Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
01-17-1989 Planning Packet
* ^ " > X-*■ *%ri pi■%i "•#. i. - ■*ie t, • : • f * #» -I'' ,,*^' '-f^^* Aj’** ■ •'^ ^T'-■'’•■ mL *■ Lii ^ • >f *'C jif • ■ ■■ .;< li -1, - p t-~'r ' •., \ • «>m •’i -1* - : «:/ »■• ^ >. ■ -i'f« .: '-‘ ik. -> .t* > ■i». i '-^X' «'■’* -'I■ y ‘.\.i'm\ \ i.'S . J.> W‘Hva>-. .. . ■. ■‘’ - ^ '■* 9 4, .1 ^ M ', . TT.- ■......... ■^1 n 'SKi M PUBLIC AfTENDANCE ? CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE f/ / 7/97 PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS NAME (pieas3 print)ADDRESS !..<<TP.;,7 ^/Oryst 2.ir __Vl -iL A OV n 3.!>>auu^ L(o,ri;>rP 4 ^(y^vuw t^AiAg^ig ita.^<■ Vti i I't^A J> ./ 'ii£ K&cjfr^ 8 \j Ai'1 10, f. lls;. 1^1* jcPJ^ ^ ^Ai»7rrot'J NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) V »f-/ur? l3rt5 toocr'^i4i Lc AU^ I« 2&.H ICS /^L»^»*C'-*'^i-t.-£'<> u1«A' /o/r; iUJl)^.Aj lAiJc ^771 :irz> s^.Onz^^ /W 12. UV^A- 13. y\^^(gft>7 15-,T^\b.rq i.\ J 16. a-i^ (( Wkh!^ J^.t^h^Jl iKTls^,<3L IHOO Cf) t-; U- RbO cO V^^) W 14 Kbfe flrhni on 4(/^0 l\ i i t {])-IK H r. K( ) ' r if« »f, '■'■'’'.^^^•'J!4;j-'-; :’4 V uiiaxim.i^v-.-: mM ^v •-■Ji:^^otSSI :ting date flll/71 )UR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER lESENT FOR (from agenda) V j-/\jf}<.-^ C3>s & / (]) mL. •■ V.-I r :; .:*• r Ar •> H' • ^-V, A:- PLANimiG OOMMISSIOH MBEnSB fDBSDAY, JAMOART 17, 1989 7x00 P.M. 1275 BRCWi ROAD SOOTH - OOORCIL C :f ^ »:♦ CODHCIL 8BPRBSBOTATIVB - Edward Callahan Jr. ATTBHDARCB SCHEDULED PUBLIC HBARIR6 2^^ 7x00 p.m. §1366 Loren Butterfleld^^3925 Wafcertwon RoAdi action items 2 §1334 Sidney Rebers# 715 North Brown Road - Conditional Use Permit/PRD & Class 3 Referred Back to Planning Commission for Additional Review #1359 David Lindstrom, 1315 Woodhill Avenue Variances — Public Hearing 4.#1360 Robert Merkow & John Charlton, 2340 & 2380 Abingdon Way Vacation of Easements - Public Hearing 5.#1361 Orono School District #278, 980 Old Crystal Bay Road - Vacation of Easement - Public Hearing 6.#1362 Paul Hauser, 2801 Casco Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing 7.#1363 Roger & Becky Berry, 1392 Baldur Park Road Variances - Public Hearing 8. 9.#1365 Marty B. Schneider, 2180 North Shore Drive - Conditional Use PermitAariance - Public Hearing ADDITIONAL ITBIS 10. Planning Commission approval of November 21, 1988 Minutes 11. Planning Commission to select a representative to attend the 13, 1989 Council Meeting. February ADJOUR T':. T- . • ,p ■V tiAl ■r .»-■' Road - Inary Subdivision dltlonal Review Abingdon Way - Bay Road - •aring saring B Minutes, attend the February 'mi vr -mm . PUBLIC ATTENDANCE: CITY OF OROMO MEETING DATE PlEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS NAME (please print)ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 1 / 2. 6 araW ry^ \ ||/„4 \^t«rte.AA d-ig^rr> lLan>^______yri^V ry I ^t-S. 5.s W LX. Zl •j n y \y^ V^X\ Lj2.<.‘ .^ f\ ftX>ALg, ^N<^y-rA .JL'I ?lOLL'uC 7yt-r KJAi/S-Q.^ tPjis .SVbb 20. i- ■ .V W4 if: ' ■ ' To: Zoning Dii Appllcati resid List of Bs Exhib Exhib Exhib Exhib Exhib The p areas Cram' the p Appli 1 on 3.Lot 2 C. T exist This Plank based split would need preva The a grant ever acconi dlvls remov. Inher First side line. -Mi- : V____ :eting date OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) L jxa fcv- ■Vi: ■v". V*'' \0 :'t- .?e To:Planning Coounission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:January 12, 1989 Subject: #1366 Loren Butterfield, 3925 Watertown Road Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IA, 5*acre Application - Split off a 5-acre lot for applicant's son to construct a residence. List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Application Plat Map With Wetland Map Compilation Property Owners List Survey Proposal With Building Envelope Added Pertinent Facts - 1.The property extends across the Luce Line Trail and contains 2 wetland areas. The applicant has additionally purchased Outlet A of Katherine Cram's Hillaway Farm in order to make up a total of 5 dry acres for the proposed lot. 2.Applicant intends to keep Outlet B with his main parcel, shovm as Lot 1 on the survey. 3.Lot 2 is proposed to be served by an access driveway shown as Outlet C. This outlet width is shown as 28', which is proposed due to the existing greenhouse buildings being 29' from the east lot line. This is somewhat similar to the subdivision approved for Michael Plank further west on Watertown Road, where a 30' outlet was approved based on the concept that while one additional building site might be split off from the large remaining parcel, the existing homestead would be unlikely to access from the outlet area, hence there was no need for a 50' road outlet. The same situation appears to be prevalent in this case. The applicant intends to keep Outlet C and Lot 1 in common ownership, granting an access easement to Lot 2 over Outlet C. Then, if Lot 1 is ever subdivided in the future. Outlet C could be widened to accommodate the normal road outlet width associated with a 3-lot division. Such a future widening of Outlet C would likely require removal of portions of the greenhouse operation. Inherent in this subdivision request are some unusual occurrences. First, the accessory structures on Lot 1 will no longer meet a 10' side setback, they will be set back only 1' from the new side lot line. This requires a varl2mce« i' ' -.'i wn 4 i - ‘ ■i. Zoning January Page 2 Se 5- ac me th. Th wi en Coi sh si' sii Lo se] Ci^ C se] ac< Wa boi 7.Nr pr« op. pe: coi ne< 5-i cui 12 foi Coi fai aci Discussd Th« subdivic that hi{ The Exhibit west lo directic lot lin continue that th conside: observe maintai] Also, if the 26' Administrator Dad - t's son to construct a and contains 2 wetland 3 Outlot A of Katherine tal of 5 dry acres for Ln parcel, shown as Lot Lveway shown as Outlot Ls proposed due to the e east lot line. approved for Michael )0* outlet was approved building site might be :he existing homestead ea, hence there was no uation appears to be 1 in common ownership, it C. Then, if Lot 1 is could be widened to Bociated with a 3-lot : would likely require unusual occurrences, no longer meet a 10* :rom the new side lot n.i :4 'V. m 15V';-;-. Zoning File #1366 January 12, 1989 Page 2 of 3 Secondly, Lot 2 and Outlot A are intended to be considered as a single 5-acre parcel. Lot 2 contains 2.44 acres and Outlot A contains 2.79 acres of dry buildable area, for a total of 5.23 dry acres. This meets the letter and intent of the subdivision code which requires that at least 2 of the 5 acres of dry land must be contiguous. The applicant intends that the building site on the new lot will be within Lot 2 on the north side of the Luce Line Tr^l. The building envelope for that portion of property is shown in Exhibit E. Planning Commission may wish to consider whether the setback from the Luce Line should be 50* or 100*. In either case, this is an appropriate situation for use of the "special lot combination" document which is simply a resolution that recognizes the common relationship between Lot 2 and Outlot A, and which places a prohibition on selling Outlot A separately from Lot 2. 6.City Engineer Glenn Cook has reviewed the access location where Outlot C intersects Watertown Road. This is an existing driveway that serves the greenhouse operation. The Engineer has suggested that the access be improved to create a more level and perpendicular access to Watertown Road. This can be accomplished within the property boundaries. Mr. Butterfield has operated the commercial greenhouse on this property under a conditional use permit since 1972, although the operation existed many years before that before a conditional use permit was required. City files indicate that no limitation or conditions have even been placed on the minimum size of the property necessary to accommodate the operation, although in the early 1970s a 5-acre "farm operation" standard was apparently in effect. The current greenhouse operation would appear to use less than 1/3 of the 12 acres remaining in Lot 1, hence splitting off the 5 acre parcel for a single building site will have no effect on making the current Conditional Use Permit. Note that is this was considered as a "crop faxnn”, the minimum Conditional Use Permit standard for acreage is 10 acres. Discussion - The applicant states that he has no intent at this time to further subdivide Lot 1, and is only applying for the current subdivision in order that his son can build a home on the property. The building envelope for Lot 2 has been designated by staff on Exhibit E per the standards of the RR-IA zone, being 50* on the east and west lot lines, and 100* on the north lot line. There is no clear direction in the code that would define the south line of Lot 2 as a rear lot line, considering that the buildable lot area is intended to be continuous across the Luce Line. A conservative interpretation would be that the north right-of-way line of the Luce Line Trail should be considered as the rear lot line for Lot 2, and a 100* setback should be observed. The DNR has been asked to verify what setback they want maintained from their right-of-way, but no answer as of this writing. Also, if a 100* setback from the Luce Line is maintained for Outlot A, with the 26' wetland setback the buildable envelope in Outlot A is minimal at Zoning Fil< January 13 Page 3 of ^ best. Sta that no pr and Planni should be . Regar acres in a acre parci would be h be on the soil test! ground wai areas of L which are side of th evaluator sites for would cer’ However, without re Staff Reco Staf 1 Butterfiel 1. A Outlo 3. C The c of tl exist to Lc 4. a shal provd ered as a single A contains 2.79 ry acres. This which requires tiguous • new lot will be L. The building bit E. Planning om the Luce Line an appropriate ocument which is kionship between telling Out lot A ion where Outlet r driveway that ggested that the icular access to n the property mhouse on this I, although the conditional use > limitation or of the property le early 1970s a in effect. The than 1/3 of the e 5 acre parcel Icing the current dered as a "crop >r acreage is 10 time to further Lvlsion in order :ed by staff on on the east and re is no clear Lot 2 as a rear intended to be station would be rail should be tback should be :back they want •f this writing, r Outlot A, with A is minimal at ifer I rv ■■ 1®: ' ’ % mm *. •V''! , i- -r r-.l . V- Zoning File #1366 January 13# 1989 Page 3 of 3 viab4> Q^aff would suggest that a stipulation be placed on the property . . * rkr*4nelt3*l residence structures may be constructed within Outlot A# consider whether accessory structures should be allowed on Outlot A. Regarding septic testing, the total parcel will be than 5 Sere*p«cVl*“;ortro/th'^iu*c“ Lin?\^r e«ential*ir« 2*2cre* l°t. a^^it ITlt t^he’^tfuil. r/e I'Tne'r^ Vh\ 'a^p'pTicVf rrUnrwVs"\o%^%:^s"erto ’irr r indicates r/c-h :'re“n;t“»^alM s'^IJaT/e roi^Sourd^Tpe /loperon^rso^ without requiring full percolation testing. Staff RecomBsndatioD * staff recommends approval of the preliminary subdivision for Loren Butterfield# subject to the following conditions; 1 A Special lot combination resolution shall be filed for I^t 2 and Outlot A# specifying that the 2 parcels must be sold as a unit. 2. Likewise# a special lot combination for Lot 1 and Outlot B should be required. 3, Outlot C shall act as a private driveway «ccess “^jV^nd^Win of * t^eTub/l V1» ion‘‘apVr o va “duV tTthe % ro" ^ ^hiMVx2c^4/-by "e^t^Vr oVirl 4. The driveway access where Outlot C intersects with Water^^^ Upgraded per the recommendations of the City g provide a perpendicular# flat access entrance. s A 9* variance is granted for setbacks to the east line of Lot 1 for the existing greenhouse buildings. The setback for those structures would be 10' from the side lot line. 6. The applicant is advised that any future subdivision of I«t 1m^ i:ratra%^ p“o\'riy“ purposes ri'li 7. Septic testing will not be required for the until such time that a building permit is applied for# since the property in question exceeds 5 total dry acres in area. ft--. ' - . Eliv. ./Vi- .4- ,«V 'Tr; ^ •v^ m M : V ‘;a CITT OF OROHO - PSOPBRT7 LOCATI If':'Site Address j Property Identi Please check on Attach legal d< APPLICAHT Name Address ONHBR (if diffc Name Address: (attach ] EXISTING LAND I Number of Developmei Present U: ':h Present Z< PROPOSAL Numbe It f'v- Propo Minim Propo II”' the property hin Outlet A, ry structures 'eater than 5 ed. The 2.44 I lot, and it ouse on Lot 2 tempted to do ated that the lap Indicates ot 2, both of on the south ns. The site r of suitable Les. Testing Id be issued, subdivision (ion for Loren for Lot 2 and a unit. Atlot B should lerving Lot 2. IS a condition f Outlet C to tlot C granted lot C. Watertown Road :y Engineer to line of Lot 1 mally required B. • of Lot 1 may rision would served by a it it is the for safety 3 building site for, since the • V CITT OP osoao FSOPBRT7 LOCATIOW Site Address H 9:1 Si Name CITT OF osoao - _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _-SXHiSiT Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) - - Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ SS5S------------ N«ne - t/Y V.. -.............^..eU _ Phone (j^rlc)__-------m omiER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Phone (work) Address: -- - - --- - - --(attach list if more than one) City:Zip: existing LAND USB Number of Tax Parcels Development Size , • m * A*i Ik* ^ i / X w’ W - V V \/ V ni rznj vwA An % I CHECK CCi TL nort A.')4.WV* vv 1 i^tiLlPT-THM YOU 9_0 Present Use (check) Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land - - Acres Total, all 4j22530 COOI HOi 7ij-* a A n . /Residential; no. ojE units Other f specify) AtA1.— i 0 / T ? A“ ekil-/ atw/ Present Zoning atrlet ^ ^ ^^ Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites » •»(4ii .. 4. t * Number of Building Sites:{Existing Units New Units Total Units '«- Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: proposed Use: (check) Units per ^0 Acres So Feet Dry Buildable Lan Residential Other (specify) ill*M NATBR3 Completec Preliminc Certifiec this lis^ 348-3271 Stamped, names on obtained As an ad any othe Certificatio ccsnplete • Zoning Offici Payment Signed c Title Of Easement Developc Certificatioi Zoning Offied Final *(Plu The applica requested b Planning Con further agre Applicant * s Owner's Sigi Applicant mi Planning Coi third Honda review meet, unable to a authorized Office of t .r-r-VBBLUOHMX iPPLICATIffliIPII lUkTBRlAL BBCBSSABY FOR P^iSintry*Plat List” of**^e"?““t cmtet lllV-nf^ |roTSLS?n”o5n« ^yrt».ent of Finance A-603 Govt C«>t.r }:r^o%TAsTJi\iro tLtii SS?a":a”-t5.%rop.rty pLe„e attach a separate list of - ‘•/StSef^«oM^ou Vis'? notifi^i of this application. - • . Preliainaty Plat Application iscertification by Zoning Department that Prelimi y r l-ilSSVekiircalrill -r^4y'ii^S?lirco;!es Of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, ®4 Letter of Credit.K Developers Agreement and Letter o a. 4.K 4- Final Plat Application is complete.Certification by Zoning Department that_ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Zoning Official • s Signature._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _—- - - - - - - - - - - - - Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II » Preliminary Review (Class I » II Subdivision) preliminary Review (Class HI and all non-re.idential) Scrt SuNLoKnoi^ $150.00 250.00 300.00 + 20.00/Lot J BO- 00 150.00* Planning Commission and established by ordxnance. . _ ■further agrees to pay all aaailii ^ ^.pplicanf. Signature dj.^jL---------------- ' ? m ■ • " Date ----- owner • s Signature citv ~Jf ices 25 dW»'before "L"?: /n^o a’S‘vi%e ”'Se""“!;di^^ A Zoning S?rc'e"rf%Sfy-re“yiorTo%^^ . . ... * _ g t»f M ■ ---- ■ -AV. Ms a •l..p . •' - f /__ t .. p % (you must obtain A~603 Govt Center Bd to each of the le address labels , separate list of ;ion. at Application is • e * ate_____ -— tter assessments) lal plat. nation is c ^ate lete. tial) $150.00 250.00 300.00 + 20.00/Lot j 30. 00 150.00* Ion required or City Attorneyr application and rdinance. .. . -U//pr days before the are held on the t all scheduled an applicant is nents to ‘have an ijLldlxi9 6 • Zoning , ... i . - ^ w •-» * • V-. ♦ • •' • -t. » . . . ijaatK i :-Ml"-uf0OlkHi4^smw 5 HXH2Ia B I . . i *^«HJ1U I WJ3m r 5 f m T miSmii*. ,...in .1 “J**, Pf^POfr**^ i . f mWM f. • ^•;v m ^ M si \ \a M Xe<A Si sI UuzM g| Ul a. mI ZM &I 1 \ iS*sls :si|sivsessz62,ssg I «j «j < a III lii tti “SSSogu u ^ & SSSSSIS I * V8 N “8 lA UJ _M o: i-« CD uj ^ I o Ik 3 o Z o MM M I H si Ss^’l 9%im h9^mH%sN 9^3 S§“ lA 00ROa s|i mm&tmi . • •• • <vmm,.4 m **»««r:^jr (A n CXtSrtiiC LECAl OCSCRtFTIOil:* Pfoiiiiicl Sulidivisnui for lorto f. Bvttprfitlfl III llio SoulhtM»st 0u4rior r.f Sortiiiii l.'.llfl. . lluniiopin Count )f. H|itnc\ot« EXHIBIT BuiuwtJfc £/ovtoc^ Tfiot part of tfio Vortliuttt Qotfttf of Iht $o«.tliutxt Qtarior otfcriofo at foiiout; •ofiofiiiif at a poioi 100.81 ftct Cast of a point 870.1 ffti SovtO cf too Morthuttt comar of tald Souitiuftl Qoartt-; tlitnct Ocrth 7f*0J* latt 31f ftti to tOf cenitrline cf liattrtoun Read (forotrly County Road Ko. 4$); Uitnce SoutOcastarly along said ctnttrlfnt to a point 070.0 ffft Softo froa the RortO lint of said SoulHwatt Ouaritr (latasured perpendicular to laid Portii llnal: tOonct Oast to fht point of Pcglnnlog: RISC that part of said NortOutst Quarttr cf tOt fowlRuost Quaritr datcribtd as follows: Otcinning ft a point on tlif V#f lint of said ^'ortfiwtst Qtarttr of toa Soutnwest Ouartar dill* ant 870.6IS feat South of tha Rortbwast cornar of said South* west Ouartar: tfianca South along said Mast llna a Jisianca ef 439.3175 fait; thanca Cast 495 fact: thanca Rorm 439.3US faat: tharca vafl 49S faat to tha poiot of haginning; OISO all that part of tha Vast half of said Sei.in«asi Quir* tar Cascribad at follows: Oaplnnlng at tha Soithuest cornar of said South»#st Ouartar; tharca Porih along the Wfft ima c* sai I Srattiuesi Otariar a dlstanca of 1340. 1 faat *cra or las*. to a rcint I317.937S fail South of tha Northuast cerner of S4ii Souihwatt Ouartar; thanca Cast parallal uith the South line rf said Southuast Ouartar a dlstanca of 49S faat: thanca North pjrallai ulth thg Vast Itna of said Southuasi Ouartar a distance Cf 439.3 faat wera cr lass to e point 878.625 feet S»»wih of the North line cf said Sowthuatt 'iuarier; ihrrrf |4*.t parallel ulth tha !outh line of laM S'ulhwctt Oiiarter a dlstanca of 25.5 faat; thence South parallel ulth the West line cf said Sowthuatt Ouartar to tha South lina cf said Southuasi Ouartar; tharca vast along tha South llna of said Southwast Ouartar to tha point of baginning, etcapt high.uays and right-of-uay of tha Clactric Short llna Railway. 411 In Section 32. fowoshlp 110 North. Ranga 23 Vert of the Sth Principal Meridian. • fh€ description nay bt changed r «rje:* the final •Itl* r: I Ml oil that It to tf pr^r'^^^d. ALSO. •».| |..I A. HIU4VAY fARlI. hzopBset D(v/s/0Ai cnrrni s N. ».ntP6. inc. F.n'tne#-* , !. in.* Surveyors. P|a;i*t>r inn * l -«.- . sc ta L ot h /i.!& A«- -iwi*4- Scale: i mu. < too feat Date : f.«^certrr iT Jrnn marker?2. „ S; TCffsdi- SS >lc. l>A.y) • L b!t 2.5 2.yy*<.i>.iy 0>L, A ; z.ri A«- ,i>A Af*t> L«fr 2. *' 5.2-i Ac. wey At-niTAC. ittl isiun for rtfhl t 0u4rter r.f Sfrlinr. , NI line sot 4 HlBiT B~l ir of thf Soi^lliiitsi Qtoricr •t • point 100.01 ffct list lit NorthMtt corner of sold 7f0)' Cast 31f ftft to tnt ratrip County Road Ro. tSI; ctnitrlint to a point 078.0 f said Soutnuaet Quarter Rortn lint): tntnet Vest to Quarter cf tlie Sotinuest thinning at a point on tne Ve? f the Southwest Quarter oist> rthuest corner of said South- said West line a Jistance ef Mt: thence Rorth 439.SUS I coint of beginning: Bif of said SoLihwest Quar- aing at the $oi*tliwest corner a Rorth along the west line r* I of 1340. 1 feet itcre or less af.the Rorthwest corner of ist parallel with the Sotth distance of 495 feet; thence t of said Southwest Quarter less to 4 point 878.€2S laid Southwest Quarter; nh line of said Siuthwcst thence South rarallel with )uarter to the South line cf k'est along the South line of ini of beginning, eicept electric Short Line railway, forth. Range 23 West of the mged r -iit:* the fini) *rwit. i ^V/S/OA) Urh /Z.I8 Ar<- -wnw- /,S3 (W- 8i »e- jerr 2.5 KL. A : 2.n AC x>^r AMb 2. 5 ' s.zi Ac i>(iiy AcnUTAC- -M' - ■/ m W: I .«*< IIISTmC LCGRl OCSCRlRTfON;* EXHiSnRroposed Subdifisiun for loren f. lutterfield in the Souihwwst Quarter nf Seril«ifi t/*li8- * iinnnepin Couiilr. Ninnevota That part of tho Rorthweit Quarter of tho Southwest Quarter described et follout: Otglnnlng at a point 100.81 feet Cast of a point 078.0 foot South ef the Oprthwett eerner of said Southwest Quarter; thence Rorth 79*03* Cast 339 feet to the centerline cf Watertown Rood (foraerly County Road Ro. 49); thence Souihoasierly along said centerline to • point 070.0 Soith fro# tho Rorth tine Of said Southwest Quarttr iueasured pe^^pendlcuter to teld Worth lint)* thenct vest to the rotni of beginning; RISC that pert of said Worthwott Quarttr cf tho Southwest Quarter described as follous: Reglnnlng at a point on the vas !lnc of said Rorthwest Quarter ef the Southwest Quarter diet- am 070.62S feet South of tho Rorthwest corner of said South west Quarter; thenct South along said west line a distance of 439.317S feet; thenct lest 4gs feet: thence Rorth 439.3US feet: thence wen 49$ feet to tho point of htflnnlng; mSO all that part of tho Wost half of said Southwest Quar ter described at follows; btclnnlng at the Southwest corner nf said Southwest Quarter; therce Rorth along the wait tine cf said SMthwest Quarter e distance of 1340.1 reel acre or les% to 4 pc ini 1317.9370 feet South of tho horthwost cerner of S4id Southwest Quarter; thence Cast parallel with the South line cf said Scuthwett Quarter a distance of 495 feet; thence worth parallel with the West line of said Sowthwost Quarter a distance cf 439.3 feet aero cr lets to t point 070.$25 feet South of the Rorth line of said Southwest Quarter; therre Cast parallel with the South line of said Southwest Qiiarior a distance of 2S.9 feet, thence South parallel with the West line of said Southwest Quarter to the South line cf said Southwest Quarter; thtree West along the South lint of said Soulhwist Quarttr to tho point of btglnnlng. eicept highways and right-of-ugy of tho Clfctrlc Short Lint fallway. All In Section 32. Tgunthip tit horth. tango 23 west of tho Sih Principal Herldlan. •fh€ at".¥- description nay bo changed to r*ft it:*, the final title ninion that It to be prep'r^ed. ALSO. Ovtiof 4. ntlLAWAY FARN. cerr III s wi r.ntPC. inc. fnrjner*'.. La***! Suffeyors, PlarinAr« L^nM trtA.. . Minri^scla Scale: i inch > too feet Cate : neceettr 22, 1900. c : *rnn marker ... ...... ^ .V. . feX/STTWe.__ tcT t,/M^ « • - -w. • e f we • -er* W:.yrS..;:: mi t - m To: Prom: Date: Subject: List of B Exhi: Exhi: In o higher dei the north the 25 un It has r strategics adjacent along the and anima. ment of t building the impac from 6 to would the structure With approval, proposal, on the f< attendanc envelopes impact fo limitatic s.f.? If controls 1 the highei EX’HiSn bill VI SIun for iti»rf If Id hwi*Sl Qu4rtff of Sec I lull uiilf, NI lino sol« varttr of tot SoLthufst Qcfrltr IHI09 at a point 100.81 fact Cttt cf iho Porthwftt corntr of said irtli ;f03* Cast 3Jf fttt to to# l:(for«trly County toad Ko* 4S); laid ctRttrlInt to a point 878.8 Ina of said Soutbuast Qoarttr raid Portii llnth thanct Vast to imait Quartar cf toa Soctouast 1: 8aclnnlng at a point on too Vf! Lor of too SouUincst Ouarttr dist- la Porthvtst cornar of said !ouio* ilono said Watt llna c distanca of Its fatt: thanca aorta 439.314$ Lo tha point of baglnning; »tt Half of said Sotin«att Quar- laclnnlng at tha SovtliMfSt cornar Lharca aorta along tha watt lina cf itanca of 1340.1 raal ncra or las% luta of tha aorthMSt cornar of ica Cast parallal with taa South tar a distanca of 49$ faat: taanca t llna of said Soutanast Quartar ra cr lass to a point 878.82$ I of said Southwait Quartar; la South llna of said Scuthwast raat: taanca South parallel vita ifst Quartar to tha South line cf ?ca Vast along tha South llna of la point of beginning, aacapt r the electric Short Llna railway. 118 North. Nanga 23 Me ft of tha la clungad r«iHa:*. tha final nmr >rnil. INM. T7WC. Plann4r< 4 . t 1. “ . « * k, «4»^- % . • m. , W I • --w ^ ’1.* ' / f ¥ir». <m**99*" •f’ *r- c'm p: $ To: From Date: Planning Commission Cha; man Kelly Orono Planning Commiss'* .-.» Members City Administrator Mark iernhardson Jeamne A. Mabusth, Buil ing & Zoning Administrator January 12, 1989 Subject: #1334 Sidney Rebers, 7 , North Brown Road - PRD/Subdivision - Refe» ed Back to Planning Commission for Further Review List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Topographic an<» Building Pads - Lots 1 t'lrough 4 Exhibit B ~ Amended Plan In order to satisfy the i tent ol the Comprehensive Plan with the higher density development adjacent to the existing rural development along the northern property line of ne Rebers' property. Council has approved the 25 unit PRD with a 100* widt- restricted development area. In addition. It has required the plantin^v* of evergreen bufferea areas in three strategically placed locations 11"at would lessen the visual impact upon the adjacent properties. An agric:*-itural/farm fence will .ilso be installed along the north boundary of th t property to prevent trespass of children and animals upon the Platteter f.ooerty. Council also called for the amend ment of the original PRD tha^n i t»uld reduce the number of units to four building pads along the north , operty line in another attempt to lessen / development to the south. The reduction impact of higher density development, but pads create potential for more intense the impact of the higher dens.. from 6 to 4 lots would minimiiv would the increase in the sizit structural development? With many other pressing i sues for Council to resolve at preliminary approval. Council asked that th Planning Commission reconsider the amended proposal, specifically to deter* Ine the need for further building controls on the four northern bulldin* pads (1 through 4). The neighbors in attendance appeared concerned' that with an increase in the building envelopes, that massive st^uctu rs would be constructed creating a visual impact for surrounding rural r fsidential owners. Is the 80% hardcover limitation adequate for build! g pads ranging from 17,1:00 s.f. to 23,000 s.f.? If not, should the hardc ver allowance be reduced or would other controls be more effective in re ucing the visual impact of development at the higher elevations along the "orth border? p/:-,te -5 v:*■ Zoning File #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 2 of 5 Review of Hardcover Controls - Lot 5 — (the largest of the remaining 21 pads) 80% of 21,400 s.f. Of building pad « 17,120 s.f. Lot 11 - (the smallest of 21 pads) 80% cf 8,200 s.f. of building pad 6,560 s.f. Coapare Building Pads 1 through 4 with Hardcover Allowance Reductions - Lot 1 - 80%of 20,800 s.f.8L 16,640 s.f 70%of 20,800 s.f.-14,560 s.f 60%of 20,800 s.f.•12,480 s.f Lot 2 - 80%of 23,000 s.f.am 18,400 s.f 70%of 23,000 s.f.*16,100 s.f 60%of 23,000 s.f.13,800 s.f Lot 3 - 80%of 20,600 s.f.16,480 s.f 70%of 20,600 s.f.*14,420 s.f 60%of 20,600 s.f.s 12,360 s.f Lot 4 - 80%of 17,200 s.f.m 13,760 s.f 70%of 17,200 s.f.B 12,040 s.f 60%of 17,200 s.f.»10,320 s.f Hardcover Improvements Associated with Lots Reported to Sell at $80,000~$100,000 - Drive + Turn-around » (includes 20'x50* drive through restricted area plus remaining drive and turn-around area) Principal Structure 100-120'x 50-60* * Accessory Structure 20*xl6* * (maintenance shed) 2,250 to 3,000 s.f. 5,000 to 7,000 s.f. 320 s.f. TOTAL 7,820 to 10,320 s.f. *♦>: wm .in mm. ■TV '*'**»' %. of 21r400 s.f. of of building pad le Reductions - ported to Sell at to 3f000 s.f. bo 7r000 s.f. s.f. L0,320 s.f. IMliiniiii ■ililll!.'Jk».iiifTwiKii iiiw Zoning File #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 3 of 5 Staff CoBBients ~ Compare hardcover allowances for each pad at 80% through 60% to estimated hardcover improvements. Does reducing the hardcover allowance have any significant effect upon reducing the profile or mass of a structure? If you reduce hardcover allowance you encourage upward expansion. Lot 4 with graduated lower elevations to the north and west will provide negligible visual impact upon the northern property owners, certainly no more than Lots 5 and 1? would along the westerly existing rural residential development. The 70* of depth (review Exhibit A) of the building pad will place greater restrictions on stiuctural planning. Staff would strongly recommend no special restrictions for Lot 4. In staff's opinion even at 60% or less hardcover allowance, there is negligible impact on development as far as the visual aspect is concerned. Hhat other controls may be more effective in dealing with structural intensification? Height. If the goal is to reduce visual impact of structures, a height control should be considered. A recent recommended standard by the DNR for all lakeshore property has been set at 25* in height. If height is to be restricted than residential development along the horizontal plane will be intensified and encouraged. Is this what is sought by lessening visual impact? If a walk-out to the north is planned, the 25' height would be measured from the lowest elevation at the walk-out side. This is different from the existing Building & Zoning Code Standards that would measure height from the entrance level (only if 50% of lower level is not exposed). All other standards in the zoning code would be applicable in determining height of structure (review Section 10.02, Definition 13). Planning Commission may wish to consider other height elevations. For staff, 25' would still allow 2-story structures with room for creative roof designs. No Accessory Structures. If we limit accessory structures, this might encourage the expansion of the principal structure. This most certainly will not be a neighborhood of detached garages and small barns, etc. The most one would envision would be a maintenance structure, if even that. I ' P A p;s Si% pmm r 1 "v;-. '-I mm:: - -M Mm Zoning F January Page 4 c MO] iis-. • • I.* ••• ** w.. for the Commis s: buildin' Options To Pads 1 1. ch CO 2. rv hj 2- 1; f< a' 3 P a 4 b r i c a c mc C devel through 60% to :over allowance t or mass of a courage upward north and west >roperty owners, tterly existing :hibit A) of the planning. Staff : 4. In staff's •gligible impact with structural structures, a standard by the . If height is >rizontal plane it by lessening 5' height would side. This is rds that would sr level is not applicable in )efinition 13). evations. For r creative roof ures, this might i most certainly barns, etc. The ,f even that. kmm,. 1 1.-m I i’t'-' ' i Wm fii' Ny* mm.- I 4'^ V- j- ^ ■ i-L,.,. 4 • > Zoning File #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 4 of 5 « 4i^4«n Fnveloce. I think this would be difficult More RestrlcHv. . our^engthy discussion at the Planning for the developer to accept envelopes. The more restrictive the commission meeting regarding ion of the principal structure, building pad, you encourage vertical expansion o Options of Action - controls on residential construction. fi a PRD froin 6 to 4 units alon^ th© 2. council's recent „iH lessen the impact of the rural residential boundary at the developed at rural higher densities to the south. P north property line at 1250 2-acre standards, development a ong ^ ngities with a 50' setbacklineal feet could have been at 5 for construction of a principa at a 10' setback. applications. 4. The additional landscape the boundary, the 100 ’ wide no boundary have already addressed the reduction of units along t e nor neighbors. Visual impact impact upon the existing rura ^ structure has never been concerns created by the mass ° ® historic and environmental a consideration of the City code for lakeshore/shoreland concerns addressed in our existing development• OR »»nd the following additional controls for the residentia TO recommend the follow g through 4, as follows: development of Lots 1 through 3 or Lots 1 thr g .'i X Zoning Fil January 12 Page 5 of iHiHi lould be difficult )n at the Planning re restrictive the Lncipal structure. tial development of • unique physical d call for special 4 units along the the impact of the leveloped at rural >erty line at 1250 with a 50’ setback ccessory structure I properties within a 3 review of similar along the north ig zoner and the iS^y addressed the i. Visual impact ire has never been and environmental eshore/shoreland B for the residential s follows: m mm Zoning File #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 5 of 5 Planning Cm— I n n t nn may choose any co^ination or all A) Hardcover allowance to be limited to 70%, 601, or less. B) Height limited to 25' (walk-outs to be measured at the lowest final grade at the walk-out side) or another height - -*• C) No accessory structures permitted. D) Increase the setbacks for the building envelope. E) Any other deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. - is. Or Ci Subjects #1 Va Zoning Distr List of Bxbi Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Planning Coinmission Chairman Kelly Orono Planing Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Proas Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building Zoning Administrator January Hr 1989 Subjects #1359 David J. Lindstrom, 1315 Woodhill Avenue Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IB Pertinent ordinances - Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 - Required * 10* Existing ■ 20'2" Proposed * 6* Variance * 4' or 40% Section 10.28f Subdivision 5 (B) - Front Yard Setback Required * 50* , ^ Proposed Additions - 50'+ (per Exhibit G the applicants do not require front street setback variances for proposed addition to the existing residence) List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit P - Exhibit G - Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Exhibit K Exhibit L Exhibit M Application Addendum Property Ovmers List Plat Map Survey of Existing Development Site Plan of Original Improvements Site Plan of Revised Improvements per Staff Recon (Exhibit also designates assumed property lines) Original Floor Plan Revised Floor Plan South Elevation Section/Porch Addition UBC Section 504 (c) and Table 5 (a) Septic Location tend at ion snue - tback - ! applicants do not it setback variances on to the existing ir Staff Recommendation >perty lines) ■ m: zoning File #1359 January 11» 1989 Page 2 of 3 Staff Update - Cca»enta ^ i-minrkrv review of the submittals for the application. Based on preliminary rev ^.rlier this week to resolve staff called for a meeting with the specifically certain Building Code limitations on ^ ® revise the deck location and rbrifi-ation *"d inclusion in your packets. Review of Application The additions to the existing residence consist of th* porch at the southwest //"//“rprirc^^^^ structure (14.1x6.7M. expand beyond the existing limits of t - p structure will require a Porch and deck addition at the sout ®*® between principal and accessory setback variance to the required ^^x^ h. note the a. -a. in* Roview the original floor plans, t.xnxuxu ,r.» 1...1 ... y»- ”r ” r r‘.Lf../a. why a deck would be squeezed a.4,.nai to relocate the deck to the and asked if it would not be of the adaitlonal area of east side of the porch ^ \j,e applicants concurred noting that the treed slop ng side as a future expansion, but because Tfrsf h^^rr^Lln^^th^ point. ^eas\^ slde“”“"!s time theUk'^^ld'h^re a°railing because of the sloping yard at that side of the house. G H and L, based on the Uniform Building Code, the Review Exhibit G, H and L, o openings within the assumed property line is 3 , be relocated (considered an substandard setback area. The chimney „„»t be rated opening) and the door if it is to *have advised that they would 1-hour fire resistant. The app northwest corner of the porch probably prefer relocating sliding glass doors along the east addition. The floor plans also show sli 9 9 side. This will no longer be a concern as applicants pi deck along the east side of the porch addition. i from 5 staff %: - *"■ for the application, this week to resolve ovement, specifics1 ly the deck location and of this week for the removal of the d room that wi 11 not bructure (14.1x6.7'). itur#' will require a [ncipil 2ind ftccBSSory Exhibit H, note the 3 the qaraqe. The 6 Staff questioned •ture and the garage, ;ate the deck to the e additional area of oncurred noting that cpansion, but because lat in their amended the east side. This ing yard at that side Building Code, the openings within the ated (considered an t wall must be rated that they would corner of the porch oors along the east plan to locate their Zoning File #1359 January 11, 1989 Page 3 of 3 ■:U The north garage wall and the east wall of the porch addition must be of fire resistant construction as follows: 5/8- sheet rock wall, 1/2- sheet rock along the outside of the wall with non-combustable siding. Applicants should designate a staircase to deck if access is desired from grade level. Review Exhibit B, applicants addendum in which the reviewed as to why the applicant has choosen the south side t proposed improvement. Mature trees to the immediate west and the location of the well on the south, the drop in elevations along the east side, and the fact that the house is a corner lot surrounded by Orono orchard Road on the west and Woodhill Avenue on the north. AS long as the special construction standards are met because of the minimal separation of 3' per the assumed property line, “^“** **” "° “*^^ crinclcal structure. To expand to the west and reduce the north/south dilefsion meeting the required setback of lO- is not ^ Vx^rirM, the well location on the west side of the addition (review Steeper topographies to the east and the location of the septic drainfiel prevLt eastern expansiorf. To the immediate west of the existing structure are mature trees. propety located at 1315 Woodhill Avenue based on the hardships and finding noted above subject to the following conditions: 1. prior to scheduling the application before the Council for final action, applicants must provide an updated survey of the improvements approved by the Planning Commission. the addition and the north wall of the garage and all wall construction to be per 1-hour rating. \lw. ■tl. mf: r.' ; .. CITY 01 Initial ($50, Renewal (no < After-1 PROPER' Site A< Proper Please Attach requir applic i; ONRER 1 J PRESS DESCB VARU -u ♦ r« ^7* ^ m 1^'H 1 addition must be »ck along interior k non-combustable access is desired * < the hardships are lUth side for the 8St and southwest, vations along the turrounded by Orono 1. et because of the taff has no major »en detached and the north/south ksible because of •view Exhibit M). septic drainfield existing structure V . ■ .VI W ■■ "-t to the required r the residential ships and findings i Council for final ey of the final ik area shall be le, specifically :he south wall of and all wa11 V’ ^ . V Wr:'7 cm OF OR<VMIMICB aPPLlCAMOII •f •initial Application pee $150.00^^^^^J ($50.00 per each Renewal ^®®iLnal applica^j^) .A-SS,uctio.j..i 4$ *■ A » i I cm ff tffse fjA'iSiVC; CFFICE PBOFBSXX tOOkTIOH «4... inn............ vv^i^rNfNViWL i Ji.<VteVVV vv Ai rrv rLjr.v-v'-t* - 4 W V « B^on«rtv abstract or _ _ torrens?Please check one - Property - - •# f o > • > # f »j^.iiwuTV wvvi i f pjLease • - ----- Attach legal description to application if not include on required survey. --------------------------- ______________________— APPLICAHT y ^ _ Phone (worlc)3S£.::°V'^^^- Ofi^ (if different than applicant) Phone (horn ) _ _ Phone (work) - - - - -- Name Address: Date Property Acquired City:Zip: (month/year) r(do')'(do n'ot) al»o_o^_tte_adjacent_par^ ------- pbbssht osb op property Present Zoning District ■0 Present Use of Property Other (specify) _____________ - ■« *» ------------------------------- Estimated Construction Cost PHSCRXPTXOH of RBOOBST VARIABCBS rbqoirbd , i * Lot Area "Lot Wid^ '' 0 w . _________________,■• n.- - • pyu rdcover ' c« •••Setback Variances ^ * Other 4oJ.±tI^. L/^Prbnt r---: ^t-Rear) 7 . i- p- •- •• :r*Jv hardship Describe enf orceme; dbscriptioh of Describe i Code Requ • / WUIRED SUBMl Completed Certified this list 348-3271) Stamped, names on obtained Certif ica- Topograph in existi Plat Map As an add any other Additiona The Applicant remember that information ha Certification Zoning Officia APPLICANT'S SI The applicani requested by unusual expens the informati knowledge. Applicant's Si OWNERS SI6NATD The owner her authorizes rea agents, Commia tion and verif Owner's Signat Applicant must Planning Commi third Monday review meeting unable to att< authorized age Office of chi£ „ -0-7-^c — >- —s' - •N ’n «• ^ .#*- ( ^ ^ I CIfY l F OROi^O FIR^nCE CFFICE i Jfc-‘vi;.u'vvvv A i r^v rUuiw< !&• wn i u fTA t“ i%jV M i 3.*/ cTffSgi/'!'-^®'"' i'5t'------j>ns44s cot! at! tic«JS« rens? ided on ork) i f f gjp: -_ •« • •• *• ork) Zip: (month/year) HMHii f land. ion Cost' $JSS*SiSS ^ i • ♦ ' - » • ^ ,• # •♦••• :.iS' irdcover' * ^ - it*.. Si. -7 k. • '■ . ^■=^4;V'^;5 m:d • i ^i’‘ d*i-■•■■•Ty-: ■ .«!rf?::... h ■• •: '• '•: h V hardshipiHTP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict vnnina r^aulatiions: QP9 fcgVrnr>\.t-^ DBSCRIPTIOH of OTOSOAL property COHDITIOHS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: StA ETOUIRBD SUBMITTALS CMtifi^ Property Owners List of owners Govt Centerthis list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A 603 Govt Center iti^pldV‘legal sised envelopes (#10) names on the^ above list with no return address (use address labels Certificate ^of ^s^u/vey^iTc^^^ required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Plat Map (obtained with property owners ^^^t). e,™„te list ofAs an addendum to this application, please attach a separate 1 any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ The Aoolicant and Property Owner must sign this application- re^mblr that ?Sur va?ian« application is not complete if the above information has not been included. CertIficatiorbrzoninrDepIrtment that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature ?^f"a1^1can'^^by agrees to provide all information -quired o, reouested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or SnuSTal expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that Se information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Applicant's sicmature \ - - - - ackowledges and agrees to this trentt^Tom:“l?or^Snbmr\^ tlon and verification of this re^est- Date __Owner's Signature ttltle to attend a scheduled meeting, please make “"“gements to have authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Bull q Office of this change prior to the meeting. an Zoning w suiting from strict ipliance with Zoning )0* (you must obtain e A-603 Govt Center red to each of the use address labels ions as required, ■ons) if any changes a separate list of ation. plication. Please plete if the above ation is complete Date ation required or all fees and/or and certifies that & best of his/her te ication and further staff# consultants, rposes of investiga* te \\ 25 days before the gs are held on the : at all scheduled If an applicant is gements to have an Building & Zoning m r'- .‘•Vi ■r • - .V ■ V.: '-C. i •it . - '■ ■J ! i J J David J. Lind Strom 1315 Woodhlll Avenue OronOy Minnesota 55391 Movenber 23, 1988 Orono Planning Conudssion Gentlemen: There ere -.fty reesone I feel the verUnce. requS.ted ehould be granted. It eeeme there le ea inherent right to make reeeoneble .it seeiM n-rrmosal is foT a garden room and entry, ootn on one s The*^g«den room interferes with no sight lines Eh. .E th. *' E'" '™“* s “:rj.'tssy‘:r:s attached garage. TTEEfEYrMinetelv the contour of the existing property limit the area oMSblTf^ Wovement. The problems of tree locetion west e^ south. Sell access tof^he south, septic system to the east, and proximity Woodhill Avenue to the north, are obvious. I thank you for your consideration Sincerely, David J. Llndstrom DJL:mu m f .' f; " ■ -V '■'•2 ■ •’ ■u- '■?.l I M H« SpSS )Kss:s: X (Hriss :,iis a|33^ o o u ® 5 jUUj g o < 3 •O O “> “1 ihould be Improvefflentis and entry, both 0 sight lines try repleces en ructure. he road . Expansion 1 stays well within .on is six feet, .ve feet. The s garage wall, m of even an .t the area i west and south, I proximity to * "Tc &i- ,4nm t** 4 V 1 iM U'rvv.:^' fV ■ '“•' I '[V ¥.lfe■Wi il : '■^:; mimm mi mm /■ ^ ..‘- :vv .i';rA«K V, mim .?;» ‘‘ ^ " " .-^ • • ".Vi V • • • -.• .;■ -r • •-% A, .' . .^ ^%.. Tsr-':Z ■ ■■■ .»! .i-■W^ i, y vimi ^llllllll^^^llll^.« r .1 504^UMFOfW BUODiNQ CODE cne third the distance from an assumed vertical plane located E;rmistive protection of openings is fint rrnniieiiitiinii 1< is the h — »-i5o required to be protmet^^ to distance openings shall not exceed 50 on property. When openings from tsoogUp-ttSe, the sum of the aru the total area of the wall in each story. (c) Buildings on Same Property and Buildings f!ont«liiiHgf*nMfff, F*^rthf purposes of detennimng the required wall and opening protection and roof covering requirements, buildings on the same prooertv and court walls of build ings over one story in height snail be assumed to have a property line between them. [CEPl'iON; In court walls where opening protection is required such proiec- 000.^ the aggregate area of j; within th (3) the buiktingii me€tt^ned as a Group I Oreupancy. a new building is to be erected on the same propeny^aS^Ji existing buildin^>s^ location of the assumed property line witfrpaiflaon to the existing building sluBb^uch that the exterior wall and opepiagf^otection of the enlisting building naeet tM^acii^ as set forth in Table^tfT^ and Part rv. EXCEPT10N7''P m|^ more buijdMfson the same property may be considered as portions of one buildmpiftbaug^gate area of such buildings is within the limits specified in Section X^Sontimk building. When the bgjldill^so considmdltouse different occupancies or are of different *ypc*<>fgpnwictioo. the area shall belhatallowed for the most restricted occupancy ibi« Root Areas SccT'EM. (a) One-story Areas. The area of a one-stm)iH$uilding shall not exceed thdH^ts set forth in Table No. 5-C except as hi Section 506. (b) Areas^^Buildlngs Over One Story. The toiucombined floor area for multistory builtUMs may be twice that permitted>^able No. 5-C for onc-story buildings, andtoehoorareaofanvsinglesto^s5jiUJ!2L£5£Sii!!SL££D2liS£^a onc-storv building.^ ~ considered f^a separate story, the floor area of all in calctddong the allowable floor area of the stories (c) Mfgaanines. U mezzanines shall be incl in which the mezzmiinn (d) Basements. A bast provided such basement building. (e) Area Separa jnorearease not be mcluded in the total allowable area, mt exceed the area permitted for a one-sto Uls. Ea^ portion of a building separated by one or av be c^idered ^egarate building, provided the n walls meet the following requirements: 1. Area sepd^on walls shall be not les^han four-hour flre-resisdve construc tion in Tvor 1, n-F.R., III and IV building^ud two-hour fire-resistive construc- in Ty^ n One-houi; II-N or V building wdlls shall not exceed 25 oercent of the i TABLE NO. S>A—ConttnuMi TYPES II ONE-HOUR. Il-N AND V ONLY onoun OCSCremON OP OCCUMNCY RRC RCSISTANCC 0^ EmRionmuxs oncNmosiN UTEmonwnLLS B (Com.) 3—Aircraft hangars where no repair work is done except exchange of piru and maintenance requinng no open tlame. welding, or the use of Class I or U liquids Open parking garages (For requircn6its« See Section 709.) Heliports I hour less than 20 feet Not permitted las than 3 feet Protected less than 20 feet 4—Ice plants, power plants, pumping plants, cold storage and creamenes Factonea and workstaopa usuig noncombusuble and nonexplosive matwislt Stonge and sales rooms of noncombusuble and nooexplotive materials 1 hour less than 5 feet Not permitted less than -5 feet E See also Sectioa 802 1 — Any building uaed for edttcatiooaipufpi»es through the 12th grade by 50 or ~ more persons for more than 12 boun per week or four hours in any one day 2— Any building used for educaoooal purposes through the 12th grade by less than 50 peixooa for mote than 12 hours per week or tour hours many one day 3— Any building used for day-care purposes for more than six children 2 hours less than 5 feet. 1 hour less than 10 feet' « Not peimtned less than 5 feet Proteaed less than 10 feet' H See also Sectkns 902 wd 903 1 —Storage, handling, use or sale of haraidous and highly flammable or explo- live matmaii other than Qass 1,0, or III-A liquids (See also SectioQ 901 (a).Divisioa 1.] See Chapter 9 and the Fire Code 2^—Siotafe. handling, uae or sate of Classes I. Q and UI-A liquids: dry cleaning ptens usittg Clatt 1.0 or in-A liqoidt; (Mint stores with bulk handling; paint shops and spray-pnintingroomt and shopa (See also SectioQ 901 (a). Divi- Uon2.] 3— ^Woodwofking estabUshmeots. planing mills, box factories, buffuig rooms for die rebttikiinf piaets and picking fooms; shops, factories or warehouses where kme combustible fibers or dust are manufactured, processed, gener- ated or Uoied; and pinwefimshing rooms 4— Repair garages not classified as a Group B, Division 1 CXxupancy 5— Airciiit repair hangars • • . • . i 4 hours las than 5 feet. 2 hours less than 10 fKt. 1 hour less than 20 feet 1 hour less than 60 feet »W • *•# Not permitted less than 5 feet Protected less than 20 feet «n •• • • Protected less than 60 feet 'Group E. DivisioM 2 tad 3 Occupuncia havin| an occupnm load of nM more chan 20 may have exterior wail and opening pnxection as required for Grc^ R. Division 3 Occupancies. Seclkm 1002 • j 7—Nurseries for the fuU-dme care of children under the ag^^f sw ( _ __i hour elsewhere ------------- . . .._______I •• Ihour -R -- See'also Section •1202 * ^ T_Pnvaie garages, carporo. she^ a^ agricultural buiWtr;^ (See also Section 1101. Divtsioo 1.) ____ _• • — - i •* 1 hour less than 3 feet (or nsay be protected on the exterior with maten- als approved for 1-bour flic-resistive ccnstruc- _ _ tion) — Not permitted less than 5 fre«. protected less than. 20 feel Not permitted less than 3- feet IM than 10 feet Not permitted leu than 5 feet, protected less than 10 feet Not permitted less than 3feet ■ 2- Fences over 6 feet high, tattles and towers ^ I—Hotels and apartment h?m” ^ nwre than 10 persons)Convents and monasteries (each accommodaung mwe uwu—1~_----- 3— pmyilinga and lodging hop^ I hour less than 5 feet r j ' ; I 1 hour im Ay 3_tet Not regulated for fire resistance Not permitted less than 5 feet Not permitted lessj^ _ - "3 feet") SiB O O rtcultuni buildings, see ^ ^ ^’^^^TSwring J > %% i m —I______mEnion vai i« than 20 feet Not permitted less than 3 feet "weeted less than 20 feet than 5 feet Not permitted less than ----3 feet 'han 5 feet, lan 10 feet*Not pennitted less than 1 ^ 3 feet *™e«ed less than 10 feet* Chapter 9 and the Fire Code • • • , ‘ an 3 feet, sthan less than a 60 feet |p Not permitted less thanS fed ^*<otectedleuthan20 feet . .. . • * • rotected less than 60 feet 15 feet, than ess than Not pennitted less than 5 feet, protected less than. 20 feet 15 feet, here Not permitted less than 5- Protect less than 10 feM 15 feet, here - Not pennitted less* than 5 feet, protected less than 10 feet i3feet ctedon materi* Not permitted less than ■ 3 feet I-hour osouc-1 gulated for fire resistance Sfeet 3 feet -Not pennitted less than 3 feet Not pennitted las than 3 feet"! I nitted in exterior walls.. {..{ I a*l~! ■mIk \ > z ■/ •.-S i OC.cC O 9 - S s^ s ^ OS C ^ 09 lo w : h'l -..i:,.: ^ ■ V ■m^'r fete.: ■■ « •O - 0-1 te' 'V ^ m » 'HI TO: Zoning i Appllca List of Exh Exh Exh Exh. Exh: SC'3S 32.' Thi; P'r3vic-.:3, * * o ^ w appllcati former 1 similar d The easements vacation property Staff Rect Staf vacation i 1. 1 prope 2. the p 3. quest: 4. I resuH boundc Pi^nnln"' City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning 5 Zoning Administrator January 11, 1939 ^ A*b/ngdcfCharlton, 2340/2380 Public Hearing -'arnage and Dtility Hasementa - Zoning Districts RR-IB With Lot Vine" ReLrangemlnt*App?!LVion Vl3®54?"*“ =°"i“"=tion Wat of dibits ^ ” Application Exhibit B - Plat Mapisjsi s: iit?:r Exhibit E - Legal Descriptions Tnis vacacicn oz --'^daz zz SZ.C'»Z - -'a .......................... - - . .r® _ct; .•.•no ^PP^^®^tion IS to remove th^ r»i/^ a z r.z ar. z z z •*=. former lot lines, which tht Sl?v wV"lT„ utility easements'ili^g the easements." Vhere*^ are Vf confl-'cte^'^-iV®'^ ■ ^■'’® "®” 'drainage and utilitv vacation action. The anc"grant'"nV^".^V “^‘-®® involved in this property lines is appropriate. * 9 o the new easements along new Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends apcroval n-F ♦->>.:» ^ j vacation request based upon the following findingjf ®nd 'utility easement property. not affect access to or use of any adjoining —...a ^eccr.c. '^naja-•’titn for a lot lire ’roa'tr^--;;:;': "mJi', .V . '.5 t..; .V ------------ .-3 -A —» , .T _ '**• • • 2. fc- ii !■ I)’ A qiestiVn® selteVo%MicVurVoVe ‘! utility easements in result of a recent lot^ Une"rearrangeme^ utility easements, as a boundaries between the Propertier^rrflJS'aVlsVVbfngdorwfy.''^'’ CITY 01 -Ropshc Site Ad Propert P Xease (fc Please i on requi 6 qj Nam Add: Qlfmai H.J Name Addr Date X (d. - coi Ran S’: a - - = - OTHER APPLIC X ^ H V,' ■ ! •■' ii^'..Vj .■■• ■ ' .j ing Administrator conjunctioni 3 5 4 • - oaccnd piiaja •-a <^OTY>cL»^ 4- mu -N — ^ lot .lire —• * - * c* C IT IT ri ** i.ty easements along the ipprovfi as lon^ as naw drainage and utility Lities involved in this lew easements along new and utility easement use of any adjoining velop, improve or use sasements in question. utility easements in ility easements, as a nger coincide with the Abingdon Way. ms. . V' * mm h-im 1 ^4 h> , jt, 'c: rl- ■ii • t‘ -*4 ••i'ij /■’( :'ri-J —“ss appmcatich ?aoPHaT? LOCATION vri----_________ sjlh/^~C ^C'L'-K r^/3(^0 Site Address -* Property Identification Number (P.i.d.)'C 1 ' Ul Please checJc one - Proneri*v (for conditional ise A^pplISnio^s ^onl'y) ___ a M ^ torrens? — Taj «« 4» Pi WA* .a* / tn re^ ^®5al descriotion to anm < .•__‘_ff5J^rred survey. ' ° application if not included . 7* **•* 4. V -1 V ^ ^Seycr L. Address Vo/c_ '?*^iti^^^?rent than applicant)^ oKin^fr----T------------=S^^. Name __r^r^i^uz -* * • ■^ . —I. ,/\ j Phone (home) f -2-^60 ^A/A:.r•■^.- . Phone - -'1- - ;-5»6^ City 4 L Property Acquired - -?>Jff_not_)_also_owI^he adjacent parcels~f‘rind^^®"' — iIZnMriTtTt'r ^ ---- ------------------------------------------- «J®pxc:iAL csr?il^;s'-aanawal ?=•= _ : /t ___ _ rar-zne-Jacu Jaa - $100.00 a) • •*» — Wi4k * $150.00 b) $150.00 cj $250.00 d) $200.00 f ) Residential accessory Use Institutional (church, school, etc.) Duplex Credit/Bldg Commercial/Industrial Use Land Alteration PRD/Pid - see fee schedule f!oodpL“" - <^-i9nated wetland or G^dinl, “Hawaii "/et'a/“' =“• ^'='-Of lakishorr ' ^®taining walls within 75 • ■"■■■•jfeil *■^#4; -(I .; . ='...• -.tfj • . .. .,/VVt* f OTHER APPLICATIONS Z=Z «lo:So consultant fees, —X~T S Vacation ZZ'kloloo TAZrnt Subdivision ----- $100.00 Appeals “" ~ ~ see fee schf>«^n7aa z' n. present Pr. Prc DBSCRIPI Oes • ' (! ^ RBQOIRBD ■!• • Comt Ceri this ^ Cent 3. Stam - . on t Cert. Topo ^ alte: y'K* Const Plat • As ar any o The appli iemember t! not been i. Carrificatd Zoning offi •>'4. ■v; j applicant * s The applic requested ] unusual exp. fhe informe knowledge. Applicant's OWNERS i The own, authoriz agents, investig Owner's S';'.‘’i Applicar Planninc third M< review m unable t authoriz :orrens? 1- urflCcj.y:o::‘Oooo ncluded T ^ i/ ,^« w ~ VffyL •-• V ^ % w i “ /Ar /W m-’: Zip 32^/r? f it-• -l- - !iC'/ H- '•'- zip -Tsarc th/year) •A • 'a1 C.) *i\ ^;:m nated wetland or ru. yd. or more walls within 75* :1 int fees) present ose op property Present Zoning District Present Use of Property description op request Describe r^st in details 7T-— Residential uther—^«peeifyf ^nutBD SOBMITSALs” </'2. Certified /, ce^’er^aVe-ailF""*^”'" 7oV / ' <no, Pte^r ■ aVpUcatlon?*""* “»" £ J_____ . ___ r'f.i Certification by =onr;;7;;;::"”":”""-":------------ - - - - - - - Zoning Officials Signature " °° complete Date agr ------------------------T unuraVlsVeLe\"Vc°u"i"e| " ^PPiicant 's sigmature Date m^/fj^ I SIGNATURE > f — / ' '* n"Vl ‘’'•*°'^“«*'p^rty''by City *w=hsr Own0»r>'e> «,•_____ A. ^Owner's signatur. Applicant must haveall^ --------------------------------------^/// _______ third Monday of each Planning Commission before the review meetiV3%|*°^/|?‘h- Applicants must tt present^L"^ unable to attend a schfl.t? Commission and Counoi! r? scheduled authorised agent tttend A Please make ar'nJ “ ^PPUcant is Office of this change prio? ^o “/k P^A<=® and advise thf ! "®"*"® any prior to the meeting, aavise the Building s Zoning to each of the names >ntours) if land airements). J separate list of ion. ication. Please information has on is complete. ion required or ®ii fees and/or Jd certifies that best of his/hern ho ion and further ‘fr oonsultants, r purposes of l£o/<r^ days before the held on the all scheduled an applicant is ints to have an Lding & Zoning O mi 01 BS0f lU ^ u M OK> u S ^ SB o uj 2 •i8-£2* IS ri:ii :■ • • :•Tx-. -sH■-V-.. r| : V- -J J ■* '■■: t ■ trator rystal Bay Rd No bile Hearing fe Haseoien'ts to be nds Class I line rearrangement ondltlon 2 of that Jhool Expansion, the previously platted tely 630* along the the former Crystal > public purpose and ck 2 encroaches the tescrlptlon of the ralnage and utility ck 2, Orono School f the drainage and ollowlng findings: •ic purpose. sent within Lot 2,"*^;- strlctlons on the ■ t: of drainage and i west side of Lot r^Tji ■A ■Iri''- '-1>W b:-;:^ <<• "Vfi?m f ^ I = J md M - - - -- ^ <»2NBRAL land 1 «»OPERTY loranOM Site Address ~ >:r-Please c''>ec?v ^ -- -^002. r>. >«^ c..ec3c one - Prooeri-v / . - - - - - - -- torrens? 4 ^ i : 'CT^ occe 4 cc - /-I 7^ iSir Please check one - p^nr>^,-4. / (for Conditional Use ADi5P^i®ncations only) ■c P --------------WXCIJS only) ----------——-------------- APPLiCauiT Name L Phone (home ) ^7^ _ .-j _._Mdres3 ' - -■ (worJc)_f 73 - v ' £*llOndPhone (home) Address GL/ci Phone -cSSl^c-c -PEES - COMDITMN m'toe’p^;;" p'~ WPUctlon______ $100.nn ,1 « ._ " t»: • -"r* “'-t eC.T ••U t' » \/ v $150.00 $250.00 $200.00 5100-00 a) Hesidential aooessory use 0150.00 b) Institutional (church k - -•■ ■icnurch, school, etc ) _ _ -v..-v Duplex Credit/Bldg ' ‘ w* i/ ^ j,- Coimnercial/industrial Use l*and Alteration m V . ^ I' PED/PID - see fee schedule flo^plain"^ filling - designated wetland or G«din|, “sfawaic "/etain/„ f“°re of lakeshore walls within 75 * ■ :| Iv- , .- ;• i. ‘ ;i /l t* OTHER APPLXCATIOHS : is 2^™“ ““ ""'• —..... - - - - IzIo.'oS Vacation With Subdivision ~' - ff00-°° Appeals ^ >1 m % present 02 Presc Prese DBSCRZPno Descr K? c) 3. jibed 2 Comp] Certi this Cente Stamp on thi Certi; Topo^ a 1 ter< Constj Plat 1 As an any ot The applica remember tha not been inc Certificatio; Zoning Offic: applicani The appl requestei unusual e the info; knowledge Applicant's owsiBRs si^ The owner hi authorized z agents, co; investigatio Owner's signat Applican Planning third Me review m< iinaKi a._a. occc ,cc ■'“f /X -/i-^L, ± . 7f o z o o o 3 Jrrans? eluded Zip 6S3:f(C i;-7 ■: ••*-1 * r* t 7 3 /3 ^L. Zip .6 ^3 ^ 6 /year ) Vr .>.ki . - l- li. •. V. V u' »• u t' 7 VV -v’V • %/v •'M^a r////551 S ■:■ ■ -i. •■ i * •■. i ,.. . •' «• w* V -~ w' u :r.- /,^•:y ted wetland or yd. or more alls within 75* '-v/' 1/;: fees) 5^-' 1#'fe'':'■ • •V -.5- ■“f PRSSBHT USB OF PSOPERTT Present Zoning District Present Use of Property bbqubst _ _ Residential Other (specify)_ Describe request in detail :#li ■5f .k.. ' , V'< ^HBD SUBMZmiJLS ” ________—— Application Form. - - O' -e na„e» Plat Map. applicable (see. staff for requirements). As an addendum to this persons you wish notifLd'of thiV appuJation?""^" . Mf • ** ** •“ *• *■• •» •am mm- w Zoning Officials Signature ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _^ ^ Pi ^ MPticaure*s sighmokb ----------------------- re|uMtL“ b*y \he*z!,ning’Ato^ information required or wusual expenses incurred in reviet of ***^ '««» and/or Applicant * s signature JV.VT ^ • f - OmSBRS SIGHATORB * Date ■PPliMMo. .„d f.rth.r Owner • s signature "' i 1w . ora........ . Date Applicant must have all aiiKm^^a. t j ■. ■ Office o/thinLS^^^"^./o"/. Place, and adTia\"Tg^1"V-'o. ^?^o. ^=vv-: -r , ■ w ■ V >■•••■■ ■ h- Tk; : ♦.>• * '‘‘i ' . •*• .* • ••*•. g. • uiS3 !" .3 = UI d520°* — g y ^ 5t 2»s§* €0 -J O !*o T *u _’ u. u oZD M «J O -I O O «S*6osswg;: ■<» SS sI s M r: 1*5 B 2 § ID <CM CD c «J ^ I. O ^ < < fo in K C* >- UI S3 “p>.5K1 tl ^ ^ W Ui y ^3SSS a os I U. u. IK !PSS~0 0 ; Us -. •• - . • •-“ %l»*^ • JSS eg eg pn 9J I CO ss K COs. IoCM ID to M ID o ^ -Js eg \ N O CO D13^ ^ t) K1o UI IVc: r o ^ < Q: g 50* (you can obtain e A-603 Government o each of the names tours) if land rements).' ** e. separate list of in. cation. Please t information has n is complete, be on required or fees and/or I certifies that sst of his/her ■on and further •r consultantsr ' purposes of \GKO . lays before the re held*6n^the ell scheduled n applicant is -A Its to have an ding Zoning W^‘:- K:-;- mm m r-s « » m 'I u < •I- ^ . r'. • • :f-. ;r. • ■t f . 'f'^1 f L -■'v,- r.'H ■'w W r* k ,v ! -I t .« ^■•ii ■ « * <«• < et:.<r'-#“t*iifej'• -^lJM•V.^ «.fe'af>, #. » ^LL-iMETr-O Li.MD SURVEYORS 2240 Camels Street RO. 3cx -t-ia Long Lake. Minnesota 55355 Ph; 475-1433 RE; ORONO SCHOOL EXPANSION Li -!j t December 3, 1988 UTILITY ANP DRAINAGE EASEMENT VACATIONS Portion in Lot 1 r e* • L-* . * * » Portion In Lot 2 of the north 5.00 feet of Lot 2, Block 1, CRYSTAL Minnesotariying eas^of""th^west^SsL OO^fle^o^sa^^ west or the east 25.00 feet of said ^0^2! ’■ym1^. I-', -i '1^ It 1? ■ -i- ¥■ /sr?t w3 Oat# ; 7.N87 Scai#: I’ • 20 ® •• Iron m# r».» r^lsti.nq Legal 0#j C. Lot$ I and 2. I Proposed Legal 0#j A. The West 642.00 8. That part of Loi •A •r •? ” ■H.«. ! ONS ‘••-Y --.• . * k *• • •1, CRYSTAL ennepin County, said Lot 1 and ’-• Ik ' fc «. 1, CRYSTAL snnepin County, said Lot 2 and ■ iB vV ‘-;*yT->. ••••V ■j^.; > ’-» ■ £Ti M mm -•..■• -a.- .. , j|^-- rti» -s»f vivivc •." /-«■ ■. • yy:- - ..■.:o ■:.viilm '^1 If nc wffr ‘■'^^ 0*''"S!Cf;/CO«BIfMnon Of LOTS t ano 2. QLOCX I, Crystal C*est Henneoin Ccuntv, Minnesa “a *cr ::.'!Muf.-irY ch ”ch resolution #2219 ♦/ c <*•• w c T Date ; /-i-a/ Scale: I" « ;qo* 0 : Iron marker Ekisti.ig Legal Oescrfnti««, C. Lots I and 2. Block I, CRYSTAL CREST Proposed Legal Oescriotinn* A. The uest 642.00 feet of Lot 2. Block 1. Crystal Crest e m« e„, „ fe« ^/Z Lot 1. Block 1. Crystal Crest. V nr-n^r^J S“»-vey Mas J^sfnn®? ®'’ “"‘**'* <H»'ect super. » Sion and that I am a duly Re«jisterM ihn'i*"** *••*'”* Surveyor uiiilcr U.0 l.ms ,.f u,e state of Mi.,..es„i.r n.irk \ r. u.. ■ M f I to •5>S • f m. ' * ♦• JLjLMJULlJUL«kj f-r- Zoning Pile #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 2 of 5 Review of Hardcover Controls *■' Lot 5 - (the largest of the remaining 21 pads) 80% of 21,400 s.f. of building pad * 17,120 s.f. Lot 11 - (the smallest of 21 pads) 80% cf 8,200 s.f. of building pad - 6,580 s.f. Building Pads 1 throvigh 4 with ! 80%of 20,800 s.f.16,640 s.f 70%of 20,800 s.f.-14,560 s.f 60%of 20,800 s.f.12,480 s.f 80%of 23,000 s.f.18,400 s.f 70%of 23,000 s.f.*16,100 s.f 60%of 23,000 s.f.*13,800 s.f 80%of 20,600 s.f.16,480 s.f 70%of 20,600 s.f.S8 14,420 s.f 60%of 20,600 s.f.as 12,360 s.f 80%of 17,200 s.f.S 13,760 s.f 70%of 17,200 s.f.■12,040 s.f 60%of 17,200 s.f.*10,320 s.f Hardcover Improvements Associated with Lots Reported to Sell at $80,000>$100,000 - Drive + Turn-around * (includes 20'x50' drive through restricted area plus remaining drive and turn-around area) Principal Structure 100-120'x 50-60 ’ * Accessory Structure 20'xl6' * (maintenance shed) ¥ TOTAL - 2,250 to 3,000 s.f. 5,000 to 7,000 s.f. 320 s.f. 7,820 to 10,320 s.f. ■Mm -u- . 1 ;.1 - / Nm -fl t 21r400 s.f. of f building pad - Reductions - f .. >rted to Sell at O 3r000 s.f. ) 7,000 s.f. .f. ),320 s.f. mmm Zoning Pile #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 3 of 5 Staff Coments - Compare hardcover allowances for each pad at 80% through 60% to estimated hardcover improvements. Does reducing the hardcover allowance have any significant effect upon reducing the profile or mass of a structure? If you reduce hardcover allowance you encourage upward expansion. Lot 4 with graduated lower elevations to the north and west will provide negligible visual impact upon the northern property owners, certainly no more than Lots 5 and 19 would along the westerly existing rural residential development. The 70* of depth (review Exhibit A) of the building pad will place greater restrictions on structural planning. Staff would strongly recommend no special restrictions for Lot 4. In staff's opinion even at 60% or less hardcover allowance, there is negligible impact on development as far as the visual aspect is concerned. What other controls may be intensification? »re effective in dealing with structural Heiqht. If the goal is to reduce visual impact of structures, a height control should be considered. A recent recommended standard by the DNR for all lakeshore property has been set at 25* in height. If height is to be restricted than residential development along the horizontal plane will be intensified and encouraged. Is this what is sought by lessening visual impact? If a walk-out to the north is planned, the 25' hexght would be measured from the lowest elevation at the walk-out side. This is different from the existing Building & Zoning Code Standards that would measure height from the entrance level (only if 50% of lower level is not exposed). All other standards in the zoning code would be applicable in determining height of structure (review Section 10.02, Definition 13). Planning Commission may wish to consider other height elevations. For staff, 25* would still allow 2-story structures with room for creative roof designs. No Accessory Structures. If we limit accessory structures, this might encourage the expansion of the principal structure. This most certainly will not be a neighborhood of detached garages and small barns, etc. The most one would envision would be a maintenance structure, if even that. *7- . ri-- V-Vm K;; / .-a. WWii mm mmm::.. Zoning Fi January 1 Page 4 of More for the d Commissic building Options i 1 mmm- It* To : Pads 1 tl 1. cha con 2. rur hig 2-2 lii foi at 3. PR] api 4. bo re im CO a CO de Tc develo ■w™ ______________-L it —V., •mkM5 through 60% to rover allowance I or mass of a courage upward north and west iroperty owners, terly existing ihibit A) of the planning. Staff ; 4. In staff's igligible impact with structural structures, a standard by the , If height is >rizontal plane it by lessening 5' height would side. This is rds that would »r level is not applicable in )efinition 13). evations. For r creative roof ures, this might i most certainly barns, etc. The f even that. m mt mm mw mm '# mmr*AW' f ■' "k f'-W.vv-u; S'--« .-...I t ^Eia.« ' «I ■ «mJLJ*MK: ' ' Zoning File #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 4 of 5 ■m • T vvt'inV 4'h‘’a would be difficult More Restrictive discussion at the Planning for the developer to t,4idlna envelopes. The more restrictive the^hrirrp.rS" options of Action - p.a. 1 throaqh 4 bawd on th. following finding*. controls on residential construction. A. ^4^ PRD from 6 to 4 units slon^ th© 2. council's recent amendmen xessen the impact of the rural residential boundary a property was developed at rural higher densities to the south. If t property line at 1250 2-aore standards, development a g densities with a 50' setbacklineal ^«et could have been-t S to^e ^lotjens^xt^^ for construction of a princip at a 10' setback. TO ....011.» .d«l.lo».l control. '“Hr.'" no -111 ....Olirt • nog.tw tr.c.d.l.t In th. r..l. applications . 4. The additional landscape boundary, the 100' wide no '=°'’ j,„u„a,rv have already addressed the reduction of units along the nor neighbors. Visual impact trcrrns^“reat:d by^ Vhe Lrof » -siaentia 1 n1:" ;orrr:r..v.d“;n“o?rT,ntinV o\r‘,r l.h...or./.^^^^ development. OR the following additional controls for the residential To recommend the followi g a-hrouah 4, as follows: development of Lots 1 through 3 or Lots 1 through 4, mm ■ 'I ir * I j:-. JH. T''®'3 1' 4^-A [y M u ii } Zoning Fil« January 12 Page 5 of : g would bo difficult ision at the Planning more restrictive the principal structure iential development of or unique physical uld call for special to 4 units along the (en the impact of the 8 developed at rural coperty line at 1250 es with a 50' setback I accessory structure ; properties within a ]^0view of similar along the north iding zone, and the already addressed the bors. Visual impact icture has never been ic and environmental lakeshore/shoreland ols for the residential . as follows? Zoning File #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 5 of 5 Plaimiiig ni—innltr may choose any combination or all A) Hardcover allowance to be limited to 70%, 60%, or less. B) Height limited to 25' (walk-outs to be measured at the lowest final grade at the walk-out side) or another height — - -• C) No accessory structures permitted* D) Increase the setbacks for the building envelope. E) Any other deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. m. . ' ■ ■j • ♦ ,«tl iir-'-' ■ ■ V. * • t :>rU • •. i •1 * .• I or all ared at the lowest eight * * ig Commission I J \ ■ i f ,;v:i Aiifc X w; > ilSit; I i •\ \ y' /: Wl -r // X A. / / V /f^fj\ \ ^%A ■# ■ #> *' V.Ji y i \ "\ \ \-. s \ ;u-l-i-,: / /! Ij/ ;. I VIIA\ TTjyi I / f /- rT^df ■i » , \ ' f • ’I i' ■ •• ^ • Li * . ^ ‘ » ■. ■ • ' ♦ • im l*: ^ i:. ■ . i [y. fl \k{ ', <» 1^ kr'i ' ^• ♦ ^ r » *« . • ? » r* K ■;■«3ir r.pi• • • • * • * :» •: •: > 11 fos Plani Oron< City FroMit Jeani Bates Januj Subjects #135' Vari; Zoning Distric Pertinent Ordi: Section 1 Requ Exis Prop Vari List of Bxhibi Exhibit A Exhibit E Exhibit C Exhibit C Exhibit E Exhibit E Exhibit G Exhibit E Exhibit 1 Exhibit d Exhibit J Exhibit I Exhibit ^ Zoiliil9 District - RR-IB Planning Commission Chairman Kelly Orono Planing Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building fc Zoning Administrator January 11# 1989 Subjectt #1359 David J. Lindstromr 1315 Woodhill Avenue Variance - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 - Required * 10' Existing * 20'2" Proposed ■ 6* Variance ■ 4' or 40% Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - Front Yard Setback Required * 50' ^ ^ proposed Additions =50'+ (per Exhibit G the applicants d( require front street setback var for proposed addition to the exii residence) List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Exhibit K Exhibit L Exhibit M Application Addendum Property Owners List Plat Map Survey of Existing Development Site Plan of Original Improvements Site Plan of Revised Improvements per Staff Recomm (Exhibit also designates assumed property lines) Original Floor Plan Revised Floor Plan South Elevation Section/Porch Addition UBC Section 504 (c) and Table 5 (a) Septic Location ■i-'-'i' iv;:a ■".J MM m m ^: mm if: 'V- m staff Revie assr sub£ open 1-hc prot addd side dech rator me - Dack - ipplican'ts do not setback variances 1 to the existing Staff Recommendation erty lines) M mm P'H' - :,-Si.: :: ^ y ‘i gfs:. ^ •■■'- - > - ''-5 ■■ , .'mmm mm KIMkfyrtmfi ’> V -1' i B:i • ■*^1' ll -i i1 |j*'i9•9 Zoning File #1359 January 11» 1989 Page 2 of 3 Staff Update - Oonnents - Uminarv review of the submittals for the applicationr Based on preliminary revie o*rlier this week to resolve TrllTl'lZ crS:u:tfonronT^. ?oSr :r* Thirnerioc^u^ inclusion in your packets. Review of Application The additions to the existing ^ith^rmud roL'^thlt will not porch at the southwest principal structure (14.lx6.7-). expand beyond the existing limi ' the ^structure will require a porch and deck addition at accessory setback variance to the required *^„^?Exhibit H. note the structure at 10-. Review ;o t^ garage. The 6- grade level deck located rxg a concern to staff. Staff questioned why a deck would be squeezed in between the E relocate the deck to the east side of the porch f "\te applicants concurred noting that the treed sloping yard to the . future expansion, but because they had planned a deck ooint. They advised that in their amended of cost had to ^e the 6- wide deck along the east side. This ^tL“e" :T.:TJZ L7e\ railing because of the sloping yard at that side of the house. - _ on the Uniform Building Code^ the Review Exhibit G, H and openings within the assumed property line is 3 , and relocated (considered an substandard setback area. The chimney „ust be rated opening) and the door if it is to that they would 1-hour fire resistant. The “PP northwest corner of the porch probably prefer relocating sliding glass doors along the east addition. The floor plans also show sliding g side. This will no longer be a concern as applicants p deck along the east side of the porch addition. >••3 :1’ Zoning January Page 3 Th of fire wall; ^ siding. At from gx R< review propos the lo east s; Orchar A) minima concer princi dimena the we Steepe preven are ma Staff T separi propet noted 1 a 1 2 £ clb. t c for the appllcationr this week to resolve jveinentf specifically the deck location and :iday of this week for f the removal of the a room that will not iructure (14.1x6.7*)» iture will require a .ncipal and accessory Exhibit H, note the 3 the garage. The 6' :f. Staff questioned cture and the garage, cate the deck to the le additional area of ;oncurred noting that xpansion, but because hat in their amended the east side. This ing yard at that side Building Code, the openings within the ated (considered an ; wall must be rated that they would corner of the porch oors along the east )lan to locate their -v< - i Zoning Pile #1359 January 11, 1989 Page 3 of 3 The north garage wall and the east wall of the porch addition must be of fire resistant construction as follows: 5/8' sheet rock interior wall; 1/2' sheet rock along the outside of the wall with non-combustable siding. Applicants should designate a staircase to deck if access is desired from grade level. Review Exhibit B, applicants addendum in which reviewed as to why the applicant has choosen the south side t proposed improvement. Mature trees to the “^e .h. location of the we-.l on the south, the drop in elevations along the ea^ Side, and the fact that the house is a corner lot surrounded by Orono orchard Road on the west and Woodhill Avenue on the north. As Iona as the special construction standards are met because of the minimal separation of 3' per the assumed property line, ®*^***^““ concern with the request of the 6' separation princlcal structure. To expand to the west and reduce the north/south are mature trees. staff Recommendation - setback of 4' or 40% to the requiredTo approve the variance setuai-iv separation setback between structures on a property ^ * flndlnos propety located at 1315 Woodhill Avenue based on the hardships and fin g noted above subject to the following conditions: 1. prior to scheduling the application before the ““J action, applicants must provide an updated survey of the improvements approved by the Planning Commission. mm : i 2. All construction within the substandard setback subject to the standards of the Uniform Building Code, specifical y section 504 (c), that would tllow no openings within ^ J the addition and the north wall of the garage and all wall construction to be per 1-hour rating. \y. - ' - i Mi i 'Smrnmmm. :.r m-' r f ClTt Of Initial ($50. Renewal (no c After-t Proper Please Attach requir APPLIC R OWNER J 1 PRBSBI DBSCR VARU > •« '• •*u ■ y::b# • . . • ^ ii:I t; I Wm:B :ch addition must be rock along interior ,th non-combustable f access is desired ^ .y vV.' the hardships are outh side for the est and southwest r svations along the surrounded by Orono ft" ■ '‘i''- ■■ th.m met because of the staff has no major /een detached and le the north/south sasible because of review Exhibit M). 5 septic drainfield existing structure t 0% to the required for the residential ardships and findings .■n-' I Council for final rvey of the final ■y. .ack area shall be :ode# specifically i the south wall of ige and all wall >, m I--,.' ■ '■1ijs-i Cl« OF OROW) - VRRIMCB AFPUCRTIOH ■■N ■» • Initial jj?tionai varianci) ^ T TV rz‘ #*V'^ wi i I Li WI^W!^V . .. A •.; i. ■ w ka • • »• » U'4 4 J.WU PR0PBRT7 MCMPIOH 04 4.A a<^<lress i J..V1-VV V vv .-•i? rr;i <4» WM i tltfU.v yn/?iiirrim i u*w Please ch.clc on- - Property ^ abstract or _ torrensP ©-3 9-V JTP^f . tllSi40 UOVI i i 4 Jk.* Please cnecj^ ^— - - - Attach legal description to application if not include required survey. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ applicaht Name >y. fip« nfldr—-• 'I -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- iiOTa'TIf different than applicant) Phone (home)__^ _____ Phone (work) ------------ Maime Address: City:Zip: _ _ _ __ (month/year) Date Property Acquired - --- - - - --- - - - - - - I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent_parcels_of_land._,- - - - PBBSEHT USB OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District /C/C- - - Present Use of Property lesidentia • Other (specify) __ ---------------------------------- ®lA.4m*ted Construction Co DBSCRIPTIOH OF MOBST _ __ variahcbs required . #• Lot Area F sp ^ ^ » L- ‘ ‘ ~'LS;width^' __ _ _.• —'tC- - Hardcover Setback Variances Other y<2-ttal^ (v/^^Frbnt , .i ^ Va p, mm 0^ • r- .V .4 % « /O T '• • ^ y . »> ■« • '' ■'.•’V,' ■ ■', *I v-;: pit ( vX.«W.-^' ■Mm i '3 hardship Describe enforcer dbscriptioh ( Describe Code Re< REQUIRED SUB] 6. Complet( Certifi( this li 348-327; Stamped names o obtaine« Certif i< Topograi in exis Plat Ma; As an a any oth Additio The Applies remember th information Certificatio Zoning Offic APPLICAllT'S The applica requested b unusual expe the informa knowledge. Applicant * s OWNERS SI61 The owner h< authorizes z agents r Comm tion and vei Owner's Sign Applicant mi; Planning Coir third Honda review meeti unable to ai authorized a Offxce of cl; 4L:■■ 171:.••,•• V .y- ' --M • - *f-. w .#»• I cirr CF CFOtio FlifhCiCE OFFICE 1 V*-Vj VrAa> •)1 Ji.*Vi.VW VV A/ rr;i rij - .-VJ. Wmt Avfif • V Uii^uM it. Aw*V# 3 Sl*/ cT&&frt--T,JA*<l ynU^1 #iir!iti\ I ww ^118640 COOi !<0i Hi :rens? .uded on •f f i.^/ ) work) ) work) Zip: (month/yonJ^) >f land. i<-s V^v^vk [ardcover Vh : !”Rear) • 2mm M» • « «* .V ^ i ^ -A. - - — 7 ‘ • -- * : 1 * •. .- 4 '4tS r'!«»»■w~-•• .U. . .•»»•ii rrTs 1 •' ■if w ^RDSHIPHXPDescribe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations; ggy DBSCRIPTIOH OP UHOSOAL PROPKKTf COHDITIOHSDescribe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: - --- - --- - -- - -—- - - - - - -- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS CMtified Propt“y^^er7 List of owners Govt Cent«^ this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A 603 Govt Center 348-3271).stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) names on the above list with no return address (use address labels C°er\“if"rcat"rof "su°r^ey"=^in^u“V calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed As“an"“a?dinfu^'"w ^is “^’^rica?iln'’“”^“ _______________________________ information has not been included. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CertZfZcItiorbrzoninrDepIrtoent that Variance Application is complete. DateZoning Official's Signature E^hr. -.'.f knowledge Applicant's Signature Date \\V::i^\Vti ?rfwn?^^y acowledges -d ^\yc\\"“s?a"ff:%“ontu\Va1ft“s’: tion and verification of this revest. _ DateOvmer's Signature Z;;ZZ;Znt must have ;lLf"5”“^?l^iSrcoi!l^i8stL°Mlttln^ are’^ heW°on SePlanning Commission Meeting. Planning scheduled third Monday of each month. Applicants must be aoolicant is revit meetings of the Planning Commission and an ^able to attend a scheduled meeting, please iM)ce arrangements^ ^ authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Office of chis change prior to the meeting. •: t ~ f ■ ■. *: I S4-. K4 1/ V.. rv t: . • ■ --f f*.\m.>6'r^*' ^^ -^rV. ■ ulting from strict 1lance with Zoning I* (you must obtain A-603 Govt Center ed to each of the se address labels ons as required, ns) If any changes a separate list of tlon. llcatlon. Please lete If the above tlon Is complete Date tlon required or all fees and/or and certifies that best of his/her cation and further staff/ consultants, poses of Investlga— ! 5 days before the 3 are held on the at all scheduled f an applicant Is sments to have an Jullding & Zoning i»- ■w: V '~'->; K: *-- 1.!?^ t :i.= % ■K mM IS. . ^, . 'J ' >1 ' v''- 'I 1 Mr< I-’'. - • • 1 i®. David J. LindStrom 1315 Woodhlll Avenue Orono, Minnesota 55391 Hoveober 23® 1988 Orono Planning Commission Gentlemen; There ere nany reiton. 1 feel the verlences requeeted ehould be granted. ir eeee. there 1. •" ror“Vrd:".ir:^^'‘b:th l*rs%To^ise3'rn-thr:n!rpo«Ible looetlon. The « Sstlnl ^ch and is even smaller than the present structure. The dlstence between the garage *“1 f*«t^Th- iinlvaraal building code for safety requires oniy rive i.eou contractor has suggested fire '“'‘^'« hha inside of the g.M . This would allow the structure to meet the specification or even attached garage. Dnfortptelyjthe^t^r ^ hhe^x^i^ «rsouth. s:‘u L':e« t^th:’:::t£; sStirsystem „ the east, and proximity to Woodhlll Avenue to the north, are obvious. I thank you for your consideration. Sincerely® David J. LindStrom DJL:mu .1.* siiif t , W: M ii] > X X M -i Pt X ^ M H H X tf)p cn -j M o III o q ^*4 M M ll< S e a Q w *S L I ,t o•133*^ o o u c B. UJ Be X u should bo I Improvemonts and entry, both ao sight lines ntry replaces an tructure. the road. Expansion al stays well within ion is six feet, ive feet. The e garage wall, on of even an nit the area >n west and south, id proximity to lWr.a-1 Si. *4 1-, i|«!l* • ♦ f •J \ •v*»- !^r I M .'/■ i ■ :•'■> i*- : y’ i yoH^lP -r,.-' • r-*': ' - V ’ I* I '-^»mR ^ UNIFORM BUiLOINQ CODE 2. A'<Mim one third the distance from an assumed vertical plane located whoHiic^mistive protection of openings iinrTii location onpropert^^Wnche^isdy leasueauiofie^ — J When ftp^ing^ l>P protectei^£e to distance from pK^gfSff>4SKr^ sura of the area^rf nich openings shall not exceed 50 the total area of the wall in each stm-v*'*'**^^ • •_____^ (c) Bnildinp on Same Property and Bnildings Containing Courts. Fordie / purposes of determining the required wall and opening protection and roof* ^ covering requirements. ^uildinMOQj|)gjgiiie_QS^ court walls of build ings over one story in hdght siull be assumed to ha^ a property line between them. - EXCEPTION; In court walls where opening protection is required such protec* tiou. jjjf BE Uluiuul,>pMVMM44^|0^jgBMhantV6 levels open the court, (2) the aggregate area of the bujldiagTilciii<tiiigTBtuaurt L» within the allowable area and (3) the buildingjsjwreiassified as a Group I Occupancy. a new building is to be erected on the same propcrab«mn existing buildih^>^^w location of die assumed property line withjalsaon to the existing building sluBb^uch that the exterior wall and opepiagfpotecoon of the eidsting building meet tM^aciMu as set forth in Table^tT^ and Part IV. EXCtPI10N?'Tfre^moreIwildM^m the same property may be considered as portions of one buildug,ifd)04g^gate area of such buildings is within the limits specified in SectioaSgSAinniMie building. When theji)il4il$sso consHlmd^iouse different occupancies or are of different types of ^puSnuction, the area shall bethatallowed for the most restricted occupancy rabln Floor Aram Scc^iK. (a) One-story Areas. The area of a one si exceed th^i^u set forth in Table No. 5-C except as Kulding shall not hi Secdon 506. (b) Areas X^uUdings Over One Story. The miu combined floor area for multistory buildfrus may be twice that permitted^bylable No. 5-C for onc-story buildings, and the flpor area of anv single storv.sftall not exceed that permitted for a one-storv buildmg.^ ^ (c) Mezzanines. Uiih^ considered af a separate story, the floor area of ail mezzanines shall be incluf^d in calcu^dfing the allowable floor area of the stmies .in which the mezzaninm . (d) Basements. A basemedin^ not be mclud^ in the total allowable area. I provided such basement dopsH^ exceed the area permitted for a one-sta' building. (c) Area SeparadopfWalls. Eadh portion of a building separated by one or jnore area seoaratioiGit^lls-m^ be c^sidered a separate building, provided the —-1-31-^- inVflIs meet the followinkrequiieTOnZsT" 1. Area sepdraon walls shall be not ies^han four-hour fire-resisiive construc tion in TynSs I, II-RR., HI and IV building^ud two-hour fire- resistive constrtic- don in les n One-hour, II-N or V buildingk The total width of all openings in such wtQls shall not exceed 25 percent of the leh^ of .the wall in each story. All f 'vH .V t •1’! f.- ■ I ■ V \ cxnf ^ I ^ It qrong J city of OROiNO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2249__________ ff -I o 7T X ^ . ^ W.. i .V *- * -*. A RBSOLOTIOH APPROVXNG A MBTBS AHD BOOHDS CLASS I SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE RBARRAN6BMEHT FOR THE ORONO COMMUNITY CHURCH - FILE NO. 1179 r'^ S » lOi^ -• \ - WHEREAS* the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS* the City Council of the City of Orono has adopts! subdivision regulations for the orderly* economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS* the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision by the Orono Community Church, (hereinafter " the subdivider") of property legally described on the certificate of survey by Mark S. Gronberg dated 7/1/87 and attached to this resolution as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the metes and bounds subdivision for division and combination purposes. NOW* THEREFORE* BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the metes and bounds division of a lot line rearrangement for the Orono Community Church as shown on the Certificate of Survey by Mark S. Gronberg dated 7/1/87, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall deed to the City drainage and utility easements 5 feet on each side of the newly proposed lot line. 2. The drainage and utility easement along the north side of Parcel B will not be vacated until combined Parcels B & C are subdivided at some future date. 3. Parcels B & C as referenced on the attached survey shall be legally combined for tax purposes at the Orono City offices prior to the filing of this subdivision with Hennepin County Recorder's Office or the Registrar of Titles Office. 4. This resolution, the attached Certificate of Survey and the above referenced documents shall be filed with the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or the Registrar of Titles Office on or before February 24, 1988. Page 1 of 2 ro :iL Oi . jto*.. , * T *'^-Ifc . rf^K corporation organized r and )f Orono has adopted i safe development of ;he application for a er " the subdivider") of survey by Mark S. as rlxhibit A; and , requirements of the ition purposes. ty Council of the City ision of a lot line on the Certificate of :t to the following d utility easements 5 lorth side of Parcel B C are subdivided at survey shall be offices prior to Recorder's Office urvey and the above e Hennepin County ffice on or before V S': * $0-f 'u l^w T- = ■ WT' S..- h "i r 1 i m city of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2249 if J t ./ if ► JVI O /? -s The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the subdivision has not been filed by the date specified above. In that events it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Adopted by the City Council on this 24th day of August# 1987 •— .. -»«4 — .* ■ i- •rf* Page 2 of 2 « M.'..2*: , t .. V ' f . - il: '------------- *■'■ r • ' iii|>ii ? •-iii; -!'J ?■ CRYSTAL I «tw strtrare T ^ Kmtfuit, ih>k I, orrtm atir Li( '• ~ —— BLOCK I M1II9 5 f««t !■ * Indieatadt anA Be f««t in widtii BM •lMWii;en. thn -SU ti.5 > t ••4 p'.i- *■' ■M -'Mt.;,-'H. . r- ••X -.7 >“! Vi ■>? ■^i Ih iii 4' ?■■'■;: 'o;?la Ore Cit Froa:Mic Dates Jan Subject: #13 Var Zoning Distri Application construe List of Bxhib Exhibit i Exhibit 1 —^ « • » M , «»W ^ •M « V « » .M Aw' « ^ Exhibit I • V • * «w*' ^ .. a Exhibit I Exhibit C Exhibit I Exhibit ] Pertinent Pact 1. Hardcovei extensive hardcovei the folic 3one 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' Allowed hardco (.25x11,3 Excess hardcovi [wtU£W HUNrrT^^ Fron: Subjects '.^smJmm Planning Commission Chairman Kelly Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator January 11, 1989 #1362 Paul Hauser, 2801 Casco Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District ~ LR-IC Application - Request for average setback and hardcover variances to construct addition to existing residence. liist of Bxhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Mac Zichibit C - Prcc^r-*'- twr.ers list Exhibi** ^ Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I i. u - Survey - Staff rur-'ey Ctmcilaricr Tncli'dir.g :7eichbc - Staff Letter to Applicant Dated 11/18/88 - Proposed House Elevations - Proposed Floor Plans - Staff Hardcover Calculation Pertinent Pacts - ■' Hardcover on the property is relatively minimal, however, due to the extensive blacktop driveway near the road, the total square footage of hardcover on the property slightly exceeds that which is allowed, per the following table: Zone Area Existina Procosed 0-75’ 75-250' 250-500' 5,250 s.f. 11,300 s.f. 3,300 s.f. 19,850 s.f. 0 s.f. ( 0%) 1,595 s.f. (14.1%) 2,252 s.f. (68.2%) 3,847 s.f. 0 s.f. ( 0%) 1,980 s.f. (17.5%) 2,252 s.f. (68.2%) 4,232 s.f. Allowed hardcover on the property: (.25x11,300 s.f.) + (.30x3,300 s.f.) * 3,815 s.f. Excess hardcover (variance) = 4,232-3,815 * 417 s.f. IN- Lnistrator • • over variances to bcrir.c: Prc’^.-ertiss jwever, due to the square footage of :h is allowed, per rocosed s.f. ( 0%) s.f. (17.5%) s.f. (68.2%) s.f. mmM a-’'S|Ff' S' ■;C ■■ m: LN Ir '-w\ ; i % P i "oning File #1362 January 11, 1989 Page 2 of 3 2.The proposed addition and decks, while being located more than 160* from the normal shoreline, does require an average lakeshore setback variance due to the convex shoreline at this point. Neither neighboring property owner enjoys significant lake views across the area proposed for the addition. Note that the applicant originally questioned the City's . Interpretation of the ordinance language regarding the average, lakeshore setback. A literal interpretation of that section as written would indicate that a measurement should be taken of the distance from the shoreline of the houses on either side, and the middle house must meet the average of those two distances. In fact, the proposed decks and addition would meet that standard, if that was how the City had always Interpreted the code section. However, standard City practice has been to draw a straight line between the neighboring adjacent: resident: snructuresas shewn in Exhibit F, and than is considered the average setback line regardless of actual dioiances frem one lik ashore. Vnu ray recall that this incartr eta tier, was brought to the Planning Commission as an informal conceptual review at your November meeting, and Planning Commission unanimously felt that the interpretation of average setback by drawing a straight line should be continued, not only from a consistency standpoint, but from a practical application standpoint. Discussion - The proposed addition and decks appear to be appropriately and logically located in relation to the property and to the existing residence. Note that the house to the immediate south has a garage on its north side, and has no views of the lake that will be encroached upon by this proposed addition. The house to the north side of the subject property enjoys views generally in a westerly direction, and the existing bluff topography southwest of the proposed addition already blocks any substantial lake views that might potentially be blocked by the proposed decks. Therefore, it appears that neither adjacent residence will be significantly affected by this addition. Zoning Fi January J Page 3 oi Froi typical visualize that if would th< virtual 1; appear t similar i Staff Rec Staf lakeshore gf located more than 160' verage lakeshore setback : this point. Neither t lake views across the uestioned the City's regarding the average, ion of that section as should be taken of the on either sider and the two distances. In fact, at standard, if that was ode section. However, traight line between the shewn in Erchihit 3 and e regaraiess of actual that ratatior an informal conceptual g Commission unanimously ck by drawing a straight sistency standpoint, but D be appropriately and y and to the existing outh has a garage on its . 1 be encroached upon by th side of the subject action, and the existing bion already blocks any blocked by the proposed icent residence will be Zoning File #1362 January 11, 1389 Page 3 of 3 Staff Recoonendatii •masm,A**'m Prom a hardcover standpoint, the proposed 417 s.f. excess is quite typical or even low for the Casco Point neighborhood. As a way to visualize the seemingly high 68% hardcover in the 250-500* zone, consider that if the 75-250' zone went all the way to the street, this property would then have the equivalent of 29% hardcover in the 75-250' zone, with virtually no hardcover in the 0-75' zone. Approval of this variance would appear to be very consistent, being generally lesser in magnitude than sifliilar variances granted on Casco Point in recent times. . • Staff would recommend approval of the proposed hardcover and average lakeshore setbacks, based on the following findings: 1. No significant lake views enjoyed by neighboring properties will reduced cr encroached upon by the proposed additions. Hardcover on the property is slightly excessive based on code standards but is very consistent with other properties and variance approvals in the Casco Point area. The proposed additions and hardcover removals result in a hardcover increase of 417 s.f. There does not appear to be excessive non-structural hardcover on the property that can be easily removed without causing additional hardships for use of the property. mm JT- •fim s.f. e:;cess is quite hood. As a way to 0-500' zoner consider ;reet, this property he 75-250' zone, with ; this variance would sr in magnitude than 108# iardcover and average ring properties will itions. •ssive based on code ;erties and variance posed additions and se of 417 s.f. There al hardcover on the causing additional ■msivm » . 'A f CITT OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATI ♦ / J J ‘■i • • ’ Initial Application Fes $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance} Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) ^^®r-the-Pact Fees (Double application fee) PNOP1W>*wv rPSOPERTT LOCATION SiuS Address 2801 Casco Point Roao. Orono. ^s/jN Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 2011723230014 Please check one - Property abstract or X torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. EXHJS !T applicant Name Paul and Rosemary Hauser Phone (home) 471-8417 Address: 2801 Casco Point Road Phone (work) 726-8261 (Mrs.) City: Orono_ _ _ _ _ Zip: 55391 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:_Zip: Date Property Acquired I (do) (^^^P9^^) also oi PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Decemoer 1987 (month/year) f^pring ParLr R- 1 Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $80,000 Describe request in detail: Pursuant to November 18. 1988 letter from Michael Gaffron VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _ _ _ Lot Width Setback Variances (_ _ _ Front Other Average Lakeshore Setback ^ Hardcover Side Rear) . •>iff_ _ _ _ _. HARDSHIP Des r'enf rc DBSCRirTIOl Descri Code I REQaiRBD SI 3. Comply CertiJ this ] 348-3: Stamp names obtair Certif Topogi in ex: Plat I As an any ol Additj The Applic remember t informaricr Cartificat: Zoning Offd APPLICANT'S The appli< requested unusual ex\ the inforn knowledge. Applicant's OWNERS SIG2 The owner authorizes agents» Con tion and v< wner's Sic Applicant n Planning Cc third Mond review meet unable to . authorized Office of t v'"'r* HARDSHIP ,Describe undue hardship or ?ractica]^difficuity resulting ^rcm strict enfcrcsment of zoning reculations; w / - - DBSCRirTIOH OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe \inusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements;_ _ ___ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ' •* REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Canter 348**327X ) Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). ^ Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. VI i nrr oronosed elevations) if any chan ( ngesTopographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) in existing grade are proposed. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 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 informauicn has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete Zoning Official's Sigixature__ _ _ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date--- - - --— APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE ^ ^ The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees .to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies the information suppli.sd Is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. j^Applicant's Signature ■ I 1 / \ ^ V .1 Date • J ' ^ *7 - ^ OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and rurtner authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verificatloiT^oiNthis request. vi K‘])^J^^^TC*Owner' s Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Flaming Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place ;;; to advise the Building S Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. K: mi .f ' ir* r- ••* '-ft•! ■■■■■ ■ - , ;y *.• ‘'-a h ' ^. :* < 'v; /.; • :!tir. iftv r ‘■f •• I i . • V • J' ’ • " i ft:?i':' KV- i 0- pp ..: • * •• • . tina from strict 0 - » / ance with Zoning (you must obtain -603 Govt Canter [ to each of the address labels r.3 as required ) if any changes separate list of 3n. cation. Please te if the above m is complete :e on required or 11 fees and/or d certifies that lest of his/her I ■ - ' *7 - tion and further ff, consultantsr es of investiga- 5 days before the ; are held on the It all scheduled : an applicant is iments to have an uilding & Zoning fs'-. :•■ •■ ;v K "Pi -A. J.H«S. Homesr Inc. Attn: Jeff Schoenwetter 5353 Gamble Drive Suite 307 Minneapolis, MN 55416 s:^masei^i I ^• I CITY of ORONO Post Oflics Box 66*Crysts] Bay, Minaaou 55323•Municipal OfIlc« On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka November 18, 1988 Re: Proposed Addition - 2801 Casco Point Road, Orono Dear Mr. Schoenwetter: The Building 6 Zoning Department is in receipt of your application for a building permit, which was received by this office on November 15, 1988. A review of the application finds that a number of variances are required for the proposed construction: 1. The proposed room addition and deck extend lakeward from the defined average lakeshore setback line as depicted on the attached survey, per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B), copy attached. 2. Although hardcover in the 75-250* zone will not increase above the 25% threshold, total proposed hardcover on the property will now exceed the allowable square footage, based on the following calculations: 75-250* zone: Area “ 11,300 s.f. 25% B 2,825 s.f. Allowed Hardcover 250-500* zone: Area * 3,300 s.f. 30% « 990 s.f. Allowed Hardcover C) 2,825 + 990 * 3,815 s.f. Allowed Hardcover Overall D) Proposed total « 1,980 s.f. + 2,252 s.f. ■ 4,232 s.f. E) Excess hardcover * 4,232 s.f.-3,815 s.f.*417 s.f. Excess BUILDINC; a ZONING - 473-7357 assessing administration a finance - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 -r * 1 •' ■‘Hi -• Jiiird . I . _ f 1^ am V r*i: / % 1 < « Mi» . J T of ORONO ay. Minnesota 55323•Municipal OfSc« nka receipt of your ved by this office ^inds that a number tion: I lakeward from the I depicted on the de Section 10.22, will not increase v^er on the property age, based on the :over Overall >f. •* 4,232 s.f. ,f.«417 s.f. Excess PUBLIC WORKS - 473*7359 •»•■-■'•• •'’ * •.' • 'f’W™". r \ .A 5^;- ‘ ' -km: Mir’!- mm-'. - •i ,r ■' mmt^ 6 f I f i I —— r IJ___ . . ttPtaN^ s«, I • I* * v*Mia.Sa. I ^ j| j * <*w Ml r-f l__I___; _l fMin •l ' •' I ' r I' • 11 U-. L| km iunK vi=r=* £ W»w mk^*\ ^4- I %c* «r.i%avi4 i. •*- m 7- •e* »<- I 7^^ 4^ ^<1 bad> ■*> «B#f ^ 4^eesJL , T «e»* 4 •<». ^ ■_ y/p0fma^m,i _ —-zr tz: i: -Muli fr.} : V >. •-, ■• • .'V tr ' ' ■■■■•'. • r- M -i-rj . =*?-«0kv- •.:'/•;• ■ - •■•:4;-. ] ■: th}-: •■ VV:- 4 ^ ♦ H- 4 9|^«>v% «#•> N • - u ■II m I^%s- . J , •.. ^- t : . *' V , •••••• • ‘ !• ■ -V* 7-7'17 ■;’ '7- •>r • :v:l:;'W; ■ ■•.■ ' :v,. ,.^'- ‘•»c^ .; • .. Xtl v** r-r rx 5s. if mrm , -V' sCTgi I" iBBrliTBBilMBl 4 ij 2 r>fri«------ '-t •• Mmk»*o r t.--., j u UC.rr ^tcpt, ^u£.>v^Tig>sl - ::r J r '-*) 3^- 7... J-> •■•>•.,• i )r^> L biinfaulriiniiu ------V ✓ \ / MH-^i iH- •M —i<i -U F—L -------------------•>' IU ;r Li-t-_r; £.'<»c>vA‘r ic^v -fWr) 1 I ’- .H j W- |<*»nVr V . m j 1.^ 1 1- ^ ■ 0 i • ... nr» -V 1 ^ iH II ^ lH!!j| k ) 1^:30 % -.r^ to *w • ■• ^. . . 1 [ -r •: , PI'-^T' '^•-?*Hw(-V-ia ...JiL.■m-A-t^D• 4 ----------------------- ' 0S---------------------- - r — !’■ V .•'irJ'.snr Jt'-a :irji:r-j.\::r' ■-It!. ! t. ^ I L.— ^ . i .... S4 . i: \l '.*^0km ( <«r ^ •^1 i !i3i 3iS N-------- t •_ i'2i.*-«l^ M-/\ y\y\ /Vr^r* '*r. -if*- -------- ^ flK^mssis ^ *.. i« ... <. [ S|. I •'-— ■ Vil i'2r.:rji l| ■_-SCtSi 6«g-;^-3=::rLj ) *------- • X^Z- ■ -^- % I pi km 2*5^ ■ ***^ir^ I N / t 1 4- I Hi.. ..... . t^JALKO'^ £XHlBi“ — •j ^ 1 1* n 1 v[ >1 ■1 iu i __I U .]»‘i; #A':' *•» >*e fc- ff >ij|« T«-- te1—____ «• P>»<'ur ~3Vir lJr1ar3~-'-^^“‘^”"'^' ^ ■""-» 'ivs^'-y!^-->*lk h*»^rnm fa» *»»•>■■< i ■A rft M <»A '“*8fi*2Lr ■j n* ■ ..-•, ■'. u w> ::\y- ■4 -.A --:’ : ■ '■ !■ " ■ :f- ’ ---I ■f »» n K 1 ;i ^ iiw L •i-dt f • ■I. j 9 . . »»»t**» - - , 4»/\/^ i i 4 J ' H*z. . 1k:j-:c- r^rt {^V\ |=6r-3^ —- f • ▼k MU U ■ ^11 /-fel ki • .JMB S3I^ ssjas"^m I- 1 *——. I •, I 9 m** — U.r.-'_*±_ .-iiv , rtr^sr ’^^r-.-r, ,.--r I A^E> lAfPe^ ! I' I •it ‘I t. W"*- ^-v;,:v^: % .la& ' x J m- ■<■: ^ ■ • liiP ', i • s, * 2' <L f/V j'- »: ■ i »;lii>3 ... iwm =|H'' • j &rM p ««avb i‘, ■f^ V'_; ’tAri f[fi/i^co\ie^ S^rv»4?v«i -'2~30f Cas<^ 'P^- >Cj». V “ ' ■t:.. .0-; a ip^tS^ J /. €X/J r/AiC. f/A^CO "= ^ %P . ^AJO A^&fTIOWVt. S, 7r-'>TO'2.oAJ£' I H f • /4AeA»//so<S s^. • ♦' t - tLQCje. awbc. C.4.^ ■jfc- C0A»C. CaIAvIC STCaJ^wa^ (AT'><3S'^ » f t r-.- V;:^V'-: '. J • 4 11 . t tuoo& SrpPS C?.&a4&'^ (Mdwjr ^ 0 z ->*^50 fWTO <7o xj |^(^ >«/. ^+(3 > CPA*A 5" X5e> 0 f-■*-., -■• r» /js^s/t^zoo = /y. / pie^poscti ^<2.__ ... -)*- ...../lo'AijEr (^svc2-r^ if /z!^ Os^/(c^ ■*• ST^.?> •*■ >eCrlC-.S y I ♦r- j! I • * • i = (7.ry< o-.r^ C • • - - «i 2-^'*sT5o'iAMff-. » "Ssao iJ?, /y4je4^co\j^ «rxrs77A>c» ; z-i,i- » t'V.z. c. ooA^^i jrVi/'Ave* /Vo s:P. ^ut.k.T»f^ C2-lx7^^-(^«,>nC>* /i"2C s:^. ^s:r Acv<« 3 0 - —. 3 2k®o ^ ^ s. x> !Ci. /Oo (<^-M-0U0(9^ Of^ PA<iPttAf*f • 3'5">'/ASoO ^ Z^^T^'S . lo » ??o. I «* ( ■» « * « « < I V2-2 3_iS/S'~ V/7 s^. 0>/4Pft,4<»«' * I * « » < i I (J - «♦ 1 h T1 11 I! « * ;i i t I i « i; i t 44 ♦ • ' ? tt• » j; iifcfte .;m "mmrn^m-'y ::y:--::::M t- k; m M fes"mr :t- •wf.. •■-1 m •’*.■1 1,3?^ To; From: Date: Subjei Zonin< Appli List c T C 1 I 1 B c. E Pertin 1.T V 3-75 ' ( 75-250 0-75 ' ( TOTAL (N S •7/ C s o. 2.I. a ai ai %I- 'V.: -^ • drO r r I Vo /i"2C- */. s:P. sS'. /Jo A5»o/oS ir^ ^. 0\/ trO,4<^ t:)!' 1-^ <^V:;;; iv V' . ■■■i- . • • •••••••-••■.• 1 < vS Planning Commission Chairman Kelly Oronc Planning Ccmmiasicn Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning « Zoning Administrator January 11, 1989 Subject; >*1363 Roger & Becky Berry, 1392 Saldur Park Road - riance''CUP - P’lblie Pearino Zoning District - LR-IC, single family, 1/2 acre, sewered Application - Request for variances for hardcover, lakeshore setback, and! average lakeshore setback. CUP/variance for grade changes in 0-75* lakeshore setback zone. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Atclicaticn Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Neighboring Property Owner Acknowledgements Exhibit E - Survey With Existing Site Plan Exhibit F - Survey With Proposed Site Plan . -- H - Prelirir.d.'•/ rlccr Plans Exnibir I - Pr^rosed 'rridir.r Plan /.i * -. ’F ^ m *. C>* « V. • 'w W f Exnibir K Exhibit L riaracover Review oy Scarf Baldur Park Are^ Variance Listing Pertinent Facts - The property is bordered on the north and south ends by Lake Minnetonka. Per staff oalculaticns, hardcover in the various tones is aurmarioed as follows; j.:cistin ?rotosed w W A ^ ^ ^ f ^ j’^ i ^ \ c 75-250 ’ 0-75 '(M) 1,393 s.f. 4,110 s.f. 697 s.f. 5.1 i ) 5.5%) 3.3%) 1,393 s.f. l25.1%; 6,042 s.f. (39.0%) 382 s.f. ( 4.6%) 7,543 s.f. 15,500 s.f. 7,950 s.f. Zoning File January 11, Page 2 of 4 The e: lakes shore house that i resu 1‘ The a struc Howev to pr« house setba< Gradi this ver ii large are p dri v€ TOTAL 0-75' (N & S) 2,590 s.f. (15.7%)2,255 s.f. (14.6%) 13,498 s.f. In the 0-75' zones, there is a net hardcover decrease of 335 s.f. The 75-250* zone, there is a net hardcover increase of 1,933 s.f.there is a Overall, there is a net hardcover increase on th^property of 1,599 s.f. Please review Exhibit K for a more detailed layout of hardcover on this property. In the north 0-75' zone, the existing house encroaches 19* into the average setback zone. The proposed residence will encroach approximately 9' into the average setback zone, with decks encroaching approximately 11' into that zone. 45' f creai basei be me and ] The C p Ian. hear: Discussioi Agaii house and This re-d steady ra is fami 1i area beca total lot The ] unique w: changes t lakeshor encroach mature ti hill. j Administrator irk Road - iwered lakeshore setback, and grade changes in 0-75’ dgements d south ends by Lake in the various zones is Zone Area 1%) 0%) 6%) s.r« 13/500 s.f. 7/?50 s.r. S%)15,498 s.f. irease of 335 s.f. The :rea^e of 1,933 s.f. the property of 1,598 d layout of hardcover ncroaches 19' into the dence will encroach with decks encroaching ti- m:y m I • ■ ;v • “i-- •0' t • Zoning File #1363 January Hr 1989 Page 2 of 4 lakeshore setback, fj-nm the shoreline. The proposedShoreline, with a deck being 9 with a deck area house at 8, witn a aeci. t-he shoreline, with a deck area its closest point -S 6, _ r-ocosed house construction ■aces S5- frcs, the shoreline The p*otosead'crea^r orsVrrcWre in the'north 0-75’ tone.results in The applicants are aware of ‘j*® '“^en starting^from scratch, structures to meet required lakeshore setback variance is r pre^'erv^^^^^"*iTaUV7l| sltb^^cks wo7l'd"\ike!y"re7u°V in destruction of that tree. Grading plan. Staff requested ®.^®tailed proposed this property, ,® -he new residence will be muchthis property, along with elevations or arr ;„iaence will be much verify how grades the Ixi^stiiJg small house. The applicantslarger and spretd out than the existing am house and in the are proposing to make , house layout. The driveway area !!:•■,<1- =! ^ A >• ^ 'I - M ^ ^ *** * ^- r. a /'i1“ V 3%3.dcwn z - 7 ,^rr "•re e:^i3t:ing rr-. <x:^ u^uv-^i1- -‘.ng aDv. ... —-ss .n rcr...*y » rv-de aocur : • - '-I' snaruing abcuc “h3 apulicanuo ars proposing hi! 1 The intent is to 45' from the shoreline and working^int ^th^ proposed cut is already create a I®''® igping house, so the actual amount of dirt to b^moved t^thfnfrth 0-75- zone is estimated by staff at between 75 and 100 cubic yards. The City Engi.neer has ^®®''‘ be rece\*7ed'Trior \o* the ’public plan, and his comments are expec.--a uq hearing. Discussion - a recuest for demolition of an existing s^nall Again we have before us a residence on Baldur Park Road. house and construction of ^peninsula has been occuring at a This re-development of ^eJidenc^e per year. The current request steady rate of within the Baldur Park irelTecTuTeTt is a double lot with average width of just over 125', and a total lot area of almost three-fourths of an acre. The new residence is proposed ®A^ “"g^^o °noTLttnTtTTakTma jo? unique within Baldur Park, en app ^ reason for requesting the faSorT sttTaT^TfrTanTe \T |at^mo v^^ng the house -hTrToTe^ :ftu°T treTs oTthTpTTpertyT^lp to mask the height of structures on the hill. Zonii Janui Page move woulc to th quest line a wa] inter exten fairl outs, a wal witho grade Point area, walk— appli. a drad minima seems sever assuin< garage E avera* signif the ne R hardco the pr more s increa hardco typica shown 26.8%, Exhibi into the 0-75' ‘oni the normal The proposed ith a deck area se construction 75' cone. ig placement of f from scratch. >ack variance is 3t corner of the it the required :ee. rading plan for : the house, to ;e will be much The applicants 3use and in the » driveway area 5Ut the slope of o — r' - -3 ^ tauerina dcwn zo r. < - r “ - srarting abcur he intent is to cut is already lount of dirt to :f at between 75 trorosed grading ior to the public existing small dur Park Road. > occuring at a :urrent request he Baldur Park ver 125', and a which is also to make major requesting the er south would ;he other noted uctures on the >-'’v 1'~'- r'*'- 'll ;V (M Zoning Pile #1363 January 11, 1989 Page 3 of 4 CoBunission and City Council have taken a outs^^ ® stand against cuts in shoreline setback zones to create walk- a walk-out J'l* Waters' application on Casco Point, in which without (admittedly more severe than that proposed here) was created or;«Ho ^ proper permits and eventually was required to restore to original loll^t ’ wh/rf°t"h.“^“ *'«l<Jton application on Page?nes84^*^ property owner was denied the right to cut down his yard wllk-oit The"dlVf°" necessary shoreline bank repairs, to create a .r^r^14„.h■ difference, if any, between those requests and the current a*^dralnaoe"»n,? .<’i^^«>^ence in magnitude of the proposed cuts. From ^ infiltration standpoint, the walk-out cut should have only a minimal effect on quality or quantity of run-off water entering the lake! ___ soutii 0-75' zone, the fill to accommodate the revised driveway EC;;rV"”"assume a 10% slope immediately starting at the garage door. The whole garage access situation seems rather questionable. setback encroachment is “reduce*d und“e"/ 4e°proposVd^plan!®and^no the”new^house^^*^^^^ lines are further restricted by construction of illMllSiiii typically been approved on Baldur Park. The total proposed hardcover, shown as a percent of the total lot area in hardcover, is proposed at which is very typical of what has occurred on Baldur Park (see Exhibit L}. Zoning File January 11, Page 4 of 4 There property t< removal of areas arou property, w to the pro eliminate meet lakesh ship with t Staff Recom Based the follow! 1. Ap and so lakes] City p 2. Ap excess garagi of har 3. Th Incons by th< minor 4. Pi as a : poten* across 5. Tl appar« elimir a prol some gradir not or Plann the City Cc bring back rnjm xse optionally could be :d setback line, which 75' lake setback. Due is likely the tree in ( house behind the 0-75 ’ ng in the 0-75* zone if f the house is already order to minimize the :y Council have taken a : zones to create walk- Casco Point, in which posed here) was created to restore to original plication on Fagerness It to cut down his yard c repairs, to create a guests and the current tie proposed cuts. From cut should have only a ir entering the lake. e the revised driveway ay grades are rather apron would appear to rage door. The whole posed structures, the proposed plan, and no ;ed by construction of :he major increases of the relative size of i hardcover increases cover on the property amount of structural e increase in the 75- high end of what has . proposed hardcover, over, is proposed at on Baldur Park (see •• > -i-'- '’'' l- F ■ j m 4’ ri - Zoning File #1363 January 11, 1989 Page 4 of 4 meet lakeshore setbacks, unless the garage was reoriented in its relation ship with the proposed house. Staff RecoflBendation - Based on the above facts, comments, and observations, staff would make the following recommendations; 1. Applicants should consider moving the proposed house further west and south to attempt to more closely meet the required 75' lakeshore setbacks. This requirement would be consistent with past City practice in similar situations. 2. Applicants should consider removal of the existing garage and excessive gravel Iriveway and reconfiguration of the proposed two-car garage into perhaps a three-car garage in order to reduce the amount of hardcover increase on the property. 3. The proposed cut to create a walk-out in the 0-75* zone would be inconsistent with similar applications which have recently by the City, although the magnitude of this request is relatively minor compared to those other cases. 4. Preservation of mature trees on this property might be considered as a reasonable hardship, because those trees help to soften the potential vertical harshness of this construction as viewed from across the lake. 5. The proposed fill generally occuring in the 75-250 zone is apparently necessitated by the attempt to raise the house, thereby eliminating a more severe walk-out cut, but resulting in what could be a problem driveway situation. Retaining walls may be appropriate in some areas. The garage could be lowered a few feet to help the grading situation. Drainage must be directed down the lot lines ana not on to neighboring properties. Planning Commission is requested to either make a recommendation to the City Council or to give applicants direction to revise the request ana bring back an alternative site plan. ; ■ > ■ * 4 ■m •1 hp'!'.- r: TY OF < Initial . ($50.0 Renewal ’ (no ch. Af tor-th< PROPERTY Site Add Property Please c Attach 1 required APPLICAN Nam Add t OWNER (1 dbscript Des VARIANCE w:'1•; 1.. v: ■ 1 1 ■ i' M . • Lm ^ .Rear-) -^ r 'f i * Tr.f t.-'.i -i-i*JVe ’ >* ;.'V J . V 7Z-C.-I jwi.- 1 « ./ V V -i. - }• : -VS-' ^ ’ ^ V- •• —- i- ■■ ^'^fS iV.. iiji ■: • '■■■ :i i.---^ rf^'“^ -• If > I »« Adjacent Property Owners* Acknowledgeaent Form of /v3^'V Tc ££^ [print addrea^sl J II (we) pofJ & ^7 O- Sprint name(s)] have reviewed the^'plan^ for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at Application No. _ _ also referred to as Land Use f * I (wel understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I CweJ am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or ,um 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. "av V V . Property Owner Date ^d/\/va u/t-'U <p, t property Owner Date //• • r 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 a Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. mi'I ' A •=v*5■altii t rf; t I I m .6 V *-.a [T \tW^ } mmr:mi Kif• •% > iy — • tD j * «• lent Form -/ £mJi cjc 'Pc ££> t address] _ or proposed use of t:he eferred to as Land Use owledgement, I (we) am of the property or , u#e> . • . ' f ^ ‘ * » •- *•* (we) am (are) aware of ghbor's project or use \ *> TV» ■ * 6iJ> ->i^ f2-'l-/ Sl^ / s City in the review of snts to the Building & d meeting date. 01 h<T ¥T^:- liff V-' I / %•>m-BET zes ^ I a) 9 tc V '6^ J cj \;' •y .:W ■ ^ )l mmM A V y ] .■:;‘w»v-. Ajj ■^'j T iib IF..->■ J, • f ?> >?• Mi* •t Adjacent Property Oimers' Acknoifledgement Form I (we) (')ofJ & C:- rC^y > -ax /c-.- of /c3^V aiiL TC £jb I print name (s) ] p [print addrea^s] 7 _ A^. t3^cJlxU)cQ/ PkL have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or prooosed use of the property located at _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _also referred to as Land Use Application Ho. _____. 1 (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgementr 1 (we) am (are) not as)ced to declare approval or disapproval of the property or:.uae« . ....................... ** ‘ , . -V, ^ V *v but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) at/are of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. * * I# // - -is I _________ Date ___________!'/ Date “7 / 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. ___^ I /!/ « TY OP ORONO - VARIAHCB APPLICATION Inirial Appiicarion Fes $150.00 ($50,00 per each additional variance) ^vi Renewal Variance Pee $75.00 (no change from original application) / J After-the-Pact Pees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATIOH . * h . * • Site AddressZ. . - - - -^ FimCE OFFICE , ’u.‘v :.vv'/w # Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) /1 7 I Please check one - Property y/ abstract or _ _ tcrrens? Attach legal description to application if not included required survey. 12/20/SS 9 APPLICANT yOoe ’^tj%Ur^<Ytr ’ Neune _____ Phone (home) ___ Phone (work) ~ ^ (Pl^- Address; City; Zip; » f-. t (if different than applic^oc^cie. m IStreYy^ Name ~3 fc C. )<. V ^ g ^ V Phone (home) ^ "1 i O 1 ^ ^ Phone (work) —■ O Address; I 3’/ Z. «'ic ^'«?.City;.Zip; ..•^‘.•^3 / Date Property Accuiradm ^(month/ysar ' I (do) no^ also own the adjacent parcels of land.1 yv--r . PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential other (specify) mm. mBm DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe reaaest in detail; Hit iV -f/;. |P;* VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width y/Hardcover *-“v -r va i I u.; lU'iTL.'•ih :. ...n *“•“ •"■-•r. ; . i u u.... v» Setback Variances (Front Side ‘Reazr>--!4\ other r.i 50, CO \ i -.UM - ^ .* V 4 . vrff .-tnv Zni -;.wa: T a — 1 • t- V'V ► V J : J. • V- • ■ w* H Ik^ F -4 - f '* 'likfc 1 *1^ * '** {7; ^ ^ \rf fJJ^ 'o >0 .::»* ». 'XFi,'' 'a/J^“ «K Wi i-if U1 fm - »■ .V ,•.;•» ' :V iiAVliwU Msife.J! V^fc • »:;y iW '■ Vc-" ^. ■ : :V;■•. VA:■:•,^. ■ : :V^ i. ;•■ •-• %-lr - k^. :■ \’••' '■•' ■• Ai..•n.f •• »^ ‘ v:-.'., W:i •'r* •-• •------ %■ » 4 Adjacent Property Omiers* Acknowledgeaent Form of C/C TC ££>1 (we) po/U g- y .2>m^. / x.^C-» 1print name(8)][print addressJ ^ _£•• /' •• have reviewed t^e'plane for the proposed improve^Mt or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Dse Application No. I (wel understand that in executing this acknowledgement# I (we) am n * . ».''' (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or',uma.s 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 regnires Council approval. •:»«^ . ‘ - >.■ ;,.4: t //-&j> -b' <T ■’m ' X- ,v! mm. •••.*•»r--. : 4^ ■* m- Property Owner Date Property Owner Date t (/2-2-/ <?J 9>/ i « • p. 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 A Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. C J >^7- ( I /!/ 'M < * M ^ 5 » * ‘ 1:1 ,;j i If Pii ■■■- -Vii * - . . < " ^ aM V k ^ • -0 rotB ^dii/iCTC f^£>lrgX3 proposed usa of th« red to as Land Use dgenent, I (we) am le property or vu#e > . i . '•* •• »’t* *•“ ♦. rt . ' • ^•r-vV... •;. am (are) aware of *8 project or use L£l Sl f in the review of to the Building & ting date. r i * * . : %• >£i«»iKsi:::“■■''if? •■;. .•• =■rw^ ........................................................................................... .......................... =;: :L - • » #»• r-i ^ <€ - V J f f r ■—^1^1 —=1 4>. [lj n • .••••• 1 m. ' «• • -* •' 0.d 0 B « i 5 4ZZC1 c D O I i_ m VJ ? i___ NT <id \ii p I____ wtmm.m'm::-:. .■Bj: :««»«:: •' ■••• !^!‘ . •»•• •■ j ' MI*' -------------------1 1 Mi* • .* r I • « # HARDCOVER RS6ULAT10 HAJPCOV to 0RDIHANC2 - In 1975, th« Orono City Ccuncil ido?t»<f an ordlnaaca liaiting thm p«rcan'cag« of lot araa that can ba covarad with iaparvious aurfacaa Chardcovar*) *ttch as roofs, drivaways, sidawlks, ate. on procartias locatad within 1,000 fast of a laka. Stodias hawa shown that sadiments, oils, and dabrls carriad into tha laka froB highly urbanisad araas hawa a datriaantal impact on tha quality of watar in tha laka. Tha intant of Orono'a ordinanca is to ansnra that rainfall rnn-off will ba elaansad by filtaring through grassad or wagatatad yard araas bafora antarJng tha m > ««ai,« a HhRPCOVBg SETBACK 20HES - PERCSSITAG^ atr^wwn I* 0-75** in tha (0%),araa within 75 of tha lakashora. No Hardcovar is allowad . ^5“R50*i in tha portion of tha lot locatad batwaan 75* and 250* from tha laka, 2St of that portion of tha lot may ba hardcowarad. T.V; • *-»250—500** in tha portion of -tha lot locatad batwaan 280*vand SOQVTaat frMi tha laka 30% of that portion of tha lot nay ba hardcovarad. IV, 500«>l,000*i in tha portion of tha lot locatad batwaan 500* and 1,000* fast frem tha laka 33% of that portion of tha lot may ba hardcovared. nmt Thasa ragulations apply awan if you hare a lot that doas not abut tha laka but is ‘ within a lakashora seaing district. TOV TO DgTSRMIWB LOT AREA WITHIN gACT SETBACK SONS (To ba used as denominator in all hardcover peresntage calculations) C-“S* •!cr.e Area 75’ X /'Average width of let in 0-T5’ 3cne'\ measure parallel to shoreline ) 75* X ft. - (Avg width) II. 75-250* Zona unrnwr:;.'- ^ Si*/ Area • (175’or avg lot depth in zone) x^Avg width of lot in 75-250* sonaN measure parallel to shoreline ) 175* X ft._S.f. (2)- (Avg width)Area of 75-250* zone III. 250-500* Zone Araa ■ (250* or avg lot depth in zone) x/Avg width of lot in 230-500* zona V measure parallel zo shoreline /250' X •_ _C /a ') ft. - (Avg width) s.f. (3) Area of 250-500* zone IV. 500-1.000* Zone Area ■ (500* or avg lot depth in zone) xfXvq width of lot in 500-1000* zone measure parallel to shoreline ) 500* X ft. - (Avg width) s.f. (4) Area of 500-1,000* zone Hr mmA D. MAKpgy Lakashora Setback Sene w n r ^t^ipAipOOVUI L ' SU lakashc shoral boildin 8u shall 1 Within Within cover, hard CO Su with th< a permii WORMSI ► ^ 5 •nBfc •\ o?ta<r an ordlaaaca Halting rious aurfaeas ("hardcover') ocated within 1,000 feet of ibris carried into the lake the qoality of water in the t rainfall run-off will be areas before entering the • • » Wo Hardcover ia aliowd tween 75* and 250* from the ’ed. between 250'wand S06*.feet ardcovered. between 500* and 1,000* feet ardcovered. s not abut the lake but Is used as denominator in all s.’/ scy lot in 75-250' aone allel to shoreline ) . /-I. f lot in 250-500* sone rallel £o shoreline ') I lot in 500-1000* zone rallel to shoreline ) Lakeehore Setback J i f c.D. -■) s. r. Lot Area In Sene Existing Bardcover Zn Sene Existing Bardcover Percentage (B/A)xl00 Pinal Proposed Bardcover Zn Sone Bardcover Percentage (D/A)xl00 Allowed Bardcover Percentage 75-250* / af af af m i m V ^'7.}'I. %25 i 250-500*sf sf %af % 1 30 % 500-1000*sf sf %sf _ _r %35 % Vn LZNZTATZOKS ' / ‘ ^ *t •• • ' Mm BABOOOVBR ZVCLODBSt ^ - - Structures with roofs - Decks, even if slatted - Sidewalks . - Driveways (paved or gravel) - Decorative landscaping areas underlain by plastic sheeting ' 'v. - Tops of retaining walls, rock walls - Any other surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the ground • %» (2C>/^D la B esbokb BECDLATIOWS SBC.' 10.22, RB60LATZ0B8 FOR "LR-lA", "LR-lA-l-, -LH-lB", "LR-lC* AHO "LR-lC-l* OBB FAMZ&B AABBSBOBB BB8ZDBBTZAL OZSTRZCT. Within any "LR-IA”. 16-lA-l”, "LR-lB”, *LR-1C*, or "LB-lC-1* One Family Lakeshore Residential District the following reflations shall apply: Subd. 1. Lakeshore Set Back Regulations. The set back from the shoreline for lakeshore lots shall be at least 75 feet and no building nay be located closer to the shoreline than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent and nearby lots. Subd. 2. Lakeshore Hard Cover Regulations, within 75 feet of shoreline there shall be no excavating, filling, hard cover, temporary or permanent structures. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 25% hard cover. Within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 30% hard cover. Within 500 to 1,000 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 35% hard cover. Subd. 3. Tree Removal Regulations. No trees within 75 feet of the shoreline with the diameter of six (6) Inches or more shall be removed without first obtaining a permit from the Council. 7^ 1i ^ ■ ■' .■■ •: p 1 ■■ ■ ;.in p c ’ ■ K:.:: ik i f^i ■;« A V i i PH U £ f 01 >oo*a O'c •H M M u M E CAI ai S oo 0 1oo (A §; M < 3 U\ u o 0 in 1o%n CH ;;.V [.•n oci pu I ir r««s and«rl«la by ek walls as not allow diraet tha ground C* AHO •LR-lC-1* on , •LR-1B-, •LR-IC", or ilations shall apply: om tha ahorellna for Locatad eloaar to tha axlating rasidanea t of shoralina thara rnanant stroeturas. than 25% hard eovar. satar than 30% hard t no graatar than 35% at of tha shoralina hout first obtaining '1^3 J-S - f .• Oo M l4 a a %$ a a tis a a 01 • ' Ha ■ a OlE O w a a a a %4 a %4 a * um X ac •aa 01 •a# H p-4 £ I •coto u -aS <Q 0) U < vV 1 i oo •co H *D m CO , ic 1 m 1 tTOTAL^5 fi ► a vR i mc vQ x:u •D A 0 4-) 01 > o u •o bs Si CO O' 6 •aa 4J tl •H *s a ^u ^ -tr. a nS'' o •aa •D*o < c:.>> oua Q < U A a Qb a CO co JJ KW r) "a , V.C I (0 *D O >o 6 O K • 13 0 u It 01 > o o *o 14 0 oe 44 d §? IS > fiS if 5 44orc v5 %•3r V ca A a 0| a !C Ot I S. c 44 X A 6 01 44 M Vv Va ‘4 Of e •at bO I •o•o ar ■ I z M 5^ Q» s i-d 2 I 0| d 5 c 44 CO 11 § Itm A •o 0» I *. If Oc oe Oo 0 1oo in o 0 in 1o«n fO 0 in rj 1inr* 9 CM a CM a CM a IM > a CM 1 1 14 9 • CM • a > 9 CM • a CM a9 01 o a m a Of a 01 a o • COo 01 Of O m a s 1 1 1 • 1 0 1 0 i 1 0 a IM a a IM a 01 a CM am a CM a 01 O-''L* -C • a CO * 01 * IM a a IM • a «M CM rr I & • • M H Q 44 O'co 9 s a it O O' o M (0a a A >% <0 tl > •atua a o ait Of 01•o •at in a •o H K 't'- O M 44 Uss a a a c -4 Ot <H 4i o» a a a fi u f-4 a ‘*4 m m u >-* 4t•o « a & ac « <o a a »4 c »4 a 9 i3 a a CM so 44o a IM Sfefil mm J . .«► i \f.€>i * fL < ■ *'• -'•'**«» jS j%*«V W " '"• 'S* . .:.ii.‘5.v : S •• ,1 a a 0 1 a rWii ;• '$- ” ::■# •.; i^Vi«z...Si ill1: iii fc'-: ■ -; '-..y IP'S L'uiuii^Li!..-' -p!i.»^- T'- "i:v' •j — * “ 5' iT*.vv ■v^ir:>^^''-' f. • M..: .■•■:^:vp: .-, j 4 ■S / •;.. .yy# S.^#f I ’^4 :»>4 ? ^r*l-j U to* i. Nr I • ..I ‘t*’ »•*■ * •! tt' r *0 1 a »• 1 • 1 J[->«;1 “M a 1i1 to Q<• c V «§c <T *--r M ^ . >* ■•. -•^ ;v 8 s -M c -^a IN “ — '4*. #V 'W • * I I I T. ••: ^ t • ^ M M X u t •-; —, o G «H «H ^ O^m m G U M « «H CO « M »H 4i •O 10 01 CL « C 0) <0 ^ •« u c >«^^ m 9 Xk m !- £ '2 O . I » feia |L ■J^?iTS"'^SJ,85 :^r* .'f * -r c » - ..«P -»• ♦ 4ii& .-gf-i.^r.^owyiifi • ♦-irci^j A ^ . ■.■i r '.; *' < ✓ . .*, •:• H ^- «| ' ' r tmi ^ r-.-i*.- I • • 10 • 5i>, S •.;> - ,• % - ■ • < J»> .fr <«* ' ‘ / W* -* • • >>:■ 4'# a ^f-m W • • *1 Pr Sk' '. •V-- i h? ^•:-v. .;.. ,.^.1h-".: •!>1fa#!'n-.,.Vi.^ ■^.•^ -r •^L I V - a 0 o5 • 4 • II % I EXHIBIT *•» • •• ••» .**•* ,v**:rp;* : ^ I i-u iiI ? '?inII '' *• • 1 2^ a: ? ? iU i **•• ^^ •<• •• '.•••^, «•> -••> t —♦ •• •* I , t : S?5^^ ... - ^ & -rt > !2^r |L « . i"*i ** ‘ ••'•s*.- .1 - w . -m •'•» ■» ♦ ? ^ • • *11 ^ * •# «• t« ■ % ^ '• .a- j...... ^-■*— r IT. ^*i^» I •?. i* a- S '» 4 • A A <S<3 9 0 Q ^ «l -I v: SS«!»fl? igJsS ■*••-•• T , . . .Q . .. Jt • I ‘ <l>u. •* .ft • I r ‘ f t t—— — ► ' 4? I .« < tt l[ i i» "■ I if ^ • 1 > }• 1 ^ ‘ ^ ?!, «ri*8 uii i ' -!■ ■ -4y^:.— • :’". * • . -«•«— *» .-w»- *-.*»^- 1*^' • •• %■.!> • 4* ».• • ^ .=i.. ' VLJ r :|w{rv: • fa i.- ;. :..- .- .>•■. nd mi:1 iiv • .- .'.- I •: - m. I I'l li Is >fc » I a' _ ^ A ' €;>f# >Ij^ >tV^V* ^^V*v« I >*.® U > n\ ^ ® ^ fJ M ®4 C'i fJ -O/n ‘V /VI ^ ^ *M 3 \r^ W o ^ > 07 "a- m • • • lk#» - ** • ^6i S?I pi o E g E J" c: e BT ^ f^. <0 ^ vl ^ vC* ^ * I * ' > 1 IS I I 0;J? O Q O « 00 „4 y i ’ ! "^ • Ci ' tK Wt<S \ 1'? “ Ni < X Rie d i N* W N ^ o S o 2 ’I. 'to “ >a o ~ sf djC f»v o C -^*' I l2!Cr V* rfj C^ c*^ S. **<0 Atrfi t -si.^/«lr> JO'— » ^ o ’o P«ai o ^ v\ fli ca « M g.y O ' -''I ^ «S ..^ .• ..Tl '®-^ ^ i ^ '^1 I'^iii « ..■ “ .. •• »'£ S V* ^=~ 4 m '- a ■ - V :*» • ■ . ■to ■-...-;»^._J-V.».. -.-MlWdrj. J* >V'- t -. :•<» V.A ;r ^:^r. fV r ": V"S -:i. ■ ' ,..»■••■ ». -■• • * 4 • •• ■ . • ' ' • .‘ . . . '_t * ^ .—^.. «- . ~m~^. 1: ■ <W/Oi||iraJD<IJK'tcq>fc* —"“ ““ * • ' ■-» - -■ - - * -,^ ..;a.' , , twv^ *• »St • '^ :, ♦fcx- -•» ^ ’• «» .V •. ■\"u 1.1 t .• ^•* r^gr*^ ..Tsr »• *'r#*«“* ■‘•^'•«» k. *♦ *•• • .• •• />•dt -1 r** ** r • “ • n* ^•..“ Tn.vr : -t" • r»«.-. ' --------- - ..4:^':. 'u\ mm 1 ;.wiK;v; T©:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Frcas Date: Subject Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator January 12, 1989 #1364 Edwin Gage, 480 Tonkawa Road ~ Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IB Application - Construction of 6* wide permanent dock structure located partially in 0-75* setback zone. List of Exhibits Exhibit A <- Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Oimers List Exhibit D - Survey 4 Site Plan Pertinent Facts - 1. The applicants are requesting approval for a permanent dock that crosses a lakeshore border wetland in order to reach a seasonable dock on the shore of Stubbs Bay. The conditional use permit is required because the proposed dock is 6* in width and extends approximately 70* in length within the 0-75* setback zone above the 929.4 shoreline contour. 2.The apparent need for the permanent dock section, which in total is about 175* long, is to provide reasonable walking access across the wetland area which extends to approximately the 931 contour. The proposed pathway shown winding uphill towards the house is intended to be a natural pathway, either grass covered or covered in wood chips where grass will not grow. None of that area is Intended to be hardcover. 3.In the 0-75* zone, there is no existing hardcover. The 429 s.f. of hardcover that will be added by construction of this permanent dock will amount to approximately 1.8% hardcover in the 0-75* zone. Additionally, staff would note that there is virtually no hardcover in the 75-250* zone on this property. Discussion - City Engineer Glenn Cook has reviewed the plan provided, and finds that the proposed permanent dock and associated hardcover will have no significant impact on the run-off quantity or quality. He did note that care should be taken to construct the dock at an elevation above the normal high water level to avoid the potential of obstructing any run-off water. The plan indicates no excavation or grade changes associated with this structure. The conditional use permit/variance then is merely to allow the 6* wide structure in the 0-75* zone where normally we would only allow a 4* wide access stairway or walkway. Staff Recoms«ndatlon - w ^ » 4Staff recommends approval per the comments of the City Engineer. mm ■V :'.vS p y CITE OF OROK PROPBRTT LOG Site Address Property Ida: Please check (for Coi Please attac on required applicant Marne Gi Address OHNBR (if dll « Marne Edt Address Date Prc I (<ldO ( PENS - CONDI? -----Renewal A£ter-tt i r.*. . • • • .■ »• « i $ $ • . A.- .•.• t w . 4 "J.* »<3 V * • •- • « • e * • OTBBR APPUCA Bti.i • j--:' n j r f> ■ • *■, * •0 ’V' nlnlstrator Ln§ : structure located permanent dock that 3h a seasonable dock permit is required i3s approximately 70* bhe 929.4 shoreline , which in total is 9 access across the B 931 contour. The house is intended to vered in wood chips is Intended to be r. The 420 s.f. of his permanent dock .n the 0-75* zone, lly no hardcover in provided, and finds cover will have no He did note that Lon above the normal any run-off water. ssociated with this nerely to allow the aid only allow a 4' City Engineer. . 1 Pm/- ■v»: "-'Jt CITT OP OROaO - PROPBRT7 LOCJinOH Site Address 460 TonkaMa Road AL IA8D USB APFLICATIOir it. # J T1G Property Identification Humber (P.I.D.) Please check one - Property abstract or (for Conditional Use Applications only) torrens? ClTr OF. 0I<0H0 crv:^y>rc rcrTrr.. I .iitnMwu V* i awi» Please attach legal description, to application if not include^^'^^^^*^'^^^' Af rrx; 'wa a-*VA UUlf iVV.Won required survey. applicabt Name Gustafson Design i U: t \fx vur I 4.Phone (home) tUmimimAI I titnUf^ #U* Phone (work) • 544«#gjtf4>!? CC k '^1 ROl T1 iL *1^. Address 1845 Wisconsin Ave. No. (if different than applicant) Name Edwin Gage _ _ _ _ . CityGolden Valley zip 55427 >M — — M — — — — MM — W — — ■ Phone (home) 475-5812_ _ _ _ /• Phone 540-5288 Address 480 Tonkawa Road City Orono Zip553S6 a Date Property Acquired March 1974 (month/year) I (<Xd) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - COHDinOHEL USE PERMITS - - -Eenewal Pee - 1/2 Current Pee - After-the-Pact Pee - Double Current Application Pee ••. » $100.00 a) $150.00 b) I. $150.00 i » .? $250.00 $200.00 c) d) * f) Residential accessory Use ". .. o ' Institutional (church, school, etc.) Duplex Credit/Bldg Commercial/Industrial Use Land Alteration • . as y . ‘ r ^ •r f» . • • • • o- m 1 ■ .. -.. .. . * , •* . ... A.. %. t.* • • • * . • ♦ »• % ♦ •, h . . *• «.. • •« a % •Ob • • A ^ ,4. *|3 *V‘ • ^ 3 w •Q .t tt Grading .axid filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within -75 ' .of lakeshore r-ty: / •4: o ^ rc.\:rj:- .k'7zz:DV ’’. : .-C J. j c-k'V ./i ' PRD/PID - see fee schedule $ I • •• A j-f. -jia c * :i r»-'’.tfO « *-ir A .11 4 f r. OniBR WFUCUIOBS -- $150.00 -'C » • •• «'• w. •». » • • . ^ .. • ) M M Ilercia^Site Plan Review .'.(ticonsultemt fees) eii.j *■ii$250.00 ^i.Vacation y2\::iy ■orixirinj^.^rl* wij;doa v\;'7;iioi-L bTiTJla:no I >• ^ r f •; $150.f)0 ^^Basement^Vacation $50.00* Easement-Vacation With Subdivision •*. •. n^ r : ' \ *• *„ **vT rf> \ i V.$250.00 'Rezoning 't ropic' tM''• cj •$100.00 Appeals ....................... Other - see fee schedule 00 0^ 0 0 0*- • 9 i*i . * %• .. «• «■ -• '. rw .1 . * * • > s. t, ^ m A ► s «4« « .V.-«w- sm mm mdwmx S.- i.... . . i %» X V; l:k J ••• t_____J SSBS8MT USB I Present Present DESCRIPTION ( Describe to shoi lb VoO^ REQUXRED 8UBI 1. Complete \ Certifi • • this li Center 2 Stamped, on the I Certific Topogri alterat: Construe Flat Ma] As an a< any oth< The applicai remember that not been inc! Certification Zoning Offici APPLICANT'S S The applicai requested by unusual exper the informat knowledge. Applicant's s o ' '..••• • OWNERS SIGNAT The owner hei authorized re agents, com investigation Owner's signa Applicant mus Planning Comm third Monday review meetin unable to att authorized a< Office of thi rr . V •’ f. •• • * • • 4 *•••.■*• • •^•- ..■.. •»eg?=3|-A r«ns7 cm 01 OOOHO flU^HCB OFFICE X udi^ff' 01 OEfi 00 on.*) fsr-Cvv»vv «4-W" isuLrLir I I i inim Ti.*u 44.#?*54<! cool mjme zip 55427 ifc/ tl/ »• 5-5812 Zip55356 h/year) • • *. 4* c.) a. ttt, ^ .,'• • ■ • « a i i;* >T ft <jGf •». • •* %•' » .7 " " » . . « . . .* •• » N.* ' Hated wetland or '’** u. yd.^ or more " walls within ;75 . - ^ '“t “■* i"* " ' t.—w -w kJi '-Jf ^ T- ^ ^ *\i*‘ ' -i ’ * '** * •'•«/ . * • . • . ■ ••• ^ •*. »» w • « ^ f N/1J U • i. — ^ 5-’* L- ^ A- f^-x u .:■ /■. .> X 8 c * :i r»r;wO ... »nt fees) ,; iivi.; ^rixru'i&rSv . .. , ^ - r i ^ r* 'It' t .. ........ . ^ - -r.- .- . %. •. 4. «V u ^ I • -»• *V*'#■..*. JL *.✓ i / . •% » - . - \ <A •-. •^4:-- ' ............... — ..V j " •r . > # .. > a V V i: u> ....--/.iw. • •■s.'.-j.- w.,; •;VesHW.^F 'J •i-: 4 PBBSBHT USB OF PBOPBRTT Present Zoning District Present Use of Property _ _ Residential Other (specify) DBSCRIPTZOB OF SBQOBST Describe reguest in details ^Construclt^^jpe^^widjjexitdlo^c^ to shoreline to provide access xo laKe. uock wiIi extend inio "75"TffOT"^ftt6aek"riF6<H ihdrfel rhe:---- ' ' ^ T * • i # 3. 4. 5. e. 7. 8. BD SOBMITTBLS Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) Stamped, legal sised envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of th^ names on the above list with no return address. Certificate of survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). Plat Map. ^ ' As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remesiber that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. - - • Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ •_ _ _Date_ _ _ _ _ _" .. a •APPLICABT'S SI6BAT0RB The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, .agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurre^K^n re^ew of this application, and certifies that the information suppl^<^ is/rriM and ^ouect to the b^Yt. of his/her knowledge. f 1 /i / LM ^/. // ' I '/l Applicant's signature , Date______ ___________ Date OMHBRS 8IGHAT0BB . The owner hereby ac)cnowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable . entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. ?' •* >..iS., Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all: submittals into the-Citycoffices 25 days befpre^the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission ;Meetings3are;^held_on_the third Monday of each month. - Applicantsimust/benpresent atJa 11. scheduled review meetings of the-.Planning Commission and;Counciliii>?Ifian:applicant,is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please malcerarraihgements'to^have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise' the Building Zoning Office of thic '^hange prior to the meeting. - »' V jC ^ • '1 . *♦, ■4--' •47'.* •\ m m ^ •r*#* . dock across marsh exieno inio ^ ' > •I •• 'V- ^ *• i 350* (you can obtain nee A-603 Government 1 to each of the names lontours) if land 3ulrements). a separate list of tioh • >lication. Please ove information has j tion is complete Date ^ • t i t, .. lation required. or y all fees and/or and certifies that e beet.of his/her k/.! .cation and further staffr consultantsr for purposes of - V>\ i . w:. ^ **■ 1* 1** . ' , .r 25 days befpre^the js3are;>'held pnjthe at.'all.'scheduled If} an : applicant ^ i s jements ~to _have an Building _&...Z.oning jCC^i • • *-■. -.v,. ,. , - ■ rr-yjr~>■■ r > *• jrM 1 ' r-"' -iiiiiiifiiitiftB? m yi m ifei K'>! rV'i ••7*3 ^________________________________ ■ r';-'Mi:- ,• i ' * : / ’y. /xn'.' . . . \]r ■; •' .17 ‘ * 'fi .- • « f :V * >, ■ /?; • V ‘•^V4. *•■•■»:• » ^ ! ♦ j ^ f *• r ’' * 1Yi -1 • 'f-/!** :iV: . ?*-> • • • ••-'“ •.-• .(H-i 'f.‘ it \ » V ‘jl ‘irr■T ? *■. am .»•:? #-S i .4' 21w ^ If i #PK %tv4in a*r m I ^ !■: W -y-i fc-■ .1 c v4 Im al se I &)3 %i UJ a w I fsJ \CM ri .. • A s <A ss :3 M Hj cn K ^ H H III a,St at HI • CM ^ J ««3il f-C _ » III < CM Oo -hr' • W| UL. • f 1' Ss§ ai Kfi58S8 551 ilN I - £■ • •'■•• Mk^^Uilki^-- @ 0 ■• @ yj I '‘■r'0'i r •r^f^ ^ :«■! ;i'! ‘>'i tf: '•';V'^' ••r- V--,^ ■p ■^i m .• •. j X'•vj fLikV .- - .:^'r--. ■•tvs ,.i.i ■M mm m-: 5 ■ > .iJEk ::S^i-<A & ;av tr ■ \:.PI M ■m .>:.-r s*sa.■ • ■";'^- CJUu tCt 'O'JLSJiUlfSj^ CThXXvJL TO "XjLfS0^y{^ SX^L4/v1^6l Wc respectfully request that the City of Onmo deny the appUcation for a ^^uiance which would allow the Old Hill School to be divided into two residential units. We beUeve that a multi-unit residential usage on this site is not apprcniriate. NAME (signed)ADDRESS /a p * ^Jrn ">juo (v>*ot.fV\*«» Q.v k... fhn rsTi t 1^ v^. s yp=^!^a.e^ >S-Ss(2>. 1*)/ filiuibM Mhher >h)lt l?d. •yl4 A_ojt^ ^CTKo 1 ^ H^S UX^i' firt^ . Iw '■>: •St. :>'% ■ -i h * ;f':^ ^ a IXs X L? •• .VI XX mX^:d I XX li/X'M ivvl .'V //>? / (^/^olIJ^ ^ OCVXN • • V>^' '■% ! : i -dLi;' mmS'-.'-ia & :■ © r. ■ 0 -S «9|'vi Urno ggis &i!l! C8 . *fc. . . 1 >-i -I* ? »■ r-'* <ifMmm mm mim k'''^■ mmm r-. WP.. :P:m4 t' ,' . . ',•» i m■ T5:j;iit^'••? n■nm4 S^<S 0 S0si. ■ppl ]\p 37<^ 7U>/C a^5i‘ / <i?A-«vu3 I Ofip^ S>€^ Wat*>cc;»^/£^ 5SS5<: uM^?>5% ^jLuuJUU^ ^xxtiei^V~ 'ocix\ l ,Oe.<M Schu£^ O vcvno /3Vl> O'Tca^ Vj=«>-<vsi^ ttiof^4<i<ts Suoa^u PJouu^ ■ 'IS' *. i ♦ * ^ V V •« •• •, . %.V .M •• f .•■'o-^Al.V-?' •i;-- ■■ ■#r ;:■•*= >• •i. •, in* m m-' u '.*. 5. :'- •;T! ; .*' * ;j vs.. MkM mm ■ '.» pi I r i'’ • ..\.■ ♦> cj i-■] 1 .•";’ ^ 'A ■P MiK To: ^rti ■ . -i,r-'3 'i■.-i '• 'T'- ■.•v: >1f -STix f S^st 5i “ / 23^5555^ ,"••■ "'4 iSI^ m '.!t' mmmi 1 zx>j±>^v, bm -.-J PJOJC^ A <- 1 m'M^' -•■ M i.** • r. f?fv i •:• •* ♦ ^ .r. ^,^j\ .- a' i.- v3 \ ."^ i' ' /u::M ;■' ■ m-'rK'i.: ’M •II t-ti mm l': . I /: ^Sli -’• 1 4**i4ft r- 4 ■*,■,f j»j •*w iiifci<s^!i f=i'.'•v»* To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusthr Building & Zoning Administrator January 13r 1989 Subjects #1365 Marty Schneider, 2180 North Shore Drive - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.03, Subdivision 4 (B) - Prohibitions. It is unlawful to convert, enlarge, reconstruct or alter any structure or use any structure or land for any purpose or in any manner which is not in conformity with the Zoning Chapter. The subject property is substandard in area and width and the existing structure does not meet the required setbacks of the RR-IB zoning district. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - Standards of RR-IB Zoning District. Area: Required » 2 acres or 87,120 s.f. Existing » .64 acres or 28,000 s.f. Variance * 1.36 acres or 59,120 s.f. Width: Required Existing Variance 200' 175' 25' or 12% Setbacks: (lot is a corner lot requiring a 50' setback at both street sides and 30' sideyard) Principal Structure: Required * 50' East Street Setback = 41' (Briar Street) Variance * 9' South Street Setback * 45' (North Shore Drive) Variance * 5' Accessory Structure/Tennis Court: A) Encroaches approximately 5' into west property line B) Tennis Court has been placed in front of the principal structure on the subject property. No record of variance application. Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (A) - Existing structure is used for educational/school purposes and has a current conditional use permit for present use. •^1m mm Hr- •> • “a M - Zoning File #i Janaury 13, 1! Page 2 of 6 Section single 1 that pul: adjacent construd duplex ii Section Additional Coi The Art i would place City finds th the lot line List of Bxhib: Exhibit i Exhibit 1 Exhibit < Exhibit I Exhibit 1 Exhibit ] Exhibit ( Exhibit ] Exhibit : Exhibit » Exhibit 1 Exhibit ] Exhibit I mini8trator e Drive - c Hearing tlons. It is unlawful to my structure or use any ny manner which is not in and width and the existing acks of the RR-IB zoning of RR**1B Zoning District. g a 50* setback at both d) iar Street) orth Shore Drive) nto west property line in front of the principal property. No record of ng structure is used for nt conditional use permit ■i ■ »-i .^4 ■M ..*-1 mm" mb:;s: V. Zoning File #13(5 ^ Janaury 13, 1989 Page 2 of 6 Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (I) - "One duplex may be located on a single lot as a conditional use upon application therefore provided that public sanitary sewer service is available, and the lot is adjacent to a commercial or industrial district, and the duplex is constructed within 200* of the commercial or industrial district. A duplex is defined as a 2-family unit residential building.** Variances Required to the Performance Standards of Subdivision 3 (I) as follows: Setback to C Required Proposed Variance lerical or Industrical District: , 200* > 1,350* - 1,150* or 575% M Section 10.61, Subdivision 5 (A) - A) Open parking spaces on residential lots must meet required yard areas except that such parking may be located within 10* of a rear or side yard and in this case, 2 side yards because the property is a corner lot. A detached or attached garage could be installed on the property without requiring setbacks variances. Present parking is allowed under a conditional use permit for the school use and would not be allowed to continue for the residential use unless approved as a condition of approval for the current application. Additional CosMnts - The Art Center and the applicant propose a lot line rearrangement that would place all existing Improvements within ownership boundaries. If the City finds the duplex use acceptable, both participants will proceed with the lot line rearrangement. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit P - Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Exhibit K Exhibit L Exhibit M Application Applicant*s Addendum Property Owners List Plat Map Survey Site Plans Designating Approximate Location of Existing Parking and Other Improvements (used in previous conditional use permit applications) Floor Plans Applicant*8 Addendum to Floor Plan Exhibit Photo of u^d Hill School Restrictive Covenants 1975 Land Use Application for Art Center Bjork Application Staff*s Recommended Division w 1i 0m . 4-' --<1^ ;»%.PPPIPII IfZoning File #1365 January 13, 1989 Page 3 of 6 Review of Application - Prior to this recent holiday season a representative of the Art Center advised the City that because of a decline in revenue and other related financial problems over the last few years that the center would have to release the Hill School for private sale in order to survive. The Hill School has housed the Art Center since 1957 and in the early 70's expanded to the former Hill Elementary School. Lots 5 and 6 that contain the Old Hill School Building and the tennis court were offered to the public for private sale. Mr. Schneider's offer for purchase was accepted on a contingency. It is the applicant's plan to remodel the facility into a duplex. If the duplex use is approved by the City, the Art Center and Mr. Schneider will file a lot line rearrangement/set back variance application so that all improvements are located within respective ownership lots. Upon a site inspection by staff, it appears that approximately 2 to 3 of the parking places adjacent to the east addition of the Art Center are located within Lot 6. The survey fails to show all improvements. The parking area on the east side of the old Hill School building has not been shown either. Staff has enclosed site plans (Exhibit F) from early applications for Conditional Use Permit by the Art Center. Parking areas have been designated on the plans that locate existing parking on the site today. It should be noted that 22 parking stalls do not exist along the east side of the old Hill School. Approximately 8 to 10 gravel stalls remain today. Per Exhibit D Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 3, the Markvllle plat currently owned by the Art Center have not been legally combined. Separation of 5 and 6 will not require subdivision approval by the City. Lots 5 and 6 consist of approximately 28,000 s.f. of area. Property is located in the RR-IB Zoning District requiring 2 acres in area. In 1985 the Crystal Bay neighborhood was served with sewer. Sewer is available to the property. The Art Center has been assessed 10 sewer units. The proposed duplex use will require payment for 2 sewer units. The building has not been connected to municipal sewer as of this date. As proposed by the applicant's plan for subdivision, the Art Center structure would never meet the required 50' setback from the newly aligned residential lot line. If a mid point is sort as a separation between the existing tennis court and east addition of the Art Center, the set back would be no more then 5' 5". Review Exhibit M. The present application is similar to the Margaret Bjork application of 1986. Review Exhibit L. In the Bjork application the setback from a commercial zone was 630' and in the present application the setback is 1,350' (measured from plat map to B2 Dlstict at Smith Bay Marina). The Bjork property was not immediately adjacent to a commercial zone but was adjacent to the Railroad property and to a non-conforming commercial use of a residential property (upholstery shop). Present application involves a property immediatley adjacent to a non-conforming commercial use (the Conditional Use Permit for the Art Center involves both school and limited .'•/i 'i. \ ' 1 It . .v'i i *1 •• itatlve of the Art Center venue and other related he center would have to r to survive. The Hill the early 70*s expanded I 6 that contain the Old ffered to the public for lase was accepted on a 3el the facility Into a , the Art Center and Mr. ack variance application ;lve ownership lots. hat approximately 2 to 3 an of the Art Center are all improvements. The al building has not been (Exhibit F) from early t Center. Parking areas ting parking on the site \ do not exist along the f 8 to 10 gravel stalls 3, the Markvllle plat leen legally combined. >n approval by the City. . of area. Property Is acres in area. In 1985 Sewer Is available to !d 10 sewer units. The rer units. The building .8 date. visionr the Art Center : from the newly aligned separation between the rt Center, the set back t M. rgaret Bjork application tion the setback from a Icatlon the setback Is Smith Bay Marina). The commercial zone but was ^forming commercial use int application Involves Lng commercial use (the both school and limited Zoning File #1365 January 13, 1989 Page 4 of 6 within the Crystal Bay neighborhood. The building inspector has meet with Mr. Schneider to discuss the remodeling of the structure into a duplex. Jacobs has reaffirmed the statements made in Mr. Schneider^s addendum to the entranVer***ThrS!^en‘ve7tical*p^ east sida eaasa and a new curb cut be defined and curbing provided side to prevent the backing out of cars onto Briar Street. Off street parking must meet the required 50* setback from both street yards. Property Please review Exhibit M. Staff can not recommend a division of the property as originally proposed by applicant. The Art Center structure must have the required 50* setback no matter what use exists within the structure. A structure of that size requires a buffer of 50* from adjacent residential not to mention planning precedent. The tennis court appears to be in disrepair and lot lines cannot be dlslgnated based on existance of a tennis court. Staff would recommend that 50* setback be defined for the existing Art Center structure running north through the north lot line or 4. Said line would also provide a minimum 30* setback Hill School building. Approximate area of the duplex lot would be 29,400 . Once again, staff should note for the record as with the Bjork application the excessive setback variances are considered mei^ly a variance to a performance standard under the Conditional Use Permit for duplex use. The code would not have to be amended to allow duplex use o the structure. (Not considered a "use** variance) Prior to the filing of the application for division the City must first decide if the duplex use is appropriate for the structure and the surrounding neighborhood. Issues For Discussion A. Is the external appearance of the structure compatible with suorroundlng residential neighborhood? B. Does the proposed use create potential traffice/sfatey concerns - are they greater or less than current school use? 'mil::- y Tj r f' Zoning January Page 5 < C. fo: wh An< ce: D. wh. re: An in E. Bj< F. B jo Com group th use. We over thi the curr. involv6d A rAsldonce apartment/mother in- Total size of the 2 esidence within the said of the existing shed floor area would he surrounding homes leider to discuss the s has reaffirmed the floor plans section of najor problems with iiplex will require 2 ind electrical service St side would have to jvided along the east r Street. Off street street yards. end a division of the Art Center structure ise exists within the ir of 50* from adjacent ennis court appears to ased on existance of a ck be defined for the the north lot line of back for the existing c lot would be 29r400*. rd as with the Bjork e considered merely a bional Use Permit for to allow duplex use of ivision the City must the structure and the cture compatible with ffice/sfatey concerns - e? .• .. V' mm in r..v yit- • K: 'fe: MM ’ V . J 1 wm P-- : - m .1^ • i .ad;i=l ► M Zoning Pile #1365 January 13, 1989 Page 5 of 6 C. Does the proximity of the Art Center provide other limitations for the adjacent residential property. If the Art Center use ceased what other uses could be housed in th« over sized structure? Another school, a City facility, another governmental agency, certainly, never single family residential. D. Outside another school use for the Old High School structure, what other uses could be made of this structure. Single family residence with 3,600* s.f. of finished floor area, 50 to 80* from the Art Center surrounded by small to medium sized homes is not feasible in consideration of remodeling costs and resale value. E* How does this conditional use permit application differ from the Bjork application: 1. The setback, in the Bjork application was 630 feet and with the Schneider application the distance is 1,350 feet from a commercial district. 2. In the Bjork application the structure was already remodeled into two distinct units and in the Schneider application the structure is designed for school use. 3. With the Bjork application the yard area was severely limited requiring setback variances for off street parking and future garage. In the Schneider application no setback variances would be required for parking or placement of garage. F. How is this Conditional Use Permit application similar to the Bjork application: 1. Both properties are served by sewer. 2. Both properties are immediately adjacent to commercial used/non~conforming uses withing existing residential district. 3. Both structures contain finished floor areas well in excess of areas of surrouding single family residential structures. 4. Exterior of both structures appear as single family residential structures with single shared accesses to structure Commission members may have already learned of the dilema of another group that was interesed in purchasing the structure for continued class use. We as representatives of the City of Orono have no interest nor say over the sale of this property. We can only deal with the merits of the current proposal based on the standards of the pertinent ordinances. m Jkl^iJ e other limitations rt Center use ceased (ized structure? — vernmental agency^ h School structurer ire. Single family 50 to 80' from the omes is not feasible ilue. tion differ from the as 630 feet and with lr350 feet from a is already remodeled ler application the /as severely limited parking and future )ack variances would re :ion similar to the ;ent to commercial Idential district. reas well in excess lal structures. as single family esses to structure le dilema of another for continued class no interest nor say with the merits of inent ordinances. lii ■■ / : •‘■V ■i- ■'.v'lii mm P’: *■ Wm mm - mm t ■ 4 IS -m' Mm , • -V Zoning File #1365 January 13, 1989 Page 6 of 6 Staff has not had an opportunity to discuss staff's recommendation for division of the property with the applicant. It must be made clear to both the^t Center and any applicant that if the Hill School property is to be divided from the Art Center that a 50 foot setback must be maintained from the Art Center structure and 30' from the Hill School structure. It be difficult for the Planning Commission to make a formal recommendation without a site plan that reflects actual setbacks, location of curb cut and off street parking area. The following options of action are available to the Planning Commission: 1. If the Planning Commission recommends denial of the application finding the use is not acceptable for the substandard property based on at least one or more of the following findings: (It will not be necessary for the applicant to provide additional information.) 1. 1,350 feet is too severe a setback distance from the nearest commercial district. 2. A single family use would provide less impact on the substandard property. 3. Such use would be in conflict with the intent and purpose of the RR—IB zoning district and compiehensive management plan of the City. Or to give conceptual approval of the duplex use and to advise the applicant to file a subdivision application with the City that provides a 50 foot setback for the Art Center structure and a minimum 30 foot setback from the Hill School building and as part of that application the '^rt Center must provide an updated parking plan based on the following ratio; 1 space for 7 students and one space for each three classrooms and that such a subdivision must include Lot 4, Block 3, Markville and as part of the continuation of the original conditional use permit, provide an updated site plan for duplex use designating the following: 1. All existing improvements to remain with exact location. 2. Curb cut location. 3. Off street parking area for two residential units 10 feet from internal lot lines. vSrf* -- v-i-' ■?.tc'-,mm r; pi m. * # • , ................ CITX OF PROPBRTS Site Add Property Please c (fo Please a on requi APPLICAH Nan Add ONNBR (i Nam Add Dat I (• PEES - C Ren< Aft OTHER API f*8 recommendation for be made clear to both lool property is to be St be maintained from >1 structure. ion to make a formal al setbacks/ location Lng options of action 1 of the application andard property based ngs: (It will not be information.) nee from the nearest less impact on the intent and purpose of e management plan of se and to advise the City that provides a nimum 30 foot setback application the ^rt le following ratio; 1 isrooms and that such .e and as part of the / provide an updated axact location. l1 units 10 feet from 1. , "txr . - ■ ■ ■ ■m: -;X-:: -r.:.m '.■A•> r H -:iL .V •.v;. # • CIT7 OP OROVO - gwinqiST. JMD USB APFLICATICm property LOCATIOH Site Address SCPt>ou Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) //S—//7 —3/ ^0^3 >• OO ^ P- Please check one - Property abstract or \/ torren^ ^ / (for Conditional Use Applications only) to application if not includedPlease attach legal description on required survey. applicant Name Phone (home) /<^/ Address Phone (work)^^^_ _ _ __ City Zip ONNBR (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Name dfX 0^ Phone Address "Po.7^ fSB_____________________ City CgtSf^Af Zip SS^J Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land FEES - CONDITIONAL OSB PERMITS - Renewal Pee - 1/2 Current Fee After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a)Residential accessory Use $150.00 b)Institutional (church/ school/ $150.00 c) # Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d)Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) • Land Alteration • • Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain »> ’• Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading/ seawall/ retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule V«r-» OTB APPLICATIONS $150.00 1%-'v:r - -V. . .... — • ^ «r •• • • *‘a 4-Ji* A*' Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation “ V $150.00 Fasement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning $100.00 Appeals . r : I other - see fee schedule I/*6LC€44»<^ ■M- 'At y-A\ &■ v;i 1 m \i~ ■ PRBSSIT US Press Prese DBSCRIPTIG Descr RBQUIRBD S 1. Compl 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. CertJ this Cente Steunp on th Certi Topo< alter Const Plat As an any o The appli< remember tl not been i: Certificat: Zoning Off: APPLICANT*] The appli requested unusual ex] the Inforn knowledge. Applicant'i OWNBRS SIGl The owner 1 authorized agents/ c investigatj Ovmer's sic Applicant n Planning Cc third Mond review meet unable to < authorized Office of t 3/ ^0 ^3 oo ^9-. liv rrens? / eluded 21d gggf/ 8c*f Zip SS^Z3 th/year) d. 4 ^ be.) ignated wetland or IL , cu. yd. or. more ng walla within 75* ‘ • *' ‘i ^ ♦ Itant fees) ^ A X «# a. m ■•-■V ft v> .A ti •V- • • Jk^ i1 •j ’ .Vf- •:J m t. V-i u pmssmr usb of property Present Zoning District <e/e- i3 Present Use of Property Residential _ _ _ _ _ _ Other (specify) fiSSCRIFTIOH OF RBQOST Describe request in detail:Sag — SDBMITTRLS 2. 3. RBQOISBI 1. Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Certificate of survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). Plat Map. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date APFLICAHT'S SI6SASDRB The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true aj»4 correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date II-zt ONHBRS SI6NATDRB The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and ^rification of this request. Owner's signature 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 anjapplicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to~have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. # r.0- M HQ r ti r V ;: OS. To: Re: Froi I ai the unii and I h< bui! ind( for str\ I eu! Hisi wilJ cle£ coui My c my c horns my s cont Kent witl" in t Plea m n 350' (you can obtain ince A~603 Government id to each of the names contours) if land iquirements). 1 a separate list of ation. plication. Please 30ve Information has ation is complete. Date nation required or ly all fees' and/or , and certifies that le best of his/her be fi-Zf-BS Lcation and further staffr consultantsr i for purposes of t 25 days before the js are_held^on the at all'scheduled If an applicant is jements t6"~have an Juilding Zoning From: Marty Schneider 1235 Hunter Dr. Medina MN 55391 ‘TX.li.. To: The City of Orono Re: Description of request for the "Old Hill School House 475-1631 home 475-4312 work I am requesting approval from the City of Orono to convert the "Old Hill School House" into two individual residential units (duplex). One unit will consist of the upstairs floor and the second unit will be located on the lower level. I have gone through the structure with Tom Jacobs, Orono's building inspector, and he has said that the structure would indeed meet the structural guidelines set forth by the city for use as a duplex. Any changes necessary to bring the structure within the city's code would be quite feasible. I am also planning to register the building with the Minnesota Historical Preservation Society as to insure that the building will retain its original form and charm. I will also do considerable clean-up and landscaping of the surrounding grounds. The tennis court will also be fully renovated. My expertise in this area is two-fold. 1. I have fully restored my current residence on Hunter Drive which was an original MN homstead built in 1866.1 have done all the work myself. I learned my skills over a two year period while doing volunteer home contruction 'or the underpriviledged residents of Lewis county Kentucky. T1 ; work done on the "Hill School" would be sub-contracted with me as supervisor. 2. I have done residential land development in the City of Medina over the past years. Please call me with any questions at all. Marty Schneider January 1989 ■■• fd 11 School House”. Orono to convert Idual residential he upstairs floor lower level. Jacobs, Orono*8 he structure would forth by the city to bring the quite feasible. g with the Minnesota re that the building will also do considerable g grounds. The tennis I have fully restored was an original MN work myself. I learned ng volunteer home ents of Lewis county 1" would be sub~contracted idential land development Pi- m- r' ■.m 'a‘‘ ■ ^ - f >!* -■V . r. -V •telV© ~Q o ^JE0O Q ■V:MMliBiWI?!*\iV**- ♦it- ♦ ri w A »x> •-ir".. i >.M' ' rr ..V- ^ -#-w p gl o§SS3m fC L- _ lO U Z X Q flL yj ssi S3 (A lU «J M « < _ O O O > * j #1363Lwj .« «... ^ -I :!:§^ > SSu RSS -*5fc a* alii ?|iiQ M M M O S S s ^ M SNIIO »- S • m ji 2 §E ^ 5 ^ K < p4 «i (H 10 ____^ %4> 10 _ 10 ty lU ip «H•o o n -> si***2S ? ecxj _ w >< S o Vasia u Sb CL «-i Z S ^I «J M fit < O • t-*5w«aM 5 O' > S o 2 a M 2 h> UJ »o 0) X lO X UJ VS2 I ^ : to ui5 SCD *H uj Kl O X X X ^a«aX »o > UJ fO < X fH X aiii^i e« yj yj -S'"- .isssa s.^“S3 X u «S5S^5iis yj yi a»sanasa CM X a :o o - ^ .4^ iS”. •2___!8 8^ 85**52 Fi >• > X _ I yi X Q < 141 141 S g «• «• HIaSgg _ as** * a5»»2S saaa »x99 S 5 •-C X 85^^21 XXX XX VH X X O > X M E c « X o z X a ua u o < oe Q P z ui <3 - *r ■* -H •••V .\2 1^.;^ id PRKBNT Pr DBSCRIP De: 3. The app remember not been Certific Zoning 0 APPLIOOr The app: requeste unusual • the Infc knowledge Applicant ONHBRS S] The owne: authorize agents, investige Owner's a Applicant Planning third Moi review me unable tc authorize Office of CSI •< ss! «ii 6S**|i eS ^ S!3SS''S8S»i3_ M 2 Z ^ ^& s 10 M M M M d R O OC ^ M 2 1pCT.;- V i>s>-S® ^ ... ;mh.--' .;,• V-;•••.. • • : • / ■' '■' /'i §m A . I* * f ^ •B^mE ■■\' cv . •• -r . . ' ■ r..Mi ; ■■■’ ■•• v'. 4 ••« • « . .• . •t/- ..•. •‘Pv,.'.; V .* •'. '• . *.. ; V ••• > * . r* .;• • V 'i-Vi .‘‘V'V: .. ‘\v t:. .. ; '• •... 1 A '•/ A f * .r ; ■»/;. . » • ; . • .. • ... ' V ‘ » f*. > , ., i • .* V '* ' 'I « ' • • V » ‘ / I .. ' ' I •• ' • # ' * t*' ■ ' '. I'OfZf ■-t I' mi tt • • • # •| ♦ t • • f m • I t '•* ■• I ■ ! I ■•• -.i• • . ’I *...• • •>. ... ► . I - rmet MiiTviiAt. / # ■ V.. ' • % •*v . . # » * * •*'• 4 ,• ' % •# t* •{ ® 1 . M m.v^% Wm *? t' '« •r %: . .i X ‘U»' 1m G SKETCK MAP Gr A/ f V? ? • • • •# • ' /k » •% < ^4 ^ » VsJ>\ A?PROS# £»CA. .*£. ; i« s Qo' JUN£. ZO *74. .-*.1-- .<• I I ^ \ •'/ i 4 4 -r‘ . *. FUTURE PARKlttC^ ♦ * \ .• O V.;/ >1 4 1 I ^ • \ \ -o • c T" • \ exi s r//U6 *Tkt!K»« CotfRT mr- l»* ^ TK*' it ^ -V ■' -1 V ' • '* ^^ ■ . ' w u. ■ •• 4.r^«'. fcC/. •■,.r !. ' <t & OLD ^ HiLi. ■ 5 - ScHosL’ “ a a- . I ‘c: d I1 4 g—, ——j \ -• NiO. Si -ToTrtL ACRSMUe 4.# f-CStSfi ‘7 t ty* > .*• V? Cr » • • • 11^' ,:^ c ?r , W- . < ■ '. ■ . ^'- • V*# •’ « \ ;M££ f’CSSAS ‘♦K.’J Vi^- ; ^V.•^ ;//.< .1 ? V- ■:. ^ ^. ;,1 immu . M .. • ^ f- V ■••?Jr* h- A W ■ 'm rf y i:rjWH. ' 5*^1 1 1__J_________1 I 1 J___1 I t 1 1 1' i ■ ■ i r"T"*l '1—r-'-i f I « • ! 1 ■■M • 1 —4—» .5k —1 "'ll > 1 1 s !SS ' i tsc^1 1 1 1 K. 1 1 p 1 T V ! t J _ X #*J k 'X'"' f> 9 •i 1 e-J^•4 __Lil >J_.........../I HI ^ J>A '1«♦ 1 ! ,4 1! 1 • 1 i j _j IZ A.[ i i» 1 1 1 i% V\f\rr l> ___^!t i I 1 f 1 N . g 1 -rl \, 1» 1 1 ! •■_4 #V * { 1I I•■ . M 1 < •_L ------n A L {1 i 1 1 1 % 1 N 3 !Li i i 1 \M 1 •_l-3 i 1____, \ 1 LZUl i ____4 J ! [. . .j .. .1 \1 1 3 ! : ' i G i ; ' \/i j i1 1 1 A.i 1 i *•3 !1 j 1 t 1 1 1 1 \ 1 «II!' ill!! j 1 1 i i 1 • • i ^ ! __Lrk ? 1 ft 1 tJ !\fl1 ! i 1 -J i i 1 1 \J _fi ! 1 y 1 \i A 1 t 1 •1 Si■r n r m 0 5 ■ 'h f\t ••N i J Of {?._; 1 1 T(\ 9i)1 4-S 1 J 1 / ' •"E 1 iJ \ t •I1 1 >>V. ^ V- •“T •• '! aD ^ 1 I'll f f —1 P;«*'’’^‘ ■••'5 y J fc: i -■ h iit.-m \V- ,i.. .-4- Yl__ 1 I t ^______L-J i I .1 --------- 1 {—4 1 1 r--4- 1 —_.i !«; L ! 1 ii * T* 1■—Tn* ■ i 1 -i- ----4- i r hi r 11 1 i 1 1 1 JT 1 t • ---1-: ms 1 \ ___-L ^0^^ 1 • 4 i » i { i I —1------•-“I - J. \ 3 1 . V “I iA•J < 1 \±i• 1 $t-i _J□ ! V f1 1 - 1 i si 1 1 1 1 A 1 t \< T i 11ht;1 •m 1 l 11 1 4! ii ft11Pi—1 i 1 1 \J Q y J •Js 1 \ !J 1 I! 1 1 !_1 1 V A i J------T "■“■W 1 1 LJ ! 1 i ”1i ! • 1 1____l L A > -.li K J—4( \ mg'->:i;i -‘ 4- .--i—-r ,o. tS' i-----!- ! ! t f N ■f-r t ■ i '■4ir:-: ■>3 •: ;.t ■ km )•■ V .. tti • January From; Ma Re: Meet prop To: The On 12/20 discuss major ob it clear sewerrwa Tom felt of the 1 few mino on the w have to of havin inspecte I have n in order City cod Marty ~rwT^ Wm mmM January 9, 1989. From: Marty Schneider Re: Meeting with Tom Jacobs concerning the *Old Hill School proposed duplex conversion. To: The City of Orono On 12/20/1988 I met with Tom Jacobs at the School House to discuss the conversion of it into a duplex. There are no major obstacles that would prevent such a conversion. Tom made it clear to me that each unit would have to have its own separate sewerrwater, and electrical service entrances. Aside from that, Tom felt that size code restrictions would be no problem because of the large floor space in each unit. He also mentioned that a few minor items would have to be corrected such as tempered glass on the windows leading to the uptairs and small adjustments would have to be made to the stairwell handrails. Tom also made a point of having the existing fire escape external stairs from the upstairs inspected before he would approve the unit for habitation. I have no problems in meeting Tom’s requests and working with him in order to make sure that everything is done according to Orono City code. Marty^^neider • 1 ade parate hat, cause hat a glass would point upstairs th him Orono V' - -ll ... 1 •*va mm ‘'i'liiii.Uliin 'T' M mtm V,.- t I Hi mvi iiiii''i 11 I 1/^'4 I (’ ailJ NX SIVNIOIHO •i33rans *a3HdVa9010Hd SHdVd9010Hd AUQUSt property 38-41310- .. tax pares t a 6, BLOC land be a after, al have any otherwise one Oolla receipt w Grantor d Grantee t suecessuz desorbed with the represent hereto < —H #1 ■ Jioarans C~MjnEsnacnyE covenant Awmt —-------------• *M*^5n«i*ota corporation, hereinaltar r«£«rr« i^a a Education i.ir-^. of orono* a publStc corporation undor the the Grantor" and City of wono, a p - Grant# » of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter reterrea to as THIS INDENTURE, made and entered into thie day of 1978* by between renter flfa^innesota corporation. SereTnalter rail Grantee, WITNESSETH: NBBREAS, Grantor is **tax^Srcel ^‘property situated iTj^s^rr OF GOVT LOTS EXCEPT ROAD andSTSIsXO-SJlO. S 459 ra W E 474 5 rr ^ 52;^^i2;uii-4««%"or«oo;: sios: ?ooo. 9500. lots 2.3.«. 5. ^ eemfssrtrrT r.Pft 6, BLOaC 3, MARKVILLE, WHEREAS Grantor daaires torS*ln*d^«i**S«“^'*isfrMf^oTtis s.„TEj?^r/s;e“GsrtS^ s;a*s.*ss5tis. WHEREAS, Grantor does not this^indenture or have «ny interest in the ’^5*"* °*^erwise, except as hereinafter set forth, NOW THEREFORE, for and i" one Dollar (Sl.OO) «jd SSltSr SSSrSer.^ grant, SSoS'ai:r;sM?nr?S"uM? lll pr.d«- the use of the -«ve desorbed property as follows: 1. NO structure shall ®?JJ®5f*®2ept*for^th08e structures upon or above indenture, or structures in existence on the date -.g ^r those new structures which replace the Jesting structu ^^^ for which the City «S:2iroS*5i5el9?' 1?79? granted a conditional use permit injunction The provisions of this successors, hereto. 'im idar tha ( Grantaa# ibad pareal ^0 and 4, 5, daacrlbad lil haraln- >uld ire or Ki * • r ftbove Laced tructurea stores structures e City permit. ve, the y un ors» s .4 -J ;■m.I rjgm ■4v.BO,•• «*..f ^3^ 'u//7/7r.a cmcroHONo, ym OcDdltiflMi mm md i’i *-f a a» w M ( a crnciWL (erccQp«ty) 2240 Northshore Drive t 21»0 North5hore Drive X urysi^i oendlttinal ap« » •' MinnetonlM Cent^ of Arte 4 jn— i KdUdili'AA* .. ^ . V % t« same as above . S' i *-^A4f.v' • . •m ‘ ^ •#> -•.■ •** V ' .f % « * ■ f- ^:?^V ■y.g^fa? - ■ I aa r t : ■••'n;[;t i.n-- ' ^ Sadna Resid - RR-IB It Qaa School [oaiiid 34,720 (Ref. TtW- • • a • a \, 3U •I Conditional Use Perait required for schools in ri>^idential tone (Both Buildings and Food Service^ Application for non>conforaing use parait i Ri^Mit c**viee which is located within and aainlyfor both locations and Food Service whicn is — servins the Arts Center providing there is no outside display^ School in residential area Care will be^£^ven^J^o_jie^Jtbb££LJ2rWi**^ nlanning. future parkine areas. Qccunanev will , *Ji ■. 1. 2. 3.(flcabrii Inp tosm lecsssMtf icr ocMns» It ba faw dt^ed 1 weak pcioiP to Oooieil tlMflno) 4. Abatraetor ’a Oartlfioata of Pwpatty Ownaxa Hitbin 300 Ft , 5. $30.00 Iba ) ' n SignatUKe E?.' I* V •-: n •■'7..U//7/7r.Tr»* • *• • • • • •< schools in ling use pemit I thin and aainly Lsplay or \n nlanul ) i/CLiM. ^-•^rrr i* V* m •Ek :4^ il ^1 f > j.- m : *■■ «.V;-:> • . vS'*V> VltUOS OP Oltt« ^11'^^. ^ POO KISTIHC J55-««5|| .fvsssis^sr^ An.rt #Aia £cvA»rio*j PPtP s ooNinwauL on pmmt • • Ait Mil '1 'S, * '^;'r.; C. * <<'■■. • .•* f V • ;i a: og ""pgoptf ty hAu-}\ iM i> > lrlr?M' ?[•I :r*^INits •• ' TT--s» v» : . «O.T t' . * ^ >* •«• ‘ » .'a*-.- .- S* • f ^ * »>f va. . ■» 4 -* r.‘7-’ •* ■•• rw - •• r ♦ . i-* / •*. ' . . * a •. **«. 1-• *' •'/•. • STATUS Of BlISIilBSS ON lUMi 11. IW ■ •. %' , _ |i .* •> «•■ I '* Ha« ■•ay balldiap* of what typo and »ita. and location wad for your buiiataa on this dato^•nt li- *. i. ^ *0 J * » •■* .f -"•'I ' i: ■ 'li^'i:. * '• -' V^t Vi ft K . ^ A TA A. (» ««■-*•«» i a ,.va.. • « t »yaV««^ -H-Ip a ^0nATUS OP lustinss OM HAWH M, I9d» Vkat waf the nature of your bu»lno»« •■ thla data „^ t • • - ' ••■’■ i-V'^’ “51• ;»- i /• . t Y' ■ '••* - V'_f‘-'4ft W ^*^ •'I • •♦. \^*^' 4ft rSa-4... -J a — !'• '•'•*.-»• »J* ,» • • • *..• • * a - Cvj^v •. , ■“ . • - . . -.-.t'• * 4 fcr .■.-».-.a,. ';V 'i'-'" ■ 'v: ^ rAkiIrk "5*_a ■'■' -sv ^e ^.v l.'i'-r • ^ " ' v>»T ' •2 ‘X B F;i . h* a ^ S’# iV ^ fcl'i V ^•-.. ’ddi E>flSn V . -i '4>^>v,. 'W s. • h % V f •* ^ Pfl) ,^Taaa.a- ^ , “. •' Ig thnw '* 4 V- ‘ ‘ ' •\*T^ '*’• 'UT^iT > .N* j- %r n*‘*^ -Ca.tV *. .T •■ • ‘ 09^ ;/> «» ' Flonsn « and dialgot bttSi pofpotn .■». ... = iviJ •i%a :•* -*a <••'*•• .*■ •: -•"•V r* r •• • '-ili • • ^ ..M« <.* ni“' •f*- I' • w <• • r 4* ♦.. «> tS '*V* ‘ 4.'^ ^ 1^ .\ .* -rv* **■'.' ‘♦'"‘' V* • - . • .. :.c..'•':•&• ", . . V ' • • 'T '’i ‘ • J E-,.C !•—•'f-'/. : i « • >. A II. r-'".'12^^^ . • .. Mf* 4 ■ > t of «l«t tirp«f •!», «i4 UUtltrn »•»• «m4 tkU ,.V» • , » £i|:S5»|»w wek'iM *fc*t u*a o« .^«i^t .••4 fcr biiilaw■«• - 1*5 fmimm. __________■' < • •-»!(( n, • >;■.'« ■*«: 't^‘ of b«U4i>t4 « tkU teM. ■..mr ■* V . .:: . ! •«k ». ' - i ■'*•- _ _ r .4 ______________________ ____ _____________ ___ w ^ Tf tliw ii*tt Miy •dtfitiont to buildiaitt uo^ ^or knoijtjj J*t«**®u.««.k iA. 1001. BiAAso ototo Ooto oo4 oito_ _ _ __ ^ iy;r ■ y-^.- - , ..'■■■. . -,■ ■•. :'■■;*••>. »'• r.- '•• A- ________ ► 4-T* ^ - - ■ ;■; •■ Rv ' 4*«- ^ ♦ /-K fi'fV 2TSJS1SS JSUT|S*fcd*SMSi4iS for tesittots porposof* Mcioooo if o ii^Iot pofpoio m4 gudaaeo. .V - V.i ■< ■ rrkm ••■;■■ v.;';*?sga •« •* A. - : li--' i V 4*^ '^ ^ »• t* ^ • '••• •VhV vv -‘V *a1I ‘"% • • f V- /..iAr • 4i ^ .- '-c%• * •• •*H ■.«• *. • -. •• 'f- ^1 w. ; V: - *«<*:••" .'< •. ^r- '■■■. •«— 9 *•• W4T*>• * •».'. ^ ••* JLV ; -»• • ^ • ‘^ r. *’.••• . t*•Mik *• '' ^ *mH\;ii * •,4 %s ••/,«• ~l''* . • , T'a ,-•:* •m.% r • ^ ,j» •,% |, • , ‘"tl* mm -’ ^ mm. •- -• a'r* V‘... 41 ? . r-*'.-v-.v^v ;. :*• .•^:<-... *-.;> .♦• - .vj. .‘?r“ Oortlfl ??4 - ••, - v>> > - r w *or* •* of vtho fbbv ot lV*% .*•• •» • • ’-'.i - -,-i. ••* , u:* ' U.-V. >*%. .:. ' • • 4» . t <• < . ' -.* - * ► «* ' • ••- 4 'iS:-m- i'-*’ZZ A • Al• • * : V j.-'*'^'.w # '^ ^ r . ,•*■w ■i''. I '■•Im ’ .♦ # *<* 'J’f.* _>* *^ <* ' ts' 4 •%. .«r •’^'» •% > “* s?-5'pr‘ , S.i»i*'« *ik - J •' ‘•».>V* < ttt - i tlM T ■ • » •,’ V * - • •* .»w. *1 , *f ’■ire.:"-'''****^v->-v'-.'*. s- •.*: • ••.' 'v'-V , -J. ».•«•'*•.•: x;-;. ^ i • " % '.*• f • tid* / C---------rr’^^5^1: -■•• ••■■■•/ ■*.»•i A, r '*■’■' 'vK .•*.>-X- f V*.- 7*. . >v'^; - ; . •: • fT- ) / w ."•jj It ■ -t N. . V*/ U' .iJ- .'•• •-tl '• 1 . 5 JO '■•'•■■ - * % -4- ,» ^ ^rj: ..^^.-^4 «. •. .. • Z “'>• -*■• • ■ . ' •: * •• '- . / * c.- '► l-”,*V* »•..: Plat of Sm%T for Ghorlw I. Croio r Lot I9 Blook 2, ULIqr't UtRBopin Cow^f MlBMOota • •' •• --- % . •/* • •^* :r-:J V*--* •*' *Jr-:*- ••.-. , > •• • :/ •.-• •• A ~ • »^V-'4»' '^:i. ■.•• 1 ' •*’^'^. ^ ^ • ?■* ’ -^;/ S.. '•■ •4-^ • •>%« V . A. 4* .• ..... s'* ’-”%•• ■' •• • Li;4:*«-f -r•»•,'*.. V V^l-- • .A •ivv •? :V > . V • • .A / W* W • ^ *♦-1> -r * 'T*' *• wf ^*4 ;. ►% »' •’t ^ . •* .* n •* • • • ' . %••• .. . • •, ^ •. •« • . I • • ^ • * • . A; . . .» . .• - ■ HORTICmt - • ?*■Otrttflcoto of SOTVtJI •‘^-:7 boroby oortlt^ tiiot tbio Is • trot sod comet roprosoatstion Of^a evvoy of ttio bouadarlss of Lot 1, BLodc 2» Vlloy's Hrk, and ■; location of all bulldinga tfaoraoa. It doM not purport S f|bM other .lEprovenonta or eneroachaiats*-.. . ; ^-* "V*’v >!•!*■*• ■■•^ * . . • ‘ • • • . • . •. .•*• •••.'•. ..V. • • ••. * • - ^ • I •• Gordon R. Coffin . Rag^XNb. 6O6Z Land Surrayor and Plannsr Letof lahiy ninassota • # •• 'It. »• \ •*•....... •* 5ir^V"5i.- .i* . •■i C. • •. j»»* 'V •' ’* •• • « • ••• * • ; 4 . * • 1^ «• . • •• • • • •‘ •• -..• .“.‘V .-i-.V• . . ••-.» •». • • *r .. '. • • . ^ •••♦.«• . *i * •» • ■■•• ‘-i. •• :• T •• , • ..:. • ■ . . * •■•r..'* '• •• . *.. ^ .1. M • .1 • A •' .»• •»• M*.*rCS ■*• •« i»^’..s * ?-•:• ,v -.r „ m •• . .* « •> .*•> •“‘C VX 'V — . iC.< • • • >T.W3 W a«f t*:-•• i V ■ .', . iT. t- i/ « • % • the Cit> Bloc pro; Minn ». s- :•'**1F% > • •/. » • • I • •^ * *t.. • • .»•»'*. * • •• • •• 1 9* •k •■ • V • • •• •» • ' • • - ;• ^ I .. t 4- . > - •. • • * •f • . »•• •' • ^ *4 ^ «# • ■ • i .. , f • ••• I .V • • • * . • . r • •* ^ • *v.» ./*• ^ J • I « * 4 i V'.• ** *• •* •. •• • • T * • »• ».» • *«. ,* »•. *'•/• -f f ' • - *V .* * ' - • , V-' I* ' . t« ** .. \ • •• *4 •• • •«.• • • • . • *’,• •• "4./ 4», '.J* *■ • *. • • . .* • • ^ * • Jf • r 4^ * •.«• . •• 4 • • • • •• • » . •»•ri •• 4, ••"4 . » »• • I •4i■ I *fr ♦MSi ii m:i i::, V.;: VVJ< ■>.,:■ : j mmmm- 1 ./■';?. r'‘‘.vi| :-r '. yrr.:r;-:j Jb' L-'v^ * ^ ri m m j 'ISm 4 • 5307186 «k « i City of ORONO i CITY I I II ORONO ■ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2132 TRANSFER ENTEREDCE?r. Of PflOPERTY m S PiJBl'CRECOrol A RBSOLDTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL OSB PERMIT AND A VARIANCE TO HONICIPAL ZONING CODE AUG SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3 (r! PILE #1059 DCPUTY WHEREAS, Michael Schafer (hereinafter "the applicant”) is the owner of the property located at 2259 Shadywood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lot 1, Block 2, Wiley's Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, per Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (I), the applicant has made application to the City of Orono to permit a duplex use of the existing residence and to grant a variance to that same Section to permit a duplex use 630 feet from a commercial district rather than the required 200 feet. Minnesota: HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1059. 2. The property is located in the LR^lC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The property is approximately 7,324 s.f. or .17 acres in area. 4. The present structure was constructed approximately 45 years ago prior to the formal adoption of City-wide standards for lot size or lot width. 5. The structure contains 3,111.2 s.f. of finished living area. 6. Prior to 1963 the structure contained a grocery store on the first floor and residential apartment on the second floor. 7. From 1963 to 1976 the structure contained a dry cleaning plant on the first floor and a residential apartment on the second floor. Page 1 of 7 mm H-aS-^7 :.. o L TKANSFE9 ENTSREB Oi?J. Of PfiOPERTY m A PUBLIC RECOROl d Road within the iscribed as Lot 1/ iota (hereinafter (I), the applicant t a duplex use of at same Section to trict rather than / Council of Oronor e #1059. i Family Lakeshore » or .17 acres in )ximately 45 years standards for lot shed living area. >cery store on the cond floor. 1 a dry cleaning apartment on the T'' pi- IM ■ ■ ■■ i'' U ir m Xii ^■4W . city of ORONO CITY OF ORONO resolution of the city council NO. 2112------------- o T« 1.76 the City issued a building permit to Margaret J. family use would be the primary use. “:i"~‘rVtS to members of their church. 10. The current use of the property presents the following lot inventory facts: Hardcover breakdown - - or 30% (property is*Ls:i ^ Existing Hardcover - 4,404 s.f. or 60% Hardcover Variance - 2’^°’ V*', support parkingOff-site Hardcover « 4,200 s.r. to suppui.>. r needs - use of railroad right-of-way Lot Area Required Existing Variance 21,780 s.f. 7,324 s.f. 14,456 s.f. or 66% Lot Width Bxfst?ng “o^ at the rear of the front yard setback yard*Setback tine - 128.7' along street lot line •1> Setbacks of Principal Structure Pront/Street Required “ 30* Existing ■ 0* Variance * 30* or 100% Side Required ■ 10* Existing » 6* Variance « 4* or 40% Page 2 of 7 IT* **'- :<-e* I'-' tV" '" 4 s • 1 ►Ai.*:. ■ Em, 1? i: t( a< d< ir Wi oi i: mi ri a< cc 1: ax ei rc mi: 13 in 14 CO an up o Margaret J. a non-rental St and second nsure a single first floor imily did not )uld be rented following lot pm■ ms k (property is upport parking it yard setback Lot line K‘.f'•sa CITY OF ORONa e) City of ORONO RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL • NO. 2132 ________ Setbacks of Accessory Structures Side Required ■ 10' Existing *2.8' Variance * 7.2* 11. At the Council meeting of October 13, 1986, staff was asked to review current status of property and to determine what additional variances would be necessary to locate new garage, determine a single, safe access, required landscaping improvements and to present amended lot iaventory facts. Council was concerned with the overall effects of intensification of use on this severally substandard property. 12. Staff has recommended to Council that all future improvements must be contained within homestead lot with no dependence on railroad right —of—way. Access had to be moved to the north if access was to be within homestead lot. The detached garage is considered a hazardous structure and must be removed. The limitations in area will require that a future garage be attached and the 18 feet wide ground floor storage area be converted to either a 3 or 4 stall garage. Turnaround paved area adjacent to garage must also serve as off-street parking for residents* guests. Entire gravel parking area within railroad right-of-way removed and ground cover restored. Berming along street lot line must define single approved access to site. 13. Lot inventory facts based on staff recommendation for future improvement of the property: a ) Hardcover Breakdown Allowed Hardcover " 2,197 s.f. or 30% Existing Hardcover « 4,404 s.f. or 60% Revised Hardcover ■* 3,995.6 s.f. or 54% Off-site Hardee '*r » 4,200 s.f. Revised Off-site Hardcover - 0 s.f. b) No setback variances required for attached garage at rear of structure. The existing structure would extend 3 feet from rear of existing buildings. c) Off-street parking area provided in turnaround area to rear of garage. 14. The property is located 630 feet from a designated commercial zone but the property is adjacent to a railroad track and across the track from a non-conforming, commercial use, an upholstering shop. Page 3 of 7 , -r \%mmm0t^n\w iwwrirt iP^PI .-. VIt cijy OF ORONOJ City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2132________ 15, In 1963 the property was assessed two residential sewer units. 16. In 1971 the property was assessed two residential water units. 17. There is no contiguous undeveloped land available for applicant to acquire. 18. The current status of this property has made it impractical and/or financially impossible to make improvements. 19. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditionsr light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the appli~ cant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 20. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the duplex use of the residential structure will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (I) and per that same Section grants a conditional use permit for a duplex use to Michael Schafer, subject to the following conditions: 1. The detached garage is a hazardous structure and must be razed by July 31. 1987 . Page 4 of 7 V r u. ... JO :iL residential sewer residential water nd available for ade it impractical nts. s existing on this generally to other :ing the variance IS, light, air nor oring properties; applicant, but is or difficulty; is Lght of the appli- and intent of the i conditional use Lai structure will eneral welfare of lir nor pose a fire ties, nor will it bhat the proposed ig with the intent nsive Plan of the gs, the Orono City ning Code Section ection grants a chafer, subject to :ture and must be y . . CITY OF ORONO City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2132 WM 2. An access permit must be obtained from the Hennepin County Highway Department prior to installation. The new access must be installed by July 15, 1987 . The off-site, gravel parking area on railroad right-of-way must be removed and ground cover restored and on-site parking area to rear of structure installed by August 30>, 1987 Berming along street lot line of property to define single controlled access to County Road to be completed by July 15, 1987 . 3. Applicant is advised that if a future garage is planned for the property that it must be attached to rear per staff sketch approved by Council at their February 23, 1987 meeting and made part of this official record. The City will grant no setback variances for a future attached garage.< -.-W 4. Applicant must bring structure into compliance with all code standards of the Uniform Building Code for a legal duplex. Applicant to commence code compliance review with the Orono Building Department by May 30, 1987 _____. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution r\ui with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special coditions of this resolution will expire on that date (February 23, 1988). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. • . 7. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 5 of 7 ' .ft m i OF Pebruarj ATT] ST: othy Property jL#1 V,Avail VO JCIL le Hennepin County new access must be ravel parking area and ground cover itructure Installed Ine of property to to be completed by age Is planned for c per staff sketch 7^ meeting and made . grant no setback ance with all code : a legal duplex. BW with the Orono with the property only and must be within one year of codltlons of this 23, 1988). of the terms and a violation of the ' authority granted >r. rstood and hereby behalf of himself, s to the recording i property. sc- I V,-: -7-.- mtm"' , 1 .*•' •• A- •».lrV 'if? CITY OF ORONOJ city of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2132 February 1987^^^ Orono City Council on this 23th day of ATT ;ST: bek7 Ma^ Property Owner(s 0 IaJhy t-s"y Page 8 of 7 ..rV-v € ■: •wm.. •: • i' PRELMP4Af?Y OEVELOFMENr PLAN ann ’irvq (^nr\rA(ssic>0 l(T\€€;h'nc| •^OLnuLOurcj 19?'9 ■h -V/J, \ iiilfi m 1 Jrs—iirrrrrTr: •r—irt muc Duns 1. 7t00 p.a. #13« Loran luttarClald. 3»2S Natartwon Hoad - Claas 2 Praliaioaxy Subdlvlaloa acRoa znMS #1334 Sidnay labara, 715 aorth Brown Road - Conditional Uaa Pandt/PRO ■ Claaa 3 Praliadnary Snbdiviaion - Rafarrad Back to Planniuf CCHlsalon for Additional Ravlaw #1359 David Lindatroa, 1315 Hbodbill Avanna - Variaaeaa - Public Raaring #1360 Robert Markow a John Charlton, 2340 a 2300 Abingdon Way - Vacation of Baaaaanta - Public Baaring #1361 Orono School Olatriet #270, 900 Old Cryatal Bay Road - Vacation of Baaaaant - Public Roaring #1362 Paul Raoaar, 2001 Caaco Point Road - Varianeaa - Public Bearing 7. #1363 Reger a Becky Barry, 1392 Baldur Park Road - Varianeaa - Public Bearing 0. #1364 Edwin Oaga, 400 Tonkawa Road - Conditional Dao ParaitAarianca - Public Baaring 9. #1365 Marty B. Bchneidar, 2100 Berth Shore Orlva - Conditional Oaa PemitAarianoe - Public Bearing ADOmOWAL 1MB 10. Planning Coaaiaalon approval of Bovenber 21, 1900 Mlnutaa. 11. Planning Coandaalon to aalaet a rapraaantatlva to attend the Pebroary 13, 1909 Council Meeting. % rt ,, adUiaA-,' »»» —* n 5 snn fiir:• s z 1 ifli V ra»'iiiinif SIP H ? : !• ! .-. ■ . -.• ;. . ; .v : ; ■ . •• fcf -• J.»-- , -ra'T’il /?V£/VO'£ ^ /I'rtc as,turf iVooeHtU. fi/Ca£ #1359 Survey for: DAVE LINDSTROH • •• OESCRIPTIOM: Lot 1, Auditor's Subdivision No. 307, Hennepin County, Minnesota and that part of Lot 13, Auditor's Subdivision No. 307, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as beginning at the northwest corner of 'said Lot 13, thence East 25 feet; thence South 157.75 feet; thence West 25 feet to the southeast corner of Lot 1, thence north to beginning. He hereby certify that this is a true and conect representation of a survey of the boundaries of the land above described and of the location of all buildings. If any, thereon and all visible encroach- Bents, If any, fro# or on-eald,land.' ■. Dated this 23rd day of .November, 1985. CARLSON V CARLSON, LAND SURVEYORS INC. -M, ■i i nr' ^ca/e.: -r.. i.. #1359 1 ^ /,'^s t^/oo4)mU. /t/eag Survey forr DAVE LINOSTROM "DESCRIPTION: Lot 1, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 307, Hennepin . County, Minnesota and that part of Lot 13, Auditor's Subdivision No. 307, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as beginning at the northwest corner of. said Lot 13, thence East 25 feet; thence South . 157.75 feet; thence West 25 feet to the southeast corner of Lot 1, thence north to beginning. Ue hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the land above described and of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon and all visible encroach- nents, if any, from or on said land. Dated this 23rd day of November, 1988. !®is ^ as/ae>' l^'oeUHlU. ff/Oas (/7S.SO P/s-f-} /^i/3/6 ^i.So /«»# g /ApSA' Pvo f ■A-rfy' LiH-e~ fcK p«».v fo-i'es OP- Y<C^u.ir«.A Wo.ll frvj Op«l\| Vff ^'T o'ftff,'; 7i/cV . r..tAN».wivirau T’.^.oa* ^/V/fAs"-----f - - t/^.ItTAf^i.'l {//4.e A'U^) 44.79 r' '’3.4a Survey for: DAVE LINDSTROH • ’ .-;•.= “T —.■:. :,•-. DESCRlpTIM: ‘ T Lot ti Auditor's Subdivision lio. 307,.Hennepin . CountyV. Minnesota and-that part of Lot 13,^Aiiditdi Subdivision No. 307, Heimppin County, Minnesota' ,<J««riW^«» bjOinnl^7sald Lot .13, thence East 25 feet;, thence South 157,75 feet; thence West 25 feet to the southeast comer of Lot 1, thence north to beginning. - ' . .......We hereby certify that, this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of tt land above described and of the location of all buildings. If any, thereon and all visible encroac mentsi.lf anyi fro* or on said land. ... .• . . _ Dated this 23rd day of Noyember, 1988. . CARLSON I CARLSON. INC. LAND SURVEYORS • ^1. veyor 1 z' A l/ A ^cs/£: - r 'p.^. 0- K s "• * i “■hill »B|isi:l|in «»< g 5 i m3 8 ^ ^i'g r.§g| °4li ' s PeI |g||g 1^ :? I L CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY for Paul J. Hauser In Lots 123 and 126, Spring Park ' Hennepin County, Minnesota t7 V.y. i i O O ^.4. t /r.n I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of that part of Lots 125 and 126; and that part of Lake Shore Avenue, vacated; and that part of the tracts of land across from Lots 125 and 126 on the opposite side of Lake Shore Avenue as designated and defined in the instrument of dedication of the plat of Spring Park described as commencing at the Northeast comer of Lot 126; thence Westerly along the Northerly line thereof 20 feet; thence Southerly parallel to the Easterly line of Lot 126 a distance of 38 feet to the point of beginning; thence Northerly parallel to the Easterly line of Lot 126 to the Northerly line of Lot 126; thence Westerly along the Northerly line of Lot 126 and its extension to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence Southerly along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to its intersection with a line running parallel to and 70 feet Southerly of the Northerly line of Lot 126 and its extension, as measured at right angles to the Northerly line of Lot 126 and its extension; thence Easterly along said parallel line to a point which is 170.4 feet Westerly from the point of beginning; thence Easterly to the point of beginning, all in Spring Park, according the recorded plat thereof, and the location of all existing buildings and visible hardcover thereon. It does to show any other improvements or encroachments. to not purport COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Mark S. G Scale: 1" - 30’ Date : o: Iron Marker III ark S. Gronberg Mn.^ic. No. 12755 Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners Long Lake, Minnesota NS -A ,0' AV6^ r sr^A<i4i- 3.u*F‘'= Li"*” $ti«yry cor>i«>/<Ar/«^< z^e/’ ^/ //w« t; >4 g. S' ST liJ 3 O M- ^ OD H^ g' 0 S§ S5iO IT <Pl X CD rn 7 fl) 3 . 2If’ W I (A S. 2^f N I ?n (5 i/i I %A 5 5 CN ?D Hi\\ sHH c\ 7^> ? p ", / •* 1 j/'']{. ;2 ■IfH'o >■' H •'' n */ if' ,//1 > c/ / / y /, ' - r V/. ' / ' ; 1 ' ^ ■ ■ 1 > ^0 I 1= ihl3 - - X —i'?e § r 3 ^f-r2« = 3Ip '(aMz\ i’t IV& - S-Oi-lft ic: TS‘-egso' .i-PT A-ottA. . ec.,t»4e.5i.(=. ; pecced^ .» M-.rfrd^* -; • ^ : •f- • I Sssi4t;aisgig:i8;'4s£f.;-^ .lipp ■|1■s IB :ili., oel^tztcyjioL_r_ iiiteSlK ”;,:, liiS^ iSftI'^mi ■>8«l„■Mali leoJ >^ateea^,f,p,ej^ Af^CA^ HMC>COV<€ft.-A©//€lAJ .- - 'i'r '^4'v'88pi' itili'3iil6 ' “it 8'^SS4^ij 4#S' liig- 88;.Q.e »^;iic-e>i Pr.±4>.i DEC 2 01988 '■'C'l-L -.C3:a I • M(R|«Y CINTIVY TH*r TM<S RRiPAMO •* Uf Or I U«tOf RUYO«RICT lUMAVitlOMAMO THAr I AM AOULY RICiSTiR I »0 CAMO tU^¥£YO^ i^OtR TMf LAR« O* »*•! $»AT| 0» ■ ■SCAlf ■ I McCombs Frank Roos Associates. Inc. | /"• 30' \Pff£^A/i£D FO/?: