 8 jfljt I L•V* -Ml • r 9 ► ' »a'?i *u 4 \ <.. \ aw^iiUf Jk. cy ^ S ^'t: * ti tssn f !, M ■ .1 ; •i*‘ ►— zr tn cn 2 > O -H O -H X O .-u m o :o rn :o o 2: <• «y> r- rn r2: rn o m “H ZD 3“ C/1 m m CO n) O 33 .*cr Ln o 2! —< o •—• o 3: -H cn > »—t —I 3) o rp 33 -H O —• CZ O Ivi H^ 11 M > 8 WV?«*f ii^i 1; w K\--«J ',1* ^ ( .* 1 1 ‘V* __________ • h i r T I-- -................* ‘ 2- ivz/ l..^c . t •*,. --------------------------------------------- w / O '■■■' if?i ' ■ r-v ,:/ Tnr / o. o CITY of ORON RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 316 6 •WIIX 2f?Ii"?0NKA AVE^UB KNOWN AS LOTS 3 AND 4, BLOCK 3, BAYSIDE ADDITION TO LAKE MINNETONKA o..ani.ea “I/. and WHEREASr the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project was ini-^ated by i4Ls"4fy°44ari?4i"n 4hl4"lorsT anf^Tloc." 3° nJ^siai Addition to Lake Minnetonka, are located; and WHEREAS, the aforementioned Lo s 3 and 4 are separate adjacent tax parcels owned in common by a single ownei, described for tax record purposes as PINS number 05-117-23 13 0024 and 05-117-23 13 0025, respectively; and WHEREAS, the adjacent Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka, are vacant lots which are inten e to be sesrved by municipal sewer; and WHEREAS, the total dry land area of Lots 3 and 4 is approximately 0.29 acres, as compared to the existing zoning regulations requiring 2.0 acres per buildable site; and WHEREAS, said parcel is not buildable without one or more variances from the existing zoning code; and WHEREAS, the owner of said Lots 3 and 4 has declared to Hennepin County that Lots 3 and 4 will be allowed to go tax forfeit; and WHEREAS, said tax forfeiture would give the City the oDOortunity to allow said Lots. 3 and 4 to be sold to an adjacent property owner to increase the area of the adjacent property; and WHEREAS, two of the three properties abutting Lots 3 and 4 are suostandard in area and would become more conforming in area by incorporating said lots with their existing holdings; and Page 1 of 2 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3166_________ WHEREAS, by allowing said properties to go tax forfeit, the property owner gives up any substantial property rights for use of said property, and therefore the City's refusal to provide sanitary sewer service to said Lots 3 and 4 would not deny e property owner of a substantial property right; and WHEREAS, the parcel is unbuildable unless sewer is provided or the property is attached to adjacent vacant parcels because of insufficient room to provide for house, well, and primary and future septic system drainfields. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota that sewer service will not be provided to Lots 3 and 4, Block 3, Bayside Addition to LaJce Minnetonka, because the property is substandard in area, is intended by its owner to be allowed to go tax forfeit, is adjacent to other vacant land which will be provided with municipal sewer service and to which this property could be attached to create a single buildable site that, while still substandard, wou?.d more closely meet the 2 acre requirement for a buildable lot than would the properties taken individually. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota on this 10th day of August, 1992. ATTEST: Barbara A. Peterson,MayorDorothy Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of August, 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. CAROLE A. HASEMAN NOTART WIUC-MI«E30TA HENNEPIN COUNTY MY COMMBSON «>« Notary Public Page 2 of 2 .r X CITY of ORON RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCI NO. 3157_________ A resolution determining that sanitary sewer service Mill ^ PROVIDED TO PROPERTT tOCATED AT -245- TONKA AVE^DE KNOWN AS LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 3 BAYSIDE ADDITION TO LAKE MINNETONKA WHEREAS* the City of Orono is a municipal corpcjration organised and existing under the laws of the State of Minneso a; and WHEREASr the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project was initiated by the City to solve existing on-site sewage treatment problems xn the Stubbs Bay area, within which Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, -aysx e Addition to Lake Minnetonka, are located? and WHEREAS, the aforementioned Lots 5 and 6 are separate adjacent tax parcels owned in common hy a single owner, described for tax record purposes as PINS number 05-117 23 1j 0026 and 05-117-23 13 0027, respectively? and WHEREAS, two adjacent abutting parcels of Lots 5 and 6, namely Lots 3 and 4, owner will be allowed to go tax forfeit: and WHEREAS, the total dry land area of ^ approximately 0.29 acres, as ^ reg^ulations reouiring 2.0 acres per buxldable sit.,, and WHEREAS, said parcel is not buildable without one or more variances from the existing zoning coae^ an WHEREAS, the potential future °^hf'^Mrlel vacant land could increase the total dry land area of the parcel to approximately O.o8 acres? and Lots 5 anf rone“a“lcording \o'all" to*^n%" S standards, would not be contrary to the xntent of the Communx , Management Plan? and Page 1 of 2 i .» - -T\«J r CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.3167 WHEREAS r failure to^ provide the parcel and future septic system for house, well, ana primai-jr (3r3.infi-BXds; andis; diiLi right-o£-^y'?^fa=fnt P^^fVcp^^trupon "completion of the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project. ^ 1 n-F r bewt;!. jri.wj^ww. s s -.s.s ss:‘S s the property, of^anv^zoning variances which itself constitute granting of - construction on the lot required now Vf ied for shall be reviewed on their ow merits and circumstances at that tim . Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota on this 10th day of August, attest : OorotEy”^^Hailin', city C eclerk Barbara A. Fetersun, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. this 10th da®y o7lugu"s\S^onofa" Minnesota S. Hallin, Mayor a t^trument^as executed on behalf municipal corporation and saia insti of the City. J CAROLE A. KLSEMAN NOTAAY PVJBUC—rfMICaOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY MY CCMUlSSCN OPIRE3 i-?>Q8 Notary Public Page 2 of 2 7. TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Jeanne A. Mahusth, Building & Zoning Administrator June 16, 1993 SUBJECT: #1835 David and Ellen Phelps, 1950 Fox Ridge Road - Variance - Public Hearing Applicants propose an addition to the northeast/street side of the existing residence. The addition will consist of a garage and a family room addition where the current 2-stall garage exists. The residence is already located within a substandard street setback and the new addition will encroach further into the substandard street setback area. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - Current/sireet setback Required = 50’ Existing = 35.5’ Proposed = 24,4’ Variance = 25.6’ or 51.2% Please review E.xhibits H and I. The adjacent protected tributary. Long Lake Creek, is shown on both maps. The property is located outside of the tributary protected area (300’). Applicants’ property is not subject to the new Shoreland Regulations requiring hardcover reviews nor the required septic inspection to determine if the septic system is conforming (meeting 3’ required separation from bottom of trench to seasonal water table). List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Applicants’ Site Plan E - Photograph of Existing Structure F - Septic Map G - Survey H - Topographic Map 1" is = 100 ’ I - Plat Map r is = 200’ Zoning File ^1835 June 16, 1993 Page 2 Description of Request The applicants seek to expand living space by using part of attached existing garage addition for an expanded family room and the remainder of the existing garage with the 13.2’x22.6’ addition will provide area for the nev/ 2-stall garage. Review Exhibit E, the garage addition will be constructed with the same roof design and pitch as extension on east side. Upon your site inspection, note the garage addition will extend no further streetward than the free standing lamp post. Statement of Hardship Please review Exhibit A, applicants note the following hardships: the septic drainfield and tanks are located to the immediate west side of residence (review Exhibits D and F). iTie house is located 24.4’ from the east lot line limiting expansion to the ease side. The house is already locai d within a substandard setback at 35.5’. At the rear of property the topography slopes to the wetland at the rear. Review Exhibit H. Staff would add the following: the 7-lot Fox Ridge plat has an average lot area of slightly 1+ acres and subject to 2-acre zoning standarus. The proposed in.provements do^not imolve bedioom additions resulting in potential impact on existing septic system. M^y of the lots within the Fox Ridge plat do not have additional areas for alternate or future septic system. The addition will be placed over an existing driveway bed that would have been useless for future septic expansion. Issues for Consideration A.Will the proposed addition be consistent with the type of development within the Fox Ridge neighborhood? B.What other options are available for expansion? The walkout design makes it difficult for a family room expansion to rear and an upward expansion is impractical. C.Is there a need for nimaround now that garage is moved within 24’ of road? A backout apron would have to be installed within the east side of the driveway and may require the removal of the mature landscape plantings. Should applicants seek a loop driveway similar to the one installed on property to immediate west? Staff will ask City Engineer to comment. A CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION I'r« •« t «'•Initial Application Fee $175.00 if ^ ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address \<\<^ - - - - --- - - - - Property Identif. Number (P. I .D.), n3.d l? ^ ^ Attach legal description to application i- not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired __ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of * Present use of pr<^erty; ^X_residential ---- Zoning District: V4fi-------------------- ■S $ J V* V •r T nonur; L » u i- t l » X t- tv » - u i. { V- J - I vvv^ « ni rCf j f •fV it i I w** VV Lvl-’i _'.4.v other(specify) APPLICANT Name \ Q SUlUA Phone (home) — Phone (wor)c) ^ ; C<Tx ritv:Address OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address: ____________________________ _______________________~ DESCTWTIO^or^^si” Estimated Construction Cost $ Zip: OOX) cribe request in detailiuitLAiL.Describe £i^ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Width_ _ Lot Area y setback: V Front Side Hardcover ___Lot Coverage P^ear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and __n.-s.,-___ n c-omnliance with Zoning? Cofle requirements. VJV\^Vw,| ViocJt’ (attach additional sheets if necessary) required submittals -1 • All of the following information must be submxtted by—tl^e—applxcatxon deadline date in order iEor your application to be considered complete^. *11. Co'^’pleted Application Form , ,/2. Cei^fied Property Owners List of owners within 150 (you must obtaxn ^ this -ist from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). m3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). ^■4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to xnclu e hardcover calculations as required.(provide one (1) copy 8% xll for reproduction). , » . x- u Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevatxons) xf any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8Js"xll ). 6. Slcetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8 Jj xll ). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate Ixst ot any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application is not complete if the abo^ oi7Tii3iti.on has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information requxred or requested by the Zoning.Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (sta 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 PLlp Date tion and verification of this request Owner's Signature ^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 review meetings of the Planning Commission and Comcil. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make authorized agent attend :.n your place and to advise the Bulldl g Office of this change prior to the meeting. V :> 1 ■ .■■pj«»«Tai»«w.i.w>.»^w^««j«.ij* RUN DATE OA/22/95 • 'BATCH 009 HEWIEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM . PROPERTY Oi'WERS LIST REPORT NO. PAGE PIA35'*0120PROP AOOR 0(««ER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 3B 05-117-23 13 0001 00350 BROItl RO S H F FARLEY « K G FARLEY WILLIAM « KATHLEEN FARLEY 350 BROWN RO S LONG LAKE ttN 55356 •>^ %, i.f.;.38 03-117-23 13 00C200300 OROtM RO S JOHN C DOUTHIT ETAL JOHN C OOUTHIT 300 S BROtRI RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117-23 13 000501995 FOX RIOGE RO R S 8 MACK RAYMONO H HACK 1995 FOX RIDGE RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 » • V . ) ■1- PROP ADOR OWNER N.ir1E. TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR 38 03-117-23 :J J006 01965 FOX RTO..F RP ' •! ' 7 0 E KIRKMAN » J M KIRKMAN ’''y." t OAVIO E S JOANNE H KIRKHAN 1965 FOX RIOGE RO long lake HN 55356 « • •• . ♦ 38 03-117-23 13 0007 01895 FOX RIDGE RO 0 B COSGROVE AAA COSGROVE 0000 B > AfPI A COSGROVE 1895 FOX RIOGE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117-23 13 0008 01850 FOX RIDGE RD N C HEADRICK A L S HEADRICK M C HEADRICK A L S HEADRICK 1850 FOX RIDGE RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117*23 13 0009 PROP ADOR OI«^R NAME TAXPAYER liAHE/ADDR 01900 Fo:: RircE rd J A J FERRIS JEREMY J A JUNE K FERRIS 1900 FOX RIDGE ROAD LONG LAKE HN 55356 vi'-:'' • ''Y .• V r 38 03-117-23 13 0010 01950 FOX RIOGE RD : D S PHELPS A E 0 PHELPS DAVID S A ELLEN D PHELPS V t ; 1950 FOX RIDGE RO ' ,^.LONG LAKE HN 55356 • . 38 03-117-23 13 0011 01960 FOX RIOGE RD LUCIA T tlORISON LUCIA T MORISON 1960 FOX RIDGE RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 • • ♦' 6* o PROP ADOR OltlER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR . . ' ' % - • I ^ ' t' .* * . *.• '.»• • > ' • >' • • ;R TOTAL BATCH . • 009 00009 A; . .T ' lODR '•••V'-.ft *1' r'v '■• *:•,/• IV. I--: 'o r'1-I V , . ■ . • .i ' **i '>? }♦••;'...*-J*,:,.: f F \ * t ’ \ • * ) . -i-represent • • • I . y^r'V - C* of.hy.kho • •'.• i *: ..: .'A-,, v:'f > r. .-T,,. A'. i, that the facts REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.. o n > date' tA* V • f • • i ? ‘ ! '***\ '-'i '^1 . * • o •o *,..« i' * • r* Certificate 0 for Biff Jcnes ' of Lot 6, Block 1, Fox Ric'ga I ■ 1 f SurveyC-: P-- , ! Jones V:PLA -i i Hennepin County, Minnesota^.. • :.V V-^3 ^ j ^ -rf-3C<r^ D! Zi£y_C, Its /7rf o I hereby certify the boundaries o and a proposed a croachneniis. Date : 4-9-86 Scale: 1" « 40' 0 : Iron mark /av J i^lru -rHv opf use, -Tl^ ^Xt>us^e■- rtr^-'TVH/ D,S avvj//jCi, *"■ rJoT ir' Sf’-OVJN) 01^ S:r,uj^, - -> 5t. ■ V . • ^ r ^ >1 jsSSi'-'-w'S^-- =•T-.~ ADDRESS CODE ___ CITYOFORONO SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY CARD Date Connected to MuniciDol « 4 Address 1^0X ^ if Standard trench Property *.D. 3 CGlC^^ Za 7“ ^ Sl^c.<, / □ Mound ^ ^ / A System type ________________ Legal Descfiption _ TZZ-/(g “ Q:>0OO Permit No. .Q ^ ^__Cate of permit ^ ^ D»3> ^ Installer No, Bedrooms Building type /tg:^iD^/vjf_«£. or GPO 3-V Laundry ______Dishwasher ________ Garbage Disposal WELL DATA L *5w•p CT 3 o S "3 oi SEPTIC TANKS: Material -•^-O V r<.Capacity 1) / OCk^2) ^ P /^iTb. dPiiC Proper outlet and inlet Baffles cr^jiic c -r*^mcT»-c3 cft«-c.au. 3SO, Liquid depth to RO level __________________ Height of tank bottom above water table /J Distance to nearest building ci» — ■ j DRAINFIELD: Total length of lines /^S‘_________Number of lines -------------------------Trench width — ;r*« * Total treatment ;rea (sg. (t.) ~1 ^O Height of drainrield above water table 3 ' r L^y JS/LI/-i-Type of filter material .2:___L_t 2-» C_f<Soil type Distance from nearest bldg. ^!Pa, O__Tile size l --------------Fere rat Depth of fill over drainfleld Depth of rock over tile rate v\ 30^mln/in under tile / ^ f 5 o ?5 oa SJ> a a Eo •J I C K0 ci a uc<• £> iTo a E 3a. •3 u cou 9 I ' __:_____ . - A.;- . • ;v’. -V.Tv : V • - • -w . ‘.-i •* v*^*-'* •'V;:.;. ;: •• A -. r: . • : . . . • . - * • .. . •. • • . ••• • . - jr’ - 'X-»- , we ------- . ------ . . . ^ r-it:if .•.•-r-t.. _— •••---- .... - ‘.T. • • .S3 inspection record pumpout RECORD location SKETCH w- • DATE COMPLIANCE ^________ oate gallons ». ^ . • ^ V^9-'7P^ e,^>*ef^CJAJC. /e^c^agD /^- g -*7 B Ann y^D Z.A, O /ti^***^ Ajo 5.<<grAg/Aj6t — /-------- nr> <Lfr~fec>r\Q ^ m r\\<^ I'll' 7^ _/cOCl /p-/<^-7g /erro i / //-2.2-~~7 3 /OOO. {__/2oo .;i 7-23-^^ no J 5^3:!? I-?-20:30 1-irhR! V. « » •s?A/ I T o « ViE gtofre Include: II Well location 2) Distance from house to septic tanks, dist. box. c-CONFORMING s-SUBSTANDARD N - NONCONFORMING and drainfield 31 Noith arrow and road X 937-6 V To:Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator Date:June 17, 1993 Subject:;^1836 Ronald Lauer, 1180 Tonkawa Road Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District; LR-IB, Lakeshore Residential List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Topographic Survey E-1-2 Hardcover Facts F - Elevations First Floor Plan Second Floor Plan Basement Plan Survey G H I J The application involves variances within the lakeshore protected area as major portions of the existing residence are located within the 75 setback zone Applicant proposes the installation of a second story that will not extend beyond the existing envelope except for a 3’ X 16’ upper level deck or walkway that will encroach 3’ further into the lakeshore setback area. Refer to Exhibit J. Note deck will not result in an increase in har Jcover as it will be totally located over an existing patio. The following ordinances are pertinent to this review. 1. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Lot coverage. Total lot area = s.f. Allowed = 3,920 s.i. *.>r 15% Existing = 1,746 s.f. or 6.68% Proposed = 1,794 s.f. or 6.8% Section 10.22. Subd. 1 (A). A Structural setback. Required = 75’ Existing = 50.7’ Proposed = 47.7’ (3’ second level deck) Variance = 27.3’ or 36.4% ; • \ I Zoning File ^1836 Jane 17, 1993 Page 2 B.Non-siructural - Lakeshore patio. Required = 75’ Existing = 34.3 ’ Proposed = 34.3 ’ No change. 3.Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) - Second story addition will encroach the average lakeshore setback line, refer to Exhibit J. 4. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. A.0-75’ setback area = 11,294 s.f. Allowed = 0 s.f. Existing = 1,791 s.f. or 15.85% Proposed = 1,791 s.f. or 15.85% (Second level deck located over patio) B.75-250’ setback area = 14,838 s.f. Allowed = 3,709.5 s.f. or 25% Existing = 3,370 s.f. or 23% Proposed = 3,370 s.f. or 23% No change proposed. C.Total hardcover. Total area - 26,132 s.f. Total hardcover = 5,161 s.f. or 19.7% Description of Request The second level expansion will consist of a master bedroom suite that will include a 3’ x 16’ upper level deck at the lakeside resulting in an additional 3 encroachment into the lakeshore setback area. In reviewing the to-scale drawing submitted of the elevations, the overhang is shown at 1 ‘/i’ and will not be credited as hardcover. All exterior improvements will be contained within the existing boundaries of designated hardcover improvements on survey. review Exhibit J. At the site inspection, staff noted that the lakeside patio area was made up of cement blocks. Applicant should clarify the existing patio is to be removed and installed with a cement patio. The replacement of the patio would require variance approval and Plannmg Commission may seek modifications in the area and setback to lake. fab Zoning File #1836 June 17, 1993 Page 3 The second s^ory addition will have minimal impact on lakeshore views ot residence to the immediate north as lakeshore view windows are already blocked by privacy tencmg along the lot line. Statement of Hardship Please review Hxhibit A. The house is small compared to the adjacent homes. The improvement would be consistent with the current pattern of development in the neighborhood. The structure was located on the property prior to current zoning regulations and lakeshore setback rec|uiremenis and as a result the majority of the residence is located within the 0-75 zone. The entire expansion is upward and does not increase hardcover. The steeper elevations to the west or street side make horizontal expansion diflicult and non-functional based on the layout of the current house. A westward addition may also necessitate the removal of mature trees. t Issues for Consideration Wnat existing hardcover improvements can be reduced? Staff would recommend that the driveway backout area remain as shown, as property abuts a busy county road. The,only other area to reduce would be the patio. If applicant is to install a new cement patio, a 5 x 17 section as shown on Exhibit J could be eliminated. Hardcover would be reduced by 85 s.f. in the 0-75 ’ zone or .75%. The non-stnictural setback would now be 39.3+.’. n CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION ^ . Initial Application Fee $175.00 - . ($50.00 per each additional variances Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) v; • -0 •••: 7 y.-" « #V * • > ??f v nc ric-pijr!I I u*f t/nwiu.* fi7^,VC£ 1 u*ViL V' V VV V i)i i.:£.v ir- r>‘ Jl I w* • VV» rirrv* C r f ff u J75.0C. r.iTL^c-T- ruMSV vw ;*v7 4v<;.‘t /V\'|< CAJ 7j4;W-V'vi J>VA PROPERTY INFORMATION f ^UfVfc// Site Address //^C '7c*Ay/C Oa J'O Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) / yy g<DO<b Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired V- _ _ _(month/year) I (do)(f3^o nq$) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present usaof property: _ _ _residential _ _ _other(specify) Zoning District:__ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT Name P. LAUj=/^ Phone (home) H Phone (wor)c) 0^94e> Address: Kf *^HeA.(l 0*t City: Zip: f OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _ _ _C <“ AxfitZ. \_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) Phone (worJc) Address:City;Zip: Estimated Construction Cost $DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in detail: /-UcLSt£ A aj J I^OC VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ Lot Area Setbac)c: __ Lot Width Hardcover ____^Lot Coverage Front Side ____ Rear ____ Average La)ceshore Other (specify) HARDSRIP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements.-------------- rt /-:/n ,)^X T <-r>7«t-c ru tit' A/=‘C-A yv •=,7~^ri£A/i'c2!j A.’^r>V / ^ ‘ ^ M ^ r r -------------------------- , _ ilC TT. /MCtc d&XLK . 7Si_J=U^^^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) required submittals of t:he following information must be submi.t'ted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete; 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Depart'.ent of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8ij"xll" for reproduction). 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8J5"xll"). 6. S)cetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll"). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8._ _Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this applicatxon. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the_ infonnation 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 correp^ to the best of^is/her )cnowledge. Applicant's Signature XC Date 7' Z OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission member^ and Couiici 1 members for purposes of inv'estiga— tion and verification ofXrnis request. Owner's Signature Date r/sf/w- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Plann.ing Connnission and Council. If an applicant ^s unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please malce arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. • # • * f ** * !.-•—\ r-----W. >• •• I j tfi^ r/*. /i C- .'• 7 t 1 RUN DATE 05/26/95 BATCH 009 .> HErtlEPir4 COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY Olt4ERS LIST u PROP ADDR d^ER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR U re 08-117-25 15 0005 I \: - 01200 TONKANA RD 't ‘ MILFREO PERPER S MIFE NUFREO PERPER 1200 T0f4KAMA RO LONG LAKE m 5555G *. • * • • * . «• • PROP ADDR d4NER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 50 08-117-25 15 0008 01140 T0T4KAHA RD R A K KYLE RICHARD A KATHLEEN KYLE 1140 TONKANA ROAD LOW LAKE Ft4 55556 PROP ADDR 0I«4ER NATYE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 08-117-25 42 0001 01220 TOrYKANA RO STUART L BURNIECE STUART L BURNIECE 1220 TONKANA RD LOrJG LAKE m 55356 * ' i 4 * '•* . {;■i:-' t /. J {••::r t f I t ^ A % * \f V. *■ IA V,-V {‘}-i L 58 00-117-25 15 0006 OllOO TONKANA RO RONALD D LAUER RCtmLD LAUER 1160 TONKANA RO L0t4G LAKE MN •>5556 o . • . OlUO TONKANA RO ii-'ViliA S « E 6 OlAfWND : 1 ' . STEPHEN & ELHA 6 TONKANA RO - ■ 56 06-117-25 15 0017 01165 TONKANA RD M T RENARO AOS RENARD M T RENARO ADS RENARD 1165 lOtJKANA RO LONG LAKE HN 55556 V A' THOMAS H SMITH ' ’ t'l205 TONKANA ~ SMITH .< • • • I' w ii* VV ' • • i A . T ANA RO ' . V- • • »■ .MN 55556 M'.i,. • - .V TOTAL BATCH 009 00007 J I-• ’ * .* t CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED,PRESENTEb'ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE ‘ <• •4 REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS i', ’ OF THE HEWEPIN C0L9JTY DEPARTMENT OF* PROPERTY TAXATION» TO THE BEST ‘ ' OF MY KNONLEOCE AND BELIEF. “'v N '^ >’ ' 1; DATE I- ' • 4 *11**1* I • ; K . . ( 1 •* . V .. . 4^ • . • • ‘ - f V ♦ S4tW9 o Cert Ificate of Survey for LAUER HOMES in Lot 9, Aud. Sub. No. 217 Hennepin County. Minnesota % \ Legal Description Thai part of Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision No. 217, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East right of way line of Hennepin County Road No. ♦35 distant 1141.25 feet Southeasterly, measured along said right of way line, from the intersection of the North line of Lot 10, Auditor's Subdivision No. 217 and said right of way line; thence Northeaster Iy a distance of 143.2 feet to a point which is distant 1004.29 feet perpendicularly distance from the North line of said Lot 10, said Auditor's Subdivision and continuing on saidline a distance of 3S.2 feet, more or less to the shoreline of Maxwell Bay; thence Northwesterly along the shoreline of Maxwell Bay to a point which is distant 125 feet perpendicularly distance from the above described line; thence Southwesterly parallel to the above dosribed line a distance of 205.3 feet more or less to the East right of way line of County Road No. 135; thence Southeasterly along said right of way line a distance of 125.04 feet to the point of beginning. This survey shows the existing topography on the boundary survey supplied by the owner. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. .•Existing contour DatumiMean sea level Con IN k Gkonblrg, Inc.I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct super vision, and that I am a duly registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of the Stale of Minnesota. i*\^ I 111'. «iI ^■ 1st ’ I ‘ i‘ 0 Mark S. Gronberg Minnesota License Number 12755 DATE SCALE /^r JOB NO. rJ-/93 mSS HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE)75-250 Existing H ardcover in Zone 250-5CC' 5C0-1CG0' A.H ouse 3. Garage c. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio / ]eck F.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY PLASTIC SHEETING G. O ther ^3 LENGTH X __X X 33: - X _ X _ X WIDTH Total H ardcover in Zone /So*/ _/ S.F, _ SI F. S.F. .F. 1®=®^ _ S.F. i. - J _ S. F. S.F. .<■5%SJ S.F. S.F. _ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F /7^/S.F Total Property Area in Zone // S.F.B /. 'Tf/B //X 100 = .-.m- HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEEl SETBACK zone: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'250-500' *>— E xisting Hardcover in Zone 5C0-1GC0' A. House XS' LENGTH B. Garage c. D r I veway <±jS22£i P£A survey D,. Sidewalk 4^^ ^ATIO/ D eck F.Landscape AREAS UNDERL j^IN ?L»3T.c' - SHEETING _ X G.yOther V /S’ WIDTH 44 /O Total H ardcover in Zone Total Property A rea in Zone • //^o /S'o S I r) S • r • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ■a' S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ^ 3 VO S.F Ziill? S.F. Ib 100 =% 4 -i m‘■' .'5 ?) « f 1180 TONKAWA DRIVE. ORONO. MN •*. •I. / ■:::-.\*/l v'; ii••;c.'r.\l K.n ' I:' - . . #i t< ’ ' 4 • ••• ♦ *•■ - "*ir .4------ Oi 111 oilii^i j:zl?i-.»ill S CO! ? <3^’»kj «!(wC as iOC*TlO ON 22 t»»SV O'0 30 SCALE 150 FEET SURVEY FOR: LAUER HOMES_ ROPER TY AOWESS. 1160 County Rood No. 135. Ofono. Hennepin County. Mirmcsolo. (rurnlshed by C'‘enl) Thol pofl Lot 9. Auditor’s Subdivision No 217, described os follows: Commend'.^ ot o point on the Eost right of woy line of Hennepin County Rood No. 1^5, dislont IMl 25 feel Southeoslcrly. mec“ red olong said right of woy line, hom the intersection of the North line of Lot 10. Auditor's Subdivision No. 217. ond soid right of way line; thence Northeoilcriy c distonce of 143.2 feet to o point which is distont 1004.29 feel perpenoicUor^ distonce from the North line of soid Lot 10. soid Auditor's Subdivision ond continuing on soid line o distonce of 36.2 lect. more or less to the shoreline of MonwcM Boy, thence Northwesterly olong the shoreline of Moaweu Boy to o point which is dislont 125 fert perpendiculorly distonce ffom the above described line: thence Southwesterly porollel to the obove described line o distonce of 205.3 feet more or less to the Eost right of woy line of County Rood No. I3f; thence Southeasterly olong sold right of woy line o distance of 125 04 feet tc the point of beginning. i 4 I I hereby certify thot this plot wos prepored by me or under my direct supervision ond thot I om o duly Registered Lond Surveyor under the lows of the Stole of Minnesota. Doled this 22rd doy of Februory. 1993 EGAN. FIELD k NOWAK^INC. Jock Buike Minnesota license No 20201 NOTES The or.enlotion of this beoring system is bosed cn the Eo.‘l right of way line of County Rood No. 135 »*hich is ossumed to have o beoring of South 25 degi^ees 00 minutes 00 seconds Cost. 2 No title v^ofk NOS furnished for the preporotion of this survey to verify the legal description or the enstence of ony cosemcnls or t cu^bronces. y Thu Wifvey show, r.nly those improvements visible dutirrg the field survey, some structures or improvements covered by ice cmd snow or underground mey not be shown. 3 Areo of the propfMy described ficreon is 24.341 squu'e feel or 0.559 ocres. EGAN, FIELD « NOWAtr INU iTtim ?45'i-7a____________________ 4. The totol orea of liord cover surface on the property described hereon Is I1.I6I squore feel or 21 percent of the properly. (612) S4C-68J7 TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:June 17, 1993 SUBJECT: Cindy Fredrickson, 1516 Long Lake Blvd. - Variances - Public Hearing Applicant proposes the installation of a detached garage at 24 ’xi2 ’ within the rear yard of property. The proposed garage will replace an existing garage. Both the existing and proposed garages will be located within substandard setbacks. The following ordinances are pertinent to this review: Zoning District LR-IA Total lot area = 9,727 s.f. or .223 acres (required = 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres) Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (E) - accessory strucnires in excess of 750 s.f. require special setback requirements. Required 15’ A.Rear Existing = 5’3" Proposed = 6’ Variance = 9’ or 60% B. Side Existing = 1.5’ Proposed = 2' Variance = 13 ’ or 87% Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 - crowding principal. Accessory stnicture must be 10 ’ from principal strucmre. Required = 10 ’ Existing = 11 ’ Proposed = 6’ Variance = 4 ’ or 40% 1 Zoning File #1837 June 17, 1993 Page 2 Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - hardcover inventory. 75-250’ setback area = 2,240 s.f. Existing = 432 s.f. or 19.28% 250-500’ setback area = 7,486.5 s.f. Allowed = 2,245.95 s.f. or 30% Existing = 3,132 s.f. or 41.83% Proposed = 3,536 s.f. or 47.2% Variance = 1,290.05 s.f. or 17.2% Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) Total lot area = 9,727 s.l. 1,459 s.f. or 15% is allowed 1,533 s.f. or 15.7% exists 1,937.7 s.f. or 19.9% is proposed List of Exhibits Applicant proposes the installation of a 24 ’x32 ’ detached garage within the rear yard. Current structure is located P/2’ from east lot line and 5.3’ from north lot line. Proposed structure will be 2’ from the east lot line and 6’ from the rear at the northeast comer of the strucnire. The accessory strncmre will be located only 6’ from the principal structure where the code requires a minimum 10 ’ separation. The proposed garage is 768 s.f. and must be located 15 ’ from all lot lines. A structure less than 750 s.f. eap be placed 10 ’ from rear and side lot lines. An excess of strucniral coverage exists on the pi petty. The improvement will result in an increase of 4.2% structural coverage. Hardcover has been increased 5.4%. Applicant has shown no compensatory hardcover removals. At your site inspection determine if there will be any impact on the property to the intmediate north. The strucnire will be at a maximum height of 12'/2 ’. There appears to be a 6-7’ high solid privacy fence along the rear of the property. Along the east side there is open grassed" yard. The retaining wall along the lot line seems to be in a serious state of disrepair. Applicant should advise as to the stanis of the strucnire. Is it to remain or is to be rebuilt? The 24 ’ wide garage will require a 10 ’ wide cut into '.he existing 4 ’ bank. Applicant must provide grading and drainage detail with building permit. The maximum 12 '/i high structure will be place*! into the hill and may have limited visual impact on the property to the north. Staff has received no comments from the neighbors notified of the improvement. ■ I I ■ IMP ■ III I Zoning File #1837 June 17, 1993 Page 3 Issues for Consideration 1.There is an accessor>' storage shed on blocks located on the higher elevations to the rear of the property. There is no record of this strucaire on the survey nor does the hardcover inventory include the area. The structure must be removed before a building permit is issued for the new detached garage. What other hardcover improvements can be removed to offset increase of 5.4% hardco\er - 239.2 s.f. or 3.1% of patio deck. 158.72 s.f. or 2.1% of pavement. others? 3.The accessory strucmre will be placed less than 5 ’ from the lot line and will require special firewall construction based on building code requirements. 4.There is no turnaround on the site. Based on the limited use of roadway and location of property near tlie end of cul-de-sac, staff would recommend against a turnaround on the property-. The lot is already severely impacted by existing hardover improvements. 5.Will there will be a visual impact for the property owners to the north and east and if so, how would you minimize impact? Any recommendation of approval must include the following: 1.Removal of storage shed on blocks in rear yard prior to the City issuing a building permit for new construction. 2. Detailed foundation/grading plans for foundation walls of garage. 3.Hardcover removals are to be required. These removals must be completed prior to the footing inspection for the detached garage. Ptrr -—itar CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIO Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION V-aW. • •h r rrv rcr^/ri nccrrc A w'w'V*:. ww\.» ... '•-V «- '‘'iiu A._____»h.. I. U U/ • — ? 1-1^ AfV ///• » M.nifn I u*w '• *' VC*i‘*» "fV*»f C ^ ,r?k. I Ti. ✓ V uvv'A »wji /\‘0 Vw*.' iUW* ‘ Site Address Property Identif. Number (P. I. D. ) ^OQO^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Proeertv Acquired_ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _(month/year) I (do)^^o notT) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PresenuTls^ of property: N^J^residenticil _ _other (specify) Zoning District: / P[_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address =Lg^kb _ City: LoVs^Lg^ko^ Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address:City Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in Estimated Construction Cost $ IC^CCO'^ detail: /<L»P- - - VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ Lot Area 'V Setback: Lot Width ^ Hardcover Lot Coverage Front ^ Side ^ Rear _ _ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements. L /5cR 1^3 3>UHC>“v V«4r C/O’ ^okoH,.> (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQQIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your applicat-.ion to be considered complete: 1, _Completed Application Form 2, _ _Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 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>5"xll" for reproduction). 5, _ _Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8J5"xll"). 6, _S)cetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8J5”xll"). 7, _^As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8._ _Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variamce applicabion is not ccxnplete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. ‘.Applicant's Signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes easonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature 'Or Date Applicant must have all sal2^ittals 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 j^eview meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attena scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building S Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. J cc c e ■ 'A. ,Vw V,. RUN DATE 06/01/93 8ATCH 005 .. 1• * *1 HENNEPIN COOriTY PROPERTY INFORMATIOf4 SYSTEM PROPERTY OH4ERS LISTPROP ADDR . OHNER NAtlE * TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 58 26-110-25 55 000101686 lotk; lake DLVO J H GARDNER A A L GAROrJER ANITA L GARDNER 1686 LONG LAKE DLVD LONG LAKE MN 553S6 PROP ADDR 0»t4ER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 58 26-118-25 55 0C05 01520 LONG LAKE 8LV0 D J SMITH A K S JONDALL D J SMITH A K S JONDALL 1520 LONG LAKE DLVD LONG LAKE 55556 PROP ADDR 0K4ER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 58 2C-118-25 55 0012 01565 LONG LAKE BLVO J E BIGHAH A C A BIGHAM JAHES A CYNTHIA BIGHAM 1565 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE m 55556 PROP ADDR 0I«4ER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 58 26-118-25 55 0021 00888 DAKOTA AVE D A C NOODMARD DAVID A CYNTHIA HOOONARD 688 DAKOTA AVE LONG LAKE MN 55556 ' PROP ADDR dtlER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 56 55-118-25 22 0005 01509 LONG LAKE BLVO JAHES E COPLIN A WIFE JAMES E COPLIN 1509 LONG LAKE DLVO LOIK; LAKE m 55556 •! \ t. ■ i , '-1 I ■■■■ , . ■ " ,■>.• • * •' ■ ■uREPORT NO. PI655601 PAGE 2558 26-118-25 55 000201690 LONG LAKE BLVD T D ANDERSON A C A ANDERSON TROY A CATHERINE ANDERSON 1690 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE MN 55556 50 26-110-25 55 0006 01550 LONG LAKE BLVD GRANT D EGGENBERG GRANT D EGGENBERG 1550 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE Yfi 55556 ' 26-118-25 55 0006V* y"-- 01516 LONG LAKE BLVO; CINDY J FREDRICKSON ■\ i• CINDY FREDRICKSON r>. . ' c/o STATE BANK OF LONG LAKE . . : V i ^ BOX 656 . ; : *; / lota; lake mn 55556 i • • ' f *• ■ • ■■ ' 26-116-23 35 0007 " " i>‘ ' OIMO LONG LAKE BLVO ‘ J i ROBIN E CRAWFORD *>'•. • V _ _ __ _ _ _ . . __ _ _ _ •1>4 ^• % I. » * I*. . • •• •. V 4**^.V ■\ • o V i',C 1540 LONG LAKE BLVO • ' ' ' ‘ LONG LAKE MN S5356 ROBIN E CRANFORD ' *.I ? •v.ii ! *•• < i f 50 26-110-25 55 0016 01555 LOtJG LAKE BLVO BERNICE ZUMDUSCH BERNICE 2UHBJSCH 1555 LONG LAKE BLVO LONG LAKE HN 55556 r: •;'N » ^■ ’> ' • <‘. 58 26-118-23 S3 0020 , 00884 DAKOTA AVE .i t , * J • 1. • A T * • D I • 1 »f Yvi-v. L. ’’ »• ... ■ ‘ ■ ■ JGASNCR'- V. ‘ ' . ^ • ..' . ' .• ‘’ 1 H 4 . ^ • •. ' • » ^ t , , • J M BENHAY A K R ?\ r.’vj.'; JANET M BENHAY . >•, •^4* ? 066 DAKOTA AVE ORONO MN 55556 • -i' < • • * » 4»i 1 V 4 . 'll V f , 4’ 38 26-118-23 33 0022 00908 DAKOTA AVE S R KNUTSON A J A KNUTSON SCOTT R A JULIE A KNUTSON 908 DAKOTA AVE N LONG LAKE M4 55356 - Y'*''. i » ^ . \'.V > •'V t • f % s ^ ^ , * I* • . i. 'i TOTAL BATCH 005 00015 , y ... # 7.. . • / 58 55-110-25 22 0002 ' ' ■ *. .J ., /«•• • . 01525 LONG LAKE BLVO • • • 1 • . L H CAPRON ETAL H/L EST L N CAPRON * • 1 ' - . 17505 OLD ROCKFORD RD 4 . Y *• ■* ‘ • 1 • PLYMOUTH MN 554<46 *>• • ^ • 4 »• • i- I • • ’ *ii '*/ . '**. ^ 1' V !■ ' V .; * L .. .;.Vy • ’.v • • » , * ' 1 • • -v'-• / •*' > .*> ’ • .4 . • / . 1 • L 1. i • •I ; *' • •• ,4 't • ' j - I J T, • ) I. T'v f V ? •. , p I • « 'i;* • . V ’ 4 . . * t • fc . V *< . • * »‘i. ♦ > 4 06^ * V* • .■* * " V:. ■ 4 ■« RUN DATE 06/01/95• BATCH 005 •t I * • » ;> • ». * • ^ i ’ i ■• I'<{• • ■>y‘ I# ♦ . * » » \ , I I -.1 ■'♦ ; ■vv> V. HEtMEPZN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS I1ST • . . f f \ ( V. • .• • , f » i 1 ••• 1 ^ / • . . • > ■'■ ■'■ ' !>’.• ^ ■ V •,«, K- •# i ^ 1- i ' ••i Y4 I • I • . r •• . I * \ i 't • ‘ ■ti ; i -J i •• a'. •. • '• R . V** • • A REPRESENTATIW Of'inFORMATION'aS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS ;'ii ' ’^1 W ’ -‘ 'i' ' I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE OF THE HEftJEPlN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. , ^ * J i " * DATE' ♦ ; -V • . » .. *. * . • •* ’Ji • ♦ « • * - • ?! 'X*sV‘T*/'■■"’v' V • • ‘ V f- ' *• 'I* .V* .•> "i ’* • • 4 .• •« • •'7 ! I • • • ^ . j-'V'. i;.-.,•;v -- • *■* • * •* <‘ ■ • •V* 1 r I ■ ‘N-■*V • * *• . : '*• . I' -S's' * '• % k (6)^ %•:0 •o)# - ^ ••o rj 1 4 *■< »C <^4 • ■* .^*^6 V .: If :• __:!!>m---j;--i’^" ----------------------------- ,'t •;/••> w^swsr. Oi P a- / ^ V^ :? / /'Aisss 's I ms i/Ui'e Asm ■ Pt CP lot ?n CF LO’ !^>;a- J0H(9STii)!a'S ( '6)»< ;-5 •V, n T (in V''•<vj i;.s'* fv jHc /'/ 0 / S ? I • I r i J- r /5 il T '-» •\ (C^) \ ^ - N L0» ^»0 i% ^ 35- //5 ¥4 LOT - rf' % • 1 •,-r^ -.* V* ^'•r- i ♦ *3«*4 . ^« . >v • •%» V ’• K0* *• •■ »• -% ,««*1 «,* ■ - • "I •- I (we) Adjacent Property Ovmers' Acknowledgement Ponn Yj <L A;gz:SoO o£ LQA-,(nVg 'fiW'cL— Of' I ^—- (print: address] [print name(s)] , the oroposed iuorovement or proposed use of the o^Lr'/Tofated at"l_^'V > ^ referred to as Land Use Application No. bu?'me"rely to ^^nd'^that^tL'^propoLd'’neighbor'^pro^^^ or use the improvement plans and that tne p p requires Council approval. /fy Property 9^^®^ Property Owner Date ************************^**********'*** I (we) [print name(s)] c r of /y<P^ - C. AA J^ [print adi&ress ] rp/AVTotafed Application No J 4-v +. a-n *>v/acufna this acknowledgement, I (we) am ,.re) "„orisL"d ^ declarUpproval or' disapproval . ^l: b^oLrenr/rs^°nVt\%frhe^;rpote^d-^ P^<>.ect or use requires Cotmcil a^roval. Property Owner o o •/0«-5 8 Property Owner Date . ♦-Vi A r'T tv in the re^ lew of If you have any information that may assis ' the Buildiii9 & this Land Use Application, please subm t scheduled meeting date. . zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the schecuiea m Adjacent Property Owners- Acknowledgement Form DowAiD <T- lS?,0 CoN('- Wtdf I (we) ---------- (print address) [print name(s)] V ZT — , for rhe oroDosed improvement or proposed use of the have reviewed the plans f^r - referred to as Land Use property located at _ \ a V (.'..aY' ----- Application No j a-v, -in f^xecutinq this acknowledgement, I (we) am I (we) understand that in e. disaoDroval of the property or use (are) not asked to declare ®PP‘"°''^ CounciI'^that I (we) am (are) aware of but merely to confirm ^^/^e Crty Councr 1 ^th the improvement plans and tha. tne p requires Council approval. Date ^T- >7- ^5 Property Cwn^^r ************* Date ^c^c*************** “******* I (we) (print name(s)] (print address] have reviewed the plan^^^t^^^^ property located at Application No propo.ivement or proposed use of tne Iso referred to as Land Dse I ;we) understand that in ^|^g^pprottl"of^thl^^^ (are) not asked to council that I (we) am (are) aware of but merely to confirm tL proposed neighbor's project or use the improvement plans and that tne pi: v requi-tes Council approval. property Owner -a t* ■' / cr*"^ r • N •property Owner Date If you have any yout^commen*^^^^^^ Building s SL^„g^%"f^ic- a\^^irt^irda^y^%%Torr th/ scheduled meeting date. I (we) Adjacent Property Ovmers* Acknowledgement Form (Iqrrth . I( Wd(iX^ [pr?nt name(s)] address] ■) • ^ Dlans for the prooosed improvement or proposed use of the ^o^ert^Tolat^d ^ari!! ________ also referred to as Land Use Application No.______ I (we) understand that in executing this Vcr’us2 nor asked to declare approval or disapproval or the property or T_ t *■ oonfirm ^or the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware ofbut merely to confirm -or rne «,-^hkot *'c; nro-iect or usethe improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor s project or requires Council approval. '^/liI.j-llCa• 'TtUuli _ Property Owner Property Owner Date ^f^^t-tfklt***********'*^***** *************** I (we) ) ri4 of V [print address][print name(s)] . • ^ 4-Vho oi;,nc; for the proposed imorovement or proposed use of thehave reviewed the plans for tne prop . referred to as Land Use property located at_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __— Application No._ _ _ I (we) understand that in executing this (are) not asked CouncTrthlt I (we) am (are) aware of eh^ rm”oLl:nt°"pl“ns^"d\^%t tL proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council apj^oval. .Property # i TP O tX.* ’ 5^/ Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assise the g this “nd use Amplication, please ^“^mit your comments to Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. I (we) Adjacent Property C5wnors' AcXnovledgeaent Fona Ciluq)qS. guY.UiSXi\ of A'litl ^.................................................................................................................................. ’ U [print ria.i^e (s ) ] have re%’iewed the pi,ars the prcrcsed inprcvetnent or proposed use o^ the property located at X also referred to as Land Use Application Nc._ _ _. ' I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgements I (we) am (are) net asked to i^^clare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ^ r-^r^jskr AProperty Cwner ^kl93 Dat‘* L Property Owner Data teeee I (we) (print name(s)J (print address! have reviewed the plans for the, p^rops^sed^ improvement or proposed use of the property located at swed the plans for the, proposed. located at ^\v4 also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare~*pproval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the iraprov’ement pla :s and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner ^ i O O'O'tF S O o . .? / Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. S4«US L--/--:- I- -ris:: Certificate of Survey for Cindy Frodrickscn of Lot 5rAlbee*s Long Lake Hennepin County, Minnesota I ;i '•. I hI.- !• I' ' V • I ' ^ Y )l m 4h i' i ■ -^*4 Existing Legal Description Lot 5, Albee's Long Lake This survey shows the location ol a house and garage in relation to the boundaries of the above described property. It docs not purport to show any other improvements or encroach ments. •: Iron marker found o: Iron marker set e«eu8 Certificate of Survey for Cindy Fredrickson of Lot 5,Albee*s Long Lake Hennepin County, Minnesota Existing Legal Description Lot 5, Albee*3 Long Lake This survey shows the location of a house and garage in relation to the boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroach- mcnts. •: Iron marker found o: Iron marker set 5 «» t li I :L—J tI - •• 'i, I* ) .V ONI..U Coins & Grondirg , Isc.I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct super vision, and that I am a duly registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of the Stale of Minnesota. jLJi I p _______1__________■ t, 1:»I . r T'!i I intor DATE-93 A. SCALE }"-30' j ^uNo. 93-/04- it riJCCir.X?. CALCruAIiC jM" i < ^5 icrTjfeHiii SETIACK ::tt: (c:!>CL= cse) C-;«' "-250'J :5*-3CC' 'CO-ICCO' ExiSTIhg yAsccsvia in i.onE At House &»p. LE.'iGTH WICTM S.F. s.r. S.F s.r. H: } B. Gaa A gI X , o - >A 3 Q^ S.P. S.P. X _i.p. n. < X m . S.P. X S.F. k _ S.F. E. ^ATIO/D eck X m .S.F. s 1Aftin<rAOC k • m.S.F. Af^EAS UNOERLAtn HY X ^m S.F. PLASTIC . * SHEETING X -S.F. X • S.F. n. D thfp _S.F. • Total Hardcoveh in i « Zone S.F. Total P roperty A rea in Zone -S.F. fi" T] B ] ;0;QMo V ]on ■ I • • caicjutics _____ 2CMS* (c:acL£ cne ) Q-75' 75-250* \25C-5CG'SETIACX D isti?<(3 KAa2c:v£.^ in Zcne \ W Vi» .A w w A. He-JSS _Lx.-9 '4 ,... length WIDTH /o- /_ X _ y- T s - X -an »m 4» -y- ^« X —\i 1... - X ^ - .s.p. 1 ^ f. fi^SACS / L»- X fli An'iA. ____S.?. (?. Ha I vth AY ^- X Kz)13.00. t.f. _ X S.P. n. §rnc*-iALK ^ 3 - X K' .4 ._S 12^ J.f. . X m ......................S.P. 5f /XJA m n3k i.p. E. ?ATI0/D ecic X «,s.p. A.tANnSfAP^X .s.p. AREAS UNDERLAIN ■Y . s.p. PLASTIC SHEETING X « ft s.p. X s.p. • fi. OTMPa X •• . s.p. Total Hardcover • IN Zone ^ 1 Q S.p. /T s.p. BTotal pROPEarv Area in Zone X100 * ^ ^ 3^jyo2Ul2—^B u t i - -V • «• ■i 1 0* OFTI^J I-.- rOUNDAlION PLAN StAU: 1/4’ - <'-0' 24'-0* Vlt>c ALL PCP1M OPTIONS ONC DOUPLE DOOR tiiMt ctmi'fA--f •IW4/|t MOT I itpical oicut fBJLUi lull'!«■■■■*■■■■■ f4-»0‘ PIOC , i/Lf tocr Pi!< tuwt 1TPICAL m *e4*^' «iw -i/12 root f 2ie RAriiiis • 16* 0 C r- Rirtl TO -V OCTAIL F ASCU RtrCR !0 DtTAIl 24*-O' WIPE ALL PEPIM OPTI • k C 4/12 ROOT PITCM §•-1.3/4- WITH OPTIONAL OVERHANG 7’-11 .3/8* CUTTING RATIO -- - - - -7 V -2k4 double top PLATE H {1 OS' A. t !■> 1 TYPICAL rPOMT CLCVATION SCALf: 1/4" - r-0 4>0* VIDC kll DCPTM OPtlONS 4/lZ Ri ; I PITCU one; DOi»tE: 6a9aoc poor RAFTER LOAD TABLE \MINIMUM RAFTER SIZE AND SPACING f LIVE DEAD 24* WIDTH • • LOAD LOAD (1Z RAFTER SPAN) f 20 7 2it«16*OC. « t t 30 7 21 • • 16* O C. • t 30 15 2il«16*OC. » •40 7 2 h8«16*OC. 1 f 40 IS 2x10 9 24*0.0. SEE FRONT FRAMING ELEVATIONS FOR EXACT DOOR CONTIGURArIONS. * SHADED AREA INDICATES DESIGNED LO AD VALUE - Usa 12 Horn Fir or better 2iS RIOGC2it RAFTERS• »«. O.C tkS FASCIA BCCIN STUD SPACING O 1i ‘ 0 C FRCM This corner--------- 2k4 STUDS O 11" O.C. 1/2“ PLYRnOO S1CATMINC • FRONT RAIL BRICK UXADINC # DOORS A10 IRINOOIRSTypical 12" LAP SIDING •/to* eXPOSURt PREFORMED OUTS IOC CORNERS FOR LAP SIDING L REFER to DCTAIL TOR CORNER 4/12 Pi Lr 3* rou 24* T C; 1/4" - 1*-0- QCPTM <ynoHS t ORAO: r RAM INC , FOR EXACT ICURATIOHS. WIUH UAtiAUtlO3>e RiDCC2i6 RAfTCRS • IS' O.C. liS FASCiA 2 Hsm Fir or bener BEGIN STUD SFaCINO • IS' O.C. FROM THIS CORT&R 2«4 STUDS • IS' O.C BRICK MOmOINC • DOORS Af€> WINOOirS TYPICAL 12" LAP SIOINC W/10" EXPOSURE PRnoracD outside DORTERS FOR LAP SIDING REFER TO detail FOR CORNER 1/2 “ PLYVrOOO' SMCATHIIiG • FRONT WALL FRONT FRAHINd CLCVATION SCALE: 1/4" - r-0' 24'-0* VIOC 4/12 ROOF PITCW hll PCPTM OPTIONS ONC DOUBLE ChRkGt 9Ul% 1- RECESSED RAIN LEDGEj 1 lirfc=r 1 I 2 ’-5 i-11.1/2 7.1/2"7.1/2 16 ’-1 2-5"10 3’-11 1/2" 24*-0 FOUNDATION PLAN SCALE: 1/4" - I’-O 24*"O' VIDE ALL DEPTM OPTIONS ONE DOUBLE 6ARA6E DOOR DEGIN STUD p » ' I ♦ t mSm A 7 r To:OfofK> Pluming Commission Members Ron Moofse. Cit> Administrator From: Date: Sulycci: Jeanne A. Mabusth. Buikltng & Zoning Administrator June 17, 1993 #1836 Ri'nak* L»uer. 1180 Tonkaua Road Variances • Public I tearing Zoniog District: list of Exhibits U:-1D. Lokcshorc Rcskkntial A Application B m Plat .Map C m Pn^fty Owners List D -Topographic Survey E-1-2 Hanover Facts F *Elevations G •First FKx>r Plan H •Second Floor Plan I Basement Plan J *Survey The application involves vafiance» within the lakeshorc protected area as major portions of the .isting residence are located within the 75* sciback zone. Applicant proposes the installation of a second itory that will not extend beyond the existing envelope except for a 3’ X 16' uf^r level deck or walkway that will encroach 3’ further into the Ukeshore setback area. Refer to Exhibit J. Note deck will not result in an increase in hardcover as it will be totally locat»J over an existing patio. The following ordinances are pertinent to this review: I. Section 10.03, Subd. H (C) - Lot coverage. Total lot area »» 26.132 s.f. Allowed * 3,920 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,746 s.f. or 6.68% proposed * 1,794 s.f. or 6.8% 2.Section 10.22, Subd. I (A). A.Structural setback. Required = 75’ Existing = 50.7’ Proposed » 47.7’ (3’ second level deck) Variance = 27.3’ or 36.4% J i- Anung Fite #1836 June 17, 1993 Pace 2 B.Ni'n-smictura! - lakestk^re patio. Required * 75* I-xiiting ■ 34.3* Proposed » 34.3* No chanfc. Scettm 10.22. SuNl. I (B) • SevOisl story adsEthm wu! ca:roach the average lakeshore PClhack line, refer to Hs.hi6it J. Section IU.22. SuM. 2 - Review of hardcover 0-75* setback area - 11.294 s f. Allowed ■* 0 ».f. Existing - 1.791 s.l. or 15.35*^ Propos^ - 1.791 s.f. or 15.85% iSecond level deck Uvated over patio) 75-250’ setback area ■ 14.828 s.t. Allowed - 3,709.5 s.f. or 25% Existing “ 3.370 s.f. or 23% Proposed » 3.370 s.f. or 23% No change proposed. C.Total hartfcover. Total area « 26.132 .s.f. Total hardcover ■ 5.161 s.f. or 19.7% Detcriptkm of Requed The second level expansion w iil consist of a master bcdnx>m suite that w ill include a 3* X 16* upper level deck at the lakeside resulting in an additional 3’ encroachment into tla? lakeshore setback area. In reviewing iIk to-scalc drawing subinined ol the elevations, overhang is shown at 14 ’ and will ikm be credited as hardcover. All exterior improvements will be contained within the existing N>undaries of designated hardcover improvements on survey, review E.\hibit J. At the site inspection, staff noted that the lakeside patio area was made up of cement blocks. Applicant shouW clarify if the existing patio is to be removed an*! installed with a cement pauo. The replaeemenl of the patio would require variance approval and Planning Commission may seek mtHlifications in the area and setback to lake. J Zomag F:k #1S36 Jane I7. 1993 Page 3 The KCT>aJ ncfy «ill lave minimal unpAct on Ukeshorc «ie^ of rcsideiue to the ramwlttie north M taKeUlOfe viem winJcsws arc alrcAly blocked by privKy fcocii^ ahmf the kK Itne SUfnana of llan^p Pteisc review Exhibi! A. The bouse is saiall compared to the aljaccnt homes. The improvTincni would be consilient u ith the curteia putem of dcseiofroent m the neighborhood The swKturc ^»s kxslcd on the prt^fty prior to corrent zoning regulatioiB anJ l.ikeshiwe setbtek re^uiretnenu and as a resuh the majoniy of the rrskieiKe is livated within the 0-73 ’ zone. The entire expansion is upward and docs not increase hardco.cr The steeper elevatkHB to the west or street make horizontal espamn^ difti u:: and non-functKMUl based on the layout of the currcia bou%. A wTstward additioa ma> also necessitate the removal of mature tros. i •k Tsisnw for Considrralidli What existing hardcover improvements can be reduced? Staff would recommend that the drivew^ backout ana remain as shown, as property abuts a busy county mad. TIk only other area to reduce would he the patio If applicant is to ii^ll a new cemem patio, a 5’ x 17 ’ scciJDO as shown on Exhibit J could be eliminated. Hardcover would be reduced by 85 #.f. in the 0*75 ’ /one or .75%. The non-structural setback would now be .^9.3ii ’. cm or OROHO - vamm CC *h>i.icatio « 4 ► 4 m t Initial Application faa $175,00 ~j j ($50.00 par each additional variance)* Renewal Variance Fee SIPO.OO (no change fro* original a'^plicaticm) Variance for non confoiling use $200,00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double applicaticn fee) PROPERTY IMFORMATICNI Site Address // CJ ^ ^ 4 art :> f,.iAx£ iSSiL'^i'CCC V-; J£.V ♦ •r \ i 1 to* S £€> .1 lT5»Si *v\- YW K7*^tf0 COOi W1 T14. 5,5. :i Property Iden»^if. Ku»b«r (P.I.D.) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired V- / -*?J _ _ _ _(month/year) ,^^.4[^o nq^.- -- - Present use of property: residential other(specify) Zoning District:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ APPUCAMT Phone (honie ) ^/ -*' Nane P. _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work )_j£2Zi-£L3i£^ Address: A/City: Phone (home) Zip: C~3 7 i OWHEK (if different than applicant) Name C ^ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: IDBSCRIPTIOH OF REQUEST E8ti*rated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: /nCA£1^ AOO. VARlAliC^ REQUIRED _ _ Lot Area Setback: _ Lot Width Hardcover _ _Lot Coverage Front Sid* _ _ Rear _ _ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) lARDSHIP/DESCRIPTIOH OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY COffl)ITIOMS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:- - - r’ne: ir, iv—diLii. /?/" /-/HitV T7 751_J sb(L41&-«---------------------— (attach additional ahaata if fiecaaaary) following toforaatioc munt ba auhaltted__b]f—tN|—ap|>licatiCTAll or Aaaa.^a.«—--------- ----------------------------------------------------------TT"---------- deadl^nTdaf in order for yoo r application to ba conslder ad_.cCTPplatg2 X. 2. Cccpleted Application Fora Cartifiad Proparty Ovnera Lift of o%#nara within 150* (you Bust obtain this list froo Hennepin County Dapartsant of Finance A-€03 Covt Center 348-3271). 3 Plat Hap (obtainad with property ctmers liat). , , . 4.----c.rtiflc.t. of .urv.y (.l^red by • llc.n.od icrveyor) to Includ. hardcovor calculation* a* ra^ulrod (proyld* on* ,1> copy *11 for "'opographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8»;-xll i.5. in existing graae «*« --r^* . Sketches or plsns of floor s elevstion views (provide 1 copy 8*ijai ). “as an addendujii to this application, please attach a separate Its., or any other persona you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional Iteais as may be requested by City staff. 6. 7, The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Pl^s® rcaieaber that ytmr <»ariajice applicatioii _is not *-%i^lete if _,^he infovetioo has not been incloded. supplied is true and correj;^ to ^e beat of^ia/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date ?^nVrT^y acko-l.dg.. and a,r... to thi. authorize. r...onabl. entry onto the property by City .taff, agants, cooais.ion timber^, and Council oenbers for purpo.ai of invMtlga tion and verification of/^iis request* 0%mer*s Signature Ippiicant'»“»t hav. all submittal* into the City office. 25 day. before the Plannino Corami..ion Maeting. Planning Commicion Heatings «« *ield on the tirrd'Hlnd,y7f"V:ch;on;'h: Wlic.it.-uet be Office of this change prior to the meeting. an oning WI MTI 'I*Jf.,’ SliMivM cotMrr r«o»tRrT nroRanoi Svsfiiinontry 9*mn usr ^ U a-iir-M 11 BMD . aop «0M fiza towAMA a iCBMtl MMH.*»ii»a« 9iwrtn a mri TA)»ArCt wineiB »>t*r«A fMf«/Aa«lia torrAMA a LONG lari m HIM k A-• » M-ilf-ts 11 aa ^S J #. « f AOR Aa«BUM TomAMA a i t onncr Naa • a K RVlf ' ij 1 tAXatVIR •ic«*a a RAmitM Riril t . lla TOMIANA aA0 ioa u£i m SSSS4 ''V'k » ■ 58 a-iir-ti At a«i A* ♦P909 urn 8I7IO TONRAMA a *•• II'.4 . 0M«* NAa BTVAAT 1 Bumtct * TAXPATtR STUAAr t BUAMtfCI % MAa/aa*i;:o TcrsMA a L0U6 lARf! m !^SSM V.. V 1 ■'H 'w'« * « ‘ 1, * ♦ * •• f ’ : *4 {, L t. •■ » » ■’j‘*4* ‘ *. •• i i :.i- 'I »• M-nr-ts IS tllM TeWRMI «• t t LMR KMIi» iiuiR tlM TOMIMR a ICNS IMC m MSMt li it-iir>(i is air •II9S TcmiMi a H T *tMM9 • • t m r nrom a • t ttMaa iia ToMtAMR a iQHe uer m »ss* muJ i r rI itaiir m. »ui»aa^> vr*- 'Ti- . ■ * •* 't -u-. » A ?• > • ^ • -,94a *: 1 tr• tf ij.1* •••iir-ii n ai*T •'»« TCHEawi a T «ms M iHiTw a Mirt ' tMQms H smrM *' 19* ra^9^lm a 0MB tMJ IH USM ' ^ 9, * folii MTtN o •irk f c m »*cTs Bimstmo at an AccwAri and ntut ^ . A^i/r y ; *<»• , H S4t178 o Certificate of Survey for LAUER HOMES in Lot 9, Aud. Sub. No. 217 Hennepin County. Minnesota i m •few Legal Description That part of Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision to. 217, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East right of way line of Hennepin County Road No. •..IS distant 1141.25 feet Southeasterly, measured along said right of way line, from the intersection of the North line of Lot 10, Auditor's Subdivision No. 21? and said right of way line; thence Northeasterly a distance of 143.2 feet to a point which is distant 1004.29 feet perpendicularly distance from the North line of said Lot 10, said Auditor's Subdivision and continuing on said'llne a distance of ?5.2 feet, more or less to the shoreline of Maxwell Bay; thence Northwesterly along the shoreline of Maxwell Bay to a joint which is distant 125 feet perpendicularly distance from the above described line; thence Southwesterly parallel to the above dosrlbed lino a distance of 205.3 feet more or less to the East right of way line of County Road No. 135; thence Southeasterly along said right of way line a distance of 125.04 feet to the point of beginning. This survey shows the existing topography on the boundary survey supplied by the owner. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. :Existing contour Datum;Mean sea level Con IN & l\l I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct super vision, and that I am a dulv registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of the Stale of Minnescla. Mark 5. Gronberg Mipni\sv/ta License Number 12755 DATE SCALE 30 ^ JOHN’O ?3-/93 har :coy £r cmcmuqh MCRr-Hni 3ET1ACK ZZHt: <CISC'.£ CNC) ^0^^ 75*250* iExiSTiris HAa5C2vEs Zcn * >0 ^ ^ ^ww «* • >• # (< A. Hcuss 1. Ga ;?ac £ c. D rivemat D. SlSr^ALK E. Patio / }ecx F.Land SCAPE AREAS^ >- ■ t UNDERLAIN BY . . , T PLASTIC SHEETING 6. OXHia <3 L£?«CTH — X] X /3 I.F. WI3TH S.F. J.F.•^1 ».F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 4fn S.P. S.F S.P. .. SfPt « _ S.P* S.F. Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property A ria in Zone // /•I 9/ U : . S.F. _ S.F.I / ^79/ 4 B X 100 /S', rs^ % 1 d ¥ — iliii ‘ >'.Cty -fl o O ' ') ^ ’> \i ;5i{r 1180 tonka WA DRIVE, ORONO, MNi i y ^ '•.i'h .K-. . • • .t.* • V 1 if * • *•• • • • _ * 1 •*”».• - t.1 .si •» ••• ^. iV-:'., • •.>. '•fv •v • '#*#?•.•4tf•% • , ■*<'-. • • » • •V* * • f • • • V•, •. % . •- • .•• • \ S$I'%> i4* sj* «: I w ’SO fcn y »»■■*■»< *f CNM)•« iM t. <NrfNr*« tuMMOtfe «• 2fT. imnK •« t •< • MM tn »• fwl *1 mmt t Hm ” ***^ *M« MK •( «»•: »«M «M tlMWtiM C miIi Am4 ^ m. ii mm ^\*k #111 0. A«i4H«» ■ Hm HI. iM MM M vcy WMMi f • Mmmm U12 !• • |NM< «MM» M MM«M 1004 2« ftMt . ■ ^ ^ ^ •# MM IM .0. mM MiMIm t IiMOMmm m4 «oi mM bw • •itir^j W Mi «r iMa «• Ww *m«m •« mmn M Myt Ms«n«« Mw»»M(«rly M i*c«««N i«v %m • MMi « iMtMt f«#i r"rt~rmfMi| omimc # 4M«r%M «-s«, fsMM iMMiitMMy ^MM |« IM 4m«#M Mm • •I mi IM< fiNirt M Mm M OM C mI •# ««y t»st •! C^MMy OmO M» 05. 0imm loyUMMl^rty OMf MM ri^ M Mf (• »l m 04 fc«1 t« 0l« pmmi ^ i h«rMy cvMy IMi 1^ fIM pr^Mv# %y »vm 4r MiMr My #r«£( iup«r«M%MM ^ ^ 0«O*4«M i«M| SMfMyM tM «4 DMM iMi 2M iMf II# fl^uMry, IMi CCM i. rcio % M0MAi< IMC. 4 Mmm ^ • Z92tl Nc^lS * **?**^_ fcMfMf >• M4t4 M 11 « Cdti rlfpt M ««y mt C»wA«y 0M4 M« tMMMi I# tS#M • t#OfK>9 •! SmI^ 2% 4«frM0 60 NMnuttS 00 MCMMt C m! I ^ tm« •O.i. MMMM4 Mr fh« pf«pM«4Mfi •! Om «• .Mtfy mm MfO 4Mcr»«Mf» «r M# < e ol My MMmMlt mf MCufvMrM^M 1 Tlxi BKMvf «My m«M <mMM 4urMf «#m IMM iwrv#y. by K.4 m4 M4w m M44ffr»wA4 mmy n#1 b«it'ir4liir«t Of in^Mmonio EGan « Field & nowak ir^u. •uuuv4i»u SURVEYORS Mow^A^is, mw sao'b 1 A#«« »f th« pr«p«1y MocrOM b«r«M »• 44.341 ipi#4r9 ftf| fV • 551 OiJtt. M &.141 l^uijro foot or4 th# i«»«| 9TM •! iMTi C4MT iurfoCf OA tA# pTOpOfly h4fi 7^ POICMI Ol 1M proporty (01 546>ei?7 •Nin*:4f> k To: i Irora: Dates SuluftI: Oniok* Owwimmi^a Metnhen R.« C«:!r AiiMratt«nK«r Jc^iw A MjKimIi. Rutklmf >K»imwi<T M>.yr inr li. IW #1S5S 0»cm, 1700 Bnin't Fom Road > O^ombI t'se PermB Varan» • FiRte itemag The apptit^ ^ aiT^K^ a c.^iitoiyJ use ficrmti lo aUa« rtpain lo ft likc^>re bank \hM itmativd 0«TUfcd in the 19S7 teck h>-twick 100 year Bi»nns iXpfaKani su5prcts either worinumlup or Jeaign itilure created the rcccot pantaJ collapse of the c\tstu^ hank The 19S7 meUftid of mioratKm tmolved plac^nwni of feottvhmc fa^nc supfH'ned If Mibonicture. but ofnwosly the tmderWtnf support untcture ww inadequate Applwant is K^iraw u} return to the tnetbod ariJ seek* a more permanent M>futioa. The ne>* proposal uivolves the instailaiiofi of two tiers of cimerete hkvks with a |eo-fnJ aqipoii syoem As of this wntH^ ^e have not rcceocd the design for the support smiciurc, but »e l»v^ been advised that the necessary vmI Knxngs vkcrc completed on the 16th. The Engineer's final repon \si!l be presented to the Planning Cv>mausskei on Nfonday. June 21st. The D>)k7wtng ordinance is pcr»inenl to the review S^tion 10.03, Sutri. 19 Cooditic .-«i use permit requifed for the uuullaiuin of reuining walls witain the lakcrfiore protected area fthd for land alieranons imclvmg tlK movement of earth n excess of 100 cubic yards. list of i:\hibits A - Appficatioo A*l Applkani ’s Letter of May 27. 1993 A*2 .Aj^licanf s letter of Jiine 17. 1993 IB - Property Owners List C - Plat Map ID • GMF Coraultants. Ira;. Rcp*>rt Ocu>her 19. 1992 E ScciTon of BKxk Retaining Will F - PhxHographs G - Gustafson Report June 8. 1993 :n - Packet of Permit Information for Slonn Damigc Repair of 1987-88 I Ti^pographic Survey Eevkw of Application The subject property rcccr.td severe damage fn>m the 1937 storms. The retaining wall that runs along the shared lot line of ihc subject property and the property ow ner to the somb was installed to replace an existing wall that had been completely destroyed. The lakeshore hank I lk #1&3^ hmt IS, im ittstasK^ «rvcfv ennui* Tke re^iTi imolvefi nf rappwf M the «6orrtaw are* *f«l ihe imialiatKia |c»> frnl f*t^ »tth aiffio^ly a «am!*r to dae revert ?Hivir ISumey petiftoial .\s « vat the etfre^ ^ afpiicjai to avlmtrv a pcniunert n>4uito« with the cvrrenl im|»fo*ciiiegi pn^nai. die Cn> EafineeT hu rKOBonensied a concrete mwhtlar frtamnf •all Roirv Fthihii E I he app*»c«« prvpc^ the tmtallMhin of an Alim Rcttinw^ W*h ifut vi« be wsuilea to two tan The hifheit n*n vill he 4V Applicart vill imiall 3 I ilopeil land areas h' tor can Mhnaciuncc and imiaiUtion of plaflitn|is for the pkspme of actum^si anmcdiak gfowid cover for rtabdieaitoo of disrurhed are». Retraw I-ah?hfl J It » iw cto whether the currem piiiftoaal wvols mi a tncuhiUr block isaU will com the Stone area proposed in the ongiml land»cap«a| desi^ that nvolved umber wall coosimcti 'n It o hoped the she plan layout of (he walls will also be presentod Noee the planrer at the south side of the hwnk wdl be removed wtth the imtaitaiioQ of the wallt The Cd> E(i«mcer will provide a report for your Mceslav meetn^ revowaiii final inf«irmation Mentben may <|ucstjt^ staff as to the review of an applictokm where we have not recent coropkto iitformaiwn I nfortunaid). Mr Owens had hlw realized that he wouW have to proceed with anrther amditMiml use permit applctoioa alter reccivinf appmvals lo rcstiire his lakeshore hanks in 1987 and 1988 Stall has proceeded with the r**view of this apflicatton as there is an iramedute need to act swiftly because the collapse of the bank not only involves a small portam but as appticani's addendom notes. A-l. (here is a tension crack runiung parallel with the crest of the slope that indkares porentui for complete failure. Upon yt'sif mspretton. vrtj will note that a plastic sheet with icmpomry anchors has been placed aKing the bank lo prevem further undcrminii^ by runotf. with ilus rainy laic sprii^ applicanl is coiKctned that lime is running out. In your liiul tecommcaiai»on. (be follow mg slhwild be fatchiikd in your condiiions of af^oval: 1. Erosion control to be maimained on propeny before any land alteratums commence andl to be maintained until ground com is restored 2 To be comisicrt with similar applications in the past, applicant is to provide a lareiscapc schedule fi>r plantings that will shield the block walls from tlic lakcsiile view and that sround cover be immediately restored w ithin all disturbed areas. CITY or oncno • czs^mal csi rvopiarrY iocatios T; * ! ilcc £>ct*MS 9*e«^^*r "V «. fit# Addr«»» . *rc^«rty identification n\aib«r (P.X.D.)-in - *2 5 CCQ3 ?!•«•• attach la?«l darerlptien to application if net Ir.cludad cr. raquirafl aunray. AFPI.ICAJIT Phone (hc«a) Slaaa Addreaa HCC Phena (writ) City 2ipjS3i^ cwma (if dlffarant than applicant) Tlaa#'_______________________—— Addraaa Phere (hoaia) Phene _______ City _____ Data Prcn«yAcqolrad Slo^. (aonth/yaar) I (dc) C5o nct!^ alao ovn the adjacent parcel* of land. rSBS - COBDITIQIIAL OS* PEWITS - a 50*00 Por each variance re<jjeat with C-P application >• :r*ono^ • 125.00 Peaidantial acceaaory Caa -:v4.<£ Jf'Ju S175.00 Inatitutional (church, school, etc.) ; *•?» *iv\;^ ^co,c rr:r:r'T-’A*w\ CtiOl A(?* <wi $150.30 Ouplaa Cradit/Bldg tV(?i a ! •150.00 Cuaat Houaa/Cueat Apartrtanti $250.00 coi«arcla1/Industrial Caa *X $200.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ^ of l.X..hor. PRD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Pea - $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee nTHga APPLICATIONS $200.00 Cocnnercisl Site Plan Review (♦ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) 3300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ~ $100.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedu'^e FlKSESiT DSB OF PHOPKUnt ?r«»ert Icnirg r<i«trlc UR - 1A3 Pr«f«.nt C»« cf Prej'^rty lal ___________ Ct^«r (specify) DKOamOH OP RBQOKT ^ ^ ^ , Cescrifc* r«qu«»t in detail: S~TC^^ I i^kIK RAlS .XlulAr; Z3a^A&.:£^ ______________________________________ ......................................................................-........................."AtA»"HCfjaatc‘ - • REQUIIUBO SUBMITTALS 1, ✓Cce?pl«t«d Acpllcatlcn Fora, 2. fc^«rtifl«d Property Cwr.«ri -l»t of ovnort vlthln 3!0* (you can obta: thla li»t frco Eonnapin County Dopartaont of Flnanco A-f03 Covornaar Cantor 34l~327l), uPIat Map. vcartiflcata of aurvay (si^ad by a llcaniad aurvayor). »-?cpooraphlc aurvay (axlitino and propoaad contour*) if land altaraticn* involva change* in alavatlcn (grades). -Ccnatruction plan. If applicatla (*ee atiff for requireaant*). A* an addendua to thi* applicstion, plea** attach a separata li*t of any ether paraon* you wish notified of thi* application. 5. 4. 5. 6. 7. TOO ARB RBQOIRBD TO SUPPLY 30 COPIBS OF LAPGB CCCUMBHTS OR A MORRXHG COFT (11* X 17* OR SMALU9U FOR ALL OOCUMBKTS SUBMITTBD. The applicant and Proparty Owner nu*t *igc thi* application. Plea** rascsber that your application i* not conplet* if th* above Information ha* not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application 1* complete. Initial* of Clerical Stafft _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ AFPLICAHT*S SIGKATURB Th* applicant hereby agree* to provide all information required or requeeted by the Zoning Adainiatrator, agree* to pay additional fee* (staff time not covered by original fee peynent) and/or unusual expense* incurred in review of thi* application, and certifies that the information supplied i* true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant** signature Date OWfERS SIGMATITRB The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorised reasonable entry onto the property by City statf, consultants, agents, connission raembers, and Council members for purposer of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature V CL .4. A A. VrO u A. Wil WL • w. • # _________ Cate W / 93 Applicant must have all submittals into the City office* 25 days before the Planning Cemmissien Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on th* third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building 5 Zoning Office of thi* change prior to the meeting. i » Rot«ft N. Owtni 1700 Bohns Point RoacS Wayjafa. MN 53391 / • May 27. 1S93 Zoning Dapartment Ox* of OroiX) P b Boi6S CryralBay.MN 55323 SUBJECT: LAND USE APPUCATION Ladias/Gent^en: ES^RGENCV REPAIR T>rts fetter wi# provide additkjnai informaiion concofning our Land Use Apoifcation dated May 27, 1593 TNa Appicalioh covers the repair arv) rePiaiding of the storm damaged Oanfi aoove the snoretme of our pHoperty on Lake Minr^tonka. This was cftuMd Oy tf<# five irKhes of ra«n on Se^emper 16. 1992 As your records wnR indicatt. more dian 150 imeal feet of shoreline collapsed in the ‘100 y^ar ratn* of July 1907. This was rePme durvig 1988 at a total cost of $70,000. Because of what is Meved to have been defective design and workmanship, a portion of the ba^k conai»ed again in the Septemper 1992 heavy ram A permit was issued for the repair in 1987 withou a Land Use Application. This is the reason an Appiicaton was not made earlier. As the photographs indcate. only a portion of the bank has coSapsed. However, u ‘tension crack‘ rurmir g paraNel with the crest of the slope indicates possible failure of the entire bank. This could spiM over into the lake, arxt the repair would be a great deal more costly. The proiect has been ^ticfied by the ccnsutiing en^eering firm QME Consultanfs, Inc. and by McCombs. Frank. Roos Asxtciates. Inc. in order to arrive at a method of repair and rebuilding whph would be permanent. This has resulted in the combination of earth moving and retriining wall con^ruction shown on the enclosed plans. The GME Consultants report is enclosed. It indicates three possible methods of construction. Two of them sho^w th«» use of retaining walls. The third indicates cutting the bank back so severe!*/ mat it would cause us to lose significant large trees very important to our property 8'id a large part of our yard facir>g the lal>e. i am prepared to provide add tionaj information for your engineers if this is required. We respectfully request appiovai of this Land Use Application as soon as possible. Sincerely. IP' ROBERT H. OWENS 1700 Bohns Point Rootl Visytsts. Minnesota SS391 Jure IT. ’^93 Ms. Jeame BciiicSng and Zoning Aoministfatcf Cty ot Ofono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. **^nnesoti £5323 IRE LAND USE APPLICATION Of MAY 27. 1393 Dear Ms. MaCust.n; TTssi Icter will xnSrm Our COrtversaton ccnctfTsng tn« surjs of final design deta'Is. As coveftd in my tetttr to yoy on June 11. 1993. the lake shore dank design by our engineer. GME Consultants, was suorr^rtted to your eng reer and to you last week. The final Geogrd retrfcrcement design was net finished pending ioil test bc.nngs wfiicn have now been completed, final design wiT be completed and sent sy ‘ax to your engineer and yourseif Friday, Jure 18. 1993. As stated earner, after tfss second faHure cf the ban*<, we nave gene to considerabi# expense to irrrestigate and design a permanent repair. Our Consulting Engineers tell ui the combination of retaining wails and GeogrId fabric is the way to accomplish this. Had I understood tr.e requirement fer a Land Use Application and not just a permit, this process would have started months ago and the bank would already be restored. As it now stands, I am very concerned tnt work is completed before more of the bank collapses mto the take. Please call me if you require anything funher. Sincerely,1 ^'O I m** »WN Bitt Bi/lV?!BAT£S MIam nneTAWATltlonL/AMa ttsfknB /M cifca iMHi TMTAVIM HiHi/MM otci mm lAXMVtt NMC/Affia Hsxtia m^rr rtortin mmmnm mns ^--------Jilt u»»• •t» t§-iir-n ftjosfM c rmmuM « wiiCOMtl • SMfNKSfC t»OXia M MirfiTi rw f« l»-llV-7f ft tint M»«B tOPiV t • » lOtiKM IT n • t t MMK&3* irt* warnn 9otm MiruT« m uifi M tr-m t) 11 tMt 9U%% BOMMS roim M C i. mmum j« I n h c PUIOON H JH HlCUCUt H C USS tOHNS rotttf BS OHONI} »M »»S«| M ir-117-tS 11 «M« M*M MMIS9 ItMSStCNIB 6 R (CMttll Mi I H H C ULtfOSt OttVMN K MMtAH JR HlCHIllI M C MltUM |tS% BORNS POUir RQ ORUMU m M'fi *>17 ao. rt%»%tiRNt Isa u IItlBM KMe MINI ••• 4 • aiMAR•RVIR J • RtM i MBRM !*«• RaMm ROIMt MmtZMtt m sun «t » U ilt'fl ff Mil iffl’M BOMB BBIHI R9 « • C RMMS KStBf B 0€iafiUZRta m Msvi SS U-II7 II It amt BOMBS f I j marattt UMr • JMU Ml |7;s BOMS MINT nag MlT/alA MB itSTI » ir Ii7-tl Bl*«» BRMM 1ST tfiTinriTI BR 1 IMTtl IMS team MtNf E9 Mll/414 «« ttl«l SB lf*llT-ll 11 BBB* BBBSS MMtU UTOSStfim) BIS mmmym ir m BAviB • micaHi fm lB«t BOMBS RT RB HiT/Atii m sun «• IT-lir-tl II BBBB MBM AMRtSS UmSSIOCB B • WMBM JR • H N C »R»RMN OUTWH R RiHrUH JR MltMtUI N C HMRMN ItSS Bisns ROIH7 RS »« BUT! ISIM. »AWa Ml BMIB 1 ciRTiTT riTAr fmi ricTs nRitstmcB um m atcuRUc ma rnt RtRMSlMUlION OB IIMORmilCM AS IT ARRfARS IMtS BAIf ON IMf RfCORBS »> THf mitSRIft CntiTT OtPART»NT OR MRS'CRTT lAXATtCR, IC|^I« tlSf Of NT ANUMUOUi AND Bdllf . ' * * '' • •\ # J s GME CONSULTANTS. INC.I^ll CCNSl^^'NG £V~:N£E0S •4C0C«’*t» V V-I N*N 5544 ' A 0ct3c«r l?, lff2 «r. Rcb«rt Ov«n» 1700 »or.n Point RO«d Crono, Minn«»ots 55391 CME Project Ho. 37€# RXj ProlialnAry <4«*l9n concopts for ahor* lin# alop® rapair at 17 30 Oonn Point Road in Cnno, Hinnaaota Doar Hr. Ovan#: prasanta tha raavilt# of our fiald aurvayin<j and praliair.arj daaiqn ccncapta for tha ahcra lino alcpa rapair at your houaa at 1700 Bohn Point Road in Orono. Authorisation to pmrtorn this work waa your accaptanca of our contract addandua datad Octobar 9» 1992. This rapor- concludas tha acopa of aarvicaa dascribad in our contract addandua. pToiact PaacriPtioB Ha undaratand that tha alopa along tha Laka Minnatonka aida of your propart’, failad during tha -auperstora* of 1917. In 1988, tha alopa waa rapairad by Outdoor Environaarta, a landacaping fira from ShaKopaa. You atatad tha alopa was ataeilicad by placanant of gaofatone. Tha »iop« wa» r^shapttd ind fill vas placed with a small bulldozer. The fill was comffloii borrow and contained broken piacas of concrata ..roa a rasad baach housa. During tha haavy rains in t.he weak of Saptamfaar 13 through 18, aprroxiaataly 5 inches fall ona night and caused a failure o. tha ai section of t.ha slope. You stated that prior to t.ha failure, the crest of the slope had experienced soaa sattlaaent. During cur site visit on October 8, 1992, wo observed the failed area but did not see any geoffabric protruding fron the exposed slope. You have subsequently learned A. *.om the contractor that geofabric was naJt placed during original slope repair. Also during our visit, we observed a tension crack r’anning parallel to tha crest of tha slope, approximata..y ^ ^ back from t:«dg«. T.his crack traverses almost tha entire length of the slope. You stated that this crack is xocated at the approximate boundary between the fill and t.he natural soil from the initial slope repair. Scope of Services WtLUAM C. XWASNY. PE. GREGORY P REUTEP. PE. .VAR k. 0 MILLSCP THOMAS PAUL VENEMA. PE WYATT A. GUTZKE. PE. SANCRA J. FCRRE3T Art EauBi ODOOrtunity 6?TM3'Oy«** william E. bloemenoalpe. MERVYN MINOESS. PE. STEVEN J. RUESINK. PE Hr. Rob«rr Ov«na CHS Pro3«c^ Jio. 37«4 Octob«r 19, 1992 Ramlta On October a, 1992, vrit«r and an Enqin««rin<| Tachnician obtainad alavationa along thraa aurvay linaa axtanding from tha axiating houaa perpandicular to tna alopa and anding at tha adga of Laka Hinnatonica. Lina 1 waa aatabliahad ipproxiaataiy 20 faat aouth of tha nort.^^ adga of tha houaa; Lina 2 vaa aatabliahad approxiaataly 90 faat aouth of tha north adga of tha houaa; and Lina 3 waa aatabliahad approxiaataly 75 faat aouth of tha north adga ot tha houaa. Attachad ara tha croaa aactiona baaad on thaaa alavationa. Line 2 vaa aatabliahad through ths existing failad cona within tha alopa. As can ba aaan from tha attachad cross sections, tha alopa ia divided into approximately two portiona. An upper zona having a aidaalope of approximately 1.1 to 1.5 horizontal:! vertical; and a lower zona having a flatter slope of approximately 2 to 3 horizontal:! vertical. Based on tha preliminary data, it is our opinion that it is the upper steeper zone that is marginally stable. Based on our anginaering aaseasmant of the cross sections, va three possible remedial schemes: submit 1. 2. 3. Reshape the entire form flatter, more stable configuration a Construct a double ratainir^ wall eliminating tha existing sidaslo,>a Combination slope with reshaping a: t a single retaining wall We ha''a included preliminary drawings outlining these possible remedial measures. After discussing these with you, we understand that reshaping the entire slope is undesirable since this would require losing a large amount of ground an<; trees. If one of the two remaining schemes is chosen for slope repair, it is important that the existing fill soil be removed and replaced in a properly compacted condition. The natural soils should be benched, and the fill placed and compacted in horizontal lifts, thereby eliminating the creation of a potential failure surface between the fill and natural soils. In addition, the use of a geotextile behind the wall would be beneficial for stabilization. It should be noted that alternate 3 would be less costly than alternate 2, since a rough budget estimated cost for tied back timber retaining walls is about $10 per square foot of wall. # IHr. Rcc«rt Ovens GME S>rsj«ct MO. 37<«October 19, 1992 Prior to construction, we recctssend thst i topographical survey be sacte of the lot by a Registered Land Surveyor. This topographical survey vould be integral to the successful design and construction of the slope repair. In addition, we also recomend that test borings be perforaed to evaluate the enginee**ing properties of the soils for purposes of conducting i slope stability analysis. The borings should be taXen vithin the existing slope and near the crest of the slope. Due to difficult site access, the borings would probably have to be perforaed using hand augering techniques. We trust this provides you with t.he preliainary infomation needed at this tise.m e would be pleased to asoist you once plans have progressed further by performing the field exploration and reviewing the final design concepts. If you have any quastions, pleasa contact us. Sinceraly, Gregory R. Reuter, P.E. Senior Project Engineer Mervyn Hihdess, P.E. Principal Geotechnical Engin Enclosure GRH:MM:ssiC m rr:- : a- ELEVATION (FEET) 1 - Lx. * 'A :. '^26 /<\ V c t .-5.\v-f c n;' N u> ; «l. f -r ^ «S^-’ uuUliii Jl r ►. ^-' '’ ^ 4 -' - ><»" rr ^ «L V Vv ^*> >r^n iL-sa tu ShL. r V Bonestroo Rosenc AnderOcft «• I « % • ^1^ Associates Cngtivm A Arcfstrtti f t C • • € • ' mf' •• # •• »( 9 %f« ««• < I • • • • M «• * €4 tm a 1993 SK leasur A Nt4b«»ili. Bvildiaf aa«J /AMUfig AJdlsktratm Cify oi Offseo Post Office Box ^ Cryxtal B«>', Mmntwta 55323 Re: Robert 0*ew Sbtirctee RrputF File! Not 139-18381 Dcir ieisoe. Sabseqneni to ooi tmpectiofi la^l Ffi4jiy, '** bJi'e prepared tbis letter regardmg the propa?rd shoretoe repair and reUining wai on Robert 0«ens ’ property. The proposal b to construct a limber retaining x^all at the lop ul a 3 1 (honzontal to vertical slope The presKHisiy con.%tructed embankment ccmstnictcd at a l;l or 1.5:1 slope and lia.s subsequentK failed We feel that the prc^KJScd 3:1 tiopes and 4 to 6 ftx>t >»a’: b feasible but more detailed plans will be needed. The waH will need geogrid lies or another approsed support sy-stem. W'e do not recommend timber retaining waUi Ui oi permanent Kjlutk>n. Ccacrcle modular bkxk rcUining waUi are a more permanent and expensive opfk>o that should be considered for this applicatkin. Please contact me at thb oCEke if you have any quesfioni regarding this matter Yours very truly. B0NE:S I R(K). ROSKNE AKDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Mau«rKi Shawn D. Gustafson. P E. ^ 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. MIM 55113 • 612-636-4600 f 7 4 /.■Ita * j ¥ \ '{j r > h h -♦* #- ) \j £ t )? f « lift w»» t‘n *r t**^. 5^ a I ?,5»s«-I*;bs& s o «/io 5§ / / > \< V V o». It^Wl in. ' »“ V‘ * o o55T A O er ^•U'^ o 0 fP t m O ^Isr. w 5, t'-»»1 wC» '\ K C JL. //. To;Onma Flanmaf Cooamsucn Kkml^f* Roq Mcaanr. C«> .Kdmm Fran: Me: S«l»jcct; A BttiUinf At /< huw 17. 1993 #1839 Robert H. 0»cns. iTuO Bote's Rcte Vahrxrc3 - Public Itenar Zooinc Dterkt LRIB ToIaI ifei • 33.010 s.f. of .76 #ifc* (reqpureU • 43.560 4.1. or I u^rc) The i^splicaai propcHcs miimf teditiom k> the existkif rcskfencc tfuii «iit rrsutt m an overall rcduaioa of hank jvcr within the 75.230’ tcihack area The aiklitiom inv»4vc a thinl stall to the cxistmf aliaclietl farafr and a 52 6 » f cxpnnuua of the Ittichen and 23 s.f. of stqj area leading from new main level ptukv ikwo. A« of thia wnoog the second phase of Mr. Owen’s applicMtom, land ateratioa of takeshort banlt. tes yet lo be I'lnalmd. Stall cimn't pnivide Tinal hardcover facts within 0-75’ setback area but these facts may he completed for inclusiofi ui your final packets lo be debtered on the l&h or at your Mt^oday nighl meetif^. Staff has «itw mw changes m the hardcover facts based on the locaiKm ol the 75* Ktback line dcttrmined at the rip rap tine of the property. The folkwu^ ordinances arc pertinent to this review Section 10 03, Subd. 14 (C) - Review of kN covcrige Total be area * 33.010 s.f. Allowed - 4.931 3 s.f. or 15% EAbiing • 3,882 s.f. or 11.7% Prt»posed • 4.132 6 s.f. or 12.5% Section 10.22 uutsL 2. 0-75’ setback :irea » 10.800 S.L Existing 804 s.f. or 7.44% Prijposed hardcover to be detennined up<_>n completion of land alteration fKrmit. Application #1838 73-250’ setback area « 22.210 v.f. Allowed - 5.552.5 s.f. or 25% Exisimg • 7.308 s.f. or i2.9% Propo^d * 7,187.6 s.f. or 32.3%* 2amm$ hsm 17. IW Pif* 2 t I i 1stm RcdMCtkMiof 120 4 » f. • AJd 52 6t.f. 6iKfcrBadd!lii«. 23 * f Oe^. I« t f pnfr staO. 54 s.f bnumiftiia dm • Rcsml 4AS • f oT NMiHiwm pavvit ia street y»d. Ust^EiKlits A * A^tcaUMl B - Affilicani'f AddeniMB C - l*ropefty Owatm Lw D • Map E-l-2 Hardcow Face F - Synrey G - llaidcowr Sat Han If • Plan of Impiotrqncgti I - Fkior Ptaa I ♦ Nonh Btvatkifi K • South Ek^aiwn L • IPmpoied lafidscafs Area M - hxioiiii I andtscayg Area Dmriptkm of Rofiacsl The pro|xacd in^vriaeab are locai-^ all out of the 0-75 ’ itcitwek ^fei. All additions meet the required 10* side setback (gara«c at 50’ and kiteheo at 28 ’). Gndc-level steps arc comidered noo-encroachments as lot^ as strutiure tneett the 10 ’ side setback. Statement dt Hard^ip Please review Exhibits A and B. Harddiips arc reviewed iv follows: House was prkw to current zi’iiing standards and lakeshorc »tback requircmcnl.si. The removal of some 448 s f. of bituminous drive will minimize negative impact of extensive paved drive in Mreet yard. The comprehensive improvemem of the property will be consistent with the improvements of existing resyences within the neighN>rhood. Issues for CtHisiiteration If Planning Commission members w ish to consider existing hardcover improvements for iciroval. it may be necessary to waa to determine what final hardco er is in the 0-75 ’ scibsick area In rev iewing the site plan. Exhibit G, the majority of hardcover improvements within Lhe 75-250’ setback zone arc either the residence stnarrure or the bituminous drive. Staff would rwt recommend additional removals of the drive needed to prov^c adequate turnaround area and tfl- strect parking. / t CIT¥ OF omsm - vahiascb affucatioh 'A <« Initial Application Foo S175.00 <ISO.00 p«r onch nddltlonAl rnriwico)Ji. Rcncrval varianco Faa 1100.00 (BO chan^o fro« original appllcaticn) Varlanca fcr noo conforming o*e 1200,00 Aft«r-th«*Fact Faaa (Doublo application f*«) c;rr t*KQlPOITT IKftWMATIOS Sit. nco fa»>Kts fon^T C.c,»A------ Provarty Id.ntlf. Nuati.r <y.I .P. ’•1'^ OCO*? Attach legal doacriftioo to application if not included cn raqul.ad aurvoy. Data ProsajLiy Acgulrad Caonth/yaar) I (do)i l^ no^ alao own tha adjacant parcala of Praaant uae of propartyi roeldantlal — Zoning Dlatricti » Lp--------- 1^3 I fc 4 < W, »rouctci '^oi m othar(apacify) AFFLXCA8T Naro Addr Phono (homo > > -■ Hi 9 CHat, Phono (work ) ^ ^OO : HoO i2a>,ecity: omKR (if diffarant than applicant)Phona (hosus) Naao Phona (workj Addraaa* __________________________ City:Sip: DESCRIPTION OF WSQOEST Eatimated Conatructlon Coat $J^ ^a ^ OO >.ff; D..crib« r.qu,.t in HSX VARIANCES RBQOIRED Lot Area Setb.tck: lK>t Coverage__ Lot Width JX Hardcover _ Front Side Rear ___ Average Lekaahore Other (specify) aARDSHIP/DESCRIPTIOH OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS DMcriba undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual proportv '•o.'iitions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requiremen a.________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------■■ * (attach additional ahaatt if nacattAry) DIMED SUBMlTTiad J^ll cf tha folloatna Infooaatido nuat b« autalttad by th<» application dnadlloa data la crdor tar yoor application to ho cono id• ro d coaylatai I« Ccnplatod As-plicatioo fcra 2., ✓Cartifiad Preparty Ovtara Llit cf ovrara vithia ISO* (yea auot obtain this Hat free Rannat'ln Coarty Tapartaant of financa A-403 d^^vt Ctntar 341-3271). 3. >^Plat Map (obtainad with proparty ewnara liat). 4. ✓ Cartificata of aurvay (si^nad by a licanaad auraayor) to includa hardcovar «lculati«aia aa raquirad (provida on# *1} copy ®*i*xll* for raprodoctloB). 5. Topographic aorvay (axlatin^ and prepoaad aiaTations) if any changaa In axlating grada ara propoaad (provida ona copy S^i^kII*). I, ^ Skatchas or plana of floor & alavation viava (proaida I cepy •*i'**l2*). 7. Aa an addendua to thla applicationf plaaaa attach a aaparata lilt of any othar paraona you wiah notified of thla application. i|. Additional itana aa nay ba raquaatad by City ataff. The Applicant and Property Ownar auat algn thla application. Plaaaa ramerabar that rour aarlanca appli cation la not coi^late if tha abeaa iafocaatioa had laot boon laclodad. APPt.icAirr*s srcNATOw Th« applicant haraby agreaa to proaida all Information raquirad or raquaatad by the Zoning Adalniatrator. agraaa to pay additional faas (ataff rlai9 not covarad by original faa paysant) and/or conaultant axpanaaa incurred In review of thla application, and cartifiaa that tha information auppllad ia true and correct to tha b^t of hia/har knowledge. _____0.CApplicant*a Signature fix8 XxcAwXon# Anci rract to the b^t of id omats SlGlIATUIlB he owner hereby ackowledgea and agreea to thia application and furtnerV authorixea reaaoriable entry onto the property by City staff, conauljtan^a, invaft/gii-agents, COTBEisaion'raeiBbara, ind'’Council aaabara for purposaa of %% Office of thla change prior to tha nieating. J ROeERT H. OWENS W«yzata,l04 5»91 Mcy27. 1603 Zorwig DwMftfiirv Oty of Oro^ P O Boa 66 Crystal Bay ft ft-65323 •f: • ;i i i ^ SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICATION Lad«i/G«r^tamei: Thit t&S» vmI provkift niiirOorm ooncemr>9 our Yanonco Appicaton dated ___________ft«---------------ft n (ftiuranoft This set oi^ tfnpfovtrnerk timing beck. We have now completed (Mans end are prepared to do the modemixation and improvo- rnem work plOTed years b^ore The planned mprcwnenis will give us the h^e we corkempiated at the time of our ongtfial purchase The surrourxkng property vwues ^ certainly be anhanc«J by these changes which w«ii have our home more doaely match die character wxJ value of homes in tf>e neighborhood. An tfnportant part of improving the appearance of our property will be removing 448 square feet of hardcover “partur^ lot- ai the entry to <xft property ^ landscaped driveway Trte enclosed drawings, sketches and photograptw ilUatrate tl^. The requested variance will not alter the charactar of the neighborhood. In fact, variance will result in a signiftcant improvement for neighbors who ara constantly exposed to our parking toT. The home modemizarton and improvements ad 5 327 6 square feet to oi^ house Wiih the removal of 448 square feet of bituminous sui'ace and replaang it vwth grass, we will have a net reduction in hardcover of 120.4 square feet The hardcover reduction exceeds the addition by 137%. We respectfully request approval of this variance application. t i J ' \ . t •V rrs tnftHlist i9f«rr iffi.PAOI 1MTCM mU39ATn/m ft It itiltiMt warm ww ■» JDStMl c TMOMSCM • Miff OMOf t SMEfMI !••• MMa Pdiiif m HtTtifi 191 »i]fl i.n n; .6 • • • emit Mvnt j • 9IM j UM tern poasr ■ wvf«r« MS Mi*t »■ t. 53 I*-ll»-n «l 99*f •ifw toMMi toea Ml • • c om<n__tottat a ctc*aIfMi t3M»r. P«t«fT MiVfAU MM fMtAVtt M n • iri9 tOMtt PMMT m • I » mmwsm it *t » I S MfSOI irev 90MO aetm apM HivttfA m sfsvi . r * *# M li-iir-M It •irn T • j mi TiMT • ju.n mMm I rr% MHMB aotMt mrztrk m m«i 39 0‘-rif>ti ii e9ii 9«*1 tC«<!i »9fMT •»____ 13T IMflaiTATI H<M tttrti T ttwtr VMMgaf i*«i MMW Poti^ m »«* »«S*t V'. 'I • m TMFmt [/ U If-llf-li 11 Mtl ilftss tOMie PoiHT ii i i KiitiN ji i M N c gMTim K wrtiw jr mCl«lLi m C MIMNIM im ioms mm to m Ms^i K ft * OWIi NMI TAMiiVfi Mm/I 3^ j • U IT>llT>ff H WOT . i R mmm ji a r h c mm« ^' maviOM r mmiM jr mcwiu m € mmm lata RONMi POIRT RR iUfi i7-iir-n 11 s$ mmiMi lit gmRMn ft ii Rant i MRofwi rm ia4i wmm n n iiatcaTa m %%\n :\k' *■ Wfil tiTOi M tr-iif-n II •MSt iwttil IMktflCMni • c NCI93M jn • M M c mmm tMAVMM « MitMM M racwui n c »ctn» US3 MHM» POtMT M OOND Ml ssin CO •s 1 V O’ r“ n. 5. -. rf*’ ■ ’ V 4 • T-'L ^ * ’** ; * . '^1 -p tjl’ - Mil M»lt CO } *i n: ■’4. CD • i T i J . X • > % ' 4 • 4 cftTirv Ttir m ricrs timuNTtt mi m tctuiurt nut MrmMNTIiTIOM 01 IMPOamriOH IS IT APPIMS This MTI on TM KtCOtSSi OP TMI NtWCPni COUNTY OCPAITKNT Of PtOPCftTY JMAT:3N. T0>^ MST OP NT RMOMLIOeC OMO 9i\.\l9/ W;oarc •-f v.|:, ; : ^ • *- ♦•■ . ■'•' i ' ' /:v • (H . ;ir f a I Q * r«(r V?. •'■■ r ;• vvv.sfc?-;- r- •■ ' .f •• ^ 1' J ^ . , ^ ^.^SS4<£-A^r'' /^7r ,fT''v^ y /> [v/ / * j % ■ I f&Tr- I ^ / ti. v.y^ 7/£ $rs/^ Bf Ccje>^s77fA - cu Q. r^ 2 ^ --•ro =r—<—.rrlS? <(OfDO<CD30j' “^* 3 3 r^ CL 3 01 (O Q. (/) it> 3 3 -•• O lA *o3 -i*«lQ 3 C O O# »a 3 —• 2TIO r* r* 3* o» r» >—I __ IV • — O X> Q. —. 01 o 3-t»0-‘3U»Q.-hn> w. < n> fo _ d ^ X’ iA r“ o*^r*>cxcr-t n o n> n) ro —^ ~f r^ 3 r^vc w « ^ 3 »0 < or-4 2 1 ro rrOf (A rD d.3 n Of 3 3 (O -^- 3 ft) a rr. lA r T t'’ I un*cn ::sf: (c:«r.£ z%t) C-75* ^-25jy Z5>5vO* SCC-iru^* iusTi^« Hiu»rc3vM !» Zo«t /Qg" Lt^TM A. Houst l« Garage c. DaiVEMAf 3. SrCEHALX c. Patio / hcK r. Landscape AREAS underlain lY PLASTIC SHEETING Q, Other 2^ lo B St •:=.7So .... NICTpI •I.P. •1 ft P • I.P. •I.P. ZL»,... •^^04-0 s.p. I.P. SI. S'm '7S- i.r. S.P. m 3.P. _ S.P. .^ 40 i.r. 44 m 3.S.R. • m * • s.p. m ft• _ s.p. m s.p. • 1 Z:fiE 'iri H ZCNE s.p. 3 n Tt. c - m ga xi q x loo - 1 r-::7^ z^VT7J::zn^2^'^^ HTgAZx i:*if: (c:»c^i znt)/^T2j *5-Z: rt:sT:»« Ha*:c :vh im Ishc • r A. Holts? ^ _ I y • f.f •tltSTJI KI3TM «• X • S.P. ..... X - f.p » « « « l» • - -- s • • l.t.1 Q ........... X . • S.p. ■- Pa*as» , X ----------- • ___ ».f. ^ / J #•*. ,*X r. DafvrwAY X • S.P. ..................... X • • ___ . 1.x. * / ? * 4*w J' • • Srcr^'ALX x -- _ . 1.x. f K2&1 y - ■ ... .............- l.p.1 1 ■ 14“ X 7 . -2^A J.f. E. gATio/. ^ ^ ._ .._ X / ) -■■ • . -...f.x. f.fANnSCXPS X . 3 -r AACAS UN OCALA Iff »y X ---------- ____ S.P. FLASTIC SHEETINQ X . ^ • •• • S.F. • ^ (J> y S » ‘ 4-^ _ S.X. • f fi. Othew i ^ X •- ^ ^ S.X. m m 4» . • Total Hardcoyeh in Zsne w * • Total Property Area in Zone 34'^_ 3.r. /^i S.F. T' X m 34-^7 -TI /O.feCO X IQQ - ^ :±__ \ ■ ^ w ♦ / • zz m H Q Z 7 > r > F ior V;*• •5 V ; ir 2 9rj m.w.v i •• , i; '• jv7 v-i VH. . V 0 -Ai ’ i; / C* :'W'W^^g^'-‘y-V'i-.'. V. rf'-^ .H ‘•>■■1 •I#?' ;f^^^s:■i Av.-s^'iv;N%r4-<v> ^ ■■•• .14- '.‘' • ' V. tr V ; ■ •■..............''^ ^17. , ■ ,.i'> ^ ’- V •’', '* ■ ■■ •v^-, 'm t ■ :• -:'»:■ . :: _ * ’•> ..A*.r ■ : LV -'t i. .. t ^•.• ■‘ • vVj^ • 7 .rv Ai-;j-, /••■■■^ ’’iM' -. . - n •' ,' -N‘ i>;. :•'V>?i • / • ’ .7 .-** ^ v -:; v«^ ■•^*; >. 1 ■' -=^v ?iu^'ar ■fj fi Ji t >L LI :rr:. f *. m X C-V' ^ • -tv? -7^ » - .; '-. , r\ ■ ‘ - • .. s 7. . » V*; - •.’■'* .;-• '■ . •»'.■•■ . J 7,-,^ -• ;r*':Sv7, i '' A • • •7 Ar'i:-:-;-'^-^.-" 'MMm. :iSS-i!i ,~ ,VV - .‘1; ifr* > mM ‘ < • ?-S : - if. JT' ;V._ » .v > ' ! T •' -^ivT^ •V'J ' t->‘^ yi ( m»r.r-J A', ^/S*y r5 I /7 « :;.V. . W' / ■" >' 5c ^m-:- ^ v^“> i/ •; r-'i ■'w f / L tU. <: f Fik #1823 June 15. Page: The applicani faikd to Jcsifiu^ a wkk cai'*alk Jeck providing atcrvv the upper level hedroon! with the origual pfopinal. Fhe additk>nal JeeW will he located 26 Hvjen the rear l»>t line. The cxbtinf deck to the north side » II‘ 4 ’. Rcrici* of Landscaping The applicant asks that extsting plantii^ *lo*^ the v<iuth and east side of 'he propert)' be cooMdered as part of the ftial landscaping plan In additKin she (»oposcs the installation of a 6' high solid wwd privacy fence along the stxith tide of the cxistii« garat^t and the instan.itit>n of gravel akmg the pcrimc»n of the garage ak>ng the iKinh. cast and south sKtes Nt>te privacv fencing has not been shown enclosing the emirc gravel area. Applicant suggests that ladders and scaffolding will he stored within the gravel area. It would seem this would be completely against the inleT' »f the Planning CommtssKm ’s recommendation to have all of the son ’s work related equipment stiwed w ithin the iiuenor of sinicturcs If Plarming Commission approves the gravel yard expansion for cvtcnor storage, oatl wsiuW recommend that either mamre evergreen plantings or fencing be continued aior^ the gravel area. It is still not dear ht>w parking and drive areas are to be physically dcsignatal. Applicant sh«xild provide additional information. The applicant may be asked to consider boulders for tkfining the drive and parking areas. In earlier discussions during the review, the applicant had considered tlK installation of a berm from the materials excavated from the foundation lor the addition. Applicant has b^n advised that Use majority of the existing berm is located withm the road right-of-way and that i^rm could not he expanded within the right-of-way. Issues for Consideration A. Will the deck to the northeast side of the new ;Kidilion present new concerns? B.Has applicant’s landscape plan addressed concerns expressed by the Planning Commi.ssion at your May 17ih meeting? C.As applicant has not noted that the gravel area would be underlain with plastic or geotechnic fabric, hardcover facts have not been amended, although hardcover is not an issue for this propeny ih3W proposed .^t 13+ %. Privacy fence will be iCKated 60 ’ from the street lot line meeting the minimum required setback for fences in excess of 3 ‘A’. Applicant may install privacy fence without City ’s approval. Please refer to staff memo and minutes of the Planning • ’ommission meeting of May I7th ip making your final recommendation. Isv MARGE ROSSl'iC 130 Cygnet Place Orono, MN 55356 (612) 473-23R1 June 3, 1993 tm-ar n - , fc»c Is533^ JUfl 1 1 1993 City Council and Planning Coealaslon City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, M?J 55323 Re: Variance and Peralta for Addition and Garage, 110 Cygnet Place Ladles and Centleaen: I would like to addreaa the conditions noted froai the aeetlng on May 17, 1993. 1. Wo have coaple*'ed the existing garage. 2. Upon approval of following proposals, we plan to coaaence with the new garage. 3. Regarding the landscaping: 1. I propose to build a wooden privacy fence, 20-25* froa the front of the existing garage, approxlaiately 40-50* long and 6* high. 2. Next, I propose to lay a gravel base Inalde that fence and alongside the garage, approximately 30* x 75* to accomodate whatever construction equipment, such aa ladders and scaffolding wo •ay need to store. This will also afford us a place to park our boats and trailers and also vehicles. My son carries most of hla tools In his van which he drives to and froa work each day. 4. Several years ago I planted seedling trees Ir the south and vest of the existing garage, which Included various varieties of evergreen^ and several other faster growing varieties, soic© of which are now 4-5 high. This spring we spread wood chips In that area to help keep down the weeds. Tliis should provide very good screen from the road and from the south very soon. VThen reviewing the plans for the addition, I noticed we had not Included a second exit from the bedroom on the u^'per level of the house. We propose to build a catwalk from the northeast corner to connect with the present catwalk on the north side of the existing house. We will need to build a stairway to get to that upper level. Drawings are attached. I respectfully request your approval of these proposals and look forward to a favorable response from the Planning Commission and the City Council. Yours truly, Iddi. Marge/TRos s ii/ng 7- PDA CEnTlFICATL OF SIUVCY __Rd 5Sin^ L£6AL D hex K iPtioio La'n I i atOtA 5, SW«N H£NNrPin^ CoimT'f n, □ ■ WOOD STAKE PLACED e.M • bearings on ASSUMED DATUM O » IRON MON. SET • IRON MON. INPLAC2 PROPOSED INFORMATION _________1st FLOOR ELEV. _________BASEMENT ELEV. garage floor ELEV. • drainage OCO.O * EXIST. ELEV. (noo.oj> PROPOSED ELEV. -TOP BLOCK ELEV. 000.0 * ^^'ST. & PROP. ELEV. SCHOBORG LANDSURVEYINn INC. ^ 1. Be« 23S 0««no. MN SS32( I h«re&y certify tnai this pian, survey or report was prepared Dy me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Registered L and Surveyor under the laws of me State of Minnesca:^ /*. , y* /h- fz^/y 'y'' jobs 3Z^Z Date; >u. /oflo Registration No. 147C0 Book • Page L-L Scale HU'JTES of the 0«0N0 planning C5^^ISStON PEETINO held may 17. 1993 iONING FILE *1822 - CONT. »ov.« =^»-v.r3‘v=7A^.v of th« •X«*ting ,«., on«d uoon « dr* i nag* plan p#mg ,n. pc.Lt. VO... n.„ _ K/- •A“r««« iS Q*in#d to tn# proparty.Mayor Callahan c-jaationao ro- a-cass •• g Pru.t.r .n.-.r.o n. tNouon. "• ... .n o==... .•*—"* —‘"O Parana' to tha railroad track*. (aS) *1fl23 MARGE ROSSING, 130 C' 'NET PLACE - a-iaPMVAHiANtE - POBLIC HEAPING T:37 - 8.14 P.M. TN. A*f,..vit Of PoOMc.tlon on. cr.if.c.t. of M.mn. «r. not... Marga .Rosaing wa$ crasant. Mabuath axplainad tha «P^' ' ^*”^^''3Q?*JJt*n-h»5^garag«' wh' ch mastsrn;‘:o^‘r.oVf.'tronn:».er m... i. n. J.^dcov.r or .truc.ur.l cov.r.g. probi.rns. • • i. t-A •sc-ommodate tha cara of har garaga wiM cacoma a part of ^na rasidanca. ^ H.t U.MI hB storad in tha naw garaga ar.d noted c:«”:=.To:*.'o!run;nTon“... Br=....y Bo.sing ...... ...of tha property, and none will oa slotbv- „.bu..« no... th. .ncro.=.m.n. onto ... w,r.J.. oroB.r.y. Ros.ing note, those it.ms have Seen remove.. P.t.rson question., the n... for an additional garage. Rossln. note. ... la.se .etac.e. garage is a.orag. area for boats. MINUTES OF THE ORCNO PLANNING COMMlSSICN MEETING HELD MAY 17. 1993 ZONING FILE §1823 - CONT. Clair Bloaaanaaal. 145 Cygn«t Plac#. tastifiad that tha prooarty It an ayatora in tha nalghpornood and has baan for many yaara. Sha esprassad ccncarn that this proposal would only add to that condition. Rowlatta ojastlonad tha normal siza of a thraa stall gariga. Mabusth statad a thraa stall garaga is typically 28 to 30’, and tha proposal is ovarsizad. Sha nottO tna axisting garaga axtarior it not finishad. Rotting indicated thay hopa to do so this tummar. Smith Inguirad as to how long tha garaga hat baan uncomp Iatad. Rotting answerad two years. Barg asked wno tha contractor is for tna proposal. Resting said har sons would oa doing tha addition. Nolan askad about tha raatarltls to be used on tha addition. Rossing stated tha garagas and addition will be sided with tha same material at tha house. Rowiette Quastlonad whathaf there ara time limltaticnt on construction. Mabusth indicatad tha permit raqulres an Inspaction to be made at least every 6 months or the permit will expire. Rossing Indicated she had not been contracted by the Building staff prior to last week regarding the completion of the existing garaga. Rowlatta said she understood the neighbors’ complaints and suggested screening along the road. Peterson asked if the driveway has been included in the hardcover calculations and noted its considerable size. Mabusth indicated that was inc*uded, but added it is appropriate at this time to control the use of the grass for parking of vehicles. i ■4 MINUTES OF THE ORCNO PLANNING COHMISSICN MEETINu HELD MAY 17, 1993 ZONING FILE «ia23 - CONT. not.d ‘O— ^.^pr p".*rorthry«r‘'"s!:; but du# to tht season cha 9 * , v^hiclaa oarkad on the prooarty?-r ‘p"v.'.Vn^Yr.por. v.p ,=,... Mibusth inpuir.d th.r. is « businss. bsins run put of th. home. thT« is but th« SQuipmsnt oth#r tnan « van is S''* not'O so-tlms* her oth.r son .III stop by with his dump truck. Berg asKsd If a certificate Is Issued upon completion. Msbu.th answersd only “ final »*ould only be reouired for this project. Peterson noten if the not thatthat «ork will not continue until another is issueo. the project will continue. Ch.lr schro.d.r .xpr.s.sa concern .bout th. us. of th. garages. Vu«%To7.%” th^^^"',;v %“ou rp:;n^3:^ gar.g. .HI b. .tor.c until th. n.« garage Is comoieteo. sosslng said sh. orooos.a th. construction of the garage prior to the addition. Nolan felt they should redulre a scraanlng plan. Mabusth noted tha appi VoVdw'a“y*^n^ :c:r^?e^ir^rb:Lu..“r? -r/r.':.cVsV/rr'of fill, a conditional usa permit is necessary. Rossing noted th. scrub trees slong th. road.ey on th. second lot need to ba removed. .. -41 e.inne ted they reauest a landscape plan be presented to ^illncnVlo^g wVth th. eppi and that th. oroject be approved in phases. 4 HINUTE3 OF THE OI»ONO PLANNING COM^flSSICN HEETING HELD MAY 17, 1933 ZONING FILE *.823 - CONT. Rotsing said would I i ks to cOfr-Tisncs with th# addition as scon • s cossiDi®, but notad sh® do®t i-iot want A to construct tn® barm a«. ,nis tim®, but would I i h® p®'-m i ss • on to plac® tn® fill fro« ib® addition wh®r® tn® fc®rm would b® located. Mabusth claritiad that th® Planning Conanission would I K® to combin® th® lanoscaoing with this r®qu®st and that sh® could not from construct ion without a conditicnaI us® p®rmit.stock 0 1 I i I I It was moved by Powlstt®, seconded by Peterson, to aoorov® AppIIcatlon «1823 for Marge Rossing, 130 Cygnet Plac®. for rear and street setback variances to construct an addition to the emsting residence, on the hardships that th® lot is an unusual snao® and the house was constructed prior to adoption of the existing ordinance, subject to the project being staged beginning with th® compiet.“n of the existing detached garage, ana second the proposed detached garage be completed prior to commencing with the addition, and a landscape o I an to be presented to Council to be completed ove- the ur.'cming years, and the c'lveway boundaries identified. A/es 7, rays 0. (•6) 91824 ERIC S SHELLY LILJEQUIST, 2490 BIRCH cA‘'E - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:59 - 9:18 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Llljequist were present. Mabusth explained tha appi icants seek a street setback a detached garage to be located in the street yard o. J lot. She noted that ou.-.ng the inspection of the property, staff found it necessary to '-ack out onto Baldur Park at tha th-ae way intersection, and suggested they need to remedy tnis situation. The City Engineer has provided three options: 1. align the garage and drive with the house; 2. construct the garage so the doors 'ace aw-y from Birch Lane and angle the garage aligning it with the property boundary; or 3. directly angle the garage toward Birch Lane. Mabusth Indicated the applicant has requested hardcover be kept to a .minimum as he wishes to complete future imorovements to the house. -t l/»' ' ^ w\ (r j>> - O ii O' T? -? > ‘^' 0^ ^ 1t> ^ T-*;^ y f>CJs; CT-(7^ m 6- fo C (T> ' ? .F ISu <S r-* t / n «i •I \ C -1 -f I ■ 4 5 m J m T03 SUjm Callahan * Oiw»i> Ccmfaaiaenibcn OrcMBo Ptam^ Ccmmummi Mcaahen R do Mmme. C*y ^VlMMirator Fnan: Dale: Subject: Jcane A Mabutib. Buiklmg <& Zcsn# AteiniMrait'ir NU> i:. 1^3 #1123 &Iarf« Bfmm> 130Cyf«. PU» - Naruncei • Pubte llcannc Thr ^iplitafli has afptii.<l for wunccs to pcrmk comiructioo t>f a -0“ s, 2S* idiikiod to the »ot wde ot the «.r»rtujf rcsulcoct requiring Mreet and rear sethacl; wianc^ uttUllaiioi^ a deck. The apflicanl also profoics the •nstallittCNi of a *6 t 30' detached garage Him meets the required 15' sethacl; f.r structure *i «8 $ f m area Rcsiew Exhibit I. toflofraphic mappu^ of the area Half of the property is located withm 300’ of the Swan Ukc tnbiaary. Staff hm comidered the caire lot area for hardcover purposes. The folfmmg ofdinjnccs ire pertineni for this review . I. SeetKJO 10 2S. Sutsi. 5 (A) • Rear and sueel rethack variances r^ired A.Rear Required •50’ Propoaed • 28.82* Existing • I r 4* Varunce for new coromictioo • 21 2’ or 42 4% B.Street Setback Required ■ 50* Proposed • 41.14* Existing • 37’ Variance • 8.6’ cr 17.2% 2.&cuon 10.56. Subd. 16 (L) - Hardcover limitation for prcpcrtics located within the Nhoreland areas of iritwtancs Toul lot area - 71.734.5 s f. or 1.64 acres Allow*oi • 17.933.7 s.f. or 25% Or Allowed ■ 21,520.5 s.f. or 30% Proposed - 9 392.5 s.f. or 13%* • House - 2.492 s.f.. deck - 1,275 s f., existing garage garage • 9S8 ,s f.. paved area • 3.887.5 s.f. 750 S.f.. proposed 7xmat$ File #1123 May 12. 1993 2 ScctHMi lO 03. isiofi 9 iC) (2) Ttnal allowed area of accessory %tn»ctiifei ■ 2.iX3} i.f. Existiaf • 750 i f. Proposed - 1.738 % ( (750 * f -»■ 9S« if) Uss of £%Mbm A - B C D • E - ¥ 0 - n • 1 • j - ApplkMlOQ Propem OseKit list PUi Map ApplKioi’i Addcialufn Survey Submitted wWi Applicatioa #1387 Ekvatiom Floor Ptaiifr Propo^ Site Plan Topographic Map - Dcfinitioii of ShoreUaids >\d)JKcm to Tribumnc% Rrsotutksi #1387 Inscription of Rei|urs| Applkara proposes a 28 ’ % 20 ’ 2'^ stofy iddition to the west side of the existing residence requirinf rear and street setback variances. In 1989 applicant received approval for a rear setback variance for the deck installed at the north side with the final setback at 11 4 . Applicam also proposes the insulUtioo of a detachrJ garage measuring 26* x 33 ’ at a toul 988 iX area. The structure requires a 15 ’ setback fnrtn all lot lines and clearly meets the scibKk standard with 57’ setback from we rear and a 64* ?«tback from the street lot lines. The dct«^ smicturc will retain the rcipnrcd 10’ oparation fr >m both the principal smicturc and the existing garage. At tbc time of the planing of the Swan UJes Subdivision, the minimum area standard was 25,000 s.f. and 120 ’ width at building line. In April of 1969 when the house was constructed on the propertv. the property' was zoned R-tC requiring a minimum of 1 acre and a 140’ width with 35 ’ from ^0’ rear and 10’ side setbacks The house was placed 25 ’ from the rear lot line instead of the required 30 ’ (no record of a vfriance setback). Ail other required setbacks were satisfied. Review Exhibit I. A third of the i roperty is located within the shoreland area of the adiacent tributary . Suff has considered il.e total lot area in determining approved hardcover. Toul hardcover with propsvsed improvemtnts is at 9,392.5 s.f. or 13%. At 25% hardcover t e property would be allowed 17.933.7 s.f. ar at 30% 21.520.5%. Clearly there is no hardcover problem for the property. Mjnr 12. mi 3 D Mrs. H»Sing v tnKJgy « sMiid w (;nnv«rtcd mo lfv«g icvace * pcrtincal mtomaeto. i&e ^mperry aeoaMory «rouures VppiKaai «ict^ ^tHKnucs »k -rr'fumd m :. *^8 ut. Vplicani aitvTses tlai 4i aAlitinn lo rtoe ^’’nstnictiofl rt itc Trrv^md iOJitma. JK .^tfn j 8 ite reol tins :7rn\ujed tor *t» mat xtaeaut rbt wed *or ta aUlKWo md m'to It art wcred a cfe» Mtartirt inti nu'* « pat tfracave M «4rraitv Ml ifeo^e n ibe t m a;res .t jAmcu i 'ooi t 2.000 « 1 oi The City tm rocerved no aTCuncnn ■iigtHor? 'JuHIImI for rhe yt^oKe n«%ic^ Sfaiiaggt *a HardUiipit Serirar Extutn I. The Mkr^ing sardsimn aid f3BJ?n$s are tppn^pnaiB for das ra^vM I. Lfasm iii9t ofloi. 2 Hovae tocaled m ioi prA)r to exudlDa mning itottoLfci. 3 Praapad tffucnire dtof zoaMif laadardi a dto tune <t( cnistnicnoa n uiu aas allnv^ to he coiviruaed 25' ustead «)t 30' from die rear lot Iuk 4 Imenor lavnui of twiae Iimiti corairKnon df addition to (be 'vest »dr. ..VTPI 3 for CoosideraiiQO Will tbe to fbe sea teve m mpact on idiacexit aeigntH:nny prqpcroes.* Scto property to west is an ijndc>clct*d Citv t?ai1t The property to tbe nnnedutc nirt!i i proposed W.rt)es •ubdivoioa. Lot 2) is ax lugtier eievaoons azsi on pr.'posed iocanon of hense. the addiiKn vUl lave no onpoct. Tbe City has received no cemmena from the neighbors nonfied for the vanance revicMr 2 V(rs Rivuing has bad a difficult rune sith aumtainiag outside >tonge of vaned constfucticr sawpnient iioral on the property Staff lyouid recemrarnd that approval of the variance include a condition that applicant reduued tc tore ail construction *'ehicies and cquiprrKni within accessory sirticnirr and if equipment is to be sti'red outdoors that i^oipr.ate screening be prov^kd. Options of •* cllon Approval as proposed. Or CooditKMul approval. OR Deruai ♦ > > < if*. » *■ v.C >. N CITY of OR* vj o^ lyg. «<^Z.' June 15. 1993 RE: #1823 Marfc Rtmtiq!, 130 Cyfnei PUcc To An Affected Property Owners: The applicam has ai.'cd to Ik rescheduled before the Planmi^ Commission at their June 21. 1993 meeting to review an amended proposal that »ouK5 include the addition of a catwalk deck aloi^ the north skIc of the new addition providing access from an upper level bedroom. The new deck will be insulled at the same height of the existing deck along the west side. Mrs Ross:ng has also provided additional mlormauQn ctmeeming plate for landscaping and screening of property ’ along the street side. Please contact Jeanne Mabusth (473-7357) if you have any* questions concerning the amended proposal. Revised plans will be available at the City offices for your review. TLIXP1K5NE - 473.7357 • EU. - 473^10 /3 TOj Pl4fM^ Conwiti!»»<w Nlcnihm VUm Minjtie. Cut .Viministrtfpv mOM;A MaHcth. Boiki^ & Z>Mm% DATE:June 17. IW SITBIECT: Kcimtth Fl«e. 20H Dnve Rc^uni h> Smy Iiwb Cc»vcn»«* } .1 IM Qt Exhibits A ■ Ixxatiofi Klap B - Ptat of Sy|^ W(Htd<i C - Orifmat Surve> Pre^<aicii vnth BuiMum Pcrniil ApfUcatKia D - R cvmc O Suncy \k;ili Aiacrkied Plan E • SupptenKrtal Sheets w B»iiklinp Pcrmil AppikaiHUi fw Sugar Woods Dorlotwrai HifWifht «>f Covenams Rcs|uircd by Cit> F - Currem Dramage Pattern fot Profcrties 1 Ava^ at 21XX2 aoJ 21XM Sugaraood Dnve G - Har dcover Fact Sheet II • Packet of Support In^xinatioo Submitted by Applicani*! Comultam Xomng nidfkl R lA Panned gesKkntial Dcveloprocni IaH area - 53.421.559 s.f. or I 22b acres Building cmxtope area - 19.483 23 s f (defined by 50’ front and rear setbacks and 40’ side setbacks) AIKmed hardcover ■» 15,586.b s.f. or Proptised hardcover » 10.125 s.f. or 50% Deicriptioa of Request At the lime of the development of the plat of Sugar Woods, covenants governing the development of each dte »crc dcvekiped by both City aisl applicant ’s attorney. Ihe City c.vccuied the covenams in an attempt to rccntorce special comlitionji of plat approval The Sugar W»xxls handout. Exhibit E. highlights some of those dcvciopinent conlrols. The appiKam -vxkt the Planning Comniisskm to approve variances to these covenants. The first involves a slight curvature of the driveway resulting from the need to save a mature Review Exhibit C, the curved drive was shown on the original site plan submitted with the building permit. The building sulf could not accept this plan for with the building permit application because of the curve and asked for an amended site plan. Exhibit D. Applicant now seeks approval of the Planning Commission iMm F»r 920M 9am 17. IW Pifr 2 Thr iccuod tetfiXii n%o4vcs HMaltaiina ol a pavtd »3fk^«v located whhtfi 50' frooi/tirect peoiecieil tfca Tlie coaditiomi ibc pcniui that gnmini ^iftn>val id the pUnned rtsadeflial tSrvrIcfMnent and ike » t^tfically «tair tlm the only hitf«ko\cr nipnnemeai alkrsii^ «*>»»« the Iruoi (treet proacoed am dull he a dnvokay at a nu^aMM «hMt of 20' The wtaok oaeoi of die P R D aftpltcatioa «at to rntmoMW removal of trm THn woukl he the fint rmocti the I'vtallatiota ol a taalkiway vithin the trooi yard fwotecied area. The Nttkkr. Mr Kramer, haa advtied that no trees were mnoved as a result of the wtalUiHMt id the «alkska> as the nalkvay folknrs the line of the utlrty htstanMion frien Sufarwixid Drive. The thud request nvolves the need to fill a km leteniRMi area to the mirth of the existing resMkace. revrw Exhihr F The am t% lucaaed witlua the 50 rear protected area The «tandinf water has aircacy killed ofl leveni of the trees locatcl within the area. Applicant srbhes uv provkfc posUive draiiufe from the resukoce and connect with existing natural drainafeway that dratm from west to east. The low area will receive appnnimiiery 20 cubic vifds of fill from the coasmictioa cxcavaticws on sue. Applkant'i consultants have advised that there are maior prohlcms developing with dramage for h*vih the residence at 2002 and 2001 Sugarwoods and wiU fik a cooditii_>nal use permit tpflicaiam fiir the July meeting that wUI mvTjlvT a more coroprehcroive review and improvement plan New members drsokJ he advised that it is the responsibility of the applicant to present their position reeking to vary from the covciums. Review Inhibit H. tire packet of supportive information submined for members review and action There is no charge by the City for these reviews In the review tif these reqirests the Planmnf Commissum will have the final say. It will only be brought to die CouncU if applicanl wishes to appeal a recommendation and final action of the Planning Commeston. If the Planning Commission denies a request, the applicant may proceed with an appeal to the Council at the very next Council mcctmg on Juik 28tlL !•’ fr—is* • L tj------ Bvons ■TTrrT—-----------------------4 •I \y m — _______________ 'ft ^ 4i»» •*■•;♦ piipecMO ^i9»« --mm 9 •« —«wi| »»-*•• • 4n «i^ »■ « » ><• 2-»® ^ *1 »»## I »w * " X • •t5. ^ ”»• IJ ' ■ •»«r Tr ,:m^i UB1-. V «M* •«■ __ !«>• r .A._ a : »' ^..1 •t ^ M» Xor*! •• 2®»i .. r ■ ■* ■•? .; caarwc fC Mi ■» iM ««• t.16?. t.eci , :'■! I S» . * '''' ■9-'f:.^ iiei i« n m^m09 • ««<»^4 «-*crr~ g-'BirW sir, *■ 1^1 M» & ■» r “T^i^ ir—♦ - ■;:- -, • -1»-«* if . *. ^ «i gv ,^ S'-M I; i:! • - •••*■ • - mm • I « • \W ‘ f i“.r - MAfCH MNC mi mmi i» i »««•« V. r, *•• Sicu 1 or i stalls 6>2 ^r-r (/» goom 2OOO 0^2) 5 P I 5 5o 2 to mmrnfTi rn 222Z2ooooohhhhhmrummm tO(/)tOt'></> 5525552*00 TJ-jO Ifioomg Pi*/. i55§ 0*2 * S 2HC 2 O CO o >rm II v>> O X cu 1- ri: G f!> 0 1 •* *•1>n 0 u «»c)X -1 :i >G •U ru GXrj>•0 «■>—»to r 1 •AJ U\ V.1*1 W (Ifa0 Q >f/l 0 0 0(/)11 01):oGrt ?>:i; ?:►-4 *AJ • <;UI a '0mu>ir ►--j>\r t-*-•< '1 •-400X»%0mMK>to v,^ ;r ►H n r*i ►—< •:< n 1^* U 1 U) >CD 73 W fU AJ VO 3 r|rr (ij <0i'tr >W w y<Ql XI 0 0tn0 1 •rt 0rX01 a.0 *• ►-••■*1 * ui'u vO rr «• 0 II CO in u>*—•»—•!-•• •• cn CL K>KJ»(D i«l Kl ui *Oi CD '0 W X^ C3>(9 A)•ft •01 CO tr n D» (A 0 Vr (0 >Q «w• rt• CD 0 SUPPLERESITAL SHETT TO BOXLOISC PERMIT AFPMCATIOM PWl KESXDEHTZAL COKST*OCTIO» WXTHIM THE RBSXDEHT1AL OEVELOPWKWT OF S0GAJI mCM SUBOrVXSIOE In addition to tha planSf spacilicat ions and information raouastad In tha Orcno Bulldlno Parmlt Application packat, tha following la raquirad by spacial rasoiutioo of tha Oror.o City Council of all applicants aaaking to obtain a building paralt within tha Sugar iiooda •ubdlviaicr.: Tour aita plan uust daaignat@ tha Spacifio Building Satback Area for your lot. A) front 50 ’, raar 50* ani tlda 40* for Lota I through 4, ■ lock 11 and front 50*, raar 50* and alda 10* for all other lota in Blocks I* 2, 3 and 4. Per Orono resolution I2S52, each lot ahall stngla drieeway/ona curb cut at a 20* uaxiJiust Tha drivaway width shall be gaeasurad paral 1 road, Sugarwood Drlea. Tha portion of tha within tha front/streat setback area shall Btra-'»ht alignaant froa the loop road -*nd cur f* be sarsad by a allowed width, al to the loop driwa located bo placed in q snail not bo An inventory of all hardcover on the lot oust accoapany each application (sea worksheet attached. Attachaent All hardcover isprovenents on each lot shall be w.thin the building pad defined as that portion of the lot that ia not within the building setback area (ascaptloni the driveway leading to Sugarwocds Drive located within tha front building setback area, retaining walls and similar land scaping structures that may be built within the front building setback area). The hardcover improvuaents for each lot shall not exceed 10% of the area of tne building pad for each lot. The hardcover areas of each lot shall include the surface area on the ground of each of tha following improvements on the lot (the inventory shall include allowed improvements within the front/street setback area)} A) Footprint of each and every structural improvement on the lot, including each house, garage, accessory building, porch and covered wallcway; B) All wooden decks and boardwalks regardless of the spacing between the planks on the surface; C) All driveways and parking graveled; areas that are paved or E) AI a walkways and patios that ore coversd with asphalt, concrete, paving blocks (regardless of the space in between tha blocks), or covered with gravel, rock or woodchips upon an underliner (whether the underliner ia impervious or not), but not those walkways that are dirt, grass or gravel, rock or woodchios without an underliner; I 1 i f> Each and avary landacapad araa with an undarllnar (whathar tha undarlinar la inparvloua not)* ra^ard 1aa s whathar tha araa la eovarad with woodchlpa, atenaa* dirt or plant!i C) Any •wi.'nwirg pool or wadlnq pool; m Any tanni* court eovarad with concrata* aaphalt or clay, but net any tannla court cevarad with ^raaa. 4. Let Covarado* Par Ordinance SO, 2nd Serlas adopted Fabmary 2i, 1990, tha total coabinad footprint araaa of all principal and accesaory atrocturaa aha 11 not aacaad 199 of tha 1 acre averaqa denaity at 6,514 af. The following ahail ba includad la calculation of lot covaraqo by atructoreai a) all roofad atructuraa which extend aora than 4* above ^rada level; b) tannla courta, patioa, dacka and all alaillar epan atructuraa whan partially or fully ancloaad by fancaa, rail Inga or walls which extend aora than 4* above grade level ( if any portion of auch •tructura axtanda nora than 4' above grade level, tha entire structure ahall count towards lot coverage); c) pools. Including pool basin and associated dac)( or patio areas, ragardlaaa of whathar such pool Main* dack or patio is enclosed with a fence. 5. All lots shall be provided with a functional nnAha or aathod of backing out. Tha City will not approve tha barking out of notorlxad vahiclaa onto Sagartfood Drive. 4. For all applicants who find they cannot m&et the required standards for developaent within the Sugar Moods Planned Residential Oevelopnent, ple.^se refer to Attachment B for special directions. 7. Written confirmation from Rebars Construction that tha building plans and sit© plan have been approved by the Architectural Review Comad.ttcs Cor Sugar Moods. At the time a Certificate of Occupancy is issuad for a new dwelling within the subdivision of Sugar Woods, the City has agreed to execute ard deliver to the owner of each lot a partial release of aubdivider'a agreeaient for that lot. L*pon the recordation of such partial release of tubdivider'a agreement, the Registrar of Titles is authorized and instructed to remove from the Certificate of Title for the lot, the memorial of this instrument and the memorial of the partial relaase of subdivider’s agreement. Please contset the Building and Zoning Department (473**7357) if you have any questions concerning the directives listed above. Prior to any site prepara t ion ^ t reo cut t i ng, land alterations or construction, the Building Setbac k AreaT must be defined on the site with plastic or wooden snow fencing. This fencing must remain on the site until « representativ e of~tne Orono BuiIding Department provides written confirmation that fencing may be removed. vm CMJCUijimas vomsi Att*c.*ia«nt A pTryrx>9*4 TdCQvr - «. BotU« widtn X X b. C«r«9« c. Drlv^rfxy (includ* ar#« wxtTTin front ««tbxcJi xro* d. Sid*w«l)( ft. fxtio/ &fck/Pool/ Pond f. Landscxpo areas underlain X x X with pervious or intpervious sheeting/.......... .. * _______ fabric X g. Other X X TOTAL HARDCtrVSS Lot Area s.f. - Building Setback Area • Building Pad Area __ _ _ _ _ s.f. Allowed Hardcover s.f. e. f • s.f. s.f. e»f • a.f. a.f • Building Pad Area s.f. X 80% • 3 a.f* a.f* a.f. a.f. s.f. s.f. a.f. s.f. a.f. a.f. a.f. a.f. a.f. a.f. s.f. s.f. I 1 i I Ik REVIEW PROan>CRB rOR al :. applicamts aKABLB TO NEXT SPECIAL !«BQOIRXMENTS rom RKSIOESiriAL develophestt tilTRIN SOCAR HOOM PLAT Att*chai«nt B Ail own«r*' or build«r*’ sooking ipocial consideration ■nuat •ubait a written request to the Zoning Adnlnistrator 7 days before the official Planning Coftaission neeting for the nonth (third Monday of the *onth). The City Council of Orono has approved an abbreviated review process for all such request whereby the Planning Coeaission shall asauae the sole responsibility for the review and final recooBsendaticn regarding these special requests. Bach applicant shall have the right of appeal before the Council of all decisions of the Planning Cosuaissioa. All appeals to the Council shall be placed on the Council agendas for the following Monday (fourth Monday of the aonth). Applicants nay find that the strict enforceaent of these special requireaents for raaidantial development to not be practical nor functional when certain site conditions are found within a building lot. The following site conditions are listed below as examples to sssist applicants in the preparation of their specific request: 1. the shape or limited ares of a building envelope 2. unique or .•nature trees within a building snvolope or front/street setback area; 3. the topography of a building envalope; 4. desire to place house within a building pad so as to ninimice impact on adjacent properties. All special requests shall consist either of one or mors of the following submittalSf depending upon the specific site conditions to be considered; 1. survey/site plan designating structures# pathways# drives and type of back out lirprovement? 2. inventory of hardcover (be sure to include all hardcover within front street/straet setback area); 3. topographic mapping of property; 4. location of mature/ unique tree specimens; 5. other unique physical characteristics of property that requires special placement of house/drive on site. I IT Protjo»€fd Harfccvr • BASOCOVn CXtCriATICS 5Ti^gp^i»ch»»"t p a. Route Aenatn w idt hi X X b. C«r«9«t f 45 c. Drivowty t’# tl (includo ar#t within front ••toack trot) X _ _ __ • _ _ _ _ _ d. Sidewalk o. Pttio^ Oock/Pooi/ Pond f. Landtetpo areas underlain X with pervious or lopervious theeting/_ _ _ _ __ * __ _ _ _ fabric X g. Other X X TOTAL HARDCOVEB 1 r"’ # % A' # t.f . • f. • *. a t.f. s • f • 10. Lot Area s.f. - Building Setback Area • Building Pad“Area Allowed Hardcover Building Pad Area s.f. X 801 ■ f s.f. IC.iii--: ('T,'?'!*'- Si"'* 0• a> e .f. .f. .f. .f. .f. .f. .f. .f. .f. .f. m• m • S e !l^ • UNDQUIST V KNMM la^icirr Q ficTCHEu. jil Bt207t.32S3 •4 JUM IB, lf«3 ■JVN i n 1?S3 Hs. J«an Kabiisth Zoning Adainistrator City of orono 2750 Kally Parkway Long Laka, HH 55356 R*! Kr. fc Mr*. Kenneth J. figge, 2004 iugarwood* Orlv# Lot 2, Block 1, sugarwood* Dear Jean: On June 2, 199) you and Paul Vang net with Larry Kramer, hi* employee Mayne and myself concerning three issues about the Flgge residence in Sugarvood*. This letter will constitute the Figge's application to Crono for permission for two items with regard to their new house. The three items relate to a sidewalk from tho front door to Sugarvoods Drive, the driveway itself from the garage area to Sugarwoods Drive and a drainace area immediately north of the patio at the rear of the house. «e understand this matter will be heard by the planning coamiss*.on at its meeting on June 21, 1993. Driveway issue. Orono*s position on the driveway through the 50-foot building setback area to the street is that the paved surface of the driveway must be perfectly straight. The Figge's propose that the preferred and reasonable interpretation of the rule is that the 12 foot wide p.ived driveway surface may curve within the 20-foot wide permitted zone for a driveway, but that the 20-foot driveway zone itself must be straight fro* the street through the 50-foot restricted zone. Alternatively, if a variance is needed, the Figge's believe the driveway will be more aesthetically pleasing both to their house, to the development and to the public if 12 foot surface can be curved. The slight curve will enable them to better landscape their property to insure privacy for their property and to add additional landscaping to ths Sugarvoods. It also aids in preservation of existing trees. Sidewalk issue. While originally the declaration permitted curved, half-moon driveways with two curb cuts, Orono Resolution No. 2652 reduced the number of curb cuts to ons curb cut and one J JUM U. Ittl r»9« 2 fl sinql* driveway, fiaithar tha daclaratlon nor Rasolution 2*5; prohibits sidewslks. Tha stalf concarnad that if only one drivaaay is parsittad, and sidavalha ara not spacificaliy discussadf that thay ara proliibitad bacausa no qradii^ Is In tha 50-foot sona. Tha Fiqqa’s position is that duo to tha savara alavation change at tha rear of thair houaa, as c<»itrastad to tha ralativaly flat alavation fros tha front door of tha housa to tha •traat. tha topography is distinct fros othar lots in Sugsrvoods. In Addition, thair housa is ralativaly close to tha straat coBparad to othar housas and othar lots bacausa thair property falls off to the rear. Also, as a rasult of tha topography falling off to the rear, thara is ralativaly llttla spaca in tha front of tha housa or at tha sida of tha housa outside tha 50- f'oot restricted lone with in which to put a driveway, parking area and pedestrian access to tha housa. ><hen the houses In Sugarwoods are constructed in each instance scara *grading* ha* to be dona fros tha straat to tha house to install tha sewer line. Such is tha case with regard to the Figga rasidanca as •all. Thus, the city understands that not all grading is prohibited within tha 50-foot restricted rone. In addition, whan tha grading wav dona for tha installation of tha sanitary sawar line no largo trees ware rasovad. No large trees will be resoved to install the sidewalk. Tha sidewalk will be over tho sanitary sewer line where grading has already occurred. The declaration doss not prohibit sidewalks. In fact, it centions thea at Article IX, Section 16(e) as counting (appropriately) as hardcover, or "Covered Area". Tha Pigga's Covered Area at 60.7% is wall below tha maxisus peraitted of 80%. Presuaably tha prohibition against "grading" is intended to prevent substantial earth additions, subtractions or aovoaent within ths 50-foot tons which would sltsr the land and thus taks ,;jvay fros ths naturally occurring slsvations and topography, ths variety of which is one of ths ssthstic sJesents in Sugarvoods being protected. In fact, no "grading" is nssdsd to install the sidewalk. It lays on the existing elevations following the slope of tho land, so the sidewalk does not contravene the purposes of tha "no grading" rule. The Figge's believe that it is reasonable given the topography of their lot which falls off steeply to the rear, and tha consequent ralativaly ssall size of their actual usable lot area and the restriction it therefore places on the size and extent of their driveway and parking area, and in view of tho fact that their house is relatively close to the street and there JUfM 16, 199} 3 ia only a snail •lovation chanqo, a nidevalk curvinq in th« fashion indicatsd on tha sltai plan attached ba a pomlttad inprovansnt within tha 50-foot sona. Tha aidawalk will ba low- kay, nicaly landscapad and will ba a poaitiva addition to both tha fl99a raaidanca and to Suqarvoodn. Procadura. Tha Figqa's would like pamission to naka tha thraa changas dascribad abova. Tha cethodoloqy of making tha changas nay aithar ba by intarpratation of tha axiating daclaration and Orono Rasolution No. 2vi>2, or by varlanca from Orono Resolution No. 2652 and other governing rules and regulations because of hardship to tha applicant. With regard to tha sidewalk, tha hardship to tha applicant is caused by tha unique shape and topography of the Figge lot in that it drops away steeply to tha rear limiting the usable area outside the 50-foot setback zona on tha street side of tha property; tha problem is a naturally created one not created by tha Figga's; for a substantial and lovely new house it is a hardship that there ba no adequate means of pedestrian access to it. The lack thereof would sat their property apart from other lots in Sugarwoods which have a more amenable usable building area on tha street side for appropriate vehicular and pedestrian access. The reasons for the driveway interpratatiun or variance are similar, but are more related to, in essence, carrying out the intents and purposes of Orono Resolution No. 2652 in that a curving driveway, the Figge's submit, is more aesthetic, more natural, than a perfectly straight driveway and it is our view that "straight" refers to the permissible 20-foot width from the /n Immediately north of tha patio, at the rear of tha house there ia an area approximately 35* x 25*, triangular in shape, under water with about 10** of water at tha daapaat point which watar has already killed soma mature trees. The rigge*a wish to fill this area so that the area will positively drain to tha north of tha lot where the drainage and utility easement lias and where tha balance of tha drainage on tha lot now flows. This small, low spot was caused by "voluntaar" (suckering) ash trees which grew up along fence line. Tha trees should have bean trimmed to prevent water blockage, but they were not. Over time, as the ash grew in profundity they stopped the water flow out of the area, caused the water build-up and killed trees in the area. Even though this fill will ba within the 50- foot setback zone, it is beneficial to the rigge*s property and Sugarwoods in general in that it will facilitate better drainage from the site, will prevent the killing of more and more trees and will restore the area to its preexisting natural condition. Jure 1«, 1993 iP*<5« 4 str««t through tho 50-foot building setback area. In th« Piqgo cas9, th« 20-foot drivouay parcol la "atralght.* Tho only thing that ia curved ia the l2-foot pavad portion of tha drivavay within tha 20-foot straight drivavay itself. Tha reason for stating that tha driveway may not ba "curved** in Resolution 2452, referring to tha 20-foot atrip for tha driveway, is that an owner could run a very long driveway soc€*what parallel to Sugarvooda Drive thus conauaing a great quantity of land in the 50-foot setback tone when what Orono intended in Resolution 2452 is that the 20-foot pervitted driveway access be in a straight line froa the street to the house so that the 50-foot restricted tone would not be consuMd by the 20-foot wide driveway. The reasons for pemitting the small amount of fill as a matter of interpretation or variance ore that an unnatural condition, namely, the fence line which was allowed to go to seed so that sucker trees came into existence and blocked drainage exists. This is through no-fault of the Pigge*s. The topography of the land, the placement of the houses, the provision for the periseter drainage and utility easement around tho lots substantiates that in limited circumstances Orono understood that slight variations in existing drainage patterns night be necessary to carry out proper drainage for residential lots. We submit that this is such a circumstance and that the small amount of fill be permitted to improve the dtainage situation. /i n TO: ntCN: DATBt SUBJ^Tt Ch*irr.«r Bchro^der *ni FlAnnir^ OMMiission fc«r« Jear.n* A. Matasth, Building 4 Zoning Administrator Juns I"*, 199J R#*quest by Counci' to Review and Study for Poesible Amendment of the Current Code Standards lor N<?n-Rental Apartment Bichibits A. Code Sections 10.20 Subdivision 3 O and M. B. Caffron Memo of 1/22/87 The rcning code was acaended in February of '87 providing separate standard for non-rental guest apartments. The previous code only dealt with guest house use and standards for that use. Standards established for the guest house were not functional cr appropriate for guest apartawnts. Review Gaffron's memo, Exhibit B. providing J)jjckgrcund on the general issues and the intent of the awendment. Council's request resulted from the nany variances granted within the last half year to tnia specific code section, the issue of internal access. One of the conditional use applications involved an internal access variance for a non-rental caretaker apartment that existed for 37 years when the apartment was slated for major remodeling. Access to that unit was from a single exterior door not connected to principal residence but an attached garage. Another dealt with an arartment unit that wao located on the second floor of a garage connected by a skyway. Internal access was provided via the skyway and a separate grade level entrance door to the garage. In that case, the applicants requested special consideration as one parent was in the early stages of alzheimer e disease. In another conditional use permit application involving a variance to internal accecs, the apartment was 1,000 s.f. in area containing two bedrooms located above a i 1/2 stall garage. Internal access was through an auxiliary door adjacent to garage gtjTjcture entering in a mud room area off of a utility loom. The access stairs at *'he upper level would have entered the master bedroom through a closet area. Special consideration was eoucht as applicant's son was a diabetic. The internal access standard was developed to ensure that the apartments could never be used for rental because access was internal through th*' residence. The majority of conditional use permits for non-rental apartments have been able to satisfy the internal access standard. Staff will be happy to review the many applications where non-rental apartment standards were completely satisfled. Review the material and if we have time at your meeting we may discuss or you may prefer delaying until one of your workshops. ►l f 10.20 I, F«blic Service Structur**. Public ••rvlc« • trucbur#*# Incluilln^ iMJb net limited *o •icct.ric t rAiissl vs ion lines# boildlnqt such ss t«l«|;bone exchsn^e stations, boostor or rrossoro requlatinq stations, wells, and rluobin^ »tations# ilovatad tanks, lift stations and alsctrlcal sutstations, rrovidod no buildi*»9 shall Iccatsd within 50* fro* any lot lin# of an abutting lot in an -P* District. Prior to grantirg such tarmit it shall b* found that the architactura1 design of sarvi^ structures is coofatibla to the neighborhood in which it Is to be located and thus wil^ promote the general welfare. structures as defined above that have been a{:(coved by the City at recuired tublic hearings for r«blic infroveaent projects noz rsquirs a conditional use fxmit but subject to all other anroi-riate standards set S/il section; anendaents to a^rcoved plans involving ****^’" placeeent of these structures will require written City to ail affected preperty owners 14 days prior .o the adoption of the acended plans by the Council. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted! 2 “23 — E. Greenhouses. Cosuaercial greenhousss provided all outside storage is fenced in such a aanner so ss to screen the stored mater is 1 fro* view when observed fro* the ^ adjoining lot. Comrercial greenhouse structures sha^ I r^<>t hm located in a rec jirad yard area, and are subject general toning code requirements pertaining to accessory structures. Sourest Crdinancs 72, 2nd Series Adopted! 8-14-P9 P. Pecreation Areas. P^'i^ate gun clubs# archery ranges, ski slides, provided the area is fenced and no p principal uaa is lass than 150 feat from any lot lines 5Qm^cex Ordinance 24, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-86 G. Guest Houses 4 lion-rents 1 Guest Apartments. 1) Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot *®. *. occupants of the principal l^r^ requirementsemployees or their non-paying guests. All regular lor r q shall be met by the guest house. Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted: 2-23—87 A ORONO C 280 (4-1-84) I I* •• «•' k f 10.30 w 2) Cu«it An «|atiai«nt »lthlr. |rlr.clf«i r*.t«.nc. .tructur. c» • let /®'“f* of th. oceut.rt. of th. (tinclMl 1 tl « ImU^ Ve‘^:? -v:r t r tr’i ri: f • o. ir t\‘. ^. nc i».. tL coBC.rn. of p.rklr?. ”••**'*"* V. .ce... =.thod. such .,.rtr.nt. .h.ll »2t '‘V. • •{.aratvly from tha |rinci|ai r«»ia«nc« utiiltla* and ahall not hava a la^arat* atraat addraas. Spurcai Ordinance 39. 2nd Sariaa Adoftadt 2-23-17 H. riannad Baaldantlal Devalofmant. Lieitad to datachad aingla faelly dwalllnaa only and aubjact to the lialtatlona of Sacticn 10.33. I. Ouplaa Credit. 0n« duyla* eay tm located on a" ;.s:nnr.v, building. J. A^tiarlai. K. Antenna Structure. One independent antenna structure with antenna or coaibination of entenna attached thereto. subordinate to and aervicina the principal use or °”d^r2 sama lot and cuatoauixiiy incidental thereto that is not attached another structure provided the height of the antenna structure ^a not exceed «5 feet and the antenna structure lot line a diatanca at ieaat equal to the total height of th« antenna structure. I,, Parnui (Crop and stock). Provided that the area la tea or aore acres. M. Animals. The keeping of docestic animals for non-commercial purposes including horses for the occupants of the premises. A minimum of one acre in aggregate, exclusive of one acre for the principal building, must be available for each animal unit, except as hereinafter set forth. A minimum of two acres of open pasture must be available for a aingle nor and one additional acre must be available for each additional horse* when the horses are kept stabled and do not require pasture for feed purposes, the minimum pasture requirement may ba ad^ustea at the discretion of the Council. Such minimum pasture acreag shall not include low lying lands unusable for pasture or grazing. Any person keeping such animals must comply with the provisions the City Code. OROHO CC 280-1 (4-1-84) pr i 4 i 4 TOi Mayor Crabok Hark Bernhardson, < Oroao Council Vo«b< PBCtlS fUehael P. CaffrcMi. Assistant Planning OATEl January 22, lf§7 SObdt toning Amondoent Or^inane* Approval lLi*t of Kahlblto - A • Propoaad Ordinanca B - Planning Coa«i*#ion Minuta* of fobllr soaring hold 11-17-8A C “ Staff Haao and Exhibit* 11-13-t* At th. rublic H«*Tln9 h.ld U-17-»», flannln* ComHiIob q.v. gonoral diroction to ataff aa follooai a) Bon-rental guoat apartauenta ahoold b* tfoatad undor tbo conditional uao aoctlon. b) Guoat apartnonta within roaldoncoa ^ MfkA should not oivo tha arpaaranco of a duplax typo of “cujircy 1..! .hooTa "°t *>• •» intru.iv. .. to b. out of characi«r with th<o n^i^ht^orhood. accoaa ahould bo within tho raaidonco. d) Lot aroa ia not neceaaarily a concorn aa long aai 1) Soptic nooda ara taet. 2) ParAinq roqquiroawnta aro hanolod. th* concopt that tho guoat ajgartmont requiros doubl* tho aoning diatriefa required area ia not valid. o) Conditional Us© Permit review proceaa ahould addreaai 1) Septic 3) Exterior door/Entrance deaign <•••i 4) Interior acceas (to make aure there ia on*} f) The maid* mechanical aet-up i. not • separate metering of utilities generally will be disallowed. g) Staff will continue to treat bars, baaement -kitchenettes-, etc. aa before, homeowner that guest apartment use requires a condition use permit and rental use is prohibited. & 2oniri9 A®0T*4®«nt JaniMiry 22, 19§7 Pag* Oiv«n this diractiofi, coda raviaionai • taff iu^^aata tha following racoroandad Section 10,2^ Subdivlatan 3(C) b£ ravia^ aa (ollwa^, C. i) Cu..t Hou.... » ..F,r.t.*n V.tatinq undlaidad lot for tha aola uaa of thm "cop.nt. of th. prlnclp.1 buUdin,., “’•‘J do..,tlc «ploy«*s or ^ "«p-PybJ Jh!'ouV.tTabular lot raqulracafita aha 1 1 ba eat by t a 9 houae. ti) Hon-r.ni*l »p.rt..nt.. An ‘fV »!* th© principal raaldanca atructura on a uaa of tha occupants of tha principal includinq thair doaastic aaployeaa or non-p ^ ^ ouasta Thara shal 1 ba at laaat ona accaaa door to tha 2part«a*nt froai uithin tha principal dSir aha 11 ba tha primary accaaa ff ADDlication for such a guaat apartment shall addraaa tSI concVrn: o? P«Ain,. interior accaaa aathod. Such apartaanta shall ^ »^«ya u?ili?iaa »atarad aaparataly from tha principal raaidarca utilitias and shall not have a aaparate street address. Add tha following definition to Section lO.O.li S' ^ I • rtTo«r Anartment* “ An apartment within a principal r«l5oncrlt”“ur. for th. .ol. of th. occupant. ori^ciP.l r..id.nc. includln, th.lr domo.tic emploY.M or their non-paying queat*. with at l.Mt one acce*. door to tha apartMnt /^^^len^to^t hi structure, such door being the primary apartment. Piannin, Co-is.ion Cu..‘? Jp*a'^rr.:nt' a7rc7n ‘di\ion.l''ua. par the above r.vi.icn. PROPOSED MOTION: fon'^iorio ’^s°ubdl vision''3^Gl"to l„ral.end“l'lq srctl"o„"7S.^cr2 by iLorporatin, a definition of "Guest Apartment". Ayes Nays _. YD«luyor Crab«lt Hark larnhariaon. City Ad*inl*trat.r Orono Council J*#»b#rs Planning Co»ni»»ion Ha»bafa FUCM:Mlchaai F. Caffrcr.» j^n^^stant planning k fonlng Adainlatrator DATS:January 15» 1?I7 SOBJa zoning Anendwant - Parfotaanca Standards for Sen Bantal/Guaat Apart»«nt» airh n Prlnci^l Paaldancat Sacond Ravlaw At tha Fovaabar aaating. Planning Coaalaalon gava ganaral dlraction to staff as followai a) Son-rantal guaat apart.-ranta should ba traatad undar tha conditional usa saction. b) Cuast apartaents -ithin rasidancas should not ba obvious, and should not giva tha appaaranca ® occupancy i.a. should not ba so inrrusiva as to ba out of charactar with tha naighborhood. c» Cuast apartnants naad not racassarily ba *i*.««.ibla fro* insida tha rasidanca. Tha concapt of a saparata axtarlor antry is accaptabla but It apMsr as a second nain entrance, and tha prisiary functio access should ba within tha rasidanca. d) Lot area is not nacessarlly a concern as long ast 1) Septic needs are aat. double the toning district's required area ia not valid. a) Conditional Use Permit review process should addressi 1) Septic 3> Exterior door/Entranee design (aesthetics) 4) Interior access (to make sure there is one) «i qrnff Will continue to treat permit requests for wet use permit and rental use is prohibited. i . j Xcnina A»«n<te«nt January 15» 19§7 Page i Civan thla direction, code revisionst staff suggests the following recoewended Section 10.20 Subdivision 3(G) ^ revised as followit G 1) Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings, including domestic eeployees or their non-paying guests. regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house. il) Non-rental Guest Apartxents. An apartment within r.: •oV^fhV•p:^n•ciV%^^°/e.^^•.•nci: JC:it^^^"Ur^•sharl^^•Vt^e7s^t^^^•^ ipartment froo with.n the principal ^“***» *"? '“f door shall be the priroary access to the Application for such a guest apartment shal. address the concerns of parking, sewage interior access method. Such apartments shall ifilities metered separately from the residence utilities and shall not have a separ street address. Add the following definition ^ Section ,10 • P.gj. •Guest Apartment* - An apartment within a residence structure for the sole use of the occup o? t^rprincipal residence, = 1 f.T.Voneemployees or their non-paying guests, with at least one ^cce« door to the apartment from within the Princl^l structure, such door being the primary access to the apartment. KimiT£5 or ti ;k riJ^MWiw; cofcussioa iu:mric heu > m>vc:;tfii*ni ii, I9t4 ZOKIMG A«j:5roilE»T » PE»fOJWA»C* STAriDAW'S FtW NO:i-*Fl;TAL/ GUEST APAimtt3«TS WITHin raiBOTirAL PBSIDI3S;ES rupl.ic HSAFII8G iJlSO - 10:51 Th« Affidavit of Publication vaa r.tad. So on« was prasant frcm tha public rarnrdlnq this SMittor and tha public haaiir.g ^as clcsad. Assistant Toning Adsinlstrator Caffron asplainad th« intant of tha proposad amandaant to astablisb parfornanca standards for non-rantal quasi apartnants within principal rasidancas. Ma statad that tha Planning CoasRission should addrass thasa issuasi a) is tha *doubla tha lot sraa* standard raasonabls for a guast apartaant. b) Parking concarns? Chairaan Kallay statad that ha fait such guast apartaants ahould ba allowad undar a conditional usa parnit. He would lika to avoid crap lata saparata living Bellows statad that sha would like to avoid an axtarior appaaranca of a duplas* but not lagislata against livs"' in halp ate. Taylor statad that ha was not as concarnad about tha saparata antranca issua, and would prafar to continue traating thasa on a case by case basis. Planning Coawission dlractad staff to bring back to thair naxt siaeting a proposad wording and parformance standards for guest apsrtaants as a Conditional Usr# Incorporating tha following concepts: 1. Lot area is not a concern if septic and parking concerns sre mot? perforsiance standards for these ahould ba proposad. 2. Tha Conditional Use Parmit ravlaw procass will addrass the visual isipact on the neighborhood of each specific situation, with the goal that t.ie guest apartment should not ba an obvious sacond dwelling unit when viewed fro* without, and ahould not have the appeariinca duplax, i.e. not haw two obvious "main entrancas". . ^ 3. Primary access to tha guast apartment snould ra from within tha residence, but secondary accesr^es are allowable. . 4. Wet bars and basement kitchens proposed with new homes or remodelings that are obviously not meant to become second dwelling units, need *'®5w*** w ^ i * Conditional Use Permit ss long as the building permit states that they may not bacoroa se^jond dwelling units. To: OrofK) rUrrlr.^ Ccwlsslon mrb«rs Frail melu«l P. C^ffrcR. A**t FUnnln^ t :o«in<j Aitelnlitntor Dat« t %oywt*r 13» IB^Wctt prof<5**4 CcxJi Aff«ndr«Bt F«ttia£at Cod# •#<rtlo«»i 10.20, »ttbdiviiien 3 (C) 10.Ci, fubdlviilon J (AM?) 10.02, 0#f. •I* Dmt. #22 - Cu«st in<-*ntL of th# propoiod is to oitabliih p#rfor»onc« /4* far fusATontil «u#it iport»inti within principal raildancaa. standard! for non soctlon 10.20, fubdiviaon 3 <0> tho past, th# City J**^J^* . «itho«V th« %^rdin<i of Subdiviaion 3 (C>i 1 .«* .\:t .rpir“r«’ ...... u y th. r.c.ot p..t, r •or* t.«i.l.ture. In th. r.«nt M«iHj»*r t«, «.r. .p^oprl.t.ly t.ii unaor ,7, „e.„t ««nA..r t of v,rl«nc. Tho full Intoot of t oy oorotnlno body •• th* com Boytho St.to Stotutoo. lo not knwn, . .tho 90W dwolUnq ao bo. Six pon.it .. . *ati.»"T .Ir^f o.v iJ.to.d of .h.ll -.k.n. th. • tooTl.olly dwollloy. ®** ..j„ c.nnot bo .ccui.d of or.ntln, a 'u.o diractiva but claarly a ^ aconoaic praaauraa facing many y.ri.neo-. Th. .t.t. I oovT^^^^^ to d.fln. I.9.I. homastaada and tha naad to staff faalt it would ba appropriata Innovativa waya to aolva tha \ ^ aoart»anta aa an accaaaory uaa»undar .pacific conditions to allow guaat a^t.ants aa with parfonaanca standards writtan into tha coda, aa follows: Add Se«n:ioo 10.20, f* J** * An apartmant within tha principal ro.ld.nca otructur. for th. guo.to. ro.id.nc., inclodlny th.ir to thl MortMnt ft^ wtthln There oh.ll bo .t lo.it ®®* po tho prlBorv acces. totho principal .tructuro, and .uch door oh.ll be tn. prio. r thw apartment Doflno cue.t Ap.rt«nt by addlh, S.ctlon 10.02, Subdlol.lon 20 <-) .» followai . , o.o.-o,„i« within a principal raaidenca -0u..t *P»rt-.nt - An •P*rr»«^r occup.nt. of th. principal Structure for tho «»«r>iovaas or thair non-paying r..ld.nc, .CC.M door to th. .p.rtment from 3?“!^th. pr'lncrp.1 ^tructuro, .nd .uch door .hall b. th. prlB.ry access to th0 apArtxnent A. .n oltornativ.. boc.u.e ’““V r\Vo"utTon ?n th".‘ch.'iTo^ ccnditlcnal u,« „? "rr. . . .. fforo tho Planning CoL^lM^ion and^^oun^il, which ?. in .OBe c... an unwieldy proco... Are there any condition, under which the •.cc.ory u..- .tatu. could be granted without tho need for fili'!^ « ^9 ^ i r#rh«pft 1 of • cr 1 of 10 now hoooo cooo in with rroro»o<J iocond kitchon in b*»e=s«nt •• port of a bar or oo • bofto-fido guost apartaiont. LIST OF CUBST APAHTMKlfTS Conditional Om^ P^mito/Variancoa Sinc« • Datachod iio«s structure flQiS #1044 11002 —1955 » - 1929 9929 #924 • 924 • 856 Or. Cion Saloon. SOO Tonkawa Road - Attachod guost apartaont but not accooaod froa within principal rooidenco oxcept by Lot aroA 5 in a I ncro lono* Larry liartineau. 4360 Chippowa Lano - Baoement nothor-in-lawf •partnont, accoso frcsn within. • aero lot i In 5 aero «one. Paul walontini Conotruction. 115 Luco Lino Rldgo - Baaowont nothor-in-law apartmont. accooo fron within. 3 »! aero lot (PUD). Mrs. r.C. Lynan. 125 Old Crystal Bay Road South - Guoit houso conditional uoo pornlt. David M. Winton. 1780 Shorollno Drivo - Conditional uao ponait for guest house. Lylo Rahn. 1146 Wildhurst Trial - Conditional uso pormit for guost house - major variances to lot area, etc.) Richard Pula. 2015 Webber Hillo - Mother-in-law apartment above garage. Judson Dayton. 1655 Bohn’s Point Road - Conditional uso porsiit for guest house. Jon Sch.rv.n, 2«49 C.co Point Ko.d - Moth.r/f.th.p apartment in bas«sont. Edward Bock. 1280 North Ara Drivo - Apartment in baaoffiont for hi® children (•dulti)# di /0.1O s 10.20 SBC. 10.20. R-IA OfIB FAMTLT RKIOEirriAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. PurpoR#. Th# "R-lA" On# Faaiily Realdential District Is intsndsd to provlds s district *#hich will allow a coabination of low density residential developaent and liaited aoricult'jral activity. Planned residential developaents aay be allowed by conditional use perait. The district shall have laaediate access to highways and public sanitary sewer. Subd. 2. Peraitted Uses. Within any One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used except for one or aoe9 of the following usest A. One family detached dwellings. B. Public owned packs and playgrounds C. Kunicipal buildings. Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-lA" One Family Residential District, no structurs or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use perait: G. Guest Reuses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings. Including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house. u ’ 'i'KV y\ t : fr ry y r — V -r ■ 1 Ik /0-OS S 10.ot Subd. 3. V«riarc«t; I*saanc«*. A. in consid«rin9 applications for varlanc«» the area. lefor* granting a ear lane*, the Council for variances^ fro* the literal provlelona of Inatancei where their strict enforce«ent would cause undue hardship because of clrcuastances unique to the Individual property under consideration, and to grant .oiritdeaonstrated that such actions will be In seeping with the spirit and Intent of this Chapter, "Undue hardship" as used In connection with the granting of a variance aeans* 1. The property In queitlon cannot be s^t to a reasonable use If used under conditions allowed by the official, controls.2 The plight of the landowner Is due to olccjMt»nc«« unlqu. to hl» property not ct.«ted by the Undown.r. 3, The variance. If granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 4^ Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship If reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this Chapter. 5 undue hardship also Includes, but is not Halted to, inadequate access to direct sunlight •"VJJ systems. Variances shall be granted for g construction ss defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when Ir harmony with this Chapter. 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is loci-ted. 7 The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling . B The Board or Council «iy Impose conditions in qrsntinq vsr iinces to inputs VsrTa'nc'r sh?U b^e^Tr-t*e"d" o" ?^sn\%‘=d\eyird*tL'’^si%»itted''°n\his Chapter in the district where such land is located. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 -S lu:Ouirnufi Schraa^ md FUfanp C R oq Moonc. City ii^ M<«HKrr ^ran; Djir: Siibj«<t: Icaiw A MaNktiR. Butkioig A Admmntntar hmt 17. Roirw o# UndBC Hapfetnr •«* ***»• *»’ VP»> CAirwf Vatuiwc Review Lfal of EsMbm A > Stitt Sumtt li • Penmem Sccti ol Owi*' Ctute Clnrlcs Sctnxtkr his iskol ihtt fUtt nchik cofMrt of ihe State Sututes and Cit) Onfinaox* w the> pcrtna to the Maue of vtnanee* and the oerctwy findLn^s for undue hardship Seven ol Che twelve necessary tlntic^s wahm the Zo^if Code arc Anind uithin il» •even hanhhtp staiemcTiis from the State Statute. The remaimitf five have cxiaed ut the Orono Code since the early to nud-tO's 1 The Chairman like members to review and discuss the Code Setitom at cither our meeting or a workshop for the purpose of assuruif tboi necessary fi»linfs are made to iuppi>rt reconuncndaiKins of <i^ipfoval or denial. Please ccmuci the rooii^ staff prior to our Mtinday mcefimT l vou wish otlier informaticm for this discussion. i I. d d ir y IS o R e R I- ■ 0 h e 1 t % ^ %’ m ** * P * '••r* 2- £ rr T nr^* • »■• .1^* ■* ^jV r* i .it-X" r~ '4i ri^ -I » .* ' i-«V • •• •» -•Jrv-.. •jp 'T . MiwuaivHaMKC »iia »A(k Mvtu n Owl ont> aucr tOcie iluttlu^eRern RtcU ? w--• > r. «•» to tf»c odkc of th« c tv cSerli a wnttm cocMcr* of the ov»om of tt»o>lhinli of the %e> cral jQi tScKnpCH'>r« of real estate utuate »;:b*a 100 feet of the total i\>oli|»out drtrhptioos f ' ofre«lrsta;f heWb^tbesRineovk tr or toy (ka:t> pwrehaur^ any twch coAtifwows ptofw erty »tthia one year orece^inf t.**e reqiucst. ao4 &*ter the aftrmatt>ie vote in favor thereof hy a maior.ty of the memhen of the foeermof iKxly of any uieh city The fov- eraang ho^ of wch cit> may. by a two-thirds vote of its members, after bear adopt a new ordinance wuhoot sneh written coanent whenever the pinnntnc commts* uon or board of wch cit> shall have made a survey of the whole area of the c;ty Of of an »ea of not less than acres, within which the new oeddMnee or the tmendmeats v*r alteiatiom of the csisiin* oedinnoce wooW uke effect when adopted, and shad have .onatderrd whether the number of descriptions of real esutc alTev ted by such chances and alteratiom readers the ohtaiuac such wnttea consent impracticat. fftwt f»*ch piannittf coramisaion or pUnntne board thaU report in wntic^ as to whether in its opintoa the propoanb of the toverain« body to anv case arc reasonably reUted to the overall needs of the community, to estsStof land use. or lo a plan for future land use, md shad have vooducted a public heannf on such proposed ordinance, changes or alterations, of whKh hcnnng puNished notice shaU have been given in a daily news paper of fconal circulation at least once each week for three successive weeks prior to such hearrg. which notice shad suie the tunc, place and purpose of such heanng. and have reported to the governing body of the city its ftndtngs and recommendations in urTitiog. Subd. 6 Appeals and i^jttsQnmts. Appeels to the board of appeah and adjust- ments may be taken by any affected person upon compliance with anv reaaonable c«- dittoiis imposed by the lootitg ofdionKrc. The tKMud of ippc^Is lod idittitintnts us the fofiowing powers with respect to the xooing ordioancet (1) To hear and decide apptali where it is alleged that there if an error in any order, requirement, decision, or iklermination made by an administrative ol^er in the enforccir'ent of the rontng ordinance (2) To hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their enforcement would cauK undue hardship because of cir cumstances unique to *he indmduai property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when :t is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the ^ spirit and intent of the ofdinancc_-Undue hardship’ as used in connection with the granting of i vanance means thW^perty in question cw>t be put to a rca^ table use if used under conditions allowed by the offioal ccnlroft^e plight ol the IS due to cirwumstances unique lo the property not cirated by the lan^wncASihd the variance if mnted. will not alter the essential cHaracter of the lociliivccono^c con siderations alone shall not constitute an un^hardship if reasonable use for the prop erty exists under the terms of the ordinancb^odue hardship also mcludcs. but is not limited to. inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Vanances shall be granted for earth sheltered construcH^ as defined in section 1 loJ.06, subdivision 2, when in harmonv with the ofdinanc«The board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be. may not permit as a variance any use that is not pcnmlicd^dcr the ordinance for property in the rone where the affected person s land is locatcffirhe board or governing body as the case may be, may permit as a vanance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two Linuly dwelling. The board or gov- crning body as the case may be may impose condmons m the granting of vanances to insure compliance and lo protect adjacent properties. -i j Subd- 6a. It is the policy of this stale that handicapped persons and children ^CeZ.*iSr7 ______^ 4» % . 4 W • O * •^»U »Fpro« • »c!• lawtully •*t*t on January 1. I>i5. *. <« iin'jiufjl •"y person lonin/ch.pty «na .t^tlor or *Sjot .It.r.UoM building p#r*lta c«i!Ba'*alona of • itructara, ahall b« uhlcn «IU tha . sTta plan. If tha -Ita accoopanlod by thraa <21,^ of V ^ubdlvl^l^n or land coapoaad of conaiita of land not a pat. * h« attachad to a aurvay by a partial lota, tba alta actual diaanalona of t.ha lot, raolatarad land i?.n Tha a plan shall also show lots or parcal to ba built Jj? to ba acactad or d?..n.lo?. ot „Uti09 •"^.7 on .It. In .ttJCtur.lly .It.t.d, «^*7,i7af*-.tr..t p.tulno pl*n *nd »uch out.Id. bound.ty, '»• °'"oI;llrr to provtd. tor th. Sth.r intoc.tion .. “‘yf* Vi.n. .ub.ltt.d for .11 .nfoto.o.nt of .h.U contain U4->tl"« ‘"f u,.« .ic.pt on. •"“’d .11 .I'V f«pto».».nt« .r. to b. bond.d .t th. j:f.‘o?^-?/rt*t..: tj.'ir ..-tLot^. co.t. SEC. 10.Oi. VWUANCB. Subd. 1. V.rl.nc... .nTp^rvU^U ’^of"'?": ».tl.nc.« fro. '*’**Yioo».'’condition, .nd ..f.ou.td. •" **’* “."rr.’n=".l*Vo*%rVn't.d?“f; cVr^yl'-no'^uVlli difficult las or .? of tha loning Chapter and strict lattac of «ffact tha purpose and intent of ‘rS: :''o*n^Tcb.ptVr t^.^V.’.U^b *or ..Ifrr. of tU. public. a f _ ^ ^ ^ ^ JB jmksource* Municipal Cede Effective Date: 9^1*1-47 Subd. 2 and Adjuataanta v.rl.nc.1 H.f.t.nc. to th. Board of App..l. A. Th. dtclAon. of th. Board ar. Board of Appeal, and Setori author icatlon oC any t.nc.a,advUory to th. Council. B.tor. Appeal, and reauast therefor shall be hhe effect of the proposed Adjustments for d2?ion ’'to variance upon tha and for Its «^«^°‘"™«?tevrsucSand development of the neinnoocn variance so as to relieve suen th. Council for to the degc. con.id.r.d r.asonabl. difficulties or hardsn^p ORONO C: 264 (4-1-84) s wlthcjt lapairin^ ^ Vnd a/nt » •hmll r*co*««nw aac^ Tt# Bo.ri of Appj.lt .nd r.g.tdin^ loctlon. ccnditlon. rj^.t.d of t?« proposed S)ulldlfv». ittacta^*condition. ^*^*\*^ of t*i« proposed building* *. ?b. io.ra JJjYtr^slibV ’L'^V nVti«V’'ihin bl published In the official r.ejspa^r one •“he da/ ri. r*J* ouroose of flUin^ ealled ^irson'or br B^*nt -•• r^tice. the person responslbAe ror -n<j addresses of each appropriate record* to tv sitj.ted -hoUy or partly oSner of affected property and variance. A copy within ISO feet of the owners and addresaes to which t^ of \he notice and a list of r.,poraible person a^ notlca waa sent records of the proceed Inq*. The shall be sad# a P*J , notice to individual property -failure to gwe aalled ^ Invalidate the pcoceedlnga. l"bo'n; n*i .^.-PC t, eo.pir -t . S«b4lvl..on been sade . th« partlea. The Board ®inutea of Its meetingi# Its the final order. Subd. 3. v.tl«nc«»» I.»v>»n«». A. rn ccn.ld.c lna Board council .halland the effect of the !ind anticipated traffic welfare of the community, . _ _ Qg fire, risk to the public conditions, light and property in the -^trounding VAl granrin, a thl. Cbaptar In for variances fros the ^g|^nt would cause undue hardship instances where uniaue to the individual property un because of ^,ant such variances .oirltconsideration, and be in keeping with the “PJdemonstrated that such actions^^^^^ hardship* as used in connection and intent of thi 5 ‘‘ ^^^j^ance means: with the granting o. a variant .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . controls. ORONO CC 65 (4-1-84) S ic.:i 7 cf l*r.dcw:i«r it du« to clrcar.«.c. u«l,». to hi. rro^Tty re. -/ ______^ \ \ not: Alt# --------- 3. Th. ¥«ri.“-c.* If qr.nt.d* wi*l not n • h. ..wntl.! charMt.r cf th« locUty. <.____ ___ w. : „i.t. und« th. t.r.. of thi. ........... leSdVr-htn V. tiu::r -i--» ord.r this Ch.st.r for yrot.rty r.r.on'» mix* i» > -*.. herd or Council n.y ... " . (dwollin?. • -H* tcocial conditiono applying ..'V ...o.. >• •'•>•■•>■ •■ i^Sediatoly adjoining ptopor-y. - ________^ fT*f!iirAliy♦ . Th. Ihlch ‘.'IirtinX l2 oth.r l.nd or .tructur.. m th. di.tr-=t located. ,0. Th. 9r.ntin, of th. -rj‘.^".“t'.ntl.l n.c....rr for th. rr...rv.tlon .nd .njoya.nt cf ”l*.rty right of th. .frllcnnt. ‘ i;S:.r r'hi".%P u‘"n?. ;:f u“ n:c«»ry"to ri!:vi^«”.V“ trSr:*n«=>*‘'‘^ =r difficulty. Source: Ordinanc.^ 26, 2nd Series Adopted: 7-14-36 ORCNO CC 266 (4-1-34) - $ 1C.OS # _ icard or Council «*y lr;c*o condition* In granting of v.riirco. t'^v^^JllncV Vho I vh«ro *uc^ l*nd l» ioca.o «j City Co4« Effoctivo Cot*} . . 4- Ttrr-*#- Aro**. T?1« rcr.ino Ch«j:t*r Sufcd. ■•• ^’^;*^\wj.o^gj^ut ‘cTono *o that th* s««k* to co-ratibi« to *och cth«r and to th« varlou* tcno* “^J^oP^rtv in tho City aojoln* u*e* and rogulation*. -hor# aubjoct to ro^ulatlon* in another »unicij*.« Y ••ho «« acriylng tc tho City pro|«r»yf aubatantiaily *5® of *11 regulation* ao a* to aak* atrict rLnetl «ay take into account the •uch FroF«r-y nd tho regulation* of the adjoining BuniciFaiity in ccn»id#r^n? apF^- Sourcei Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ,. V.runc..: D.nl.1. .-rl-nc..^ ihtiirov %v.i.,“roV -- •-» - Cosaaiaaiun . Source: sruniciral Effective Date: !?-14-a7 subd ». vari.no..> within .inty («0) d.y* recoaunendatio. i* op for variance to the Board, the !;”“r...rral of th. .FFli^cn.-°^/« .w.itlr.9 .» = »after referral of the Council nay take act recoauaendation * Source; City Code Effective Date: 4-i-*a vetriance. ^ Source: Municipal Effective Date: 9-14-07 CRONO CC 266-1 <4-1-34) 5 iC.Ot in of th# fro^orty shall rsquirs s r. Vsrlsr.css shall s:<Tirs if n«t ussc!. Any r«*rf vartsncs. Soarc*i Crdir.snca ?:o. I'i ffnctlvn rstsi A ^ • - Subd... A c.rtlfi*'! co{y of ***ry ’""IHd ond.r th. r-Vl.lon. of fJ'ViUV;*u°"t% -Vcord.r. 44J.35* CoVnty'ii.cori.r lur.u.r.t to Vsrisncss filsd const!tuts J? "■".TV.?;:"" k;!;.”;"*-- SEC. 10.09. CCSDITIOSAL OSES. Subd. cordltlon.l Vch’iU: tS. dl.trlct u.. crt.J dl.trlct..tS. dl.trlct u.. chirt»“ in '.rt.ln dl.trlct., ths objsctivss of guVjsct to ths grunting of n uss conditions! usst srs t^ass usss gsnsrslly not suitsbls permit. Conditions! t which m.y und.r so«. in s particuisr xoninq^ d auch circumstances exist, a circumstances be c'-anted. Conditions may be app!io<* conditions;, use pertut !‘c2rlodic review of the permit msv to issuance of the iisued for a particular use and be required. The permit •J'* ^ Because of their unusual not fer a ^ u*** require consideration so they may characteristics, V.?’«rV*«t«c» to the objectives of the -on..nq be located prop«r,^y J 5?uniclpai Plan and with respect to Chapter and the Comprehensive Municip to achieve these their effects on to qrant and to deny L7x\V.rii«.''’f:r‘^cc“n"d!tVonir u.V;:?^Vr, j^ndmen^ upon tb. ,r.ntln, of oh... Source! City Code Effective Date: 4-l-aa Subd. 2. Condlrlcn. l o....^ %VnVi:i^»l”u.:S*-n.i"t2 Commission. Before ths in the district regulations for such conditional shall be ot the ’.oning Chapter, concerning the the Planning CoMii..ioh fer Y character and developmen rrotoaed uae on the ordinance V -icn in regard to granting ir*he neighborhood and for *"‘’.*\s“?.of, if any, or for the ,ach conditional u.a and The Coancll aay by unanlraou. Slt"ioV wllvrirfeV.ntinS^^h ’-e PlVnnin, Conalaaion. Source: .Municipal Coda Effective Datei 9-14 6/ ORCNO CC 267 (4-l-a4)