Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-13-1994 Council PacketCOUNCIL PACKET 06/13/94 ................................ _____ ■: i'».<:.V'*. ^. j;.- '>»■. O^ (1524E) ^ Rie Poctart ’. ; C'^ ^ Red Rope ‘ jT X '^' ’■ Ife: ■c MADf INKCXICO W**** •%• ^-■ - •.'. ?^ :* ■« » . „4 ■r Si f‘-^ -,-'r r# r» & : '"■* i - yh- :■' % •> . ->4 '' .^■v> A iAt* \ . /* ■d.'i •■ . • v'.’^r'. > ■ •• •• T*>'- V*.• • ••*■ • 't « ti;>: ^ >J •. •: -^<v* •-» *“-*Ihrriii-irliffe -j<y-,-T^.,..<. PLANNING COMMISSION ('cojmcTL PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE ATTEND Co - / 5 9V PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 13, 1994, 7:30 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA {*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda, memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL % * 1. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Meeting of May 23, 1994 * 3. Council Work Session of May 24. 1994 * 4. Council Work Session of June 6. 1994 C/fy PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS 5. Park Commission Action Agenda for 1994 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Dale Lindquist Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *♦ APPLICANTS **Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolutions at the Recorder’s desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials. 6. #1885 - Lundgren Bros Construction Inc., 2675 Sixth Avenue North - Sketch Plan Review 7. #1904 Eric and Shelly Liljequist, 3490 Birch Lane - Conditional Use Permit/Variance Resolution 8. #1915 George Applebaum, 4109 Highwood Road - Variance - Resolution 9* #1927 Mary” K. McCarty, 245 Tonka Avenue - Variance - Resolution 10. #1928 Suzanne K. Wacker, 1115 Brown Road South - Variance - Resolution IL #1930 Margaret P. Cost, 255 Brown Road South - Variance - Resolution 12. #1931 Megan Tully, 1910 Shoreline Drive - Variance/Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 13. Request for Building Permit for Residential Construction - Lot 1, Block 2, Old Crystal Bay Road Addition MAYOR/COU7VCIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT 14. Award Bid - Old Crystal Bay Road Improvement CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 15. Award Bid - Wheel Type Loader 16. Crystal Bay Site Building Demolition AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETLNG SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 13, 1994, 7:30 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA CITY ATTORiNEY’S REPORT 17. Partial Release of Conditions of Subdivision Approval (*18.) LICENSES (*19.) BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 06/13 06/15 06/20 06/20 06/27 06/28 07/04 07/05 07/05 07/11 07/18 07/25 Council meeting 7:30 p.m. Highway 12 Policy Committee meeting 5:30 p.m. Orono Council Chambers Council Work Session 8:00 a.m. Planning Commission meeting 7:00 p.m. Council meeting 7:30 p.m. Highway 12 Mediation meeting 3:00 p.m. Orono Council Chambers HOUDAY - Office Closed Council Work Session 8:00 a.m. Park Commission 7:15 p.m. Council meeting 7:30 p.m. Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. Council meeting 7:30 p.m. ROLL /orThe Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Callahan. Councilmembers Charles Kelley, J. Diann Goetten. Gabriel Jabbour and JoElIen Hurr. The following represented staff: City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Administrator Ron Moorse, Police Chief Stephen Sullivan. Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, City Engineer Glenn Cook, and Recorder Barbara Anderson. Mayor Callahan called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. (#1) CONSENT AGENDA Hurr removed #19 from the Consent agenda, and added items #7, #9, #10. and #11. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 5, nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (•#2) 1994 BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF APRIL 28, 1994 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the Minutes of the 1994 Board of Review Meeting as submitted. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#3) RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF MAY 9, 1994 Hurr noted that the incorrect date was on the Minutes and requested that it be changed. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten to approve the corrected Minutes of the Reconvened Board of Review Meeting of May 9. 1994. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#4) REGULAR MEETING OF VUY 9, 1994 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting of May 9, 1994 as submitted. Ayes 5, nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - LIU McMillan McMillan reminded the Council of the Park Tour which will be held on June 7, 1994 at 6:00 p.m. She had no additional comments. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Steve Peterson There were no Planning Commission comments. minutes of TIIE REGULAR ORONO CITV’ COUNCR. MEETING HELD ON MAY 23. 19W PUBLIC COMMENTS Blu Lanney from Burnett Realty, stated she had been infonned by John Holland that he feels that he has been unduly harassed about his animals by his neighbors and he claims that he owns Hollander Road, and is thinking about putting up a toU bndge at either end. Mayor Callahan noted that the Council had been so informed. POLICE CHIEF REPORT Sullivan passed out the reports on police activity for April and noted that it had been a bi^ month. He discussed the monitonng of County Road 15 and noted there had been a fatality on this road two weeks aEO. He stated that they had been requested to focus on the no passing on the shoulder^and they had issued 114 tickets in Minnetonka Beach. He commented that the intersection of County Road 15 and County Road 51 had been extremely hazardous and it was improved by installing a passing lane to allow traffic to pass on the right shoulder legally. Sullivan stated that Minnetonka Beach is trying to come up with a solution to improve safety on County Road 15, but they feel that enforcement is important for them. He believed that the speeding in this area was reduced because there were a number of police cars patrolling the area. Mayor Callahan inquired if Sullivan had provided Minnetonka Beach with the rates for police enforcement coverage and Sullivan responded that June would be the last month in the three-month trial period, and at the end of that time he would be able to give them a rate. He suggested that Minnetonka Beach hire Orono police officers on a part-time basis to provide this coverage. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#5) #1901 TANDEM PROPERTIES, 2645/3025 WATERTOWN ROAD A.ROAD NAME Mabusth noted that staff recommended the name of Deer Run Trail as there is already a Deerwood Lane in Plymouth and they believed there could be some confusion between the two when emergency vehicles must seek immediate access to an area. It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Kelley, to approve the private road name of Deer Run Trail ivithin the Coffin property portion of Old Crystal Bay Road Addition and to further require that the public road within the Dickey portion of the plat be named Countryside Drive West. Ayes 5, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE RE('»UIv\R ORONO CITY COUNCIIv MEETING HELD ON NUY 23. IWI (#5) #1901 TANDEM PROPERTIES, 2645/3025 WATERTOWN ROAD (CONTINUED) B. FINAL SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION NO. 3427 Jim Deanonie stated that they are requesting park dedication credit for the three acre site which contains the area now deemed by White Earth to be sacred Indian land. Mayor Callahan commented that he understood that it was Mrs Dickey’s wish that the land be set aside and the City was endeavoring to accommodate that wish. Jabbour stated that if the City wa.s requiring that area for park land then the City should pay for it, but he felt the City had not asked for it. If the City was going to accept it as park land, then he wished them to do so with a minimum risk of liability. Discussion ensued regarding the method of establishing the value of the land. Kelley stated he was not convinced that there was sufficient documentation to establish that the outlot contained sacred ground. Mayor Callahan proposed that since the developer was proposing the City take all three acres, that perhaps they should split the difference. Hurr commented she felt that the entire three acre parcel was a better size. Mayor Callahan stated that the land would be dedicated as park land once the title was transferred to the City. It was moved by Jabbour. seconded by Kelley to adopt Resolution No. 3427 granting final approval for #1901 Subdivision Old Crystal Bay Road Addition for Tandem Properties at 2645/3025 Watertown Road, giving the applicant ’s credit for 1.5 acres at the assessed market value, and amending condition #10 to note possible future public use instead of park land. Ayes 5, nays 0. Mabusth stated that several members of the Counliyside Homeowners Association were present, and that they were opposed to the southern trail connection within the Dickey property being public trail. After brief discussion, Jabbour stated that the Council had already determined that this would be public trail once the easements were platted. Mayor Callahan concurred, and stated that the plat was now approved with that provision, and it was too late to bring it up again. (#6) #1916 IRWIN JACOBS, 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3428 Jim Jenson was present representing the applicant. Hurt commented that staff should look at the City code and develop some sort of sliding scale regarding accessory structures that would work for a 33 acre parcel. It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Kelley, to adopt Resolution No. 3428 approving #1916 Variance for Irwin Jacobs at 1700 Shoreline Drive. Ayes 5, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CTTV COUNCIL MEEniNG HELD ON MAY 2-U 1994 f*#7) #1918 JAMES K. AND JULIE ANN LYNCH-DANIELS, 1225 ORONO OAKS DRIVE - RENEW.VL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/V*AR1ANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3429 It was moved by Jabbour. seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution No. 3429 for #1918 Conditional Use Permit Renewal and Variance for James K. and Julie Ann Luncb-Daniels at 1225 Orono Oaks Drive. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#8) #1919 TY BUCEY, 2677 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 3430 Gaffron reviewed the staff report and described the drainage patterns proposed by the applicants. A letter from Beverly and Louis Smcrling was entered into the record. Mrs. Smerling reviewed the history of the area and the relationship of her prope^ to that now owned by Mr. Bucey. She stated she believed the house proposed by the applicants was too large for the site and there was the potential for water runoff to damage her property. She stated she was not in agreement with the proposal and wished this to be on record in the event of problems arising in the future so she would have some measure of recourse. Ty Bucey stated they had reduced the height of the house to fit within the code and the drainage plan was designed to have the water flow to the north and west sides of the property away from the Smerling s property. Mayor Callahan inquired if there was anything that gave Mrs. Smerling reason to believe the present situation would be worse. Mrs. Smerling responded that the plans were changed from the original presentation but the drainage pattern wiU be changed from what previously existed on the property because the footprint of the house has been changed. She felt t e larger house may cause water to find a way into areas that were not affected previously. Bucey stated there was about one hundred square feet in area difference between the previous structure which burned and the proposed house, so the amount of structural coverage on the site has not changed much. Jabbour commented that if the applicant is staying within the ordinance requirements and is eliminating the excess hardcover, then he felt it was a major improvement. Cook stated that the drainage plan will work an t e water runoff will flow to the west with the drainage swale. Discussion ensued regarding the existing drainage on the site. Goetten inquired who would be supervising the final grading to ensure that it was done according to the jnans an Gaffron responded that the City Engineer will be reviewing the final grading on the site to ensure that it’s done correctly. MINUTES OF niE REOnAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MA\ 2,\ 1W4 (#8) #1919 T\^ BtCEY, 2677 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 3430 (CONTINUED) It was moved by Kellev, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution No. 3430 approving #1919 Variances/Conditional Use Permit for Ty Bucey at 2677 Casco Point Road. Ayes 5, nays 0. Mr. Mitchell, attorney representing Beverly and Louis Smerling, inquired whether the resolution required the applicants to install shutters on the south side of the house. Gaffron responded negatively, noting that was a private agreement between the Buceys and the Smerlings. (*#9) #1920 PHILLIP OTTO, 4116 HIGHWOOD ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3431 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution No. 3431 approving #1020 Variances for Phillip Otto at 4116 Highwood Road. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#10) #1925 PETER BOVEE, 840 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD • VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3432 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution No. 3432 approving #1925 Variance for Peter Bovee at 840 Old Long Lake Road. Ayes 5, nays 0. (•#11)#1932 ORONO SCHOOL DISTRICT #278,685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 34.33 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution No. 3433 approving #1932 Conditional Use PermitA'ariance for Orono School District #278 at 685 Old Crystal Bay Road. Ayes 5, nays 0. NUYORyCOUNCIL REPORT Mayor Callahan stated he had met with Park Commission Chair Dick Hint and they had discussed the state of the parks and the problems associated with extending the Old Crystal Bay Road bike trail south to join the Luce Line trail, including negotiations between the Hennepin Parks and Orono. He felt that the City Administrator should write a letter responding to the Hennepin Parks’ proposal regarding sharing the costs of the trail.. Flint stated that he believed the best place to build the trail was on private property because they wouldn ’t have to construct curb and gutter. He felt it was best to keep it inside the drainage ditch. Moorse stated that staff has contacted the heirs to the Thompson property but have not received any response thus far. They have considered installing the trail on the other side of the ditch, but it doesn ’t work veiy well in that location. Mayor Callahan MLNUTES OF TIIE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETLNGHELD ON MAY 23. 1994 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT (CONTINUED) bttter as it's'more in keeping with O; jno's rural character. Jabbour stated he felt they should get a firm commitment and get back to Hennepin County on this as soon as possible. Mayor Callahan stated he felt staff should make eveiy effort to get this done. Mayor Callahan stated that the Planning Commission had reviewed a 'he UtXen Brothers proposal, and noted that three Commissioners felt ^ey had ran^cB with the nroposal and left the discussion. He stated that it was a major su tviaio p p Ind b^irqTed if members of the Council would agree to sit on the P'--* "sston to aid them in making this decision. Mayor Callahan Goetten to sit on the Planning Commission for this item, and f fabbour s the alternate. He Stated that the sketch plan had reduced the denst^ from th originally proposed 52 umts to 44 units which worked out to an approximate .89 acre density. Kellev stated that it appears that the School District intends to construct the elementary school and he felt that the trail system would be a g<»d '•'''’S *°j'"PJ interest between John Uban representing Lundgren Brothers ^ City on the Park Plan. Discussion ensued regarding zoning classifications. Ugcause factors, and transitional zoning mitigating some of these factors. Kelley stated tha be of the wetland mitigation laws passed by the federal government the buildabihty of the land went down, and there is nothing the City can do about that. Mayor Callahan noted that there will be a Mayor's breakfast stated he believed that this was a very good thing to continue doing on a regular basis. Jabbour stated he had been attending the LMCD meetings on a sub-committee meetings as well. He stated that the LMCD ”7 costs as part of the regular budget. He believed it wm the City s ^ director to funds needed to address the milfoil issue, and suggested authonzing nuarters of pay the funds due from last year and the monies due for the first an se q 1994. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Hurr, to authorize the Finance Director to send the funds due to the LMCD. Mayor Callahan stated that the LMCD has decided to !'’'X^th\ureThtd Ihe lake and limit the number of car/trailer parking spaces and he did not feel that they MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY U, 1994 authority to do this. Jabbour stated he felt it was bad public policy to defer access from the Cities to the State, and he felt that they should send a letter stating that the regional activity should be supported by regional funding. Ayes 4, nays 1. Kelley voted no. ENGINEER REPORT (#12) OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT BIDS Cook reviewed the bids received and stated that Lunda was the low bidder. It was moved bv Hurr, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution No. 3433 recommending that MnDOT award the bid for the replacement of the Old Crystal Bay Road Bridge to Lunda Construction Company in the low bid amount of $499,751.00. Ayes 5, nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#13) CITY OF WAYZATA PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY SITE - CONCURRENT DETACHMENT AND ANNEXATION - RESOLUTION NO. 3435 Moorse reviewed the parcels of land which are proposed to be detached from Wayzata and annexed into Orono and the parcel that will be detached from Orono and annexed into Wayzata. Mayor Callahan asked about the signal that was discussed at the last meeting that the Orono Council was so opposed to. Moorse responded that the City of Wayzata has developed a plan which will allow for an alternative to the semaphore signal at the intersection. Dennis Eyler, Strgar, Roscoe, Fausch, stated that three years ago they had submitted a signal justification report to MnDOT, but it’s not been acted upon. They have ncH submitted new traffic data. They considered their alternatives and prepared a plan which would offset the need for a signal. Kelley inquired if the proposed plan had been approved by MnDOT and Eyler responded that it will take two to three weeks to be approved. Kelley inquired if they had made any comments regarding the proposal and Eyler responded that similar plans have been used with success in several areas and it was probable that MnDOT would approve it. He reviewed the plans and the traffic flow patterns through the intersection. He discussed the lanes, medians, and sight distances. Discussion ensued regarding the roadway design. Mayor Callahan inquired if the City of Wayzata had any plans to connect Femdale Road to Highway 12. Mayor Gisvold of Wayzata responded that they had no plans to upgrade Femdale Road south of Wayzata Boulevard and they would not oppose an upgrade to Femdale north of Wayzata Boulevard if the Cities of Orono and Plymouth decided to NUNUTES of TIIE REGULAR ORONO Cm’ COUNCIL MEEl'lNG IIEIJ) ON MAY 23, 1994 N03435 resolulion agreeing to the annexation and not adopt the joint development agreement. It was moved by Mavor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour. to adopt Resolution No. 3435 annexing three parcels of land from the City of Wayzata into the City of Orono and annexing one p.r el of land into the City of Wayzata.. Ayes 5. nays 0. (#14) PARK SURVEY Hurr commented that some excellent suggestions for changes to tht sun/ey had been made at the Park Commission meeting. She felt that the suivey should proceed with those changes. It was moved by Goetten. seconded by Hurr, to approve the revised questionnaire as submitted. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#15) 1993 INTERFUND TR,\NSFERS AND BUDGET AMENDMENTS Moorse reviewed the staff report and explained the reasons for the transfers and how the reseive fund worked. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Huri, to 1993 Interfund transfers and budget amendments as proposed in the 5/20/94 start repon. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#16) KELLEY AVENUE DRAINAGE REPORT It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to direct the to update the 1976 report on the Kelley Avenue drainage problem and determine the m effective way of correcting the problem, and inform the Council of the costs, yes , n y 0. (#17) POLICE LIEUTENANT 1994 CONTRACT SETTLEMENT It was moved by Hurr, seconded bv Jabbour to approve the 1994 Police Lieutenant co^ract settlement of a 2.75% pay adjustment and a $20.00 per month incre^e in the City insurance contribution to bring the contribution to $291.00 per month, yes , nays 8 MINUTES OF niE REGUIAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEEllNGHEU) ON MAY 23, 1994 (#18) JIM GREGORY LUMP SUM PAYMENT It was moved by Hurt, seconded by Jabbour, to approve a lump sum payment to Jim Gregory in the amount of the 1994 pay adjustment provided to the Public Works staff (2.75% of base pay). Ayes 5, nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT There was no City Attorney’s report. (#19) LICENSES Hurr commented that she pulled this item to ensure that the sign posted by Russell Norum had been covered, and she felt that limited signage should be a requirement for all licenses for home occupations. It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Jabbour, to approve the following licenses: Annual Home Occupation License:Russell A Norum 3264 North Shore Drive Garbage & Refuse Collector’s License: Site Evaluator/Designer: Septic System Installer: Geanway Sanitation, Inc. Long Lake. MN East Tonka Sanitation Long Lake, MN R & W Sanitation, Inc. & R & W Roll-Off Service Carver, MN Westonka Sanitation Mound, MN Development Engineering, P.A. 9051 Flying Qoud Drive AAA Pollution Control, Inc. St. Paul, MN Dick’s Excavating Stanchfieid, MN Ayes 5, nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGUIAR ORONO CITV COUNCIL MEETING HFJJ) ON MAY 23, 1994 (•#20)BILLS It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Ayes 5, nays 0. ADJOURNMENT The council adjourned to Executive Session at 10; 10 p.m. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk •X MINUTES OF COUNCIL WORK SESSION 7 HELD ON MAY 24, 1994 ROLL ^ The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Edward Callahan, and Councilmembers Goetten, Jabbour, Kelley and Hurr. Also present was Ron Moorse, City Administrator. The meeting was called to order at 8:00 a.m. The City Council met with the City Administrator to review the performance of the City Administrator over the past six months. The Council discussed areas of saiisfaciorv' performance and areas needing improvement. Based on the level of performance Mayor Callahan moved and Councilmember Kelley seconded that the City Administrator’s salary be adjusted to Step 3 of the City Administrator pay range, effective June I, 1994. Ayes; Callahan. Jabbour, Hurr and Kelley. Nays; Goetten. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 a.m. Edward J. Callahan. Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk I % MINUTES OF COUNCIL WORK SESSION HELD JLTVE 6, 1W4 ^ %The Council mel on ihe above date with the following members present: Mayor CallaSm. and Councilmembers Jabbour. Goetten. Hurr and Kelley. The following represetited staff; Ron Moorse, City Administrator; Steve SulUvan, Police Chief. The meeting was caUed to order at 8:00 a m. The City Council met with the City Administrator and the Police Chief to di^uss the performance of the Police Chief and police operations issues. The Council discussed areas of ^tisfactory performance and areas needing improvement. Based on the »evel of ^rtoman^ Mayor Callahan moved and Councilmember Kelley seconded that the Police Chiefs salary adjusted to Step 4 of the Police Chief pay range, effective June 6, 1994. Ayes; Callahan. Goetten and Kelley. Nays; Jabbour and Hurr. The Council directed staff to provide periodic updates regarding police operations issues to ensure the department is operating effectively. The Council reviewed police staffing and organization needs and directed staff to develop a proposal for its lecommended supervisory structure. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 a.m. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk ••' < REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June V \ ITEM NO; A ^-------------- Department Approval: Name Ron Moorsc Title City Administratw Administrator ReTiewed: ^Ifh Agenda Section: Ciiy Administrator’s Report Item Description: Park Commission Action Agenda for 1994 Park Commission Chair, Dick Flint, requested that the attached Orono Park Commission Action Agenda for 1994 be included in the agenda packet for Council review. ORONO PARK COMMISSION ACTlON_^ENPA-PQR-159^ 1st Quarter. 1994 uanu3rY*W3rcti) . Obtain proposal for park planning (done); decide upon process; present to City council Monitor ice rinks and develop proposals for improvement (John) Commence planning for Old Crystal Bay Playground; obtain public Input (sub-committee) work with developer of Dickey property regarding development of bike trail (staff and Park commission) Meet with golf course superintendent (done) Formalize Adopt-A-Park Program (Sherokee & John)(done) complete plans for French Creek Preserve (John & Susan) complete contracts with School Board and oba for new OBA field on school property (Staff. Sherokee & council) ‘NOTE: staff to monitor March • advertise the availability of canoe racks at Summit Beach (Staff) (done) NOTE: Advertise in newsletter next fall for spring availability Reorganize Park improvement Sub-Committee (#3) ^nri Quarter. 1994 (Aprll-June) Implement plans for French Creek Preserve and have formal opening ceremony (Sue & John) Rent canoe racks at summit Beach (staff) Continue planning for old Crystal Bay Playground (Sub­ committee) June meeting - Bus tour of selected parks (French Creek preserve, Hackberry. bike trails, crystal Bay site, and OBA) at 6:00 p.m. April and May • prepare parks for summer usage (staff) Repair turf and fall field at Hackperry Park before the t ball season starts (staff) continue planning for bike trail proposal (Sub-Committee: Dick, Susan, Lili, Jim) initiate park planning process (Park commission, staff, City Council) OBA to complete Little League fields on school property (Staff & sherokee) ^rrt Quarter. 1994 (July-Seotemben August meeting • select recipients for Friends of the Park award (Lili/Commlssion) Construction of first stage of Pike trail (Dickey propertyMDeveloper) continue park planning process and analyze survey (Park Commission) Complete plans for skating rinks and take any actions necessary to prepare skating rinks (Lill & Staff) • Prepare parks for winter (staff) continue planning for Old crystal Bay Playground (Sub­ committee) ath Quarter. 1994 (October-December) complete the Park Planning process commence monitoring of skating rinks REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ ^ Jg DATE: June 9, ITEM NO.: ^ !? «'/? Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1885 Lundgrcn Brothers, 2675 Sixth Avenue Nonh - Sketch Plan of a Rezoning to a Planned Unit Development Involving One Acre and Two Acre Unit Densities Brief Review of Application For more detail on the Planning Commission's review of the amended sketch plan at their May 16th meeting, please review the minutes of that meeting and the enclosed staff memo of May 12th and the exhibits attached. The applicant has filed a 44 unit PUD at an average lot size of 1.33 acres per unit. Excluding road and open space outlots, the average lot size is .85 acres although some of the building lots arc much smaller. The properties are served by a looped roadway accessed off Willow Drive. The application involves the filling of designated wetlands and protected areas not included in City ’s Conservation maps. A few of the building lots may be negated as they contain natural wetlands. Upon filing this sketch plan application for presentation before the Planning Commission, the applicant paid additional fees to include conceptual review before the City Council. At the April 11. 1994 meeting of the Council, applicant presented an amended PUD plan for 44 units that raised several new issues and the Council asked that applicant present the amended proposal before the Planning Commission for their consideration. The Planning Commission has completed the review of the amended proposal at their May 16th meeting and considered the following issues; A.Rezoning. The majority of the Planning Commission appeared to concur that 44 unit density was too intense and that a more acceptable density would be somewhere between 29 and 35. This was based on the need to provide open space buffers along the east side of the property adjacent to the existing developed rural two acre densities to the east side of Willow. Some of the budding sites were severely limited and appeared to be considerably under the average .85 acre per building site. Lots along Willow would have to be increased in width so that RR-IB setbacks could be maintained. Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 3 June 9, 1994 #1885 Lunderen Brothers, 2675 Sixth Avenue North B. C. D. E. The concept of transitional zoning would be consistent with the intent of Comp Plan Amendment No. 2. One acre densities adjacent to the multiple dwelling zone would be acceptable but there appeared to be a conflict with an even more important goal which was to protect the existing rural development to the east and the north. A maximum 35 unit PUD would appear to be an attempt to provide a moderate balance or transition between the multiple dwellings to the south followed by one unit per one acre and one unit per two acre development at north. PUD Rezoning. As in the original sketch plan, the Planning Commission strongly recommends the development of the property under a PUD plan based on the following findings: 1. The large number and random location of wetland High water table requiring major soil corrective measures in the placement of roads and the creation of building pads. 3.Comp Plan Amendment No. 2 strongly suggests that all development of this area be under a PUD format because of the environmental concerns and the need to minimize impact on the sensitive land. Wetlands. The Plannina Commission advised applicant that they would not approve the filling of natural wetlands which will have an impact on lots defined along the southern boundary. Members concur that they had no problem with the filling of designated wetlands within the interior loop portion of the plan because they had been altered over the many years of crop use. It is the intention of the developer to install higher quality wetlands to mitigate such tilling. Road and Lot Layout. The Planning Commission would like landscape buffers and larger building envelopes adjacent to Willow Drive. Some of the proposed lots are too restricted in area. The loop road along Willow Drive was acceptable and members did not feel it was necessary to provide a loop connection to Sixth Avenue North. Open Space Outlet. Applicant had asked the Planning Commission if the City had any special use that could be made of the open space outlet. Planning Commission members advised that the open space was required for density credit and that it should be used for mitigation areas and bike and pedestnan trails. It Request for Council Action continued page 3 of 3 June 9, 1994 ^1885 Lundgren Brothers, 2675 Sixth Avenue North pK)tential use of the open space outlot. 1 hey also asked that plans address need for pedestrian and bike trails connecting to the school property at the west. It would be the City ’s responsibility to provide direction to applicant concerning placement of bike trail along County Road 6 and Willow Drive. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: There is no formal action required of the Council. The applicant has now followed the appropriate procedures and fulfilled all requirements of the City and now seeks conceptual direction from the Council. A ■ rtr--w \ > -n-1 To:Orono Planning Cominission Members Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:May 12, 1994 Subject:#1885 Lundgren Brothers, 2675 Sixth Avenue North - Sketch Plan of a Rezoning to a Planned Unit Development Involving One Acre and Two Acre Unit Densities Existing Zoning District: RR-IB Proposed Zoning District: PUD Zoning (with underlying RR-IB and R-IA) Review of Area: Gross = 61.3 acres Net = 58.6 acres (excluding 2.7 acres of dedicated rights-of-way of adjacent public road) Revised plan proposes 44 single family lots. The average lot size equals 1.33 acres per unit. Excluding road and open space outlots = Average .85 acres PUD Zoning: Southern 30 acres at 1 unit per acre = 30 Northern 28.6 acres at 2 units per acre = 14 Pertinent Code Sections 1. Section 10.52 - Special requirements for rezoning in the Highway 12 Corridor Study area. 2. 3. Section 10.53 - Planned Unit Development Section 10.55, Subd. 8 - For all land alterations within 26’ of a designated wetland variance approval is required for any proposed alteration of a wetland. 4.Section 10.55, Subd. 15 (A) (2) - Properties located within MUSA and served by sewer may apply for wetland credit up to the amount of existing dry buildable area. List of Exhibits A - A-1- B - C - Application Staff Memo 11/12/93 Addendum to Application Gustafson Letter of 11/5/93 Zoning File i^l885 May 13. 1994 F'age 2 of 6 C D E F G II I J K L M N O Gustafson Letter of 11/5/93 Flood Plain Map Watershed/Drainage Recommended Alternative for Development Per Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 Minutes of Sketch Plan Review at Planning Commission 11/15/93 Existing Land Use Existing Zoning Propjosed Land Use Wetland Designation Information Wetland Mapping Highway 12 Corridor Alternatives Letter to Cook Sketch Plan PUD Status of Application The sketch plan application was presented to the Council at their April 11th meetmg. Applicant's revised plan raised several new issues The Council fell that further reuew and consideration was necessar)- by the Planning Commission before they could provide any direction to applicant and were directed to present the revised plan for consideration by the Planntng Commission at their May meeting. At the November 15. 1993 meeting. Planning Commission advised that the 58 unit density was not acceptable but would consider a plan for reduced density. You concurred that a 19 unit PUD (1 unit per 2 acres) served by sewer and water would not be realistic, but would be willing to consider increases over the RR- IB densities. One clear directive ot Comprehensive Plan No 2 required existing rural residential coned areas to the north and e.ast ot this property be buffered from the more intense developments to the south and so it was agreed 'ta' •• ">= density was to remain at the northern half of the property. Under the current 44 umi PUD plan the applicant contends that die required buffering would be met. The reduced density and clustering of building sites allows for open space areas. The Planning Commission also concurred that because of the unique physical character of this property that it be^t be developed as a PUD. The Planning Commission cited the high water table and the large number and random location of wetlands. The original application sought the rezoning of the entire property from 2 units to 1 unit oer acre The applicant now proposes the rezoning of the southern 30 acres ot the propeiiy to 1 acre or R-IA (an approved zoning district per Section 10.52) and the north 28 acres to remain I, 2 ^re. A major o^n space ouilot has been provided along the north averaging a 400 dep^ along County Road 6. The area will serve to provide tor wetland mitigation, open space buf and potential trail (pedestrian and bike) locations. Zoning File #1885 May 13. 1994 Page 3 of 6 Please review Exhibit B, applicant ’s addendum information. The 44 unit layout minimizes the impact upon the properties to the north and the school property to the west. Applicant had originally proposed special setbacks for the lots adjacent to the east along Willow Drive. Is a more restrictive setback adequate or should a landscape open space outlot be provided along the east boundary? It appears landscaping may be proposed within the residential lots. Applicant has not provided special setback information nor have house locations been noted. A loop road is no longer shown linking property to Sixth Avenue North. The new curb cut at the northeast comer of property would appear to meet the sighting distance from the intersection at County Road 6. The location of the access drive to the Shadowood plat is not shown and would have an impact on the final location ot new curb cut. All lots achieve access from the plat road and not from a shared driveway as originally shown with the 58 unit PUD. Applicant ’s addendum information did not propose special building setbacks so we must assume that the original setbacks proposed with the 58 unit PUD still holds tme tor the current and would be as follows: 30’ front yard setback typical. 30’ side along Willow Drive. 10’ side yard typical. 26 ’ to wetlands. Staff would recommend a 50’ side/street setback along Willow to be consistent with RR- IB setbacks. If RR-IB setback standards are to be maintained for the lots adjacent to Willow, the average lot width of 150’ would have to be expanded to create a feasible building envelope. Any filling of wetlands will be mitigated within the open space outlot along the north. As for grading and drainage concerns, the current plan does not provide the detail of the original so it is difficult to determine what impact any tilling may have in the creation of building pads. Once again, the City will not allow a natural wetlands such as Basin 6 or 7 to be filled. This would eliminate Lot 5 as Basin 7 extends northward. Although not in the same configuration as the City’s designated wetland maps, a closer examination has confirmed that the wetland extends northward and will be considered an Orono protected wetland. Review Exhibit L. designated wetlands shown within the interior of the loop will be tilled. As already noted in the earlier btaff memo of November 12. all wetlands not included within the conservation maps of the City will have to go through the required review of other agencies if there is to be a filling and mitigation of these wetlands. The City’s conservation maps include Basin 6, 7. 8. 9. 12. 12A and 13. If a City’s designated wetland is to be filled, it would be considered a variance and applicant would have to provide hardships. Zoning File #1885 Mav T3, 1994 Page 4 of 6 As in the earlier review, the City will be interested in seeing bike paths and other walking trails connecting to the school property to the west. General Review Comments on the Layout of the 44 Unit Proposal The City will not allow the filling of natural wetlands, obvious lot line changes have to be made. If designated wetlands are not to be filled, this will have a major impact on the current proposal. If we are to achieve similar setbacks as required in the RR-IB zoning adjacent to the property on ihe east side. Lots 1, 27, 28 aiKl 44 will have to be widened in their width in order to satisfy the 50’ setback from the side street lot line. Staff hai enclosed the original staff memo for your review' which outlines many of the issues that still hold true for the current 44 unit PUD, such as the paragraphs on Grading, Drainage, Wetland Areas and Flood Plain, Sewer and Water, and Access/Street/Trails. Review Exhibit B. Mr. Uban has listed for you the many reasons as to why he believes the City of Orono ’s Comprehensive Plan should be amended for this unique property and why a more creative approach is needed for development of the property. Staff is not going to repeat but asks you to review these 19 findings. These same findings also provide the basis needed for development under the PUD format. It is the issue of a rezoning to 1 acre and the higher densities than originally approved in Comp Plan Amendment No. 2 that is the single most concern of this application. Staff has been asked to consider the uniqueness of this property as to why a request for higher density rezoning would not open a floodgate of similar requests. Staff will list some of the findings that make this property unique: 1.During the planning process of Comp Plan Amendment No. 2, this portion of the property was included within the MUSA that would allow the extension of sewer to the rural zoned property. 2.Sewer was extended tc this property because of the high water table and poor soils. No form of development could be achieved with septic no matter what densities were proposed. 3.The property is surrounded by major trafficked roads - Highway 12 to the south. Sixth Avenue North and Willow to the east. All roads are proposed for more intense use. Willow is a potential future County road. Part of the current planning for Highway 12 calls for a heavier use of County Road 6. It currently receives more traffic as Highway 12 becomes more congested. 4.No other area of the City has been subjected to such a special planning process as the area defined within the Highway 12 Snidy Area. No other area has a special section in the Comp Plan that establishes special development standards and zoning. The plan encourages innovative approaches to development because of its special location and physical character. Zoning File #1885 May 13, 1994 Page 5 of 6 5. 8. This property is located close to a commercial/industrial road. The unique, flat elevations from Highway 12 to County Road 6 provide little relief from the noises and odors from heavy trafficked area. This property is located within a sewer and water district of the City and reflected planning for more intense uses in the Highway 12 Study Area. Municipal water systems and sewer systems were developed. The developer of Tandem Properties could have asked for sewer as sewer is immediately located to the northeast of the property. This would not have been allowed because the area was never designated for special consideration in the City’s Comprehensive Plan nor is the property located within a sewer or water district. The property is not located within a shoreland area where higher densities would nave been denied. The Highway 12 Corridor Study Area was designed to allow for PUD use recognizing the special needs of the area and the need to provide innovative choices and standards in the development of the areas. The PUD zoning is not offered in other areas of the City, only the Highway 12 aica. This was a deliberate move on the part of the City to limit its use. The flat elevations, the high water table and the random and numerous wetlands throughout this property suggest the need for clustering. In the original planning of this specific study area located between Willow Drive and Old Crystal Bay Road, there was a definite plan to provide transitional zoning from the more intense uses at the south to a less intense use to the north. The goal is to provide a buffer to the existing rural residential development to the east and north. A PUD format at moderately higher densities could provide the necessary buffer, similar to a 2 acre plat. Issues for Consideration 1.Has there been an adequate reduction in density? Should there be additional reductions? How do you feel about the rezoning of the southern 30 acres to 1 acre to achieve a 44 unit density? Again, this has been offered as the means of addressing the need to provide transitional zones from intense commercial to 1 unit per 2 acre densities. Will you allow designated wetlands to be altered as they will encroach obvious building envelopes of Lots 28, 29, 32, 34 and 35? Zoning File #1885 May 13. 1994 Page 6 of 6 5. 6. Do you agree that ihc natural wetlands Basins 6 and 7 should be protected aral not allowed to be altered? How shall the need to provide open space buffers along the east side of Willow be achieved? Through more restrictive setbacks as noted above by staff? Through open space landscape buffer? Or both? What is your opinion of the basic layout or configuration of lots? Applicant should make it clear as to what setbacks they are seeking. Define a typical building envelope. Planning Commission Action To provide applicant with clear directives concerning the current proposal addressing the following issues; 1. Use of rezoning to I acre to achieve density credit. 2. What of the 44 unit density? Should it be reduced? 3. Your position on the filling of natural wetlands and designated wetlands. 4. Bike/pedestrian trails. Need to connect to school property. 5. Other uses for open space area. 6. Landscaping, buffering within open space areas. 7. Resolve of the smaller density lots adjacent to Willow. How to provide buffer.... setbacks, open space landscape outlot or both. CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address O -h<. A' Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _ _ _ Please check one - Property ^ abstract or torrens? cm OF CS-VHO FlNAf^E OFFICE 1350200000 ^ 01 OEH 300.00 riXTi Tl 7.^A <V) :<ECEIPT-ThAt^K Y l ^ H2S6990 cool ROl ri4:5< X V'/ i fc// / ' Attach legal description to application. ^PPj^tpamt Phone (home ) _______ Name Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc._____ Phone fwork) 473-1231 Address: 935 East Wayzata Boulevard Citv: Wavzata Zip:----55.191 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Orono Center Properties Phone (home) c/o Reiersgord Law Firm Address: 4945 Halifax Avenue (attach list if more than one) ______ Phone (work) 922-7114 Citv; Minneapolis _____Zip: 55424 EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size One Unknown Unknown 58.6 Present Use (check) Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Totals all parcels Residential; no. of units _ Other (specify) Agricultural Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Existing Units New Units Total Units Units per 58.6 Acres Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). ,4 X 4. As an addendum to this application, please attach a^ separate list or any other persons you wish notified of this application. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Date_- - - - - - - -- 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Applicatiox is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ Date— - - - - - - - PEES X City Council Review of Sketch Plan Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Preliminary Review (Class I S II Subdivision) Preliminary Review (Class III s all non—residential) Final Plat Review (Class III) •(Plus any legal or engineering charges) Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Application $100.00 $200.00 300.00 300.00 325.00 + 25.00/Lot 175.00 150.00 100.00 Planning Commission and Council necessary to Pfocess this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Owner's Signature ^ Date 10' 14- Date ^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the unable *tcf at^t^n(f a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building fi Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. /■a^i To: From: Date: Subject: Orono Planning Commission Members Mayor Callahan arxl Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Admini strator November 12, 1993 #1885 Lundgren Brothers, 2675 Sixth Avenue North - Sketch Plan of Plaimcd Unit Development and Rezoning of Property Located within Highway 12 Corridor Smdy Area Existing Zoning District: RR-IB Proposed: PUD Zoning (with underlying RR-IB) Review of Area: Gross =61.3 acres Area of Dedicated Right-of-Ways = 2.7 acres Net Area = 58.56 acres Designated wetland areas have been approximated at 10 acres. Pertinent Code Sections 1. Section 10.52 - Special requirements for rezoning in the Highway 12 corridor study area, n 3. 4. Section 10.53 - Planned Unit Development. Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 - No land alterations within 26’ of a wetland. Variance approval is required for any proposed alteration of a wetland. Section 10.55, Subdivision 15 (A-2) - The property is located within MUSA and wUl be served with sewer and may apply for wetlands credit up to the amount of existing dry buildable land. Required dry buildable for 58 units at 1 acre per umt density = 29 acres dry List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - Application Addendum to Application Engineer ’s Report Flood Plain Map Waiershed/Drainage Patterns . Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 - Page 48, Recommended Alternative for Frankl^ J. Svobodia & Associates (Pertinent Sections from Wetland Classification, Etc. Report) Zoning File #1885 November 12, 1993 Page 2 of 6 H - Map of Existing Land Use I - Map of Existing Zoning J - Map of Proposed Land Use K - Plan for Phased Development L - Plan Locating Curb Cuts of Private Roads along Willow Drive M - City’s Wetland Map o j a N - Hiehwav 12 Corridor Alternative Development Plans Involving County Road 0 O - Sketch Plan Brief Review of Application The applicant seeks to rezcne property to a Planned Unit Development with underlying RR-IB zoning. Applicant seeks approval of one acre density. The propeny consists of 58.0 acres after the exclusion of the dedicated road nght-of-ways for Willow and County Road 6. The code will allow credit for the weUand areas as property will be sewered. The PUD tormat of devdonmem allows for an area credit of the access roads and open space areas along with the area of the residential lots. Based on the 58 lots, the City must be assured that there is a minimum of 29 acres of dry buUdable area for development excluding all designated or protected wetlands, retention ponds and drainageways. Review Exhibit F, the recommended alternative for development of this area was for two acre single familv residential development to be served with municipal sewer and water. Municipal serviced are located on the north side of Highway 12 at the Willow Drive mtersection. The developer would be responsible for extending municipal services north to the subdivision. The developer claims it is not economically feasible to provide municipal services to two acre lot development. The rezoning from two acre to one acre is a major issue for the City as the area was to serve as a buffer to the surrounding rural residential neighborhoods to the east and north from the more intensely developed properties to the south. The applicant has provided a strong argument in support of the rezoning. Lundgren Brothers has asked for the sketch plan and rezoning to be scheduled before the Council before formal plans are filed by applicant. Staff will review the rezoning issue first. If members object to rezoning and recoi^end demal, they need not proceed any further with the remainder of memo which will deal with the issues of th development plan. Rezoning The applicant has applied for a PUD rezoning at a one unit per acre density. The subdivision is planned in two phases; the first or 5 ihe^ PUD"code' second phase to be developed in 1995-96. Section 10.53. Subdivision 5 (D), the PUD code, provito additional protection to the City if development has not been realized. Zonmg may revert back to the original zoning district. Zoning File #1885 November 12, 1993 Page 3 of 6 Please review Exhibit B, applicant ’s addendum provides supportive findings for fezoning as follows: 1 There is adequate sewer capacity for 58 units as overall sewer needs for the area were projected at 300-450. The recommended alternative plan showed the 1-0 acre area at a maximum development density of two acres with a potential 60 units Half of the 120 acres is being developed into ballfields and an elementary school. T e proposed 58 units could easily be acconunodated. The PUD has been designed to minimize impact on adjacent rural properties to east and north by providing larger, deeper lots with more restrictive setbacks on the no^ side and a natural buffer of existing weUands and open space along the east side. Applicant also notes that the existing wetlands along the south side will provide a buffer from the multiple residential units planned for property to south. 3. The PUD was specifically created for the Highway 12 corridor to encourage the best development by allowing clustering and designation of open space areas to buffer an protect sensitive areas. 4 The PUD provides efficiency as far as consolidating lots along the interior road system and minimizing earthwork needed for correcting high water table problems. 5. The high water table and random location of wetlands require flexibility in design and lot layout. 6 The application as proposed would satisfy the special requirements the Highway 12 corridor snidy area as set forth m Section 10.52 and addressed on Pages 5-12 of applicant’s addendum. Review Exhibit O. Applicant ’s addendum has noted that a major retention pond at approximaKWb 7 acms will £ installed as a result of the Highway 12 safety ™pravem»ts I H n*fh#» next few vears The City Engineer advises that the safety plans have been “d aid t retention iond area has been reduced to 4 acres. The Pond to ^n designed to treat only the runoff from Highway 12 and not the developed land areas to north. Issues for Consideration 1 Will the PUD as proposed be compatible with adjacent existing and propose u«s of surritmding properties .... wUl it meet the intent of Comp Plan Amendment No. 2? 2. WUl the special design features of the PUD layout assure fumre compatibility? Zoning FUe #1885 November 12, 1993 Page 4 of 6 3 Review Exhibit N. Two alternate development plans for an expanded Highway 12 corridor along County Road 6 will impact this property. Does this influence your decision? 4.The City planned for a total of 300-450 units of future development where existing and proposed uses of City, the school and now Mn/DOT will limit the development of those units. Does this influence your decision? Should the City's decision be inlluenced by the need to make payment for certain public faciliues installed and planned for the servicing of these umts? Planning Commission members should be prepared to make a recommendation to the Council with the necessar>' supponive findings. 5. Review of PUD Development Plan Proposed average lot size = 44,010 s.f. Exclusive of road and open space outlet Smallest lot size is 17,200 s.f. Largest lot size is 88.970 s.f. = 28.539 s.f. Proposed building setbacks 30’ front yard setback ^ r> • 50’ rear yard setback, 100’ along County Road 6 and Willow Dnve 10’ side yard setback, 30’ adjacent to Willow Dnve 26 ’ to wetland Lot Configuration Issues The R-l A or one acre zone would require 35' ‘'reet. 30' rear and ID' side setback^ TOe proposed setbacks work for this PUD. They appear to function for this lot ^yout. Staff sees TO problem Note the 30' side setback of the two acre zomng dismcl was called out for the 1^ along Willow Lots 1 and 8. As already stated, the lots along County Road 6 have 100 setbacks provikng not only a buffet to the northem residential lots but aim to the ^sy “U J road Some of the residential units do not meet the required 26 setback from »he adjacent wetland. Filling for the building pads is aUo located within recommends that the 26 ’ setback be maintained for all land alterations and structural setbacks. Grading, Drainage, Wetland Areas and Hood Plain Note all building pads are lined along the «tion^h"ldbgTads raised 8' to bring fill dang-.ously close to the weUand area. It is doubtful whether four lots can be developed in the area. > Zoning File #1885 November 12, 1993 Page 5 of 6 Review Exhibit G, wetlands defined as Number 6 and 7 are naniral. Staff recommends that there be no alterations within the natural wetland areas. Lots 5 and 6 would have to be relocated and the road may have to be realigned. Seven of the potential wetland areas were deemed to not meet the wetland criteria and have not been shown as a protected area. The remaining wetlands are classified as agricultural - urban wetlands that have been altered - the land has been farmed for years. Some of the Ag/urb wetlands will be filled in and mitigated a 2:1 ratio shown to the east side of the subdivision. It will be necessary for applicants to receive approval from the appropriate agencies for the filling and mitigation of wetland areas. The City’s code defines wetlands 7, 8. 9, 12, 12A and 13 in their invento^. Variance to Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 is required as our code does not allow the filling of protected wetlands. Once again, these are not natural wetlands but wetlands that have been altered throughout the year. It is not clear how much area within these defined protected areas is being altered. After January 1 of next year, the replacement of any filled wetlands will be required at a 2:1 ratio and that replacement be of the same or better type wetland. What kind of setbacks will we require from the retention ponds? Will we require the same 26’ setback that we require for the wetland areas? Review Exhibit D, the property is not located in the flood plain. Sewer and Water As already noted, sewer and water will be e.xtended from the existing municipal lines to the north side of Highway 12 at the Willow intersection. Applicant will be responsible for extending sewer to the property. The City Engineer has asked that the water main be extended to the northwest comer of the site for a future connection to the City of Medina’s water system. The water main should also be extended to the west property line at the most westerly cul-de-sac for a future .oop to the water main on Old Crystal Bay Road. Access/Street/Trails The City will ask for a bike trail easement along the north side adjacent to Countjr Road 6 The Engineer recommends that a walking trail be provided between Lots 14 and 15 connecting property with school. It may be better to locate the walking easement through Lots 17 and 18. TTie Engineer recommends that a connection be made to a platted corridor within the school property to the west. Based on former agreements with the school, the City has agreed to vacate the roadway upon the school ’s complete acquisition of the four parcels that make up this subdivision. It has always been the intention of the school to never have a connectmg roa from Willow Drive through to Old Crystal Bay Road because of the proposed uses of school and playground/ballfield areas. It is staffs understanding that applicant is workmg wi* the school to acquire additional area by the curb cut access road at the north (County Road 6). Zoning File #1885 November 12, 1993 Page 6 of 6 Lots 10, 11, 12 and 13 are served by a single driveway. The City ’s code requires a private road at this level of service. It is d'^ubtful whether the four lots will be realized in this area based on the location of the natural wetlands and the need to fill for roads and four building pads. The City will also require the pl’.nmg of drainage and utility easements along the perimeters of each of the residential lots. Summary Comments The location of the wetlands throughout the property will result in the loss of units. Staff cannot recommend the filling of a namral wcUand nor should we allow variances to the 26’ setback. The real issue for the City will be if it allows the filling of protected wetlands and the mitigation of these wetlands. The random location of these wetlands creates a major hardship for this applicant. If replacement resulted in an upgraded improved wetland over one that has been altered over the years, this may be beneficial for the City and something to consider. The City cannot allow four units to be serv'ed by a private drive. Applicant will have to amenu road layout. If applicant files a formal plan, the City will expect to see a landscape plan providing for landscape buffering within the open space outlots at the north and along the east. The City is already in receipt of a sample of the covenants used in a former Lundgren project and will be available at your meeting for review. It is staffs understanding that members will be contacted this weekend to determine if members wish assistance or guidance with the site inspection of the property. Isv b DAHL jGREN SF lARDlDVV ANDUB/\N ;NCOfc»*n» ^ no CONSULTING P'. ANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH SUITE :ioMINNEAPOLIS. MN 55»Ol 6i; 339 noo April 25, 1994 Orono Planning Commission City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Long Lake. MN 55356 RE: Lundgren Willow Drive Property Dear Planning Commissioners: We met with the City Council on April 11 and were directed to review our revised pl^ with the Planning Commission for your recommendation. This property is in a transitional part of Orono and needs careful consideration to develop the best plan for the City of Orono. The following is a summary of the reasons why we believe the City of Orono Compreheiwive Plan should be amended for this property, and why a creative approach to this property is in the long term best interests of the City. The property is within the MUSA approved by the City of Orono and the Metropolitan Council, costly infrastnicture has already been built to accommodate this site being sewered. 1. 2. The high water table makes on site sewer unfeasible. 3. 4. 5. 6. The required long extension of utilities is very expensive and costs must be spread over a reasonable number of developed lots so that lot cost can compete within the marketplace. Extensive grading must take place to raise streets, utilities and building pads above the water table at a substantisd cost. Highway 12, with existing and proposed commercial uses, and the institutional uses to the west imparts the desirability of this site. Therefore a very expensive home on a 2 acre lot would not effectively compete in the market place. The extensive wetland complex makes normal development patterns ineflBcient and costly. Orono Planning Commission April 26, 1994 Page 2 7.Usb.8 sound nnd nomuDy .ocp.»d planning prindptes. * land use should form a transmonal pattern north from Hgh y ^ tcvicial would be from Commerdal, to Multifamily. then to Smgle Family one aae sewered. then Rural two acre unsewered. 8 Land Use transition is needed also west to east. From toututional. then to Smgle Family one acre sewered, to Rural two acre ur,sewered. o Since the City of Orono's Comprehensive Plan was adopted, the ^hool District the 60 acrcs to the West for future school expansion. This change m ^"la ’nd use ^ muci mte intense than the existing guiding of two acre lots. '0 The City of Orono's Comprehensive Plan designates 120 acre for 60 home sites to to Si«y acres purcLsed by the school district are 'o b'“nv'rtrf to Institutional use leaving the subject property alone to accommodate the 60 u 11 County Highway 6 is projected to carry 12,000 vehicle trip per days in the future Depending on the final Highway 12 upgrade solution, dirked to the county roads The subject property is directly impacted on the north with traffic noise and possible ROW enlargement. Devetopment should be clustcre to the southern portion of the site (as proposed by Lundgren Bros.). 1 The property is surrounded on three sides with dissimilar uses. County Hi^way 6 on the north, Orono School district expansion to the west, and ^ and commercial to the south. This property should be a transitional land use to the unsewered Rural area to the east and north. 13 Since the City of Orono adopted its Comprehensive Plan in 1987, the State Wetl^d Regulations tove changed substantially, restricting normal development patterns that were contemplated at the time the comprehensive plan was adopted. 14 'fhe City of Orono in its- Comprehensive Plan of 1987 did not know if the area would ' develop with on-site sewer or public sewer. It is now evident that sewer must be tended all the way from Highway 12 to the site in order for development to take place. 15 The City of Orono's Comprehensive Plan identified 116 sewer ^ level^pment. Seven years later there are still 58 urnts going enough sewer capacity for the 44 homes proposed by Lundgren Brothers. Orono Planning Commission April 26, 1994 Page 3 16. 19. •n,;. n,rr^l nf land can suooort more homes than presenuy investment of tax dollars to provide the existing inftastnicture. Comprehensive to the Th - Citv of Orono ’s Development Plan used to determine the adopted guiding in the oresent comprehensive plan on the subject property, contemplated a road connection school is now requesting tne vacation of that RU S portion of the Lundgren parcel. The proposed re-guiding of the parcel would only affect the southern aO a«es. Tins areaL dhectly ad^cent to the multi-family guided land and with a Single ° aae designauon would form a uansition to the Northern portion whch would remain two acre rural residential This double buffering will be a benefit to the adjacent properties and supportive of the City's tax base. Proposed Density Southern 30 acres 1 unit/acre ]^nrthem 28.6 acres 2 units/acrc 30 14 58.6 acres 44 units This site is relatively featureless, void of the naturat amenities that would ^low for very expensive homesites. The extraordinaiy development costs attnbutable to tbs or^ietty (poor sods, wetlands, high water table, low density, agnificant grading and long dhtance for utilities) make development impossible without at least 44 horn sites to absorb the extremely high development cost. DAHLGREN. SHARDLOW. AOT UBAN. INC C. John Uban Principle KG/ss ^ I Bonestroo Rosene mPH AndehikA |\| Associates Engineers A Architects November 5, 1993 Omo G Bonevroa ttOM«T *' • jc^es:*" C p? Marvr) L ServM E Vner »£ G«^nn « C«30» <^€ £ Noyrv PE Paopn G k'»u''<*n PE Su«r M EOr^ C P A •Senor Consucani A SjNb« A Gexoor Pf PE O ^s«ccj Pf «t3De-t C Pusse* a i a A touidor PE A Pf V^c^'ae ^ P^uf^jrin Pf »<3 A Pf ThortiM t Andmon A i A Don^ C BK^gJKK Pf E Angui Pf 'yri^ei Ma-lsner Pf Menje P Kau Pf /^nes M Ping AfCP Pf^Ap J Py»^ PE Thomai W PE Mcrvie; C PE • Va.and PE ierry C Pp»mc^. Pf Scon J Ai^aoTA. Pf vertfm P Andpnon Pf Mart # BtJPl pf Mart A pf Gary w Moner* pf Dan#- J fogpoon PE A men Schin^lt pf |»>*P J CasttPA PE Mart D A'aiH PE MilM t JPf«fA pf L »hit© Grav?* Pf Ratm L Wiemeh Pf Gary O ArfSK^Q P| f fjdd *0«pr Pf tf^ t taop PE DckJtfS* J Beno€ PE O GuVjrion PE CpcAO Ovipr Pf Paul C «rjPf PE jonr P Goa3 p< p£ Chanw A fnekson teo M Pattpfity Hanan M Ohon f ErtgfPtardl C i.'CV G Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Lundgren Bros. File No. 139-GEN Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the preliminary sketch plan prepared by Schoell <& Madson, Inc. for Lundgren Bros. Construction. The property is located west of Willow DrKe and south of eSAH No. 6 in the southwest quarter of Section 28. There are several issues that need to be addressed relative to engineering matters. The street alignment is acceptable and appears to be in conformance with City Codes. It should be discussed whether the streets will be public or private. We recommend that the right-of-way for a future through street be platted to the west at the most westerly cul-de-sac. This right-of-way can easily be aligned with the existing platted right-of-way on the school property. If development plans are prepared for the school that do not include this connection, the right-of-way could be vacated. A trail outlot should be platted along the south side of CSAH No. 6. Also, pedestrian access to the school property should be provided by means of a trail between lots 14 and 15, or at the end of the most westerly cul-dc-sac. We recommend that the trails be constructed as part of the site improvements. Both sanitary sewer and water main will need to be extended north from Trunk Highway 12 along Willow Drive. The water main should be extended to the northwest corner of the site for a future connection to the City of Medina’s water system. Water main should be extended to the west property line at the most westerly cul-de-sac for a future loop to the water main on Old Crystal Bay Road. The four lots at the southwest corner of the property (Lots 10, 11, 12, and 13) are proposed to be served with a single driveway. TTie City Code allows only two lots to be served on a single driveway. Three or more lots will require a street be constructed for proper access. These four lots have proposed house pad elevations 8 feet higher than the existing ground and proposed driveway elevations. No grading contours are shown for the fill placement that will be needed to develop these lots. Fill in this area will likely affect the wetlands in that vicinity. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth November 5, 1993 Page -2- Thc City Code requires a 26 foot setback from wetlands that arc identified in the City s wetland inventory map. These wetland areas are identified on the sketch plan as numbers 6, 8, 9, 12, 12A, 13 and part of 7. All other wetlands that have been delineated arc regulated at the State level by the Wetland Conservation Act At the present time interim guideUnes for the Act arc in force. Beginning on January 1, 1994, the permanent rules will be in effect. These rules will require the replacement of any filled wetlands at a 2:1 ratio based on area. This ratio applies for replacement with the same type of wetland that was lost. At the Federal level the wetlands are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The plan shows some of the wetland areas that will be filled as part of the site grading, as well as the wetland replacement mitigation area. However, due generally to the random location of wetlands, it appears that the proposed density of 58 lots may be more than the property can accommodate. Drainage and utility easements will be required 5 feet wide along all lot lines and 10 feet wide along the roadway right-of-ways. Drainage easements should be provided over the ponding, wetland and mitigation areas. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. D f'i00 i:.PA CORPORATE LIMITS f— . !( City Long I AREA NOT If LIMIT OP detailed STUDY iTr 6.2 c.r.s. f cu^vsLeu. PC-1 IavENI LC-3 -^'WATERTOWN ROAD r*LC -4 • • LL-2 CITY '-S'jBIi LONG L LL - 1 FRL- 1 4: Reconunended Alternative - The wetlands and natural vegetation in the area provide an excellent transition between the more intense use planned for the south and single family 2-acre to the north. Utilizing this as a break, the area to the north will remain at the 2-acre rural residential standard. For the area south of the wetlands, the planning consultant has offered four development schemes. providing multi-family units (either town house or apartments) to the immediate south of the wetlands with alternatives for varied commercial uses abutting Highway 12. The four alternatives of development are considered at an acceptable level for projected sewer needs ranging from 300 to 450 sewer units.The configuration of the frontage road would be dependent on the type of development undertaken but would provide for access points at Old Crystal Bay Road and Willow Drive, approximately 300' back from their intersections with Highway 12. No.! 6Co.._^ • • ft • • •#•••••*•• •^ft ft • • ft • •*•••• B'ftftft.ftftft • •’•*ft***.• >••«*•* • • ft • - • ft ft • • • ftftaftftftSft.ftftftftftft .ftft»ft«ft Sft'ft.ftaftft 5 • • • ft * • • ft a.ftftftftftftft r. ftft.ft •* .I __t................. • ft ft • ft * ^ ftftftftfttft* *ft*ft^» »ftft.»eftft» •• ft*ft*ft*» ■ • t ft ftftft.ftftft.ftft •*ft*ft^*« *ft*ft**** ft". • ft ft ft ft*ft*»ft ft ft ■ Bft ftft«»ftft*ftftft*ft*«ftft ftftft ft • . . • » ftftftft •• • •• »»• t «ft ««• .•«*« . . •••••ftftft*** •ftft««*ftft. ftftft. ••••ftftftftftftft.ft*. • ••^.• •«**‘*'..ftftft».. •*••••* ftftftftftftftftftft. •.••ft. •••••••••■ • ...ftft ftftftftftftftftftftft* ft. •••ftftftfta**.....ftftft»ftft««ftftft<ft ft. 1-' ** ' ■••••ftftftftft.a* ■•••■* •ftftftftftft* - ftftftftftftftftftft^ .«••• ..•••< 'ftftftSftft. ftftftft*. ftft.*-. -A •••••. .■•.•••■•••••.• ••••)• • ft • ••••••••••••••••.•'- M ••••••••••••••-ftftftftftftftft.ftft- • • . . %. ....•••••••••••.•••••■ m •••••«•••••••••••••.••«•*•• !• ' • * * .ftft •^•^•^•^•^ft ft^ft ft • ft^ft ftft. »ft^ft^ft^ft^ft ft ft^«^ ft ft ft ft ft ft »^ft ft ftftft ft^ft^ft ft . • ...«.ft.ftft«ftftftftftftft. - gf ftftft* ftft ••ft*. ftftft*ft.ftft*ftft. ftftftft*. • ^ ..•••••ftftft.*. ft**. W • .•*••••. ftftft^ftftftftVftftftftftftftftftVftm - ...*•**••••••■ jm ■ •••••••• •••ftft*ftftftftft*ftftft«ftft.ft ... V ..-••••**•*•••. ^ •**•**•. •« .•••••*••. ftft.ftftftftft* V •.•.•••••*•••. ftA * .aCft*** •*.*••••«• ••*•■ ftftaftftft ^ ••ftftft»*ft«ft.»*. A ^ '..•*•••••. ••ftftBft*.*ft« •••••ftftt* ft- ^ .••ft * • ft. .•••••••* ftft*.ftft>*ftft«*«.. ftftft.ft « • ft ft ft ft • * ♦ i » ft * ^ ft • ft ft ft • •*^* •*••.•• «•••••• •••ftftftftftftftftftft •*• ft • •••ftftft. *..••*•.. • •••ft *•••••• • ft •• *•••*••••••■••• • •.••••••ft - ftft*•••.•••••••••4 • ••••••••••■ft*^ • ••••**ftftftft«*ftft • •■«••••*••••*•• 4«ftftftft.«. ftftftft. . • •••••••ft**ftftftft • ••ftftftft. ••••••4 • ••••••ft** «••• • •••ft •••••ftftft^ • •••••ft.ftftftftft* • ••.•••.ftftft - . • ■ • • ft • ft*. •*•*• •*• • •••••ft* ••*•'•'! • •••••ft.* ••«*•• *•*•••***•••• • ••••••••••••ft*• ••••••.*•••«• • •*•*•••.•• ft ft . ft • ••••••••••ft •• • •**.ftft.*ftftft ftft .•••.••••■•ft. ft • . Pi' ^ . •■ .•.«•••*...•.••••••••.•,••••••.••. *» .V . • • a-**. •...-.•«•*•••••••«••*••• •••*••••••••••*••••«-. fftftft•».. • -•..•.•*••*•••.•.«••.••*••••••■•«••••,■••*• *• . • ft # V'ft*« ».... • '•'•••«•••* ftftft. •••.••**•••*•••. .«••••••.•¥ .* *1. «>«•*• *••«••••••••.•••••••»•••*•••••••• • ■ • • • V •* *. ■ .* ■ .•*•••••«••••• » ••■••* .ftft*«ft •••••.••••••••Jk. ■*•* ^a ••■*•* •••••••••.•.••*••••••••••«••••••••••• 4^ .-■.•• wf ■*.• -' -•*••.•*••*••••. .••••••••ftftftft.ftaft****. * a . . M • • . 7ft«* . ••.•••**•••••••••••»••••••..>• *^* ^ Single Family 2ac. ili:; •‘.’•'•‘ft'.",** •• • . *•• •«•»••••*. •••>• ■ '.''A*•*•*•*•*•*•* *•••••*••••* • -•••••••••*•*•.•••• *••••••••**•• i< .••••ft***** #•••«••« ft. •••■•. •••••••*•• .«*•.- . • . ft ft • • * - - jgtr •*•-••••*••..»••«•••••••♦»••»(• . • . . • *^ft • * • »^»^ft ••.ft***ft* ft^« • . • • ft • MBwu iMPfWBftaaoe'’''• •**•.•••••••*••••••••••••••. ••••»•••«•• -..■••••••-•••••*•••••••••••••••••••_.- • •• •••••••. .••• .••**. *••••*••••••••*• • ... ■••••••••«*••••*••••••••.••.•.*••.•. • •••••••••ftftft^ ...•.•••••• -W. *•••*•••••• - • • • . . • . a . .. ..•••••••••^. *..•••*•. . •*•*•*. •*• aLft*ft «*•*•*•*ft*♦*•*•*♦ »*•*•*4*•*♦*•*•*•*•*• ♦ • •••••••ftft*. ft. * •.•••••••••■•*••••*.*•. • ••••••••^••••••ft Aft ^ * ••••••••aftftftftft* .m A. - ft ft • ft • ' * * ft * • •.••••.ft* ft^^* - *•*••.•••.- • . »•*-•••..*.•■ • •'••••••••••••ft • •ft ••••••••••*• .••••*••- •*•••• ft • ft ••••*•• »••••• liiiiiiiigj §|;{ ;; i Multi-Family Residential \ ^.................................................................................^ •••••••••.••ft ft • ft ft M•••*••• ••••*ftftftftft.ft«ftftft«<•*•*••••••••••••••••••••••••ftftftft .••••••••••••••ft mMmiir*--- 4•*•*• •*.* • • • rV-iftfts, .Xvtv-: r; ftft * 4 * •%4ft*ftft*fta^ ^•* • • ft .%•••• • ft fteeftftftft Mm ••«•••• k __ •*•*. •*♦ Commercial ♦ ft ft • *.’v ■BIH Primary Frontage Road •••• Alternate Frontage Road Proposed Alternative Area 3 Fig. 29 planning commission minutes CITY OF ORONO NOVEMBER 15, 1993 & the lot limits the area available for the building. ^ thp dP«;ian of the house in relation to the shape of the lot and :r™«s ■»« responded that it was dictated by the shape of the lot. w I inHniii«;r g-ay-nndpH for aop*'^"^?* *?f 892 Variance fQ.r Commissioner PefQr?Qn mQved._y—, irh thr hnrd^'^''“r and ? variance_ior_a Thr...........V......-....... 30' .n °" with a 13.700 <^n. ft. building envelofig. Commissioners Lindquist voted "aye". Mptioo d9rried» 224fs"od Brd*%ariance • Public Hearing .Rescheduled to danuary. 1994, vererow^RJaTrouth - Variance - Redoes, to modify approved Development Plan Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mab^^^ pToblems with the up after Council had approved the original plans. rnmmi<;<;inner Nolan moved. Peterspn ?gco^d^‘ !!^o,^.To':;SonlrrNm^^^^^^^^ “ carried. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW ^;|fsirh A^nurrrt'h ^srerchlra: Review for proposed subdivision Commissioner Peterson left the table for the following discussion. Building and Zoning Administrator f ^harth^zoning was the and required no action by the Planning Commission. She stated tha most important issue, and reviewed the staff report. m 8 planning commission minutesCITY OF ORONO NOVEMBER 15, 1993 (P- Chairman Schtoeder inquired if the City would " ;"^e^"ontg''Mfyor Ed^Cailahan stated that the Council was not in favor of the retoning, and that v/as the extent of the drscussion. Mr. Terry Forbord, Lundgren j'“^ ® why the retoning Concerns. He introduced Mr. John a Certified Wetland Director of Land Development for Lundgr and Ken Adolph, a Principal Engineer with Biologist to discuss the wetland rnttigation ^ ^^3^^ iried to provide Schoell and Madson in Minnetonka. Mr. Forbord those of other distinctive features in their . ^ the supply of available land diminishes. John Uban showed exhibits that were type^of *^eve?o^^^ He diLussed the was important to the City of fenvisioned in the City's proposed zoning density and noted t should be considered. Among these is theComprehensive Plan, there are reasons why t should be cons.ae^ fact that the school is expanding and the chore P ^ J . ,_,g g^g^gd they believe this been constructed on property adjacent to * ® ^ reviewed the PUD zoning project would balance the residential and c u .jg p that a municipal sewer system is designation and discussed the development idea and needed for development of the property. ,__.jK|p He discussed the buffering for the mo;:cra7d'.heTdinrnce%r°eb^ busy roadways surrounding the site and the ddj^ent land uses as being compatible with the proposed zoning. 1 t . _ _-------A ^ t I He discussed tne compe..:>a.u.y.....7^ \ ^ch would mean that two acres or they will create new wetlands at a ratio of 2 to , illustrated where the wetlands we!Iand will be created for every one acre »',?ees anregetation within those are located on the site and described '' tiands have been subject to agricultural tillage wetland areas. He stated that most of the ^ considered to be "pristine" in the past, depending on the amount of rain ' ® variance to allow the wetlands wetlands. He asked the Planning Commission to consider a varian. to be modified. Ken Adolph. Sbboell and Mad^^ b” extended i^m the aTea, and noted septic systems. He stated that sanitary sewe nattern which could economically ren:rdV;— planning commission minutes CITY OF ORONO NOVEMBER 15. 1993 plan and the site grading and drainage plans. He showed graphics illustrating the wetland mitigation proposals. John Uban reviewed the zoning issues and the density ^ acre He discussed the site constraints and reviewed the design for the proposea ri oinnmpnf Hp exolained how the runoff can be consolidated and retained in one large wed nd area by us^^^^ features of the site. He discussed tree preservation plans nnrt thP roadwav olan He stated they believe it is beneficial to put the open space around the penr^ett of\he She and cLtL the houses together on the interior portion of the srte^ He discussed the internal roadway system and their efforts to ® M °ac%s which that the site consists of 58.6 acres, and the ''®-®'°P'^®"' p;olsed =pment ^f'Xe^VSo rna'irceTtherir arieT ratln^ ^ o^uality development. standTrd" l^rinquired increase the^ot size to SVprfTus=inrnd"wt:th^d?^^^ staff to design 3 project that would best suit their potential customers and in case supported^ format for development. He noted that the one unit per acre density exceeded the normal density throughout the metropolitan area. Chairman Schroeder commented that the City of Orono has 2-5 acre which exceeds the standards of other communities in tne metro area. -ccuo reaardinq the costs involved with extending municipal utilities to the property and '^sue ;?h;w?hose c"lt "would be passed on ,o the buyers of the lots within P; P®® d development. Commissioner Nolan inquired why septic systerns '"P®" '’,®g^®o®,® this site, and Ms. Mabusth responded that a study had been ‘‘°"®"I® ® earlier subdivision which indicated that no septic systems should be P'®®®^ '^'® P'®"® ''' She noted she felt that PUD was the proper zoning designation for this property. The costs invoived with extending City sewer to the P^°P®^'V were discussed Je^twTacm the density was discussed, with the Commission concurring that the ^ density was preferable to the one unit per one acre density Forbord stated that it was not feasible to proceed with the pro)ect th^^ ^ ^ the requirement of the City. He explained how their costs per benefits to those of other developers. Commissioner Nolan commented he Hpnsitv and clustering the houses within the development, but he was concerned abou p J^ord inquired if the density could be reduced and the project st.ll Mr Forbo^^ responded that there was a diversity in what people wanted and he PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CITY OF ORONO NOVEMBER 15, 1993 project would be viable if they were required to construct it with a one unit per two acre density. Chairman Schroeder stated he supported the one unit per two acre density and he would like to see tha project developed with that density. Commissioner Lindquist stated he concurred with Chairman Schroeder and hj would have difficulty supporting the project as proposed. Commissioner Nolan stated he thought the plan showed sensitivity to the area but the density issue was something he had to agree with his ~ w commission 3 tn. The overall density of the project was discussed. Mr. Forbord commented that if the City was going to require a density of two acres per unit this property would not be developed by Lundgren Brothers and would probably not be developed at all given the expense of providing municipal utilities. He asked if the City was saying that they did not want this property to develop at all. Chairman Schroeder responded that they wanted to se? the land developed with fewer lots, but it was not accurate to say that the City did not want the land to be developed at all. John Uban asked if the Planning Commission would support a plan with multiple access from County Road 6, and all the Commissioners responded negatively. Mr. Forbord stated that it was not the price of the land which made it so expensive to develop the project, but the costs involved with the grading costs, which were three times *:ne usual given the poor soils and the high water table. He stated they believe the s'^e is ideal for a PUD zoning designation. Chairman Schroeder stated that they would considei the plan with a reduced density. Commissioner Peterson returned to the table. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 14. Report by Planning Commission Representative to Council Meeting of November 8, 1993. Chairman Schroeder reviewed the actions taken by the Council which included acceptance of the Planning Commission recommendation regarding i; .» 1 ‘ots and staff had been directed to draft an ordinance. He stated that the McKinney dupi* x was approved, although the City Attorney had informed them tnat they could not legacy require owner occupancy. 15. Other issues for discussion. There were* none. • ; planning commission minutes CITY OF ORONO NOVEMBER 15, 1993 ADDITIONAL ITEMS 16. Planning Commission approval of minutas of the October 18, 1993 meeting. rnmmissioner Schroeder moved. Lindnuist seconded, for approval gf thg October 18, 1 993 Lnninyr ommt^o minntee as submitted . Commissioners Nolan, Schroeder, Peterson, and Lindquist voted "aye". Motion carried. 17. Planning Commission approval of minutes of the October 21, 1993 special meeting. Chairman Schroeder m,^veH Pererson seconded- for approval of ye Qcwb^l.^2 oiannion Cr;r;imlsa,on f.necial m°°rmg min.ir^s as submitted. Commissioners Nolan, Schroeder, Peterson, and Lindquist voted "aye". Mo^'On cgrri.ed- 18. Planning Commiss:on to select a representative to attend the December 13, 1993 meeting of the Council. Chairman Schroeder volunteered to attend the December 13, 1993 Cilv Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT --------Paramoo moved. Lindquist seronded^ to jdioum the ^ a, 11 no n.m. Commissioners Nolan. Schroeder, Peterson, and Lindquist voted aye . M2L2_ carried. The meeting was adjourned. Charles Schroeder, Chair SION MINUTES )3 meeting. of the October 18. 1993 Schroeder, Peierson, and )3 special meeting. f tho nrtoher 21. 1992 Commissioners Nolan, ember 13, 1993 meeting 93 City Council meeting ling Commission meeting jist voted "ave ”. Motion IS Schroeder, Chair J'v t:i •*v 1 . - • r* M s • . ^ •. «» • • SieO'i Tti““’.rwm HP 4 •• t.!» C 33(D ■■■■ ■D (A <D Q. Tl ■0) *3 3■■■■ < Willow'■''’"“'^■■^jjrn-Drive % • i."-j *• *t * t »• ♦ ^ •’ • ^ f «< 7 »; 4^4 4i ffolM m i*»>» ># ‘ • ^ I ^S- 4 1.® ______- t V TABLE M THE ORONO SITE WETLAND DESCRIPTION INFORMATION ' • Appendix E * • From Soil Survey of Hennepin County ’ • From Hydric Soils manuji Area Wetland Type On NWl Map (Y/N) Quality Class' Domioani Vegetation Soils’ Present Hydric Soil* (Y/N) Welland Conditions Met No. Circ. 39 Cowardin 1 1.2 PEMlA Y Ag/Ufb Reed Canary Grass Mamet Y Y 2 2.3 PEMIC N Ag/Urb Spikerush. Catiail Hamel Y Y 5 N Giant Ragweed. Smanweed Glencoe Y N 4 N Barnyard Grass. Smartweed Le Sueur N N 5 2.3 PEMIC N Ag/Urb Spikerush, Cattail Glencoe Y Y 6 2.3.6.7 PEMl/SSl/FOlD/C Y Nat •Reed Canary Grass. Cattail. Elm. Dogwood, Sedge Glencoe Y Y 6A 6 PSSIB Y A|/Urb Willow, Hummock Sedge Glencoe Y Y 7 2.3.7 PEMI/FOIB/C Y Nai Reed Canary Grass. Green Ash. Elm Glencoe Y Y 8 2.3.4 PEMIC/F Y Aj/Urb Reed Canary Grass. Cattail Glencoe Y Y 9 1.2.3 PEM1 A/C Y Ag/Urb Reed Canary Grass Glencoe Y Y 10 N Ragweed Clover, Barnyard Grass Glencoe Y N II N Barnyard Grass. White Clover. Common Ragweed Le Sueur N N TABLE 1-2 THE ORONO SITE WETLAND DESCRIPTION INFORMATION • . From Soil Survey of Hennepin County * ■ From Hydric Soils minusl *. Wet'and Delinealed in field is larger than what is shown on NWI map r-.r-1M •»-'-.•r i > -0 , -^‘V?v^ w:- v^V:'■ #^ \ -* 1 ^ r • ■ •'- < =*ir- - rr 'f^>>nZLi* J /«fc,.'' fc^* ♦.' -W * ri. T ,.i; ■*- ; .'p i K-^:« .' ^>4 ‘4 4« N0.6 ! _ PbAli-5 • - ■ — ^ r * «|^. - • /•l/T-V- r V !h!X2X''.VN^!' Ki ■A' wAti'Vv ’!w\w . jm „. ik->!^rf >v^ i.‘-. T "'t:i' i* • - ?a‘‘ ’j i’'•<' .. » I .? . i;v 'r- ^-. I •. ■ ',f-, • ji*!i-;:i.,. • Ml *'v '/ '' f.’ J • •'., *' *. '' ' J “•■•!•■■*,-"'■)* 'l-'-V:-' ■'' M. --, 5MM'‘ ,r ••■ sJ-.i;';’^-'':. -‘ L ;'y: k' a, - !'■ : ■’■■ 4V=y: -*• 4> •,■. ’. ,•. I . ' K *i* ' ■: . » ' ______________^ •C -i - ' V . '■- ‘-p;' \ tf ' ' r; - ■ ♦ i • « ^l- ‘ » * ' • M .Ml •- , * • . * 4 I: I f' '« • ‘ A aVAfllk : • _____ gREflJi' I Ju. —*‘ Hr*" "** P •; ■Ku^r- * ^v- T • M.'r. ■^■ '''''i ' ^ I* • . > • ' ■ “T^ V*• : '. '' ■»> ' ’I- " M.-; - y? , ■P>.. ;• - ■' , — »■■■.■.'•j'' r \ »i ^ ■Ls<i' - fl!2 I Ml WkM K»Hiii ..wL'; iVvi^“ raMS BrWvJk.V l|y. V •:**■%■*’'"• 0 V ^ * I .*■ iv»’ tv y>. v% m ‘ < \ '• ■ «i. ‘ •* X • ‘i.1' ,. • " ,* pKv •p. V,V y p. A?/s; S. •* '• :&] i* O* *2 •ti V. ♦ •»- cif\'I A. '7 j'.'i 'X'')'. • '.V*- LsMV-^1 1 s.r--u. ».< ‘i.Vi mV ll\ m &A*1 • ** '.^>1 mm^ms ■■■r.ii: ta: *--'7^_y. •n on <ocr > l/M (/i Oo Oc/> V:^:ri^:r -ft' ‘L I f -4 ^ - *;• . ► ;■ :.: *. y^ y V ;•. r* V* « ti t •.-’■% ^•iiv • v'iiv V ■zM T1 »t P 5. <oorE. p > t/^ c/3 On rt>c/» II O n»z E. p DC^ Kt/» ^-Tin p O 3 a.a 3 3)oP O 3 a 3a P O 3 I' *^'' i|^'»]|»-'. -^. •» A 1 •* P r -.• I- ^ ,<** V v'*-'♦r !. r ..*“•' ■ Li ' ' *• W'-{.OK: H y •.‘..rii!*., V.' , . ■ f ;1 i' - 'n Vs''# . >, ‘ Jir * •< SIXTH AVE N r* > " in -■ »• f'.. ♦1 i ^1* < L’’ it’ >•• l/JK*: . ' 'j .> '•A>A‘JiSP^V-^. Hi J ? 3 •V;. #! V*-. M r ‘i -z r > ^ • ^ , . . ■ a?f .:ll|Kia^ otI v'v’r-J Wm^m-I k-^fjcirr r /£ >:. r2 *• , •' A ■.? ■J... r>‘ cv*'; .j lil-tl^mi-^ mm«,:S2a m <* f m 'mm rf»' '>r*> - • i# *■ r [13 ?7V' ^>V♦/' s ♦x'i K jK / Ss-feiiS^ <»^'"i5y>>«.'Mi 4j LV *limi Im o 70ozo .'%" ■'' 'i-■i*;.: .. ifj.’ /.w^s k-l-'? PIS W. mim -jxic eU';^ -Hm iSiiS \ »A* -V r,t-• A .r-lW 4iiM&i»».• ..Vr < .1 IAS-B n BA^ A/C,REM > r I m S:i' 4 « r^Fi • » '*1 > I'l' ■'* FIs % r« -i‘ HA ’ PI' »c w ■» \ sa* iiv mms^ ^ ■:-• _ ,..i .; ■. { «<o. ^ ^ Al 3^ ^ ‘*^1 f I 'iI \ irii•• •'" ,>fv jct » :'' .,-'• ..V7'5,^t. : *-' • ■^4 -^^531»4^.; V '; ft ifi '^Kt. r”' • • ** 4’ ^ ^ V( », SfWs '.r .1 k; i* ,»4i»w.‘*^'lSfI 4 «’ • tf ai'« • ^n:-' •'■ ■ ■'’ i • ■ 4 -M ■^. ij ^1' !**'■ > r-i ^1 .»♦•• • I ?fcpTvJ-- r •>s i \. < 1 . \«■ .f“. *i X- ' C r - -t s mm I • 4* . .‘JV ■ I t*. -vtL4 v-r . >*-*F4 r) ipr. . f^- 'iJ VJ /V m w. f4| Vi^rr ‘V o ■*•'/ V' ■■■Sw- •-! 1 ----------' ‘ -* '"') wf" 'V 4>«^ / << » » • ■'V >,r-- n 1 ‘ ':X 4 ^ ■ 4# * ^MV •3^-^ !i8 S2r-^ ■ A'"*"”'’>j? v» r' iro-^:- , ' 4 » « ^ 5Lri>»j '4™ f*; 7^5^m ‘ L^'XyF i A. 4- — ^- > .f' * yWTj '!>v' '.* m ■" t‘ /•r’vV.x i,u- •s,", '' Vi4^-v//*.#>- • 10 m.>7- •r.'i ■"^•g ■ • ■"- '.^r J sjJi . r--* t' tSi'- , ,' R \ ■f'’ I'i. J ■ ‘V . .. 4!^ \^^\ ■* » . ,*1 • ^ ; '>* ^ ‘ •' 'vf * ' W ’'^7' • • #•,'jt 4 W- W^ K tv s<f'.i.^r M ,-;SS^mm 'ft,mm PPj I 'H CITY of ORONO Municipal Ulficcs Street Address: 2750 Keiley Park»»ay Orono. MN 55356 Mailini Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 April 26, 1994 Mr. Glenn Cook 2335 Highway 36 St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 Dear Glenn: At the April llih meeting of the Council, Gabriel Jabbour directed staff to determine how many sewer units are available for the development of the northeast quadrant of the properties owned by the Orono Shopping Plaza located to the south of Sixth Avenue North and on the east by Willow Drive. llis question specifically asked how many units are available before improvements are required to the existing municipal sew-er system. This, of course, wou exclude developers’ responsibility for extending municipal sewer to the property from the existing sewer main at Willow and i2. Lundgren Brothers plan to bring in an amended proposal before the Planning Commtssion at thetr May 16th meeting calling for a staged rezoning of the lower portions of the property to 1 acre and the northern portion to 2 acres. Staff does not have a copy of the amended proposal. You should contact John Uban at Dahlgren. Shardlow and Uban and have him directly submit a copy for both yours and Shawn’s review. Please contact my office if you have any questions pertaining to staffs understanding of Council ’s directives at that meeting or if I may have any information that you need to assist m your review. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator JAM/ch Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 1 Wi ilrfcH ■ S?>,I ■!■■’-.'frf;- -\ ■ / ^Si., i^i*;;.®. ■• V ■ (/ Y . • ’'vll< *<. • * * *1 fl i».r 5. 7 •• m i«PiSSi'-'.. ■•,'^.•■1; : ' ■ vjt -I --' - ---------------------—.. I i'/' ‘ X■V! v.:'-0 '•••ij •'•. L. i * -■"f A « itii« • REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION jum 1 m ^ 1994 DATE: J ITEM NO.;^7 Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusih Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1904 Eric and Shelly Liljequist, 3490 Birch Lane - Conditional Use Permil/Variance Additional List of Exhibits I - MCWD Permit #94-76 Brief Review of Application The entire footprint of the Liljequist residence is located within the tlood plain of Uke Minnetonka. The structure is to be completely rebuilt with new foundation. A conditional use permit and variance is required as work is done within the shoreland and new construction involves permanent structure within the flood plain ot Lake Minnetonka. Applicants have completed their review before the Watershed District and have received approval. Review Exhibit F. 1, and J. The Watershed District has approved a retention plan providing tor mitigation/retention area to the street side of the residence. Shawn Gustafson has provided another alternative, review Exhibit H, that would allow for the creation of a swale along the west side of the residence providing for positive drainage towards the lake and away trom residence. Gustafson is concerned that with the mitigation pond to the rear or street side of residence that positive drainage would not be achieved and that it will be necessary to create a swale leading from retention area. In recent discussions with Ellen Sones of the Watershed District, she also concurred that it would be necessary to maintain positive drainage and that a swale is needed providing for positive drainage from the mitigation area at the south. The applicant has been offered two alternatives for mitigation of the filling of the flood plain. It is staffs understanding that the Liljequists prefer the original plan approved by the Watershed District. It will be the applicants’ responsibility to provide a drainage plan designating a 1:1 mitigation of the filling of the flood plain and providing positive drainage on the property. The City will ask that the engineer review that grading and drainage plan and complete the necessary inspections on site. Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 2 June 8, 1994 #1904 Eric and Shelly LiEequist Ellen Sones has apologized for the Watershed District’s issuing a permit before the City of Orono has completed its review of the conditional use permit/variance application. The applicant had submitted a copy of the original variance application approving the variance setbacks for the reconstruction of the residence and she had assumed that this was the approval of the current proposal. The Planning Commission granted unanimous approval of the conditional use permit and variance application and asked that applicant resolve any concerns he may have with the engineer’s comments and directives. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the approval resolution drafted per the Planning Commission recommendation. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MXWICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE NO. 1904 WHEREAS, Eric and Shelly Liljequist (hereinafter the "applicants") are the owners of the property located at 3490 Birch Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as: Lot 2, Block 1, Baldur Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit recoasiruction of a permanent residence within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka and a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 as the construction within the flood plain requires the excavation of compensatory mitigation area on the property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1904 The property is located in the LR-IB Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 21,780 s.f. or one-half acre in area. The property consists of 13,894 s.f. or .32 acres. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 16. 1994 and recommended unanimous approval of the proposed conditional use permit and variance based on the following unique findings and hardships: Page 1 of 5 4. a.The proposed improvements will not increase the runoff on the property b. Positive drainage will be maintained on the property. c.A permanent residence has existed on the property for over 50 years. d.The footprint of the new residence will not exceed that of the former residence. e.Hardcover within the 75-250’ setback area is proposed at 21.9% as a result of these improvements. The Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring 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 applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow additional excavations to provide mitigation area for the filling of the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka 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 Ciry. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and other parties and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 i CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 and a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to permit the reconstruction of a new residence structure to be located completely within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka and to allow compensatory mitigation for the filling of the flood plain, subject to the following conditions: 1.Applicant’s residence shall be designed so that the first habitable Boor of residence is installed at the 933.5 MSL. Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide a grading and drainage plan that will include compensatory excavations for the filling of the flood plain and other necessary land alterations to ensure positive drainage is maintained on propeny. The grading and drainage plan shall be reviewed by the City Engineer who shall also be responsible for making on-site inspections to confirm drainage plan is satistactoiy. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, 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 conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (June 13, 1995). 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. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the propeny. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council at a regular meeting held on this I3th day of June, 1994. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Cleric Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of June, 1994 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk ot the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City, Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public withinand for said couno^. ^ the foregoing instmtuem. andicknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTa\RY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public withinand for said county, personally appeared---------- ----v ^ known to me to be the person(s) descnbed m and who executed ihe foregoing instrument, and Acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 5 of 5 To: From: Date: Subject: Orono Planning Commission Members Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse. City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusih, Building & Zoning Administrator May 9, 1994 #1904 Eric and Shelly Liljequist. 3490 Birch Une - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Public Hearing - Current application has been considered as an addendum to original application filed January 28, 1994 Pertinent Ordinances 1. 1 Section 10.03. Subdivision 19 - Conditional use permit is required for any land alteration that would alter the grade or shore of likeshore property . Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 - Permanent structures are not allowed within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Planning Commission Minutes of February 22, 1994 E - Topographic Map . . F - Profile of Flood Plain Areas to be Filled with Installation of New Foundation G - Applicants Proposed Grading Plan H - Shawn Gustafson Letter of May 5, 1994 Description of Request During the preparation for the building permit for the new construction, staff soon realized that with limited topographic information on hand that at least portions of the struemre would appear to be located within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka. Staff advised the applicants to obtain additional topographic information for the entire footprint of the residence. Applicants submitted spot elevations for the new construction confirming that the entire struemre was located within the flood plain. Applicant was advised to commence the permitting process with the Watershed District and file the necessary permits with the City. In early discussions witli the Watershed District, the applicant was advised that the approximate 625 cubic feet of fill in the flood plain could be mitigated on site rather than requiring pilings as in two earlier reviews for construction on Big Island. Members may remember that the earlier reviews involved a seasonal cabin and small storage shed. Ellen Sones of the Watershed District has advised the applicant that they would allow mitigation on site if Zoning File #1904 May 9. 1994 Page 2 of 3 this met with the approval of the City of Orono. Planning Commission members should be aware that it is the responsibility of the City of Orono to enforce all Federal flood plain regulations. The Watershed District also reviews and issues permits for any activity that involves the alteration of the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka. The City has reviewed the applicants ’ plan of mitigation proposing the excavation of some 630 cubic feet to the south or street side of the propeny. The proposal involves the excavation of approximately 6" over a 36' x 35' area. To qualify excavation would have to take place below the 931.5 elevation and above the 929.4 OH L of Lake Minnetonka. As Gustafson s comments note (Exhibtt H), the total excavatton wou result in a retention pord at a 2' depth as credit would only begin once you reach the 931.5 elevation Gustafson recommends a shallow trench or swale be excavated out to the lake along the side, preferably the west side of the property as the east side contains more mature planting. He notes that, based on the review of topographic information, excavations within this area of the property would be located within the Hood plain and qualify. The drainage swale would also provide positive drainage fron: .. ...ence. In fact during the Planning Commission s review of this application (review Exhibit D), applicants advised that it was their plan to create drainage swales to carry runoff to the lake. In further discussions with Gustafson, we concurred that applicants should provide additional grading and drainage plans with the submission of the budding pennit confirming the location and width of the swale noting that swale need not go any further south from the lake than to the low retention area adjacent to residence and that spot elevations be shown within swale confirming positive drainage to lake. Once apin, mitigation credit can only be gained by excavations between the 929.4’ and 931.5’ elevations. The MCWD has also asked that the regulatory flood protection elevation be set at 933.5 rather than 932.5’ as required per Orono Municipal Ordinance Section 10.55, Subdivision 7 (B). The Watershed District requires 2’ above the flood plain elevation at 931.5 . Staff Recommendation To approve the conditional use permit and variance for Eric and Shelly Liljequist that would allow the filling and compensatory mitigation of 625 cubic feet within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka, based on the following findings: 1. Proposed improvements will not increase the runoff on the property. 2. The required swale will provide positive drainage on the property. 3. A permanent residence has existed on the property for over 50 years. Zoning File #1904 May 9, 1994 Page 3 ot 3 The footprint of the new residence will not exceed that of the former residence. 5.Hardcover withi die 75-250 ’ setback area is proposed at 21.9% as a result of these improvements. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. 3. Applicants’ residence shall be designed so that the first habitable floor of residence is installed at the 933.5’ MSL. Applicants shall provide a grading and drainage plan that will include the following: a. Location of swale. b. Width of swale. , c. Spot elevations confirming position drainage to the lake noting that credited mitigation area must be above the 929.4 and below the 931.5 elevation. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the new construction, the City must be in receipt of a copy of a permit from the MCWD approving the flood plain mitigation plan. jm1I ft* » .' h CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address _____J^lQ L clv Ul ^Site Address ^ » ivy — u\^ .rT------- Type of Application to be Filed ([yi4 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) u9r*/» r —» P vQO Ar. I /-% i -• APPLICANJ Name E/^Cr^Jl^JdL Address SV ^ O (3 iV Phone (home) Phone (work) , hA.iA Zip ys2 OW'NER (if different than applicant) Name_________________ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address City_ _Zip. Date Property Acquired ^5u-fV /??2^ I (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - ^ S 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application ^ $125.00 Residential Accessory Use $200.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $175.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ' $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ' $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use ' $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplam Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $100.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS . $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant tees) $250.00 Vacation $175.00 Easement Vacation ’ $ 75.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ” $300.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ~ $300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _ $100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property y" ^^^^ent^ ^ Other (specify) (month/vear) rrrv nr nunkin / I CM CM \ Will.* n Irih^L-E vP^ 1 c*u 1J50200000,M rru *vi V'-l • V'V ! . Cl rn A.’i vv -i \fui yCrir Ti .rlfCClV I C OLTCTO T« VuAii V’ VPi I »vvit Cvtj r/rtJviw-TV CVVA MVA » A • 04/2L t. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Describe request in detail. 3 ’ 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). 4. Plat Map. 5. Cenificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout survey information. 6. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. 7 Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 8. List of the legal names (include marital sams) of ail persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). 9. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 10. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish •'.ctified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11” X 17” OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:__________________________Date-------------------------------------- APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE TTie applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. j ■( /ff¥Applicant ’s signature^ ' Date 21 /7fn OWNER’S SIGNATURE TTae owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s signamre Date ______"V'" f__ Applicant must have all submiiials into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all sch review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning ice of this change prior to the meeting. MJN DATS 04/li/9S »AtcH 001PROP AODR OKNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR I * PROP ADOR OI««R HAMC TAXPAYER NAME/AODR •• • • # . PROP ADOR ONHER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR , * ’ ■ » ’ *• •* ’ ' PROP ADOR ' {RMER NAHE •.TAXPAYER . ‘ NAME/AODR ». PROP AOOR (RMER NAHE •• TAXPAYER • . NAME/ADbR 56 06-117-2S «5 000105A70 BIRCH LA REX EUGENE BOLLItIGER JR REX EUGENE BOLLINGER JR 5A70 BIRCH LA NAYZATA HN 55591 58 08-117-25 A5 0004 01444 BALDUR PARK RO VIOLET DEROSIA VIOLET OEROSIA 1444 BALDUR PARK RO NAYZATA Ml 55591 58 Oe-117-25 45 0008 05510 NORTH SHORE OR 0 A J SIKKA OALJIT A JASHINDER SIKKA 5510 NORTH SHRE DR NAYZATA MN 55591 58 08-117-25 45 0015 05460 NORTH SHORE OR BRUCE A NUSBAUH BRUCE A NUSBAUH ' 5480 NORTH SHORE DR NAYZATA HN 55591 56 08-117-25 45 0025 05450 BIRCH LA E R ENGLER A B ENGLER EDHARD R A BOMIIE ENGLER 3450 BIRCH LA NAYZATA HN 55591 58 08-117-25450027 . ■ PROP AOOR • 054A0 BIRCH LA ‘ ONNER NAME ' R HILLIAH TOWARD ETAL • • TAXPAYER R MILLIAM TOWARD W • NAHE/ADDR. . 5460 BIRCH LA ■ ■ •- .NAYZATA MN 55591 r*- 8 ^.. •- > ' • I . •' * \ I IIEMIEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY Olt«RS LIST38 08-117-25 45 000205490 BIRCH LA E LILJEQUIST A S LILJEWIST ERIC J A SHELLY R LILJEOUIST 5490 BIRCH LA NAYZATA MN 55591 58 08-117-25 45 0005 01440 BALDUR PARK RO R E ENGEBRETSON ET AL RICHARD E EtIGEBRETSON A JEAN ENGEBRETSON 1440 BALDUR PARK RO NAYZATA MN 55591 36 OB-117-25 43 0009 05520 NORTH SHORE DR DAVID A SINGER DAVID A SINGER 5520 NORTH SHORE OR NAYZATA MN 55591 58 08-117-25 45 0014 05490 NORTH SHORE DR KENTON H CARLSON ETAL KENTON H CARLSON 5498 NORTH SHORE DRIVE NAYZATA MN 55591 38 08-117-25 45 0025 05458 mRTH SHORE DR P E BOWMAN t B D DLAOER PAUL B0I81AN/BARBARA 0 BLADER 5450 NORTH SHORE DR NAYZATA MN 55591 TOTAL BATCH 001 00016 REPtmT NO. PI435401 PAGE38 08-117-25 45 0005.01448 BALDUR PARR RO CORAL N LAIWENCE CORAL H LAWENCE 5120 lOTH AVE SO WLS m 55417 58 08-117-25 45 0006 01456 BALOUR PARK RO HIP NELSON WALLACE E NELSON 6221 WASHBURN AVE S MPLS MN 55425 58 OB-117-23 45 0012 03470 NORTH SHORE DR HAROLD J BROUELLETTE HAROLD J BROUELLETTE 3470 NORTH SHORE OR NAYZATA HN 55591 58 00-117-25 45 0015 05498 NORTH SHORE DR KAO CARLSON KENTON H CARLSON 5498 NORTH SHORE OR NAYZATA MN 55391 58 08-117-25 45 0026 05460 NORTH SHORE DR JOIN G NELSON ETAL JOHN NELSON 3460 NO SHORE OR NAYZATA MN 55591 35401 • .I' .’ii'-’vV'* ‘‘vA'-V .. >;• • ?; • * t:• • • ' Vi i-v •< . * 4 *. . * . *A • • t ^; • ••■ ■■■ .'■■yy*. • t •’ * ' * •* » i •! «V • 4 .* ..s4# • ..sp " • V- -vj V ..'HIm. . . H i-' . V • ' ■ -h' ! '»: • •■9*., •.‘i. •• • II • i r . .• <*1. • 8 •. 1 : , .• I V * 4 ‘ . • •• * .8 V* .t • •• V• • •m •I:• • •. S.F.**| V • . *. •1 * .•*•.1 .1 • . "Y *• ••. • . . •• .• •• i’*% 1 « t -* • > • i* v‘ in a 3 /n (0 f in] D MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CO>'AnSSION MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 22, 1994 (#6) #1904 ERIC AND SHELLY LILJEQUIST 3490 BIRCH LAN'S VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING . .u .-.ff and noted that any condition of approval must include hardcover a. 2.194 sq^ fe« a^ that applicams are allowed 300 square feet of addiuonal improvements for steps, deck, or sidewalk. Frio I ilieouist reviewed the revised footprint for the new house and inquired why he was Enc variance. Chairman Schroeder responded that the area vanance already met those requirements and done the revisions on s own. Nolan inquired if there would be any grading done on the lot and Mr. Lilje^ist responded affimatively, noting that there would be drainage swales running down the side lot lines. Nolan moved Berg seconded, to approve #1904 Variances for Eric and Shelly Liljequist at 3490 Lch Lane subject to submission of a grading plan and noting that ±e applicants ate allowed 300 square feet of additional hardcover. 6 ayes, 0 nays. Mr. Liljequist requested that this application be forwarded to the City Council meeting scheduled for February 28, 1994. (#2) #1905 JOHN POVVERS/KEN HOPKINS 75/85 FERNDALE GREEN SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT Mabusth reviewed the staff report. Mr. Larry Berg, attorney for the applicant, noted that Ae owners of Lots 5 and 6 have been contacted regarding their option to purchase the p abutting their lots, and they have been considering this action. If they decide ^ .j. the applicant intends to approach the Country Club to inquire if they would ^ obtaining Parcels A and B. This could be accomplished through ^ ® bec^ause he deedine these two parcels to the Country Club. Mr. Powers is proposmg t^s wishes'to have legal jurisdiction over this area which he has always "Oi^‘dered to back yard, and he would like to have the legal right to mamum it as such. "hrimzine them Lmbined with the adjacent residential lots it wiU increase the area of diese lots b g g closer to legal size. He suted that the Country Club was presently maintainmg the ““ were willing to continue doing this. He requested the Planning Commission to appro request. ..J House ERIC LILJEQUISTOF LOT 2, BLOCK 1, BALDUR PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA r> . •> ftif V LEQAi. DESCRIPTION OF PREMISIS SUHVEYED; Lot 2. Block 1, BALDUR PARK denotes Iron markor(♦ii.»;: denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum * Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This survey Intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, and the location or an existing house and garage, and a proposed house*thereon. It does not purport to show aoy other Improvements or enccroachmenls. 5* rnmN fc C rondeug . Inc \ ‘-•JH I |.. •* I • r*' * - ' • I ‘ I \ l\\\» r I i il It I hereby certify that IKH survey prvp.vcti by me or under my direct super ­ vision. ond Ihol I nm & duly rc^l^il^’fcd C vit Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws ttf the State of Mlnnc^nla. Maik S. Cfonbctg Minncsola license Number 12755 uAih 3*25*94 SCAU l"»20' joiiNo. 94*55 ?4*5*r I I IAf€Al ‘ eofso -TP 1 Vi* zsoo -) .r.^^6^^>.f: X -l- \i^(»s.F. rt • ? tSb c«>^ -IJIS “.t) ^25 I; 6«MtTL PH* : 3(,'x Sis’ .9 = Oi‘ f+ <^i-g J c5^iwaiL ! ^ ■> ^ t o <3' f 0b^ y ^\ •4 iaK<#| ^ •jiS.x- ® .5) <iP f I (vl».f) Pll! i' _ •/•••' » vj\ oi ’‘■■'34? v«’‘';:K \' \ CEHTIFICATfc OF SURVEY FORERIC LILJEQUISTOF LOT 2. BLOCK 1, BALDUR PARK IcNNEr'IN COUNTY. MINMESUlA m • • • « » •S M X 6»'' ,• •>. X" X 5p y-•.V'.-' ♦*(*2' 4;v>^ M. % w a (*ii.f) L65AL DtSCr.jy I > Oh I* »-^tHISIS SUKVETEP! Lot 2, I'OCX 1. SALOUit PAAK ^Qnotts iron DiQrk«p denotts exlstlny spot cltvatlon. netn s«i t»vel dataiti ' ttirlngs shown art bastd upon an astumad datun. This survey Intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, and the location of an existing house and garage, and a proposed hou$e<thereon. It does not purport to show anjf other Improvements or enccroachments. ^ COFriN & GKONBtKC, l.\'C I • I.......'................ ♦ r I. MN • ••• * III Mil I bcicby cc*llfy th.il iMs lurv^y wa^ jvi p.vi J bv me or unJCf my rfireef 5uprf. vblon. irtd tbit I om ■ duly registered civil Eoginocf md Ufrd Surveyor under Ihe Uws of the State of Mlnnrsntn. WAia J-25*94 sc^u rt20' lOe^'o CA-CC Bonestroo Rosene Andeiiik & Associates Engineers & Architects May 5, 1994 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Liljequist Variance File No. 139-1904 Oiro G >one «Da toom w 9otene Pi • Joseph C AndP^ Pi V^vin L Sorv«*»j P€ 8. njna i Vne* ► £ Cne-r* • Coon Pi Thomas E No^ Pi 9ooe*f G •£ M EDe^ *S«no ConsuOJric A SjnM ^ •t«h ^ GJ*OPh. Room 8 Ptfitgftg PS PKfxtnS W Powf. Pi Djv <s O Loviora ^E •ooea C 8une^ ^ ^ a SotMlon P£ Mart A Har»fon PE Mcha?< T Ksmmjnn *»E PE Trxjmas 8 Anoe<iqn. A i ^ Donaid C Bu^gaidt PE T*x)mas E Angus PE •inae^ PE M<raet P tau PE Pqr^ M ting AiCP PNIO J Pyne Pf Thomas W Pp»*ion PE Mchaet C Lynch PI ja'^ 9 Matand Pf .erry 0 Pp'trsc ’^ PE kon J Arganat. PE •tanneth P AfxjMon. PE Mart 8 8o8\. Pf Mart A SpiO Pi La^ ^ Moripr> P| D^sie* J Eagerton Pi A Pet Schmrt. Pf Ph»Hp J Catvi«« PE Mart O NAAtts PE Man • jpnvn Pf L PhAoG'awp* Pf Aa<m L Wemen. p | Gary O AnscoPa Pf « ^Md Postpr Pf AWh 8 Taoei PE Oougias J S p «c p E Shawm o Gusjhon. PS CccPo Otvipf PE Paul G Hpupr Pf John P Goropr pf Chartps A E.xtjkon LPO M Paw^nay Hanan m Own James f Engpmamt r/ F—^IVED MAY 9 1994 .r ORONO Dear Jearme, We have inspected the property and reviewed the certificate of survey submitted with the variance application for the proposed house on Eric & Shelly Liljequist s property. The information shows that the proposed house will require approximately 625 cubic feet of fill to be placed within the floodplain of Lake Minnetonka. The applicant has proposed to excavate approximately 6 inches over a 36 feet by 35 feet area adjacent to Birch Lane as compensatory floodplain storage. We do not recommend this location because it is has the highest elevation on the lot. To qualify for floodplain storage, the excavation must take place bebw the floodplain elevation of 931.5. To provide the 625 cubic yards required, the proposed location near Birch Lane would first have to be excavated down to the 931.5 elevation, then lowered an additional 6 inches to create floodplain storage. The total excavation in this location would be nearly 2 feet in depth. The side and rear yard areas presently have poor drainage. It is apparent that the low areas on the lot drain solely by seepage into the soil. Although the proposed improvements will not increase the runoff on the property, the drainage could be improved by excavating a shallow ditch out to the lake. If the excavation is done either west or north of the house, nearly all of the excavation would qualify as floodplain storage. The excavation should be graded to drain around the west side of the house and out to the lake shore. Prior to the work, silt fence should be installed near the lake for erosion control. The disturbed area should be seeded or sodded shortly after the work has been completed. We see no adverse impacts on the property from either the till placement or excavation, if it is done in this manner. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636*4600 MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT WATtRSHEO BOUNOAAV 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345-1597 office: (612) 939-8320 fa*: (612) 939-8244 DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR: Ellen B Sooes BOARD OF MANAGERS: Thonas Mapw. Jr, Pres • C. Woodrow Love • John E Thomas CiaHison Lir'Oley • Tnotnas W LaBouniy • Martha 3. Hartfiel • Painela G. Biirt LAKE MNNETONKA Per»i.t Application Wo« 94~76i Applicant:Eric and Shally I.lljeqtti«t 3490 Birch Lana Orono, MN 55391 Location: Purpoca: City of Orono, T117, R23, Section 8 Floodplain altaration involving raconatruction j^0g^doiica within floodplain of Lake Minnetonka* Dear Mr. and Mrs. Liljequist: At the regularly scheduled May 26, 1994 meeting of the Board of Managers, the subject permit application was reviewed along with the following exhibits. 1. 2. 3. 4. Permit application 94-76 received May 5, 1994. Site plan received May 5, 1994. Volume calculations received May 5, 1994. City of Orono approval received May 5, 1994. Action was taken approving your permit application pending receipt of Rule J fees in the amount of S12D.60. Please note that due to size and complexity of certain projects, the Board to^"'hTDu"t*rl« "to‘” the 'co.S'’ of "ield inspection of the work, including investigation of the area affected by analysis of the work, and any subsequent monitoring of the work. These costs are referred to as Rule J fees. Please be advised that the project is not authorized until the above has been submitted and you have been notified of permit issuance. Sincerely Ellen B. Sones District Administrator EBS/cr Jeanne Mabusth, City of Orono Mark Gunstad, McMonigal Architects L % REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION % Ct DATE: June 8 J. ITEM NO.:>% % % Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: ZoningDepartment Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator _________tints'_________________________r----------------------------:------- Item Description: #4944 George Applebaum, 4109 Highwood Road - Vanances Resolution Review of Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Lot coverage Total lot area = 15,965 s.f. Allowed = 2.394.75 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,654 s.f. or 10.4% Original proposal = 2,767 s.f. or 17.3% Amended proposal = 2,662 s.f. or 16.6% Variance = 267.25 s.f. or 1.6% Section 10.25, Subd. 6 (B) - Setback variances for additions to principal strucmre A.Second floor level - street setback Required = 35’ Existing = 16’ Proposed = 16’ Variance = 19’ or 54% B Attached garage addition - street setback. Required = 35’ Existing = 3.5’ (detached garage) Proposed = 9’ Variance = 26 ’ or 74% C.Attached garage - side setback. Required = 10’ Existing = 3’ Proposed = 7.5 ’ Variance = 2.5 ’ or 25% Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 4 June 9, 1994 #W4 George Applebaum, 4109 Highwood Road __________________________________________________________ 3. Section 10.22, Subd.2 - Review of hardcover. 0-75* setback area = 7,720 s.f. Existing = 2,510 s.f. or 32% Proposed = 1,139 s.f. or 14.7% Reduction in hardcover = 1,371 s.f. or 17.1% 75-250 ’ setback area = 8.245 s.f. Allowed = 2.061 s.f. or 25% Existing = 3,423 s.f. or 41.5% Original Proposal = 3,804 s.f. or 46.1% Amended Proposal = 3,557 s.f. or 43.1% Hardcover increase = 134 s.f. or 1.6% Variance = 1,496 s.t. or 18,1% 4.Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C) (2) - Setback variances from top of bluff. A. Garage addition. Required = 30’ Existing = 35’ Proposed = 20’ B. Overhang - East side. Existing = 15’ Proposed = 8’ C. Principal structure addition at lakeside. Existing = 18.8’ Proposed = 12’ D. Deck. Existing = 16.5’ Proposed = 6.5 ’ List of Exhibit A - Application B - Plat Map Request for Council Action continued page 3 of 4 June 9, 1994 Georce Applebaum, 4109 Ilighwood Road /9/r ^__________ C - Property Owners’ List D - Neighbor’s Acknowledgement Forms E - Average Lakeshore Setback Line F - Existing Survey G - Existing Topographic H-1-2 Lot Coverage Facts I - Staff Sketch - Top of Bluff J-1-3 Hardcover-Existing 1) Key 2) 0-75’ 3) 75-250 ’ K-1-3 Hardcover-Proposed 1) Key 2) 0-75’ 3) 75-250 ’ L - Elevations M - Floor Plans Brief Review cf Application The Planning Commission reviewed the multiple variance application at their April and May meetings. Improvements consist of a 24’ x 24’ attached garage, a second story, a main floor addition involving the enclosure of the existing 18’ x 18’ deck, a 6 x 18 addition at the southeast comer and an approximate 18’ x 10’ deck at the lakeside. The improvements result in an increase of 1,008 s.f. of structural coverage requiring a lot coverage variance of 267.25 s.f. or 1.6%. The existing house does not meet the required setbacks from the street which requires setback approvals for the second story. The existing detached garage shall be replaced by an attached garage that would be located 9 ’. The original detached garage was IW from the street lot line. The original garage was 3’ from the sid»* lot line and is now proposed at 7Vi still requiring a side setback variance. Review Exhibit E, note all improvements will be located well behind the average lakeshore setback line. Review Exhibit I. Staff has sketched the top of the bluff at the lakeside of the property. All improvements will encroach the required 30’ setback from the top of blulf none will impact the bluff as all alterations will be set back from the top. In die original proposal, a portion of a walkout was shown but was denied by the Planning Commission as they would not consider any disturbance of the bluff. The applicant was advised of the special standards required per code for all construction within a bluff area, noting special erosion control and Request for Council Action continued page 4 of 4 June 9, 1994 George Applebaum, 4109 Highwood Road building standards. There was discussion regarding possible need for additional plantings but members noted that existing vegetation would not be altered and would provide the necessary screening. Hardcover was a major challenge for the Planning Commission for this review as there is excessive hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area. Existing hardcover within the 0-75’ zone exists at 2.510 s.f. or 32%. The Planning Commission worked with the applicant to reduce hardcover^by 1,371 s.f. or 17.7%. Hardcover is now proposed at 14.7%. Within die 75-250 ’ setback area, it exists at 41.5%. It is now proposed at 43.1%. The original application was presented at 3,804 s.f. or 46.1 %. The Planning Commission worked to reduce 3% of proposed new hardcover. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the amended application. Now that adequate hardcover reductions had been agreed upon, they recognized the limitations of the property including the substandard lot area, unique topographic restrictions and the location of existing improvement. Retaining walls and walkway have served the property well as there are no signs of severe erosion. Any attempt to make major alterations within the severe steep topographies may create a potential for erosion. Staff has enclosed the memos for the May and April meeting and Councilmembers may wish to review the minutes of these meetings. The enclosed resolution has been dratted per the Planning Commission’s recommendation, including the hardships and special conditions of that approval. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution; OR To deny the amended proposal. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECT ION 10.03, SUBDFV^ISION 14 (C), SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2, SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (C) (2) FILE NO. IW / 9/5" WHEREAS, George Applebaum (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 4109 Highwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lots 17 and 18, Highwood Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereina'*er "the property"); and VVHEPr’AS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section ,0.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to permit structural improvements that will result in 2,662 s.f. or 16.6% of structural coverage where only 15% is allowed; per Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) seeks approval of side and street setback variances tor a second story addition to be located 16’ from the street lot line where a 35’ setback is required and a garage addition that would be located 9’ from street lot line where a 35’ setback is required and where a 3 5’ setback exists and located IW from the side lot line where a 10 ’ setback is required and where a 3’ setback exists; per Section 10 ’2, Subdivision 2 seeks approval of hardcover variances within the 75-250’ setback area where 3.423 s.f. or 41.5% exists and where 3,557 s.f. or 43.1 % is proposed and where 25% is allowed; and per Section 10.56, SuMivision 16 (C) (2) seeks approval of setback variances from the defined top of the bluff requiring a 30 setback where the garage is proposed at 20 ’; a cantilevered second story at 8 ’, grade level addition at lakeside is 12 ’ and a lakeside deck at o'/i’. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File The property is located in the LR-IB Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consists of 15,965 s.f. or .36 acres. Page 1 of 6 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 18, 1994 and May 16, 1994 and recommended approval of the variances as amended based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A. B C. D. E. F. G. H. I. The 15,965 s.f. or .36 acre property is subject to standards for a one acre zoning district. The property has severe topographic limitations that consist of a bluft area requiring more additional restrictive setback standards. The existing residence has existed on the property for over 40 years prior to the development of current shoreland management standards. More gentle sloped areas to the rear or north of the property have resulted in structures being placed at a substandard setback from the street but this has been found to be consistent with the pattern of development for all residential construction along Highwood Road. The proposed improvements will not encroach the average lakeshore setback line creating visual impact for existing residences on adjacent properties. Hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area will be reduced by 1,371 s.f. or 17.7%. 2,510 s.f. or 32% hardcover exists on the property and 1,139 s.f. or 14.7% is proposed. The existing detached garage is located 3 ’ from the side and street lot lines. The proposed garage addition will be located 9 from the street lot line and IW from the side lot line. The proposed improvements will not result in the alteration of the bluft at the lakeside of the residence. The existing plantings and vegetation on this property will provide for adequate screening for the expansion of structure closer to the top of bluff. Paee 2 of 6 The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other propert>’ in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affci t traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring propert>-; would not merely serv'e as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City statf, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C), Section 10.22, Subdivision 2, Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) (2) to permit the construction of a garage addition, a second story, and grade level addi.;o,i involving the conversion of an 18 ’ x 18.9 ’ deck, 6.8 ’ x 18 ’ addition at the southeast comer of residence and an approximate 10 ’ x 18 ’ lakeside deck as shown on the site plan included as Page 6 of this resolution, subject to the following conditions: 1.All land alterations resulting from the proposed new construction shall be subject to standards set forth in Section 10.56, Subdivision 6 (B) governing erosion control, preserving existing vegetation for the screening of stmetures and other facilities as viewed from the surface of Lake Mirmetonka. Applicant shall complete all existing hardcover improvements as shown on Page 6 of this resolution prior to the footing inspection by the Orono Building Department. Hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback area shall be maintained at 1,2139 s.f. or 14.7% and within the 75-250 ’ setback area at 3,557 s.f. or 43.1%. 3.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a buildiiig permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 13, 1995). Page 3 of 6 4. 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. 5 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. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of June, 1994. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of June, 1994 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf ot the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of _____-------------- ^own w me iescribed in and who executed the foregoing insmunent.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) tree act and deed. , 199_ before me a Notary Public within NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of _199 _before me a Notary Public within knoJim described in and who executed the foregoing instrument.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public w’ithin and for said county, personally appeared ----------------------------^ ------r— known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the toregoing instrument.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) tree act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 6 r V 1 • w V r>’’R ___ •>t»* likA! Imi ) awMvtr ft.« Mk«.mk ^ «i li < )»**l I ^ A ntwl *Ii«i£U l«/*i*4lX.H .r *t.i : t ^ «« t y.'m I M ( k < . > I w-ta ruKlH ,U«vETl!‘<0 INC jC^ FCHSoH 5 1 M t ttH » oijl ’aa*'»7o< Taa 78a if(Ci*4 i^r«ut4LMT « oAt wU ^4 u^Tom zo Cl ,RaN I ON NO XUiV"^ '*>4 LOTS I 7 <S. GHWOOD I 8 ■?RO?O^G-D COUDVT\OMt3'' «=.o?a- UA^L^OOvrfCQ. C.'^vCvJl^A*T\ OKI ^ LAKE MINNETONKA .0 HENNEPIN COUNTY ,0. MINNESOTA KGEO^E. ^ .0\\ \ '^^0 o- t. A r' I J f * • £ ^ «i. «] (D %%v /‘‘V. (Ek? @ s'**' O.' y,%r /• \ V n (To). VN V ^ss*^ Page 6 of 6 ‘^\-vG.G.T a OP H u To:Orono Planning Commission Members Mayor Callahan and Ororu'* Councilmembers Ron Moorsc, City Admim^trator From:Jeanne A. Mabusih. Building & Zoning Administrator Date:May 11, 1994 Subject:George Applebaum, 4109 Highwood Road - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing Review of Pertinent Ordinances as They Relate to Revised Plan 1. Section 10.03. Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of lot coverage Total lot area = 15.965 s.f. (updated survey information negates original area shown at 16,540 s.f.) Allowed = 2,394.75 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1.654 s.f. or 10.4% /oo& Proposed — 2,662 s.f. or 16.6% (original 2,767 s.f. or 17.3%) u Variance = 267.25 s.f. or 1.6% Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) - Setback variances for additions to principal structure. A.Second Floor Level - Street Setback Required = 35’ Existing = 16’ Proposed = 16’ Variance = 19’ or 54% B.Attached Garage Addition - Street Setback Required = 35’ Existing = 3.5’ Proposed = 9 ’ Variance = 26 ’ or 74% C.Attached Garage Required Existing Proposed Variance - Side Setback = 10’ = 3 ’ = 7.5 ’ = 2.5 ’ or 25% /9/S' Zoning File »m4 May 11. 1994 Page 2 of 5 3. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Review of hardcover. 0-75’ setback area = 7,720 s.f. Existing = 2,510 s.f. or 32% Proposed = 1,494 s.f. or 19% “ ^ ^ ^‘7 V ^ ^/• 75-250’ setback area = 8,245 s.f. (area adjustments have reduced the setback area from original estimated at 9,250 s.f. having impact on hardcover facts) Allowed = 2.061 s.f. or 25% Existing = 3,423 s.f.*' or 41.5% Proposed = 3.648 s.f.*^ or 44.2% (addition of 57 s.f. overhang) Increase In hardcover = 225 s.f. or 2.7% cr>- Y *' Original existing = 2,917 s.f. or 35.3% Original proposed = 3.804 s.f. or 46.1% 4. Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) (2) - Setback variances from top of bluff. A. B Garage addition Required = 30’ Existing = 35’ Proposed = 20’ Overhang Existing = 15’ Proposed = 8’ C. Principal struemre addition at lakeside Existing = 18.8’ Proposed = 12’ D. Deck Existing = 16.5’ Proposed = 6.5’ List of Exhibits A - Cenificate of Survey B - Topographic Survey C-1-2 Lot Coverage Facts Zoning File ^4-^4 May 11, 1994 Pace 3 of 5 D - F G Hardcover 0-75’ 1 - Key 2 - Existing Inventory 3 - Proposed Inventory Hardcover 75-250’ 1 - Key 2 - Existing Inventory 3 - Proposed Inventory Staff Sketch Defining Top of Bluff Staff Sketch Denoting Structural Setbacks for Principal Structure Status of Application The Planning Commission tabled Application #1915 providing applicant additional time to amend his improvement plans addressing the following issues: 1. Reduction of structural coverage proposed at 1.6%. 2. Provide an updated hardcover inventory as members of the Planning Commission felt hardcover within 0-75’ setback area was not complete. 3. To also consider additional reductions of hardcover within both setback areas. Members advised that reducuons in hardcover could result from removal of additional access stairs in lakeshore yard as a major accessway was provided. Since that review. Council passed the Bluff Ordinance Amendment redefining the top of bluff. Unformnately, the top of bluff remains ?s shown in original packet intormation. The 956’ elevation still defines the top of bluff Review of Amended Proposal The applicant has reduced the size of the detached garage addition from 24 x 27 to 24 X 24’ and a staircase has been provided along the outside of the structure. No interior access is proposed. The second story remains as originally proposed. The lakeside ground-level addition also remains as originally proposed with the existing deck being enclosed and the 125 s f addition at the southeast comer of structure. The deck has been reduced to half the origina area now proposed at 212 s.f The upper level of deck will be approximately 5 ’ x 32’ but only 66 s.f of deck will result in new hardcover. (9/s^ Zoning File U\%2A' May 11, 1994 Page 4 of 5 As applicant's facts reveal, there has been a reduction in lot area which has au impact on lot coverase facts and hardcover facts when comparing them to the original facmal information. excess of strocniral coverage is still shown at 1.6%. The garage side setback has been improved now proposed at 7.5'. originally at 5'. By moving the garage tunher west, the street setback of the garage addition was proposed at 10' and is now shown at 9 in the 75-250' setback area has been adjusted to include the overhang along the east side of the residence. Remember haidcover would only include P/i' of the overhang area (overhang at 3 width). The top of the bluff is now defined at the 956 ’ elevation. Note even the garage addition as it is moved southward on the property falls within the required 30’ setback area. Review the setbacks to the top of bluff as presented above in the factual review intormation. Issues for Consideration 1 There is an excess of 1 structural coverage. The following improvements add to the structural coverage: Boathouse = 256 s.f. or 1.6% (existing) Second floor deck = 200 s.f. or 1.2% Other reduction in either garage or principal structure additions. 2 Excesses of hardcover exist on the property (refer to Exhibits D-3, E-1 and E-3). Note all landscape areas underlain with plastic will be removed but applicant has not removed the additional access stairs as requested by Planning Commission. Refer to Exhibits E-1 and E-3: 75-250 ’ setback area: Area 6 = 35 s.f. or .4% Area 23 = 11 s.f. or .1% 0-75 ’ setback area; Area 28 = 25 s.f. or .3% Area 9 = 400 s.f. or 5.1% Area 29 = 11 s.f. or .1% (wood deck) Area 10 (wood deck) = 355 s.f. or 4.5% Area 8 (boathouse) = 256 s.f. or 3.3% Any there other improvements? Zoning File May fl. 1994 Pase 5 of 5 3.Setbacks for new construction from top ot blutf. Note deck no longer is at the top but is 6Vi’ away from top As for garage that encroaches along the east side, should garage be moved closer to street? Should 24 depth be reduced to 22 to help minimize setback encroachment? The DNR has been asked to comment on the revised proposal. Staff has received no further input as of this writing but we ’.vill be able to report at our meeting. 4. What improvements shown in the current proposal are acceptable to Planning Commission? Options of Action Approval. Any recommendation of approval must include the condition that hardcover scheduled for removal must be removed prior to the footing inspection for new construction. OR Denial. OR Tabling, providing applicant additional time to make any necessary revisions 1 TO Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Adm DATE:April 14, 1994 SUBJECT: #1915 George Applebaum, 4109 Highwood Road - Variances - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.25, Subd. 6tB) - Setback variances for principal structure A. Street Required = 35’ Existing = 3.5’ Proposed = 10’ Variance = 25’ or 71% B Side yard Required Existing Proposed = 10’ = 3 ’ = 5 ’ Variance = 5’ or 50% Section 10.22. Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. A. 0-75’ setback area = 7,296 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 2,083 s.f. or 28.5% Proposed = 1,153 s.f. or 15.8% B. 75-250’ setback area = 9,250 s.f. Allowed = 2,312.5 s.f. or 25% Existing = 2,917 s.f. or 31.5% Proposed = 3,804 s.f. or 41.12% Variance = 1,491.5 s.f. or 16.1% Hardcover increase = 887 s.f. or 9.5% Section 10.56, Subd. 16(C-2) - Proposed addition will encroach required 30 ’ setback from top of bluff. Applicant also proposes the alteration of the bluff area by providing a walkout from lower level basement. Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Total lot area = 16,540 s.f. Allowed = 2,482 s.f. or 15% Proposed = 2,767 s.f. or 16.7% Variance = 281 s.f. or 1.7% Zoning File #1915 April 14, 1994 Paee 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Neighbors Acknowledgment Forms E - Existing Survey F - Topographic Surveys - Location of Bluff Gl-3 - Sections H - Existing Hardcover Inventory 0-75 ’ I - Proposed Hardcover Inventorv' 0-75 ’ K - 0-75 ’ Site Plan L - Existing Hard, 'ver Inventory 75-250 ’ M - Site Plan ot Existing Hardcover 75-250 ’ N - 75-250 ’ Hardcover Inventory O - Site Plan of Proposed Hardcover 75-250 ’ PI-2 - Floor Plans. Q - Elevations R - Section of Structure S - Proposed Site Plan Description of Request The application involves the removal of the existing detached garage at 18.9’xl6 8' and installing an attached garage approximately 24’x27 ’ to be relocated at least 10 front the edge of the risht-of-way. Applicant proposes the enclosure of the existing lakeside deck and a second story addition. The improvements also include a lakeside deck than will be installed right to the top of the defined bluff. The existing single storv residence is limited to two bedrooms. The upper level expansion will provide much needed bedroom area for applicant ’s older children. Note the garage will be at two levels providing additional storage area at lower level. Applicant also proposes'^ installation of expanded basement beneath lakeside addition. In a recent site inspection, the applicant advised that there will be no overhang structure above lower level doors of garage. Elevations of garage show an overhead structure. It is not clear ^ information submitted whether existing foundation will be replaced and a new one installer . Applicant should advise if current foundation has been evaluated to determine if it can sustain second story. Applicant proposes a reduction of some 12.7% hardcover improvements within the 0-75 ’ and an increase of 9.5% within the 75-250 ’ setback area. The improvements result in an excess of structural coverage for the site at 1.7%. Zoning File #1915 April 14, 1994 Page 3 Issues for Consideration 1.Review the recenilv improved homes on Highwood Road. Is the proposed impro\ement overly ambitious for the 16,546 s.f. property? Is the improvement consistent with the surrounding Highwood neighborhood specifically the lakeshore properties? Can the '’4’x'»7’ garage addition be reduced? It is possible the 10’ required side setback could be met or at least minimized if the width was reduced to 22 ’ to 24’. Although doors face the nreet safety will be increased because of the additional 10’ provided for cars backing out of garage having clear view of roadway. The majority of garages on Highwxxxl open out onto road. 2.Lot is consistent as far as topographic limitations forcing construction closer to roadway. The Citv has adopted setbacks from the top of bluff, the majority ot these properties could not be redeveloped or additions planned without variances. Can deck size ^ reduced in lakeshore yard pulling it further back from top of bluff? Upon your site inspection, review the defined bluff areas. It is difficult for staff to accept the upper level terraced yard as a bluff As structure will encroach closer to retaining walls, applicant will have to address the need to reenforce or install new walls. 3.The existing principal strucnire is approximately 16’ from the street lot line. The addition of the second level will have minimal impact on adjacent neighbors as both homes are placed far in front of existing residence. Note all side setbacks are met by existing principal strucmre. Overhang on east side will also meet required side setback. Note no increase in hardcover because it is being installed over an existing concrete walkway. If new foundation is proposed, should house be shifted closer to road? - how close? 4.No matter how the code is amended the basic definition of a bluff will not change the definition of the top of the bluff on this property. The proposed addition will encroach the required setback area. Will you grant a setback variance based on the umque physical characteristics of this property and the fact that the property is already developed with the house in place? How tar should deck be from top of bluff? Staff Reconunendation It is difficult for Planning Commission to act on any application involving bluff issues until the code is amended. We recommend that you table this application but provide clear directives to applicant so that the plan can be amended by your May meeting. The Planning Commission should address the following concerns: Zoning File #1915 April 14, 1994 Page 4 1. Need to reduce structural coverage so that 15% standard is met. •) A# • 3. 4. What structures arc to be reduced — garage, lakeside deck, decks at shoreline attached to boathouse smicture? (Note the decks adjacent to boathouse would not have been included in your lot coverage determinations.) Do members have any problems with the second stor>' addition? What other areas of hardcover can be removed in both setback areas to provide a reasonable percentage for increase in the 75-250’ with additional reductions in the 0-75’. 5. Others presented by Planning Commission, CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATICy^4 1 € ? j* V ^ Kt ^ h. Initial Application Fee S200.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $200.00 After-ihe-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION ^ Site Address V OS U\v.y^u:CCk^ V_c-C^C5_----------------------- Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) - COy^ rrrv ncwill wr cTiJAkirc neerrer Uf » aww ia wwvw v'v'vvv ,\i rciu WCiT wWWaW “Liri T] ,v> WMWL.A IW L* LI TTD T- luAl/i* vrw # AL.L L.AI I I f IfVfYA I L'W ________ 03/1 S/9- Attach legal description to applicatioji if not included on required survey. Date Proj^a^ Acquired ______C I (do) (^no^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of propert>': yi residential Zoning District: ________ (monthyear) APPLIC^T Name Q; dcvXcC- \\\-^V Address: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name__________________ Address: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Phone (home)A“\'L-V'LT'e- Rione(work) City:Zip:# _ Phone(home) Phoi« (work) City:ZiD. Estimated Construction Cost S \ OOxCCO'^ Describe request in detail: ^ \~r\o vc> fe; (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width )C Setback;'jCf ront yC Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) hardship /description of unusual PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: g.v^v«<rtv.. A. ^ ___L ---------------------------------------—--------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) (X ^\\OCoUe. REQUIRED SU'BMnTALS All of the follnwinp mformation must be submittfd bv the applkation deaMn e_datejnOTd^ for vour application to be considered completei 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. ^ Completed Application Form . .. r ~ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150’ (you must obtam this list from ~ Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). ^ Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). “ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8-i x 11 tor Topographic survey (existimi and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade — are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8«.^" x IT for reproduction -- Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8 ^ ^ List of the legal names (include mantal status) of all persons with an interest m the propcrtv'. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons vou wish notified of this application. ___Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour varianre annliruiinn is not complete if the ab ove information has not been inelud.ejL The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zomng Administrator, agrees to payadditional fees (staff tune not covered by origmal fee payment) and/or consulunt expen^sincjIswiLOn review of this applicatton. and certifies that the information supplied i^tue knowledge. Applicant ’s CionanirS . T- Date &-I n | OWNER’S SIGNATURE , .. The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the propcrtr by Ciiy^tf. consultants, agents. Commission members, and CouncU members for purp^s of/1^ti^on and verification of this request. J nateOwner’s Signatui ADDlicant must have all submittah into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each mon ^ ADoUcLts must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission ^n^^ Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arra^emen to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Budding & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE OS/01/9%BATCH 005PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAMC/AODR PRO^ AfiOR UtCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR 0»MER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR iSIMEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHCRS LIST50 07-117-25 0011OAOTl HIGHHOOO RO F L JOHNSON A 0 L FOSS FREDERIC JOHNSON AORl HIGHHOOO RD MOUND HN 553AA 50 07-117-25 44 0014 04105 HIGHHOOO M CHARLES E DA MART HILLIAM 6 BRICKLEY 4105 HIGHHOOO MOUNO m 55544 50 07-117-25 44 0050 04140 HIGHHOOO RO J 0 CUSACK ACM GRACE C GRACE A J CUSACK 4140 HIGHHOOO RO MOUNO ftl 55544 50 07-117-25 44 0055 04100 HIGHHTOO RO DAO BAXTER DAVID C A DEBRA J BAXTER 4100 HIGHHOOO ROAD MOUm m 55544 TOTAL BATCH 005 00012 50 07-117-25 44 0012 04044 HIGHHOOO RO OLLIS L NELSON ETAL ALONZO B SERAN III 4044 HIGHHOOO RO MOUNO m 55544 56 07-117-25 44 0015 04104 HIGHHOOO RD GEORGE H APPLEBAUM GEOtGE APPLEBAUM 4104 HIGHHOOO RO MOUNO m 55544 36 07-117-25 44 0051 04152 HIGHHOOO RD SCOTT G A CATHERINE ANDERSON SCOTT G A CATHERINE ANOERSON 4152 HlOtOOO ROAD MOUND MN 55544 56 07-117-25 44 0054 04104 HIGHHOOO RD GAB SAUER GLEN A BEVERLY SAUER 4104 HIGHHOOO RO MOUNO MN 55564 REPORT NO. PAGE PI4554011556 07-117-25 44 0015 04101 H16HH0QD RO EVA THEOBALD EVA A THEOBALD 4101 HIGHHOOO ROAD MOUND m 55544 56 07-117-25 44 0018 04144 HIGHHOOO RO LARRY M KARKEU LARRY N KARKELA 4144 HIGHHOOO RD MOUNO rtl 55564 56 07-117-25 44 0052 04114 HIGHHOOO RO BRUCE J MOLUMBY PHIL OTTO 4140 HIGHHOOO RD MOUND IM 55544 5B 07-117-25 44 0004 04125 HIGHHOOO RO JOHN H A ROBERTA J HENRICH JOHN H A ROBERTA J WNRICH 4125 HIGHHOOO RO ORONO MN 55544 ■■ M-'n ■ • f 4 •• •4 . . iV « . I i-! ’ • . ' \ I • h t>U- i ■| V. .■;I'l ’ J- .. : vM-;- f i r 4 6. • 4 /• .*61■ I¥ r 1 •» .•. .•i {•- i 1 !• CD . I 1 6* ^ i ^ 01 • { ; 4 • • J t . !* , ♦■•J ’*.-. II i ji'" V' ■ fi • I ) f 5 -.f NUN DATE OS/OI/^HEr#€PIN COUNTY PtOPERTY II^ONHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST REP«T NO. PI43S40I PAGE 14natch 005 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNONLEOGE ANO BELIEF./ .»Jr 'I 1?^ UiQQji^ > . * • I % • » 4 4 •i *. t I =tt: •t CD OX ; •• 1 •». I I ' ^ iji -" , , . . • GHWOOD LAKE M ONKA. HENNEPIN COUN MINNESOTA ill CO o E fv . • p- 9' L it C 3 • • p H I 1I ^ I ^ NN I 11^ KJ \ ^ \ I M ESO hi toz>o X wvw > ♦ « ir V » V 9 V V V 199999 99999* SACRIF 1CIAL HARDCOVER RETAINABLE HARDCOVER 0-'rX' ^\/l NOTE: THESE AREAS ARE IN ADDITION TO STRUCTURES SHOWN ON THIS SURVEY S\A£.eT ^ OP iiahDCOVfii WLCUbUUIfl KORXillftI - 'bl-\t£-T I oc 2--bHiSiT^ t i£ftACK 20;i£: (emeu 0M£) 7'J-2b'U ‘ 25U-500' !iU0-i000' . V-^oo‘p'3 t>. t?^t>5.vs<£Xcv; AC*s*st> g>'f ' •bvAuc/T\K^ LCnOTfi X X Q\. Otk6P!. 'b'b ^b\X \ \ AteP A >2-0. *5 ^.F.(fi) WiliTII . X _(4/t\S.F. X U./\.S.F, • X ^oo S.F.©c.oMct.e^ c VS| AwX .t .«<• 2-5 S.F.© X *3 ^>■7-6 S • f I <3>X o ^ So 1 X S IMO S.F. j< iKCwviOwo ^ SXOa VSAUX VCoO O c 'O/J VMOOV va Awe *:7 (^O eu. 6Z.O c c © fiu.OKc, ^ • r • I _3o_. s.f. ©■ \^oAT •\l^cw->0w COMC- ^•b> S.p, ® VT- or- K4i>Ti»' KuS'aToNu 5.F. vl-V ^2.6TAm\Kio,Vi; S.F. © 6^X .\ •51 S.F. AO X 1 •• S.F. 5M X .i • •?>4 S.F. •• •, • •r—• ’ Total HA/iflcovEn IN Zone . . ^‘■slC’___S.F. Total PROpenTY A rea IN Zone 172.0 S.F. 1 A ^6\Q 5 [b X 100 ^ ,^2-' A B It 11 11 I \ ‘ ii>4ct-*M>it> ^»H«*6 X. '% r i; VioT” DilUlMGATvfD \H iTU lckx ^iTH >« vsi DTH V^CRiT PLAip\VKeTeR«rO OK coNveoTe'R, Cj^^o p;zo^e.AK-^ \ luiiiuww^r-ii uiutuuuiuu iiwn^-^nLL* LEfLACK ZO.Jt:; (lIKCLE Ofl£) 7U* Lusiniu llAfiucyviirt ifi /one ♦ \ • Gi.O-rvAG^15 X \«4 • ^5 ‘J.F _ AW . © Pk QC^^WTtQ* ) KC*<1>TO»«*> LEfiijTH WIUTII A>mvK> VSt AV-V- ■LO X \—Z.O S.f . s ) IB X _\IS S.F,;(£ •• - X S 8C S.F. . 'a4 00P QaJTA L.?- \2^X 0 Q S.F.dS/ ^ \ T »* (V >: \X _ _\\ \S.F.S piicotAXl V V ) StAe>L> •# X S.F.. X • • s]f. X s , S.F. 1 ^ . ac 1 S.F. ✓ X 1 S.F. . X = .. S.F. m . X a • • S.F. X ^S.F. X . • S4 • • S.F. • • X . • ••a • • • S.F. • • ^ . • a£ • • S.F, • AL HA/lOCOVCn •• IN Zone • H2- • S.F.u -1^1^ ?A67iT T otal Psopeiur Area lu Zone X 100 s.f-. [T J b ________ C i; Crj luiftLjCOYFii 0\LCDL^\TU^N HQfiK^I^ET LCtVALK AOAe; ftlACLE OtrE) U-?';' 2SU-SCO' 'M->MX ^ ^ ^ ».c^'a 0€Vc^xf*nc ---------------------------- UIIOIII %;)c-.ABAtnS le).'^ cr^otiMoysu-, P?)(JVK0^IV9c wKic^vA.'»xi V*vT>' (Cj'l^OTVAt?. X bZ O^bh O.hl X X X X ’ Total HAnflCOvcn l« Zone Total Psopeaty Area in Zone loftO S.F. WIUTII 1 • & a 3l&S.F.© .b&o 5.F, M<^‘5 S.F. s .lisQ. 9 S.F.© Sir.©1 •L S.F.<S) & • S.F.(S) ■■ _•\-bO <* CxO . I 1 s \toO S.F. 1 ue>s.f. ® pioKT *p WOc (>tOAC^uir C ^ O^ l^T VsiO*'^ otfcyi r«\o ^ *OtS O V rAo*J*v\T ‘>'00' Oi^ »iOO^\5’ Us ,f. I©•VTtTP> 5..-. le^isiAtr" S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. Vil^s.f. S.F. rn h.^X'b -i- fn &'Z-M^ X 100 ^ ’%c — i; r^OTd\ rtOT D(;^\^4lS:l^'TUt? VslV'OrV )« WV QTVi \sie^^c D»^ Co.^\PJTL^ CA^^T) ?(2oG,<AAa LOTS 17 HIGHWOOD LAKE MINNETONKA. HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA "PROPOtpGD CORt>\TiONlt?" ppu. l4 AtOCo>#^^ t> N prk LU i/> D 0 1 UJe> <a: < O UiLiuuu Uiii ruw.^utm iitirxK. 20;2SU-500' 5L’0-iQ0d'at: (CIHCLE Cf/E) (jh?^ /ii-'ihO' 2b •I . soeMw*";/^TbD ?24P0^tX)-tL»4TIU tUUCOVEH 111 ^ -------------------------------------------------------------- ‘3VAV.U \ -A y —V r^,wOvC^Q v^(OU<b>c tjAR. At/j c':)02.\\\g'nM P?)tAKOt>CCW Gn^cmACC.t> i?,'5 X L0.6 ^6Co i.f. LliMiiiH • X HIliTlI u / A s.p X ^ S.F. • X MQQ_ s.f. X __ S.F. X H(a s.f. X ■0.*5 «S.F. X 1 *=" Z-*5 s.\r* _. S.F. “bl X 1 _ S.F. 5 \X \ ^b V S.F. MO \^C> S.F. X \- S.F. • • 0‘S X s.f. LO V \S.F. • ® © ^ X \ \ ‘b\(^ X o.%i • lO'A \2- X 0.^3 8> S.F. S.P ’ T otal HAnocoven la Zone T otal PftOPEATy Area im Z one ________S.f ~llO s.f (3) (w) <S) © © acAT rtO-»t>C ^4>a AiO>*^U TO bv; iLA»vov<2 5> CO«^C%va>A £.O^K. Vs^^V-f » % % I i • \« © A B t i PC«.oB-*>a\»/C 6w. ^VH?C 9vT Majd_ T cD_nie_ X100 - _J3__'%C i: r KOv'Q'S^U h;»rtUCUVf.K 0\LCUL/\i lUN ___ uikAL^ (CIKCLE oi .e) Q'j^!) 25U-500' 500-1000' y^'O E.ll'i I li75^llAfiUCU»CH 111 -^7___________________________ 'iJHCtlb . 1//C- • W OkJ*^ C^V>z\^C\f4P^'i CL'T) ^€CV^ Av^c(\^ 0#^oC2-^'*^ ‘t'i OT lA lTR LtrtOIH 66 :)t- 16 51 X HIUTIt - X X rcooP* 2,r*o t,TO?-'{ ^ X Q«b"? Ov6'6 O ^65 X X 0.6 s« X X t , A«C^ Pt^>C«.»?t\0 l(b3Q i.F.o 61(b S.f. CdMO S.F. I ic>C>S.F. P-COKT ^7 © m/^ Nl/<iV »4/a vAoo*jd C-*» *3»O v5 0(5 (Aoo S.F \ \S.F. © 1^\\ TO ■^di^ovc 0 i'*CO^'C. vMAt^ OH H\(i.\4uJOOC. S.F. \':S.F. 5 • F • Sf I >M«00 ■VTfe^^ I VN»C»0 ViOOO VSACC (^^1 It," COHC.NN'^UC S.F. S.F. S.F. ’ Total HAnacovcn in Zone - . ^ Total PFOPEftTY Area in Zone - ^ 06b6 _ ^fTl 6ZH6_ , X 100 ^ S.F. 6Z.^6 S.F.3 M4_ '%c: i; 4 . •'# ■< '2 if",i.-lii% •.I _ . r ✓ iais /•-V //✓/ »«•»w«l«<v> $.« ••• •1*^ fm* »«»M« MnO-* 1 * »rr^MTMir /' IW^ 4f ------------ r r; ,«V j-— • •• *** ***** ^ **** J »**J .O T #» ••^1 4- $ 3fC U--J'.'‘J4-J W«< • l»%4 m0>^t I ..■*.r»* •> ^5T ElEVAT/DN I-* -•f i > il tt.' < ik. o \ \ \ / / / ,* •• • ••*.«, \ ' \ /% / / ft .4 , ^ . ^ V [^] OASEMENT/FOUNDATION PLAN couNciU;:z.f REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUN 1 3 1994 OTYOFORONO DATE: June 10, 1994 ITEM NO.: Department Appro?aI: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1927 Mary McCarty. 245 Tonka Avenue - Variance - Resolution Brief Review of Application Council granted an area variance for Lots 5 and 6 in July of 1993. During the review, the applicant advised that she was attempting to acquire the soon to be tax forfeited lots to the immediate north. The current application now includes Lots 3 and 4 and involves a lot area variance and rear setback variance. A lot width variance is no longer required as total building site meets the 200’ requirement and the area has been increased to 25,050 s.f. Because of certain physical site constraints such as a low retention area in the south end within Lot 6 and the location of mature trees at the west and mid points of Lots 4 and 5. (Review Exhibit F), the single story structure will be located 30’ from the west or rear lot line. Review Exhibit G,' the applicant proposes to design the home in order to fit the existing neighborhood of cottage-like structures. If the structure was to be realigned in a north and south alignment within the legal building envelope, this would no longer be possible. The Planning Commission accepted the hardships noted by the applicant and recommended unanimous approval of the rear setback variance as proposed. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission’s recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed application resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIMSION 6(B) FILE #1927 WHEREAS, Mary K. McCany (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 245 Tonka Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6, Block 3, "Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka", Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6(B) to permit construction of a new residence on a property that consists of 25,050 s.f. or .6 acres where 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres is required and a rear setback variance for the structure is proposed 30’ trom the rear lot line where a 50 setback is required. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1927. 3. The property is located in the LR-IA, Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres in area. The property consists of 25,050 s.f. or .6 acres. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 16, 1994, and recommended unanimous approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings and hardships: A. The property is 25,050 s.f. in area and is subject to 2 acre zoning standards. Page 1 of 4 B. The lets were platted prior to present zoning standards. C. Per Orono Resolution #3167 the City approved sanitary sewer service to the property. D. The substandard lot meets the 200 ’ lot width requirement. E. The lot is 125 ’ in depth. The depth of the building envelope is defined at 25.5 ’. If structure is to be designed as a cottage-like structure, there is a need to build in an east-west alignment rather than a north-south. F. Development of the lot as proposed would be consistent with the pattern of development within the immediate Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka plat. 4. 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 aflect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring propeny: would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby erants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivisions 6(B) to permit the construction of a new residence at the property located at 245 Tonka Avenue granting an area variance of 62.070 s.f. or 71.2% and a rear setback variance of 20 ’ or 40%, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 4 1. 2. 3. w. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicant shall apply for the legal combination of the four lots that will make up the final building site. Applicant shall apply for an access permit from the Public Works Department prior to installing an access at Tonka Avenue. The property is located within 500-1,000’ of Lake Minnetonka and shall be allowed 35% of hardcover improvements. Authorities granted by this resolution run 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 ot Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 13, 1995). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constimte a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically tgffninste any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 13th day of June, 1994. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of June, 1994, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. On this __________day of______________________. 199___, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared ----------------------------------------------------- known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. On this day of , 199__before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared ______________________^^---------------- known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 [0 To: From: Date: Orono Planning Commission Members Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator May 13, 1994 Subject: ^^1927 Mary McCarty. 245 Tonka Avenue - Variance - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B). A. Lot area. Required = 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres Proposed = 25,050 s.f. or .57 acres (Resolution No. 3310 approved area variance 12,500 s.f. or .28 acres, July 1993) Variance = 62,070 s.f. or 1\.2% B. Lot width. Required = 200 ’ Proposed = 200 ’ (Resolution No. 3310 approved 100’ lot width, July 1993) Lot width variance no longer required. C. Rear setback. Required = 50’ Proposed = 30’ Variance — 20 ’ or 40% List of Exhibits A - Application B-1-2 Applicant ’s Addendum C - Property Owner ’s List D - Plat Map E - Site Plan F - Detail Plan G - Elevation H - Original Survey I - Council Minutes 7/26/93 J - Resolution No. 3310 K - Existing/Proposed Development of Neighborhood Zoning File #1927 May 13. 1994 Page 2 Description of Request In July of 1993 applicant received approval of an area variance for Lots 5 and 6. During the review, applicant advised that she was attempting to acquire the soon-to-be tax-forfeited lots to the immediate north. Lots 3 and 4. Ms. McCarty was successful in obtaining the two parcels and now includes them within the building site. The lot width variance is no longer required and the area has been increased to 25.050 s.f. Due to certain physical site constraints, she has placed the house more to the north and to the west. Drainage and a low retention area to the south within Lot 6 creates the need to move northward. The desire to preserve trees along the west and mid-point of Lots 5 and Lot 4 places house within 30’ of the west rear lot line. Review Exhibit K. specifically Illustration A. that reflects existing lot lines and development within the immediate neighborhood. Applicant notes no impact upon existing residences as Parcels 2 and 3 have homes well to the south. Illustration B reflects lot lines that were proposed in a subdivision that was never completed involving Parcels 1 and 2. It is stall’s understanding that the current owner of Lot 1 objects to substandard setback to the west lot line placing the rear of a house within 30’ rather than the required 50’. The proposed 40’ length residence could never meet the required front and rear setback of a lot at 125 ’-H depth. Refer to Exhibit H. The depth of the building envelope is defined at 25.5 ’. It was noted during the first review the possible need tor rear or front setback variance. Hardship Statement Refer to Exhibits B-1 and B-2. Applicant notes the following: 1. The southern portion of property is wet. 2. 3. 4. The location of trees located within the central portions of the property Applicant notes stand of trees in higher elevations along west lot line minimizes impact of single story residence. Applicant claims the design of home is to fit the existing neighborhood of cottage ­ like structures. If structure was to be realigned more north and south, this would no longer be possible. Issues for Consideration 1.Applicant has provided photos of the area depicting density and type of vegetation. It may help if Planning Commission members are able to once again visit this site. Are the hardships valid? Zoning File #1927 May 13, 1994 Page 3 2. 3. 4. As applicant seeks early direction from the City to assist in finalization of her building plans, should we define acceptable setbacks? A 40’ length home requires a 15 ’ setback variance from either the north or south. What is a reasonable setback and w'ould it be consistent with the development along Tonka Avenue? Should 40’ length house be reduced? What will be reasonable for a lot at a depth of 125 ’ and also allow applicant to build the cottage-wke structure? Review Exhibit K, existing lot lines. How valid is a concern of property owner whose lot lines as of this date do not abut the rear of this property? If the proposed lot line rearrangement is completed, the future owner always has the opportunity to adjust the placement of his home in relation to existing development. Options of Action 1. Approval. Any condition of approval must include the following conditions: A. The legal combination of the four parcels prior to the issuance of a building permit. B.Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide updated survey locating residence structure on property with additional grading and drainage information to ensure that drainage from new construction does not impact neighboring property to south. Any other conditions set forth within Resolution No. 3310 that are appropriate for the current review. OR 2.Table. 3. OR Deny application as proposed Section 10.08, Section 3 (A). Planning Commission members should then refer to crrv OF ORONO - variance ON p Initial Application Fee $200.00 ^¥ ($50.00 per each additional vanafce) Renewal Variance Fee $1(X).00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $200.(X) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) 0*^p -TTv rc ur.i~AH\ t * W*»L f;u.AA,rr nzcrrc I AltniTC U. C'i I A U-4-. i V-.’i .A fc/w'Vt, V'WVV» _ , I*j i ^ V A i2Vi * w* V' • V'V* f-LfCTi* M “A»i- w'VtVV rvr.-rTDT^TUAiiiV* VTiff iViAf #:nl rA.C.;A. ry«^v^v.AV u-vv'l nv'A f» .*v .* .‘V/9. rrrv nr non^fn c r.vAA/f'i. f Liu I f V I Aitniicu C‘i f Awu ^ 7v;‘ V, V*».Wi ^4wwv^v^VVvy " vx L-ttl rLTrc VLi it i»m.______Av \i#,vv ; .r*/T* vr»T I y* f fi ll jL/<uc rjcfpvivj ----------------—------—-----— I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property; ___residential ___other (specify)—,^‘d'fC^ Zoning District: 'IR______________—------------------------------------ APPLICANT Name Mdt Phone (home) ^77-s53^ ___ Phone(worlc) 3^/ 3 City: /?czIMK/ _ Zip: 5 OWNER (if different *^an applicant) Name________________ Phone(horae) Phone (work) Address:Citv:Zip: description of request Estimated Construction Cost $:;acKiriiui^ vjr -----------------.--------- _ . —^—- ■■t-—77- Describe request in detail: Xt'hn meet ^o' -yrgoi ScAhadi 4 3q l3..<f ChT\ Ye^nf^-hA^ (S^ 3Q‘ ------ "tr (attatih addittbnal sheets if necessary) /of JyCe' f/c/rtry*i^, VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front ipi ;^sidSide X Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) hardship /description of unusual property conditions Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual pro^ny conditions iVs ii Hfc QS hh- ^ ^ not brI >T(.h» 'hic j l.( l^n Q J l)(^rSPl M ei^-d (y\ 0'^eri:> (attach additional sheets if necessary) (;i s'M^-f L'(indricc r^Ar REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All nf fhp fnllnuing inforroation must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered coinplctc. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150’ (you must obtam this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 816 .x 11 for reproduction. • • • j Topographic sur\'ey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existmg grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'A" x 11" for reproduction.^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/6" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest m the property. This would include n?Tie(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your vnrinnce apDlicntion is not complete if the above information has not been include^ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE u 7 „ The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zonmg Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by onginal fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signature .111II OWNER’S SIGNATURE ^ . . . The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and CouncU members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Date ___________Owner’s Signature --------- ------------------------------ to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the BuUdmg & Zonmg Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 FROM THE DESK OF . . . MSTy McC3rtV -ft yUtU- l)yrJL /XfUttlZ/^ ^ -hAuo a^yjnyi n^ ^ ^ / , • 'U/“rrr^ U.'oAa^c /■lAjxJ Clf4CbCtr/> "-h /lH'/TVi'-A^ . 6250 HIGHWAY 12 WEST • MAPLE PLAIN. MN 55359 47^4343 V- ^ McCarfy Water & Waste " y.lUdi ^ h r ^;^ir'/J^,;.'£ ■L/'' u yfn/Ljs A/-C d, rtd- ^ TZ' ^ . V lA^ u^i^ ,jM'^ /, •• • •• AWi-' /i^- '».•■* »• % .H . ,♦•f^h-O-rr^rt ! JJ'-<-^'-'-^l^-ryi.cr. ^ . ^PH 2 6 >/££ i>^Nd '^^otvoeoBON^^ r W ^ .^y,... • ’ U '! / f ^ » * t . /f,, ^ ■’■■■-'A -■ '^"■'-''^'•~ J, „ •'a ^ 4 ,\:-<ilU! nx^A 3 ^rLiZL, < « / * * •___ / c trr^/^.o c^” i'f /’ -'. ' • * *' y4 ! .7 t * '•' ^ ^ 1 . . ' . /D^if /li]AJ^r\' ^ .■7 ; -------------/ — '/■/ ^ -../, J /p.t:oAU4.n- 6' / ./' ' , •''' /. , <; •. /7V/ - UyJf^C^^t . ^^--(^^r-;^ S ^^extor^] yff-UdoUAJ .( / • *• f / / ‘ --' - V / -' Z C-i'^X/./lCr^- Sexton Printing, Inc. 250 E. Lothcnbach Avenue St. Paul. MN 55118 457-9255 • J I' • • I w \\ .'1 • « .i • ♦ • : ’? . v: Y/t /^Jr fe' ■ •.■■'• • i • • • J/^C-.. 9^ i^lt ott^ / 'n ■ jLAX ’Mo y •- -• '^Ai\ H , yjju ^ i))^ V?^- ‘/2> ^3 / -J Cct-!' Yh/- 1/CU-3^ /I’ l '/i>:/-j> id Mi d L^cdJ f^dc. 3 ^'^ y y 3 • . k* .* i t ,y fV ;V . '* • i % r. • ••»-.■ I , , • • \ * . •*• * • • • .-• •«■ ;• • *1' # *. :.‘rv' • . •. .. I ) » OS-lir-25 IS 0012 0S42O OAYSIOf 00 0 « M ANDERSON ROKRT r A HENDV S SA20 MYSXOE RO LONB URE m 55SM DROP ADDR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR PROP ADOR OM«R NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP AODR OIMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SO 0S-U7-2S IS 002A OOOSO ADDRESS UNASSIGICO STATE LA»«) OEPT STATE LAIC DEPT AOJ OMIERS SALE PENDXNB CITY RES NO S2S2 SO 05-117>25 IS 0027 002AS TOMCA AVE ESTHER M ADDISON ESTHER M AOOISON SS02 OAYSIOE RO L0N6 LAKE m 55S54 SO 05-117-2S lA 0024 00200 TOMCA AVE P A K SKOOC PHILIP A A KAREN S SKOOC 200 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE Ml 55SS4 SO 0S-117-2S 14 0027 002S0 TONKA AVE JAMES K PULKERSON A HIFE JAMES K FULKERSON 250 TOMCA AVE LONG LAKE MN 55554 HEIOCPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFOiBttTXaN SYSTEM PROPERTY OMCRS LISTSO 05-117>25 15 OOlS 0S440 OAYSIOE RO T M ZIESMER AMT TOOO H A MARIE T ZIESMER 5440 OAYSIOE RO LONG LAKE M« 55554 SO 05-117-25 15 0025 00050 AOORESS UNASSXGNEO STATE LAND DEPT STAH LAND OEPT AOJ OMIERS SALE PENDING CITY RES NO 5252 50 05-117-25 15 0020 00275 TOMCA AVE HSR SCHMITZ HENRY A ROSIE SCHMITZ 275 TOMCA AVE LONG LAKE Ml 55354 SO 05-117-23 14 0027 . 00200 TOMCA AVE P A K SKOOC PHILIP A A KAREN S SKOOC 280 TOMCA AVE LONC LAKE Ml 55354 56 05-117-25 14 0042 00500 TOMCA AVE JAMES L PATRIN JAMES L PATRIN 75 H GEORGE ST PAUL MN 55107 REPORT NO. riASVMll PAS 130 05-117>2S IS 002S 00225 TOMCA AVE CAROLE J MALSN CAROLE J MALSM 225 TOMU A^LONG LAKE m SO 05-117-25 IS 0024 00245 TOMCA A^ ESTHER M JCOOXSON ESTHER M AOOISON 3502 OAYSIOE RO LONG LAKE Ml 55554 SO 05-117-25 15 0027 00056 AOORESS UNASSXGNEO ESTHER H AOOISON ESTHER M AOOISON 5502 OAYSIOE RO LONG LAKE Ml 55554 30 05-117-23 14 0020 00250 TOMCA AVE GERALD L ORIGGS GERALD L ORIGGS 250 TONKA AV LONG LAKE Ml 55554 • 4' ' O «« ••• • I ) TOTAL OATCH 001 00014 . ; 1 V.. W .... "1 •.* 4 -*.4/ > MlNil I f ■ \ __________ Ui W! - rv j O CD ’4’^ Vtv,,^-'.> X''- V /;’ ■«.r OiX »•) I4TT ■<J !3l)t UJ 1 "<i\“'5>: 4 ir| % %)’JiLi TONKAd" O'• ;*v ^1**jU /‘iJ 'i)tAJ UJ ^ 1 , — % ' j •U t.A - - — « M OI . u* "9 •/J ‘iJ tt)•0 *0AV « *4 ' n m SI )E A >DM 1 \ 5^^ '\ ■ t^'&\ > '-»i« w a*ii»oJ— *04 i"*► _ ‘X.-\'*^ -• .# lV VQ •n •/I *r)w •p *J) lU 1. 'V c». ^ ► > «Ni ^ - fO W.6 rn UJ ;u)to iO to UJ a ;« ,'u» 1 ! ^^ . *0 • V)0 '0 *n ^^^/ »40*IJ*J'J*t 9t IS) ' .j;' / r / , / i «^/ ^ ^ V - o c>j / ^ o •/ i? / /» f / i . 1 T, MIMricoUTA ,..••••■ % *• ■ N t2S.Z5 8 0 8 f 1 o do . - - ^ ^ A S V. > .O „ 32.0 ^ ^6 Proposed o Goro^e^" 32 O ^ V V V ^ 30.0-------1 N ^> A *•< s...; Stn o 8 fO.O so Proposed J3 House ^ > > > q's; 400 %V\.VVV%.vv V V .•• « ... •>, J : -N Cm I 8 8«v< I 2» •• % ^ • € «. J2S.25 / LU 3Z < z Legal Description Lots 3,4,5 and 6, Block 3, "Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka". This survey shows the location of the boundaries of the above described property and a proposed house and garage thereon. It does not £>urport to show any other improvements or encroachments. / o; Iron marker Bearings shown are based on an assumed datum. K.cFg 'T "ff) (hX .• f i t i •;• •» 4 4- I I . •“ f« I •.' I » •■ 1 :• •• ■ ♦. . i ^.1 4. . J f-4-i i -r * } • i • ■ . j.T.i.i ! J.. . -I ] • . ' 4 i ; . . j -i.!. I I.. ; ! 1 ' ! , i I I j ; : 1 - . t j-1 't i H - i • • ♦•j ■ “ J. J J. i. J. 4 • . j-y-» ♦ I . • . I . . ^ . -*..i - i ; • . . • , J 1 . . , . I-. . 1 . l ♦ •«•Ml''.in:! :.L‘ ' • • r i ’, J i V « 1 4 ' / ./ ii:’ ! • 4-t I -1 J t i « I I* - • » 4 4 . 1 . - 1 ♦ -* . iMMlli : 'i.ir- 4 t I i I f I i •rv -i.l ••• 1 * i f 4|. l:.,., •4- T acvu ri vi-W'* ■f - ------- - --------------------f 1 ^ I 1 ; ; : t*’*'..I...'. 4.: - J' -•-------^ ..I- 4— --:'• 1 * • r“ ' nT[]“ •- ,.i • ‘4 -t • r ’ • - •• • - I +-•* 4* -• 4-^4--4-j • ->1 r-1 f '■ * '■ I ‘ ^ I * J 1 * J. 1 L. L -i - , I , -i 1 U-- •*»-♦ ■"' -mmi :1 1 . 1 i *. I * «.! J , i • i * • . ; -1 t • -i-t ■; r r ■ •! :•! • ‘ i i • • -f! : 1 ii i {•• t-5 l « • • • ‘ "•• ' H- ••:•' *!*:'•’ ■. ; ‘ . • :. f._ 1 . » ; 1 . •,•»■• • • • I,.; . I--------; ^--------------------------------------------:—»------TT •.. . •........................... .*..!;•.•• ■••'•{■■ ‘ « 4^. 1 ------- t :.’ it: l.[ ! * \ •1 ^ , * 1 , t • ♦ \ 4I 1 ^ i; i‘i1 ’‘ . t • • • ‘ j ; I * ! » • *; 1 ‘ J11i ; , 4 i .* » 4 I . 4 < 1 * - M L. - » ■m ^ - J 4 .. i • • • m !r; f • I *r • 4 * -J .i . . , ■ ♦ I II ! • . t : t • • J »• • I ' ‘ • ______________■ K ‘ • ■ • ' ■ . • i ' I * i*j •■■ • ^ » -i I - > I •*. \ t JlOO -UT. . t »•/ / 11' / j/ I / • / V.pmpo^Aho^r,^:o. / —rr/ i I X XI A^9y '49 25 Legal Description Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, "Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka” ^•his survey shows the location of the boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to show any improvements or encroachments. o: Iron marker Bearings shown are based on an assumed datum. __rnm\i_i?rjCDQ\]1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct super- f date ^-3-93 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 26, 1993 (#7) #1834 MARY K. MCCARTY, 245 TONKA AVENUE VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3310 Mary McCarty was present. exDlained the apolicant seeks a lot area and lot width variance to allow the con’struction of a new residence on a vacant lot in the Stubbs Bay area which has been provided a sewer stub. She noted Lots 3 and 4 to the north will go tax forfeit and the apDlicant hopes to acquire the property. The owner to t.he north oi the tax forfeit orooerty has indicated he is not interesuea in the property, and they‘are not certain of the intent of the owner to the west. Mayor Callahan asked what happens if the applicant does not acquire the additional property. Mabusth stated then she would be back before the Council requesting setback variances. She indicated the same findings used to justi y the sewer stub connection be mace to support the current variance request. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Hurr, to adopt Resolution #3310 for Mary McCarty, 245 Tonka Avenue, granting lot area and lot width variances to permit the construction ^ new residence on a property that consist? of 12,500 s.f. where 87,120 s.f. is required. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#8) ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - SECTION 12.30 - NON-CONFORMING SYSTEMS REPLACEMENT - ORDINANCE #118, SECOND SERIES It was moved by Jabbour, seconced by Mayor Callahan, to adopt Ordinance #118, Second Series, amending Section 12.30 by revising the required timeframe for repair or replacement of non-conforming septic systems. Ayes 4, nays 0. (*#9) MET COUNCIL - SW AREA MUSA TOUR It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Callahan, information presented regarding the Metropolitan Council s MUSA tour. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#10) NORTH SHORE DRIVE MARINA - 1993 LICENSE Gaffron explained the marina has met all the conditions of tne license, but has failed to submit the late fee. They ^^d o overpay according to staff's calculation of 20 allowed Therefore staff recommends the marina pay the additional late of $46.00. CITY of ORONO tr resolution of the city colt ^cil NO. S3 '0 ■j/:‘ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE/1^1834 ^VHT-REAS MaivK McCanv (hereimfttr-tht applicant-) has an interest in th= p^op^rty iocateS^ti^ --e within'the City of Orono (herenufter "City-) and legaily described as follows: Lota 5 and 6. Block 3. -Bayside Addition to Uke Minnetonka". Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property ); and «-HEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances “ ' Zoning Code Section ge^crM whTri'sT.TzO sXor° 2 acre! ^required and propetry that consists ^.500 sX ot^ 86 ^ a lot width vanance as lot is KXJ at me rear oi me -v required. NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED by the City CouncU of Orono, Minnesota: findings 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File i?18a4. The property is located in the LR-IA. Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. J.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this »PP»fj t^Kommended unanimous approval of the proposed vanances based upon following fmdings and hardships: A. The property is 12.500 s.f. in area and is subject to 2-acre zoning standards. Page 1 of 5 tmrnVOi ch^ CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 3 3 - 0 ^ constmction of a new residence at the property located at 245 Tonka Avenue, subject to the following conditions: 1. 4. 5. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicant shall have applied for the legal combination of the lots that will make up the final building site. Applicant shall apply for an access permit from the Public Works Department prior to installing an access at Tonka Avenue. 3. The property is located within 500-1.0C0* of Lake Minnetonka and shall be allowed 35% of hardcover improvements at the time of development. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but arc permissive only and must be e.xercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will c.xpirc on that date (July 26. 1994). 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 tenninate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 • 0 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE Cm' COU*NCIL NO.3 3:0 STATE OF NflNNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On liiis ^6 day of -'f'u 4/199 ^ before me a Noiaiy PublicwiitoandforscdcW.and who cxcclHid tbc forcgorng imtrumcnt. i^dlctaowledgcd that he (they) executed the same as hts (them) free act and deed. I as DA S. VEE NOTAr^Y PUBLIC - MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNrt' My cOfTimisuon fisirM d-l2-96 NOTARY PL'BUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 __before me a Notary Btblic Within and for said county. the foregoing instruml^^cknowledged that he (they) executed the same as ins (them) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 I . r % REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE; June 6. 1994 ITEM NO.: /O % Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: >1928 Suzanne Wacker. 1115 Brown Road South - Variances Resolution Brief Review of Application For more detail on this review, please refer to Planning Commission minutes of May 16, 1994 and staff memo dated May 10, 1994. The current owner cf the property has filed for an amended variance application seeking approval of a 24 ’ x 20 ’ detached garage to be partially located in the required 50’ street setback and to be placed in front of the principal structure on the property. The former owner had received approval for a renewal variance in December of 1993 for a 22 ’ x 20 ’ detached garage within the street yard of the property. The new garage will encroach no closer than the previously approved locations of the garages in the former variance application. In exchange for increasing the size of the detached garage, the applicant and new owner has agreed to remove the 10’ x 12 ’ shed in the rear yard. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the variance as amended, subject to applicant removing the 10’ x 12 ’ storage shed in the rear yard upon completion of the new construction. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission recommendation. A RESOLUTION GRANTING \ ARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (D) AND SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE NO. 1928 \\HEREAS, Suzanne K. Wacker (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1115 Brown Road South within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: refer to Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03. Subdivision 9 (D) to allow a detached garage to be constructed 40 ’ in front of the front line of the principal stmcmre, and a variance to Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) that would allow the structure to be placed 23.1’ from the front street lot line instead of the required 50’. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1 2 FUNDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1928. The propeny is located in the RR-IB Rural Residential Single Family Zoning District requiring two acres in area. The property consists of approximately 14,824.25 s.f. or .38 acres. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 16. 1994 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following hardships and unique findings: A. The unique shape of the lot prevents structure from being placed adjacent to principal structure. B Insufficient width to allow an access drive to rear of property without requiring the removal of the only mature trees on the property. Page 1 of 4 c.Proposed location of the garage in the street yard is consistent with the pattern of development for accessory stnicmres within this neighborhood. The .38 parcel is required to be developed under two acre zoning standards. E.The proposed improvement does not exceed the lot coverage allowance for structural improvements proposed at 1882.4 s.f. or 12.6% where 15% is allowed. 4.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 oranting the variances^would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial proj^iy right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) and Section 10.28. Subdivision 5 (B), subject to the following conditions: 1.At the time of the final inspection for the proposed detached garage in the street yard, the applicant shall obtain a demolition permit for the removal of the accessory shed in the rear yard. 2.The proposed detached garage shall meet the required 10 ’ side yard setback and applicant shall provide namral plantings along south side of structure to minimize impact upon residents to south. Applicant shall provide a planting schedu e upon application for building permit. Page 2 of 4 3.Authorities granted by this variance run 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 this variance will expire on that date (June, 13, 1995). 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. 5.The undersigned applicant has read, understands and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain ot Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of June. 1994. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr.. Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) • ft The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day ot June. 1994 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf o t e City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of ss. , 199 ___, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 ___, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 I M (/ To:Orono Planning Commission Members Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator From;Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:May 10, 1994 Subject: #1928 Suzanne Wacker, 1115 Brown Road South - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB, Rural Residential, 2 acre minimum Pertinent Ordinances 1.Section 10.03. Subdivision 9 (D) - Variance required for placement of accessory strucmre in front of front line of principal structure. Accessory structure to be located 20’ in front of principal strucmre. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - Front street cetback, Required = 50’ Proposed = 23.1’ (to edge of 33’ right-of-way) (43’ from traveled road) Variance = 27.9’ or 55.8% 3. Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Lot coverage review Total lot area = 14,824.25 s.f. Allowed = 2.223.6 s.f. or 15% Proposed = 1,882.4 s.f. or 12.6% No variance required. Hardcover review not required as property is not located within 1,000’ of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka or French Lake. List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - Application Property Owners List Plat Map Original Development Plan Resohidon No. 3372 Granting Approval of Renewal Variance in December, 1993 Description of Request Applicant has filed an amended variance application seeking approval of a 24’ x ^ detached garage rather than the 22’ x 20’ approved by the City in December of 1993. ihe Zoning File #1928 May 10, 1994 Page 2 of 2 detached garage will meet the recpiired 10 side setback and will not extend any closer to the front street line than the original proposal. The garage will extend closer to residence but meet a 20’ separation setback (10’ required). An amended variance application was required as entire structure is located within substandard 50 street setback. Note with the current proposal the detached shed in rear yard will be removed. Additional storage area will be provided in the proposed garage structure. Applicant’s lot coverage is at 12.6%. Strucniral coverage is not an issue but applicant has decided to remove shed in the rear yard. In the original reviews, the applicant had agreed to relcKate shed to meet conforming side yard setback. The original findings and hardships set forth in the enclosed resolution remain relevant for the current application. I M- CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $200.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address I ii< i^/majjKJ/hX.^ , ma/ ______________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) jH'I i7'-2'^ ^ _____ Attach legal description to application if not jncluded on required survey. Date Property Acquired [)(<^ _____________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ___residential ___other (specify)_________ Zoning District:__________________________________________ .'vrrrv uc roovn . cr\j^Airz nzcrrc VW !* urri’ i. • Ai rrv r? I tm 1 nA rV» A W« W V fAA .V^ AW* vv .Or**k’ *D7-. I'u V A#i tUmLr^At t I t t ZAi Tr»C'*A f?k.*V'4.V^V WWiA ?IVA I Vi/»V , U /A */C' VT/ / (raonth/year) APPLICANT Name ^.^/Ar-JK/If ^ uJfiCkiPlZ. Address: IIK pY.yJrJ /Zo S ■ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name __________ Phone (home) ^25?/_______ _____ Phone(worlc) - *f22~7 S~V6 ' 7 City: rrnry.\ _______Zip:£_5Xl±l__ Phone(home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $_______________ . Describe request in detail: 77) /? OfTPah^) AtHddiA ^ fhr:^ ------------------------------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width )C Setback: / Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventmg compliance with Zoning Code requirements: _____________________________________ /aUiTPD r7\ Ot^ Hc/^.tT r/J L<rf,_--------------------- /<• //o 'P-j W —-------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date »n_Q.rder for vour application to be considered complete: 1. 2. i/^Completed Application Form 3. 4. Certified Property Owners List of ow ners within 150’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). v/ Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). __ _ . 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. “7 Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8Vi x 11 for reproduction. • • • j A Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existmg grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘A" x 11" for reproduction.^ 1/ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/i" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital stams) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). __As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has npt been included^ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zonmg Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by onginal fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that t e information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signature uJiUtl Date V ' OV^’NER’S SIGNATURE . . u The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and fiiither authonzes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council meinbers for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature k'.Date T Applicant must lave all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each moiith. AppUcants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meetmg, please ^e arra^emen to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the BuUdmg & Zonmg Office ot this change prior to the meeting. 8 L CORUN DATE 05/15/92 BATCH 00«RROR ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAtC/AOOR 5B 10-117-23 13 000101000 BR02t4 RO SJAtCS A ABBOTTJAHES A ABBOTT1753 REGATTA DRFERNANOINA BEACH FL 32034 HEfMEPlN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY a««RS LIST58 10-117-23 24 000301085 BROHN RO S JAt«S S BURANEM JR JAMES S BURANEN JR P 0 BOX 121 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 1538 10-117-23 24 0004Olios BRONN RO S ABIE J CHRISTENSON ETAL ABIE J CHRISTENSON 1105 S BR0IP4 RO NAYZATA MN 55391 co PROP ADDA OM«R NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADOR ONER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR PROP ADDR ONIER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR 38 10-117-23 24 0005 01115 BROtl RO S R A S BATZLAFF ROONEY A SHARON BATZLAFF 1115 BROHN RO S lUkYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 24 0008 01140 NILLOH OR S 0 B LIESCH ACM LIESCH DAVID B A CARLA M LIESCH 1140 HILLOH OR S NAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 24 0033 01130 HILLOH OR S SAD MCHILLlAttS SHIRLEY A DORCAS MCHILLIAMS 1130 HILLOH DR S CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 24 0004 01135 BROHN RO S D A GLEH APS GLEH DUANE A A PATRICIA S GLEH 1135 BROHN RO S NAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 24 0011 OHIO HILLOH DR S C A SUESS A J J REtm JAMES KEMNA/CANDEE ANN SUESS 1110 HILLOH DR S NAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 004 00010 38 10-117-23 24 0007 OllSr BROHN RO S PHYLLIS I SYHONIAK PHYLLIS SYHONIAK 1155 BROIM RD S CRYSTAL DAY FM 55323 B 38 10-117-23 24 0032 01120 HILLOH OR S SAD MCHILLIAMS SHIRLEY A DORCAS MCHILLIA»e 1130 HILLOH OR S CRYSTAL BAY FM 55323 € . F* ( t. i I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESEFTTATION OF IFIFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEfAFEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERJY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF HY KNOITLEOGE AND BELIEF OAT ( TP' ( '....■• **• ••S3 5 sm »• « 2 = ► ..•n 2C 2 *3 ^ • fM i*2*1121__^ •• m JL JL.JL 71 %9B SB JL JL Line, ^aipllc.1 w'tHh , anddiSTant zie,.69ff LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES SURVEYED: V ^,.0 All that part of Government Lot S, Section 10, Township 117, Range 23, de­ scribed as follows: Beginning at a point on the East line of said Lot 6 distant 725.02 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof; thence West at right angles to said East line, a distance of 258.72 feet, more or less, to an intersection with a line drawn parallel with and distant 216.69 feet Northeasterly from the center line of County Road No. 87; thence Southeast erly along said parallel line a distance of 47.95 feet; thence deflecting left an angle of 39 degrees and 45 minutes a distance of 234.2 feet, more or less, to the center line of County Road^o. 146; thence Northerly along last said center line to the point of beginning. Note; Because of the various ways this section has been subdivided over the years, it may be necessary to judicially establish the boundaries to be certain of their location. • • iron marker found 0 : Iron marker set Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum.V CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 837?;_____ c. neighborhood. D.The .34 acre parcel is required to be developed under wo acre zoning standards. E. 4.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property ar. »t, and drnot apply generally to other property in this zoning district *a Inttog the variate Luld not adversely affect traffic conditions, light air nor TOse a fire hazard or oiher danger to neighboring property; would not merely L^e afaTonveliKe to thi applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a suostantial prope^ right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and mtent Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5.The City Council has considered this application including the fmdings arid Commendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City statf, commenB by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS 1 setback. impEct upon residence to south. Page 2 of 5 f-rm VJn Oia O' K CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 3 •7 Q A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (D) AND SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) file no. 1889 ^VHEREAS, Rodney J. Baulaff (hereinafter "the applicant-) ‘5;= property located at 1115 Brown Road south within the C.ty of Otono (hetetnafter ty ) and legally described as follows: Refer to Exhibit A. attached (hereinafter "the property"); and c. sSS s S required 50’. Minnesota: 1 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE FT RESOL\'ED by the City Council of Orono. findings This application was reviewed as Zoning File ^^1889. The property is located in the RR-IB Rural Residential Single Family Zomng DistrictTe^inng two acres in area. The property consists ot approximately 14,824.25 s.f. or .34 acres. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 15 1993 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following hardships and unique findings: A. The unique shape of the lot prevents structure from being placed adjacent to principal strucmre. B Insufficient width to allow an access drive to rear of property without requiring the removal of the only mature trees on property. Page I of 5 ^0m jiA Ok* O. o\CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.83 ^ ^ 3. Authorities granted by this variance run 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 this variance will expire on that date (December 13, 1994). 4. 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. 5. The undersigned applicant has read, understands 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. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of December, 1993. Edward J. Callai}afi, irTTMayor A STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13tn day of December, 1993 by Edward J. CaUahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporadon and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. NOTAflY^fuSUC ■- MmNESOTA J ■“"iJENNEPlN COUNTY ‘ My comrr.ission expires Notary Public Page 3 of 5 i CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.337^ STATE OF NflNNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199^ before me a Notary Public within and for‘ ______ *-----/ ----- - y said county personally appeared Kc(ine^^ S._--------------------------------------------- He »be the p.r^n(s) descnbed in'and who execuKd the foregomg .mtmmem.a™ . . . j ________.... «'JOf TnH mP^CI.Known 10 me lu uc ui^ ---------------— . . . v ^ ^ acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) tree act and dee . L!SD.\ S. VEE r.OTAPY PUBLiC - MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My cofnrr.iSSiCn expirM ft-12-96 / ^ NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) C\/)^J ‘ • ^ Notary Public wijto and for ited me t(ta^w^tTme to Won(s) described'^ and who execu^ *fe foregoing instrament.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. ■-* 1*-?^ i JAMIE LBOS^„go^PV«jC4«NJ^tA mennwn couhty My Comfli. Eyputt NO(rARY PUBUC Page 4 of 5 CITY of ORONO resolution of the city council NO EXHIBIT A Ml tliot part of Governmont Lot 6. Section 23. de­ scribed as follows; Beginning at a point on the East *1"® - distant 725.02 feet South of the northeast V^feM’ more or !eh laff in inolp of 39 clenrees and 45 minutes a distance of 234.2 [6®^* ® !□ the center line of County Road Ho. US; thence Northerly along Ust said'^center line to the point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Page 5 of 5 REQUEST FOR COU>JCIL ACTION JUN 1 3 1994 QTYOFORONO DATE: June 8, 1994 ITEM NO.: ! I Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabustli Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1930 Margaret Cost, 255 Brown Road South - Variance - Resolution Brief Review of Application For more detail on this review, please view the Planning Commission minutes of the May 16th meeting and the staff memo of May 11, 1994 enclosed in your packet. The application involves a structural setback variance from a protected tributary. Long Lake Creek, review Exhibit L. The structure will meet the 30 ’ setback from the defined top of the bluff but cannot meet the required 100 ’ setback from the protected tributary. The severe sloping topography to the west and the fact that there is only one location for septic development on this site has limited the choice of placement of the structure. If the structure was to be moved to the west and south, the access drive from Brown Road would be at a greater than 10% slope and would require major cuts into the existing elevations. Ceil Strauss of the DNR has advised that they have no problem with the strucniral setback from the tributary as long as the 30 ’ bluff setback was being maintained. She also advised that the access drive should be able to meet the minimum 20’ setback from the defined top of the b' <ff. The recently amended site plan. Exhibit L, shows the access drive meeting the 20’ setback. Dave Zetterstrom of the Hennepin County Department of Transportation has approved the proposed curb cut. The proposed drive will encroach no closer than 12 ’ to the southern side lot line and is shown at approximately a 7% slope. The neighbor to the immediate south is concerned with the location and size of the structure noting that septic development will destroy the majority of the trees that now provide the natural screening from the site of the proposed residence. The applicant has agreed to develop the alternate site located more to the west that will allow the saving of mamre plantings at the upper elevations to the e^,st. The on-site evaluator has provided additional testing to confirm that die site would support the proposed residence. The neighbor to the south asked the Planning Commission to consider the shared drive that was origiiially proposed with the Bytield Plat. The Planning Commission advised the neighbor that this matter had already been resolved by both the County and the City at the time of the sale to the current owner. The res ' ve was to allow separate access for both properties. Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 2 June 8, 1994 Zoning File #1930 It was the hope of the Planning Commission that both property owners would work together to minimize the impact of new development upon the developed site. The Planning Commission appro' ed the application as amended granting a 25 structural setback variance from the protected tributar\'. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To aaopt or amend the approval resolution; or To deny the setback variance as proposed. A RESOLUTION GRANTLNG A VAPIANCE TO MUNIClPAi ZONLNG CODE SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (C-1) FILE #1930 WHEREAS, Margaret P. Coat (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in the property located at 255 Brown Road South within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Byfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.56. Subdivis*on 16 (C-1) to permit the construction of a residence that would be located 75 ’ from a protect.U tributary instead of the required 100’. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1930. 2. 3. The prop^*^'' i*: located in the RR-IB, Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres of iii; contiguous area. The property consists of 5 acres, 3 acres of wet and 2 ac 1 ^ of dry contiguous. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 16, 1994, and recommended approval of the variance as amended based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A.The Byfield Plat was approved in 1980 prior to the current Shoreland Regulations that now require setbacks from protected tributaries. At the time the Byfield Plat was approved the setback for structures from the protected tiibutary was 26’. Page 1 of 4 B. There is only one location on the entire 5 acre site that would support and treat on-site sewage. C. The 2 acre building site is severely limited by a bluff and steep slopes. D. The e.xtreme drop from the elevation at the street to the west portion of the dry buildable envelope are severe. 4. 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 varian;e would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not tnerely serve as a conveiience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardsl»T difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comp'-ehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the pionosed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER .\ND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby Grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.56, Sulxlivisions 16 (C 1) subject to the following conditions: 1. Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide a detailed grading and drainage plan that will adhere to the protective standards for construction within the steep sloped areas. Erosion control must be maintained until groundcover is restored. The plan must provide detail on imerceptor/French drain to be installed to east and north drainfield areas. 2.Applicant must obtain a Hennepin County driveway permit before any work can commence within right-of-way of County Road. Page 2 of 4 3. 4. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the propert>’ not with th^ 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 this variance will expire on that date (June 13, 1995) 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 anv authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of tide of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 13th day of June. 1994. ATTEST. Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this I3th day of June, 1994, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Mirmeseta municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of ss. .199 »before me a Notary Public ^ .ho executed >he roregomg ir^trument, iiS acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of ss. ^ 199 ___before me a Notary Public me”o >" and who execut^ ihe foregoing insimmem. ana acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 To:Orono Planning Commission Members W' Mavor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorsc, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator Date:May 11. 1994 Subject: #1930 Margaret Cost, 255 Brown Road South - Variances - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances 1.Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) (1) tributary. A. Residence Required = 100’ Proposed = 75’ Variance = 25’ or 25% - Structural setback variance from protected B Applicant no setback area. longer requests a setback variance for fencing within protected 2. Section 10..56, Subdivision 16 (C) (3) - Proposed drive encroaches 20’ bluff impact zone 3.Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1 &. 2) 0-75’ setback area No hardcover proposed. 75-250’ setback area = 52,150 s.f. Allowed = 18,037.5 s.f. or 25% Proposed = 10, 600 s.f. or 20.33% No variance required. List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L - Application Hardship Statement Addendum to Application - Engler Letter 4/18/94 Plat Map Property Owners ’ List Neighbor’s Acknowledgement Form Kearney Letter 5/5/94 Hardcover Fact Sheet Boundary Survey Bvfield Plat Photos of Proposed Residence Staff Sketch Zoni.ig File #1930 May n, 1994 Pace 2 of 3 Description of Request; Applicant proposes consmiction of a new residence on Lot 1 footprint of the residence is shown at 1900 s.f with an anached two-stall garage at 575 s.f Aorficant ’s architect Clark Engler. has advised that the actual residence to be constructed will be waller than the 1900 s.f. footprint as the footprint shown on the inie plan approximate footprint of Mrs. Cost’s existing residence in Plymouth. Mr. ^ architect who designed the original home and will design the new residence lor Mrs. Cost. No elevations or lloor plans are proposed but photos of her existing residence Natural materials and colors that blend in with the environment ^ earthtone colors used in the contemporary design of the extsting residence (Exhibit K coIot photos will be viewed at meeting). The north side of the house facing the l^ce Line will be one story, long and low to ground. The lower level will have a walkout to the south. Althoueh the property consists of 5 acres, 3 acres are wet and the remaining 2 acres are limited bv bluff and steep slopes and a protected tributary that requires more restrictive seibsack standards' than were in effect in 1980. When the Byfield plat was proved the «tback for strucmres was only 26'. Note non-slrucmral hardcover can be located within the 75-100 setback area from the tributary. The applicant met with the Orono and DNR staffs at the site to discuss possible need for fencine to eliminate trespassing on property at the northern boundaries adjacent to ite trtbuuiT and Luce Line. Staff discouraged applicant from installing a fence as lencing soon becomes , attractive nuisance. The applicant was encouraged tocontact fwlice when the trespassing bwame objectionable. She was advised to put up no trespassing signage advising people of private property and the DNR would put up their standard signage advising ol the lunits ol the tra . Staff has discLSsed the encroachment of the driveway within the bluff impact zone noting that there is adequate area to meet a 5’ setback from the side south lot line and meet the .0 setback from the defined top of the bluff. When the Bvfield plat was approved by the City, a shared access was encouraged by both the County and Ih^ City. Upon the sale of the property to the “7“ 7"''’ developer asked the City and the County to allow s separate access for Lot 1 to “»<>» L" 2 to retain the existing access. This request was approved by both the County and the City. It the applicant’s desire to also maintain her own drive because of the dealing w h a shared drive. The applicant is meeting with a representative of Hennepin County DOT on Wednesday, May 11, to review the realigned curb cut. Hardship Statement Review E.xhibits B and C. Zoning File #1930 May II, 1994 Page 3 of 3 Issues for Consideration 1.The site plan has been submitted to Ceil Strauss at the DNR for any comments she may have concerning the substandard setback from the protected tributary. What is the position of the Planning Commission? Are the hardships valid? Options of Action Approval. Any condition of approval must include the following conditions Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide a survey locating the proposed structure and other improvements. Survey information is to include the topographic information. The permit application must also include detailed grading and drainage plaas assuring that the bluff impact zone is not encroached by the new construction. Grading plans are to include detail on interceptor to the north side of proposed drainfield area. Note majority of drainage from driveway w'ill be directed to the southwest of residence. Imerceptor is needed to direct drainage away from drainfield site. OR Denial. If application is to be denied as proposed, members should refer to Section 10.08, Subdivision 3 (A). ;) 1130' CITY OF ORONO - VARLVNCE APPLICATION A u Initial Application Fee S200.00 (S50.00 per each additional varianc Renewal Variance Fee $100.(X) (no change from original applicatio Variance for non conforming structures $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 255 Brown Road Snut-h, ni-rmn V rjTv f^'rrrrr f rcv)v,v,--i,*v\A •A w'w*V*C W'VV'V 01 CtH CHECK TL •'■rA ,v) tew'V a VV -r,*! M iCw*Va W RtCEiPr-THAKK YOU ir202140 COOl ROl 715:5- 04/22/9- Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 0311723240008 Attach legal ^-‘scription to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired September. 1990______________________ I (do) noraalso own the adjacent parcels of land. Present u5!fTJi propertv': ___residential ___other (specify) Vacant land Zoning District: R^Rifipni-ial ____________________________________ (month/year) APPLICANT Name Maryaret P. Host Phone (home) 473-5957 Pbone(work)___________ Address: Trr>y r.;:in<> N OVVTVER (if different than applicant) Name John M. Morrignn City: piymoiii-h Zip: ssdav Phondhorae)________ Phone (work) sa9-inni Address: 27 Casa Mar i.n City:Map 1 ^<3 Zip:940 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Estimated Construction Cost $ 325,000 See (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width X Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:______________________________________ See Attachment (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUB\nTTALS All of the fnllo\*ing information must be submitted hvthe_appncation deadline date in order for vour nPDlication to be considered complete: 1. 2. 3. 4. Completed Application Form Certified Property' Ovcners List of o'vnen within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance. A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8V^ x li for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8*>i x 11 for reproduction.^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/:" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. ___Xddii'onal 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 ahove informatioji_hai not been included , APPLICANT’S SIGNATLllE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoiung Admim.'trator. agrees to pay addition-'*’ fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best ot his/her knowledge. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Applicant’s Signature O^CHA r ^Date OVVNER’S SIGNATURE ., The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and CouncU members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature / Date 79^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Co^ission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at aU scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arra^^ents to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zonmg Office ot this change prior to the meeting. 8 ATTACHMENT TO VARIANCE APPLICATION Submitted by Margaret P. Cost -t ■■r.i .X 4 ,• ' The property hos an area of slightly less than nve acres. Long Lake Creek runs along the north property line to approximately the middle of the property and then turns south splitting the site into roughly two halves. Much of the land area is wetland. After all setback regulations have been taken into account, it has been found that only a very small portion of the site is buildable and that minor variances to tw'o setback regulations would allow the site to be used in the most advantageous way. This application is submitted to request variances to setback regulations affecting the location of a house on the property and oonstruction of fence along Ll.e Northern border of the property to designate private property. Requested Variance No. 1 We request that permission be granted to reduce the setback of the structure from Long Lake Creek to 75 feet as illustrated on the attached site plan drawing. Compliance with the 100 foot setback regulation would require that the house be moved west and south of the location shown which would significantly increase the length of the driveway. The relocation would lower the floor elevation of the structure to a level that would reduce long views of the wetland area to the west, would increase the slope of the driveway and would result in greater disturbance to the natural terrain and vegetation on the property. Also, although soil borings have not been obtained as yet, it is possible that soils with lower bearing capacities will be found as the structure is located closer to the wetland areas which will increase the construction cost of the project. A 75 foot setback for the structure will place it no closer to the creek than other hardcover areas developed on the site. Care will be taken in the development of the project to divert all surface water run-off away from the slope leading to the creek north of the house and driveway. Requested Variance No. 2 We request permission be granted to construct a fence along th^orthern border of the property to designate the boundary between public cind priVu.te property. We have seen young people congregated at the culvert at the Northeast comer of the property playing and throwing objects in the water. We feel this a liability issue if the property is not fenced. We are discussing this issue with the DNR. r "Ik*' -i*,•- .. iir ( •* . V— - «- . u^: :r:«pp^ cguif© engler cfchite". fs 423 south moin street Stillwoter nr; S S 0 I 2 .• I f.• 1 • i\ ;- . • 'V April 18, 1994 Ms. Jeanne Mabusih Building and Zoning Administrator City or Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 R£:VARIANCE APPLICATION OF MARGARET P. COST FOR 255 SOUTH BROWN ROAD Dear Ms. Mabusth: The variance application prepared by Ms. Cost lacks specific informadon about the house that she will build if variances are granted. She does not wish to devote the time or money necessary to plan tht house until she knows the result of her application. We know that the house will be a two story structure built on the south facing slope in approximately the location shown on our site plan drawing. The floor area will be no larger than 1,900 square feet on each of the two levels and there will be a two car garage with an area of approximately 5 /5 square feet on the upper level. The lower level will be a "walk out" to the south. From the north side me house will appear to be a one story structure, long and low to the ground. Natural materials and colors that blend with the site will be used. Our goal will be to design a house Uiat minimizes the visual and physical impact on the site. A fairly thorough study has been made of the regulations that must be followed in siting and designing a house for this property. Other than the two variances requested in the accompanying application, we believe that the design will be well within the requirements of the codes and o.'dinances in effect in your city. There will be cha*!^es to the configuration of the footprint and orientation of the structure as the design is develop?d and there v'ill be minor reconfigurations of the driveway and pr .'king areas. Our site plan drawing is intended to be an illustration of location and general size of major elements on the site and should not be interpreted as an illustration of a design for the house or the drivewvy and parking a'ea. 612-439-3/10 fox 612-439-372I Jitr ..-s •• i ;• «'.t The hardcover calculations are generous. We expect the final total percentage of hardcover to be less than shown in the application. We wish to thank you and your staff for the cooperation and assistance given to us in the investigation of the site and in preparing the variance application. Sincerely, l^c^i^^^e^Xr^tects, P.A. Clark W. Engler CWE:dlb miN DATE OA/15/^BATCH 013PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR SB 03-117-23 12 0002 0003B ADDRESS UNASSI6NED CARGILL HAC MILLAN JR ETAL LONCRXDa ASSOCIATES P 0 BOX 9300 DEPT 2B MPLS MN > 55440 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONhCRS LIST58 03-117-23 12 00030003B ADDRESS UNASSXGNEO STATE OF MIW STATE OF MINN (ONRI I LUCE LINE TRAIL>REPORT NO. PI455401 PAGE 4938 03-117-23 12 001100140 BR0M4 RO S DAL COLEMAN JR L-0U6LAS R COLEMAN JR 140 BROItl RO S LONG LAKE FN 55354PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 58 03-117-23 13 0005 01995 FOX RIDGE RO R A B HACK RAYMOND H HACK 1995 FOX RIDGE RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 58 03-117-23 13 001101940 FOX RIDGE RO LUCIA T MORISON LUCIA T MORIoON 1940 FOX RIDGE RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 38 03-117-23 21 002100185 BRONN RO S C A J KROGNESS CHARLES A JEAN KROGNESS 185 BRONN RO S LONG LAKE Ft4 55354PROP ADOR 0»tCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 58 03-117-23 21 002200195 BROm RO S L M A C S JOHNSON L M A C S JOHNSON 195 BR0H4 RO S LONG LAKE m 55354 38 05-117-23 24 000300325 BROI#J RO S MirM»FL T GUSTAFSON ET AL CfM BELL 325 SOUTH BRONN RO LONG LAKE MN 55354 38 03-117-23 24 000402150 ABINGDON NAY MICHAEL T GUSTAFSON ET AL PERRY8ELL INVESTMENTS INC 401 LAKESHORE PKNl 0350 MiNNETOFKA rtl 55305 PROP ADOR (»4«R NAME taxpayer NAME/ADOR 38 03-117-25 24 0008 00255 8R0»M RD S JOHN M MORRISON JOHN M MORRISON 27 CASA MAR LA NAPLES FL 33940 38 03-117-23 24 0009 00245 BROFM RO S A A P KEAIH4EY III ET AL ADRIAN A A PAMELA H KEARNEY 245 BROFM RO S LONG LAKE MN 55354 TOTAL BATCH 013 00011 y r I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEFtlEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT.OF PROPEWTKTAXATION* TO/J’HE BEST OF MY KNONLEOGE AND BELIEF .4 DATE 17 •• 0 • • r #19SfAdjacent Prop^ft>''0\»'nc?%’ Ackirowedge Fonii I (we) LijM A K-^A^rJCs^ [print nanie(s)] *[print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at '2-^*7 - 'rhQ.o^'^ also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project qr use requircyCouncil approval. Property Owner ^ V____—r Date Property Owner Date ♦♦♦o************************************************************************** I (we) [print name(s)][prin: address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No.________ I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. ADRIAN A. KEARNEY III 2S5 South Brown Rood Long Lako, MN 55358 (612) 473-4112 TO: Mr. Charles Schroeder Chairman: Orono Planning Commission FROM: Adrian and Pam K'o.irney Residents of 265 S. Brown Road RE: Application j’M930 for variances to 255 S. Brown Road May 5, 1994 Dear Planning Commission, We have lived in this house for ten months. Before we wrote our purchase agreement, we did our homework on the lot for sale ne.xt door. We accepted the fact that somebody would be interested! in buying the lot. We found that the specific limitations placed upon this lot would insure that the new owner would have to construct a small enough house to comply with the guidelines set forth by the D\R and the City of Orono. To us, this meant the least amount of intrusion upon our property and privacy. We feel that abiditig by these specifications is imperative to the preservation of the protected tributary to Lake Minnetonka, and the nature of the property itself. Therefore in reviewing the oroposad plans of Mrs. Cost, we have concerns regarding the follcwing: 1. 100* setback from the Long Lake Creek. .As all rivers do, this one meanders and curls. With water levels changing from season to season and year to year, we fear that a building constructed within the 100 foot setback will be damaging to the integrity of the creek. A more reasonably sized house would fit into the space without the need for a varianve. Although this is a five acre lot, a majority of it is wetlands, and these plans show a disproportionately large house for the limited building site. Loss of trees due to the septic system insta11 at ion. to preserve as many trees asIt is in both our best interest possible to provide a visual barrier in between the two houses. Specifically, there is one large, mature maple tree that would be destroyed in the proposed septic site. Again, a smaller house would require a smaller septic site, therefore fewer trees would be lost. Witn everything scaled down in size, the least amount of impact would occur, both to the property and to the neighbors. / 3. 20* driv'cwav and 30* building setbacks from the bluff. This is a very steep bluff, and prone to erosion. Preserving the nature of the rim, both to the North and West is necessary. The proposed driveway is within the setback to the North. There is room to move it to the South. It appears that the West rim also could be within the building setback. These setbacks need not be encroached with a plan that is more conducive to the small building site. It is our strong feeling that a shared driveway would be the most cooperative use of the limited space available. And, it would move the driveway flafely away from the rim of the bluff. Creating a separate entrance as proposed, would mean a si.x foot drop-off from our existing driveway down to the new one. This would significantly and negatively affect our house and its value in the resale market. We are willing to reshape our whole access to our house and garage in order to create the best and most appealing solution for both lots. At the time of the original subdivision approval, the .Minnesota Department of Transportation recommended that for safety reasons, a common driveway entrance to Brown Road would be advisable. We understand the amendment to this original recommendation, which allov's for two entrances, however, we would like to cooperate in every way share the entrance if possible. We value your time and your serious consideration of these issues. We will welcome the opportunity to show you the areas in question personally, if you would like to call us before you come to inspect it. Respectfully, Adrian and Pam Kearney ) % ✓ ] hardcovt :r calculation worksheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-7r 75-250’25-500’500-1000’ FYT<;TTNr. hardcover in zone A. House______________2600 Length Width X X X B. Garage X BOO C. Driveway X X 4500 D. Sidewalk .t X ?nn E. Patio/Deck V X hQQ. JOEL F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X 1 200 G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 10.600 - B 52.150 10.6QiI 52.15Q. X 100 20.33 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House______________ Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ___________ ^ B .X 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F, S.F, S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B A B N 0*03 IS" W # • 4IS 39 S',** I *••• * . •/. \ % • • • • • ^ * 0 IB* / ♦ 111 • 0 I • • % % »sA /O’\fc // \1 • : .....'......I •. i « -"e. ' \ « * t t I * t t *• • .......':'k.......1 .• • • j •* #•••• ■-..a&"'\ \ -----it _____ ^ north 90^ t • cj X .o "603^ <#;• It ": !• •* . ^J/' • $ '30^ ^^8.00 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES SURVEYED: Lot 1. Block 1, BYFIELD o: denotes iron marker Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum 5 This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. O - 55.00 NOKTU \••• •« a ; - - • N0«03'I5"W 197.00 \Co. i?c/. No. /46 (Brown Road) *. y,X} •mm • • ••.;\ $ .i**'f'i •% •*•(»r-!1 m I m \ 'I \ \ \ « N If I il I If ' I|{ I I i I i I^ I I I I ^ I N N \ \ 30*. V X s'-Vs \ X X X tt-'" 8 -iiC..«•» \ • «% n \ * i \» ''\\k \w\',\' Wv\ ' '\'"iV \\\l\ ■\1 >1 \ \'\\' /"'ll Ss. •s •V N s k • \ \ \\ \ j I \ \\\ ■'T \ \ \ \ \>• \ N. ,. 15? " Ls kiro /i' SiV? • / *• f •♦ /hi ____________ \ 9 9 Zm ■o:#N \\> iVn ' ^'l \l < I / U 4- 1 \1 i V" ' \\1’! \1 i t' 8 /(1 / ! / /’ y ^ \ It''' C'iX ' /h.■--------- ?<’ ' I Vi /?/ /</55 \ *N • I \ lil'lI I I I 1 I > I ; 1,. 1111! / / I « \ •'V‘ !.' /i! IllI !> I I 'V v- 31/1 - v' iV., *\ I n • i \.' \v \ \ / /I i l\ VA\\\W^, l\\\v I , \ \ ' V \ V ^ ------------------- -------- \ »\' \ \ V -------------- / / \\\\^ • W V' »■ », • •». »,♦. . -............................ *^...______ Lii . I>j ■ V •• ■■■ •, . •••V-; •»•%. • *■'' ^ JJ..!: ; ■; V .* ••: !. .-.■■?;rv ■..;: \ ■■:.■ ,.■ r^v.-:TiT^CMIVm^-'6^r-- - V :.*;/•■v37^:'7 ' ^ - j#''• r ",t«4?HSBl'■€'#S;'7; ';:WmMi'. :-/'7^-:- \ # V- 7^%7^7 7- -Fi- • •■7.7 .•• .... .•■.•• j'-'-- ■■ ■.■ •■ AK' : •' %■ h: 'F'l ^ \ i\n''\\V'o'7^7^ - •"' .- .■''W' \ I \\\\\\Xv7X— .y \\ \ \\\\\>N::^fH’: •:S:':.-.rE;- V-:-:v -j- vi....*.. '...• .V ■■■■‘^ir'ii.isSij •r .•■ .• .•.-. . , T *. ' \ ■:mm- r:“rr:rzr7- I'/- '•• ■ ....■> L^.^'‘v:■ -lis fi . <r .''r^>^ • > ^ ?:3-■^'' ’'W!j s. S V ' . J*, ;T- ?»!<?\ 1* • • M-t! , .,., f f . \ • , f * f ' ^ • * • . / ■/ . . X ^ \ ^ ' • » I . • ^ ' - •■■/■■• /' \ -. ' / •__________ -.vv. •'•iii ftl»| r^fv %t •Sii: - 7^» . e ”^‘-W•M,'^ W ppa>;« Nv *■ ' * '^■1 r •i. ....» *• * < p^sv* €!fe WT>; >*iA ^ /if*t.<is'\..' 'h •’v ‘-4«y4'>. , ■ • V.l-’^/ .-<:i-'i. w ■KsAfaf^'^ I I- *'*•• • B mi • • \ ‘tr-i / V §L£k Iv.'s iW‘----' •<»' ^ ■*f.- ' V ^ tvT*A ’f+-« *>] Jim v:f ‘Tn \ i^‘ K!k’ \\ uin. v-#,i fsm ■ :.V-■. j' '| ; ^ ■':?<■-';«:«'i ^ V‘.^^•3>c7. r, < ' ' ■/■>'i V* .-;:* i?' L*- '■ ■■.i, / ' v:«.5 fc *\‘''mc- * •■ ^■'•^ miMmm'b'i:>^XfefWTOtrj •.L2^4 >V.iiMlii r»:»! :■}/ nfiV, - ,-f.‘ ;n mm m^m. m \'i .r^wKt'' w 5;.: • th ^IT' V >."’*■ 4ei •' , - ;• ■ r;;' M / *M. k::k :.• ^ yi"'pi - m'mm- * fit' ti .-.TtJ M, .. :vLJs -M kH- 'Sin m • 2<iIiIf i IIm •1ii " r >. U'' >.*' // IL K ,^N,V r Wn : r.i:..:• ^j* . > . ^ i « t'ik' fj % ^\* ' f<^L V . •• %fe; -^-rSsps|!'''■■ -■. ' . .";/ M .; .*-*■«.V.■4‘--.....................m;m iW«ii*iiiP i;..'•- % J • • if.- ■ . \.i tA'Sf■^i.''^= ■'^ : 5v'v'tsiiwiiiWili"iiSiairnmmB-:^Sliiii®iWW:-«wsi«Wi^<''- ■!% »Sliliaiillii ms\'--'m- ■** '••y ;:r.VM,-,-'■■■‘-■4-y i:.y.>vM' #sy m :yy;y mm \wmi; •■mm-. -'. m^sSSfeprasj^y 1:: Ss:liBS«, i^^is-fas^fsammmmmmmsramsmiis ,pM'♦f'T''' i' ... «f ■■ A:'-' ^.- smmmswm ■ -C ‘ iA., ■.y^-;; y. , Wm msmm m':^sa: » "iy-yj-y 1I,., -wms 1' Rr^ y y-<yyy-”?syy : ■•■-.. .y; -■* I ' - ■■ y;. ^ v: , fe.vy: y :R|‘« n 'v «' v' yy#E ' i / y;y«s ;■; \7: ymrn-mi i,‘' ■• . i" »■ V- bmmmmmmsm' . T-^"' R ;- V, :: ■ #>syy;:;.,-, isSiiWIliiliwmmSSSksM SpiSIftSiiSi^ :..,«.;-;;.;;V ■■■,<'■:• : :v.. pv= ;': V- '■ -"RV./ vyrv-P: "*:-y:i;^ ■Vy. ■i:i::Ryi-;v,Rpy py?-pilli*» vRyp'-h-■ 'V -y •,, v^'y-'i :»E •.;,iiiiiijliPiill V:r-TJ'-p M .yt-: ■-: 'V- ^ ;' 'PI- fW' «tR^'Lvy^. • 1 m • V ~~{ 'mirm.-m^:-.- .■■ y :?. --yfy * .•■ :-y. V 'i'y-'i'y:'. :■ • ..yip- i©?yipsy; ..V'y-rV iv.y:,t;yy'--;-; ''<■ maWmWmW^'mmmmmrn *y Pe ■■,-■ v •0m^'m''SssmsTrnW0i^, .:'.■.. ■ S:^ iiiaBil»ii w i;iSSW laFP»l« imMsm “ ;;y-aK'yi A5 ’;iK«ay^ ^Smmrn s :iili^:-iC-«i:y:y|i^il®!:P ■#i mm fm mm mm. N D. \A^) A REQUEST FOR COt^CIL At I ION Ctk DATE: June 7. I ITEM NO.: j [ Department Approval: Name Michael P Gattron Title Asst Planning & 7-onmg Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zonine Item Description: #1931 Megan Tully/James McManus, 1910 Shadywood Road - Variance/CUP - Resolution Application: Request for land alteratioa'conditional use permit and hardcover/structure variances for replacement of deteriorating retaining walls and stairway in 0-75 zone List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 5/20/94 C - Memo and Exhibits of 5/10/94 Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of May 10. 1994 Briefly, applicants propose to replace an existing deteriorating retaining wall structure located at the shoreline with a similar but slightly smaller retaining wall system. The existing walls and stairway are of timber construction. Applicants' proposed plans indicate a timber strucmre to replace it. but they have indicated they may use a ’Keystone" type concrete wall system, with which Planning Commission had no problem. The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and his comments are incorporated in the approval resolution. This wall svstem with stairway is the only hardcover in the 0-75' zone which totals 1.7%, slightly less than the existing 18% hardcover. It should be noted that if a Keystone wall is built, it’s hardcover would have to be calculated and also held to 1.7% or 96 s.f. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the attached resolution COUNCIL ACTION REQLT:STED: Moved bv . seconded by_____, to adopt Resolution if____approving variances and a conditional use permit for replacement of the retaining wall stairway system at 1910 Shady wood " j navs.Road ayes. A RESOLLTION GRANTLNG VARIANCES TO SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2. SECTION 10.55. SUBDIVISION 8, SECTION 10.56, St^DIATSION 16 (C-5), AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L), AND GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE NO. 1931 WHEREAS, Megan Tully and James McManus (hereinafter the "applicants") are the owners of the propeny located at 1910 Shady wood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as: Lot 31, Shadywood. Hennepin County. Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"). and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono to permit the replacement of an existing retaining wall and stairway system at the lakeshore. requiring variances to Municipal Code Sections 10.22. Subdivision 2, 10.55, Subdivision 8, and 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) to allow hardcover in the 0-75’ lakeshore setback zone, and a variance to Section 10 56, Subdivision 16 (C-5) to allow retaining walls which are prohibited in the shore setback zone, and a conditional use permit for lakeshore alterations per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19. Minnesota NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1910. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 16, 1994 and on a vote of 6 to 0 recommended approval of the necessary variances and conditional use permit for replacement of the existing retaining wall system based Page 1 of 5 on the following findings: a. The property currently contains an existing deteriorating timber retaining wall and stairway system b The existing reuining walls ant^ stairway are located within 25' of the shoreline, and provides stability to an unvegetated portion of the approximately 10 ’ high lakeshore bank c. The new retaining walls will be similar in function and visual impact to the existing walls. The flat planter areas which currently exist will be similarly maintained as nonhardcover The stair system meets the 4’ maximum width requirement for lakeshore stairways. d. The existing retaimng wall system/stairway hardcover is approximately 1.8^. The proposed wall/stairway system will be 17%, a slight decrease in 0-75' hardcover There is no other hardcover in the 0-75' zone. e. No other grading work or walls are proposed on the north side ot the stairway. This area has significant vegetation in place and any disruption of that vegetation could negatively impact the stability ol that slope. f. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and finds them acceptable from an engineering standpoint. His findings should be incorporated into this approval. g. Planning Commission finds that approval should appropriately be conditioned on proper erosion controls, appropriate vegetation screening, and a two week time frame for completion of the project to minimize erosion potential. h. The Planning Commission finds that if applicants choose, a ’Keystone" block type retaining wall/stairway system under these same parameters would be acceptable rather than the initially proposed timber wall system. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar Page 2 of 5 to It and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning distnct; that granting the vanances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor ^se a fire hazard or other danger to neighbonng properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property ruzht of the applicants; and would he in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City 5 The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow replacement of the existing retaining wall system 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 its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be m keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City CONCLtSIONS, ORDER .AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22. Subdivision 2. 10.55. Subdivision 8. and 10.56. Subdivision 16 (L) to allow replacement of hardcover in tf;e 0-75’ lakeshore setback zone, and grants a variance to Section 10.56. Subdivision 16 iC-5) to allow construction of retaining walls where they are normally prohibited in the shore setback zone, and grants the conditional use permit required for lakeshore alterations per Section 10 03. Subdivision 19. subject to the following conditions; 1. 3. Hardcover in the 0-75’ zone shall not exceed 1.7% (% f.). and construction shall adhere to the approved plan attached as Exhibit A. Applicants shall obtain the necessary land alteration permit prior to construction. Prior to issuance of the land alteration permit, applicants shall provide a planting schedule for vegetation, screening of the wall system acceptable to City staff. Proper erosion control procedures shall be established and maintained during construction activity in accord with MPCA’s "Best Management Practices for Page 3 of 5 8 Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas', and m accord with the provisions of Shoreland Regulations. Section 10.56. Subdivision 16 (J) In order to minimize the period during which the shoreline is disrupted, the retaining wail/stairway replacement project shall be completed within two weeks of commencement. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the propeny not with the owners, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application tor a land alteration permit within one year of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (June 13. 1995). Violation of or non-compliance with any ol the terms and conditions ot this resolution shall constmite a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors ana assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 13th day of June. 1994. ATTEST Dorothy M. Hallin. City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner!s) Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of June. 1994 by Edward J Callahan. Jr and Dorothy M. Hallin. Mayor and City Clerk ot the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the Citv. Notarv Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of .199 . before me a Notary Public within and for said County. persorally appeared--------------------------------^^---------------— known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of ss. . 199___. before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared----------------------^^^ known to me to be the person!s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notarv Public Page 5 of 5 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crvstal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING KILE ^1931 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: 5 20/94 TO: Megan Tully/James McManus 1910 Shady wood Road Wavzata. MN 55391 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance/Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 5/16/94 VOTE:6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Proper erosion control measures/methods to be used. 2. Applicants to provide appropriate vegetation screening to reduce visual impact of walls 3 Completion of project to be within two weeks of commencement to minimize erosion potential. Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday. June 13. 1994; meeting starts at 7:30 p m If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. I To:Chairman Schroeder and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator From:Michael P Gaffron. Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:Mav 10. 1994 Subject:#1931 Megan Tully/James McManus. 1910 Shady wood Road - Variance/ Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Application:Request for land alteration/conditional use permit and hardcover/structure variances for replacement of deteriorating retaining walls and stairway inO-75 ’ zone List of Exhibits A B C D E F G H I Application Plat Map Property Owners ’ List Hardship Statement Neighbor Acknowledgements I^etter from City Engineer Survey Construction Plans Hardcover Worksheet Pertinent Code Sections 1.Section 10.03. Subd. 19 - Conditional use permit required for lakeshore alterations Section 10.22. Subd. 2/Section 10.55. Subd. 8/Section 10.56. Subd 16 (L) - Hardcover limitations in 0-75’ zone. Section 10.56. Subd. 16 (C) '*') - Retaining walls prohibited in shore setback zone Section 10.56. Subd. 16 (F) - Standards for lakeshore stairways 5.Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (J) - Standards for topographic alteratioa'grading/lillmg Discussion Applicant proposes to replace an existing deteriorating retaining wall structure with a similar but slightly smaller retaining wall system. The existing retaining walls and stairway are located within 25 ’ of the shoreline, and provide stability to an unvegetated ponion of the approximately 10’ high lakeshore bank. Zoning File #1931 Mav 10. 1994 Page 2 of 2 The new retaining walls will be similar in function and visual impact to the existing walls The flat planter areas which currently exist will be similarly mainuined as non- hardcover The stair system meets the 4’ maximum width requirement for lakeshore stairways. The existing retaining wall svstem/stairway hardcover is approximately 18%. The proposed wall/stairway system will be' 1.7%. according to staff calculations, or a slight decrease in 0-75 ’ hardcover. No grading work or walls are proposed on the north side of the stairway This area has significant vegetation in place and any disruption of that vegetation could negatively impact the stability of that slope. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and finds them acceptable from an engineering standpoint. He cautions that proper erosion control procedures must be maintained and the disturbed areas be restored with groundcover as soon as possible. T^e inspection staff will monitor this activity and require measures in accord with .MPCA’s "Best Management Practices for Protecting 'Water Quality in Urban Areas", and in accord with the provisions ot Shoreland Regulations. Section 10.56. Subd. 16 (J) Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit and variances to allow replacement of a deteriorating retaining wall/stairway system with new walls and stairways in the same location with a slight decrease in hardcover, and subject to the use of proper erosion control procedures. Options for Action 1. Approval with conditions as noted above 3. 4. Denial (state reasons). Table (request additional information). Other \ , •-r'r:-cr ^ 2 --'I 1 ’v.-' ^ \ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICAT10>» g . 3 i ‘AInitial Application Fee $200.00 ($50 00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.(X) (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming strucPircs $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTV' INFORMATION Site Address i<I:o Shfl^ywood Orpno.MM S53^i Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) n-ll7-Z3 OQ2.0 r * TV “l“u- a » » w» u'l \ uiTu : • ViSiirr r.rrrrr < 'ta v'V wv .Tiu •A.’S .V.V'a w'L.M tewv'*w •'uL'i'i Ti W'% iJL ~CT tlT^Tu-^kik VHti*^t.ucai • I c'i.* ^ 7m *’• f ^ r Am i On i T • 7 •»*-.*vcaav c vv a Mw*a la^** Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired June . » ^ ^3__________________ I (do)(yao not^also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use ofproperty: >/ residential _ (month/year) other (specify) Zoning District: L I O APPLICANT r^ne(home) Ul^"H7l-7?-7S Name Mtaain Tolly ‘ Tarnes McMoni/5 Phone(work) (,IZ‘ Mutf*) UZ-MSl-Zt Address: Cn>-: Or-QMO.Mivj_____Zip:^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _____ Phone(home) Phone (work) Address;Citv:Zip DESCRIPTION OF REQLTST Estimated Construction Cost $ I 7 0 Q Desenbe request in detail; Lr tiin ------- fTLmifiq m.U J ^ti'vci-L nL:■)// -^u uc rur^____________ ^ (attach additional sheets if necessaiy) VARIANCES REQLTRED Lot Area Lot Width X Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coveraee X Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventmg compliance with Zoning Code requirements:_____^ ---------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED St^Nim ALS Ail of the following information roust be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. ^. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 9. ^ 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 Center, 348-3271) Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). y/ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/^" x 11" for reproduction. NTopographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed In addition, provide one il) copy 8'/^:" x 11" tor reproduction. ^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one copy 8*^" x ID. List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). /V/> As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT ’S SIGNATITIE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant ’s Signature ^t l LC\ D^te OWTVER’S SIGiN.ATLTl^ ^ The owner hereb\ acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City suff. consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and venfication of this request. Owner’s Signature A V __________ X yyi Date y// Z / 9</ Applicant must have all^mittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. mm DATE M/M/9%DATOf DMTAXDAYIDNMI/A0DD M 17-I17-ES M tool DlDTf SHAOVMOQ0 DO DIM TULOTEONDtEiM D nttonoNliTS SMAOYMOOO DO MATEATA IDI »S9I NEfMDIM county DDODfDTY INFODMATION SYSTfM 7DODEDTY QltCDS LISTM 17-117-n M ODDS OOOSD AOODfSS UNASSlONii D D TIUOTSON/N A TULOTSON QLtm D TXLLOTSON urs SNAOYMOOO DO MAYZATA MN MS 91 DiDODT NO. DXASSAOl DADi UM 17-117-73 M DIMO SNAOYMOOO DO DUDIOOO A TAYLQD OLDA H TAYLOD IDM SMAOYMOOO DO MAYZATA Mi MS9I OMCD NAME TANOAVED NAm/AOOD M 17-117-ZS M 0013 00030 AOODfSS UNASSIMO COTFEE UNOINM COFFEE LAN0XN6S %7E< M FAID MILLS DO HUfCTCMU lOi 3534ft SO 17-117-E3 74 0014 00030 AOODfSS UNASSK COFFEE LANDINDS COFFEE LAN0XM6S 4777 M FAID MILLS DO MIlOCTtMU MN 33343 30 17-117-73 74 0010 01040 SMAOVMOQO DO N D I D T OHLIE NlLiUM i DMQNOA OMtZE 1040 SHAOYMUOO DO MAYZATA Mi 33391 TAMDAVED NAHE/AOOD DDOD AODD OMffD MANE TAMDAVED NAME/AOOD TAMDAVED NAME/AOOD 30 17-117-73 74 0019 01090 SNAOYMOOO DO D L LITTLE i 0 A LITTLE D L LITTLE IDA LITTLE 1090 SMAOYMOOO DO MAYZATA Mi 33391 SO 17-117-73 74 0077 01930 SNAOYMOOO DO DAVID A ELNDUXST DAVID A ELNDUtST 1930 SMAOYMOOO DO MAYZATA Mi 33391 30 17-117-73 74 OOU 01977 SMAOYMOOO DO LLOYD 0 NEHDINO ETAL LLOYO 0 NENDINO 1977 SMAOY MOOD DO MAYZATA Ml 53391 30 17-117-73 01910 SMAOVI J D NCNANUB A J D MCMANUS I 74 0070 KXX> DO H E TULLV N E TULLY 1910 SNAOYMOOO DO MAYZATA Mi 55391 30 17-117-73 74 0073 01940 SNAOYMOOO DO RAY F DAMSON RAY F DAMSON 1940 SMAOYMOOO DO MAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL 3ATCN 004 00013 30 17-117-73 74 0071 01970 SMAOYMOOO DO LODXN A 6ASTEDLAND LODIN OASTEDLANO ESTATE C/0 1ST TDUST SDECIAL ASSETS D O OOM 44147 ST DAUL MN 35144-0147 30 17-117-73 74 0074 01944 SMAOYMOOO DO JIM UDOAN JAMES L i HADTNA J UDOAN 1944 SNAOYMOOO DO MAYZATA Mi 53391 CO CO Hanbhip V Our hardship, in requesting this variance, is that we will expenence significant soil erosion along our shoreline if we are unable to replace an existing retaining wall structure which is on a steep slope leading down to the lakeshore. The existing wall has substantially decayed and is crumbling away. In addition, the wall materials are old railroad ties which contain creosote, which we feel could harm the lake. In order to prevent further soil erosion, this retaining wall structure needs to be replaced. As part of the repair, we propose to eliminate the top tier of the existing three-tier reuining wall structure smce a two-tier structure would be sufficient to satisfy our objective of preventing soil erosion. The elimination of this tier will reduce hardcover in the setback zone. 3AAdjacent Property I (we) / O / YAJ/J ^ [print namc(s)l , , _ idgeftM^t Form /^z C S'/i’/r'/jy ^ocv/D [print address) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at .o.rt also referred to as Und Use Applicatton No ------------ I (we) understand that in eaecutmg this acknowledgement. I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am tare) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor s project or use requires Council approval. ♦ 9 Property Owner Date Property Owner Date 1 (we) [print name(S))[print address) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ..oerW ^also referred to as Und Use Application No.------------ I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement. I (we) am (are) not asked to Cou'n^'l Zr.tTaneraltfoll'™'^^^^ project or use requires Council approval. Date If vou have anv information that may assist the City in the review of diis ' 'nd Uk Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 ays pn to the scheduled meeting date. Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik& Associates Engine«rs 4 Architects May 4. 1994 Jwc o ScrieMffX) 9ooe*f * * iC<seo^ I Arvir^iii S/ijrv>o . • < • # - f ..* IT a n-* • t Koce^ j ■ *^wr V fDe'M'- •%erH0» Cor^jnt McSKtearO A •SMT" A Oo«tlor» »£ »nc>^ • »f «.('"<*fc X *o«P ’ 4v-0 - anoe'* a * • * doufOnr' <>§ Mam ♦ •-'ar'W' W^ae< ^ ?aoi^ar»r ® ^•Xje^VX' • < A <. 9 u^3-i'Oi ‘'f '•^cK^as f *'>gus ^6 \rr>rf^ Pf Mcnae- ® «at. »• M fp>q • 'C A A ^e'%L>T' M»i'^ae* - ^r*^. 9 Maa^'*'? r»'v r ®^/v'' Von - A/gane* P£ P Aniip«vv^ Pf Mam P »fvh Pf Maf* * »r-o Pf 3jrv X Mcx^^ OarMT- . fjgfTOr Pf ♦ Pi • 'M P| p*'<<»c . P ^ Ma^« :) \A/9lt>i Pf i Jipr^s#^ Pf , p^'rfiio 0»av^' P£ Aa<^'' pf jam ^^utoht/ p£ ‘ ’rxsc ‘r>sip» P^ VT*' • *aoo Pf :*c\A>a\ . •p'xm p§ /'awvr- 0 Ouu^f\on P£ JPtrtiO Ol«V»# Pf Paul G Hpu^ Pf xjrr» P Guajp* Pf C^anp' A f'vfeion ao M PaMThlry “•ariar* M Oior Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Asst. Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Tuller Residence File No. 139-1931 HAY 1994 Dear Mike, We have inspected the property and reviewed the survey and construction plan for the proposed retaining wall at 1910 Shadywood Road. The retaining wall as proposed will be constructed from treated cedar timbers in two tiers, located in the same area as the existing wall made from railroad ties. The proposed wail as shown is acceptable in regards to engineering matters. Prior to starting the work, proper erosion control procedures must be in place, such as silt fence. Shortly after the work is completed, the disturbed areas should be sodded or seeded with a suiuble ground cover. If the slope directly north of the stairway is disturbed, an erosion control mat should be used to control erosion until the ground cover is reestablished. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC 2^. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 • St, Paul. MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 , March 2 5, >994 Also ORl'INAR r >ti(^i iVA7fk' ki ARK , 92 9 4 CONTOUR IJMIlAI l^tH‘% M M.ilkt M I I 7,7i NK K1 \NI 'S HM ADVANn- SURVI'.YINC] & RNGINEERING CO. ......... M.«». ....... MN Ih..~ (M:i 4T« ^.4 laMkl2|«?«Ufc* M HYI I t<m IIM M( MANUS SSKVIA 1 1> M.'.l. 2> l >>M 1>KAI II 1> M.1,1. .’h iVii REYiSED Ap-i i 5,1994 I !-‘iAI l>l I<ir|H>N Mtnnes!>V.* Tounty. Ntnncsota.a County .1 iH« at.*. ,tt >a .1 (u .f* I )a ■ I,,. I| lla. ,U. «1 n. »|a,* „* Ht .m« (niM IM tat.4 A «« ..................... •«•"•■■■■■ .h. — a... ............................................. ' ................................... - ■'••■ -"J ■•••■ a~— - - *. *, ^ „««.«, .».» ,fc. .................. ....................N...... -I.. lu. .M-cJ.., ■ •att t, A «. A • M. .AMk.. < .At SI AI^)AI<USyN1|MH^ ( »»NV|;N|i^)NS, .1 (>tn..UA J? in |.ifH pltMt. t«« jrin( Smk I hchm Nutuhii V7U hi il *»»* H fifkU in IH lm «kn«tu^ It'utt.l i««>n mi.nutiit n» ( 1 UJJI l( AJION I hiit K) ttiiiK tiMi Ihi^ Kunyy ,a.,> h% iiu ni itiiJt t iiiy tliirii %y|nnKNHi «im| 1I141 | am a rit.Ut.Mitn •< I npnt tt .mil j PmiU vM..n iI ^uny mm umi K i ikt I na»A t.| iIk Sl.tU td Klmm»i»la i'J- . . I I* I A fS Nil n ;is S(All, ONi IN( M ?f» IMI ............................. *...................... ............-■....................* •.- -- z ...- ..... ‘ - * •*'—..........—......... ■ .................. : T.I Mcfiv Ny(n|»^i V?1$'*■ *» HI iHc^hm •nyiiK D|IJ( Allow'*'**^* •h;ii Ihh..........................................................................................................................................................................--------------------------------------------------'OKais >„ ,,, , mm wsm i■••• •.. V-... r;•. . ' . M /-I- ^*• NOTES & SPECIFICATIONS • TIMBERS ARE TO BE FASTED WITH TYPICAL POLE BARN NAILS. THEN SECURED WITH 12" SPIKES. • ALL TIMBERS ARE TO BE 5* x 6" CEDAR TONE PRESSURE TREATED QUALITY. • ALL SOIL AROUND STRUCTURE IS TO BE COMPACTED TO 95%. • TIMBERS ARE TO BE OF HIGH QUALITY. NO SPLITTING. WARPING. OR CURVATURE OF ANY DEGREE. • SOIL IN AND AROUND EACH STEP TO BE AT 95% COMPACTION. • EXISTING RETAINING WALL TO BE REMOVED BY CONTRACTOR. • CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROPER AND LEGAL DISPOSAL OF EXISTING RETAINING WALL MATERIALS. • CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS • FOR TIMBER WALL LOCATION SEE LOT SURVEY PLAN 4-0' o r □j t IA -3 4-0* ‘-----------------------------------J 4 4-0‘ 1 »o TYPICAL STEP DETAIL SCALE: 1/4* - V O’ r ^T?-*a' i!L»»V •i ' 1/ o planter RETAINING WALL PLANTER RETAINING WALL SHORELINE jj-O'1 4-0- L V//. 6" STAIRCASE n^iiiaiiitginig ^^^^7iT«iTii^niisni IS - EXISTING SOIL -^mw" STAIRCASE DETAIL SCALE; 1/4"- r-0’ • ^3.S . q r U~L sf ■ - ®n ^" ■ SHORELINE <w>S>y LXN'Vy^y^ I<o 7--6*8--0*5’♦— PLANTER PLANTER 6*^iiir^iii^in <k ^S lUJ M ^iii'i3iii-iiii£^iii=iiii» « jjill- 4 OEADW?AN EXISTING SOIL B‘ OEAOMAN TIMBER WALL DETAIL SCAI^E; V4* - r-0’ hardcover calculation worksheet SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONT) C 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House 75-250’25-500’500-1000’ Length B. Garage % \ \ C. Dnveway _ D Sidewalk E. Paiio Deck X X X X X X X X X F Landscape ______________ Underlain______________ bv Plastic _________ G. Other ' TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- B . PROPOSED HARDCpyTR IN ZONE A. House __________________ ' Leogtit X X X B. Garage C. Dnveway D. Sidewalk _ E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Uoderlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X G. Otber______________ ) TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ______________ - B . WkJ* X 100 Width s s X 100 ll-± A c- X ^ S.F S.F. S.F S.F S.F S F S.F S F S F S F S.F S.F S.F S.F S F S.F . CJLO i (A- c . 2 < . --------- S.F S.F S.F S.F S.F S.F S.F S.F, S.F, S.F, S.F, S.F, S.F, S.F, S.F S.F. /O . ^ « f ♦' A B A B ^ 6f^ oos' ^^*£'*‘7rx*7S^^ r2-^r 5:C. 'b i£>./tr?~> : ^/n b'^ ^ • of Ca" ^<fr, <^*ua - 5^. ^ ■ ~' ~ ^^V/V' art^^s. - <4.7.. s-T . 4. -rwntt r /o/.S" ir. »«- /;5 v< ' 00 /i»^^4. <5'^ rWTT'"■n«.S « V ' ' =T*.*« »■ 4 2- s ^ . 32..S T»^ ^ 9r. ^ a-^. ort. I. REQITST FOR COUNCIL ACTION UNCIL Liw JUN 5 3 DATE: JuiQfYOFOROrJO ..a ITE\I NO: Department Approval: Name Jeanne A Mabusth Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Administrators Title Building and Zoning Administrator Item Description: Tandem Properties Request for Building Permit for Lot 1. Block 2 (Dickey Parcel) Exhibits A Request of Tandem Properties 5/23-94 B Eiden Letter 6/6/94 C Existing Site Planw D Survey for New Development E Resolution of Approval At the May 23rd meeting of the Council. Tandem Properties submitted a wrinen request on behalf of the Tony Eiden Company seeking approval of the Council to allow staff to issue a building permit for residential construction on Lot 1 . Block 2 prtor to the completion ot certain site improvements. It is the desire of the Eiden Company to complete construction of a model home for the '94 Parade ot Homes. Review Exhibit C. The lot is already served by an existing driveway at Watertown Road that served the former horse operation. Applicant s addendum notes that fire and safety is addressed because there is good access available for emergency vehicles. The Drive will serve during the early months of construction and a new drive at Countryside West will be installed as soon as road is approved by the City. fSTAFF COMMENTS ANT) RECOMMENDATION Staff would approve the request to allow the issuance of a building permit to Lot 1 . Block 2 as lone as both Tandem Properties and the Eiden Construction Company are aware that the City win not issue a certificate of occupancy until an approved road base has been installed for Country Side Drive West and a new access installed from that roadway Staff has prepared an approval resolution tor Council s review and action. COUNCIL ACTION REQLT:STED To adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution or to deny the request of Tandem Properties, the subdivider of Old Crystal Bay Road Addition. A RESOLLTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT TO LOT I. BLOCK 2. OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ADDITION PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF ROAD AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, on May 23. 1994 the City Council of the City of Orono. approved the plat of Old Crystal Bay Road Addition requiring certain drainage and road improvements as a condition of approval of the plat; and WHEREAS, on June 13. 1994 Tandem Propenies. the subdivider, on behalf of Tony Eiden Company filed a request with the City to direct the Orono staff to issue a building permit to Lot 1. Block 2 before these required site improvements are completed to this City's satisfaction; and WHEREAS, this lot is already served by an existing driveway at Watenown Road that will provide safe access for emergency vehicles during the early months of construction. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVTD, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Building and Zoning staff to issue a building permit to Tony Eiden Company for new residential construction on Lot 1. Block 2. Old Crystal Bay Road Addition upon the satisfaction of all requirements of the City to allow the issuance of a building permit subject to the following conditions; 1 All drainage and grading improvements wiihm Lot 1. Block 2 as shown on final grading plans for Old Crystal Bay Road Addition must be completed in conjunction with the construction of the residence and completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy A Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued to Tony Eiden Construction Company un'il an approved base has been installed for Country' Side Drive West and a new drive installed to serve the residence at Lot I, Block 2. Old Crystal Bav Road Addition. Upon the installation of the new drive at Country Side Drive West the former drive at Watertown Road must be closed off to all vehicular use and the gravel drive restored to natural ground cover. Adopted by the Council of the City of Orono this 13th day of June 1 >94 Edward J Callahan. Jr., Mayor ATTEST Dorothy M. Hallin. City Cleric TANDEM PROPERTIES James L. Ostenson Rtchird A. Putnam BROKERS • BLANNEBS • DEVELOFEBS I Mayor Callahan and Members of the Orono City Council 2780 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN Re: Building Permit LI, B2 Old Crystal Bay Road Addition May 23, 1994 Dear Mayor Callahan and Council Members, We request on behalf of Tony Bden Company the opportunity to begin construction of the '94 Parade Home for our Orono development. Mr. Bden will build on Lot 1 Block 2 on the comer of Old Cry stal Bay Road and Watertown Road. The lot currently has a gravel driveway from Watertown Road that served the horse bam. This request is necessary due to the fire/public safety' concern that the building site has good access available for emergency vehicles. We believe this lot meets all the requirements for safe access and is unique from most new lots because of the existing driveway. Allowing Mr. Eiden to begin promptly will be greatly appreciated since the time needed for construction to meet the mid September *94 Parade construction deadline is ver>' tight. Thank you for your consideration of our request. Sincerely, Dick Putnam Orono Limited Partnership 2765 Casco Point Road • Wayzata. Minnesota 55391 • Office & Fax (612) 471-0573 7808 Cieekndge Circle ♦ Suite 310 • Bloomington, Minnesota 55439 • Office (612) 941-7805 • Fax (612) 941-785? El DEN 9. RECEIVED JUN 6 1994 CITY OF ORONO June 6, 19<)4Mayor Callahan and Members of the Orono City Council 2780 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN RE Building Permit Old Crystal Bay Road Addition Deal Ma>or Callahan and City Council Members By his letter of May 23, 1994 Dick Putnam has requested your approval for issuance of a building permit for a home to be constructed on Lot 1. Block 2 ot the Old Crystal Bay Addition This is the comer of Old Crystal Bay Road and Watertown Road The Tony Eiden Company has acquired interest in all lots of the Old Cry stal Bay Addition We have registered a 1994 Parade Home on Lot I, Block 2 As Mr Putnam states, it is imperative to begin construction of this home immediately if we are to have a chance of having a home of that si?e and complexity completed by the opening of the Parade in September We understand that Tandem Properties intends to begin construction of the interior public street serving this lot soon - and. that it will be complete well before the Parade opens Our use of the existing dnveway from this lot to Watertown Road, as suggested by Mr Pumarn, would, therefore be for construction access only Your favorable consideration of our request for a building permit under these circumstances is respectfully appreciated Sincerely yours, Tony EideiyCompany ony Eiden, Resident 4100 BERKSHIRE LANE • PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55446* 16121559-0251 FAX 16121559-1256 4 / EIDEH CONSTRUCT IOH j^meyori (foitiflnde ^2 & KlO^V 0«not«t Sui’ac« Drolnog* f7 f, 7 Proposed Top of Block propoftd Goro9« Floor ^^J/7 Proposod Lowott Floor Typo of Building • fjjASJipah /Z€irh/AM»i S>i^i \oct»o ' '2.e5CC>\ooSX. (/rfL(7Y y OI2AIHAC.C e««ff-f£A/r 090.1* .*P'' - -VOT K- 6f?Limi2Y^itpe (u.»i.Pipep) Proposed building information must be checked with approved building plan before excavation and construction.Lot I, Block 2. OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ADDITION .n4^E>zJLBJla<Tn*{Jbiv^Ljcjn«<l<4M4JbsL .Ail Bonestroo Rosene Andefiik& Associates Engineers A Architects One G aonevmo 90btn \*# ffnsene ®E • K3\t0f> C Bw''^ i Tumr* ji^nri B : X3* t 't BnDe^ G » '*;wr M t^e tr* . P • Conv*<UKit • *jr>fD«d ne<n 4 Go<tlon Btx>en B Bf n^nr? ^ «ove* Bf C Lcntmtd •room C Bu^%e* * *• A 8ou*tJon PE A Hjnson be Mr-'.je* ^ Bpucmjnr' Pf V3 « PE '«iorrtrf\ B Aodmor * ' OortAta (. Rurg^rdt PE rhomjs A >y(fito BE f'^dpne ; Sre' f^wg PE vnje* VUhir*r/ V»n B Bjo •E iVjne\ M B»r\g A iC P Ai be C L^h BE • Mjund BE D ^rtTVh PE »OCT Bf Aerto«r B Arxjprvjr be ViATk 9 Brxfv BE MATk A ^ BE A Monen Bf B^ > OAOrion A I A Datmt * J A Bwk BhPip j Mjrk D VAPS 9 I PTimfi GrSMPf BE Bjipr (. Bf D Ar*vohO BE « Todfl Bower be BMh B noD Bf DOugLBS J iP'>OA Bf ShAnm O GuSIJfton Bf Cectio Ov»» Bf Bju» G Heupr Bf XJho B Go<or» Bf Chjhrt A EnckiOT' Leo M Bjtoirntcv M Ohon jjmps E E'XjeP'jrt* June 8. 1994 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re: Old Crystal Bav Road MS AP 152-102-11 Our File No. 13960 Honorable Mayor and City Council: c Bids were opened for the Old Crystal Bay Road Project on Tuesday, June 7. 1994. Transmitted herewith are ten (10) copies of the bid tabulation for your information and file. The following summarizes the results of the five bids received: Low Buffalo Bituminous. Inc.$157,105.00 #2 Bituminous Consulting $180,971 00 #3 GMH Asphalt, Inc.M 81.735.75 #4 Wm. Mueller 6l Sons, Inc.$196,280.50 #5 Midwest Asphalt Corp.$228,275.80 The low bidder on the project was Buffalo Bituminous. Inc. with a Base Bid of $157.105 00. These bids have been reviewed and found to be in order Pie low bid compares favorably with the Engineer's estimate of $160,000.00. We are therefore recommending that the City award this project to Buffalo Bituminous, inc. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 636-4600. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. y<^Juuu>i i). Shawn D. Gustafson SDG:rb:enc 13960.ro R 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636^600 Prafecl Naac Municipal State Aid Street Improvement • Old Crystal Bay RoadPraiBClNo. S.A.P. 152-102-11 Fie No. i.^%0lOKW a.m., C.D.S T . Tuesday. June 7. 1994 OroiK>. MinnesotaBID TABULATION Tabvlitioa of Five Low Bids at Five Received ■UNa I Buffalo Bituminoui. lar. Bitufmnous Coiisuhifig A Cofitractifii Co. MN ol 3 GMH Asphalt Corp. ■UNa 4 Wm. Mueller A Sons. Inc. MiNocS Midwest Asphalt Coqi. m bm Mas V 4 ) A Total IM tnm Total Hah Moe ibtoi IIUaii mi B mc Bid - S.AP. 152-102-11 2101502 Ckaring (tree)EA 10 5000 500.00 150.00 15(X).00 75 00 750.00 300 00 3.000 UO 100.00 l.(X)0.00 2101507 GruMMug (tiee)EA 10 50 00 W)00 100 00 1.000 00 100 00 1.000 (VI 300(10 3.000(X)100 00 1.000.00 21CM501 ReflMiue plate beam guardraii LF 220 300 660 00 too 660 (M)10 25 2.25^ («7 00 1.540 («)12 00 2.640.00 21CM501 tUmuwt 15* culvert LF 75 6 00 450 01)4 00 3t)0 (K)6 H()487 SO 6 00 45C(»i 10 00 750.00 2104.505 Remcwe bitiimiiious pavement SY 1530 3 00 4590 Of,1 75 2.67750 2 60 t.Q^H ftfp 1 50 2.295 rii 260 3.97800 2104521 Salvage diam link fence LF 320 4 00 1.2HO (HP 3 00 960m 8.50 2.^20 (n)Hon 1.600.(Wt 18.00 5.760.00 0104.601 Rekxate maUbcaes. signs, etc.LS 1 200 00 200 00 1.250 00 l.2Horn 6 HO on 650 fJO 500 f»)M 10.00 1.000.(10 1.000.00 13960.TAB IWi sa UwlBa*TbUl IteilPiiocf TaUl UwlVrict Uwil^iot TbUl UbMtarnSY2,760 1.00 2.760 00 1.10 3,036.00 1.50 4,i4aa)135 3,45000 120 3312.00i1,500 3.50 5,250.00 492 7380. (X)4.50 6,75a00 4.50 6.75a00 4.^0 6,750.001CY5004J02,250.00 5.07 2335.00 4.50 2350.00 4.50 235a00 430 2350.00CY2,500 9.00 22,500.00 10.95 27375.00 10.50 2^350.0()12.82 32.050.00 19.50 48,75u.OOCY4407.00 3,080.00 5.10 2344.00 6.00 2,640.00 6.00 2,640.00 8.00 332aooTN1,600 9^0 15,200.00 10.95 17320.00 9.60 15360.00 10.15 16340,00 9.50 l3,2U).00 CY 950 12.00 11,400.00 11.65 11,067.50 14 60 13370.00 14.85 14,107.50 24.00 22,800.00 TN 43 120.00 5,16a00 125.00 5375.00 120.00 5,160.00 125.00 5375.00 125.00 5375.00 TN 195 17.00 3315.00 25.00 4fil5XJ0 39.00 7,605.00 25.00 4,875.00 23.00 4,4!-.00 TN 260 16.00 4,160.00 24.00 6340.00 27.15 7,059.00 2400 6,240.00 20.00 5300.00 TN 325 1600 5.200.00 23.00 7,475.00 26.45 8,596.25 24.0(J 7,800.00 20.00 6300.00 84 30.00 2,520.00 32.00 2,68'“ T)45.00 3,780.00 50.0J 4.2(XUXi 46.00 3364.00 Usif aa Moei T.^frioe Total ibtai Tolal &S5SYZ306.50 L625.00 10.00 230a00 13,50 3375.00 20.00 5JXXK30 430 U23.00GL3501.00 350.00 i.25 437.50 1.50 525.00 1.00 isaoo 1.70 595.00SF2,150 13.50 29,025 00 12.^0 26,875.00 11.50 24,725.00 15.00 32,250.00 15.75 33362.50CY8015.00 UOO.OO 1H,00 1,440 00*15.00 1300.00 1800 1,440.00 28.00 2,240.00EA26000120.00 loaoo 200.00 85.00 170.00 80.00 160.00 116.00 23.^001EA2400008oaoo325.00 65a00 115.00 63aoo 300.00 600.00 275.00f 550,00LF500 3.00 1300.00 9.50 4,750.00 2.50 U50.00 6.50 3a5a00 12.00 6,00000 LF 120 35.00 4i00.00 22.95 2,754.00 28.50 3,420.00 27.00 324a00 48.50 5320.00 LF no 22.00 2,*420CI0 29.35 3,228.50 29.50 3,245.00 28.00 3,080.00 30.55 336030 LF 200 23.00 4,600.00 29.75 5,950.00 32.75 6350.00 31 00 6,2CK).(J0 33.50 6,70C.00 £A 1 250.00 250.00 100.00 100.00 150.00 15000 145.00 145 00 225.00 225.00 EA 1 250.00 250.00 100.00 100.00 125.00 125.00 115.00 inoc 170.(10 170.00 roui UaitPrice Toul|price Total73.00 20.00 5.000.00 4.50 1.125.0025.00 1.00 350.00 1.70 595.0025.00 15.00 32^.00 15.75 33.862J010.00 18.00 1,440.00 28.00 2.24a00^0.00 80.00 160.00 116.00 23100i0.00 300.00 600.00 275.00 550.000.00 6.50 3J5ttOO 12.00 6,000.00 0.00 27.00 3.240.00 48.50 5,820.00 5.00 28.00 3,080.00 30.55 3360J0 ).00 31.00 6.200.00 33.50 6.700.00 1.00 145.00 145.00 225.00 225.GU .00 115.00 1150(1 170.00 170.00 MNol 1 Biliiiiiiaout. Inc.mHfkZBitwhnoys Consattinf A Contractmit Co KdrfoiiGMH Aspiinlt Coipi WINo.4 Wm. MueierA Som, Inc.■UNaSMklnreslA&phaU Corp.& fia0 Uwl fia Uulmst tbul IMIMn Tolall IMl IM Umifisa IbUj uyiMeei 2575.502 Seed, mLOure 500 LB 40 2.00 80.0ft 5.00 200.00 350 i«L00 3.(X)12aOD 3J3 iMQD 2575J05 Soddiag. 1>pe bm SY 1.50 3,oofrno 250 5«aoaQo 1.45 2,«3aOO 2.00 4,000.00 2 10 42oaoo 2575511 MhIcIi iMiennl, Type 1 TN QJ 25a00 2oaoo loaoo 24aoo 150.00 120.00 650.00 320.00 723.00 58QJ30 2575519 Disk niiclKiniig AC a4 ioaoo 40.00 300.QQ 120.00 150.00 60.00 1(K).00 40.0QI nzm 44.80 2575531 Commerdil aoiJ^ 20>1(M0 TN 0.2 300.00 60.00 5.00 1.00 200.00 40.00 49a00 98,00 55aoo iiaoD Tout 9000 Bid S.A.P. 152-102-11 S’<7.105.00 S180.971.00 1181.733.75 Sl96280.<0 $228,275 ><0 1396aTAB DT-5 KdNo. 1 Bid No. 2 KdNo.3 Bid No. 4 Bid No. 5Bid Bead, GoLdkMiL.5% Bid Bond 5% Bid Bond 5% Bid Bond 5% Bid Bi>nd 5% Bid B<indfinBuffalo Bituuunotts, Inc.Bituminous Consulting Sl Contracting Co.GMH Asphalt Corp.Wm. Maeller & Sons, Inc.Miduest Asphalt Carp. 9f DarreU E. Hicks Stephen R. T ' aenshuh, Sr.Gary Harms Richard Wendlandt Blair B. Bury im President Presider Vice President Sc'.-y/Treas.Vice President AM m 2852 Co. Rd 12 N. P.O. Box 337 24^ j Main St NE 9180 Laketown Road 831 Park Ave.P.O. Box 5477 CMy.SUtB.Buffalo, MN Blaine, MN Chaska, MN Hamburg, MN Hopkins, MN Z2r CoA*55313 55449 55318 55339 55343 THriAnt (612) 682-1271 (612) 755-1888 (612) 442-5288 (612) 467-2720 (612) 937-8033 taNa (612) 682-6522 (612) 755-1899 (612) 442-5656 (612) 467-3894 (612) 937-6910 13960TAB BT-6 Bid No. 4 BidNo.S5% Bid Bond 5% Bid Bondp-Wm. Mueller & Sons, Inc.Midwest Anhalt Cbip. Richard Wendlandt Blair B. Bury Secy/Treas.Vice President ad 831 Park Ave.P.O. Box 5477 Hamburg, MN Hopkins, MN 55339 55343 (612) 467-2720 (612) 937-8033 (612) 467-3894 (612) 937-6910 Loader Case 62IB Bid S 93.425.00Snow Plow Craig 6973H 301-10 7,755.00Snow Wing Craig 301-10 8.975,00 $110,155.00 Less Trade In 18.000.00 $92,155.00 6.5% Sales Tax 5.990.00 Total S 98,145.00 w s TO:Ron Moorse. City Administrator FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director DATE:June 8, 1994 SUBJECT: Demolition of Buildings - Crystal Bay l(o - % V ^ Recently I submitted information for review regarding the costs for lead paint abatement at the old Council Chambers building in Crystal Bay. Council directed staff to contact the appropriate persons or agencies that had previously showed an interest in keeping the building for future use. I have discussed this matter with Marge Gasch. Marge stated that she would pursue funding assistance for the project but it would only work if the City was involved by way of monetary assistance, determining some type of use of the building, keeping the building on City property a.nd pojticipating in the maintenance ot the building. The Citv of Independence and the Western Hennepin County Pioneer Association entered into an agreement for the Independence City Hall. Attached is a copy of the lease agreement. If Council determines that they do not wish to retain the structure, it is staffs recommendation to demolish the building. )sts for lead paint abatement at the [encies that had previously showed ed that she would pursue funding was involved by way of monetary ?ing the building on City property Pioneer Association entered into copy of the lease agreement. ture, it is staff’s recommendation ✓ V.LEASE AGREEMENTAGREEMENT made this_ _day of July, 1992, by and between theCity of Independence, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "the city", and the Western Hennepin County Pioneers Association, Inc., a non-profit corporation under the laws of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as WHCPA. WHEREAS, the city owns the "old city hall" and the property on which it is located, legally described as: Lot 5, Block 1, Town of Armstrong, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. (PID 23-118-24-33-0008) WHEREAS, WHCPA is desirous of operating a museum on said property, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be derived by each party hereto. IT IS AGREED: 1. That the city shall lease to WHCPA the above described property for a period of twenty (20) years at for a total rent of One and no/lOOths Dollars ($1.00) payable in advance, for the purposes of maintaining and operating a museum. 2. That the city will at it's expense keep proper liability and property damage insurance on the premises. 3. The city will maintain the outside of the building and the surrounding lawn and landscaping. 4. WHCPA will obtain and maintain a security system, and at its expense maintain the inside of the building. 5. WHCPA will pay all electricity, heating and cooling expenses. 6. Neither party shall be responsible to bring the building up to any current building or access codes. If either party is ordered to bring the building into compliance with any building or access codes, either party may cancel this agreement. 7. Either party may ca.icel this agreement on 6 months written notice. CITY OF INDEPENDENCE WESTERN HENNEPIN COUNTY PIONEERS ASSOCIATION, INC. By: Marvin Johnson, Mayor By: (print) It’s Mary Leintz, Clerk-Treasurer TO:FROM:Ron Moorse, City AdministratorJohn R. Gcrhardson, Public Works DirectorDATE:May 17. 1994SUBJECT: Lead Paint Abatement Old Citv Council ChambersIf we are to keep and fmd a use for the old Council Chambers, we must remove the lead paint on the exterior and interior. The company that performs this type of work has suggested the following: • Remove all material with lead in the paint e.xcept the interior and exterior walls. Encapsulate the walls with an approved product. • The removal of material would be the windows, wood trim, painted roof overhang boards, rear door, wood panels, doors and windows in front entry and covering the ceiling with plywood, and secure the building to weather. The cost for the above is 512,847.00. The cost to do all of the above and restore the building to its original condition with the same style of woodwork, doors, roof, etc. is 545,200.00. The above costs are very preliminary and we have not requested formal competitive bids which will probably lower the costs somewhat. The above costs do not include plumbing, electricity, etc. The costs for demolition, removal and disposal of the building were estimated at $4,000.00 in 1992. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approral: Name Ron Moorse Title Citv Administrator CCUiiCit. yiiaTiluij JUN 1 3 1994 CnYOFORONO DATE! June 10, 1994 ITEM NO: Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Partial Release of Conditions of Subdivision Approval In 1991 the City approved Foxwood Second Addition with a resolution that placed conditions on the developinent of the subdivision. The propeny owners have requested the City to partially •dease the property from these conditions. The City Attorney has been working with the property owners on this issue and has requested that the partial release be placed on the Council agenda. The City Attorney will provide specific information on the requested partial release including an explanation of why it is not reasonable to approve of the release. 1 pOPHAM HAIK MEMORANDUM TO:Jean Mabusth J HKOM:Thomas Bairo RE:Attached Rele DATE:June 8. 1994 Could you see that this is on Council Agenda? Thanks. Tom 3300 Rper Jdft~ny Tower 222 South Nintii Street Minneapolis. Minnesota 55402 (612) 333-t800 pPC-SiVEC' JUN 9 W94 CtTY OF ORONO 082/220475156/7/94 KSON t BV»OK t.J9»4 15S35 P. 2 pARTIAl FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, ihe receipt end sufficiwey of which ii hereby acknowledged, that certain rc^’ property located in Hennepin County, Mmnesou. legally described as follows: Lot I, Block 1; and undivided U3 interest in and to Oullol A, Fox wood Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate »n Hennepin County, Minnesota, together with the appurtenant easement contained in Document no. 2061857 beln£ registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Tide No. 783119, is from^lhi certain NoUce of Adverse Claim and the Developer's Agreement attached tocr^o. filed by the undersigned, dated September 9. 1991, executed on ^half of the undersigned, and filed for record September 23, 1991, as Document No. 2..04996. CITY OF ORONO Its. And_ Its. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) s» COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Tlic foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ and . day of June, 1994, the____________ respectively of the City of Orono, a municipal corporationand __ under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation Notary Public This Instrume:.;. waj itrafied by: Fredrikson Sc P.A. (BAO) 1100 Internatioiial Centre 900 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 3f6US r JUn request for council action 1994 DATE: June 9. 1994 ITEM NO Department Approval: Name Dorothy Hallin Tide City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: Licenses for Council Approval Garbage & Refuse Collector’s License Baldy Sanitation Inc Maple Plain, MN Septic System Installer Kober Excavating Zimmerman, MN COUNCIL ACTION REQLT:STED: Motion to approve licenses. >* */,.ONO » >"6 6 /Bay» MN 553 23 /57 License Year Date Received Fee Paid Initials GARBAGE & REFOSE COLLECTOR* S LICENSE APPLICATION The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and herewith makes application for a license to do so. Business/Pirm . Jh / ■- - -- - - - --- - Address -^ (Str^RIr (City] (State) Business Phone Number 3 - - - - - - - (Zip Code) Applicant's Name _ Address (Street) ' Phone Numlaer ? 3 «=,i_ _ __ " (City) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (State) (Zip Code) Check One: _ _ _ _ Individual _ _ _ _ Partnership Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono /_- - - - - - -- Description of Vehicles (attached list if more): Loaded Loaded Year Mfcr. Gross W t. Rear Axle Wt. Size/Yards 1/ Corporation :* TT*V I •U a I I U*f U'MWfTl.* L t f w lim ^ * 'I wi t aw ' T ( * ““f • a a I V wvT -rvW'Jl License wWiinber/l • 11 w C i i ~ f ** » iVniVA V'y^-/ 7?-’■ .L;: /L'C . General area of City served r'Z'yt^, /t? ( Schedule of Collection charges/ dates A-fon _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __— Approximate number of customers in Orono /o _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ Location of dumping area _ _ In”o^ER for this APPLICATION TO BE COMPLETE, YOQ MUST ENCLOSE THE FOLLOWING: Surety bond in the amount of $1,000. Proof of insurance in the amount of $100,000-$300,000-$50,000, and 10-day cancellation clause. Annual fee is a S30.00 flat rate fee, plus $15/truck, and a $30.00 transfer fee (if applicaoie;. _ __ _ __ _ mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm I am the owner and operator of the above business and I have paid all license fees and taxes required by law. The above information is correct. _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Applicant / Date _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ for city use ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends: Approval _ _ _ _ _ _ Denial _ _ _ _ _ _ Other (specify) Signature of City Official Date CITY of ORONO SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTXLLE: (612) 473-7357 LICENSE APPLICATION Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bayr MN 55323 All questions must be answered. License fee, bond, certificate of insurance, and evidence of MPCA Certification must be attached. All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. 2. 3. 4. Business or trade name Business address (.cyj A, . s-iTSf Business phone W/ • ^ S’J~ 3 Residence phone g'S~C - 3/f c— Name of applicant or company representative holding MPCA certification Lk. f-------------------------------------------- Installer PumperType of certification held: _ Certificate expiration date __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license in Orono before? »O Most recent year Have you ever had a license revoked? Where? ______________________ n O When? f ■■ ■■■ " i t i. fc -V'W V'v» ,if rrki K'X UL.M f Tf f A 111 .rcki V' A CL. i • r,- «.'V 8 9 Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes Do you pump out septic tanks? Yes ______ No I •! I I IT Oi No '>:iCK c*ui I ri 1C-, Aw*'CMC Li' »l- ijcrcTor^ruMik‘ yr i\CCC Ai I » I »nitl\ » C njLV'C*.' SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: $50.00 License application fee. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orono as obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accepted/ $50-100-300,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance. S^S~'?S' Copy of current MPCA Certificate. LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED List persons other than applicant who are authorized by you to apply for permits under your license $ i r* n f K ,'n C- - - --- --- - - The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of Orono, Minnesota, for a license to install and repair septic systems, and/or pump out septic tanks, subject to the laws of the State or Minnesota and the Ordinances of the City of Ovono,. Date S ~ 3! - y V Applicant's Signature >7^ > ____ CITY USE ONLY Staff recommendation Approval Reason for denial: _ H/Denial Date City Council Action Date Date license mailed _ _ Approved Denied c Cs^ # / 06/30/94 PR: CM PRREGOR 213 YTD CURRENTEMp n NAME DPT GROSS GROSS469108O2€CALLAHAN , EDWARD J 11 1800.00 300.0010324677GOETTEN,J.DIANN 11 1450.02 241.67470366069HURR, JOELLEN L 11 1450.02 241.67473646272JAPBOUR,GABRIEL 11 1450.02 241.67476527186KELLEY,CHARLES 11 1450.02 241.67 1,266.68 sBBssessxaB ■■Vi. 0 06/05/94 PR: CB PRREGOREMP « NAME DPT471688060474563339476921819471840871 475443862 468113870 468843008 472503991 469526026 475989721 468821018 468622840 472529007 468701868 507585424 469686562 468420832 469087884 474667812 475380151 477500666 475444249 477463877 471569863 473141624 477647279 476020397 471848180 504260307 472500574 121262417 475344512 480843542 470987727 477700023 334506281 473108428 468909535 476783251 476866274 470700901 469848107 474167795 475382983 473746173 473609629 470566529 469629194 475569177 267460042 472563051 474663296 470704904 475505292 468629488 477881539 P R HASEMAN, JOHNSON, JOSTROM, KARNITZ, ANDERSON, BRUCE L BOBZIEN, SUE A BORIS, SCOTT W BOSMA, JAMIE L BRINKHAUS, JOHN F CALLAGHAN, JEREMIAH CARLSON, MICHAEL B CHESWICK, GARY B CORNICK, JAMES L DEMBOUSKI, JAY C ENGLISH III, IRVING ERICKSON, DOUGLAS J ERICKSON, KURT R FISCHENICH, DAN T FRITZLER, JOHN M GAFFRON, MICHAEL GERHARDSON, JOHN GOMAN, DAVID J GREGORY, JAMES D HALLIN, DOROTHY M HANSEN, STEVEN C HANSING, CAROL J CAROLE BRADLEY P FOREST J RICKY D KING, ANITA D KNOLLENBERG, KRISTIN KNUTSON, CHARLOTTE A KUEHN, THOMAS M MABUSTH, JEANNE A MCINTYRE, WILLIAM E MCNICHOLS, DAVID L MILLER, CHRISTOPHER MOORSE, RONALD J MOROWCZYNSKI, JAMES OAS, DANIEL O OBERAIGNER, SCOTT G OBRIEN, RANDY L OLSON, JOHN C. OMAN, LYLE E PALMER, GREGORY A PETERSON, JACK W QUAST, WAYNE A RATHBUN, BARRY J ROSS, JOHN A SCHOENHOFF, JOHN B SKREEN, DALE S STEFFENHAGEN, RONALD SULLIVAN, STEPHEN X THOMTON, MARK R TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE F TOMCZYK, MARK W VANG, BRUCE L VEE, LINDA S WECKMAN, STEPHEN J 31313112 42 93 31 31 31 31 31 93 31 31 31 33 42 35 42 12 42 31 12 31 93 31 35 31 15 15 33 93 31 15 12 31 93 42 92 15 33 42 93 92 92 93 31 42 93 31 31 31 31 33 12 33 YTDGROSS210901263729287137 19446 462 1943 21296 22681 20946 21188 66 19506 19811 21030 17787 36279 3917 16553 15337 15292 6957 12879 20279 745 2414 763 1315 13943 2oll7 22248 1031 19060 2771 28942 19796 1193 15330 15359 375 17589 14552 478 18556 15152 1245 6346 14912 15337 24816 1 9286 19559 19565 15615 13557 14169 0910 96 29 68 00 76 49 68 08 15 68 62 86 44 85 81 96 21 85 60 11 72 63 81 48 61 07 44 69 87 13 21 61 07 55 82 13 80 32 41 26 25 26 75 85 54 77 87 89 71 81 62 07 92 22 CURRENTGROSS1928.80 1071.88 273 591 1621 255 900 2297 2204 1748 1972 66 1023 1667 461 1483 2368 332 1579 1278 1582 636 1055 1611 0089 37 00 90 29 03 46 75 68 03 54 53 13 11 96 04 97 60 93 40 52 186.45 311.22 25 458 1146 2177 1054 242 2038 1139 2511 1007 260 1113 1649 375 1483 1113 231 1403 1113 04 95 01 28 87 95 05 25 84 92 58 03 39 32 12 05 25 92 04 437.80 442.26 1113 .04 1270.96 2068.86 1650.54 1581 1611 1304 1110 3 6 52 16 99 1186.40 67,243.09 E = — — I- — — 06/22/94 PR: CB PRREGOR 212EMP » NAME471680060474563339476921819 471840071 475443862 460113870 468043008 472503991 •169526026 475909721 460821010 472529007 468701860 469686562 468420832 469087884 474667812 475380151 477500666 475444249 477463877 471569863 473141624 477647279 476020397 471848100 504260307 472500574 121262417 475344512 480843542 470987727 477700023 334506281 473100428 460909535 476703251 470700901 469848107 474167795 475382983 473746173 473609629 470566529 469629194 475569177 267460042 472563051 474663296 470704904 475505292 468629488 477801539 HASEMAN, JOHNSON, JOSTROM, KARNITZ, ANDERSON, PRUCE L BOBZIEN, SUE A BORIS, SCOTT W BOSMA, JAMIE L BRINKHAUS, JOHN F CALLAGHAN, JEREMIAH CARLSON, MICHAEL B CHESWICK, GARY B CORNICK, JAMES L DEMBOUSKI, JAY C ENGLISH III, IRVING ERICKSON, KURT R FISCHENICH, DAN T GAFFRON, MICHAEL P GERHARDSON, JOHN R GOMAN, DAVID J GREGORY, JAMES D HALLIN, DOROTHY M HANSEN, STEVEN C HANSING, CAROL J CAROLE BRADLEY P FOREST J RICKY D KING, ANITA D KNOLLENBERG, KRISTIN KNUTSON, CHARLOTTE A KUEHN, THOMAS M MABUSTH, JEANNE A MCINTYRE, WILLIAM E MCNICHOLS, DAVID L MILLER, CHRISTOPHER MOORSE, RONALD J MOROWCZYNSKI, JAMES OAS, DANIEL O OBERAIGNER, SCOTT G OBRIEN, RANDY L OMAN, LYLE E PALMER, GREGORY A PETERSON, JACK W QUAST, WAYNE A RATHBUN, BARRY J ROSS, JOHN A SCHOENHOFF, JOHN B SKREEN, DALE S STEFFENHAGEN, RONALD SULLIVAN, STEPHEN X THOMTON, MARK R TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE F TOMCZYK, MARK W VANG, BRUCE L VEE, LINDA S WECKMAN, STEPHEN J DPT YTD CURRENTGROSSGROSS3119161.21 1703.163111565.22 1071.00312655.96 412.23 12 6545.40 597.00 4 2 17025.31 1621.35 93 207.00 207.00 31 1042.86 802.62 31 18999.20 1727.20 31 20477.65 1848.21 31 19197.62 1656.69 31 19215.40 1917.39 31 17683.59 1611.52 31 18144.32 1609.37 33 16304.72 1483.13 42 33911.70 2133.11 3S 3585.00 360.15 42 14974.17 1555.57 12 14058.88 1278.97 42 13710.00 1259.12 31 6320.18 540.31 12 11024.32 1036.83 31 18668.11 1823.02 93 559.36 279.68 31 2103.26 447.72 35 730.57 34.43 31 056 .12 295.67 15 12796.63 1146.01 15 23940.41 2177.28 33 20394.00 1854.88 93 708.10 254.25 31 17021.36 1506.00 15 1632.36 1008.24 12 26430.23 2311.84 31 17900.63 1656.64 93 933.24 303.00 42 14217.10 1405.21 92 13710.41 1113 .04 33 16106.29 1403.12 42 13439.21 1113 .04 93 247.00 247.00 92 17152.34 1403 .92 92 14039 .71 1113.03 93 807.97 364.43 31 5904.20 955.50 42 13799.73 1113.04 93 14050.91 1270.96 31 22748.01 2060.89 31 17636 .17 1581.35 31 17970.45 1729.61 31 17954.10 1671.96 33 14310 .91 1304.16 12 12446 .93 1109.17 33 12982.74 1186.49 63,942.55 aBBassBaBBHaaai /PC,i ffauD C//ecKS - CITY OF OROMO 05/20/94 FBI, MAY 20, 1994 9:16 AM ---req: CHBIS--- VOID, TYPED 1 REVERSED A/P loc: OR-FINCE- -job: 3893 fS033 CHECK REGISTER P»9« 1 •pf09: CK2C0 <1.07>- -report id: CKREG--- Check Payee ID. Payee Name •x=s==s*» »***x***x«** ■**-***""""' OR 027485 T500 MURICI-PALS/P WEIGEL TR OR 027486 584 OR 027488 T125 OR 027489 629 OR 027490 T528 CR 027491 842 OR 027492 269 OR 027493 T006 OR 027494 629 OR 027495 T108 OR 027496 T529 OR 027497 629 OR 027498 1046 OR 027499 1046 ORONO GOLF COURSE SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITIOS 04/11/94 POSTMASTER CONDON,BOB WAYZATA,CITY OF COVERMMT TRAINC SERV MN DEPT OF REVENUE POSTMASTER ORONO SCHOOL 01 ST 278 notary law INSTITUTE POSTMASTER COMMERCIAL LIFE INS CCRWERCIAL LIFE INS SUB TOTALS: Total Void Machine Written Total Void Hand Written Total Machine Written Total Hand Written Total Reversals Total Cancelled Checks SUB TOTAL Date Check Amount Type ssssaxsa s*arx*ss*=s== sss* 04/06/94 84.00 HW Subs Rel To SZSS XSSSSS TR Note a jtaaassssx S3I ” 2 s = » xaasxaaa*: Hand Written 04/07/94 300.00 HW TR Hand written 04/11/94 125.00 HW TR Hand W-itten 04/18/94 331.36 HW TR Hand written 04/18/94 200.00 HW TR Hand written 04/18/94 709.04 MW TR Ha.id written 04/19/94 160.00 MW TR Hand written 04/19/94 419.00 HW TR Hand Written 04/22/94 900.00 HW TR Hand Written 04/25/94 43.20 HW TR Hand Written 04/26/94 35.00 HW TR Hand written 04/26/94 841.00 HW TR Hand Written 04/27/94 18.88 HU TR Hand Written 04/27/94 64.40 HU TR Hand Written 0.00 Number of Checks Processed:0 0.00 Number of Checks Processed:0 0.00 Nimber of Checks Processed:0 4,230.88 HiiPberof Checks Processed:14 0.00 Number of Checks Processed:0 0.00 Nimber of Checks Processed:0 asssssssss** 4,230.88 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Thu May 26 1994 01:99:45CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT II 9999-2030 INVOICE000964 PO NUM,030678030679030680 030681 030682 030683 030684 030685 030686 030687 030688 030689 030690 030691 030692 030693 030694 1994/05/251994/05/251994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 1994/05/25 $4,836.00 $4.836.00*CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNI W/H J. TRANSFERRED$95.79 $95.79*COLONIAL LIFE INS INS W/H$64.40 $64.40* COMMERCIAI, LIFE INS INS W/H $9,101.94 $9,101.94* FIRST NATIONAI. BANK OF W/H FED/MEDCR/FI CA $2,803.13 $2,803.18* FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CITY SHARE FICA/MEDC 4^ 3 7,631.80 $37,631.80* FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF NET PAYROLL TRANSFER $1,274.00 $1,274.00* $983.08 $983.08* GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURA DEF COMP W/H GROUP HEAi;ni PLAN W/H INS 5/22 U G/5 $146.50 $146.50* HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR MARK THOMTON #C02667 $174.50 $174.50* HENNEI'IN COUNTY SUPPOR DALE SKREEN BC026231 $50.00 ICMA RET1R1;MENT trust- W/H DEE COMP $50.00* $325.00 $325.00* LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR W/H UNION DUES $562.02 $562.02* MED CENTER HEALTH PLAN W/H INS 5/22 6 6/5 $2,284.56 $2,284.56* MEDICA CHOICE INS W/H 5/22 Sl 6/5 $5.09 $5.09* MINNESOTA BENEFIT INS W/H $2,771.79 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVE STATE TAX WITHHELD 2,771.79* $100.00 $100.00* MN STATE RETIREMENT-DE W/H DEF COMP 9999-20309999-2030 9999 - 2030 9999-2032 9999 2030 9999-2030 # 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999 2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 000951000958 000965 000947 000968 000959 000953 000967 000963 000955 000966 000962 000957 000952 000948 000961 IPIP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP COUNCIL CHECK REOISTEK Thu May 26 199-1 01;S9;46CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR UEUCH1ETION ACCOUNT A $68,249.56 INVOICE PO NUM.030CD!i 1994/06/25 $1,J1J.46 $1,313.46«PEhi’.CO/US CONP OF MAYO W/H DEF ('OMP 9999-2030 000954 03u696 1994/05/26 $54 . 00 $54.00* PERA LIFE INS INS W/H 9999-2030 000949 030697 1994/05/26 $3,621.57 $3,521.57* PERA PERA W/H 9999-2030 000966 030698 1994/05/26 $18.00 $18.00* UNITED WAY CHARITY W/H 9999-2030 000950 030699 1994/05/25 $132.88 $132.88* PEDSCO/OBRA W/H l»EF COMP 9999-2030 000960 Pago 2 MANUALIP IP IP IP IP COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Wed Jun 8 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT 1994 01:05:09VENDOR DESCRIPTIONCITY COUNTY CREDIT UNI TRANSFER W/H ACCOUNT # 9999-2030 INVOICE000990 PO NUM.Page 1 MANUAL IP030804030805030806 030807 030808 030809 030810 030811 030812 030813 030814 030815 030816 030817 030818 030819 030820 1994/06/081994/06/081994/06/081994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 1994/06/08 $4,836.00$4,836.00*$95.79$95.79*COLONIAL LIFE INS INS W/H$64.40$64.40*COMMERCIAL LIFE INS INS W/H$9,821.13 $9,821.13* FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF FIT, FICA, MEDCR W/H $3,002.75 $3,002.75* FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CITY SHARE PICA/MEDC $41,356.71 $41,356.71* FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF NET PAYROLL TRANSFER 1,274.00 1,274.00* GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURA DEF COMP W/H $146.50 $146.50* HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR MARK THOMTON #C02667 $174.50 $174.50* HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPOR DALE SKREFN #0026231 $50.00 $50.00* ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST- DEF COMP W/H I 2,212.56 2,212.56* MEDICA CHOICE INS W/II $5.09 $5.09* MINNESOTA BENEFIT INS W/H $2,974.15 $2,974.15* MINNESOTA DEPT OP REVE STATE TAX W/H $100.00 $100.00* MN STATE RETIREMENT-DE DEF COMP W/H $1,313.46 $1,313.46* PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYO W/H DEF COMP $54.00 $54.00* PERA LIFE INS $3,521.57 $3,521.57* PERA INS W/H PERA W/H 9999-20309999-20309999-2030 9999-2032 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 9999-2030 000974000980000991 000970 000987 000962 000985 000989 000992 000979 000975 000988 000984 000976 000971 000978 IPIPIP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Wed Jun 8 1994 01:05:09CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT n 9999-2030 9999-2030 INVOICE000973000983 Page 2PO NUM. MANUAL0308210308221994/06/081994/06/08 $18.00 $18.00*$208.69$208.69* $71,229.30 UNITED WAY PEBSCO/OBRA CHARITY W/H DEF W/H IPIP COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY Wed Jun 8 1994 01:05:12FUND It 999 PAYROLL CLEARING $71,229.30$71,229.30 Pag* 1 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Thu Jun 9 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT030826030827030828030829 030830 030831 030832 030033 030634 030835 1994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 I 994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 030836 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $14.22$14.22*1994 00:32:07VENDOR A T 6 T$28.85$28.85*$110.00$80.00$160.00$350.00*$251.57 $251.57* $9.50 $9.50* $73.00 $73.00 $146.00* $.57 $.57* $31.42 $44.05 $31.42 $31.42 $31.42 $31.42 $201.15* $30.44 $36.00 $44.84 $111.28* $130.52 $130.52 $130.52 $G5.26 $456.82* DESCRIPTIONTELEPHONEAMDERSON, BARBARA AMDERSON, BARBARA AMDERSON, BARBARAAPACHE PAPER CO ASP ASPLUND COFFEE ASPLUND COFFEE AT iT ATSiT AT6T AT6T AT&T AT&T AT&T INFO INFO INFO INFO INFO INFO SYSTEM SYSTEM SYSTEM SYSTEM SYSTEM SYSTEM AUGIES MOBILE CHEF AUGIES MOBILE CHEF AUGIES MOBILE CHEF BIFFS INC BIFFS INC BIFFS INC BIFFS INC $161.57 $67.34 $145.00 $58.14 $145.00 $577.05* DLACKOWIAK BLACKOWIAK BLACKOWIAK BLACKOWIAK BLACKOWIAK & SON & SON & SON & SON & SON PLANNING COMMISSION PARK COMMISSION CITY COUNCILTOWELS & TOILET TISS ABC BASIC KIT COFFEE COFFEE LONG DISTANCE-POLICE MAY 20 - JUN 19 SERV DATA PROCESSING MAY 20 - JUN 19 MAY 20 - JUN 19 MAY 20 - JUN 19 MAY 20 - JUN 19 SERV SERV SERV SERV SANDWICHES FOR GOLF COFFEE KIT SANDWICHES FOR GOLF BEDERWOOD PARK-JUNE SUMMITT BEACH-JUNE HACKBERRY PARK-JUNE GOLF COURSE-JUNE TRASH SERVICE TRASH SERVICE LEAF PICKUP TRASH SERVICE BRUSH DELIVERY ACC'OUNT » 0590-4320A-1 MINNETONKA RENT SEWER TRASH PUMP REN 0569 43310174-43060290-43060039-43060129-4231 fX29-4232 0039-4210 0129-4210 0129-4320 0249 0129 0129 0059 0069 0174 4340 4340 4340 4340 4340 4340 0591-4802 0590- 4210 0591- 4802 0290-4331 0290-4331 0290-4331 0590-4331 0099 0590 0249 0290 0249 4343 4343 4343 4343 4343 INVOICE001631 PO NUM001642001609001609001609127263 20665 68910 60910 001615 5211393183 5211391572 5211393183 5211393183 5211393183 5211393183 25369 20111 26361 BI027047 BI027049 BI027048 BI027050 141315 141373 141067 141342 141069 Page 1*manualOMOHOHOHOHOH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OHj OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Thu Jun 9 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT 1994/06/130308370308380308390308401994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/13 $1,840.78$1,840.78*$63.90 $264.12 $328.02*$90.00 $90.00*$340.00 $340.00*1994 00:32:07VENDORBLACKOWIAK 6 SON DESCRIPTION PICK UP BRUSH account II0249-4343BROCK WHITE BROCK WHITE SECURING PINS FOR EM SUPPLIES FOR EMBANKMC MCDOWELL DELIVERY OF BEER COOCAMERON'S SOFTWARE TRA TRAINING FOR WP5.2 0249-45200249-45200590-43990039-4356 INVOICE141066 PO NUM.68406201684038010016101241 1994/06/13 $1,018.87 CARGILL SALT DIV COARSE ROCK SALT 0549-4234 613506 030841 $1,018.87» 281803 1994/06/13 $81.95 CARLSON EQUIPMENT CO TRI-POXY SPRAYER 0249-4233 030842 $81.95» 001613 1994/06/13 $32.76 CELLULARONE CELL PHONE SERVICE-G 0249-4320 030843 $32.76* 4540E 4516E 4552B 4567E 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $173.99 $326.67 $243.73 $167.08 CHUNKS GARAGE CHUNKS GARAGE CHUNKS GARAGE CHUNKS GARAGE TUNE UP 11710 TUNE UP #427 BRAKES FOR #168 SERVICE ON #166 0249-4341 0249-4341 0129-4341 0129-4341 030844 $911.47* 1445369 1507648 1338960 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994; 16/13 $253.75 $149.00 $199.75 COCA COLA VENDING COCA COLA VENDING COCA COLA VENDING POP FOR GOLF COURSE POP FOR GOLF COURSE POP FOR GOLF COURSE 0591-4802 0591-4802 0591-4802 030845 $602.50* . •*»/ 13 $1,134.10 COMMERCIAL ASPHAL COMP ASPHALT FOR STREET R 0249-4233 001624 030846 $1,134.10* 001608 199- / 06/13 $25.00 COMMISSIONER TRANS PERMIT RENEWAL-SIGN 0590-4383 030847 $25.00* 3207 1994/06/13 $148.78 CONNELLY INDUSTRIAL EL COILS FOR GRINDER ST 0569-4232 030848 $148.78* 1935661 1994/06/13 $189.87 COPY DUP PR INC LEASE FOR JUNE 0129-4210 030849 $189.87* 001614 0016141994/06/13 1994/06/13 $44.80 $84.19 CORNICK, JAMES CORNICK, JAMES REIMBURSEMENT FOR TR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TR 0129-4381 0129-4356 030850 $129.29* 90950 1994/06/13 $1,010.69 DE LUCA’S RESTAURANT S; BEER COOLER FOR GOLF 9674-1500 Page 2 MANUALOHOHOHOHOH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH A COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Thu Jun 9 1994 00:32:07 Page 3'CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT H INVOICE PO NUM.MANUAL030851$1,010.69*•1994/06/13 $75.00 DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS OS4‘?-4303 27-170-0004-94A OH0308521994/06/13 $75.00 $150.00*DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 0549-4383 27-170-0004 94A OK0308B31994/06/13 $62.35 $62.35*DPC INDUSTRIES INC.FLOURIDE 0549-4234 1040165 OH0308B41994/06/13 $5,265.00$5,265.00*E-Z RECYCLING MAY PICK UP 0295-4392 001617 OH 030855 1994/06/13 $171.00 $171.00* EAST SIDE BEVERAGE BEER FOR GOLF COURSE 0591-4815 25304 OH 1994/06/13 $66.83 G K SERVICES FLOOR MATS 0099-4343 214226 OH 1994/06/13 $15.10 G t K SERVICES RATHBUN, QUAST 0569-4221 217864 OH 1994/06/13 $73.07 G L K SERVICES SKREEN, HANSON, BRIN 0249-4221 217863 OH 1994/06/13 $2.56 G St K SERVICES STEFFENHAGEN 0590-4221 217862 OH 1994/06/13 $2.56 G K SERVICES STEFFENHAGEN 0590-4221 221422 OH 1994/06/13 $45.80 G K SERVICES O'BRIEN, PALMER, OBE 0249-4221 221423 OH 1994/06/13 $15.10 G L K SERVICES CLOTHING 0549-4221 214228 OH 1994/06/13 $45.80 G i K SERVICES CLOTHING 0249-4221 214227 OH 1994/06/13 $2.56 G fit K SERVICES PANTS 0590-4221 214225 OH 1994/06/13 $132.49 G fit K SERVICES FLOOR MATS 0099-4343 221421 OH 1994/06/13 $15.10 G fit K SERVICES CLOTHING 0569-4221 210587 OH 1994/06/13 $64.92 G fit K SERVICES CLOTHING 0249-4221 210586 OH 1994/06/13 $2.56 G fit K SERVICES CLOTHING 0590-4221 210505 OH 1994/06/13 $15.10 G fit K SERVICES RATHBUN, QUAST 0549 4221 221424 OH 1994/06/13 $2.56 G fit K SERVICES STEFFENHAGEN 0590 4221 225065 OH 1994/06/13 $15.10 G fit K SERVICES RATHBUN, QUAST 0569-4221 225067 OH 1994/06/13 $61.73 G fit K SERVICES STREET DEPT. CLEANIN 0249-4221 225066 OH 1994/06/13 $38.02 G fit K SERVICES FLOOR MATS.0099-4343 220699 OH 1994/06/13 $2.56 G fit K SERVICES STEFFENHAGEN 0590-4221 220700 OH 1994/06/13 $66.83 G fit K SERVICES FLOOR MATS 0099 4221 228701 OH 1994/06/13 $38.02 G fit K SERVICES FLOOR MATS.0099-4343 228698 OH 1994/06/13 $15.10 G fit K SERVICES RATHBUN, QUAST 0549-4221 228703 OH 030857 1994/06/13 $45.80 $785.27* G fit K SERVICES STREET DEPT EMPLOYEE 0249 4221 228702 OH 030858 1994/06/13 $50.40 $50.40* GAFFRON, MIKE MIl.EAGE GAFFRON 0174-4301 001616 OH 1994/06/13 $19.89 GENUINE PARTS CO STREET SIGNS 0249-4233 001606 OH 1994/06/13 $131.27 GENUINE PARTS CO EXHAUST PIPES 0569-4232 001606 OH 030859 1994/06/13 $254.70 $405.86* GENUINE PARTS CO MISC. AUTO SUPPLIES 0249-4232 001606 OH 030860 1994/06/13 $2,010.00 $2,010.00* GOLF CAR MIDWEST LEASE-APRIL, MAY 0590-4331 001636 OH COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Thu Jun 9 1994 00:32:07CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT 8 INVOICE0308611994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/13 $291.00 $582.00 $158.13 $1,480.26 $2,511.39*GROCI' HEALTH INC GROUP HEALTH INC GROUP HEALTH INC GROUP HEALTH INC GH INSURANCE-JULY GH INSURANCE-JULY GH INSURANCE-JULY GH INSURANCE-JULY 0590-41510249-41510174-41510129-4151 23375752337575233757523375750308621994/06/13 $13.13$13.13*HALLIN/DOROTHY MILEAGE REIMBURSEMEN 0039-4381 001605 030863 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $3.95 $7.40 $11.35* HAPPYS POTATO CHIP HAPPYS POTATO CHIP FOOD ITEMS FOR GOLF CHIPS FOR GOLF COURS 0591-4802 0591-4802 267480 267183 030S61 1994/06/13 $436.00 $486.00* HENN CTY PIN DIV ROOM &I BOARD-APRIL 00804358 2480 030865 1994/06/13 $266.47 $266.47* HENN CTY SHERIFF DPT BOOKING FEES 0080-4358 001611 030866 1994/06/13 $485.94 $485.94* HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED GRASS SEED-CRYSTAL B 0651-4399 60262 030867 1994/06/13 $20.93 $20.93* HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASU POSTAGE PAID 3/7-5 0040-4321 001634 030868 1994/06/13 $27.15 $27.15* HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASU STATE DEED TAX FILIN 0039-4383 001623 030669 1994/06/13 $56.37 $56.37* HURR, JOELLEN PARKS PHOTOS/HOLDERS 0299-4900 001637 030870 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $55.33 $55.32 $110.65* INTERSTATE BATTERIES INTERSTATE BATTERIES BATTERIES FOR TRUCK BATTERIES FOR TRUCK 0249-4232 0290-4232 103218 103218 030871 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $55.00 $85.00 $140.00* INTL INST-MUNI CLKS INTL INST-MUNI CLKS ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP-VE ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP-HA 0039-4380 0039-4380 001629 001628 030872 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $15.68 $28.22 $43.90* KUEHN, THOMAS KUEHN, THOMAS MILEAGE 5/lS 5/31 MILEAGE 5/15 - 5/31 0569-4381 0069-4381 001639 001639 030873 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $10,775.00 $7,609.00 $18,384.00* LAKEMTKA CONS DIST LAKEMTKA CONS DIST 2ND HALF 1993 1ST HALF 1994 9001-2040 9001-4380 001640 001640 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $7.90 $11.22 LAND CARE EOUIPMENT CO LAND CARE EQUIPMENT CO OIL & BRAKE ACCESSOR OIL & BRAKE ACCESSOR 0590-4220 0590-4232 12966 12966 PO NUM.Page 4 MANUALOHOHOHOHOH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH A- COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Thu Jun 9 1994 00:32:07CHECK NO CHECK DATE 1994/06/13 CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTIONLAND CARE EQUIPMENT CO PARTS FOR MOWER ACCOUNT tt 0590-4232 INVOICE12782 PO NUM.Page 5 MANUAL030074030075 030876 030877 030078 030879 030880 030881 030882 1994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 S195.27 $214.39*$11.99 LANO EQUIP CO SIG. GAUGE$11.99* $820.00 LOGIS SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE$18.22 LOGIS - SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE,056.00 LOGIS * SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE,264.00 LOGIS ^ SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE $64.00 LOGIS - SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE $457.40 LOGIS - SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE $34.16 LOGIS - SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE $462.00 LOGIS ^ SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE $600.00 LOGIS SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE $198.00 LOGIS - SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE $42.50 LOGIS - SUITE 300 APIRL service $120.00 LOGIS - SUITE 300 APRIL SERVICE $5,144.20‘ $101.10 $101.18‘ $29.60 $29.60* LONG LK FORD TRACTOR TILLER RENTAL MARTINS NAVARRE 66 MISC. SERVICES $2,016 $1,164 $291 $1,143 $199 $465 $1,459 $470 53 04 01 50 58 75 58 17 MEDICA MEDICA MEDICA MEDICA MEDICA MEDICA MEDICA MEDICA CHOICE CHOICE CHOICE CHOICE CHOICE CHOICE CHOICE CHOICE HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH INS INS INS INS INS INS INS INS JUNE JUNE JUNE JUNE JUNE JUNE JUNE JUNE $7,218.16* 0249-42320174054901290069 0174 0069 0039 0569 0129 0549 0569 0039 4352435543554352 4355 4355 4355 4352 4352 4352 4355 4352 0290-4331 0129-4341 0129 0249 0069 0039 0549 0569 9001 0174 4151 4151 4151 4151 4151 4151 1298 4151 48322AR0494AR0494AR0494AR0494 AR0494 AR0494 AR0494 AR0494 AR0494 AR0494 AR0494 AR0494 2029 001645 194152102552 194152102552 194152102552 194152102552 194152102552 194152102552 194152102552 194152102552 $20,717.00 METRO WASTE SERVICE FOR JULY 9673-1282 51480794 $20,717.00 METRO WASTE MWCC JUNE 9673-1282 51480694 $41,434.00* $34.28 MIDWEST bSNS PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES 0174-4210 806212 $34.24 MIDWEST BSNS PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES 0039-4210 806212 $34.28 MIDWEST BSNS PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES 0249-4210 806212 $34.28 MIDWEST BSNS PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES 0069-4210 806212 $34.20 MIDWEST BSNS PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES 0129-4210 806212 $171.36* $13.92 MINNEGASCO FIEAT WATER PLANT-NAV 0549-4324 001607 $373.43 MINNEGASCO HEAT PW/CITY HALL 0099-4324 001607 $307.35* OHOHOHOHOHOH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH JH OH COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Thu Jun 9 1994 00:32:07 Page 6CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT n INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL1994/06/13 $24.9a MINNESOTA BENEFIT JUNE LIFE INSURNACE 0129-4152 001622 OH030883$24.98*1994/06/13 $3.03 MN CORRECTIONAL FACILI UPS CHARGES FOR PLAT 0129-4322 1858 OH030884$3.03*1994/06/13 $9.49 MN DEPT OF REVENUE MAY SALES TAX 9001-3527 001635 OH1994/06/13 $1,956.00 MN DEPT OF REVENUE MAY SALES TAX 9674-2222 001635 OH1994/06/13 $3.51 MN DEPT OF REVENUE MAY SALES TAX 9001-3500 001635 OH030885$1,969.00* 1994/06/13 $54.06 MOORSE RON REIMBURSEMENT FOR EX 0039-4382 001638 OH1994/06/13 $6.00 MOORSE RON REIMBURSEMENT FOR EX 0039-4301 001638 OH030886$60.05* 1994/06/13 $:i.50 MPLS OXYOL’N CO ACETYLENE L OXYGEN P 0249-4232 RI05940826 OH1994/06/13 $13.50 MPLS OXYGEN CO MEDICAL OXYGEN 0129-4232 RI05940827 OH030887$45.00* 1994/06/13 $23.43 MTI DIST CO ROPE 0590-4231 415354 OH1994/06/13 $259.30 MTI DIST CO SPRINKLER k HOSE 0590-4343 418279 OH030888$282.73* 1994/06/13 $20.76 NAVARRE TRUE VALUE MISC. SUPPLIES 0290-4231 001641 OH1994/06/13 $26.61 NAVARRE TRUE VALUE MISC. SUPPLIES 0249-4232 001641 OH1994/06/13 $169.44 NAVARRE TR’:F VALUE MISC. SUPPLIES 0590-4232 001641 OH1994/06/13 $112.34 NAVARRE TRUE VALUE MISC. SUPPLIES 0569-4234 001641 OH1994/06/13 $3.37 NAVARRE TRUE VALUE MISC. SUPPLIES 0549-4231 001641 OH 1994/06/13 $2.33 NAVARRE TRUE VALUE MISC. SUPPLIES 0549-4232 001641 OH1994/06/13 $14.61 NAVARRE TRUE VALUE MISC. SUPPLIES 0590-4210 001641 OH1994/06/13 $6.99 NAVARRE TRUE VALUE MISC. SUPPLIES 0129-4242 001641 OH030889$375.65* 1994/06/13 $225.78 NORTHLAND ELEC AB COIL 0569-4232 346262 OH030890$225.78* 1994/06/13 $362.66 NSP NSP COSTS 0549-4324 001644 OH1994/06/13 $1,107.04 NSP NSP COSTS 0099-4324 001644 OH1994/06/13 $2,335.66 NSP NSP COSTS 0569-4324 001644 OH1994/06/13 $9.67 NSP NSP COSTS 0175-4324 001644 OH1994/06/13 $87.93 NSP NSP COSTS 0590-4324 001644 OH1994/06/13 $158.33 NSP NSP COSTS 0249-4324 001644 OH1994/06/13 $24.04 NSP NSP COSTS 0290-4324 001644 OH030891$4,084.33* 1994/06/13 $971.31 NSP STREET LIGHT BILL 0249-4325 001619 OH030892$971.31* 1994/06/13 $30.60 OMAN/LYLE MILEAGE REIMBURSEMEN 0174-4381 001633 OH / COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Thu Jun 9 1994 00:32:07 Page 7CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT •INVOICE PO NUM.MANUAL030893$30.80»t1994/06/13 $24.00 PERA INS LIFE INSURANCE-JULY 0129-4152 001621 OH03O894$24.00*1994/06/13 $13.86 PIONEER AD FOR MUNICIPAL ZON 0174-4323 297 OH030895$13.86*1994/06/13 $153.89 PRECISION TURF WEED KILLER 0590 4231 4537 OH030896$153.89* 1994/06/13 $29.53 PRO TIRE & EXHAUST OIL CHANGE #168 0129-43;i 2407 OH 1994/06/13 $26.45 PRO TIRE 6 EXHAUST OIL CHANGE #169 0129-4341 2322 OH 1994/06/13 $121.77 PRO TIRE b. EXHAUST SERVICE FOR #162 0129 4341 2319 OH 1994/06/13 $75.08 PRO TIRE 6. EXHAUST OIL CHANGE #166 0129-4341 2007 OH030897$252.83* 1994/06/13 $4,625.32 PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN PERA 05/09/94 - 05/2 9999-2031 001620 OH 1994/06/13 $4,861.38 PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN PERA 5/23 - 6/5 9999-2031 001632 OH030898$9,486.70* 1994/06/13 $29.63 PUMP METER SERVICES VEHICLE CARD 4i COUPO 0249-4220 84511 OH 1994/06/13 $29.63 PUMP L METER SERVICES VEHICLE CARD & COUPO 0129-4220 84511 OH 1994/06/13 $264.67 PUMP & METER SERVICES SERVICE ON GASOLINE 0099-4342 84917 OH 030899 $323.93* 1994/06/13 $112.00 QUALITY PLOW SYSTEMS I REPAIR LIFT STATION 0569-4344 1600 OH030900$112.00* 1994/06/13 $21.30 R C INDENTI FICATIONS ID CARDS 0129-4210 17615 OH030901$21.30* 1994/06/13 $40.80 REED VENDING FOOD ITEMS FOR GOLF 0591-4802 11490 OH1994/06/13 $103.00 REED VENDING CANDY FOR GOLF COURS 0591-4802 11497 OH1994/06/13 $50.20 REED VENDING CANDY & ROLLS 0591-4802 14003 OH030902$207 00* 1994/06/13 $8 00 REGAL CLEANERS CLEANING SERVICE-BLA 0129-4232 5629 OH030903$8.00* 1994/06/13 $7.91 RITZ CAMERA FILM PROCESSING 0129-4210 3760004 OH 1994/06/13 $4.62 RITZ CAMERA FILM PROCESSING 0129-4210 3760019 OH1994/06/13 $3.74 RITZ CAMERA FILM PROCESSING 0129-4210 3769825 OH 1994/06/13 $76.98 RITZ CAMERA ULM PROCESSING 0129-4210 3760986 OH030904$93.25* 1994/06/13 $1,412.80 ROLLINS OIL CO UNLEADED GASOLINE 9001-1260 928487 OH1994/06/13 $717.93 ROLLINS OIL CO PURCHASE GAS 9001-1260 76955 OH 1994/06/13 $418.60 ROLLINS OIL CO GASOLINE FOR GOLF CO 9001-1260 28457 OH030905$2,549.33* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Thu Jun 9 1994 00:32:07CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR Rage 8030906030907030908 030909 030910 030911 030912 030913 1994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $1,682.24$1,682.24*$887.00 $138.00 $1,025.00*$1,075.05$1,075.05*$169.85 $317.40 $71.30 $558.55* $584.00 $584 .00* $53.50 $53.50* $57.64 $57.64* $20.00 $20 .00* RYAN FORDS«VFE BENEFITS SAFE BENEFITSSERV A CLEAN STA-SAFE LOCKSMITHS STREICHERS SWENSON ELECTRONICS 030914 1994/06/13 $41.44 $41.44* TOMCHECK, LARRY 030915 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $433.72 $530.11 $963.83* TOWN 6 COUNTRY TOWN 6 COUNTRY 030916 1994/06/13 $1,115.06 $1,115.06* TRI-K SPORTS 030917 1994/06/13 $385.97 $385.97* U S WEST CELLULAR 030918 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $10.49 $80.91 $76.87 $54.90 $31.95 $97.83 $352.95* UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 1994/06/13 $255.67 US WEST COMMUN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT M INVOICE PO HUM. MANUALTRANSMISSION REPAIR 0129-4341 59771 OHJUlJE FEE JUNE FEE 9999-20300299-4306 1097010970 OHOHCARPET CLEANING 0099-4343 001630 OHADVERTISINGADVERTISINGADVERTISING0361-43230355-43230249-4323 CPC 031121 CPC 031121 CPC 031121 OHOHOH TUITION FOR TRAINING 0129-4356 001627 OH LOCK ADJUSTMENT AT P 0099-4343 3158 OH BATTERIES 0129-4210 86789.1 OH TAPE CLEANING-COUNCI 0020-4342 13262 OH MILEAGE REIMBURSEMEN 0129-4381 001612 OH OFFICE CLEANING-JUNE OFFICE CLEANING-JUNE 0129-4349 0099-4349 001625 001625 OH OK BLACK DIRT FOR GROUN 0590-4231 119 OH CELLULAR PHONE-CHESW 0129-4320 001626 OH COLLAR LETTERS TROUSERS FOR SCHOENH ASP 6 HOLDER-CORNICK SHIRT FOR CORNICK MAGAZINE HOLDER-CARL CLOTHING FOR THOMTON 0129-4221 0129-4221 0129-4221 0129-4221 0129-4221 0129-4221 447535 447558 449164 447332 446702 446884 OH OH OH OH OH OH US WEST COSTS 0590-4320 001643 OH \ > COUNCIL CHtCK REGISTER Thu Jun 9 1994 00:32:07CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT n INVOICE PO NUM.Page 9 •MANUAL - -_ _ _ _OHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOH030919 030920 030921 030922 1994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/131994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 1994/06/13 $41.85 $03.70 $247.58 $83.70 $83.71 $54.92 $03.71 $67.01 $29.30 $1,031.15* $46.80 $99.05 $145.85* $30.80 $30.00* $9.00 $9.00* $126,651.34 USUSUS WEST WEST WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST COMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUN WARNING LITES OF MN WARNING LITES OP MN WECKMAN STEPHEN US WEST COSTS US WEST COSTS US WEST COSTS US WEST COSTS US WEST COSTS US WEST COSTS US WEST COSTS US WEST COSTS US WEST COSTS WARNING LIGHTS RENTA WARNING LIGHTS RENTA MILEAGE REIMBUKSEMEN WRIGHT HENN ELECTRIC USAGE THRU 05/15/94 0069-4320 0059-4320 0129-4320 0039-4320 0174 -4320 0175-4320 0249 4320 0549-4320 0569-4320 0249-4331 0249-4331 0174-4381 0249-4324 001643001643001643001643001643001643001643001643001643 57597 57596 001604 001618 OH OH OH OH COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY Thu Jun 9 1994 00:32 : 16FUND001GENERAL FUND $58,612.71FUND115BLDG CAP 0/L FD $485.94FUND423MUN ST AID CO/FD $487.25 FUND 672 WTR OPERATING FD $2,141.61 FUND i 673 SWR OPERATING FD $45,589.21 FUND i 674 G/C OPERATING FD $8,960.92 FUND i 999 PAYROLL CLEARING $10,373.70 $126,651.34 Page 1 % 4 TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator June 7, 1994 SUBJECT: Performance Fvaluation Forms I have attached the new perfoimance appraisal form for the Clerical/Technical employee group and the new performance appraisal fomi for the Supervisory/Administrative employee group as requested by Council. rDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYe<>^PMMCNT 9TATK>*. C0««* MUt riAELS F§Rf»V ROAO vi«:K.%A«iPn anoo-e^tW TO AT *|N^I0N Of ^vlA - 6 June l$94 FYI Chief Steve Sulltven Qfono Police Depertucnt 2730 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Dear Chief Sullivan n ‘c"rS" '*’' and Carcofia Bay. W. WIU be «.rKlng flatW.t.r Patrol in Spring Park) an^ -oUectlns^dalaJ «rsf;f.«.r;r “'„^st“i5«’ “..tnant >. -in cou.ot d.t. Severil day* per week In all of out ploca through 5 Auguat. (601) 634-2495. Thank you for your assistance. t "b Kurt D. Getalnger, PhD R«Acarch Biologiec Mrr.MA.I. »\.:n ^•9.* HN*;aAU I aB-^nA-on' StMlJUTuPES bAnCRAtOHT k NV IMUPiMe N r*t. I AHilPA^OnP ^OAnTAt ENOINCLM'NO RCSEAnCH EtNlkR IMUJUUAT.ON ti.rMH‘'»LOc:'' CAH'aiMA^on^ m'r:U k^rBr^ \^.Vf J *\ *\ •y>;f .p,\' ■ ■ '\ ■ ■■!--Ijf '' (•■ / / / ,^o Casco Point X - '••• « •• ,vLocl<V. - j'j •• A \ \ "b 55'\ f I / ; / i I • \ \ • fj / i,-'Cr^scei^t/^ fpr BKacjh// . ' •/i./>; .C) \ / \l i 1 1 1 V- N ! \// X ' (/ .•1 ' . • / . '• ti / / • ' \ • a • \ /M / 2300 LOIVC^IIEW CIRCLE L03TG LAKE. MEK^TESOTA 53330 /UoA^ t±,c 4-fi-^^’,A'Oi^<-e.-a.-.cjL- ui 6£uz '-U^'<rr<^-^c^ 4tX:aJL ^ ^y(M-C '■^{/6iC- ^L/^' 0.£,^c(.^cci^ /^esi^ RECEIVED JUN Z 1994 CITYOFORONO James K. Bovvers 290S Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 (612) 471-9749 June 3,1994 John Gerhardson and City Clerk (for distribution to City Council Members) City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Gerhardson and City Council Members: m 7 The existing road on Casco Point was laid down in 1971 . A thin. 1 1/2 inch of bituminous was rolled out over the remains of an old tarred road tom up during the installation of the sewer and water project. The road was described as temporary even as it was being installed. Twenty three years later, it is far beyond its intended design life. I would appreciate it if the Planning Committee and the entire City Council would look at redesigning the existing roadway to include: A. Curb and gutter with storm drains. B. Buried utilities - electric, cable, phone. C. 6-10" base course. D. Modem lighting. E. Bike/walk path, where possible. Casco Point roads are not only worn out but unsafe as well. I'm sure nearly every family on Casco Point has a story to tell about how they, or their children, or their pets, were nearly run down by a car. I’m aware that a project of this size will result in an assessment of the properties involved, but I’m also aware that it will add value and quality to our lives on Casco Point. I would be glad to attend Planning or City Council meetings when this subject is discussed. I’m sure others on Casco Point would also attend. I would appreciate a call or a letter letting me know when this subject will be put on the agenda. ^ncerely,___ J Bowers •LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT MEMORANDUM RECEiVct TO:LMCD CITIES JUN 6 1994 FROM:BILL JOHNSTONE, CHAIR LMCD CnYOFQRONO DATE:JUNE 2, 1994 RE:PROPOSED 1995 I'.UDGET !fs; “»s. “ .. hold a hearing, consider the objection and determine whether changes should be made in the budget as a result thereof. In recent years the LMCD Board has solicited input concerning the budaet prior to its adoption pursuant to tne enabling act. This is not intended to and does not prevent ciSe^from 4xercising their right to object to the actual budget and request a hearing thereon pursuant -^isedoes afford the cities more time to consider the budget and raise and discuss questions with respect thereto with their reoresentatives and the LMCD staff. Consistent with this practice, enclosed is a preliminary dtaft of the bu^et the LMCD for the year commencing January 1, 1995. The LMCD Bo received the draft budget from the staff at its May ..5th meeting, and authorized it to be distributed to the cities consideration at the Board meeting of June 22th. Please take the time to review it and direct your questions and comments with respect thereto to your representative, myself or Gene Strommen, the LMCD Executive Director. We would appreciate hearing your comments by June 21, 1994. Several comments are relevant: - The enclosed budget is a draft. It has not been considered or acted upon by the Board. It will not be acted up until June 22th, at which time changes and adjustments may be made. - For purposes of presentation the budget is divided into two principal categories: Administrative and Milfoil. Administrative covers projected revenues and e.xpenditures wit resect to the normal operations of the LMCD, exclusive of the milfoil control program. Milfoil covers the projected revenues and expenditures with respect to the milfoil control program. - Consistent with the policy adopted by the Board in February of this year, money in both the Administrative operating Reserve (the "Administrative Reserve") and the Milfoil ?Snd Ope?at!ng Reserve (the "Milfoil Reserve") is being budgeted for current e-xpenses from each Fund in amounts which are LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Page 2 estimated to reduce the Administrative Reserve to approximately six months of operating expenses ($125,000) and the Milfoil Reserve to approximately 12 months of operating expenses ($125,000). In addition to the Milfoil Reserve, the LMCD has to the depreciation reserve in 1995. This will increase the depreciation reserve balance to approximately $210,uuu. - The LMCD also administers the Save the La)ce Fund which contains donations by private parties and interest income thereon. The Save the La)ce Fund is used to fund special pro3ects of benefit to the lalce which the Board does not , bSdgeranticipaterappLximately^$32 f SOO^if ^ Save the Lalce Fund in 1995. This amount will oe reviewed later in the year based on the success of the fund raising efforts and the needs for special project funding. - Overall, the enclosed 1995 Budget is essentially flat from the 1994 Budget. - With respect to estimated revenues in 1995 the following comments are relevant: (a) The requested funds from the cities total $143,323 consisting of $80,323 for administrative purposes and $63,000 for milfoil purposes. Under state law, the maximum amount that the cites can provide (without a 3/4 vote of all of the cities) is $144,135 based on 1993 assessed valuation. In 1994, the amount of city funds requested, after adjustments for reserve reductions, was $88,117. (b) License revenue from multiple doc)c and other licenses is estimated to be $86,000 in 1995 compared to $112,000 in 1994. The reduction is due to (i) a decrease in multiple doc)c license fees _ protests from the licensees and an analysis by the LMCD of the costs associated with regulating the multiple doc)c licenses and (ii) the elimination of duplicating licensing of special events. (c) Revenue from fines and interest income is reduced to reflect actual 1993 experience and reduced fund balances. (d) The proposed 1995 budget anticipates receipt of approximately $40,000 of funds from the DNR and Hennepin County for purpose of the milfoil program. This is consistent with our 1994 e.xperience. However, we have no assurance that we will in fact receive the money. If we do not, it may be necessary to curtail the milfoil program. LAKE MIIIHETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Page 3 - On the expense side, the following cciraTients are relevant: (a) The salary expense has increased about 6% due to a personnel change in 1994 and salary increases. The salary increases account for approximately 4% of the total increase. (b) Office lease expense has increased from due to a new lease. It is essentially the same as the budget. (c) Legal expenses are estimated to increase by about 10% from 1994's budget, but are about 1993 actual. We are continuing to Iooa. at this item. (d) Our contractual services expenses are estimated to be down 40%, due in large part to the completion of several projects. (e) The 1995 budgeted e.xpenditures for the milfoil program are in line with the 1994 budget, , actual e.xpenditures will be affected by lake levels an the intensity of our harvesting. One final overall note. The proposed 1995 budget indicates that the LMCD will have to further reduce expenditures in future yetrs or find supplemental funding sources The proposed^^^ budoet relies on the use of approximately $60,000 program expenditures. This i®," because of the size of our reserves. It will not be in years. Thanks for your assistance. W( comments. look forward to your lotus.budgetSS Mmy 26. 1994 DRAFT LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1995 Proposed Budget REVENUE 1 LMCD Communities Admn Levy 2 Reserve Fund Allocation 3 Court Fines T Licenses 5 Interest, Public Funds 6 Shoreland Rules, DNR City Grants 7 Shoreland Rules, DNR Consultants 8 Other Income SubTotal. Administration (a) Income Prepaid at 80% in 1992 9 EW Milfoil Program a City Levy b Other Public Agencies c Private Solicitation d Reserve Fund Allocation e Interest SubTotal, EW Milfoil 10 TOTAL REVENUE DISBURSEMENTS ADMINISTRATION Personnel Services: 1 Salaries 2 Mgmt Plan Impl/PT Tech. 3 Employer Benefit Contributions 4 Total Personnel Services Contractual Services: 5 Office Lease & Storage 6 Professional Services 7 Total Contractual Services Office & Administrative: 8 Office, General Supplies 3 Telephone 10 Postage 11 Printing, Publ. 12 Maintenance, Office Equipment 13 Subscriptions, Memberships 14 Insurance, Bonds 15 Mileage, Expenses, Training 16 Total Office & Administration 1993 1993 1994 1995 Budget Actual Budget Budget $60,000 $54,215 $25,117 $80,322 43,432 0 65,383 39,625 45,000 37.733 45,000 41,000 117,300 119,577 112,000 86,000 7,000 13,105 6,000 6,000 0 22,665 4,000 (a)0 0 0 2,000 (a)0 0 508 0 0 $272,732 $247,803 $259,500 $252,947 $63,000 $56,925 $63,000 $63,000 57.280 43,069 49,500 40,000 7,930 7,702 0 0 0 0 5,000 18,500 5,700 15,326 6,000 8,000 $133,910 $123,022 $123,500 $129,500 $406,642 $370,825 $383,000 $382,447 $105,700 $103,372 $106,150 $113,000 15,000 0 0 0 18,000 18,005 19,600 19,700 $138,700 $121,377 $125,750 $132,700 $10,482 $10,897 $11,600 $11,647 5,550 5.439 5,400 5,700 $16,032 $16,336 $17,000 $17,347 $3,500 $4,557 $4,300 $4,500 2,300 1,939 2,000 2,000 4,000 3,913 4.000 4,500 3,000 1,345 3,000 2,000 2,000 1,656 2,000 2,000 200 175 250 200 5,800 3,932 5,000 4,200 2,500 1,689 3,000 2,500 $23,300 $19,206 $23,550 $21,900 Page 2 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1995 Proposed Budget Capital Outlay: 17 Furniture, Equipment 18 Total Capital Outlay Legal 19 Legal Services 20 Prosecution Services 21 Henn. Cty Room & Board 22 Process Service 23 Total Legal Contract Services/Studies 24 Shoreland Rules. DNR Consultant 25 Shoreland Rules, DNR City Grants 26 Lake Use Density Study 27 Public Information, Legal Notices 28 Public Access Studies 29 Mgmt Plan Environment Implementation 30 School District Boater Ed. Program 31 Total Contract Services/Studies 32 TOTAL ADMINISTRATION Eurasian Water Milfoil (EWM) Weed Harvesting Program 33 Trucking Contract 34 Salaries & Employer Taxes/Insurance 35 Administrative 36 Operation Supplies 37 Contract Services 38 Contingency 39 TOTAL EWM OPERATIONS 40 TOTAL ADMN, EWM EXPENSE Save The Lake Program Income: a Private Donations b Interest Sub Total, Save the Lake Save the Lake Program Expense: INFORMATIONAL: EWM Equipment Reserve Allocation 1993 1993 1994 1995 Budget Actual Budget Budget $5,000 $1,084 $3,000 $2,000 $5,000 $1,084 $3,000 $2,000 $25,000 $25,780 $20,000 $22,000 27.000 31,670 30,000 30,000 3,170 0 200 0 200 0 $52,200 $60,620 $50,200 $55,000 $0 $1,250 $2,000 $0 0 4,665 4,000 0 0 0 7,000 0 3,000 592 2,000 1,000 2,000 0 0 0 27,500 14,361 15,000 13,000 5,000 0 10,000 10,000 $37,500 $20,868 $40,000 $24,000 $272,732 $239,491 $259,500 $252,947 $35,280 $20,324 $28,160 $32,000 51,060 34.939 43.360 46,000 6,440 4,049 5,900 6,100 25,500 23,198 29,000 30,500 9,250 7,303 8,500 8,900 6,380 0 8,580 6.000 $133,910 $89,813 $123,500 $129,500 $406,642 $329,304 $383,000 $382,447 $10,000 $15,076 $22,500 $28,000 4,000 3,832 4.C00 4,500 $14,000 $18,908 $26,500 $32,500 $14,000 $14,792 $26 500 $32,500 $0 $0 $35,000 $35.r 0 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1995 BUDGET DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENSE DRAFT Mai’lcet Value Deephaven Excelsior Greenwood Minnetonka Mtka. Beach Minnetrista Mound Orono Shorewood Spring Park Tonka Bay Victoria Wayzata Woodland TOTAL 303.839,500 97.155,800 59,671.300 2,946.311,200 69.127,100 271.390.000 343.925.000 658.911.700 425.119.000 57.378,500 128.390,200 150,848,900 356,093,300 87,833,200 5.955,994,700 % of Total Market Value Share of EWM Pg. $63,000 Share of Admin. $80,322 Shaie of Total Budget $143,322 8.08 5,088 6,492 11,580 2.58 1,627 2,071 3,698 1.59 999 1,280 2,279 20.00 12,600 16,064 28,664 1.84 1,158 1,479 2,637 7.21 4,545 5,789 10,334 9.14 5,759 7,341 13,100 17.51 11,034 14,062 25,096 11.30 7,119 9,076 16,195 1.53 961 1,232 2,193 3.41 2,150 2,737 4,887 4.01 2,526 3,221 5.747 9.47 5,963 7,610 13.573 2.33 1,471 1,868 3,339 100.00 63,000 80,322 143.322 Less Minnetonka 2,946,j1Jq2QP 3,009,683,500 5,955,994.700 X .0000242 144.135.07 Total of market value less Minnetonka because Minnetonka is a constant 20%. rai^iilatino per centagei City market value divided u, 3,009,683.500 times .80 equals per cent Use only 80% because Mi.nntuonka is always 20%. i.e. amount of city market value divided by 3,009,683,500 X .80 = % of total May 26. 1994 Lotus:95MKTVAL LAK MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force Agenda 8:30 am, Friday, June 10, 1994 Norwest Bank Bldg Conference Rm 135, Wayzata 1. Introductions, Chair Tom Penn 2. Review, accept/amend minutes of 4/15/94 as mailed May 5 with May meeting cancellation notice; 3. MN DNR Report, Chip Welling: a. Garlon 3A (triclopyr) Corps of Engineers test plan update (see enclosures) * Informational meeting scheduled with lakeshore owners in bays to be used for test applications at 8:00 pm, Tues., June 14, 1994, Deephaven City Hal 1 . b. Highlights of biocontrol presentation by Cofrancesco, U S Army Corps of Engineers; c. Additional mi 1foi1/exotic control priorities; 4. Zebra Mussel and Exotics Action Plan subcommittee report; (see enclosed minutes -- next meeting set for 6/15/94) 5. Steve McComas, Blue Water Science, presentation on "Lake Smarts" publication dealing with aquatic plant control; 6. LMCD 1994 harvest operations preparations update. Gene Strommen and project manager Todd Grams: a. DNR harvest permit provisions for 1,008 acres b. Herbicide (2.4-D) treatment of 8 public accesses; c. Assessment of milfoil growth and harvest priorities; d. Progress on weekly launch ramp fragment clean-up; e. Equipment and personnel selection status; f. Hennepin Parks equipment/operation participation; g. Questions, recommendations by the Task Force; 7. Lake association reports; 8. Hennepin Parks update; 9. Additional business; 10. Next meeting July 15;* 11. Adjourn LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 2ebra Mussel and Exotics Action Plan Subcomrnittee Agenda 8:30 am, Wednesday, June 15, 1994 LMCD Conference Rm 160, Norwest Bank Bldg, Wayzata 1. Review, accept/amend minutes of 5/5/94 meeting; 2. Zebra Mussel draft control plan as being developed for the MN DNR by Gary Montz; 3. Report on zebra mussel populations and any new sighting, Montz and/or McLean; 4. Further addressing the objective to reduce the spread of zebra mussel by humans (subcommittee discussion): Strategy A. Increase public awareness about zebra mussels Strategy B. Restrict transportation of zebra mussels 6. Explore marina possibilities to assist in dealing with prevention of zebra mussel spread, per marina representative in attendance; 7. Explore Fishing group possibilities to assist in dealing with prevention of zebra mussel spread, per fishing group representative in attendance; 8. Additional business; Next meeting and adjourn at •\ I I 'I Plyrr.outh/Suburban Northvwst Office4100 Berkshirt Lane Plymouth. MN 55446 612 55Q-4<WO Fan 612/55^5-1256 June 7, 1994 becbved JUN 9 1994 cnv OF OBONO Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O.Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Ms. Mabusth: Recently, my client and I had a number of questions about a private septic system located in Orono. The information was essential to her purchase of the home. A employee under your supervision. Steve Weckman, was extremely helpful ^n^ courteLs in his dealings with us. He did his best to explain a subject new to us and was very patient despite having to explain the same points to us a number of times. Then, when we requested that he check the functioning of the system, he re-arranged his schedule to accommodate us and promptly examined it. My client and I were very impressed with the high level of service we Mr. Weckman. What a positive introduction to the services of Orcno! Please let him know how much we appreciated his help. Sincerely, Mary Neece TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator June 7, 1994 Personal Watercraft Ordinance For Long Lake A number of Orono reridems who live ™ ;i?afbeg ’:n nuisance created by personal watercia on g „ j of tjiis group plan to attend “S Jirsl .ri- - •»“ > 776 North Brown Road Orono, MN 55436 June 9. 1994 Gotten. Hurr. Jabbouf and Kelley Orono City Council 2780 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN Honorable Mayor Callahan and Distinguished Councilmembers: The residents of Orono who live on Long.^^ n^ jelikl?' arxl unsafe conditions created by exces^ ^ oeopi*» who live on or on Long Lake at an intolerable level^ near tfS lake ,s affect^ in a si9™^can>v ^ found at the bme®^ aSr^^n^ tf^ ptob^-n and pass an ordinance limihng the use of personal watercraft on Long Lake Enclosed please find the following information related to this issue. Minnesota. 4. water Surface Use Summary from the DNR including restrichons currently in effect for all lakes in Minnesota. o^inar^ that is both legal and enforceable. Her phone number is 297-5708. Sincerely, r .r Barbara A. Luikens May 7 ,1994 of mottTzed'^o^lSra^^^^^ Skis, etc.) on Long Lake. Signature - -tLQc\:'iCa W.Wi^ - *. - - Print name Address C. - - -■ -'- - t"............................ \ ,. i - - Szc-U.-i. 1.1 }i slyi^ .J^/OJ. y?i€??Si'.C. yM. - .-^y7yn(Arm. .^b.yJjoi^nM.-..—. 5? r??:/- .. ?y. t'- M djy^>^ M^^ru ;^k^/?JS-— --^=-JA U I 5 L, May 7 ,1994 We, the undersigned residents of Orono, respectfully request that the Orono City Council act immediately, in cooperation with the Long Lake City Council, to eliminate or severely restrict the hours and manner of operation of motorized personal watercrafts (i.e. Jet Skis, etc.) on Long Lake. Signature Q/ y,, A i Cu. Print name Address / id'*i t i~_ A A'A- . J -L - .-i-: A1------------------- - ........................ f vlLdlLi. /ay u •') I ) (3i/yjiAlAyy ■Card.&myi. /y^r.^3-Wp.... y^JO..... yy.IlLi/rfita. JJ.-.A rMl^ add. PERSONAL WATERCRAFT What IS a personal watercraft? Sometimes know n as /et Skis, Wet Jets, Wave Runners, SeJi Doos, water scooters etc., a personal watercraft is defined by law as a motorboat that 1) IS powered by an inboard motor power­ ing a water )et pump or by an outboard or propeller-driven motor: and 2) is designed to be operated bv a person or persons sitting, standing, or kneeling on the craft, rather than in the conventional manner of sitting or stand ­ ing i..side a motorboat. All personal ‘vatercraft are considered motorboats and therefore, anv regulations that govern other motorboats (such as fishing boats, cabin cruisers, etc.), also govern personal watercraft. Personal Watercraft Laws In summary, the law requires that: • Anvone operating or riding on a personal watercraft must wear a U.S. Coast Guard approved Type I, II, III or V personal flotation device (PFD or life jacket). • You may not operate a personal watercraft between sunset and 8:00 a.m. the following day. • You may not travel at greater than a slow- no-wake speed, within 100 feet of anv shoreline, dock, swimmer, swimming raft, anv moored or anchored watercraft, or non- motorized watercraft at anv time. (S/ow-no- wake IS the slowest possible speed necessary to maintain steerage, but in no case greater than live miles per hour.) • If vou tow a person on water skis, or any other device, there must be an additional person on board the personal watercraft to act as an observer. (The obseaer does not have to be facing backward.) The skier/ kneeboarder etc. must also be wearing a PFD or there must be one on board the personal watercraft for the skier. Factorv-installed or factoa-replacement wide-field reaaiew mirrors are allowed instead of an obseaer when pulling a skier or other device (tube, kneeboard, etc.) The mirrors must be integrated into the hull design of the craft. After-market mirrors, stick-on mirrors, motorcycle mirrors etc., do not qualify for the obseaer exemption. • If the machine is equipp>ed by the manu­ facturer w ith a lanvard-^pe engine cutoff switch. It must be attached to the person, life lacket or clothing of the op>erator when under­ way. • You may not operate a personal watercraft if any part of the spring-loaded throttle system has been removed or tampered with so it inter­ feres with the refurn-io-idle system. • You may not chase or harass wildlife. • You may not travel through emergent float­ ing vegetation at greater than slow-no-wake speed. • You mav not operate a personal watercraft in a manner that unreasonably or unnecessari ­ ly endangers life, limb or property. • You mav not weave through congested watercraft traffic, or jump the wake of another watercraft within 100 feet of the other water­ craft. This includes other personal watercraft. Age of Operator Requirements Under 13 years old A person under the age ' i j years may not operate a personal watercra.;, .^-gardless of 29 person mi'teas'd act as an observer itS. !3, to have ,o be fac^ tectwa,^T teeetearder Wmust alZ^iL^^ or there must be oTo„^^ "faring a PfD “'aiercraft for the°kier ^ h'''®"al w'dedSirream>?vm,TO^^^ "tirrors mw S L,~ra «=■' The jacket or clothine o^hga^^ °way. operator when under- d a'nvZn ,h°i a personal wale,carl hat ^rre“r^ttf'':;imi‘'2 '«£m feres W„h the relu,n.,o.S?swem"’ “ '' • Vou mav rSi' k'^ wildlife. Relation at g'lrer'taolmT^a'k^'’ 'V-dangers I,,? Zl7rTJ^'‘’'"^--'‘- wale^craKr 'htoPgh^ested waiercrafi within °oo “fea l!rttetrh°' -It Jhis includes othe™ r'lJ^eS: person under the aee r i < ^^Parate a personal wa^e^rau.'.lg^iJLro’;"" D. Public regulations and management: to include federal, state, or local regulations and management plans and activities having direct effects on water­craft use of surface waters.E. Histon’ of accidents which have occurred on the surface waters.F. Watercraft use: to include information obtained in the morning, afternoon, and evening on at least one weekday and one weekend day, concerning the number and types of watercraft in each of the following categones: kept or used by riparians, rented by or gaining access through resorts or mannas, using each public watercraft launching facility, in use on the w-aterbody. G. Conflict perception and control preferences: to include opinions gained by surveys or through public meetings or hearings of riparians, transients, local residents, and the public at large. Subp. 2. Written statement. Any governmental unit formulating, amending, or deletmg controls for surface waters shall submit to the commissioner the fol­ lowing: A. the information requested in subpart 1, portrayed on a map to the extent reasonable; B. a statement evaluating whether the information reveals significant conflicts and explaining why the particular controls proposed were selected; C. the proposed ordinance; and D. a description of public hearings held concerning the proposed con­ trols, including an account of the statement of each person testifying. Subp. 3. Commissioner review and approval. The commissioner shall require the ordinance proposer to provide additional information of the kind desenbed in subpart 1 when needed in order to make an informed decision. The commis­ sioner shall approved the ordinance if it conforms with these rules. Statutory' Authority: A/5 s 361.25 6110.3700 WATER SURF.\CE MANAGE.MENT STANDARDS. Subpan 1. Purpose. To promote uniformity of ordinances or rules on the use of watercraft on surface waters of this state, to encourage compliance and to ease enforcement, the commissioner and any government unit formulating such ordi­ nances or rules shall follow these standards. When formulating an ordinance or rule, it is not required that all the standards listed below be incorporated into eveiy' ordinance or rule. Rather, the commissioner or governmental unit shall select from th-' standards listed below such standard(s) as are needed to regulate the surface use of waters. Subp. 2. Watercraft type and size. Controls may be formulated concerning the type and/or size of watercraft permissible for use on surface water body(ies) or portions thereof. Subp. 3. Motor type and size. Controls, if any, concerning the maximum total honepower of motor(s) powering watercraft on surface waters shall utilize one or more of the following horsepower cutoffs or motor types: 25 hp; 10 hp; electnc motors; no motors. Subp. 4. Direction of travel. Directional controls, if used, shall mandate watercraft to follow a counterclockwise path of travel. Subp. 5. Speed limits. Controls, if any, concerning the maximum speeds allowable for watercraft on surface waters shall utilize one or more of the follow­ ing miles-per-hour cutoffs; A. “Slow-No Wake" means operation of a watercraft at the slowest pos­ sible speed necessary to maintain steerage and in no case greater than five mph. B. 15 mph, C. 40 mph. ^llU'J riiW ^■Ctl iititj RmlM R1IM Riiirct]MfMtijftM«tiattT^rairtiti4«c«r«tiiraMllftMramraintiftfiMoiirartp.imiransi ranmi»*^«•»cTtratlR« raiim tMtlMiSt •lOI [•jtim] psimpioi [^W•^ •■tI4iLffliLiHtTCtrt rtsfti ra»WAio [tlillMinAS^Cilimj •itjv.mvi ilVi ITTFliTOkWi ranmmrti raiwtiwt raao] tjoit ltI4lLtI« RirJinPTmp.TTtl MtVt rtp.iv« •KtliMtmiiP MfVt •ic«i^MrtriY4T4f n4:« •I4».tt] rtiiimi ra4iCt1 t]#r« r«Mf ■ CO a»] M »!t1L^T« gil /. 111 p rar«i §roi vtmi ^ISCtMO Ilf llH.lt] . TV- countv board must allow the same types and of wJJ’emmfJ^d’ ,Xn I’lS? “tt"y by permit. _ -r nuhlic access. A county board may acquire by put chase,“^i. or dm« ’hasten acres and”fs" mi'guouno ‘the 'relnde? l':;fora'’ShTe1a^« cniirely ^*^lhln ihc corporate limits ot ^ j^unicipal council Subd. 8. Advisory assistance. The of supervisors or water- or town board or the soil and represcnuiive to advise and consult with shed dtstnct board of ma^ S the county board on wate * . r v Qn request of a county, city, or Subd. 9. Watercraft use rul« public interest, establish town, the commissioner waters of this state that border upon or are rules relating to the use of boundaries of the governmental unit. re“airbe>su^^^^^^^^ of ‘t“umil'rrs7ar--d b™ of .he couniy boards of a ma.on.y of .he coun- ties affected by the proposed rules. ‘n, Ihe' .^‘ars:re':rwa.ercraf. and sire of mo.or .ha. may use .he wa.ere affected by the rule; watercraft-(2) the areas of water that may be used by watercra , (3) the speed of watercraft; (4) the times permitted for use of watercraft; or (5) the minimum distance between watercra . the physical charac- (d) When establishing rules, the ^o"'"'‘f“onc ^ ^ ^^d classification, .crislii of .he ,h. refes. and o.hcr fea.urcs unique .0 .he J f „f .he rules affec.ing them a. leas, .wo weeks wa.ers. The faUure of .he commi^ smner to «mpiySu para'graph does no. affec. .he validi.y of U,e rules or a convi - tion for violation of the rules. -,-rVinc and posting waters under this sub- di “L-tlt "tetlecred by .he rules, as appor..on«l by .he com- ""”(g) Regula.ions or ordinances relating to^the effecruntU repeal^ ^ commissioner adopted under this subdivision. History; 1990 c 391 art 9 s 10 JUN-10-94 FRI 13:55 TONF.A BAY HARIRI FAX NO.P.Ol BOARD MEMBERS Willing A JonnftTona CPUif. Minnetomu Tam Pann Vice Tonka Bay Douglas E. Ba<3coc^ Secretary. Sonng Park Rooen Raacop Treasurer. SnorewopcJ Mme Bk)om Minneiorka Beacn Aiben (Ben Foster Deepnav«?n James N G ah^ol Excelsior Eugene Partyxa MinnetrjftS Ouane Markus Wayzata Craig Moiiat Victona Terras W. Raasa Mound Hai) J. Sue^h Wood'anO Joseph Zuvak Oreenv^ODO Orono LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 800 EAST WAVZATS aouL'^/ARO. suite -60 • WAYZATA. Mi\NSSOTA 55391 •TiLEPriONB 612/473-7033 ^ , EUGENI H. STROMMEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR June e, 1994 Mr. Gabriel Jabbeur Tonka Bay Marina 220 Tonka Bay Road Tonka Bay, RN 55331 Thank you, Gabriel . . • for your generous cooperation in providing a boat and refreshments for the LMCD board's lake inspection tour June 7. This experience provided board members and the two attorneys representing LMCD legal matters a great opportunitv to view lake sites recently or presently under co.nsideration for dock provisions. Similarly beneficial was the chance to view examples of dock and lakeshore lighting. Your demonstration of how even a 100 watt bulb can make an undesirable intrusion over lake water was most striking. This practical application should be beneficial as the committee and board continue its evaluation of how best to regulate dock structure lighting. Hopefully guidelines appealing to the cities will also be developed. Oq indebted to Dean Vianos for making his cruiser available to the board. Please share our thanks with him. We will thank him by a personal memo as well. LMCD Chair Bill Johnstone joins with the entire board in expressing our appreciation for your considerate service on this special occasion. sincerely, LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Xugene R. Strommen Executive Director R«cvc.«e Ccmt»v 30*'. ^01’ wsnt