The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09-19-1988 Planning Packet0- PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATICS REOUESTED BELON FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) /^/ff P/C • / 3 z.Acr O/c^s^/fe/vusAi'sFp 4. “PoP tic V VJ^ u4il i ^.'7 1 5. ^lirfro db^.iSiVCoh A^'ISC<A # a 7. fiiy ri • H^4i ^ ^ >5^ 75 i/5 TA L 1 3a 3 8 • » L <.r t T' Ftt V </ / / i'i/« X ■/■ r n !3 3 2 9 • Irip^ ^ l/vj all i ixC f Q>n\LiLp JLI'l?Kp 0. F'/-"^7 Ot\'Cv*f(fli.*yt Or-/3 14t /6 V Co-'x K./3>4^ a "iFT^vy "i ✓Ki a .4. ^^K'l ^ H /\D N.KlAB Fax Sir.J'bl2 ._ •.. ..... / 3 ^ V 6. ----------------------................................... ......................... 7, »8 • «r 9. * 10.>.28r: -... - * . t. ' jm' f.■.IMilll JT"' i-: . ■■»4 Tqs PI Or Ci Mi Se Subject: # Application of the Zoning Distz List of BxhJ Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit MOTE: The private edge oi Propos buildal The pr< and it main d] City si drains submit should / •+ ^ ' rot Planning Cominission Chairman Kellay Orono Planning Commission Membsrs City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning ft Zoning Administrator Dates September 14, 1988 Application - Split off a 2.8 acre building site from the northeast corner of the Wayzata Country Club property. Zoning District - RR-IB, Single Family, 2 Acre, Unsewered ^st of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit P - Exhibit G - Exhibit H * Application Plat Map Property Owners List Letter From City Engineer Glenn Cook Survey of Proposed Subdivision Air Photo . , Lot Diagram Indicating Required Setbacks Septic Site Diagram HOTE: The most feasible access for viewing this proposed lot t^h^girf^-lou^se” prp‘e^rt?rpteise\%“fer"\rr pVat"U)! Pertinent Pacts - 1.proposed lot size is 2.8 acres, all of which would appear to be dry buildable from City wetland maps. 2.The oroperty has a general downward slope from the north to the south. City staff has requested a topographic survey of this draLage concerns, however, that ^opograpnic survey has submitted as of this writing. Applicant notes that such a su y should*be completed by the end of this week. \■M Zoning File September 1 Page 2 of 3 The aj primal centri Both t slope accept The g< would neith' shoul the ei *:■' : A. Note corri This ; prope also actua narrow As yo of th resid Staff would the e parce width oppor purpc devel long purpo presv; corri quest plat the e road ownei ilnistrator North Perndale Road taring he northeast corheff 3d sed lot is from the ard along the north :he plat map). lid appear to be dry north to the south, located along that be needed. this property due to survey has not been that such a survey t -tn % KJ • •i.nIm ■'T*-j Zoning Pile #1326 September 14, 1988 Page 2 of 3 5. 6. 7. 8. The acDlicants' site evaluator has indicated feasible sites for both primly an“tlternate drainfield systems ^'ho?V“,Vee“ Exhibit centrally on the lot along the east boundary line. (See Exhibit HI Both the primary and alternate sites require mound systems, and the slopes at the proposed sites range from 2% to 4%, well within t acceptable range for mound systems. The general drainage direction ''ithin the area of the mound sites would appear visually to be parallel to the neither the proposed house development nor proposed septic systems should havt any'^runoff effect on the neighboring Hauser property to the east. care will have to be taken to direct surface run-off around the drainfield sites, and given the proposed house design plan, the location of the drainfield sites ® ^®^®3reful severe restriction on the proposed house location. site planning will be necessary to insure that overland drainage in addition to the run-off from the house development does not affect the septic system. Note that the proposed division creates a "flag" type lot, with a corLdofeO- in width running about 23 0- before the lot widens out. This requires a lot width variance, since the defined width of this property will be 60* where a 200' width is normally require • also that the lot is 320* in east/west width at its widest poi^t and actually contains more than 2 acres in just the area south of the narrow corridor. As you can see from the plat map, staff has sketched of the private easement road which currently residences. This would be the ninth residence served by that road. Staff has sketched in on your plat map the lenqth^towould note that the private road is approximately 2,100 in length to the end of the loop at the '»est end. Staff would also note that the parcel from which this lot is to be <3i/i<3ed is^ - • approximately 14.1 acres. This is the City s :pportun?trto^n"\a\"e"^aT;7pV^^^^^^purposes on this 14 acre parcel. Staff would recommend that the Lviloper be required in his proposed plat to show a 25 long outlot at the north side of the property for purp^oses. Note that the survey indicates that private easements exist presumably for access purposes to neighboring properties, corridor 16.5’ south and north of the north lot line of the parcel in question. Also note that the plat of Fairway View ^o the plat road outlot width of 50* on the north/south P®^ ' he outletthe east/west portion. That plat was completed in 1977. The outlet r^d parcel on the plat of Fairway View is currently owned by the owner of Lot 5. CITT OF OW ^ROPEKTT LOG Site Address Property Ide Please checli Attach lega applicant Name J Address QN1IER (if d Name Addres (atta existing la Number Develc Preset Presei proposal _ F I ble sites for both sites are located i, (See Exhibit H) d systems# and the , well within the )f the mound sites t lot line, hence sed septic systems Flauser property to un-off around the ition on the septic laces a relatively i. Again, careful le natural flow of E from the house type lot, with a le lot widens out. ined width of this Ly require 1. Note s widest point and area south of the ed in the location srves eight total rved by that road. I of that road, and 2,100’ in length to also note that the roximately 930' in [•his is the City’s n for private road ecommend that the a 25’ wide by 930’ for private road ate easements exist properties, in a le of the parcel in a to the west has a portion, but 30’ on 1 1977. The outlet ently owned by the • ••= >'• -/•; . -fV ir.' ' \ d r..v I'.'': 'i m*- ■■■■ i • #■ w rk ■ Wi v: i. y ♦ ■. 2-■ ,-jl Fi c» - • '• > CITY OF OK»0 - SOBDIVISIOT PROPERTY LOCATIOli Site AddreffCountry Club 2 b 'iry Of c^Of^o • A u Ut’i i-t UtOLX^OOOO IfCn [. F 02 -Cr‘- *V •«' Jf W' Property identification Number (P.l.D.) -- - Please check one - Property -X abstract or .'t-irri'Ti II. i.f - : « i.W « vv tOO torrens?m04390 cool v&' A **/ * ! Attach legal description __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ - - - - - - - -- Phone (home) S41-4949.- - - applicaht Raxne Ronald D. Lauer Address; 8Q Gideons Pt. Rd. OffHER (if different than applicant) N2une Phone fworlc) 473»Q314- - n^^»Y«TnnkA Rav Zip:,,553jl Phone (home)^_ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ Phone (worlc) attach list if more tnan City:Zip: existing land osb Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present Use (check) Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify), Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building site#) Subdivision for New Building Sites Existing UnitsNumber of Building Sites:1 New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density* Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Units per _ _ Acres Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) ** • Zoning Septemb Page 3 Discuss On approxd residen propose Th subdivi lot cox Exhibit Staff R( Sti the fol! 1. #3' of pu] si‘ Rox 2. 3. o rv rtC ij, I I u u i TkiAtirc riPPJCE 135O2OQOO0 n i *ryi/j. vi.if LhEiK TL {?bCEIPT-lrfi^^^ amiYO CCOl ROi )41-494S k) 473-0314 Disciissioii ~ Zoning Pile #1326 September 14, 1988 Page 3 of 3 On the air photo, attached as Exhibit P, i have drawn in the approximate boundaries of the proposed parcel. You can see the Hauser residence under construction just to the east of the narrow portion of the proposed lot (these air phot j were taken about 1970). This proposed lot would appear to meet the minimum requirements foif subdivision, the only variance being the lot width variance due to the flag lot configuration. The normal setbacks would be required as shown in Exhibit G. Staff Recommehdatioii - Staff would recommend approval of the proposed subdivision subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat drawings shall include the entire parcel listed as P.I.D. #36-118-23 14 0010, and shall show a 25' corridor along the north line of that parcel as Outlet A, to be dedicated for private roadway purposes. This is consistent with previous plat approvals in similar situations, and consistent with recent plat approvals on "Lydiard Road" a few blocks north of this property. 2. Variance to be granted for lot width. 3. Prior to Council preliminary plat review, applicants shall provide a topographic map for site planning purposes and to verify drainage patterns that affect or will be affected by the development of this property. 4. The standard Park Fee of $200 per the current fee schedule will be collected as part of the final subdivision fees. 5. The standard Drainage & Utility Easements shall be shown on the plat drawings. i.".- 1-3 t tl M.. d ^^V.Vyi ■ ■“ HlNUfOM 1. Com 2. 3. 4. 5. Pre Cer thi 348 Sta nan obt As any Certific complete Zoning 0 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payi Sigi Tit; East Devt Certifies Zoning OJ FBBS S) Pi Pi PI The appl requeste* Planning further a Applicant owner's S Applicant Planning third Mor review me unable to authorizet Office of I have drawn in the DU can see the Hauser narrow portion of the imum requirements for riance due to the flag required as shown in subdivision subject to larcel listed as P.I.D. r along the north line for private roadway approvals in similar Fprovals on "Lydiard ilicants shall provide nd to verify drainage i development of this : fee schedule will be shall be shown on the fJ:- II It’ Mm 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. iTBRIAL HECBSSJIR7 FOB FBS.lMIHIURt APPLICA^OH Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350• (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is . complete. Zoning Official's Signature _ _ _Date* 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (parlc fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies ut formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, Covenants, etc. ... Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Pinal Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ - Date FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Preliminary Review (Class I fi II Subdivision) $150.00 250.00 Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) 300.00 + 20.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) ~ —• *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 150.00* The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all ad^i^rional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Pl£uining 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. •ATLCm (you must obtain A-603 Govt Center d to each of the e address labels separate list of .on. t Application is te” er assessments). 1 plat. tion is complete, te $150.00 250.00 al) 300.00 + 20.00/Lot 150.00* ion required or City Attorney, application and rdinance. m 5 days before the are held on the Lt all scheduled ' an applicant is ments to have an uilding & Zoning sfi 28 »» 27 1 ' 1 _ i I 26 --1 ^40 140 \IZO CHASE m SvV - % • •» ; . .. 1 l/wv • 1 * •m, •* ‘ .• K Isiis.. i S3 > «<ySS8S •« M M msiHrI ft Ul Ul Q2S**|i •7 flift itf *888*S 83 I m mH < >• ^ Z <^;ss..iS ^ •_ ^ a: 5 mUSiS ft Ul Q < Zri-i*s»-“S^MZZIA? go « ^ H lA HiII ft P Ul 9 liS u u •i I SI Kl inft Si ssss aa»a aa>.3 S ft X X ft al 8* ft Q ft ft Ms ^ >> tu ft si i|“ sSf-ij 8 ft Z 2 S tr ^ft ft Q ft^8s<3sa si >- N E =f ; ! . .;• •: ’'V-tj ”■**'•*! -1^m ' I** -s*^- Q o A<0 "O o n. V'.Ife.. a > r ’.i ? • ( *«• r-^' V-:, / . 'S. *t-v .. 3 -i I«t-.*'! T* .' isudb^. '.>T.‘> ""i. lU M Bonestroo Rosene Anderllk & Associates Oao G. iDnggfOft um A Gor^^ ?t iaairt w aoMnt, Menard W. ffomr, Pi. Jdwph C AndrrWt. PC Donald C. Wur^mm, P.£ iwdtoid A. Lcaidpf^ PC- Jtffy A. iQuidon. PC. aiMfd E mmdr. PC Marft A Hamoa Pi. Jamti C OHon. PC. M K F Gitnn i. Cook, PC Thomat C. Moyav Pi. ioftgft G. ScfHjnid% PE Marvin L Sorvala. P.E rhamm W, PRaiun. PE Micnati C la«t Pi. iMai i Maiand. PE *Pnnfcn p Andtrson. PI. NMi A Bachmann, Pi,. Mart f ftrdft p r Chan« A Enctoow Laa M PanaMry! Hartan M OHon SMian M. ibariin Mara A Saip inglnecn A Architects Septeober 9, 1988 SEP I 3 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Attn: Hike Saffron Ret 139-1326 Ronald Lauer 200 Vayzata Boulevard Dear Mike: We have made a preliminary review of the proposed Vayzata Country Club subdivision. In walking the site we observed no serious site problems that would prohibit development. The site generally drops fras the north to the south with modest slopes. (1-lOZ) The site drainage generally follows the same pattern with a slight concentration to the west central part of the site. We would recommend that topography be provided for the site as the proposed home would be located along the main drainage way. It appears that some protection of the on-site system would be necessary. If you have anr questions, please contact this office Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:ci i' 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 Wn .i •<r. • Jim — ‘ /. A < • 4) 1 ... ' va ti — —was ••■I^ ^ y ft \ sqp^v ton. PI.Oiaries A. Brkkion . PE.Uo M. Pa^^Htky . PE.Hsrisr M. OHon son. P£.Susan M. Qwftm m. P.£Mark A. Sa«p i Country Club problems that modest slopes. 1th a slight s the proposed rs that some f !■; ■ : • W ■ * A ■*' i f , m '4 #^;!Sya2l.: '< Ml V' M.L ■ '• . V Vr > ,* #» -.•» ^ . ‘L ,V^ 2L- 1 x-r- *i ' ■'/ >' •■** X*: i”‘^^'^p?3 ♦ ^ f : ,iv) '•r. fiiS ■5>^X r :*--,"vm 1 • » •^XLr *^S V'.j -«.;v: m- m * V ’gSS^^i r 4. f^.‘V.I n/i"i->1 Mi '■ -^^>Ldfwr’ .4 >«1^ V' • % ,^:f •Hmm)*^ Vh' >• sifi Nm mif. 4l J»«PI ’%• ’^pi 1• %L »t iV,i' :-^ ^ % t a *\ 11^ m™ ’■ j IP?,; V';\V lU*'f «r5ffSi '.at fUv;’ #3#'• ■m4 mi ■i.'j' 1>MS,2-. ••xj4 iyt ' -I r .-•^ A ils il'k'l.^ €>♦ f ‘4 / i;.>.,., v.*':!^ r / ■ "ll ‘UL'tlij fi^i^ C:i<* 1‘ > ,' »T ^ V*.. ...«^TTTTrr* • ^..jir:i--w.-—.•4 • 4?p <;,“■’4.t . / 'T. ; I IB -i ■A- ,V.; ifc ■i. ":;'g» t ■ ;i"|| l: : / r- •'^em f «i str iSL' !? ;? o !!8 «#»• lac ar Wf «f t «•€ MM •#«•%.!•«, J r.*-^ :-iw..*• «rr • • • I L J'''j ?f. ■. v^ -^X-v»f^* > f) -^15^.___ r* ' /JV. V' :• |i 4y'<;^ ‘ <‘ , A rmM •J r -* ^ ^1 i. . %w- , m'^ V i • V* lA » .-/V •s; - - • -■ - • ♦ / ■• •■ ;■ .■ • v ^-.ytv ': • . , v<m.^ tX y >rx«r ^li/ >•;> Ji-?!^ f« J U-** ^Tf >1? ^4NM^W«« f *9f «t««* PC* v occ «e jQssiw VW^54T 1 j^ijijj B!»4i*1ff’,'«22'.• «c*a aomtr— (teeivuM^ S«r*A.q<% «As m iA»«Okt afu OOC *# &M- Cr AREA- 121,935 SiT •2.801 ACRES to t m, .*'• ------1-------- „> —745/1 -r- ^ V «'■* uc«r««MViNtMM«r . / *0*««»i«-"0i«« <t«€ «i« or tcs i«. fi«.«ft^ / /fv!-ir;os •f- •: ft i I \ PfilNIEO **AT25 1988 NQtUUC Itc ft J. ll Sc at. fj: lA7 onj %f ► •:s?. •uc;. •v :l lUCC::;s. OAir Was LiV:: :»te r:c*. 1 *? Ik ^ ■- ^ ■ :.:■■• ••"• ■ ■r Kj f-:- . ^ i A 1> -f % .* c A^JU f --'W -.'y ■■:■.: ■-''iv-d i;.\'.il • i . . • ..• '. '. • '. WMy . • ._■ _ 4 •' ■ • . -s 'V occ lio joou»; CAS 09tsm^r Am ooc 90 ti.-,— — Itoa Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:September 14, 1988 Subject #1328 Howard B. Johnson, 1635 & 1675 Concordia Street - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Class I - Public Hearing Application - The Trainor House at 1675 Concordia Street encroaches approximately 1' over the lot line into the Johnson property at 1635 Concordia Street* The proposed lot line rearrangement places the Trainor house within its property boundaries. Zoning District - LR-IC, Single Family 1/2 Acre Minimum, Sewered List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Proposed Registered Land Survey Discussi< Howard Johnson of 1635 Concordia Street is in the process of selling his property which consists of approximately 3.9 acres. It came to light as a result of a recent property survey, that the neighboring Trainor residence at 1675 Concordia Street encroaches approximately i^fpto the Johnson property. This subdivision is merely to provide an additional parcel of 336 s.f. to the Trainor property in order that their house at 1675 Concordia Street can be within its property boundaries. Although it is not dimensioned on the survey, the proposed Tract B to be transferred to Trainor, appears to leave a 5' setback from the Trainor residence to the new property line. In our LR-IC district, normally a 10 side setback is required. Staff would suggest that Planning Commission ask applicant to consider granting additional square footage for Tract B so that the normal 10' side setback can be accomplished. area. The current proposal increases the Trainor property to 0.434 acre in Staff Recoomendation - Although it would appear that granting of additional area within Tract B to accomplish the 10' side setback standard would be a logical goal in this type of lot line rearrangement, applicant may have specific reasons why such an arrangement is not proposed. Regardless, the proposed lot line rearrangement, which places the Trainor house within its own proper y boundaries is a positive application and staff would recommend approval. ■ -J. 41 strator treat - reet encroaches property at 1635 nent places the swered k >cess of selling Ct came to light liboring Trainor :ely 1' into the e an additional their house at s. posed Tract B to :rom the Trainor f normally a 10* g Commission ask i for Tract B so to 0.434 acre in rea within Tract logical goal in specific reasons roposed lot line ts own property lend approval. r-•w... t 0 ^ * CITX OF OROIK) -SUBDIVISIOH* APPMCATIOH FROPBRTT LOCATIOH I ^ Site Address Property K' ntification Nunber (P.I.D.) H Please check one - Property - -abstract or torrens? -.1 urfiLu r,"i ,V; V.I.'V • VV Attach legal description to application_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ - - - - - - - Phone U / / APFLICAHT £ t Name Phone (work) • City: - Zip: ONNBR (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (work) ^tattach list it more than one^ City:Zip: existing land USB Number of Tax Parcels Development Size / f Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)Residential: no. of units Other (specify)_ _ __— Present Zoning District^/^- A proposal_ _ _ ___Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:Existing Units New Units Total Units Pj^oposed Gross Density. Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) I Units pet ^1- Acres M.Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) - i:mm mNIMUH MAT^W P3^0lifliinai Certified this list 348-3271) Stampedp names on obtained ’ As an add any other Certification complete. zoning Officia Payment c Signed ce Title opl Easements Developei Certification Zoning Officii Sketch Prelim Prelim Final ♦(Plus The applicai reguested bj Planning Comi further agree Applicant * s Owner's Signi Applicant mu Planning Com third Honda- review meeti unable to a1 authorized a Office of tt Utt iCu .01 'EH ^0.0<J ^0.00 . - ■> *•-;’ V'J/ i.’- ^ 4 Zip: __Zips [Jnits 4- )uilding sites) Acres ry Buildable Land m .*V- • :•m-- ■ I--■ «»o«ecaitY FOR COMPXiBTB PRELDaHART APPLICATIOHmthtmOM MATBRIM* HBCBSS^ for conri^x 1 Completed Application Fora Certificate of Survey. W4.*;n preliminary Flat of ^era within 350* (you must obtain certified ^“coS^ty nipertaent of Finance A-603 Govt Center this list from Hennepin County p the ira;iydV W‘»-n^nrrfsr?u%%^ -‘d'-dr^.-s's^ i“.‘hei. wif :^*UcaUon!' please attach a separate list of - ^*“thef^«ons you -ish notified of this ap^ ♦•bat Preliminary Plat Application isCertification by zoning Department that Prel 7 . . . . 5°^ina^Official* S g<g^*ttire —_ ___ __ _ _ _J^TT- - - -- --- - - - --Zoning _I- - - --- - - - - - --- - - water assessments). cer/m t:rv;y'or"S?larcop!es of formal plat. 3* Title opinion. 4. Easements, better of Credit. - 4. ♦•hat Final Plat Application is complete. Certification by Zoning Department that . . Date.. —;_ ___— Zoning Off icial* _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _——— Sketch Plan.Review (Class I, II & HU preliminary Review (Class I A II Subdivision) preliminary Review (Class HI -nd all non-residenhial) 4 • e « • • $150.00 250.00 300.00 20.00/Lot 150.00* -- - - *(P1US any legax wa. _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _' ■.«. Applicant's Signature . ^ _ Dete - owner's Signature - - - "j ** ^ offices 25 days before the Applicant must have ^"=^?“„i"g°CoJ;^issiL «e«t=i"9S are heW^on^the SSIb?: To" attend Vefa^n^four;\a"cl' a"nd* to a“vrse”hegilding s Zoning . ‘ * atioh (you must obtain \-603 Govt Center i to each of the \ address labels separate list of ion. It Application is ate ^0]- assessments) al plat. lation is complete )ate $150.00 250.00 tial)300.00 + 20.00/Lot 150.00* ion required or City Attorneyr I application and irdinance. <P' w lays before the re held on the all scheduled in applicant is ints to have ^ an Idinq & Zoninq ■iffl r- •, n 1*1 • ttf Him >»mi sM H 83 !•* S >* o8i« 8 ga Uim I 8.lilo ^ O lU < 938 8 .«88^ K Q Ui UI X • «.?K fu O _ “> ^ ttoo O UI O tt J5g (M H Ui IM n a K Ui T g:| N uj tt Z O ^ U) ? O -1 5 o 9 O K S S So O UJ Og $ s II K1 X UJ CM P a u I ^ UJ c 32395 M I N. S3S. o <n CO c S O CO S ^ o lO UI c K r c Ui o o •< a c H < o Q Z UJ ^ < ^" Q X iJ QC << L a UJ a : Eoc 5 CQ mfmi P: ''STti u '* V «p^tl '•• ", r * V-lO» \40- V ■\ "• AtV ^ ‘ ^ii V- s:s 7|88”'“Q ui uj XX ?: a: H- ^7 P-ji li» Ife X Q “ -> -1 K ui 3tS o ^ tSi o ->X ^ »^go in la.119 HI ®8 UJ > ^ :SS « M ^a ^ O VO 1^ O l9 ui ttl •Ji «i < < »• (0 a C9 C0 a: « te.m r- UJ i&j «■« o o ^ on a. »51^ yj |A £D CD Ws|^ 2 2 X 2««s* Ui Ui *-4 ts^ o 5 X £§: 1^’. f;;: ..r-s.-;:,!. V- ''.’..i. ■..ioL^. - .HRHHHIl f-•JU^ ^ X X o < IM U h- 5 cvi IM X tt «- . >=^25o u tfl «u. Kg’* _ Z Z 5 «» W H M « W HI iiiis, 7 33|i o CO DC oe ^ lU Ul CO S38« O QC K 1^ tH < < K (D (0 X iok >• X “*S5 n «D U Oi l a*Sa Q Ul HI U. CO u. -• tt X «J O M O -• < O CJ HI U. o HIo §1 o O Ul o a a QC ft VO Ul ui a CO CD o lO o fO lO fO CM 1 N LUND ETAL RS 0 H EN6LI RING ROCK C VA 22032®8 VO X CM K 1 Qt LIMAS LIMAS ORE DR 55364g|3 i i •■IP «a,g Z £ _ Z CO UJ UJ O O C.- U in HI M o» X XCO Kl < < 10 o -> -> K K X o a<ac aO X Ul < < >- \ a < u4ft - 5 5 E O 8 8S‘ “8f Ul III l ^ -J c -< *< c O O f o o H X ^ CO P - VO ft £ CoO ^ ft co5ZiM. ft < u•;1 a UJ CL z V- •t SsSS ctt E O H- O • N I S Hi ft M Ci 0 UI ®g -1 H*H UI “ ilfii in i in s?M N » )£f!-*«£ii ^ l/> i3i o o o n *^5 ®!? ^ s z r 2 «v.|20< :i5I flOO O Ui Mo a p in M o f^ <0 ^ -j inri o < o ^ |5S9 “ 5 iya uj Q. s o 3 5 ^ ^ 2 OL O K i->V *ll^j^ O ca m (SI I I .»iS -i£§5 “§15uu Z uj yj in «j ^ CM O CM CM •n CM I I f^ m in*-fS3 uu o S oc521U o: <0. Ui Qlo 5 X tt 5 Q. O H QCa 9 lU 5 yj H- •« Z m MM < < < in) •j «i M m ly UI o ^ o N 5 g CM X CM in UI M X M CM H MI a in l:SS ^ Z rl ^ M in u. CM CO ro Ki o «J K Oa tL O q:o. a Ui-ir 2o UI UJ ^ SS;^ H X in in in in iE, 5“'®2 CM >- ^ -y fo tto X g UI •< >- \ < Ui QL X X -< < X H- . y.- ... .^:t ii/'ii-sr Titt •; •••■■■••••-. ■■ O ttl _ UI m MCM g w M S a ^ 2 ^ X ^=*^5? •"555ma ^ ^ ^ CD ^ ^ < Ml <in o ft tt ^ 3 M H- c» in CM M ni m CM (h Kl ininills U M M O -• U P I- u ^ m: X 8 z 2 ^ < Ui Ui in N -j -* >• I —• in M> CO ^in o E < Ui Ui ft O< ft g 2 UI 3 UI ft X o o < >- N ft < UI a Ui a X o X X 3 ft 2 < z Q. o K CM i- ft€» m r*»-<a ni M m CM a ^•n g 5 ni I K M u U •*4 < • -> M in H Si cn CM M «J 0 M M «M 0 01 <0 01s0 M M 0 MC UI < in CM M 01 M CM M CM 0 M in «M 0 is X m 9 E X U X Q •< M -I IT; fv UI i-« M K* U. W253 S M •» 1^ ft O CM Mo m CM M :§ip3 n* M inin CM I •jo u 3 z o s 7 cn cn o < UI UI u H M in ^ < CM ft ft m N f^3 3(M>- 3 z X <m o u u M z o m O M < I- ^CM M m m CM a in ft Ui < in •n 0 >- M M CM U UI z o rlii«§S-* u o rt. •» M in UI *T u r** M CO Mm o < § ! •nUH M in M D >y >- -J < << ft z M crft X Q o 3 ft Q a z UI < < >• \ ft < UI ft Ui ft X O Z X < ft Z < Z ft O H I N. M CO X ZUI UI CO -i ^ ^ o << 10 CM CM CM CM M ft O wg"* CM I fSA < M in ft CO M> -i CO M in o M ft r Hin in m_ < in i! O CO >- fta “5SSo•< >• ft ^ ft UI ft gi5 ft O M UI ____cc UI ^ r** m o *1 ft M CM M UI 0 in -*J Ui o < ft M < M Ui P ^CM M UI M in in CM a Z _ in _ ft UI o < in in o M N M iilHi 1 to _ 3 CO ^ in o ft “5-I ft o fto fto ft Q ft < UI ft UI ft X O Z X < ft 3 < Z ft O h- September 13» 1988 List of Exhibits mnSMTm -■ ■ JW n»i»w>iii'-.«a>'? Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning St Zoning Administrator Subject: #1330 Fullerton Properties, Inc., 880 Townline Road Class III Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Application - A 7 lot residential subdivision with private road Zoning District - RR-lA, Rural Residential, Unsewered, 5-Acre Minimum Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Preliminary Plat Survey Air Photo Soil Survey Map Overlay Soil Association Diagram Portions of Proposed Road Plan Code Section 11.33, Subdivision 4, Regarding Required Road Width Staff Diagram Indicating Slopes Exceeding 61 Pertinent Facts - Subdivision Specifications; 1. Seven lots are proposed; each contains 5.0 acres or more in area. 4 2. Each lot has 2.0 acres or more of contiguous dry buildable land Lots requiring width variance (300 feet required); Lot # Defined Width at Setback Line Variance 2 4 5 285' 175' 150' 15' 125' 150' i L : / 9SS " zoning Fi September Page 2 of 4. R 100' rati Seel thai not 5. pri and 6. mail 7. sta cul 8. whe lea not Dis B) Buil 1. f 1« sya to 2. ext les arc wit 77mm Administrator nllne Road - Hearing rivate road. d, 5-Acre Minimxim Regarding Required :eeding 6% acres or more in area. IS dry buildable land 5uired); nance 15' 125' 150' % i 1'- se- i' ;a 1 ■•■■’ill # Zoning File #1330 September 13» 1988 Page 2 of 5 4. Road length proposed is l.OOO'; proposal is for a 100' cul-de-sac; paved road section is proposed as urban ( rather than shoulders), 24' paved width is section 11.33, Subdivision 4 (F) requires 24- F»ved width for mo than" seven lots being served, 24* for "3 through 6 lots, but does not define for seven lots. . .) 5. The road access point onto Townline Road is private road in Independence; sight distance appears to be adequate and has been approved by the Public Works Director. 6. This will be a private road, subject to the normal ownership and maintenance covenants. 7 Access for Lots 3 and 4 will require crossing Painter's Creek; s;afrrecoJends a single shared creek crossing point adjacent to the cul-de-sacr at the shared lot line. 8. AS Of this writing, the City Engineer has not whether scecial outlet structures will be required wher leaverthe cul-de-sac area near the creek. Applicant's surveyor has noted that they are working with the Minnehaha Creek Maters e District regardinc cpecifics of this application. B) Buildability; 1 Each lot contains at least 1.5 to 2.0 acres with slopes at 6% or f’latter. This should allow for development of "“"f "‘yP® systems which are anticipated to be necessary on most of the lo , - to high water table soils. 2 soil types on the property, according to the soil survey, include ’ Hamel loam, Kilkenny loam and clay loam, andextensive areas mapped as Hamel it Ramel lesser areas of Lester. Lerdal, and LeSeur soils. are normally considered to be suitable for mound type septic sy.terns, with the Lester often being suitable for trenches. ir a 50' outlet with IS urban (with curbs posed (note: Code vred width for "inore 6" lots, but does cectly across from a ears to be adequate r. normal ownership and ng Painter's Creek; Dint adjacent to the commented regarding lired where run-off icant's surveyor has ha Creek Watershed 'ith slopes at 6% or : mound-type septic ost of the lots, “^’le soil survey, include im and clay loam, and , All but the Hamel type septic systems. 3S. •• r- 'I m ■ .-H- ?••• I ji. « i: *:S Zoning Pile #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 3 of 5 hv the Soil Survey as Hamel are likely incorrect, 3;;,...“:: b.»~" .«~t» bill.. .M ». ““ «h. «tbqr.pl.ic.l ,ut..y .hw= «™l <ib. soli very likely (see Exhibit G, Soil Association u y survey)• 3 orono codes do not require septic testing at the tl".s of subdivision for lots exceeding five acres in area unless Editions are anticipated This =od^^^ t^.-^ :“pe^\V^nrtrar:-: lo":^crn°ta?ning five dry buildable acres have I'Zry high likelyhood that suitable sites exist on the property. por this currently proposed subdivision, staff would reconsnend that f«»asible on those two lots. Starr wixx . j consultant regarding the location and number of borings required. C) Future Road Extensions* =“==-;ir=v,;r ;= =~ ™ connections would be anticipated. D) Easements Required: The City will require dedication on the plat of Conservation and ,lowage%aseLnts over the wetlands ---^^/^.^iVnglh^^f Vain"tr“s Easement of a width yet to be determine standard 10' perimeter and creek in Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5. as similar roadway drainage and utility easements will be required, easements 5- in width each side of interior lot lines. m Zoning Pil* September Page 4 of B) Roadwa The I the City f P) Park P The I 5+ acre Ic Diacussioc This each lot < family rei 1. I the I 2. I not i Two < the City : 1. ’ a pu road 2. 1 at t henc at t The a need fc -JT- ' ■ # re likely incorrect, \f occurs in flatter survey overlay onto 6% to 18% slopes, not n Diagram from Soil ing at the time of 1 unless unusual site t presumes that it is cated on a five-acre buildable acres have on the property. would recommend that iltant for Lots 2 and » of the property are :iate at this time to table mound sites are rk with applicant's orings required. development in the uture road access to ncur that, since the he maximum five acre idards no future road >f Conservation and 3ts 2 and 3, and an length of Painter's ird 10 ’ perimeter and [, as well as similar e.v■ ■ ■ %1 ▼Vi v^' Eg-'Mmmm Zoning File 11330 September 13, 1988 Page 4 of 5 B) Bn^^dway Dedication;: The proposed plat indicates 33' of right-of-way will be dedicated to the City for Townline Road right-of-way. P) Park Fees; Discussi* This proposed subdivision appears to have been well thought 1. Does the developer propose any permanent signage or monuments at the entry to the subdivision? 2. Are there any specific grading proposals for berms, etc. that are not shown on the preliminary plat drawings? TWO questions staff will address at the meeting after discussions with the City Engineers 1. With the minimal likelyhood that the City would t>ke this over as a public road in the foreseeable future, is the island in the private road entry a cause for concern? ■».. «. Ci« 1.— •« 1*1 ‘ nr.«iy «> »«“« at the Creek? The Public works Director has indicated this proposal will not create a need for any upgrading of Townline Road. I -r<' .i ■ i Zoning Septemb Page 5 Staff R 1. 8 will be dedicated to i Schedule of $100 peiT application• ^ell thought out, with anstruction of single this time may include: ignage or monuments at r berms, etc. that are after discussions with /ould take this over as 5 island in the private garding run-off control intended to be curbed, d directly to an outlet roposal will not create 1 ..9 Zoning File #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 5 of 5 Staff RecCHKiidatlon staff would recommend preliminary approval subject to the following: 1. Lot width variances granted for Lots 2> 4 and 5. 2. Private road will be subject to the normal private ownership and maintenance covenants, and underlying road and utility easements. 3. Access for Lots 3 and 4 shall share a single creek crossing point, subject to any permits which may be required by the Watershed District and the DNR. 4. Prior to preliminary plat review by the Council, applicant’s consultant shall provide borings confirming acceptable soil types on the property. 5 Dedication on the plat of Conservation and Flowage Easements for the wetland in Lots 2 and 3, and a Drainage Easement of yet-to-be- determined width along the length of Painter’s Creek in Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5. 6. Dedication on the plat of standard Drainage and Utility Easements 10’ along perimeter and roadway lot lines and 5 ’ either s e o interior lot lines. 7. Dedication on the plat of 33 ’ of City right-of-way for Townline Road. 8. Payment of Park Fees of $100 per lot per the current fee schedule. 9. Subject to additional requirements regarding drainage easements or structures as may be required by the City Engineer and M.C.W.D. 10. Prior to council preliminary plat review, applicant shall P^o^^de specifications for any signage, monuments, or unusual grading (berms, etc.) that may be proposed. 3t1 V;" - i vl • *4% iiwr"' -''^■^ ■iMMii^iiiliiyi^ o the following: vate ownership and Ity easements. sek crossing point# Watershed District ncil, applicant's able soil types on ige Easements for nt of yet-to-be- ik in Lots 2# 3# 4 Utility Easements ' either side of f-way for Townline irrent fee schedule. rainage easements or : and M.C.W.D. leant shall provide 5ual grading (berrab#m:. T • . ■■ 4-1 • • if Cin OF OROK) - SOBDIVISIOT_»^««“ pbofertt MCAtIOW site Address A ^ * (S^ O /f • ^« ■,' air. Of CA-ao . .«>««£ OfWOS 13H200000 -7 ^ i - '1 • • • • •- Jvv.^ Site iddress,^-----ll!-----------------------------Jo-j*?&0000 D^BMrtv Identification Number (P.l.D.) --------------- " .'I rroperty .... _____ •• terrene? C«23C Please check one - Property CHEOi TL Cvdl R01-J09*4.4«n •' '■ ■*' ■’*" ' ' "■ ' 4105300 cool R01-J09----------T-r"Zua^--r"""'^ j^PLICJM Name t*iA \ \ 4. ^ > tl—f i- Phone - (home ) Phone (work)_333j3isil -Address: i^'Tif’dlfferent than applicant) Name ' ^ City: Phone (home ) Zip.’.i5l^_ ^ • t » 4* « -• 'Itttlch TntTT^orTthan^^ Phone (work) city:___—— errSTIBG LAND OSB •• • •*• • • ^ 4 - number of Tax Parcels Cevelopment Size m « 3f.H Acres Dry Land Ac«s parcels _ ei^ « «----present lise' (check) Riildeiitikirno- Other (specify) /‘fiifi . . * Present Zoning District, PROPOSAL \ X •• ■ ';S":V Division fir Tax Purposes _ .^ ' ‘ «om«nt Only (no 'Hew building sites)Lot Line Rearrangement only subdivision for New^uilding Sites Number of Building Sites: y - e Existing Units " New Units Total Units a • .#s. • Proposed Gross Density. Minimum Lot Size: proposed Use: (check) Uniti per ^_Acres 7/J ‘f03 tSq Feet Dry Buildabie Lan4 ^ - Residential Other (specify)_1 ■M M :a. -r '• 4l'_. MimMOM MATRF 1. Complete 2. Frelimir 3. Certifi^ this li! 348-327: Stamped names o obtained As an a any oth 4. Certificati complete. Zoning Offic Payment Signed Title c Easemer Develoi Certificati< Zoning Offi< FEES Sket Prel Pina *(P1 The appli< reguested Planning O further agi Applicant t • Owner * s Si Applicant Planning C third Mon< review mee unable to authorized Office of . :^.i^ m W •* . : • 'city. CF DRCm . OFFICE - 1350200000 01 CBi , 200>00 ^ ^f^vzobooo . - - ■ • ■ * ■ ,- oim -i2^-oo CHECK 71 ■-1590.00’ iiECEIFTrW^'-^^^„ #i 05S00 cool FOi ;ip:- zip: reels units — — ^ fSjfLa — ^. •« *A • # ilding sites) lits . \ '2?.^_Acres .* . - Buildeb^® Lend LISTS' X< 4 h- b A 4. 5. «BIM0M HATKRIM. «CBSS«T for COHPIFTE «a=.IMIH»RF RFFLICATIOH ^2* fr:?irifarrpiiriror^™on^^^^ „ust obtain '• lllsVit ?rcTreL^rn“oun^%‘ oipart.ent of Finance A-603 Govt Center StlmpldV^ega^l^8^rted_^^^^ rltSrn^’ndretrfuse ad°dre8S label8 SS?ai“ned witt property ^«”,^ton,' plenae attach a separate list of i;,“otS?Sr„s o', ,.i. .poucoi... C.„l„=..,=» b, POOIOO P.P.«-o« b“b -b-'b-b"*" »" ■ WnrSfficial • 8 Signature____________________----!!!»------------f= i:"l?i5%«tii!catf of irr^4y““s?iir;opnror f o^^^piat . 3I Title opinion. . 4. Easements, Tetter of Credit.I Developers Agreement and Letter or 4. Pinal Plat Application is complete,certification by Zoning Department that Final PV __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ zoning of f iciar8_Signature______________________ —--------------------------------- FF£S Sketch Flan Review (Class I, II * m' Preliminary Review (Class I S II Subdivision) ?triis"iny ?:giror^nrine«^^^^ $150.00 250.00 300.00 + 20.00/Lot 150.00* ;;;-7p-p"rc;;v-re;;^^^^^^^^^^ |?lS“^Co^i-ion further agrees to pay i.. iAc. , / Applicant's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant must c1,e°duledPlanninQ Commission Meeting, be present at all seneauxea ;;;s‘r,\;!rppSr.“t.Sp'"bS.™.bipp. 4 .J Tos Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson ProBs Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject: September 14, 1988 ♦1328 Howard B. Johnson, 1635 & 1675 Concordia Street Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Class I - Public Hearing Application ~ The Trainor House at 1675 Concordia Street encroaches approximately 1' over the lot line into the Johnson property at 1635 Concordia Street. The proposed lot line rearrangement places the Trainor house within its property boundaries. ling District - LR-IC, Single Family 1/2 Acre Minimum, Sewered List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Proposed Registered Land Survey Discussion - Howard Johnson of 1635 Concordia Street is in the process of selling his property which consists of approximately 3.9 acres. It came to light as a result of a recent property survey, that the neighboring rrainor residence at 1675 Concordia Street encroaches approximately 1 Johnson property. This subdivision is merely to provide an additional parcel of 336 s.f. to the Trainor property in order that their house at 1675 Concordia Street can be within its property boundaries. Although it is not dimensioned on the survey, the proposed Tract B to be transferred to Trainor, appears to leave a 5' setback from the Trainor residence to the new property line. In our LR-IC district, normally a 10 side setback is required. Staff would suggest that Planning Commission ask applicant to consider granting additional square footage for Tract B so that the normal 10' side setback can be accomplished. area. The current proposal increases the Trainor property to 0.434 acre in Staff Reconmendati Although it would appear that granting of additional area within Tract B to accomplish the 10' side setback standard would be a logical goal in this type of lot line rearrangement, applicant may have specific reasons why such an arrangement is not proposed. Regardless, the proposed lot line rearrangement, which places the Trainor house within its own proper y boundaries is a positive application and staff would recommend approval. 4*. . . w -i . : mm. fi CITY OF Of PROPERTY 1 Site Addr« Property : Please ch« Attach le applicant Name Addr OWNER (if Name Addi (a1 EXISTING Num] Dev< Pre r ator : encroaches erty at 1635 : places the ed 5 of selling ame to light ring Trainor ' 1* into the 1 additional sir house at ed Tract B to m the Trainor lormally a 10' Commission ask or Tract B so 0.434 acre in within Tract cal goal in Lfic reasons jed lot line wn property approval. PROPERTY LOCA t IOM Site Address applicant Name A-1 EYISTING LAND OSB 5! f • - .5 cm OF OROBO - SOBDiyiSIOT _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ property Identification Number (P.I.D.) -V^ ^ - -=“ Please check one - Property , ^ OFFICE abstract or /<! torrens? m 0 ^,v..,;:v tvv >..-u 250^00 attach legal description to application.________________________ --------------------------------------------;;one (home) i^7M«±2l£‘AO rv Phone (work)^t tr Name — " ""-'/ —-------------- —-1 Phone (home)-----------------OIIHER (if different than applicant) Phone (wjrk) *^Uttach list ii more City:Zip: Number of Tax Parcels Development Size /Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Lend Acres Totals ell parcels Present Use (check) Residential; no. of units Other (specify)- --- - - I Present Zoning DistrictJ^^^iL-t^£S^ Division for Tax Purposes Dot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:Existing Units New Units Total Units Pj^oposed Gross Density. Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) units per jp , L sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) i: f '"3 f F 2. 3. itlNIMOlt MATERIAL N 1. Completed App Preliminary F certified Prc this list frc 348-3271). Stamped, lec names on the obtained witl As an addendi any other pe: 4. 5. Certification by complete. Zoning Official's 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of f Signed certi Title opinio Easements, C Developers A Certification by Zoning official's FEES Sketch Pl« Preliminai prelimina Pinal Pla ♦(Plus an The applicant requested by ti Planning Commisi further agrees t Applicant's Sigr Owner's Signatui Applicant must 1 Planning Commis: third Monday ol review meetings unable to atter authorized agen Office of this 2. - Q mo 0 Oi rSO.Ov . CASH "il .;- ■7--r.^jJAiJj^VQ<J ^ ' — r^O'iC:/ Zip zip: reels units / ilding sites) Iu ,-f • .ill Vjj lits 3 Acres i y Buildable Land 1 cify)__ n wMTHTMOM MATBKJ^*" --on rn sr£gn ‘“i'.t r.ras””.s,'? »<““"rS’ iv-.uy-A.-r.iiK; a^:s n^i Obtained with property please attach a separate list of "„v»2-SSoS »i. .p.u»«- ^ Plat A any other persons you wxsn ^ ^ ^ Preliminary Plat Application is Certification by Zoning Department that ^ ____ complete. •■ ... - Pete ■— Lning ; Iff IfllSF 2 Title opinion. 5: “vS^^r; A^lSSn^'an^Letter of Credit.5 Developers Agreement: ana ^^moi-teFinal Plat Application is complet . Sketch Plan Review (Class 1, II * Preliminary Review (Class I * II Subdivision) preliminary Review .(Class III and all non-residential) $150.00 750.00 300.00 + 20.00/Lot !^ri« i^tr^ ISO.op* —- - *(Plus any legax _ _ _-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ d or y » «s—» Applicant's Signature ^ Date .-.'T /C ’ A-^ Applicant must have ^ll^f^bmittLls^into^t^^^ izti: a« a"dtrse“”e%uiidin, * zonm, tL meeting. m r ■? -V..: -f- £.5-‘- s:r TT /ra < II .hi i liiw; a - »,’,/i»<•/>____ ’ I. * ^ i ^ r a; .'.i ‘N. V ^ xM '<• I a* I rsp> .. ^e iM ‘ *e 1' b vUrS-Jii . «a ; *V I e !•ID </ /, ■/. % ^ •» ^>fv< / % 'i- ' -as-s *.v '% /./ €^s'-'J7*7 •8 * '5 - •'* . •-. catioii ^*(you must obtain A-603 Govt Center ed to each of the se address labels I separate list of tion. .at Application is }ate iter assessments) nal plat. , cation is complete Pate ^_________ $150.00 250.00 300.00 + 20.00/Lot 150.00* itial) tion required or , City Attorney » •s application and ordinance. . . ite O'^.rr ^9'P' Ite 7 _5? t 5 days before the are held on the tt all scheduled : an applicant is ments to have an ,uilding & Zoning ir8 o tti < o a >* O M Ml <r SSgiS SE333'*ilii? o o tu ao CM H- Ui B UJ ^ Ui S S IB ^ =^i:|s _ Hi Q| X _ fC|o O UI Kt X Ui Ui B :P O 1^ CM h- Q: UI UI rlS^)^S I SS3 Ift i g S o S S ^ Kl Oo “^5 u t!c CO B Oo - N, B < UJ Q. UI a. ]Co S ?5 5DC 2 < X CL O »- 9^ Kl HI M I (O iSi HI HI HI HI HI CM I I < < I- CO O B CM HI HI HI HI CM I I « O B O UJr < ao £ B ZUi S2 X X 2 < O K B O 5N UI 5 t m HI HI CM I CO >^^23 o umi^ in HI oo IHI IHI HI CM IN I CO Ui B S B O O < B Q gZiu^ B < UI o. Ui a X O X X < a o H- HI»ss ^81. -1 U fi oo SuiS ®8i<g 0 0 UI ®8 lO HI 2 :i^ o ^ Ui U CM CrS" HI HI HI CM fc- 2 “2 “ XHI Si g X 5 CM B IER50NSHORES5U41 HE §:ss 1 at ^1 B Ui5 1- ^ Z Ui ii mm UI «• Uu «i« B <o s 1 CO ^ogO *2!? 1 ^ UI H* IT ^ H M < \ HI U CL MT HIUIo o UI1^ is^ HI HI HI CM I CL = § S§ 3 o UI Uio I o Uu O Ui >- >• 3^< H- B ^ I- M < N HI U CL ^ &; CHs O UIo HI HI HI CM I ^ U CM Q HI -i X o < Ui U CM H O CM UI r B i §OJ HI M > I CO O CO HI S*S5 UI HI u. -« B Z -t O M O < o O UI u. s o ^ B O a X Ui - N B < UJa Ui a X X Ui 3 M H< ►- r HIis ^ HI M B Ui & Os i Ui H HI O o 3 B :r i »-•t ICI ■Pi o CM CM HI CM I I H- HI S O O UI CM CM ^ H I CM O CM CM HI CM I I **« I <0 HI B: o • a I £i I Ka oc Qss 23 33TH SHtLANDLANDSHORE55364•5 i|SSg :i£i ZZil 1 o Si»i0 E S9 ^3 li# Uv kf ^ M M O Z•S33Siin o o o tn £ ’■S2S Ul OC OCH o o :< OC q OZiu5 tt < Ul OL UJ CL O Z X MM M < < < Ut ^ ^ M in Ul Ul o o:oo CLo 2t OCUl 2o QC a S3 >- \ < Ui CL Z X < < X H* “5SI»3^ M M M 9 •« < < <ia < ^ O QC QC ^ 3 M o in M M Ul m o M M o tt tt o P H I X X in z z UJ UJ ^ ^ -j CO ^ UJ UJ lO O Z X UJ QC r O < QC O Z UJ < >- QC < a UJ CL O Z X q: 3 < CL O M in ^ in < m M a Szy =3 u in < H* QC O 3 N UJ tHI «l o cn»<aCM M to o — C:88 I -> •«i* m H iO m o in X u X a •< K -I r Ul M U IL Ul in z :: >r u «< tn M OC M t O I CM Ho m iSi z in o cm!a K o ^k# < £ Ul m X > o u < ^ CM m ! J Mi Bu5 inS a QC o in >- UJ UJ O :iiii 5 m N ^ m CM 1 ^ 4 3S2S (Si U -< -j o 5 . M 1Sxxai w _U 3 3 lii •■4 1 K 1 cn in N Ul Ul uM in QC »-i ^ M 1 1o ^ ^ m >» M in -1 -J ?:33 CO a X ^ £S o 2 2 ^ 2 •0 ^ X z m o u u M >• t:S “i3== 0.So z CL Z OL O QC O tt O Ul •< >- N < UJ CL r M mN 1CSI H g'"5 < < CM M CL CM O _ CM U S 5 cn m 53 - \ QC < UJ CL UJ CL £ O Z X < QC 3 < Z CL O M s CM O o CM CM tt. u M CM I N ►- in Ch inin< QC M M MS u z o !2|SSz S“-52^ = I U. O < N 1 W H M O < t;: o (Q -i UJ O < pc M < M Ul P CM M UJ M </> m CM o g in QC Ul o < in m o M M M 2i|s§, =“s:is! S -I 2 O N D U1>- 2 o 2 £ 2 UJ or q: £ o o < QC o q z UJ < < >• \ QC < UJ a UJ a £ o z CL 3 CL O " ■■■ ■■-■• o Ul mo a £ o 3M < o 3^o g D.S 5a 5 CQ O Xsi S z r** N >• lA N >-25 H 10 ro III < 10M Sz !i!S CO >2 25 q:aa UJ i4i- oro H o CO oO*<CO ro CM MtoCM O< lO M k»8 O CM U ^ CO o < m ui u h- - __ - ^ >zCO ^ M r^ <lo o < < o ^ ai as ,1 o S ^ p- C^CO u H O*CO lo CM CO CO ro lA CM UJ -J lO < 10 Z < UJ < lOMK> X M M M o0^ _CM UJ U Z 1 to Z O o d :o < d : q:o z ui § >• \ a < ui a UJ Q. z o z X < q: z < z Q. o H *1 S8 O Ul s Ml cr ^ ^ ^ 10 10 a ^ to X M M «i P 2 3 IM HIm -• III O 114 iu ^ ^ ^ «J CSfcu lO M I fi. 10ro S M CU CO CO UJ lO <M i a Ul CO ss 5 a UJ (K 9h SX K CL ro UJ lO X M CO lO U h- CO5i^Ul OL X Z UJ 1! I CM h* « CO o 9 « 0» «• co_ < <s:s CM >• o d ^ ai XoUJ o S X 2 gXcuS X < UJCL ui a. z ® S 5 5q: 3 < Z XL o iHifeiiil Q..J / .? r‘-T.ri:r- CM COo CO «Jg •- “5o < X 9*2 X < CL UJ CL o 5 ?5£s? Xoo \ UJ 5z \ X K CL u. \r^ »8S% 1 -iff ; v..V; t Tos From ;oat«s Subjec App lie Zonim List I ;.r 1 1 ] 1 1 1 ] 1 ] 1 Pertii •^4 rl___^’’UwaMaai r Date:September 13» 1988 List of Kchibits Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Proas Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Sobjects #1330 Fullerton Properties# Inc-# 880 Townline Road Class III Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Application - A 7 lot residential subdivision with private road. Zoning District - RR-lA# Rural Residential, Unsewered, 5-Acre Minimum Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Preliminary Plat Survey Air Photo Soil Survey Map Overlay Soil Association Diagram Portions of Proposed Road Plan Code Section 11.33, Subdivision 4, Regarding Required Road Width Staff Diagram Indicating Slopes Exceeding 6% Pertinent Facts - Subdivision Specifications : 1. Seven lots are proposed; each contains 5.0 acres or more in area 4 2. Each lot has 2.0 acres or more of contiguous dry buildable land. 3. Lots requiring width variance (300 feet required); Defined Width at Setback Line Variance 285' 175' 150' 15* 125' 150' p Zoning File #133 September 13, 19 page 2 of 5 4. Road ler 100' cul-d€ rather tha Section 11 than" seve: not define 5. The roa private ro and has be€ e. This wi maintenance 7. Access staff recoi cul-de-sac. 8. As of whether si leaves the noted tha' District r Buildabilit 1. Each ] flatter, systems wh to high wa 2. Soil t extensive lesser are are normal with the I itor i. 4inlmum Required ore in area. dable land. rV' V. H K t Zoning File #1330 September 13# 1988 Page 2 of 5 4. Road length proposed is 1.000-, proposal is for » ^0 “ut^wi 100- cul-de-sac; paved road section is proposed as rather than shoulders). 24- paved width is section 11.33, Subdivision < does than" seven lots being served, 24' for 3 tnrougn o not define for seven lots. . .) 5 The road access point onto Townline Road is directly across from a Private road in Independence; sight distance appears to be adequate and has been approved by the Public Works Director. 6. This will be a private road, subject to the normal ownership and maintenance covenants. 7 Access for Lots 3 and 4 will require crossing Painter's ^^eek; s;afrrecosInds a single shared creek crossing point adjacent to the cul-de-sac# at the shared lot line. 8. AS of this writing, the City Engineer has not whether special outlet structures will be required where run off leaves the cul-de-sac area near the creelc. Applicant s surveyor ha_ noted that they are working with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District regardinc onecifics of this application. B) Buildability; 1 Each lot contains at least 1.5 to 2.0 acres with slopes at 6% or flatter. This should allow for development of systems which are anticipated to be necessary on most of the , - to high water table soils. 2 soil types on the property, according to the soil survey, include extensive areas mapped as Hamel lo^, “Vbut the Lmel with the Lester often being suitable fo.r trenc es. i<y r * V A 5* i^;. .jiSl I Zoning Pile #1330 September 13# 1988 Page 3 of 5 The areas ma] given that I depressions k the topograph very likely Survey). 3, Orono C subdivision 1 conditions ai difficult tc property# an< a very high : For this cur soil borings 6# both of w; mapped as Hai request this feasible on consultant r< C) Future Road E Staff and t surrounding prop the east or sout neighboring prop density for this connections woulc T» Easements Rea The City wi Flowage Easemen* Easement of a w; Creek in Lots 2# roadway drainage easements 5' in w r a 50' outlet with s urban (with curbs posed (note: Code red width for "more 1 6" lots, but does I sctly across from a ars to be adequate ormal ownership and ng Painter's Creek? )int adjacent to the commented regarding .red where run-off cant's surveyor has Creek Watershed Lth slopes at 6% or mound-type septic )St of the lots, '’’?e foil survey, include m and clay loeun, and All but the Hamel type septic systems. 3. ■ik I •f;.. Iv I L: r» ! zoning File #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 3 of 5 , , ♦.ua cni 1 Survey as Hamel are likely incorrect. The areas «Jei -i ^ given that y and the soil survey overlay ontodepressions between steeper hills, and the y ^ the topographical survey shows Hamel in areas from Soil very likely (see Exhibit G, Soil Association Diagram from Soil Survey). 3 orono codes do not require septic testing at the ti">e °f subdivision for lots exceeding five acres in area un ess conditions are anticipated. This code requirement presumes th»tr-r rr—‘;; .r. a'v^y high likelyhood that suitable sites exist on the property. For this currently proposed subdivision, staff soil borings be completed by the applicant s consu nrocertv are 6 both of which indicate that the flatter «eas of the mapped as Hamel soils. Staff feels it is appropri _.„„j sites arerv““ .irr„u::nr. C) Future Road Extensions: ,„,ro.«4in, in nonom «h*t. nl"'* «»* the east or south. Staff and the C ^ ^ ^ maximum five acre ...na.,*. «• connections would be anticipated. D) Easements Required: The City will require dedication on the plat of Plowage Easements over the wetlands ^ of Painter's Easement of a width yet to be % and creek in Lots 2. 3, 4, and 5. as similar roadway drainage and utility easements will be required, as we easements 5- in width each side of interior lot lines. ik:. ■■ ■ •.... r. A .. Zoning File September 1 Page 4 of 5 E) Roadway The pr the City fo Park Fe The Pa 5+ acre lot Discussion This E each lot a] family res: 2. Ai not si Two qi the City Ei The P a need for re likely incorrect, y occurs in fletter survey overlay onto 6% to 18% slopes, not n Diagram from Soil :ing at the time of a unless unusual site It presumes that it is icated on a five-acre buildable acres have on the property. would recommend that ultant for Lots 2 and s of the property are riate at this time to table mound sites are rk with applicant’s >orings required. development in the [itur^ road access to icur that, since the He maximum five acre dards no future road of Conservation and lOts 2 and 3, and an length of Painter's ard 10' perimeter and d, as well as similar r'fy r7- *■ -j. .ji • wS, -- Zoning File #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 4 of 5 E) Pn^tdway Dedication t The proposed plat indicates 33' of right-of-way will the City for Townline Road right-of-way. be dedicated to P) Park Fees; Discussion - This proposed subdivision appears to have been well 1. Does the developer propose any permanent signage or monuments at the entry to the subdivision? 2. Are there any specific grading proposals for berms, etc. that are not shown on the preliminary plat drawings? TWO questions staff will address at the meeting after discussions with the City Engineer; 1. With the minimal llAelyhood that the City would tahe this over as a public road in the foreseeable future, is the island in the private road entry a cause for concern? rh°" ''de'sac Trt""*give“n\ha"t t'e'r^ad Ts^rnfenler t'o°be cu"rS hLcf virtually all rln-off will be transported directly to an outlet at the Creek? The Public works Director has indicated this proposal will not create a need for any upgrading of Townline Road. Zoning l Septemb< Page 5 < Staff R 2. ma 3. su ar 4. cc th 5. tJ di ai 6. 1( ii 7, R< 9. S‘ 1' SI dedicated to .e of $100 per .on. jght out, with ion of single a may include: r monximents at etc. that are .scussions with :e this over as in the private run-off control i to be curbed, ly to an outlet ^ill not create ^^4 '4 ti l'!’ id' S M Zoning File #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 5 of 5 Staff BecxnBendation - staff would recommend preliminary approval subject to the following: 1. Lot width variances granted for tots 2, 4 and 5 2 private road will be subject to the normal private ownership and maintenance covenants, and underlying road and utility easements. 3. Access for Lots 3 and 4 shall share a single creek crossing point, subject to any permits which may be required by the Watershed District and the DNR. 4. Prior to preliminary plat review by the Council, applicant's consultant shall provide borings confirming acceptable soil types on the property. 5, Dedication on the plat of Conservation and Plowage Easements fo the wetland in Lots 2 and 3, and a Drainage Easement of yet-to-be- determined width along the length of Painter's Creek in Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5. 6. Dedication on the plat of standard Drainage and Utility Easements 10' along perimeter and roadway lot lines and 5' either s e o interior lot lines. 7. Dedication on the plat of 33' of City right-of-way for Townline Road. 8. Payment of Park Fees of $100 per lot per the current fee schedule 9 Subject to additional requirements regarding drainage easements or structures as may be required by the City Engineer and M.C.W.D. 10. Prior to Council preliminary plat review, applicant shall prov e specifications for any signage, monuments, or unusual grading (berms, etc.) that may be proposed. 0^ OF OROHO S' propertt locatios Site Address, • •e> if Property 1 Please chech one # Attach 'legal des applicant .. : . 7 : - Name ^ Address:.^ OHNSl (if differ Name Address: (attach li busting land OJ Number of •• Developmeni Present tls 1 • • • • *Present Zo proposal e*es:*s • •• Numbei Propo Minim Propo A o the following: vate ownership anci Lty easements. sek crossing point. Watershed District ncil, applicant's able soil types on age Easements for •nt of yet-to-be- ek in Lots 2, 3, 4 Utility Easements ' either side of f—way for Townline rrent fee schedule. ainage easements or and M.C.W.D. icant shall provide ?ual grading (berms. m • cm OF OROSO - S0BDr7ISIOT_»^»““ ■pBOBEBS^ MCATIOW • *, • Site Address u O OJr 1 -O u cin (f OFFICE 13t020OOQ0 \• 4» ^ -m • ^iT - - - %01 CSH JOS.IO ... ■ ; je-*^hooooi property Mentific .'orrens? ' ''‘fiSC n.„„„ ...=4- »op.« .:;s'gss, ^ ‘ * iA t at '“one (worK)3^\-U^ ritvs -—- - - * » ., Zip: “tt?”h Tl»t a more tiiSTS^ grrSTIMG LAHD OSB Number of Tax Parcels Development Size V Acres Dry Land AcreS ?otau"aU P«*cel» Present Use (check) ^ 4« • m Resideiitiai; no. of units Other (specify) present Zo'ning_District__ ” Division for Tax Purposes ^ ^ <«?: PROPOSM.------. • „^*Bt only fno^new building sites) _Lot Line Rearrangement only .1 . . ’-"TT” subdivision for sew^uilding Sites i u- oNumber of Building Sites: Existing Units New Units Total Units e • % *S. ^ •• • • •Proposed Gross Density* Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use; (check) *7_ _ _ Units per • ^/3.»4>4i>^Sq Feet Dry BuiIdable Land Residential “ Other (specify) mm * i’ 2. 3. MINIMUM MATES 1. Complete Prelimir Certifi€ this lii 348-327] Stamped names o obtaine< As an a' any oth 4. 5. Certif icati' complete• Zoning Offic 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment Signed Title c IEasemer Develop Certificatic Zoning Offi< FFBS Sket( Prel X Prel 7 c* Fina *(P1 The appli< requested Planning C< further agi Applicant * i owner's Si< Applicant Planning C third Mon< review mee unable to authorized Office of , .$ r crm t OFFICE . 300.0(1 Ei ■■iifo.oc I -1590.00-nm'-jou . ioi'Roi-TOfi s** tfiln f "/VA^ S --------- »...«•tes) 5 1-i* — . % » • - « » Le Land •a - '.V^. * 4! ■ f- ■■#«', 4. 5. lumium material mbcbssary for * preliBiMry^’plat 3°“ of®''omers^within “^0^*(yoo »“st obtain lllfVit rr^HeJn^r/Sointy D%arta.ent of Finance A-603 Govt Center t\fe’aiove*\^^ r!tSrn‘’ad;r«r?»%®e addr*e.°s label. Sbtainid with property ^tion,* please attach a separate list of *"y“tSef^«on» yoJ wifh notified of this application. certification by Zonin, Department that Preliminary Plat Application s Zoning^^Official • s Signature__ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--rTT— - -- - - - -IntsT”' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ f^iina fee, sewer and water assessments). W^efc^rtmcatrof surv4y or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. >.. Easements, e^ter of Credit.5 Developers Agreement and Letter , J.U ♦. i?4riAi Plat Application is complete r.rfification by zoning Department tha Date__ _ _ ___ _ _ zoning Official’s Signature,^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ —-- - - - - - - - - - - - 1 2 3 4 FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II ‘ preliminary Review (Class I s II Subdivision) preliminary^ !^riis“^y i^gtror^e^^^^^^^^ $150.00 250.00 300.00 + 20.00/Lot 150.00* *tPXUS any "1”_ _ _ _-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _.— i a or ^ Date Applicant's Signature ■ -t>- - - -. j i V Date Jf4^- - S “•vkv % amrm. I .«■ - . ^ W j*'1 m t * 4 - / » •* T«. i V “T , * s> > *.\i\ ■K. -? ''I'r ^ L«t? 4*;l|ioassfft ♦ . i»‘ » *f V > ’‘i:. ,<TS s -.l ’i.r"-- 1 *r* ’•• ^r- .: '■%irv * ■» jr-‘ • • T - *.:. ^ 11-W * •■^'*rsr* 'U""5 '-f^ ^*"^"*^* i • • JtmM? «*>r •v %£i Jim »o • •»- i ^ -r 2 -1 a r/ir i t-f it U^li ti%9 “-—••* — » • •i T* ► Z, c^o. •£ :t #?? • 9 ♦ 2 I I mJ0Ur9N ___ff wr I ••* \ / ” !Jr % ■ ♦* 1 5 *5"'.' s ^' ' . bo. _..J ■Ml *- ss 4 1 « ------,— _r —— ’•"'*’•■• \i - •• j ' n? * *' rm « # 1 • • ■ •i; ■ .■' m ■ 55 ,A.^^:;\. .::j '* • t ‘1 >. ,-• ■ .h i#4 V Hi. E 5;... ivnf-rf- • *• \ ••% *VV-J «:% *‘^iraL ‘ • ........... ■»• • / »%».*» — » —*«»• - •X.. «<• »JSS <•> i}.«. 1 1 ■■HH \i • ^ • i «• i .#i ‘ \ i ■r-^n 'i'-; i-V;. »..•* il '• Li V •••in Ir. . ' ;i -4: ■.:. • SSjS ^ H* in ttl. poiS'lilil M o ae p S SSi!x *«”li m->U!C p iSiSxSSS OC M ^ &-}g 9^Ch HI HI aKlo o a l?.iHI o £ cn HI §UI X $ o•1 Kl M QC si -IB Z S2z«».is, ^ M o o HI ^ ^h- T 5 —K1 O X QC _ m, M UJ O r-^ $1 2"8S< O K X *« £ =1 2" "Lxi*:i§iis "s:: SSSSS2 lAl Ii4 O Iftl SSS9 s •"2*Soa sl:§ii ui yj 1^ « B 2k 1 £eg yj m ty Q I H- M M H X A ^ a. a» Qt M ____ lU < -J -J H J I < o. lo e B IX _ tti M UI UI h» A A M a S o B a ^ £ >• UI H B □ Ui UI H «i m zUI M iSi 7 g;;|2 •U ^ -J Ui K UI ^ M 2*»8 “5S| UI cu «* !1S5I^p «J UI ^ £ 2^i S9e*ilUI a M 2 I flQ < €L I/I UI B M o -i r _ UI h» O ^ «i o «u B r^ ao o - 2 Sh. o CD n 3^ COcv 5 -o o CO < 1 i t s a § s o UU kXJ m<- o: ^ < UJ XM -i |8i «M 1 u. CD ^ ^-1 •«" 3= o u. ^r: cn CD i/' < ^ UI x:•a ^ o ex 00 ^ U. «< CO x: cn I— O W rH C/) » ®smi “!5l^ i-Ssi o o o « £ ■-TJI 'ur^ ##■IPWW"**K ■ ’r-i ' ^ ■■ *«a^ :h : < 35 O 00 ZI oo UI o >. f-l ex 1—4 3 X CM O h- 1 Z =3 00 o:: UI r—1 •0 1 ex VO - CDrooa OD oeoC /•£'-.,k^'' ■' ■’■ ■ ■•S im!- 8 I .V^- ;5-- • - _j_;;;V ■ .^ f: ■ ■* 4| P b ^•:V-.a/-, - F '■-*•■ ■■■' 41 f I,|-r: ft\'';' -‘I /■=>-:-r? [^ J' > . - > \ 1 • I I / / .’ • . I • /'' ; l^'.iil ./ / /■7/ ^ii,;/ v-i /■••■ Sot^ S^iyievrV Oytc^iA^ ^4L - f/amel ' j^#c8 ^ WC2^ - Kictc€AV</ 44 B *”/,«Sev4ifi ; /. r B " L€ST€^A. 6><- C. A ■ CoiCPoWi Pi^ ■ ^ fl/liA<4e )H-t - lfi4AitsH JliK. ■ - -r^ Vi f-.-^ •- ♦ :• % 1 WM ) &(H< x: S 11.33 „™,no „.. o “i .J"s.'.v\‘b‘sv, 'mfSi.'. r‘.’v/.i^‘n'?u-i u;: Snd^^Axtv ?lo) feet in a coomercial or industrial area. The topping ar« shall be designed to provide a naxiaum grade of t«o (2) percent. K Where any street intersection will involve earth h.nk. or existing vMetation inside any Irt corner that would P. The crown of all streets, including intersections, shall be three percent (3%) or less. Subd. 4. Typical Section. Tl^ typical section indicated as determined for a Clay Subgrade (A-6 Soil Classitica tlon) and may be subject to change. Soil borings may e requ re to be determined by the.City. Private Street - Residential Units 3-6 R.O.W.* 50* M.P.W.** 24* Section 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3* 2341 Bituminous Surface Over 7 50*28'8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface PublicStreet - Residential Units 3-10 R.O.W.* 50' M.P.W.** 28* Section 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Over 10 50*32'8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Maximum cul-de-sac length - 1,000' Maximum number of units on cul-de-sac - 10 Public Street - Commercial or Industrial Units 1+ R.O.W.* 70* M.P.W.** 32* Section 0•• cXsss 4 8" Class 5 100% crushed 4" 2341 Bituminous surface * Right-Of-Way Width ** Minimum Paved Width ORONO CC 462 (4-1-84) i\ i'IB" lU.PF V \ 1 > ^ /I i A ■ / /W 7 ; / i ' '• I Chores ■*VvV: s 11.33 signed with a flat i a residential area ustrial area. The laximum grade of two 1 will involve earth corner that would .ty, the subdivider ncluding trees) in -way to the extent uate sight distance. ree ts, .ess. including il section indicated l-6 Soil Classifica- ngs may be required 3S 5 100% crushed L Bituminous Surface 33 5 100% crushed L Bituminous Surface I iS 5 100% crushed L Bituminous Surface IS 5 100% crushed . Bituminous Surface 5 100% crushed Bituminous surface (4-1-84) ■ ■ 'A . "■■•J •I m I / • #7 f / » \ \ f »/ / f f* • X \ ■> -'X: \V ) ^ __________________IV I \ \ - { 1 T J7 ^ ^ ‘/,M W I - /. \ fi V a1 I M I • F* » ' * ^lli • ' i » * ‘I • ,.......... \ I u /, / /; I I //; f I I • J/^/ I I *\ •'i:-r ! J \^\\v \ .‘Ti\ A \ ' / vvvk';\\v\K' : • \ / \ \ A \ \V \ ’___L ^ li r\ 1 I U ■^N i,. VV\ \..Ml!v;y ! * I » # T ' %I • I w I t L i '/oo'* 'V -’r \ . ■ ? -:e^U£n ■/ % .A A'-: i-fT M A V J ■ f-'»-. ‘ i 'i f • f y i! \ \ •V \ / : ! I ! n^-/-f /./! I I • « tl iS''^ m ■i:- k •••in: M f :i\ -r, f•j •.•.•.• t ii mi r- r :M •1 %■% B><^>s/rs 4^/32>0 1^ <^*o^*ee^e& 4-trr®rSL_oF ^ foitrro/^ ftzeui^^ i^LA~r s/|Iouj /aJ£. ^ C»b*> XeerroM,* S^ P<9«-T70A> p^-w^i SM«»-^AJd* p/toftereli A«rc-T£S XnttVCMAys <?aj ^r-T 5 - ^ ^I«cvta ^ 'Jor« TWAT" /'^C , »A3 TVjo Ci/t<teK~ c«fcosX/w<iS^, ^^3 CfC4r>^ C-^otA uemf^ 9- f - 9ft ^^:b&eMUl/4^^^itic.Ar'A -7-0 9"/^ /V.enw-0 ; . AJoTC ‘rUArT’ L a-t 3 r«AJT-A,/Jl y. ?d> <lc.^ A<6 ’T' A'OT^Ci /f^ f^lCI^O ~ -TM1S UOTT f TCi i/A^i^AJCCF rD /4fieA /g,^; ^e>T^ 2. 4 3 - »« #r M ^ f, /A) z<>/u/mg ? <zas>es ^ /Ooj^ C^Airrfc^/S^ T7/V C» Tl> TT^tf" S"%0 A c , AM/AJ/r^uj/^ fT' /z AJo^“ f»<4ew€- k*0'Va># ^ /f- /j '/^Ct^tA.^4s^ As f^AArr OF 2.0 i>/tr ^l^iT74u^usJ i^irno^^ CASt^e^^^ yiHti2jr fs 2^, O ^Pam ^ h^>f ^T‘s 2.^ 3 , t ►-HrGT'T^ /6^, 2.0 5>^ e^Airv^vi^cK^ /a/ V^?.^ 3-vC>- /S"./, j__________________________________________________________________________________________________it______I : "J m^j. rf, 1 ■i4;.1 #: ^1 ••:V :.; :^X '■ .. * .:!:Si /f L- ■ - ' 'v' Septer City I P.O. I Cryst. Atten* Dear I En< road I wantei struc Al: in th( under 3 and Since) COFFII P/i^ Mark : MSG/II Encloi #« (lC so l» ?*r' -»<J -82» iAT" ^/i»OtM//J<, » ‘T'/i-sa) AAi SWO<^>/JC» e?/j 4 ot-t 5*4^ AJ07T« THAT HC SX'/w<iS^ , /6“ sa # # 'w s y. ^d> <c-. aJ ot - -T^r ^;or“ T© ^ i/AN«./«^d€r fD /4f^A 'f t7 A/ C» TO Sf*^c^ fT" /S AJO^“ Ae^sfx e'Aiev^t^T, ey^fs^T" y €.^/i^uA^ufr ^T-tc^u ^7^5 2. 3 Q^/siT'f6^dv^ /A/ ''V.- >■ ;f l< • T'^rr-TT**•••X, ■;%iiiW it^- • "* I r' COFFIN A GRONBERG, INC. 4«i A TAMAMACK AVINUI UINO LAICC. iMttNM. AMM 471*4141 September 19^ 1988 B©llD^[g t90B City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attention: Mike Qaffron Dear Mike: Enclosed are revised copies of the preliminary plat and road plan for PAINTERS WOODS. The Minnehaha Watershed District wanted us to shew the existing access easement to their weir structure. Also, because of this weir structure and subsequent storage in the wetlands, the culvert sizes are much smaller then those under County Road 6 allowing two driveway entrances for Lots 3 and 4. This has been approved by the watershed district. Sincerely, COFFIN & GRONBERG. INC. ^4t Mark S. Gronberg MSG/lh Enclosures tSt: m . :• '■ '; ■ ( •. -lii N '.VJ V 4 7 plat and ershed District .0 their weir lequent storage ler then those ices for Lots id district. V ■•'i ‘'■i 4 ”'*i ^ •* •• •• s 10.02 : or more guest meals for com-' inent guests or any guest room, rooms is made arson in charge. e, discarded or stored, baled, but not limited jbber products, ijunction with a nclosed area or al Code 9-14-67 which a deed or e office of the Hennepin County, approval by the ice No. 172 1-1-75 horizontal plane area occupied by area frequently \q higher land on I which has been the junction of, or a lot at the lous street, the 13, distance between 1 corner lot. ding a lot except public right-of- le of such public a lot which abuts e case of a corner Ic street. If the (4-1-84) 1^- ^ I jia^ i tK. I S 11.03 21„ "Improvements, Private" - Any improvement, required by this Chapter, which improvement the City or subdivider shall construct at subdivider*s expense and for which the City will not assume any responsibility for its maintenance and operation and which shall not be dedicated to the City. 22. "Improvements, Public" - Any improvement, required by this Chapter, which improvement the City or subdividet shall construct at subdivider's expense and for which the City will ultimately assume the responsibility for its maintenanr--* ai.d opera tion upon issuance of the certificate of satisfactory completion. 23. "Lot" - A tract, plot or portion of a subdivision or other parcel of laud intended as a unit the purpose, whether immediate or future, or transfer of ownership or for building development. Every platted lot shall be a buildable lot or an outlot. 24. "Lot Area, Minimum" - Each lot shall contain the minimum area required for each proposed lot as prescribed in the Zoning Chapter of the City Code. In rural zones not served by sanitary sewer, each lot must contain a minimum of two acres of contiguous dry buildable land exclusive of wetlands, public and private rights-of-way, vehicular or pedestrian easements, surface areas below the ordinary high water mark of any surface water or areas at or below the flood plain elevation for a specific property. All rural lots must comply with the City's on-site septic system provisions of the City Code. In urban areas served by sanitary sewer, each lot must contain contiguous dry buildable land equal to the minimum areas as prescribed in the Zoning Chapter of the City Code or half-acre, whichever is less, (exclusive of public and private rights-of-way, vehicular or pedestrian ease ments, surface areas below the ordinary high water mark of any surface water wetlands or areas at or below the flood plain eleva tion for a specific property) and have legal access to the building site without encroachment of a wetland or flood plain area. 25. "Lot, Buildable" - A lot or combination of lots or outlots which meet all of the requirements of the Zoning Chapter of the City Code and this Chapter for the intended purpose. 26. "Lot, Outlot" - A lot which is intended only for public or private roadways, open space or other use, which use must be restricted by the appropriate easement and which use must be approved by the City at the time of final >lat approval. The use of the outlot will thereafter be restricted by the appropriate restrictive covenant or open space easement. 27. "Lot, Corner" - A lot situated intersection of two (2) streets, the interior angle intersection not exceeding 135 degrees. at the of such ORONO CC 419 (4-1-84) * :w.*; * m Gvali facte use protc Perm, pur pc the < fulfi but I State cert: the floo part: lot 1 plat incr welf shai; elevi faci; road prott Wetl that an a area or p this Coun< and I been as n* prov flow in c af fe' ORON' r. S 11.03 y improvement, ty or subdivider ch the City will nd operation and ly improvement, ty or subdivider ch the City will inr ce and opera- try completion. portion of a I a unit for the of ownership or 1 be a buildable shall contain the trescribed in the IB not served by of two acres of ands, public and isements, surface surface water or for a specific e City's on-site [ban areas served DUS dry buildable he Zoning Chapter (s, (exclusive of pedestrian ease- ater mark of any lood plain eleva- is to the building Lain diea. mKmfBmmmwmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmrnmm mbination of lots bhe Zoning Chapter 3 purpose. intended only for se, which use must tfhich use must be approval. The use { the appropriate situated at the or angle of such (4-1-84) r m S 10.55 Subd. 13. City Determination. Based upon the technical evaluation of the designated engineer or expert, and based upon the factors listed above, the City shall determine whether the proposed use is in the floodway or flood fringe and the regulatory flood protection elevation at the site. Subd. 14. Conditions Attached to Conditional Us© Permits. Upon consideration of the factors listed above and the pjrposes of this Section, the City may attach such conditions to the granting of a conditional use permit as it deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of this Section. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: facilities. A. Modification of waste disposal and water supply B. Limitations on period of use, occupancy and operation. C. Imposition of operational controls, sureties, and deed restrictions. D. Requirements for construction of channel modifications, dikes, levees, and other protective measures. E. Flood proofing measures, in accordance with the State Building Code. The applicant shall submit a plan or document certified by a registered professional engineer or architect ^hat^ the flood proofing measures are consistent with the regulatory flood protection elevation and associated flood factors for th3 particular nd Development and Platting. No part of any lot wiVJ^-the^Flood^lain and Wetlands Conservation Area shall be platted fSf^'fesidential occupancy or for other uses which will increase the danger to health, life, property or the public welfare. All lots containing land within the flood plain districts shall contain a building site above the regulatory flood protection elevation. All subdivisions shall have water and sewage disposal facilities that comply with the provisions of this Section and have road access no lower ;han two feet below the regulatory flood protection elevation. Whenever a portion of the Flood Plain and Wetlands Conservation Area is located within or adjoins a land area that is being subdivided, the subdivider shall dedicate to the City an adequate perpetual easement over the land within the protected area and along each side of such area for the purpose of improving or protecting the area for drainage or other purposes expressed in this Section and other recreational uses, as determined by the Council. Public or private streets, driveways, drainage openings and culverts shall not be Jbnstructed unless the design thereof has been approved by the City, and such structures shall be designed so as not to restrict the flow of water. Subdivision applicants shall provide all certified engineering data, surveys, site plans, flowage calculations and other information as the City may require in order to determine the effects of such development on the affected land and water areas. • rl: ■i* ORONO CC 370 (4-1-84) To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Fr Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:September 14, 1988 Subject #1328 Howard B. Johnson, 1635 & 1675 Concordia Street - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Class I - Public Hearing Application ~ The Trainor House at 1675 Concordia Street encroaches approximately 1* over the lot line into the Johnson property at 1635 Concordia Street. The proposed lot line rearrangement places the Trainor house within its property boundaries. Zoning District - LR-IC, Single Family 1/2 Acre Minimum, Sewered! List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Proposed Registered Land Survey Discussion - I Howard Johnson of 1635 Concordia Street is in the process of selling his property which consists of approximately 3.9 acres. It came to light as a result of a recent property survey, that the neighboring Trainor residence at 1675 Concordia Street encroaches approximately 1' into the Johnson property. This subdivision is merely to provide an additional parcel of 336 s.f. to the Trainor property in order that their house at 1675 Concordia Street can be within its property boundaries. Although it is not dimensioned on the survey, the proposed Tract B to be transferred to Trainor, appears to leave a 5' setback from the Trainor residence to the new property line. In our LR-iC district, normally a 10' side setback is required. Staff would suggest that Planning Commission ask applicant to consider granting additional square footage for Tract B so that the normal 10' side setback can be accomplished. The current proposal increases the Trainor property to 0.434 acre in area. Staff Recommendation - Although it would appear that granting of additional area within Tract B to accomplish the 10' side setback standard would be a logical goal in this type of lot line rearrangement, applicant may have specific reasons why such an arrangement is not proposed. Regardless, the proposed lot line rearrangement, which places the Trainor house within its own property boundaries is a positive application and staff would recommend approval. i ^ vf'lJ ■ ■ '*4 Ar ^ CITY OF < PROPERTY Site Add Property Please c Attach 1 APPLICAN Nair 1 Add OHHER (i Kan Adc {i BXISTIIK Km De Pr' Pr PROPOSA i£ r street I - treet encroaches property at 1635 sment places the acess of selling It came to light hboring Tralnor :ely 1* into the e an additional their house at posed Tract B to rom the Trainor r normally a 10* j Commission ask for Tract B so o 0.434 acre in :ea within Tract ogical goal in pacific reasons oposed lot line s own property nd approval irtMf t!! CITY OF ORONO - S0«>IV1SI0N AFPLICATIOII PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address I Z<r - Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) \'T ■--TZ-'Z--i 5,.i7 f ir Please check one - Property abstract or torrens?k i w ? - fc tm : : w I ii^r**tiv4. u'j •r,-', ,V, ».w‘V • VV ”A r:A 01 OEU L r“k*T * L *-w' w‘ m w V - T— T- t vi'ii T!-’* Attach legal description to application. •• •• •• •• •• 4*1 MR M» MV VM VM VM MV MV MV MV 4M W VM W MV MV MV MV M^ VIV MV MR MR MV MV VM MV MV MV MV VM MV MV MV < APPLICANT Phone (home) U 1 \ r' Name V-( <? . C) r AO •vw/ iO. Phone (work)11 I Address s ] G OWNER (if different than applicant) Name City; t - Phone (home)_ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (wc rk) Zip: Address: (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Niimber of Tax Parcels _ Development Size City;Zip: Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Totals all parcels Present Use (check)Residential; no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ / I /' A. *7^.Present Zoning District^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PROPOSAL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites ‘ . 1 . . Number of Building Sites:1 Existing Units •> ‘ .-•»»New Units Total Units $ V Proposed Gross Density:1 i'Units per Acres Minimum Lot Size:JL X Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use; (check)Residential Other (specify) IPIW i-:P:- tV'Vi r-. « MINIMUM MATER 1.Complete 2.Prelimin 3,Certifie this lis 348-3271 4.Stampedi names on obtained 5.As an ad any othe Certif Icatio: complete . Zoning Offici 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment • Signed c< Title op Easement Develope: Certification Zoning Offici. FEES Sketch Prelim: Prelinu Final 1 *(Plus The applican requested by Planning Comm further agrees Applicant's Sd Owner's Signal Applicant musi Planning Comm: t?hird Monday review meetincm unable to att authorized age Office of this r • / i f D nz*w^ / I l/^ i^iAr'ALil U:^ r iCE .. , *>i/* L / ms? <} #n^/tt 01 Oti^ {j I L. • — •. ^ ^ •, / * I If ru* V » V V U 7 / J<Oi TIC: ■ :z -T-ZT- -• i-^ij^XOU AO / If •• V'-'.' A'i*. 4 Zip:_£lL_2_fZ :k) Zip: parcels > of units r building sites) j Units :s tits sr 14-Acres Dry Bulldable Land :ial specify) m \e • -I ?LKTB PRSLIMIMARX APPLICATIORMIHIMOM material ireCBSSARY FOR C 1. Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate cf Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this jist from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names cn the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property o%mers list). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. 5. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. ... _ _ . ..... Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, Covenants, etc. ... Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature. . . .. . . . . Date : FBBS Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) $150.00 250.00 Preliminary Review .(Class III and all non-residential) 300.00 4* 20.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 150.00* The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. _ Applicant's Signature ' - • / Owner's Signature Date Date 7 ~<P' ^ I ”7 ^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the Vhird 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. *rfr^. . , Vi [.IGATION rey, 50' (you must obtain 36 A-603 Govt Center tsed to each of the use address labels a separate list of aticn. lat Application Is Date /ater assessments), nnal plat. cation is complete Date $150.00 250.00 itial)300.00 + 20.00/Lot 150.00* nation required or ar. City Attorney, his application and y ordinance. :e :e -!?'w \~y —5? if 25 days before the gs are held on the ^ at all scheduled If an applicant is gements to have an Building & Zoning -•■ V' IMP* m I Sf*l♦M s3 oc s Hin >•m sM K ►- in M I i >- >• 8! XMa CO ■ e UJ h- < Q #n oo s q: u H m 0 -J C> lU <e tt K ji;. lU u. X X H1 K Ul U. O •a r* si ^ Q o O U| t in M K I tn X H K UJ UJ I T*r'»§io cn < o X ( ^ o -> O c S S pg s * oo O UJ Q m X Ud €si ji =ii I _ O IT CO ^ 2 mow a 5^ Ot Q q: Q _ tt < UJ CL ui a X o X X < CL 5 < z a o H ■ 7i-:M v^V-. V -jl :t'- ^ pJ-:-. .if? .V:':-:-}; ^:' ■^r11 S t0i • MJ S3 S »4or a ita 83 (0 CK I4l 8^ S >- I i;o 8 2a «ose CO UJ < K% Oo fc! 10 S O mJ G m < o as ^ m &o $ M ^ SSg^J ?e < < X 407588*“' ^ Q Ul UJ Ipu e N X H* ::i* <o SS 8 oro os Ul ^ lo z ^ (5 X lo M ^ !u lU S to si “ I N _ UJ ^ 0> -.f §1^ o z ^ o -> u o ^ « o<» K o: ^ osQ p^ X UJ eg or ^ O K» 10 ^ q: UJ loimi xS^i ''255«g m o CO 5S ^ QC O UJ o < tt Q O X UI 9 *< >- \ . a < ui 0. UJ Q. X O X X < q: X < X GL o H* .-1 A po po lO •g I ps* s PO PO PO <g I o <0or q: lui u. I CO CD if O^ lO B tt S s UJ UJ •J «J < (0 CO or eg PO po PO PO eg fo.:: SI C9 (0or UJ UJ CO CO 9^ CV‘ 4* *9 lO ^ mJ ex a UJ UJ «i< ta < < H(0 o ex lU IX Z IXo P < OS ^ P Z UJ ex < u2 ex UJ Q» O X X? 3 < a. o p- • M 9^4* PO lO PO eg I -• 2 » e < UJ u eg I- ^ O eg iu X ae 3 |»SS s*Ssui m ul exX «i O Mo ^ < O U kO U. _ ex P Q ttl <4 U. O UJ M=g, PO oro Ui 4 8^ — Z Z X lO •VP H* M M lO 40 w X S2 SPeg H» M M sill 33|£ o «ex ex9 UJ UI CO ^ O B ex m 10POo O lO PO PO eg I I €0o O COex (XUI UJ 0 P Q Q egli" 4 PO to to B B X Z O Xs UI UI p PO < CD O ex Ui B Z O < 3 = a£ Si CL O B O B O UJ -< >- \ •< UJ CL Z X 4 t 9 p £ 3 PO PO PO tg I N Im £ S|§8 -'8 B UJ CO lU H ^ X 9» P'^ s < e; -e tr < N 10 U CL 4 PO to r- to PO PO PO eg I lx UJ Q “s SS pItsa K 10 IP s •J Ik. UJ® H < K ex »g I- M 5 N CO a CL 4 s too o i§ po PO —i cj eg O PO -I Z X o PO eg I N UJ eg P- o eg UI r B i ?:is I €0 S*S3 PPO UJ P u» r -j S M O 4 a u p u. ex r 4 ex o IX o - ° ax^< _ ex 4 UJ a UJ a z o z X 4 IX 2 4 z 0.0 1^ m»8S 4 UJ U» O ft U. PO X ^ loiS P 8 w I ? eg K ft ^ X us Z UI 4 S8;e ex X p UJ lO pe ipi« > ^ X 4 P-* IP o P c^ IkO siisi o 3 y?ex p .3 P O UI 8 PO s ^ ^ ^ M IH 8= -^51S~»§i :is•< ->IP e ex ftQ p p o PO exo p O UJ p eg 2 3i 33“S Z Z UI to 338“* O 0 X I P o o to CP* P PO P o UI UJ z u u M M o 55» “> “> p ex a 4 ex Q *P9 111 UJex z o O Z UJ 4 >• a UJ a o N UJ s «W ^i3l ■ •• mi^ mf I , V ■• ' • • .. -■ f H t»i p 9 O B •f ^ / 9’Cy-rr--^ (M O 0 H* O H* ft _ OE O QZU,^ _ ft < tu CL Ui CL 2: 0 2X5 O H ^ \ ■■5E855|3 fc UJ M- Z X M tU K 0 IdSj« id Ik U. M ft 0 \# ? .{ r Prom Bates Planning Coimnission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning £ Zoning Administrator September 13, 1988 S»bj«:t» #1330 Fullerton Properties, Ino., 880 Townline Road - Class III Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Applieatioc - A 7 lot residential subdivision with private road. *o«lng District - ER-IA, Rural Residential, Unsewered, 5-Acre Minimum I-ist of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit P - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Preliminary Plat Survey ^ Air Photo Soil Survey Map Overlay Soil Association Diagram Portions of Proposed Road Plan *. Regarding ReouiredRoad width staff Diagram Indicating Slopes Exceeding 6% Pertinent Facts - Subdivision Specificatirmc 1. 2. 3. seven lots are proposed; each contains 5.0 acres or more in area Each lot has 2.0 acres or more of contiguous dry buildable land. Lots requiring width variance (300 feet required): Lot # 2 4 5 Defined Width at Setback Line ^8 5 • 175* 150* Variance 15* 125* 150* ' 'u^f- -i-^ • > ■■ ^ g Administrator i^nline Road - c Hearing private road. id, 5-Acre Minimum Regarding Required seding 6% cres or re in area. dry buildable land. ired): ance 5* 5' 3* I 1 ■ ul <1 W fi r Zoning File #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 2 of 5 4. Road length proposed is 1,000'; proposal is for a 50' outlot with 100' cul-de-sac; paved road section is proposed as urban (with curbs rather than shoulders), 24' paved width is proposed (note: Code Section 11.33, Subdivision 4 (P) requires 24' paved width for "more than- seven lots being served, 24* for *3 through 6- lots, but does not define for seven lots. . .) 5. The road access point onto Townline Road is directly across from a private road in Independence; sight distance appears to be adequate and has been approved by the Public Works Director, ^ This will be a private road, subject to the normal ownerships and! maintenance covenants• 7. Access for Lots 3 and 4 will require crossing Painter's Creek; ^^®c:ommends a single shared creek crossing point adjacent to the cul-de-sac, at the shared lot line. 8. As of this writing, the City Engineer has not commented regarding wnether special outlet structures will be required where run-off leaves the cul-de-sac area near the creek. Applicant's surveyor has noted that they are working with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District regardinc puecifics of this application. B) Buildabilitv; 1. Each lot contains at least 1.5 to 2.0 acres with slopes at 6% or flatter. This should allow for development of mound-type septic systems which are anticipated to be necessary on most of the lots, to high water table soils. 2, Soil types on the property, according to the soil survey, include extensive areas mapped as Hamel loam, Kilkenny loam and clay loam, and lesser areas of Lester, Lerdal, and LeSeur soils. All but the Hamel are normally considered to be suitable for mound type septic systems, with the Lester often being suitable for trenches. Futi Sti surroun the eas neighbo density connectj Th€ Flowage Easemen' Creek in roadway easement or a 50* outlet with as urban (with curbs oposed (note: Code ived width for "more jh 6" lotSr but does rectly across from a }ears to be adequate ormal ownership and .ng Painter's Creek; oint adjacent to the commented regarding tired where run-off Icant's surveyor has ha Creek Watershed ith slopes at 6% or ' mound-type septic Dst of the lots, *^’ie oil survey, include It and clay loam, and All but the E£unel :ype septic systems. it':-.; 'J •V* t ff> V r Ml, Zoning Pile #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 3 of 5 The areas mapped by the Soil Survey as Famel are likely incorrect, given that by definition Hamel scil normally occurs in flatter depressions between steeper hills, and the soil survey overlay onto the topographical survey shows Haunel in areas of 6% to 18% slopes, not very likely (see Exhibit G, Soil Association Diagram from Soil Survey). 3. Orono Codes do not require septic testing at the time of subdivision for lots exceeding five acres in area unless unusual site conditions are anticipated. This code requirement presumes that it is fo determine where houses will be located on a five—acre property, and that most lots containing five dry buildable acres have a very high likelyhood that suitable sites exist on the property. For this currently proposed subdivision, staff would recommend that soil borings be completed by the applicant's consultant for Lots 2 and 6, both of which indicate that the flatter areas of the property are mapped as Hamel soils. Staff feels it is appropriate at this time to request this information to determine whether suitable mound sites are feasible on those two lots. Staff will work with applicant's consultant regarding the location and number of borings required. C) Future Road Extensions: Staff and the City Engineer have reviewed the development in the surrounding properties in relation to the need for fut’^re road access to the east or south. Staff and the City Engineer concur that, since the neighboring properties are generally developed to the maximum five acre density for this area, under the current zoning standards no future road connections would be anticipated. D) Easements Required; The City will require dedication on the plat of Conservation and Flowage Easements over the wetlands occurring in Lots 2 and 3, and an Easement of a width yet to be determined along the length of Painter's Creek in Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5. Additi'>nally, the standard 10 ’ perimeter and roadway drainage and utility easements will be required, as well as similar easements 5' in width each side of interior lot lines. ' ^\ m Zoning Pil September Page 4 of Roadwa The p the City f. F) Park F< The Pi 5+ acre lol Discussion This ( each lot a] family res: 1. Dc the en 2. Ar not sh' Two qu- the City En< 1. Wi- a publ road ei 2. Doe at the hence ^ at the The Put a need for a '.mm likely incorrect/ accurs in flatter urvey overlay onto to 18% slopes/ not diagram from Soil g at the time of nless unusual site ^resumes that it is :ed on a five-acre ildable acres have the property. iild recommend that :ant for Lots 2 and f the property are te at this time to >le mound sites are with applicant's ngs required. svelopment in the •re road access to r that, since the maximum five acre :ds no future road Conservation and i 2 and 3, and an ngth of Painter's 10' perimeter and IS well as similar L 4 ir. Zoning Pile #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 4 of 5 E) Roadway Dedication: The proposed plat indicates 33' of right-of-way will be dedicated to the city for Townline Road right-of-way. P) Park Fees: The Park Dedication Fee per the current City Pee Schedule of $100 per 5+ acre lot shall be paid with the final subdivision application. Disciissioo - This proposed subdivision appears to have been well thought out, with each lot appearing to contain suitable areas for construction of single family residences. Items for further discussion at this time may include: 1. Does the developer propose any permanent signage or imonuments at the entry to the subdivision? 2. Are there any specific grading proposals for berms, etc. that are not shown on the preliminary plat drawings? Two questions staff will address at the meeting after discussions with the City Engineer: 1. With the minimal likelyhood that the City would take this over as a public road in the foreseeable future, is the island in the private road entry a cause for concern? 2. Does the City Engineer have any concerns regarding run-off control at the cul-de-sac area, given that the road is intended to be curbed, hence virtually all run-off will be transported directly to an outlet at the Creek? The Public Works Director has indicated this proposal will not create a need for any upgrading of Townline Road. i- ■h ll •Vi ..r t'KR Zoning Fil September Page 5 of Staff Reca Staff 1. L< 2. p] maintf 3. Ac subjec and tl* 4. Pi consul the pi 5. Oe the we deterir and 5. 6. Dec 10' al interic 7. Dec Road. 8. Pay 9. Sub structu 10. Pr; specifi etc.) tl I ^mjl Jt C . t-.r will be dedicated to Schedule of $100 per pplication. sll thought out, with istruction of single his time may include: jnage or monuments at berms, etc. that are fter discussions with ild take this over as sland in the private rding run-off control itended to be curbed, iirectly to an outlet osal will not create ■r1 « iJ t .V. •• h'-i mu '■ fl-*; Zoning Pile #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 5 of 5 Staff Rec [atioa - Staff would recommend preliminary approval subject to the following: 1. Lot width Variances granted for Lots 2, 4 and 5 2. Private road will be subject to the normal private ownership and maintenance covenants, and underlying road and utility easements. 3. Access for Lots 3 and 4 shall share a single creek crossing point. subject to any permits which may be required by the Watershed District and the DNR. 4. Prior to preliminary plat review by the Council, applicant's consultant shall provide borings confirming acceptable soil types on the property. 5. Dedication on the plat of Conservation and Plowage Easements for the wetland in Lots 2 and 3, and a Drainage Easement of yet-to-be- determined width along the length of Painter's Creek in Lots 2, 3. 4 and 5. 6.^ Dedication on the plat of standard Drainage and Utility Easements 10' along perimeter and roadway lot lines and 5' either side of interior lot lines. 7. Dedication on the plat of 33' of City right-of-way for Townline Road. 8. Payment of Park Fees of $100 per lot per the current fee schedule. 9. Subject to additional requirements regarding drainage easements or structures as may be required by the City Engineer and M.C.W.D. 10. Prior to Council preliminary plat review, applicant shall provide specifications for any signage, monuments, or unusual grading (berms, etc.) that may be proposed. X . m • tm •Add] (ai BXISTIR6 Nuilll Dev< Prej Pres PROPOSAL ; j j . i- - - \**X#D« / ________________ iu^*Vv/WVVW CITY. CF . Fltmt OFFICE . (Zi 300.CC o the following:- 01 CEH -1290. OC C}W( R ■♦ A'-« w ^ V • V\' /ate ownership and ty easements. ek crossing point, Watershed District icil, applicant's ble soil types on age Easements for nt of yet-to-be- Bk in Lots 2, 3, 4 Utility Easements ' either side of way for Townline ent fee schedule. nage easements or nd M.C.W.D. int shall provide 1 grading (berms. ; •> -4 i .1 f--■ ^H If: “?f V. : -I Property Identification Number Please check one - Property J< abstract or :... : .. RECEIFT-TmK.m Attach "legal description'to application. -- - - 3tlOS3C^^^^l^i~T09i APPLICANT -----Phone-(home) Name Fw^U-CA^dfJ filLo^< CTit4>jXf/C Phone (work) C 11 ---- Address: )^V<. City: S V OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ^_ _ _' Phone (home) Phone (work) Address: m • ^city:Zip: e (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND OSB Number of Tax Parcels . 2. Development Size _ • e • flis* Nk 4^ 3?.^ Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels » . . . . . /. 7 / m ^ «m ^ • m ' Present Use (check)Residential; no. of units Other (specify) ✓ 1^00^1 ......t* .. • • Present Zoning District /A PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes - - - -__ J- - - - - Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no *new building sites) V 'N , V r'* _ Subdivision for New Building jSites Number of Building Sites: ^ • * • - W - s. Existing Units New Units Total Units I % Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Units per / Acres * . ». - . j* 2^3. ^00 t Sq Feet Dry Bui Idable Land >c_Residential Other (specify) m M 't li MATE] Complett Prelimii Certif i< this li 348-327; Stamped names o obtaine< As an a< any oth< Certificati< complete. Zoning Offic: 1.Payment 2.Signed < 3.Title o| 4.Easeinenl 5.Develops Certificatioi Zoning Offic: FEES Sketcl Prelis X Prelis 7 4 or Final *(Plu« The applies: requested b^ Planning Comi further agree Applicant's £ Owner's Signe Applicant mus Planning Comr third Monday review meetir unable to at authorized ac Office of thj • —?.r ♦ • mT •» '. . I ■ CITY. OF cr<m ■ .FINOHS OFFICE . ■ US0200000 . 3W.K . ^^hoooco: :-- ■■ ■ " . 01 'CEH CHECK TL ■■-1590.00 .. RECEiFT-nm.ym ■__iiOCSOO coot FtOlIJO?.: ziot • 7. * • _Zip: i» ^ « »• I «• •« ✓ * " • 4 ^reels fAcfH^iAf-ro*.t(t units /f/fca ^ _~ •••••« 4A . « ildlng sites)••• ^ V- # • ^ ^ mm its , •• • ^ »<*■ •. •• • * a. . . *X / Acres . Buildable Land ify) tA •• 1"^ Ti ) ■■ -jii MIHIlfOM MATBRIAL HBCBSSARY FOR O la Completed Application Form •,«IPLS^ PRSLIMIHARY APPLICATION 5. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of o\«iers within 350* (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). Stamped, legal si'zed envelopes (110) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 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. <0 Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date PEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) $150.00 250.00 Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) 300.00 *<■ •7 JOo ~ ^^0 ^ AO40 iSOO t /.f6o C'^o) ' ^/T^O 20.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 150.00* The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. 4Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature Date f/9/i’?' - -^Date // / Applicant must hav^^^jril submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. mm • i the private road [*** VERIFY DESCRIPTION •••) for the private use and enjoyment of the Owners and their respective familiesr tenantsr guests and invitees. The Association shall maintain the trail. Trail maintenance shall include without limitation the following: clearing the surface of ice and debris; repairing the trail surface and the slopes; and controlling erosion. Bicycles, tricycles and household pets, such as dogs and cats, are allowed on the trail, but motor vehicles and horses are prohibited. Section 6. Other Common Facilities. The Association, acting through its board of directors, shall have the right to install additional facilities in the Common Areas for the use and enjoyment of all the Owners; but no other group of Owners and no individual Owner shall have the right to install any facilities in the Common Areas, whether for the private use of one or more Owners or for the common use of all Owners. The Association shall maintain all facilities owned by the Association on the Common Areas. Section 7. Costs. The Association shall operate and main tain the Common Areas and the Association's improvements thereon, at the cost of all the Owners. Such costs are Common Expenses included in the Common Assessments made by the Association. How ever, if the need for maintenance or repair of any part of the Common Area or the improvements thereon is caused through the willful or negligent acts of an Owner, or through the willful or nMligent acts of the family, guests or invitees of an Owner, tHan the cost of such maintenance or repair shall be added to and become part of the assessment to which the Owner's Lot is sub ject. ARTICLE IV INSURANCE Section 1. Casualty Insurance on Insurable Common Area. The Association shall keep all insurable improvements and fixtures of the Common Area insured against loss or damage by fire or other casualty and may obtain insurance against such ocher hazards that are normally covered by the standard extended coverage endorsement; and all other perils customarily covered for similar types of projects, including those covered by the standard "All Risk” endorsement. Such insurance shall cover 100% of the current replacement cost of the property covered. The Association may also insure any other property whether real or personal, owned by the Association, against loss or damage by fire and such other hazards as the Association may deem desir able, with the Association as the Owner and beneficiary of such insurance. The insurance coverage with respect to the Common Area shall be written in the name of, and the proceeds thereof shall be payable to the Association. Insurance proceeds shall be used by the Association for the repair or replrcement of the property for which the insurance was carried. Premiums for all - 5 - Sv- & lii IM'I L . ■m N j I r1 insurance c in the C •JMM* Sect ioi maintain li against cla. about the dollars ($1 Board deems Sectioi blanket fid« agents who Association, in the possi less than Association Sectior of damage t the Associa’ ranee proce< ficient to property dai struction A: tional cost proceeds, i against the Sectior provisions c in conformit Sectior Association by the FNMA insurance p< Board of Oi whether the make any ne< have been da Section Association. Association, separated fr ment. private use families, lintain the tation the pairing the Bicycles, ire allowed Lted. isociation, e right to :he use and lers and no facilities ne or more Association Lon on the and main is thereon, m Expenses lion. How- art of the hrough the willful or an Owner, Ided to and ot is sub- Common ements and damage by ainst such d extended ly covered red by the cover 100% ^ered. The sr real or damage by eem desir- ry of such the Common ds thereof Is shall be !nt of the ns for all insurance carried by the Association are Common Expenses included in the Common Assessments made by the Association. Section 2. Liability Insurance. The Association shall maintain liability insurance for the protection of all Members against claims arising out of injuries or damages sustained on or about the Common Areas in an amount of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence or such higher amount as the Board deems appropriate. Section 3. Fidelity Bond. The Association shall maintain blanket fidelity bonds for all Association officers, employee.-^ agents who handle or are responsible for the funds of the Association. The bonds shall be in an amount equal to all funds in the possession of the Association at any time and in no event less than three months assessments for all Lots plus the Association reserve funds. Section 4. Replacement or Repair of Property. In the event of damage to or destruction of any property of the Association, the Association shall repair or replace the same from the insu rance proceeds available. If such insurance proceeds are insuf ficient to cover the costs of repair or replacement of the property damaged or destroyed, the Association may make a Recon struction Assessment against all Lot Owners to cover the addi tional cost of repair or replacement not covered by the insurance proceeds, in addition to any other Common Assessments made against the Lot Owners. Section 5. Coverage, Loss Adjustment. The coverage and provisions of all insurance obtained by the Association shall be in conformity with FNMA requirements. Section 6. Other Insurance? Annual Review of Policies. The Association shall maintain any other insurance required by law or by the FNMA or that it determines desirable and appropriate. All insurance policies shall be reviewed at least annually by the Board of Directors of the Association in order to ascertain whether the coverage contained in the piolicies is sufficient to make any necessary repairs or replacement of property which may have been damaged or destroyed. ARTICLE V MEMBERSHIP AND VOTING RIGHTS Section Association. Association, separated fr ment. !• Every Lot is subject to assessment by the Every Owner of a Lot shall be a member of the Membership shall be appurtenant to and may not be a ownership of any Lot which is subject to assess- - 6 5. Se< members ex< VO' Owi Shi SOI wh: OWI to fo: Sec levy asi safety, the imp; reasonab ment. Sec Assessme perties, tance of in such Associat Art Art and included sn shall L Members ned on or i million nt as the maintain loyee& or ( of the all funds no event plus the bhe event Delation, bhe insu' re insuf- of the a Recon- :he addi- insurance nts made irage and shall be Les. The }y law or ate. All y by the ascertain Lcient to fhich may by the r of the ly not be > assess- Section 2. The Association shall have two classes of voting ttembership: Class A. Class A members shall be all Owners, with the exception of the Declarant, and shall be entitled to one vote for each Lot owned. When more than one person is the Owner of a Lot, all such persons may be members and each shall be entitled to a fraction of a vote equal to the per son's fractional ownership of the Lot. Class B. The Class B member shall be the Declarant, forwhich shall be entitled to three (3) votes for each Lot owned. The Class B membership shall cease and be converted to Class A membership on the happening of either of the following events, whichever occurs earlier: (a) when 75% of the Lots have been conveyed of record to Owners other than the Declarant; or (b) seven years after the first Lot is conveyed of record to an Owner other than the Declarant. ARTICLE VI COVENANT FOR ASSESSMENTS Section 1.. Purpose of Assessments. The Association may Tuslevy assessments exclusively to promote the recreation, health, safety, and welfare of the residents in the Properties and for the improvement and maintenance of the Common Area, including reasonable reserves for future repairs, maintenance and replace ment. Section 2. Creation of the Lien and Personal Obligation for Assessments. The Declarant, for each Lot owned within the Pro perties, Hereby covenants, and each Owner of any Lot by accep tance of a deed therefor, whether or not it shall be so expressed in such deed, is deemed to covenant and agree to pay to the Association: (a) Annual Assessments per Section 3 of this Article; (b) Emergency Fund Assessments per Section 4 of this Article; (c) Sinking Fund Assessments per Section 5 of this Article; and (d) Capital Assessments per Section 6 Of this Article; (e) Special Assessments per Section 7 of this Article. - 7 - real*, ispSSii •i Such assess end reasons the forecl< Lots and si each such together w attorneys' person who ment fell < ments shall assumed by charge the Sectioi defray thosi frequently, bonds, operj the Annual Annual Asse: January 1, be Lot. There each year n percentage 1 the increas Netropolitar Statistics, ship. The J rate only b voting in p< purpose. the first d Lot by th( Assessment remaining Directors s each Lot al year. Writ every Owner. Directors ai frequently t Section (a) meet unforesc The Emergency estimated Ann i ' asses of votin# wnersr with the intitled to one i person is the ambers and each al to the per- the Declarantr t for each Lot nd be converted either of the len conveyed of t; or jOt is conveyed larant. ssociation may sation, health, »erties and for Lrea, including :e and replace- Obligation for rithin the Pro- Lot by accep- be so expressed to pay to the this Article; tion 4 of this ion 5 of this C this Article; e this Article. f- Such assessments, together with late penalties, interest, costs and reasonable attorneys* fees for the collection thereof and for the foreclosure of the lien thereof, shall be a charo# on Ihl Moh • continuing lien upon the Lots against which each such assessment is made. Each assessment against a Lot t^ether with late penalties, interest, costs a2d reasonibli attorneys fees, shall also be the personal obligation of the person who was the Owner of the Lot at the time when the assess- ment fell due. The personal obligation for delinquent assess ments shall not pass to his successors in title unless exoresslv assumed by them. The sale of a Lot shall not operate to dis charge the seller's personal liability. ^ Section 3. Annual Assessments. defray "Annual Assessments" to ^equently, including without limitation: taxeS“ iLSran^^ bonds, operations, maintenance and minor repairs. urance. the Annual*an aioun\“ no to this subsection. Until y ' Maximum Annual Assessment shall • Tt'ereafter the Maximum Annual Assessment ^may be increasedeach vear not more ___ _ _ _ xnuireasea pircentaae for Maximum Annual Asse^mfnt the inV^Ms. * percentage not more thanthe increase in the consumer price index for the Twin Cities Stlti5tics“"wht^h“ P“t>lished by the O.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, whichever is greater, without a vote of the member- Assessment may be increased abovi this rate only by a majority vote of each class of members who are pSr^le.^" person or by proxy, at a meeting duly called for this t-hA firtxh Assessments shall be due as to all Lots on Lot ^hJ month following the conveyance of the firstthe Declarant to any purchaser tha re** AnMumi Assessment may be adjusted according to the number of months remaining in the Association's fiscal year. The Board of each'Lot* at * amount of the Annual Assessment against vear Wrl^t«i®no^< days in advance of each fiscal Lfrv Annual Assessment shall be sent to DireL^a aAa mil® k“® ‘*®*^®® established by the Board of ?JJ|Sen”y%"h^rs"em"f-an°nu?Uy.'^*^“®"“^ ‘*’®" Emergency Fund Assessment. . - Association shall establish a separate fund to expenses or emergencies (the "Emergency Fund") The Emergency Fund shall at all times be equal to tSr^2) mSnth^ estimated Annual Assessment for each Lot, but the amounts paid - 8 - 1 i [ r into t of Ann "Emerg Fund s of the after pay €i Associ. funds the sa level replen Assess! S< fund ( replace after « improv! sewer : determ: schedu! Sinkii increa! is ex{ Sinkini quate i may le the exi Fund i whenevi improv4 "Capitf in sue: but no semiani expect< est, costs (Of and for rge on the iinst which 1st a Lot, reasonable Lon of the he assess* nt assess* expressly te to dis* sments" to ly or more insurance. >n may fix le Maximum )n. Until nt shall ) per increased Assessment more than in Cities of Labor le member* ibove this s who are for this 1 Lots on the first It Annual )f months Board of t against :h fiscal i sent to Board of i no less e fund to f Fund"). 2) months ints paid into the Emergency Fund shall not be considered advance payments of Annual Assessments. (b) The Emergency Fund shall be established by "Emergency Fund Assessments." Each Lot's share of the Emergency Fund shall be collected from the Owner at the closing of the sale of the Lot from the Declarant to the Owner. Within one year after the closing of the sale of the first Lot, Declarant shall pay each unsold Lot's share of the Emergency Fund to the Association. Declarant shall be reimbursed for this payment from funds collected from the various Lot C-r^ners at the closings of the sale of the Lots from the Declarant «o the Owners. (c) Whenever the Emergency Fund is depleted below the level set forth in Subsection (a), the Association shall replenish the Emergency Fund by levying additional Emergency Fund Assessments against all the Lots and their respective Owners. Section 5. Sinking Fund Assessments (a) The Association shall establish a separate reserve fund ("Sinking Fund") to provide cash for major repairs and replacement of those improvements in the Common Area that will, after a number of years, need major repairs or replacement. Such improvements include, without limitation, the road, the storm sewer facilities, the entrance monument and the pedestrian trail. (b) The Board of Directors shall, in good faith, determine the useful life of such improvements and an appropriate schedule of Sinking Fund Assessmentv such that each year the Sinking Fund Assessments are appropMately equal or gradually increasing and such that, when each major repair or replacement is expected to occur, there will be sufficient cash in the Sinking Fund. (c) If for any reason the Sinking Fund is ever inade* quate to fund a major repair or replacement, then the Association may levy a Capital Assessment (pursuant to Section 6) to defray the extra cost. Section 6. Capital Assessments. (a) Whenever the Board determines that the Sinking Fund is inadequate to fund a major repair or replacement and whenever the Members decide to install additional capital improvements to the Common Area, the Association may levy a "Capital Assessment." (b) Each Capital Assessment shall be due and payable in such installments as the Board of Directors shall determine, but no more frequently than monthly and no less frequently than semiannually, and in any event shall be fully paid within the expected useful life of the improvement. * 9 * Sect sible fo] the Asso< Lot and j in such frequent] and in ar Sect Under Sec the pur of this days, first entitle members not prc notice meeting precedi than 60 Sect shall be Assessmen whom the opportuni Sect and drair of all Ic no houses fere with struction side 30 £ City Cour backs are tions (a) conducted of each I are measu yard sett Outlet B mon bourn standing ce payments >lished by e Emergency of the sale n one year irant shall nd to the ayment from :losings of 3 below the bion shall rgency Fund Owners. ate reserve epairs and that will, ment• Such the storm rian trail. ood faith, appropriate ih year the : gradually replacement »sh in the ever inade- Association ) to defray ;he Sinking icement and al capital nay levy a and payable determine, uently than within the I* - i m-4 ■;* \ IV* - • . •k: -1 .1 ■mmmm r:;--•v:¥ i. Section 7. Special Assessments. (a) Whenever a Lot and its Owner is separately respon sible for maintenance or repair of any part of the Common Area, the Association shall levy a "Special Assessment" against that Lot and its Owner. (b) Each Special Assessment shall be due and payable in such installments as the Board shall determine, but no more frequently than monthly and no less frequently than semi-annually and in any event shall be fully paid within one year. Section 8. Notice and Quorum for Any Action_Authorised Under Sections 3 and 5. Written notice of any meeting called for the purpose of taking any action authorized under Section 3 or 5 of this Article shall be sent to all members not less than 30 days, nor more than 60 days, in advance of the meeting. At the first such meeting called, the presence of members or of proxies entitled to cast a majority of all the votes of each class of membership shall constitute a quorum. If the required quorum is not present, another meeting may be called subject to the same notice requirement, and the required quorum at the subsequent meeting shall be one-half (1/2) of the required quorum at the preceding meeting. No such subsequent meeting shall be held more than 60 days following the preceding meeting. Section 9. Uniform Rate of Assessment. All Assessments shall be fixed at an equal rate for all Lots, except that Special Assessments shall be levied against only those Lots and Owners whom the Board determines (after notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard) to be responsible. Section 10. Setbacks. (a) The recorded plat of MEYERS WOODS public utility and drainage easements have been dedicated along the perimeters of all loti? (*"* certain lots? Within said easement areas no houses or other improvements shall be built that would inter fere with utilities or drainage. (b) Ordinances of the City of Orono prohibit con struction of buildings within the front 50 feet, rear 50 feet and side 30 feet of each Lot. Said ordinances may be changed by the City Council. For this purpose, front, rear and side yard set backs are measured pursuant to municipal ordinances. (c) In addition to the setbacks described in subsec tions (a) and (b), no clearing, grading or construction shall be conducted within the front 25 feet, rear 25 feet and side 10 feet of each Lot. For this purpose, for each Lot front yard setbacks are measured from the Lot's common boundaries with Outlot A, rear yard setbac<^s are measured from the Lot's common boundaries with Outlot B and side yard setbacks are measured from the Lot's com mon boundaries with other Lots. [*** VERIFY ***] Notwith standing the foregoing prohibition, each Lot may have one drive- - 10 - ,iw .. mm 4 >1 < mri • - 'U ^&xKv'. • . 1.; way le the cl< in wid S< of the within from tl legal bring . pay th' and in both, action also b waive I for he] S< or belj shall I under I under 1 The pu] expense rowing butabli all lal or elii the sa: rules < of sue)* Sc lien oi to the records transfe ever, t closure guish 1 due prj relieve becomin Mmmm Ly respon* imon Area/ linst that id payable t no more -annually Authorized :alled for on 3 or 5 s than 30 . At the >f proxies class of quorum is the same subsequent urn at the held more ssessinents It Special ind Owners reasonable ,c utility perimeters Rent areas lid inter- ibit con- [) feet and jed by the yard set- Ln subsec- 1 shall be de 10 feet i setbacks ot A/ rear iries with LiOt's com- Notwith ane drive- 1 -V'J way leading from the private road to the garage/ provided that the cleared right-of-way of the driveway shall not exceed 20 feet in width. Section 10. Effect of Nonpayment of Assessments! Remedies of the Association" Any Assessment or portion thereof not paid within thirty (^0) days after the due date shall bear interest from the due date at the rate of eight percent (8%) or such other legal rate set by the Board of Directors. The Association may bring an action at law against the Owner personally obligated to pay the entire unpaid portion including costs of attorneys' fees and interest/ or foreclose the lien against the property/ or both/ and the costs and reasonable attorneys' fees of any such action shall be added to the amount of such assessments and shall also be secured by the lien of the assessment. No Owner may waive or otherwise escape liability for the assessments provided foz herein by the sale or abandonment of his Lot. Section 11. Late Payment. If an Assessment is not paid on cr before ten (10) days after the date when due/ the Lot Owner shall be obligated to pay/ in addition to the interest required under Section 9 of this Article/ a late Assessment service charge under the following schedule: 11th to 30th day after 30th day $25.00 $50.00 The purpose of this fee is to compensate the Association for the expense and inconvenience of collecting late Assessments/ bor rowing to cover Association expenses and any other costs attri butable to late payment. The Board shall collect these fees on all late payments. The Board may increase/ but may not decrease or eliminate/ the service charges set forth in this section in the same fashion as is established for the adoption of other rules and regulations. This penalty shall be added to the amount of such Assessments and be secured by the lien of the Assessment. Section 12. Subordination of the Lien to Mortgages. The lien of the Assessments provided for herein shall be subordinate to the lien of any first mortgage/ provided the mortgage was recorded before the delinquent assessment was due. Sale or transfer of any Lot shall not affect the assessment lien. How ever/ the sale or transfer of any Lot pursuant to mortgage fore closure or any proceeding or deed in lieu thereof/ shall extin guish the lien of such assessments as to payments which became due prior to such sale or transfer. No sale or transfer shall relieve such Lot from liability for any assessments thereafter becoming due or from the lien thereof. - 11 - r* No menced/ exterio] shall a other li ficatioi locatioi writing to surr< architec tives a] designat further (30) day to itf deemed t Sec and cond lease si* more tha written for less the Asso the pers' assessmei provided that' exceed 20 feet nents: Remedies lereof not paid L bear interest ) or such other {Association may ly obligated to attorneys' fees e property, or ^es of any such ments and shall No Owner may sments provided is not paid on the Lot Owner terest required service charge ciation for the sessments, bor- er costs attri* : these fees on ay not decrease this section in ption of other d to the amount the Assessment. Mortgages. The be subordinate e mortgage was due. Sale or gnt lien. How- mortgage fore- f, shall extin- bs which became transfer shall ents thereafter ^ ARTICLE VIX ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL No building, fence, wall or other structure shall be com menced, erected or maintained upon the Properties, nor shall any exterior addition to or change or alteration therein be made, nor shall any change or addition in the lawns, shrubs, trees and other landscaping on any Lot be made, until the plans and speci fications showing the nature, kind, shape, height, materials and location of the same shall have been submitted to and approved in writing as to harmony of external design and location in relation to surrounding structures and topography by the Board, or by an architectural committee composed of three (3) or more representa tives appointed by the Board. In the event said Board, or its designated committee, fails to approve, disapprove or request further information on such design and location within thirty (30) days after said plans and specifications have been submitted to it, approval will not be required, and this Article will be deemed to have been fully complied with. ARTICLE VIII RENTAL OF LOTS Section 1. Any Owner may rent his Lot subject to the terms and conditions contained herein: (a) Any rental of a Lot shall be by written lease. No lease shall be for less than thirty (30) days. Any lease for more than an initial term of six (6) months shall have the prior written approval of the Board of Directors. No lease shall be for less than the entirety of a Lot. (b) Each lease shall contain the following provisiont The undersigned tenant(s) has (have) received a copy of the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws of Meyers Woods Homeowners Association, Inc., the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Ease ments for Meyers Woods and the Rules adopted by the Association Board of Directors governing this property. I (We) agree to be bound by the requirements and conditions of those documents, including any other Rules adopted by the Board of Directors from time to time. (c) A lease may provide that the lessee(s) shall pay the Association assessments, but no such provision shall affect the personal liability of the Owner to the Association for such assessments, nor the lien of such assessments as provided herein. - 12 - obst the ( Dire< the i this pa tic secon poses not I such dwell shall a spe term! effec cease laundl expose to the on eac (5) a Declar as it Declar S visibl or O.S e shall be com- ir nor shall any ein be made, nor rubs, trees and ^lans and sped* t, materials and and approved in bion in relation Board, or by an nore representa-> d Board, or its rove or request 1 within thirty i been submitted Article will be ct to the terms Itten lease. Mo Any lease for have the prior lease shall be ring provision: reived n and >wners i of Ease~ lopted actors to be ns of Rules i time :' ’■* '.'is i 4’ ) ee(s) shall pay on shall affect iati'^n for such »rovided herein. .mmtm m^;V : ;.v •bilitv subparagraph (a) shall limit the cessorl -nd%.'.Vg“ r/oS^V - 5“fa" ?or®le." mn'"s’iTiS,"ntV’s the Lot ARTICLE IX additional restrictions for Residential Use. No Lot shall be used exceot to aliStffn i i PV^Poses' sscept that Declarant shall be entitled * business and sales office and have model units uoon the Lots during the construction and sales period. obstruction of’ th^^^rfc^-^lHirPliiythiSrbrUired iS the RCTii'gg the nBculton. «ith thl. Home Occupations. Notwithstanding Section 1 of pation *" '“y engage in a home occu- secoSdarv *to 'thT / “®® ''*'^®** incidental and 2S;i‘K; r !;;s?EvC* «:■ .rn. ':b52“.i;:is!:effect on the Properties, the Owner shall immediatelv thero»fr»r cease and terminate such occupation. ^ - §££Li^!!—5. Clotheslines. No clothes, sheets, blankets laundry of iny kind or other articles shall be huna out exposed in any part of the Common Area or on any Lot ^ to Signs. No sign of any kind shall be displayed to the public view on any Lot or on the Common Area- excen? rhaf- on each Lot the Owner may display one sigHI n*t »orr?SSn l?ve (5) square feet advertising the Lot for sal. Zil! Declarant may erect and maintain upon the Properties such sions M It deems appropriate to advertise the Properties until tul Declarant owns no Lots within the Properties. '"® . £?°^i°c 7* Antennas. No television or other ant-.nn.s - 13 - except tural shall* trash, Commoi doned and ti tary Lot. Nothir on ar insura or the prior in vie or ott No dan ated 1 any 0« the Af result invite allowe done t may be other and dr of all no hou fere w struct side 3 City C backs tions conduci of eacl act me< yard s< Outlot mon bo standir mm limit this or its sue** It or a deed sing the Lot used except be entitled L units upon shall be no e stored in :he Board of ormity with setion 1 of home occu** Idental and ential pur** Luding, but smaking and issory to a occupation parties, at require the jectionable thereafter blankets or mg out or » displayed sxcept that i than five ccept that such signs until the antennas Brown Road y Lot \Sm mmm except with the approval of the Board of Directors or irchitec** tural committee in accordance with Article X. Section 8> Trash. Neither the Common Area nor any Lot shall be use^ or maintained as a dumping ground for rubbish, trash, garbage or other waste. No part of any Lot or of the Common Area shall be used at any time for the storage of aban doned automobiles, boats or other equipment. Garbage, rubbish and trash shall not be kept on any Lot, except in clean and sani tary containers in the garage of the townhome located on such Lot. Section 9. Nuisance; Illegal Activities; Variation. Nothing shall be done or kept on the Common Area or on any Lot or on any part thereof which would (i) increase the rate of insurance on any other Lot over what the Owner of such other Lot or the Association, but for such activity, would pay, without the prior written consent of the Association, or (ii) which would be in violation of any statute, rule, ordinance, regulation, permit or other validly imposed requirement of any governmental body. No damage to, or waste of the Properties or the buildings situ ated thereon shall be committed by any Owner or any invitee of any Owner and each Owner agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Association and the other Owners from and against all loss resulting from any such damage or waste caused by him or by his invitees. No noxious, destructive or offensive activity shall be allowed on the Common Area or on any Lot, nor shall anything be done thereon, either willfully or negligently, which may be or may become an annoyance or nuisance to any other Owner or to any other person at any time lawfully residing on the Properties. Section 10. Setbacks. (a) The recorded plat of MEYERS WOODS public utility and drainage easements have been dedicated along the perimeters of all lots [*** certain lots? **♦]. Within said easement areas no houses or other improvements shall be built that would inter fere with utilities or drainage. (b) Ordinances of the City of Orono prohibit con struction of buildings within the front 50 feet, rear 50 feet and side 30 feet of each Lot. Said ordinances may be changed by the City Council. For this purpose, front, rear and side yard set backs are measured pursuant to municipal ordinances. (c) In addition to the setbacks described in subsec tions (a) and (b), no clearing, grading or construction shall be conducted within the front 25 feet, rear 25 feet and side 10 feet of each Lot. For this purpose, for each Lot front yard setbacks are measured from the Lot's common boundaries with Outlot A, rear yard setbacks are measured from the Lot's common boundaries with Outlot B and side yard setbacks are measured from the Lot's com mon boundaries with other Lots. [*** VERIFY ***] Notwith standing the foregoing prohibition, each Lot may have one drive- - 14 - A ■i. 'ikM "i I 5i Hi m ifVv. M mm V ■* way lea the cle in widt Se foregoT use of "Rules'* may be Directo: tions si occupan< Sec shall~~H] equity, liens ai this De< the Ass restrict of the I Sec covenant way affc and eff€ Sec this Dec twenty after wh sive pez by an i: members requests which rc mortgage recorded Sec provisio requirem "FNMA"), to the A bonds, m. (10) day gage sez architect : any Lot rubbish, or of the of* aban- t, rubbish and sani~ d on such Variation. iny Lot or rate of other Lot Lthout the i would be >n, permit ktal body, ngs situ- nvitee of harmless all loss or by his r shall be lything be nay be or or to any ties. c utility perimeters lent areas Id inter- Lbit con- I feet and ed by the yard set- n subsec- shall be e 10 feet setbacks t A, rear ries with ot*s com- Notwith- ne drive- m way leading from the private road to the garage, provided that the cleared right-of-way of the driveway shall not exceed 20 feet in width. Section 11. Rules and Regulations. In addition to the foregoing restrictions, conditions and covenants concerning the use of the Properties, reasonable rules and regulations (herein "Rules”), not in conflict therewita and supplementary thereto, may be promulgated and amended from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Association. Copies of the rules and regula tions shall be furnished by the Association to each Lot Owner and occupant. ARTICLE X ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS Section 1. Enforcement. The Association, or any Owner« shall have the right to enforce, by any proceeding at law or in equity, all restrictions, conditions, covenants, reservations, liens and charges now or hereafter imposed by the provisions off this Declaration or the Bylaws of the Association. Failure by the Association or by any Owner to enforce any covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. Section 2. Severability. Invalidation of any one of these covenants or restTlctions by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3. Amendment. The covenants and restrictions of this Declaration shall run with and bind the land, for a term of twenty (20) years from the date this Declaration is recorded, after which time they shall be automatically extended for succes sive periods of ten (10) years. This Declaratioi; !.*ay be amended by an instrument signed by not less than 67% of each class of members and 51% of the first mortgagees of Lots who have requested that the Association notify them of any proposed action which requires the consent of a specified percentage of eligible mortgage holders ("Eligible Mortgagees"). Any amendment must be recorded to be effective. Section 4. FNMA Provisions. In addition to various other provisions oF" thii Declaration and the Bylaws, which meet the requirements of the Federal National Mortgage Association (herein "FNMA"), the following additional FNMA provisions are applicable to the Association, Lot Owners and the Properties. (a) No insurance on the Properties, including fidelity bonds, may be cancelled or materially modified without giving ten (10) days prior written notice to any first mj.tgagee, any mort gage servicer and to the Association. First mortgagees, upon - 15 - ■■ 1. . *•:• written : insurance receive affects I on the L (60) day] its morti of a spec shall gi' rights o the mortc shall ha AssociatJ IN herein, t of STATE OF COUNTY 01 The this the Pres tion, on THIS ins: LEONARD, 100 Soutl Minneapol 612/337-: provided that exceed 20 feet Idition to the concerning the Lations (herein sntary thereto, 3y the Board of .es and regula-* h Lot Owner and or any Owner, g at law or in reservations, t provisions of n. Failure by ly covenant or deemed a waiver ly one of these ler shall in no 1 in full force estrictions of for a term of n is recorded, 5ed for succes* &idy be amended each class of Lots who have proposed action ige of eligible mdment must be various other which meet the siation (herein are applicable Luding fidelity lout giving ten igee, any mort- irtgagees, upon V.... .. 1'*- m :W: . . .‘t L •-■qpW' kV ]^0quest, shall also receive notice of the lapse of any insurance policy maintained by the Association. (b) A first mortgagee, upon request in writing, shall receive notice of (i) any condemnation or casualty loss that affects either a material portion of the project or the townhome on the Lot securing its mortgage, (ii) any delinquency of sixty (6C) days or more in payments of assessments on the Lot securing its mortgage or (iii) any proposed action requiring the consent of a specified percentage of the first mortgagees. (c) No provision of this Declaration or the Bylaws shall give a Lot Owner or any other person, priority over the rights of first mortgagees, their successors on assigns, under the mortgage to insurance or condemnation proceeds. (d) First mortgagees, their successors or assigns, shall have the right to inspect the books and records of the Association during normal business hours. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being herein, has hereunto set its hand and seal this of f 198S. REBERS CONSTRUCTION CO. the Declarant _ _ _ __ day By Its President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing this day of instrument was acknowledged before me , 1988, by the President of REBERS CONSTRUCTION CO., a Minnesota corpora tion, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: LEONARD, STREET 6 DEINARD (HMM) 100 South Fifth Street, Suite 1500 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 612/337-1500 - 16 - laps<& of any riting, shall :y loss that the townhome incy of sixty Lot securing the consent : the Bylaws ity over the (signsr under or assigns# cords of the he Declarant _ _ _day before me sota corpora- RETURN RECORDED ORIGINAL TOt LEONARD STREET t DEINARD (HMM) 100 South Fifth Street# Suite 1500 Minneapolis# Minnesota 55402 612/337-1500 •e 4‘ • i a.* ^ • » [ X m To th© p: We are c( property the nega^ property addition property horses or We moved that Oror commonit^ minimum ] environmi We have i over the increase horses or park or i Such high per day c widen the oppose, enjoy our must hole density h We are al to our sc privacy— close st€ trespass! not need I-f the pr believe s 1andowner path sa-fe Brown Roe vehicles using Nor gm-mm Ui " i ^V r *• ♦#•-, ■ . . ”‘ ' /■ . s *^“ - . ■*.,=' 1 ■ r * » *. ft \h I 5 i . ':W ^ >■'- • J- V s, J' » If- •v. » / «\ It H.-^'^ JiiH.»• ••i> September 16, 1988 To the Planning Commission and the City Cottncil of Orono: We are concerned about the proposed development and rezoning of the property located at 715 North Brown Road. Our roncern centers around the negative influence of so many homesites immediately adjacent to our property and the increased traffic on North E<rown Road. We believe the addition of 25 homes in the area will decrease our ability to use our pi^opBi^ty and increase the risk of injury or damage to our property, our horses or trespassers. We moved to Orono in 1977 and were assured several times by the City that Orono was then, and intended to remain a rural residential community. We chose the area because of the requirement for 2 acre minimum lots, though 5 acre mini mums would do more to ensure the rural environment. We have seen the traffic use of North Brown Road increase dramatically over the last 10 years. We believe the addition of 25 homes will increase the traffic to such a point that we can no longer ride our h°*^ses or walk along Brown Road. Thus we will have no access to the park or trails. Such high density of housing will generate an additional 25 to 75 cars per day on Brown Road. The solution, no doubt, will be to upgrade and widen the road and assess the landownersj a solution we would strongly oppose. It would generate yet more traffic and lessen our *ability to enjoy our property, our horses and our neighborhood. We believe Orono must hold fast to its goals“~or become another Bloomington with high density housing. We are also concerned with the plans to locate five to six lots adjacent to our south property line. We chose the area so we would have privacy at least 2 acres per homesite. Locating so many homes so close steals our privacy and increases the risk of children, dogs, etc. trespassing and injuring our horses or themselves. Quite frankly, we do not need increased liability. property known as 715 North Brown Road is to be developed, we believe several conditions should be met with NO cost to the adjacent landowners. First, North Brown Road should be revamped to include a path safe from vehicular traffic for horseback riding and walking. North Brown Road should also be studied for ways tc reduce the number of vehicles and, increasingly important, the excess speed of the vehicles using North Brown Road. m wm Mm III rKtli^itr^' ■-’••■•" • '■•■^u.klititL^. MlU [•H«] ■H« ■l«]Bla ermanent non—penetrable barrier needs to be pass by children, dogs, etc. on our property, -o-ftensive and blend in with the woods and rural nature o-f the area. Mr. Rebers should n and maintain su-fficient liability insurance and hold us harmless for all damages to m the development at 715 North Brown Road. e changes in the name of progress. However we ,sina the housing density of Orono is progress, ming of property from rural residential to evelopment is progress for the community of the resoning of any rural residential property of 1 acre minimum in Qrono. atteter m V’- .. ^ - 3;- ■.%'k 4\ h mm m'l # mwm Proas Dat6s Subject Applic bu 11 Zoning List of E3I Bn £91 £94 Bn £91 £91 Discusf Tl creatic remain! outlet City's large i large ] additlc a futui Tl lot sut off a I at the m. *at0r^.'m:'' ’r .U-*. & •> - .: il ier needs to be on our property the woods and Mr. Rebers should ability insurance damages to th Brown Road. Dgress. However we Orono is progress, residential to the community of '•esidential property ■ 4 Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron# Asst Planning 4 Zoning Administrator September 15r 1988 #1301 Fredrick White, 180 North Shore Drive West ~ Preliminary Subdivision - Second Review - Continuation of Public Hearing Application - The applicant has revised his request to exclude the second building lot from consideration at this time, and has revised the lot lines for the parcel to contain the existing house. Zoning District - RR-IB List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit P Exhibit G Exhibit H Notice of Planning Commission Action 7/21/88 Glenn Cook's Letter of 7/15/88 Hennepin County Department of Transportation's Letter 7/27/88 Staff's Sketch of Potential Access Locations Conceptual Area Development Plan Based on Feasible Access Locations Memo & Exhibits 7/14/88 Revised Preliminary Plat Drawing Planning Commission Minutes of 7/18/88 Discussion - The applicant has revised his proposal, as noted above, to include creation of just a separate 2+ acre lot to contain the existing house. The remaining parcel could then be designated as either a second lot or as an outlot.* Note that designation as an outlot would be appropriate if the City's intent is to not allow a separate house to be constructed on the large parcel without further subdivision. The reverse option, to make the large parcel Lot 2, would allow a single residence to be built without an additional subdivision, and would have potential significant effect on how a future subdivision might occur. The applicant states that his intent is to complete this initial one- lot subdivision now, then perhaps come back later with a proposal to divide off a second lot. Applicant notes that he has interested parties looking at the large parcel for possible development. W Zoning Fil September Page 2 of Note meeting, received i this time. Access Sit The a the poten County re there is Bayslde R< access Ic requiremei those two necessary northerly 19/County would inv< Thos other acc developm> and the o for the existing would nol road. Givi Developmc ne-tih-vri It a in the a: require f of the pa ■/ .*i rr-lPjp .\_v listrator 5t - fiuatlon of exclude the second s revised the lot 1/88 tion's Letter ions n Feasible bover to include sting house. The :ond lot or as an propriate if the instructed on the tionr to make the built without an ant effect on how bhis initial one- roposal to divide 3 parties looking ms mi S' Zoning File #1301 September 15» a988 Page 2 of 4 Note al.o that per Planning Coumlaslon-s apparent attitude «<= the July meeting, that a single division just to split off the house received in a more positive light than if additional lots are considered a this time. A topographic map has not been provided. Access Sites and Area Developmentj. ri:%n:n‘r -u/r;, r Bayslde Road at the northeast corner of the property. There are "^nce access locations that strictly speaking would meet the th^e two points would encroach into the two acres of dry “* necessary for the proposed lot around the northerly of the two access points is much closer to the County Road 19/county Road 84 intersection than the County would like to •«*' would involve a major revision of the right turn lane on County Road 19. for the White house. The access point south of and a j K.nce existing driveway was determined to be a very unsafe access would not be a reasonable location to consider for placement of a futu road. Given the above information, staff has put together another Area Development Diagram that hopefully gives a conceptual idea as to how the oring properties might develop. It appears that no dedication for private roadway would be in the area of the existing house. It would then seem appropriate to require future roadway dedication only upon an application for subdivis on of the parcel remaining after the house is divided off. % Zoning File September j Page 3 of 4 I wou] the Armsti developmei Armstrong ( on the eas' by a cul-d extremely extension v City's Roac At th; road from # to County 1 be with pr private roe road const! the lots individual outlot ext< As is outlots on Drive/Si1^ providing t Staff Recoi Consic subdivisioi line to di and given houser sta applicant exception ^ appears uni maintain a gerrymandei titude at the July e house would be are considered at rty have discussed als from Hennepin at per Exhibit Br f and that is off here are two other he sight distance most southerly of dry buildable as house* The most 0 the County Road ke to seer plus it County Road 19* There were two at regarding the long Bayside Road existing driveway adjacent to the cess pointr hence ;ement of a future :her another Area dea as to how the would be necessary tern appropriate to ion for subdivision wm I ■ ■'r- V; ^mm , siOWi' ■^ aNv<aw:r i-. • •.» -*r. Zoning File #1301 September 15r 1988 Page 3 of 4 I would also note for the record that the applicant has discussed with the ArmstrongSr who own the property to the southr their plans for development of the property. Given the location of the wetland on the Armstrong property south of White’s house# most likely development would be on the easterly 2/3 of the Armstrong property with potential to be served by a cul-de-sac extending from North Arm Lane. This would seem to be an extremely long cul-de-sac proposition# that would provide for a logical extension up to Bayside Road as the area develops. City’s Road Development Policy; At this time# the City has no defined need to create a north/south road from North Arm Drive West to Bayside Road# nor to connect to the west to County Road 19. Therefore# any development in this area would normally be with private roads constructed by private developers to the City’s private road standard. The developer would be responsible for all costs of road construction# and would presumably reflect those costs in the price of the lots when they are sold. It is likely that as the properties individually are subdivided# the City would require dedication of private outlot extensions so that a future through road would be feasible. As is current practice and policy# as evidenced by the connecting outlets on a similar type of subdivision area# namely Woodhaven/Golden View Drive/Silver Meadow Drive# the City certainly would be well served by providing the possibility for future road linkages to occur. Staff RernaiT ndation - Considering the information presented above# and considering that the subdivision application has been revised to include only creation of a lot line to divide off the existing house from the remainder of the property# and given that adequate drainfield sites have been found for the existing house# staff would recommend approval of this subdivision. Although the applicant has expressed concern that the remaining width south of the "exception" parcel is only 150’# and not meeting the 200’ standard# it ^appears unfeasible to have two dry buildable acres with the house and still maintain a 200’ width south of the exception lot# unless an unreasonable gerrymandering of the dividing line occurs. i ''M wm mm m V>, 7 • ; Zoning Fil September Page 4 of staff 1. A outlc 2. 1 requt consj of-w2 19 ai 3. C stip occu: the one appr resJ rest sert Furt priv 4. in L 5. the 6. Citi cant has discussed with nth, their plans for of the wetland on the y development would be potential to be served is would seem to be an provide for a logical } create a nerth/south to connect to the west lis area would normally elopers to the City's isible for all costs of e costs in the price of at as the properties ! dedication of private d be feasible. ced by the connecting r Woodhaven/Golden View lid be well served by 1 occur. nd considering that the only creation of a lot lalnder of the property, found for the existing Sivislon. Although the Lng width south of the the 200* standard, it rith the house and still unless an unreasonable Zoning Pile #1301 September 15, 1988 Page 4 of 4 staff would recommend the following conditions of approvals 1. At this time there is no need for dedication of a private road outlot along the south end of the property. 2 Planning Commission should consider granting the Hennepin County 2. Planning commissx right-of-way for County Road 19, «« "l. ZVa « -Uh «• City. 1«»' 19 and 6. , « » - Desionate the large remaining parcel as Outlot A, with Furthermore, no future subdivision would be approved unless interior private roads are provided. 4. Granting of a Conservation and Plowage Easement over the wetland in Lot 1 and in the remaining lot or outlot. 5. Granting of the appropriate Drainage and Utility Easements along the property lines. 6. Denial of additional right-of-way for County Road 84, per current City policy and practice. to re< parce: inters did S' divis: appro quadr remai roadw< an ini most ( topog sugge attacl il: private road tmepin County inty Road 19# s 100* right- county Roads Itlot A, with property can B - Designate n. of at least in the plat t 2 that any :t to access Ly have to be constructed. less interior er the wetland Sasenents along B4, per current —^ ^ n - ■ - Mg..-SlESf, —,-- r------------------.....aajjtefcJBMaBliltfn -IWWjKT- I” - ■» bM. a - -• ^ -#r-sa. XOHV6 PILE lO. 1301 cm OP OROHO EOnCB OP PLAmiMG COMMISSKRI ACTZOR P.O. Box 66 - , , iCrystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 7/ to* David 6 Fredrick White COPIES TO* Marvin G. Lovlein 14195 Pauls Drive 6025 Abbott Ave N Rogers, MN 55374 Brooklyn Center, MN tXPE OP APPLICATIOHs Subdivision DATE OP NEETIEGs 7/18/88 VOTE* 6 For 0 Against Planning CoHaission reoosawnds the followings Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Planning Commission requested that the applicant work with neigh property owners to consider a logical, comprehensive developmen for the area, in order that future road needs can be addressed. 2# Planning Commission felt that a topographical map of the < property is necessary in order to determine future develi potential given this division of one parcel into three parcels. 3, Planning Commission requested that staff investigate the City's regarding development of the anticipated road connection between Arm Lane and County Road 19; i.e. Would it be public or private was a through road? Who would build it? Who would pay the cost Planning Commission was unable to take formal action on your r to reconsider division of just the house and three acres from the parcel, because the application had been tabled until August 15th a interested members of the public had left. However, Planning Comm did suggest that a topographical map would likely not be required division to split off just the house, but that they would likely con approval upon dedication of a portion of future roadway at the sou' quadrant of the property, and require that any future division < remaining large parcel be required to access from internally pr< roadways, not directly to County Road 19. It would appear feasible t an interior road serving the entire northerly remaining parcel, so t most only 1 new access point is created on County Roads 84 and 19. Staff would support approval of the one lot division witl topographical survey based on the conditions noted above. Staff suggest a reconfiguration of the north boundary line as shown < attached conceptual map. >?■ : : m m m\ % B *\ 11 p* ^m Zoning Pile %12 Notice of Planr July 21, 1988 Pege 2 of 2 In order ^ soon as posslt three lot pla topographic sui three acres wii to discuss the It would be ap] meeting. The next 1988. In ords contact staff proceed. Stafj will be prepar Planning Commi owners to dev< staff's opinioi planning, hen< owners to veri If the ap contact the Zo If you de minutes, they approval by th j «•SM ii A <9 -jf'89> ILB HO.1301 [X>ififis8ic« Acncm late of Notices 7/21/88 in 6. Lovlein Abbott Ave N klyn Center# MN 55429 Against mt work with neighboring lenslve development plan can be addressed. Leal map of the entire Lne future development ito three parcels. stlgate the City's policy connection between North public or private If It would pay the costs? L action on your request te acres from the larger ntll August 15th and the rer# Planning Commission Ly not be required for a ^ would likely condition roadway at the southeast future division of the om Internally provided appear feasible to have lining parcel# so that at toads 84 and 19. lot division without a bed above. Staff would y line as shown on the » m ■ ■X- , _=4^■y; ' ■ ■ toning Pile 11301 Notice of Planning Commission Action July 21# 1988 Page 2 of 2 In order to proceed with this application# you must advise staff as soon as possible^^of your Intent. If you wish to continue the proposed thr*. lot pl.t (two build.bl. lot. .nd .n outlot), you must provld. a topo9r.phlc‘^8urv.y of th. .ntir. prop.rty. If you wl.h to thrM act., with the existing house, you should to discuss the necessary roadway dedication and lot line It would be appropriate and helpful to have your surveyor involved in this meeting. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for *“9ust 15th, 1988. In order to continue dicussion of your application, you should contact staff no later than August 5th, 1988 to discuss •‘®* y°“ proceed. Staff will Investigate the City’s road policy for thia area and will be prepared to address that at the August 15th meeting. Regarding the Planning Commission's direction that you work with the owners to develop a comprehensive development plan for the area, it Is staff's opinion that the City is responsible for this planning, hence staff will pursue discussions with neighboring property owners to verify their future intentions. If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional Information# please <dontact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, th.rare available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. ^■■vq »•::£.>■ i.-‘«- advise staff as ua the proposed must provide a merely split off » meet with staff reconfiguration, involved in this for August 15th# :ion# you should how you wish to or this area and g. Regarding the jhboring property the area# it is >e of coordinated hboring property formation# pleas# nning Commission ifter review and iLi- tl li mmSa;i .1^ i 4* -' ;'f--• ■If-.-'n-i-., ■^iSlXy fe'il '•*i- H ■ "A / ■ IShVIV “iitrnmtA Conm of /mrftrnttl OwortJ'<*/S«. 6. T»p. Iir. «90. 23 / Umopiw Comity Coot treo a«ucK • tMioc 155y5®^£ Iron »«»** Nsg^ss^aa-E . Nortti IM of Nontiwtol Oimrtor Of S«C. 6. Tnpi H7, 23 f ;.CTO «CMCT ,I9W98\ / \ ------635 08-“- ROAD 605.14 N^39*50“W >33 00 com ^ ir»-25.00 NO.3300'•ri\ \ n* I 30.00 M0O*39'80*W to A>0 'Honnopi Northoo of Stc* OUTLOT a SmM liM of Nortt MO 00 %«t N89*35 22'E 241.77 Itef 0^ W«*l 274 7T /ot Wfgl of Nerffjettf / Qworfof Of Stc. 6, T«p.117, ^ 25 f- 9' 8 •4. OOMl O ^ LM6CAT 241.77 ’3W.72 I -t Is 62349 Mi34"f:;**‘*“’'*Na9-27M9-E I nr ^ ^ 0-6O tJ'/V jo,» ' /(A \ e K> ► ! *4*-- \ \ n®o. /\ iT>W E LAND \ LOT \\ $crr.c Tiiaa ^ ->8.~ ui e o o K ♦/2STOOV #000 'n V.’ft - -lOOOl fOOOO / / •' V*.\\ 4100 ^OOAIN ^ICLO \-A 174.96 Li i03Jtf / • s 2-1329 37 624^47 N89*27'I9 E OCAM T. AOMSTRONG 'South lino of Witt Holf of Nofthwttt Quortif of Northwttf Quortff of S*c. 6, T.p. 117, Rg*. 23OeA/cArsG F»f2 m Jl^ e^- Hennepin County Cost Iron Monument ^ ^ ^ Southwest Corner of Northwest Quorter <20^0 W^T ■■ ■‘#1 L?- n• •??-! . t !■ i 4i R •' ■ V ¥'- . ..>-ila-vK Shginccn 4 July 15, City of On Box 66 Crystal Ba Attn: Mik Rat 139.1 Daar Miket We have developmer Ve would 1 property more desli Yours ver BONESTROO Glenn R* GRC:ci 2335 We I liM of Wait Hoff rlhwotl Quarter rih«t»t Quorier ic. 6. Twpi lir, Rgr 23 F»<? ieoA^MAY ■^ vt-H • X.■ ... ' ^ I/ll Bonestroo Rosene «l~« Andcrilk & Associates E„gkwcrs O ArcMttctt oao a.« r“c^.“ sr:~ W OOMT*. W '*' ^ r MMMI. fit. HaH»» M OW« I c. ^xa ria Donaa <^**«*^ • p. AnOtnon. PC su*n « »«* . A.UP«r*« ^H aS^TpY ttot a. •«»—r-r. W MW A. S-# iS'c <ST« !Tk . fT^T -w GIM. «. coot. PC t A«*ui. Ptrr/iss;** =:~« ":3Ip JUL I l! July 15, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay,fli 55323 Attn: Mika Caffron Re: 139-1301 White Pond Estates Dear Mike: ,, . ,^^*t an White Pond Estates. The proposed on« counc, eo.. i*. road sTStein be developed to provide “• r.“ij Tcr."“ r “n. re™;« ^«E .UK cu, i» pr.p«in« a more desirable access plan for the site. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Glenn R. Cook GRCfCi m mmkmm ,.j- m m -V. > i ifoSfNw »• ^■.'•vY ../■ '^1 mi^M : H lJN! July 27, Ms. Jeann Building City of 0 P. 0. Box Crystal B Prop eSAH Sect Henn Ravi Minnesota proposed i following For futi an addi right 0 For futi feet of Any new approve) Contact All pro| utility limited landscai - The devi right 01 Please dli Sincerely, jD David W. < Transports DWS/LDW:b -.w-r->^v -r: ■ ^»52?“‘4.S- ; ■ t-' •-# •• .■aiTwjigiifea " 1 County review of and nake the r should dedicate H 19 to make the e an additional 7 enter of CSAH 84. ss riiqulres an onstructlon. n approved but Is not t, and t forms. Ion within County >UNTY >loycr t r ^ » > 1^^ PiEi HIii m •'I m m mM /.: • 0^ ‘5 R y :.^ • : *• vV'i>. •?.. MM V/tf Aeuj^ o^i^V ZHCICS% w-er^ ■> a ’ -■•: , ; J.,I m mik'r,i Administrator hore Drive West - reel into two 7 acre air 2 acre unsewered. < Across Co. Rd. f X TOTAL 3.004 AC 4.808 9.402 17.214 m isting trench type orth of the existing ig trench drainfield le dry weather? our em in the past and in the relatively ms determined by the lie sites for septic additional area from roposed area comprises concurs with this sntly proposedf has a additional acreage. the proposed Outlet A. ,11 r- k. m f- ■ iv^'X :'XAt-4 . A re"- e-^v. staff would note that if applicants* intent is to build a house within the Zone File #1301 July 14r 1988 Page Two of Four large parcel* it should not be designated as an outlet but as a separate lot that is large enough to be potentially divided in the future. Conceptually* an outlet is only designated when a parcel is intended to not be used until further developed. Staff would note that all of the sites tested on the property require mound systems. This is not unusual considering the Kilkenny loam-type soil located in this area of Orono. 3. Note the "gerrymandered" configuration of proposed Lot 2. It is staff's understanding that this configuration came about because the applicants are compelled through a Court Order to sell a 2-acre parcel to Donald and Judy Kempf as a result of a Purchase Agreement entered into by Kempfs and Whites in 1984. You will note that Lot 1 just barely contains 2 acres of dry* buildable land. Staff has dra%fn in the building envelope for Lot 2* and suggests that while there may be a feasible house location directly south of the Langert exception* a more probable and attractive building site is east of the drainfield sites tested within the 1.3 acre recommended additional parcel. It would seem to staff that the east/west line between Lots 1 and 2 could be straightened out to provide a more useful potential secondary alternate drainfield site for Lot 1* while still leaving a plus-or-minus 150 foot wide corridor to the rear for Lot 2. % 4. The applicants have not provided a topographic map of the property. The topographic section of the US6S Maps is of a scale that it has little value in discussions of the development of this property. Based on the fact that the property contains a significant area of wetlands* staff feels that it is appropriate for Planning Commission to require that a topographic map of the entire property be provided. 5. In Exhibits G* 1 through 3, you are provided with a plat map sketch showing existing development in the area* showing the proposed division and the probable future request for development of Outlot A without the need for an interior road* and finally a conceptual diagram of how the areas to the east of County Road 19, south of Bayside Road and north of North Arm Drive West will likely develop under the 2-acre standard. Given the existing developments along North Arm Drive West* staff would see North Arm Lane extending northward and then west to County Road 19* with the outlot road being taken from properties on either side. It probably is not feasible to ask for dedication of roadway south of the existing White hibuse* since it is only 45* north of the existing side lot line. Staff would also anticipate a northerly extension up to Bayside Road that would allow 2 acre lot development on either side of it. Looking at exhibit G-3* the question becomes* is there a need to dedicate property within the currently proposed plat for future access? Summary of Issues - 1. The north lot line of proposed Lot 2 is intended by the applicant % •/V- w V m'Am ^ t r -f.ISIS • . '> I?" ■t ■ -i: e^?:... Page Second ^ we tDelieve some per*manenti non~penetr’abl© barr'ier needs to be installed to prevent trespass by children^ dogs, etc. on our property The barrier should be non^ottensive and blend in with the woods and brush in keeping with the rural nature ot the area* Mr* Rebers should also be required to obtain and maintain sufficient liability insurance at his cost to endemnify and hold us harmless for all damages to trespassers eminating from the development at 715 North Brown Road. We understand the land use changes in the name of progress. However we don't believe that increasing the housing density of Orono is progress We don't believe the rezoning of property from rural residential to allow such high density development is progress for the community of Orono. We are opposed to the rezoning of any rural residential property to single family district of 1 acre minimum in Orono. Sincerely, Orono Applicati builc lines Zoning Dis List of Ba Exhlt Exhit Exhih ; « -. . V n ;> . ;i '• ■' -V:' Exhik Exhit Exhit Exhit Exhit Biacussioi The i creation c remaining outlet* city's in large par< large part additional a future f The i lot subdi^ off a seo at the lai ar needs to be an our property, the woods and r. Rebers should bility insurance damages to h Brown Road. ress. However we rono is progress, esidential to e community of sidential property ,'."!v V? •4a Ty-' ...’.■ r-' p'.if • |,;7-ma ' I Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael t. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Dates September 15, 1988 Subjects #1301 Fredrick White, 180 North Shore Drive West - Preliminary Subdivision - Second Review - Continuation of Public Hearing Application - The applicant has revised his request to exclude the second building lot from consideration at this time, and has revised the lot lines for the parcel to contain the existing house. Zoning District ~ RR-IB List o£ Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit P Exhibit G Exhibit H Notice of Planning Commission Action 7/21/88 Glenn Cook's Letter of 7/15/88 Hennepin County Department of Transportation's Letter 7/27/88 Staff's Sketch of Potential Access Locations Conceptual Area Development Plan Based on Feasible Access Locations Memo & Exhibits 7/14/88 Revised Preliminary Plat Drawing Planning Commission Minutes of 7/18/88 Discussion - The applicant has revised his proposal, as noted above, to include creation of just a separate 2+ acre lot to contain the existing house. The remaining parcel could then be designated as either a second lot or as an outlot. * Note that designation as an outlot would be appropriate if the City's intent is to not allow a separate house to be constructed on the large parcel without further subdivision. The reverse option, to make the large parcel Lot 2, would allow a single residence to be built without an additional subdivision, and would have potential significant effect on how a future subdivision might occur. The applicant states that his intent is to complete this initial one- lot subdivision now, then perhaps come back later with a proposal to divide off a second lot. Applicant notes that he has interested parties looking at the large parcel for possible development. p’»■?! i: ■V ifei: I •v zoning File September 1 Page 2 of 4 Note a meeting, tl received in this time. Access Site The ap the potentd County reg there is o Bayside Roa access loc requirement those two I necessary northerly 19/County I would invo] Those other acces developmex and the otl for the W1 existing d would not road. Given Developmen ne*‘:^hr- -»rin« It ap in the ar< require fu of the par ’A'.•■'!?■■ •• ■ ■ . T Ldmlnlstrator t West - mtinuatlon of to exclude the second d has revised the lot se. 7/21/88 ortation*s Letter ocatlons ed on Feasible 88 ed abover to Include ! existing house. The i second lot or as an e appropriate If the e constructed on the e optionr to make the o be built without an lificant effect on how .ete this initial one- 1 a proposal to divide ested parties looking Pi H --f I :r: i t-. * y\ \ . iV .-V1 if.; Zoning Pile #1301 September 15r x988 Page 2 of 4 Hot. also that per Planning Commission's apparent attitude at th y meeting, that a single division just to split off the house would be received in a more positive light than if additional lots are considered this time. A topographic map has not been provided. rSSSHS5!.rsr, i.r.m s;= County regarding feasible road access sites. Note that ' there is only one good access site for this property, and Bayside Road at the northeast corner of the property. T ere are access locations that strictly speaking would requirements, due to hill, and valleys in the road. The those two point, would encroach into the two acres of dry liable as necessary for the proposed lot around the existing “ouse. The mo. northerly of the two access points is much closer to the County Roa 19/county Road 84 intersection than the County would like to would involve a major revision of the right turn lane on Coun y r v“." r r. r»: exlst\^n, drfvewTw« determtnH^o l“e^a very would not be a reasonable location to consider for placement of a fut road. Given the above information, staff has put together another Area Development Diagram that hopefully gives a conceptual idea as to how the neii,i>..oring properties might develop. require future roadway dedication only upon an application for subdivision of the parcel remaining after the house is divided off. 14- ■ Zoning Septemb Page 3 the Ar develo Armstrc on the by a cu extreme extensi As outlets Drive/ providi Staff s Cc subdivd line t< and gi^ houser applic "excepi appears mainta. gerryma :ltude at the July e house would be are considered at rty have discussed ils from Hennepin at per Exhibit Br and that is off lere are two other le sight distance most southerly of dry buildable as house. The most ) the County Road ce to see, plus it County Road 19. r. There were two at regarding the long Bayside Road •xisting driveway adjacent to the cess point, hence :ement of a future her another Area lea as to how the would be necessary em appropriate to .on for subdivision ?••• -i fgf • " :^;r. If..,-, ft if Zoning File #1301 September 15, 1988 Page 3 of 4 I would also note for the record that the applicant has discussed with the Armstrongs, who own the property to the south, their plans for development of the property. Given the location of the wetland on the Armstrong property south of White's house, most likely development would be on the easterly 2/3 of the Armstrong property with potential to be served by a cul-de-sac extending from North Arm Lane. This would seem to be an extremely long cul-de-sac proposition, that would provide for a logical extension up to Bayside Road as the area develops. City's Road Development Policy; At this time, the City has no defined need to create a north/south road from North Arm Drive West to Bayside Road, nor to connect to the west to County Road 19. Therefore, any development in this area would normally be with private roads constructed by private developers to the City's private road standard. The developer would be responsible for all costs of road construction, and would presumably reflect those costs in the price of the lots when they are sold. It is likely that as the properties individually are subdivided, the City would require dedication of private outlot extensions so that a future through road would be feasible. As is current practice and policy, as evidenced by the connecting outlets on a similar type of subdivision area, namely Woodhaven/Golden View Drive/Silver Meadow Drive, the City certainly would be well served by providing the possibility for future road linkages to occur. Staff Recommendation - Considering the information presented above, and considering that the subdivision application has been revised to include only creation of a lot line to divide off the existing house from the remainder of the property, and given that adequate drainfield sites have been found for the existing house, staff would recommend approval of this subdivision. Although the applicant has expressed concern that the remaining width south of the "exception" parcel is only 150', and not meeting the 200' standard, it appears unfeasible to have two dry buildable acres with the house and still maintain a 200' width south of the exception lot, unless an unreasonable gerrymandering of the dividing line occurs. .3^ ♦"1 .•'K- Zoning Pil< September ' Page 4 of - Staff 1. A outlo 2. P reque consi of-wa 19 an 3. 0 stipi oceux the ] one appr< resi rest serv Purtl priv i i 4. ' in L 5. the 6. City :ant has discussed with ith, their plans for of the wetland on the 7 development would be potential to be served Ls would seem to be an provide for a logical > create a north/south to connect to the west iis area would normally elopers to the City's isible for all costs of e costs in the price of at as the properties I dedication of private d be feasible. ced by the connecting Woodhaven/Golden View lid be well served by > occur. d considering that the only creation of a lot inder of the property, found for the existing [vision. Although the ig width south of the the 200' standard, it th the house and still nless an unreasonable h ■'4' ■>: ■■X- ir'•S' : W'-• -fe:v- ii X 'X L: Si [T: mm *, ■■■ # Zoning Pile #1301 September 15, 1988 Page 4 of 4 staff would recommend the following conditions of approval 1. At this time there is no need for dedication of a private road outlot along the south end of the property. 2 Planning Commission should consider granting the Hennepin County2. Planning commxssiu right-of-way for County Road 19, request for an additional 17 . ^ a. 4 4.v» rttv's 100' right-, • 2 __ ^hati this would be consistent with the y « Jiconsidering that rnxs wouj.« 4 «n between County Roadsof-way corridor for the McCuily Road connection between »-oun y 19 and 6. 1 option A - Designate the large remaining parcel as Outlot A, with stipulations that no residential construction on^that occur until construction of at least the large parcel o«cri with a statement in the plat :":y:::r:roi:tion%arn,„, the prope^^^^^^^ Furthermore, no future subdivision would be approved unless interior private roads are provided. 4. Granting of a Conservation and Plowage Easement over the wetland in Lot 1 and in the remaining lot or outlot. 5. Granting of the appropriate Drainage and Utility Easements along the property lines. 6. Denial of additional right-of-way for County Road 84, per current City policy and practice. ik;^ \ mm, tr «l • ■i r .i:- m?9- ..W’ •'•■-I CITf C P.O. B Crysta 90t C 1 B TTPB C DATS C Plamii 1 iiOfBS le B F f 2.I F F 3.I X B to rec parcel intere did SI divisi appro' quadra remaii roadwa an int most G topog] suggei attach ;,ipE^= /: -xo, > roval: f a private road Hennepin County County Road 19» ty*8 100* right- sen County Roads 8 Outlot A, with lat property can Lon B - Designate :tion of at least ent in the plat : Lot 2 that any bject to access ately have to be is constructed, i unless interior t over the wetland ty Easements along >ad 84, per current B»t. A - . <9 -/f-SS XOnllG FIUE MO. 1301 city op OSOHO MOTICE of PLA8HI86 COMMISSIOM ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 7/21/88 TO: David 6 Fredrick White COPIES TO: Marvin G. Lovlein 14195 Pauls Drive 6025 Abbott Ave N Rogers, MN 55374 Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 mm mm ^ ^ mm mm mm ^ mm «« ^ ^ mm mm mm mm mm mm mm m m mm mm mm mm mm <mm mm mm TYPB OF APPLICATION: Subdivision DATS OP MBBTIMG: 7/18/88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Pianniiig CowBission reooBBesds the followings Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AMU SPECIAL COEDITIOHS: 1. Planning Commission requested that the applicant work with neighboring property owners to consider a logical, comprehensive development plan for the area, in order that future road needs can be addressed. 2. Planning Commission felt that a topographical map of the entire property is necessary in order to determine future development potential given this division of one parcel into three parcels. 3. Planning Commission requested that staff investigate the City*s policy regarding development of the anticipated road connection between North Arm Lane and County Road 19? l.e. Would it be public or private if it was a through road? Who would build it? Who would pay the costs? Planning Commission was unable to take formal action on your reqi’est to reconsider division of just the house and three acres from the larger parcel, because the application had been tabled until August 15th and the interested members of the public had left. However, Planning Commission did suggest that a topographical map would likely not be required for a division to split off just the house, but that they would likely condition approval upon dedication of a portion of future roadwf<y at the southeast quadrant of the property, and require that any future division of the remaining large parcel be required to access from internally provided roadways, not directly to County Road 19. It would appear feasible to have an interior road serving the entire northerly remaining parcel, so that at most only 1 new access point is created on County Roads 84 and 19. Staff would support approval of the one lot division without a topographical survey based on the conditions noted above. Staff would suggest a reconfiguration of the north boundary line as shown on the attached conceptual map. Mm 1\ ^ ^ _■ V ■ mm Zoning Fils Notice of F July 21, 19 Page 2 of 2 In ore soon as po three lot topographic three acre: to discuss It would b< meeting. The n< 1988. in • contact St proceed. C will be pr Planning O owners to staff's opJ planning, owners to ' If thi contact thi If yo minutes, approval b U>WS«*|5Immm■•iV.jL.gapaA s m>.1301 INlSSlOil ACnOH B of Notice: 7/21/88 6. Lovleln abott Ave II Center, MN 55429 gainst work with neighboring sive development plan n be addressed. l1 map of the entire i future development three parcels. gate the City's policy nnection between North blic or private if it uld pay the costs? iction on your request seres from the larger .1 August 15th and the V Planning Commission not be required for a rould likely condition idwjjy at the southeast ture division of the internally provided ppear feasible to have ing parcelV so that at ids 84 and 19. t division without a 1 above. Staff would line as shown on the m m '"A 'fc- >■ ■ lission ActionZoning Pile #1301 Notice of Planning O July 21# 1988 Page 2 of 2 In ord.r to proc.ed with thi. appliention, yon nuat adviae ataff aa aoon aa poaaibl.*^of your int.nt. If you wJah to continue th. propoa.d throe lot plat (two buildable lota and an outlot), you nuat provide a topographic aurvey of the entire property. If you wlah to ®!f acrea with the exlating houae, you ahould arrange to to diacuaa the neceaaary roadway dedication and lot line It would be appropriate and helpful to have your aurveyor involved in thla Bieeting e The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for 15th# 1988. In order to continue di« cussion of your application# contact staff no later than August 5th# 1988 to discuss proceed. Staff will investigate the City's road policy for will be prepared to address that at the August 15th meeting. Regarding the Plannlng*^Coraission's direction that you work with the "®^9hborii^^^ owners to develop a comprehensive development plan for the area# it is staff's opinion that the City is responsible for this type of coordinated planning# hence staff will pursue discussions with neighboring property owners to verify their future intentions. n If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional information# please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Co^ission minutes# they are available from the City Recorder after re approval by the Planning Commission. vise staff as the proposed list provide a rely split off eet with staff tconfiguration. irolved in this r August 15th# »n# you should ow you wish to this area and Regarding the K>rlng property he area# it is of coordinated Dring property ^nation# please ing Commission er review and - yt. M yti m0ia uJ.'- 'V If.t . (I n .' ii ■■ ■ '• vSa r 9 tM s Wormwtrt Cornar of ^Horl»ww»t „ Sac. 6, Twp. tl7, R q*. 23 Nwnapin County C«t Iron •MUCC • LAMM 3 OUN«l N89*35'22*E Nortti ft« of Northwort OworHr - ,S«-«• T-» I » #CTC« *C«£t J / \ « , Oays :&£ ■3300 COUNTY I wi g jgpc^v N00*39‘50“w :^=.a-25 00 ------655 06- ROAD 60S 14 NO 3300<T\ 30.00 liOO*3®‘50*W TO M> '’Honnaai Northoo of Soc* ROAQ* OUTLOT A o4».SmM Imm ot Norik MO OO N89*35'22"E 241.77____ _______ -E3»» l^olWrU 27477 /ofvrtn HoH,of Njftiyttt / Qisvttf ^ Stc. 6, Tfpp. Ilf, 23 s ^ 00MM.0 n UUIQCOT WlO 241.77 381.72 62349 *’“”‘Ne9*27 ‘l9-E Is LOT %. O ^,<C* .0’.» •\3‘*J,9't '/7 Z' \ (M(P \ /\ W E LAND \ \ LOT \\ TANKS ^ -lOOO sooo \I lOO.OO «^v a*// / TT* / / 4^00 •■v*\\ onow riCLD V.\ 174.96 L i i03Jtf / •'it 624.47 I \> 1329 37 N89»27‘I9"E jcan r. ahmstrons ^Soiftti Uni ol Wttt Holf of Northwttt Quortcr of Northwtft Quarter 0> 5>ec. o, •w|j. II •# ©eAfCATSt r»/2 Hennepin County Cost Iron Monument «* ^ Southwest Corner of NorthMSt (^ler pUT t|f8 6 JEOAO a I CArtinn A. ToemthlD tl7 NOfltl .jr -y I ;T. m \ ■- V •• - 4 •: *> :.-U - N- f,* E m A Bone! Roser Ande Asso Engmecn A An July 15. 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, AttnI Mike G Rei 139-1301 Dear Miket V« have re\ developnent i Ve would rec< property act more desirab Yours very t BONESTROO, R Glenn R. Coo GRC:ci 2335 West ^ lilM cH w*ll HoH rthwMl Quoriw rlhwttl Quorler ,e. 6, T«ix 117, Rfl« 23 F»<? mtssLi■• ■ ■•• ■I*-m '■-M mi’- -‘'^^422n iifliitiiy ''rrjaijT •■..'M Boncstroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates engineers S ArcWiecti s«*vrsrpf STc-r-- r/-r:r“ C^Mt A. ■»«»*" C ft u» Wwii^y .1 MMNt ft Hw«w* M own f Aiiminigi. ft Siwn U. tbemn n«h A. ■Kfiwm. ft MW« MUrt t Ma. ft T ■■ ■Iiir- ft aoDWt c. ■«■•». AXA- t. Coot ft T. ^ thamm t N(^ « lobtn G. ft 09M O IW«A M- L. Sor«M. ft- i! „ I ft-0^ July IS, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Mike Caffron Ret 139-1301 White pond Estates Dear Mike; . «i.f on White Pond Estates. The proposed rev.?:;:.nrii”hLTit.'’ruTro;«t/acce,, onto county Ro.a 19. "• Tc^r" Z" und Sv:™« :"ouid’^r“.ith ^rrsnirm. :«... pun for th. .it.. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK S, ASSOCIATES. INC. Glenn R. Cook GRCtci 2335 W.« Highway 36 • St. Paul. Mlnne««a 55113 • 6.2-636-1600 Prop eSAH Sect Heno' Revi Minnesota proposed following For futi an addi right 0 For futi feet of - Any new approvei Contact - All pro| utility limited landscaf - The deve right 01 Please dli Sincerely, jD ^iAA^ David W. S Transport« 0WS/L0W:1« 4____ Utitnow. f.E. Chart** ^ Ertduoo Lynch, P.f. «ao M. fam«i*y toiand, r.f. Hirtan M. O«on Andcnon, r,t $*»**" M. B««n Ktwiann. P.f. Martt A, Selp af*. PE. Rutiafe. AJA. Angus. P.E. ^ Santofrt. PE. ■i! JUL I fl itates . The proposed »ad 19. 5ve loped to provide » city in preparing a ty •}: ■I ?.x:1 ■w iW''’ Wi-:'-. *-5 ■ .>4 I <r ■Y I a«» £XA e^r-ifc hL.4NEPIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 935-3381 ll July 27, 1988 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Adnlnlstrator City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0 Dear Ms. Mabusth: PE: Proposed Plat - White Ponds Estates CSAH 19/84, Southeast quadrant Section 6, Township 117, Range 23 Hennepin County Plat No. 1657 Review and Recomiendatlons Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County review of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat and Make the following coaaents: - For future laproveaents to this segment of CSAH 19 the developer should dedicate an additional 17 feet of right of way where necessary along CSAH 19 to make the right of way a minimum of 50 feet from the center of CSAH 19. - For future Improvements to CSAH 84 the developer should dedicate an additional 7 feet of right of way making the right of way 40 feet from the center of CSAH 84. • Any new access to a county road or revision to an existing access r>:qu1res an approved Hennepin County entrance permit before beginning any construction. Contact our Maintenance Division for entrance permit forms. -> All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to beginning construction. This Includes, but Is not limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms. - The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. Please direct any respaiise or questions to Les Weigelt. Sincerely, David W. Schmidt, P.E. Transportation Planning DWS/LDW:lw HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer Si 1 i rt ■it ■h i■A- =• i ■'i': 4 • 3unty review of ind nake the should dedicate 19 to nake the an additional 7 Iter of CSAH 84. 5 ri?qu1res an istructlon. approved 9ut Is not , and forms. Dn within County J 4.V: *-i;- ;v^ ■ •■■i ill JNTY )yer m iii Jfc '*^•1^ A TO: STT.-' H WJ- 1 w \ ® 9 \ • ft ft XI m rA « 9 1 \J 9 tS 1 L/vvtevievJ aiir** • '! !; 'I . • • . j -• .- *>v ■ .' M- Wm I Administrator Shore Drive West - parcel into two 2 acre es. tialr 2 acre unsewered. r Across Co. Rd. 19 #• ms ^c total 3.004 AC 4.808 9.402 17.214 xisting trench type North of the existing Lng trench drainfield he dry weather? our lem in the past and in the relatively '.f was determined by the table sites for septic an additional area from t proposed area comprises if concurs with this irrently proposed, has a tiis additional acreage. in the proposed Outlot A. rnfm mi Vv.' . 4;V7«y % ^ ■ ■ ; ■IfP : Staff would note that if applicants' intent is to build a house within the Zone File #1301 July 14, 1988 Page Two of Four large parcel, it should not be designated as an outlet but as a separate lot that is large enough to be potentially divided in the future. Conceptually, an outlet is only designated when a parcel is Intended to not be used until further developed. Staff would note that all of the sites tested on the property require mound systems. This is not unusual considering the Kilkenny loam-type soil located in this area of Orono. 3. Note the "gerrymandered" configuration of proposed Lot 2. It is staff's understanding that this configuration came about because the applicants are compelled through a Court Order to sell a 2-acre parcel to Donald and Judy Kempf as a result of a Purchase Agreement entered into by Kempfs and Whites in 1984. You will note that Lot 1 just barely contains 2 acres of dry, buildable land. Staff has drawn in the building envelope for Lot 2, and suggests that while there may be a feasible house location directly south of the Langert exception, a more probable and attractive building site is east of the drainfield sites tested within the 1.3 acre recommended additional parcel. It would seem to staff that the east/west line between Lots 1 and 2 could be straightened out to provide a more useful potential secondary alternate drainfield site for Lot 1, while still leaving a plus-or-minus 150 foot wide corridor to the rear for Lot 2. • 4. The applicants have not provided a topographic map of the property. The topographic section of the USGS Maps is of a scale that it has little value in discussions of the development of this property. Based on the fact that the property contains a significant area of wetlands, staff feels that it is appropriate for Planning Commission to require that a topographic map of the entire property be provided. 5. In Exhibits G, 1 through 3, you are provided with a plat map sketch showing existing development in the area, showing the proposed division and the probable future request for development of Outlot A without the need for an interior road, and finally a conceptual diagram of how the areas to the east of County Road 19, south of Bayside Road and north of North Arm Drive West will likely develop under the 2-acre standard. Given the existing developments along North Arm Drive West, staff would see North Arm Lane extending northward and then west to County Road 19, with the outlot road being taken from properties on either side. It probably is not feasible to ask for dedication of roadway south of the existing White h)buse, since it is only 45' north of the existing side lot line. Staff would also anticipate a northerly extension up to Bayside Road that would allow 2 acre lot development on either side of it. Looking at exhibit G-3, the question becomes, is there a need to dedicate property within the currently proposed plat for future access? SusBary of Issues - 1. The north lot line of proposed Lot 2 is intended by the applicant : f.: -%K'B 2one File #1301 July 14r 1988 Page Three of Four to move north 150 feet# leaving about 4.5 dryr buildable acres within lot 2. Based on this configuration. Lot 2 would not be further subdividable under the two acre unsewered zoning. Planning Commission should then discuss whether a lot width variance as measured at the 50 foot setback from County Road 19 is appropriate, and should discuss whether or not the east/west line between Lots 1 and 2 should be straightened out rather than gerrymandered, as is currently proposed. 2. Is Outlot A intended for immediate development as a single residential lot, or is it strictly to be held for a future subdivision? If it is going to be subdivided in the future, what configuration does Planning Commission feel would be most appropriate? Given that determination, is there any need to dedicate future accesses with the current subdivision? 3. Topographic map was not provided. Is a topographic map critical to this Subdivision Application? Discussion - The tested drainfield sites and proposed building site on the property are 250 feet or more east of County Road 19. In walking to the rear of Lot 2 around the north end of the wetland, it was apparent that portions of this property have been used as a dumping ground for many years. Perhaps the best thing that could happen to this property would be development into 2 acre lots with subsequent individual owners cleaning up the dump sites. For the record, staff would note that most of the junk on the property will have to be hauled out and not buried on the site. Likewise, you will note the excessive amount of outside storage on the property. Including vehicles and building materials. The existing house is currently rented, but upon completion of the subdivision it will be sold to a new owner, and presumably the storage will disappear. A further comment: If you plan to walk to the rear of the property to see the building site for lot 2, there is a pathway that generally follows the^ edge of the wetland and it was dry the day I walked it, but wear your hiking boots. Staff Ree ndatii Staff would recommend approval of this subdivision, subject to resolution of the issues noted above. If Planning Commission does recommend preliminary plat approval based upon the proposed configuration or one similar to it, such a recommendation for approval should incorporate the following conditions: 1. Payment of appropriate park fee for Lot 2. 2. Place specific stipulations on Outlot A that define the reasons it is being approved as an outlot rather than as a separate Lot 3. Zoning July 1 Page F all pr acres within lot ler subdivldable lion should then 50 foot setback lether or not the I out rather than ent as a single subdivision? If ifiguration does e? Given that scesses with the hie map critical the property are the rear of Lot 2 portions of this irs. Perhaps the svelopment into 2 ) the dump sites, ihe property will e storage on the existing house is i it will be sold pear. A further ;>erty to see the follows the edge wear your hiking ct to resolution does recommend Lguratlon or one incorporate the ne the reasons it ^ot 3. Zoning File #1301 July 14, 1988 Page Pour of Four 3. Granting of a Conservation and Flowage Eaimnt over the wetland in lot 1 and 2. 4. Granting of the appropriate drainage and utility easements a Ion# all property lines. ^ right^ f *^^^*^^* R*^d*19 County for additional 6. Make a policy statement regarding the City’s position on the future access to these properties. ? 4: : Tl CZTT OF ORG mPBRST LG Site Addres Property Id Please chec • •• • ♦ Attach lega Address (attac Present Present PROPOSAL r*:. Numi Pro] Min: Proi BZISTIK LMD OSS IksL.■m:r---. zsessasil^ &xf^A CITY OF OROHO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATH fSOPBBTT LOCATION Site Address/g(7 yi//7/?r// D>?. U)/ ' Propej^y Identification Mximber (P.I.D.) 0^-‘fl7’-ZZ 'X% '€>^a^ Please check one - Property ____abstract or )(. torrens? Attach legal description to application. OfiU/Od.. CJ /4/7^ . Name C U/HlTp Phone (home) 14 Phone (work) Address?P4^CS City: BC^BRS ^537^ • (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address: (attach list if City: ire than one) Zip: Number of Tax Parcels / Development Size cm OF crm fl/VAVCf OFFICE lii. Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land .. ,qa m Acres Total, all parcel^^^ ^ - ho'.OC Present Use (check)Residential? no. of unit;^, Other (specify) }<ELEifT-rmK m nV96m cm M Tll:k Present Zoning District >6 'HhmjE. ___ Division for Tax Purposes « _ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) ^_ __ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: _ _ _/Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density:Units per Acres Minimum Lot Size:Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (check)Residential Other (specify) I lii , r_.. .. . m m ii • •• •. 5. Certif complet Zoning Certifi Zoning FBBS The api request Plannini further Applical Owncir' 8 Applicar Planninc third Ml review n unable 1 author!z Office c *.ims Ol 3-2. oOOZ \ . t 18 -^gg<l Zip: CJ7T a'' tWfl Fmm OFFICE 1350200000 ^.00. „.,^..u£aifT-Tim m^Tpaii'cii/ cm m Tils'•IV 06/20M uilding sites) nits 3 Acres / Buildable Land L =ify) wM.'i &> t;- it .(^■ mn kJm I PLBTB PRBLmillART APPLieAflOH 2. 3. MIHIlfOll MATERIAL MBCBSSART FOR 1. CcMQpleted Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels . obtained with property owners list). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 4. 5. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. . Zoning Official's Signature Date Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, Covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. .At-uA *7 '/in Certification by Zoning DeMrtment that Pinal Plat Application 1» complete Zoning Official • s Signature\ j /tt _ _ _ _ Date FEES f ££=. Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) 0 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) $150.00 250.00 300.00 •»- 20.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) •(Plus any legal or engineering charges)150.00* The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature C. pate /3 T Own€!r's Signature C.Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an author!zed^agent^attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning fV’ if r ■mi Fredc 14195 Rogex Re: ] In ac( of the Judge the ai a $ b ii y a 4 t] b a] If you repres< I have attachn Please- X Yours RONALD RJJ:sej end. APPLICATIOH Survey. n 350' (you must obtain .nance A-603 Govt Center iressed to each of the ss (use address labels ;ach a separate list of tlication. ry Plat Application is Date nd water assessments), formal plat. pplication 1» complete. Date h ^">^0 ^ S^p- $150.00 250.00 Ldential)300.00 + 20.00/Lot 150.00* formation required or Lneer, City Attorneyr s this application and d by ordinance. Date 3 S' Date S Lees 25 days before the etings are held on the sent at all scheduled 1. If an applicant is rrangemenbs to have an the Building & Zoning I ms mm * h: * *•* w MmP- ■.•'Ill ..-•• •. • . ■ -.^ . -.jV-'y »,.. ■ ^■M-m..mmm.. -'Si*' May 31, 1988* HOPKINS OFFICE CENTER 33 TENTH A\TNUE SOUTH SECOND FLOOR HOPKINS, MN 53343 (612)933-5151 O) Frederick C. White 14195 Paul Drive Rotfere, Mn. 55374 #1 He: Donald Kempf, et ai v. David L, White, et a) Our File: 85-959 Dear Fred: In Mcordance with our conversation, I am providing you with the elements or the settlement agreement that was entered into the court record before Judge James Rogers on May 9th of 1988. The foUowing are the terms of the agreement: ' +■ . i.f L .The Whites would provide an approved plat of the property within sue months from the date of the agreement. 2. The Whites would convey a lot on which the house was situated that contained a minimum of three acres and approved by the City. ^oe purchase price for the parcel described above would be $85,000.()0. The terms would bo $1,000.00 earnest money, which h«tf been paid; $9,000.00 at closing; and a Contract for Deed bearing interest at the rate of lOX per annum, due and payable in full four years after the date of closing. Payments on the contract would be at tha rate of $650*00 per month* 4. The Kempfs would pay their pro rata share of taxes on the lot transferred to them, and the Whites would pay the differential between the homestead and non-homestead taxes. The Kempfs would apply for homestead immediately after closing. If you need further verification of this agreement, please have a representative of the City contact me. I have enclosed a statement with regard to attorney fees, as a separate attachment. This statement is in accordance with our conversation. Please-call if there is_j^y additional question. / / \/ Yours very truly. /RONALD J. iifOHNSObF LAW jOPEI^ES P.A. ; / /' (nal i J. Johnson RJJ:sej end. V if*: ps»K S* »l i min i M H 83 Sa I €NJ N lu 5 eg o sH lU l4l _ O tfl K ^ u O iO IT) ^ eg nj 1*1 III 1^ S S S eg |y lu in cr> 1*1 Ul M M Ui Ui s ^< lU (T) O 1*1 Ui 0 ft ft M 0 0 0 ft insiiN 0 IL ^ O N SS>• s • O GARY 0 1 GARY 0 1 13320 NC HTKA HN2 ssss laiu M *-e Ui III tt a eg I fu . . ttlVMO O »0 1*1 Ui o ^ tt CK M ^ i*j UI tt in f fS” i egsfs^?; CD CD ^ UIck: s:a:o “2S3S •>.£21^ . k. INmos 1C inm ni m eg UI v _ o u. m M y. eg in Ui I N CD N ^ M 0 «j I S*i •u UI lu 0Z Hi M M ‘•23 2 in ^ N ero M B.S III QC 4- 0 -i O < O UI NOgui eg K 9^ » in Qc in a uj _ "g£ eg X h- eg 0 K p saia II I 2 o Ui ®s ‘I eg X H eg cn UI m ^ UI minin = ^*£x i -**8 ^5 O 0 M M in u. ^ > > I*.0 e to o DCoo 3 a ^o z lU < >- Noe < Ul CL UJ Q. O 8 5 :s •n Ul in eg 0 2 u. in > “ — sss 3*S-23 i ^“2** 0 % $2si pn M m eg I N Ie|is 5S’ -• K I 0 O 52 35.T. Ui Ul to -> 1 eg 0eeo o eg eg DJa S z S2Sto eg 1 N O -JN < _ o p s 0 4t O 0 0 Z <9 Ul.S"8 0 O z z •J Si 22 o 0 Zo “9 Ul K X O sP X Ui < >- \ ^ Z < Ui iL Ui a X a < zH 00 Ul O 0 eg I0 Ul Ul!i!3 It 0 si.i. 59:0 Z ft Ui n ^ Ul Ul 2^2•> X 0 0 0 0 0 0”85S0 5 ft 0 Ui O UJ O K»So8“i eg 0 >- Ul 1 N «• O Z«J M M 0 N 0 ^ 0 0 N □ 5 2 0 ssioiti O 4* X I 0 22^ io«2 0 Ul Ulo 0 M N eg 0 Ul *g 0 < 2 0 0 1*1 0 SSi ^5 I 0 2 ft Ui O h- eg Ul N a O0 “ 9 ^2“3 0 eg CL CL 00 0s fto 5^? _ 0 CL 0 CL X <# i s 2 2 8o 0 0 0 in Og0g 0 < 0 01 N > > ^ 0 0 Si I «• e« 5 a N N >» y 0 0 ft ft X 3 33slN O 0 0 0 > 0 0 0 I 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 I 0 jg" 0 0 ft CK 0 *> g 0 0 2 Z U H Z UM 5 M M SS8S5 a: £ o o < ft Q o z 0 < < N \ . ft < 0 CL 0 CL X X < » .I' . ■ 2 mJ I r- ■ ►■ I i stu m in^ g in lAi UJ — o55“in g ^ CO S3 K tt___3SS&I lAJ >UJ ?5 CO ^ UJ lU s|~i.ss q; K ^ < Q UJ -> CDH UJ UJ < Z U H Z U M 5 M Msuss S3 >- N tt < UJ lU CL “ O K .V :■ ■■ -f •n w ,y ' 1 ^ ^ * « #^. t % *. ^ »•- •*- «» . « • \ i © 10 -=3ra JUL I 2IS88 ^ • £/?U/ytu*u^— byM. C-) /9o 71 f . . „ . 9^, c(p7u^. e449S^ ;7^<^ ^ - « « « n •; ^ • /'.’^ .. •=I*'ili^»* :'. •- * • •. . mm^’i' ; / • "i- .#Pi m^70, ^'"^, smorhlin ' .' * ' .' vx y X yy/ '' OoJs-.''^'\ • 4 nr" F^ \ \ • •-«t-;V- * *5*1 .Aw 2%. :v*fe•:^P■ liirtii,-. f'^ '^1 ■»■»«**:- *5»^;'.- Y':.:, '’. / .'ijHi -m PiPi 4: e L'^ofrT flTiT ^ >w .U ‘ .- If , (j - IV.*. ar___1 NJ 1 11 C—1 !! •9 1 / \ \ —j . - ■ '. ; I*-. 4-: ■ - |! 'i'. •. t<-; MINI AmamMCE The Ox members prc arrived at Zoning Adm Gaffronr present. #1301 DAVIl 180 NORTH S CLASS 3 PRfl Mr. Fx Gaffrc existing h parcel wit Their site its propose site evalu sitesr lea this revisj would resu! Road 84. I developed anticipated eastr expre be served I North of Ar Applic north part would be ex Outlot A. access dire of subdivis all lots wc Hansoi agreed tha comprehens necessary, seen, he f< adjacent : development south of Ap in with a : questioned proposal, future road on this prc be shared g that road? • • f *m ; • ' ♦ ' .. f T a ^WN*Nte-..v - »iii|gia»«awp^-«^^->w-<*36j^ -"^i ,iek=i*^,»^'-^ •*-«?-*-.;K1.S.-’jsjs MIHUTBS OF THE PLANlilllG COMMISSION MEETING HELD JOLT 18r 1388 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. ^ , . The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley, Johnson, Moos, Cohen, and Hanson. Brown arrived at 7:25 p.m. The following represented the City staff: Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning A Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Scheffler. CounciImember Peterson was also present. fl301 DAVID L. NHITB & FREDRICK C. NHITE 180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE NEST CLASS 3 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Mr. Fredrick White was present for this matter. Gaffron explained the proposed subdivision, noting the location of the existing house and garage. The Applicants propo e to leave a 2-J- acre parcel with the existing house and also create a second buildable lot. Their site evaluator found an alternate site for the existing house with its proposed 3-acre parcel, but testing resulted in a recommendation by the site evaluator to add about 1.3 acres to Lot 2 to accomodate drainfield sites, leaving Lot 2 with about 4.8 acres total. Applicant has agreed to this revision. They intend to leave Outlet A for future development. This would result in a subdivision of three lots that would access from County Road 84. The City Engineer, Glen cook, recommends that interior access be developed for this property. Staff pux. together a diagram showing anticipated development in the area. Mr. Armstrong, property owner to -the east, expressed concern about access. The Armstrong property could easily be served by a road along it north boundary. The Olson property directly North of Armstrongs could be served by a cul de sac. Applicant stated that he doubted the ability to put a sewer system on north part of the outlot due to topography, and was not sure whether there would be enough land to put in a cul de sac and still have 2 acre lots in Outlot A. Hanson suggested an alternate cul de sac location to avoid access directly onto County Road 19. Gaffron suggested that a stipulation of subdivision approval be that once an interior access road is developed, all lots would have to access from it. Hanson noted that a topographic map had not been submitted and Cohen agreed that since the Outlot area is of concern as it relates to a comprehensive development plan for the area, that topography would be necessary. Hanson commented that, more than any parcel he has lucentiy seen, he feels that the total acreage here and development possibilities adjacent really do require a more comprehensive approach to development. Mrs. Armstrong,, who is the owner of property to the east and south of Applicants stated that she is interested in the ability of coming in with a road from 19 since they may wish to sell that property. She questioned whether plans to do so would need to be written into the present proposal. Mr. Kelley informed her that the dedication of 20 future roadway would probably be ona of the conditions of the subdivision on this property. Gaffron inquired whether road construction costs woul be shared given that 2 of Applicant's lots may ultimately require usage o that road? Kelley commented affirmatively and went on to say that ne -^4\ m 4 • mm ■4 -i ■m #1301 DA concurre suie tha plan of Roads, Commissi to devel Kel question- county Ri they hav to limit Kelley, consider topograp the roadi #1207 GEl 2815 CAS( CONDITIO! THIRD RE^ Gem Zoni the repl 1987. Tl a 7* X 7* underneat in the t. hardcove reviewed Comm it inclui Kelley qi that this persons w Applicant area. Ha this. Ma this. In asked A] next Sp that ap] and the John: the -75 structure seconded -4igvi- JLY 18, 1988 with the following and Hanson. Brown staff: Building & ling Administrator Peterson was also he location of the ) leave a 2+ acre nd buildable lot. listing house with lommendation by the nodate drainfield :ant has agreed to development. This access from County interior access be diagram showing perty owner to ^he Derty could easily property directly a sewer system on sure whether there ive 2 acre lots in Location to avoid that a stipulation road is developed. >mitted and Cohen it relates to a ography would be he has recently ent possibilities ipproach to the y to the east and ability of coming t property. She i into the present n of 20 feet for E the subdivision :tion costs would require usage of n to say that he V •• ■ ■ ■"'rf-VV?rv MIBUTBS OP THE PLAHNIB6 COMMISSIOII XTIBG HELD JULY 18, 1988 #1301 DAVID L. WHITE « FREDRICK C. WHITE>CONTINUED concurred with Mr. Cohen's request for a topographic map. The PC has to be sare that the development of this land is in line with the comprehensive plan of the City. He felt it is important to limit access from County Roads, especially 19. because that traffic will increase over time. Commissioner Johnson agreed that a more comprehensive workup was needed as to development alternatives for the property. Kelley asked for further public comments, there were none. Johnson questioned whether it was Hennepin County's position to limit access to the County Roads involved as much as possible. Gaffron responded that although they have not yet responded in this application, typically they would like to limit as far as possible the number of accesses. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Cohen, to table #1301 pending Applicant's further consideration of a comprehensive development plan and submittal of e topographical map, and review by the City as to the p<!'sition and cost of the roadway. Motion, Ayes«€, Nays»0, Motion passed. #1207 GBEE 8 CATHERIEB SCAHLOH 2815 CASCO POIET ROAD COEDZTIORAL USE PERMIT ft VARIAHCB THIRD REVIEW Gene and Catherine Scanlon were present for this matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the Applicants were seeking the replacement of structures that were damaged in the storm of July 23, 1987. The specific structures involve a lake shore deck, access stairs and a 7* X 7' storage shed. Applicants now propose placing the storage shed underneath the existing or proposed deck, which will allow for a reduction in the hardcover from what was there prior to the storm. The total hardcover for the proposed deck is 165 sq. ft. The plans have beer reviewed by the building inspector. Commissioner Kelley asked what the 165 ft. included. Mabusth stated it includes just the decking, and not the 149 sq. ft. of access stairs. Kelley questioned recommendation #2 regarding plantings. Mabusth replied that this procedure is very consistent with what they are now asking of all persons who replace retaining walls in lakeshore yards. She noted that the Applicants have volunteered to reduce hardcover within the 75~250* setback area. Hanson commended the Applicants on making every effort to work or this. Mabusth added that the Scanlons are going directly to the Council or. this. In regard to the date the hardcover removals are to take place, Hansor asked Applicants for a date they felt was realistic. Applicants replied next Spring, and June 30, 1989, was agreed upon. The specific hardships that apply in this particular variance are the extreme slope of the land and the necessary work required to stabilize that area after the storm. Johnson stated that he did not think this variance was consistent with the *-75' policies in that there is a retaining wall, stairs, storage structure and deck all within 25' of the Lake. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval of #1207, Gene & Catherine ;.. N • -i \ ■ •'rvV '■... i iiiii 2So < mm o < on- CO 00sm M Ui V (0 CF CO <0 (O CM CM €0 ID K 00 CD• N Nf Ml-m 00 2^ ujo: z HW O CQZ cn>: o < CM N CMl«! U l O 0» ID 0> €0 O CO 00 UJ tc < tot-z 01 # a < K ID li. cr CD CO 00 CO • Hi ID CO o in iP •! L C fli ^ ^ #) in A| ■Q Cl D UJ S *0 1V r*^ 3 X X • -4^ <«-• D D O X X U *o tJ ♦* <4t 3 L o •ft- ♦* ♦> ucf m XI c *o co r>i tn 2 -ft» <ft- -ft* Q O M •1 M fvi c HI (0 c an fO ^ W il m X 81 V r>4 D U -ft* »w 10 X ® ^ >* 3 •ft- X tl D D D 3 ft*D #3 o tl O IS «ft- C Q X} m D D O X ♦4 X •ft- -ft-* • c o CC C j9 m in • • -4 M- L •ft- o r-O)O)moo X c 4^ O fO *-• m D o>c CP>c♦* ■ft* L "O m « C DUX 3 D -ft* a X 3 -• c C XIDam 3 D ft- O X X ID P ■o ■5 ■m 3 D <0 D X X D •ft* ft* c D D 3 •ft. D X O ^3 o 3 o O *ft- -ft* ►—o K U Xc • ■M D c•■■1 D T-T-CM CM ft*ft* o o o o -1 -J J o o o o (Q D (0 3 D D D D ita.Vb < < << Actic Commi meetl repre. for < impro Commi Plann conce al loM lette the ui grade< May, •: necea that 1 until alopet during o f 8 M d CO o < CM N CM cr 0) o 0> 10 0> <0o (D CO tJc (0 O)c X3 Oc CM O (0 O UJCK < Z (0 0) o < N in wcr CO CO CO CO• lOm CO •oc (0 O)c XJ 3 o X (0o «) o < CMo di CT CO COo CO CO 0> o < o (D d> 01 % . » — Date: Planning Conmiasion Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A, Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator September 1, 1988 Sobjaets #1310 Howard P. Eisingerr 3245 Wayzata Boulevard Conditional Use Permit - Second Review Please review the attached Planning Commission Notice of Action that outlined the questions presented by the Planning Commission to the applicant at your August Planning Commision meeting. Staff will ask that Mr. Eisinger have an authorized representative for the contracting firm that will be responsible for doing the filling under the MNDOT contract for 394 improvements. Some of the questions raised by the Planning Commission have been outlined for Mr. Eisinger in that notice. Planning Commission may wish to alter or add others. The City Engineer has made a recommendation regarding the concern for the duration of time disturbed earth should be allowed to remain on site before it must be seeded. Review his letter of August 31, 1988. Cook recommends periodic seeding of the unfinished side slopes, suggesting that the side slopes be graded and seeded by approximately the 15th day of the month of May, June, August, September, October, and November when deemed necessary by the inspecting staff. Note that he would suggest that the top of the fill area remain in an undisturbed state until the finish elevation is achieved. Maintaining the side slopes in a seeded state will prevent further erosion of the site during the long installation. Staff Rern—s niliition - To recommend approval subject to adding the following condition to the conditions already set forth in the original approval resolution enclosed in your August packets. Exhibit J* 1. The City will require periodic seeding and grading of side slopes during the time the property is receiving fill. Applicant/owner will be asked to grade and seed the side slopes at approximately the 15th day of the months of May, June, August, September, October, and November if deemed necessary by the inspecting staff. Upon satisfaction of the answers to the questions posed by the Planning Commission to the applicant's contractor, the Planning Commission may wish to add other conditions found appropriate under the authorization cf a conditional use permit by the City of Orono. m Iministrator I Boulevard - Lesion Notice of by the Planning inning Commision e an authorized 1 be responsible itract for 394 by the Planning in that notice, srs. in regarding the sarth should be led. Review his Lodic seeding of i side slopes be of the month of iber when deemed e would suggest disturbed state :aining the side Sion of the site the following in the original tSr Exhibit J: ding and grading ty is receiving ide and seed the if the months of nd November if stions posed by ontractor, the inditions found 3nal use permit “323 *73-7357 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Dat. of Hotic 8/23/88 COPIBS TOj Park Construction 3245 Wayzata Boulevard Attn: John Gannon Long Lakep MN 55356 7900 Beach Street NE __ _ _ _ Minneapolis, MN 55432 APPLICATIOH8 Renewal Conditional Use Permit WTB OT MBBTHI6: 8/15/88 VOTE* 5 For 1 Against *“'**“*” Tobled for reasons noted below. mOTBS AED SPECIAL COEDITIOESi CoBBlMlon the questions raised by the Planningcommission in their preliminary review of your application, staff has contact«l the City Engineer and has requested that h^provide S report wl?S guidelines to staff concerning the issue of the Mr Co^k earth should be allowed to remain on the site.Mr. Cook has just briefly suggested that once filling has begun, specific eo^ 1 ^ established whereby if earth remains in an undisturbed ^ ®i o”« inspection period to another, that at the second period, the earth be required to be graded and seeded at the As for the Planning Commission's concerns, it would be helpful if Mr as*^ollow8*^ certain concerns raised by the Planning Commission, I'nn ?? example of the duration of time it would take to fill f steady supply of fill was available, and then of time^ another example where filling could go over a 6 month period 2. Confinn the carrying capacity of a tandum truck and establish the cubi ^^eJrds^of^fill* ^*ndum vehicles would require for the 100,000 the traffic safety procedures when entering sights, Ell’lnaiJ.*. area like the Highway 12 area where Mr.Eislnger*s property is located: A) Can a temporary passing lane be provided? trafSc?^*"*’^^*^^ filling signage be provided to alert on-coming C) Does the State Highway Department allow such signage and temporary turning lanes if needed? ^ D) Point of information: Who repairs road sections when private construction vehicles damage the roadbed? Does the State Highway Department provide such protection to the local community? . .. .;*■ FILB HO. 1310 C0NMI88I0H ACTK Date of Notice: 8/23/88 nstructlon non Bt NE 55432 L Against )ns noted below. * raised by the Planning application, staff has he provide a report with rning the issue of the d to remain on the site. Ling has begun, specific emains in an undisturbed tr, that at the second raded and seeded at the ly as soon as we are in would be helpful if Mr. the Planning Commission, it would take to fill was available, and then JO over a 6 month period truck and establish the equire for the 100,000 when entering sights, ^ay 12 area where Mr. led? ^ided to alert on-coming illow such signage and d sections when private Does the State Highway local community? .r.v-x Bonestroo Rosene Anderllk A Associates Engineers A Architects a BMmjm EdHert W HMcnt. PE Jottfih C Andtrfife. PE •MM A. UiiMeg. PE. fidM E. lUmtA PE. Jimei C Oiwn. PE. Gtervi H Cook. PJ. E NopoA PE. G. khMcftt PJL L SorMA PE. A. teooa Pi. NidiM W Fofter. PE D oom C. EurggiOt. PA ifffy A. iounOon. Pf Mar* A. Honson. P£ M K. PlefO. PE. kkdM T iaiownn. PE. MffT • PfHWtfU. Pf. a LOOM. Pi. w Pmmm. PE. CTwm A ^idladiH UkhM) C. Ij^nch. KE Uo M t MWIWE ^E Hamn M. Oban r. AmrnnmK Smmn M A. ■■cMwtww. AE MW* A. Sap * Mb. P t C baa*. AI.A. August 31, 1988 City of Orono Box 68 Crystal Bay. MH 55323 8831 Attnt Ms. Jeaima Mabusth las File Mo. 139.1310 Hovard Bisingar Daar Jaanae. The proposed filling on the Hovard Eisingar property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard will be coaplatad over a one year tiaa period. Restoration of the site ia a concern because of the length of tiae over which the work will be done. ¥e would reconmend that unfinished side slopes be graded and seeded periodic cally during the course of the project. The top of the fill area should be graded and seeded when the finish elevation is reached. The seeding ehould be coopleted on or about the 15th day of the aonth of May, June, Sapteaber, October and Moveaber, if any filling work has been done, ^his will help prevent erosion of the site during the construction operations. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. 61e&i R. Cook GRCtli 2335 West Highw^ 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 ;••• ■■ i !te-/ ■ m- -tv :mp»- omas W. Person, PE. Chaaf C Lynch, PE. mtt ff. Maiand, PE. nntfh P Anderson, PE Hh A. Bachmann, PE. wk t. Mfl PE btfl C. ftusMlr, A.I.A. omas fi. Angus. PE. RMard A. SsMbrd, PE. CPades A. Endtson Lao M. PMMidty Harfan M. Ofion Susan M. EbaiUn Mart A. Sdp W3I 245 Wayzata Boulevard of the site la a 111 be done. d and seeded period!- ill area should be of the month of ttsy, ork has been done. ruction operations. .. -A v',\ f-.:* ■» ..i ■'i'W [^^h;Miii|jjii| ■ •. . ■: didtdttfe >■ ^ a»>fr,4; CZTT OF OBOOO P.O. Box 6E Crystal Bay, MN S5123 IOHIH6 FILS MO. 1.118 HORCk or ruuniM comiissioa MmoH 473-7357 Oat. of Hotlci 8/23/88 TOs Suad Azhari 1745 Fox Straat Mayzata, MN 55391 COPIB8 TOt FTPS OF APPLlCATZOMt Varianca Otan OF NBBTZMGs 8/15/88 iPlaimiiig rn—t aalon rarnunda tlM f Tabled for reasons noted belov. AMD SPBCXAL COHDITIOHSs VOTBi 6 For 0 Against The Planning Commission tabled the application as you were not present to respond to any questions they had concerning your proposal. Please advise the Building 8 Zoning office if you will not be able to attend the September 19th, 1988 meeting. If you are unable to attend, you may certainly have an authorised representative present in your place before the Planning Commission. You should advise the City offices of the name of the person who will attend in your place. •lx- .' .ii* A.*m 10. 1318 [88I0K ACnOM 3f Notice: 8/23/88 met fou were not present proposal. Tlease able to attend the o attend, you may t your place before Ices of the name of I- .* : ■m •A- ".:A- . V-: . .,:^i Subject: #1319 Karen Fuller, 4055 Elm Street Renewal Variance • Public Hearing Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator September 13, 1988 ffOTB: This item was tabled at your last meeting because the applicant was not present. On August 17, 1988, the applicMt was sent a notice requesting her attendance at the September 19, 1988 meeting. Attached please find that notice and the memo of July 28, 1988. IH ling Administrator ing because the 17, 1988, the ttendance at the Lease find that hr ;■ > ■t * 1 14 P i■i . iiN 4\ V:' -jM ft ^ r-iiii......imfe-j M ::^r; m I X(»IflG FILE HO. 1319 CIT7 OF OSOHO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN HOTICE OF PLANNIH6 COMMISSION ACTION 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice; 8-17-88 TOs Karen Fuller 4749 Weclone Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55429 COPIES TOs TYPE OF APPLICATIONS Variance DATE OF MEETING:8-15-88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against PlanBing Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant was not present. This item will be rescheduled for the Planning Conuaission meeting of September 19, 1988. You or a representative must be present at that meeting to answer any questions that may come up. If you or a representative cannot attend please contact staff at 473-7357. It; V •1^; ■'P.l ;• •• 4 > l* 3. 1319 5SI0N ACTION £ Notice: 8-17-88 ist scheduled for the ir a representative i that may come up. itaff at 473-7357. Fromx Dates ....jr**- •siBifcSisrva 4j^f*r ■U-jmL-.:.-^ i''ii>i mirte ' liiir Planning Commission Chairman Kelleys ^^®*^*^ing Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Mi«.hael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning 6 Zoning Administrator July 28, 1988 Subjects #1319 Karen Puller, 4055 Elm Street - Renewal Variance - Public Hearing application — Renew variances to lot ... j. i. -new home. width for construction of a «onlng District - L»-1b, single family, i sewered List of Bxhibita Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Topographic Detail From City Files 2f P«''®l°Pe<l I«ts in Neighbornood Map of Sewer Stub Location Documentation Prom 1980 and 1978 Variance Approvals Pertinent Facts - Lot /Area Lot Width Required 43,560 s.f. 140* Existing 19,920 s.f. (46%) 118* Variance 23,640 s.f. (54%) 22* (16%) S£"! Sji'/r“S is, si‘ drivewayV!*^decksr"elf“°*' " single family residence with the normal >c2.LC5^ yj.l> "TTb .Vr-vf-JC. ■k} •‘V rvfm'f fc'i ? Vi Zoning Fi July 28, Page 2 of Discussloi This in 1978 I neighborhi appropria- of the Pu that the issued, a; Staff Rec< Base informati following 1. by P 2. perm. 3. 1 4. 5“^ -T>r for oonstruction of a hbornood nee Approvals Variance 23,640 s.f. (54%) 22' (16%) s been assessed for cel). :h along Elm Street, ien the driveway is i normal setbacks of setback zone, which This is more than ce with the normal tboring developed Be to make this lot Zoning Pile #1319 July 28, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Discussion * staff Recosnendation - :.yV This 0.46 acre lot was originally granted a variance for buildabillty in 1978 and renewed in 1980. Previous variance reviews addressed the neighborhood drainage concern, which lead to the approval condition that an appropriately sized and constructcMi culvert be installed per the directives of the Public Works Director. Additionally, previous approvals required that the three individual lots be combined before a building permit can be issued, and that all setbacks be met. Based on a current site inspection of the property revealing no new information or concerns, staff would recommend approval subject to the following conditions: X, Driveway culvert size and location must be reviewed and! approved by Public Works Director prior to installation. 2. The 3 lots must be legally combined prior to issuance of building permit. 3, Normal LR-lB setback requirements shall be met. 4. Hardcover on the property shall not exceed 5,976 s.f. (30%). S'- ) 3 kf:' \ h .c. . • • r. / JCITf OF ■i i '-V e Initial ($50.C Renewal (no ct After-tt PROPBRT3 I , . .. Site Add Property plus 06-] Please c Attach ] required PRBSBNT • • • ' Pre Pre DBSCRIPT ^Des Set] Oth< rlance for buildablllty reviews addressed the iroval condition that an lied per the directives Lous approvals required building permit can be •perty revealing no new pproval subject to the e reviewed and approved to Issuance of building met. 5,976 s.f. (30%). CITT OF tjutj:VARljUK3 applicat: Initial Application Pee $150.00 ! ($50.00 per each additional var: Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change frOTi original applica _ After-the-Pact Pees (Double application tee) OFTICE noBam LOomoH Site Address_ _ _ I«o c s 7, # 8» and # 9 A w w w w V* Block 9 - rii m VA tfWJt fWaVV . . i 7^ Ari I vv- JL ' RECnFT-lVM YOU Property Identification Humber (P.I.D•) 06-117-23-41 0081 CC04 . . . . s' _ _ _ torren.7 : - -VI/ I. Attach legal description to application If not 'included on required survey. Karen Lynn Fuller Phone (home) 533-5597 or 536-0846 Phone (work) 922-3825_ _ _ _ Address; 4749 Welcome Ave. North City; Minneapolis Zip; - -55429 OWNER (If different than applicant) Name _ _ _ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address;City;Zip; Date Property Acquired March 18, 1983 (month/year) B ^ • « 4 I'(do)' (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land PSBSBMT OSB OF PROPBRTZ • - « « « e . ' Present Zoning District Present Use of Property _ __ e * s non residential Residential • • • other (specify)• • e DBSCRIPTIOB OP RBQOBST Estimated Construction Cost $, VARIAHCBS lOfXtStBSD Lot Are.\y^ Lot Area Setback Variances ( • • *e Lot Width .« •e Front __ Hardcover Side Rear) Other i m.% rLJ ^ A I-. .-.A U HARI DBS( The reme Info appl: The requ unusi the know: Appld ONNBI The < authc agent tlon Ownez Appld Planr thirc revie unabl autho Offic ija 1. (? • rmm office 1350200000 -----01 CBi-' 75.00 CHEEK- 1L • 75.00 RECEIPT-WM you '41D2530'COOi'm THU \ ■ • 07/22/i on 33-5597 or 536-0846 922-3825 _ Zip: - -55429 Zip: lonth/year ) id. " * • • Residential • -r • ;o8t $ rer Rear) fc.»ss*ip V . m r*-: / .: -' 7*s»n . Id s:s\, 3; : tei*si . .V IRDSHIP Describe undue ha JBihipr ^ pi enfpreempt .of zoning'^re^Belf ^ mi , * ^^ cal difficulty resulting from strict DSSCRIPTIOII OMOSUAL Describe unusual property Code Requirements: nTnfTTTii¥ rpiffliTnii roperty condxiions ipreventing compliance with Zoning : •11 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. fIRBD SUBMITTALS 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). Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtaincKi with property o%mers list). Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Plat Map (obtained with property ovmers list). 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 remember that your variance application is information has not been included. this application. Please not complete if the above by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date ** •• •• •• mm mm mm mm ^m mm mm ^m mm mm mm mm ^m mm mm ^m mm mm mm mm ^m mm mm ^m ^m ^m ^m ^m ^m ^m ^m mmm._ _ APPLICABT'S SIGHATORB The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied^ i^ true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge• Applicant's Signature OWNBRS SIGHATURB The owner hereby ackowl authorizes reasonable en agents. Commission memb tion and verification o Date ges and agrees to this applicatibn and further rv onto the property by City staff, consultants, and Council members for purposes of Investiga- bis requ Owner's Signature Dat Applicant must have ^ll submittals into the City offic Planning Commission Mesifeting. Planning Commission Meet 5 days b ;fore the s are held on the third Monday of each pionth. Applicants must be present at all scheduled 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. i ulting from strict llance with Zoning ' (you must obtain A-603 Govt Center ed to each of the le address labels ms as required, is) if any changes separate list of ion. ication. Please ete if the above Lon is complete. &te tion required or all fees and/or and certifies that best of his/her ation and further &ff, consultantsr ses of investiga~ UAS. 5 days b ;fore the s are held on the at all scheduled f an applicant is ements to have an Building & Zoning ■mm a Mu.4 (n) % TRACT .0J>€D1 \r s u. m'r-■U\J \ ' 10 ;; 4->i4 • \ I \ f ' V (t' R .T\ >4 N r~iww- st^ \‘lWKP^U^ Cilfg S%..mfm « \. 1 i - a *f t i t • itu\ .. :u yv^ .••4 «4 ■i •4 1^. 7 ul ii ■I mu S:5:'Si ! • -;» \ . . » \» I \\ * •iXj is Ht M -i _J SsISs^ t“:„5| SSIS! 0^ 3 *hCC ifi ly HI IIIm AsSI&s *i« O HI HI HI 2 “13 °siis!i HI H S3 I K O9 , aSS£X ^ - T is M v^^:• ^i.': *># » >» % 1^ HI I t s - g-Si ____H* HI HI ^ HImi i 3 I* 1 HI HI S||!5SSzdiss^g .iissiHI 9 OB CH ^ 3 oo < s ?! •* S B<o HI O eMt HI •H 1 «§§2 mm mm HI ^ 2sS iAj M 1t Z Z ^ Mi HI HI < ^ -1 -1 CL M mM HB 7 IS BoS! St feUS-j BBS HI IS lil S3 M O < Kl S| 3*5 CL S CL s 2^-1*3 HI HI 1* HI S u HI « HI M I h* HI SfS < HI HI HI s i B 9^ lib lib M «J < I- HlSS ISSs HI HI Ir** HI SIB< HI I Hi a^Sz 3 3 a * h! £ M «4 tt I HI HI ^ iSK <r >• < OB Ms sS tt Q Hi < >- \ h HI HI 5iali^ B » M m s .IS! §5 si ;1. “sSsli HI HI i HI 3 -r aww M (• a *S“z s»w o ^ ^ 3 3 HI Ik is M HI HI 'viaa§2as I HI IM HI"SMK M -HS«z S«^si U U ^ -I g >r aos CL 3 3 *3 HI <H 0 iJi** sisis bIssbS g gill ••S l4 mm M ■):kfm mi :3P;r. ••• ■ -.■•si '«:su»,vk .-'. t •# ,- -j; . V/ \ta -• . ■ .._;'■*m-■■Hb-1■ .1• - -.1 ‘•:l v.-m'•. ; ^ •■*■ ■■ -■ito-;-^ T*,. »V-^ J « 1 For: ELEANOR HATCHE^E &£ "SJiSffi* Jfgflt;!*'"« 1311 EUSTIS ST^ ST. PAUi; MINN. 99IQt ’^1 i-sj :'- Zi »• ■.w m , . •: . .* «*».- Elm l«.5 A* ^ 0 ^ ft '0 ?.' -# / 'V ’ .C ■• •* ^ ^ - ' ■ ■ • • ***i^'-H ‘ y^. • ■ «-»* ♦ i«^ . • . ... % •.. . -., ^ .•. • ■ - I , «-- I 1 1 - ^ r . ‘ - ■^.. I , .. ^_ . .. • ♦ • A i ScaW:|"*LQ' 0 OenoVes \ron F\oceJ • Den<iVcS Iron Found ■■;• • I • v\rk'^^ I I S^Ory Fromj N. ^ Mouse _wo.0 PtaV M8.T} Mftai Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 9, Minnetonka Summit Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota i CI9TIFY THAT THIS IS A TfUl AND COftICCT lEMCSCNTATtON Of A SUftVEV OF THf •OUNOARIES OF THE lANO ABOVE OfSCIIlEO AND OF THE lOCATlON OF AU BUIlOINCS. IF ANY THEtEON. AND AU VISIBLE ENCIOACHMENTS. IF ANt, FBOM Ol ON SAID LAND. Oot«d iMiJOilll^rfoy *< Jung A.O. ib7S C. B.lOEN A ASSOCl/B'fES. INC »jV/U ^ - • ■;;. • .:..• 'i v • >5-C -y mm -*r''7L^-. ^ M.'Ski*‘ •r.. & M w^‘>- .m--.-' '.:-ty mimmm f 3 Si»^v«yor. l•fi•trottoll Ma. *>12€ - y- : • .-• ♦.■yT...r' - ,.u- • .- ;y.' . • •• •• A’•.•%.;•••m : , I >..V . i f- ■ I \ / \ m .m mam: Vmyfii.■.,-...uf;4 ■itfU . V ..'”L ■-■•• •/•'. t.iU. ■ v.^ f p<K<f (,^7, See ^ Ooo ^ 7oo Y F p*4 •- •>' b /ifrfft - t; J32 j . pc; >v\' » ^ L . m jr%^\ ^.'<S ‘d<s-~. . •• ^ A KO&r.. ifj u ± o> O r I' TTi.-*,^ •-Vv ‘ic -■IP ww r\ i. i^. 5 ■• .M ■'•7j m- , : kW : ; ■^ 3steata^jiiaaiat^*j :;-;4:7,w'-::7;^■^■' - aa (l(!slauiis4M9i».--r. ^. •; ■•••• •• ?• •••.•.. .•• A> ^ S'i ■ I I 1 ‘ ! i !t I I i li vr j ; .♦V M m.j • •'7/•. I < * •-. 'tm IE& f. i I VIT la —i- w •rt/T ■'..•••I'iimIJm' ,• v^ .• * \ I i » I i^M I ( t < t i I ifew /SI iS 6 s r ;i ^ 1 »* K • ^r'::/, *'4«v^:i ::?j Bi]t'J . A.<^ Ht^AHI .9*0 6'OM ANI 51*1 fc!>V-m (S2t»g; ^1*1 HIM ■»&______i_______________________________ - ■--4 ■■ •____ 1. V ■ f N- 33 RF- wm. 4 7.*- -Vwmniiiiit ^ ■it.. l^:'V > -1 •kik' Thtt M« approx Pttllaz tha na inform a • *«a «a ^ a*» Hark Pullar variijiea application is tha exact sane application approved by the Council in the summer of 1978 (1401 George Hatchett). grandson of the Hatchetts» plans to begin construction within the next year. Please review the Hinutes of June 9» 1980 for baekgztxtfid infomation and recommendation. I'.r c r :^- ...^. V* «• * ‘ "■ a '*• • .. -• • ... a. # , » •. 'a?'..; - *; * • '<» ' **>i 1.1,- *'-si' *' • * •*r*-It.'. .--V:' o;: *:>.-•-a'*'-*.- ^ VJ ^ r • i « • i.:/ • * V- • V.- V:. ’ ?*■ * . f.** •• * — - • V * • .« ■: .*:•* ■ •• • •«. • r* •. • • »• wt Hftliv ftOUNOAtllS THflfON. A ' 0«i«4 iKit^ 151 /n *-w V* >u^.rv _1* ',*A'“M'-^:v; 1*#^:H^ . \V ^ •-,..v , :-^^>^4^ \ ^:i______________________________ • * « W ''* 1 1%'m^*'•"'»■A ■■ • - I -’•'*\^e i^ficate c^ ^u^veu: '~t:CR AVrCHETTZ *9 •< • ‘« J.\20.0 Put .* .MS.T3 hAftaC* '• 4U. *• ,• • *. e, r^:*• •• «.•• ^ ^ts 7, 8 and ?, Block 9. Minnetonka Su^xt Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota ,4S79-«^ '-^ '.I wt Hftiiv citTirr THAf rnif rs a riui and coaiicr iiatiSiNTAiioN o» a snavfv a* tu« fSlifON^ AHS^^rvi?^® CfSCmiO. AMO oa TMC lOCATlOM Of AU aUHOINCl. If ANTTMMfON. AMO Ml VISitLf fNClOACHMINTS. If AMT. »»0m QS OM SAID lANO. . June__ > D«taS tHi*.J«y •#AO i»i8 ' . . ' % 150 /n • • ./■.■• a *. . ♦-*• A. a ^ " 'K i.-:'•'<-.V‘'■• *tr >, •♦. ♦'I r-'h 4A•I *^% ■ir ■. i i .1 15 1 5CIATE5. INCk9*3«4«99I0« • 'r >• :oW:\\ti5v^. noV csVlrbn* ^occ ■y J Framf *.t .-tr • %# •; 4itVtT 0» TMI * *V OINGS. ir ANT. 'A * L iC ^ :r # I ^ - ki«: a r -••• • :i* '■ .hiASfe•• . ^ iw——»^^-^^^»^*^'r—^r"—T, ■ ^ .vk.- ♦..^X*; :'*! ri. #401- V TflACT4;^ t«»CT ^ c5£|5'^ d 5|^(,i0 ^lOi i (!») 22P> (^3 0)2 io(l)£asi ST»CCT IMJIL_1 H.. Uka ft)* , * t X ** ~ ^ ■ » • r* r» ^ rr~» m jii': A 6 a: fO Iz jv $ •i: J|: XT.. < DK I < « r E L I-H sI «w/ : * ro cvi rd N- *• mm *•« K* !f- UJ in ^s,^Uut y «•* •4•'fe y t r • J 4« I ^ff^iiiwwwiWiasw r If, % cm or oROK 'ft* a-£.AnioiiT“J LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE INVENTORY il VARIANC ES REOlUjED PEKSl lY >f^nn»g *CD*V____— Zoning Use Distric r«D«_»tcn« ¥-f« tot 3<T^V A3^iWV -^9. • __LLfJ.__AP.'— _/>—J SETBACKS vA.ft!Miee r^-«cttsi SI4« tite ii«f« ti«f« n i^. H rt^ hartcover • M M • 7% r%. M • tS0 r%. 77m • SM rt. lOT • iMo Ft. m •vfx. fct.»jirrai MAA9 Ori&TM NMnCG Jl - puo^na MJJMICOVUI TCthL Jl n.m M.Mt ti m 14.f« M.m OIHEK SECTIONS jbbxs^ tottoto* totffct tMB.I ------------- i.i __________ DdSriHfl rtOrOBCD !2&1NSL LAND mrnrnim^tmamm^ •IVUtOif ___ QJ MRpUttto • to* atoli'**!** J«fHi«r7 I, lf7S CWi*#rNhi^ tln|tU i^ltK othFr If thU aFFtlcat^ ____________________Yilfli ffuvFi _ ImwmX ^wmm§ rFlllfit FUI» •1#F^« -aFam •iFp#* _. pf»f mwmm wmi^irnm •!••• FS0Q«APinr •ff»<tlJif «|P^liCFti«Fi ■ ^ »t ehep^ _ mmummmt F«fl«tiif l^r^tlM ITSLSTlttf esty • M|«|C ____ NAStFilt witll MlF^totho«l4 4»»#lFfP*FFt ^tiJi^ ritr ___p9i^m\m _____ c«ri#»Fr«F4f City ^tmw __ F««llft%l» • •IttlFf ronf«neifif •«l«tlFf (fFmliif LAND USE |Mt tot »• Jk^ MFMM tm 99 %jr mim€i9ml t* 999 Fiatricti eoFfenitfif hm - Fcr^aaory btilltfiiif mw 999 I e«nr»r«l •••\f99mim^ 999 k ’ PfCTtJRES f9 with ilAf fi»rfer«afir# •fai%Aar4F N«r«(1IAL ■ - •atiraly mm hmitAimm mw 999 . 99wi9w 99 mm 99 ••• Irtiat aaeaa^a t9« FWy| fwimw •• caiFlUCItCM af •■laMaf fraat !••• th9n %0m FMF| CaytIfiF ball4la^ FAIN MAANtT VAAOC (yr> _____ • alll 1# ail I aat ra^aa am a«letia<7 aabataaAaHl ytM Alaaa«lafi £ •w..1 L^ir-v-: -■r; V ar Li . > . i 'f "^1M ."■ : :•; R..- ^ i By r- A-.f.' Ui, #562 i» ‘ i EU «C»y„TU _ ‘-i; • ^ V^.,- fc • A»y i. xaoL>> %J ►•3 •. fm.■‘.^s _X;i :-Vt <• ti> m 3 ■ v: ■ ifeji t^tv‘ ■4 f.1 si V r-v '■mfr HTUffTM or A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 9, 1910 - PAGE 5 Hark Pullar and Mrs. Gaorge Matchatt# oimar and grandaothar of tha applicant* %rcra prasant. The application is a renewal of a lot area and lot width variance application approved in tha suonar of 197t. Tha drainage ditch running along Eln Street in front of property was raviaired and applicant was again advised that tha Po''lic tforks Coordinator siust datamina site of culvert for driveway to proposed house. Jabbour novad to approve tha lot width and area variance of Mark Fuller bas€»d on tha hardship that there is no adjacent land available and subject to the following conditions: Lota 7* 8 and 9 siust be cosibined as one building tite. All construction to meet setback of the zoning district LR-IB. Public Works Coordinator to determine culvert site for proposed driveway. Motion seconded by Prahm. Vote: Ayes (5)* Nays (0). Motion passed unanimously. Mrs. Marts was present. Mabusth reviewed the two lot plat and stated that each lot meets the standards of the soning district. The existing structures on Lot 2 Bieet t^e setback from the proposed lot line. The On-Site Manager will prepare a report on septic infonzation provided by applicant. A Public Xnfomation Meeting has been scheduled for June 23* 1980. Mr. Cloutier was present. Mabusth reviewed the application. The variance was required tor a proposed 3* deck addition to be constructed along the aides and lakefrort of the existing structure. Mr. Cloutier stated that he has o such plans and that the attorney who handled the application was mistaken. Mabusth continued wiLh the following review of the conditional use permit. A CUP is required for the guest apartment use and the intensification of a non-conforming use . The intensification results froii quest apartment request and proposed screened porch to be constructed on second level. 1 MANX FUU2II 4055 Eln Street VARIANCE (4582) £. T. MBRTX 1820 Fox Street SUBDXVXSXOR Work Session (•557) COXTLEN CLOUTIER 2480 Casco Point Road CONOXTXdlAL USB PBRM VARIANCE Work Session (•555) Hi m rl ■ ' : t.*;f.CLAR MSubject t 1, Anpli folio a) b) 1 ( o h b d P- Ccr^bii 3. All ir 1 iinitc 4. Condi1 only. Council Me Discussior problems. Paurus mo\ of Robert for a cond address th concernino densely pc ments. Me Jeanne Nab the record Street* fa whicn stat The Mark F of a lot a summer of Elm Street and the ap Works Coor driveway t At their J the Planni: area varia; that there to the fol :.» f.CI.AR y.KET]KG Of THE OWONO COUNCIL, Jl’NS 30. 1980 Subject to the following conditions:t A-^nlicant to subwit a site plan d'^signating tho following physical inprovcnents; a) location, setbacks and size of physical plant (crcerhouic 48’ X 52.5*.- 20* X 48* head housei b) only one curb cut to be allowed for expanded use (two exist serving residence and bar* ^rea). c| driveways and of f-street pa’’king area (three parking spaces). 2. Ccr'bine fou.* separate tax parcels. 3. All improvenents involving greenhouse operation limited to the above lef'.rcnci'ti site plan. 4. Conditional use permit gr.inted to the Mortensons only. Council Meeting - June 30, 1980 Discussion included the amount of sales, traffic problems, and future use of the property. Paurus moved. Hurt seconded, to table the request of Robert & Joanne Mortenson, 1205 Arbor Street, for a conditional use permit and request staff to address the adverse effects of this application concerning the potential traffic problem in a densely pooulated area in excess of zoning require ments. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0). Jeann, Mabusth, Zoning Adn>iniatr«tor, entered into the record the request of Mark Fuller, 4055 Elm Street, for a variance, dated June 26, 1980, which states: The Mark Fuller variance application is a . of a lot area and lot width variance approved xn the sunroer of 1978. The drainage ditch running along Elm Street in front of the property was J^®viewed and the applicant was again advised that the Public Works Coordinator must determine size of culvert tor driveway to proposed house. At their June 9, 1980 Planning Commission the Planning Commission appro 'od the lot width and area variance for Mark Fuller Lased on the hardship that there is no adjacent land evailable and subject to the following conditions: ; sf' •, ^ ^s- (Continued) 1980ig theil pl.'int ‘od house/ ip.incled I and (three at ion onsons cst t, to n uire- xnto n wal in the ong ed ublic rt for ing, and dship ubject r.'ifjc 21CONDITIONAL USE PERXilT1205 Arbor Street (Continued) VARIANCE % 41L55uE1« Street* t #562 Fuller (Continued) n' ji .1 ‘■r ■r ; ■ ■5, V r V REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNC'^L, JUNE 30, 1980»X. Lots 7, 8, 69 must be combined as one building site.2. All construction to meet setbaurk o£ the zoning district LR-IB. 3. Public Works Coordinator to determine culvert size for pr^osed driveway. Council fleeting - June 30, 1980 Paurus moved, Butler seconded, to approve the variance request of Mark Fuller, 4055 Elm Street, per the Planning Commission recommendations of .Tune 9, 1980. Nbtion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0). Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator, entered into the record the request of Alan Dale, 2690 Pheasant Road, for a variance, dated June 24, 1980, %dtich states: Zoning District. - LR-IB 1. Side yard variance: Required: 10* Proposed: V Variance: 3*30% 2. Hardships: a) no adjacent land availa.^Ie b) house location on lot The Dales have recently constructed a deck 28* X 20* on the rear of their home at first floor level extending 4* from their neighbor*a property line. They would like to construct a 16* X 16* screened porch over the west edge of the deck that will extend 7* from the side property line. The screened porch is considered an encroachment (31.433) and will require a setback variance. We have been advised that the neighbor to the west does not oppose the application. Ke have not received %nritten comments nor did he make an appearance at the action meeting. Council Meeting - June 30, 19R0 Butler moved, Hurr seconded, to request staff to draft a resolution approving the variance request, of Alan Dale, 2690 Pheasant Road, subject to the porch never being enclosed and made a part of the house, to be entered into the chain of title, and that the drainage from the roof be directed to the Kr.:- Page 22VARIANCE4055 Elm Street(Continued) '4 VARIANCE 2690 Pheasant Road,; #565 ; Alan Dale ■ 4 Ic * .ej• V --'A'*'1-^1 •j I-;- i.- 'i:- ■ .■■■■. “ J i 1 # - TO:Planning Coanlssioii and Council PROM:Alan P. Olson, Village Planner DATE:June 21, 1978 SUBJECT:Variance • George Mitehctt 4055 Elm Street i Sh« a^leant wishes to construct s new hoBM on an existing waesat property consists of three separate parcels totaling 19,920 sq. ft. (.457 acre). There is no additional land araiUble 5“* •«J*cent parcels are occupied. The house location is not todicated hut it would have to confom to all regular setbacks. There is one sewer unit assessnc^nt on the three lots (1/3 unit* p^ parcel). Variance 34.452 lot area and lot width. Area required: 43,560 sq. ft. Actual area: 19,920 sq. ft. VarUnce: 23,640 sq. ft. - 54X Width required: 140 ft. Actual width: 118 ft. /ariance: 22 ft. • 16% Hardship: no additional land available. PLANNING COMMISSION - June 26, 1978 jJO appUcant present. Staff read into the record a eoownt fron Brad Eln Street, wherein he objected to the variance saplng he did aot think any hardships could be denonstrated. 1®* drainage. Planning CoBDtsslon cabM application pending review of drainage and requesting applicant to be present to address connlsslon. co Staff Note - June 28, 1978 existing on the City. The ditch flows west to the platted undeveloped rlAt of «y of rtrk Avenue where It turns to flow southwesterly. ThlJ flow is off the subject property. Development on this lot would require crossing of the ditch with a culvert acceptable to the public works department. Also, construction procedures must be such as to prevent siltratlon or clogging of the ditch at all times. \\JSM»» 2-.’;m Ml m 1 m Jtee 28, 1978 Georg* Metehott 4055 EIb Seroot Page 2 #401 The followliig table conparea adjacent propdrtiee: Subject Lot: 601 Mtka. Righlanda: 615 Mtka. fUghlanda: 594 park Lane: 4100 EIb Street: 4060 EIb Street: 4030 Ela Street: 19,920 eq. ft. 19.5 17.5 12, 24,7 15, 35, »»• * • * •q •q •q •q •q •q- ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. Varlanee ai^rored 5-10*76 Variance approved 6-24-75 PLAmmiG OOltaSSIOIf - July 10, 1978 Reconaended approval of variances finding proposal consistent vitli the nei^iborliMd and a hardship of no additional land available, subject to no setback variances, to legal lot coiAination and to approval of driveuay and culvert by the City Public Works Supervisor* fOi Plani Oroiu City Frosi:Jeanr Date: Subject: Septe #1321 Preli Befor Zoning Distric Total area Revised Applic Lot 1, Blo< Lot 2, Blo< Lot 1, Bloc Lot 2, Bloc Outlot A (I In light representative representative variance to th< subdivide the ; district accep future plannin property in th subdivision app of a Class III road. Review of Four Li Staff hae location of th Crystal Bay Ro for a 40 mph ro of the recent packets), the approved schei centrally local 10-76 24-75 tat with Lablt, tad to Ittper^or. Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator September 2, 1988 #1321 Tom Haislet. 950 Old Crystal Bay Road - Before Class III - Request to Reschedule•fore the Planning Co,t>r.j.jBlon for Review of Amended Application Lot 2p Block 1 * 15,07 acres Lot Ip Block 2 - 12.08 acres Lot 2p Block 2 * 12.08 acres Outlet A (Road Outlet) » 1.57 acres In light of the issues raised durino the flr*^- 4.uraprssantatiy ^ne rxrsc roviaWf tna ownor’s r.^re,:St:tij|; oV ?Se achioY «t?'2^ie«^d7nTth"fl°"variance to the subdivision reoularl««. request for a subdivide the propertv with *1“''® them to district accepts the City's descriptions. The school future planning nee5s ol’^the^S?t^ «oa?dle«‘’o?%^‘’“/.'=^ ^."®“® ’=*‘® .jj Cl... m ..Mi.,.1., „. Review of Four Lot Plat - loc.t?oVlA%%Trop''oied fS?ure7hrou’gh"road°2t\"h* "*'® ?o%-a‘Vo III id ?rr^e;2e#lHHif -\“ cln^7a?l^ iTcTJ JLtl /uf"f^? ttlo^r;e"tit“e"^ tte^^A^? Zoning Fil September Page 2 of All accea depending will detex to be cons proposed i fields, th would be property, of each of a road to lots is tc defined. T1 as part of City must 2 of develop] engineerin preliminary forth in t^ Review of R Each ] 200 feet 1< can be ser^ curb cuts a overall s< patterns o connecting property wi all wetlai informatioi noted that information no need for The scl has been in has also be< to complete The se| dry buildah development r-^y V;->^4p3ji'-■:'/Z^.y[ nistrator oad - eat to Reschedule of Amended Application itiguous area required. of four lota review, the owner's icerns of the City with ig their request for a d have allowed them to criptions. The school ibility to insure the the disposition of the sd to re~schedule the asks for consideration with an interior access B site to confirm the »e intersection of Old 1 the safety standards pment plans for Area 3 osed in your previous s consistent with the pears to be the most ■h ."£| hr;P-. • f .m W- 'S-r- f M iff?™ m..r- ■•••V.. V ," ■ • > i;. .mmrnSm^ Zoning File #1321 September 2, 1988 Page 2 of 4 All access to these lots must be via the approved access corridor, thl« interim period. As there are no formal plans ?fr?A^ ‘•y the school, except for possibly pliying * lots, advising any future owner of the need to install 1- engineering standards of the City if one of these the road should be ‘ l^d® »'»Jx*ivider's responsibility to define and develop citv language within the Developer's Agreement, The y must require assurance that the road would be constructed at the time «noln»«T*4 (for the City is being asked to waive the requirement that n?lll»ln/rv^/ii^^ ^®®* ^® ®t the time of the4?*fu “®®** plans and review fees should also be setforth in the Developer's Agreement. Review of RR-lB Standards - 200 ®®^® contiguous standard and ^®*^ ^^® setback line. All lotscan be served in the future by an Interior road not requiring additional Vi ^‘’^4* review. In review of the minutes,’it'^wasnoted that a Planning Commission Member suggested the need for topographic information. Staff has reviewed the location of the road outlot and sees no need for topographic information at this point of the review. The school district has advised the staff that a member of the board has been in contact with each member and has discussed the current plan and trcOTpletr?hifVe°vievJ:*'“^ "dditlonal information will be needed The septic testing has been waived as the lots all exceed 5 acres of dry buildable area. Septic testing will be required at the time of development of each of the four lots. Zoni] Sept( Page loca rece. issu€ The i acqui to th stand subdi folic 2. li P« 3. r€ un fa pa ti ccess corridor, school district and type of road no formal plans 3sslbly playing on that the road t level of the e chain of title need to install if one of these road should be ^ine and develop Agreement. The 5ted at the time requirement that :he time of the >uld also be set us standard and Line. All lots ring additional pending upon the inal ownership »d to the north latting of this were made, and or topographic linutes, it was for topographic outlet and sees iriew. er of the board urrent plan and will be needed ceed 5 acres of It the time of Smm. Zoning File #1321 September 2, 1988 Page 3 of 4 district should be placed on notice i staff Itspnamw nJation - flndln, all insura^lnattlla'tlon'nf"!"# be executed by the developer toxnsure installation of a future road that must meeti all engineering standards of the City at the time of construction The thit ^will SddrMf*?h« restrictions/covenants within that agreement mat will address the following concerns of the City: A) Development or use of either one of the four lots shall require the installation of the through rLd from tha Intersection of Old Crystal Bay Road to the east border of Outlot reoardinc1-hI®i?^*v provide some clarification language fctlvltiL^««*.^^4®^ school for play fields or other involving structural improvements. It should be fields must be via the approved City Engineer shall define a standard of minimum improvement for the temporary access road to the play field. ^ formula should be established providing guidelines for the share in the cost in the total upgrading of Outlot A. Should also advise future owners that at the time road plans are submitted, additional fees will be required letter^o?'"'' posted with the City in the forS of a credit to assure that road is completed to required sfsndards. How shall these costs be shared? ?'® amount of $400.00 ($100.00 per each park-fee at tMrie"ve?TdVvX"^^^ reaulred*^j^<? 4.^^® engineering plans for road usuallyequired at the time of a subdivision application# because of fac^thlV't'hlf^'n"''®®! this subdivision application and thefact that the Developer's Agreement will address the need for fA« appropriate security to insure completion of road at the txme development pressures require construction road in the future! • -!-1 :x; ■".'V i ’•> ■ :•! *>. ‘1 : ^ '.J: tb Zoning File Septei^er 2, Page 4 of 4 4. AIJ additic County to be f 5. The of Outl has pro' i Ji r it C6 that with the formal loproent application is lid have to address the existing road Outlot A. the road upon the final .e if development plans >m Haisletf finding all nent standards of the roval is based on the d by the developer to must meet all future of construction. The within that agreement City: the four lots, shall rough road from the i east border of Outlot ■Arification language r play fields or other vements. It should be be via the approved a standard of minimum :o the play field. ing guidelines for the Outlot A. ire owners that at the fees will be required City in the form of a i^mpleted to required ).00 ($100.00 per each :o waiving payment of ans for road usually ition, because of the •n application and the ess the need for fee letion of road at the of road in the future. Zoning File #1321 September 2, 1988 Page 4 of 4 mm ■w.V._ __■’0*^ 4. All access to the four lots must be via approved Outlot A. Ho additional curb cuts will be allowed off of Old Crystal Bay Road or County Road 8. Additional curb cuts will be considered if property is to be further developed. 5. The developer and future owner is placed on notice that vacation of Outlot A may not feasibile if the development of the eastern parcel has proposed a future connecting link to Outlot A. ^ -T : ■■■ ,-v. siii H r i ^ .c '^W ^ i-i*, f V 4 ■- > V ;; V . •J* V^r**** r' Ji., 4 Dates 'ject Applies set Zoning D List of ] Exh: Exh: Exhi Exhj Exhi Exhi Exhi Exhi Exhi: Exhi] Exhil Pertinent 1• On Ap front Orde: appaz lette appli variai pproved Outlet A. No .d Crystal Bay Road or isldered if property is ti notice that vacation ; of the eastern parcel A. P <r-# W U Ml - •i' it mm mmm ' ^ J V,- • Tor m Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson ^// Michael P. Gaffron^ Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Oates September 14, 1988 Subject #1323 John W. Papas, 3369 Crystal B«y Road - Variances - Public Hearing '*’ settac", anf^virage" iVkVsVo^e's^ttac^^^^ hardcover.lakeshore Zoning District - LR-lc List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit 0 ~ Exhibit E - Exhibit P - Exhibit 6 - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Exhibit K - Stop Work Order Dated 4/4/88 Plat Map Provided by Staff Signatures of Neighboring Property Owners (no certified property owners list was submitted) certified Applicant's Letter of Application Photographs Submitted by Applicant Hardcover Calculations Submitted by Applicant Site Plan and Deck Plan Submitted by Applicant Site Plan Sketch by Staff, 9/14/88 stiff 1° »“hmitted by applicant ^>'««*'°re Setback Pertinent Facts - flolt“irVw\t®houl"lfllle«lr?p"e^r^^^^^ constructing a deck in his order was posted on the property ol that‘’ir''"^l; * apparently did stop work ^ ^ applicant letter of notification was sent tV\9BS " applicant's letter of July 25, 1988 resulted in variance application receive! ol jl'lylll'i^^a ""’ ■^V 4 b ! i <iiv I r' u: h W'M W0B Zoning Septem Page 2 4L •T C V S' 3. P< r< Discuss Th the ex constri structu that si hardcoT based o surface Staff Ri Gi varianc the re< hardshi] ^// M nlstrator v;-' :i i. dcover^ lakeshore - 'iiifS >-■•,'V . (no certified :ant Leant v'-'- .icant I Setback ■ ••* L r. L-'. 'IV -v;,. ■? I-:-'’'- ng a deck in his Is, A stop Work The applicant - removed and a his resulted in I with a partial ^■:^^'-v-' JS'j'Sv':ri :.•'.•Ir . I ■w, ,a •:::,.5^ IT TiiVmm '..ffi ;V •y /•: H*! -r- l-Av{ 4JV- ■ ^ ■.=■; jSS$: ^■:>> rr-:iypf Zoning File #1323 September 14, 1988 Page 2 of 3 The applicant has failed to provide the required survey, plat map, and certified property owners list, which are requirements noted on the variance application form. Envelopes with address labels were submitted and the neighbors have been notified of the Public Hearing. Per the site plan sketched by staff, the following variances are required in order for this deck construction to continues A) Construction in the 0-75' setback zone where no construction is normally allowed. The proposed deck is approximately 58* from the normal shoreline. B) Hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone, excluding the paved road from the calculation is 20.0%, and with the deck would increase to 27.4%. C) Per the average lakeshore setback diagram, the applicant's deck encroaches approximately 10' lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line, as defined by structure on the neighboring properties. Discussion - The applicant's only legitimate hardship in staff's opinion is that the existing house is located in the 0-75* setback zone^ and was constructed prior to the 75* setback requirement. The actual house structure extends towards the lakeshore in such a manner that any deck on that side of the house will require an average setback variance. From a hardcover perspective, the property has excessive hardcover percentages based on code standards, but does not contain excessive unnecessary hard surface areas that could be removed to mitigate the hardcover addition. Staff Re dation - Given the lack of a survey which is normally required for every variance of this type, staff finds it difficult to recommend approval of the requested variances although the applicant may have legiti.Tiate hardships for requesting variances. mm.mm m ^ m: f *> i: n m fm Zoning Fi September Page 3 of Plan: Tabl Take info] prlo] mi -M Take addit m t\<w ■i- S: ■■ ■si i id survey, plat map, and [ulrements noted on the 1 address labels were of the Public Hearing. 1 lowing variances are I continue: i where no construction I approximately 58' from iccluding the paved road he deck would increase agram, the applicant's award of the average by structure on the taff's opinion is that itback zone^ and was it. The actual house anner that any deck on back variance. From a hardcover percentages isive unnecessary hard hardcover addition. y required for every recommend approval of may have legitimate mm , j-m im's Zoning File #1323 Septeiaber 14, 1988 Page 3 of 3 Planning ComBilssioii would appear to have a number of options: 1* Table the request until the required survey has been submitted. 2. Take action to recommend either approval or denial based on the Information available, subject to providing the required information prior to Council review. 3, Take action to recommend denial or approval without requiring additional information. ’ * • - - ... r of options: boen submitted. denial based on the B required information il without requiring ... • * *• «••♦ .m •5 .,w . •*: CITY OF ORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PERMIT NO. CALLED IN SCHEDULED completed ADDRESS OWNER _ CAVSTAL. TELEPHONE NO.CONTR. roOTINO rPAMINQ INSULATION WALL 80. PINAL PNOQRESS oemol. PIREPRCV. PLUM8INQ Rl PLUMSINO FINAL MECHANICAL WATER HOOKUP METER SETmjRN ON SEWER HOOKUP SEPTIC INSTALL. SEPTIC MAINT. WELL TEST PUMP SITE INSPEI EXCAVyQRAOiNQ/FILLINO LAKESHORE/WETLANOS LICENSINQ COMPLAINT FOLLOW-UP SEPTIC FINAL FIREPLACE/WOOO BURNER COMMENTS: -S- i m ■« a PHOTO TAKENQ □ WORK SATISFACTORY; PROCEED O O CORRECT WORK A PROCEED O □ CORRECT WORK. CALL FOR REINSPECTION BEFORE COVERING TOtS. «u°«sT^ INS^CTO. W.LL R6TURH ^□^NSPECTION REOUIRED. CALL TO ARRANGE ACCESS. call for the next inspection 24 hours in advance. Owner/Contr. on,si Inspector Wlite /(hiptctor't File 473-7357 CHiMjr /SiM Netle* r>’ •4’ ‘>.P ?P4 LO/t End cc: BUILDING A 1 ASSESSING -#1 DIN •ULEO m mu&h. evi. B 5k , ‘ li-r ‘•4M# OfitONpi, l^*.) . CITY of ORONO Port Office Box 66«CrysUl Boy. Minnceota £t5323*Munidpol Officii On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka July 22, 1988 Jon Walter Papas 3369 Crystal Bay Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Rat Deck Construction Without a Peniilt Dear Mr. Papast On April 4, 1988, a Stop Work Order was posted on a deck being constructed at the above subject property. As of this date the partially completed deck still remains on the property and a permit has not been issued. This letter Is to notify you that Orono Municipal Code does not allow any construction within 75* of the lake and the addition of the deck may exceed the amount of hardcover allowed. You have 2 options: 1) remove the deck and restore the yard to original, or 2) apply for a variance to the required 75* setback from the lake and possibly a variance for excessive hardcover. Enclosed are variance and building permit applications. You must take corrective action before August 1, 1989 or the City may Issue citations. If you have any questions or have a problem meeting this deadline feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, LO/tln Enclosure <- Ly.'.e Oman, Field Inspector Variance & Building Permit Applications Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Thomas J. Jacobs, Senior Building Inspector BUILDING a ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING administration a finance - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 rVof ORONO il Bay, MinncMte 55323•Municipal Office Honka posted on a deck As of this date tie property and a licipal Code does te lake and the irdcover allowed, (tore the yard to ulred 75* setback Lve hardcover. ^plications. You ) or the City may : have a problem my office. >ns itrator dministrator PUiLiC WORKS - 473-7359 sii CITI OF OBOUO - VWIUUK* AFWJCATIOII ^ g ^ Initial Application Fee $150.00 . ^ \ ($50.00 per each additional variaj<^) , PAnaiwal Variance Pee $75.00 (no change from original fee) After-the-Fact Pees (Double _ i Cl } y L'l" PBpPbBTY LOCATIOa Site address 3369 C I’ti’iTTrir f^IfHrhLl: v-i i iwu ;^COCjOOOO \i t..'V)awt' ■ W property Identification Humber (P.I.D.) - - Please check one - Property - abstract or cwit -•‘-n* Ti f AAwV • w torrens?LvOj. nVi.JxJ* Attach legal description to application if not Included on required survey. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICABT Phone fhome) 471-8690 Phone (work) 553-7759 Address. crystal Bay Road _ City.. $ip.-ggg —„ (if different than applicant) Name Same Phone (home) Phon? (work) Address:City:Zip: Date Property Acquired ^6/84 (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own parcels _- - - - - - - - prbsbr use of fkopbkr Present Zoni”?^ District Present Use of Property Residential • other '(specify)____________________zz _ ________ flU BMP di® dP __ __ ^PP B^P BPP _ m__j ^ An S 587#00 V*_D^PHOH of MQOBST ZVi'CiZl construction Cost S_582^ . Describe.'.request in detail:_pn1djm a slotted wopden degcjn m,^^rontjard. VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot"Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( X - Front T'- Other Side Rear) • • ' r A. — The App remembe informal Zoning C APPLICAI The app requests unusual the inf< knowledge OHNERS S: The owne authorize agentSp ( tion and Owner's S Applic Planni third review unable author; Office w* /» i.T 0>^'UiiQ FlN^flCE CFFICi •Tf lF5(/100000 01 j^* • I • ni is:ri Mlu^/m W LntiS JiCA AO Al rrens? Luded on ••’—r“CrT-.7L;/i'V yn/» 3iy^4v LvVl p •» i * f ' ' *S .•in / 4.U* .' ) 471-8690 work) 553-7759 Zip:. 55391 i) work) Zip: ___ (month/year) 5f land. » • • Residential ify) tion Cost S 587.00 ■ •_ oHon f^egic in my ffont yard tardcover Rear) r.f- V;-:' fW- ii:-. 5 ^vi :» T- W. F") <^:jM 'li \-y : \ fm- M r: 4 K i. BRRDSBIP enforcement of *oning^?egulftfons-”^^ resulting from strict _____-^tder the standards and n^^^ces dbscriptic * of urosuAi. PROFxxR c^inms ------------ compliance with Zoning 3. required submittals 1. Completed Application Form this lilt frornlseL^n Count^^ of*F^" obtain348-3271). ^ Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center miron th*e®lbotVlist"wiih‘’no Jitu’ P";*<>'J>^essed to each of the obtained with property ownw list) •<’<^ress (use address labels in existing grade^are plowed. elevations) if any changes Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). app?ica?iln.^*^*''® 4. 5. 6. 7. !:___ai may bi re^u^sted "by''city“st^^^^ remember that your^variance^applica^ application. Please information has not been includedf^ ^ ^ complete if the above Certification by Zoning Zoning Official's Signature Date applicart 's signature "I”""" -------------------------- requesteV'^by \he*”n^n|’Adlinilt/a\|j^^ information required or unusual expenses incurred in reviel If thl« f«l?f f. and/or the information suppli^ is true and corr*?ct TheTes?’^lf"h?s/^llknowledge. Applicant's Signature Date 7r CffNBRS SIGNATURE aSlhori^es ^ValoLt!e°lil^®«„to furtherreasonable entry onto the orooertv hv r,^T,r -1 i-utmer agents. Commission members, and Crmno-j i k ^ staff, consultants, tion and verificatiirSl Ihirle^^ Purposes of investiga- Owner's Signature OvO Date ijifkv thePlannlnrclllLllll lle\rngr“prinl,L"o°r“ h month, he Plani -114.K..W.- j 5chedult>. —yj,, offinJ'lt place and to advise the Building & Zoning tSIir-M^onT^r o7 eTch ;Vn\")?- App7?i||tsT"7i°" Meetings are" heTd on' the review meetings of the Planninrr^rrtnif- must be present at all scheduled unable to attend a schedu?«H^L^^ Council. If an applicant isa scheduled meeting, please make arrangements t^o have an Office of this change prior to the meeting. 'IMS &-y.;m ^suiting from strict s nonsensical when you 2tures. pliance with Zoning 0* (you must obtain 8 A-603 Govt Center sed to each of the ise address labels ons as required, ns) if any changes a separate list of bion. Lication. Please ^ete if the above ion is complete, ate tion required or all fees and/or and certifies that best of his/her 7r ktion and further aff, consultants, ses of investiga- ikrhv !5 days before the 5 are held on the at all scheduled C an applicant is kments to have an luilding & Zoning 1: -v; '-: J - • J it-' .. .fa CL -jy iiiiTi eoc/ 7 / 0« D \..VA >i 'A'* %VJb -S * AX •- ;• • V vijy \ 'Vd3 »\ mT' 2^ •• A -VA>- tf«. — U m • .. - ... -------- • . > —V, ... ■ . I . ''••I'"'. . -|\ •'.> r-T-ry^vviv .. • ..: .. f . • « Ml ’ • •* • ‘ ' .• .> •/ / V A - '-/I rhi • 5 • • • f • * .'•■*■ • . »• 4 “• ^ *• ^ ^ jU'i 'f 4.1 aV T O '?5^ 7^ T5ir s£v • »• • Tw r» TW '.2r< > /* «/■SsCLL '•‘0 L ■'• ’-'S 'S!-, 1* ►•S/’ I------|i ^ •* sfc»'jpy 1 ------1As;^ k^i o-»« 1 —* to'^l-^*11 [i t2? ^ 1 _ MM N i 1 T » i ^ WE, THE UNDI NOT OBJECT FOR THE BUII •VK .• ,r’. . I ^>,'5'^ •*»Hr >. ■ft <y .« .*• - V- «• ^r • 3^ -♦ Vi . % 2 ^ ’ 1% ^ ^\. \» 7**A f Al \&*F1------7^*^ 1 • • .■ w’-^ 1 FvZ' 1 *4 01^ If9-Z—S------- . \Si» '' •1 ^A •! "t~zSl jf ^s''j---------- •sViski.'Hri t <:^^^ ^r»^’l —A --■ • 2>,, X *1 tf) •—•» H'' ^ ' ' ' ^vft »N PfV',:. T-»,r \i i.'! : - ' ; '^Wvf- min;' f:rr-~:-^ < '■-■i m(- € I: S€™™r€-L-: NAME @&6fig§§ AJsL^iiky:^_______/ <LU=z.LA.---------------------^<5.__~_ ~ 2^^ Cv..,ay^^ /^/ ^ L_________Jll£-^tfiTd 6^ /fiA___ 31?Sl_<!mr/?^—^-^-£4 f> ‘V ^ •i^ '1■> - »v 1 ^ .' ,4 » ■' ■ '. -K ■ . ^‘- .^00V. ^ JULY £5, 1988 CITY OF QRONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 553£3 ; - RE: BUILDING PERMIT VARIANCE APPLICATION ir j. ^« TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: ENCLOSED THERE IS A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION, TWO COPIES OF MY CONSTRUCTION PLANS, A VARIANCE APPLICATION AND A SIGNED NON-OBJECTION LETTER FROM MY NEAREST NEIGHBORS REGARDING THE PROPOSED WOODEN DECK ON THE FRONT OF MY PROPERTY. THE MAJOR REASON I LIVE WHERE I DO IS THE ENJOYMENT WHICH THE VIEW OF LAKE MINNETONKA PROVIDES ME. THE IDEA THAT I HAVE TO JUMP THROUGH ALL OF THESE BUREAUCRATIC HOOPS SIMPLY TO PUT AN UNOBTRUSIVE DECK ON THE FRONT OF MY PREMISES IS REPUGNANT TO ME. PER THE INFORMATIONAL PAGE ON YOUR VARIANCE APPLICATION, THE HARDSHIP WHICH I MUST ENDURE IS ONE OF LACK OF SIMPLE COMMON SENSE. I HAVE ENCLOSED SEVERAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF OTHER DECKS BUILT ON STRUCTURES ON MY IMMEADIATE BLOCK WHICH DO NOT MEET YOUR ZONING REQUIREMENTS AS TO SETBACK DISTANCES. I AM NOT INCLUDING THESE PHOTOGRAPHS SIMPLY TO SHOW YOU THAT OTHER EXCEPTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE OR HAVE BEEN GRANDFATHERED INTO PLACE; RATHER, MY INTENT IS SHOW YOU THAT DECK ON THE FRONT OF ONE’S PROPERTY IS MORE OF A MATTER OF STANDARD AND ACCEPTED PRACTICE IN OUR LOCALITY. I WOULD COMPARE IT TO THE OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENCE OF DOCK. IT EFFECTS THE "ORDERLY DEVELOPEMENT AND USE OF THE LAND" AND EFFECTS ABOUT AS MUCH "HARDCOVER" AS A DOCK. , WITH THAT MINI-TIRADE OUT OF THE WAY, I WILL ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN MY CONSTRUCTION PLANS. AS YOU WILL READILY SEE WHEN YOU LOOK OVER THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS, I AM NOT AN ARCHIECT BY TRADE. IN AN EFFORT TO CLEAR UP ANY QUESTIONS WHICH YOU MAY HAVE I WILL INCLUDE A BRIEF NARATIVE REGARDING MY CONSTRUCTION PLANS. THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF LUMBER WHICH WILL BE USED IN THIS PROJECT. WHEN THIS PROJECT IS COMPLETED, THE NONVISABLE, SUPPORT, FRAMING MATERIAL WILL BE CONSTRUCTION GRADE TREATED PONDEROSA PINE (HEREAFTER REFERED TO AS TREATED). THE VISABLE OUTSIDE CASING AND THE DECKING ITSELF WILL BE CONSTRUCTED OUT OF REDWOOD LUMBER (HEREAFTER REFERED TO AS REDWOOD). THE FOUNDATION OF THIS DECK BUILT NEAREST THE EXSISTING DWELLING IS BUILT ON 8X12X18 CONCRETE BLOCKS. THERE ARE TWO 2X8X10 TREATED RUNNERS (CUT TO LENGTH), BOLTED WITH METAL BOLTS AND ANCHORS, WHICH FORM THE REAR HEADER. THE FRONT HEADER IS ALSO CONSTRUCTED OUT OF TWO 2X8X10 TREATED RUNNERS, TIED TO A SERIES OF FIVE 4X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. THERE ARE 15, 10 FOOT, TREATED, 2X8 JOISTS RUNNINGS BETWEEN THESE TWO HEADERS. EACH OF THESE JOISTS ARE CONECTED TO THE HEADERS ON BOTH ENDS BY JOIST HANGERS. THESE JOISTS ARE SEPERATED BY 16 INCH CENTERS. THE TWO OUTSIDE TREATED JOISTS ARE EACH FURTHER CONECTED ATTACHED TO TWO 4X4 AND ONE 2X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. THE REMAINDER OF THE DECK IS VISABLE AND IS CONSTRUCTED WITH REDWOOD LUMBER. THERE IS ON 2X4 SUPPORT POST ON EITHER SIDE OF THE DECK LOCATED NEXT TO THE DWELLING. ON EACH OF THE 10 FOOT LENGTHS, THERE IS A 4X4 POST SITUATED FIVE FEET FROM EITHER END AND ANOTHER 4X4 POST ON THE PORTION OF THE DECK LOCATED ON THE FRONT CORNER 0^=’ DECK, AWAY FROM THE DWELLING. CONECTED TO THE OUTSIDE OF THESE SIX REDWOOD POSTS ARE TWO 2X6X10 REDWOOD BOARDS WHICH FORM THE OUTSIDE PORTION OF THE TWO 10 FOOT BlDES. te'-: , Vl;:' ^ a;. I fV:®' i h:- ■ KN-. / p mMmm- BUILDING F THE FRONT, 4X4 REDWOC OF THE 10 4X4 REDWOC TO THE DEC WHICH WILL WILL FIND END OF THE 2X6 REDWOC THE POST P WHEREVER 1 WILL BE 0^ THE DECKI^ FEET OF Th THERE WILL THE PERIME PICKETS, K THESE WILL AGAIN, I ^ APPROVAL C OTHER CUES WORK-553-" UON W. PAF 3369 CRYS* ORONO, MN .• V; Wtimmm fc' ’ ♦ i> •• , - --— • :'^!v.--.,\ ■*■ -^ /-V': -•;&H.P^ OF MY CONSTRUCTION TER FROM MY NEAREST MY PROPERTY. ^E VIEW OF LAKE iH ALL OF THESE FRONT OF MY PREMISES [ANCE APPLICATION, ]MMON SENSE. I 'RUCTURES ON MY AS TO SETBACK SHOW YOU THAT OTHER .ACE; RATHER, MY IS MORE OF A MATTER COMPARE IT TO THE :VELOPEMENT AND USE L AIN MY CONSTRUCTION RUCTION PLANS, I AM TIONS WHICH YOU MAY ON PLANS. JJECT. WHEN THIS {lAL WILL BE ) TO AS TREATED). INSTRUCTED OUT OF .LING IS BUILT ON [RS (CUT TO LENGTH), ^DER. THE FRONT TIED TO A SERIES rREATED, 2X8 JOISTS IE CONECTED TO THE DERATED BY 16 INCH 3NECTED ATTACHED TO REDWOOD LUMBER. TED NEXT TO THE ST SITUATED FIVE THE DECK LOCATED ED TO THE OUTSIDE CH FORM THE OUTSIDE V I BUILDING PERMIT PAGE #2 THE FRONT, SECTION OF THIS DECK IS CONSTRUCTED AS FOLLOWS: THERE ARE FIVE 4X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. TWO WERE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED AS THE CORNER POSTS OF THE 10 FOOT SIDES. ONE FOOT FROM THE WESTERN SIDE CORNER POST IS ANOTHER 4X4 REDWOOD POST. THIS WILL SUPPORT THE RIGHT HAND RAIL AND STEP/ENTRANCE TO THE DECK. THREE FEET EAST OF THAT YOU WILL FIND ANOTHER 4X4 REDWOOD POST WHICH WILL SUPPORT THE LEFT HAND RAIL AND STEP. FIVE FEET FROM THAT POST YOU WILL FIND ANOTHER 4X4 SUPPORT POST. THE LAST 4X4 SUPPORT POST FORMS THE EASTER END OF THE FRONT OF THE DECK. ATTACHED TO THESE SUPPORT POSTS WILL BE ANOTHER 2X6 REDWOOD BEAM WHICH WILL FORM THE FRONT OF THE DECK. THE POST AND HEADERS WILL BE CONECTED WITH 5/8 INCH, FOUR INCH LAG SCREWS WHEREVER THEY MEET. THIS DECK WILL BE 15 INCHES ABOVE GRADE, THEREFORE, THERE WILL BE ONE STEP BUILT AT THE FRONT ENTRACE OF THE DECK. THE DECKING ITSELF WILL BE 2X6 RE WOOD DECKING. THE DECKING WILL RUN THE 19-^ THE DECK. THESE WILL BE TIED TO THE JOISTS BV 16 PENNY SfiLVfiNlSED NOILS THERE WILL BE A TOP RAIL SITUATED 36 INCHES ABOVE THE DECKING RUNNING ACROSS THE PERIMETER OF THE DECK. THIS WILL FUTHER ADORNED BY A SERIES OF 2X2 REDWOOD PICKETS, HUNG VERTICALLY, RUNNING COMPLETELY AROUND THE OUTSIDE OF THE DECK. THESE WILL BE SEPERATED BY 6 INCH CENTERS. AGAIN I HOPE THAT THIS IS ALL THE INFORMATION WHICH YOU WILL NEED FOR THE RAPI APPROVAL OF A BUILDING (?) VARIANCE AND CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, PLEASE DON’T HESITATE TO GIVE ME A CALL—HOME-471-8690; WORK-553-7759. wm iV OON W. PAPAS 3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ORONO, MN r" i V. PAGE #£ rHERE ARE FIVE THE CORNER POSTS POST IS ANOTHER STEP/ENTRANGE i»X4 REDWOOD POST ROM THAT POST YOU 3T FORMS THE EASTER rS WILL BE ANOTHER CH LAG SCREWS , THEREFORE, THERE WILL RUN THE 19+ MY GALVANISED NAILS 3 RUNNING ACROSS RIES OF 2X2 REDWOOD IDE OF THE DECK. _ NEED FOR THE RAPI IF YOU HAVE ANY 'lE-471-8690; b t-:. :n m F: - • y-.:: ^>i> MKr i V- i 'r wm I ■ '.4 r i '■> m ^yMsm 7 % r* ■^0m * V . -• N *L>v X •- ♦ « I L >• ■ a.hV ., ••I--*'! ^ A • 1 A mm 3-- I & M ^ < w * V i-' • r *' ; f • ► ------------ m %%f CA VCs M §s § a:u >ouoo: < X oo |4m >ou •TJ U c 4J M mm <9 eo •04 u < 4^ 5 'I S •o & 9^ C 4J M Ooo Ioo in 8m <& in f4 0 m 1in 8 fH M t IM » il 4: 4i•o «H P-Mu h« *04 U c •H 41 (3 O N l4 >oo•aums M 0 <0 4i 01 IrJ Ol C 44 in M x: 4i 01c 01 o « 3os •• < V t- .■' ■ .' V , y; - ' f d ♦/ p •$ ^ • ^ ••’ * -I' ^ — ^ ♦ r > • ' r A.. 3*-‘* ::fv:H fe'- .r-: .. ^ ^nm .i. h> Uu (0 OS i zo Ms •J Do O OS Ci3 >ouaos < X :■• --.IP • • m- ^ ^ • • • CM m m m m %« m¥. M U >oo u c 4i M Mw <1 co i4 <r I w •*4 » 5 O li •O u f S o Oo •D S o» w • oo•ow co M M < n\ j: >«c gs < nsm > je 01c m g 2 o 41 41 M 5 o w >oonsu 4J MJ 4i 01e o^c Xla 41 M ' X mm n 1 g .•e •: :c: « &r AO•a 2 1^* A.go 14 A Id 0 M X Im •p4 ♦ 0 tM^ 1>1 : J C - ^PHm PS C M «p4 •p4 ftp ►4 2s 1oo in %«%4 IM «M <M 44 9 IM II lU * m «u %4 • • IM CM • • •s m (X (■m m m % in 1om CM 1 -t rj Ia m 1 1 s k » O b ol #v^ - PIOXi^^ • o •1 1 •1 t 1 1 1 1 1 . ■i 1 • in CM I in x: 41 •O uu «lco M u Ionsum M Um J3 4J 01 Ul cc 4Jm X M X 41 Di Co pH om 3 X 0 01 X too o > wo *x pHso •D o ^ M 41 U CO ns S o uf ca 4i o»o m m G O pH « « X ^4 pH 44^ X o a OG ^ ns o o i4 e >i3S ^ o 3 «0 X 4... O O' "O O AJ L# IV..- ':*-V, '! ,.rm-i IM m 1os pao Ob (0 Iu Ot u $o 8 Pi iO S 01 b« «M m IM IM o f C <»4 Ot «p4 4> 0> « « « B O *H « •»« « • »« ^ 44« « « a • BBT) « B h B >tJS •J « 9 A « nc fit 1 0 ia •n I 6 «H !? (M Oc •H »4 •O :i €1 XI & ♦ O 6•H »4 O* 6 4# CO M M CM CM M 0> CM .— • - w gssKBaiiiMffls ;■: Xfic'ii. -V ^-'tmGIG ,.m;-.-'■ ’^ ' oUM i s fH r u (VJ^ o' 'C C ii TJ*o JS 0 o•o M p-C 01 iCo •o•o < BOfW'S>vPi’^ • CM CM •mm • m %l CM m CM m CM I ♦ %4• m 4J•o rsi >c 8 ^oa < mn >o 4^ c Ol fi 0)m Pb CO o 4J •4 < 44 M W M 01 > Oo•o M Oc c Kpa 44 •P •M 44mc2 Pb CO 8. i4 < O M Ot 44 M o >oo 03u & tH e •H Pb G «M i4 I » • CM 1 • CM a CM 1 a CM a CM a CM 1 a t Cm • • CM • a CM a a CM a a CM a a CM a » a CM a a CM a i a CM a • CM a 1 i CM a • a CM a a CM a> a 1 m a . G am a G a G G ! G a G G G G G G G V G G a G G . G Q rJ rs •a • .'•V3 •• • % 3^1 ^ r':^to-.* * 9 O 1 ' I 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 \ 1 1 1 1 •■1 •1 ■1 • Ji u < • rM v> a rsl r •r V >■ K n n K M M M n M H M M M M n H M M G u k •c T VG r U U « • If M 8.C •M -H 44 OC S 8 Gcn G M > •H M O G G •O •M CO o •H JO 44 O G O 2^ G « 6 rH G -H M « M p4 44 G G a G C G *0 G G M c >ix: M G P X G o •D G CM Pi > G oz M CO M X CM CM i4 < O m 1 S •8 :i •H • ^o- •o oo z -M s l4p 01 ^ >c a ♦ ooTJ •c ♦ O' UQl IQc m o •HH 18 •c•H •H m2 8.0 u 01 la %4 m H H H > 01 %4 y<"-. A /' ’ HAKOCOVBR ORDIUmCB3'k^iMtCB - In 1975. TfiSr( SBCOlAtldl NORKSl Orono City Council adopted an ordinance liniting the percentage of lot area that can be coTered with iapervious surfaces ("hardcover”) such as roofs# driveways, sidewalks, etc. on properties located within 1.000 feet of a lake. Studies have shown that sedinents. oils, and debris carried into the lake frosi highly urbanised areas have a detriswntal impact on the quality of water in the lake. The intent of Orono's ordinance is to ensure that rainfall run-off will be cleansed by filtering through grassed or vegetated yard areas before entering the lake. • • B. BARDCOVBR SETBACK 20WE8 - PBRCBHTAGB ALLONBO I. 0-75*t in the area within 75* of the lakeshore. Ho Hardcover is allowed (0%). . .. -------—^ II. 75-2S0*! in the portion of the lot located between 75* and 250* from the lake. of that portion of the lot nay be hardcovered. 111. 250—500*t in the portion of the lot located between 250* and 500* feet from the lake 30% of that portion of the lot nay be hardcovered. IV. 500-1.000*9 in the portion of the lot located between 500* and 1.000* feet fron the lake 35% of that portion of the lot nay be hardcovered. HOTBi These regulations apply even if you have a lot that does not abut the lake but is within a lakeshore soning district. c. HOH TO PBTERMIHB LOT AREA WITHIN EACH SETBACK fONB (To be used as denominator in all hardcover percentage calculations) I. 0-75* 2<me Area - 75* x /Average width of lot in 0-75* soneN \ measure parallel to shoreline J 75* X ft. -s.f. (1) (Avg width)Area of 0-73* sone II. 75-250* Zone Area - (175*or avg lot depth in zone) x^Avg width of lot in 75-250* zone measure parallel to shoreline __________ft. » 6, 7^ C?______s.f. (2) (Avg width) Area of 75-250* sene ) III. 250-500* Zone Area • (250* or avg lot depth in zone) xfAvq width of lot in 250-500* zone measure parallel to shorelinec ') 250* X ft. -S.f. (3) (Avg width) IV. 500-1.000 * tone Area of 250-500* zone Area ■ (500* or 4vg lot depth in zone) x/Avg width of lot in 500-1000* zoneN measure parallel to shoreline /f 500* X ft. ■ (Avg width) s.f. (4) Area of 500 —1.000* zone If V-f-w^m r-. iT.. mm W'- % "^ '***§ > KS 0. HARDCO Lakeshore Setback lone BAB’^COVEB 1 > .. ' B. OTHER ly BBC. 14 FAMILY LAR] ■LR-lC-1" Oi St lakeshi ie shorel buildii Si shall Within Within cover, hard cc Su with th a permi ffORKSE lopted an ordlnanca liaitin^ rvloua aurfacaa (*hardcovar”) Located within 1,000 feet of Bbria carried into the lake the quality of water in the t rainfall run-off will be areaa before entering the t. Wo Hardcoifer ia allowed atween 75* and 250* f roa the red. t between 250* and 500* feet hardcovered. between 500* and 1,000* feet hardcovered. ea not abut the lake but ia k uaed aa denominator in all if lot in 75-250* aone' irallel to ahoreline • « of lot in 250-500* zone arallel to ahoreline of lot in 500-1000* zone' arallel to shoreline *’,'.151 m. S', ■ v'^- !• I * ■ FW-- - . ♦> T* .a n A M '» ..-T-'-f . -fk' V V:-;* : V. .:VV; . -ri $ ■'S% - iM ■■ > '■ ■ t -i.' f-' ^ -it'. ': O. HARDCOVCT CkLCOLATIOW SQHMAWY takeahere Setback Sone Lot Area Xn Sone Bxiating Bardcover 2n Sone Bxiating Percentage (BA)xlOO Final Propoaed Bardcover In Seme Bardcover Allowed Percentage .- Bardcover (D/A)xl00 : * Percentage C.l fa,t LCi9 ,t « AH')^ »t _3^__» -2r-1 n<t't- .t--0.C « • ■ * 0 > 1 • 30 % %35 i • • • 4P % • B'llDCOVBX LIMITATIONS yfiP :*«<*= aMDCOVn INCtODIS I e - Structurea with roofa - Decka, even if alatted - Sidewalks . .; . -Driveways (paved or gravel) . - Decorative landscaping arete underlain by plastic sheeting - Tops of retaining walls, rock walls - Any ether surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the ground ROAD ee e • e *• LAXBSBORB BB60LATX0NS weeev«ie SBC. 10.22, BB6ULATZOB8 FOB "LR-lA**, *LB-1A-1>, "LB-lB*, "LB-lC* ABO **LB-1C-1* OBB FAMILY LAXBSBOBB BB8ZDBBTXAL DI8TBZCT. Within any *LR-1A*, LR-lA-1", *LR-1B*, *LR-1C*, or *LR-1C-1* One Family Lakeshore Residential District the following regulations shall tpplyt Sttbd. 1. Lakeshore Set Back Regulations. The set back free the shoreline for- .Itkeshore lots shall be at least 75 feet and no building may be located closer to the shoreline^than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings *bn adjacent and nearby lota. Subd. 2. Lakeshore Hard Cover Regulations, within 75 feet of shoreline there shall be no excavating, filling, hard cover, temporary or permanent structures. Within 75 to 250 feet of the ahoreline there shall be no greater than 25% hard cover. Within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there shall be no'greater than 30% hard cover, within 50()_to 1,000 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 35% hard cover. Subd. 3. Tree Removal Regulations^'No trees within 75 feet of the shoreline '^ith the diameter of six (6) inches or more shall be removed without first obtaining a permit from the Council. i ...*u I ■ ■ i*-* = • - ;/ ^ ^ a ^ ^ ^ .4^ _4M £-.j.:.-aifc--''- ■gggjJH dcovar Allowed centage .;• Bardcover 'A)xlOO . Pareantaga • m • •* 1C wl) . ig areas undarlaln by . * * •; r rook walls i does.not allow diraot Into the gronad •• • »*• *« • •< •^as> Ut-lc* AVO *LS*-1C-1* on k-l*r ■LR-IB", •LR-IC*, or regulations shall applyt > •from the shoreline for be located closer to the of existing residence feet of shoreline there r pernanent structures. &ter than 25% hard cover. » greater than 30% hard 1 be no greater than 35% 5 feet of the shoreline without first obtaining I:* : &M N -i iHi js'-.v’■i' .r'-»ailir mtna V --:■ ■ .. ^ » • . i: ^■#1 ►:• Vi?f ! ' AY iT3*tpF 6W. J -30 < VI V'.' — —*■ ♦« •■■ j ♦ f -- »» T) • .................... -T'0-- DOS'* !« <}'<a« e«> *i^n> t\ 4"~'— - 5» -^>r ••.J7SO 2*7 JOs 2-*700 ; __________^ ^^^1^4^32. *■ l'2-C 2-00 ; r'*3r?ro ;6d A i^ • 24 *x«-tn ' .1^ ?*rD r/Gkro 7SO-^oro ^ 2^*700 s^;~ ^ ^ ^ ______I j? t/i _pw«»357 _____32. Ve^^iPo^t^ Oeqc ^ 2-^00 ^^20.0*/. T|i-r?. */ •/. 2.700 5v- -i*^-. ;i.-.r -. >3^ '-■ "-i i.'-^'rvi' ' . ■• :-• ■ ^.. ■ ' uSSSSKUtf J teli¥« m '?ri• ■h:-^”-■';••• •.•»■■. ■ • t-Av; .jnnswyvjd *> ^ •. . ..-i-1 ■ & ' . Uenes;i*tMiLi€ %trrAh'sZ4C. it Sr^'PP' e»jc ¥ >* ^4 9^Lj^. 77 = i 77T5 » <»•«-----1/ « « .^- ---------------- i \ ----.^1 -------- — • t JL...:. -_^... m 1^,M fr;' Iv .■'»' J 'M ~w^ 'i\ H vf '/ xi m i A. ’• ^ ii • : ■ " 1 CITY OF 0R0^ p.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, f^Ei VARIANCI DEAR MEMBER! please ACCEI BEING INSTAI TO ATTEND Ti I AM ABLE T I WOULD ALS FOR ME AT T WHO WILL BE COURSE. AS MY BUILDING THIS PRDJEC IK a:.J I WOULD LIK BUILDING OF MY FATHER £ EXTRaDINAR^ I VISITED r DIDN’T BEEr WELL (HE W# FIVE SBCONI CHANNEL AG< HAVE HIM Ai for THE FR( FRIENDS, I ATTENTION . t. ^.: :is HE WAS NDW SUPPLIES W BUILD THE ADVISED US I DID NOT IMMEDIATEL SAME INSPE looked THF HAD NOT. SURVEY COL SHOWING WF COVER EXPC ft i, ; : : . . i na/ice^ew.M 1 >. V- * , .>•-.■ '> ■•^>< \ '■A ' ttki \i 4Ki,iiiivi. I■V ..: -^v*t ‘ - V -wi^iarg^dJi '^1 yyk ^ • r i :xy SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 RE, VARIANCE APPLICATION ■'A DEAR MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, =>. tr/^cer nrrFPT MY APOLOGY FOR NOT BEING PRESENT AT THIS MEETING, BUT AS I AM INSTa[^eS Af™rMASTER OF MY MASONIC LODGE TONIGHT, I WILL NOT BE ABLE ?0 A^TEN^^hlfMKtInI until WELL AFTER YOUR 7.00 P.M. START TIME. I HOPE THAT I AM ABLE TO BE PRESENT AT THIS MEETING BEFORE IT ENDS. T umiin c^ic^n LIKE TO THANK JAY KEISER, MY NEXT STORE NEIGHBOR, FOR SITTING IN pn^H^ A? TOIS mIeTiNG SnTIL I CAN GET DOWN THERE. MR. KEISER IS THE PERSON uSo WILL B^MOST EFFECTED BY THE BUILDING OF THIS DECK, OTHER THAN MYSELF OF COURSE. AS NEITHER HE, NOR ANY OF MY OTHER NEIGHBORS, HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS T MY BUILDING OF THIS DECK, I HOPE THAT WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE COMPLETIO THIS PROJECT WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAYS. T uiniiin 1 IKE TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND FIRST. THE ORIGINAL IDEA FOR THE LiILDING OF THIS DECK CAME THROUGH SOME AD HOC THERAPY BY ME FOR MY FATHER. mv'paTHER suffered a stroke last YEAR. ALTHOUGH HIS RECOVERY HAS BEEN E^TRO™NARY^ LIKE MOST STROKE VICTIMS, HE STILL HAS BOTH GOOD AND BAD DAYS. T^UTQTTFn MY PARENTIS HOME ON ONE OF HIS BAD DAYS EARLIER THIS SPRING. HE DIDN^T sLm TO BE ABLE TO CONCENTRATE ON WHAT WAS HAPPENING UP I I (HE WASN’T GETTING INVOLVED IN ANY CONVERSATIONS, HE WOULD WATCH ABOUT PT^P S-CONdIoF one T.V. SHOW AND THEN CHANGE THE CHANNEL AND THEN CHANGE THE riALIc AGa!n L^SO ON he ALWAYS HAS BEEN UUITE A HANDYMAN, 1 TRIED TO w^YP^HIM APPLY HIMSEIF BY GIVING HIM A KNOX AD AND I TOLD HIM TO DESIGN A DECK cnn.^TuP PP-nNT OF MY HGUS5E. AS HE HAS DESIGNED AND BUILT 10 OR MORE DECKS FOR FRIENDS, I WAS SURE THAT HE COULD HANDLE THIS TASK AND IT DID SEEM TO FOCUS HIb ATTENTION AND CLEAR UP THE FOG THAT HE WAS IN. ur UAC' unw READY TO BUILD THE DECK. TOGETHER WE WENT '“’UT TO PURCHASE THE SUPPLIES WHICH WE NEFDED AND WITH THE HELP OF MY YOUNGER BROTHEIR, WE STARTED TO «nr n tL- DECK ON GOOrFRIDAY. THAT NEXT MONDAY A CITY INSPECTOR CAME BY AND ADVISED US THAT WE WOULD NEED A BUILDING PERMIT AND POSTED A STOP WORK. ORDER. I DID NOT KNOW THAT WE WOULD NEED SUCH A PERMIT AND NATURALLY STOPPED WORKED immediately I THEN WENT DOWN TO THE CITY HALL AND BY CHANCE MET WITH THE SAmI INSPECTOR IN ^ there HE GAVE ME A PERMIT APPLICATION AND I nnk'FD THROUGH MY FILE TO SEE IF A PRIOR LAND SURVEY HAD BEEN COMPLETED. IT mSd^'not However he did advise me that on such a small scale project, ’■he SURVEY COULD AN^PRoL^^ BE WAIVED IF 1 SENT IN AN ACCURATE DIAGRAM SHOWING WHERE THE PROPOSED DECK WOULD BE BUILT AND LAYING OUT ANY OTHER HARD COVER EXPOSURES. ■n ■: fim W- CITY^ ORONO DECK PERMIT IN ADDITION Tl BOTHS BIDES 01 THEY DID NOT I AND MY WORKINI FACT THAT I Tl TOOK ME A com HAD ALL OF TH WORK ORDER, I HEARD FROM AN’ OMAN. NEEDLESS TO Si THAT THEY NEVI AGAIN FILE ALI STUMPS ME AS TO THE WRONG i AFTER AGAIN Ci THIS INFOPMAT UF THE ♦150.0< AND I BELIEVE FIRST SUBMISS THAT BASICALL TO DO ON THIS TO THE COMPLE INTERFER WITH FRONT. IN FAi NOT HAVE AT LI LAND SURVEY I HOPE THAT YOU FOR A PROJECT SUCH A SIMPLE WOULD THINK Ti MUCH OF AN EN MEASURABLE CH EXPOSURE. I CERTAINLY H ' < nr MUCH IS 70 COMPLET WHICH IHE LAK ^NCERELY, ^ON W. PAPAS ^ 3369 CRYSTAL ORONO, MN 553 •••< ■ • ±i i^r • ■ ’V ■■■ '■■■ ' . mHSJ / ' -■ ' '•■"■■■ '■■■■-■•^^^.v ‘'■‘•,..:>^ ■ ::.;=• r; 3■•>•••• •••• e wetland will be boundaries. tsue a permit subject Lvert (which crosses restoration of the >ted that they will permit. rges to a relatively lid discharge, there ia before any of the oval of the project ct. recommend approval roperty boundaries ig plan proposed, and itershed District. during all phases of and erosion control, work is completed. ;s' contractor must commencement of the •5’ '••"a S,.:. ^ V' ".-K Wk'-- f-: w «&■•V- ,«iV jaf- 1 '■:( O <4 1 '•' '■ -.»»»».Xr.»-l»L.s»iL/0 ^ # /3.3 yI : r#j i i. I'- V I;-' .-u fc . • .*.»* • * •* LOCATIOH site Address TAMAKACJ^ 2>/^t\Je. Property identification Number (P.I.D.) //^ tPlease check one * Property abstract or (for Conditional Use Applications only) tor reni^^^‘?5^_ ^ w » vv % 'cm> |se em».a |»»1 .'ll w ■ w Please attach legal description to application if not includett^^^'*^^"/^^' on required survey. ^ ^104170 COOl fri)! 709 i APPLZCAHT Name Vl/M ■ fiNt IWi. dteC^Y Phone (home) Phone (work) ___ vO/ i v/ Address TAf^AKACItL ZXtKlE HUR (if different than applicant) Name ___ , City lAk€^ Zip ^$"3^4 (■•«•••• ■ •• «■» •» •• «■» «• •• •» •• • Phone (hone) Phone _ ___ _ _ __ Address City Zip Date Property Acquired __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _^_ _ _ _ _ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land (month/year) FBBS - COHDITIOKAL USB PBRMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee <e ei - $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use ___ $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) e ____ $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg _ _ $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration . . ■• ••* Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling “ 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule ■mm ■ * i.: iL- ^ OTHER APPLICATIOBS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning $100^00 Appeals Other “ see fee schedule fi m ■ \ K'Sfe?:) Si ■’’•r ‘K ' ■«. ii.tm iNiik PlOSraiT OSB OF PROPBRTT pp , Present Zoning District Kf^' fry Present Use of Property Residential ___________ Other (specify) DBSCBIPnOB OF RBQUBST ^ ^ Describe request in detail: ^jLCA\/ArE, /W &^tST’/NCj LOi^A^CA Tt> k 2. BBQDIBBD SDBNXTTBLS !• Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you can obtai this list from Hennepin County r apartment of Finance A-603 Governmen Center 348-32711 Stampedr legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the name on the. Above .4.1st with no return address. Certificate of survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if lead alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). Plat Map. As an addendum to this applicationr please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 4. 5. 8. 7. 8. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if th above information has not been included. « Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is craiplete Zoning Officials Signature _______________________________ Date APPLICAHT'S SZ6HAT0RB The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Adroinistratorr agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this applicationr and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her )cnowledge. Applicant's signature Date GinnSRS SIGHATURB The owner hereby aclcnowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staffr consultants# agentSr commission members# and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting# please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. & LotA/ASeA TX> n 350* (you can obtai ance A-603 Governmen ad to each of the name contours) if land ► Bquirements). ti a separate list of atlon • tplication. Please hove information has 4 ation is complete Date mation required or ay all fees and/or and certifies that he best of his/her te :ion and further ff, consultantsr purposes of 25 days before the gs are held on the ^ at all scheduled If an applicant is gements to have an Building & Zoning &.1 y mtm mw mmikm DOCK woes SSA WALLS SIP SAPPING PILE OSIVING ilN&MINNETONKA PORTABU^REM iini ^*-^ BILL OMICKI NlCtlS^ ^ S? 500 West Lake ^ ^ EXCELSIOR. MINNEMTA SS^aSL. 474-9454 - 472-3457 I i ! » ! sJ^Aa/A/£1 aAA&{/s TH ~s/f7^PA<~ STe-ArJfitE. -i- ^HC^eJk AfPOcA nofJ FoPaA -■p+c Ho/u /v VAcAnsAJ ^^\€,AfpUCArtOfJ . ttte-i' APJP Id MHFd tdey iiye y-r^HlLU:^.U.^ie.^ /fp Tm7/ly^ dPts-d /T Adjei^^ iHirS fifiPucAvod Af^ed/did7yd ide. dtcidb fits. ^(/etyreds. 7i'^dS£ i£OAjTFcf-Aite i I I ( i <^^FecrF\/LUr <t7&dffjth f I CuFfaAi^A <e©|pp \ i r »I f ' j i ! ! i I I ! ! I i I i > i i I 1 • » i I I ) I I Ff. 4 f ■- M >a •V, ir“ hv:.:cvS }| ' ; m4 t mi ‘ T ]MfaC. ’-■■I pi;:.,1 a ’ -■ *: v-k-'•■id ■ v'mii-rwifrf a-"w ■' i, "Mi 1 1 ^ S/f 74&! i _LL.' 1 i • ' •' 1 i i ; ! I i I ' ; ‘ ;i 1 ^WUA/Jti 1 i'll! i ! t i • i i ; j ‘• 1 < ! . ! f ' « ( ] i ^ ' 1 ! ; ! ^ 1 f ' ' »j M attoaI Ftt^, 1 ill ^7“ S4}/i/y» 1 1 Hert tH^r ^TVAfJ. 1 ' i i ’ ! j Mil £ Fe^ ; » • ! I i !(till ■m -f-i id ■% -..i:- :x WMm - s i ^ #w ^ t T- X O 41 .-'(ICA=s..^aT- ••- i ? “ X-' V ■ g^-W fs«>cfT dOr ^ ♦ I » - »*i£££ WjFS m Va .-V ,1 MOVdVI ■ -»• i ......t^itniLi • n'i/ y j «/>w (/) r.o H K % ^ ^ ZJ (T 4 <Ll. itifp • J • • 'S-' sc:> ;;s f\i . 'ir • «• *• *1 ■J-!piW .i;-. \ L i 4f,.0H* 140 OO’ N0*l4 4u'r Vj» e.%^ * V % *. *•. . « , ^ . .. ..; ’i; •• • • •. *. >!•.••*.V .-».•• ’ •.*%-•v*'.*^ f • ^ / L. _ • •* •* # » »v- • • 1^ km ■■'i 1 .•.’s''*•'‘.-I ••. I-. iM ■ ■ *;■■.■'■.;■■■; \ m' iS . t,-: , .A;,. •: h r I" L, iA *4 H «4 ir> i " ill •*•■•.• • • f • • ...,,'• . I - ^ . .. ' * .,^X* •**•*'**'•-*•**“•**'** *'^***’* * ‘ ■'*•'• *. * ’ ♦ * *• • • • V . • • - # E si I gi c I I 1 2 I !!§!& Sm iiSpSSSi S 8S X ^ ki T **g5 ^ O n _^ «4 m 94 I ;is I S 5»“ sils^ iSsfti is* ^H>»- -•* -5!^ s 2 8 •*8 SS illm S8 -SxS* 8 s -•Hf-uapj T S z 3 ^ si:iii 8 S8 IP IP III Ml Xrl8882 iS So.aS'- •^55 SS PI p> Ml >•sD.S _ilH 8<om 8 IPn S{ S 2! §§s» Ml Ml £S sMI !iiiIP IP mi 8® r888gi =‘BSiSaog2«3 sliii ~8 S PMP 01 0^ssee S ssdSgs- lb 8 S S S z s 2|8S' 8S M 2'i § III si a. Ml CL ■••1^ . » «— • *. « V. ■ ^ n 9> <dw /W a IP 94 • ID 01 01 I •PMl Ml _ !3a*« §§si M 8 CL _Si m sMl < >• \ CL Ml CL X k4^ •• §1a M H M HI SE ooo ao Xu 09 ..4 LU X < Q ^ ^ / • 4 . ♦ in ly ' •. \r i . ifi , f . * V .'■^ r 4 »• •». / • «^ -4r r- -A.ste'v.a;*-' m % 11 V'v:^d ■ ' >» ■‘•"'-I,.M ’.^r 1^ :^>5® CL.i« •.•••■ ifeif • ■■ :■ •% ■f“ ■■:, « j,V.. .*■■■ ^ r 1?^: '.■-^,->•r- ''•■iie tf • r;. ^ r-^Jfcp| yil, •3 naumMtd iwimiMf MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRI \lV.r<^. O'A’ P.o. toi 387, Wayzata, Miiuitsota 55391 .*t»0i» •»*» ■MivaMaMliCM*aAfl*iinm • AIMtlJlniw • AUnlThona jMMtRSpmhy • McMlimv • Rotat0ifricksM • C.\MMdrawLaM Permit Application No. 88-114 Oimer: August 22. 1988 William Gregory 1099 Tamarack Drive Long Lake. MN 55356 Location: City of Orono, Sec. 26CA Project: Regrade an existing on-site pond to provide additional water depth Dear Nr. Gregory: At the regularly scheduled August 18, 1988 meeting of the Board of Managers, the subject permit application was reviewed. Action was taken allowing the District staff to Issue your permit only after receipt and staff approval of the following: Revised plan showing erosion control placed around the outlet culvert for the ponding area and a method of restoration. Review and approval by the City of Orono. Please be advised that the project Is not authorized unti the above has been submitted to me and you have been notified of permit Issuance from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at 473-4224. Very truly yours, EUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES Engineers for the District 0. Kevin C. Larson, Engineer cc: Board L. Smith C^^^Refp c^efty of Orono ■X^ iim ( ■4 ■C:7v. 1 m ■ii /■-.I A:':-. 1 4.;:; : 4-' V ■ 7^' Sep Deal Glenr GRCtc 2335 \ 1^.: -;• wmitstuo •oiMMM«r August 22. 198d Itlonal water depth. Board of Managers, taken allowing the d staff approval of he outlet culvert for \ above has been ance from the questions regarding i-' . I ■0-: X.! •• vRSfr^’- ■0 w :i *•1 . c: ■: V : J t '.V'l V•' ; ■•■■=^;;V^■:■•'-: :j »7 ,''it•h^}. *''•■' ■■- ••vt/.V •* - * •Wr ■i r. -LiJTliiiirto‘’^iiii imMMili>.•--jW-.V •.■•*•. Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates O bo G. ioBert w ioaene. JoMpfi C AnBemk. P£. Bmakar^ A Umbtf% PC. AchaeC C. Ibrnci; PX iMOT C Oiioa Pi. Glerwi t. Cook. Pi. rhomas i. Noyos. Pi. iakin a ScfkjnichL PC. Aif\Wft L SorwiQi. Pi. HMfi A. GofOpg P.i. Kottfr. Pi. C iMPfM. Pi. Jerry A. iDiifOQn. Pi. Mark A. Hantorv P.i. M C. PiM. Pi MkfMl T taioioinn. Pi Mm t pment. px OoMd O. LOMU. PC. • i ■0:^ 'i Suian M Mmn S£Tf 3*1568 ^'■r ■m Englneen A Architects $«pteab«r 0, 1988 Citf of Or Box 68 Crystal Bay.55323 Attns Mika Gaffron Rat 139-1324 Villiaa Gregory 1099 Tanarack Drive Dear Mikat Wa have reviavad the plan for a pond at 1099 Tanarack Drive. The excavated ®*t®riala are proposed to be deposited within the existing wetland areas. The storage area will not be significantly affected (-9Z) by the proposal. The drainage area is relatively small (11.9A) so the area can still retain a 100 year rainfall event. He would reconmend approval of the plan subject to the Watershed recommendations. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Glenn R. Cook GRCtci 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-46(X) •Vii .•V’i M07% 0. k- ' I •jfl : ^0 7M .1 ' - IP- IMtf t sAm^n * ymsA*m ■I tAto /fS Jtbnam ............................. **••• ll : P.M e eeeeeee e wee t€i.60 /ttsnxit .•o ' .■»• - H j ■4T.. r:“ liy iPI ■x^ { I / / /' } / /A // /i * mV V : ^ y. - ru's LfJiV,' t^'J-'V? W# // /«/v »* 00A0 ■— J### / / ..^4----- I: fesf I. IP^^'‘i:^ 8r?, > J ;l- .'.♦.tv ..•••< V/ d vf> 5^*:.r_32«3 7- 7^/■ \ t*\V-•*•..* ,;4v •* /j'J 5 «, N'.'»'i, I X •sfe " V .•••.• • H / ;•/ fe . ; / ;.-!«✓ • |M. / / • • • ' Pi ♦ ui .c.\ ✓ 'A' vt^ -^f!0. > mv- X. - '•r7ol: ■U• • 1$ A. . \ . •? m ip: P^'rv V ‘ ■ -ly' ; ■v«S ►fjf > VC A -'V'; ■"•-J!• ' * '• jV t'-r-L' --BV-r.s\ ' '22:1 S'i^;_4iLC4 .M zm z. A •4 •u^/c-L/''.* I I ••I • » ri;^ *1* if • i <• •• • • • ' St ♦ a— 65 *'♦ 4-^ l\QC« c:r- ui ^ K'i \ , •« i- t >< r 1+;^i K3 ra-... ./ > ‘ -N :* ^tv/. .^ V' - •♦••••* •••«•€* * • » a • n* ‘TV • • H* • » *r'\* a “•• liji.-.. >V?«'.*v.v.-.V*A '~r • •l\^ » V • • • • • • • ••••••• ■■ sj'^J ‘V* - ' , • V. V. .» , » / __kfS,La, ; • ■- ••V-' •• m ^r. w '■'rSV'^'■i :H ■1st '"'■I 4.< ^SSfeiSlMil ;^!i' '5Wt.>-■; HHCM fl^T ^ 70 o .It |r if": ■'m‘' — |!35»# C: aC ^ 90 r ,1^ vV' i .2V. r ►f# « i =• I •j’ < ?! -:-r>5: . *w* *' . • ^ •ti 'll i4*( \ ^ #. • - iji X ^ I___\ \ V V IV • S "• » ^ yv ^1. ttvSA ■f ♦. I'? .^'A' % i4M2f ‘*.>v: ,i t m • 4ikf/ l.-A-!-; •! ; ■ •• :' .V \-.'»iVj /:• /A . . : ;i 1 '. I. DOCK WORK SEA WALLS RIR RARRING RILE ORIVINC 'A-f 1 C 1 3l • oi 1 BZJ .6^ 35 .11 » e&•11 B?.i: 111 37 •^:11-.01101 1 I 111 1 1 1 ■ .-•i : • •»-,I - i DOCK WORK SiA WALLS RW RARRiNG RILE DRIVING MINNETONKA PORTABLE DREDGING RILL (MICK) NICCUM 500 West Lake Street EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 474-9454 - 472-3457 e/5'/&6 <^0et 0i«y %iijD ✓duujMl 5 •1aJrt£lE VA T7ok/ <97,d>:7 - it' - ^ 1 r J£iU77(0*1/1 -v7 i/£ £.|(I5 >£ m A:1 51 iCi£l-A. FT./(Se A*^ Ac : -L/■Cl =t: 1 D 1 (?7 f 1 i(?#c 1 113 1 -. se M i •7? — •1 f 1 «s?i 4 98 /i —.8 1 /•/711 i 11 1 1 m 1 /.47 1 11 .8 1 j Af 4)1 1 1 1----- 1 d ev b le 1?j /aJi e /'tMM -yi 5^■//£/^ /^c.iTlKS TI A ///7\r V I V h •* %• 9 • » ♦nt iM mimm ■ ■ 1■ . 1 . • :'.r :* ‘ ‘•41 : .:=-A •*i EONLY) t Writ* Abov* This Line) L'if.I^-iMia^ yjt| lim ‘•^'i <Zip) □ L.A. ^jS' Other ovement 9 33 (Rano«| f^i>/770/V/H- /h F//J. *f .■ t lunicipal Review.' ipletion and Restora> ••, >3 • * ’•* ■ • . ■ " • v'; ; :^'; ilS«S m 3 Vj " V-. •»'• . VS i [• 7.- V * t *•'*- ^ !>* 4^^ i *mmm hi^t-r ' % ^ •<: i ^ . ■ "pi A * ^ j .V . ' o'**!!' f^ v ■ ‘Sv*-•• ' r WJ*- . ^ ^ g> ^ - ^•» v;.*; ^ ' •' w '•-jV-J-' , .itJF'>'; 5:5ft, V \ yr R>/ mm * j^z.* •r- • Vw- ysss?' A'-mB,?3r • '* V* •».» <s"» *^N' JT«*» *> !*T>' 1 ifMiiMii I 0> J '.'%, ;li::: .1* I i' I I; ■>’ fc,, ■ . tKiiS .'I ^ >4 V I ..,, !r V, t ..V * ^ V</^i'W'9 •W, 5sf:f M. 4?V/f - r'«.. A- • • •iW.v ft. V- X LvJ f *• V ■» 1 V jV 'J&i; • >%..^ ■ \ ' '■ • ,*v\ *t yt-.l i • ■ •-.V; t'-^^?>l i^' .> •■ ,.i ■ ♦ . •. ■ 4 '.> ‘A' ^ ^3",''.fTx . {-’- V ‘Jjwfrrr^r'P A; ft. ‘I' (i I. 'i Ml III!' Ill*W. ^ JULY 25, 1988 CITY OF GRONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 RE: BUILDING PERMIT VARIANCE APPLICATION ir -I- /w TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: ENCLOSED THERE IS A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION, TWO COPIES OF MY CONSTRUCTION PLANS, A VARIANCE APPLICATION AND A SIGNED NON-OBJECTION LETTER FROM MY NEAREST NEIGHBORS REGARDING THE PROPOSED WOODEN DECK ON THE FRONT OF MY PROPERTY. THE MAJOR REASON I LIVE WHERE I DO IS THE ENJOYMENT WHICH THE VIEW OF LAKE MINNETONKA PROVIDES ME. THE IDEA THAT I HAVE TO JUMP THROUGH ALL OF THESE BUREAUCRATIC HOOPS SIMPLY TO PUT AN UNOBTRUSIVE DECK ON THE FRONT OF MY PREMISES IS REPUGNANT TO ME. PER THE INFORMATIONAL PAGE ON YOUR VARIANCE APPLICATION, THE HARDSHIP WHICH I MUST ENDURE IS ONE OF LACK OF SIMPLE COMMON SENSE. I HAVE ENCLOSED SEVERAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF OTHER DECKS BUILT ON STRUCTURES ON MY IMMEADIATE BLOCK WHICH DO NOT MEET YOUR ZONING REQUIREMENTS AS TO SETBACK DISTANCES. I AM NOT INCLUDING THESE PHOTOGRAPHS SIMPLY TO SHOW YOU THAT OTHER EXCEPTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE OR HAVE BEEN GRANDFATHERED INTO PLACE? RATHER, MY INTENT IS SHOW YOU THAT DECK ON THE FRONT OF ONE’S PROPERTY IS MORE OF A MATTER OF STANDARD AND ACCEPTED PRACTICE IN OUR LOCALITY. I WOULD COMPARE IT TO THE OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENCE OF DOCK. IT EFFECTS THE "ORDERLY DEVELOPEMENT AND USE OF THE LAND" AND EFFECTS ABOUT AS MUCH "HARDCOVER" AS A DOCK. WITH THAT MINI-TIRADE OUT OF THE WAY, I WILL ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN MY CONSTRUCTION PLANS. AS YOU WILL READILY SEE WHEN YOU LOOK OVER THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS, I AM NOT AN ARCHIECT BY TRADE. IN AN EFFORT TO CLEAR UP ANY QUESTIONS WHICH YOU MAY HAVE I WILL INCLUDE A BRIEF NARATIVE REGARDING MY CONSTRUCTION PLANS. THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF LUMBER WHICH WILL BE USED IN THIS PROJECT. WHEN THIS PROJECT IS COMPLETED, THE NONVISABLE, SUPPORT, FRAMING MATERIAL WILL BE CONSTRUCTION GRADE TREATED PONDEROSA PINE (HEREAFTER REFERED TO AS TREATED). THE VISABLE OUTSIDE CASING AND THE DECKING ITSELF WILL BE CONSTRUCTED OUT OF REDWOOD LUMBER (HEREAFTER REFERED TO AS REDWOOD). THE FOUNDATION OF THIS DECK BUILT NEAREST THE EXSISTING DWELLING IS BUILT ON 8X12X18 CONCRETE BLOCKS. THERE ARE TWO 2X8X10 TREATED RUNfiERS (CUT TO LENGTH), BOLTED WITH METAL BOLTS AND ANCHORS, WHICH FORM THE REAR HEADER. THE FRONT HEADER IS ALSO CONSTRUCTED OUT OF TWO 2X8X10 TREATED RUNNERS, TIED TO A SERIES OF FIVE 4X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. THERE ARE 15, 10 FOOT, TREATED, 2X8 JOISTS RUNNINGS BETWEEN THESE TWO HEADERS. EACH OF THESE JOISTS ARE CONECTED TO THE HEADERS ON BOTH ENDS BY JOIST HANGERS. THESE JOISTS ARE SEPERATED BY 16 INCH CENTERS. THE TWO OUTSIDE TREATED JOISTS ARE EACH FURTHER CONECTED ATTACHED TO TWO 4X4 AND ONE 2X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. THE REMAINDER OF THE DECK IS VISABLE AND IS CONSTRUCTED WITH REDWOOD LUMBER. THERE IS ON 2X4 SUPPORT POST ON EITHER SIDE OF THE DECK LOCATED NEXT TO THE DWELLING. ON EACH OF THE 10 FOOT LENGTHS, THERE IS A 4X4 POST SITUATED FIVE FEET FROM EITHER END AND ANOTHER 4X4 POST ON THE PORTION OF THE DECK LOCATED ON THE FRONT CORNER 0*^ DECK, AWAY FROM THE DWELLING. CONECTED TO THE OUTSIDE OF THESE SIX REDWOOD POSTS ARE TWO 2X6X10 REDWOOD BOARDS WHICH FORM THE OUTSIDE PORTION OF THE TWO 10 FOOT SIDES. BUILDU THE FRC 4X4 REI OF THE 4X4 REI TO THE WHICH 1^ WILL F] END OF 2X6 REE THE P0£ WHEREVE WILL BE THE DEC FEET OF THERE k THE PEF PICKETS THESE U AGAIN, APPROVE OTHER C WORK-55 CERE JON W. 3369 CR ORONO, I • s. -if^ : B OF MY CONSTRUCTION ETTER FROM MY NEAREST OF MY PROPERTY. THE VIEW OF LAKE yOH ALL OF THESE E FRONT OF MY PREMISES RIANCE APPLICATION, COMMON SENSE. I STRUCTURES ON MY 3 AS TO SETBACK SHOW YOU THAT OTHER 5LACE; RATHER, MY I' IS MORE OF A MATTER } COMPARE IT TO THE }EVELOPEMENT AND USE :k. :-LAIN MY CONSTRUCTION STRUCTION PLANS, I AM ESTIONS WHICH YOU MAY nON PLANS. ROJECT. WHEN THIS iRIAL WILL BE ID TO AS TREATED). :ONSTRUCTED OUT OF :lling is built on JERS (CUT TO LENGTH), •ADER. THE FRONT IS, TIED TO A SERIES TREATED, 2X8 JOISTS )RE CONECTED TO THE OPERATED BY 16 INCH :ONECTED ATTACHED TO *H REDWOOD LUMBER. :ated next to the >OST SITUATED FIVE ■ THE DECK LOCATED :ted to the outside ilCH FORM THE OUTSIDE ■J.- Wi : Si •y.1? ■r. m fens': n#f.. wm • '■ Sh s<v •!*. H: CSS f> A-'*3 •J:' ■% . '.V .. BUILDING PERMIT page #a THE FRONT, SECTION OF THIS DECK IS CONSTRUCTED AS FOLLOWS; THERE ARE FIVE 4X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. TWO WERE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED AS THE CORNER POSTS OF THE 10 FOOT SIDES. ONE FOOT FROM THE WESTERN SIDE CORNER POST IS ANOTHER 4X4 REDWOOD POST. THIS WILL SUPPORT THE RIGHT HAND RAIL AND STEP/ENTRANCE TO THE DECK. THREE FEET EAST OF THAT YOU WILL FIND ANOTHER 4X4 REDWOOD POST WHICH WILL SUPPORT THE LEFT HAND RAIL AND STEP. FIVE FEET FROM THAT POST YOU WILL FIND ANOTHER 4X4 SUPPORT POST. THE LAST 4X4 SUPPORT POST FORMS THE EASTER END OF THE FRONT OF THE DECK. ATTACHED TO THESE SUPPORT POSTS WILL BE ANOTHER 2X6 REDWOOD BEAM WHICH WILL FORM THE FRONT OF THE DECK. THE POST AND HEADERS WILL BE CONECTED WITH 5/8 INCH, FOUR INCH LAG SCREWS WHEREVER THEY MEET. THIS DECK WILL BE 15 INCHES ABOVE GRADE, THEREFORE, THERE WILL BE ONE STEP BUILT AT THE FRONT ENTRACE OF THE DECK. THE DECKING ITSELF WILL BE 2X6 RE WOOD DECKING. THE DECKING WILL RUN THE 19+ FEET OF THE DECK. THESE WILL BE TIED TO THE JOISTS BY 16 PENNY GALVANISED NAILS THERE WILL BE A TOP RAIL SITUATED 36 INCHES ABOVE THE DECKING RUNNING ACROSS THE PERIMETER OF THE DECK. THIS WILL FUTHER ADORNED BY A SERIES OF 2X2 REDWOOD PICKETS, HUNG VERTICALLY, RUNNING COMPLETELY AROUND THE OUTSIDE OF THE DECK. THESE WILL BE SEPERATED BY 6 INCH CENTERS. AGAIN, I HOPE THAT THIS IS ALL THE INFORMATION WHICH YOU WILL NEED FOR THE RAPI APPROVAL OF A BUILDING (?) VARIANCE AND CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, PLEASE DON’T HESITATE TO GIVE ME A CALL—HOME-471-8690j WORK-553-7759. \JON W. PAPAS 3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ORONO, MN , ^-M - •'Vi I / •n 'X • 1 ■ t . ; *•. 'L »■ w I rT:tf/ire4c:9WJC i>i Sr>^ .»i^ • m •». •» «--» •P^-: /r ^ ¥ ■.►I •.V II1 J ' ;■ ■ ■/'■* it*-:- KE- mmm m u 51!?.. -•• ^1 IJ JW - ..ff 5:\ i:-.•J* • t.' •:'r '■ 5^"^'•> -4>^ r ^ ’■’■'■■ V/''■ ■t*’- c. « ' ■' i.SEPTEMBER 19, 1980 CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 PEI VARIANCE APPLICATION DEAR MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONi PLEASE ACCEPT MY APOLOGY FOR NOT BEING PRESENT AT THIS MEETING, BUT AS I AM BEING INSTALLED AS THE MASTER OF MY MASONIC LODGE TONIGHT, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING UNTIL WELL AFTER YOUR 7:00 P.M. START TIME. I HOPE THAT I AM ABLE TO BE PRESENT AT THIS MEETING BEFORE IT ENDS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK JAY KEISER, MY NEXT STORE NEIGHBOR, FOR SITTING IN FOR ME AT THIS MEETING UNTIL I CAN GET DOWN THERE. MR. KEISER IS THE PERSON WHO WILL BE MOST EFFECTED BY THE BUILDING OF THIS DECK, OTHER THAN MYSELF OF COURSE AS NEITHER HE, NOR ANY OF MY OTHER NEIGHBORS, HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO MY BUILDING OF THIS DECK, I HOPE THAT WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAYS. I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND FIRST. THE ORIGINAL IDEA FOR THE BUILDING OF THIS DECK CAME THROUGH SOME AD HOC THERAPY BY ME FOR MY FATHER. MY FATHER SUFFERED A STROKE LAST YEAR. ALTHOUGH HIS RECOVERY HAS BEEN EXTRODINARY, LIKE MOST STROKE VICTIMS, HE STILL HAS BOTH GOOD AND BAD DAYS. I VISITED MY PARENTIS HOME ON ONE OF HIS BAD DAYS EARLIER THIS SPRING. HE DIDN'T SEEM TO BE ABLE TO CONCENTRATE ON WHAT WAS HAPPENING AROUND HIM VERY WELL (HE WASN'T GETTING INVOLVED IN ANY CONVERSATIONS, HE WOULD WATCH ABOUT FIVE S-CONDS OF ONE T.V. SHOW AND THEN CHANGE THE CHANNEL AND THEN CHANGE THE CHANNEL AGAIN AND SO ON). AS HE ALWAYS HAS BEEN QUITE A HANDYMAN, I TRIED TO HAVE HIM APPLY HIMSELF BY GIVING HIM A KNOX AD AND I TOLD HIM TO DESIGN A DECK FOR THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE. AS HE HAS DESIGNED AND BUILT 10 OR MORE DECKS FOR FRIENDS, I WAS SURE THAT HE COULD HANDLE THIS TASK AND IT DID SEEM TO FOCUS HIS ATTENTION AND CLEAR UP THE FOG THAT HE WAS IN. ;r HE WAS NOW READY TO BUILD THE DECK. TOGETHER WE WENT ’"»UT TO PURCHASE THE SUPPLIES WHICH WE NEEDED AND WITH THE HELP OF MY YOUNGER BROTHER, WE STARTED TO BUILD THE DECK ON GOOD FRIDAY. THAT NEXT MONDAY A CITY INSPECTOR CAME BY AND ADVISED US THAT WE WOULD NEED A BUILDING PERMIT AND POSTED A STOP WORK ORDER. I DID NOT KNOW THAT WE WOULD NEED SUCH A PERMIT AND NATURALLY STOPPED WORKED IMMEDIATELY. I THEN WENT DOWN TO THE CITY HALL AND BY CHANCE MET WITH THE SAME INSPECTOR IN THAT OFFICE. THERE HE GAVE ME A PERMIT APPLICATION AND LOOKED THROUGH MY FILE TO SEE IF A PRIOR LAND SURVEY HAD BEEN COMPLETED. IT HAD NOT. HOWEVER, HE DID ADVISE ME THAT ON SUCH A SMALL SCALE PROJECT, THE SURVEY COULD AND PROBLABLY WOULD BE WAIVED IF I SENT IN AN ACCURATE DIAGRAM SHOWING WHERE THE PROPOSED DECK WOULD BE BUILT AND LAYING OUT ANY OTHER HARD COVER EXPOSURES. 11! •Vvm h -C V- ' r?ii ■v| '■■V fv ’ .1 Si CITY-OF QROS DECK PERMIT IN ADDITION BOTHS BIDES THEY DID NOT AND MY WORKI FACT THAT I TOOK ME A CO HAD ALL OF T WORK ORDER, HEARD FROM A OMAN. NEEDLESS TO THAT THEY NE AGAIN FILE A STUMPS ME AS TO THE WRONG AFTER AGAIN THIS INFORMA OF THE tl50. AND I BELIEV FIRST SUBMIS THAT BASICAL TO DO ON THI TO THE COMPL INTERFER WIT FRONT. IN F NOT HAVE AT LAND SURVEY HOPE THAT YO FOR A PROJEC SUCH A SIMPLi WOULD THINK MUCH OF AN El MEASURABLE Cl EXPOSURE. ] CERTAINLY I MUSI Df MUCH :S 70 COMPLE WHICH THE LAI MON W. PAPAS 3369 CRYSTAL ORONO, MN 55: ..■4 BUT (\S 1 AM LL NOT BE ABLE ME. I HOPE THAT FOR SITTING IN IS THE PERSON HAN MYSELF OF OBJECTIONS TO OMPLETION OF IDEA FOR THE 3R MY FATHER. HAS BEEN :^ND BAD DAYS. SPRING. HE DUND HIM VERY D WATCH ABOUT rHEN CHANGE THE MAN, I TRIED TO TO DESIGN A DECK MORE DECKS FOR SEEM TO FOCUS HIS URCHASE THE ER, WE STARTED TO TOR CAME BY AND TOP WORK ORDER. STOPPED WORKED MET WITH THE ICATION AND COMPLETED. IT : PROJECT., THE :URATE DIAGRAM ANY OTHER HARD '■n .-i ■■ .t- h: J .ii:v 1% CITY^ QRONO DECK FERHIT PAGE »2 HAD ALL OF THIS ZI^TORMATION, ABOUT 10 DAYS TO TWO WEEKS AFTER THE ORGINAL STOP WORK ORDER, I MAILED EVERYTHING THAT I HAD TO THE CITY. THE NEXT TIME THAT I HEARD FROM ANYONE REGARDING THIS MATTER WAS THE JULY 22nd LETTER FROM LYLE OMAN. NEEDLESS TO SAY I WAS MORE THAN UPSET. I CALLED THE CITY AND THEY ADVISED ME THAT THEY NEVER HAD RECEIVED MY ORGINAL SUBMISSION AND THAT I WOULD HAVE TO AGAIN FILE ALL OF THE NEEDED FORMS. WHAT HAPPENED TO MY ORIGNAL FILING STILL STUMPS ME AS I NEVER RECEIVED IT BACK AND COULD ONLY ASSUME THAT IF I SENT IT TO THE WRONG ADDRESS IT WOULD BE RETURNED. AFTER AGAIN COMPLING ALL OF THE INFORAMTION WHICH YOU NEED, I HAND DELIVERED THIS INFORMATION. IN MY EARLIER TELEPHONE CONVERSATION, I WAS ALSO INFORMED OF THE $150.00 FILING CHARGE. THIS WAS NOT INCLUDED IN MY FIRST SUBMISSION AND I BELIEVE THAT IS WHERE THE PROBLEM ACTUALLY AROSE REGARDING THE •'LOST'* FIRST SUBMISSION. THAT BASICALLY BRINGS US UP TO DATE. THERE ARE ABOUT FIVE HOURS OF WORK LEFT TO DO ON THIS PROJECT. THE PEOPLE LIVING ON CRYSTAL BAY ROAD HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO THE COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT. CERTAINLY, A DECK FACING THE LAKE DOES NOT INTERFER WITH ANY AETHCTIC DESIGN WHICH THE CITY FATHERS MAY HAVE FOR THE LAKE FRONT. IN FACT THERE ARE VERY FEW LAKE FRONT PROPERTIES IN THIS AREA WHICH DO NOT HAVE AT LEAST A DECK EXPOSURE FACING THE LAKE. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A LAND SURVEY I THINK THAT I HAVE COMPLETED ALL OF YOUR REQUIRED FORMS. I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD AGREE WITH ME THAT PAYING $600 TO $G00 FOR A LAND SURVEY FOR A PROJECT WHICH COSTS UNDER $600 TO COMPLETE IS AN ONEROUS PRICE TO PAY FOR SUCH A SIMPLE PROJECT AND THAT YOU WILL WAIVE THIS REQUIREMENT. LASTLY I WOULD THINK THAT YOU WOULD AGREE WITH ME, A SLOTTED WOODEN DECK DOES NOT HAVE MUCH OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL INPACT. IN FACT, I FAIL TO SEE WHERE THERE IS ANY MEASURABLE CHANGE ON THE RUNOFF PATTERNS OF MY PROPERTY DUE TO THIS NEW EXPOSURE. i CERTAINLY HOPE THAT WE CAN PUT THIS SITUATION TO BED. I KNOW THAT THERE MOST or MUCH WEIGHTIER PROBLEMS WHICH YOU SHOULD GO ON TO. MV SIMPLE DESIRE IS TO COMPLETE THIS PROJECT AS SOON I CAN AND BE ABLE TO ENJOY THE LIFESTYLE THE LAKE PROVIDES THE RESIDENCE OF OUR AREA. NCERELY, 'JON W. PAPAS 3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ORONO, MN 55391 r-t- Cr.'* rT‘ ■JT'. w ■\V; To: Mict Date:Sepi Subject:«13: Cone Zoning Dietrie Application ~ List of Bzhibi Exhibit f Exhibit E Exhibit C Exhibit n Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Exhibit K Exhibit L Discussion - The appld 0.6 acre in ar< wetland to cr width, or abou The gradi and south side The appli at about l,00i amounts of fil before and afl decrease by 9%, H;-. /.Vr' *-"' iiiillllliiii■r» . V-PAGE «2 4EAREST NEIGHBORS ON ^ STATEMENT SAYING THAT iTARTEO UP A NEW BUSINESS lliOO P.M. PLUS THE : BILLS FOR A WHILE, IT IGETHER. AS SOON AS I AFTER THE ORGINAL STOP THE NEXT TIME THAT I Id LETTER FROM LYLE Y AND THEY ADVISED ME HAT I WOULD HAVE TO ^ ORIGNAL FILING STILL lUME THAT IF I SENT IT :EDj, I HAND DELIVERED I WAS ALSO INFORMED MY FIRST SUBMISSION REGARDING THE "LOST" VE HOURS OF WORK LEFT ' ROAD HAVE NO OBJECTIONS ICING THE LAKE DOES NOT i MAY HAVE FOR THE LAKE • IN THIS AREA WHICH DO I THE EXCEPTION OF A :OUIRED FORMS. I WOULD !00 FOR A LAND SURVEY •NEROUS PRICE TO PAY FOR REMENT. LASTLY, I 'EN DECK DOES NOT HAVE : WHERE THERE IS ANY DUE TO THIS NEW I KNOW THAT THERE 0. MV SIMPLE DESIRE ENJOY THE LIFESTYLE ■ .t • 'TV. \mm. ;7f.i L.. r i'i mm • V ..'n. 'wm-.:Vv.t-.-i£.“5S2asi Tot Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson WTtms Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administfatoj? Sate September 15, 1988 Subject: #1324 Mr. & Mrs. Willieun Gregory, 1099 Tainarack Drive Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-lB, 2-acre, unsewered implication - Excavate an existing wetland area to create a pond. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit P - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Exhibit K - Exhibit L - Application Letter of Transmittal Plat Map Property Owners List Letter From Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Letter From City Engineer Glenn Cook Plat of Neighborhood Topographic Survey of Property USGS Topographic Survey Proposed Plan Showing Cut & Fill Areas Calculations of Cuts, Fills, Storage Volume & Drainage Volume Air Photo Showing Designated Wetland Discnssion - The applicants' property contains a designated wetland approximately 0.6 acre in area. They propose to excavate the northwesterly end of that wetland to create a pond approximately 120* in length and about 60* in width, or about 1/4 of the wetland area. The grading plan indicates that spoils will be placed along the east and south sides of the existing driveway. The applicants' designer has calculated the cut and fill volumes, each at about 1,000 cubic yards, hence it is unlikely that any significant £unounts of fill will enter or leave the site. He has also calculated the before and after storage volumes and is noting that while storage will decrease by 9%, the 100 year rainfall event will still be retained. ,4m# Si H ... L >• '*yy‘'yif ■: - s v-y/y-A mm I% ^ i 1 k&SttJ *-30 wm Mf : '■ W 0^1 .V' disru] to er the d distu issue 1 flat would overf { sub je< Staff sub je< f ^ ■■ ; .1 ■gv'.'4 w , $100.00 a) $150.00 b) $150.00 c) $250.00 d) $200.00 f) ew.FJULY £5, 1988 CITY OF ORONO P.0. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 RE: BUILDING PERMIT VARIANCE APPLICATION fr TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: ENCLOSED THERE IS A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION, TWO COPIES OF MY CONSTRUCTION PLANS, A VARIANCE APPLICATION AND A SIGNED NON-OBJECTION LETTER FROM MY NEAREST NEIGHBORS REGARDING THE PROPOSED WOODEN DECK ON THE FRONT OF MY PROPERTY. THE MAJOR REASON I LIVE WHERE I DO IS THE ENJOYMENT WHICH THE VIEW OF LAKE MINNETONKA PROVIDES ME. THE IDEA THAT I HAVE TO JUMP THROUGH ALL OF THESE BUREAUCRATIC HOOPS SIMPLY TO PUT AN UNOBTRUSIVE DECK ON THE FRONT OF MY PREMISES IS REPUGNANT TO ME. PER THE INFORMATIONAL PAGE ON YOUR VARIANCE APPLICATION, THE HARDSHIP WHICH I MUST ENDURE IS ONE OF LACK OF SIMPLE COMMON SENSE. I HAVE ENCLOSED SEVERAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF OTHER DECKS BUILT ON STRUCTURES ON MY IMMEADIATE BLOCK WHICH DO NOT MEET YOUR ZONING REQUIREMENTS AS TO SETBACK DISTANCES. I AM NOT INCLUDING THESE PHOTOGRAPHS SIMPLY TO SHOW YOU THAT OTHER EXCEPTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE OR HAVE BEEN GRANDFATHERED INTO PLACE; RATHER, MY INTENT IS SHOW YOU THAT DECK ON THE FRONT OF ONE’S PROPERTY IS MORE OF A MATTER OF STANDARD AND ACCEPTED PRACTICE IN OUR LOCALITY. I WOULD COMPARE IT TO THE OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENCE OF DOCK. IT EFFECTS THE "ORDERLY DEVELQPEMENT AND USE OF THE LAND" AND EFFECTS ABOUT AS MUCH "HARDCOVER" AS A DOCK. WITH THAT MINI-TIRADE OUT OF THE WAY, I WILL ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN MY CONSTRUCTION PLANS. AS YOU WILL READILY SEE WHEN YOU LOOK OVER THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS, I AM NOT AN ARCHIECT BY TRADE. IN AN EFFORT TO CLEAR UP ANY QUESTIONS WHICH YOU MAY HAVE I WILL INCLUDE A BRIEF NARATIVE REGARDING MY CONSTRUCTION PLANS. THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF LUMBER WHICH WILL BE USED IN THIS PROJECT. WHEN THIS PROJECT IS COMPLETED, THE NONVISABLE, SUPPORT, FRAMING MATERIAL WILL BE CONSTRUCTION GRADE TREATED PONDEROSA PINE (HEREAFTER REFERED TO AS TREATED). THE VISABLE OUTSIDE CASING AND THE DECKING ITSELF WILL BE CONSTRUCTED OUT OF REDWOOD LUMBER (HEREAFTER REFERED TO AS REDWOOD). THE FOUNDATION OF THIS DECK BUILT NEAREST THE EXSISTING DWELLING IS BUILT ON 8X12X18 CONCRETE BLOCKS. THERE ARE TWO 2X8X10 TREATED RUNr'ERS (CUT TO LENGTH), BOLTED WITH METAL BOLTS AND ANCHORS, WHICH FORM THE REAR HEADER. THE FRONT HEADER IS ALSO CONSTRUCTED OUT OF TWO 2X8X10 TREATED RUNNERS, TIED TO A SERIES OF FIVE 4X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. THERE ARE 15, 10 FOOT, TREATED, 2X8 JOISTS RUNNINGS BETWEEN THESE TWO HEADERS. EACH OF THESE JOISTS ARE CONECTED TO THE HEADERS ON BOTH ENDS BY JOIST HANGERS. THESE JOISTS ARE SEPERATED BY 16 INCH CENTERS. THE TWO OUTSIDE TREATED JOISTS ARE EACH FURTHER CONECTED ATTACHED TO TWO 4X4 AND ONE 2X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. THE REMAINDER OF THE DECK IS VISABLE AND IS CONSTRUCTED WITH REDWOOD LUMBER. THERE IS ON 2X4 SUPPORT POST ON EITHER SIDE OF THE DECK LOCATED NEXT TO THE DWELLING. ON EACH OF THE 10 FOOT LENGTHS, THERE IS A 4X4 POST SITUATED FIVE FEET FROM EITHER END AND ANOTHER 4X4 POST ON THE PORTION OF THE DECK LOCATED ON THE FRONT CORNER pc’ DECK, AWAY FROM THE DWELLING. CONECTED TO THE OUTSIDE OF THESE SIX REDWOOD POSTS ARE TWO 2X6X10 REDWOOD BOARDS WHICH FORM THE OUTSIDE PORTION OF THE TWO 10 FOOT SIDES. mm' i. •W'. P" OF MY CONSTRUCTION TER FROM MY NEAREST ■ MY PROPERTY. iE VIEU OF LAKE ►H ALL OF THESE FRONT OF MY PREMISES ANCE APPLICATION, IMMON SENSE. I ■RUCTURES ON MY AS TO SETBACK iHOW YOU THAT OTHER ACE; RATHER, MY IS MORE OF A MATTER COMPARE IT TO THE VELOPEMENT AND USE AIN MY CONSTRUCTION RUCTION PLANS, I AM TIONS WHICH YOU MAY ON PLANS. JECT. WHEN THIS lAL WILL BE TO AS TREATED). NSTRUCTED OUT OF LING IS BUILT ON RS (CUT TO LENGTH), DER. THE FRONT , TIED TO A SERIES REATED, 2X8 JOISTS E CONECTED TO THE ERATED BY 16 INCH NECTED ATTACHED TO REDWOOD LUMBER. TED NEXT TO THE ST SITUATED FIVE THE DECK LOCATED ED TO THE OUTSIDE CH FORM THE OUTSIDE k ■■S .*• 1 . *'■ pm iii ' m % m lift 11 ifcirTilltf ' BUILDING PERMIT PAGE #2 THE FRONT, SECTION OF THIS DECK IS CONSTRUCTED AS FOLLOWS: THERE ARE FIVE 4XA REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. TWO WERE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED AS THE CORNER POSTS OF THE 10 FOOT SIDES. ONE FOOT FROM THE WESTERN SIDE CORNER POST IS ANOTHER 4X4 REDWOOD POST. THIS WILL SUPPORT THE RIGHT HAND RAIL AND STEP/ENTRANCE TO THE DECK. THREE FEET EAST OF THAT YOU WILL FIND ANOTHER 4X4 REDWOOD POST WHICH WILL SUPPORT THE LEFT HAND RAIL AND STEP. FIVE FEET FROM THAT POST YOU WILL FIND ANOTHER 4X4 SUPPORT POST. THE LAST 4X4 SUPPORT POST FORMS THE EASTER END OF THE FRONT OF THE DECK. ATTACHED TO THESE SUPPORT POSTS WILL BE ANOTHER 2X6 REDWOOD BEAM WHICH WILL FORM THE FRONT OF THE DECK. THE POST AND HEADERS WILL BE CONECTED WITH S/8 INCH, FOUR INCH LAG SCREWS WHEREVER THEY MEET. THIS DECK WILL BE 15 INCHES ABOVE GRADE, THEREFORE, THERE WILL BE ONE STEP BUILT AT THE FRONT ENTRACE OF THE DECK. THE DECKING ITSELF WILL BE 2X6 RE WOOD DECKING. THE DECKING WILL RUN THE 19+ FEET OF THE DECK. THESE WILL BE TIED TO THE JOISTS BY Ifa PENNY GALVANISED NAILS THERE WILL BE A TOP RAIL SITUATED 36 INCHES ABOVE THE DECKING RUNNING ACROSS THE PERIMETER OF THE DECK. THIS WILL FUTHER ADORNED BY A SERIES OF 2X2 REDWOOD PICKETS, HUNG VERTICALLY, RUNNING COMPLETELY AROUND THE OUTSIDE OF THE DECK. THESE WILL BE SEPERATED BY 6 INCH CENTERS. AGAIN, I HOPE THAT THIS IS ALL THE INFORMATION WHICH YOU WILL NEED FOR THE RAPI. APPROVAL OF A BUILDING (?) VARIANCE AND CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, PLEASE DON’T HESITATE TO GIVE ME A CALL—HOME-471-8690; WORK-553-7759. UON W. PAPAS 3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ORONO, MN • V ■r '■V Pd ■ I * . :vmmm im 1 r i.. im . =;jH »•' ;• ■•v-- . '■' iivJ --A-y rrf,:■:i ' A -: -v >• . i , . - -■ '.■ ' al^K; ' 1 •:. !v-' • : ■■:■ / Administrator arack Drive - eate a pond. d District as Volume & Draina§e wetland approximately hwesterly end of that ngth and about 60' in placed along the east ind fill volumes, each that any significant IS also calculated the t while storage will .1 be retained. ■ ■ ‘ i* . ■ ^ r’ ■- j-"’ '■rl M r;-. ^ Vl, - ■ .i; . ■ % m:mm -s'-’ m a.• * S• Mt...-? ^ '(■•ft *: '‘ -5 mm jft •c, -* •• ■ zoning File #132'4 September 15, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Note that only the northwesterly half of the wetland will be disrupted, and all work will occur within the property boundaries. The Watershed District has noted that they will issue a permit subject to erosion control being placed around the outlet culvert (which crosses the driveway) and upon submittal of a proposal for restoration of the disturbed areas. The Watershed District also has noted that they will issue a permit only upon approval of the City of Orono permit. Note additionally that the outlet culvert discharges to a relatively flat field to the west, so that if that wetland ever did discharge, there would be excellent filtration through this grassed area before any of the overflow became channelized downstream. City Engineer Glenn Cook has recommended approval of the project subject to the recommendations of the Watershed District. Staff RecomBendati* Staff would concur with the City Engineer, and recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1. All grading work must take place within the property boundaries. 2. All grading work shall conform to the grading plan proposed, and per any aunendments that may be required by the Watershed District. 3. Proper erosion controls shall be maintained during all phases of the project until the area is re-vegetated. 4. Such re—vegetation , i.e. seeding or sodding and erosion control, shall be commenced Immediately after the grading work is completed. 5. Per the current fee schedule, the applicants' contractor must obtain the normal $50.00 grading permit prior to commencement of the excavation work. i JM'. •*' - •V . to ft-'"’-N ll ,v*!t' i’' .' '.i 4u- ■' •: i- ■ » m ’X .WimSwi’’■mt ' -iv-i*: ■( Siti 4iy -I I m- Pro( Plei APPI DWHB FBBS OTHBI 9 a . $100.00 a)Residential accessory Use $150.00 b)Institutional (church# sc $150.00 c)Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d)Commercial/Industrial wse $200.00 f)Land Alteration ■ ■'ill i..nwgiii<l JULY 25, isaa CITY OF ORONO P. 0. BOX 66 CRYSTRL BRY, MN 55323 RE: BUILDING PERMIT VRRIRNCE RPPLICRTION ir j. : V 1 “. #■ TO WHOM IT MRY CONCERN: ENCLOSED THERE IS R BUILDING PERMIT RPPLICRTION, TWO COPIES OF MY CONSTRUCTION PLRNS, R VRRIRNCE RPPLICRTION RND R SIGNED NON-OBJECTION LETTER FROM MY NERREST NEIGHBORS REGRRDING THE PROPOSED WOODEN DECK ON THE FRONT OF MY PROPERTY. THE MRJOR PERSON I LIVE WHERE I DO IS THE ENJOYMENT WHICH THE VIEW OF LRKE MINNETONKR PROVIDES ME. THE IDER THRT I HRVE TO JUMP THROUGH RLL OF THESE BURERUCRRTIC HOOPS SIMPLY TO PUT RN UNOBTRUSIVE DECK ON THE FRONT OF MY PREMISES IS REPUGNRNT TO ME. PER THE INFORMRTIONRL PRGE ON YOUR VRRIRNCE RPPLICRTION, THE HRRDSHIP WHICH I MUST ENDURE IS ONE OF LRCK OF SIMPLE COMMON SENSE. I HRVE ENCLOSED SEVERRL PHOTOGRRPHS OF OTHER DECKS BUILT ON STRUCTURES ON MY IMMERDIRTE BLOCK WHICH DO NOT MEET YOUR ZONING REQUIREMENTS RS TO SETBRCK DISTRNCES. I RM NOT INCLUDING THESE PHOTOGRRPHS SIMPLY TO SHOW YOU THRT OTHER EXCEPTIONS HRVE BEEN MRDE OR HRVE BEEN GRRNDFRTHERED INTO PLRCEj RRTHER, MY INTENT IS SHOW YOU THRT DECK ON THE FRONT OF ONE’S PROPERTY IS MORE OF R MRTTER OF STRNDRRD RND RCCEPTED PRRCTICE IN OUR LOCRLITY. I WOULD COMPRRE IT TO THE OWNERSHIP RND MRINTENCE OF DOCK. IT EFFECTS THE "ORDERLY DEVELOPEMENT RND USE OF THE LRND" RND EFFECTS RBOUT RS MUCH "HRRDCOVER" RS R DOCK. WITH THRT MINI-TIRRDE OUT OF THE WRY, I WILL RTTEMPT TO EXPLRIN MY CONSTRUCTION PLRNS. RS YOU WILL RERPILY SEE WHEN YOU LOOK OVER THE CONSTRUCTION PLRNS, I RM NOT RN RRCHIECT BY TRRDE. IN RN EFFORT TO CLERR UP RNY QUESTIONS WHICH YOU MRY HRVE I WILL INCLUDE R BRIEF NRRRTIVE REGRRDING MY CONSTRUCTION PLRNS. THERE RRE TWO TYPES OF LUMBER WHICH WILL BE USED IN THIS PROJECT. WHEN THIS PROJECT IS COMPLETED, THE NONVISRBLE, SUPPORT, FRRMING MRTERIRL WILL BE CONSTRUCTION GRRDE TRERTED PONDEROSR PINE (HERERFTER REFERED TO RS TRERTED). THE VISRBLE OUTSIDE CRSING RND THE DECKING ITSELF WILL BE CONSTRUCTED OUT OF REDWOOD LUMBER (HERERFTER REFERED TO RS REDWOOD). THE FOUNDRTION OF THIS DECK BUILT NERREST THE EXSISTING DWELLING IS BUILT ON aX12Xia CONCRETE BLOCKS. THERE RRE TWO 2XSX10 TRERTED RUNNERS (CUT TO LENGTH), BOLTED WITH METRL BOLTS RND RNCHORS, WHICH FORM THE RERR HERDER. THE FRONT HERDER IS RLSO CONSTRUCTED OUT OF TWO 2XSX10 TRERTED RUNNERS, TIED TO R SERIES OF FIVE 4X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. THERE RRE 15, 10 FOOT, TRERTED, 2XB JOISTS RUNNINGS BETWEEN THESE TWO HERDERS. ERCH OF THESE JOISTS RRE CONECTED TO THE HERDERS ON BOTH ENDS BY JOIST HRNGERS. THESE JOISTS RRE SEPERRTED BY 16 INCH CENTERS. THE TWO OUTSIDE TRERTED JOISTS RRE ERCH FURTHER CONECTED RTTRCHED TO TWO 4X4 RND ONE 2X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. THE REMRINDER OF THE DECK IS VISRBLE RND IS CONSTRUCTED WITH REDWOOD LUMBER. THERE IS ON 2X4 SUPPORT POST ON EITHER SIDE OF THE DECK LOCATED NEXT TO THE DWELLING. ON ERCH OF THE 10 FOOT LENGTHS, THERE IS R 4X4 POST SITURTED FIVE FEET FROM EITHER END RND ANOTHER 4X4 POST ON THE PORTION OF THE DECK LOCATED ON THE FRONT CORNER 0'=’ DECK, AWRY FROM THE DWELLING. CONECTED TO THE OUTSIDE OF THESE SIX REDWOOD POSTS RRE TWO 2X6X10 REDWOOD BOARDS WHICH FORM THE OUTSIDE PORTION OF THE TWO 10 FOOT SIDES. ^ . V •j f-'W S OF MY CONSTRUCTION ETTER FROM MY NEAREST OF MY PROPERTY. THE VIEW OF LAKE LIGH ALL OF THESE E FRONT OF MY PREMISES RIANCE APPLICATION, EOMMON SENSE. I STRUCTURES ON MY 3 AS TO SETBACK SHOW YOU THAT OTHER 5LACE; RATHER, MY /IS MORE OF A MATTER ) COMPARE IT TO THE DEVELOPEMENT AND USE :k. :*LAIN MY CONSTRUCTION STRUCTION PLANS, I AM ESTIONS WHICH YOU MAY nON PLANS. ROJECT. WHEN THIS [RIAL WILL BE ID TO AS TREATED). :ONSTRUCTED OUT OF [LLING IS BUILT ON JERS (CUT TO LENGTH), [ADER. THE FRONT (S, TIED TO A SERIES TREATED, 2X8 JOISTS iRE CONECTED TO THE OPERATED BY 16 INCH :ONECTED ATTACHED TO 'H REDWOOD LUMBER. :ated next to the >OST SITUATED FIVE • THE DECK LOCATED :TED to the OUTSIDE JICH FORM THE OUTSIDE BUILDING PERMIT PAGE #£ THE FRONT, SECTION OF THIS DECK IS CONSTRUCTED AS FOLLOWS: THERE ARE FIVE 4X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. TWO WERE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED AS THE CORNER POSTS OF THE 10 FOOT SIDES. ONE FOOT FROM THE WESTERN SIDE CORNER POST IS ANOTHER 4X4 REDWOOD POST. THIS WILL SUPPORT THE RIGHT HAND RAIL AND STEP/ENTRANCE TO THE DECK. THREE FEET EAST OF THAT YOU WILL FIND ANOTHER 4X4 REDWOOD POST WHICH WILL SUPPORT THE LEFT HAND RAIL AND STEP. FIVE FEET FROM THAT POST YOU WILL FIND ANOTHER 4X4 SUPPORT POST. THE LAST 4X4 SUPPORT POST FORMS THE EASTER END OF THE FRONT OF THE DECK. ATTACHED TO THESE SUPPORT POSTS WILL BE ANOTHER 2X6 REDWOOD BEAM WHICH WILL FORM THE FRONT OF THE DECK. THE POST AND HEADERS WILL BE CONECTED WITH 5/8 INCH, FOUR INCH LAG SCREWS WHEREVER THEY MEET. THIS DECK WILL BE 15 INCHES ABOVE GRADE, THEREFORE, THERE WILL BE ONE STEP BUILT AT THE FRONT ENTRACE OF THE DECK. THE DECKING ITSELF WILL BE 2X6 RE WOOD DECKING. THE DECKING WILL RUN THE 19*^ FEET OF THE DECK. THESE WILL BE TIED TO THE JOISTS BY 16 PENNY GALVANISED NAILS THERE WILL BE A TOP RAIL SITUATED 36 INCHES ABOVE THE DECKING RUNNING ACROSS THE PERIMETER OF THE DECK. THIS WILL FUTHER ADORNED BY A SERIES OF 2X2 REDWOOD PICKETS, HUNG VERTICALLY, RUNNING COMPLETELY AROUND THE OUTSIDE OF THE DECK. THESE WILL BE SEPERATED BY 6 INCH CENTERS. AGAIN, I HOPE THAT THIS IS ALL THE INFORMATION WHICH YOU WILL NEED FOR THE RAPI. APPROVAL OF A BUILDING (?) VARIANCE AND CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER (3UESTI0NS, PLEASE DON’T HESITATE TO GIVE ME A CALL—HOME-471-8690; WORK-553-7759. JON W. PAPAS 3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ORONO, MN - ri : ^ ■ V- H, V V':'A »• W I r- ■ RBGOLATIOBS Mfl> NOSlSraiT Orooo City Council adoptod an ordlnanca liaiting' !. HMIDOOVgR SETBACK 80WBS - PBRCEOTAGg ALLOIIBD * ^*** Within 75* of tha lakaahoca, tio Hardeovag it allowad; of’fit" x:rj;vr.*,5«vVr:sr" ”■ *'•- III. aSO^-SOQ't in tha portion of tha lot locatad batwaan 250* and 500* faat txoa the laka 30% of that portion of tha lot may ba hardcovarad. IV. 500~l,000*t in tha portion of tha lot locatad batman 500* and 1,000* faat from tha laka 35% of that portion of tha lot nay ba hardcovarad. NOTE. Thaaa ragulations apply even if you hava a lot that doaa not abut tha lake but it within a lakashora zoning district. ffO* «> PBTEgWnre LOT ABBA W1THHI 8ACH SWMCT (,o b. n,*a .. d.no»ln.tor In .11 hardcover parcentaga calculations) 0-75* Zona Area • 75* x /Average width of lot in 0-75* zofta\ \ measure parallel to shoreline ) ft. -75* X (Avg width)a.f. (1) Area of 0-75* zone 11. 75-250* Zona Area - (175*or avg lot depth in zone) x/Avg width of lot in 75-250* zone /?r X measure parallel to shoreline ) _ _ _^ s.f. (2) (Avg width) Area of 75-250* zone III. 250-500* Zona Area - (250* or avg lot depth in zona) x/Avg width of lot in 250-500* zone\ \ measure parallel to shoreline ) 250* X ft. - (Avg width) IV. 500-1.000* Zone a.f. (3) Area of 250-500* zone Area - (500* or avc lot depth in zone) x/Avg width of lot in 500-1000* zone \ measure parallel to shoreline ) 500* X ft. - (Avg width) I a.f. (4) Area of 500-1,000* zone mi fc': € -i.\. m IT. HARDCOVER lAkaahora Setback Iona 4 .. « 4 . i mrCQVER LIMI >t T / 1 \ 1 (ZO B. OTHER LAKES SBC. 10.22 FAMILY LAXB8B0 **LR-1C-1" One Pj Subd. lakashora : shoreline buildings *4 Subd shall ba Within 75 Within 2! cover. V hard cov« Subd. with the dl a permit fr fORK^i ited an ordinance Halting Lous surfaces ("hardcover*) cated within 1,000 feet of ris carried into the lake »e quality of water in the rainfall run-off will be reas before entering the Ho Hardcover is allowd ween 75* and 250' froa the d. etween 250* and 500' feet rdcovered, itween 500* and 1,000* feet rdcovered. not abut the lake but is sed as denOTilnator in all lot in 75-250' zone' Llel to shoreline • # » lot in 250-500* zone' illel to shoreline lot in 500-1000* zone' llel to shoreline :n; • V . ,.'V ■■ / If m e' ■ -a." [ i'H ■ I i. •r A ■ 'f IPB0Hb| •IW ***J H. HkRDCOVBt CktetJLATIOW 8DMMARV Xakeabore Setback Zone tot Area Zn Zone Existing Bardcover Zn Zone itZZ2_< Uit .f ------------if - sf • • « • BJR0COVS8 LZNZTATZOIfS S;.-' ^ \ 1^' ROAC^ LAKBSHORB RH60LATZ0NS Existing Bardcover Percentage (B/A)xl00 D. Pinal Proposed Bardcover Zn Zone Bardcover Percentage (D/A)x100 - yc * 1479 «< ? y 1 -zr-1 nii - ,t --“"ic '' % • « sf • • e rp • m • %4P» « --------------- — r r JM4# wa8 FAJIZLT LAKB8BOBB BB8ZDBBTZAL OZ8TBZCT. Within any "tR-lA*, LR-lA-1*, *LR-lB*, "LR-IC*, or •tR-lC-1* One Paaily Lakeshore Residential District the following regulations shall apply: Subd. 1. Lakeshore Set Back Regulations. The set back * froa the shoreline for -^*^****®^* shall be at least 75 feet and no building stay be located closer to the shoreline^than the average distance ‘froa the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent and nearby lots. Subd. 2. Lakeshore Hard Cover Regulations, within 75 feet of shoreline there shall be no excavating, filling, hard cover, temporary or permanent structures. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 25% hard cover. ... Within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 30% hard cover. Within 50()_to 1,000 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 35% hard cover. » Subd. 3. Tree Removal Regulations: " Mo trees with'iii 75 feet of the shoreline obfinm. BAROCOVra ZMCLODBSt - Structures with roofs - Decks, even if slatted - Sidewalks . .. . - Driveways .(psved or gravel) - Decorative landscaping areas underlain by plastic sheeting - Tops of retaining walla, rock walls - Any other surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the ground l...• e» 1% rwi 9m s m ^ • B.' F. • irdcover • • Allowed ireentage .;■ Hardcover >/A)xl00. : * Percentage e e • • * • . % 0 i . • r« • •►•- • 2C ,e • * * • ■ •«« *« « % '25" • • % ♦ .* * » % 30 __i IV«1) . ng areas undarlain ’' •.* I, rook walls ;. t doss.not allow direct into the. .ground *• • .«• i LK-IC* AK> "XJt-lC-1* on A-1", "LR-lB", "LR-IC", or regulations shall applyt t ‘froa the shoreline for be located closer to the of existing residence feet of shoreline there r permanent structures, ater than 25% hard cover. > greater than 30% hard 1 be no greater than 35% 5 feet of the shoreline without first obtaining M •fr- f M mm '’MM srs?!^ > <•S'ky y ■ '■■ •I' 'f- ^rr^-PiM^ B-YiT^cFF s • l( I "-30 \ 4. - II i > j/c "■ UA - ft !f — — ' - ■ ’ '- • - • 4H» M OPS'* f+<^ wm >•- =■ 2J *x r-rs • • I» ^ >*ro r/««> 2r>^'fasO e 2,*70© 5^; ^fr~)r' Rc._s_.7.j» t/i _p«m«4.2&7 l\ uf ^^4^3,2. if 6/XZO I2.C Zoo 1^1 vieofrifck V ■—■ » » —•♦♦ -• » •-*. Z7. */ */. -----it i'/ ■ :v ; i j ;• - _ , X ’k ■:> i^V> .,:• ■ . >■•:■’ ■.. ■ •■•..: 3- •' :??? :# r * % «• »— - •• >• . i /s lf_4-J 45 y- «* ■ -------------------------------- • « ' —------- • f T ■ -v;i *.*7 Sr*^ V ‘ -• • ♦ •-« rf^ li it m-M fh»‘- 5<V t' -.•- .-..V'T?-i-i-! ft"'. » §i ^r; ■V n SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 reb variance application DEAR MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION* PLEASE ACCEPT MY APOLOGY FOR NOT BEING PRESENT AT THIS MEETING, BUT AS I AM BEING INSTALLED AS THE MASTER OF MY MASONIC LODGE TONIGHT, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING UNTIL WELL AFTER YOUR 7b00 P.M. START TIME. I HOPE THAT I AM ABLE TO BE PRESENT AT THIS MEETING BEFORE IT ENDS. ■*• 't- I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK JAY KEISER, MY NEXT STORE NEIGHBOR, FOR SITTING IN FOR ME AT THIS MEETING UNTIL I CAN GET DOWN THERE. MR. KEISER IS THE PERSON WHO WILL BE MOST EFFECTED BY THE BUILDING OF THIS DECK, OTHER THAN MYSELF OF COURSE AS NEITHER HE, NOR ANY OF MY OTHER NEIGHBORS. HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO MY BUILDING OF THIS DECK, I HOPE THAT WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAYS. I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND FIRST. THE ORIGINAL IDEA FOR THE BUILDING OF THIS DECK CAME THROUGH SOME AD HOC THERAPY BY ME FOR MY FATHER. MY FATHER SUFFERED A STROKE LAST YEAR. ALTHOUGH HIS RECOVERY HAS BEEN EXTRODINARY, LIKE MOST STROKE VICTIMS, HE STILL HAS BOTH GOOD AND BAD DAYS. I VISITED MY PARENT’’S HOME ON ONE OF HIS BAD DAYS EARLIER THIS SPRING. HE DIDN^’T SEEM TO BE ABLE TO CONCENTRATE ON WHAT WAS HAPPENING AROUND HIM VERY WELL (HE WASN’T GE1TING INVOLVED IN ANY CONVERSATIONS, HE WOULD WATCH ABOUT FIVE S'^CONDS OF ONE T.V. SHOW AND THEN CHANGE THE CHANNEL AND THEN CHANGE THE CHANNEL AGAIN AND SO ON). AS HE ALWAYS HAS BEEN QUITE A HANDYMAN, I TRIED TO HAVE HIM APPLY HIMSELF BY GIVING HIM A KNOX AD AND I TOLD HIM TO DESIGN A DECK FOR THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE. AS HE HAS DESIGNED AND BUILT 10 OR MORE DECKS FOR FRIENDS, I WAS SURE THAT HE COULD HANDLE THIS TASK AND IT DID SEEM TO FOCUS HIS ATTENTION AND CLEAR UP THE FOG THAT HE WAS IN. -i- •• - •’•jm HE WAS NOW READY TO BUILD THE DECK. TOGETHER WE WENT nyr TO PURCHASE THE SUPPLIES WHICH WE NEEDED AND WITH THE HELP OF MY YOUNGER BROTHER, WE STARTED TO BUILD THE DECK ON GOOD FRIDAY. THAT NEXT MONDAY A CITY INSPECTOR CAME BY AND ADVISED US THAT WE WOULD NEED A BUILDING PERMIT AND POSTED A STOP WORK ORDER. I DID NOT KNOW THAT WE WOULD NEED SUCH A PERMIT AND NATURALLY STOPPED WORKED IMMEDIATELY. I THEN WENT DOWN TO THE CITY HALL AND BY CHANCE MET WITH THE SAME INSPECTOR IN THAT OFFICE. THERE HE GAVE ME A PERMIT APPLICATION AND LOOKED THROUGH MY FILE TO SEE IF A PRIOR LAND SURVEY HAD BEEN COMPLETED. IT HAD NOT. HOWEVER, HE DID ADVISE ME THAT ON SUCH A SMALL SCALE PROJECT, THE SURVEY COULD AND PROBLABLY WOULD BE WAIVED IF I SENT IN AN ACCURATE DIAGRAM SHOWING WHERE THE PROPOSED DECK WOULD BE BUILT AND LAYING OUT ANY OTHER HARD COVER EXPOSURES. •S-A *3 ; . ^"1 CITY-«OF QRO DECK PERHIT IN ADDITION BOTHS BIDES THEY DID NO AND MY WORK FACT THAT I TOOK ME A C HAD ALL OF WORK ORDER, HEARD FROM OMAN. NEEDLESS TO THAT THEY N AGAIN FILE STUMPS ME A TO THE WRON AFTER AGAIN THIS INFORM OF THE *150 AND I BELIE FIRST SUBMI THAT BASICAI TO DO ON TH TO THE COMPI INTERFER WI FRONT. IN I NOT HAVE AT LAND SURVEY HOPE THAT Yi FOR A PRO J El SUCH A SIMPI WOULD THINK MUCH OF AN I MEASURABLE I EXPOSURE. J CERTAINLY MUSI Dt MUCI IS 70 COMPLt WHICH THE L^ NCERELY, / MON W. PAPA£ 3369 CRYSTAL ORONO, MN 5* •»-Vii^ I B w (?i EETING, BUT AS I AM T, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TART TIME. I HOPE THAT GHBOR, FOR SITTING IN KEISER IS THE PERSON OTHER THAN MYSELF OF lAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO H THE COMPLETION OF HGINAL IDEA FOR THE iY ME FOR MY FATHER. ICOVERY HAS BEEN H GOOD AND BAD DAYS. ER THIS SPRING. HE ^ING AROUND HIM VERY HE WOULD WATCH ABOUT EL AND THEN CHANGE THE =i HANDYMAN, I TRIED TO _D HIM TO DESIGN A DECK T 10 OR MORE DECKS FOR IT DID SEEM TO FOCUS HIS JT TO PURCHASE THE R BROTHER, WE STARTED TO INSPECTOR CAME BY AND TED A STOP WORK ORDER. URALLY STOPPED WORKED CHANCE MET WITH THE IT APPLICATION AND D BEEN COMPLETED. IT L SCALE PROJECT, THE AN ACCURATE DIAGRAM NG OUT ANY OTHER HARD ■ «•••*! PS CITY^ qpc DECK PERHIT .4 ...^ ' i' - ■ ^W WORK ORDER, I MAILED EVERYTHING THAT I HAD TO THE CITY. THE NEXT TIME THAT I HEARD FROM ANYONE REGARDING THIS MATTER WAS THE JULY 22nd LETTER FROM LYLE OMAN. NEEDLESS TO BAY I WAS MORE THAN UPSET. I CALLED THE CITY AND THEY ADVISED ME THAT THEY NEVER HAD RECEIVED MY ORGINAL SUBMISSION AND THAT I WOULD HAVE TO AGAIN FILE ALL OF THE NEEDED FORMS. WHAT HAPPENED TO MY ORIGNAL FILING STILL STUMPS ME AS I NEVER RECEIVED IT BACK AND COULD ONLY ASSUME THAT IF I SENT IT TO THE WRONG ADDRESS IT WOULD BE RETURNED. AFTER AGAIN COMPLING ALL OF THE INFORAMTIDN WHICH YOU NEED, I HAND DELIVERED THIS INFORMATION. IN MY EARLIER TELEPHONE CONVERSATION, I WAS ALSO INFORMED OF THE tlSO.OO FILING CHARGE. THIS WAS NOT INCLUDED IN MY FIRST SUBMISSION AND I BELIEVE THAT IS WHERE THE PROBLEM ACTUALLY AROSE REGARDING THE "LOST'' FIRST SUBMISSION. THAT BASICALLY BRINGS US UP TO DATE. THERE ARE ABOUT FIVE HOURS OF WORK LEFT TO DO ON THIS PROJECT. THE PEOPLE LIVING ON CRYSTAL BAY ROAD HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO THE COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT. CERTAINLY, A DECK FACING THE LAKE DOES NOT INTERFER WITH ANY AETHETIC DESIGN WHICH THE CITY FATHERS MAY HAVE FOR THF LAKE FRONT. IN FACT THERE ARE VERY FEW LAKE FRONT PROPERTIES IN THIS AREA WHICH DO NOT HAVE AT LEAST A DECK EXPOSURE FACING THE LAKE. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A LAND SURVEY I THINK THAT I HAVE COMPLETED ALL OF YOUR REQUIRED FORMS. I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD AGREE WITH ME THAT PAYING *600 TO $G00 FOR A LAND SURVEY FOR A FROJECT WHICH COSTS UNDER #600 TO COMF'LETE IS AN ONEROUS F’RICE TO F'AY FOR SUCH A SIMPLE PROJECT AND THAT YOU WILL WAIVE THIS REQUIREMENT. LASTLY I WOULD THINK THAT YOU WOULD AGREE WITH ME, A SLOTTED WOODEN DECK DOES NOT HAVE MUCH OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL INPACT. IN FACT, 1 FAIL TO SEE WHEFv'E THERE IS ANY MEASURABLE CHANGE ON THE RUNOFF PATTERNS OF MY PROPERTY DUE TO THIS NEW EXPOSURE. 1 CERTAINLY HOPE THAT WE CAN PUT THIS SITUATION TO BED. I KNOW THAT THFRE -‘-‘SI Bf MUCH WEIGHTIER PROBLEMS WHICH YOU SHOULD GO ON TO. MV SIMPLE DESIRE is; to complete this project as soon I CAN AND BE ABLE TO ENJOY THE LIFESTYLE WHICH THE LAKE PROVIDES THE RESIDENCE OF OUR AREA. ^ON W. PAPAS ^3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ORONO, MN 55391 V' 3 • ■ ; Vi. jJ-k_ 5 mm le wetland will be boundaries . ssue a permit subject Ivert (which crosses restoration of the oted that they will permit. rges to a relatively did discharge# there ea before any of the oval of the project ct. recommend approval roperty boundaries. ig plan proposed# and Ltershed District. during all phases of and erosion control# work is completed. tits' contractor must 3 commenceir.rint of the - 1 A'-• •S) ?.s ... ■; S-r: ■% ;■ -w ^ 1. u. ■■% #•OftOBO - GB8B8AL U II#USB ^ b ■ j tf i iisH 'h ■%v. /•r.« n LOCATIOH Site Address 1 0^^ 'TAa AAiCACM^ D/^(U^ Property Identification Number (P.Z.D.) HA \ *■Please check one - Property abstract or (for Conditional/ Use Applications only)«.« % « * % % ^ Oi.lf 77uofcv»%^. u. Please attach legal description to application if not ^OU FLiAI€E OFFICE torrenS^'*^^’^^^•• .-,\ PAP' CHECK r^AA AA r^AA A,^fcV V • on required survey. APFLZCABT m4i70 cm Roi ro9i Phono (hone) '4T5-^i?/7 v\^y i. V/ H obo Wl\.AHb Ce&Mty Phone (work) Addroso /a^<1 TArti/fMCk. g<li4£ DimR (if different than applicant) City /t?My LArk£^ Zip Phone (home) Name Phone Address City Zip Date Property Acquired I (do) (do not) also oim the adjacent parcels of land. ■ mm mm ^ mm mm mm mm mb ^ mm «w mm ^ mm mm ^ ^ mm mm mm mm mm mm om mm ^ ^ ^ mm m - COHDITIQIIAL USB PERMITS - Renewal Pee - 1/2 Current Pee After-the-Pact Pee - Double Current Application Pee - $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use (month/year) e e <• $150.00 b) Institutional (church# school# etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg _ _ $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling ^&signated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or mofe Grading# seawall# retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule on * s APPLICATIQBS _ _ _ $150.00 _ _ _ $250.00 _ _ _ $150.00 _ _ _ $ 50.00 _ _ _ $250.00 _ _ _ $100^,00 •s.. Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Rezoning Appeals Other - see fee schedule b': - ‘ f. tftjfe j£- m '' •* ^:(rS p|:0| *■' '*.■■' ••.•'•••,•' ..y : • - V ■■•sjiv':■ •’• 1 • • . -. V' m’mm im f\ ■■ :%.^; i: ■ ■■Mi. il:- KSis'/'fiSi1®^ ''' i- ■■• **»-».•.•■ :.‘’/4ii myyy im > ‘->V m .- 'f ^ - i * *€: Hi'-. ■•V" -. To* Date: Subject: Appllcati exces pilla Zoning Dis List of Bx Exhib Exhib. Exhib; Exhib: Exhib: Exhib: Exhib: Exhib: Pertinent C A) S€ encroa to be pilla light anticj right lighti B) Se in hei front require the fr< Discussion The a pi 1 lavs wi discussion position or statements inside the both those incorrect ] yard. ifc: :'^ '•9 •I &dif tI m it •; •. ■■ .-■■ ■ ./■.>•' r-, V. ■:;• -•>•-■-. •■'.•: •■ ■mrnm me - mm W^'-i 'J #s hIIi ■:a Tds Planning Conmission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Dates Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator September 15, 1988 Subject: #1332 Marcelo Gunucio, 980 PerndaXe Road Heat After-the-Pact Variances - Public Hearing Application - height variance for driveway entry pillars in pillaL?^ height, in conjunction with setback variance for such Zoning District - LR-IA Mat of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit P - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Letter of Request & Hardship Statement Survey John Gerhardson's Letter of 1/6/88 Gaffron's Letter of 1/25/88 Plan & Elevation Views of Pillars Pertinent Code Sections - A) Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (O- Ths* ^ to^be*c^sid maximum 3%* height ”limitation pillars is |®6' reoulr?n"'®"°~1°‘’^"^ Existing height of lUhtlnq fixture or o^ht*PPli«nt notes that no “4’-" Ii9htln9°iS n«Msaa^! Sloba if thay datarnlna additional dctveway ?! Subdivision 5 (B): Since the pillars exceed 3'6* f?ont leVback® fro°m t1,e°™“KV’' required to meet the minimi 5^ required! The f^erino ^^^ht-of-way, hence a setback variance is the front lot line. ^ ^ Hars are wxthin the property but abutting Discussion - pillars“with*’!tl« urlor ‘'to ^wo occasslons, discussed these discussions rl^ulteTfn e l er?“ construction. In both Instances, those position on the men-.r *'"c® architect confirming the City's statements Somehw, the architect managed to misinterpret the inco„ec\^ pVe‘r;;i:- rot/t'Jfe a^-fi-on/ o^/^^Vh^^^l^in^nrfr ”o “n^? •i v* ;k' r? «vm- wms M- M: iif'S r I /;. vJ0 w Zoning Septern] Page 2 T1 Additi travel maintez T1 purpos them, for emc Staff c St pillar Perndal A) ro fr B) cl pr C) sa Ap] 1. fi: dl; cr< 'p < ^ .. . ■■(■ *-■■ ............................................................................................................................................1^•vV. •..'.^■•■^■•.S^^Jik^-vV ■ 4 *' \'** ■ ' '‘"ilM linlnis1:rator t - sway entry pillars in ck variance for such s are considered an [' height limitation Existing height of Leant notes that no >f the pillars is fer to reserve the l<3itional driveway lillars exceed 2'6" et the minimum 50' itback variance is >perty but abutting i, discussed these :h instancesr those firming the City's bo misinterpret the }illar construction Commission to read the architect made :-of-way and front Zoning File #1332 September 15, 1988 Page 2 of 2 JThe proposed pillars are 5.5' in height, approximately 30" on a side. Additionally, the pillars are approximately 15 to 20' back from the traveled pavement, and will have no effect on nor be affected by road maintenance, and will not pose a hazard to traffic or maintenance vehicles. The apparent need for these monuments is mainly for aesthetic purposes, and the property owner has no intent to place a gate between them. The pillars are approximately 18' apart and would create no problems for emergency vehicles. Staff fff rrmm nilation - Staff recommends approval of the height and setback variances for the pillars that have been constructed at the residence located at 980 West Ferndale Road, finding that: A) The pillars do not create a hazard to the users of the public roadway nor of the private driveway because of the 15 to 20' setback from the traveled roadway, and will not impede road maintenance. B) Separation distance between the pillars provides adequate clearance for emergency vehicles that may have to service the property. C) The pillars contain intregal lighting fixtures to provide for safety of this driveway entrance. Approval would be subject to the following conditions: . 1. Applicant is placed on notice that if at some future date light fixtures are placed on top of the pillars, such lighting must be directed downward and the intensity must be at a level so as to not create vision problems for the users of the public roadway. lately 30" on a side. 1 20* back from the be affected by road laintenance vehicles. inly for aesthetic lace a gate between d create no problems ck variances for the located at 980 West isers of the public le 15 to 20* setback id maintenance. provides adequate ve to service the ures to provide for onsi 3 future date light h lighting must be level so as to not roadway. ■Ail ^^(53^ CITY OP OROMO -> VARlAiiCB APPLICATI#1Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) r-TTv :-fr wji I I wi rvkfAkH^c rtcrrrc f U'f i i I} T* ♦' > w A JwfWaL VV W At mJ vx owif 7AA AA wW • VV PROPERTY LOCATION rum,' im i .L.WA Tfiu j *t IWW' » vv Site Address !X/ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Ot^Hl i h.CTurTmm i ijAkiil \ i ti! L.O.# t t ULf rt\Ai Ml T,v;:~ •Ti w'Ui.W biVVA iVWA •v?/*-., : VUV iU.' i. Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name ^ _ _ Phone (work) Address:City: Zip: CT^Yf^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) S*~V/ Phone (work ) Address: 73^ City: Date Property Acquired ^^/fSy__________ .Zip:£02/ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (month/year) I (do) fdo not)/also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USB OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District -Present Use of Property 7^Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP R]Estimated Construction Cost $ 3yC00 ^ Describe request in detail: 0^>i VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover SideSetback Variances (_ _ _ Front _ _ _ ^ Other 3^“"^ * Rear) m rrry nc nrrn\;nUA i i bi UJ\unu ry^iA;iirc ncrrrrcI itnnnLtm ut I ii/bi i Tr,*>9AAr> A,-i w vw 01 CEi CHEK Vu R£CEIFT-imK YOU uii^ior\r\ r/vu cn< T.’tc*- JTA WWA /\V',A IVU'*-- nC / * W‘00l1 »rrens? luded on • ■<■ work) zip» /*~?yy^ work) ztpxSrni (month/year) f land. Residential fy) ion Cost $ “^yCOO ^ rdcover Rear) CITI OF ORONO - VARIJUMCB APPLICATIO Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) ' oo ■1 «■% PROPBRTT LOCATIOH 980 Fern'lale Road w«»gf“ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 03~i1q Please check one - Property _ _ abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Phone (home) 646-2326 ^^cvin Keenan^ Project Mgr.# Arteka Phone (work) gag-gpoo Address! 5800 Baker Rd. City: Minnetonka Zip: SS34S OWIIBR (if different than applicant) N2une Marcelo Gumucio Phone (home) 475-3817 _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work) 333-5889 Address: 980 Ferndale Road West City: Orono_ _ _ _ _ _Zip: 55301 Date Property Acquired V~ August 1987_ _ _ _ _ _ _ (month/year) I (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ^ ** *"" ^ ****** ^ *"***“*" ^**"* *■ ^ •• •» «■» tm ^ mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm - - PRESENT USB OP PROPBRTT Present Zoning District Single Family Residential Present Use of Property Single Family Residential < Other (specify) DBSCRIPTION OP RBQOBST•hi;Estimated Construction Cost $2.500.00 Describe request in detail:Sre attached TARIANCBS RBQUIRBD Lot Area Setback Variances ( Lot Width Front Hardcover Side Rear) O^her ..^siqht-JTAJiiAiiiiift, • .- • ' • • » r ?W55S'SrK#.«^<!~“ 8* 88 gs -* 5o S8 ..S- ft ftft Hi ft ft 3 ft ft ft ft ft .y ft ft ^ ft ft ail _ ft -i O HIft S ft ft ft ^iiiiii ^ — — ft ^ Ifeil, S » H * i **a2 *28gM2 sssssi IM Sc « < 8 8 u 8 ill 2 i Ui ly ^ ^Isl^- llv Itim I iU O ttl H P4 M ^ 9 &E E CL X L IMS Si ^M ^ 1 2S m m K S HIrss t ^^mun•S* M Z gsSso ly . ____S8S3S8fe 8S yi ui S ?HI yj III ?isss,ssiiissi g«"*5ssssSsss|s3 9 sK UI >- \ UI 2 mi SSS.U ^3 «i o ^<# ly Q ft HI ^ -J U ft HI < < yj III HI Q ft U ft Z ^ _ O ft Q ^ N UI M Z Z •i«U.Uft ft Z=“-a;s® ~ |3"-So e 8 ft S ft «s> ^ *8 HI ft ft ft___ K S Ml S M ^ M i 7 g ft _ ft ft HI S ® S ^ ^ Q_ O ft H M -I SiaS CL ft Q.IIH i way m the fflo then it In the < reasons 20* bac you do initial r the pot approij originaJ 6' in he varianc parentl: front yj reoeivei dedsioc of both than th< 1 discus with it i The Gly punctur m > in lyIS! {Eg r,i-;i m y-mm '•’'ii>l 'T A ‘ '■i ■Is V I xm'f- m: 't m- :W\ |v; H i ^v>-v/- /:!mm 1 m' ■ ^..f/. Mm mr mm r:XV- ii.v''’■ 4 U XI ■*e-- i- , ■?.; .,*^1 \y Pxfr‘ ■ m jX ,4 >. X.‘ ; .<■ . -f */■ ••• >* • . :•‘ ■ '. v.v. ■' ■■ \.-■ *<'-t 'I .v^:?xf' AutEU«t3l. 1981 QtyorOr Description of Request: I am requesting an after-the-fact variance for the height rf the brick entry pillars at 980 Femdale head West. ! • InititUy t concept plan was reviewed with the Qiy of Orono (January 1988) showing eiahorate 6' tall brkk entry "gates'* located within the street right-of-way. After discussing this concept with Qty officials (see attached letter January 6.1988 from John (lerhardson). I choose not to apply for a variance for these structures but rather simplify the design and slide the brkk pillars back, thereby removing them from within the street right-of-way. They are now on private property. 1 felt this redesign and relocaUon of the brkk entry pillars negated the issue and thus the need for the variance procedure. In John Gerhardson's letter to me dated 1/6/88 he states (Paragraph 2) "according to Orono ordinances, we would not allow the brick surface drive approach or the 6' high monuments in the street right-of-way. If the monuments are adjacent to the right-of- w^ they cannot exceed 3 5'. It also appears that there is a sanitary sewer line in the driveway." I interpreted that as saying if I obtain approval via a variance, the monument could in fact be in the right-of-way. but not taller than 3 5\ in other words they are standing firm on the fact anything within the right-of-way could only be 3.5’ tall. In closer analysis of that statement there is still much ambiguity. Adjacent to the right-of- way means what? Is 1' adjacent or is 10' adjacent? Again. 1 interpreted it as stating if the monuments were on private property, out of the way of snow plows, utilities, etc... then it is OJC. to proceed with my plan. In the early design scheme the monuments were closer to the street for structural reasons. 1 presumed the soil conditions closer to the road bed would be more secure than 20 back on the private property. By placing them back on private property it also puts you closer to the two existing ponds that flank the driveway. By following the Qty's initial requests 1 moved the two pillars back onto private property, consequently closer to the ponds and 1 chose to set these brick pillars on pilings that were dri'Ten down approximately 25‘. Michael Gafron’s letter dated 1/25/88 also mentions the height of the orkinally designed monuments. (Note the second sentence). 'The proposed m<muments 6' in height in a front yard area (or within street right-of-way) certainly requires a variance from the municipal zoning code". 1 interpreted that sentence and the phrase in parentheses as clarifying the previous statement. In other words, 1 read it to mean; in a front yard area or in other words within the street right-of-way. Both of the letters 1 received from the Qty weighed heavily in my understanding of the regulations and my decision to simplify the design and move the brick piilars onto private property. The tone ctf both letters seems to highlight the right-of-way and location of these pillars more so than the height of these pillars. I discussed the simplified brick pillar scheme with John Gerhardson prior to proceeding with it and the issue of height was never mentioned. 1 never asked, he never offered. The Qty in fact came out to locate the underground sewer line so that I would not puncture or destroy it when we drove the piling for these new brick columns.h Ithou comm that ai privat these • * Now(j mentk also St thefm or dins or dins Hardsh • • • * The pr; several be und By plac needed to adetj decide! .-•■Tv'm r the height of the ♦Jill 19S8) showing way. After 6, l98Sfrom J t but rather simplify offl within the street I and relocation of rianoe procedure. In "according to Orono ie 6* high It to the right-of- sewer line in the iance, the monument ^ords they are be 3.3'tali. In 9nx to the right-of- led it as stating if ITS, utilities, etc... or structural le more secure than operty it also puts wing the City ’s nsequently closer to i<ren down ns the height of the posed monuments ily requires a and the phrase in ad it to mean: in a 1 of the letters 1 igulations and my property. The tone le pillars more so ior to proceeding B never offered. 1 would not }lumns. % p- .1. •> •Hi' 1 I? •v.' -.1 Sii,-p—- I thought 1 was following the tetter of the law. For several months we have had open communication about revising the design, the location of the pillars, the soil stability in that area, the sewer lines adjacent to the pillars, etc 1 thought that by moving back onto private property 1 resolved all of the concerns the Qty originally had in reference to these new brick entry monuments. Now (after the fact) while discussing this issue in a phone call with Jeanne Mabusth, she mentiooed that this entry monument issue is becoming increasingly more common. She also stated that many of the variances applied for. for these entry monuments, are after the fact. This leads me to believe that 1 am not alone in my Interpretation of the eiisting ordinances and perhaps more attenuon should be given to clarifying the language In your ordinances for these particular site elements. .> *•% Hardship and Unusual Property Conditions #1332 Hr The practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of the regulations is that for several months out of the year (the winter) 42** high entry monuments could conceivably be under snow and not visible. By placing these address pillars back on private property 1 felt the 3* 6" height was needed for visibility. This portion of Ferndale Road is very dark at night Fdr safety and to adequately light the driv -way as well as the house numbers, the 3' b** height was decided u K' '' ‘ ^ Xf' Okf* , 4’ . < ■ ■ 1 :■ ♦ ^ v iii ■»v Arteka Kevin K 5800 Ba Minneto Dear Ke Recent] Road We: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Accord! surface right-of they ca] sanitary In regal you dis Resource If you a the norm that thi If you h 7357. JRG/pp 1C cc: Jeanr BUILDING a ZONING ASSESSING A;/ •i8 we have had open '8. the 8oil 8tability in it by moving bach onto ^ bad in reference to b Jeanne Mabuath, 8he Jy more common. She monumenta, are after >retation of the exiating ng the language in your 9 {ulationa ia that for lenta could conceivably »3' 6” height was t night. Foraafetyand e 3* 6" height was »‘yv ■ v;- ■ .V, * . . ' 0. ;?** ■ 1 r-.i V m 9": '■ •Av i F [pi i .1 ^ #r.Su.-:♦ ■. . :,\ :v-; ••••:• ■ CITY *CITY of ORONO OF ORONO Poat Ofltoi Box 66*CryaUl Bay. Minnaaota 56323«MiiB^paJ OOcm On th€ North Shore of Lake Minnetonka January 6, 1988 Arteka Land Planners Kevin Keenanr Landscape Architect 5800 Baker Road Minnetonkar MM 55345 Dear Kevin, Recently, you and I reviewed a landscape plan for 980 Ferndale Road West* Items of discussion were: !• Brick surface drive approach in street right—of—way* 2. Monuments 6* high in street right-of-way. 3. Proposed aeration of pond adjacent to driveway. 4. Location of sanitary sewer lines and lift station. 5. Length of process for acquiring variances for all of the above. According to Orono ordinances, we would not allow the brick surface drive approach or the 6* high monuments in the street right-of-way. If the monuments are adjacent to the right-of-way they cannot exceed 3.5 feet. It also appears that there is a sanitary sewer line in the driveway. In regard to the aeration pump for the pond, it is advised that you discuss this with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. If you are Interested in pursuing variances for all of the above, the normal process requires approximately 6 weeks. Be advised ^Dat this is an informal review of your proposal* have any questions please feel free to call me at 473- / / a Sincerely, ^ John R. Gerhardson Public Works Director JRG/pp 106.3 cc: Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator BUILDING a ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION 1 FINANCE - 473-7358 f PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 «: ‘ y-r* V;ri ii0 .*y /1 m A" . - - . 0^ Art< Atti 580C Mi nr Dear copy to 1 monu righ zoni righ (cop’ for ' that apprc applj in tfi inciu would 473-7 MPG/t3 building a zoN ASSESSING .J-.T iS’SittiiKi■‘i’::- ■vry^y mma r of ORONO , MinnaMU 56323•Mmudp«l OfficM !a 980 Ferndale -of-way. ay. atlon. r all of the 9w the brick n the street right-of-way t there is a advised that of Natural of the above. Be advised 1 me at 473- public WORKS - 473-7359 .j.; mm mM Mm i ♦ . J'-' 1 ' . fi Ifv L :-u| A.Ls.48 ■ •, •t";''iai • t jj CITY OF ORONOJ GITYof ORONO Port Oiloe Box 66*CrysteJ Bay, Minnaaota56323*Maiuc^ OfBeaaf Oh the North Sfutre of Lake Minnetonka January 25, 1988 Arteka Land Planners Architect Minnetonka, MN 55345 Dear Kevin: copy Irth^zl^rng “ enclo.in, a to the property at 980 We^^ Ferndale'^R^ad°"**Th^"*’^°'^®'’®"** monuments 6* in heiaht In » V® The proposed right-of-way) certlinU roJLirl. I area (or within street zoning code. The brick ^ variance from the municipal right-of-way irgoSed bv ^ »treet (copy attached), which reoulrea i-hfl? municipal code for work within a right-of-wav first be obtained that the brick surfacino will ^^®'*9h I am led to believe appropriate thlt you ll>c!udt a support, it is application for the monuments. ^ ^ ^ variance in tir^Vnirng -Tj^“°?“°"i-Sgg-^^^°^ submittals should h- t-1.K.'Jj!j ■ 1° "^st^.^_bnan reDigary ^bhh: ItfBH in or;<.rI - I ■ ------------ j.at-eir tnan reoruarv :?Rfh lUBTTM.. ^ J "^ — hirlrd n i i n |i7 n , I, l| i iihin zorn^I988^Planning Coiiunlssion meetir -----------final Council actionThen on Aprfr'llth. fgsT WS 473-735“if yo^‘have“anrq^ertilnsf"^"^®**'“’'° Mabusth at njmcnaei. F. CSaffTOxi^ Asst Planning s Zoning Administrator MPG/tln JohH *aert^rlf' « zoning Administratordonn R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director BUILDING A ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING administration a finance — 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 ;• V ■ Y - "■'■ r-' nHI •-. i i ■;- •, .’. -■•*5 A • j V ? jm rowf'*VV7 I' .Mi ’t.mV i] \ ti "?< ‘ <:--m'uaai te* . :.v| 1 Y of ORONO ly, MiiinaM>t« 56323 •Mimidpal OOIom Jka sun oncloslngr a I improvements rhe proposed i^ithln street the municipal Ln the street inicipal code t be obtained td to believe upport, it is your variance tls should be li" order to TJe “Reetinq. W5 ie Mabusth at / Administrator :or PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 K. - ,v. ;- ^ •■ .. :..if m if^iwr^ M.mm-p^4 smm i«akii 1-’ i ’ Li^:SU. A: ''Xm»_i«r. -\-.WV' ' s. ' • •^ o 10 snot fci»» m' ^ j:* ■., j -1 f-1 \ ' • . ■'^' ^ V-. *.'. mm;fi|| ’‘M .. m i . '::m * .i r..‘ It, ^ ; - m. :i PwS :..■ s" • •: > • • •. ;.^ . . i'-;^ 11^ PHip §4 ^r r: \: r^ ■: I Vv, V. p J ii '!•:• : ^ . "'Vi ' • ♦ A »\‘t-. r#‘. -<fc# ** *..¥ ■ft \ A A ‘*fV ' \ ■; '■ . «4' r ‘* !■■ *“'’«• '^■ 1^ A * ' *- ' W* '•■ H •’"S* >-^ r ^^..» ; mA c • WoM m f-'; :jdt' ■nr■> £ •S UJ q> Ul 5 1^ w K- ¥:-%j:r» "V .'V •.. m<1 /‘:^i4 A h t'v *1 V ^ir • f V* .^•■'* * - f « ^.1. .O'-;(• >#>fS%’. ' %*. •> *>■ \* <■ .• f,s ■ # ■ •ir/> ’-•!ll‘ V im ♦ tv '**' jr '» ■' ^ t > i • •■ lilu V \»9 ♦ t-- • ' 6*- 3. / ♦ \ ; Meyers- PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Mewrs,Woods, PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN f(tr\ PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MEYERS WOODS / I ,4... u P ii Ii' ^ ■y-.. % E r E c_(• f V tE TO V r> s* Xr -c I e rs X ■«• t *T» ' <(» # ^ i h .<'tsn<* -A- • O«fiot«« irmn m^nymmnt W4flf»0« 9MOW$$ AM AAAUVAO MMAAl MTM • //•#! IMMIMUMlt lAM.g 0«iMf«« •Mtatlfig m^t miyvmUyn JW1 p«n«f«« pr«p«MA «p«t •l•vaf/ol• —•— P«ff»l«» •mmlimrp mymmf —•— D mmMc wtmfmmin *• p9it«f«« «t»rm MNir«r o ffM —*P— •v«rfw«A yowmr llrf ••NA «pnf»tfr fMpp ApppIpp p«/pflp« topfwfpp EXISTING PROPERTY DESCBIPTIOW: Lot 1, Block If CRYSTAL CREST, accordinq to tha racordad plat tharaof, Hennapin County. Hinnasota. ALSO: That part ot Lot 2, Block i. CRYSTAL CREST, according to tha recorded plat theraof. Hennepin County. Minnaaota lying aastarly of the west 642.00 feet thereof. PROPOSED PAJtCEL AREAS: Total Area SI. 19 acres "or/I ?.c. REVISIONS DATE BY REMARKS; i — DRAIPN BY F.A.H.: h*r«»r «*♦♦»» tMi ym •> »•••» »rna 9i H»4*I m, tftraci «»m>> «'cn a«i« in«i 1 am a aa\f e«s.tt«>*a Lund a^ftafot '*• '«•* 0* *"* S*ata a« M**ftaaot«. t A __ ___....nczi, 2340 Danieis Street. Long Lake, Mmnesoto 55356 Ph: 475-1433 Preliminary Plat r. 100' mnv T~ Pwrf>AHE.L- FOR: ORONO SCHOOLS mu’:vli II |2 ii? o ^ H “0 > m CZ m ? (J) I o -n ?r-m cn —1m § ^ ^o ^ COiq-o" sPqIo'?S OD — I T)oo CO ?!>rn £ (/) ^ CD G0 i V 6025 -- '■ ^ ) ..v-, :iS5 .►>•»/ ■? mm .... -mm^- - MiiS mmm^'rn 1■i WM f^ikm ffr©i:.tr;4'w ^ 'SJib tel »» 'f&M M -toW^.sV Ua3i i/'>“^ i'4bT48i 8 EXISTING COMBINED LEGALS; Johnson Lagal - That part of Government Lot 2, Section 17, Township 117, Range 23, described as beginning at the intersection of the South line of the North 148.5 feet of said Government Lot 2 and a line drawn parallel with and 777.85 feet West, measured at right angles, from the Rest line of "Shady Rood"; thence Southerly along said parallel line 280.61 feet to the South line of the North 428.5 feet of said Government Lot 2; thence West along the South line of the North 428.5 feet of said Government Lot 2 a distance of 300.65 feet to a point thereon 1077.85 feet West, measured at right angles, from the West line of "Shady Wood"; thence Northwesterly to a point on the South line of the North 368.5 feet of said Government Lot 2, distant 1097.85 feet Nest, measured at right angles, from the West line of "Shady Wood"; thence Nest along the South line of the North 368.5 feet of said Government Lot 2, to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence Northwesterly along said shore to its intersection with the South line of the North 148.5 feet of said Government Lot 2; thence East along the last mentioned South line to the point of beginning. Trainer Legal - That part of Government Lot 2, Section 17, Township 117, Range 23, described as beginning at a point on the Southerly line of the North 428.5 feet of said Government Lot 2, distant 1077.85 feet West, measured at right angles, from the West line of "Shady Wood"; thence Northwesterly to a point on the South line of the North 368.5 feet of said Government Lot 2, distant 1097.85 feet West, measured at right angles, from the West line of "Shady Wood"; thence West along the South lino of the North 368.5 feet of said Government Lot 2 to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence Southeasterly along said shore to an intersection with the South line of the North 428.5 feet of said Government Lot 2; thence East along the last mentioned South line to the point of beginning. Denotes iron monument Denotes cross chiseled in concrete Denotes esisting spot elevation Denotes proposed spot elevotion *--------- Denotes surface drainage Ooshed contour lines denotes proposed features Solid contour lines denotes existing feotures Proposed top ot toundation elevation > Proposed basement floor elevation » Proposed garage floor elevation = BENCHMARK; I hereby certify thot thi* e«r'»r pie* or report nos prepared by me or under try direct swparrition and that I am o duly Regitterod Lend Suryeyor under tha.-to«eof the State at Mignesoto. A TijhMfu llnjn \ioi5 ALL-METRO LAMP SURVEYORS 2340 Doniels Street, Long LoKe, Minnesota 55356 Ph; 475- 1433 PROPOSED REGISTERED LAND SURVEY scale ^« 40' toOK fZ PAGE 4^ FtLE NO sso*?? c SHcrr PREPARED FOR: DAVE EISS